Chapter Twelve



When the people of Aryavarta gave up the study of the Vedic lore which alone enables one to discriminate between right and wrong, ignorance spread over the land and many sects sprang up, the Jain religion, whose teachings are opposed to science, took root in the country. We find no mention of the Jainees in the Ramayana by Valmiki and in the Mahaabhaarata, while in the Jain scriptures we find the life stories of Rama, Krishna, – the heroes of the two poems – in detail.

This goes to show that this religion came into existence after the period of the Epics, for, if the Jainees have been right in holding that their faith dates from remote antiquity references to it would surely have been met with in the books like the Ramayana. It is clear, therefore, that the Jain religion was later than the period of these books. If it be argued that the authors of the Ramayanaand theMahaabhaarata borrowed the stories from the Jain scriptures, the question may be asked as to why the sacred books of the Jainees are not referred to in the Epics, while the latter are adverted to in the holy books of the Jainees.

Is it possible for the son to be present on the occasion of his father’s birth? Form this it may be safely inferred that the Jain and the Buddhist religions originated even after the Shiviteand Vaama Maarg sects had come into existence. Whatever has been written about the Jain religion in this chapter has been supported by quotations from the Jain scriptures (for chapter and verse have been citied in each case). The Jainees shold not take offence at our comments, for in offering them we

have been actuated solely by the desire of ascertaining what is true and what is false, and not by malice or the desire of injuring susceptibilities. The perusal of this chapter by the Jainees, the Buddhists and other people will engender in them the spirit of enquiry into truth and prompt them to life up their pen in their defense and study the subject with this end in view. So long as discussions, whether oral or written, are not carried on and the parties in the debate do not maintain a spirit of love, it is impossible to arrive at any conclusion as to the correctness or otherwise of a belief.

It is only when learned men do not act in this spirit, that the ignorant people are steeped in utter darkness and suffer extreme misery. Hence in order that the cause of truth may triumph and (that of) untruth may fail, it is the bounden duty of all men to conduct debates, whether written or oral, in a friendly spirit. Unless this course is followed, the human race can make no progress. It is believed that this chapter which treats of the Buddhist and the Jain religions will be of immense help to the followers of other religions and will considerably add to the stock of knowledge because the followers of the Jainreligion do not let others read or copy out their books.

By dint of great efforts made by the author and especially Mr. Sevak Lal Krishna Das, secretary, Arya Samaj, Bombay, some books have been obtained. Again the study of the Jain religion has been facilitated by the publication of some books at the Benares Jain Prabhakar Press and by that of the book called Prakaran Ratnakar at Bombay. What would you think of those learned men who would monopolize the right of studying their sacred books and deprive other of the same. From this it is clear that the authors of these books were in constant fear that if the followers of other religions read their books, they would refute the doctrines of their faith and if their co-religionists read the scriptures of other religions they would lose all faith in the Jain religion, the reason being that there was a lingering doubt in the minds of the Jain writers that their works were replete with incredible absurdities. This, however, is patent to all that there are many people in the world who cannot perceive their own

faults but they are ever ready to notice the shortcomings of others. This hardly just, for one should find out and remove his own shortcomings before he proceed to discover and remove the faults of others. And examination of the doctrines of the Jain and Buddhist religions is now submitted to the judgment of al impartial readers.

This introduction, though short will, we hope, satisfy the discerning reader.

Vrihaspati, founder of the Charvaka

Once there lived (in India) a man named Vrihaspati who did not believe in the existence of God, in (the revealed character of) the Veda and in the efficiency of good works, such as Yajnas. this is what he believed.

  1. ~ ” No living creature – not even a human being – is immortal.All are subject to death; let a man, therefore, live in ease and comfort so long as he draws breath. If it be objected that the practice of virtue entails suffering, while deviation from the path of rectitude brings on misery in the nest birth, in reply to this it may be urged that, after death, the body is burnt to ashes and, therefore, the man who enjoyed himself during his lifetime never returns to this world after his demise.

Let a man, then, enjoy himself to his utmost capacity, deport himself in this world as expediency may direct, accumulate wealth and spend it on the gratification of his desires. All our interests are centered in this world. There is not hereafter.”

The four elements, earth, water, fire and air, have entered into the composition of the human body; consciousness results from their combination even as inebriation results from the use of intoxicants. Similarly, the soul takes its births simultaneously with the body and is dissolved with its dissolution. The reaping of the fruits of good or evil deeds is, therefore, an utter impossibility.

“The soul is called into existence as the result of the combination of the four elements and is annihilated synchronously with

the dissolution of the body, for, the existence of the soul, after death, is not demonstrable by direct cognition only. We believe in direct cognition only. Because the inferential and cognate modes of reasoning have for their basis direct cognition, Direct cognition being, therefore, of primary importance, all the rest sink into secondary importance, and are, therefore, not acceptable. The enjoyment that results from embracing a beautiful woman is the greatest reward of human effort.

  1. ~ Your so-called elements are devoid of consciousness, therefore consciousness cannot result from their combination. Just as in our day the human today is formed as the result of sexual intercourse between the husband and the wife, likewise it was impossible for the bodies of men and other living beings to come into shape without the author of the Universe causing them to do so. It is wrong to say that consciousness is called into existence or annihilated even as inebriation is produced or removed, for it is a conscious being that is susceptible to the effects of inebriation, but not one devoid of consciousness.

All things are destroyed, i.e. pass into a state of invisibility, but nothing is ever annihilated. Similarly it is a rational belief that the soul becomes non-existent, because it is not an object of visual perception. The existence of the soul is made manifest only when it is embodied. When it leaves the body, the latter suffers dissolution and ceases to be the habitation of consciousness.

It is even this which the Vrihadaranyaka Upanishad declares. (Yajnavalka says to his wife) “O Maitreyi! What I say is not prompted by infatuation. The soul is immortal. Being united with, it, the body becomes possessed of conscious effort. When it is separated from the body, consciousness is altogether dislodged from the latter. If the soul be not distinct from the body, how could it be that its union with the latter produces consciousness, while its separation from the same makes it devoid of consciousness. The eye sees all objects but cannot see itself, even so the soul, which possesses the power of sensuous perception, cannot itself be an object of that mode of perception. Though the instrumentality of the eye, the soul sees all (visible) objects, such as pitcher or a

piece of cloth, but it is conscious of the existence of the eye by inferential reasoning. The seer is always a seer and can never be transformed into an object of visual perception. Just as the thing supported cannot exist without a supporter, an effect without a cause; constituent parts without whole, and act without a doer; even so there can be no sensuous perception without the perceiver.

If the ultimate aim of human effort be the pleasure resulting form sexual intercourse with a pretty woman, it cannot be true because it is momentary. Again, this act* also produces some undesirable results, and it cannot be said that they are the aim of human effort. Otherwise, the carnal pleasure not being an unmixed pleasure, suffering will result. If it be said that the aim of human endeavor should be to obtain exemption from pain and an increase of pleasure, that aim will be frustrated. Hence carnal pleasure cannot be the aim of human effort.

Charvaka. ~They are foolish who renounce (carnal) pleasure, because it is mixed with pain. Just as a farmer thrashes out the corn, keeps the grain and throws away the husk, likewise, a wise man should enjoy pleasure and reject pain, for those people that renounce immediate pleasures of this world and desire to obtain mediate and uncertain joys of paradise and, with that end in view, perform Homa do righteous deeds, offer worship, devote themselves to the acquisition of spiritual knowledge – all these practices having been enjoined by the Vedaas which have been composed by rogues – are sunk in ignorance.

It is foolish to hope for heavenly bliss when it is clear that there is no hereafter. “Vrihaspati (the founder of the Charvaka faith) says that the performance of Homa (sacred) recitations from the three Vedas, the use of three staves, the smearing of the body with ashes have been turned into means of subsistence by people devoid of understanding and activity.” In our opinion physical pain such as caused by puncturing the body with a thorn constitutes hell. Salvation is nothing but attaining to the position of a king – who is in point of act God – possessed of glory or the dissolution of the body.

* The loss of the reproductive element brings on physical weakness which brings, in its train, disease and decay. There is no carnal pleasure, which has not its attendant disadvantages. _Tr.

  1. ~ It is sheer folly to believe that the aim of human endeavor is the gratification of bestial appetites and that the realization of the heavenly state and the faithful discharge of duty consists in getting rid of pain which accompanies sensual gratification. Performance of Yajnas like Homa contributes to the purification of air, rain and water and thus promotes health and enables one to acquire virtue, wealth, gratify natural desires and obtain salvation.

Whoever does not understand this and scoffs at God and the Veda and the teachings of the Vedic religion is a scoundrel. The author of this verse is right in denouncing the use of the three (sacred) staves and the smearing of the body with ashes. If the pain caused by pricking the thorn constitutes hell, why should not terrible maladies, which bring on greater suffering, be designated by the same name. It is, no doubt, quite true that a king, who is possessed of glory and is the protector of his subjects, is deserving of homage, but none except a perfect dunce would accord divine honors to an unjust and wicked king. If salvation is only another name for the dissolution of the body, wherein then lies the difference between human beings (and beasts) like dogs and donkeys excepting in the external appearance?

Eleven arguments in favored by the Charvaka Faith.

  1. ~
  • .”There is no author of the universe*. All things combine together by virtue of properties inherent in them.”
  • .”There is neither heaven nor hell, nor is there any entity like the soul to reap, hereafter, the fruits of deeds done in this life,



* Charvakas, Buddhists, Jainees and Abhanakas – all these four orders of atheists hold the same view with regard to Cosmogony, i.e., there is no author of the universe.

nor does the performance of duties pertaining to one’s Class and Order bear any fruit.”*

  • .”If the animal offered as sacrifice goes to heaven, why does not the Yajmana (master of ceremonies) send his parents, etc., to heaven, by killing them by way of sacrifice.”
  • .”If oblations offered to the manes of departed ancestors satisfy the latter, what need is there, then, for people going abroad to take with them victuals, clothes, cash, etc., for maintaining themselves during the journey. If a thing offered in the name of a departed ancestor reaches him in heaven, why cannot things, offered in the name of the person, gone abroad, by his relations staying at home reach him in foreign lands. If it be impossible to convey anything to foreign lands in this way for the benefit of a traveler, how much more so would it be to convey things to heaven (for the benefit of the departed ancestor)?”
  • . “If the physical wants of an ancestor in heaven cant be satisfied by offerings made in his name in this mortal world, why cannot the cravings of hunger, felt by a person in the upper story of a house, be satisfied if eatables are offered in his name by some one in the lower story.”
  • . “Therefore, let a man pass his life in ease and comfort; if he has got nothing with him, let him borrow money from others. No obligations exist to pay back debts hereafter, for a particular individual (combination of the body and the soul) that contracted the debt will never return to this world. Who will, then, demand payment and who will have to pay?”
  • . It is wrong to say that, after death, the soul leaves the body and is transported to the next world, for if it be otherwise, why does not the departed soul return home, impelled by love for its family.”



* The Charvakas have no belief in the existence of the soul and in a future life but the Buddhists and Jainees do not subscribe to that belief. In other matters their beliefs are almost identical.

  • . “Hence, all these practices have been invented by the priests for their own pecuniary benefit. The ceremony of offering rice balls on the th day after death, and other funeral ceremonies like this have ‘been devised for the same selfish purpose.”
  • . “The authors of the Vedas were buffoons, scoundrels and devils. The words like jarfari and tarfari are symbolic of the rascally teachings of pundits.”
  • . “Mark! What the rascals teach. Who but a scoundrel can promulgate that the wife of the master of ceremonies should have sexual intercourse with a horse and obscene jokes should be cracked at the expense of the bride.”
  • . “The portion of the Veda which inculcates indulgence in flesh-diet has been composed by some fiend (in the garb of a man).


Rebuttal of the eleven arguments.

  1. ~
  • . Dead and inert substances cannot combine together of their own accord and according to some design unless the Conscious Being – God – fashions and shapes them. If they could combine together by virtue of inherent properties, why does not another set of the sun, the moon, the earth and other planets spring into existence by themselves.
  • . The enjoyment of happiness constitutes heaven while the suffering of (extreme) misery constitutes hell. If there be no soul, who would enjoy happiness or suffer misery, just as in this life the soul enjoys and suffers, likewise it will enjoy and suffer in the next birth. Will the cultivation of even such virtues as veracity in speech and benevolence by people belonging to a particular Class and a particular Order go unrewarded?
  • , , . The Veda and other Shaastras do not at all sanction animal sacrifice; the practice of offering oblations to the manes of departed ancestors is an invention of priests, because it is


opposed to the Vedic and Shaastric teachings and finds sanction only in the Puraana like the Bhagvat. We have, therefore, nothing to say against the refutation of this doctrine.

