Nahi Joie 2600 Ni Rashtriya Ujavani

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Nahi Joie 2600 ni Rashtriya Ujavani," focusing on the critique of the Indian government's proposed plans for celebrating the 2600th birth anniversary of Lord Mahavir.

Book Title: Nahi Joie 2600 ni Rashtriya Ujavani (Translation: Not Needed: National Celebration of 2600) Author: Pujya Muniraj Shri Hitvardhan V.M. Publisher: Shrimati Chandravati Balubhai Khimchand Religious Trust

Overall Theme: The book, written from a strictly orthodox Jain perspective, vehemently opposes the 20 proposed national-level celebrations by the Indian government for the 2600th birth anniversary of Lord Mahavir. The author argues that these proposals are unscriptural (ashastriya), detrimental to the core principles and sanctity of Jainism, and a misinterpretation of the teachings of Tirthankaras. The author believes these proposals are aimed at sensationalizing, trivializing, and ultimately diluting the profound spiritual essence of Jainism for political or commercial gain.

Core Arguments and Critique of Government Proposals (20 Points):

The book systematically addresses each of the 20 proposed government initiatives, providing detailed reasons for rejection based on Jain scriptures and principles:

1. Postage Stamps with Lord Mahavir's Image:

   • Rejection: Unacceptable because stamps are licked (implies saliva on the divine image), handled by unclean hands, attached to mail that may be defaced, and eventually torn or discarded. This is considered a grave disrespect and devaluation of the Tirthankara's image. The use of animal products (mutton tallow) in stamp adhesive is also a concern.
   • Analogy: Compares it to disrespecting one's own father's photograph.
   • Principle: Contradicts the concept of Aparigraha (non-possession), as stamps are a form of possession, while Tirthankaras were completely non-possessive.

2. Translation of Jain Agam Sutras:

   • Rejection: Strictly forbidden by Jain scriptures. The author cites the example of Acharya Siddhasen Gani who faced severe penance for translating even a few verses of the Namokar Mantra into Sanskrit. Agam Sutras are considered incredibly potent and their translation could destroy their inherent power.
   • Principle: Agams are meant only for ascetic monks (Shraman), not for householders. Attempting to translate them for wider public consumption is a violation of scriptural injunctions meant to protect their sanctity and profound meaning.

3. Mobile Exhibition of Tirthankaras' Lives:

   • Rejection: Jainism is a religion of practice (Achar Pradhan) and discipline (Maryada Nishth), not just information. Traveling exhibitions would lead to a lack of reverence, exposure to worldly temptations (smoking, drinking, etc., near the divine depictions), and an undignified display of the Tirthankaras.
   • Principle: Tirthankaras are to be revered in all forms (name, form, substance, feeling), and such exhibitions would fail to uphold this reverence.

4. Plays Based on Tirthankaras' Lives:

   • Rejection: Tirthankaras themselves have prohibited watching plays, considering it a sinful activity (Anarthdand). Depicting them through actors is a gross insult. The character of the actors might not be pure, and their actions could be condemned while associated with the Tirthankara's name, leading to negative karmic consequences for the community.
   • Principle: Such portrayals are not found in the 7000-year history of Jainism and are considered unscriptural.

5. Introducing Tirthankara's Likeness on Coins:

   • Rejection: Lord Mahavir renounced vast wealth, considering possessions a source of suffering. Placing his image on coins, symbols of wealth and transaction, is like pouring nectar into a gutter. Coins are used in corrupt economic systems and for indulging in vices.
   • Principle: It would associate the completely pure and detached Lord Mahavir with the impure world of economics and vices, which is unjust and ignorant.

6. Unity of Four Jain Sects (Digambar, Shvetambar, etc.):

   • Rejection: Impractical and harmful. The author highlights the visual differences (nakedness vs. clothed) and doctrinal disputes, particularly mentioning the Digambaras' depiction of Tirthankaras as naked and their alleged attempts to claim ownership of Tirthas historically managed by Shvetambaras. Engaging with sects that do not believe in idols or have different interpretations of monastic practices is seen as futile.
   • Principle: Such forced unity could lead to irreparable damage and conflict, with potential political pressure from the government to divide Tirthas.

7. Establishment of a National Council for Jainism Studies:

   • Rejection: Jainism's principles are eternally valid and self-sufficient; they don't require re-study or "study councils" formed by hired individuals.
   • Principle: The author views this as a conspiracy to interpret Jainism according to the council's whims, undermining the authority of Jain ascetics (Shramans) and their sovereign role in preserving and disseminating Jain Dharma.

8. Making a Film on Lord Mahavir's Life:

   • Rejection: Impossible to depict Tirthankaras, who possess special divine powers (like being seen clothed without actually wearing clothes), accurately through modern film technology. Films often depict nudity or partial nudity, which is a severe disrespect. The use of electronics and modern actors is also seen as a contradiction to the ascetic lifestyle of Tirthankaras.
   • Principle: Jainism considers TV and cinema as "Anarthdand" (wrongful activity), making it a direct contradiction to show the Lord on such a medium. It also questions the credibility of those who promote films on Mahavir while opposing TV.

9. Release of 2600 Prisoners:

   • Rejection: The author questions the selectivity of "chosen" prisoners. More importantly, releasing prisoners is not a religious act. The true religious act is to help people avoid the actions that lead to imprisonment. If these released prisoners re-offend, the sin would fall on the Jains. It could also breed envy among other prisoners and animosity towards Jains.

