Basic Jain Culture Non Possession

Author(s): Padamchand Shastri, N L Jain
Publisher: Veer Seva Mandir Trust
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/006745/1

Page #1

BASIC JAIN CULTURE NON-POSSESSION
Padam Chand Shastri
परस्परोपग्रहो जीवानाम्
Jain
on International
For Private &
Use Only

Page #2

BASIC JAIN CULTURE NON-POSSESSION
- Padam Chand Shastri
- Translation - Dr. N. L. Jain Rewa
Vir Sewa Mandir 21, Daryaganj, New Delhi-110002

Page #3

BASIC JAIN CULTURE NON POSSESSION by Padam Chand Shastri
मूल जैन संस्कृति अपरिग्रह ले. पद्मचन्द शास्त्री
English Translation By Dr. N. L. Jain Rewa
अंग्रेजी अनुवाद डा. नन्दलाल जैन, रीवा
English Edition Jan-2005 1000
अंग्रेजी संस्करण जनवरी-2005 1000
Price : Study
मूल्य : स्वाध्याय
Publishers Vir Sewa Mandhi 21, Daryaganj, New Delhi-2
प्रकाशक वीर सेवा मंदिर 21, दरियागंज, नई दिल्ली-2
Also available from Dr. Nandlal jain 12/644 Bajrang Nagar, Rewa-486001 (M.P.)
डा. नन्दलाल जैन 12/644 बजरंग नगर, रीवा-486001 (म. प्र.) से भी उपलब्ध
Printers Shakun Printers 3625, Subhash Marg, New Delhi-110002
मुद्रक शकुन प्रिन्टर्स 3625 सुभाष मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110 002

Page #4

PROLOGUE We are passing through an era of transition in values, volitions and validations. There is a continuously growing trend of movement from moral to immoral, limitation to accumulation, manhood to institution-hood, philanthropy to individuation, mind to machine and inner show to outer show. These tendencies lead to inner and outer heterogeneity in life of individuals, society and nations even. Every conscientious person is pained to see all this. It seems the individual and society have forgotten the sayings of the experienced and self-realised seers that the inner happiness is more beneficial than outer pleasures. The Jain religion aims at release from various types of sufferings and acquirement of inner happiness leading to supreme bliss. This book addressees the above issues in reference to the religion and suggests means for this cherished objective of life.
This book was originally written in Hindi and has been very popular among the conscientious persons as is clear from its two editions. Many people have suggested it to be published in English too for its wider readership. Accordingly I asked Dr. N.L. Jain to fulfill the reader's wishes. He deserves my full blessings.
I hope the readers will be able to appreciate the Jinistic thoughts and practices presented in the book and try to become 'Jain' by religion and not by 'sect'.
Padam Chandra Shastri
Vir Seva Mandir

Page #5

PUBLISHER'S NOTE "We kept engaged in accumulation as a result of which we lost every thing", voices the author his concern for the deterioration of essential Jain virtue. The truth contained in these words is beyond all contradiction. More and more did we amass possessions, more and more we went astray from the essential Jainness". We have come to such a stage that we seem to have forgotten the basic Jaina householder's conduct which was instrumental in attaining that 'Jainness'.
Generally, the people and scholars kept on searching the roots. They centred their efforts in writing and publishing dissertations and getting mundane recognitions, managing awards and rewards. Pundits and pedagogues talked much about souls. They painstakingly explained, in their lectures, common subjects of interest such as Ahimsa, donation etc. from the podium to the credulous audience and simultaneously kept on manoeuvering and accumulating all sorts of possessions and indulging in ego-gratification. Consequently, non-possession or nonattachment which is the very spirit of Jaina faith, receded to background.
If we want to preserve the basic identity of Jain religion and culture, there is no other

Page #6

way out except to follow the principle of nonpossession.
Iam greatly impressed and fully subscribe to the views of the learned author Pt. Padam Chand Shastri. He has made invaluable contribution to Jaina thought and religion during his association of about four decades with Vir Sewa Mandir, Delhi. The translation of his treatise 'Basic Jain Culture-Non Possession' by eminent Jain scholar Dr. Nandlal Jain, Rewa, I hope, will prove greatly useful to the readers.
- Subhash Jain General Secretary Vir Sewa Mandir

Page #7

NON-POSSESSION (AN ENGLISH TRANSLATION)
The thesis propounded in this book, that 'nonpossession/non-attachment' lies at the root of Jaina thought more than any other single concept, was well received by the readers both scholars and laity alike. It appealed greatly to conscientious minds. The response was so overwhelming that the second edition was soon brought out. There appeared a growing demand for its translation in English for larger section of readers either living abroad or those having scanty knowledge of Hindi, the language in which it was originally written. Dr. Nand Lal Jain (Rewa) who is well versed in Jaina thought, philosophy and religion and is also widely travelled, took up the responsibility of accomplishing this onerous task.
The fruit of his labour is before the readers. I am highly confident of Dr. N. L. Jain's calibre and am sure that his translation will prove as authentic as the original text. I express my whole-hearted admiration for him for the sincere efforts he has put into performing this stupendous task.
If this work turns out to be of any worth or use to the readers, the efforts of the author as well as the translator will stand amply rewarded.
- Dr. B.D. Jain
MA., Ph.D.

Page #8

BASIC JAIN CULTURE : NON-POSSESSION
The term 'Culture' has a deep sense and it is related with innate nature of entities. The refined form is called 'Sanskritai' and the pure stream of refinement is called 'Sanskriti' or culture. The culture is generally long-lasting because of it being a stream of developed innate attributes. The lexicons indicate the meaning of term 'Sanskrita' as refined or purified and culture originates from this form. Thus, its stability is self-established. In contrast, the non-culture loaded with many alien forms or mimicry- is unstable. This mimicry is a temporary and a borrowed form. It is never stable. For example, the purified gold has a form of the culture of gold and the form developing out of this purified form is called culture. Same should be taken in all cases. The people have taken the term 'culture' to indicate many meanings like the practical customs and rites, dress and ornamentation and the like. But it is pragmatic and not real.
The term 'Jina' is technical as well as pragmatic. It indicates those pure souls who have won over the karmas leading to attachment and aversion. The religion of the 'Jinas' is called Jina Dharma (Jainism). The Jain culture may be defined as a stream of Jina precepts which may be either pure themselves or be instrumental in purification.
Nobody knows how long this stream is continuing. The statement that it is the contribution of Rishabhenatha also is a realistic attitude rather than idealistic. In fact, he is the first link of this era in the beginningless tradition of ford-builders who have re-invigorated this culture. There are some people who have a miscomprehension that this culture is the contribution of the ford-builder Mahavira (last fordbuilder, 599-527 BCE). However, one should remember that the Jain Culture follows the fundamental, it does not go against the fundamental.

Page #9

Those, who developed this culture, are (externally and internally) non-possessed Jinas who are the fundamentally beginningless form of pure soul. Of course, the term 'Culture' can also be used to other refined systems like 'Human Culture' etc. It is alright to state the terms 'Jain culture', 'hunan-culture', 'self-culture' and so on, as they are beginningless and endless and they do not differentiate between oneanother because of their innate unifying nature. In contrast, Hindu will be differentiated from Hindu and the Muslim from Muslim and so on.
It must be noted that any so-called culture based on sects or denominations will be divided in many forms depending on their followers. i.e. Digambar, Svetambar, Terapanthi, Bispanthi among the Jains, Shia and Sunni in Muslims and the like. But this division does not exist in soul, human or Jinas. All of them are characterised through their attributes and are integrated. There will be no difference in their attributes. If there seems to be some difference, it will not be innate, but will be due to defiled or unrefined modes.
We expect the word 'Culture' to represent the stream of basic nature. The Jain culture indicates the solitary pure form of soul or Jina. That is why, it has given prominence to be away from alien or possession which is instrumental in basic development of the wordly soul.
The renunciation from the internal possession like attachment, aversion, delusion etc. and the external possessions like all worldly possessions are the basic means to acquire the basic nature of soul. All the spiritual practices like non-violence etc. are based on negation of possession. Thus, the basic Jain culture is the concept and practice of non-possession and non-possessiveness of any kind of inner or outer nature presents the pure 'Jina' state. This Jain culture has flourished and has been brought to light by the Jains and is called as 'Jain Culture'.
The slogans like 'Non-violence is the Supreme Religion' and 'Live

Page #10

and let live' etc. are based on conducts which are associated with basic Jain culture. They are all based on the culture of non-possession or they are the effects resulting from non-possession-based nature of Jinas. Such slogans are also observed in non-Jains also. They also denigrate violence, falsity, stealing, illicit sex etc., though they might not be at the same level as are the Jainas. However, they also do not nourish non-possesion upto the end. Their gods are also possessed of and surrounded by possessions. In contrast, the 'Jinas' or 'Arhats' have total non-possessiveness.
It seems that the slogans like 'Non-violence is the Supreme Religion'etc. are just the counter-slogans of Kill or let be killed' etc. It is possible that such slogans might have developed from many narratives like Narad-Mountain dialogues when the word Aja (no rebirth) was taken to mean'goat'. Alternatively, it might be during the time of Mahavira when violence was predominant in the society. We assume that such narratives must have been rare in the periods prior to Neminatha.
In the beginning of this current era, there were no such incidents during Rishabhdeva's time. The royal penalisation, then, was limited in three words, (1) Oh/Ha, (2) Do not do so (ma) and (3) Censure to you (Dhik). These compassionate words were the penalties. The mutual fight between Bharata and Bahubali (sons of Rishabhadeva) is itself an indicator of compassion towards other (human) beings. It was the period of an atmosphere of renunciation of possessions and observance of restraint even upto the end of one's life. The Pravachan Sara (Essence of Sermons, 3.40) states that the individual is restrained shramana (Striver) who follows 5 carefulnesses, 3 guards, control over five senses, winning over passions and who acquires good knowledge and conation.
Another important point is that Jains have always given prominence to acquire detachment and non-possessive character. That is why,

