Aparigraha

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Aparigraha" by Dr. Veena Jain, based on the provided PDF excerpt:

The book "Aparigraha" by Dr. Veena Jain delves into the Jain principle of non-possession or non-attachment, highlighting its profound significance for both individual and societal well-being. The author begins by observing that modern humanity is caught in a relentless pursuit of material desires, chasing after illusions without understanding the ultimate goal or destination of this frantic race.

The core reason for this entanglement in the web of worldly attachments, according to Jainism, is the increase in parigraha (possession/attachment). The text quotes scriptures like the Vyakaran Sutra and Acharanga Sutra to emphasize that there is no greater bondage for living beings than parigraha. The Acharanga Sutra even states that all suffering experienced by the soul arises from association with external substances, advocating for complete renunciation of such connections.

What is Parigraha?

The text defines parigraha as the soul becoming bound. It is described as that which surrounds an individual from all sides. In Jainism, murchha (infatuation or strong attachment) is identified as the true essence of parigraha. While collecting necessary items for life is not inherently wrong, the characteristic of murchha lies in not using those possessions oneself and not allowing others to use them. This attachment is deemed the root cause of worldly wandering.

Importantly, parigraha is not solely about the presence of objects but about the desire for them. Not only the possession of what is acquired but also the yearning for what is not yet obtained constitutes parigraha. The text states that for one whose mind is consumed by attachment, the entire world is parigraha. Conversely, for one free from infatuation, possessiveness, and attachment, even possessing the entire world does not make them a possessor. Where there is desire, there is parigraha; where desire is renounced, parigraha is renounced, regardless of whether one is a householder or an ascetic.

Distinguishing Objects from Attachment:

The book clarifies that Lord Mahavir, in the Dashavaikalika Sutra, did not consider material objects themselves as parigraha, but rather murchha (infatuation) as the real parigraha. The existence of an object is one thing, and the attitude of possessiveness and infatuation towards it is another. Scriptures may refer to objects as parigraha to encourage detachment from them, as shedding this possessive attitude is what lightens the individual.

The text uses analogies to illustrate this. A person's attachment to possessions should be like a fly that enjoys the sweetness of jaggery but flies away with a gust of wind, rather than a bee that clings to it even when struck by winds, ultimately leading to its demise. If one can live in the world like the fly, they can break free from all bonds instantly. Lord Mahavir, therefore, does not attack objects directly but attacks the attitude of parigraha.

Internal vs. External Parigraha:

The book emphasizes that parigraha is determined by internal inclination, not external possessions. A beggar with tattered clothes and no vows is considered a possessor if he harbors attachment, even without many possessions. In contrast, King Chetak, despite his wealth, was non-possessive because he had conquered the attitude of parigraha. Where there is longing, greed, possessiveness, and attachment, there is parigraha, whether external objects are present or not. Where these desires are absent, even the vast wealth of a Chakravarti (universal monarch) is considered aparigraha.

The Dashavaikalika Sutra is quoted again to state that the clothes, bowls, blankets, and brushes used by ascetics are for the protection of their vows and are not held with a possessive attitude. If attachment to parigraha remains in the heart, then outwardly observing vows of non-possession or limited possession is meaningless, as the saying goes, "Without the inner knot of attachment, outer renunciation is futile."

Balancing Individual and Societal Needs:

Jainism, the book explains, harmonizes idealism and realism. While an individual is part of a family, society, and nation, and cannot completely detach from them, they also cannot neglect the needs of these collective entities. Therefore, religious scriptures prescribe the vow of Iccha Pariman (limitation of desires) rather than Avashyakta Pariman (limitation of needs). Lord Mahavir did not necessitate the acquisition of wealth for livelihood, considering the acquisition of wealth for necessary needs as valid, but he viewed unnecessary accumulation as poisonous to society.

The Uttaradhyayana Sutra is cited, stating that the unnecessary accumulation of wealth traps the country and society in a web of problems. Jainism advocates for living with restraint, keeping desires within the bounds of necessity. Exceeding these limits is considered inappropriate, and this is the ideal of the vow of aparigraha.

Aparigraha vs. Dana (Charity):

The text differentiates between charity (dana) and aparigraha. While both aim for human welfare, they are not equivalent. Charity involves accumulating possessions and then donating them, bringing explicit welfare to the recipient and often fame to the donor. Aparigraha, on the other hand, involves renouncing the very act of accumulation, leading to explicit welfare for the individual and implicit welfare for others. Taking from people and then showering it upon them, the book argues, fosters ego. Giving back to the same people is not a complete donation.

Jainism places greater importance on aparigraha than dana. Charity is likened to washing mud off feet after they have been soiled, while aparigraha is about preventing the mud from getting on the feet in the first place. As moralists say, avoiding the mud altogether is better than washing it off.

The Ultimate Goal of Aparigraha:

Aparigraha is described as a step towards great penance, a sentiment oriented towards liberation. Lord Mahavir stated that it involves abandoning all internal and external attachments. This can be interpreted in several ways: from a societal perspective, it means the absence of accumulation and helping others' prosperity by minimizing one's own needs. From a spiritual perspective, it means reducing the "self" to such an extent that only the "other" remains, leaving no trace of "self."

The text briefly touches upon similar concepts in Buddhist and Vedantic philosophies, noting that while their approaches differ (one in reducing the self, the other in expanding it), the ultimate goal is the same: to erase the distinction between "self" and "other." Jain philosophy presents this as anāsakti (non-attachment). The existence of differences does not hinder development, but clinging to any single object becomes the greatest obstacle to progress. This clinging, the text concludes, is what Jainism calls murchha.

In essence, the principle of aparigraha serves as a foundational mantra for the development of both society and the individual.