  • . Whatever exists cannot cease to exist. The soul is an entity, therefore it can never become non-entity. It is not the soul but the body that is reduced to ashes (when it had been cremated). The soul (after death) passes into another body. Whoever, therefore, enjoys himself by borrowing from others and does not pay back his debts is verily a sinner and will, doubtless, suffer terribly in the next birth.
  • . After leaving the body, the soul is transported to another place and takes on another body; it forgets all about its previous birth and its family, hence it is impossible for it to return to its previous family.
  • . Yes, it is true that the priests have devised these funeral rites from motives of pecuniary gain, but, being opposed to the Vedas, they are condemnable.
  • . It cannot, therefore, be gainsaid that if the Charvakas had read or heard them read, they would never have reviled them by saying, that they had been composed by buffoons, scoundrels, and devils. It is, no doubt, true that commentators like Mahidhar were the real buffoons, scoundrels and devils.


It is on account of their rascality that such teachings have been fathered upon the Vedas. What a pity that the Charvakas, the Abhanakas, the Budhists and the Jainees never cared to study the four Vedaas in original with a learned man. This was the reason why their intellectual vision was blurred and distorted and they began to revile the Vedas in a foolish and nonsensical fashion. There read only the un-authoritative, absolutely wrong, and dirty commentaries by wicked Vama Margis, turned against the Veda and fell deep down in the bottomless pit of ignorance.

  • . No sane man would believe that any people except the Vaama Maagis are capable of sanctioning such practices as the co-habitation of the wife of the master of ceremonies with a horse and poking obscene fun at his daughter. Who but these vile reprobates (i.e., Vama Margis) could have thought out such a filthy, incorrect exposition quite at variance with the Vedic text?


It is much to be deplored that the Charvakas, etc., took to a thoughtless vilification of the Vedas. They ought to have made some use at least of their sense. But they were greatly to be pitied because they did not possess enough knowledge to enable them to sift truth from falsehood, to champion the cause of truth and denounce error.

  • . Flesh-eating is not all enjoined by the Veda, it is only the Vama Margi commentators who have perverted the Vedic texts to yield this meaning, they verily deserve to be called demons in human shape. The Vama Margi commentators and those, who have thoughtlessly reviled the Vedas without having properly studied them or picked up any reliable information about them, will doubtless suffer for having committed this sin.


To tell the truth, all those, who have opposed the Vedas in the past, do so now, or will do the same in future, being steeped in dense ignorance, suffer great pain and misery instead of happiness. It is, therefore, the duty of all men to mould their conduct according to the teachings of the Vedas.

The Vama Margis, in order to gain their selfish end – which was to be free to resort to wicked practices such as the use of flesh and spirituous liquors, and adultery with impunity – invented their creed – which finds no sanction in the Shaastras – in the name of the Vedas, and thus brought them into disrepute.

The Charvakas, the Buddhists and the Jainees began to revile the Vedas when they saw that that the professed believers in these scriptures followed such wicked modes of conduct. The founded a new religion which is atheistic and anti-Vedic. Had the Charvakas, etc., read the originals, they would never have been misled by false commentaries into forsaking the Vedic religion. They are very much to be pitied. When ruin is at hand, understanding is warped and perverted.


The doctrinal differences between the Charvaka and allied faiths.

We shall now point out the doctrinal differences between the Charvaka and allied faiths. They are alike in most respects.

  • The Charvakas believe that the soul comes into being simultaneously with the body and ceases to exist as soon as the body is dissolved.
  • They do not believe in metempsychosis, nor in a future life.
  • The reject all kinds of evidence except that of direct cognition.


The etymological meaning of the word Charvaka is a person who is clever in speech and is extremely fond of wrangling.

On the other hand, the Buddhists and the Jainees believe in the four kinds of evidence, such as direct cognition, the immortality of the soul, metempsychosis, the future life and emancipation. These are the main differences between the Charvakas on one hand and the Buddhists and the Jainees on the other.

The points of agreement are following:-

. Atheism.

. Reviling God and His Word – the Veda.

. Malicious antagonism against other religions.

. Belief in the efficacy of six acts to be described later on.

. Disbelief in the first cause.


We have briefly explained the doctrines of the Charvakas.

Buddhism. Back to contents

Now, we shall briefly discuss Buddhism. The Buddhists believe that there is an “inseparable relation between cause and effect, i.e., “the cause invariably suggests the effect and the effect the cause. In this mental process Inference follows Direct cognition. Without the help of the Inferential mode of reasoning the affairs of the world cannot be satisfactorily carried on.” The Buddhism, therefore, attaches special importance to Inference and, therefore, constitutes a system of belief different from that of the Charvakas.

The following are the different forms of Buddhism:-

. Madhyamika.

. Yogachara.

. Sautrantika.

. Vaibhashika.


Etymologically the word Buddha (Buddhist) means ‘one who acts in accordance with the dictates of reasoning’ that is one who accepts reasoning as the supreme and final authority.

  • Madhyamika. – It teaches that all is nought, i.e., all things originally proceeded from nought and will ultimately resolved into nought. Whatever we perceive continues to exist only so long as our perceptive faculties.


are at work. When they cease to act, the objects of perception recede into naught. For example, no pitcher was inn existence before it was made, it ceases to exist after it was broken. It seems to exist when it is an object of perception on our part, but when our consciousness is concentrated on other objects it passes out of its range (and therefore ceases to exist). Hence naught is the sole entity.

  • Yogachara teaches that nothing exists outside human consciousness, i.e., all objects seem to exist in the mind. For example, the knowledge of the existence of the pitcher resides in the soul (consciousness), that is why a man calls a particular object by the name of pitcher. If this delusion had not previously existed in consciousness, how would he have clothed it in words?
  • Sautrantika teaches that the existence of objects of the universe is mainly inferred. There is nothing that can be wholly known by direct cognition. It only affords the data but complete perception is arrived at by means of inference only.
  • Vaibhashika teaches that when a thing is known by direct cognition, no mental images of the outside objects are formed in consciousness. For example, when one says, “Here is a blue pitcher,” he means that the blue substance in the form of a pitcher appears to exist outside his consciousness.


Although the founder of the (Buddhistic) faith was one – Buddha, yet on account of intellectual differences among his disciples it came to have four forms. Take an example. When the shades of the evening close in, a rake meets his inamorata, while a good and learned man busies himself with the performance of righteous acts such as truthfulness. Thus at one and the same time two different persons act differently; each acting according to his understanding.

Of the four forms, the Madhyamika teaches that all perception is of a transient nature, i.e., each individual state of consciousness being of momentary duration, the perception of a thing at one moment differs from what it was a moment before. All knowledge is, therefore, transient.

The Yogachar form (of Buddhism) teaches that all enjoyment results in pain, because gratification of desires does not bring one

contentment. When one desire is satisfied, a new one takes its place (and thus peace of mind is never secured).

The Sautrantika form (of Buddhism) teaches that all things are known by their Lakshanas,* just as the cow is known by its distinctive Lakshanas and the horse by its won distinctive Lakshanas. Lakshanas always reside in objects of which they are attributes.

Vaibhashika form teaches that naught is the sole entity. In this matter there is an agreement between the Madhyamika and Vaibhashika forms. Hence, there are many antagonistic forms of belief among the Buddhists. The chief of them are these four.

  1. ~ If all be naught, the knower of naught can never be naught, for if he also be naught be cannot (being himself naught) know naught. It is, therefore, clear that (even from the Buddhistic point of view) there must be two entities – the knower who perceives the naught and the thing known – the naught.

As regards the Yogachara form of belief according to which nothing exists outside consciousness, it may be said that even big objects like a mountain must be believed to exists in the seat of consciousness. But this is absurd, because it is incapable of holding a mountain. The mountain, therefore, exists outside consciousness and a perception of this object is formed in consciousness – the soul.

The Sautrantika form (of Buddhism) teaches that nothing is known by direct cognition** (all knowledge is gained by inference).(We say in reply that) if it be so, the declaration of belief and the existence of the person making it must be held to be the result of inference. This being the case, it would not be logically right to say, “This is pitcher.” It rather ought to be said, “This is part of the pitcher,: but the name pitcher cannot be applied to a part to a part of it, it is applicable to all the constituent parts of the pitcher taken as one object.

“This is a pitcher” is a proposition which can only be made by one who has gained knowledge by direct cognition and not by inference, because the whole pervades its constituent parts, and, therefore, as soon as the whole is perceived by direct cognition, all its constituent parts may be said to have been


* A Lakshana is that by means of which an object is known. Attributes are also lakshanas but the two terms do not coincide in extension.-Tr. **In inferential reasoning we proceed from the part to the whole, from particulars to generals, from example to rules, etc. It is by direct cognition alone that the knowledge of an object as a whole is gained all at once.-Tr.

individually perceived in the same manner. In other words, the pitcher is perceived as composed of constituent parts.

The Vaibhashikites are not right in holding that when a thing is known by direct cognition, no mental images of the outside objects are formed in consciousness. for, direct cognition is impossible unless there be the perception of an object and a knower. Although the object of perception is outside consciousness, yet perception is impossible, unless a mental image of the outside object is formed in consciousness.

. An examination of the four schools of Buddhism.

We now proceed to examine other doctrines of the aforesaid four schools of Buddhism.

. If all perception be of a transient character, there should be not recollection of past events, but the fact is that we do recollect what we had seen or heard in the past, hence this belief in the momentary character of perception is erroneous.

. It is not right to say that in this world there is nothing but sorrow and misery, and there is absolutely no happiness, even as one can conceive of the night only in relation to the day, and vice versa.

. It is wrong to believe that lakshana always resides in the object (of which it is a lakshana) sometimes it does, and at others it does not). Take for example, light is always perceived by the eye and, therefore, the latter is the lakshana of the former, while light is the lakshya (i.e., that which is known by means of lakshana). But the eye – the lakshana is distinct from light, the lakshaya.


This proposition can also be demonstrated by taking the relation between the color of the pitcher and the eye as an illustration. [Now we offer an illustration to show, that a lakshana may also reside n the lakshayas.] The power of exciting olfactory impulses is a lakshana of Prithivi. It resides in Prithvi and can never be separated from it. It is, therefore, clear that lakshanas do not necessarily reside in their lakshayas.

. The belief about the naught being the sole entity has already been examined and refuted.


The Jainees believe in the same tirathankaras (perfect beings or incarnations) as the Buddhists. Both these religions are, therefore, identical.

They hold that the four kinds of beliefs stated above constitute the means towards the attainment of freedom from all (worldly) desires which leads to Nirvana, or extinction (of the soul). This is their salvation. They teach their pupils the path of Yogachara and also that whatever falls from the lips of one’s preceptor is worthy of belief and that the beginningless intellect, being clouded by passions and desires, appears to assume different forms.

The five mundane forms of Consciousness:-

. Perception of objects, such as color by the senses such as eyes, constitutes Rupa Skandha.

. Knowledge of the activity of the thinking faculty constitutes Vijnana Skandha.

. Sensations of pleasure or pain – the result of Rupa Skandha and Vijnana Skandha – constitute Vedana Skandha.

. The belief in the relation of the words, such as cow, with the objects signified by them constitutes Sanjna Skandha.

. Different kinds of Klesha (affliction) such as inordinate love and hatred, or upaklesha (minor kinds of affliction) such as hunger and thirst, ardent passion, negligence, vanity, virtuous and sinful acts – the result of Vedana Skandha – constitute Sanskara Skandha.


The Buddhists hold that one should realize that the whole world is full of sorrow and pain, it is a vale of tears. With this belief one should exert himself so as to be freed from (the troubles of) this world. This constitutes the highest form of salvation according to the Charvakas. The Buddhists also believe in the Inferential mode of reasoning and deny the existence of the soul. One of their scriptures says:-

“It is the duty of the Buddhists to believe in one who understands all about the Lords of the worlds, otherwise known as Tirathankaras such as Buddha, who possessed of perfect knowledge and has renounced the world and attained the blessed state of

beatitude in this life, who preaches all things separately and has been described minutely and in different ways.”

“One should also believe in the teachings (with regard ot naught, etc.) of different gurus (preceptors) which have a clear and deep significance and have briefly been described before openly or covertly.”

“The Dwadashayatanapuja (or the worship of twelve places) alone can lead to salvation. Let a Buddhist, therefore, collect all kinds of material for offering this kind of worship and build twelve places and worship them in the proper manner. Why should he worship anything else?”

