Jain Darshan Me Shwetambar Terah Panth

This is a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Jain Darshan me Shwetambar Terah Panth" by Shankarprasad Dikshit, based on the provided pages. The book critiques the beliefs and practices of the Terah Panth sect within Shwetambar Jainism, arguing that their doctrines deviate from core Jain principles and even universal ethical values.

Central Argument:

The book's primary aim is to expose and refute what the author considers to be the erroneous and harmful interpretations of Jainism by the Terah Panth sect. The author asserts that the Terah Panth's views are contrary not only to established Jain philosophy but also to fundamental human morality and the inherent nature of the soul.

Key Criticisms and Themes:

1. Misinterpretation of Ahimsa (Non-violence) and Compassion (Anukampa):

   • Equating all life forms: The Terah Panth allegedly teaches that all living beings, from one-sensed (sthavar) to five-sensed (tiras), are equal.
   • Paap (Sin) in Saving Life: Based on this equality, they claim that saving a five-sensed being (like a human or animal) by causing harm to one-sensed beings (like plants, water, fire, air) is a sin. They argue that the harm caused to innumerable sthavar beings in the process outweighs the benefit to the one saved.
   • Paap in Compassionate Acts: They deem acts of compassion, such as offering food and water, saving dying creatures, or providing aid, as sinful because they allegedly prevent the suffering being from paying off its karmic debt.
   • Critique of Historical Jain Figures: The book highlights instances where Terah Panth adherents allegedly label the compassionate actions of revered Jain figures like Lord Rishabhdev, Lord Parshvanath, Lord Neminath, and Lord Mahavir, as well as historical figures like Meghkumar and Maharaja Meghrath, as sinful or mistaken. For example, they allegedly call Lord Mahavir saving Goshala, or Lord Parshvanath saving a snake, as errors or sins.
   • Hypocrisy in Practice: The author points out the perceived hypocrisy in Terah Panth practices, such as using a rjoharan (mouth cloth) which involves harming air-bodied (vayu kayik) beings, or crossing rivers, which harms water-bodied (jal kayik) beings, while simultaneously preaching against harming even the smallest beings. This is presented as evidence that they do not truly uphold their stated principles.

2. Distinction between Sadhus and Shravaks (Laity):

   • Equal Conduct for Sadhus and Shravaks: The Terah Panth allegedly insists that the conduct and principles for Sadhus (monks) and Shravaks (laypeople) are identical.
   • Discouraging Scripture Study for Laypeople: The book claims that Terah Panth gurus forbid laypeople from studying scriptures, deeming it sinful and outside the purview of religious commands. This is seen as a method to keep lay followers ignorant of true Jain teachings and to maintain control.
   • Dichotomy of "Supaatra" and "Kupaatra": Terah Panth allegedly labels all beings, except their own Sadhus, as "Kupaatra" (unworthy recipients). This includes lay Jains (Shravaks) and followers of other sects. Giving to or helping "Kupaatras" is deemed sinful.
   • Contradiction with Jain Teachings: The author argues that Jainism clearly delineates distinct codes of conduct for Sadhus and Shravaks, based on their respective life stages and vows. The Terah Panth's denial of this distinction is presented as a fundamental error.

3. Critique of "Punya" (Merit) and "Daana" (Charity):

   • Punya linked to Nirjara: The Terah Panth allegedly claims that Punya is intrinsically linked to Nirjara (karmic expulsion) and cannot arise independently. Without Nirjara, Punya cannot be generated.
   • Charity to Non-Sadhus is Paap: Consequently, they argue that charity given to anyone other than their own Sadhus does not generate Punya and is, in fact, sinful. They assert that Punya is only generated through Nirjara, which they claim only their Sadhus achieve.
   • Rejection of Universal Compassion: This leads to their conclusion that acts of charity and compassion towards the needy, the poor, animals, or even one's parents are sinful.
   • Reinterpretation of Scripture: The author argues that this interpretation is a distortion of scriptures, citing examples from texts like the "Dashavaikalika Sutra" and "Sthananga Sutra" where "punya" is associated with acts of charity to all beings, not solely to specific ascetics.
   • Contradiction with Tirthankara's Teachings: The book highlights the charitable acts of Tirthankaras, such as Lord Rishabhdev's distribution of wealth or Lord Neminath's freeing of animals, as evidence that charity is not inherently sinful and that compassion extends beyond mere abstention from harming.

4. Deception and Manipulative Tactics:

   • Twisting Scripture: The author accuses Terah Panth leaders of misinterpreting and twisting scriptural verses to support their unorthodox views, often by taking words out of context or assigning new meanings to terms.
   • Discouraging Scripture Study for Followers: To prevent their followers from discovering these misinterpretations, they allegedly discourage laypeople from studying scriptures themselves.
   • Using Anecdotes and Examples: They employ misleading analogies and examples, such as the parable of the two prostitutes or the cow and the fishpond, to justify their anti-compassion stance.
   • Promoting a Self-Serving Doctrine: The author suggests that these doctrines are designed to elevate the status and authority of Terah Panth Sadhus while discouraging any form of societal contribution or compassionate action from their followers.

Overall Tone and Purpose:

The book is written in a critical and argumentative tone. Its purpose is to educate the Jain public, particularly Shwetambar followers, about what the author considers to be the dangerous deviations of the Terah Panth from the core tenets of Jainism. The author aims to protect the integrity of Jain philosophy and to safeguard individuals from what he perceives as harmful and misleading teachings. The author also includes appendices with articles from other sources, further supporting his critique of the Terah Panth.