Jain Darshan Aur Jaiminiya Sutra Taulnik Nirikshan

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Jain Darshan aur Jaiminiya Sutra Taulnik Nirikshan" by Anita Bothra, focusing on the comparative analysis between Jainism and Mimamsa (Jaiminiya Sutras):

Title: Jain Darshan aur Jaiminiya Sutra Taulnik Nirikshan (Jain Philosophy and Jaiminiya Sutras: A Comparative Examination) Author: Anita Bothra Context: This is a paper presented at the 57th All India Philosophy Conference in Parner, Maharashtra, in January 2013.

Core Argument: The paper explores the seemingly contradictory philosophies of Jainism and Mimamsa (Jaiminiya Sutras) by undertaking a comparative analysis. While Mimamsa is characterized by its emphasis on Vedic rituals, sacrifices, and potentially violence (in its literal interpretations), Jainism stresses the cessation of action and prohibits sacrificial violence. The author aims to uncover the underlying similarities between these two traditions, which may stem from a shared ancient source of knowledge.

Key Points and Comparisons:

• Background and Shared Sources:

  • Jain tradition posits "Drishtivada" as the original source of all Jain literature, a vast repository of knowledge encompassing various philosophical viewpoints. This is analogous to how different Indian philosophical schools gradually established themselves by drawing from foundational texts.
  • The paper suggests that both Jainism and Mimamsa may have drawn upon the ancient "Purva" texts, which served as encyclopedias of knowledge in ancient India.

• The Term "Mimamsa":

  • The term "Mimamsa" originates from the root "man" (to think, reflect) and means deep thought, inquiry, examination, and research.
  • The Jain tradition also uses the term "Mimamsa" (or "Vimamsa" in Prakrit) in a similar sense, referring to thorough investigation and analysis, as seen in texts like Nayadhammakaha and Nandisutra.
  • The paper argues that even though the term "Jaiminiya" or "Mimamsa" is not explicitly mentioned alongside other philosophical schools (like Sankhya, Vaisheshika) in the Nandisutra, it is highly likely that the Jaiminiya school is implicitly referred to.

• Methodology (Anuyogadvara and Mimamsa):

  • Both Mimamsa and the Jain text Anuyogadvara are considered "Paddhatishastra" (methodology or systematic treatises).
  • Mimamsa aims to harmonize Vedic texts and establish their meaning and intent. Anuyogadvara, on the other hand, aims to clarify the Jain Agamas.
  • A significant similarity lies in their methodologies for interpreting texts. Anuyogadvara employs the "nikshepa-chatushthaya" (Naya-Sthapana-Dravya-Bhava or Dravya-Kshetra-Kala-Bhava) for conceptual analysis and also discusses grammatical aspects for proper understanding. This methodical approach to interpretation is seen as a notable parallel.

• Concept of "Dharma" (Duty/Religion):

  • Jaimini begins with "Athato Dharma-Jijasa" (Now, an inquiry into Dharma). While "Ath" is considered auspicious in Vedic tradition, Jain texts do not start with it.
  • Both traditions inquire into Dharma. However, Mimamsa defines Dharma as actions prescribed by the Vedas ("Chodanālakṣaṇo'rtho dharmaḥ"), emphasizing ritualistic action.
  • Jainism, in contrast, emphasizes renunciation and restraint as the path to Dharma, rejecting ritualistic violence.

• Structural and Philosophical Features (Jaiminiya Sutras vs. Tattvartha Sutra):

  • Tattvartha Sutra, a foundational Jain text, is seen as a Sanskrit summary of the Prakrit Agamas, covering core Jain principles, cosmology, karma theory, nayavada, and ethics. It is influenced by Vaisheshika and Yoga Sutras, but not directly by Jaiminiya Sutras due to differing subject matter.
  • Jaiminiya Sutras are based on Vedas, Brahmanas, and Kalpa texts, focusing on extracting the essence of ritualistic karma rather than philosophical concepts. While they use categories like substance, quality, and action from Vaisheshika, their primary aim is to establish the validity of ritualistic action and resolve contradictions in Vedic injunctions.
  • Tattvartha Sutra comprehensively covers topics that are consistently addressed in both Svetambara and Digambara Jain traditions.

