Sarva Dharm Sambhav Aur Syadwad

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Sarva Dharm Sambhav aur Syadwad" by Acharya Tulsi, based on the provided pages:

The text explores the concepts of Sarva Dharm Sambhav (Coexistence and Equanimity of All Religions) and Syadwad (The Doctrine of "Perhaps" or Conditionality) as presented by Acharya Tulsi. The core argument is that true understanding of religious harmony and the acceptance of diverse viewpoints stem from the profound principles of Jainism, particularly Syadwad.

The Nuance of "Sarva Dharm Sambhav":

• Acharya Tulsi begins by questioning the literal translation of "Sarva Dharm Sambhav." He argues that from an ultimate, absolute perspective, there is only one true Dharma. Therefore, the notion of "coexistence of many religions" is problematic.
• However, he clarifies that in practical, worldly (vyavaharik) terms, when "Dharma" is used to refer to various religious traditions or sects, then the concept of "samabhav" (equanimity or balanced attitude) towards these different paths becomes relevant.
• A critical question arises: how can one maintain equanimity towards religions that are not inherently "sama" (equal or harmonious)? For instance, how to reconcile a religion that champions non-violence with one that does not? The text uses the analogy of light and darkness – they cannot be considered equal. To treat unequal things as equal is a mistaken perspective.

Syadwad as the Foundation for True Equanimity:

• The author posits that Syadwad is the underlying principle that enables true equanimity. In the context of Syadwad, "samabhav" means the equalization of one's own feelings and perspectives.
• A person whose viewpoint is "anekant-sparshi" (touching upon manifoldness or multiplicity) can accept the truthful aspects of each religion and reject its untruthful aspects, thus remaining balanced and neutral.
• The text highlights the diverse philosophical viewpoints that have existed throughout history, such as:
  • Kala-vadi (Time as the cause)
  • Swabhava-vadi (Innate nature as the cause)
  • Niyati-vadi (Destiny as the cause)
  • Yadṛcchā-vadi (Chance as the cause)
  • Bhuta-vadi (Elements as the cause)
  • Purusha-vadi (Self-effort/Individual as the cause)
  • Ishvara-vadi (God as the creator)
  • Karma-vadi (Action/Deeds as the cause)
  • Paristhiti-vadi (Circumstances as the cause)
  • Pravṛtti-vadi (Engagement/Activity as the path)
  • Nivritti-vadi (Renunciation/Withdrawal as the path)
• Ancient texts like the Shvetashvatara Upanishad and the Mahabharata are cited to illustrate these differing views on causality. For example, Prahlad was a "swabhava-vadi" (believer in innate nature), and Bali supported the idea of time as the doer.

Syadwad's Synthesis of Opposites:

• According to Syadwad, concepts like time, nature, destiny, past deeds, and self-effort are all causes, but they are interdependent for the completion of an action. They are not absolute or independent in their functioning.
• The true doer (karta) lies within the substance itself, which operates according to its own nature. External factors like time are merely instrumental causes.
• The text quotes Haribhadra Suri, who states that the ultimate doer is the Supreme God, and the soul is the Supreme God in its own sphere, being the doer of its natural actions. This acknowledges "kartva-vada" (the doctrine of the doer) in a qualified sense.
• Syadwad reconciles seemingly opposing principles like permanence and change. From a Syadvadi perspective, no object is solely permanent or solely changing. The coexistence of contradictory qualities within an object is what constitutes its existence.
• Coexistence (sah-astitva) is presented as a direct consequence of Syadwad. If opposing elements did not coexist, then things would be singular and possess only one quality. The reality is that contradictory substances and qualities exist together.

Syadwad and its Application in the Jain Tradition:

• The author laments that some Jain scholars have not fully upheld Syadwad, engaging in debates in a sectarian manner, akin to absolutist philosophers. This has hindered the full development of "coexistence" as a practical outcome.
• The Shvetambara and Digambara traditions are seen as branches of the same tree, with no fundamental differences in their core principles. However, the language used in their debates has sometimes been regrettable, suggesting a need for further development of Syadwad's principles to bridge these divides.
• Syadwad is described as a vast ocean into which all other "vadas" (isms or doctrines) merge. The text equates the number of "vachana-pathas" (ways of speaking) with "naya-vadas" (perspectives or standpoints), and the number of "naya-vadas" with other philosophical systems.

The Depth of Syadwad:

• While reconciling diverse religious and philosophical views is challenging, the true essence of Syadwad lies not just in intellectual reconciliation but in the depth of spiritual practice (sadhana). It leads to a state where truth is the sole foundation.
• Professor Keith's view is discussed, suggesting that Jainism's contribution was to resolve the conflict between permanence and change. However, the author partially disagrees with Keith's assertion that Jainism did not develop significantly intellectually.
• The author argues that while Jain tradition prioritized spiritual realization over purely logical argumentation (unlike the Nyaya and Buddhist schools), this does not mean a lack of intellectual development. Truth, for Jainism, is attained through spiritual practice, and Syadwad is a pathway to that truth, not merely a logical construct.
• Only one who has practiced non-violence (ahimsa) can truly have equanimity towards all religions. Syadwad is seen as a form of non-violence. Being a Syadvadi without being non-violent is as impossible as being violent and not being a dry rationalist.
• The text contrasts Kautilya's view that logic is the basis of all religions with Bhartṛhari's idea that even well-reasoned arguments can be overturned by others.
• Acharya Kundakunda's saying is quoted: "Nirvana is not achieved by mere knowledge if there is no faith; nor is it achieved by mere faith if there is no self-control." Jain scholars developed knowledge integrated with self-control and faith, thus their logic remained within the bounds of Syadwad.
• Logic alone cannot resolve doubts. It is only when logic becomes imbued with the spirit of Syadwad that doubts are dispelled. Jain acharyas explored all aspects of logic and acknowledged every viewpoint. For them, nothing was inherently false, except for absolutism and rigid insistence on one viewpoint. Even the Charvaka's perspective, focused on sensory perception, is not entirely false; it is a truth accessible through the senses. Similarly, Vedanta's view of supra-sensory truth is also valid. The complete truth lies in the synthesis of the perceivable and the supra-sensory.

Haribhadra Suri's Vision of Synthesis:

• Haribhadra Suri's perspective on synthesis and equanimity is highlighted as very broad. He demonstrated how seemingly contradictory philosophies, like Samkhya's concept of Prakriti, could be understood and reconciled within a Jain framework, acknowledging the profundity of their proponents.
• He believed that even Buddha's teachings of impermanence were for the purpose of shedding attachment, and his teachings on consciousness were to detach from external objects. Similarly, Advaita's teachings were for the realization of equanimity.
• Finding non-contradiction in apparently opposing views and showing respect for their founders is the work of a balanced, Syadvadi logician.

Conclusion for Present-Day Jain Scholars:

• The text concludes with a call to action for contemporary Jain scholars: to practice Syadwad, integrated with the pursuit of equanimity, to resolve disputes and conflicts in all areas of life.

In essence, "Sarva Dharm Sambhav aur Syadwad" by Acharya Tulsi argues that true religious harmony is not achieved by superficially accepting all religions, but by deeply understanding the multifaceted nature of truth through the lens of Syadwad. This philosophical approach, rooted in spiritual practice and the acceptance of interconnectedness, allows for the discernment of truth in all traditions and fosters a genuinely balanced and respectful attitude towards diverse viewpoints.