Jailed Bihar legislator gets doctorate for non-violence thesis

ICT by IANS

Jailed Bihar legislator Sunil Pandey, sentenced to life imprisonment for kidnapping a doctor, was awarded a PhD Thursday for his research on Lord Mahavir’s philosophy of “Ahimsa (non-violence)”.

The Veer Kunwar Singh University (VKSU) at Arrah in Bhojpur district, about 60 km from here, awarded a doctorate degree to Pandey at its convocation for his thesis “Mahavir Ke Updesh Adhunik Paripeksha Mein (Mahavir’s Teachings in the Modern Context).”

University sources said Pandey appeared for the viva examination Nov 25 under police custody. He was interviewed for nearly an hour by a team of experts on Jainism and the result was published Nov 27.

However, Pandey failed to receive the PhD degree from Bihar Governor R. L. Bhatia, who as the chief guest at the convocation, gave away the degrees. Pandey reached the ceremony nearly two hours late due to a delay by the jail authorities and expressed his displeasure for missing a life-time opportunity because of the jail officials’ “high-handedness”.

Pandey, in his 40s, is a legislator of Bihar’s ruling Janata Dal-United (JD-U) from Piro and is currently lodged in Patna’s Beur jail.

He has nearly two dozen criminal cases against him that include murder, kidnapping, extortion and loot. In September last year, he was sentenced to life imprisonment for kidnapping Ramesh Chandra, a neurosurgeon, in 2003.

Chandra was abducted from Patna May 18, 2003 while he was returning home from a party. He was rescued two days later by the police from Chiraura village near Patna. The abductors had demanded Rs.10 million as ransom, but Chandra was rescued without paying any money, the police said then.

At the time of Chandra’s kidnapping, Pandey was a Samata Party legislator from Piro in Bhojpur.

Now happy at being able to add the prefix doctor to his name, Pandey said that now wants to write a book on the principles of non-violence propounded by lord Mahavira, the 24th and last “Tirthankara” (enlightened one) of the Jain religion.

“Pandey has made up his mind to write a book on the relevance of Mahavir’s non-violence,” a close associate of Pandey told IANS.

The legislator has written at least half a dozen articles on Mahavir’s non-violence.

A family friend said that Pandey was drawn towards Mahavir’s philosophy of non-violence.

“Pandey has been doing research on Mahavir’s non-violence, not for livelihood or out of any compulsion but due to interest,” he said.

Pandey, once said to be close to Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, hit the headlines in 2006 when he threatened to kill some media persons at a hotel in Patna.

Quest for truth & human unity

Mahavira kept the door to his religion's domain open to people of all castes and creeds. He would never have imagined that his religion would get associated with any creed or caste and thus close its doors on some people -Acharya Mahaprajna

I once read somewhere that Jainism has the potential to be a world religion. In yet another context I read that Jainism was the world religion. I went deeper into these thoughts. I wondered if these thoughts had some truth in them. Does Jainism have the potential to become a world religion? Is it a world religion? I began to measure Jainism with the yardstick of a world religion. The religion, which has a large number of followers, can be a world religion. Jainism has not more than ten million followers. Then how can it be a world religion? The religion that has followers in all parts of the world can be called a world religion. The followers of Jainism are present only in a few countries. Then how can be it called a world religion?

The religion that has followers from all sections of society engaged in all types of occupations, can be called a world religion. The followers of Jainism are primarily traders (the vaisya caste) then how can be it called a world religion?

Measured by these yardsticks I came to the conclusion that in its present form, Jainism is not a world religion. I went a step backward and tried to discern if Jainism had the potential to become a world religion. I was little overwhelmed. It is not surprising that I was overwhelmed considering that the religion towards which I was attached and which to me embodied the best could not be instantly taken to the top. I walked into the unknown territories of past. I wandered lost. At one point my step faltered. Some unknown voice whispered into my ear.

"All men are one."

I recognized the voice. I knew it belonged to Bhadrabahu, a commentator. I asked, 'Is it true that all men are one?'

"It is not imagination, it is really the truth." "Then who divided man."

"Man did."

"Is this division God-made?"

"If it were God-made then why would this division be only in India. Is God bound within the geographical limits of the country?"

"What is the basis?"

"Vedic seers established the four varnas for social organization. The basis of this division is for organization of society."

