Vyavaharik Jain Pratimano Ki Adhunik Prasangikta

Here's a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text, "Vyavaharik Jain Pratimano ki Adhunik Prasangikta" (The Modern Relevance of Practical Jain Ideals) by L.K. Oad:

The author begins by reflecting on his childhood in Mandsaur, an ancient city known historically as Dashpur. He recalls hearing from Jain monks about Lord Mahavir's visit to Mandsaur and a local king's initiation into Jainism. Despite the presence of a significant Jain community, Mandsaur was unfortunately marked by communal discord and strife, even extending to conflicts between different Jain sects. This troubled the young author, who observed that places touched by Lord Mahavir's feet, meant to be sacred, seemed to be centers of violence, immorality, exploitation, and conflict in modern times. He questioned if Lord Mahavir's influence had waned.

He then reminisces about historical accounts of Lord Mahavir preaching in various cities, influencing kings, nobles, and commoners to embrace Jainism and the path of self-welfare. However, he also recalls the wars and conflicts of that era, including the battles between Lord Mahavir's followers like King Chetak and King Shrenik, and the territorial ambitions of Jain rulers. This led him to the realization that even during Lord Mahavir's time, personal and social ethics were often disparate. For instance, King Chetak could imprison his rival Udayan as a king, but apologize to him after a ritual of atonement, signifying different ethical codes for different roles. This ethical dilemma, the author observes, persists among Jains even today.

These observations fueled his questioning of his devout parents. He asked if Lord Mahavir's principles were merely theoretical or if they had practical application and possibility in the real world. He found it difficult to understand the justification for many Jain practices, such as the limited use of water, restricted use of vegetation, wearing a mouth-cloth during meditation, the principle of not harming any mobile (trasa) living beings, controlling fire usage, protecting even venomous creatures, fasting, and controlling speech. While his parents' faith-filled answers were not fully satisfying to his inquisitive adolescent mind, they held a strong conviction that a time would come when humanity would abandon exclusive doctrines and embrace Lord Mahavir's principle of anekantavada (non-one-sidedness). They believed that natural and human circumstances would compel people to adopt the principle of parasparopagraho jeevanam (mutual dependence of living beings).

Though not a believer in prophecy, the author developed an interest in futurology. He analyzed his father's pronouncements in light of futuristic writings by scholars like Herman Kahn and Alvin Toffler, which highlighted the depletion of natural resources. The scientific discoveries and political-economic changes of the latter half of the 20th century reinforced his father's prediction. He now believes that to maintain Earth as a habitable planet, humanity must adopt Lord Mahavir's principles in daily life, or face inevitable destruction.

The text then delves into the renunciation of subtle and gross violence in daily life. It explains the broad and subtle classification of living beings in Jain philosophy, where 'consciousness' (upayoga) is the characteristic of a soul. Jain texts detail various types of souls, from single-celled organisms to those with multiple manifestations, including classification into five major kayas (bodies) like earth, water, air, fire, and plants. While science recognizes microscopic organisms in these kayas, they are not yet considered "living beings" according to current scientific definitions. The author suggests that scientific definitions may broaden in the future to encompass all forms of life. Jain philosophy also categorizes beings based on evolutionary development, distinguishing between non-sentient and sentient beings, including humans and deities.

The core expectation in Jainism is for individuals to protect all living beings and renounce all forms of violence to the best of their ability. This translates to careful living to avoid even unintentional harm. This principle is exemplified by the Jain practice of conserving water, land, energy, air, and vegetation, and being mindful of all mobile creatures, as all these contain life. The author emphasizes the heightened relevance of this lifestyle today, citing futurologists' warnings about the consequences of indiscriminate resource exploitation.

He contrasts Darwin's "life feeds on life" with Lord Mahavir's positive assertion of parasparopagraho jeevanam. The industrial revolution, he argues, led to ruthless exploitation of nature, disrupting the ecological balance. Jainism prohibits fifteen types of karmadanas (actions that lead to karmic bondage), including large-scale enterprises (maharambha) that cause destruction like deforestation, depletion of earth's resources, pollution of water bodies, and energy waste. The principle of mutual dependence underscores that humans and nature, and all living beings, are interconnected. Any taking from nature necessitates giving back. The destruction of forests, for instance, has led to imbalances in rainfall and atmospheric health.

