Mahavirno Trividh Sandesh

This document is a commentary by Pandit Sukhlal Sanghavi on the triple message of Lord Mahavir: Ahimsa (non-violence), Aparigraha (non-possession), and Anekanta (non-absolutism). The commentary is based on a lecture given by Sadhvi Shri Ujjwalkumarji.

Here's a summary of the key points made in the provided text:

The Core Message and its Misinterpretation:

• Sadhvi Shri Ujjwalkumarji's lecture was clear and understandable, focusing on Ahimsa, Aparigraha, and Anekanta.
• Anekanta is the foundation of Ahimsa and Aparigraha, not just a philosophical concept but one that permeates every aspect of life.
• True Anekanta vision prevents extreme tendencies in practical life. Without it, Ahimsa and Aparigraha become distorted in individual and social life.
• These three principles are crucial for a harmonious society, yet despite frequent discussions, progress seems limited.

The Root Cause: The Gap Between Principle and Practice:

• The primary reason for this stagnation is the failure to understand the difference between the core principle and its outward expression.
• People tend to follow the outdated rituals and practices that were once implemented to realize these principles, believing they are living according to the principles themselves. This provides a false sense of satisfaction.
• When challenged, they defend these empty rituals rather than the core principles.

Lord Mahavir's Example vs. Modern Followers:

• Lord Mahavir himself practiced extreme austerity, lived a life of self-reliance and renunciation, and demonstrated Anekanta, Ahimsa, and Aparigraha through his life.
• However, his followers, even in changed circumstances, have clung to the external forms of his life without deeply understanding the underlying principles.
• This has led to a disconnect, with even ascetics (Tyakis) deviating from the core principles, rigidly adhering to ancient practices.
• Laypeople (Grihasthas), who look up to ascetics as role models, have also adopted these superficial practices, losing the living awareness of Anekanta, Ahimsa, and Aparigraha.

Examples of Distortion and Misunderstanding:

• The practice of going barefoot and pulling hair (for rituals) is cited as an example of a distorted practice that is now dependent on the labor of others. The use of fine, silk garments, unsuited for renunciation, is also questioned.
• If ascetics adopt clothing and live in cities due to changing times, why don't they make their own clothes to uphold the principles? The difficulty in answering this highlights the lack of deep understanding of the core principles.
• Engaging in social welfare activities like literacy and knowledge dissemination is sometimes seen as a deviation from renunciation. This is because the focus has shifted to rituals (Nivritti) as the entirety of Dharma, forgetting that renunciation (Dosha-nivrutti) is only one aspect and a prerequisite for social welfare.
• This leads to a situation where even renunciation becomes artificial, and the pursuit of good deeds (Satpravritti) is abandoned.
• The hypocrisy of laypeople engaging in black marketing and exploitation while supporting ascetics is highlighted. The ascetics may condemn these practices, but the laypeople believe their support purifies the illicit income, perpetuating the cycle of social impurity.

The Need for Reinterpretation in Changing Times:

• It's essential to redefine principles according to changing circumstances.
• An example is given of the vow of chastity for laypeople (Swadaar-santosh - contentment with one's own wife). If a person remains content with his wife but has an excessive number of children that he cannot adequately support or educate, he is arguably violating the spirit of the vow in today's context.
• The true meaning of Swadaar-santosh includes not only contentment with one's own wife but also a responsible approach to procreation, ensuring the well-being of the child and society.

Commentary on Kumāril and the Nature of Accusation:

• The text refers to Sadhvi Ujjwalkumarji's statement that Kumāril called the non-violence preached by Kshatriyas like Buddha and Mahavir "milk in a pot" (implying it's not pure or fully beneficial).
• The author clarifies that Kumāril was from the 7th century, and much earlier, Jains had criticized the Brahmin caste. Kumāril's statement is seen as a response to these earlier criticisms.
• The author emphasizes the importance of maintaining a neutral stance, regardless of who initiates accusations. The focus should be on examining one's own faults rather than blaming others.

In essence, the commentary argues that while Jain principles like Ahimsa, Aparigraha, and Anekanta are timeless and vital, their strict adherence to outdated practices without understanding their core meaning has led to their distortion and a decline in their impact on society. It calls for a re-evaluation and reinterpretation of these principles in the context of modern life, emphasizing the need for genuine understanding and practice over superficial rituals.