Vichar Kanika

Here is a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text "Vichar Kanika" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, based on the provided excerpt:

Vichar Kanika (A Collection of Thoughts) by Sukhlal Sanghavi: A Summary

This excerpt from "Vichar Kanika" serves as an introduction to a collection of essays by Kishorelal Mashruwala and Kedarnathji, exploring the interplay between "Society and Religion" (Samaj aur Dharma). The author, Sukhlal Sanghavi, highlights the profound and intellectually challenging nature of these essays, which delve into diverse subjects from multiple perspectives with fundamental critique. He then distills his understanding of the core arguments presented by the two authors into four key points:

1. Alignment of Philosophy and Religion: For both philosophy (Tattva-chintan - contemplation of truth) and religion (Dharma - way of life based on principles) to be meaningful, their directions must be one and the same.
2. Collective Nature of Karma and its Fruits: The law of karma and its consequences is not solely individual but also collective.
3. Liberation through Purification, Not Annihilation: Liberation is not found in the cessation of karma or the dissolution of the mind, but in the progressive purification of both.
4. Ultimate Goal is Human Flourishing: The supreme aim is the preservation, strengthening, and advancement of the good qualities of humanity.

Sanghavi elaborates on these points, using historical examples from Indian philosophy to illustrate his arguments:

1. The Necessity of Harmonized Direction between Philosophy and Religion:

Sanghavi posits that philosophy seeks to uncover truth, while religion translates these principles into individual and collective life practices. He argues that differences in societal roles, abilities, and efforts lead to variations in religious observance. However, a fundamental divergence in direction between philosophical understanding and religious practice is detrimental. Without the light of philosophy, religion remains unenlightened, hindering human development. Conversely, religion devoid of philosophical grounding risks becoming stagnant and superstitious.

He illustrates this with the evolution of Indian philosophical thought:

• First Era (Self-Difference): This era emphasized inherent differences among individuals based on their actions (karma), leading to the caste system and rigid social structures where development was confined to one's prescribed role.
• Second Era (Self-Equality): This era advocated for freedom in spiritual development through ethical conduct (yama-niyama), emphasizing non-violence based on treating others as oneself. While acknowledging karmic differences, it focused on their amelioration through equalizing efforts.
• Third Era (Self-Non-duality): This advanced further, asserting no fundamental difference between individuals, even negating the distinction of equality itself.

Despite these philosophical advancements, Sanghavi observes a critical disconnect. Even proponents of self-equality and non-duality often continue to live in practice according to karmic disparities. He points to Jainism and other sects where, despite espousing equality, they often perpetuate caste distinctions and the practice of untouchability, indicating a divergence between their philosophy and lived reality. Similarly, adherents of Advaita Vedanta may espouse non-duality but their actions, even those of ascetics, often reflect duality and karmic inequalities. This disconnect, Sanghavi contends, has prevented Indian life from truly benefiting from its profound philosophical insights, instead leading to fragmentation in practice.

2. The Collective Dimension of Karma and its Consequences:

Sanghavi argues that a purely individualistic understanding of karma, while deeply ingrained in Indian thought ("As you sow, so shall you reap"), is insufficient to explain the universal disparities in well-being and suffering. He posits that an individual's actions have consequences that extend beyond themselves, impacting the collective life in known and unknown ways. He criticizes the intellectual class and various traditions for their resistance to this idea, often citing scriptural evidence against it.

He highlights the Mahayana Buddhist concept of not being able to find happiness when others suffer and the universal prayers for the welfare of all beings. However, he notes that these sentiments often clash with the deeply entrenched individualistic karma theory, rendering them less impactful in practice.

Both Mashruwala and Kedarnathji, Sanghavi states, view karma collectively. While his own upbringing inclined him towards individual karma, deeper reflection reveals the necessity of a collective perspective. He asserts that collective life encompasses individual life, thereby refining and purifying the individual perspective. The true essence of karma, he reiterates, is that no action is futile and no result is without cause. The outcome should correspond to the cause.

