Dharm Nirpekshta Aur Bauddh Dharma

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Dharm Nirpekshta aur Bauddh Dharma" by Sagarmal Jain, focusing on the relationship between secularism and Buddhism:

The text begins by highlighting the interconnectedness of the modern world due to scientific and industrial progress. Despite this proximity, it laments that human hearts are growing distant due to self-interest, leading to increasing religious conflicts, oppression, and violence. In this context, the concept of secularism (धर्मनिरपेक्षता) becomes crucial for humanity's salvation.

The author clarifies that secularism, often equated with the English term 'secularism,' does not mean irreligion or lack of ethics. Instead, a secular state (सेक्युलर स्टेट) is one that does not endorse any particular religion as its national religion, but rather grants freedom, equal opportunities for development, and equal respect to all religions practiced within its borders. Secularism is defined as equal treatment towards all religions (सभी धर्मों के प्रति समव्यवहार), not the absence of religion. Mahatma Gandhi's concept of "Sarvadharma Samabhav" (सर्वधर्म समभाव - equal respect for all religions) is presented as a more meaningful and significant synonym for secularism. True secularism involves accepting the relative value of all religions and providing them equal opportunities for growth, moving beyond religious prejudice and dogma.

The text emphasizes that the word 'dharma' itself has multiple meanings, including the nature of things, duty, and a specific path of spiritual practice or worship. In the context of secularism, 'dharma' refers to these methods of spiritual practice and worship, which are often linked to specific ethical codes. Therefore, secularism means acknowledging the relative truth and value of various paths of worship and spiritual practice (उपासना या साधना की विभिन्न पद्धतियों की सापेक्षिक सत्यता और मूल्यवत्ता), ensuring that no single religion, sect, ritual, or worship method is prioritized, and all are granted an equal right to develop and survive.

When examining this concept in relation to Buddhism, the text acknowledges that Buddhism is a specific religion and thus, its understanding of secularism is not identical to the general definition. While it doesn't necessarily extend beyond respect for other religions, Buddhism possesses strong foundations for "Sarvadharma Samabhav" and religious tolerance (सर्वधर्मसमभाव एवं धार्मिक सहिष्णुता).

The author posits that Indian culture and thought have always been liberal and syncretic. This liberality is evident in Hinduism, which has become a vast repository of diverse spiritual practices and worship methods. Buddhism, as a part of this Indian intellectual tradition, has also consistently exemplified religious syncretism and equal respect for all religions. It has never sought to eliminate rival religions by force. This syncretic approach led to Buddhism being absorbed into the broader Hindu fold in India, but outside India, it has expanded globally by harmonizing with the cultures of various countries like Bhutan, Tibet, China, Japan, Thailand, and Sri Lanka. This expansion was achieved not through power, but through its liberal and syncretic perspective (उदार और समन्वयशील दृष्टि), which integrated local customs and deities, making Buddhism an integral part of those cultures rather than an external imposition.

A core principle of Buddhism that underpins secularism and equal respect for all religions is the abandonment of attachment to views (दृष्टिराग का प्रहाण), also known as "ditthi parivasa" (दृष्टिराग). Buddhism mandates that individuals rise above their preconceived notions and prejudices. The Buddha's message was not about adopting a particular viewpoint, as all viewpoints are forms of craving and grasp only a part of the truth. The essence of the Buddha's teachings lies in transcending these views. Transcending attachment to views is what can be termed as secularism (दृष्टिराग से ऊपर उठना ही दृष्टिनिरपेक्षता है और इसे ही हम धर्मनिरपेक्षता कह सकते हैं). While this is a negative effort, unlike the positive approach of Jainism's anekanta (many-sidedness), Buddhism discusses right and wrong views, with right view being essentially a state of being free from attachment to views or being viewless.

The text explains that Buddhism considers all views to be absolute (एकान्तिक) and that attachment to any view is a form of craving. Those who remain bound by such attachments are not in right view and, conversely, cause conflict and disharmony. Conversely, those who rise above attachment to any particular view neither engage in disputes nor become bound; they become seekers of world peace.

Quoting from the Sutta Nipata, the Buddha emphasizes that clinging to one's own views and deeming others foolish leads to conflict. Those who abandon all views do not create strife. Attachment to views binds, and what binds also breaks from elsewhere, leading to conflict and destruction. The wise do not fall into the views of ordinary people. The Buddha also states that those who declare their religion as perfect and others' as inferior are not superior in religion; they are merely denigrating others. One who adheres to a specific view or is attached to a particular doctrine cannot attain purification. The discerning person does not fall into the craving for views but overcomes all views, scriptures, and thoughts, becoming free from them and unbound to the world.

Therefore, Buddhism, by condemning attachment to views, conveys the message that individuals should not be afflicted by prejudice in the spiritual and meditative realms. Without abandoning attachment to views, one cannot attain right view or the path to Nirvana. The great Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna states that the realization of truth is only possible by rising above the confines of views, as all philosophies obscure it. Thus, Buddhism's principle of abandoning attachment to views is a significant basis for secularism. The Buddha's message has always been about transcending dogma and prejudice, believing that truth can only be realized by rising above them.

The Buddhist principle of Vibhajjavada (विभज्यवाद - analysis or discernment) also teaches that to see truth in its entirety, one must view it from a non-exclusive perspective, not a singular one. Seeing truth from multiple perspectives is considered wisdom. The Theragatha states that one who sees truth from only one side is a fool, while the wise man sees it from many sides. Disputes arise from one-sided views, as only those with limited perspectives quarrel. When we see truth from multiple sides, we apprehend it more broadly without being confined to a single ideology.

