Dharmni Ane Ena Dhyeyani Pariksha

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Gujarati text from "Dharmni ane Ena Dhyeyani Pariksha" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, focusing on the key themes and arguments presented:

Overall Theme: Examining Religion and its Goals

The text critically analyzes the nature of religion, its goals, and the discrepancies between theoretical and practical religious observances. It emphasizes the importance of reasoned examination of religious practices and beliefs, contrasting it with blind adherence.

Key Arguments and Sections:

1. Education is like Sunlight:

   • Education is compared to sunlight because it not only dispels external darkness but also cannot tolerate darkness within itself.
   • True education, by illuminating itself, can then shed light on other subjects like religion, history, society, and politics.
   • Just as a skilled physician first diagnoses their own ailments, education must first understand and rectify its own ambiguities.

2. Where There is Religion, There is Examination:

   • Religion inherently involves thought and examination. A religion that does not encourage or tolerate contemplation loses its soul.
   • Examining religion is akin to giving it life. Even a review of the examination process is ultimately beneficial.
   • While authoritarian regimes may suppress critical thought, genuine religious examination is a vital process.

3. Dangers in Examining Religion:

   • While religion itself isn't inherently dangerous to examine, pitfalls exist. These include a lack of complete intellectual power, an inability to maintain balance in thought, or a lack of appreciative audience.
   • The primary danger in examining a subtle subject like religion is self-interest (swarth). Anyone driven by self-gain or the fear of losing it cannot impartially examine religion. Extreme caution is necessary.

4. The Universal Desire for Goodness:

   • The author posits that even staunch socialists who wish to abolish religion desire the destruction of virtues like compassion, truth, contentment, renunciation, love, and forgiveness. This is unlikely.
   • Conversely, religious individuals, regardless of their sect, desire to eradicate vices like falsehood, hypocrisy, anger, violence, and immorality.
   • Both groups, the perceived "destroyers" of religion (socialists) and the devout, agree on the importance of cultivating good qualities and eradicating vices. The disagreement lies not in the what but the how and the what constitutes religion.

5. Disagreements are About External Forms, Not Core Virtues:

   • The fundamental disagreement is not about the intrinsic virtues (like purity of conduct or devotion) which are universally accepted as part of religion.
   • The disputes arise from external manifestations, practices, or behaviors that are presented as religion. These disagreements are as old as human history and can be categorized into three types:
     • Individual: Rules related to personal choices like food, bathing, etc. (e.g., one person considers eating roots irreligious, another considers it religious during fasting).
     • Social: External behaviors deemed religious (e.g., building temples vs. opposing their construction; differences in idol worship or practices within the same deity worship; varying views on marriage, widow remarriage, and caste).
     • Public: Practices affecting the general populace where religious interpretations differ (e.g., killing disease-carrying rodents or dangerous animals for public welfare; defecating in public spaces).

6. The Basis of Right and Wrong is Pure Devotion (Nishtha):

   • Practices, rituals, and rules that originate from pure devotion (shuddha nishtha) can generally be considered religious. Those not born from pure devotion are irreligious.
   • The same action can stem from pure devotion in one person and impure devotion in another.
   • Examples of pure devotion: Building temples out of genuine faith, or opposing temple construction to redirect resources for greater good; permitting widow remarriage for the welfare of the widow; advocating the killing of harmful animals for public health.
   • Examples of impure devotion: Supporting institutions for personal gain, living off the fame of holy places for livelihood, supporting widow remarriage without considering the widow's well-being but for other selfish reasons.

7. No External Rule is Universally Religious or Irreligious:

   • No external vow, rule, behavior, or ritual can be definitively declared as always auspicious or inauspicious for everyone in all times.
   • The religious or irreligious nature of these external practices depends entirely on the devotion (nishtha) and honest understanding of the practitioner.
   • Even actions like using a weapon can be performed with pure intention (to save a life) or impure intention (for selfish gain).

8. The Outcome Argument is Flawed:

   • Some argue that external practices, even if not born from pure devotion, can lead to it over time, thus making them religious from an outcome perspective.
   • The author counters that external practices do not necessarily generate pure devotion; often, the institutionalization of these practices for religious purposes leads to the exploitation of self-interest. Examples include religious administrative bodies becoming autocratic or individuals misusing religious funds.
   • Therefore, neither the cause nor the effect of external practices can exclusively define them as religious.

9. Jain Tradition: The Core is Unchanging, the Forms Adapt:

   • Jain scriptures, like others, consider the philosophical, virtuous (taatvik) aspect of religion as one and eternal for all.
   • However, practical (vyavaharik) religion, with its external forms, is not considered uniform or eternal.
   • Those who clearly understand the distinction between philosophical and practical religion, and their interrelationship, are not disturbed by disputes over practical religious matters.

