Jaina Political Thought

Author(s): G C Pandey
Publisher: Prakrit Bharti Academy

Page 50

sovereignty as such and in this departs from the Vedic or Confucian view which makes the king unite heaven and earth, and also from the Western idealistic tradition for which the state is the highest realization of the moral idea. For canonical Jaina thought while the king is required for moral life, his actions can never cease tobe tainted by the evil of force or danda. The state could be called a necessary evil on this view which nevertheless must be distinguished sharply from any kind of modern individualism. The use of natural powers does not in itself constitute any good in Jaina thought. Such a search only stregthens spiritual delusion. Consent reduces the element of force but does not eliminate it.
Force or bala has been conceived in the canon as a fourfold viz., as bala, virya, purusa-kāra and parākrama (Thanaim, 5.70). Bala is physical force, virya is spiritual or soul-force, purusakara is the human sense of free-will dependent on the ego-sense, para krama is its expression in action. These represent the diversification of energy issuing into activity at different levels of being spiritual, psychic and physical. The basic conception of action has been defined as the movement of a substance, spiritual and material - "devue kiriye janayā" (Suya, 2.2., Niryukti, 166, p. 203).” Human action combines both and is either the increasing attachment of soul and matter or its opposite. It is thus basically of two kinds, dharma and adharma. Dharma is what is conductive to inner peace, adharma what is conductive to restlessness. These are ideal distinctions which are mixed up in different proportions in ordinary human practice. In so far as it proceeds from the involvement of the soul in matter and leads to violence towards the ubiquitous principle of life, it is called danda, force or violence. It has been classified in various ways in the canon. The most important of these varietiesis arthadanda, i.e. the use of force to gain some end. The condemnation of this form of danda is a rejection of the usual principle governing political behaviour viz., that the end justifies the means. Punishment, and war, the two fundamental forms of governmental action are thus usually justified by this principle. A similar justification is also given for rebellion,revolution and other such means of seizing power. The Jaina view, however, is clear. Violence remains evil.
Those who are engaged in the pursuit of wealth and power and value the satisfaction derived from this kind of life are classified as violent and evil persons who are destined to go to hell. Mahavira predicted that even a ruler like Bimbisara was destined to be born in hell. On account of the taint of violence and worldliness attaching to the rulers, the Jaina monks were advised to keep away from them and their entourage. It was, thus, deemed a violation of monastic discipline if a monk were to avail of certain facilities coming from the king, rajapinda. The Thanamga (5.101), thus, de
al
37