Page #11

10
there has been a custom of qualifying all ford-builders as detached, (i.e. vitaraga)- the detached Rishabha, the detached Mahavira etc. There has been no intricacy in qualifying them as non-violent (despite their being non-violent, i.e. non-violent Rishabha or non-violent Mahavira etc.) as all these attributes are based on renunciation of possession.
When we glance at the nature of violence etc., we find they are all due to possession. According to Umasvami, the violence is defined as harming the vitalities due to carelessness (TS. 7.13). The word carelessness should be taken to mean possession. In Purusharthasiddhi-upaya (Means of Accomplishing Exertions) also, there is prominence of carelessness as indicated in verses 43-48' which mean.
"Truly, the violence is the destruction or harming of physical and psychical vitalities through mind, body and speech transformed volitionally due to passions (carelessness). The Saints never incur the sin of violence even in harming the vitalities in the absence of volitions of attachment etc. In contrast, there is always violence due to attachmental volitions and activities or carelessness even when there is harming or no harming of vitalities. The harming of vitalities is always there when there is carelessness. The soul harms first himself due to passion even before harming others".
Just as the carelessness is the cause in violence, it is also a cause in all other sins, as indicated in the Rajvastika commentary on aphorism of 'Tattvarth Sutra' (Formulae on Reals) 7.13.
All sins or defects originate from possessions. There are the processes of keeping up etc. in the resolve oftmyness' and there is unavoidably violence. The human beings speak false, steal and involve in sins for safeguarding 'myness'. Thus, there is no question of violence etc. if there are no internal possessions like 'myness' and external possessions like grains and wealth as the maxim states : "There is no effect without cause", 'Dhavala', (4.5, 6.92-93).

Page #12

The text of 'Charitra Sara' (Essence of Conduct), p 19 states that possession is the birth place of all kinds of sins. It is the birth place of passions like anger etc., sorrowful and cruel meditations, five sins like violence etc. and fear also.
The text of 'Tattvanushasana' (Discipline of Reality), verses 16-173 state.
"The 'I-ness' and 'my-ness' originate from delusion associated with wrong faith. These two lead to attachment and aversion in the Jivas. The passions and quasi-passions originate from them leading to activities resulting in sins like vitality harming etc."
In practice also, it is necessary that religion of non-violence should be catalysed by compassion, kindness and affection etc. and it must be nourished by ten kinds of duties of forgiveness, humility, straightforwardness and greedlessness etc. through mind, speech and body in the form of committed, commissioned and consented. There seems to be instigation of compassion and kindness etc. in the currently following of non-violence, but there are deficiencies in them with respect to other duties. It does not matter whether the above non-violence is related with votary or monk. The main cause for violence is carelessness only as stated in Svayambhu-stotra (Hymn of the Soul) by Samantbabhadra“.
The minor or fine violence is also incurred due to alien entities. Hence, the possessive nature causing violence should be renounced. It is stated in Purushartha-siddhi-upaya, verse 49 that the soul does not incur even the minor violence based on alien entities. Still, one should renounce possession-the home of violence for purification of volitions.
It could be asked if the Jain culture does not have the prominence of'non-violence is the supreme religions', why Acharya has given the first place to it in his aphorism 7.1 defining Vratas or Vows:

Page #13

However, it should be remembered that just as one has to move through the downstairs to move upstairs, similarly, one has to pass through observance of five minor vows (Anuvratas) to move towards major vows (Mahavratas) in order to acquire total non-possessive state. In the series of major vows, the step of non-possession is the last and best. The earlier steps of non-violence etc. are left over when one reaches the final step. The living beings, who practice the four vows completely, have to toil hard and take a long and difficult route for renouncing the passions or attachment towards them. It is only then, they reach the twelfth spiritual stage and acquire full detachment. In contrast, the completion of the vows of non-violence etc. takes place earlier in the seventh spiritual stage or later in the 10th spiritual stage when non-origination of attachments etc.occurs and non-violence appears. It means that possession has deep roots which are not crossed over even through the complete observance of major vows and one has to work harder to uproot it. This is the reason, why nonpossessiveness has been placed in the end whose completion was resolved at the time of initiation.
It seems that in post-Mahaviran period, Jains became lax in conduct and wanted to avoid little difficult restraint of non-possession. Hence, they made it secondary and the basic Jain culture was restricted to practices of non-violence etc. This is the reason, whereas we find lacs and crores of sky-clad monks wandering in anciant eras as stated in biographic exposition texts, there has been a gradual decrease in their number since post-Mahaviran period. The position is that the number of possession-renouncer Digambara monks existing today can be counted by fingers only. The reason is that the people have neglected non-possessiveness as the basic Jain culture and they are trying to nurse the culture of non-violence, donation, compassion and kindness etc. which is nourished by possessiveness. This has resulted in heavy accumulation of possessions by just or unjust means. They now earn lacs and donate merely thousands. This leads to growth of

Page #14

possessions due to sensual desires and they are always free from the religion of sense-control. Along with this, they also gain glory and prestige which is cherished by them. Had they not followed this path and would have been trying to nourish non-possessiveness, the Jain culture would, undoubtedly, have not suffered such a loss.
13
Many scholars think that when the volitions of self are violent, all other sins like falsity, stealth, illicit sex etc. also are its forms. In addition, as possession also causes violence, it may also be called as violence, even if formally. Similarly, carelessness is also violence as it too causes it. We would like to point out to such scholars that the Jinstic sermons are very sharp and fine, they should be looked at with the same sharpness. Basically, just as the practice of cause and effect is separate, similarly, they are also different with respect to their existence. That is why, they have been designated as separate categories. In the current, the statement of carelessness as violence is just formal application of effect into cause. This has been stated with the indication that in all these activities, carelessness is prominent. This is the category of the maxim like, foods are our life '(Annam Vai Pranah), where foods have been shown as prominent in life by formalising effect into cause. Otherwise, had there been no difference between carelessness and violence, our acharyas would never have counted violence as separate from carelessness.
All the wrong faith, passions, quasi-passions, non-religious tales, senses and sleep etc. are included in possession only from which sins like violence etc. are originated causing harm to the soul.
The term 'Parigraha' means 'attachment' as per Umasvami3 and the term 'attachment' is defined in terms of activities of earning and preserving internal and external possessions as stated by Akalanka. Thus, all sins originate from attachment. Hence, the renunciation of attachment-based possession has been given prominence in Jain Culture.

Page #15

Basically, the chain of possession is very large and, in other words, all the sins like violence etc. are included in it. As a result, it is propitious to be freed from possessions. All the ford-builders and great men have followed the path of renouncing the possessions. Firstly, they tried to renounce the family of possession like wrong faith, passion, quasi-passion, non-religious tales, sensuals and sleep etc. and, then, all the internal ones of external possessions like riches and grains etc. and this led them to be freed of other sins. 1. FAMILY OF POSSESSION 1. Wrong FaithTM: As per BA, verse 56, the wrong faith is defined
as non-belief in the true nature of reals and realities. Until this kind of non-belief is there, there will always be attachment with possessions. In contrast, when there will be rational faith in their true nature through right knowledge, there will be the tendency of absorption in the selfand moving away from the alien or non-self. It is only, then, he will be able to move towards renunciation of possessions. In gross terms, wrong-faith is five-fold :(1) Reverse, (2) Mono-sided or absolutist, (3) Reverential, (4) Doubt-born and (5) Ignorancial. (1) Reverse wrong faith? : It is to believe that liberation is
attained through violence, falsity, stealth, illicit sex, possession,
attachment, aversion, delusion and ignorance etc. (ii) Absolutist8 : It is to believe that the entity has only one form.
For example, the admission of an entity as absolutely existing at all times or not existing at all times. The existing entity has only one form or facet. Similarly, the admission of an entity as totally composite or componental, temporary or permanent etc. also represent the absolutist wrong faith as per Dhavala 8 P.20. In contrast, as per Jain philosophy, every entity is multi
aspectal. It has always many aspects at the same time. (ii) Reverential': It is to offer reverence and services equally

Page #16

Is
to all kinds of true or false gods, scriptures and saints without
analyzing and recognising their proper qualities. (iv) Doubt-born 10: It is to think whether the nature of entities as
sermonised by the omniscient and detached are correct. It is to remain colloidal in thoughts without believing their statements. This is stated in Tattvasrthasara (Formulae of
Realities 5,8.) (v) Igorance or Ne-science'l: It is to think that the entities like
Jiva or Ajiva are non-existent, they are not temporany-cum
permanent and, there is neither world nor liberation. 2. Passions 2: The volitions which attach the soul with karmas are
called passions. The living being is bound with karmas loosely or tightly according to his volitions. These passions are mainly classified in sixteen categories, but they can be 25, numerable or innumerable when they are thought of in details. (a) Infinite-bonding passions: They are the four passions of
anger'3, pridela, deceit" and greed which lead one to have infinite worldly bondage. The scriptures have stated them as line-on-rock-like, pebble-like, bamboo-root-like and crimson
red-like. (b) Partial vow-preventing passions : They are those passions
which lead to non-observance of vows. They are also fouranger, pride, deceit and greed. The scriptures have stated them as line-on-stone-like, horns-of-ram-like, bone-like and
lubricant-like. (c) Total vow-preventing passions : They are the passions of
anger, pride, deceit and greed which lead to non-observance of total conduct. The scriptures have stated them as line on sand-like, line-on-wood-like, cow urine-like and bodily-dirt
like. (d) Gleaming passions : They are the four passions of anger,

