Ahimsa - Book Summary | JainGPT

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Ahimsa" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, based on the provided pages:

Introduction: The Ancient and Evolving Principle of Ahimsa

The concept of Ahimsa (non-violence) is deeply ancient within the Arya tradition and is equally respected across all its branches. However, with the expansion of society and the development of diverse religious traditions, the understanding and practice of Ahimsa have evolved in multifaceted ways. The text identifies two primary ancient streams of thought on Ahimsa within the Arya tradition: one stemming from the Shraman (ascetic) way of life and the other from the Brahmin tradition, particularly its concept of the four ashramas (stages of life).

While there is no fundamental philosophical disagreement between these two streams regarding the essence of Ahimsa, practical application and interpretation reveal significant differences, not only between the two main streams but also within their sub-branches. This divergence is primarily attributed to differing life philosophies. The Shraman tradition emphasizes a personal and spiritual outlook, where societal well-being (loksangraha) is valued only to the extent it doesn't contradict spirituality. If it does, the Shraman perspective becomes indifferent or even opposed to it. In contrast, the Brahmin tradition adopts a social and broader perspective, integrating societal well-being to such an extent that it minimizes conflict between spirituality and materiality.

Ahimsa in the Shraman Tradition (Agamas)

The Shraman tradition's understanding of Ahimsa flowed uniquely, culminating in the exemplary life of Lord Mahavir. This thought process is clearly reflected in ancient Agamas like the Acharyaanga and Sutrakrutanga. The foundation of Ahimsa lies in the perspective of seeing oneself in others (atma-pamya). The Agamas present Ahimsa through three key points:

Violence is inherently harmful because it causes suffering and fear. This is the fundamental reasoning behind the principle of Ahimsa.
The true cause of violence, though often equated with causing death or suffering, is ultimately pramada (negligence, indulgence) or passions like attachment and aversion. Merely causing death without pramada is not considered the ultimate act of violence. This is the analysis of Ahimsa.
The severity of violence's sin is not determined by the size, number, or vitality of the living beings killed. Instead, it depends on the intent and intensity of the perpetrator's action, their consciousness (knowing or unknowing), and the degree of force used. This is the essence.

These three points, derived from Lord Mahavir's teachings and actions, are woven into the Agamas. Any individual or group, regardless of their spiritual inclinations, will naturally arrive at this analysis if they consider a life of restraint. The subsequent detailed discussions on Ahimsa in Jain literature are rooted in these ancient Agamic principles.

Key Pillars of Jain Ahimsa Discourse

The comprehensive discourse on Ahimsa in Jain literature is based on four main pillars:

Focus on Navakoti Ahimsa (the highest form of non-violence), primarily concerning the life of ascetics.
Condemnation of various forms of violence considered permissible in the Brahmin tradition, such as sacrifices (yajna).
Emphasis on the stricter control and discipline within Jain ascetic life compared to other ascetic traditions.
Attempt to resolve internal contradictions and disputes within different Jain sects.

The insistence on practicing Navakoti Ahimsa while also supporting a livelihood for the development of self-control and virtue led to discussions on the distinctions between dravya-himsa (violence in terms of action or substance) and bhava-himsa (violence in terms of mental state or passion). Ultimately, the conclusion is that pramada (negligence/passion) is the true violence. Even actions that appear violent externally are considered non-violent if performed without pramada. This final conclusion is universally accepted across all Jain sects like Shvetambara and Digambara.

Opposition to Vedic Violence

Jain, Buddhist, and Sankhya traditions uniformly opposed the violence sanctioned in the Vedic tradition for rituals like yajna, hospitality (atithi), and ancestral rites (shraddha). However, the primary continuity of this opposition was maintained by Buddhist and Jain traditions. Jain literature extensively refutes Vedic violence, and in turn, Vedic followers question how Jain practices like building temples or worshipping deities can be considered non-violent if ritualistic violence is prohibited. Jain literature addresses these doubts in detail.