10. Development of Forest Areas (Vansthali):

    • Rejection: Lord Mahavir advocated for the protection of all life, including plants. Developing forests, especially as a celebration of his birth, is seen as a contradiction to his teachings of not harming vegetation unnecessarily. It's considered a modern, superficial way of honoring him.
    • Principle: Forest development would lead to the destruction of countless microscopic life forms (Vanaspati Kay), which is unacceptable. It's a social or environmental act, not a religious one.

11. Government Allocation of 100 Crore Rupees:

    • Rejection: Viewed as hypocrisy and a political ploy. The author points out that the Jain community has historically been charitable and self-sufficient. They question why Jains would need government funds, suggesting that the money would likely be siphoned off by corrupt officials.
    • Principle: It could lead to division and corruption within the Jain monastic orders (Sadhu Sangh) by providing funds for their projects, potentially making them more complacent.

12. Serving Jain Food with Non-Veg in Five-Star Hotels:

    • Rejection: Jains generally do not patronize hotels and restaurants. The author expresses deep suspicion about the food preparation, fearing cross-contamination and deception.
    • Principle: It's seen as a cunning tactic to lure Jains into consuming forbidden food (Abhakshya) and to exploit the community's affluence. This will lead to the downfall of the Shravak Sangh (community of lay followers) and make it difficult for monks to receive alms.

13. Establishing a New University in Lord Mahavir's Name:

    • Rejection: Universities today teach materialistic and worldly knowledge, devoid of spiritual principles like the soul or afterlife. They promote practices like dissecting animals, which are against Jain teachings. The scientific worldview taught (Earth revolving, sun being hydrogen) contradicts Mahavir's assertions (Earth is stationary, Sun is a Deva).
    • Principle: Associating Lord Mahavir's name with universities that promote incorrect knowledge, materialism, and practices like abortion for population control is unacceptable and a severe disrespect.

14. Exchange of Indian and Foreign Scholars:

    • Rejection: Jainism has no shortage of scholars or internal crises requiring external "scholars."
    • Principle: The author believes this exchange would undermine the authority of the Acharyas and the monastic Sangha, potentially leading to the "death knell" of Jainism. They question the scholars' adherence to Jain principles, their diet (non-vegetarianism), and their faith.

15. Including True Lessons on Lord Mahavir in Textbooks:

    • Rejection: Concern over the government education board's ability to select truly scriptural and accurate lessons. The author fears that lessons compromising the reality of Lord Mahavir's life might be included, and that the religious gurus' objections might not be accepted.
    • Principle: There is a fear that Lord Mahavir's life might be presented in a way similar to or less impactful than those of secular politicians, diminishing his stature.

16. Naming a University After Lord Mahavir:

    • Rejection: Associating the name of a Tirthankara, the beacon of right knowledge, with universities spreading false knowledge is a sacrilege. Lord Mahavir's religion is itself a vast university.
    • Principle: This is seen as a slippery slope; if universities can be named, then cinema halls might be next. It questions the respect for Mahavir among the university faculty and students.

17. Declaring Certain Tirthas as "Holy Places":

    • Rejection: All Jain Tirthas are inherently holy. Declaring some as "holy" implies others are not, which is incorrect.
    • Principle: The real need is not to declare them holy but to strictly enforce the adherence to their sanctity. Simply declaring them holy will not stop practices like meat consumption or drinking, as evidenced by the situation around Shatrunjaya. It will also lead to them becoming tourist spots, diminishing their spiritual significance.

18. Establishing Government Boards for Tirtha Development:

    • Rejection: Jains are not weak or dependent. Seeking government boards implies inviting government interference in religious matters. The members of these boards might be atheists or materialistic, turning Tirthas into businesses.
    • Principle: Government intervention will lead to the government eyeing the vast wealth of Tirthas and potentially seizing trust funds, as suggested by recent government budget proposals.

19. Running Special Trains at Jain Cost:

    • Rejection: The author criticizes the idea of Jains bearing all costs for special trains while the government benefits. They question whether these trains will serve only Tirthas or also tourist spots, fearing the spiritual decline of pilgrims.
    • Principle: Naming trains after Lord Mahavir, which are powered by the killing of countless life forms, is considered highly inappropriate. It suggests a loss of self-respect and pride in Jainism.

20. Appealing to UNESCO to Recognize Lord Mahavir as 'World Man':

    • Rejection: Lord Mahavir is not just a "World Man" but a "Cosmos Man" or "Universe Man." Seeking recognition from secular human organizations is seen as ignorant and a foolish attempt.
    • Principle: If UNESCO rejects the proposal, it would be a humiliation for Jains. Comparing Mahavir to secular figures like Jesus Christ is also seen as a trivialization of his transcendental status. It's considered a declaration of war against the transcendental essence of the world.

Conclusion: The book strongly advocates for the preservation of Jainism's unique scriptural principles and the sanctity of its practices. It urges Jains to resist these government proposals, viewing them as attempts to dilute, commercialize, and ultimately damage the integrity of the faith. The author implores the Jain community to stand firm, uphold the teachings of their Tirthankaras, and reject any unscriptural interventions in their religious affairs.