The author highlights how maharambha leads to mahahimsa (great violence) because the rate of resource depletion far exceeds their replenishment. The intense extraction of minerals has severely damaged the Earth's regenerative capacity, leading to potential scarcity of vital resources. Jain ethics advocate for slowing down mineral extraction and revitalizing depleted mines.

The mechanization of agriculture, while increasing yield, also carries the risk of maharambha. Traditional farming with livestock maintained a natural balance; animal dung fertilized the land, and crop by-products fed the animals. Modern mechanized agriculture consumes dwindling fossil fuels, pollutes the atmosphere, reduces soil fertility, depletes livestock, and creates dependencies on resources like diesel. Jain ethics advocate for harmonizing crop production with restraint in consumption, animal welfare, and soil conservation.

The advancement of science has also led to water wastage and pollution. While water scarcity in some regions remains unaddressed, abundant water resources have been squandered and polluted by industrial waste, causing immense harm to aquatic life and disrupting the aquatic ecosystem. Even areas with plentiful water now face scarcity due to pollution, impacting public health. Prudent and moderate water usage is therefore crucial for sustaining all life.

The author notes that while infinite energy sources exist, their utilization requires carefulness, aiming for necessary violence with a commitment to restoration. The waste of natural energy sources can also lead to human destruction. Once considered free gifts of nature, air, water, and food have become private property. The author laments how the life of air-dwelling organisms (vayukaya) has been disrupted by air pollution, and how industrial mahahimsa has extended to them, upsetting atmospheric balance. He stresses the possibility of restoring this balance by halting such actions.

Regarding plant life (vanaspatikaya), he explains that different plants have varying impacts. Some may cause harm to numerous living beings, while others help maintain ecological balance. The author emphasizes the Jain principle of avoiding waste, practicing caution in consumption, preserving the life cycle of plants, and compensating nature for its use.

Following single-celled stationary beings (ekendriya sthavara) in the evolutionary chain are mobile beings (trasa jeeva) categorized as two-sensed, three-sensed, four-sensed, and five-sensed. Jain ethics strictly prohibit the intentional killing of any mobile being. A Jain follower is expected to live in such a way that even the smallest insect is not harmed. This includes not killing mosquitoes, bedbugs, rats, lizards, or snakes, nor hunting wild animals or killing predatory ones for self-defense. While a Jain consciously accepts the minimal violence necessary for sustenance from plant life, they abstain from harming any mobile being for food or pleasure. They also avoid intentional harm to mobile beings for protection, fear, or revenge.

All mobile beings play a role in the cosmic cycle. Nature's laws and their own karma dictate their interactions. As sentient beings, humans should not intentionally cause harm. Natural violence among other creatures, driven by karma, supports the continuation of the cosmic cycle and is generally considered separate from human actions.

The author addresses the human perception of certain animals as enemies: insects and mosquitoes as disease carriers, rats as destroyers of grain, snakes and venomous creatures as life-threatening, locusts as crop enemies, and predatory animals as threats to livestock. He argues that these creatures have a place in the ecosystem. Removing any link in this biological chain disrupts the cycle of violence, leading to further problems. He provides examples: killing crocodiles might save fish but also allows other harmful organisms to thrive; killing diseased fish leaves pollutant-causing organisms behind. Snakes control rat populations; if snakes are eliminated, rat numbers will rise, leading to other insect infestations. The author reiterates that nature's order functions best without human interference.

Driven by ignorance, ego, and desire, humanity has eradicated some animal species. This, the author states, is humanity's cruelest act towards nature. He notes that some biologists are now advocating for the conservation of animals like lions, monkeys, elephants, great Indian bustards, and peacocks. However, Jainism advocates for the preservation of all animal species, recognizing their vital role in maintaining the environment.

To ensure a habitable natural environment and social balance, the author asserts the necessity of curbing large-scale enterprises (maharambha). Western industrialized nations are beginning to recognize the need to slow industrial production and for individuals to control their consumption to avert destruction. They are gradually shifting towards decentralized production, a policy that aligns with Gandhian economics for India.

Given India's large population, the author emphasizes prioritizing human labor in its economy. Machinery can be used for tasks beyond human capacity or those that exploit certain groups. However, the use of machines that render human and animal power redundant is considered mahahimsa. He calls for an end to the race for large industries and advocates for decentralizing their operations as much as possible. Decentralization, he believes, is a path to dismantling societal disorder and human exploitation.