Page #17

pride, deceit and greed which do not obstruct or restrain the observance of conduct despite afflictions and inflictions. The scriptures have stated them as line-on-water-like, bamboo
like, weeding-hook-like and turmeric-like. Besides these passions, the nine quasi-passions of (1) laughter, (2) liking, (3) disliking, (4) sorrow, (5) fear, (6) disgust (towards religion and the religious ones), (7) feminine libido, (8) masculine libido and (9) neuter libido-are also the roots of sin.
The four non-religious tales related with (1) women, (2) foods, (3) nations and (4) kings-are also included in possession. The attachment and aversion in favourable and unfavourable objects of senses like touch, taste, smell, sight and hearing are also a kind of possession. The external materials like the grains and riches are also possessions.
Thus, the individual gets engaged in sins in the presence of any of the causes of possession described above. This way, the Jain culture is prominently based on non-possession. It should also be understood that it is also the basis of other vows.
There is one more thing to be noted. For those individuals, who knowingly or unknowingly, get involved in violence, falsity, stealing and illicit sex, can be proudly called as non-violent, truth-speaking, non-stealing and celibate. But nobody can declare himself as nonpossessed in the presence of even small quantity of possessional sin. Here, we have to add the term 'Quantity'. For example, (1) A votary is called minor non-violent even getting involved in
domestic, professional and opposition violence. (ü) A votary is called minorly truth-speaking even when he speaks
untruth to save one from heavy penalty. (ii) One is called observer of the vow of non-stealing even when he
renounces stealth partially. (iv) One is called celibate (minor vows) even when he incurs the sin of

Page #18

17
sex with his own wife. (v) However, a votary is never called observer of the vow of non
possession despite renouncing the major quantity of possessions but having a small amount of it. Why is it so?
In fact, these traditions have been designed with the object of social obligations rather than theoretical considerations. For example, the term 'Maithuna' (copulation) is the volition and/or activity of sexindulgence irrespective of its reference to normal or illicit case. The copulation in all cases is non-celibacy. When a person marries a girl who offers herself to her husband, he addresses her as having a moral character. Does it, in fact, go beyond the limit of'copulation or noncelibacy'? It is never so. It is admitted only for some practical adjustments.
The people knowingly gather various means of copulation and declare it as 'celibacy' in swinging words. This is only a social custom and not the ideal religious character. But it does not happen so with possession as it happens in case of other sins. The people do not show courage to declare a person as 'non-possessed' if he has even a small amount of possession-what to say of songs in his praise?
The basic cause of all this is the high potency of possession. The venerable karma destroyers or Arhats have led us on the path to renounce it. And this path was basically designated as 'Jain Culture'.
It is, thus, clear that non-violence etc. are religion whose origin is the basic culture of non-possession. Just as there is no possilbility of shoots and branches in the absence of roots, similarly, no branches of sin like violence etc. can grow in the absence of root of possession. Accordingly, we should admit that non-possession is the basic culture of Jain system.
The saintly acharyas have mentioned two compulsory conditions while defining violence which are

Page #19

18
(i) Association with carelessness or passions and (ii) Injury to vitalities.
This indicates that when these two conditions are met, there is violence.
The acharyas have stated one more point in this context. It is the fact that there is violence even if there is no injury to vitalilies, if there is passion or carelessness. It is because the acharyas opine that the term 'vitality' involves both of its form-physical and psychical along with the vitalities of self and others. Accordingly, even if the vitalities of others are not injured, there is the injury of the vitalities of the self due to carelessness or passions. If we consider this point a little deeply, it should be admitted that the existence of mutually opposing violence and non-violence is limited only to injury or preservation of vitalities and not under the state of devoidance of alternatives. In contrast, the detachment or non-possession is the ever-lasting nature of the soul.
While classifying upayoga or applied consciousness, Pravachana Sara"? (Essence of Sermons) has stated that applied consciousness has two varieties: (i) pure and (ii) impure. The first one is devoid of attachment while the second one is associated with attachment. The impure upayoga has also two varieties: (i) auspicious and (ii) inauspicious. The auspicious upayoga involves engagement in compassionate behaviour with all the living beings as it is found in non-violence. Moreover, violence and non-violence are two attributes mutually opposite in nature which are impossible in the absence of the opposite. As a result, the designation of violence and non-violence is possible only as far as the state of options is there. The state of optionless pure soul is possible only in detachment or non-possession.
The auspicious non-violence admitted by the common man has the nature of compassion in all the living beings (PS, v 157).
Ifwe wish to carry the concept of non-violence to a higher stage, we can not realise it separately except its amalgmation in non

Page #20

19
possession. It will be absorbed only in passionlessness or detachment. Hence, non-possessivenes is the basic Jain culture and other moral vows like non-violence etc. originate from this quality. There should, thus, be no objection in admitting this fact. 2. POSSESSION AND KARMA : SYNONYMS
The Jain culture basically proscribes activity or attachment and prescribes inactivity or detachment. The proscription is based on the fact that there is alround earning or bondage of auspicious or invauspicious karmas in activities. And the karmic bondage means worldly cycles. In contrast, the detachment leads to salvation. If considered deeply, it can be stated that activity itself is not only a kind of possessions but it causes possessiveness also. This is why, whereas 'Tattvartha Sutra', 6.1 (Formulae on Reals) of Umaswami states that yoga or activity is the action or functioning due to mind, speech and body in the first aphorism, he also states in the second aphorism 6.2 that activity leads to karmic influx which is the cause of worldly life. Had activity been the cause in purification of Jiva, the aphorist would not have composed the second aphorism. He would have included activities in stoppage or shedding f karmic influx. In this context, we should look at the definition of possession as per 'Dhavala' 12.4-218.
The scriptural texts mention two kinds of derivation of the word 'Parigraha' (possession). (i) Parigraha is that which is received. It means external materials
like fields or grains etc. (i) 'Parigraha' is the instrument of reception which is the soular
volition which is the cause of reception of external materials. Out of these two derivations, the acharyas have preferred the meaning resulting from the second derivation in comparison to that from first one. That is why, they have given prominence to attachment or delusion while defining possession. It is because the activity of

Page #21

attachment is the main cause in giving and taking of external materials. The acharyas had the sense that those liberatable beings should desist from activities and move towards detachment or non-activity.
In this context, let us look at the definition of vows to see whether the acharyas have defined them in terms of activity or non-activity. In my opinion, they have defined them on the basis of detachment. For example, the first aphorism of the seventh chapter of Tattavartha Sutra (7.1).states:
हिंसानृतस्तेयाबह्मचर्यापरिग्रहेभ्यो विरतिव्रत। It means that a vow means desistance from or indifference to five sins like violence etc. It directs us to be indifferent toward the sins. There is no indication about any kind of engagament in them. The acharyas state:
(1) Desistence from violence is a vow. (ii) Desistance from falsity, stealth and illicit sex is a vow. (ü) Desistence from possessions is a vow.
They do not say that engagement in non-violence etc. is a vow. It means that when one becomes free from the sins of violence upto possession, it will automatically result in manifestation of non-violence etc. However, even if the individual engages himself in non-violence etc., he does not get fully desistance from possessions. The only difference will be that he will be engaged in auspicity rather than inauspicity earlier. If the Jiva wishes to purify himself, he should desist not only from inauspicity, but he should also not engage himself in auspicious also. He should stay in himselfor absorb himself in his true nature.
Wherever there is engagement, there is possessiveness or karmic influx. In contrast, wherever there is dis-engagement, the heavy load of possession is lightened and, further, one gets completely away from it when there is total dis-engagement. It is stated in 'Samaya Sara'19 that the attached or engaged one binds karmas while the dis-engaged one gets freed from bondage.

