Dharmyuddha Ka Adarsh - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Dharmyuddha Ka Adarsh" (The Ideal of a Righteous War) by Amarmuni, focusing on its discussion of Ahimsa (non-violence) and its application to the Bangladesh Liberation War:

Central Argument: The text argues that while Jainism holds Ahimsa as the supreme principle, the true understanding of Ahimsa is nuanced. It's not merely the absence of physical violence, but the intention behind actions. Therefore, a limited or "small" violence undertaken to prevent a greater, more destructive violence, especially when motivated by compassion and the protection of righteousness, can be considered an expression of Ahimsa and a righteous war (Dharmyuddha).

Key Concepts and Arguments:

Four Forms of Violence: The author categorizes violence into four types:
1. Dravya Himsa (Material Violence): Violence occurring only externally, without malicious intent.
2. Bhava Himsa (Mental Violence): Violence occurring purely through thoughts and intentions, even without external action.
3. Dravya + Bhava Himsa (Material + Mental Violence): The most severe form, involving both external action and malicious intent.
4. Na Dravya + Na Bhava Himsa (Neither Material nor Mental Violence): This is considered Ahimsa itself, a state of being completely free from violent thoughts and actions.
The Pervasiveness of Violence in Life: The text acknowledges that even basic life activities like walking, eating, and breathing inherently involve some degree of Dravya Himsa (killing microorganisms). The Jain tradition addresses this by emphasizing that as long as the Bhava Himsa (intent) is absent or aligned with Ahimsa, the external Dravya Himsa is not considered a binding sin. A Jain's inner state of non-violence is paramount.
The Principle of Lesser Violence to Prevent Greater Violence: The core of the argument for "Dharmyuddha" lies in the idea that a smaller, necessary act of violence to prevent a larger, more destructive one is not truly "violence" in the same category.
- Analogy of the Poisoned Wound: The author uses the example of a surgeon cutting off a poisoned limb to save the entire body. The act of cutting is a physical violence, but its intent is to preserve life and prevent the spread of a greater destructive force. This act, driven by compassion, is seen as aligned with Ahimsa.
- The Concept of "Small" vs. "Great" Violence: A "small" violence (like a war) undertaken to prevent a "great" violence (like widespread injustice, moral decay, or the annihilation of principles) can be justified. The crucial factor is the intention and the ultimate outcome for the greater good and the preservation of righteousness.
Dharmyuddha vs. Adharmayuddha (Righteous War vs. Unrighteous War): The distinction lies in the motive and ideal behind the war.
- Ram's War against Ravana: This is presented as a Dharmyuddha because Ram's motive was to protect Sita (representing chastity and justice) and to counter Ravana's societal injustice and moral corruption. The violence, though significant, was a means to uphold higher ethical principles and prevent the further spread of unrighteousness.
- Ravana's War: This was an Adharmayuddha driven by lust, ego, and the desire to perpetuate injustice.
- The Bangladesh Liberation War: The text uses this as a contemporary example. The war was seen as a Dharmyuddha because India, under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, felt compelled to defend millions of persecuted Bengali refugees from the barbarity of the Pakistani army. The act of war was a response to prevent immense human suffering, widespread atrocities, and the destruction of moral and human dignity.
The Importance of Future Consequences: It is not enough to consider the immediate violence. One must also evaluate the future consequences. A present act of Ahimsa that leads to greater future violence is not true Ahimsa. Conversely, a present act of violence that leads to a greater state of peace and righteousness in the future is justified.
- Example of Prithviraj Chauhan: The text criticizes the misguided thinking of King Prithviraj Chauhan's warriors, who hesitated to fight against Muhammad Ghori because of the potential for accidentally killing cows. This limited focus on immediate, minor violence (cow slaughter) led to their defeat, enslavement, and subsequent vast amounts of human suffering and cultural destruction. They failed to consider the greater, long-term violence that would result from their inaction.
The Role of Intent (Bhava): The ultimate determinant of whether an act is violent or non-violent is the intent (Bhava) of the doer.
- King Chetak's War: King Chetak, a devout Jain follower, waged war to protect a refugee. Despite the immense loss of life, his act was deemed righteous (leading to heaven) because his intention was to uphold the principle of Sharanagata Raksha (protection of the refugee) and defend the innocent against an unjust aggressor. His motive was noble.
- Kunika's War: Kunika fought for selfish reasons, driven by greed and ego. His war, despite involving violence, was unrighteous (leading to hell) because his intentions were base.
Ahimsa is not Passive Indifference: The author strongly criticizes the idea that adherence to Ahimsa means remaining passive in the face of extreme injustice and atrocity. Such an interpretation is a misrepresentation of true Dharma and humanity.
- The Duty to the Oppressed: Failing to help a victim or refugee when one has the capacity is considered a greater sin than the act of the oppressor. It is a betrayal of trust and a dereliction of moral duty.
- Humanity and Dharma: True Dharma and humanity demand action to protect the innocent and uphold justice, even if it involves the use of force against a ruthless aggressor.

Conclusion:

The text asserts that the concept of Dharmyuddha, or righteous war, is a necessary and sometimes unavoidable aspect of upholding Dharma in a world where evil and injustice exist. The ultimate criterion is not the mere absence of physical action but the purity of intention, the commitment to higher ideals, and the aim to prevent greater harm. In this context, India's involvement in the Bangladesh Liberation War, undertaken to protect refugees and counter brutal atrocities, is framed as a righteous act, a modern-day echo of historical examples of defending Dharma, and a testament to India's enduring cultural values of compassion and protection for the vulnerable. The author emphasizes that the Jain tradition, with its deep understanding of Ahimsa, fully supports such actions when they are undertaken with the right intentions for the greater good.