Mahavir Ka Anupam Upahar Aparigraha

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Mahavir ka Anupam Upahar Aparigraha" by Niraj Jain:

The book "Mahavir ka Anupam Upahar Aparigraha" (The Unparalleled Gift of Mahavir: Non-Possessiveness) by Niraj Jain posits that if Lord Mahavir's teachings can be summarized in a single word, it is Ahinsa (Non-violence). Conversely, if the means to achieve this path are to be enumerated, Aparigraha (Non-possessiveness/Non-attachment) emerges as the primary method.

The text identifies five cardinal sins in Jainism: violence, falsehood, theft, sensual misconduct (kushil), and possessiveness (parigraha). However, it argues that in contemporary human life, possessiveness has become the root cause of the other four sins. This is why Lord Mahavir repeatedly emphasized Aparigraha in his sermons, and Jain saints who interpret his teachings explicitly state that the desire for possessions (parigraha-lipsa) is the progenitor of the other four sins.

A quote from "Samansuttam" is cited to illustrate this point: "For the sake of collection, one commits violence; for the sake of collection, one speaks falsehood; one commits theft for collection; one engages in sensual misconduct due to the immeasurable desire for collection." The text elaborates that violence, falsehood, and theft are all committed for the sake of accumulating or retaining possessions. Sensual misconduct also arises from the lust for possessions, and it extends beyond mere physical misconduct to include interpersonal conflicts, such as disputes between brothers over property, tension between parents and children, or distance between husband and wife, where mutual respect and boundaries are broken.

Lord Mahavir declared the desire for possessions as the greatest sin, as the other four sins are fundamentally rooted in it. This is why greed is referred to as the "father of sin." It is the gateway through which the remaining four sins infiltrate our lives. The text likens this desire to a leak in the edifice of our personality, allowing the flow of sin.

While possessions can be categorized in various ways, and the intent behind them can be good or bad, the fundamental truth remains that possessiveness itself is the fifth sin. Lord Mahavir, while describing all actions related to initial activities and possessions (arambh-parigraha) as sinful (savodya), advised householders (shravaks) to adopt a vow of contentment and accept limited possessions for their livelihood. For monks and nuns who have taken the Digambara vows, he mandated the renunciation of all activities related to possessions and initial actions in nine ways (navakoti): through direct action, causing others to act, and approving the actions of others; through mind, speech, and body; and through intention, execution, and accomplishment.

The book then delves into a critical historical aspect: Possession worship became the cause of schism within Mahavir's Sangha (community). Lord Mahavir's teaching was unequivocal: the journey of self-realization can only be undertaken through complete non-possessiveness. Any hope, request, or intention to possess anything, for any reason, would strip a mendicant of their respected status, making them an object of ridicule in the world and leading to an unfortunate destiny in the afterlife.

However, the text laments that the "winds of time" did not allow this flame of Mahavir's teaching to remain steady for long. Merely five hundred years after Mahavir's Nirvana, disagreements arose regarding the "role of possessions in the path of spiritual practice." Within the next hundred years, a schism occurred among Mahavir's followers.

The author asserts that the current division within Mahavir's followers into Digambara and Shvetambara traditions is not due to any fundamental doctrinal difference, but solely due to divergent concepts regarding possessions. The history of these divisions shows that while all sects agreed that violence, falsehood, theft, and sensual misconduct were sins, a particular group began to interpret the "cause-and-effect relationship" between external and internal possessions. The Digambara Acharyas used this interpretation as the bedrock for their spiritual scholarship. In contrast, others, to conceal their attachment and lack of resolve, presented various arguments and accepted possessions as conducive and beneficial to spiritual practice. These became the other branch of followers. Thus, the author concludes, attachment to possessions, and only attachment to possessions, was the reason for the schism among Mahavir's disciples. In the initial stages, there were no other doctrinal differences between them.

The book concludes by stating that even after two and a half thousand years since Mahavir's Nirvana, the fundamental traditions of his Sangha have survived primarily because the venerated Acharyas and monks who carried forward his tradition strived to remain firmly detached from all activities related to possessions and initial actions. Moreover, even in this era of material competition and the dazzling allure of possessive status, the followers (shravaks) of the path of non-attachment have accepted possessiveness as the 'fifth sin'. The text honors both the monks and householders who are progressing by remaining as detached as possible, deeming them worthy of reverence and veneration.