Dr. Samani Mangal Pragya
In the field of conduct, the concept of non-violence is predominant, though, the concept non-possession is marginally considered. Whereas, in reality- non-possession is a major part of conduct. Most of the violence occurs due to possession. In the Jain āgama literature, within the context of conduct, both non-violence and non- possession have been discussed. There are two main reasons for the bondage of karma, namely, violence and possession. Attachment, hatred and delusion are also the causes of bondage of karma, but these do not over in the absence of violence and possession.
Possession is a primary cause between the two. Violence is done for possession.[1] Jambu asked Arya Sudharma-What is 'bondage' as per the philosophy of Lord Mahavira and how can it be broken? Sudharma answered - possession of anything causes bondage, and violence is bondage.[2] The cause of bondage is the sense of attachment. In the present context, possession has been given a primary place (in reference to the causes of bondage) and violence is the secondary. It is very clear that among five kinds of influx, prāṇātipāta (violence) etc., the possession is considered as the more powerful cause.[3] Possession does not take place due to violence, but violence takes place for having possessions. Violence is the result and possession is the cause. Today, violence is considered as a major problem and its remedies are being searched, though ironically its main cause has not been pondered upon. Without the removal of the cause, the effect cannot be eliminated. The shoot and root-both have to be considered.[4] The solution for violence can only be discovered under the light of non- possession.
Non-possession has been emphasized greatly in the āgamas. In the five great vows of a monk and in the vows of the laity, non- possession holds a primary place.[5] Though, non-possession of a householder is not at the same level as that of a monk. A monk follows the vow of complete non-possession. Non-possession of a lay follower is the voluntary restriction upon the desire for possession (icchāparimāṇa). Jain philosophers have described the transgressions (aticāra) of non-possession very minutely, so that in practical life, a man can get direction on how to practice non-possession. Transgressing the limit of field, buildings, silver, gold, animals, grain, male-female, slaves and metallic utensils such as plate etc. and other articles is called as transgressions of the vow of non-possession (icchā parimāṇa).[6] Lay followers try to remain away from these transgressions.[7] Solutions to the financial problems can also be achieved by following the vow of non-possession.
The real possession is delusion or deep attachment (mūrchā).[8] The meaning of mūrchā is the feeling of mineness in anything. This consciousness of mineness develops due to attachment. Because of this consciousness, a living being is always worrying for earning, collecting etc. In order to develop this non-possessive attitude, there is a need for giving up this mineness. According to Uttarādhyāyana Sūtra, the central cause of all the worldly sorrows is deep desire or hankering. One whose desire comes to an end their attachment also vanishees leading to cessation of their sorrows.[9] Delusion or infatuation is possession. Another term for infatuation is greed and it has been considered as the destroyer of all virtues. [10]
Social Base of Non-violence is Non possession
Anekānta
- Theft or exploitation
- More possession than required
- Consumption
Violence does not only refer to killing and bloodshed, but, possession more than necessary is also violence because without violence, possession is not possible. Possession causes the violation of another's right and in this form possession is violence. Non-possession is the external freedom from infatuation and freedom from infatuation is the internal non-possession.[11] For the development of non-possession, development of freedom from infatuation is required. Jain āgamas discuss consistently about equal distribution. Equal distribution has been considered as an essential part of spiritual practice.[12] Acārya Tulsi has tried whole-heartedly to invoke the consciousness of renunciation. Acārya Mahapragya considered renunciation as very important not only for spirituality but also for living a healthy social life. His thoughts are 'The problem of possession is much more complex than that of violence, while considering the present problems. It is very important to stress upon the practice of non-possession. 'Non-violence is the greatest religion' and correspondingly need for, 'non- possession is the greatest religion' is also to be emphasized upon. Non-violence and non-possession are a pair, but they have been cut apart. By reconnecting it again we can go forth in the direction of finding a solution. The day when the voice of 'Non-violence is the greatest religion' encompassing 'non possession is the greatest religion' becomes strong, all the financial problems will find a solution.[13]' Thus, the ideology and conduct of non- possession is not only the highest spiritual practice, but, it is essential for personal happiness and a healthy social structure too.
