Some Aspects of Indian Culture

Author(s): A S Gopani, Nagin J Shah, Dalsukh Malvania
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 61

52
Some Aspects of ladie. Culture
They are not the absolute principles; they have therefore to move with full regard to and in complete barmony with each other. For if the former alone is to work, the word will be out of joint; its centre will shift and consequently it will be out of its axis. And if the latter is to function alone with complete disregard to the former there will be cosmic paralysis. The long and short of it is that they are not principles-in-themselves.
Now let us see what is the Jaina description of the nature of these principle, and conclude.
They have neither the qualites of jiva nor of pudgala. They are non-physical, non-discrete and non-atomic. They are entirely simple, that is to say, they are a single unit throughout. Their full denominations are Dharmastikāya and Adharmāstikāya. They are neither corporeal nor have they any form. They are neither light nor heavy. They are also not the objects of sense perception. Their existence is merely felt and inferred through their functions. They are hypothetical assumptions. This, in short, is the description of the Jaina physics.
Now I shall discuss Ahimsa. Ahimsa and Jinism are so vitally connected with each other that the real conception of Jaina thought and culture shall for ever remain incomplete without a reference to Ahinsa. The popular belief that Jaina Dharma is Ahimsa Dharma is well-founded. It is the backbone of Jaina Ethics as Anekāntavada is the backbone of Jaina philosophy. Of the three constituents of Jinism Ahismā or non-injury is the first. 3° It is the first and the foremost qualification required by one who wants to walk on the path leading to a land of joy, glory and immortality. It is the first of the five vows and has got to be observed irrespective of Time and Space. It means non-injury to any living organism (moving or non-moving),81 small or great, whether it is a beast or a bird, an insect or animal. Not only should one not practise injury in action but one should not do so even in thought and speech. This much does not suffice. It further stipulates that not only should one directly do injury but one should not make others do it and also should not approve when one is actually doing injury.
This makes all the difference which exists there between the Jaina and the Bauddha conception of Ahimsa. The Bauddhas say that one should not directly deal injury. That is all. This gives them a license, in a way, to buy meat from a butcher and use it, seeking satisfaction that they are exempt from the sin which they might have otherwise incurred.
This is what is preached and actually practised by them. On the contrary the Jainas hold that not only is this not permissible but morally culpable also. It is expressly laid down in the Jaina doctrine of Ahimsā that injury to life should not be inflicted, encouraged and approved in mind, speech and deed. So there is a clear line of demarcation between the same doctrines as conceived by both the rival schools of thought-Jinism and Buddhism. If the principle of Ahimsa is to be rightly and rigidly followed, the nine types of cruelty, as defined above, should be abandoned at any cost.