Sampradayikta Ane Tena Puravanu Digdarshan - Book Summary

Here is a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Sampradayikta ane Tena Puravanu Digdarshan" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, based on the provided pages:

Central Argument:

The core argument of the text is that Sampradayikta (sectarianism) is the primary corrupting force that has hindered the true potential of religion, specifically within the Indian context, to bring about true welfare. Despite India's deep-rooted religiosity and the inheritance of profound philosophies like Upanishadic Vedanta, Jain tapas and ahimsa, and Buddhist communalism, the populace remains "paltry" or underdeveloped. The author posits that this is not due to the inherent weakness of religion itself, whose transformative power is evidenced by great saints, but rather due to the dilution and distortion of religion's true strength by an external, malevolent element: Sampradayikta.

Defining Sampradayikta:

Etymology: The word "Sampradaya" is described as being mixed (Roodhyaugik), meaning it has both an established meaning and a linguistic derivation. While some interpret it solely as "Vedas," this is considered too narrow.
Broader Meaning: A more realistic and extensive definition, drawing from Amar Kosh, defines Sampradaya as an "exhortation passed down through a lineage of gurus," and by extension, the people who adhere to such teachings.
Examples: The text cites examples like Vedic Sampradaya, Buddhist Sampradaya, Charak Sampradaya, Gorakh and Machhindranath Sampradaya to illustrate the practical application of this definition.
Synonyms: Terms like Amnaya, Tantra, Darshana, Parampara, Tirtha (in Jain and Buddhist literature), Samaya (in Jain literature), and Mat are mentioned as conveying a similar meaning to Sampradaya.
Sampradayikta Defined: Sampradayikta is then defined as the thoughtless adherence or attachment to a Sampradaya.

Distinguishing Sampradayikta from Mere Adherence:

The author clarifies that simply accepting a Sampradaya is not Sampradayikta. True Sampradayikta arises from narrow, one-sided over-reliance or an uncritical attachment. A lack of open-mindedness within a Sampradaya leads to this. The author contrasts two extremes:

Rejection of all Sampradayas: This is seen as absolute and extreme.
Blind attachment to a Sampradaya: This leads to a loss of critical thinking and a detriment to compassion.

The Middle Path: Drishti Udharata (Broad-mindedness):

The genuine middle path, Drishti Udharata, involves accepting a Sampradaya while retaining open-mindedness. This approach avoids the fallacy of ego associated with blind adherence and respects human intellect and compassion. It recognizes that any attachment, even to seemingly noble subjects, can become detrimental if it blinds one to truth. Ignorance distances individuals from truth, and so does this form of delusion. Broad-mindedness, conversely, brings one closer to truth.

Illustrative Examples:

Medical Practice: Blindly adhering to one medical system (e.g., Allopathic) without considering the merits of others is Sampradayikta. Embracing one system while acknowledging the valid aspects of others is broad-mindedness.
Vision and Spectacles: Someone who claims that true vision is impossible without spectacles exhibits sight-related delusion (Drishtirag). Someone who, while using spectacles, acknowledges that others might see clearly with their own eyes demonstrates broad-mindedness.

Causes of Sampradayikta (Mataandhata - Blind Faith):

The author attributes the infiltration of religious distortion and blind faith into human intellect to several factors:

Environmental Influence: People absorb religious elements like faith and restraint from their surrounding environment, including family, society, religious places, and learned institutions.
Uncritical Samskaras: If deeply ingrained sanskaras (impressions/tendencies) from childhood are not critically examined with reason as one grows, a person can remain convinced of their own religion's absolute superiority, deeming others false or inferior. This extends to deities, scriptures, and religious leaders.
Consequence: This blind adherence constricts the pure and liberal power of religion, causing it to flow through narrow channels. This can manifest as religious fanaticism, even without worldly motives, leading to impaired judgment and action.

The Scope and Purpose of the Evidence:

The author states that the evidence presented will be limited to Aryan literature, and even then, only specific parts. However, they encourage further research, suggesting that similar evidence of sectarianism can be found in any culture and era. The current effort is meant to be suggestive, like a "sthali-pulaak" (a few grains representing a pot full) approach.

Types of Evidence:

The evidence for blind faith will be presented in two forms:

From Scriptures: Scriptures are seen as reflections of life, so what exists in scriptures must have originated in life.
From Practical Life: What is observed in practical life reflects in the scriptures.

