Dharm Aur Sanskruti

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Dharm aur Sanskruti" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, in English:

The text "Dharm aur Sanskruti" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, published by Z_Dharma_aur_Samaj_001072.pdf, argues that the true meaning of Dharma (Religion) lies in spiritual upliftment. It's about turning inward, shedding external desires and attachments, and moving towards one's pure, conscious, or self-nature. If this true spiritual essence is present in life, then outward practices, regardless of their form, can be considered part of Dharma. However, if there is no liberation from desires, or even no effort towards it, then any outward practices, no matter how they appear, cannot be considered Dharma; instead, they become Adharma (unrighteousness). In essence, Dharma is fundamentally about spiritual virtues like truth, non-violence, and non-possession, and it is not an external object, though it manifests through external life and behavior. If Dharma is the soul, then outward life and social interactions are its body.

The author contends that there should be no real difference between Dharma and Sanskruti (Culture). A society considered cultured but averse to Dharma is no different from a savage one. Thus, the true meaning of human culture is a life and behavior that is religious and just. However, in common understanding, culture is often equated with human-made arts, inventions, and knowledge. The text points out that these cultural manifestations are not always driven by the pure intention of human welfare. History shows that many arts, inventions, and disciplines lack a purely benevolent objective. Yet, society readily accepts and embraces them. Therefore, anything created by human intellect and effort that elevates society from one level to a new one falls under the category of culture. This type of culture does not necessarily have an inherent connection to true Dharma. This explains why even highly cultured civilizations can sometimes be found to be indifferent to Dharma. Examples given include the construction of Buddha's idols, the demolition of temples to build mosques and vice versa, and acts of plunder, all justified in the name of Dharma or the "restoration of Dharma." These are certainly not characteristics of truly cultured societies.

The author observes that ordinary people often confuse culture with Dharma. If something cultural gains widespread admiration, it is frequently praised as Dharma. Many naive individuals mistake these cultural objects for Dharma and become content with them, neglecting the importance of just and ethical social behavior. They might continue to celebrate under the banner of culture. The text suggests that if we consider Indian society specifically, the nation has lost much of its true strength in the name of culture. A society that has considered itself cultured for thousands of years, and superior to others in culture, but is morally weak, lacking in character, physically feeble, and deficient in the spirit of cooperation, and is internally divided, raises the question of whether it is truly cultured or not. The author states that culture being advanced while weakness is also at its peak is a contradictory notion. From this perspective, it would be a grave error to unequivocally consider Indian society as cultured.

The text further argues that just as India is not truly cultured in the present sense, it is also not truly religious. When historians and scholars refer to India as the abode of culture and religion, their statements can be interpreted in both ways. If their statements imply that all of Indian society or all Indian communities and traditions are cultured and religious, then their statements are indeed far from the truth. However, if their statements simply mean that in the country, specific sages or practitioners have been and continue to be cultured and religious, then their statements are not false.

From this discussion, the author concludes that if we consider ourselves cultured and religious based on the cultured and religious lives of our distant or recent ancestors, without actually being so, it is a form of self-deception and deception of others. Based on his limited study of history and observation of the present situation, the author believes that Indian society, which calls itself 'Aryan,' is actually far removed from culture and Dharma.

The text poses critical questions about the prevailing situation in India:

• How can there be such widespread illiteracy in a country with millions of Brahmins whose stated life's purpose is teaching and education?
• How can there be such widespread destitution and lack of support in society when there are millions of monks, ascetics, sadhus, and mendicants whose sole objective is stated to be selfless service to humanity while living a life of renunciation?

The author recalls the Bengal famine of 1943, where while skeletal remains lay on the streets, religious ceremonies and festivals involving immense expenditure on rituals, oblations, and donations were being observed elsewhere. This seemed as if human society was already perfectly content with food, clothing, and shelter, and the surplus life resources were being spent for the afterlife because they were no longer necessary in this world.

The text continues to highlight the true nature of Indian culture and religion in the year preceding the article (1947-48):

• Despite the immense suffering of millions of refugees, the hoarding and possessive tendency has not diminished.
• Few traders are found who do not engage in black marketing under the guise of religion.
• Bribery has become the sole practice of culture and religion.
• If culture and religion are to be found in a society where the majority of the population does not sincerely follow social norms and government laws, then it must be acknowledged that such culture and religion could also exist among thieves and robbers.
• For thousands of years, and especially on a large scale recently, women (mothers, sisters, and daughters) have been abducted. The author acknowledges that due to the weakness of men, women have become more vulnerable and orphaned, and it is a remembered duty to protect and own them. Yet, in their "cultured," "religious," and "advanced" state, many proud pandits, Brahmins, and those with similar mindsets refuse to accept women who have been abducted back into society. If a brave individual adopts an abducted woman, many sisters take more pleasure in disparaging or neglecting that woman's plight.

The author concludes that in whatever sphere of life one considers, it becomes evident that Indians are as far removed from culture and Dharma as they claim to be proponents of culture and Dharma. However, he acknowledges that the outward forms of culture and the superficial aspects of religion are so prevalent in India that perhaps no other country can compare. Living solely on the names of rare great men and boasting about past achievements is a sign of lack of culture and aversion to Dharma.

The article was published in "Naya Samaj" in July 1948.