________________
H. BHATTACHARYA
fasts and privatione? If-killing, in any form of even ferocious creatures, for example is reprehensible, how is it that wars are sometimes justified in the Jaina scriptures themselves ? Lastly if one is to see that he 18 not to do any act, however, good it may be, if it involves the killing, intentional or nonintentional, of even a minutest animal how can the constructions of temples or Rest houses or hospitals be undertaken, which are admittedly highly moral acts but which nevertheless involves the killing of numerous sentinent beings? In all these cases, the doctrine of the strict adherence to the moral principle of non-violence seem to be relaxed to a certain extent and a different moral standard set up and kept in view.*
What then is the place of Ahimsa in the Jain moral philosophy?
We think, with the Jains, non-violence is generally the moral standard by which we are to judge our acts It may be that here are cases in which, circmstanced as we are, the strict adherence to absolute Abımså may be impossible for us, but tbat 18 no reason why the standard of Abımsā abould be criticised as defective An act is to be morally judged by the measure in which it conforms to the principle of non-violence The Jaina arguments for the forbearance from killing a suffering creature or a ferocious animal may not sound as conclusive to some people but they are undoubtedly illustrative These arguments, show, in other words, that in order that your acts may not be sinful you are always to look to the principle of Ahimsă,--to see that your acts are not in any way violent. Small violences unintentional and regretted, may be often unavoidable but Akimsā is the absolute standard of all moral acts and a morally disposed man is never to lose sight of it In all his acts, he 18 to begin, to continue and to end by asking Is my act strictly non-violent? Was I non-yzolent in my thoughts, words and manners of working? If yes, the act is all right If not, it is morally bad, at least to some extent, -no matter that it 18 otherwise justifiable or commendable on other considerations.
A very good illustration of the fact that with the Jains, non-violence is the absolute moral standard, a supreme prisciple, in light of which all acts are to be morally judged, is afforded by the reasons which they put forward for abstaining from the enjoyment of the four things yız, wme, meat, honey and the five kinds of Udamyara (fig) fruits All moralists incuicate on the avoidance of intoxicating liquor, because it lowers the spiritual nature of man or 'upmana' bim, so to say The Jains, however, would bring in the
* Here the learned writer seems to have overlooked the Ahımsā row of a layman and that of an ascetic The ascetic only observes the full Ahımsa. Battles in self-defence and construction of Temples are the works of a layman only. Even layman would try his best to midimiae Himsā and avoid intentional one altogether. Penance 18 not observed to cause injury to one self. No Kasaya stands in it Hence ao Himgā GENERAL EDITOR.
