Adhunik Sandarbh Me Jain Darshan Ke Punarmulyankan Ki Dishaye - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Adhunik Sandarbh me Jain Darshan ke Punarmulyankan ki Dishaye" by Dr. Dayanand Bhargav, focusing on the directions for re-evaluation of Jain philosophy in the modern context:

The author argues for a dynamic and adaptable understanding of Jain philosophy in the modern era, emphasizing the need to move beyond rigid, literal interpretations and embrace the inherent flexibility suggested by Jain principles themselves.

Key Arguments and Themes:

The Nature of Reality and Change (Shat's definition): The text begins by referencing the Jain concept of "shat" (existence) as described in the Tattvarthasutra: utpad-vyaya-dhrauvya-yukt sat (existence is characterized by origination, decay, and permanence). The author asserts that if Jain philosophy is to remain relevant, it must not only acknowledge permanence but also embrace the consequentiality of change and evolution.
Critique of Static Interpretation: The author criticizes the tendency within some traditions to view religious principles, including Jainism, as entirely immutable ("kutast"). While acknowledging that even in ancient times, different dharma for different eras were prescribed (suggesting adaptability), the author finds it paradoxical when a tradition that acknowledges "kutast" (static) and "parinamansheel" (mutable) simultaneously claims its doctrines are exclusively static.
Embracing Change for Relevance: The core argument is that allowing for change in Jain principles, with respect to substance, place, time, and form (dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhaav), is entirely in line with the original spirit of Mahavir. Conversely, believing that Jain philosophy has been finalized and fixed by a particular person or scripture, leaving no room for adaptation, essentially removes it from Mahavir's definition of existence and renders it "asat" (non-existent) or "jad" (inert).
Religion and Science: The author observes a trend of religions, including Jainism, trying to prove themselves scientific. However, he points out the fundamental difference: science is characterized by open doors for new discoveries and the continuous evolution of its principles. Religions, on the other hand, often claim their doctrines are finalized by a specific person or scripture, discouraging any new interpretations or additions. Religions making such claims should refrain from calling themselves scientific.
The Problem of "Novelty" and Authenticity: In science, "novelty" signifies originality. In religious philosophy, however, "novelty" is often equated with "unauthenticity" or being "apramanik" (unauthorized). This leads to a distortion of ancient scriptures to make new ideas appear to conform to them. The author sees this as a form of denial of truth.
Re-interpreting Scriptures for Adaptability: The author suggests that freely accepting the potential for change in religious principles would eliminate the need to contort ancient scriptures. Jainism, which accepts the changeability of all worldly substances, is well-positioned to lead in not treating its principles as immutable. The author questions the practice of validating principles based on their origin in ancient texts rather than their inherent truth or analysis.
The Concept of Omniscience (Sarvajnatva): The author challenges the conventional understanding of omniscience as an exclusively supernatural event, received from divine texts, a specific individual, or achieved through profound meditation. He questions the foundationality of the concept of omniscience in Mahavir's original teachings, citing the Acharanga Sutra (considered the oldest Jain scripture) as lacking any explicit mention of Mahavir being omniscient or possessing extraordinary knowledge. He refers to a scholarly opinion that the concept of omniscience might be a later addition to Jainism.
The Challenge of Authenticating Scriptures: The author notes that various Indian philosophical schools have sought to authenticate their scriptures. The Jain tradition, through figures like Acharya Hemachandra, has also presented arguments for the authenticity of Jain Agamas, drawing parallels with the perceived reliability of other religious texts based on their adherence to established principles.
Misrepresenting Scientific Facts in Agamas: The author addresses attempts to establish the authority of Jain Agamas by highlighting their descriptions of physics, chemistry, and mathematics. While acknowledging the presence of scientific facts in the Agamas, he cautions against presenting them as if modern science's entire achievements were already present in them. Science has a continuous history of development, and while Jain Agamas may contain scientific insights relative to their time, it's crucial not to ignore that modern science has progressed far beyond those earlier understandings. He argues that it shouldn't be problematic if any scriptural statement, including those from Jain Agamas, is disproven by modern science.