“The Buddhistic Swaddashayatanapuja consists in showing respect to the five organs of sensation, such as ears, eyes, nose, mouth, and the organ of touch, five organs of action such as those of speech, locomotion, excretion and reproduction, the principle of attention and the principle of discernment by giving them unlimited license. This the Buddhistic faith.”

  1. ~ Had there been nothing in this world but pain and sorrow no living soul would have had inclination for anything in this world; but it is our daily experience that the souls do desire for the objects for this world, hence it cannot be true that in the whole universe there is nothing but pain and sorrow. Both happiness and misery are to be found in this world.

If the Buddhists really believe in the above doctrine, why do they attend to the health of their bodies, and for this purpose take food and drink and follow the laws of health and in case of sickness take medicine, etc.? Why do they believe that these things are conducive to one’s happiness? If they believe that these things are conducive to one’s happiness? If they answer that they certainly do these things but at the same time believe that they lead to misery and pain, it can never be true

because the soul takes to what is conducive to its happiness and shuns what entails misery and suffering. Practice of virtue, acquisition of knowledge and wisdom, association with the good and the like undoubtedly are conducive to man’s happiness. Now wise man can ever assert that these result in pain and sorrow. It is Buddhists alone who hold such a belief. As regards the five skandhas (given above), they are not exhaustive, since if one were to classify skandhas like that, one does not know where he would end. They believe that the Tirathankaras were the teachers and lords of the world, while they refuse to believe in the Eternal, Supreme Spirit who is the Lord of lords.

Now, we should like to know who was the teacher of those Tirthankaras. If they answer that they evolved knowledge out of their own minds, it cannot be right, because no effect can come into existence without a cause. Besides, if what they assert be true, why don’t the Buddhists in our day become learned, without studying with others or hearing what they teach and associating with the learned men? Such being the case, their assertion, which is altogether groundless and opposed to reason, is as valueless a the mutterings of a patient suffering from delirium due to high fever. If, a negation of all that exists be the belief of the Buddhists, it can never be valid since that which exists can never cease to exist, though it can be converted into its subtle causal form – the elementary matter from which the whole universe has proceeded. Hence, this statement (of the Buddhists) is also erroneous.

If they believe that it is only through the acquisition of wealth and other worldly possessions that the above-mentioned Swadashayatanapuja (worship of the twelve* places), which leads to salvation, can be offered, why don’t they also worship the ten Paranas – nervauric forces and the soul (which is eleventh)?

If the worship of the senses and the mind (i.e., becoming a slave to them) is held to be the means of attaining, what difference is there, then, between the Buddhists and the sensualists? When the Buddhists did not escape being slaves to the senses, how could they ever attain salvation? People who are slaves to their senses can never have an idea of what salvation really is. What a wonderful progress have hey (i.e., the Buddhists) made in ignorance? They have really no equal in this respect. It is certain that this is the result of

* These twelve places represent the ten organs of sense and, action and the manas – the principle of attention and the principle of discernment.-Tr.

their opposing the Veda and God. First they imagined that in the whole world there was nothing but sorrow and suffering and then they formulated this doctrine of Dwadashayatanapuja consist in worshipping objects which are outside the world? If this mode of worship could lead to salvation, we should think a man, with closed eyes, could as well find diamonds.

These people have come to believe in such stupid things by rejecting the Veda and God. Even now if they seek happiness, they should lean on the Veda and God andthereby realize the true aim of human life.

A description of the Buddhist religion by the Vivekavilasa.

The book called Vivekavilasa thus describes the Buddha religion:-

  • . There are four first principles recognized as articles of faith by the Buddhists, viz.:-

. Sugatadeva, otherwise known as Buddha, is the Lord worthy of homage.

. The universe is transient in nature.

. All men and women should endeavor to be good.

. All should study the science of tatwas or true principles.

  • . “Let a man first understand that this world is a vale of tears, it is , then, that he can make any progress. Here follow the successive steps of this (progress).”
  • . “There is nothing but sorrow and suffering in this world. Let a man realize that there are five Skandhas or mundane forms of consciousness which are as follows:-

. Rupa Skandha

. Vijnana Skandha

. Vedana Skandha

. Sanskara Skandha.


  • . The five organs of sense and their five objects, the principle of attention, the principle of discernment are the twelve Ayatanas (seats) of dharma (righteousness).
  • . The springing up of passions, such as love and hatred, in the heart of man is called Samudaya. The soul, and its nature (and attributes) constitute Akhya which, again, gives rise to Samudaya.”
  • . “All impressions are of a transient nature; cessation of desires is the path of Buddhists and the resolution of the soul into nothing constitutes (their) salvation.”
  • . “The Buddhists believe in only two kinds of evidence – Direct Cognition and Inference. Vaibhashika, Sautrantika. Yogachara and Madhyamika.
  • . “Vaibhashika holds that all objects, whose knowledge exists in our consciousness, have an objective existence, because a perfect man (i.e., a Buddhist) cannot believe in the existence of what is not present in his consciousness; while Sautrantika holds that all objects have only a subjective existence, they do not exist in the outside world.”
  • . Yogachara believes that the reasoning faculty has a form, while Madhyamika believes in the existence of the ideas of objects exist (in the outside world).”


  • . “All the four kinds of Buddhists believe that salvation consists in the cessation of love and the like passions in (human) consciousness.”
  • . To use deer skin ( as a seat) and water-gourd )for carrying water), shave the head, beard, and moustache, etc., wear garments made of bark, eat before : A.M., avoid seclusion and wear re-colored clothes constitute the fashion of the Buddhistic mendicants.”


  1. ~
  • . If Sugatadeva, otherwise called Buddha, alone is the deva or Lord of the Buddhists (we should like to know) who was his teacher?
  • . If the world is transient in nature, one on seeing an object again after a long time should not be able to recollect that it is the same as he had seen before, nor should that object have been there, no one, hence would have been able to remember it. If the Buddhists really believe in the doctrine that the world is transient, their salvation will also be of momentary duration.
  • . If all objects that are perceived be possessed of consciousness, even inert substances should possess consciousness and conscious exertion. Now how could that which is perceptible to the senses be nothing?
  • . If the intellect possesses a form, it should be visible. If the outside world exist only our consciousness and has no objective reality, it can never be true, since there can be no perception without the existence of objects whose percepts are formed in our consciousness.
  • . If the cessation of passions and desires constitutes salvation, sushupti (dreamless sleep) should also be regarded as salvation, but such a belief opposed to the dictates of knowledge is not worthy of acceptance.


We have very briefly discussed some of the doctrinal points and beliefs of the Buddhists. All enlightened and thoughtful men after going through this (description of their beliefs, etc.) will know

how much learning the writers of the Buddhistic scriptures possessed and what kind of religion Buddhist is. The Jainees also share these beliefs.

Now we shall mainly discuss the Jain religion.

The belief in four substrata.

It is written in the Prakarnaratnakara, Part , called Nyaychakrasara, that the Buddhists believe in five substrata (which are renewable in different ages) viz:-

. Akasha – a subtle form of matter, something like ether.

. Time.

. The soul.

. Pudgala – material atoms.


  1. ~ The belief of the Buddhists with regard to the substrata being new in each age is quite erroneous, as Akasha, time, the soul and atoms can never be new or old, since they are beginningless and imperishable on account of being factors in the causation (of the universe). How can then such terms as new and old be applicable to them.

The belief in six substrata .

The Jainees believe in six substrata which are as follows:-

. Dharma.

. Adharma.

. Akasha.

. Pudgala – material atoms.

. The soul.

. Time.


They also hold that out these six, time is not an astikaya (a substratum), it is only supposed to be a substratum but it is not really so.

  • . Dharma is the substratum, which exists in the soul and Pudgala – material atoms – (in which changes are brought about by changes in motion), and becomes the emans of sustaining motion. It is to be found in countless places, worlds and in an unlimited measure.
  • . Adharma is that substratum which is the means of maintaining rest in the soul and the material atom in which changes have been wrought by rest.
  • . Akasha is that omnipresent substratum which is the support of all souls and material atoms and in which they move about and their ingress and egress take place.
  • . Pudgala (primordial matter) is that substratum which is the cause (of the universe); it is also invisible, eternal and simple. It is known by its effects such as taste, color and smell, and is subject to development and disintegration.
  • . TheSoul (the soul) is that substratum which is the seat of consciousness, and is of service in acquiring knowledge and


is affected by countless changes (wrought in its environments). It is the doer (of acts) and reaper (of fruits).

  • Time (Kala) is that which is indicative of the above-mentioned five substrata being near or far, new or old and in which all the present events take place.


  1. ~ The belief of the Jainees (in the existence of the above-mentioned six substrata) is also untenable, since Dharma (righteousness) Adharma (unrighteousness) are not substrata but attributes (of the soul), hence they have no separate existence from the soul. it would have been alright, if they had believed in (four substrata viz.), Akasha, atoms, the soul, and time.

The Vaisheshika Shaastra teaches that there are nine substrata, viz., Prithvi, Apa, Teja, Vayau, Akasha*, time, space, the soul (human or Divine) and the manas. This teaching alone is the right one, because these mine distinct substrata have been ascertained (by the philosophers). It is sheer prejudice on the part of the Buddhists to believe in one conscious entity – the soul – and refuse to believe in the other – God.

The seven Bhangas of the Buddhists and the Jainees.

The seven Bhangas or Periphrases and Syadvada** of the Buddhist and Jainees are as follows:-

  • . To affirm the existence of an object constitutes the first Bhanga. For example, when we say “The pot exists,” we affirm its existence and negative its non-existence.
  • . To affirm the non-existence of an object constitutes the second Bhanga. For example, when we say “The pot does not exist,” we negative its existence.
  • . To affirm the existence of an object but to deny its being different from what it is not constitutes the third Bhanga. For example, when we say, “The pot exists but it is not a


* These terms have already been explained in the rd chapter of this book.-Tr. **Syadvada is an assertion of probability (Philosophy), it also means a form of Scepticism.

(piece of) cloth.” We affirm the existence of the pot and deny its being a (piece) of cloth. This is quite distinct from the first two Bhangas.

  • . To affirm the existence of an object and deny its existence if looked upon as a second object of the dame kind constitutes the fifth Bhanga. For example, it is wrong to call a pot a (piece of) cloth. It is right to affirm ghatship* (i.e., the fact of its being a pot) of a ghat (pot) and wrong to affirm potship* [i.e., the fact of its being a (piece of) cloth.
  • . To affirm, that it is not right to call an object what it is not, and that whatever it is and that it is, it is right to speak of its as such, constitutes the sixth Bhanga. For example, whatever is not a pot should not be spoken of as a pot, and whatever is a pot is so and should be spoken of us as such.
  • . To affirm that it is desirable to speak of another (object) such as a pot, constitutes the seventh Bhanga.



  • . “To affirm that the soul is, but does not exist in the dead, inert objects is called the first Bhanga.
  • . To affirm that the soul does not exist in the dead, inert matter constitutes the second Bhanga.
  • . (To affirm that) the soul is indescribable constitutes the third Bhanga.
  • . To affirm that when the soul is embodied, it becomes manifest, but when it leaves the body, it remains non-manifest constitutes the fourth Bhanga.
  • .To affirm that the soul is but is indescribable constitutes the fifth Bhanga.



<* I owe the reader an apology for coining these terms but I am constrained to do so.-Tr

  • . To affirm that the soul not being cognizable by the senses and is not visible constitutes the sixth Bhanga.
  • . To affirm that the soul is, because its existence can be inferred, and at the same time it is not because it is not visible, that it is not unchangeable, on the other hand it changes every moment, and that it cannot be said of it that after being something constitutes the seventh Bhanga.


In like manner there are eternal and non-eternal Saptabhangas (seven periphrases). Saptabhangas can be spoken of every object by virtue of its special characteristics and common characteristics, properties and changes (taking place in it).

This is the Saptabhangi and syadvada philosophy of the Buddhists and the Jainees.

  1. ~ All the above could be expressed by the use of the terms Anyonyabhava* (or reciprocal negation of identity), Sadharmya (similitude) and Vaiddharma (Dissimilitude). To discard such easy expressions and concoct circumlocutory methods of expressing thought could have no object other than that of ensnaring the ignorant.

Now mark! The soul as a soulless object does not exist, nor does the soul-less object exist as a soul-possessing. The fact of the mere existence of the soul and the dead, inert matter constitutes their similitude, while the fact of one being possessed of consciousness and the other devoid of it constitutes their dissimilitude, in other words consciousness exists in the soul but inertness does not. In like manner, their Saptabhangas and Syadvada become easily intelligible by reflecting a little on the similarities and dissimilarities between the characteristics (of different objects).