Page #22

Accordingly, when a liberatable person wishes to move towards his soular welfare after realising worldly sadness and goes to preceptor to get initiated, the acharya should instruct him on the vow of disengagement and to be free from karma-influxing and karma-bonding sinful activities. He should not ask him to accept any vow. However, a tradition has developed in such a way that the acharya asks him to adopt vows and vows are offered to him. In contrast, the canors state that a vow means dis-engagement and non-possessivenes. It does not mean engagement. The statement, that a particular individual has adopted major or minor vows, is just a language of pragmatism. It means that the individual has dis-engaged himself from the specific sins. It does, however, not mean that he has either got freed from the tendency of engagement or he has become engaged in sacredness.
This is not only my statement. The acharyas themselves have characterised the vow in terms of dis-engagement in many texts 20 which mean that a vow (dis-engagement) means
(i) Desistance from five sins.
(ii)
Volition of total dis-engagement.
21
(iii) Desistance from all options of auspicious or inauspicious volitions of attachment and aversion etc.
(iv) Partial restraint.
(v) Total restraint.
(vi) Abstinence from sins
(vii) Total abstinence.
(viii) Non-origination of volitions of attachment etc. (ix) Desistence from injury to vitalities, or renunciation. (x) Release from violence etc.
All these characteristics of vow have prominence of abstinence, restraint or desistence. There is no prescription for engagements in non-violence etc. as is normally stated that one is adopting the vows

Page #23

of non-violence etc. This is just the effect of our beginningless volitions of attachment to adoption rather than abstinence whereas the religion of Jina is a religion of abstinence to move towards purification of soul. The Jinas have themselves renounced all.
It is stated in 'Niyama Sara' (Essence of Discipline), 56-602) that. (i) Desistence form volitions of violent activities toward the Jivas after
knowing about their family, birth place and class etc. is the first
vow of non-violence. (ii) Desistence always from volitions of speaking false on account of
attachment, aversion or delusion is called the second vow of truth. (ii) Desistence from volitions of picking up articles, left by others or
lying in village, town or forest is the third vow of non-stealing. (iv) Desistence from volitions of not desiring a woman by seeing her
beauty despite having desire for her or freedom from volitions of
copulation with women is the fourth vow of celibacy. (v) Desistance from volitions of desirelessness for possessing all kinds
of possessions is the fifth vow of non-possession.
In all these verses, the acharya has stated vow as desistence from sins in every case. However, we find now-a-days that'vow' is taken for adoption like, "Adopt this vow" and so on.
The word 'Grantha' (knot) is also taken in the sense of possession. They are called Nir-granthas (knotless, possessionless) who do not have any knots and renounce every knot. It is stated in 'Bhagvati Aradhana' that the term 'Grantha' derivatively means entities or volitions which create longer life in the world. They are the volitions of wrong faith, non-abstinence, passions and three kinds of activity.
The granthas or possessions are those internal and extemal volitions or activities which string us with world or create elongation of worldly life. The acharyas state the volitions of wrong faith, wrong knowledge, non-abstinence, passions, three-fold mental, vocal or bodily activities

Page #24

or granthas or possession. The renouncer of these volitions is called 'nirgrantha' or non-possessioned. He is known as non-possessed also. In both cases, the vow is that of renouncing of possessions rather than adoption of some of it as the vow is defined as dis-engagement rather than engagement
Even if a person is engaged in auspicious activities or volitions, he can not be the total renouncer of non-possessions as the venerable Jinas are.
All this means that he will be the totally non-possessed and knotless who will observe totally abstinence from activities. Prior to this stage, it will be just a formal designation of knotless. In the aphorism of T.S. 9.46 deseribing the varicties of monks, the knotless ones are defined as those who are to acquire omniscience and omniconation within a Muhurta or those who are just prone to destory the destructive karmic species.
With this essence in mind, one should consider the derivation of possession and non-possession in a little detail when these terms are related with devoidance of karmas. This will make us understand the true sense of the term 'possession'. Had the acharyas wanted, they would have called 'parigraha' (all-round grasping) as 'graha' (grasping) only as the same sense also results from the term 'graha' which we have discussed above. For example, the term 'graha' means which is received or grasped i.e. receiving of external material. Alternatively, the instrument of receiving is 'graha', i.e. attachment and aversion. But it seems that by adding the prefix 'pari' (from all sides), the acharyas have involved spiritualism in it. Per chance, they meant that we should not involve ourselves in receiving external materials, instead we should look into the soul and the Karmic mud associated with it. We must differentiate between the two and get away froni karmas and be nonpossessed. The reception of karmas is also a possession. This becomes established from the derivation of the word 'Parigraha'.

Page #25

24
While defining the mass-point bond (Pradesh bandha) in 8.24 of 'Tattvarth Sutra', the acharya states.
totaallefal: Hafaydarg 3-aria-ydel: 8.24 Explaining this Sutra, the author of Rajavartika states that the term 'Sarvatmapradeseshu' means in all pradashas of the soul and not one or two etc. The karmic points are found in all the soul in upper, lower or oblique directions. It means that karma points are pervaded in all the soul spacepoints and they are attracted by soul from all sides. For example, if the red hot iron ball is dropped in water, it absorbs water from all corners equally. Similarly, the soul heated in the fire of passion and activity attracts karmic variforms transformed into karmas from all corners. In spiritualism, there is no other entity except karmas which the soul absorbs from all corners. And when it is so, the karmas are the possessions. For example, the physical karma is defined as that possession which is received from all corners. The psychical karma is defined as that instrument which leads to receive 'possessions'. In this sense, the meanings of 'non-possession' and 'vow' should also be reconsidered along with the true nature of knotlessness. 3. IDENTITY OF JAINS : NON-POSSESSION
The term 'characteristic' (lakshana) is defined as that which independently separates one out of many entities mixed together. For example, the hotness of fire is the cause or quality of fire to separate it from water.
There are many dogmas like Jain, Buddhist, Vaishnava, Shaiva, Muslim, Sikh and Christian etc. in the world. They have their separate identities. This is undoubtedly true that the Jains are identified mainly through 'non-possession'. This quality or cause identifies the Jains from others. Normally, the other qualities like non-violence etc. are not eapable to get the Jains completely identified from others as these qualities except non-possession, are found in varying degrees in all

Page #26

the dogmas. Hence, they do neither have any importance in identifying Jains from other dogmas, nor any of these qualities is capable in doing so. It is because every activity of Jains involves the concept of totality of non-possession. We can say that even the existence of Jains is based on non-possession as the word 'Jain' itself is derived from the word 'Jina'; whosoever follows 'Jina' (victor) is a Jain. Here, the term 'Victory' refers to winning over the alien and non-natural volitions like delusion, attachment and aversion etc., as these defiled modes are not only themselves 'possessions', but they are its origin also.
We have read the daily routine of laity and monks and have observed their primary activities. The idea of non-possession is there even in the characteristics of daily practices of equanimity etc. It means that one can practice equanimity until there is indifference towards the possessions of attachment etc. The equanimity is there only where withdrawal from possession and abidance in stainless self is there. Then and then only, the practice of equanimity is the cause of selfpurification. Until the Jiva is engaged in alienity, whether it is the activity of non-violence etc., it will result in karmic bondage as the qualities of non-violence etc. are alien-aspective, they depend on others. The volitions of self are the forms of non-possession, therefore, they do not result in karmic bondage. The non-violence etc, are socially oriented, while 'non-possession' is spiritual which is directly related to 'Jinas' and the 'Jains'.
All the twenty four ford-builders from Lord Rishabha to Mahavira and innumerable others acquiring state of enlightenment (ari-hanta) were non-possessed and, hence, they could attain perfection and salvation. There is not a single example which could prove salvation of the possessed person.
The two sects among the Jains-Digambaras (sky-clads) and Shvetambaras (white-clads) have their origin due to possession and non-possession. It seems that those, who professed alround and finer

Page #27

vision on non-possession, were called 'Digambaras', while those, who had a coarse and mono-sided vision on non-possession, were called Shvetambaras. It should be noted that whereas the Digambaras emphasize withdrawal from all kinds of internal and external possessions with a finer vision, the Shvetambaras emphasize only on withdrawal from internal possessions assuming the external possessions as secondary. That is why, they have admitted the salvation of women and clothed individuals. Had non-violence etc. were the origin of these two sects, it would have been mentioned somewhere. However, it is not so. Both the sects have uniformity of forms and characteristics of the four qualities of non-violence etc. If there is any difference, it is only with reference to characterising 'Possession' and 'non-possession'.
Two verses are quite popular in both the Jain sects. There is the one auspicious verse recited in Digambara sect at the beginning of reading the religious scriptures which offers bowings to the naked Kundakundacharya-a perfect non-possessed saint. In contrast, the Shvetambara sect recites the verse which offers bowings to the clothed acharya Sthulabhadra (who as per Digambaras, is a possessed one). These verses are as follows: (a) In Digambaras
मंगलं भगवान् वीरो, मंगलं गौतमो गणिः। मंगलं कुन्दकुन्दार्यों, जैनधर्मोऽस्तु मंगल।। Auspicious is Lord Mahavira, Auspicious is Gautama-the chief disciple Auspicious is Kundakandacharya
Auspicious is the Jain Religion. (b) In Shvetambaras
मंगलं भगवान् वीरो, मंगलं गौतमो प्रभुः। मंगलं स्थूलभद्रार्यो, जैनधर्मोऽस्तु मंगल।।

Page #28

Auspicious is Lord Mahavira Auspicious is Gautama-the Chief disciple Auspicious is Sthulabhadracharya
Auspicious is the Jain Religion. These two verses also indicate that Mahavirian order was intact for sufficient time after Mahavira and Gautama- the chief disciple. It is later the verses were composed on the basis of clothlessness and clothedness with different names of Kundakunda and Sthulabhadra. The names of Mahavira and Gautama are the same in both the verses. It is on this basis that Digambaras do never offer bowings to a clothed saint assuming him not to be a knotless saint and teacher. They also do not recite the auspicious litany in the form which is being recited by some people now.
The religion of non-possession also indicates spiritualism which shows the pure nature of the soul different from alien entities. It is only for acquiring this non-possessed state, that the practices of Pratikramana (penitential retreat), renunciation and equanimity are prescribed. The term 'Pratikramana' means to come back to pure soul. The term 'Pratyakhyan' means not to go to aliens and 'equanimity' means 'stabilisation in the self. It is all pragmatic statement that religion means to get away from the inauspicious and to move into the auspicious. (i) Penitential retreat (pratikramana)
The living being surrounded by possessions moves every time towards them in terms of volitions of attachment and aversion etc. and he becomes unaware of his self which carries them to the tendency of engagements in virtue and sin or continuation of worldly cycle. The penitential retreat has been prescribed to get away from possession or karma-bonding activities and to return towards the non-possessed self-soul. There is a complete proscription of engagement in the alien and prescription of moving towards the non-possessed self-soul. This involves expressions of penitence for worldly activities and not to repeat them.