The text then discusses the nature of truth and the anekanta path. Truthful statements are categorized as factual or interpretive. Factual statements describe things as they are or as perceived, while interpretive statements involve personal opinions and explanations. Both have limitations. Perceptual knowledge is constrained by our senses, which can be augmented by scientific tools but not made absolute. Our senses perceive things from a particular perspective, and only omniscience can grasp reality completely. Thus, our perception is incomplete and mutable, with differing perspectives among individuals.

While factual perceptions often show consistency, interpretive statements, based on logic, incorporate personal opinions. Language itself has limitations in conveying the myriad contexts of a statement. For example, stating "Devadatta is the son of Yajnadatta" focuses on one relationship, leaving others unmentioned.

The author identifies an excessive attachment to one's own views as the root cause of misunderstandings, conflicts, and class struggles. We tend to impose our opinions on others without understanding their context. India, he notes, has a long history of accommodating diverse thoughts, beliefs, cultures, and religions. Strengthening this liberal Indian culture is essential.

While India has adopted a democratic system where differing groups strive to understand each other's opinions and majority views are accepted for the welfare of the many, sectarian differences and ego-driven imposition of personal opinions have increased, leading to national disunity. Jain philosophy posits that truth is not absolute but manifold (anekanta). Every individual has the right to their opinion, but also the responsibility to understand others' viewpoints in their proper context and be willing to change their own opinion if it proves reasonable. The author believes this approach to living is increasingly relevant for modern India.

The discussion then moves to freedom from exploitation and non-possession. Theft is defined as infringing on another's rightful ownership, and those who exploit others' vulnerabilities for their labor's reward are considered thieves. Jain philosophy views this theft as both gross and subtle, making asteya (non-stealing) a major vow, encompassing mind, speech, and action.

Theft includes tax evasion, cheating in exams, publishing someone else's research under one's name, and plagiarizing creative works. Exploitation occurs not only between individuals but also between classes, as seen in the issues faced by the Dalit community. The root of theft and exploitation lies in the tendency to hoard and avoid personal labor. A Jain monk is called a shramana (laborer) because he returns to society through his labor many times more than he receives for sustenance, and never hoards. Non-stealing and non-possession are interconnected; asteya is impossible without aparigraha (non-possession). While a householder's conduct may not be entirely like a monk's, they should strive to emulate monastic ideals. A Jain follower may not be entirely non-possessive but must set limits on possessions like food, clothing, housing, wealth, and consumables. These limits can vary based on individual development, but unlimited possession is forbidden. Similarly, everyone must labor according to their capacity, as consuming without contributing through labor is considered theft.

The author finds these behavioral guidelines of Jain scripture highly relevant today. He posits them as the only non-violent means to resolve class conflict, a principle also advocated by Mahatma Gandhi. These ideas can play a significant role in eradicating exploitation, oppression, and hunger.

The text then addresses the fourth vow of a Jain follower: brahmacharya (celibacy or disciplined conduct), which relates to population control. For a Jain follower, brahmacharya means restrained and limited sexual intercourse with one's spouse and abstaining from physical relations with any unmarried or unauthorized partner. It also prohibits all unnatural sexual acts and bestiality. India faces a population crisis, with more consumers born daily than the production of goods. Government measures for population control, such as contraceptives, abortion, sterilization, and hormonal treatments, are deemed unnatural and violent. Jain scripture offers natural and non-violent methods, such as abstaining from sexual activity on specific holy days and setting limits for other days. It also prohibits sexual relations with unauthorized partners, both before and after marriage, which is essential for social order. Societies with unrestrained sexual relationships, the author argues, have seen an increase in conflict, frustration, competition, envy, and suicide, leading to their disintegration.

The author concludes by stating that to prevent the disintegration of Indian society and to foster peace, prosperity, and emotional unity, Jain ethics should form the basis of public conduct. This, he believes, is the only alternative for the salvation of today's misguided and turbulent humanity. He references scholar Washburn Hopkins, who initially criticized Jainism but later acknowledged the praiseworthy ethical conduct of Jains, regretting his earlier prejudiced views. Hopkins realized the profound impact of Jainism on character and morality, appreciating its practical utility through closer study.