Jinamanjari 2001 09 No 24

Author(s): Jinamanjari
Publisher: Canada Bramhi Jain Society Publication

Page 33

inflexible; however, in the context of the “religious message,' the message can be 'constant' or 'changeless' while being at the same time quite flexible. .
The ancient preceptors and pontiffs, envisaging such a philosophy/metaphysical encounter, did not remain ambivalent on this issue. They have prescribed a practical way of life, and developed a code of conduct that recognized that many of their lay votaries had to engage in duty-bound activities. In other words, a code of conduct had to be developed that could help deal with the complexities of the 'art of king-craft.'
The early apostles who developed the philosophy of ahimsā had made, therefore, a distinction between munidharma (individual ethics), and śrāvakadharma, (social ethics) that outlined the differences between the dharma of the ascetic to that of householder. This, in fact, has become one of the characteristic features of Jaina ethics. That is, for the monk or nun the negation of spiritual compromise is the cardinal principle, and for the laity moderation must be the keynote of existence since his life is rooted in compromise.
A transparent and categorical segregation of ārmbhajahimsā (occupational violence), and virddhi-himsā (countering violence with violence), as opposed to the strict principle of ahimsā, helped the expounders of the Jaina philosophy to reasonably explain the tangled position of laity vs. ascetic. The Jaina ascetics and scholars expressly forbade, however, intentional hiṁsā, and emphasized a renunciation of samkalpaja-hiṁsā (willful violence).
Of all the challenges that a strict philosophy of ahimsā faced, the major problem revolved round the axis kșatriyadharma (the military conduct/duty of the martial race) and the ahimsā philosophy of the Jaina ascetics. This polarization had to be logically and convincingly disposed. Before addressing the issue from its historical perspective, I would like to start with two relevant quotations:
Indian history, even until Gandhi, has accepted violence as a means to promote social good. The Mahabharata says that there are two things: 'abstention from injury, and injury done with righteous motives. Of these two, that which brings in righteousness is
27 For Private & Personal Use Only