Tithi Ek Samsya

Here is a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Tithi Ek Samasya" (A Problem of Dates), authored by Pu. Aa. Bha. Shri. Vi. Chandraguptasuri, and published by Anekanth Prakashan Jain Religious Trust:

Central Issue: The Discrepancy in Observing Jain Festivals (Tithis)

The book addresses a significant and ongoing debate within the Jain community regarding the correct observance of auspicious dates (tithis), particularly focusing on the festival of Paryushan and its culmination in Samvatsari. The core problem lies in the differing interpretations and applications of scriptural principles related to the calculation and observance of tithis, leading to two main factions: the "Ek-Tithi Paksha" (One-Date Faction) and the "Be-Tithi Paksha" (Two-Date Faction).

Author's Stance and Motivation:

The author, Pu. Aa. Bha. Shri. Vi. Chandraguptasuri, is a follower of the "Ek-Tithi Paksha" and, in this book, critically examines the arguments and publications of the opposing "Ek-Tithi Paksha," particularly a publication by the late Pandit Prabhudasbechardas Parekh. The author's motivation for re-publishing and expanding upon his previous work stems from the resurgence of this tithi dispute in Vikram Samvat 2061 (2005 CE), coinciding with a similar debate in 2055 VS (1999 CE). He feels compelled to present a clear, scriptural understanding to counter what he perceives as flawed arguments and rigid adherence to incorrect beliefs.

Critique of the Opposing View (Pandit Prabhudasbechardas Parekh and his Supporters):

The author expresses strong disagreement with the arguments presented by the late Pandit Prabhudasbechardas Parekh, and by extension, the "Ek-Tithi Paksha." Key points of contention include:

• Interpretation of "Karya" in "Kshaye Purva": The author refutes the Pandit's interpretation of the word "Karya" in the scriptural phrase "Kshaye Purva" as "Aradhya" (to be worshipped/observed). The author argues that this interpretation is grammatically sound and widely understood in practice, contrary to the Pandit's objections.
• Adding "Parva" to "Tithi": The author questions the Pandit's objection to adding the word "Parva" (auspicious festival) to "Tithi" when the context clearly refers to an auspicious occasion. He suggests that if the Pandit has issues with this phrase, he should offer an alternative scriptural guidance for observing tithis other than the twelve main "Parva" tithis.
• Limiting "Kshaye Purva" to Twelve Tithis: The author argues that the principle of "Kshaye Purva" (observing a tithi on the previous day when it is in decline) is not limited to the twelve main auspicious tithis. It applies to any tithi that becomes significant for observance due to specific circumstances.
• Misrepresentation of "Praghosha": The author criticizes the publishers for attempting to include Samvatsari within the scope of "Praghosha" (scriptural pronouncements), despite the Pandit himself stating that this pronouncement was not for the Paryushan-Mahaparva.
• Inconsistency and Lack of Humility: The author highlights an anecdote where the Pandit, after hearing scriptural arguments from "Nishithachurni" and other ancient texts supporting the "Be-Tithi Paksha," readily admitted, "Sir, these readings were not in my awareness. I cannot say anything now." This suggests a potential for intellectual flexibility that, according to the author, is absent in the published work, which appears to have been written before this admission.
• Misinterpretation of "Tattvatarangini": The author points out that the "Tattvatarangini" text, mentioned by the Pandit, clearly states that a tithi should be observed on the day it concludes, irrespective of whether it is a tithi in decline, increment, or a normal tithi. Had the Pandit considered this, his interpretation of "Kshaye Purva" would have been different.

Critique of the Publishers:

The author also criticizes the publishers for, in his opinion, losing their integrity due to their "wrong insistence" (kudagraha). They are accused of misrepresenting the Pandit's work by associating it with the Samvatsari dispute, despite the Pandit's own statements limiting its scope.

Broader Concerns and Criticisms of the "Ek-Tithi Paksha":

Beyond the direct critique of the Pandit's work, the author expresses broader concerns about the "Ek-Tithi Paksha" and the ongoing tithi dispute:

• Undermining Jin-Shasan: The author views the tithi debate, particularly the rigid adherence to a single date, as a form of "playing with" or "harming" the core principles of Jainism. He sees this as a serious transgression against the teachings of the Tirthankaras.
• Lack of Scriptural Adherence: He laments that some leaders, who are supposed to protect and propagate the Jain faith, are indirectly or directly involved in activities that deviate from scriptural traditions.
• Misuse of Authority: The author criticizes trustees and local Sanghas (communities) for imposing their beliefs on the entire Sangha, stating they have no right to make decisions contrary to scriptural traditions.
• The Concept of "Twenty-fifth Tirthankara": He strongly condemns those who claim to be the "twenty-fifth Tirthankara," arguing that they have broken the boundaries set by the Tirthankaras and are not even true followers of the faith.
• "Sangh Bhed" (Schism in the Community): The author argues that those who adhere to scriptural principles are wrongly accused of causing a schism. He contends that true unity lies in following the teachings of the Tirthankaras, and it is those who deviate who are actually causing division by undermining the faith. He invokes historical examples where expulsion of those who deviated was necessary to protect the Dharma.
• Personal Grudges and Ego: A recurring theme is that the tithi dispute is fueled by personal animosity, ego, and a desire for recognition rather than a genuine pursuit of truth.
• Misrepresentation of Traditions: The author challenges claims of certain traditions, like the "Devasur Gachha," stating that they have not been authentically proven.
• Abandonment of Principles for Unity: He criticizes those who are willing to abandon scriptural principles and their own past writings for the sake of perceived "unity," which he believes is a superficial and harmful goal.
• Selective Interpretation: The author points out the hypocrisy of those who adhere to scriptural rules for some aspects (like dates) but reject them for others.
• Misleading the Public: He accuses certain scholars and ascetics of deliberately misleading the general public with flawed reasoning and distorted interpretations of scriptures to push their agenda.

Scriptural Basis for "Be-Tithi Paksha" (as presented by the author):

The author supports the "Be-Tithi Paksha" by referencing scriptures and traditional interpretations:

• "Udayami" and "Kshaye Purva": These scriptural pronouncements are cited as the basis for observing a tithi on the previous day when it is in decline (kshaya) and on the following day when it is in increment (vriddhi).
• "Janmabhoomi Pratyaksha Panchang": The author relies on this specific almanac as a reliable guide for calculating tithis and advocates for observing festivals according to its calculations.
• Historical Practice: He mentions that the Jain community historically followed almanacs and applied scriptural rules to determine tithi observance.
• Tirthankara Teachings: The author asserts that the practices of the Tirthankaras, like Aryakaliksuri Maharaj, who observed Samvatsari on Bhadrapada Shukla Chaturthi (Bha. Shu. 4), were based on the teachings of Lord Mahavir.

Conclusion and Appeal:

The book concludes with a strong plea for adherents to follow the scriptural principles and observe festivals on the correct dates as indicated by reliable almanacs, specifically the "Janmabhoomi Pratyaksha Panchang." The author urges individuals to not be swayed by personal animosities or superficial notions of unity that compromise the core tenets of Jainism. He emphasizes that true adherence to the faith lies in following the divine commands of the Tirthankaras, and any deviation leads to "viradhana" (transgression) and spiritual harm. The author encourages sincere seekers to independently study the scriptures to arrive at the truth, as the ongoing debate is unlikely to be resolved through current divisive approaches.