Page #29

28
(ii) Renunciation (Praatyakhyana)
It is the resoluteness to abide in the self and not to engage in karma-bonding worldly activities again. This will check his future karma-bonding worldly cycle. (iii) Equanimity (Samayika)
An individual engaged in penitential retreat and renunciation will be capable to be steady in equanimous volitions as this quality is strongly related with pure soul. The sense of equanimity is to renounce altogether the auspicious or inauspicious volitions towards the alien ones. It is because of these volitions, whether they may be similar among the different Jivas, will always be karma-binding. In contrast, in practice of true equanimity, there will be absence of both the karmic influx and karmic bonding. It has an objective to make the soul perfectly non-possessed. This equanimity strengthens the process of meditation and karmic shedding. Thus, all the activities ofa Jain are inclined towards non-possessedness, while the qualities of non-violence are mutually dependent.
We have to state something about meditation which is being strongly promoted these days. It is observed that the current meditation has special objective of engagement in the alien entities. 4. NON-POSSESSION, AN EXCELLENT OR SUPERIOR MEDITATION
The term 'non-possession' refers only to the self-soul which may not have any option for possession. The ford-builders and enlightened ones are perfectly non-possessed, abiding in self and steady in their self-nature. They do not have any self-entity except the soul in the form of knowledge. They are called knowers and perceivers. These qualities are also referring to alienability as the enlightened ones do not have any place for non-selves. Whatever entities are reflected in their knowledge, they are all merely due to their existential nature. The existence of these entities have no sameness with the knowledge of

Page #30

the omniscient. There is merely a state of being knowable and knowership and that too is only pragmatical. This is because the self-entity does not require any option or statement. It is merely an entity of outright self-experience.
It is just surprising that we are unaware of the meanings of skycladness and non-possessiveness even under this state of things and we are engaged in identifying them on the basis of external entities like body etc. We are assuming clothlessness only as Digambara and not non-possessedness.
Well, let it be. We may be admitting clothlessness as Digambara or non-possessedness, but we must understand the true meaning of the term 'Vastra' (cloth). The cloth is indicator of cover or obscuration which hides the reality and does not allow it to be unfolded. In this sense, all the states and entities different from the self-nature are like covered by clothes. They are clothed only. This obscured existence has been designated as 'possession' in Jain philosophy which has directed us to be free from it.
This philosophy admits the 'non-possessed' as venerable as he is the only one devoid of defects and he is the only one capable of selfnatured and abiding in the state of omniscience. It is stated that
"Whosoever is not faultless, he is not omniscient. The faultlessness is moving away from obscurations like attachment and aversion etc. which are faults". The Jain scriptures have stated only the pure soul as faultless:
"You are the faultless whose speech is always consistent with scriptures and logic".
With this objective in mind, Niyamasara verse 6 has also pointed out coarsely the 18 defects or faults as below: (1) Hunger, (2) Thirst or desires, (3) Fear, (4) Anger, (5) Attachment, (6) Delusion, (7) Anxiety, (8) Old age, (9) Disease, (10) Death, (11)

Page #31

30
Perspiration, (12)Fatigue, (13) Pride, (14) Indulgence, (15) Surprise, (16) Sleep, (17) Birth and (18) Restlessness.
'Jambudvipa-prajnapjti' (Enunciction on Jambudvipa) and 'Dravya Sangraha' (Compendium on Realities) commentary etc. have also elaborated these defects. All these are 'possessions' because they do not belong to the nature of self and they obscure the infinite potency of soul.
Here we are discussing the 'non-possession'as admitted by the Jains in which Jainness resides, lives and pervades. The tendency of being a Jain, despite appreciation of possessions, is just like assuming a dead as alive by pumping air into it. The dead body may swell due to air pumping, it may be shaking also, but this does not indicate its livingness. It is merely a mattergic activity. Similarly, the external or alien activities of the Jiva, aware of appreciation of possession, are not indicators of Jainness. This is because all the Jainness is involved in minimisation or devoidance of possession whether it is included in non-violence, truth and non-stealing etc. If there is no sense about the origin of non-violence in non-possession, they are not worth observance. Here, the sense of the term 'non-possession' refers to (1) Leaning of passions like attachment and aversion, (2) Limitation of external accumulations and (3) Renunciation etc. It must also be noted that our vows and religious activities are meaningful only when they nourish non-possession through volitions and activities having a nature of non-possession.
We have been making mistake to assume Jain-ness in showing observance of vows and other rituals and foregoing the relationship with non-possession. Currently, every man of the country is suffering and that too either due to excess or absence of possessions. All the propensities of violence etc. are due to possessions and their growth. It is also surprising that the government has also not recognised the growth of possessions as an offence. Just as in the Indian penal code, there is prescribed penalisation for violence, falsity, stealing and illicit

Page #32

| 31
sex, there is no section in IPC to check growth of possession. Had the government thought of some relationship with the concept of nonpossession, or had prescribed a section of penalisation for excessive possession, the country would have freedom from many kinds of offence. Under these conditions, no body would occupy the property of others and neither there would be floods of offence like tax-evasion etc. The limit of accumulation would have been fixed and the people would have collected possessions within this limit. This would have resulted in absence of houses with unlimited possessions and of houses without possessions as is observed in the present causing worries everywhere.
We wish also to indicate here that the meditation, defined in 'Tattvartha Sutra' 9.27, is also based on non-possession and instrumental in karmic stoppage and shedding. In other words, we can also state that non-possessiveness and meditation are the same, occurring smiultancausly. The meditation could be practised only in the practice of non-possessiveness. How can there be meditation without it?
The meditation is characterised as the abidance in the selfand this should be the total non-possessiveness as is felt during meditation. There is karmic stoppage and shedding because of non-separation between meditation and non-possessiveness. However, meditation on single object after getting away from all other worries is also an activity which causes karmic influx. It will be there when there is even the activity of thinking. The worry or anxiety is the activity of mind. When there is thinking, there is activity which has been called as karmic influx which does not tally with the definition of meditation. Currently, we are concerned with that meditation which may be instrumental in karmic stoppage and shedding. I must repeat the thinking or concentration is the activity of mind which is influx due to its being an activity. Any other view on this point is unteneble.
Every body knows that acharya Umasvami has described karmic

Page #33

influx and bondage in 6-8th chapters and stoppage and shedding in ninth chapter of his 'Tattvarth Sutra'. He has designated the mental, vocal and bodily activities as (causes of) karmic influx and controlling or putting check on them as karmic stoppage. In the same context, the austerities have been called as causes of both the processes of stoppage and shedding. He has counted meditation in austerities. It means only that meditation is meaningful which may effect stoppage and shedding. Under this state, where stands the classification of meditation in terms of auspicious or inauspicious or sorrowful or cruel (Arta, Raudra) which could be included in the above definition of meditation or it may be included in the causes of auspicious or inauspicious influx? Both these meditations represent lower level of volitions which are influx themselves.
Besides, the description of the effect and eligilulity of meditation as indicated by Umasvami also, indicates that it leads to karmic stoppage and shedding. The wrong-faithed one can not have this type of meditation. That is why, Dhavala has stated only two kinds of meditation : (i) Meditation on virtues or the nature of reality (Dharma or Dharymya) and (ii) Absolute or pure meditation. The first kind of meditation has been called as meditation as it originates after the total subsidence of deluding karma and the second kind is meditation because it develops after destruction of the remaining destructive and non-destructive karmas.
It must, however, be noted here that both the above meditations require abidance in the self. The activity of body, speech and mind is not intended here. 'Dhavala' Vol. 13 p.80-81 22 states that (i) The effect of multiple verbal transitive pure meditation (prathaktva vitarka vicara) is to abide steadily in the soul after total subsidence of twenty eight sub-species of deluding karmas. (ii) The subsidence of deluding karma is the resultant of meditation on the nature of realities (Dharmya dhyana).

