Jain Evam Bauddh Paribhashik Shabdo Ki Samasya - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Jain evam Bauddh Paribhashik Shabdo ki Samasya" by Sagarmal Jain, focusing on the challenges of defining and translating technical terms in Jainism and Buddhism:

The book, "Jain evam Bauddh Paribhashik Shabdo ki Samasya" (The Problem of Defining and Translating Jain and Buddhist Technical Terms) by Professor Sagarmal Jain, addresses the inherent difficulties in establishing precise meanings and translating technical terminology used within the Jain and Buddhist traditions. The author highlights that words are dynamic, with their literal meanings (vācyārtha) evolving over time due to semantic narrowing and expansion. This complexity is amplified when a term's meaning changes within the same tradition or when a term adopted from one tradition takes on a different meaning in another.

Key Challenges Identified:

Semantic Drift: Words can acquire new meanings or shift away from their original interpretations over chronological periods within a single tradition. For example, the term "Āsava" is used in both Jainism and Buddhism but with differing meanings.
Cross-Traditional Adoption and Meaning Change: Terms originating in one tradition may be adopted by another, only to be reinterpreted with a different meaning.
Influence of Translator/Commentator Context: When texts are created in one country and era, and their interpretations or commentaries are done by individuals from different countries and times, the definitions can diverge from the original meaning or even become erroneous. This is particularly problematic for ancient texts like the Āchārāṅga, Sūtra kṛtāṅga, Ṛṣibhāṣita, and certain Chedasūtras.
Historical Evolution of Meanings: Many terms, initially used in a general sense, later acquired specialized meanings within specific philosophical or doctrinal frameworks.

Examples of Terms and Their Evolving Meanings:

The author provides several illustrative examples of how the meanings of specific terms have evolved:

Arihant/Arhant: Initially a general Indian term for "worthy of worship" or "honorable." In Jainism, it later came to signify one who has destroyed the four ghātiya karmas (knowledge-obscuring, perception-obscuring, deluding, and obstructing). It also became synonymous with sarvajña (omniscient) due to the destruction of knowledge-obscuring karma. Later, it became almost exclusively a synonym for tirthankaras. The etymological interpretations of "one who has destroyed enemies (karmas)" or "one who will not be reborn" also contributed to the evolving understanding.
Sarvajña (Omniscient) and Kevalin: In early Jain Āgamas like Sūtra kṛtāṅga and Bhagavatī, sarvajña did not carry the later meaning of knowing all substances and their states at all times. It referred more to self-knowledge, inner vision, or a profound understanding of life and the world. In Buddhism, too, early sarvajña referred to the discernment of what should be abandoned and what should be adopted. The meaning later expanded to encompass complete knowledge. The Bhagavatī Sūtra's statement "kavalī siy jāṇai siy na jāṇai" (the kevalin may know, may not know) reflects this earlier, less absolute understanding. The term kevalin itself, likely originating from the ancient Sāṅkhya tradition where it meant "knower of the self" or one who discriminates between Prakṛti and Puruṣa, also evolved to mean one with comprehensive knowledge in Jainism. Kundakunda's clarification that a kevalin truly knows the soul, and knowing the universe is a conventional understanding, highlights this semantic shift.
Buddha, Jina, Vīra: These were initially common terms across various Śramaṇic traditions. Buddha meant "one who has conquered the senses," Jina meant "one endowed with wisdom," and Vīra meant "one who endures hardship." Later, Jina became specific to the Jain tirthankaras, and Buddha became specific to the founder of Buddhism. Vīra, which in the Āchārāṅga referred to a patient ascetic, later became associated with Mahāvīra.
Tathāgata: In the Āchārāṅga, this term primarily referred to a wise monk. It later disappeared from Jainism and became a specific term for Lord Buddha in Buddhism.
Darśana (Vision/Philosophy): Within Jainism itself, darśana evolved. In the Āchārāṅga, it meant the state of being a seer or witness. In Jain epistemology, it referred to sensory and mental perceptions. The term "pāsa" or "pāsai" (to see), used in Āgamas, was synonymous with darśana in the sense of viewing worldly events equanimously. Later, when used with epithets like Jina darśana, it came to mean "philosophy" (darśana), leading to terms like samyag-dṛṣṭi (right view) and mithyā-dṛṣṭi (wrong view). In later Jain Āgamas, it also became synonymous with śraddhāna (faith). The distinction between darśana-moha (delusion of perception/philosophy) and darśanāvaraṇa (perception-obscuring karma) exemplifies how the same root word can denote different concepts.
Pudgala: In the Bhagavatī Sūtra, pudgala was used to mean "individual" or "individual's body," but also "material substance." In Pudgala-āstikāya, it signifies matter, while in the Bhagavatī it can refer to individuals, bodies, or even "flesh" in the Daśavaikālika. In contemporary Jain monastic slang, it signifies "wealth" or "money." In Buddhism, pudgala refers to an individual or body.
Ātman (Self): The concept of ātman (expressed in Prakrit as āttā, appā, etc.) also saw semantic shifts. In the Bhagavatī Sūtra, it could refer to "one's own" or "self-interest." In Buddhism, anātman (no-self) carries the meaning of "not one's own." While in Jainism, jīva and ātman are largely synonymous, in Vedānta, they are distinct. The Upanishadic "Ātman" could also refer to Brahman or the ultimate reality.
Dharma (Duty/Nature/Religion): In Jainism, dharma has diverse definitions, including the nature or characteristic of an object (vastu-svabhāvo dharmah) and equanimity or virtuous conduct. When used in dharmāstikāya and adharmāstikāya, it refers to substances that assist in motion and rest, respectively.
Vipāśī and Vipassanā: Terms like these, used in the Āchārāṅga, were originally Buddhist concepts. In the absence of knowledge of Buddhist texts, Jain commentators defined them with different meanings.
Tālapalamba: This term, used in the Niśītha, originally referred to germinated palm seeds. As Jain monks moved to regions like Rajasthan and Gujarat, where this context was lost, the meaning shifted to "banana fruit" in Jain tradition.
Sandhi: In the Āchārāṅga, sandhi meant attachment or emotional bonding. However, commentators often interpreted it as "opportunity."
Mokṣa and Nirvāṇa: While generally used synonymously in Jainism, they refer to distinct states in the Uttarādhyayana Sūtra, where it's stated that the unliberated cannot attain nirvāṇa.

The Importance of Comparative Study:

Professor Jain strongly emphasizes that for accurate interpretation and translation of technical terms in Jain and Buddhist literature, a comparative study of both traditions is essential. This is because both originated in the same geographical and temporal context. Understanding terms like Vipassi, Tathāgata, Pratisaṃkhyā, Āyatana, and Sandhi in early Jain texts requires knowledge of Buddhist texts. Conversely, clarifying terms like "vāri" in Pali literature necessitates an understanding of Jain Āgamas.

Conclusion:

The author concludes by stating that no tradition arises in a vacuum; it inherits its vocabulary from a specific time and place. To grasp the original meaning of terms, one must understand their historical, geographical, and traditional context. Therefore, the process of defining technical terms cannot afford to ignore the era in which they gained their meanings, nor can it be completed without a comparative study of contemporary traditions. The subjective interpretations of commentators, driven by their own traditions or lack of historical context, must be carefully examined and avoided.