Examples from Practical Life:

The author describes how one will hear irrational intolerance in people's communal lives. For instance, Brahmins in Kashi, Bihar, and Mithila might call Jains atheists for not believing in the Vedas or accepting Brahmins as gurus, even accusing them of actively trying to insult Brahmins. Conversely, proud Jains might call Brahmins deluded, selfish, and lacking true knowledge. Buddhists would also voice similar harsh criticisms of other religions. This mutual animosity is so deep that Sanskrit grammarians use "Brahmin-Shraman" as an example of inherent conflict. The text also notes the extreme animosity between Vaishnavas and Shaivas within Vedic traditions, to the point where a Vaishnava might avoid asking a tailor to "stitch cloth" to prevent the mention of Shiva's name. Despite living together, sharing interests, and sometimes even having guru-shishya relationships, people of different Sampradayas often harbor deep animosity.

The "Brahmin-Shraman" Conflict:

The conflict between Brahmins and Shramanas is categorized as "jati-virodh" (hereditary animosity) by grammarians, implying it's an innate enmity like that between a snake and a mongoose. While the cause is seen as doctrinal disagreement, the grammarians' classification as "jati-virodh" is significant. It suggests that the religious differences became so intense that seeing one another naturally triggers anger. This deep sectarianism is considered more potent than mere causal animosity, hence its elevated classification.

Evidence from Vedic Literature:

The author then delves into examples from Vedic literature, divided into three categories: Puranas, Dramas, and Philosophical texts.

Puranas:
- General Tendency: The Puranas, especially those composed after the time of Vikram, are heavily biased against Shramana traditions (Jainism, Buddhism, etc.), even calling them "nastika" (atheistic) for not believing in the Vedas.
- Historical Context: The conflict's roots are ancient, appearing in early literature, but the grammatical examples of this opposition become prominent after the 7th century CE, coinciding with the Puranic era and its sectarian conflicts.
- Impact: The Puranas' immense influence on the general populace has spread sectarianism deeply. This ingrained mentality then seeped into other literary branches, affecting even esteemed scholars and philosophers.
- Method of Denigration: Puranas often fabricate stories where victorious groups (often representing Vedic traditions) are depicted as being weakened by embracing non-Vedic (Avvaidic) religions, which were supposedly introduced by divine figures to undermine their enemies. These stories are then used to explain the origin of Jain, Buddhist, and other sects as corruptions of the original Vedic dharma.
- Specific Examples from Puranas: The text provides detailed summaries of narratives from Vishnu Purana, Matsya Purana, Agni Purana, Vayu Purana, Shiva Purana, and Padma Purana that portray Jain and Buddhist origins in a negative light, often linking them to divine deception or the corruption of enemies. These narratives attribute the spread of these sects to the weakening of Vedic practices and the adoption of "Avvaidic" (non-Vedic) doctrines.
- Internal Sectarianism: The author also notes that even within Vedic traditions, there is significant intolerance and animosity between sub-sects like Vaishnavism and Shaivism, evident in Puranic texts.
Drama Literature:
- Two Types: Dramatic works are divided into two categories:
  - Direct Criticism: Works primarily aimed at criticizing opposing Sampradayas, exemplified by Prabodhachandrodaya.
  - Satire/Humor: Works that use satire to critique exaggerated practices within any Sampradaya or portray religious figures humorously, exemplified by Chaturbhanu, Mṛcchakatika, etc.
- Prabodhachandrodaya: This play, written by a Vaishnava, depicts all non-Vaishnava religions (Jain, Buddhist, Pashupata, etc.) as tamasic or rajasic, while glorifying Vaishnavism as sattvic and supreme. It attempts to portray Jain and Buddhist sects in the most repulsive ways possible.
Philosophical Texts (Darshana Shastra):
- Examples: Texts like Tattvavartika, Shankarabhashya, and Sankhyatatvakoumudi are cited.
- Kumarila (Tattvavartika): Kumarila criticizes any Sampradaya that deviates from Vedic ritualistic sacrifices, deeming them "apramanika" (invalid) for rejecting sacrificial violence. He specifically criticizes Buddha, a Kshatriya who adopted the practices of preaching and begging (Brahminical activities), questioning the validity of such a dharma-tyaga (abandoner of one's own dharma).
- Shankara (Shankarabhashya): Shankaracharya accuses Buddha of misleading people with his doctrines, calling it an insult to his own dharma.
- Vachaspati Mishra (Sankhyatatvakoumudi): A renowned scholar, Vachaspati Mishra calls all traditions other than the Vedas "mithya Agama" (false scriptures), arguing that only base, ignoble individuals would accept scriptures that contradict the Vedas.