10. The Distinction Between Ideal and Manifestation (Soul, Body, Ornaments):

    • The Jain tradition defines philosophical religion through three elements: Deva (Divine), Guru (Teacher), and Dharma (Religion/Duty).
      • Deva: The state of complete purity of the soul.
      • Guru: The true spiritual practice for achieving that purity.
      • Dharma: Mindful, appropriate restraint.
    • These are the "soul" of Jainism. The body of religion is the sentiment that preserves and propagates these elements.
    • Manifestations (like temples, idols, worship, rituals, rules about food and behavior) are like the clothes and ornaments of this body. They are secondary to the core principles.
    • Analogy: The soul needs a body to function, just as a body needs clothes for protection and adornment. However, clothes and ornaments are not the body itself and can change or be discarded without harm to the body. Similarly, external religious practices are not the essence of religion.

11. The "Destruction of Religion" Cry:

    • When external religious practices are questioned or reformed, a segment of people cry out that religion itself is being destroyed.
    • This is likened to a child crying when dirty clothes are removed or a young woman crying when her hair is cut due to infection. The reaction is emotional and based on attachment to the external form, not the essence.
    • The author argues that those who make these cries either don't understand the distinction between the philosophical and practical aspects of religion, or they are so intolerant that they mistake changes in external practices for the destruction of the core.

12. The True Reason for Such Outcry:

    • The cry of "destruction of religion" often arises when people have become accustomed to a comfortable and idle life supported by the established reputation and popular devotion towards external religious practices, without any corresponding effort, sacrifice, or duty. To protect this lifestyle, they resist any change.

13. Critique of Those Who Declare Religion Eternal but React to Any Change:

    • The author addresses religious leaders who declare their religion immutable and eternal, yet immediately cry "destruction" when any differing opinion or practice emerges. This is a contradiction.
    • If religion is truly eternal, it should remain unaffected by any external attempts at change. If it can be destroyed by mere thought, then its eternality is false. In either case, the outcry is futile.

14. Examining the Goal of Religion:

    • The text then shifts to examining the goals of religion.
    • Theistic (Aastik) Critique of Materialists (Charvak): Theistic proponents accuse materialists of being atheists because they deny an existence beyond the present life. This denial, they argue, leads to the rejection of karma, moral responsibilities, and a disregard for social and spiritual well-being. Materialists are accused of having a narrow, self-serving view.
    • The Karma Theory (Karmavadi): The core of this theory is that every action, good or bad, has a consequence that manifests in this life or future lives. This perspective is deemed "long-sighted" because it spans across time.
    • Contrast with Materialists: Materialists, focusing only on the present, are considered "short-sighted."

15. Karma-Vadis (Theists) vs. Charvaks: A Practical Comparison:

    • The author questions whether Karma-Vadis (theists) actually live better lives than Charvaks, and whether their worldview leads to a more prosperous existence.
    • Charvak's Practicality: A Charvak might be selfish, taking advantage of others for personal comfort, but their focus remains on immediate, tangible benefit.
    • Theist's Hypocrisy: A theist might have a more expansive worldview but often fails to live up to its principles. They might accept impure conditions, avoid effort to improve things, or avoid conflict, all under the guise of higher spiritual goals ("It's all written in destiny," "Why bother with others?"). This often results in them failing to improve their immediate situation and not achieving their supposed higher goals, making them worse off than the Charvaks.

16. The Misunderstanding of the Goal of Religion (Perlok-sudharana - Improving the Afterlife):

    • The prevalent understanding that the goal of religion is solely to improve the afterlife (perlok-sudharana) is flawed.
    • This misunderstanding leads to neglecting present responsibilities. People might say: "The present life is fleeting," "Everyone is selfish," "What is destined will happen," "Why try to improve others?" This leads to inaction and irresponsibility.
    • This creates a cyclical problem: by neglecting the present, they are believed to be working towards the afterlife, but this neglect will carry over as a negative "sanskar" (impression) into future lives, where they will repeat the same pattern of neglecting the present for the afterlife.
    • Jain Society Example: The Jain community, considered theistic and karma-vadi, claims to aim for improving the afterlife. However, the author observes that they often fail to achieve even this-worldly comfort (like the Charvak) and simultaneously fail to properly manage their present responsibilities, thus not truly achieving their stated goal.

17. The Real Goal of Religion: Duty, Responsibility, and Effort:

    • The author concludes that the true goal of religion should not be the exclusive pursuit of the afterlife or mere present-day pleasure.
    • Instead, the goal should be a clear understanding of one's individual and social duties (kartavya), a sense of responsibility (jawabdaari) towards these duties, and the vigour and effort (purusharth) to fulfill them.
    • If this understanding and practice are adopted, individuals and society as a whole will transform for the better, regardless of their specific philosophical stance (Charvak or theist).

18. Conclusion:

    • The text argues that the success of religion and life's progress depend on embracing duty, responsibility, and effort as the primary goals.
    • This approach would enable individuals to contribute positively to their families, society, and nation, ultimately leading to a more equitable and prosperous life for all.
    • The author suggests that by focusing on these practical aspects, the Jain community and society at large can reach a level of excellence comparable to any modern civilization.
    • Finally, it clarifies that even a pragmatic approach like Charvakism, when focused on stable, long-term personal happiness, necessitates fulfilling family and social responsibilities, as worldly happiness is interconnected with others. Therefore, both perspectives, when properly understood and implemented, allow for the concept of responsibility.