Bhagavana Mahavir Aur Aushdh Vigyan

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Bhagavan Mahavir aur Aushadh Vigyan" (Lord Mahavir and the Science of Medicine), authored by Muni Darshanvijay, based on the provided PDF excerpt:

Book Title: Bhagavana Mahavir aur Aushadh Vigyan (Lord Mahavir and the Science of Medicine) Author: Muni Darshanvijay (Triputi) Publisher: Bhikhabhai Kothari, Mumbai

Central Thesis: The book strongly refutes the claim that Lord Mahavir consumed meat. It argues that the commonly cited scriptural passage referring to "Kovaya Sharira" (कवोय सरीरा) does not denote meat but rather medicinal preparations made from specific fruits, particularly Bijora (Citron). The author aims to demonstrate that Lord Mahavir was an epitome of Ahimsa (non-violence) and his practices were entirely consistent with this principle.

Context and Motivation: The author states that the book is a rebuttal to certain scholars, specifically mentioning Shri Dharmanand Kosambi, who have falsely accused Lord Mahavir of being a meat-eater. This accusation is seen as a misinterpretation of Jain scriptures and a distortion of historical facts, stemming from a lack of complete understanding of Jain philosophy and the Prakrit language. The book aims to set the record straight and defend the integrity of Lord Mahavir and Jainism.

Key Arguments and Methodology:

1. Rejection of Meat Consumption: The book begins by asserting Jainism's absolute prohibition of meat consumption and highlights Lord Mahavir as a living embodiment of Ahimsa. The author finds the accusation of Mahavir consuming meat to be a gross misrepresentation.

2. Analysis of the Key Scriptural Passage: The core of the argument revolves around the interpretation of a passage from the Bhagavati Sutra (Chapter 15) which describes Lord Mahavir suffering from a severe fever and bile-related illness. The passage mentions a devotee named Revati preparing certain items for him. The controversial terms are "duve kovaya sharira" (दुवे कवोय सरीरा) and "paritasika majjara kadaye kukkura mansa" (पारियासिए मज्जार कड़ए कुक्कुड़ मंसए).

3. Linguistic and Semantic Analysis: The author dedicates significant portions of the book to a detailed linguistic analysis of the Prakrit terms. This includes:

   • Jain Sutra Composition and Interpretation: Explaining the interpretive methods and evolving nature of Jain scriptures, suggesting that interpretations can vary if context and stylistic nuances are not understood.
   • Polysemy of Prakrit and Sanskrit Words: Demonstrating how many words in ancient Indian languages have multiple meanings, particularly concerning names of plants and fruits which sometimes resemble animal names. This is crucial for understanding how terms like "Kovaya" and "Kukkura" could refer to plants rather than animals.
   • Modern Polysemy: Briefly touching upon how even contemporary words can have different meanings depending on context.
   • The Ascetic's Life and Devotee's Character: Emphasizing that both Muni Singh (who fetched the medicine) and Revati were devout Jains. It's highly improbable that such individuals would offer meat to Lord Mahavir, especially given the strict Jain adherence to Ahimsa.
   • Science of Disease, Medicine, and Regulations: Discussing the nature of the illness (bile-related fever with burning sensation and blood-related issues) and the types of remedies considered beneficial in such conditions.

4. Detailed Breakdown of Controversial Terms:

   • "Kovaya" (कवोय): The author argues that "Kovaya" refers not to a pigeon but to a type of edible plant or fruit. Several Sanskrit and Prakrit texts are cited where "Kapot" (related to "Kovaya") is used to denote plants like white gourd (Kushmand), parijata, and citron. The book provides extensive lists of plants whose names are similar to animal names.
   • "Sharira" (सरीरा): This term, used in the masculine gender, is interpreted not as a "body" (which would typically be neuter when referring to a corpse or animal carcass) but as a "preparation" or "dish" (like a preserve or jelly made from fruit).
   • "Duve" (दुवे): This quantifier indicates "two," and when combined with "Kovaya Sharira," it means "two preparations of the Kovaya fruit" (likely Kushmand/Bijora).
   • "Paritasika" (पारियासिए): This adjective means "very old" or "well-aged," referring to a preserved preparation, not fresh meat.
   • "Majjara" (मज्जार): The author explains that "Majjara" can refer to a type of cooling plant or a specific preparation used to cool the body. It does not mean cat.
   • "Kadaye" (कड़ए): This term is linked to "Majjara" and means "prepared" or "infused" with the essence of the "Majjara" plant.
   • "Kukkura" (कुक्कुड़): Similar to "Kovaya," this term is argued to refer to a specific medicinal plant, possibly a type of gourd or a beneficial herb, not a dog.
   • "Mansa" (मंसए): This is the most debated term. The author vehemently argues that in this context, it does not mean "meat." Instead, it refers to "preparation," "dish," or "essence" derived from plants, especially when used in conjunction with specific medicinal plants. The masculine gender of the word further supports its non-meat meaning in this context, as "meat" would typically be associated with a different gender or more direct terms.

5. Specific Medicinal Properties: The book elaborates on the properties of plants like Kushmand (white gourd/ash gourd), Bijora (citron), and others mentioned. It highlights that these are known for their cooling effects and are beneficial in treating conditions like bile-related fever, inflammation, and digestive issues, which aligns with Lord Mahavir's described ailment. In contrast, meat is described as being heating and detrimental to such conditions.

6. Refutation of Meat-Related Interpretations: The author systematically debunks the literal interpretation of "Kovaya" and "Kukkura" as animals and "Mansa" as meat, citing dictionaries, commentaries, and the context of medicinal practices.

7. The Case of Revati: The book details the story of Revati, a devout Jain laywoman, emphasizing her piety and commitment to Jain principles. The idea that she would offer meat to Lord Mahavir is presented as absurd and contradictory to her character and Jain teachings.

8. Support from Jain Scholars: The author mentions that ancient Jain commentators and scholars have also interpreted the passage to mean plant-based preparations, reinforcing their argument.

Conclusion: The book concludes by reiterating that Lord Mahavir never consumed meat. He was a pure practitioner of Ahimsa. The passage in question refers to medicinal preparations of fruits like Bijora (Citron) or Kushmand (White Gourd), which were used to treat his fever. The author urges readers to understand the true meaning of scriptures through rigorous linguistic, contextual, and scientific analysis to prevent misinterpretations and uphold the teachings of Lord Mahavir.

Overall Tone and Purpose: The book is polemical in nature, written with the clear intention of correcting what the author perceives as a malicious distortion of Jain history and philosophy. It is written with scholarly rigor, employing linguistic analysis, scriptural references, and medical knowledge to support its claims.