Page #34

33
(iii) The destruction of three destructive karmas results from singleverbal-intransitive form of absolute meditation(Ekatva-vitarka-vicara). (iv) The destruction of four non-destructive karmas results from the fourth variety of pure meditation. (v) There can be no meditation without predilection in nine spiritual categories (padarthas), or in other words, only the right faithed one is eligible for proper meditation.
The indication about the eligibility for meditation by Umasvami makes it evident that the meditation meant by him is only that which leads to karmic stoppage and shedding and ultimately to salvation. Had the acharya intended to mean influxing or mental concentration activity by it, he would not have added the word supreme bodyjointed' (Uttama-sanhananasya) in the aphorism to indicate eligibility for meditation. It is so because the meditation in the form of mental activity is always practiced by common man and even the wrongfaithed individuals.
When we consider the aphorism defining meditation, we find a meaningful word there 'Ekagra cintanirodha' or fixing of mind on one object. The word fixation on one point prominently (Ekagra Cinta) means meditation is thinking on one object prominently. Now, consider, where is the place for other entity when one fixes his mind on one entity? If there is place for other entity, where stands the fixation on one entity only? The meaning of'Fixation of mind on one' indicates that there is no option for any other. And when the 'other' is off naturally, what is the use of the word 'fixation' (Nirodha) in the aphorism? Under this state, it would serve our purpose if the acharya has mentioned "Thinking' on one subjeet or object only as meditation. It would have strengthened the mental activity and all the four Dharmya dhyanas would have come under the purview of meditation.
Further, if acharya had to say anything, he would have stated 'Rodha' (blocking) instead of 'Nirodha' (Fixation), as in those periods,

Page #35

34
the grammarians celebrated the child birth even on elimination of one short vowel in aphorismic compositions. It seems that by placing the word 'Nirodha' (complete cessation), the acharya intended not only the thinking on one and not thinking of others, but he meant checking of all other activities completely. By assuming the term 'nirodha' as absence of trifling fixation, the author of Rajvartika has indicated for those who are engaged in single thought that the absence of thought is in the form of different positivity. He has stated that 'Nirodha' does not mean absence, but it is positive only with respect to intended object. In the best meditation state, the soul is taken as objective and all other activities of mind are made absent. There is the soul only as object of soul and nothing else.
It has also to be noted that the term 'agra' (direction) is also indicator of soul in the best meditation state. The acharya also states that meditation is abidance in self. The external thoughts and activities are withdrawn. It also means when the word 'Agra' indicates object in the form of physical or psychical atomor any other object, the meditation will mean concentration on that object only. In this case, the meditation refers to the first two kinds of pure meditation.
Further, meditation is an austerity which requires the object of soul only and exclusion of all others. It is in this sense that the exclusivity of all desires (except soul) has been called 'austerity, 'Dhavala', 13 and 'Pravachan Sara', 79 also support this view.
There is no indication ofany difference between selfand non-self in the exclusion of objectivity so that the self-activity may also be admitted as acceptable. Here, one will have to admit that the acharya desires that all kinds of mental activities should be absent in meditation and admits abidance of self in soul only as meditation which is a form of non-possession.
Some scholars have indicated to me that in meditation, fixation of mind on an object is taken as prominent. It means they have taken the

Page #36

35
meaning of the word 'Nirodha' as fixation of mind. Such scholars should consider this meaning with reference to its meaning in 'Dhavala' as stated earlier. Further, it should also be thought whether the activity of fixation of mind will lead to karmic influx or stoppage and shedding. 'Dhavala' has explained this term to state that 'Nirodha' means absence or destruction of activities. Formally, the activity means mental activity whose destruction is meditation.
After all, what is meant by checking or destruction of activity? It means absence or destruction of the mental, vocal and bodily activities. Formally, the mental activity is called 'yoga'. Getting engaged on single entity is not meditation. Further, there is no karmic stoppage or shedding through this activity. Even if there is stoppage and shedding, it is merely due to withdrawal from other propensities. It will also be proportional to withdrawal. However, it is not due to meditation. To call it a meditation is just a formality.
It is evident from the above discussion that meditation is that which may lead to karmic shedding and stoppage. Nemichandracharya in his 'Dravya Sangraha' verse (Compendium on Realities) has also mentioned only two meditations as the cause of salvation and concentration of mind on incantations containing 35, 16, 19,5,4,2 and one letters and on objects, holy chants and form has been called as pragmatic meditation as they are causes of salvation through succession (and not direct). However, the meditation on the formless is ideal meditation. Ifwe think over it, this statement agrees with the Dhavala author. An author has stated that fixation of mind on object for an Antarmuhurta is the meditation of the non-omniscients and meditation in the form of absence of activities is the meditation of the omniscients.
This is also clear from the above discussion that the sorrowful and cruel meditations are neither pragmatic nor the ideal ones for the right faithed ones. Instead, it would be better to say that they are most impractical and lead the Jiva in pitiable condition. They represent false volitions.

Page #37

In general, meditation is a general word which means fixation of mind or suspension of other activities except one. Hence, they try to explain it in terms of thought process. However, the people should think, had meditation been the thinking process, the acharyas would not have excluded the thought process in the two upper varieties of pure meditation. They say that the second variety of pure meditation is devoid of mental activity. The third and fourth varieties are already devoid of thinking process.
The scholars know it well that the term 'activity' means transition between meanings and words. The term 'Vicara' and 'Viicara' (thinking) are synonyms. It means that there is transition when the Jiva, while thinking, sometimes moves on to modes and sometimes to meanings. This transition is not there in higher states. Now, one has to think that when mind means the activity of thinking, transition in thinking is inevitable. When there is no transition or change, how it could be called thinking? It will be equivalent to the concept of absolute permanence. However, if the mind is absolutely permanent, how could it be called the mind? Further, if the mind does not undergo transition, what activity does it undertake? Why could it not be called an influxing one when the acharyas have called the activity of mind, speech and body as the influx?
While considering all the above points, we can conclude that mind is not to be engaged in meditation, but it has to be kept away. This keeping away of mind is non-possession. Jain philosophy cherished only this objective. Thus, the meditation and non-possession fall in the same category with respect to keeping away from mental processes. Until we agree to this, the aphorismic meaning that austerities lead to shedding also besides stoppage, will not be meaningful and the living being can neither attain Jinistic state nor salvation. 5. POSSESSION : VOLITIONAL ATTACHMENT
It is stated that truth is a bitter nectar. Whosoever drinks it

Page #38

courageously even once, becomes immortal and he always repents who lets it fall. I am going to tell such a bitter truth which everybody knows, but does not admit and he does not follow it even when he admits it.
One day a gentle man came to me to have my autograph. He said, 'I am always reading your clear and audacious thoughts in 'Anekanta' Journal (Polyviewing). I had to come to Delhi for my personal purpose. I thought I must pay a visit to you". On his insistence, I gave my autograph to him. When he read them, he was surprised and said, "Oh, you are a Jain? You never wrote yoursfelf as Jain. You are always writing as Padamchand Shastri only".
I said, "Yes, it is so. But please do not take me as if I am not a Jain I am a born Jain, I have grown up as a Jain and I wish I should die as a Jain. How best it would have been that people should let me die as a Jain or let my body may he left but I should remain as a Jain".
I further added, "However, I do not know how much and what I will have to do to be a Jain or to become a Jina (victor)? Of course, if I could lean the possessions and attachment. I could write myself a Jain in not a distant time".
The words 'Jina' and 'Jain' are closerly related with each other. The 'Jinas' are those who have won over the karmas and the religion of Jinas is called 'Jain'. In general, we find two definitions of the term 'religion': (i) The religion is the innate nature of an entity or (ii) The religion is an instrument which leads the living beings to enjoy supreme bliss and releases them from worldly sufferings.
As far as the first definition is concerned, I have nothing to say and the innate nature of 'Jina'will be called as 'Jain'. For example, the fire has an existence by itself and hotness is its innate nature. Neither does the fire forego hotness, nor hotness foregoes fire. Similarly, those

Page #39

38
who profess to be Jains, neither the 'Jinas' will leave them, nor the Jain will leave the Jinas. They are Jinas because of withdrawl from possessions of delusion and attachment etc. and their religion will be restricted in them. Further, whosoever continues to become a Jina, his religion will continue to grow as 'Jain'. This point belongs to a high level of spiritualism. Let us leave it here.
Currently, we mean 'Jain' as a religion propounded by the Jinas and which could lead the living beings to get release from worldly suffering and make them 'Jina' or to acquire the supreme bliss of salvation. This religion has such a magnanimity that whosoever adopts it, becomes 'Jina' or 'Jain'. It is stated that he is a condemned richman who does not make his sub-ordinates as equal to himself.
The current practical definitions of non-violence, truth, non-stealing and celibacy are colloidal. One could be a true worldly human being if these are modified or refined. The old tradition of their refined definition has been able, by now, to keep the society and nation intact. Undoubtedly, neither the society nor this country would have been saved and preserved without these moral laws. The worldly peace and pleasures are also based on these laws. That is why, the various Indian dogmatic systems have emphasized these laws so that the man may become man and should live with peace and pleasure.
However, the vision of the Jain ford-builders reached a higher level of paraworldly or superworldly pleasures. They showed the path ofeternal world of salvation. Their path has the capacity to enjoy both the worlds. The path is to become Jain from human being and later to be'Jina' from Jain or to detach one-self completely from attachments and possessions. It means that when one forsakes coarse violence, falsity, stealth and illicit sex, one can become a human being and when one undertakes limitation of possessions or gradually forgoes them, he can become a Jain. The description of ten religious duties in Jainism has an objective of accomplishment of forsaking the possession in

Page #40

toto. The remaining nine duties are just complementary to nonpossession. It has been stated that the duties of (i) Forgiveness, (ii) Modesty, (iii) Straightforwardness, (iv) (external and internal) purity (these four refer to forgoing four passions of anger, pride, deceit and greed), (v) Truth, (vi) Restraint, (vii) Austerities, (viii) Renunciation are the methods while (a) Celibacy and (b) non-possession are the effects. These ten religious duties are the most excellent.
39
When the mind is cast in volitions of forgiveness, modesty and straightforwardness through the methods of purity, truth, restraint, austerities and renunciation, the religion of non-possession gets originated alongwith the total celibacy or absorption in self soul. The absorption in self is the crux of being Jina or Jain. To acquire this state, one has to make efforts to get away from karmic influx and apply methods of karmic stoppage and shedding. All these methods are not affirmative, they have withdrawing nature as happens in meditation. Sometimes, we can also call them 'Jina' or 'Jain' who have partial withdrawl from the possessions etc.
'Dhavala' 9.4.1 states that the Jinas have two categories:- (1) Complete or perfect and (2) Partial. The perfect Jinas are those (i) enlightened ones who have destroyed all the four destructive karmas and (ii) the liberated ones who have destroyed all the eight karmas. In contrast, the group leaders or pontiffs, preceptors and sages are called partial Jinas who win over the intensity of passion and senses. Further, we can admit those votaries as partial Jain who undertake the partial renunciation or leaning of possessions as the bliss of salvation is acquired only through leaning or zeroing of possessions whether they
are external or internal ones.
This is the contribution of Jinas that they defined the nature of entity without any absolutism and placed non-possession as a diadem and postulated the vows of non-violence etc. as instruments in developing non-possessiveness. Some days ago, I have received a

