SAMBODHI ^ (QUARTERLY) VOL. 2 APRIL 1973 NO. 1 EDITORS DALSUKH MALVANIA DR. H. C. BHAYANI L. D. INSTITUTE OF INDOLOGY AHMEDABAD 9 CONTENTS Jaina Theory and Practice of Non-violence 1 Dalsukh Malvania A Brief Survey of the Iconographic Data at Kumbharia, North Gujarat 7 Maruti Nandan Prasad Tivari Apastamba's Views on Inheritance 15 Surabhi Sheth Evolution of the Jaina Treatment 19 of Ethical Problems K. K, Dixlt Art Notes on Sculpture in Dhanapala's 39 Tilakamanjarl N. M. Kansara Some Versions of the Tale of 47 Vyaghramari H. C. Bhayani ^TRfft i. ?r, JAINA THEORY AND PRACTICE OF NON-VIOLENCE^ -*-- Dalsukh Malvanla The Vedic tradition upto the Upanisada did not bother about the the is theory and practice of non-violence (ahiriisn). Even word ahiihsu not found in the Vedas and the Brahmanas; it is found, for the first time, 1 in the Upanisad (Cog. 3.17.4) The religion of the Vedas mainly consisted of the sacrifices; and (here were many types of the Vedic sacrifices which could not be performed without the killing of animals. Even the Smrtis enforce the householders to serve not only the animal-meat but the beaf to the guests. In such circumstances it would be proper to say that the the Vedic but theory and practice of ahimsa were not of origin, were propounded by the Jamas, the Buddhists and other ^ramanas. In his 'Man in the Universe' Prof. W. Norman Brown rightly concludes that "The ideas AMmsn and the unity of all life did not have their origin in Vedic it environment in Aryan thought, but entered from outside. The which those ideas were at home was that of Jainism and Buddhism. In them ,4Wrfw3was a dominant and original, not supplemental, feature".* Here In this short paper I want to discuss the Ahirhsn doctrine of the Jainas In theory and practice. can As far as the literary evidence is concerned we say that Lord Mahavira seems to be the first person who was convinced that not only the mankind but all the moving and non-moving living beings should be not be harmed because he was convinced that each protected and should does not want harm to be done of them, just like any human being, any is the first who endeavoured to it. And not only this, Mahavira person not be to mould his life in such a way that he may willingly harmful to is clear when we read his life as is described In the any one. This quite Jaina text. 2csrnnga, the oldest his conviction in these words j "All He preached to the people beings hate shun destruction, like are fond of life, like pleasure, pain, life, long 8 In order to this conviction the to live. To all, life is dear." emphasize and of the Acaranga declares that : The Arhatas Bhagavatas past, present, declare thus, explain thus; all breath- and future, all say thus, speak thus, treated sentient creatures should not be slain, nor with ing, existing, living, the Calcutta, Pub, Oxford and I BH : Man in Univent ; "l. Brown W. Norman 1966 54. publishing company, ; p. : in the Universe, 6$. 2, Brown W. Norman Man p, 19. 3! SBE Vol. XXII, p. givrnbodi 2, 1, 2 Dahukh Malvanla nor nor violence, abused, tormented, nor driven away. This is the pure, unchangeable, eternal law, which the clever ones, who understand the world, have declared."* The question is asked to the of ! propagators violence : "Ve professors is pain pleasant to or ?" you, unpleasant And on right reply it is clear that "For all sorts of living beings pain is unpleasant, disagreeable and greatly feared"" -So why should one kill others ? In this way killing of living-beings of all types was denounced and non-violence was as the accepted principle of good life. But was it to live possible without any harm to any body ? While 'answering this question the attention was given to the problem of sin. The violence or the killing itself is not the sin but the passion In the self is the cause of sin or the passion itself is sin. This theory of sin is found in when it SutrakrtUhga says that the pamfya (pramZda) is the karma or sin (pamnyam fcammarh nhamsu 1.8.3). The word pamnya is translated as earless- ness but It means much more than that. We are convinced of this fact when take we into consideration the sayings of the Buddha regarding this pramnda. He says that all the akufahs are due to pmmadai not only that but it all the In 'destroys kusalas, (AAguttara; 1.6,8-9). Sthmnhga (502) the Jaina text is described as six pramvda having types : 1. mada intoxica- tion or 2. arrogance, nidm sluoibar, 3. vi$aya sensuality, 4. ka&ya- passion, 5, dynta gambling and 6 pratilekhana-pramVda idleness in inspection. in view this Keeping definition of sin we should define the violence which is counted as sin. This is the reason why Umssvati in his Tattvsr- thdsUtra defined the violence as pramattayogat prnnavyaparopanam himsz the which is done the killing through careless activity (of mind, speech and is body) violence. This is corroborated by the advice given to the monks with reference to their behaviour in the world, the smallest part 4. SUE Vol. XXII, p. 36. i. 1.1. 