• Cosmology, Heaven, and Hell:

  • Jainism has a detailed cosmology with concepts like Lokakasha, Alokakasha, Trilokya (Urdhva, Madhya, Adho Loka), and the four Gatis (Hell, Animals, Humans, Deities). Tattvartha Sutra dedicates significant portions to this.
  • Interestingly, the paper notes that none of the six Vedic schools, including Mimamsa, have a well-defined cosmology. While the Vedic mantra "Svargakāmo yajeta" (One who desires heaven should sacrifice) is explained, specific details of heaven and hell are often missing.
  • A striking similarity is that both Jainism and Mimamsa consider the universe to be eternal and infinite. This is because both traditions reject the concept of a creator God and notions of creation and dissolution.

• Concept of Deities (Devata):

  • Jaimini discusses deities in the context of sacrifices, considering names like "Indra," "Vishnu," etc., as mere indicators of the recipient of oblations. For Mimamsa, deities are subordinate to the mantra and the ritual.
  • In Jainism, the divine realm (Devagati) is one of the four Gatis. Deities are subject to the cycle of birth and death and must eventually leave their celestial abodes. While deities can be worshipped for specific desires, they bestow fruits based on the worshipper's own karma.
  • Both traditions assign a secondary status to deities. The truly supreme beings in Jainism are the Vitaregas (Jinas) and Tirthankaras.

• Ontology (Sadvastu Mimamsa):

  • Mimamsa schools (Kumarila and Prabhakara) differ on the number of categories (padarthas) they accept (five or eight). Kumarila includes elements like earth, water, fire, air, ether, time, direction, soul, mind, darkness, and sound.
  • Jainism identifies seven fundamental truths (Tattvas): Jiva (soul), Ajiva (non-soul), Asrava (influx of karma), Bandha (bondage of karma), Samvara (cessation of influx), Nirjara (shedding of karma), and Moksha (liberation). However, the actual substances (dravyas) in Jainism are six: Dharma, Adharma, Akasha, Kala, Jiva, and Pudgala.
  • Both traditions consider substances (dravyas) to be eternal. Both can be classified as realists (as they believe in the existence of reality), dualists (Jainism with Jiva and Ajiva; Mimamsa with the reality of Vedic injunctions and the world), and pluralists (believing in multiple souls).

• Epistemology (Pramana Mimamsa):

  • Mimamsa generally accepts six or five valid means of knowledge (pramanas), including perception, inference, comparison, testimony, postulation, and non-apprehension.
  • Jain epistemology is divided into different periods, with Jain logicians in the "Nyaya era" developing unique approaches based on Syadvada and Saptabhangi. Generally, Jainism accepts four pramanas: perception, inference, comparison, and testimony (Agama).
  • The paper notes that Mimamsakas had to accept postulation and non-apprehension as independent pramanas to resolve Vedic contradictions and interpret ritualistic injunctions. Mimamsa believes knowledge is "svatah pramana" (self-valid), especially Vedic knowledge. Jain knowledge, however, is always self-illuminating and illuminating of the object.

• Authority of Words (Shabdapramanya):

  • Both traditions establish foundational texts: Jaimini relies on the Vedas, Brahmanas, and Kalpa Sutras as word-pramanas. Jainism accepts the Agamas, compiled teachings of the Vitaregas, as pramanas.
  • While there are differences between Svetambara and Digambara views on the authority of Agamas, both accept their respective ancient texts as word-pramanas.
  • Mimamsa views Vedic words as having been "seen" by sages and emphasizes the purity and immutability of these words (eternal nature of sound).
  • Jainism believes the teachings of Tirthankaras were collected and verbalized by their disciples (Ganadharas) in the vernacular. The focus is on the meaning and essence rather than strict literal adherence to the words. The translation of Jain Agamas into various languages did not alter their core philosophical framework.

