Methods of Mahāvīra for Social Change [2/7] Socio-Ethical Method

2. Socio-Ethical Method:

Effective social changes were made by Mahāvīra through the promulgation of the socioethical values of Ahińsā, Aparigraha and Anekānta these three are the consequences of Mahāvīra’s devotedness to the cause of social reconstruction.

(a) Ahińsā

In an unprecedented way Mahāvīra clarified Ahińsā. In the Ācārāńga he says, " none of the living beings ought to be killed or deprived of life, ought to be ordered or ruled, ought to be enslaved or possessed, ought to be distressed or afflicted and ought to be put to unrest or disquiet.[5] (savve pāņā ņa hańtavvā, ņa ajjāvetavva, ņa ajjāvetavvā, ņa parighettavvā, ņa paritāveyavvā, ņa uddveyavvā) The sociopolitical organisations and the capitalistic set up can easily derive inspiration from this ethico-social statement. Thus the Āyāro (Ācārāńga) conclusively pronounces that after understanding the importance of kindness to beings, the enlightened person should preach, disseminate and applaud it at all places in East-West and North-South directions. (dayań logassa jāņitta pāiņań padiņań, dāhinań udiņań āikkhe vihae kiŧŧe vedavi)[6] The Praśnavyākaraņa Sūtra designates Social Ahińsā as kindness (dayā), security (rakşā), salutariness (kallāņa), fearlessness (abhaya), non-killer (amādhāa), and so on.[7]

The Ācārāńga gives us certain arguments to renounce hińsā.

(1) Socio-political argument against hińsā:

The Ācārāńga condemns hińsā by saying that its operation is without any stop, cessation and discontinuance and it goes on increasing to the extent possible with the political consequence that the race of armaments becomes unarrest- able and continues to grow without any check. In contradistinction to this it eulogizes Ahińsā by saying that its observance is total and not piecemeal, with the result that the armament race discontinues and comes with the result that the armament race discontinues and comes to a stop. (atthi sathań pareņa parań, natthi asatthań pareņa parań) [8].

(2) Psychological Argument against hińsā:

After comprehending and beholding the significance of peacefulness of beings, one should renounce hińsā, inasmuch as hińsā causes suffering to beings and human suffering caused by theft, hoarding, falsehood, slavery, economic exploitation, social operation, curtailment of legitimate freedoms and the like is a great mental disturbance is dreadful and is associated with unbearable pain and affliction. Since life is dear to all beings, pleasures are desirable, pain is undesirable for them, beings ought not to be killed, ruled, possessed, distressed & so on. (ņijjāittā padilehittā patteyań pariņivāņań savvesiń pāņāņań assātaņa pariirvāņań mahaubhayań dukkań. Savve pāņāsuhasātā dukkhaparikutā. Savvesiń jivitań piyań ) [9]

 It cannot be gainsaid that human beings are engaged in actions and these actions are directed to different ends and some purposes. The Ācārāńga expresses unpleasant surprise when it finds that there are human beings who are prone to realize ends and purposes through hińsā, such as killing, ruling, and possessing, distressing and disquieting beings. They not only commit hińsā, but also they provoke others to commit hińsā and appreciate those who commit hińsā. The Ācārāńga further tells us that these types of perverted actions defile human personality and thwart its proper development.(imassa ceva jīviyassa parivańdana puyaņāejāti-maraņa-moyaņāya dukkha parighāta heuńse sayameva pudavi satthań-udeyasatthań-agaņisatthań-vaņessattisatthań-vāyusttha-taskāyasathan samārańbhati, aņņhinvā puthvisattan (ādi) samārańbhaveti, aņņe vā puthvisatthań (ādi) samāńrańbhate samaņījāti. Tań se ahitae….) [10]

We may thus conclude that the criterion of perverted action is hińsā, whereas the criterion of right action or ethico-social action is Ahińsā. It is of capital importance to note that when our energies are directed to hińsaka (destructive) ends social development is obstructed and when our energies are directed to Ahińsaka (constructive) ends social development sets in.

It will not be possible to talk of Ahińsā without a world of living beings. Social Ahińsā begins with the awareness of the ‘other’. Like one’s own existence, it recognizes the existence of other beings. In fact, to negate the existence of other beings is tantamount to negating one’s own existence. Since one’s own existence cannot be negated, the existence of other beings also cannot be negated. Thus there exists the universe of beings in general and that of human beings in particular.

The Jaina Āgama classifies living beings (Jīvas) into five kinds, namely, one-sensed to fivesensed beings.[11] The minimum number of Prāņas possessed by the empirical self is four (one sense, one Bala, life-limit and breathing), and the maximum number is ten (five senses, three Balas, life-limit, and breathing). The lowest in the grade of existence are the one-sensed Jīva which posses only the sense of touch and they have only the Bala of body, and besides they hold life-limit and breathing. These one-sensed Jīva admit of five-fold classification, namely, the earth-bodied (Pŗthivīkāyika), water-bodied (Jalakāyika), firebodied (Agnikāyika) air-bodied (Vāyukāyika) and lastly, vegetable-bodied (Vanaspatikāyika) souls.

The two sensed Jīva posses six Prāņas, i.e., in addition to the four Prāņas of one-sensed souls, they have two Prāņas more; namely, the sense of taste, and the Bala of speech; the three-sensed souls have the sense of smell additionally; the four-sensed souls have the sense of colour besides the above; and lastly, the five-sensed souls which are mindless are endowed with the sense of hearing in addition; and those with mind possess all the ten Prāņas.[12] Thus the number of Prāņas possessed by the one-sensed to five-sensed souls is four, six, seven, eight, nine and ten respectively. This classification of Jīvas into five kinds is used for the measurement of the degree of Ahińsā. The more the senses one has, the more the evolved consciousness. As for example, two-sensed beings are more evolved than the one-sensed beings, five sensed beings are more evolved than the one, two, three and four-sensed beings. Thus Ahińsā will be directly proportionate to the Ahińsā of the beings (Jīvas) classified.

