Tap

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, focusing on the concept of "Tap" (asceticism/penance):

The text, likely an excerpt from "Jain Dharma aur Darshan" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, delves into the historical and philosophical aspects of tap (asceticism or penance) within Jainism, particularly in relation to the Nirgrantha tradition and its comparison with Buddhism.

Key Themes and Arguments:

• Historical Continuity of Tap in the Nirgrantha Tradition:

  • The text strongly argues that the Nirgrantha tradition, even before Lord Mahavir, was fundamentally tap-pradhan (focused on asceticism).
  • Lord Mahavir's own life is presented as the epitome of intense tap.
  • The author draws parallels with Buddhist scriptures (Pali Pitakas) which mention "Nigranthas" alongside adjectives like "tapassi" (ascetic) and describe them performing penance in places like Rajagriha.
  • The text posits that Mahavir likely inherited this tradition of intense tap from the Pārśvanātha lineage of Nirgranthas, into which he was initiated. He didn't introduce the path of tap but rather refined and deepened its spiritual dimension.
  • Buddha's own autobiographical accounts of his ascetic practices are cited, suggesting they align with the description of Nirgrantha tap found in Jain Agamas. Buddha's temporary adherence to the Nirgrantha path is highlighted as evidence of the tradition's established ascetic practices before Mahavir.

• Mahavir's Contribution: Spiritual Purification:

  • While acknowledging the pre-existing emphasis on tap in the Nirgrantha tradition, the text asserts that Mahavir introduced a crucial element: spiritual purification (adhyatmik shuddhi).
  • Mahavir distinguished between external tap (physical austerities, kayaklesh) and internal tap (mental and spiritual discipline, leading to self-purification and the eradication of passions).
  • He declared that mere physical austerities, even if extreme, were "false tap" (mithya tap) if not directed towards spiritual cleansing.
  • Mahavir integrated the traditional external practices with the ultimate goal of inner purification, emphasizing meditation (dhyana) and wisdom (prajna). This enriched and refined the concept of tap.

• The Sachélta (Clothed) vs. Achélta (Unclothed) Debate:

  • The text briefly touches upon the historical debate between those who advocated for clothed ascetics (sachélta) and those who practiced nudity (achélta).
  • It suggests that while the Nirgrantha tradition was initially clothed, Mahavir introduced nudity as the ideal.
  • To integrate the Pārśvanātha lineage, a limited form of clothed asceticism was permitted, leading to both forms coexisting during Mahavir's time.
  • Over time, disagreements and deviations arose, leading to distortions in later Nirgrantha literature regarding this issue.

• Buddha's Critique of Nirgrantha Tap:

  • The text addresses why Buddha critiqued Nirgrantha tap.
  • Buddha's primary criticism was that Nirgrantha tap was perceived as mere physical hardship (kayaklesh), leading to increased endurance of suffering but not necessarily spiritual happiness or purity.
  • However, the text argues that this critique isn't entirely accurate from a Jain perspective, as Jainism also emphasizes the spiritual goal of tap.
  • The author suggests Buddha's critique was partly strategic:
    • Personal Inclination: Buddha's own nature was more inclined towards reasoned inquiry and meditation. Finding extreme asceticism unsatisfying, he shifted focus to the path of meditation, ethical living, and wisdom.
    • Popular Appeal: The general populace is easily attracted to visible, extreme austerities. Buddha needed to establish his own distinct path and attract followers.
    • Critique of External Practices: Buddha likely focused his criticism on the external aspects of Nirgrantha tap, sometimes overlooking or downplaying the internal spiritual goals that were also central to the Jain tradition. He might have grouped Nirgrantha tap with other forms of asceticism that did purely focus on physical hardship.
  • The text concludes that Buddha's criticism of Nirgrantha tap was "partially true" because while the core Jain tradition aimed for spiritual purity, some individuals within the broader Nirgrantha community might have indeed focused solely on external austerities.

• The Impact of Mahavir's and Buddha's Approaches:

  • The text contrasts the two approaches: Mahavir refined the existing tap tradition by linking it to spiritual purification, while Buddha largely abandoned extreme asceticism in favor of meditation and ethical conduct.
  • The impact of Mahavir's ascetic lifestyle on the public was so significant that it compelled Buddha to introduce stricter rules within his monastic order.
  • Ultimately, the text notes a potential drawback in the later interpretation of both traditions: Buddhist asceticism became too lenient ("sukumarata"), while Jain asceticism sometimes devolved into mere physical hardship ("kayaklesh"), both being natural flaws in communal practice rather than the original ideals.

In essence, the book excerpt establishes that tap was a foundational practice in the Nirgrantha tradition from its inception, with Lord Mahavir's crucial contribution being the redirection and integration of this tap towards the ultimate goal of spiritual purification and self-realization. It also contextualizes Buddha's critique of this practice within his own philosophical and strategic approach to establishing Buddhism.