Jain Achar Me Achelakatva Aur Sachalekatva Ka Prashna

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Jain Achar me Achelakatva aur Sachalakatuva ka Prashna" by Sagarmal Jain, based on the provided pages:

This text, "The Question of Nudity and Clothed Asceticism in Jain Conduct," by Sagarmal Jain, delves into the ancient and ongoing debate within Jainism regarding the practice of nudity (achélakatva) versus wearing clothes (sachélakatva) for ascetics. The author aims to trace the historical origins and development of this issue, which has been a major point of contention between the Shvetambara and Digambara traditions.

The Core of the Debate:

• Digambara Tradition: Believes that only nudity (achélakatva) is the legitimate path for a monk. Any possession of clothing, even a loincloth, disqualifies one from being a monk.
• Shvetambara Tradition: Holds that monks can be either nude (achél) or clothed (sachél). They also argue that current circumstances make it inappropriate for monks to remain nude.
• Yapaniya Tradition: Occupies a middle ground. They consider nudity the superior path but allow for the possession of clothing in exceptional circumstances. In essence, they see nudity as the ideal (utsarga marg) and clothed asceticism as an exception (apavada marg).

Historical Context and Source Material:

The author emphasizes the need to understand this dispute historically. The primary sources used for this analysis include:

• Ancient Ardhamagadhi Agamas: Specifically Acháranga, Sútritkrutanga, Uttaradhyayana, and Dashavaikalika. These are considered to represent a pre-sectarian viewpoint.
• Pali Tripitaka: Mentioned as more significant and closer to the truth in understanding the historical context.
• Ancient Jain Sculptures from Mathura: Dated to the 1st-2nd centuries CE, these are considered highly authentic and have been heavily relied upon.
• Other Jain Texts: Shauraseni Agamas like Bhagavati Aradhana, Múláchára, and Shatkhandágama are discussed, though their classification with the Yapaniya tradition and later dating (post-6th century CE) are noted. Kundakunda's works are also mentioned, with the caveat that they are not pre-6th century.
• Non-Jain Sources: Vedic mentions of nude ascetics (shramanas/vratyas) and Hindu Puranas are discussed, but their direct connection to Jainism is often difficult to establish, and their reliability is questioned due to later dating and varying accounts.

The Status of Clothing in the Nirgranth Sangha Before Mahavira:

• The text explores the beliefs of the 23 Tirthankaras before Mahavira.
• Myth vs. History: The author notes that Digambara texts assert all Jinas were initiated nude, while Shvetambara texts claim they were initiated with a celestial garment (devadúshya). Both views are considered to be influenced by sectarian bias.
• Rishabhadeva: Considered a proponent of the nude tradition.
• Párshvanatha: The 23rd Tirthankara, is explicitly mentioned in the Uttaradhyayana Sutra as having advocated a clothed tradition (sachél).
• Mahavira: The last Tirthankara, is presented as advocating nudity.
• Historical Importance of Párshva and Mahavira: Due to the scarcity of pre-sectarian information about other Tirthankaras, the discussion primarily focuses on Párshva and Mahavira.

Párshva's Clothed Tradition (Santaruttara):

• The Uttaradhyayana Sutra's 23rd chapter is crucial, describing Párshva's tradition as "santaruttara."
• Meaning of Santaruttara: The text explains that santaruttara (or sántarottara) refers to having two garments: an inner garment (antaravasa) and an outer garment (uttariya). The interpretation that it means sometimes clothed and sometimes nude is refuted.
• Scholarly Interpretations: The author discusses the differing interpretations of santaruttara by commentators, suggesting that some later interpretations aimed to reconcile the concept with evolving practices by assigning specific qualities to the garments. The original meaning is understood as possessing two garments.