The Difference Between Jain and Buddhist Views on Ahimsa

Both Jain and Buddhist traditions agree that pramada (mental faults) is the primary cause of violence, and action-based violence stems from these faults. Despite this shared philosophical basis, significant debates and refutations occurred between them. Early Agamas like the Sutrakrutanga critique Buddhist views on Ahimsa, while Pitaka texts like the Jizha Nikaya mock Jain Ahimsa. This tradition of debate continued in later Jain (Niryuktas) and Buddhist (Abhidharma Kosha) texts.

The primary reason for this internal conflict, despite a shared theoretical definition of Ahimsa and opposition to Vedic violence, lies in the Jain tradition's emphasis on extreme external restraint for the practice of Navakoti Ahimsa. This contrasts with the Buddhist approach, which is seen as more lenient in regulating external activities. The stark difference between excessive external regulation and the relative laxity resulting from a "middle path" led to the extensive debates between the two traditions. Often, these debates involved mutual misunderstandings.

Ahimsa and the Distinction Between Kati (Action) and Bhava (Mental State)

As the Jain monastic order expanded and encountered new situations, Jain philosophers further refined the definition of Ahimsa. They established the principle that if violence, even to the extent of causing death, occurs or must occur without pramada (negligence) for the sake of maintaining a disciplined life, then that action is considered ahimsak-kati (violence in terms of action) and is therefore innocent and even virtue-enhancing.

This perspective allows ascetics, even after accepting the highest vow of Ahimsa, to engage in activities that might appear violent for the perfection of their restrained life, thereby progressing further in their spiritual development. This is termed nishchay-ahimsa in Jain terminology. When ascetics who renounced possessions like clothing began to condemn those who possessed even a minimal amount of clothing, the latter justified their practice by this very principle: Possessing limited possessions, like the body, for the purpose of maintaining restraint is not an obstacle to Ahimsa. Such debates, born from differences in practice, have significantly contributed to the discourse on Ahimsa, as evident in texts like the Gathavaya.

The Nuances of Ahimsa: Beyond Mere Absence of Harm

At times, discussions on Ahimsa have been perceived as overly focused on logic. For instance, a question arises: "If you must wear clothes, why not keep them whole instead of tearing them, as tearing them releases microscopic life-harming particles?" The response highlights that if the particles released from tearing clothes cause harm, then the very words used to prevent such tearing also cause harm.

However, the true essence of Jain Ahimsa, as articulated by Jinabhadra Gani, is that the presence or absence of harmful particles in a place, whether living or non-living, does not solely determine violence or non-violence. True violence lies in pramada, ayatan (lack of carefulness), and asamyam (lack of restraint), regardless of whether any living being is harmed. Conversely, if apramada (diligence), ayatan, and samyam are maintained, even the killing of a living being is considered Ahimsa.

The Hierarchical Framework of Jain Ahimsa Discourse

Based on the above principle, Jain discourse on Ahimsa follows a hierarchical framework:

Preventing death is Ahimsa. This is the initial understanding.
When activities essential for life, particularly a disciplined life, may inadvertently lead to harm, if performed without pramada, that harm is not violence but Ahimsa.
To be truly non-violent, one must first renounce mental afflictions (pramada). With this, Ahimsa is achieved. External actions have no inherent or indispensable connection to Ahimsa; the connection is primarily with mental activities.
In certain exceptional individual or collective situations, what is considered violence can become virtue-enhancing. In such cases, refraining from such action out of fear of perceived violence would be a fault.