Page #41

40
letter from Gorawala Khushal Chandra from Varanasi. In essence, it states that cause-effect relationship of four passions and five sins is just reverse. The effect (passions other than greed) has been stated first while the cause (passion of greed) has been stated later. It means that out of four passions ofanger, pride, deceit and greed, the last one is the origin of the other three passions. The passions of anger, pride and deceit will originate only in presence of greed whatever may be its object. Similarly, out of the five sins of violence, falsity, stealing, illicit sex and possessions, the last one, i.e., possession is the origin of all the remaining four sins. The four sins originate only due to possessions whatever may be its objective. It is stated in 'Rajavartika', as has already been referred earlier (7.1.7), that all the sins have origin in possession. In the resolve of 'This is mine', there are tendencies of safeguarding etc. which cause violence. The living being speaks false, steals and incurs illicit sex due to the possession only.
The acharyas have called possession as attachment only. Here, the attachment refers to fourteen kinds of possession. The attachment means the volitions of'myness' and this is the root of all kinds of possession. The disliking, sorrow and fear etc. also originate from it. That is why, one should get away from 'my-ness'. The venerable Jinas are called 'detached' rather than de-aversed, because of the prominence of attachment. If this is allayed or the volitions of attachment are allayed, the individual can become 'Jina'. In the Jinistic path, possession has been stated to be the origin of all sins and the individual renouncing it has been called as 'Jina' or 'Jain'.
Some persons admit the attachment etc. as violence and absence of attachment etc. as non-violence. Thus, they are not differentiating between violence and possession. Such people quote Amritchandra acharya who has stated in his text (see ref. 20) which means that the sum and substance of Jain scripture is that non-origination of attachment etc. is non-violence and their origination is termed as violence.

Page #42

Such people should look into the matter of cause-effect system a little deeply. The acharya has formalised the effect of violence through the casues of attachment etc. The volitions of attachment etc. are not violence in themselves, but they are its causes. That is why, the same acharya has stated further two more verses which mean that even the minor violence is caused due to alien entities like attachment etc. Further, violence incurred is proportional to the passional volitions. The passion leads to injury of physical and psychical vitalities. The individual with passions first injures himself through himself.
41
We have shown earlier with reference to meditation that the total withdrawal from possession is the main basis for being a 'Jain'. The persons, who state about the fixation of mind on one point or object, also incur karmic influx. Further, the long lasting worldly beings have established meditation centres throughout the world for its promotion. Many persons attend them for pacifying their mind. However, they can not acquire anything there which they could have acquired by diverting the mind from all corners or becoming Jain or non-possessed. In being Jain, one will find the vision of soul, and in the modern meditation centers, they will have defiled modes of possession. It may be possible that these defiled modes might be called as auspicious from the perspective of karmic chain for practical purposes. However, really they are inauspicious only as they are karma-binding. It is said in Samaya-sara (Essence of Soul). Verse 145 that the inauspicious karma is bad and auspicious karma is good. However, how a karma, which lead to worldly cycle, could be good? It is never possible.
All this means that one could easily become a Jain if he renounces the influx-earning activities of possession and moves on to the path of karmic stoppage and shedding and absorbs himself in his self by renouncing all options. All the causes leading to karmic stoppage and shedding postulated by acharyas are in the form of withdrawal from attachment and possession. There is no accumulation of any possession like violence, falsity and stealing etc. Umasvami acharya has stated in

Page #43

his 'Tattvarth Sutra' that the karmic stoppage occurs due to observance of (i) three guards (guptis of mind, speech and body), (ii) five carefulnesses (Samitis or care in walking, talking, foods, picking and placing and secretions and excretions), (iii) ten religious duties (like forgiveness etc.), (iv) twelve introspecting reflections (like momentariness, refugelessness etc.), (v) victory over 22 afflictions (like hunger, thirst etc.) and (vi) good moral vows of many kinds. Further, he adds that though the austerities form a variety of conduct and cause of karmic stoppage, but they also lead to karmic shedding. All these 64 activities involve withdrawal rather than involvement. All involve renunciation of alien-i.e. possession and absorption in self. It has been stated 23 that. (1) The Guard (Gupti) is defined as an instrument which gets the
self away from the causes of worldly cycle. It has three varieties. (1) Guard of mind : is that which makes the mind away from
volitions of attachment etc. (ii) Guard of speech: is getting away from falsity etc. Alternatively,
the silence is the guard of speech. (iii) Guard of body: is getting away from bodily actions or relaxation
or bodily detachment. (2) Carefulness (Samiti) is the assemblage of supreme attributes
like natural enlightenment which is the innate quality of self in which it is engaged. 'Pravacanasara' (Essence of Sermons) commentary states that the self, transformed in its own nature by observing right movement is carefulness. It is further stated that carefulness may also be defined as absorption in self through renunciation of defiled modes like attachment etc. It is its spiritual form. However, externally it is five-fold as in point (ii) above

Page #44

43
(3) Religious duties (Dharma): The pure nature of the soul is the
basic religion. The methods leading to acquire them are the ten religious duties. The religion is also defined as an instrument which moves the living being away from the world in the form of attachment etc. and leads him to acquire the undefiled mode of pure consciousness. The gem-trio (right faith, knowledge and conduct) is religion. The right conduct and equanimity are religion in ideal sense. The self-soul devoid of disturbance of delusion and involvement in equanimity are religion.
The ten religions duties have already been mentioned on P. 39. (4) Introspective Reflections (Anupreksha): The deep study of
scriptures for shedding the karmas off is Anupreksha. Alternatively, the reflections on the unsteadiness of body and
sensuals etc. is Anupreksha. (5) Victory over Afflictions (Parishaha-jaya): It is not to deviate
from nectar of elernal bliss acquired due to equanimous practices of absorption in self despite intense rise of pains due to hunger
etc. There are twenty two afflictions. (6) Conduct (Charitra) is defined as moving towards own nature of
the self-soul by the self. It means the absorption in the self-soul by
self. (7) Austerity (Tapa): It is defined as subjugation of desires.
In all the above referred quotes (which have relevance for karmic stoppage and shedding) indicate prominently devoidance of possession and absorption in self. We can call some people as partial Jinas or Jains who are trying to follow and practice the above methods. However, currently any person born in a specific sect boasts himself

Page #45

44
to be a Jain despite his altogether ignorance about the Jain discipline. The mockery of the fact is that though they have Jain as a sect, they are proudly calling it a religion. They are stating that'Jain' is not a sect, but religion. And they are themselves Jains despite the fact they do not have any concern for observing its disciplines. This is like a selfcontradictory statement that a woman is called barren who has no issues like 'my mother'. Well, if she is barren, how could she be a mother and how could you be her son ? Similarly, if one is sectarian, how could he be a Jain?
In summary, it could be stated that if one wishes to be a true Jain, he should first restrict and limit his psychical and physical possessions. When they are restrained, there will automatically be the awakening of vows of non-violence etc., because possession is the origin of all sins and the basis of Jain culture is non-attachment and non-possession.
REFERENCES 1. यत्खलु कषाययोगात् प्राणानां द्रव्यभावरूपाणाम्।
व्यपरोपणस्य करणं सुनिश्चिता भवति सा हिंसा।। 43।। युक्ताचरणस्य सतो रागाद्यावेशमन्तरेणपि। न हि भवति जातु हिंसा प्राणव्यपरोपणादेव।। 45।। व्युत्थानावस्थायां रागादीनां वशप्रवृत्तायाम्। म्रियतां जीवो मा वा धावत्यग्रे ध्रुवं हिंसा।। 46।। तस्मात् प्रमत्तयोगे प्राणव्यपरोपणं नित्यम्।। 47।।
यस्मात् सकषायः सन् हन्त्यात्माप्रथममात्मानम्।। 48।। पुरु. 43-48 2. 'क्रोधादिकषायाणा-मातरौद्रयोर्हिसादिपंचपापानां भयस्य च जन्मभूमिः परिग्रहः।'
-चा. सा. पृ. 19 3. 'मिथ्याज्ञानान्वितान्मोहान्ममाहंकारसंभवः।
इमकाभ्यां तु जीवस्थ रागो द्वेषस्तु जायते।। ताभ्यां पुनः कषायाः स्यु।कषायाश्च तन्मयाः। तेभ्यो योगः प्रवर्तन्ते ततः पाणिबधादयः।।'