Jain Literature:

The author then turns to Jain literature, dividing it for convenience into:

Agama: The original scriptures and their commentaries.
Charita: Biographical works from the medieval period.
Khandanatmak: Works primarily refuting other schools to establish their own.
Tarka: Works dealing with logical reasoning and epistemology.

Agama: Considered the primary Jain texts, their compilation and organization happened after their initial creation. Despite later restructuring, their antiquity remains. The text suggests their composition dates close to the time of Lord Mahavira, reflecting a focus on establishing the principles of non-violence and non-absolutist viewpoints. Early Jain literature is characterized by a focus on personal conduct and intellectual debate, demonstrating strong faith in their own principles but generally maintaining an indifferent, rather than hateful, stance towards opposing views.
Commentaries (Niyukti, Bhashya, Churni, Tikā): These later commentaries, written in the medieval period, show a growing influence of sectarianism, reflecting the broader historical context where inter-sectarian bitterness was prevalent.
Charita, Khandanatmak, Tarka Literature: These genres, also originating in the medieval period, are not exempt from the influence of sectarianism.

Specific Examples from Jain Literature:

The text then provides detailed examples from various Jain texts, focusing on the origins and criticisms of other traditions, particularly the Brahmanical worldview and the concept of the Brahminical class.

Brahminical Origin (Jain Perspective): Jain texts offer alternative explanations for the origin of the Brahmin class, contradicting the Vedic narrative of their birth from Brahma's mouth. Some Jain traditions suggest the term "Brahmin" originated from the constant chanting of "Māhaṇṇa Māhaṇṇa" by lay followers to attract the attention of ascetics. Others propose it stemmed from the term "māṇa" (pride) or even the act of "hitting" (māriṇu). Jain texts argue that the Kshatriya, Vaishya, and Shudra classes were created first, and the Brahmin class emerged later from these, particularly from those who adopted a more relaxed or compromised way of life. This is often presented as a consequence of societal changes and a departure from the rigorous practices of the early Jain ascetics.
Critique of Vedic Yajna (Sacrifice): Jain literature strongly criticizes Vedic sacrifices involving animal slaughter, labeling the Vedas that sanction such practices as later fabrications or corrupted versions of an earlier, non-violent Vedic tradition. The author highlights the Jain critique that adhering to such violent practices is inherently wrong and leads to negative consequences.
Critique of Brahmin Superiority: Jain texts challenge the birth-based superiority of Brahmins, emphasizing that true high status comes from virtuous conduct, tapas, and spiritual knowledge, regardless of birth. The Uttaraadhyayana Sutra is cited for its critique of Brahminical arrogance and its assertion that even someone born in a lower caste could attain a higher spiritual status through righteous conduct.
Origin of Other Schools (from Jain Perspective):
- Samkhya: Jain texts suggest Samkhya originated from Marichi, a disciple of Rishabhadeva, who later compromised Jain principles for a less rigorous path. While Vedic traditions attribute Samkhya to Kapila, Jain tradition places Marichi as the primary originator, with Kapila as a later disciple who popularized it.
- Buddhism: Some Jain texts mention Buddha as having received initiation from a Jain tradition before establishing his own school, portraying him as a follower who later deviated.
- Ajivikas: Jain literature, particularly the Bhagavata and Upasakadashana, mentions Ajivaka leaders like Makkhali Ghosala, portraying him as a significant contemporary and rival of Mahavira, highlighting debates and clashes between their disciples.
- Vaisheshika: Jain texts recount the origin of Vaisheshika philosophy from a character named Rohagupta, who, after a dispute with his guru over the nature of 'jiva' and 'ajiva', established his own distinct philosophy. This narrative suggests a departure from established Jain tenets.

Overall Conclusion:

The author's work is a critical examination of how sectarianism, driven by blind adherence and mutual antagonism between religious groups, has obscured the original teachings and undermined the positive potential of religion in India. By drawing examples from various religious and philosophical traditions, particularly highlighting the often-unflattering portrayals of opposing views within the scriptures themselves, Sanghavi aims to illustrate the pervasive nature of this problem and to advocate for a more open-minded and inclusive approach to spirituality, rooted in truth and compassion.