ISJS Jainism Study Notes E5 Vol 02

Author(s): International School for Jain Studies
Publisher: International School for Jain Studies

Page 214

In a Particular sense, Ahimsa means only non-killing.
SCHOOL
OF
all the aspects of social experience in its normative perspective. The political organization, the economic orientation and the institutional set up can easily derive inspiration from this ethically significant statement. Owing to the all-inclusive nature of Ahimsa the Puruşarthasidhyupaya seeks to explain falsehood-truth, stealing-non-stealing, non-chastitychastity, possession-non-possession etc. as forms of Himsa-Ahimsa. This way of expression regards Ahimsa as the essence of all virtues, thus giving the supreme status to Ahimsa it deserves.
SELF STUDY IS THE SUPREME AUSTERITY
Farenga
STUDY NOTES version 5.0
In a logical sense it can be said that Ahimsa is the highest genus and particular Ahimsās are its species, and the relation between generic Ahimsa and particular Ahimsa is a relation of identity in-difference. As for example, in non-killing and non-exploitation, though the identical element of Ahimsa is present, yet the two are different. So the above is the most general definition of Subha just like the definition of Dravya. It may be noted that we can understand 'being only through the particulars, similarly, the understanding of general Ahimsa is possible only through the particular examples of Ahimsa, e.g. non-killing, non-exploitation, non-enmity, non-cruelty, etc. Ahimsa is the most general definition like the definition of Dravya as that what is Sat. The former can be thought of evaluative, just as the latter can be thought of factually i.e. value neutrally.
2.8 Does definition of Subha (Good) Require the Definition of Ahimsa?
It is all right that good is definable as the experience in tune with Ahimsa, but it may be asked: what is Ahimsa? Now the question 'Ahimsa?' in the value-world is like the question 'What is Sat?' in the factual world. Just as Sat is understandable through the particular examples of things like pen, table, book etc., so also Ahimsa is understandable through the particular examples of Ahimsa, like non-killing, non-exploitation, non-enmity, non-cruelty etc. When it is so easily understandable through examples, the craving for the definition of Ahimsa is pedantry, serving no purpose. Ahimsa can be taught by examples, just as in arithmetic 2+2 = 4 can be taught to a child with the help of an example like two balls + two balls = 4 balls and gradually the child learns to do big sums without examples. In the same way Ahimsa can be understood gradually. The argument of understandability cannot be adduced in the case of Subha without definition. For understanding Subha, definition is a necessity, but a similar necessity does not exist for Ahimsa in view of the above-mentioned facts.
Page 201 of 385