Ambedkar Se Bhetvartta Me Anekant Charcha

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text, "Ambedkar se Bhetvartta me Anekant Charcha," by Darbarilal Kothiya, focusing on the conversation with Dr. B.R. Ambedkar:

Title: Conversation with Dr. Ambedkar: A Discussion on Anekanta Author: Darbarilal Kothiya Publisher: Z_Darbarilal_Kothiya_Abhinandan_Granth_012020.pdf

This document details a significant conversation that took place on November 14, 1948, in Bombay, between Dr. B.R. Ambedkar (Chairman of the Constitution Drafting Committee of independent India, considered the "mind" of modern India and a supreme legal scholar) and Darbarilal Kothiya. The meeting was facilitated by Professor Panditrao Madhvacharya Vidyamartanda, a renowned scholar.

The author notes that while Dr. Ambedkar was a legal luminary, he was also a scholar of philosophy, having deeply studied various philosophical systems, including Buddhism and Jainism. Kothiya had a copy of the first year's file of the Jain magazine "Anekant" with him, which contained an essay by Professor Madhvacharya on "Indian Philosophy," particularly highlighting the concept of Anekanta.

The conversation revolved around the Jain philosophy of Anekanta and its relevance:

1. The Name "Anekant": Dr. Ambedkar inquired about the meaning and significance of the magazine's name, "Anekant." Kothiya explained that "Anekant" is a core principle of Jainism, signifying that all objects in the universe possess multiple characteristics (plurality of attributes). He used the example of a pot:

• From the perspective of its material (clay), it is eternal (nitya, one, non-different).
• From the perspective of its transformations (shards, etc.), it is non-eternal (anitya, different). Therefore, the pot is simultaneously eternal and non-eternal, one and many, different and non-different – thus, it is Anekant. Kothiya further illustrated this with the example of family relationships (e.g., a person being a "father" to their child, a "son" to their parent, an "uncle" to their nephew), where multiple roles and relationships coexist simultaneously within the same individual, depending on the context of reference. The magazine is named "Anekant" to signify this multifaceted nature of reality.

2. The Purpose of Philosophy and Inter-Philosophical Disputes: Dr. Ambedkar expressed that the purpose of philosophy is to show the path to peace in the world. However, he observed that most philosophies engage in disputes, refutations, and criticisms of each other, rather than promoting peace. Kothiya agreed that philosophy's aim is indeed to guide towards peace, especially when blind faith and blind adherence to tradition become prevalent. He emphasized that philosophy encourages critical examination and acceptance of ideas based on reason and evidence, rather than mere authority. He cited the Jain principle: "I have no partiality towards any great person, nor aversion towards Kapila and others. Whatever statement is reasoned, that should be accepted." Kothiya attributed the disputes to the followers of philosophical traditions in later times who, due to partisanship and the desire to refute opposing views and establish their own, deviated from the original benevolent intentions of their founders. Jainism, he explained, offers Syadvada (theory of conditional predication) and Ahimsa (non-violence) as two peaceful methods to reconcile and resolve disputes. Ahimsa prevents aggression, while Syadvada harmonizes various perspectives and attributes, clarifying which attribute is relevant from which viewpoint (e.g., the substance view vs. the mode view). He clarified that Jainism does reject ekant (one-sided, absolute) viewpoints, as they lead to doubt and prevent correct knowledge. He stressed the need to refute false, absolute beliefs.

3. The Path of Synthesis (Samanya) vs. Refutation: Dr. Ambedkar questioned the effectiveness of the "path of synthesis," suggesting that only the refutation of opposition can bring peace and the right path to the public. Kothiya clarified his concept of synthesis through Syadvada. He explained that if someone holds one of two co-existing attributes of an object as absolute and refutes the other, Syadvada intervenes to show that "perhaps" (syat) from one perspective, a certain attribute exists, and "perhaps" from another perspective, another attribute exists. He used the example of the soul: Vedanta considers the soul absolutely eternal, while Buddhism considers it momentary. Jainism, through Syadvada, states that from the perspective of substance (dravya), the Vedantic view of the soul's eternality is correct, and from the perspective of its modifications (paryaya), the Buddhist view of the soul's momentariness is also correct. However, the soul is neither absolutely eternal nor absolutely momentary. Therefore, accepting the soul as partially eternal (from the substance view) and partially non-eternal (from the modification view) as both Vedantists and Buddhists do, represents the true nature of the soul. He reiterated that the rejection of false, absolutist beliefs is necessary, and the approach of "everything we say is true, everything they say is false" is not a proper method of determining reality. He drew an analogy with national identity: claiming "India is only for Hindus" leads to conflict, whereas acknowledging it as also belonging to Jains, Buddhists, Muslims, etc., resolves conflict. This, he argued, is the essence of Syadvada. When we speak or act with Syadvada in mind, we will find no opposition to truth that needs refutation.

4. The Policy of Service (Seva Dharma): Dr. Ambedkar praised the "service dharma" policy of Buddha and Mahavir, stating that its adoption can bring peace to the public. Kothiya agreed, affirming that service is an integral part of Ahimsa. An अहिंसक (non-violent person) should inherently be service-oriented. He noted that Mahavir and Buddha brought great peace through Ahimsa, and their "lokottara seva" (extraordinary service) encompassed the welfare and progress of the people. Mahatma Gandhi also achieved national independence through Ahimsa. Kothiya concluded that service, care, and assistance are all manifestations of Ahimsa, as alleviating the suffering of others is the practice of Ahimsa.

The conversation concluded with Dr. Ambedkar expressing his pleasure at the profound philosophical discussion, and Kothiya thanking him for his valuable time. The meeting was described as very friendly and courteous, lasting for about half an hour.