Shishya Chorini Mimansa

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Shishya Chorini Mimansa" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, based on the provided excerpt:

The text "Shishya Chorini Mimansa" (An Inquiry into the Theft of Disciples) by Sukhlal Sanghavi addresses the contentious issue of "Shishya Chorini," which translates to the act of "stealing disciples" or, more specifically, taking disciples for initiation into monasticism without the consent of their guardians (parents or other close relatives). The author emphasizes that this is a highly debated topic within the Jain community today, causing significant conflict and division.

Context and Motivation for the Discussion:

• The author acknowledges that the current national and economic climate, as well as rapid social and educational changes, are affecting the Jain community. However, he justifies focusing on the seemingly minor issue of "Shishya Chorini" because it has become a significant point of contention, drawing the community's attention.
• The core of the debate lies in whether "Shishya Chorini" is permitted or prohibited by Jain scriptures. Those who support it believe it is scripturally sanctioned and act accordingly, while opponents strongly protest it, leading to disputes and even physical altercations.
• The author's intention is not to favor one side but to present a neutral analysis of the scriptural arguments from both parties.

Current Landscape of the Issue:

• The Jain monastic community is divided into three main groups:
  1. Advocates of Shishya Chorini: Those who openly support and practice it.
  2. Opponents of Shishya Chorini: Those who vehemently oppose it.
  3. Those who appear neutral but benefit from Shishya Chorini: A more subtle group.
• The lay (householder) community, which relies on their own intellect and scriptural understanding, is small. This group largely opposes "Shishya Chorini."
• The author notes that the conflict appears to be between advocates and opponents, but in reality, the entire Jain society is affected by this "poisonous friction."

Scriptural Basis: The Third Vow (Aparigraha / Asteya / Adattadanaviraman):

• The foundation of Jain monastic life lies in the five Mahavratas (great vows), which are accepted by all parties. The third Mahavrata is Adattadanaviraman, which literally means "abstinence from taking what is not given" or "abstinence from stealing."
• The author delves into the deeper meaning of this vow. He argues that it's not just about the literal act of taking something without permission but also about renouncing greed (lobha) and fear (bhaya), which are the underlying motivations for such actions.
• A Jain should strive for desirelessness (nirlobhapana) and fearlessness (nirbhayapana). Therefore, any action that compromises these qualities, even if not a direct "theft" of property, is considered a violation of the spirit of the third vow from a Jain perspective.

The Concept of "Sammat Diksha" (Initiation with Consent) vs. "Asammat Diksha" (Initiation without Consent):

• Sammat Diksha: Taking initiation with the consent of parents or other relevant guardians.
• Asammat Diksha: Taking initiation without consent, which is what "Shishya Chorini" refers to.
• Historical Practice: The author highlights that while the original scriptures (Mula Agamas) do not explicitly state a rule requiring guardian consent for initiation, the examples and history of Lord Mahavir and his disciples consistently show that all initiations were with the consent of parents and other family members. This practice remained unbroken for nearly 1000 years.
• Reason for Consistent Sammat Diksha: The strict adherence to "Sammat Diksha" (even without an explicit rule) is attributed to the understanding that "Asammat Diksha" could lead to a breach of the third vow (greed and fear). Jain scriptures, aiming for peace and purity of mind, cannot condone actions that disrupt them.
• The Risk of Conflict: Initiating someone without consent can lead to disputes within families, bring disrepute to the religion, and cause distress to the initiator. Instead, the author suggests that a sincere aspirant should cultivate patience and perseverance, and through wisdom, humility, love, and true renunciation, eventually win over those who oppose their initiation.