*It is one of the different forms of non-existence described in Chapter.-Tr

Why should then such circumlocutory and absurd expressions be conocted?

Bith the Buddhists and the Jainees equally believe in saptabhanga and syadvada, though there are some minor points on which they are divided.

Discussion on the Jain religion.

. The Jainees believe in “two principal entities only, viz., one possessed of consciousness, and the other devoid of consciousness; Viveka consists in distinguishing one from the other. A Viveki is one who accepts what is worthy of being accepted and rejects what is worthy ob being rejected.”

. “It is best to reject that senseless religion which teaches that there is a Maker of the Universe, free from passions and desires, Who created the world, and to embrace (the Jain religion which teaches that) the souls is possessed of the highest light and can be realized through (the practice of )Yoga.”

They do not believe in any other conscious entity – God – besides the soul. the Buddhists and the Jainees hold that there is no Eternal, Perfect God. Raja Shiva Prasad writes in his book called the Itihas Timirnashak that they have got two names – Jain and Boudddha (Buddhist). These two terms are synonymous. But some of the Buddhists are Vama Margis and eat meat and drink spirituous liquors.

The Jainees differ from them. Mahavira and Gautama Gandharas (lords of hosts) are called Buddhas by the Buddhists, while they have been named Ganthara and Kinavara by the Jainees. Raja Shiva Prashad whose forefathers have been Jaiinees for generations together writes in their Chapter of his book called Itihas Timirnashak that Jina lived altogether about , years before Swami Shankarcharya.

The Buddhist or the Jain religion prevailed in the whole of Bharatavarsha (India). He then adds the following footnote. “By the term Bauddha (Buddhist religion) we mean that anti-Vedic religion which prevailed in all India from the time of Gandhar Mahavir, or Gautama Swami to that of Swami Shankar and was believed in by the Emperors Ashoka and Samprati. The Jain religion cannot but be included in it. The words Kina from which the word Jain is

derived and Buddha – from which the word Bauddha (Buddhist) is derived – are both synonymous. The dictionary gives the same meaning of both these words. Both (the Jainees and the Buddhists) believe in Gautama. Besides, Shakyamuni Gautama Buddha is often called Mahavira in the ancient books, such as Dipavansha, of the Buddhists.

it is clear then that in his time at any rate both these religions were one and the same. The foreigners (Europeans) have in their books called them by the name of Buddhists, it is only for the reason that we have not used the term Jainees for the followers of Gautama and have instead called them Bauddha (Buddhists).”

The Amarkosha* says the same thing.:-

“He is called Sarvajna Sugata Buddha, dharmaraja, Tahtagata Samantabhadra, Merajit, Lokajite, (and) Jina, etc.” AMARKOSHA : :. . . Is it not clear even now that Baudha and Jina, or Bauddha (Buddhist) and Jainee, are one and the same?

The ignorant Jainees neither know anything about their own religion nor that of others. Being blinded by prejudice they simply talk nonsense, but those who are learned among them know very well that the word Buddha is synonymous with Jina and Baudha (Buddhist) with Jainee. There is not the least doubt about is.

. Denial of the existence of God.

The Jainees hold that soul itself becomes God, their Thirthankaras having attained salvation become God. They do not believe in an eternal God.


* It is the name of a big Sanskrit lexicon. It was written by Amar Sing who professed Jain religion.-Tr.


Sarvajna (Omniscient), Vitaraga (free from passions of love,, etc.)Arhan (worthy of homage),Kevali (saved), Tirthankrit (sanctified) and Jina (victorious) are the six names of the gods of the atheists (Jainees and Buddhists).

Chandrasuri thus describes the nature (and attributes) of the Supreme Deity in his book called the Aptanishchayalankara:- Q. –

. “Verily He that is free from such evils as passions of love, etc., worthy of being worshipped in the three worlds, rightly expounds all branches of knowledge is Omniscient and Adorable is the Supreme God.”


Trautatitas have written to the same effect:-

. “There is no Omniscient, Eternal God demonstrable by ocular evidence, since we do not see one at the present time. In the absence of ocular proof there, can be no inferential evidence, because the inferential proof of an object can only be available after direct perception of a part of it.”

. “In the absence of direct perception and inference, testimony or verbal authority also cannot be available in order to prove the existence of an Eternal, Immortal, Omniscient Supreme Spirit. These three proofs being unavailable, Arthavada (praise and dispraise), Prakriti (or life-sketch) and Itihasa (history) can be of not good.”

. “Like bahubrihi* compound the existence of the Invisible Supreme cannot be demonstrated. Without hearing about God from the preachers, the reiteration of His nature, attributes, etc., is impossible.”


* It is one of the principal kinds of compounds in Sanskrit. In it, two or more nouns in opposition to each other are compounded, the attributive member (whether a noun or an adjective) being placed first and made to qualify another substantive, and neither of the two members separately, but the sense of the whole compound, qualifies that substantive – The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary by V. S. Apte, M.A.

. Proof of the existence of God.

Besides, one that is first possessed of such faults as passions of love, etc., and then later on becomes free from them, cannot be God, because when the causes, whose operation helps the soul to free itself from the bondage of evils (such as passions of love, etc.,) cease to act, their effect – the salvation – will come to an end. One that is possessed of finite power and finite knowledge can never be Omnipresent and Omniscient.

Since the soul is by nature circumscribed and possessed of a finite nature, and finite attributes and activity, it can never expound perfectly all the different branches of knowledge, hence your Tirthankaras can never become God.

. Do you only believe in what is perceptible to the senses, and not in what is otherwise? Just as color cannot be perceived by ears, nor sound by eyes; in like manner, the Eternal Supreme Spirit is not perceptible to the senses. He can only be seen by a pure soul through the purity of heart, acquisition of knowledge and the practice of yoga. Just as one cannot reap the advantages of knowledge without acquiring it, likewise the Supreme Spirit cannot be seen without the practice of yoga and gaining the highest knowledge.

Moreover, just as the earth is made directly cognizable by observing its properties, such as form, etc., which are inseparably related to it similarly we become directly cognizant of God by observing the wonderful design of this world. Again, when we are inclined to commit a sin, feelings of fear, shame and hesitation arise in our soul. nor, these feelings are given rise to by the Omniscient Supreme Spirit. We, thus become directly cognizant of the presence of God.

. The evidence of direct cognition as well as that of Inference being thus available, the evidence of Testimony in support of the Eternal, Beginningles, Omniscient God is also valid. All these

proofs being available it cannot but be right to praise his powers and attributes, because the nature, attributes and characteristics of an eternal substance are also eternal, hence, there is nothing to prevent us from glorifying the Eternal Supreme Spirit.

. Jus as no human work can be done without the doer, likewise, this great master-piece – the universe – could not possibly have come into existence without a Maker. Such being the case, even an idiot cannot doubt His existence. On hearing about God from preachers, it also becomes easy to reiterate what one has heard.

Hence, it is wrong on the part of the Jainees to deny the existence of God on the ground that such proofs as direct cognition, etc., are wanting.

. Denial of the Vedas as the eternal revelation.

. “It cannot be said of an eternal Shaastraa that it is create, because how could a non-eternal and, therefore, unreliable book correctly explain an Omniscient God?”

. “If the existence of God, is proved on the authority of His word, it comes to this that the truth of an eternal revelation rest on the authority of an Eternal God, while the existence of an eternal God is proved on the authority of His Eternal Word. This is an argument in a circle.”*

. “When you hold the Veda to be true, because it is the Word of an Omniscient God, hoe can you, then, prove the existence of God on the authority of that very Veda? In order to prove that God exists and the Veda is His Word, you will have to look for some other authority. Hence there will be no finality in authority.**


* Literally it would mean that they, i.e., God and the Veda will be subject to anyonyashraya dosha, i.e., the charge of being dependent on each other or arguing in a circle.-Tr. ** In Sanskrit philosophy it is called anavastha dosha and is regarded as one of the faults of reasoning. It means absence of finality or conclusion, or an endless series of statements or causes and effects.-Tr.


. Response to the denial of the Vedas as the eternal revelation.

  1. ~ We (believers in the Veda) hold that God, His nature, attributes and actions are eternal. Eternal and beginningless substances cannot be subject to anyonyashraya dosha, i.e., the charge of being dependent on each other for authority. Just as an effect is known by its cause an vice versa, and the nature and properties of a cause reside permanently in its effect, while those of an effect in its cause; in like manner, God and His infinite attributes, such a knowledge, etc., being eternal, the Veda which is God’s Word, cannot be charged with anavastha dosha (absence of finality in authority).

You believe your tirthankaras to be God. Now, this can never be true, because unless they had parents, their bodies could not be formed. How could they have, then, practiced austerities and attained knowledge and salvation? What is the results of combination must have a beginning, since combination presupposes separate existence (of the constituent elements).

Hence you should believe in an Eternal Creator of the world. However great siddha* a man may be, he can never perfectly understand the construction of the human body. Besides, when a siddha passes into the condition of dreamless sleep, he does not remain conscious of any thing. Again, when a man is afflicted with (physical or mental suffering, his knowledge also diminishes.

no one but Jainees with warped intellects could believe an entity which is possessed of finite power and is circumscribed as God. If you say that those tirthankaras were born of their parents, whose children were their parents and so on. There will thus be an absence of finality.


Now we give here question** set forth, in part II of the Prakarna Ratnakar on theism and atheism, with our answers:-

  1. – Nothing happens in this world as the result of the Will of God. Whatever happens in this world as the result of the Will of God. Whatever happens is the result of deeds.

* A siddha is one who has attained the highest state of perfection possible to a man.-Tr. ** These have been approved of, and published by many a well-known Jainee.

  1. ~ If everything is the result of deeds, who is the doer of deeds? If you answer that the soul is the doer (of deeds) we ask who created the organs such as ears with which the soul does deeds? If you answer that they are beginningless and it is in their nature to come into being, we rejoin that what is beginningless can never cease to exist, hence salvation will be impossible.

If you say that like Pragabhavavat (that kind of non-existence which did not exist before it came into being) it has no beginning but has an end, all will be freed of the necessity of doing deeds without any effort on their part. If there were no God, (the giver of the fruits of their deeds to souls) no soul will ever, of its own free-will, suffer punishment for its sins, just as burglars and other criminals do not voluntarily suffer punishment for their crimes such as burglary, it is the law that compels them to do so; in like manner, it is God Who makes the soul reap the fruits of its actions, – God or bad, otherwise all order will be lost; in other words, one soul will do deeds while the other will reap the fruits thereof.

  1. – God is actionless, because of He did any deeds He would have to reap the fruits thereof. Hence you should also believe like us in the perfect beings who have attained salvation and are actionless.
  2. ~ God is not actionless, on the other hand, He is active. Why is He not active when He is a Conscious Being? When He is active, He cannot be actionless. No enlightened man can believer in your fictitious God who is not other than your tirthankaras – human souls who have attained the state of salvation, since whoever becomes God through the operation of certain causes would become non-eternal and dependent on causes etc.

Such a God was a mere human soul before he attained God-head and then, through some cause or another, he became God, some day he will again become a soul as it can never get rid of its own nature. It has been a soul for an infinite number of years and will remain so eternally. Hence it is right to believe in the Eternal, Self-existent God.

Now mark! The soul at the present time does acts – virtuous or sinful – and reaps the fruits thereof – pleasure or pain, but God does not. Had God not been active, He would not have been able to create the world. If you believe acts to be beginningless but perishable like pragabhvavat, they will not stand in intimate, inseparable relation to the soul, and if this be the cause, they will be sanyogaja (the

result of union*) and hence perishable. If you believe that the souls in the state of emancipation are actionless, (we should like to know) if they are possessed of consciousness or not. If you answer in the affirmative, then it is clear that they do possess mental activity, but if you deny them consciousness (we ask) do they, then. Become dead, inert like stones in the state of emancipation, lie in one place and remain idle? If you say yes, you salvation is no salvation at all but darkness and bondage.

  1. – God is not All-pervading, because if He be so, all objects could be possessed of consciousness, and men should not be divided into four Classes, viz., Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra some of which are higher than others. The same God pervading all there should be no inequality among human beings.
  2. ~ The ‘pervader’ and the pervaded are not one and the same; on the other hand, one that is pervaded is localized, whiles the pervader is present in all places, just as ether pervades all, while the earth and other objects such as a pot and a piece of cloth are localized, but the ether and the earth are not one; in like manner, God and the Universe are not one. Just as ether pervades all objects but they do not become conscious (like God).

Just as a learned man and an ignorant man, a righteous man and an unrighteous man are not equal, in like manner, on account of differences in their qualities, such as knowledge, in actions such as truthfulness in speech, and in disposition, such as gentleness (Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras and outcast are regarded unequal). The duties and qualifications of the four Classes, have already been dealt with, (Vide Chapter ).