The Buddha describes the two fruits of dispute: incompleteness and one-sidedness, and the cause of conflict and disharmony. Nirvana, the ultimate goal of life, resides on the ground of non-dispute. The Buddha advises that the practitioner who understands Nirvana as a realm of non-dispute should not engage in disputes. Partisanship and debate are not the actions of those on the path to Nirvana; they are merely a form of "wrestling" or "malla-vidya." The Buddha suggests sending those who challenge their opponents like wrestlers to their opponents, as those who are liberated have no reason for conflict. He also states that those who proclaim their own views as truth should be told that there is no one to debate with them when disputes arise. Buddhism also considers it improper to praise one's own views and condemn others'. The Buddha states that purity is here and not in other groups; one who is excessively attached to their own view is a heretic (mithya-drushti). Therefore, attachment to views is wrong view, and the abandonment of attachment to views is right view.

The text identifies wisdom (प्रज्ञा) as the controlling element of religious conflict. It argues that religious fanaticism and conflict arise because people prioritize faith over reason and logic in religious contexts. Faith devoid of reason and contemplation becomes blind faith, which religious leaders exploit for their self-interest. Therefore, while faith is accepted in religion, it must not be without discernment and contemplation. Buddhism consistently prioritizes reason and wisdom over faith. The Buddha himself advised the Kalamas not to accept his words simply because they were spoken by him or because he was the object of their faith.

In the realms of spirituality and practice, everything should be accepted after weighing it on the scales of reason and testing it by experience. The Buddha never wished to curtail the freedom of thought of other thinkers. Instead, he always urged people to test his teachings by their own experience and weigh them on the scales of truth, accepting them if they found them to be true. The Buddha states that only when one knows through self-experience that these actions are wholesome, blameless, and lead to happiness should they be accepted. He expounds a religion of reason rather than faith, thereby elevating individuals above religious fanaticism and dogmatism. One should not accept something merely out of respect for the teacher. Unless reason or wisdom is considered the controller of faith in religious life, humanity cannot be saved from religious conflicts and the "holis" played in the name of religion. While faith is necessary for religion, it must be guided by reason. It is essential to weigh all scriptural pronouncements and interpretations on the scales of reason and evaluate them in the context of the current era. Until this happens, the narrowness that has entered religious life cannot be eradicated. Reason is the element that can make our vision liberal and broad. Faith is necessary, but it must be a follower of reason. The need of the hour is for intellectual religion, and the Buddha, by giving the message of intellectual religion, has urged us to rise above religious fanaticism and dogma.

The Middle Path (मध्यममार्ग) is presented as the foundation of secularism in Buddhism. Just as a river flows between its banks without getting entangled, Buddhism journeys by avoiding exclusive views. The Middle Path means not accepting any single viewpoint. Both worldly indulgence and self-mortification are considered extremes for Buddhism. The Middle Path's distinctiveness lies in the renunciation of extremes. It means not accepting either side of mutually contradictory doctrines. The Buddha's Middle Path exemplifies a non-exclusive perspective. While he emphasizes not getting entangled in absolute views, religious secularism also shares this ideal of adopting a broader perspective without getting entangled in a particular religion or dogma. The Buddha states that only those with limited vision quarrel and get entangled. The Middle Path signifies rising above disputes, and in this sense, it is a proponent of secularism. Buddhism believes that the ultimate goal of life is the cessation of craving and that rising above attachment and ego is the highest ideal. Attachment to views is a form of conceptual craving or ego, and as long as it exists, the practice of the Middle Path is not possible. Therefore, the practitioner of the Middle Path acts by rising above these attachments to views, as stated in Buddhist philosophy: the wise are those who abandon both extremes and remain in the middle. In essence, a neutral perspective (माध्यस्थ दृष्टि) is secularism.

The author concludes by examining Buddha's life and religious tolerance. The Buddha himself was not attached to any particular religion or spiritual practice. In his early spiritual journey, he engaged with numerous thinkers and practitioners and adopted their methods. Even though he later renounced them when they did not bring him satisfaction, he always held a respectful attitude towards all practitioners. After attaining enlightenment, he desired to share his discovered truth with them. Although most of these masters had passed away by then, the respect shown by the Buddha towards them signifies his liberal and broad perspective. While criticism of other contemporary religious figures like Purna Kashyapa, Makkhali Gosala, and Ajita Kesakambali is found in Buddhism, it is attributed to later sectarian prejudices. It is unlikely that the great-minded Buddha was characterized by such dogmatism and sectarianism.

Furthermore, Buddhism is fundamentally a moral code of conduct (नैतिक आचार पद्धति) rather than a ritualistic religion. As a moral code, it can remain free from religious prejudices and dogmatism. According to Buddhism, the cessation of craving is the supreme goal of life, and all efforts to achieve this cessation are not tied to any single religious tradition. Buddhism accepts all methods that are useful in breaking through craving. Being virtuous, meditative, and wise are the tenets of Buddhist thought, but this cannot be called solely the religion of Buddhists. It is the universal and eternal nature of religion, and by adopting it, Buddhism exemplifies a broad and liberal perspective. In Buddhism, 'dharma' (as a practice) is a means, not something to be held onto; it too must be let go of. Therefore, it is not attached to any specific path of practice.

In conclusion, the text argues that differences in practices and conduct based on individual variations are natural. Therefore, a slogan for "one religion" for human unity and the end of human conflicts is not only impossible but also unnatural. Such differences will inevitably remain. This is why the Buddha taught not one vehicle but diverse vehicles (paths of Dharma). The need today is to integrate these differences in practice within a broader perspective, accept their usefulness, and construct a life perspective that, while accepting the relative value of all, can contribute to human welfare.