Bramha Ane Sam

Here is a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text:

Book Title: Bramha ane Sam Author: Sukhlal Sanghavi Publisher: Z_Jaindharma_no_Pran_002157.pdf Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/249521/1

This text, "Bramha ane Sam" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, explores the foundational concepts of "Bramha" and "Sam" (equanimity/equality) in Indian philosophical thought. It argues that Indian philosophy originates from two distinct sources: the internal (self) and the external (nature).

The Origin of "Sam" (Equanimity):

The text posits that at an unknown time, humans began introspecting about their own existence: "What am I? What am I like? What is my relationship with other beings?" In seeking answers, they turned inward. This internal exploration led to the realization that they were conscious beings, and that other living beings also possessed consciousness. This realization fostered a sense of equality between oneself and other creatures. From this perspective, the various meanings and roles of equanimity (Sam) were introduced into philosophical discourse. This intellectual stream, originating from introspection, is identified as "Sam".

The Origin of "Bramha" (Brahman) and its Meanings:

The second source of intellectual inquiry is external nature. Those drawn to the diverse aspects, events, and driving forces of the natural world found inspiration for a poetic, or rather, poetically contemplative, approach. The text gives examples from the Rigveda, where poets described dawn, the ocean's waves, and the power of fire, personifying them as deities like Ushas, Varuna, and Agni. These prayers, addressed to various natural symbols, were seen as emanating from a divine essence or a single, profound underlying reality. These various natural symbols ultimately led to the concept of "Sat" (Existence/Truth) as the supreme reality.

Over time, the meaning of "Bramha" expanded. The sacrifices where these hymns were recited came to be called "Bramha." The texts describing these rituals and the priests performing them were also referred to as "Bramha," "Brahma," or "Brahman." Ultimately, the diverse aspects of nature and the divine essences were conceptualized as a single reality. The Rigveda itself suggests that deities like Indra, Mitra, Varuna, and Agni, though invoked by different names, are ultimately manifestations of the same one reality, "Sat." Thus, the manifold symbols of nature found their resting place in the singular, supreme reality of "Sat."

The Role of Brahmana and Shramana Ideologies:

The followers of "Sam" (equanimity) were termed "Shramana," and their contemplatives were called "Shramana." In Sanskrit, this transformed into "Shaman" and "Agam." The adherents and thinkers of "Bramha" were called "Brahmana." The former group remained primarily focused on the self (Atman), while the latter, inspired by the external world, reached the subtlest essence through its symbols, thus remaining primarily nature-focused. Although the initial impetus for their respective intellectual streams differed, both ultimately converged towards the same ultimate truth.

While these two streams sometimes appeared to diverge or even conflict, the self-focused "Sam" current ultimately established that consciousness is present throughout the entire universe and that this conscious element is inherently equal in all embodied beings. This led to the perception of consciousness even in earth, water, and plants. Conversely, the nature-focused "Bramha" current, after exploring various external aspects of the universe, turned inward, establishing in the Upanishadic period that the single, ultimate reality underlying the entire cosmos is also present within the individual embodied soul. Thus, the individual contemplation in the first stream resulted in universal equanimity, which then shaped the path of life. The second stream, in turn, established the non-dualistic view that the ultimate reality perceived at the root of the universe is the individual soul itself; the individual soul is not separate from this ultimate reality. This non-dualism also gave rise to various practices.

The text uses the analogy of the Ganga and Brahmputra rivers, which have different origins but eventually merge into the same ocean. Similarly, the self-focused and nature-focused intellectual currents, though nurtured differently, ultimately converged on the same foundational understanding. Any perceived differences were merely verbal or arose from historical conflicts.

The "Paramarth" (Ultimate Truth) Perspective: Unity Amidst Apparent Differences:

It is acknowledged that societal records and scriptures do note the differences and conflicts in thought and practice surrounding "Bramha" and "Sam," citing the mention of "Brahmana" and "Shramana" in Buddhist texts, Jain Agamas, and Ashoka's inscriptions. Even Patanjali, the commentator on the Yoga Sutras, referred to these two groups as being in eternal opposition. However, the text asserts that both streams, in their own ways, touch upon the same ultimate reality. The question then arises: from what perspective is this asserted?