. The act of creating of first human beings without parents

  1. – If God be the author of creation what is, then, the use of parents?
  2. ~ Males and females created by God in the beginning of creation were not the result of sexual congress. This is called aishwari shrishti; but He is not the Authorof Jaivi Srishti (i.e., creation which is the result of sexual union). God cannot do what is the work of the soul. God has created trees, fruits,

* i.e. not inherent in or inseparably related to the soul but united to it in other words, they are a sort of accretion.-Tr.

medicinal herbs and cereals, etc.; if man would not take cereals, etc., thrash and grind them and make them into bread and eat it, will God do these things in his place? The soul could not even exist if it did not do its work. Hence it rests with God to create (human) bodies in the beginning of Creation (but after He has done so) it becomes the work of man to procreate children, etc.

. Why did God get Himself involved in the troubles and worries of the world?

  1. – Why did God get Himself involved in the troubles and worries of the world, when He is Eternal, Beginningless, Conscious, All-Blissful and All-knowledge? Even an ordinary man would not give up his pleasures and take to what entails pain and suffering, why should God have done such a thing?
  2. ~ The Supreme Spirit is never involved in troubles and worries of the world, nor does He ever give up His Blissful state, since he that he that is circumscribed is involved in pain and ignorance but not one who is All-pervading. Who but the Eternal, Conscious, All-Blissful and Omniscient Supreme Spriti could create the world.

The soul does not possess the power of creating the world nor does inert matter possess the power to mold itself, hence it is the Supreme Spirit alone Who creates the world ad also remains in blissful state. Just as God has created this world out of the material atoms, likewise it is He who has ordained that children should be born of their parents, – their efficient cause.

  1. – Why did give up the bliss of Emancipation and bother Himself with the creation, sustenance and dissolution of the universe?
  2. ~ God is Ever-free and Eternal. He does not act like your Tirthankaras who lived in one place and were in bondage before they were emancipated. He that possesses an infinite nature, infinite powers, infinite attributes, infinite activity does not become subject to bondage by creating, sustaining and dissolving this little – compared to God – world.

Bondage and emancipation are correlated. Bondage has reference to Emancipation and vice versa. How could emancipation be predicted of Him Who was never in bondage. It is the circumscribed soul that becomes subject to bondage and emancipation. The Infinite, All-pervading, Omnipresent God does not become subject to bondage or emancipation, dependent upon particular causes. That Supreme Spirit is, therefore, called Ever-free.

  1. – The soul can reap the fruits of its deeds without the instrumentality of a higher power even as intoxicants such as

Indian hemp (Cannabis Indica) inebriates a man without any extrinsic aid. Hence, God is not the giver of fruits (of deeds).

  1. ~ Just as a dacoit or a burglar does not voluntarily go to jail, nor does (a homicide) of his free-will, mount the gallows it is the king by whom those sentences are executed.

Likewise God justly punishes the soul for its sins in accordance with the laws ordained by Him because no soul wants to suffer punishment for its evil deeds. Hence the necessity of a Just Ruler of the Universe is established.

  1. – There is not one God in the universe, all the emancipated souls become God.
  2. ~ This assertion is altogether absured, because the soul, being emancipated after having been in bondage, must necessarily become subject to bondage again, because it is not free by nature. Your twenty-four Tirthankaras were in bondage before they were emancipated, hence they will necessarily become subject to bondage again. If there are many gods, don’t they quarrel and wrangle with each other just as men do here?

. Did the universe came into existence by itself?

  1. -O Idiot! There is no Maker of this world. The Universe has come into existence by itself.
  2. ~ This is a great blunder of Jainees. Can an act ever be done without a doer? Can an effect ever come into being without any effort on the part of the doer? Has anyone ever seen wheat being ground into flour and flour made into bread without the agency of man and the bread going without any effort on their part down the throats of the Jainees?

Cotton is never see n to be transformed except through the instrumentality of man, into thread and clothes such as a coat, a dhoti,* a handkerchief, a jacket, a turban in the cotton fields before it is sent into towns? When such is not the case, how could this multifarious world with its wonderful construction, come into being without a Maker?

If you, through sheer prejudice, hold on to the belief that the universe came into being without the instrumentality of a higher power, you ought to prove to us by ocular demonstration that the above-mentioned articles, such as clothes, come into existence without the agency of man. When you can’t do it, how can a sensible man, then, ever believe in your most unwarrantable statements.


* Clothing covering the lower half of the body (male).

  1. – Is God Virakta (one who has renounced all pleasure) or Mohita (one who is attached to worldly objects)? If HE be Virakta why did He bother himself about creating this world? But if He be Mohita, He could not possess the power to create the world.
  2. ~ Neither Vairagya (Renunciation) nor Moha (infatuation) can be predicated of God, because He that is all-pervading can neither accept nor renounce anything. There is nothing higher than God, nor is there anything that is unattainable to Him, hence He cannot be attached to anything. Renunciation and infatuation can be predicated of the soul and not of God.
  3. – Should you hold that God created the world and gives souls the fruits of their deeds, He would be involved in the manifold affairs of this world and will consequently be afflicted with misery.
  4. ~ When a righteous, and learned judge of this world, who discharges manifold duties and awards men just fruits of their deeds, does not get involved in his affairs nor is afflicted with miser, why should the Great God, possessed of Infinite powers, be involved in the affairs of this world, and afflicted with misery?

You, through your ignorance, seem to think that God is also like you or one of your Tirthankaras. Now, this is the result of your lack of knowledge. Should you desire to rid yourself of your ignorance and the like evils you should depend on the Veda and other Shaastraas for guidance. Oh, why do you doubt and stumble?

. Discussion of the Scriptural aphorisms of the Jain religion.

Now we shall show, on the authority of their (scriptural) aphorisms, what the beliefs of the Jainees with regard to the universe are. We shall briefly give the meaning of the Sutras (Scriptural aphorisms) and then discuss them in order to show how far they are right and how far wrong.

“This world has no beginning nor an end. Neither it was ever created, nor will it ever perish; in other words, this world has never been created by anyone.” Ratnasara Part: , .

In the above-mentioned discussion on theism and atheism it has been stated. O, idiot! There is no creator of the world. It was never made, nor will it ever perish.” (A discussion beteen Mahavira and Gautama)

  1. ~ That which is the result of combination (of different elements) can never be beginningless or endless. An effect must have a beginning as well as an end. All objects of this world are the result of the combination of their constituent elements, and are subject to creation and dissolution, why is not this world, then, subject to creation and dissolution, had your Tirthankaras possessed correct knowledge, they would not have written such impossible things (in their books).

You are as ignorant as the founders of your faith were. A man who believes what you Jainees say can never know the true nature of things. Why can’t you believe that which is clearly the result of the combination of its constituent elements is subject to creation and dissolution? It is clear, then, that the teacher or the founders of the Jain religion were not acquainted with he sciences of Geography and Astronomy, nor do the Jainees, at the present moment, possess any knowledge of these subjects, other wise how could they have believed in, and taught, the under-mentioned incredible things.

Mark! According to the Jainees, even the earth is the body of a soul: they also believe in such creatures whose bodies are made of water. No man could ever believe in such things.

Now, her are a few samples of the false teachings of their Tirthankaras whom the Jainees believe to be possessed of correct knowledge and the state of God-head.

. Time or age of creation.

Time has been described in the Ratnasarabhaga [The Jainees believe this book to be authoritative. It was printed and published at the Jain prabhakar Press, Benares, by Nanak Chand Jati, on the th April, A.D.] on thus:- Samya is called Sukshmakala (smallest period of time).

Asankhyata Samyas =Avati , , , avalis =Muhurtta. Muhurittas =Divasa (day). Divasas = Paksha (fortnight). Pakshas = Masa (month) Masas = Varsha (year).

[,,x,,+,x,,] Varshas= Purva. Asankhyata Purvas = Palyopamakala.

Now, as to the exposition of the meaning of the word Asankhyata.

Let a pit, square in shape, each side of which is four Kisas* ling and the same in depth be dug, let it be filled with pieces of the hairs of the body of juguli men in the following manner:- The hair of a juguli man is , , times finer than that of an ordinary man of our days, in other words, , hairs of a juguli man make one hair of an ordinary man.

Now, take the hair of a juguli man about one finger’s breadth and length and divide it into parts and then repeat this process seven times and you get altogether ,, pieces. Fill the above-described pit with such pieces of hair. Then get one piece of hair out of the pit in years, when all the pieces of hair have been removed in this way and the pit is emptied, the time occupied by this process is still Sankhyata (not Asankhyata).

When each of those pieces in again divided into Asankhyata pieces and the pit is again filled with such pieces of hair so compactly that even if the army of an Emperor of the whole earth were to pass over the pit, it should not make any impressions on it. Then let each piece of hair be taken out once in one hundred years, when that pit is thus emptied, the period covered by the whole process is called purva,. Such Asankhyata Purvas make one Palyopamakals. ,, x ,, Palyopamakals = Sagaropama kala. ,, x ,, Sagaropawakals = Utsarpani. Utsarpani+ Avasarpani = Kala Chakrat Kala (or one cycle of time). Ananta Kalachakras = pudgala paravrita. Ananta Kala is that which is beyond the calculation of time given in the Jain Scriptures and has been exemplified by nine illustrations. Such Ananta Pudgala paravritas have passed since the soul has been wondering about.

Now, will you, mathematicians be able to calculate the time given in the Jain books, and will you be able to believe it to be correct? The Tirthankaras of the Jainees had studied a novel kind of mathematics, such are the teachers and followers of the Jain faith. Their ignorance is unfathomable. We give here a few more specimens of their dense ignorance.


* mile = and three quarter Kosa. ‘n some parts of India miles = kosa. -Tr.

In the Ratnasarabhaga, on , begins what is called the essence of the Jain Scriptures written by their Tirthankaras from Rishabhdeva to Mahavira who are in number.

. The bodies of plants and creatures.

On of the same book it is written that the clay and stones, which are different forms of earth, should be regarded as Prithvi Kayu creatures. The bodies of such creatures are the minutest part of a finger’s breadth, on other words, they are very small. Their age is , years at the most.

There are countless souls in one plant. These are called ordinary plants. Bulbous roots, roots, etc., and Anantakyay, etc., are the souls of ordinary plants. Their age is Anta muhurtta, but this muhurtta is the Jain Muhurtta that has been described above. The simple plant s one which possesses only one sense, (i.e., of touch) and only one soul. the body of such a soul measures , yojanas in length. [According to the believers in the Puraanas, yojana = kosas but, according to the Jainees, yojana – , kosas.] Its age is, at the most , years. (Ratnasarbharga ).

Now, we come to the souls which possess a body with two senses, i.e. one body and the other mouth, such as a conch-shell and a louse. Their physical bodies measure, at the most, kosas in length and their age, at the most, is years. The writer has made a mistake here. A creature with such a big body should have a longer duration of life.

Lice with bodies kosas long will surely be found on the bodies of the Jainees alone and they alone must have seen them,. Other people could never be so lucky as they.

Their scorpions, bugs and flies have bodies yojana long. (Ratnasarbhaga o) Their age, at the most, is months. We are sure no one besides the Jainees has ever seen a scorpion miles long. Scorpions and flies miles long are to found according to the Jain faith alone. Such scorpions and flies must be surely found in the houses of Jainees alone and they alone in the whole world must have seen them. Should one of such scorpions sting a Jainee, it is hard to imagine how he would suffer.

The watery creatures such as fish have bodies , yojanas. One yojana being equal to , kosas, the body of a water creature must be ,, kosas long. Their age is ,, Purva varshas. None but the Jainees could eve have seen such big creatures. The bodies of quadrupeds, such as elephants, range between and losas in length and their age is , years. No one but he Jainees could ever have seen them,

and it is they alone who could believe in their existence. No sensible man could believe in such things.

The mammals that live in water have bodies , yojanas or ,, kosas long and their age is ,, years. (Ratnasarabhaga ). The founders of the Jain faith alone must have seen such animals with such huge bodies in their dreams. Now are these not huge lies? These things are so utterly incredible.

. Measurements of the earth.

Now, we come to the measurements of the earth:- On this crooked planet there are Asankhyata lands and Asankhyata oceans. By the term Asankhyata is here meant the period covered by and half Sagaropamkala. On this earth Jambudwipa is in the midst of all islands. Its area is , yojanas or ,,, kosas. This island is surrounded on all sides by the salt sea. Its are is , yojanas or ,,, kosas. Next to it is the ocean called Kalodadhis; its area is ,,, kosas. Further back is Pushkaravarta island. Its interior is divided into zones. One-half of it is occupied by men. Further than this there are countless oceans and islands in which crawling creatures live. (Ratnasarbhaga ).