Sanghavi emphasizes that no individual is entirely separate from the collective. Examining an individual's life history reveals the influence of countless others' past and present actions. Conversely, an individual's actions also transmit to others. He questions the meaning of collective life if individuals are entirely independent in their karma and its consequences. Since empirical evidence demonstrates that individual life is deeply intertwined with collective life, philosophy must also reflect this reality.

He criticizes the individualistic approach in spiritual and material pursuits across various traditions. This focus has prevented the development of fundamental principles and practices centered on collective well-being, leading to the failure or weakening of many collective welfare initiatives. He uses the example of world peace, where individual national interests often supersede the collective goal, hindering both peace and national stability.

By embracing a broad, unbroken view of collective life and individuals taking responsibility within that framework, personal harm can be offset by collective gain. This expansion of one's duty leads to broader relationships and a sense of "Bhuman" (vastness or fullness).

3. Liberation through the Purification of Karma and Mind:

The desire for freedom from suffering led to the idea of freedom from its cause, karma. It was believed that karma and worldly engagement were inherently binding, and complete liberation was impossible as long as they existed. This led to the development of traditions like the monastic path (Angar-marga) and asceticism, emphasizing the renunciation of karma and worldly duties.

However, Sanghavi points out the flaw in this approach, which eventually manifested as a weakening and disintegration of collective life due to a lack of accountability. Those who renounced worldly life became more dependent and artificial, and the fabric of collective life began to fray.

This experience led to a re-evaluation: karma itself is not the sole binding factor; rather, it is the underlying desire (trushna-vrutti), narrow vision, and impurity of the mind that are the true bonds causing suffering. The core message of "nishkama karma" (action without attachment) emerges from this understanding. The authors of the book, Sanghavi notes, refine this by emphasizing progressive purification of karma and declaring liberation to be found therein.

He uses an analogy of a thorn in the foot. While removing the thorn is correct, discarding it completely is a mistake if it might be needed later. The proper approach is to remove it and keep it safely for future use. Similarly, individualistic living is like a thorn in the collective life. Removing it and using it properly means embracing collective responsibility with understanding. Such a life is liberation for the individual. As each person purifies their desires, they reduce the "impurities" of collective life, leading to collective freedom from suffering.

In this light, karma itself becomes religion. Just as a fruit has both pulp and rind, life requires both the essence of religion (karma's intention) and the form of karma. They must be integrated for life's fruits to manifest. Without the foundation of karma, where would religion find expression? And without purity, what value would karma hold beyond a mere husk? This interconnected view of religion and karma permeates these writings. The authors, Sanghavi highlights, also approach the concept of liberation from a collective life perspective.

He further discusses the idea that as long as the mind exists, thoughts and variations will arise, preventing peace. This led some to believe that the dissolution of the mind was liberation. However, this overlooked the development of humanity. Other thinkers revised this, stating that mind purification, not dissolution, is the path to liberation. Yet, equating liberation with individual mind purification alone is incomplete. The true ideal should be the continuous purification of the collective mind. If this is achieved, then the need for liberation in some other place or realm becomes unnecessary. Such a realm is merely the contribution of individual purity to collective purity.

4. The Primacy of Humanistic Development:

Sanghavi observes that while all traditions emphasize the welfare of all beings, the welfare of human society itself is often difficult to fully implement in practice. He therefore questions where the primary focus should be. He states that both authors clearly direct their attention towards the development of humanity, urging a life lived in accordance with this principle.

Human development, he explains, means preserving the good qualities humanity has attained, refining them, and developing new ones to prevent the emergence of destructive forces like conflict and enmity between people. The more this goal of human development is achieved, the more harmonious and unified social life will become. The natural consequence of this will be the welfare of all beings.

Therefore, every seeker's efforts should be primarily directed towards human development. This principle, he concludes, also arises from the idea of applying the law of karma from a collective perspective. This line of thought suggests integrating individual life with community life, with the household (grihastha-ashram) at its center. The household is where the virtues of all other stages of life can be realized. The ideal household, therefore, transforms from a place of mere indulgence into a place where enjoyment and spiritual practice are combined. Consequently, other stages of life are not meaningful in isolation from the household. The household becomes a symbol of the entirety of the four stages of life, which is also natural.