Sramana 1995 10

SR No.: 525024
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Ashok Kumar Singh
Publisher: Parshvanath Vidhyashram Varanasi
Publication Year: 1995
Total Pages: 122
Language: Hindi
Classification: Magazine, India_Sramana, & India
File Size: 6 MB

Page 86

67 : FAUT/371-fc4
/1984
indicates very many dimensions of violence. Thus, the distinctions between physical and psychological violence, negative and positive violence, violence with or without a subject committing it directly, violence with or without an object suffering it directly, intended and unintended violence, manifest and latent violence and finally, personal and structural violence, are made. The last distinction is very important indeed from the perspective of peace.?
We are not here concerned with the details of these types of violence. What we propose to deal in this paper is, firstly, whether the definition of violence given by Galtung has any relevance to the Jaina Weltanschauung and secondly, whether his various dimensions of violence correspond broadly with the types of violence mentioned in the Jaina scriptures.
Jainism, as we all know, is a way of life which gives a very high premium to non- violence. But before we examine the meaning and typology of violence in Jainism, it is probably necessary that we make a search into its view of human nature.
In a Jaina text known as, Bhagavati Sūtra, there is a conversation between Lord Mahavira and his disciple, Gautama. Gautama asks Mahavira, "What is the nature of self?" and Mahāvira answers, "O ! Gautama, the nature of self is Samatva and Samatva is also the ultimate purpose that self has to realize.
Now the concept of Samatva occupies a very central place in the Jaina philosophy. As a matter of fact the whole of the Jaina thought revolves round this concept. It has many dimensions and many shades of meaning. Samatva, on the one hand, has individual and social dimensions and of the other hand, may mean, as per context, equality, harmony, equanimity or even perfection.
When Mahāvira says that the nature of self is Samatva, he is, of course, trying to emphasize that self is to maintain identity with itself. But unfortunately self, instead of remaining with itself, identifies itself with the 'not-self or the 'other'. This is a clear-cut violation of the rule; and anything which is responsible for this separating the self from itself can, therefore, be treated as violence. Not that the self has not the potential to identify with self. As a matter of fact the self is at peace only it is 'placed' as if, in its proper place, i. e., in itself. But somehow or other the self is not able to actualize its
potentiality. This is, of course, not said in so many words in Jainism. But if