This perspective is that of "Paramarth" (ultimate truth). The "Paramarth" view transcends differences in lineage, caste, origin, language, rituals, and attire to perceive the fundamental nature of things, thus naturally leading to non-duality and equality. While practical differences and conflicts arose between sects and their followers, leading to occasional strife, the records of these differences, such as the distinction between Brahmana and Shramana, have been preserved. Alongside these, the insights and experiences of wise individuals who attained the "Paramarth" perspective have also been recorded in various traditions and scriptures.

The Jain Agamas, which note the distinction between Brahmanas and Shramanas, also present a synthesis of the "true Brahmana" and the "true Shramana." Similarly, Buddhist texts offer such a synthesis. In the Mahabharata, Vyasa repeatedly defines the true Brahmana as a true Shramana. In the Vanaparva, Nahusha, in the form of a python, asks Yudhishthira who the true Brahmana is. In response, through Yudhishthira, Maharshi Vyasa states that all born are of mixed lineage. Citing Manu, Vyasa supports this by saying that all progeny are born mixed, and a Shudra with good conduct is superior even to a Brahmana by birth. A person becomes a true Brahmana only by possessing good character and wisdom. This is the "Paramarth" perspective.

The term "Brahma" is frequently mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita with noble connotations, and "Sam" is also used in a high sense. The phrase "Vandita Samadarshinah" (saluting those who see equally) is well-known. The Buddhist text Sutta Nipata emphasizes that the view that "others are inferior or lower, and I am superior" is not the "Paramarth" perspective.

The text reiterates the river analogy: though the Ganga and Brahmputra have different origins, their confluence is one. However, their riverbeds, surrounding populations, languages, and customs differ. Those engrossed in these differences fail to see the unity of their meeting point. Yet, this unity is real. Similarly, thought currents originating from diverse sources, and nurtured in different ways, are not recognized in their ultimate convergence by followers who are immersed in their specific contexts and outward manifestations. However, this truth remains inviolable. Reflective individuals who perceive this truth have continued to emerge across all traditions.

The Intertwining of "Brahmacharya" and "Sam":

Despite "Sam" (equanimity) being a guiding principle, terms like "Brahmacharya" and "Brahma Vihara" are so prevalent in Shramana traditions like Jainism and Buddhism that they are inseparable from these traditions. Likewise, in the tradition that espouses "Bramha" as its guiding principle, the term "Sam" has become so integrated that it cannot be separated from the "Brahma-bhava" (state of Brahman) or the "Brahmi Sthiti" (Brahmanic state).

This "Paramarth" perspective, which has existed since ancient times, has been carefully nurtured in later periods as well. Consequently, Vasubandhu, who was born a Brahmana but a follower of Buddhism, clearly stated in the Abhidharma Kosha that the ultimate reality is not merely the gross form. Asanga also conveyed a similar idea. This tradition of the "Paramarth" perspective is reflected in Narasimha Mehta, who is considered a sectarian saint. He sang the praises of Hari as the one element in the entire universe and then described a characteristic of Hari's devotees, Vaishnava Janas, as having "equal vision and renunciation of desire." Similarly, Upadhyaya Yashovijayji, also considered sectarian, stated that achieving equanimity is the attainment of the state of Brahman. Finally, Dr. A.B. Dhruve also elucidated the distinction between ultimate and practical perspectives and the validity of the ultimate perspective. When he refused food prepared by a Brahmana, he explained it as a family tradition of the Nagar community, stating that he did not consider its reality to be logically proven but merely followed the tradition. He pointed to the true perspective elsewhere.

In his preface to the Jain Agama Sutra Krutanga, he wrote: "One does not become a 'Brahmana' without becoming a 'Jaina,' and one does not become a 'Jaina' without becoming a 'Brahmana.' The essence of Jainism lies in conquering the senses and mental dispositions, while the essence of Brahmanism lies in embodying the vastness of the universe within the soul."

From this brief overview, we can grasp that intellect ultimately rests in a single truth. We can also understand that despite the existence of any number of practical differences and contradictions, the ultimate truth perspective is never disregarded.

(This is an excerpt from a presidential address delivered in the Philosophy section of the Gujarati Sahitya Parishad in 1959, held in Ahmedabad.)