Jaina Monastic Jurisprudence

SR No.: 001621
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Shantaram Balchandra Dev
Publisher: ZZZ Unknown
Publication Year: 1960
Total Pages: 108
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Ritual_text, Philosophy, Ritual, & Religion
File Size: 5 MB

Page 71

JAINA MONASTIC JURISPRUDENCE
53
Ex
the circumstances of each case of the delinquency. tenuating and aggravating circumstances were duly considered in inflicting the punishment. For instance, touring with nuns of other faiths or with eunuchs, in a woman's apparel at day time, was punished with 'laghukacheda' or 'guruka-cheda'. Doing so at night was sentenced with 'mula'. If, however, a Jaina monk toured with a Jaina nun at day time then he was punished with 'anavasthapya'; if he did so at night time then he met with the highest punishment, that of pārāñcika. Here both the circumstances under which the breach of rule of monastic conduct occurred as also the considerations of maintaining the purity of monastic conduct of one's own creed were critically and scrupulously considered by the framers of monastic laws.
Along with this, the makers of monastic laws were conscious of the social, religious, economic and geographical peculiarities of various regions. Hence suitable exceptions in these regions were provided for by the church. Here was therefore flexibility as also the rigidity of the spirit of the law. For instance, the monks and nuns are not to touch each other's body under normal circumstances. This does not mean, however, that this law is to be followed even under peculiar circumstances of distress. If a nun or a monk is bitten by a snake and if there is no other way of outside help then a monk could touch her body by way of treatment (Kalp., VI, 3). Similar is the case in which an ill monk was allowed to overstay at one place (Nis. cunni, 404), or in cases of going out to ease nature in rain instead of suppressing such calls, crossing the river under emergencies, staying at a proper place even without permission instead of living in a forest full of wild beasts and intense cold, so on and so forth. In all such cases, these practices were resorted to only as 'apaddharma' for which suitable prayaścittas were undergone afterwards. Actually the Nisihacunņi (2684) allows the acceptance of ‘adhākarmika' food under such abnormal conditions as famine, wickedness of a king, great fear or illness, etc. Not