"Has this organization not contributed to the progress of society in India?" "Why not? It is this organization that has kept the social tradition of employment and artistic heritage even in the absence of formal schooling systems."

"Then why did Mahavira denounce the system of castes?" "The idea that one is born into a particular caste fostered the feelings of high and low and untouchability thus destroying the principle of equality.

If under such a situation, equality among men had not been declared, it would have made the idea of non-violence meaningless."

Acharya Badrabahu was assuaging my curiosity to a certain extent. At that time my ears resounded with yet another voice.

"Man is a Brahmin by virtue of his action, is a Kshatriya by virtue of his action, is a Vaisya by his virtue of action and also a Sudra by virtue of his action."

I reflected on all this for two seconds. Then I asked Bhadrabahu,

"Is the fact that action decides caste not eloquent of the principle of equality among men?"
He said, "This is not the only truth. It is only useful for organizational interaction. Man is just man. If he is acquiring knowledge he becomes a Brahmin. The same man in the same lifetime may pick up arms for protection. Then he becomes a Kshatriya. If he trades, he becomes a Vaisya and when he is performing services he becomes a Sudra. This ever changing idea of caste does not construct barriers of high and low or of untouchability between men."

I thanked Acharya Badrabahu with humility and moved on. Crossing milestones of the past, I reached Indrabhuti Gautam. He was the eldest pupil of Mahavira and also the most significant commentator on the teachings and principles of Bhagawan Mahavira. Entering the subtle world I established contact with him and presented my problem.

"Lord! You were, by birth, a Brahmin who was well versed with Vedas. Then why did you accept tutelage under Mahavira?"

By saying that it is quite possible for a person ordained into Jainism not to find liberation and equally for a person ordained into any other religion to find liberation, Mahavira presented the irrelevance of rituals and the indivisible form of religion.

Religion is the purity of the inner soul. Therefore it is not bearing on caste, creed or ritualistic tradition. And yet the exterior form of religion presents itself in ritual and so caste gets associated with it. Mahavira kept the door to his religion's domain open to people of all castes and creeds. He would never have imagined that his religion would get associated with any creed or caste and thus close its doors on some people. And yet time wove such events that turned Mahavira's concept of oneness among men to differences among men. We can present Mahavira's principle of oneness among men to the whole world. But we cannot present the contemporary practices of Mahavira's religion as an example of human oneness to the world.
Non-possessiveness (aparigraha) is a significant principle of human oneness. This can be presented to the entire world as a lofty principle but the Jain society cannot be held as an example of this principle. Multifaceted reality (anekanta) is another significant principle of human oneness. This can be presented as a tool to find solutions to the problems of the world. But the contemporary world of Jains cannot be cited as the followers of relativity or equanimity. Observing this conflict between principle and conduct the question that arises is:

- Is this principle only followed at the intellectual and emotional level and not at the practical level?
- If it is not to be applied at the practical level then what is its use?
If it is practical why is the Jain community not following it?

Jain society has been so greatly influenced by the events of time that it could not remain the ground for Mahavira's valuable principles. Today, the need is for the kind of Jain community that would represent Mahavira's valuable principles and would qualify to be the heir to his religion. The followers of these principles can be located in any section of the world.
From this point of view it can be said that Jain dharma has the potential to be a world religion.

As told to Lalit Garg
From www.centralchronicle.com/

The beliefs of the Jains

Ashik Shah

Outline of Jain Beliefs

What is it which prompts a prince, used to the best things in life, to abandon his material and worldly pleasures, and to adopt a life of strict asceticism austerity?

Two and half millennia ago, Lord Mahavira (599-527 BCE) did precisely this, at the age of 30.
He spent years in silent contemplation, living a simple and austere life. At the age of 42 he attained Enlightenment or Omniscience, which the Jains called Kevalgnan, and for 30 years shared his message of universal spiritual upliftment until, at age 72, his soul left embodiment for good and he attained Moksha or Nirvana.

Lord Mahavira is a historical figure and he is mentioned in Buddhist texts, being a contemporary of the Buddha, but from an older, established tradition. He is a Jina, or victor, having overcome his inner enemies. A Jain is one who worships a Jina.

In addition to being a Jina, Lord Mahavira is a Tirthankar, a ford-maker. He has made a ford for us so we can cross over from this world of embodied existence (Sansar) to the state of Moksha, Liberation.