Page #46

4. 'अहिंसा भूतानां जगति विदितं ब्रह्म परमं,
न सा तत्राऽऽरम्भोऽस्त्यणुरपि च यत्राश्रमविधौ। ततस्तत्सिद्ध्यर्थे परम-करुणो ग्रन्थमुभयं,
भवानेवाऽत्याक्षीन्न च विकृत-वेषौपधि-रतः।' स्वयंभूस्तोत्र 21/4 5. मूर्छा परिग्रहः। तं सू.ए 7.17 6. तं मिच्छतं जमसद्दहणंतच्चाण होइ अत्थाणं। - भ. आ. 56 7. 'हिंसालियवयण-चोज्ज-मेहुण-परिग्गह राग-दोस-मोहण्णाणेहि चेव, णिव्वुई
होई त्ति अहिणवेसो विवरीय मिच्छत्त। -ध. पु. 8 पृ. 20 8. अत्थि चेव णत्थि चेव, एगमेव अणेगमेव, सावयवं चेव णिरवयवं चेव णिच्चमेव अणिच्चमेव, इच्चाइओ एयंताहिणिवेसी एयंतमिच्छत्तं।
–धव. पु., 8 पृ. 20 9. सर्वेषामपि देवानां समयानां तथैव च।
यत्र स्यात्समदर्शित्वं ज्ञेयं वैनयिक हि तत्।। -त. सा. 5-8 10. सर्वज्ञेन विरागेण जीवाजीवादि भासित।
तथ्यं न वेति संकल्पो दृष्टि : सांशयिकी मता।। -अमित श्रा. 2/7 11. विचारिज्जमाणे जीवाजीवादि पयत्था ण सन्ति णिच्चाणिच्च वियप्पेहिं,
तदो सव्वमण्णाणमेव, णाणं णस्थित्ति अहिणिवेसो अप्णाणमिच्छत्तं।'
-धव. पु. 8 पृ. 20 12. कषन्त्यात्मानमेवात्र कषायादिति दर्शिताः। ___पंचविंशतिसंख्याका मोहकर्मोदयोद्भवाः।। --जम्बू. च. 13/108 13. स्व-परोपघात-निरनुग्रहाहितक्रौर्य-परिणामोऽमर्षः क्रोधः। --त. वा. 8/9/5 14. 'विज्ञानैश्वर्यजातिकुलतपोविद्याजनितो जीवपरिणाम औद्धत्यात्मको मानः।
-ध. पु. 12, पृ. 283 15. परातिसन्धानतयोपहितकौटिल्यप्रायः प्रणिधिर्माया । त. वा. 8/9 16. वज्झत्थेसु ममेदं भावो लोभो।
धव. पु. 12.1/284 द्रव्याद्यभिकांक्षावेशो लोभः।
त. वा. 8/9/5

Page #47

46
17. 'अथायमुपयोगो द्वेधा विशिष्यते शुद्धाशुद्धत्वेन। तत्र शुद्धो निरुपरागः अशुद्ध
सोपरागः। स तु विशुद्धि-संदलेश रूपत्वेन द्वैविध्यादुपरागस्य द्विविधः शुभोऽशुभश्च।
'सभूतग्रामानुकम्पाचरणे च प्रवृत्तं शुभ उपयोगः। -प्र. सा. टी. 63, 65 18. (1) परिगृह्यते इति परिग्रहः बाह्यार्थः क्षेत्रादि।
(2) 'परिगृह्यते अनेनेति च परिग्रहः बाह्यार्थग्रहणहेतुरात्मपरिणामः।
-धवला 12/4/286 पृ. 282 19. 'रत्तो बंधदि कम्मं मुंचदि जीवो विरागसंपत्तो।' -समयसार, 150 20. हिंसाऽनृतस्तेयाब्रह्मपरिग्रहभ्यो विरतिव्रतम्।
-तत्त्वार्थ 7/1 'सर्वनिवृतिपरिणामः।'
पर. प्र. टी. 2/52/173/5 'समस्तशुभाशुभ-रागादिविकल्पनिवृत्तिव्रतम्।'
-द्र. सं. टी.
35/100/13 'देशसर्वतोऽणुमहती।' देशश्च सर्वश्च ताभ्यां देशसर्वतः। विरतिरित्यनुवर्तते। हिंसादेर्देशतो विरतिरणुव्रतं, सर्वथाविरतिः महाव्रतम्। न हिनस्मि नानृतं बदामि नादत्तमाददे नांगनां स्पृशामि न परिग्रहमाददे' इति।'
-त. रा. वा. 7/2/2 ज्ञात्वा श्रद्धाय पापेभ्यो विरमणं व्रतम्।' -भ. आ. निरतःकान्यनिवृतौ भवतियतिः समयसारभूतोऽयं।। या त्वेकदेशविरतिर्निरतस्तस्यामुपासको भवति।।' -पु. सि. उ. 41 'अप्रादुर्भावः खलु रागादीनां भवत्यहिंसा।' --पु. सि. उ. 44 पाणवधमुसावादादत्तादाणपरदारगमणेहि। अपरिमिदिच्छादोविय अणुव्वयाई विरमणाई।।' - भ. आ. मूला. 2080/1899 पेज 635 "हिंसाविरदी सच्चं अदत्त परिवज्जणं च बंभं चं।
संग विमुत्ती य तहा महव्वया पंचपण्णत्ता।। -भ. आ. 4 21. कुल-जोणिजीवमग्गण-ठाणाइसु जाणऊण जीवाणं।
तस्सारंभणियत्तण-परिणामो होइ पढम-बद।। 56।। रागेण व दोसेण व मोहेण व मोसभासपरिणाम।

Page #48

जा पजहदि साहु सया विदियवयं होई तस्सेव ॥ 157 || गामे वा णयरे वा रण्णे वा पंछिऊण परमत्थं । जो मुंचदि गहण भावं तिदियवदं होदि तस्सेव ॥ 158 1 दट्ठूण इच्छिरूवं वांछाभावं णिबत्तदे तासु । सेहुणसण्णविवज्जिय परिणामो अहब तुरीयवदं । 59 ।। सव्वेसिं गंथाणं चागो निरवेक्खभावणापुव्वं । पंचमवदमिदि भणिदं चारित्तभरं बहंतस्स | 1601
- नियमसार
22. (1) अट्ठावीसभेयभिण्णमोहणीयस्ससव्ववसमा वट्टाणफलं पुधत्तविदक्क- वीचार सुक्कझाणं ।
मोहसव्ववसमो पुण धम्मज्झाणफलं । तिण्णं - घादिकम्माणं णिम्मूलविणासफलमेयत्तविदक्क अवाचीरज्झाणं । । - धव. 135,426 पृ. 80-81 (2) अघाई - कम्म - चउक्कविणासं (चउत्थसुक्कज्झाणफलं), वही पृ. 881 ( 3 ) ण च णवपयत्थविसयरुइ-पच्च सद्धाहि विणा ज्झाणं संभवदि, ।
वही पृ. 651
47
23. गुप्ति - ' यतः संसारकारणादात्मनो गोपनं सा गुप्ति: । ' रा. वा. 9, 2, 11 गुप्त - 'जो रागादिणियत्ती मणस्स जाणाहि तं मणोगुत्ती । ' वचोगुप्ति- 'अलियादिणियत्ती वा मौणं वा होई वचिगुत्ती ।। ' नि. सा. 6। कायगुप्ति-'कायकिरियाणियत्ती काउस्सग्गो सरीरगेगुत्ती । ' नि. सा. 78 समिति - 'निज परम तत्त्व निरत सहज परमबोधादि परम धर्माणां संहतिः समिति: ।
- नि. सा. ता. वृ. 61
'स्व-स्वरूपे सम्यगितो गतः परिणतः समिति: ।' प्र. सा. ता. वृ. 241 'अनंतज्ञानादिस्वभावे निजात्मनि सम सम्यक् समस्तरागादिविभाव-परिसयागेन तल्लीनतच्चितनं तन्मयत्वेन अयनं गमनं परिणमनं समिति । ' प्र. सं. टी. 35 धर्म - ' भाउ विसुद्ध अप्पणउ धम्मुभणेविणु लेहु । प. प्र. मू. 2/68 ‘मिथ्यात्वरागादिसंसरणरूपेण भावसंसारे प्राणिनमुद्धृत्य निर्विकारशुद्ध - चैतन्ये धरतीति धर्मः ।'
'सदृष्टिज्ञानवृत्तानि धर्मम् ।' - रत्न. 31

- प्र. सा. ता. वृ. 7/9191

Page #49

'चारित्तं खलु धम्मो धम्मो जो सो समोत्ति णिद्दिट्ठो। मोहक्खोह-विहीणो परिणामो अप्पणो हि समो।।' प्र. सा. 7 अनु प्रेक्षा--'कम्मणिज्जरणमट्ठि-मज्जाणुगयस्स सुदणाणस्स परिमलणमणु-पेक्खणा नाम।'
-ध. 9, 4, 1, 551 परीषहजय--'क्षुधादिवेदनानां तीव्रोदयेऽपि...समतारूप-परमसामायिकेन... निजपरमात्मात्मा भावना संजात निर्विकार-नित्यानन्द-लक्षणसुखामृत संवित्तेरचलनं स परीषहजयः।' -प्र. सं. टी. 351 चारित्र-'स्वरूपे चरणं चारित्रम्। स्वसमयप्रवृत्तिरित्यर्थः।' प्र. सा. वृ. 7 तप-'इच्छानिरोधस्तपः।' -त. सू.

Page #50
Vir Sewa Mandir 21, Daryaganj, New Delhi-110 002 in Education F P & Personal use www. brary.org