Lessons of Ahimsa and Anekanta for Contemporary Life

Author(s): Tara Sethia
Publisher: California State Polytechnic University Pomona

Page 14

Tara Sethia, “Introduction”
into the trap of “extreme moral relativism or religious exclusivism.” In demonstrating this she draws from her own experiment with anekantavāda while she served as a “teacher of Christianity” for the nuns at Jain Vishva Bharti Institute in India. Her dialog with the nuns over a period of one year convinced her that being open-minded to others' beliefs does not require a break with one's own. Thus, Valley suggests that anekānta is a resolution to the problem underlying the debate on pluralism versus exclusivism.
Reflecting on the “multi-dimensional significance” of anekantavāda for day-to-day life, Kamla Jain relates anekanta to the functioning of a secular state or a system, which underscores the neutrality and respect toward all religions; to the working of modern jurisprudence which takes into account all perspectives to arrive at a judgment; to the effective functioning of a business organization which succeeds only with the co-existence of various departments, and even to post-modernism and post-structuralism.
While in principle anekantavāda may appear as system to recognize the multiple worldviews, in reality it served, according to Paul Dundas, as a way which could establish the superiority of the Jain worldview over other models of reality. Based on the critical examination of medieval Jain texts and their authors, Dundas demonstrates the tensions and divisions that existed within the Svetāmbara Jain community where even superiority of a sect became an issue. Taking the example of Yaśovijayaji, he draws attention to a Jain argument which goes beyond anekāntavāda. This is the position of being madyastha (literally meaning standing in the middle), a position from which it is possible to praise qualities in individuals who may be non-Jains and may even belong to a “false” religious path. However, such inclusive and tolerant approach, Dundas points out, did not mean that the non-Jains were considered equal to the Jains. This approach allowed the Jains to be tolerant of non-Jains without abandoning the superiority of Jainism over other paths.
Christopher Key Chapple argues that anekāntavāda allowed the Jains to survive during some of the most hostile and
For Private & Pe7onal Use Only