He is the last of 24 Tirthankars which Jains believe to have existed in this particular part of the time cycle. The 23rd Tirthankar, Lord Parshvanath, is also a historical figure. It is typically one or more of these 24 Tirthankars who Jains worship.

The Jain tradition is a unique, distinct and ancient part of the culture of South Asia. Often considered to be a sect of Hinduism, it is actually an independent religious tradition.
Like Buddhism, Jainism is considered a Shramanical tradition, as opposed to a Brahminical Hinduism.

While the Tirthankars are worshipped, they are considered to be mortal human beings, who attained Moksha and left behind a religious order and shared the eternal message of Jainism. We believe in them as exemplary beings, whose path we can follow to realise the same exalted states they achieved. In Jain philosophy, any living being, if it so wishes, can attain Moksha, or liberation, and become a Jina.

Each and every living being is, by nature, a soul. Each is eternal, unique and identical, apart from the circumstances of its embodiment. This state of embodiment has been driven since time immemorial by the Law of Karma. Just as gold is found in ore, so our soul is embodied, and the process of purification will lead to its shining liberation.

Despite our spiritual nature, we identify with the body we currently occupy and animate. Without a soul, a dead body is literally lifeless and will not function. The mind, the breath, the senses are all driven by the soul or Atma or Jiva. This soul is the seat of consciousness, which is its defining characteristic. The body is cast off from one life to another, in the same ways as we change clothes.

The misidentification of ourselves as bodies is a function of our delusion. This delusion generates a sense of “me and mine” toward the body, its relationships and its circumstances, with which we have a merely ephemeral, temporary association.

This generates feelings of like and dislike towards situations which are positive and negative for the body, and these are expressed as the quartet of passions, namely anger, ego, deceit, greed, which lead to various vibration activities in the soul, seens as thought, words and actions. This delusion, these passions, and these vibrations drive the process of Karma, in a seemingly vicious cycle. The Jain path is the path of breaking this cycle.

If we realise that we are souls by nature, and that all living beings possess a soul like ours, then this must have a dramatic outcome on both our vision and our ethical conduct. Jains believe in the cultivation of friendship and compassion towards all living beings. These virtues are to be practiced until they become a state of being, rather than conditional on any particular soul, just as a rose give fragrance, regardless of whether anyone is there.

Jain ethics are driven by the principle of Ahimsa, non-violence. This traditionally governs diet, business and professional practice, and general conduct. Jains are usually strict vegetarians: In addition, many do not even eat certain vegetables and fruits, as their cultivation, harvesting or consumption would entail more damage to living beings: in the West, there is increasing adoption of Veganism amongst younger members of the community. The scriptures and codes of conduct contain injunctions against certain professions involving harm, or the exploitation of other lives.
The religion and practice of Jainism, as with other South Asian traditions, is best expressed as Dharma. Dharma can be considered three ways: “Dharma is the nature of things;” it is that which protects us from conduct which is not beneficial to the Soul; and it is the path to Moksha.
Dharma thus brings us closer to the our own true nature, or soul. It generates conduct which will free us from Karma, and it is the path to Moksha or freedom from Karma.

“Right Belief, Right Knowledge, Right Conduct constitute the path to Moksha”
These three are seen as the three Jewels of Jain Dharma. Right belief, at one level, is the belief in our true nature as Soul, and not as body; a belief in the True God, True Dharma and True Guru; it can also be understood, at another level, as the very experience of the soul, of self-realisation. Right Knowledge refers to the insights that are conducive to faith, such as that body and soul are separate. Right Conduct ultimately also resides in the soul, in that our inclinations, thoughts, words and deeds are governed spiritually, and, ultimately, that we become still in the experience of soul.

The nature of the soul has already been described as eternal consciousness. It is our own sense of identity. Also intrinsic to it are the qualities of bliss and energy. In an embodied state, all of these are obscured by Karma, but in the state of Moksha, we experience them in infinity. The state of Moksha is thus freedom from Karma, but, more positively it is the experience of eternal, infinite consciousness, bliss and energy.

The soul is free from the duality of pleasure and pain, from like and dislike, and from the ups and downs of mundane life. Even before the state of Moksha, in self-realisation, one can experience this bliss and peace, even if momentarily, right here and now.

It is this potential to realise the joy and ecstasy of self-realisation, to cultivate a state of selflessness, and equanimity, and to live in harmony with all living beings, which inspires me on my journey.