In the Jambu island there are continents:- . Himavanta. . Airanyavanta. . Harivarsha. . Ramyaka. . Devakru. . Uttarkuru.

  1. ~ Geographer please! Have you made a mistake in taking measurements of the earth or the Jainees? Will you please correct the Jainees of it be their mistake or correct yourselves if you have made a mistake. Anyhow settle this little matter between yourselves. A little reflection will show that the writers of the Jain scriptures and their disciples were quite ignorant of Geography, Astronomy, and Mathematics.Had they been conversant with these braches of knowledge, why would they have concocted such cock-and-bull stories? Now wonder! Such people believe the universe to be uncreated and deny the existence of God.

The Jainees do not let learned men of other faiths have their books to read, because the books they believe to have been written by their reliable Tirthankaras are full of such things as are opposed to the dictum of knowledge. They do not let other people see them, lest some one might expose their absurdities. No one, besides the

Jainees, who possesses a grain of sense can ever believe in such yarns. They have introduced all these absurdities, in order to prove that the world is beginningless, but is altogether wrong.

It is true though that the material cause of the world (called prakriti) is beginningless, because those paramanus – the minutest particles of matter which cannot be further divided by any means are the basic principles and are uncreated, but they do not possess any power for ordered formation and disintegration. The paramanus are simple entities. They are separate from each other and inert by nature. They cannot combine with each other in an ordered manner, hence it is imperative that there should be a Conscious Being to combine them who should also be Omniscient.

It is the work of the Beginningless, Eternal, Conscious Supreme Spirit to regulate the sun and the earth and other planets. The physical world, in which combination (of different elements) and a special design are to be seen, can never beginningless.

Should you believe the effect to be beginningless, it will have no cause; in other words, it will be both an effect and its own cause and, therefore, atmashrayi. But this can never be true since a man cannot stand on his own shoulders, nor can one become his own father or son. Hence the necessity of a Maker of the Universe is clearly demonstrated.

. If God is the Maker, who is His Maker?

  1. – If God be held the Maker of the universe, Who is His Maker?
  2. ~There can be no Maker of the (first) Maker, the Cause of the (firsts) Cause. It is only because the first Maker or the first Cause exists that (the world – ) and effect – comes into being. That of which combination (with others) or separation (from them) cannot be predicated and which is the cause of the first combination or disintegration can never have another maker or cause.

This subject has been fully discussed in the th chapter of this book. The reader is advised to consult that Chapter for further information. How can the Jainees understand the abstruse Science of Cosmogony when they do not even properly understand simple and easy things?

The belief of the Jainees with regard to the world being beginningless and endless, to formation in each substratum being also beginningless and endless, and to attribute each substratum being also endless which is recorded in the Prakaranratnakar is quite untenable, because attributes and other characteristics that are finite must have an end. Even if by the world endless you

mean countless, you cannot be right. It may be alright from the point of view of the soul but cannot be true from that of God.

The belief that because each object of the world is distinct from all objects and cannot be classified with any other objects, possesses the power of producing an effect, of being transformed into its causal forms and, because there are an endless number of objects in the world, the number of forms will be infinite, and the power residing in objects will also be infinite betrays the ignorance (of the Jainees).

How could a paramanu (an atom) contain endless unclassified formations when it ahs limits? In like manner it is childish to believe that an object can possess endless formations in its attributes, because when a space has limits how can its contents be endless. There are many other cock-and-bull stories told in the scriptures of the Jainees.

Now, we shall set forth (and discuss) the belief of the Jainees with regard to Jiva (the soul) and ajiva (inert matter). In the Jindatsuri it is written:- “What possesses consciousness is Jiva (the soul) and that which is devoid of it is ajiva (dead, inert matter). Good and righteous atoms constitute virtue and evil atoms constitute vice.”

  1. ~ The soul and inert matter have, of course, been rightly defined, but it is wrong to say that the inert atoms are righteous or vicious, for, the power of doing the right and wrong can exist only in a conscious entity. Mark! All inert substances are incapable of doing deeds – good or bad.

The doctrine of the immortality of the human spirit is sound, but it is foolish to believe that the human soul, whose capacities are limited, can, when emancipated, attain to a state of omniscience, for whatsoever is finite can never attain infinite power.

The Jainees believe that, the universe, the soul, the actions of the soul, and the concatenation of births, and deaths are eternally co-existent. Here, too, it seems, that Tirthankaras of the Jainees have fallen into a error, for it is impossible that the created universe (i.e., the world which is the product of the combination of elements), the natural process called into being after creation, the actions of men and metempsychosis should be eternal.

If it be so, how can the Jainees believe consistently that the concatenation of existences and the necessity of doing deeds may come to an end? Whatever is eternal can have no end. If it be said that eternal substances are subject to destruction, all eternal substances believed in by the Jainees will naturally be

thought to be capable of existing only for a limited period .if, however, the word eternal be taken to mean “that which can never come to an end” it is impossible not to believe that human actions and metempsychosis will exist for ever.

This being the case, it is clear that salvation, being dependent on a particular cause, viz., the temporary cessation of actions, will last only for that limited period and not forever. Moreover, on account of the relation between the doer and his actions being perpetual, actions will never cease to exist. The conclusion subverts the Jain beliefs that the Tirthankaras have attained salvation forever and that the ordinary Jainees can also attain to that state.

. Is emancipation of the soul eternal?

  1. – If a rice-grain be divested of its outer covering or be brought in contact with fire, the seed cannot grow; even so a soul once emancipated (from physical bondage) can never again become subject to births and deaths.
  2. ~ The relation between the soul and the necessity of doing deeds does not resemble that which subsists between a rice-grain and its outer covering. It is one of inseparable inherence. The soul is eternal and from eternity action and the soul’s power of doing deeds are intimately related. If it be believed that the human spirit is devoid of the power of doing deeds it will naturally follow that all souls are inert like stones and , therefore, incapable of enjoying the bliss which falls to the share of emancipated spirits.

If the soul is emancipated from the bondage of actions, the power of doing which has inhered in the soul from eternity, ti will surely after attaining salvation which (according to the Jain belief) is perpetual, again become subject to metempsychosis, for it is possible that a soul being freed from the necessity of doing deeds – which are the means of salvation – can attain to the state of final beatitude, it is equally possible for it to revert from perpetual salvation to the bondage (of births and deaths).

An effect which is due to the operation of certain causes can never be perpetual. If, however, you believe that salvation is attainable without the adoption of the means of attaining it, what then is the difficulty in believing the soul’s (reversion to the state of) bondage is possible without its being under the necessity of doing deeds,

A piece of cloth which has become dirty on account of contact with dirt is cleaned by washing, and can again become dirty; similarly, the soul is placed under the necessity of doing deeds when it has committed sins like dissimulation and been dominated by malice, etc. If you believe that the soul is purified

by the attainment of true knowledge, by keeping good company and by righteous conduct and is contaminated if the causes which go to contaminate it are in operation, you cannot escape the conclusion that souls in a state of emancipation can revert to the bondage (of births and deaths) and vice versa, for it adventitious circumstances can remove dirt, they can, likewise, bring on pollution. The sound belief, therefore, is that the soul has been subject to metempsychosis and emancipation since creation and is not so eternal.

. Is the soul always pure or somewhat contaminated?

  1. – The soul was never pure. It is always (somewhat) contaminated.
  2. ~ If it was never quite pure, it cannot ever be so. It is possible to remove by washing the dirt that may have soiled a sheet originally clean, but it is impossible to remove its naturally white color. The dir can soil the sheet again, even if it has been once washed; similarly, the emancipated soul can be branded once again with the taint of sin.

. The belief of reincarnation without the existence of God.

  1. – It is foolish to believe in the existence of God, for a man can take on a new body as a result of deeds done in the past birth.
  2. ~ If it be in the power of the soul to take on a new body without Divine instrumentality, it is inconceivable that it will, of its own free will, be re-incarnated amidst happy environments.

The plea that the soul is subject to the fruits of its deeds will not hold good, for even a thief does not go to jail voluntarily, nor does (a homicide) mount the gallows of his own free will. It is the king by whose authority these sentences are executed. You cannot, therefore, but believe that God exists in order to cause the soul to take on new bodily forms and to reward or punish it according to its (good or evil) deeds.

  1. – Even as drinking causes intoxication (without extrinsic aid) so does the soul receive the fruits of its deeds without the instrumentality of any other power.
  2. ~ This is absurd! Inveterate drunkards do not fell the effects of intoxication as do those who are not addicted to the

vice. If your contention be right, those that are sinners of the deepest dye should be punished less severely than those who are not given much to sinful practices.

  1. – Each man is punished according to his natural instincts.
  2. ~ If the punishment is due to natural instincts, it cannot be predicated of it that it has begun or ended (for it must always endure). (It is, therefore, clear that the award of reward or punishment is not due to adventitious causes) even as accidental causes soil the clean sheet and their removal restores to it its former purity.
  3. – combination is essential to the production of a result, just as clarified butter cannot be produced unless milk and some acid thing are combined. Why not, then, believe that (reward or punishment) is the result of the union of the soul with an action?
  4. ~ Milk and an acid thing are combined through the instrumentality of a third entity. There ought, therefore, be a third entity – God – to establish a relationship between the souls and the fruits of the deeds done by it, for inert substances can never, of themselves, combine methodically and the soul, being possessed of finite power, cannot of itself, receive the fruits of its actions. This shows that, without the operation of laws made by God, the system of rewards and punishment according to deeds done by men cannot work.

Q.- Whoever is freed from the necessity of doing deeds (attains salvation and) becomes God.

  1. ~ The power of doing actions, being eternally inherent in the soul, the latter can never be deprived of it.
  2. – The necessity of doing deeds is not beginningless.
  3. ~ If it is so, there must have been a time when the soul was incapable of doing deeds, and thus the capacity of doing actions was planted in an entity which did not possess it. Why cannot, then emancipated souls be made to perform deeds? The relation between the doer and the deeds is of an inseparable character and can never cease. What we have written on this subject in the th Chapter is, therefore, worthy of belief. The soul can never be equal to God, no matter how extensive its knowledge and power

are, these latter being necessarily limited. Of course, by force of psyschic practices, the soul can secure the development of its knowledge to the greatest possible extent. The arhats among the Jainees believe that, like the body, the soul also possesses the property of extension. This is absurd, for, if it be so, the soul of a little insect could not be contained in the body of an elephant and vice versa.

The soul is a fine entity which can reside even in an atom. Its powers, however, are linked with nervauric and electric forces and the nerves, etc., and it is, therefore, kept informed of all that goes on in the body. If healthy influences operate, it becomes virtuous, and if unhealthy influences operate, it becomes sinful. The following verses clearly set forth the Jain beliefs:-

()O man! Only by following that Dharma pain and caused by the concatenation of births and deaths and pursuit of mundane aims is destroyed which has been expounded by a deified Jain saint (lit. one who has subdued his passions). Do thou believe that only Jain preceptors are good teachers and real Devas; Brahma, Harihar and in fact all except the Jain saints, the first of whom was named Rishabhdeva and the last Mahavir, are not worthy of adoration. Whoever worships them with the desire of securing his well-being is a dupe.” The upshot of all this is that no good accrues if one does not follow the good Jain faith and its good saints and follows the bad religion and the so-called saints of others.

  1. ~ Learned men should mark how stupid the Jain scriptures are.

The regeneration of people groveling in misery is only possible if they follow the system of conduct expounded by Jin who is the God of gods, glorious deified saint, possessed of all knowledge, the expounder of scriptures, pure, free from the stain of vice -, possessed of the qualities of mercy and clemency.

The religion taught by Harihar is not such as can promote the well-being of the world. The four virtues expounded by the supreme saints are exalted. They are:-

() Mercy, () forgiveness, () possession of correct knowledge, () good company and good conduct.

  1. ~ If mercy is not shown to all mankind, it is of no use. The same may be said of forgiveness. It is not good to remain ignorant while boasting of knowledge, to grope in the dark while talking of good company and to mistake starvation (fasting) for good conduct.

The following has been said in praise of the Jain religion:- “O man! Even if thou canst not perform austerities, reform thy conduct, read the aphorisms, meditate upon the teachings of the Prakaran Ratnakar and other scriptures and bestow charity upon the deserving, do thou believe that the arhat (the Jain saint) alone is the God to whom and to other true preceptors, worship is due from thee and the Jain religion is the best. This is a beautiful belief which will be the cause of your regeneration.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part, Sutra

. The true meaning of Mercy and compassion.