Anekanta and the Evolution of Knowledge: The core principle of Anekanta (non-absolutism) is that reality has infinite aspects. The author questions the wisdom of trying to confine this infinite reality within the "jug" of finite scriptures. Even the Agamas themselves acknowledge that only a fraction of the truth known to the omniscient has been conveyed. Therefore, if a reasonable idea is presented that is not found in the Agamas, there should be no objection. Just as accepting multiple perspectives on truth reveals its multifaceted nature, the possibility of uncovering new aspects of truth always remains.
Doubt as a Catalyst for Progress: The author argues that while opponents have often portrayed Anekanta as skepticism, doubt is actually the root of knowledge development. He uses the example of the geocentric to heliocentric shift in astronomy. The author emphasizes that rigid adherence to existing knowledge stifles such progress. He draws a parallel with Upanishadic Rishis who questioned the efficacy of rituals, which led to the establishment of Brahman philosophy. Doubt is detrimental only when it leads to inaction; when it prompts new discoveries, it should be welcomed. Anekanta, in essence, views truth not as a fixed, static entity but as a relative, fluid, and dynamic phenomenon, which is the only path for the progressive evolution of knowledge.
The Danger of Absolutist Thinking in Jainism: The author warns that if Anekanta followers adopt an absolutist stance similar to those who believe truth is singular and contradictory properties cannot coexist, then there will be no difference in their approach to knowledge compared to absolutists. A perspective that considers anything not found in scriptures as non-existent (yadi hasti tadanyatra yannehasti na tat kvachit) contradicts the fundamental spirit of Anekanta. The author believes that if Jain scholars embrace this, it can overcome the stagnation in Jain philosophy and make it a living discipline.
The Need for Awareness and Creativity: The author emphasizes that individuals and societies must remain aware and creative to uncover new aspects of truth. Merely repeating old truths requires neither awareness nor creativity. The current state of philosophy, he contends, is primarily about repeating old truths, which fails to attract national talent. This is true for all Eastern philosophies. The more one can view truth from new perspectives, the more one can reveal its Anekanta nature, requiring constant intellectual dynamism.
Enduring and Mutable Aspects of Jainism: The author identifies core, enduring aspects of Jainism such as the proclamation of human dignity, the respect for labor, the support for equality, and the ethical principles of non-violence (ahimsa) and non-possession (aparigraha). Victory over ego, attachment, anger, and greed are its goals, achieved through the restraint of mind, speech, and body. He categorizes these as the "kutast" (immutable) aspects, while other elements are largely mutable.
The Evolution of Lore and Mythology: Referring back to the Acharanga Sutra, the author notes its absence of deities, heavens, hells, Yakshas, Gandharvas, Kinnaras, miraculous powers, or omniscience attributed to Mahavir. He acknowledges that later Jain literature incorporated these supernatural elements, possibly due to the demands of the times. However, he questions the necessity of continuing to propagate them as eternal aspects of the faith. He also ponders whether deifying the human form of a great ascetic like Mahavir truly illuminates his image or diminishes it in the modern context.
Reinterpreting Caste and Social Hierarchy: The author points out the contradiction in Jainism opposing birth-based superiority (as evidenced by the statement "by action one is a Brahmin, by action one is a Kshatriya") while simultaneously asserting that Tirthankaras can only be born in a specific caste (Kshatriya) and a specific sub-class (royal lineage). He finds it incomprehensible how a tradition that opposes the concept of inherent superiority or inferiority based on lineage could harbor such beliefs. He suggests that while the principle of karma and self-effort should be paramount, the tradition has, perhaps unconsciously, given importance to birth. He argues against considering this a permanent aspect of the faith. He also critiques the notion that Tirthankaras are necessarily handsome, suggesting that spiritual beauty is what matters, not physical attributes like a flat nose, thick lips, or dark complexion. The association of Tirthankaras with princes (symbolizing wealth and desire) and the perceived distinction between them and Kevalins (enlightened beings) indirectly valorizes indulgence and diminishes the importance of the common person in an era of democracy and socialism.