• Creatorship of Vedas and Agamas (Paurusheyata and Apaurusheyata):

  • Mimamsa considers the Vedas to be "apaurusheya" (not authored by any person or God). They are eternal and not created by God, as Mimamsa doesn't acknowledge a creator God. Sages are considered "seers," not authors.
  • Jain Agamas can be considered "paurusheya" in the sense that they were expounded by Tirthankaras at different times. However, they are also "apaurusheya" because Jainism does not accept an originating God, and each Tirthankara continues a tradition. Jainism does not accept the eternality of words or their relation to meaning, viewing words as modifications of pudgala (matter).

• Concept of God (Ishvara Sankalpana):

  • Many theistic Indian philosophies accept God as the creator, dispenser of karma, revealer of Vedas, etc. Mimamsa, however, rejects the creation/dissolution of the world and a creator God. They consider the world eternal. God is not considered the dispenser of karma.
  • While Jaimini is silent on God, later Mimamsa scholars have shown some belief in God.
  • Crucially, Jaimini's approach to God is very similar to Jainism's. Jain texts explicitly reject God and the origin of the universe. Later Jain logicians have presented rational arguments against the existence of God.
  • The terms "Ishvara" or "Paramatma" are sometimes used in Jain scriptures to refer to liberated souls (Siddhas) residing on the Siddhashila, but this is not a creator God.

• Concept of Karma:

  • Mimamsa's primary aim is to demonstrate the ritualistic meaning of Vedic sentences, leading to extensive analysis of karma. Karma is classified in various ways (e.g., based on stability, movement, personal effort, eternal, occasional, desired, forbidden).
  • Jainism integrates the concept of karma and rebirth. The entire cycle of birth and death of infinite beings is explained by karma theory.
  • Mimamsa karma is largely human-centric. Jain karma theory applies to all beings and all four states of existence.
  • Both consider karma to be inert (achetana). Jain karma is also understood as atomic (anu-rupa).
  • While later Mimamsakas needed God to explain the fruits of inert karma, Jainism has a self-operating karma system. Jain karma theory is highly elaborate, detailing eight main types of karma, their sub-types, karmas that obscure or don't obscure the soul's qualities, and 14 stages of karma.
  • A unique concept in Mimamsa is "Apurva" (unseen potential generated by rituals) which bridges karma and its fruit. Jainism does not have an equivalent to Apurva; instead, they recognize a "period of non-obstruction" for karma.
  • Despite differences, both systems place immense importance on karma, striving to make their karma arrangements logical and self-sufficient due to their atheistic stance.
  • A fundamental difference lies in Mimamsa's inclination towards karma-kanda (ritual action) and Jainism's emphasis on cessation of karma bondage (karma-nivrutti).

• Concept of Sacrifice (Yajna):

  • Mimamsa considers sacrifices as the highest duty, focusing on their importance, actions, and procedures. It is primarily a karma-kanda-based philosophy.
  • The paper highlights that Vedic sacrifices, particularly by the later Brahmanas, became associated with animal sacrifice and meat-eating due to the influence of desire and greed.
  • Maharshi Jaimini, in the Mimamsa Sutras, aimed to re-establish the authority of ritualistic karma by reinterpreting Vedic verses, especially those related to violence.
  • Jaimini explicitly states that interpreting sacrificial rituals in a meat-centric way is incorrect. He reinterpreted terms like "aja" (goat) to mean old grain seeds. His contribution was to:
    1. Remove the perceived violence in Vedic texts.
    2. Re-establish the importance of ritualistic karma.
    3. Provide linguistic and interpretative tools.
  • Jainism consistently opposed animal-sacrificing rituals and even showed indifference towards sacrifices involving sesame seeds and ghee. Jainism considers "Agni" (fire) as a being (agnikayika jiva) and thus objects to any form of sacrifice involving it. Texts like Paumacarya discuss the term "aja" in detail. Visheshavashyakabhashya analyzes Vedic mantras related to sacrifice and concludes their futility. Dharmopadeshamalavivaraṇa states that the fruit of sacrifice is going to hell.
  • Despite strong opposition to sacrifices, the influence of sacrifice on society was such that some Jain texts describe monastic life using sacrificial metaphors.
  • The strong opposition to sacrifice from Jainism and Buddhism led Maharshi Jaimini to critically analyze Vedic verses and highlight their non-violent aspects.