Similarities with Mimamsa and Smriti on Ahimsa

The Jain discussion on the general (utsarga) and exceptional (apavada) aspects of Ahimsa aligns closely with the similar discussions in Mimamsa and Smriti. The difference lies in the focus: Jain thought primarily considers the life of ascetics, while Mimamsa and Smriti consider the lives of both householders and ascetics.

| Jain Ahimsa | Mimamsa and Smriti Ahimsa | | :--------------------------------------------------------------------------- | :-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | 1. All life should not be harmed. | 1. Do not harm any living being. | | 2. Question of the impossibility of living in the ashramas for all. | 2. Question of the impossibility of living and performing duties for all individuals in all four ashramas. | | 3. Absence of fault in permitted actions; forbidden actions are violence. | 3. Absence of fault in permitted actions; forbidden actions are violence. (i.e., forbidden conduct is violence). | | 4. Ultimately, Ahimsa lies in following the teachings of the Jinas (Jain scriptures). | 4. Ultimately, Ahimsa lies in following the teachings of the Vedas and Smritis. |

It's important to note that "scripture" for Jain thinkers specifically refers to Jain scriptures detailing the injunctions and prohibitions for ascetic life. For Vedic thinkers, "scripture" encompasses all texts that prescribe individual, familial, social, religious, and political duties.

Development of the Ahimsa Sentiment

Before Parshvanatha: The text mentions the legends of Yadukumar and Neminath within the Nigrantha tradition, highlighting their role in establishing Ahimsa. Neminath, witnessing the planned sacrifice of animals for his wedding, renounced the ceremony, influencing societal practices towards vegetarianism.
Parshvanatha: Lord Parshvanatha actively opposed violent ascetic practices like panchagni (five fires) and encouraged the abandonment of violence in religious contexts.
Mahavir's Establishment of Ahimsa: Lord Mahavir inherited and strengthened the Ahimsa sentiment cultivated by Parshvanatha. He vehemently opposed violence in religious fields like sacrifices, similar to the Buddha, establishing Ahimsa as the lifeblood of Indian religions. His life and rigorous penance attracted many influential Brahmins and Kshatriyas, laying the foundation for Ahimsa in social and religious festivals.
Other Propagators of Ahimsa:
- Samprati: Ashoka's grandson, Samprati, significantly promoted Ahimsa under Aryahastin's guidance, extending its influence beyond his kingdom.
- Nirgranth Ascetics: These ascetics played a crucial role in spreading Ahimsa across India, experiencing fulfillment in preaching the abandonment of violent habits. Their efforts are compared to Shankaracharya establishing mathas in the four corners of India.
- Influence on other traditions: Tilak pointed out Gujarat's Ahimsa sentiment as a Jain contribution. The Vaishnava and other Vedic traditions were influenced by Jainism's emphasis on Ahimsa. Even proponents of violent Vedic rituals today are hesitant to encourage animal sacrifice among their followers.
- Acharya Hemchandra: He influenced King Siddharaja to a great extent, leading to the cessation of animal sacrifice in many temples and initiating a broader movement against such practices.
- Kumarapala: Siddharaja's successor, Kumarapala, furthered the cause of Ahimsa, making his "amari-ghoshana" (declaration of non-violence) incredibly popular. This led many ascetics and lay followers to adopt it as their life's goal.
- Impact on foreign tribes: Even foreign tribes like the Shakas were influenced by Ahimsa.
- Akbar: Hiravijayasuri requested Emperor Akbar to implement an amari-ghoshana, at least on specific days. This was followed by his successors, like Jahangir, demonstrating the significant influence of Jainism even on Mughal emperors.

The Enduring Presence of Ahimsa

Even today, the Jain community consistently strives to prevent animal and bird violence in various spheres. Despite diverse cultural backgrounds and the prevalence of meat-eating, a general inclination towards Ahimsa is evident. The lives of medieval saints and faqirs who preached only Ahimsa and compassion attest to the deep roots of Ahimsa in the Indian psyche. Mahatma Gandhi's movement for a new life in India was fundamentally based on Ahimsa; his success would have been limited without this pre-existing fertile ground.

Ahimsa and Amari: Affirmative and Negative Aspects

Human nature contains both violent and non-violent tendencies. Early Vedic practices involved extensive animal and even human sacrifices. The counter-reaction to this violence led to the rise of Ahimsa, with figures like Mahavir and Buddha being its prime proponents and the source of its continuing tradition. The widespread propagation and nuanced philosophical exploration of Ahimsa in India have no parallel in other countries. Ahimsa, which has evolved over thousands of years, has had an extraordinary impact on other cultures.