The Case of Arya Rakshit: A Turning Point:

• The text then focuses on the pivotal case of Arya Rakshit in the 6th century of the Vira Nirvana era. Arya Rakshit, at the age of 22 and after extensive studies, sought initiation from Arya Taliputra. He had his mother's consent but not his father's.
• The "Shishya Nishphatika" (First Deviation): This case is considered the first instance where initiation occurred without full guardian consent (specifically the father's, though it was not an active opposition). It's termed "Shishya Nishphatika" (meaning "broken disciple" or "flawed disciple").
• Analysis of Arya Rakshit's Case:
  • Arya Rakshit was mature and capable of making his own decisions.
  • He was not married.
  • The preceptor (Arya Taliputra) did not coerce or deceive him.
  • The mother initiated the request, and the preceptor merely stated the rule of teaching only to the initiated.
  • There was no mention of opposition from the father or conflict with the mother or preceptor after the initiation.
• Significance of the "Shishya Nishphatika": This incident highlights the established norm of obtaining consent from all guardians. By labeling this case as a "first deviation" despite the father's passive lack of consent, it underscores the strong and indispensable nature of the tradition of seeking consent. It also implies that prior to Arya Rakshit, no such instances of unconsented initiation had occurred.

The Misuse of the Arya Rakshit Example and Subsequent Scriptural Clarifications:

• The Arya Rakshit incident, though a unique case, was later misused by some "unwise gurus" to justify giving initiations without consent. This created a "crack" in the tradition of "Sammat Diksha."
• This laxity led to initiations of individuals regardless of age, marital status, and involved deceitful tactics like convincing, hiding, or absconding with potential disciples.
• Commentaries (Bhashya and Churni): To address this misuse and protect the original tradition, later commentators introduced exceptions. They clarified that initiation without consent is considered a "Shishya Nishphatika" only for those under 16 years of age. For those above 16, the rule was not strictly applied in the same way.
• Further Misuse and Refinement: Even this exception was misused, leading to conflicts and legal issues. Consequently, commentators further refined the exceptions, stating that initiations without consent should not be given if the guardians are powerful, have state backing, the religion is likely to be criticized, or if it leads to court cases.
• The "Mandharma" (Weak-Faith) Designation: Those who continued to misuse the exception of Arya Rakshit and treat it as a general rule were condemned as "Mandharma" (having weak faith) and deviating from the "Mula" (original) rule. They were compared to a banyan tree uprooted from its base, which cannot survive despite its branches.

Understanding Utsarg (General Rule) and Apavad (Exception):

• Utsarg: The general, universal rule. In this context, "Sammat Diksha" is the utsarg. It is based on the principles of desirelessness and the reputation of the spiritual order.
• Apavad: The special exception to the general rule. In this context, "Asammat Diksha" is an apavad.
• Relationship: An exception is always a nuance to the general rule and is valid only as long as it supports the underlying principles of the general rule. It is confined to specific times, places, and circumstances.
• The Limit of Exception: The author stresses that an exception is acceptable only if it does not involve greed, fear, or disrespect for the spiritual order. The author argues that the current situation demonstrates that the exceptions for "Asammat Diksha" have exceeded their limits, leading to the "Mandharma" behavior described. The prevalence of disputes, court cases, and the government's intervention (e.g., the Gaekwad government's resolution) are cited as evidence.

Defining "Shastra" (Scripture) and the Path Forward:

• The author emphasizes that "Shastra" should be that which brings improvement and does not cause harm or discord. Any scripture that can be twisted to justify negative actions like violence, falsehood, theft, or lust is problematic.
• The core foundation of Jainism is Anekantavada (the doctrine of manifold aspects). Even the exceptions found in commentaries were made with this perspective in mind.
• The author concludes that based on scriptural interpretations and the current reality, initiation should not be undertaken or given without consent, unless there are extraordinary circumstances and the individuals involved are exceptionally wise and possess divine insight, which are rarely found today.
• He challenges those who advocate for unconsented initiation of individuals over 16 to understand that this is not a direct scriptural mandate but an exception that arose from a specific, fortunate incident and has since been misused.
• The author concludes by stating his readiness to engage in reasoned debate (written or oral) with anyone who wishes to discuss the scriptural aspects of this issue, provided they approach it with a calm and proportionate perspective.

In essence, the text argues that while the spirit of the third Jain vow (non-stealing) is paramount, the traditional practice of obtaining consent for initiation ("Sammat Diksha") is the established and preferred norm. The case of Arya Rakshit created a deviation, which was later codified as an exception but has since been widely misused, leading to detrimental consequences for the Jain community and its spiritual principles. The author calls for a return to the spirit of the scriptures and a careful consideration of the true meaning of "Utsarg" and "Apavad" to resolve the current disputes.