• Concept of Self (Atmavichara):

  • Mimamsa views the soul as the basis of consciousness, distinct from the body, senses, and happiness. It is the doer and enjoyer of its karma. The soul is pervasive (vibhu) but experiences pleasure and pain within the body. It is eternal. Self-knowledge is achieved through self-awareness ("aham-pratyaya"). Each soul is distinct, and liberation is attained through the destruction of accumulated karma and self-knowledge.
  • Jainism's concept of the soul is very similar, with minor exceptions in terminology. Consciousness (upayoga) is the primary attribute of the soul, and happiness, sorrow, etc., are its modifications. Jain souls are body-sized but possess an infinite number of soul-substance points, equivalent to the points in Lokakasha.

• Concept of Liberation (Moksha Vichara):

  • Both Jainism and Mimamsa share significant similarities in their concept of liberation, despite terminological differences.
  • Kumarila defines liberation as the dissolution of worldly attachment. Prabhakara defines it as the absolute cessation of the body. Jainism defines it as the complete destruction of all karma.
  • Kumarila believes liberated souls possess only the power of knowledge, not actual knowledge. Jain liberated souls have infinite knowledge, vision, bliss, and strength.
  • Both traditions agree that liberated souls are eternal, numerous, and eternally exist. Rebirth is not possible after liberation, and thus, the concept of avatar (incarnation) is absent in both.
  • "Consuming and exhausting accumulated karma" in Mimamsa is comparable to Jain "akam-nirjara" (unintentional shedding of karma). "Removing obstacles to the path of liberation through eternal and occasional actions" is akin to Jain "sakam-nirjara" (intentional shedding of karma). "Abandoning desired and forbidden actions" corresponds to Jain "samvara" (prevention of karma influx).
  • Both believe that the complete annihilation of both "sinful" and "virtuous" karma is necessary for liberation.
  • In essence, the nature and process of liberation are almost identical in both philosophies, barring specific terminology.

• Conclusion:

  • The outward differences between Mimamsa (proponent of ritual and sacrifice) and Jainism (critic of sacrifice) are so apparent that one might not expect fundamental similarities in their philosophical frameworks.
  • However, the paper emphasizes the Indian characteristic of "unity in diversity." By delving deeper into both traditions, fundamental commonalities can be found.
  • Key Similarities Highlighted:
    • Jain texts use "Mimamsa" to mean contemplation and inquiry.
    • Anuyogadvara in Jainism serves a similar interpretative function as Mimamsa for Vedic texts.
    • Both accept "word-authority" (Jaimini for Vedas, Jainism for Agamas based on meaning).
    • Both consider their foundational scriptures as "apaurusheya" (unauthored).
    • Both are genuinely atheistic, not recognizing God as a creator or controller.
    • Both have similar concepts of heaven, but assign a secondary role to deities.
    • Both can be described as realist, dualist, and pluralist.
    • Both believe in the independent existence and plurality of souls, each being the doer and enjoyer of karma.
    • Both emphasize self-reliance and personal effort, lacking devotion to God or reliance on divine grace.
    • Both assert that the karma system is self-operating and drives the cycle of birth and death.
    • Liberated souls eternally exist in both traditions, and their return (reincarnation) is not accepted.
    • Both provide equal rights to men and women in religious activities and challenge caste systems.
  • Further exploration might reveal deeper conceptual proximity in areas like the concept of moving and non-moving beings (trasas and sthavaras), evolution, and the nature of life forms (e.g., Sammurchhima jivas in Jainism).

Overall Significance: The paper argues that despite the stark external differences, a comparative study of Jainism and Mimamsa reveals significant underlying philosophical parallels, particularly in their rejection of a creator God, the eternal nature of the universe, the concept of karma, the nature of the soul, and the process of liberation. These similarities suggest a deeper connection or shared intellectual heritage, challenging the initial perception of them as entirely opposing systems. The paper highlights Jaimini's role in reinterpreting Vedic texts to address the issues of violence that arose in ritualistic practices, a stance that aligns with the fundamental ahimsa principle of Jainism.