Mahavira's Practice and the Evolution of Nudity:

• Initiation: Mahavira was initiated with a single garment, which he renounced after a little over a year, becoming completely nude.
• "Anudharma" (Subsequent Law): The initial acceptance of a garment is termed anudharma, implying adherence to a tradition rather than the ultimate ideal.
• Reasons for Initial Clothing: Possible influences include family tradition (Párshvanathas) and the severe winter conditions in North Bihar where he was initiated.
• Mahavira's Ideal: Nudity (achélakatva) was Mahavira's ultimate ideal (mukhya dharma), while being clothed was a secondary or lesser practice (anudharma).
• Influence of Other Traditions: The text suggests Mahavira's philosophy was influenced by the Párshvanatha tradition and possibly the Ajivikas (who were strictly nude).

The Introduction of Clothing into the Nirgranth Sangha:

The author outlines several potential reasons for the gradual introduction of clothing into Mahavira's Sangha:

1. Initiation of Women: When women were granted ordination, they were necessarily clothed due to social norms and physiological reasons. This precedent may have paved the way for exceptions for men.
2. Young Monks: Young male monks were vulnerable to physiological issues like erections and seminal emissions, leading to social embarrassment. To mitigate this, they might have been allowed to wear clothes.
3. Elderly Monks (Sthaviras): Elderly monks who found it difficult to endure extreme cold in North India may have been permitted to keep a woolen garment for warmth, leading to the concept of "Sthavirakalpa."
4. Incorporation of Párshva's Followers: The entry of Párshva's traditionally clothed followers into Mahavira's Sangha would have naturally introduced clothed asceticism.

Evidence from Sculptures:

• Jain sculptures from Mathura (1st-2nd century CE) depict nude ascetics wearing blankets and mouth cloths, suggesting that even in a generally nude tradition, certain coverings were used for practical reasons.

Reasons for Clothing from the Sthānánga Sutra:

The Shvetambara text Sthānánga Sutra lists three reasons for wearing clothes:

1. To avoid shame (especially when the male organ is exposed).
2. To avoid disgust (if the genitals are deformed).
3. To endure hardship (specifically, the cold).

The first two are subsumed under "social shame" or avoiding public opprobrium.

The Yapaniya Perspective on Exceptions:

• The Yapaniya tradition acknowledged exceptions for clothing based on the following circumstances:
  • Individuals from noble families needing to cover themselves in public.
  • Highly modest individuals.
  • Young monks struggling with desire and facing public ridicule.
  • Individuals with deformed genitals, though nudity was permitted during final renunciation (sánlekhana).
  • Those unable to endure cold.
  • Monks suffering from ailments like hemorrhoids or fistulas.

Jinkalpa and Sthavirakalpa:

• Jinkalpa: Initially associated with strict nudity and minimal possessions (like a mouth cloth and broom). This was considered the ideal, followed by Jinas.
• Sthavirakalpa: Developed as a more accommodating practice, allowing for certain exceptions and a greater number of possessions, including clothing.
• Shvetambara Evolution: The Shvetambara tradition gradually redefined Jinkalpa, eventually allowing for clothed ascetics within its framework, arguing that the strict nudity associated with Jinkalpa was no longer feasible.
• Yapaniya View: The Yapaniyas maintained that Jinkalpa (nudity) was possible in all eras, even in the current age, and they criticized the Shvetambara notion of the "cessation of Jinkalpa."

The Divergence of Traditions:

• The author concludes that the differences between the Shvetambara and Digambara traditions regarding clothing stem from their differing interpretations of the ancient Agamas and the practicalities of the times and regions.
• The relative absence of extreme cold in South India allowed the Digambara tradition to preserve its strict adherence to nudity for a longer period. Conversely, the harsh winters of North India contributed to the acceptance of clothing in the Shvetambara tradition.
• The text highlights that the debate over clothing was not merely about adherence to rules but also about the underlying causes and the evolution of monastic conduct in response to societal and environmental factors.

In essence, the book traces the historical trajectory of the nudity vs. clothing debate in Jainism, demonstrating how differing interpretations of ancient texts and changing circumstances led to the distinct practices of the Shvetambara, Digambara, and Yapaniya traditions. It emphasizes that the core issue was not just the presence or absence of clothing but the underlying principles of asceticism, renunciation, and adaptation to different contexts.