Jaina Political Thought

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

Page 60

alumpe sahasakkare, vinivitthacitte ettha satthe puno-puno.20 Tormented day and night, without regard to time and convenience, seeking to add more, greedy for gain, one tends to forcible acquisition and crime. With a possessed mind one uses violence again and again. One seeks to gather diverse types of force including political force (raya-bala) and engages in violence (danda-samāyānam). It may be out of positive thought for gain or out of fear (sapehāe bhayā kajjati). One cannot be expected to act justly if one is not prepared to limit one's wants and this is the principle underlying the anuuratas.
The Brahmanical tradition had defined dharma as a just order in terms of the duties of the varnas and the asramas, which included the duties of the kings as well as the mendicants. The Jainas defined the duties of the mendicants and the householders, which in effect could replace the asrama-dharma. They did not accept the Brahmanical system of the vamas. Instead they distinguished three social classes--the Ksattiyas, the gahavais, and the lower classes, the ksattriyas are conceived as the ruling class the gahavais are men of wealth, posessions and business, the lower classes induded slaves, servants, labourers, primi tive tribals and the poorer craftsmen. This classification is merely a recognition of actuality as seen from a non-Brahmanical point of view. It is not held up as the model of an ideal society.As already mentioned the Jaina recognised the existence of a multiple order of social norms or kinds of dharma. Society runs by nature and convention.Tomake it ideal and just, one needs no detailed blue-print or scientific ingenuity but the practice of discipline, non-violence and the limitation of wants. To seek justice one must go beyond the cause of injustice, beyond strife and the pursuit of wants. This cannot be done by any political reorganisation. The ideal state can onlybe a state where moral and spiritual faith prevails. This implies the rejection of an alternative point of view according to which the opulence of nature exploited by scientific technology can give man ever higher levels of satisfaction when social organization keeps pace with these changes. The ancient Vedic view also believed in the bounty of nature but made it depend, not on scientific technology, but on the righteousness of the king. The Sramanic view, however, did not share this optimism, modern or ancient. Wants will always outrun resources and produce strife. The state may punish some criminals but produces the organized crime of war. No reorganisation of force can produce an ideal society.
The Jaina canon presents images of kings of different types but the descriptions tend to be stereotyped. At the top are the Cakravartins like Bharata followed by Vasudevas like Krsna, and Baladevas. They are mighty and just but not wholly spiritual. At the lowest are wicked rulers
47