  1. ~Although mercy and forgiveness are good qualities, yet if they be prompted by unreasoning prejudice, mercy becomes equivalent to cruelty and forgiveness becomes as bad as revenge. What we mean to say is that it is not possible to enforce the principle of not causing pain to any living creature on all occasions. Punishing the wicked is, in fact, a act of mercy. If a wicked person be exempted from punishment thousands will suffer at his hands.

This act of (misplaced) mercy will be as much fruitful of mischief as cruelty, and this act of forgiveness will prove as bad as revenge. It is quite true that mercy consists in endeavoring to promote the happiness of all sentient beings and to wean them from sorrow. It does not consist in merely drinking water filtered by means of a piece of cloth or in saving the lives of tiny creatures. This species of mercy is only theoretically believed in by the Jainees; they do not show it in their practical conduct. It is not

an act of true mercy to feed the needy without distinction of of creed and to reverence and serve the learned men professing a religion other than one’s own. If (the teachers of the Jain religion) had the right conception of mercy, they would not have preached as follows:-

“The Jains are strictly prohibited to

. praise a person belonging to another religion or to talk of his good qualities.

. T salute him.

. To talk much to him.

. To talk to him frequently.

. To bestow upon him food and clothes.

. To supply odoriferous substances and flower to enable him to worship his idol.” Vivekasar .

Let the wise consider with what feelings of hatred, malice, and hostility the Jainees are actuated in their relations with those who profess a religion different from theirs. Those who show so little consideration for people who do not belong to their religion surely deserve to be called merciless. It is not a act of very great piety to serve the members of one’s own family. The Jainees may be called members of one great household (fraternity).A person, therefore, who has absolutely no regard for others will not be called merciful by the wise.

In the Vivekasar ( ) it is written that the Jainees murdered Namuchi, the Prime Minister, of the then king of Mathura, because they thought him their enemy and the murderers were purified by the performance of penance. Was not this an act calculated to destroy all feelings of mercy and forgiveness?

People whose malice against those who differ from them in religion is so great that they do not scruple to murder them should rather be termed actively hostile than merciful. The definition of good company, etc., are given in Parmagamansar which is a synopsis of the teachings of the Jain saints.

Right faith, good company, knowledge and good conduct – these four – lead to salvation. Yogdeva has given an exposition of these duties.

Possession of a firm and perfectly sincere faith in what the Jain scriptures teach about the soul and other entities and a love for the Jain religion constitute true faith and good company.

“One must believe in those entities in which Jin believed and no others.”

The wise call a full or a superficial knowledge of the entities believe in by Jain – a knowledge of them as they really exist – “correct knowledge”.

Good conduct is the renouncing of all connection with other religions – which deserve to be denounced.

. Five obligatory duties of the Jains.

Again there are five Bratas (obligatory duties):-

  • Ahinsa – abstention from killing any sentient creature.
  • Sunrita – sweet speech.
  • Asteya – abstention from encroaching upon the rights of others.
  • Brahmacharya – thorough control of the sexual impulses.
  • Aparigraha – renunciation.

Most of these injunctions are sound, such as those relating to abstention from killing and to the he giving up of theft and other evil practices but the behests enjoining hatred and denunciation of other religions are likely to mar the wholesome effect of these sound teachings also.

In the very first aphorism quoted above it is laid down that the religions expounded by Hari Har, etc., cannot help forward the regeneration of the world. The denunciation of a religion, the study of which makes one learned in all sciences and virtuous, is surely a malicious act.

People who extol to the heavens their tirthankars (saints) who teach doctrines which are absolutely opposed to the laws of nature cannot be prompted by wrong-headedness and unreasoning prejudice.

How absurd that a Jainee should be regarded a good man merely because he declares that the Jain religion is a true religion, even though he be not possessed of good conduct, of knowledge, and of habits of benevolence, while philanthropic and virtuous people who are non-Jainees should be regarded bad men, merely because they do not profess a belief in the Jain religion.

We wonder what to say about such people, except that they are possessed of a defective and childish understanding. The only conclusion that can be drawn from all this is that their teachers were not deeply learned men. They were, on the contrary, selfish. If they had not denounced all religions, no body would have been seduced from the right path and led to believe their false teachings and they would surely have been baffled in their object. Mark! It can be proved that the Jain faith is calculated to ruin people (morally and spiritually) and the Vedic Religion tends to the redemption of this world and that Hari Har. Etc., were the true devas, while Rishabhdeva, etc., were

the false devas. How would the Jainees like being told this by other people?

. Further errors of the Jain faith.

We should now expose further the errors of the Jain teachers.

“Whoever disobeys the behests of the Jain saints by deviating from the path carved out by them and thus falls into moral turpitude commits a sin and is involved in misery. It is very difficult to follow duties like – laid down by the Lord of Jain (Tirthankaras) therefore, it is best to always act in such a way that his behests may not be violated.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :-.

It is foolish to indulge in self-praise, to extol one’s own religion and to denounce other religions. That alone is worthy of praise which is praised by learned men belonging to another faith. Even thieves praise themselves. Does this prove that thievishness is worthy of praise?

Again, the Jain teachers teach:- “Jus as a ruby, which is embedded in the head of a venomous snake, should not be sought after, even so it behoves the Jainees to shun the company of a non-Jainee, no matter how virtuous and learned he is.” Prakaran Pratnakar, Part :.

How erroneous is this teaching! If the Jain teachers and their disciples had been learned men, the would have (tried to inculcate) a love for the learned. When even their tirthankaras were ignorant, how could they be expected to reverence the learned? Who would not like to take hold of gold even if it be lying in filth or dust? It is clear, therefore, that no sectarians are so much biased, perverse, wrong-headed and ignorant as the Jainees are.

Again, the Jaiin scripture says:- “Let not the Jainees even look at those that are opposed to the Jain religion.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

How stupid this injunction is, the wise can find out for themselves. Theire is no doubt about it that he who preaches the true religion stands in no dread of any body. The Jain teachers know very well that their teachings were absurd and could not stand the test of discussion and, therefore, thought it best to denounce all thus to ensnare fools in their net.

Again, it is taught in the Jain books:- “All religions that are opposed to the Jain faith lead mankind to sin. It is, therefore, best to shun all other faiths and believe in the Jain religion only.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :, .

This show that the Jain religion teaches its followers to hate, denounce and regard with malice all that does not belong to it. It thus makes people wicked. No sectarians are so unreasonable and violent in their hatred of others as are the Jainees. It is the wicked only who denounce all indiscriminately and praise themselves in hyperbolic terms. Discerning men – no matter to what religion they belong – praise the good points in a religion and express disapproval of the weak points therein.

Here is another specimen of Jain teachings:- “The other faiths and their teachers dwindle into insignificance, when compared with the Jain faith, the teachings of the Omniscient Jins and the teachers of the Jainees. It means that the Jain teachers are the true devas and the Jain religion is the true religion; while the teachers of other religions are the false devas and their teachings are false.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part : .

It seems that the Jainees are like the market -women that sell plums – who always trumpet forth that their plums are sweet, even though they be sour, and invariably run down the plums sold by others. The Jain religion teaches that it is a sin for the Jainees to serve people professing other creeds.

We have already stated that, according to the Jainees, it is best to shun even the good and virtuous among the Non-Jainees even as it is advisable not to seek he ruby embedded in the head of as snake.

But Jains have gone a step further in their denunciation of other religions. Say they:- All except the Jain teachers are false teachers and are worse than snakes. It is, therefore, not right to see them, to serve or to associate with them, because snakebite kills a man once only but by association with false teachers belonging to non-Jain religions one becomes subject to a concatenation of births and deaths. O good man! Do thou never stand by the side of a non-Jain teacher because thou wilt court misery, if thou served him even a little.” Prakaran Tranaakar:

Who can possibly be hard-hearted, mistaken, hostile in a greater degree than are the Jainees. Perhaps, the Jain teachers think that if they will not denounce others and praise themselves, no body will serve and respect them. But in reality they are very unfortunate, for so long as they will not associate with, and serve, good and learned men, they will never obtain true knowledge and attain to a right conception of duty. It, therefore, behoves the Jainees to give up their false beliefs and to accept the truths taught by the Veda. In this consists their real well-being.

Again, the Jain saints teach:- “One must always shun company of him who is past all reform, refractory, and skilful in doing evil deeds. Such a person is sure to compass the ruin of his benefactor. The man who seeks to do good to a false teacher (belonging to another religion) seeks his own ruin even as a person who, prompted by compassion, undertakes to

remove the bandage from the eyes of a blindfolded lion is eaten up by the animal. It, is therefore, safest to keep away from a false teacher.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :.

If the Jainees were regarded by others with the same amount of hostility with which the (are taught to) regard all non-Jainees, their lot would become intolerable. If nobody were to do them a good turn, they would grovel in misery and much of hteir work would remain undone. Why do not the Jainees do unto others as they would be done by.

Again, the Jain books teach:- “What a wonder that the more people respect and reverence preachers whose very sight is abhorrent, who are so wicked that they can be purified only by penance, who are deserving of punishment and vicious, who keep with them (with a view to dupe others) three staves which are the symbols of the fourth, Order, who are Sanyasis or Brahmans, the more the true knowledge, possessed by the Jain saints (that are possessed of discernment) is manifested.”Prakaran Ratnakar Part :

Mark! How can it be possible for anybody to be possessed by vindictiveness, hostility and unreasoning prejudices against others in a greater degree than are the Jainees. Other sectarians have also these weaknesses but not the extent to which the Jains have them. Vindictiveness is at the root of all sins. What wonder, then, if some Jainees are wicked!

Again, the Jain teachers say:- “People belonging to non-Jain sects which are composed of thieves do not shun (moral) deterioration even as ignorant people who mix with thieves shake off all fear of their noses being lopped* off (by way of punishment).” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part f: .

A man’s own inner-self is often reflected in his judgment about others. Can it ever be true that the Jain sect alone consists of


* This was the punishment usually awarded to thieves in ancient times.-Tr.

honest men, while other sects are composed of thieves? It is only ignorant persons and those whose intellect has bee perverted on account of association with the wicked that are hostile and vindictive in their treatment of others. There is no religion which enjoins so much hostility towards people belonging to other faiths as does the Jain faith.

Again, the Jain books inculcate:- “In a former aphorism it has been stated that all to belonging to the Jain religion are preachers of falsehood and the Jainees alone are possessed of true knowledge. Whoever, then, helps forward the cause of a religion started by a preacher of false hood is a sinner.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part : .

If the naumi fast observed in the honor of Chamunda, Kalka and Jawala is a sinful act, why are not the Jain fasts like ‘Pajusan’ sinful acts. Their fasts involve much pain. The Jainees are right in denouncing the hopus copus of Vama Margis but there seems to be no reason why they should not denounce the worship of their own goddesses like Shasan and Marut.

It cannot be said in reply that these goddesses do not favor cruelty, for it is recorded about the goddess Shasan that she had taken out the eye of one man and of one goat. Why should not that she-fiend be regarded the real sister of Durga or Kalka. It is the height of foolishness on the art of the Jainees to call their fasts Pachchakkhana virtuous acts and to denounce fast like Naumi. True Vratas (fasts) observed by Jainees and others are not good.

Again, their book say:- “Those who admire prostitutes, mimics and bards, and Brahmans, are in favor of Yajnas and worship false gods and goddesses like Ganesha who should never even be looked at, are themselves sunk in ignorance and mislead others, because they expect those goddesses to gratify all their desires and, therefore, keep away from Jain ascetics.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

It is sheer prejudice on the part of Jainees to call the gods of others false and their own gods true. They denounce the goddess of the Vama Margis but it is strange that they do not call their goddess Shasan cruel. It is recorded about her in the Shardhadin Kritya ( ) that she aimed a blow at a man and took out one of his eyes, because he had taken supper on a night (on which he ought to have fasted). Then she took out the eye of a goat and put it in the empty socket of the man. Just see what is written in the Ratan Sagar (Part , ). The goddess Marut transformed herself into a stone idol to help the wayfarers.

Again, the Jain teachers say:- It would have been very much better if the non-Jainees – the preachers of falsehood – had not been born at all or had not attained growth, even if born.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

Just mark! The Jain religion which has been enjoined by saints and it professed to be based upon mercy enjoins that the death of non-Jainees should be desired. The truth is that the Jainees only talk about mercy (i.e., they do not practice this virtue) and if they do show mercy, it is to tiny creatures and beasts, not to non-Jainee human beings.

