Jain Journal 2000 04

Author(s): Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication

Page 16

172
JAIN JOURNAL : Vol-XXXIV, No. 4 April 2000 Indian history, even until Gandhi53, has accepted violence as a means to promote social good. The Mahābhārata says that there are two things : 'abstention from injury and injury done with righteous motives. Of these two, that which brings in righteousness is preferable. There is neither act that is entirely pure nor any that is entirely simple. In all acts, right or wrong, something of both prevails.'54 Violence as such is ethically bad, but in life one has to consider the whole situation before deciding whether the use of violence is justified as a mixed good. The whole situation may not be dominated by one, single ethical principle.55
5. Countering the many faces of violence : The Śramaņa-call to
Life. 5.1. Social inequality and caste discrimination
Śramana culture is said to be a reaction to the Brāhmanical system of social stratification and to the authority of the Vedas. Dharmakīrti
53. For Gandhi 'to cause pain or wish ill to or take the life of any being out
of anger or a selfish intent is Himsā. On the other hand, after a calm and clear judgement to kill or to cause pain to a living being with a view to its spiritual or physical benefit from a pure, selfless intent may be the purest form of Ahimsā.... the final test to its violence or non-violence is after all the intent underlying the act' (Young India, 4.10, 1928, published in book form by Tagore and Co., Madras, 1972). As such, killing is not himsā when life is destroyed for the sake of those whose life is taken (Sharma: Gandhi as a Political Thinker, Indian Press, Allahabad, First impression, p. 52); Violence is admissible to Gandhi, (i) if non-violence would cause the sacrifice of some other values of great worth like honour of women, freedom and honour of the nation, overall strength and growth of the race, or survival of democracy was at stake (N.K. Bose : Selections from Gandhi, p. 155, 156, 168, 170), (ii) if a sufficient number of people were not ready and could not be persuaded to believe in and practice true Satyāgraha, violent struggles for just causes would be justified (ibid. p. 169, 174), (iii) if there is a little prospect of the conversion of the oppressor to the course of justice through Satyāgraha, the victims must defend themselves violently (The heart of the doctrine of Non-violence is the principle of 'universal convertibility' i.e. the belief that all evil-doers, anywhere and in all circumstances, can be persuaded to give up their course of evil if their victims practise
Satyāgraha) (N.K. Bose, Selections from Gandhi, pp. 159, 175-177). 54. Mahābhārata, śāntiparvan, 15.48-50, Ādi to Bhisma parvans, ed. V.S.
Sukthankar and others, Pune, 1927; Ed. T.R. Krishnamacharya and
T.R. Vyasacharya (Kumbakonam edn.), 6 Volumes, Bombay, 1906. 55. Tahtinen Unto, Non-violence as an Ethical Principle, Turku, 1964, p.
66.