Ashoka, Samprati, and Kharavela

The establishment of Jain and Buddhist monastic orders led to vigorous propagation of Ahimsa. Emperor Ashoka's edicts clearly indicate his command to avoid violence during festivals and gatherings. His influence, as a ruler who embraced a non-violent lifestyle, was profound. His grandson, the Jain king Samprati, furthered this mission in his own way. The fact that kings, royal families, and high officials supported Ahimsa demonstrates the progress of Ahimsa propagators and the public's receptiveness to the principle. King Kharavela of Kalinga also made significant contributions.

Success of Ahimsa Propagation

Despite the cyclical rise of sacrificial traditions, the Ahimsa propagating orders (Jain and Buddhist) achieved considerable success both within and outside India. Medieval Jain and Buddhist kings, nobles, and officials in North and South India prioritized the propagation of Ahimsa.

Kumarapala and Akbar: King Kumarapala of Western India was renowned for his extreme adherence to Ahimsa. The Jain monk Hiravijayasuri and his disciples secured imperial decrees on Ahimsa from Emperor Akbar, which remain historically significant. Commitments from landlords, officials, and village leaders to non-violence also highlight the efforts made to create an Ahimsa-conducive environment.

Evidence of Ahimsa Propagation: Panjrapoles

A clear testament to Ahimsa propagation is the institution of Panjrapoles (animal shelters). While their origin is unclear, their widespread presence in Gujarat, Kathiawad, and Rajputana, even in small villages, suggests a significant role played by Kumarapala and Acharya Hemchandra in their establishment and propagation. These shelters protect animals and birds, with substantial annual expenditure and care for hundreds of thousands of creatures. Similar institutions exist outside Gujarat, primarily for cow protection. These animal welfare activities are a direct result of the efforts of Ahimsa propagating orders. Other practices like feeding ants, feeding aquatic creatures, and stopping sacrifices at shrines also stem from the Ahimsa sentiment.

Service to Humanity

Beyond animal welfare, the text emphasizes service to humanity. The tradition of charity in India ensured that no one suffered from hunger. Generous individuals like Jagadusha opened their granaries during severe famines. Given the resources dedicated to animals and birds, it's natural that human welfare was also a priority. India's renowned hospitality is directed towards humanity. The presence of millions of ascetics and mendicants reflects a deep-seated regard for fellow humans. Jain, Buddhist, and Brahmin scriptures command extensive service to the helpless, orphaned, and sick, reflecting the prevailing public sentiment. The argument that Ahimsa primarily extends to insects and animals, not humans, is refuted by historical evidence of extensive relief work during famines and natural calamities, financial support, distribution of food, medicine, and clothing.

Ahimsa and Daya (Compassion): Negative and Affirmative Forms

Ahimsa has two aspects:

Nishdhatmak (Negative): Not harming others, or preventing them from sharing one's suffering against their will.
Bhavatmak (Affirmative): Sharing in another's suffering or offering one's comfort and convenience to others. This affirmative aspect is known as Daya (compassion) or service.

While Ahimsa may have greater intrinsic value than Daya, it is not as immediately apparent. Ahimsa is described as svagamy (experienced by oneself), while Daya is lokgamy (perceptible to all). The benefits of Ahimsa are realized by others, often without them knowing the source. Daya, however, is immediately perceived by the beneficiary, making its practice evident and impactful.

Both Ahimsa and Daya are essential for a well-ordered society. Societies and nations with less oppression and greater protection of the weak are happier and more free. Conversely, self-centeredness leads to decline. Therefore, both Ahimsa and Daya are not only spiritually beneficial but also foundational for societal and national stability and prosperity.

Ease of Practice: While both are essential, Daya is generally easier to practice than Ahimsa. Ahimsa requires introspection and cannot be fully embraced without it. Daya, being affirmative, can be integrated into the lives of ordinary people, even without deep introspection. Ahimsa, being negative, liberates one from causing harm and can be followed methodically. Daya, being affirmative, requires careful consideration of context and circumstances.