5. SBE. Vol. XXII, p. 39; ^SrSaga 1.4.2 : "q^aj tf&&tfl \ 5 ^ qRI3W, ft ^ Jaina Theory and Practice of Non-violence i # of which is inhabited by innumerable living beings and so it was impossi- ble to live without killing any living-being. The question was asked "How should (a monk) walk, stand, sit and lie down ? ,In what manner shall he eat and speak in order that he may not bind evil karman ? "The answer is this ''He should walk, stand, sit, and lie down carefully; if he eats and speaks carefully, he does not bind evil karman. Evil karman does not attach itself to a man who identifies himself with all beings (and by this) looks on the beings in the right manner, who has closed the doors of 'influence' and is content". Schubring . Dasaveynliya 6, (7-9.) From all these Jama canonical texts one thing is clear that one should Identify himself with others and should try as far as .'possible not to harm any body with the intention of harming and should live in this world in such a way that one may kill the other living beings with the kind feeling for them and only when it is unavoidable. With this view of non- violence in their mind the propagators of non-violence have first tried to find out for what purpose the people resorted to killing of the living beings. They have noted that people resort to killing with no purpose at all. When we read the Acnrnhga it is clear that for various purposes or without any there was killing of all types of living beings. In daily life the use of earth, water, fire, wind etc. was there without any sense of violence. For the purpose of food and drink and even for the religious ceremony the killing of living beings was allowed. Only for the sake of game and pleasure the performance of violence is noted in the AcUrVnga. War was also one of the cause of violence. When Lord Mahsvira noted all these types of violence he renounced the world and took only such food, shelter etc. what was not prepared for him and that also only when there was utter neccessity. He made a rule not to accept any food or shelter etc. in which the killing of any living being, for his sake, was involved. As a general rule he was not in favour of accepting the meat, fish or wine. In this way he became an example of noi-violent life, and then he propagated the non-violence in daily life to the people of East India, and was really responsible for propagation of religion rooted in non-violence. So we find that the Jaina religion is described as a religion rooted in non-violence.7 6, kahain care kaham ctf(he kahafn ase kahafn sue kaham bhumjanto bhasanto p&vam kammatn na bandhat \\7ll jayafn care jayant ctfthe jayatn ase jayam sae / Jayam bhumjanto bhasanto pSyam kammam na bandhat 1/8 /I savva-bhuyappa-bhuyassa sammam bhuyai ptisao \ plMasavassa dantassa pavafn kammafn na bandhai II 9 // 7. so ya ahimsamuh : dhammo JlyarSgadosamohehifit bhanio jtnehl _ PuspamJlla, gathZ~5. 4 Dalsukh Malvania In this way in India the importance of ahimsn instead of satya (truth) was accepted in religion due to the propagation of the religion rooted in ahiihsft. It may be noted here that before the time of Mahavira and the Buddha in Vedlc religion the satya was most important. But after Mahsvira and Buddha we find the importance of Satya as as well as of the Ahimsn, recognised in the Epic literature and the Puranas. It is quite clear that this is due to the influence of the Jaina and the Buddist religion. In view of the theory that the internal passion is the real violence and not the killing of the other living being it was clearly stated by Lord Mahavjra that purisft tumam cva tumrft-mittam kirn bahiyam mittath icchasi ? (Acs. 1.3.3.4.) tumam si mma tarn ceva jath 'hantavvam' ti mannasi tamhu na Hants na vi ghUyae (Acn. 1.5.5.4) "Man, Thou art thy own friend; Why Wishest thou for a friend beyond thy self" (SEE.