Sramana 2006 04

SR No.: 525058
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Shreeprakash Pandey
Publisher: Parshvanath Vidhyashram Varanasi
Publication Year: 2006
Total Pages: 226
Language: Hindi
Classification: Magazine, India_Sramana, & India
File Size: 9 MB

Page 96

The Jaina Concept of 'Ahiṁsā' and the Modern World : 89
up with some psychological impairment. The question is whether the person who "walked out" has committed violence (FET) on the child/children. What happens to your judgment if you are told that the person went away in search of 'mokşa'? Or, that the person went away to serve mankind ?
Modern technology has introduced new terminology like "preventive maintenance", "adequate precautions" and "due diligence"; if these concepts were not there, many of the "accidents" would be interpreted as "Acts of God" and no one could be held responsible or accountable. These do not fall under the usual definition of 'violence' (EHT). Think of the Bhopal Gas tragedy; was it 'violence' (féHT)? What would be your opinion if you are told that the factory dealt with a dangerous chemical (methyl isocyanate), that it was permitted to be located in a region with high population density, that it stored much more of the chemical than was stored in its 'sister factory' in USA, that the accident was on large-scale and occurred without warning, and that it manufactured an extremely useful product. If the Bhopal gas tragedy was 'violence' (F= FT) according to the religious definition, who committed it and what was the 'YA' ? in it.
One final example in the 'long-term' and 'long-distance' problems of modern life. Suppose a Selection Committee appoints a teacher or an officer (e.g., a General Manager) or a clerk; call him Mr. X. You are told that the Selection Committee had functioned under 'extra considerations' (a "Source", say, or pressure from other quarters). Now, Mr. X during his service period of nearly 30 years, turns out to be incompetent and spoils the 'careers' of (i.e., gives long-term 'pain' to) a whole generation. It seems to be clear that Mr. X commits 'violence' (TEST), but it is difficult to find the 'HTC' in this case (in fact, he does not know what he is doing). A further question is: "Has the Selection Committee committed 'violence' (FÖH) ? These are the certain points which need serious discussion.