Jain Shraman Sangh Ki Shasan Paddhati

This document, "Jain Shraman Sangh Ki Shasan Paddhati" (The Administrative System of the Jain Ascetic Sangha) by Kalyanvijay Gani, explores the organizational structure and governance within the Jain monastic community, tracing its evolution from the time of Lord Mahavir.

The text begins by emphasizing that the Jain ascetic sangha's administration is an extension of the broader "Jin-Shasan Paddhati" (Administration of the Jin's Teachings). Lord Mahavir is described as a "Dharmachakravarti" (Emperor of Dharma), possessing absolute authority over his vast following of millions. His teachings were universally accepted and tailored to individual capacities and circumstances, encompassing rules for both ascetics and householders.

Mahavir organized his ascetic followers into nine divisions called "Gans" (groups), each headed by one of his eleven principal disciples, the "Gandhars." The Sangh's overall management of ascetics and nuns was entrusted to these Ganchdars, while Mahavir focused on religious instruction, resolving doubts, and establishing religious laws. The ascetics were also categorized based on their spiritual attainments into seven groups: Kevalis (omniscient), Manahparyavajnanis (mind-readers), Avadhinjanis (clairvoyant), Chauterdashpurvis (masters of fourteen Purvas), Vaikriyaviddhik (those with yogic powers), Vadis (debaters), and ordinary ascetics. The text provides approximate numbers for each category, highlighting the Kevalis as the highest in rank.

Following Mahavir's Nirvana, the administrative structure shifted from a single, centralized authority to a "Sthavir-Sattak" or "Yugapradhan-Sattak" (rule of elders or age-leaders) system. The text then defines key positions and their authorities within this evolved system:

• Kul (Family): The group of disciples under a single Acharya.
• Kul-Sthavir (Head of a Kul): The Acharya presiding over a Kul, responsible for its management.
• Gan (Group/Division): A joint committee of two or more Kuls with similar conduct and practices.
• Gan-Sthavir (Head of a Gan): The Acharya heading a Gan, also responsible for its judicial matters and overseeing Kul-Sthavirs.
• Sangh (Assembly/Community): The collective body of all Ganas.
• Sangh-Sthavir (Head of the Sangh): The chief Acharya of the Sangh, appointed based on merit rather than lineage, responsible for overall administration and policy-making.
• Yugapradhan (Leader of the Age): The foremost among the respected Acharyas of the time, known for their comprehensive knowledge of scriptures, mastery of languages, extensive travels, and virtues like peace and compassion. A Sangh-Sthavir was often chosen from the Yugapradhans.
• Gachchha (Cluster/Group): Originally referred to groups of ascetics, it later evolved to mean a council for managing a Gan and eventually became synonymous with Gan.
• Acharya (Preceptor): The supreme ruler of a Gachchha, analogous to a king of a province.
• Upadhyaya (Teacher): The successor to the Acharya, akin to a crown prince, assisting the Acharya in many tasks, especially in teaching scriptures to disciples.
• Gani: Assisting the Acharya or Upadhyaya, and often acting in their absence.
• Pravartak (Manager): The minister responsible for internal and external affairs, caring for young, old, and sick ascetics, and managing resources.
• Sthavir (Elder/Judge): The judge of the Gachchha, whose decisions were binding even on the Acharya.
• Ganavacchedak (Divider of Gans): Responsible for maintaining relationships between different Kuls and branches within a Gan, organizing ascetics into groups for travel, and managing their needs.

The text then elaborates on the "Vyavastha-Paddhati" (Administrative System) itself, drawing an analogy between a nation with provinces and the Jain Sangha with its Ganas and Kuls. Kul-Sthavirs were subordinate to Gan-Sthavirs, who in turn reported to the Sangh-Sthavir. Gan-Sthavirs formed a governing council called the "Gachchha," comprised of the Acharya, Upadhyaya, Pravartak, Sthavir, and Ganavacchedak.

Interactions between different Ganas are discussed, noting that initially, all Ganas maintained close relations. However, differences in practices, particularly concerning alms-gathering (bhiksha-vidhi), led to a break in these relationships, introducing the concepts of "Sambhogik" (those with whom interaction is permitted) and "Asambhogik" (those with whom interaction is restricted) Ganas. Despite these divisions, the text emphasizes that the care of sick ascetics was a universal duty, transcending these boundaries.

The internal rules governing inter-Gana relations are also outlined, focusing on four key principles:

1. Kshetra-Swamitva-Maryada (Territorial Ownership): Each Kul or Gan had ownership over the territory they occupied for a specified period, preventing others from settling there without permission.
2. Sachittaadi Parihar (Exclusion of Living Beings and Other Items): Ownership of resources found in a territory belonged to the territorial owner. The text also details rules regarding discipleship, specifying that within three years of gaining a spiritual guide, one could only be initiated by that guide.
3. Ganaantaropasampada (Initiation in Another Gan): While generally discouraged, an ascetic could join another Gan for spiritual advancement or penance with the permission of their original Acharya. The new Gan's Sthavir would verify the reasons and grant initiation. This involved a pledge of allegiance to the new Gan's leadership and adherence to their practices. Exceptions were made for ascetics leaving lax Ganas for more disciplined ones.
4. Sadharmya-Vaidharmya-Nirvah (Coexistence and Separation of Harmonious and Dissonant Groups): This refers to the hospitality extended to Sambhogik and Asambhogik Ganas. Sambhogik Ganas received three days of hospitality, while Asambhogik Ganas were provided with basic necessities and introductions. Discussions on differing practices between Asambhogik Ganas were handled with equanimity.

The text concludes by discussing "Vyavahar-Chhedan" (Dispute Resolution). Two types of disputes are mentioned: "Prayashchitta-Vyavahar" (penance for offenses) and "Aabhavad-Vyavahar" (disputes over rights or property). Prayashchitta was handled by the respective Sthavirs, with more severe cases escalated. Aabhavad-Vyavahar involved a hierarchical court system at the Kul, Gan, and Sangh levels. Appeals against the decisions of lower courts could be made to higher ones. In cases of significant disputes between Ganas, a "Sangh-Samavay" (assembly of the Sangh) would be convened, with the Sangh-Sthavir presiding. The Sangh's decision was final and binding.

The author expresses hope that the modern Jain Sangha will draw inspiration from this ancient, well-organized administrative system to improve its current governance.