Samthara (Sallekhana) and Ahimsa

The text addresses the apparent contradiction between the Jain prohibition of suicide and the practice of Samthara (voluntary fasting unto death). The core concept is that violence, in Jainism, is rooted in pramada (negligence), attachment, or aversion. The abandonment of these is Ahimsa.

Jain scriptures prohibit suicide motivated by desires for worldly or otherworldly gains, lust, or other selfish aspirations. Such acts are considered violence because they are driven by attachment. Samthara, if undertaken with similar motivations of fear or greed, is also considered violence and is not permitted.

The permitted Samthara is Samadhi-marana (peaceful death). This occurs when an individual faces an unavoidable choice between the body and spiritual virtue/restraint. One who truly values Dharma will prioritize their pure spiritual state over the physical body. This act is performed without anger, fear, or attachment to comfort. The focus remains on preserving their restrained life and equanimity.

While it is ideal to protect both body and restraint, when a choice is necessary, the spiritually inclined will choose restraint over the body, unlike ordinary individuals who might prioritize bodily survival. This ideal spiritual person is permitted Samthara. It's not for the weak, fearful, or greedy. Samthara is described as destroying the "house of the body" to save the "divine life of the soul," making it fundamentally non-violent.

Is Bodily Destruction Suicide?

Authors who label Samthara as suicide often fail to grasp its essence. An act like fasting unto death undertaken with a noble objective, without attachment or aversion, and with friendliness, as exemplified by Gandhi, would be praised and not called suicide. The intent and life path of such individuals are visible. In Jain tradition, even if the intent is pure, the understanding might be different. However, the scriptural injunction is based on Ahimsa.

Consider a person who cannot save their burning house. They would prioritize saving themselves. Similarly, a spiritual practitioner facing the potential loss of their restraint due to circumstances (like famine or incurable illness) might choose Samthara. This is not about destroying the body aimlessly, as the scriptures command protection of the body. Rather, it is about preserving restraint when all other options are exhausted. This act, performed under specific conditions, is considered Samadhi-marana and Ahimsa, not childish suicide.

The principle behind Samthara is the preservation of the subtle spiritual life. This viewpoint is also central to the concept of fasting unto death discussed by figures like Gandhi.

Spiritual Heroism, Not Violence

This practice is free from any hint of violence. It is for individuals aspiring for a spiritual life who are committed to their vows. The text mentions the historical practice of Jinakalpa (a solitary ascetic path) where individuals prepared themselves to die without external aid. These ascetics, after fulfilling their duties, would dedicate their lives to meditation and penance for twelve years.

The core idea is that if one cannot bear the breach of their vows and chooses to uphold their vows through death, it is beneficial. This is spiritual heroism, not the cowardice of fleeing death out of attachment to mundane life or the childishness of succumbing to despair. Such individuals are as fearless of death as they are prepared for it. They cherish life but are not attached to living. Samlekhana is not an invitation to death but a preparation for facing it fearlessly. Samthara may follow. This entire concept stems from deep immersion in Ahimsa and the virtues it fosters, and it remains accepted by discerning individuals in various forms.

Buddhist "Suicide"

The text addresses Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan's statement that Buddhism does not accept suicide, stating it is inaccurate. Even during the Buddha's time, monks like Channa and Valkali committed suicide due to incurable diseases, and the Tathagata accepted it. These monks were diligent. Their form of suicide differed from Jain Samthara in that they used weapons for a swift end, comparable to hara-kiri. Jain scriptures do not permit such violent means. The fundamental principle in both traditions is the protection of a life lived in samadhi (equanimity).

The term "suicide" is derogatory. Scholastic terms like "Samadhi-marana" and "Pandit-marana" are more appropriate. The stories of Channa and Valkali are found in the Majjhima Nikaya and Samyutta Nikaya, respectively. The text includes Prakrit verses illustrating that Samadhi-marana is not self-violation but a means to resist death, not desiring life or praying for death, and that the pure soul in virtuous conduct itself "sanctifies" Samthara.