Now for the progress and development of these beings, Ahińsā ought to be the basic value guiding the behaviour of human beings. For a healthy living, it represents and includes all the values directed to the ‘other’ without over-emphasizing the values directed to one’s own self. Thus it is the pervasive principle of all the values. Posit Ahińsā and all the values are posited. Negate Ahińsā and all the values are negated. Ahińsā purifies our action in relation to the self and other beings. This purification consists in our refraining from certain actions and also in our performing certain actions by keeping in view the existence of human and sub-human beings.

It may be asked what is in us on account of which, we consciously lead a life of values based on Ahińsā? The answer is: it is Karuņā, which makes one move in the direction of adopting Ahińsā-values. It may be noted that the degree of Karuņā in a person is directly proportionate to the development of sensibility in him. The greatness of a person lies in the expression of sensibility beyond ordinary limits. This should be borne in mind that the emotional life of a person plays a decisive role in the development of healthy personality and Karuņā is at the core of healthy personality and Karuņā is at the core of healthy emotions. Attachment and aversion bind the human personality to mundane-existence, but Karuņā liberates the individual from Karmic enslavement. The Dhavalā, the celebrated commentary on the şaŧkhańdāgama, remarkably pronounces that Karuņā is the nature Of soul.[13] To make it clear, just as infinite knowledge is the nature of soul, so also is Karuņā. This implies that Karuņā is potentially present in every being although its full manifestation takes place in the life of the Arhat, the perfect being. Infinite Karuņā goes with infinite knowledge. Finite Karuņā goes with finite knowledge.

Thus if Karuņā which is operative on the perception of the sufferings of the human and sub-human beings plunges into action in order to remove the sufferings of these beings, we regard that action as Sevā. Truly speaking, all Ahińsā-values are meant for the removal of varied sufferings in which the human and sub-human beings are involved. Sufferings may be physical and mental, individual and social, moral and spiritual. To alleviate, nay, to uproot these diverse sufferings is Sevā. In fact, the performance of Karuņā is the verification of our holding Ahińsā-values. It is understandable that physical, mental and economic sufferings block all types of progress of the individual and make his life miserable. There are individuals who are deeply moved by these sufferings and consequently they dedicate themselves to putting an end to these sufferings. Thus their Karuņā results in Sevā. Thus Ahińsā, Karuņā and Sevā are interrelated and are conducive both to individual and social progress.

It is significant to point out that Mahāvīra’s social mind exhorted that Ahińsā consists in recognising the dignity of man irrespective of caste, colour and creed. Man is man and should be recognised as such without any hesitation. The dignity of man is sacred and it is our duty to honour this dignity. Every individual, whether man or woman, should enjoy religious freedom without any distinction. A non-violent society cannot subscribe to class exploitation and social oppression of man. Mahāvīra bestowed social prestige upon the downtrodden individuals. This led to the development of self-respect in them. Thus he showed that no man or woman should be deprived of availing himself of the opportunities of advancement. This Ahińsite spirit of Mahāvīra extended itself even to the lowest scale of life and he promulgated that life as such is basically identical. Hence no living being should be hurt, enslaved and excited.

(b) Aparigrha:

Mahāvīra was well aware of the fact that economic inequality and the hoarding of essential commodities very much disturb social life and living. These acts lead to the exploitation and enslavement of man. Owing to this, life in society is endangered. Consequently, Mahāvīra pronounced that the remedy for the ill of economic inequality is Aparigraha. All the means of illegitimate Parigraha bring about social hatred, bitterness, and exploitation. The method of Aparigraha tells us that one should keep with one self that which is necessary for one’s living and the rest should be returned to society for its well-being. Limits of wealth, essential commodities, all these are indispensable for the development of healthy social life. In a way wealth is the basis of our social structure and if its flow is obstructed because of its accumulation in few hands, large segments of society will remain undeveloped. The hoarding of essential commodities creates a situation of social scarcity, which perils social life. In order to resist such inhuman tendency, Mahāvīra incessantly endeavoured to establish the social value of Aparigraha.

(c) Anekānta:

It should be borne in mind that along with human and economic inequality, differences in outlook create a situation of conflict in society. The result is that constructive tendencies in man suffer a great deal. If we take things in the right perspective we shall find that differences in outlook appear as a result of the use of creative faculties inherent in man. If this fact is not adhered to, these differences become the cause of conflict between man and man, the consequence of which is that social unity is disrupted. Mahāvīra by his deep insight could see the waste of social energy on account of the wrong understanding of the nature of things. Consequently, he preached that differences in outlook are in fact differences in the nature of things. These different aspects of things are to be understood as the different aspects of truth. In fact, difference in outlook should be treated as difference in standpoints. By this, dissension disappears and social solidarity sets in. Mahāvīra's doctrine of standpoints can be called Nayavāda, which is a corollary of Anekāntavāda, the doctrine of multiple aspects of truth. By virtue of the promulgation of this social value, man started thinking that along with his own standpoint; the standpoint of the other is also significant. This gave rise to social tolerance and broad-mindedness, which is a key to social adjustment and progress. This led to the conclusion that truth cannot be monopolised and every man in society, can subscribe to the discovery of a new aspect of truth. Thus Anekānta is the dynamic principle of social life, by virtue of which life is saved from being stagnant.

References