Sambodhi

Author(s): Dalsukh Malvania, H C Bhayani, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 49

Buddhist and Jaina Concepts of Man...
have set models to the Jaina, which they have adepted to their own point of view. In the Brahmanical Rāmāyana Rāma slays Rāvaņa for the unlawful act of abducting Sitā but does not incur guilt; on the contrary his mission as an avatāra of Visnu was precisely the destruction of the ungodly Rāvaņa. The Jainas correctly perceived the contradiction inherent in Rāma's killing someone and yet remaining unsullied by the karmic consequence of of the deed. They modified the story so that Rāma could attain mokşa by attributing the slaying of Rāvana to Rāma's younger brother, Lakşmaņa One can appreciate the ethical awareness of the Jainas in their insistence that the path of mokşa cannot admit acts of violence, however justified they are. But it is truly striking that Lakşmaņa, who commits this heroic act, is not born in heaven, as we might expect; instead he goes to the same hell to which the Jainas send Rāvana. 16
This can be compared with the story of the Mahabharata, in which we are told that the villain, Duryodhana, and the hero, Yudisthira, were reborn in the same heaven. 17 The former attained to this destiny because he perished on the battlefield, thus fulfilling the dharma of the kşatriya, and the latter, because of his celebrated virtues. Had a Jaina written the Bhagavad Gitā, he would have accepted Arjuna's arguments for refraining from battle, and he would have blessed him for his spirit of renunciatio for, according to the Jaina, time is endless, the world is vast and civilization can take care of itself. One's only duty to one's self is to attain salvation. All other actions are to be forsaken.
The same situation is seen again and again in the Buddhist ja takas; there the Bodhisattva abdicates his throne, gives away his kingdom, and refuses to fight his enemy.18 Although such actions are generous and touching, the nation and the Bodhisattva's family did certainly experience great suffering, the conventional rescue of the hero through the intervention of the gods notwithstanding.
The Jaipas could not provide for svadharma and hence could not find room for Laksmana in heaven. The moral of this story, for the Jaina, is that all killing must lead to hell, and that killing can not be dharma. The path to be followed is Rāma's, namely refraining from all acts of killing. Because of their refusal to admit svadharma, the Jainas could not develop a philosophy which would build a civilization or maintain it on strong foundations.
These trends show that both Buddhists and Jainas, in their zeal for renunciation were unable to develop a philosophy that could sustain civilization and justify the role of the individual within the society. Instead