Vedsamya Vaishmya - Book Summary

Here is a comprehensive summary of the provided text from Sukhlal Sanghavi's "Vedsamya Vaishmya," focusing on its philosophical and critical points:

The text is a personal reflection and response by Sukhlal Sanghavi to a scholarly discussion, likely between Professor Hiralalji and Pandit Phoolchandji, on the subject of karma and related concepts within Jainism, particularly focusing on the concept of "Vedsamya Vaishmya" (equality and inequality of gender/sexual disposition).

Key Points and Arguments:

Appreciation for the Scholarly Discussion: Sanghavi expresses deep respect for the intellectual rigor and profound nature of the debate between Professor Hiralalji and Pandit Phoolchandji. He considers their exchange a substantial contribution to Jain scholarship, highlighting their ability to maintain equanimity, politeness, and a modern perspective despite their differing backgrounds ("Pandit" vs. "Professor"). He acknowledges the historical and philosophical significance of their discussion, deeming it essential for future scholars.
Praise for Pandit Phoolchandji: Sanghavi considers Pandit Phoolchandji to be exceptionally insightful and deeply knowledgeable in the karma texts, surpassing many other scholars he knows. He laments that such brilliant minds are not adequately supported or given the freedom to contribute fully to scholarly progress, often being exploited by those driven by materialistic pursuits.
Praise for Professor Hiralalji's Insight into Karma: Sanghavi commends Professor Hiralalji for his profound understanding and contemplation of karma principles. He believes Hiralalji's ability to respond to Pandit Phoolchandji's detailed and reasoned arguments with depth and precision indicates a mastery of the subject, suggesting Hiralalji has not just read but deeply internalized the karma doctrine.
Shifting Personal Focus and Skepticism of Traditionalism: Sanghavi admits that his personal intellectual focus has shifted from purely scholastic debates to broader humanistic concerns. He also expresses a growing detachment from rigid traditionalism within Jainism. He believes that the pursuit of "sampradayik moksha" (sectarian liberation) and the concept of "nivritti" (renunciation) are incomplete and even obstructive to the holistic development of humanity. He argues that Jainism, despite its philosophical depth, has become entangled in rote ritualism and intellectual stagnation, obscuring its core essence.
Critique of Current Jain Practices and Interpretations: Sanghavi is critical of the "sampradayik jadata" (sectarian inertia) that he believes has stifled Jain thought and practice. He argues that this inertia has made the community incapable of objective, unbiased examination of their own doctrines. He feels that many traditional interpretations, even those considered authoritative, lack intellectual satisfaction and can be discarded if they don't align with reason and logic.
Support for "Vedsamya" (Gender Equality/Sameness): This is the core of the critique. Sanghavi finds the concept of "Vedsamya" (equality or sameness of disposition, particularly regarding gender) to be more consistent with reasoning ("vedsamya vicharsangat janta hai"). He questions the traditional explanations for phenomena related to gender differences.
Rejection of Traditional Explanations for Gender Phenomena:
- He dismisses notions that "bhogbhumi" (a mythical land of enjoyment) and the concept of "yogya upadan" (suitable material) in the womb for male-female couples are anything other than "balish" (foolish) if they cannot be substantiated by experience.
- He argues that if karma principles cannot be applied to observable experiences and require recourse to mythical realms, then those karma principles themselves should be re-evaluated.
- He states that just because ancestors believed something doesn't mean current generations are bound by it; their ideas can and should be tested.
Reinterpreting Gender-Related Phenomena:
- Sanghavi believes that perceived instances of male desire for femaleness or female traits in males can be explained differently, in ways that support the idea of "Vedsamya."
- He asserts that simply desiring to be like the opposite sex does not make one experience the disposition of the opposite sex.
- He defines "Strived" (female disposition) not merely by desire for female-associated pleasures but by the capacity to conceive, carry, and nurture a child.
- He uses analogies: just as wishing to see with the ears doesn't make one see, or wishing to walk with the head doesn't make one un-crippled, mere desire doesn't change one's fundamental disposition or the karmic effects associated with it.
- He suggests that the effect of a disposition can be altered by other emotional forces or associations, even if the underlying disposition itself remains the same. A man with a masculine disposition who desires femininity should be seen as having a contrary manifestation of his masculine disposition, not as having a female disposition.
- He emphasizes that the power to generate semen (for males) and the power to receive semen (for females) are the fundamental, materially determined aspects of "Pumved" (male disposition) and "Strived" respectively.
- He uses the example of a goat giving milk to illustrate that an unusual phenomenon (milk production) doesn't change its inherent masculine nature. This is merely a deviation from the typical characteristic due to an external cause.
- He advocates for the idea that a single disposition (like "Ved") can have the generative power for various desires, even if society categorizes those desires conventionally.
Addressing Ambiguity in Gender: Sanghavi questions the classification of "eunuchs" as a separate, independent "Ved." He proposes it's more likely that they possess either a male or female disposition, but with atypical or reversed outward characteristics. He also acknowledges that the physical form of males and females can vary significantly in intensity.

In essence, Sanghavi's reflection is a critique of religious dogma and sectarianism when they hinder intellectual freedom and rational inquiry. He champions the cause of logical reasoning and empirical observation, even when it challenges long-held traditions, and finds the concept of "Vedsamya" to be more aligned with a reasoned approach to understanding gender and its manifestations. His personal intellectual journey is marked by a disillusionment with rigid traditionalism and a focus on human potential and progress.