Feudal Influences and the Rejection of Principles: The author draws a parallel between the idea that only a prince can be a Tirthankara and the literary convention that only kings can be protagonists. He states that the current era belongs to the common folk like Hori and Dhaniya (from Premchand's writings), not kings and queens. He criticizes the philosophy that emphasizes non-possession for imposing a prerequisite of royal lineage for becoming a Tirthankara, attributing this to the influence of the feudal era. This same influence, he suggests, led the philosophy that extols celibacy to imagine numerous queens for its great figures (Shalaka Purushas). These ideas are contemporary interpretations that may not align with the fundamental essence of the religion.
The Absence of a Social Philosophy: A significant concern for the author is the lack of a robust social philosophy within Jainism. While acknowledging historical references to Rishabhadeva providing for practical aspects of life like warfare, administration, and agriculture, the current Jain principles do not offer a clear framework for an organized society. While individual ethical principles may have societal implications, they do not constitute a social philosophy in themselves. Despite efforts to address this void, many problems remain unsolved.
Jainism and Socialism: The Dilemma of Violence and Inequality: The author delves into the critical issue of economic inequality in the context of socialism. Socialism aims to provide equal opportunities for all and, in its struggle against capitalist exploitation, does not entirely reject violence. The author questions whether violence is the only recourse to end economic disparities if Jainism's principle of aparigraha has failed to eliminate them. He raises crucial questions: would such violence be permissible for householders, similar to the concept of anti-violence? Does the theory of karma support economic inequality? He argues that these contemporary questions are often bypassed in discussions of Jain ethics, which tend to praise principles like ahimsa and aparigraha without addressing their practical implications for social justice. He poses the pertinent question: does a philosophy emphasizing non-violence and non-possession become a powerful movement against economic exploitation, or does it inadvertently support the status quo?
The Potential for a Dynamic Jain Philosophy: The author concludes by expressing his belief that Jain philosophy possesses the seeds of dynamism and ample scope for revealing new dimensions of truth. He stresses the need to establish it on a human and logical foundation, suggesting that mythological supernaturalism is not an essential component. He reiterates that even while upholding the authority of the Agamas, Jainism does not consider truth to be bound by them. Mahavir, he emphasizes, gained his knowledge through personal experience, not from a guru or scripture, which serves as a powerful testament to individual freedom.
Jainism and Equality: The author highlights that the foundation of Jainism is equality (samata). Based on this, Jain philosophy opposed birth-based superiority and the caste system, opening the doors of spirituality to individuals like Harikeshi, born into a Chandala family. He asserts that today, this same philosophy can challenge economic disparities and open doors to a dignified life for the underprivileged. Otherwise, if such change is achieved through violent revolution, material prosperity is built upon the ruins of religion, philosophy, culture, and human dignity. While violent revolutions may end millennia of exploitation, they also annihilate millennia of human achievement.
The Principle of "Samichin" (Appropriateness/Correctness): The author concludes with the principle of samichin. Any religion, ancient or modern, is acceptable only if it is samichin. Otherwise, it is not. The importance of the ancient lies in its being samichin. The author stresses that samichin (appropriateness/correctness) is not a universal, static attribute. The appropriateness of anything depends on its specific dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhaav (substance-place-time-form). If any of these change, the appropriateness of an action or principle can also change. What is appropriate for a householder (like restraint in desires and possessions) may not be appropriate for a monk, and vice versa. A monk who practices Mahavrata but engages in actions suitable for a householder is committing an offense because the samichin dharma for a householder is not samichin for him. This principle underscores the need for context-specific understanding and application of Jain principles.

In essence, the book calls for a critical re-evaluation of Jain philosophy, urging its followers to embrace its inherent flexibility, engage with contemporary challenges, and present its timeless wisdom in a manner that is both intellectually robust and relevant to the modern world.