Again, it is written in Jain scriptures:- “It is no wonder if man born in a Jain family attains salvation, but is it surprising if one born in a non-salvation, but is it surprising of one born in a non-Jain family and belonging to a false religion attains final beatitude.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part : .

The upshot of this is that only Jainees attain salvation. All who do not accept that religion got to hell. Is there no wicked man among the Jainees or none that deserves to be sent to hell? Do all of them attain salvation? It is sheer madness to assert that. Who but a simpleton can believe in such absurdities.

“It is a good thing to worship Jain idols but worshipping idols of non-Jain is no good. Whoever obeys the commandments of the Jain religion is a philosopher, whoever does not is not so.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

How funny! Are not Jaiin idols like the idols of the Vaishnavites inert and lifeless? Idol-worship is bad – no matter whether that form of worship is Jain, etc., or Vaishnavite. The Jainees call themselves philosophers and do not consider others so. This shows they know nothing of philosophy.

Again, the Jain religion teaches:- “Virtues like mercy and forgiveness taught by God Jin constitute Dhaarma (the true ideal of conduct). The commandments of all other teachers lead to sin.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part : .

How unjust is it to assert that none among the non-Jainees is truthful and virtuous? Should not one respect a non-Jainee, even if he possesses a righteous character. This (i.e., the monopoly of religious conduct) could have been claimed for the Jainees if their bodily make had been different from that of others. The Jainees, in lavishing and unbecoming excessive praise upon their books, their saints and their sayings, excel even hired bards.

Here is anther quotation from the same book:- The increase in the influence and power of gods (i.e., teachers) like Harihar will lead people to hell, the Jainees cannot view this without feelings of horror. When violation of orders promulgated by an earthly sovereign entails upon the offender penalty of death, why will not one who goes against the behests of the Jain God (great teacher) become subject to metempsychosis.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

Look at the Jain’s teacher! Now, their real inner motives have been disclosed – not to speak of the trickery and deceptive practices. They cannot hear the enhancement of the temporal influence of Harihar and his followers. If people belonging to other sects accumulate riches, they are consumed with jealousy. Perhaps, they desire that all the worldly belongings of non-Jainees may be transferred to them and that (their adversaries) may be reduced to poverty.

They have compared the commands of their teachers to those promulgated by a king, because these people are liars and cowards. Ti is absolutely necessary to obey all the commands of a king – even those that conflict with the ideals of truthful conduct. We do not think that there are any people more vindictive and malevolent than the Jainees.

Here is another citation from the same work:- “Only fools are opposed to the Jain religion. Religious preachers, recluses, householders and authors described by the great Jain teacher (Jin) are equal in position to the tirthankaras, noe can equal them.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part : .

How funny! If the Jainees had not been possessed of childlike intellects theyw ould not have pinned their faith to such absurd sayings. These teachers are like the devi monde who take delight in dwelling on their personal charms.

Here is another verse from the same book:- “If does not behove the Jainees to ease paying homage to the great god (Jin), the Jain preacher, and to give up their faith in the doctrines propounded by the former.” Prakaran Ratnakar.

It appears that the Jainees are perverse, ignorant and biased other wise they would never have said so. The truth is that almost all the teachings of the Jain religion are unacceptable. If even a man possessed of a limited understanding has an occasion to learn something about Jain gods, their books and their preachers, he is sure to make up his mind to have nothing to do with them.

Only those that act in accordance with the teachings of Jin deserve to be adored – not those that contravene those teachings. One must follow the Jain preceptors and none others.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

If the Jain teachers had not ensnared ignorant people and driven them before them like dumb cattle, the latter would have been enabled to avail themselves fully of the advantages of life and thus to fit themselves for the attainment of salvation. Would not the Jainees feel aggrieved, if they were addressed as misguided people, liars and preachers of falsehoods? By addressing others in these terms they surely cause them pain. These religious teachers teach many more foolish things like this.

Here is another verse from the Jain literature:- “Let the Jainees never engage in trade and agriculture, even though they risked their lives by obeying this injunction. These occupations lead one to hell.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

It is, indeed strange that the Jainees take to these occupations (in defiance of the behests of their religion) and do not give them up. If they gave them up, they could not support themselves. If all people followed this Jain commandment, the Jainees would get nothing to eat and could not live. It is foolish to preach such absurdities. But the Jain teachers are not much to blame. They

were devoid of learning and had never associated with the learned and , therefore, thoughtlessly wrote down such things.

Here is another verse from the same book: “People that believe scriptures whose teachings are oppose to those of Jain scriptures are extremely wicked. Let no one believe or speak anything against the Jain religion even if by doing that he can gain his end. Let no other religion be accepted even if by so doing some be gained.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

All the Jain teachers, not excepting founder of the religion, have done nothing but indulged in vilification of other religions. Nor is it expected that future Jain teachers will depart from this course. When, a selfish object is to be gained, the Jainees are found willing to enlist as disciples of those who themselves are disciples of others. What then, is the use of indulging in boggodocia like the above. It is a pity that they feel no shame in doing this.

We quote another verse from the same book: “If a man were to say that the Jain ascetics are virtuous and so are others, he would be doomed to pass billions of years in hell and thereafter will be re-born as a despised creature.” Prakaran Ratnakar

How stupid! These enemies of enlightenment have laid down this damning injunction, so that none may dare contradict their teachings. But this is impossible. How can one go on arguing with these people. They think it a pleasing occupation to indulge in misrepresentation and to gain their (selfish) object by denouncing and crying down other religions.

Here is another specimen of their teachings: “Even if a man cannot act up to the precepts of the Jain religion, he crosses the sea of pain and misery if he only believes this to be the only true religion in the world.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

What a nice trap have the Jainees set to attract fools who would like nothing better than to be placed in the way of attaining salvation without having to do (righteous) deeds. We do not think that there exists a religion more idiotic than this.

Mark! What the scriptures of this religion teach: “If a man has only a desire to believe in Jain scriptures and never to pin his faith to non-Jain books he can cross the sea of misery.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :.

These verses have been composed solely with a view to entrap simpletons, for no one can cross the sea of misery in this world, simply by entertaining this desire, and escape suffering pain of evil deeds done in the past birth. If the Jain teachers had not preached such false and foolish notions – notions oppose to the dictates of knowledge -, their followers would have taken to the study of the Vedas and other true Shastras, found out the truth and renounced all belief in the teachings of their foolish books.

Ignorant fools have, however, been completely entrapped. It is possible that some wise, man, who associates with learned men, may snap asunder these chains but a fool can never do that.

Here is another Jain teaching: “Only those people attain happiness and become virtuous that study books on Grammar, Annotations Books containing authoritative expositions and codes of Law written by the Jain teachers – not those who study books written by others.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

Is it righteous conduct to suffer the pangs of (self-imposed) starvation (fasting)? If going without food and drink constitutes righteous conduct there is not reason why people that starve when famine decimates a country or those that starve because they have no means of subsistence should not become sanctified and thus attain righteous ends.

In point of fact neither such people are purified in this way nor are the Jainees. Such people, instead of attaining happiness, suffer pain, for they are consumed by internal heat (which gets no fuel). In reality,

continence, equity and truthfulness in speech constitute various conduct and mendacity and inequity constitute vicious conduct. “Desirable conduct” may be defined as the establishment of living and benevolent relations with all. Going without food and drink – as the Jainees do – has nothing to do with virtue. Whoever accepts the guidance of the Jain aphorisms jumps into a sea of misery, for much of what they teach is false. Only very little of it is based upon truth.

Here is another Jain aphorism: “The Jaine religion is accepted only by those that are possessed of good fortune; in other words, all non-Jains are ill-starred wretches.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :

Is not this statement erroneous and false. Does fortune never smile on non-Jains and does fate never frown upon Jainees? The Jain teachers say that the Jainees should not quarrel among themselves, but, should love one another. This shows that no harm will accrue if they will quarrel with the followers of other religions. This is also foolish, for good men always make it a point to love good men and to reform bad men.

Again, the Jain teachers hold that Brahmans, ascetics, sanyasis and recluses are enemies of the Jain religion. How can the Jainees be said to cultivate the virtues of mercy and forgiveness when they regard all people with feelings of hostility and denounce them. Hostility towards others is inconsistent with forgiveness and mercy. Nothing is calculated to do greater injury to others than this attitude.

The a Jainees are the embodiments of hostility towards others – no other people approach them in this matter,. How would the Jainees take it, if all the tirthankaras from Rishabhdeva to Mahavir were called jealous, vindictive and mendacious, and the Jainees are denounced as people suffering from insanity and their religion were regarded as a hellish faith inculcating venomous doctrines? The reason why the Jainees are suffering from incalculable pain is that they are given to an unreasonable denunciation of other faiths. It would be very much better if they gave up this habit.

Now we quote another aphorism:-

“All true disciples (Jainees) have one God, one teacher, one religion. It is the highest virtue to protect the Jain idols, Jain temples and the property attached thereto and to worship Jain idols.” Prakaran Ratnakar, Part :.

The fact is that idol-worship with all its attendant evils originated with the Jainees and, therefore, the Jain religion is at the root of all fraud.

“All Shravaks (Jain disciples) should first prostrate themselves at the gate of a temple. When he has prostrated himself at the second gate he should say, ‘i am a true disciple’. After prostrating himself at the third gate, he should say to himself, ‘How many have we’ saints.. after prostrating himself at the fourth gate, he should mutter to himself. ‘Of the four principal aims of life salvation takes the foremost rank.

True knowledge is the means of attaining it and is, therefore, called yoga.’ These are the six ways in which a man can be purified of all his sins. They also are said to constitute yoga. ‘We shall realize them.’ At the fifth gate, let him think of prostrating himself before the idol, of presenting offerings to it and of worshipping it in the mind. At the sixth gate he must think of the duty of repeating legends – the nine authoritative legends.”

Further on, in the same book, it is written that at the time of supper the idols of tirthankaras should be worshipped and the temple-door should be worshipped. The ceremony connected with door-worship is very tedious. As regards temple-building, it is written that a man will attain salvation if he gets old temples rebuilt and renovated.

The worshipper is enjoined to sit in the temple in the prescribed manner, to offer his worship with great reverence, to mutter texts like “Salutation to the great God Jin” at the time of bathing the idol and to mutter texts like “offer water, sandal, flowers, incense and lamps” at the time of offering fragrant substances. It is written on of Ratnasar

Bhaga that the Jain priest are not even subject to the authority of a king. On of Ratnasar Bhaga it is written that, by worshipping idols, one becomes immune form sickness and is freed from the principal vices. A man once offered to an idol a flower worth five shells and got in exchange sovereignty of kingdoms. His name was Kumarpal, all these statements are mendacious and are meant only to ensnare fools.

There are many Jainees who worship idols and yet fall ill and by worshipping idols do not obtain the sovereignty of even one acre of land. If the offering of a flower worth shells can secure sovereignty, why do not the Jainees become master of the entire world by offering to their idols many flowers worth shells each. Why do they submit to punishment inflicted by the government of their country.

If idol worship enables one to cross the ocean of misery, what need is there, then, for acquiring true knowledge, good company, and practicing virtue.

On of the Ratnasar it is written that the water of immortality is to be found in the thumb of Gautam and that, by meditating on him one gains the desired end. If it be really so, all the Jainees would become immortal, but, as a matter of fact – they are subject to death. This shows that this story is simply meant to lead fools astray. There is o truth in it.

The verse which they chant at the time of offering worship is written on of the Ratnasar Bhaga. Ti means, “May we worship the (idols of) the Tirthankars – who had completely mastered their passions and offer to them water, sandal, rice, flowers, incense.” This is the reason why we say that idol-worship is originated with the Jainees.

“In a Jain temple one is not dominated by inordinate affection. It enables one to cross the ocean of worldliness.” (vide Vivekdar, )

“Idol worship leads to salvation and by visiting a Jain temple one becomes possessed of admirable qualities. Whoever worships the idols of the Tirthankaras by offering them water and sandal is released from hell and goes to heaven.” (vide Viveksar,s and .

“By worshipping the idol of Rishabhdeva, placed in a Jain temple, one attains righteous ends, wealth, the fulfillment of desires and salvation.” (vide Viveksar, ).

“One who worships Jain idols is freed from all worldly sorrow,” (vide Viveksar, ).

Now, mark! How stupid and foolish are these statements! If it were true that in this way, i.e. (by worshipping idols) one is weaned from sin, ceases to be dominated by inordinate affection, crosses the sea of worldliness, becomes possessed of good qualities is released from hell and goes to heaven, attains righteous ends, wealth, fulfillment of desires, and salvation, and is freed from sorrow, how is it that all the Jainees are not happy and do not become possessed of all the good things of the earth.

On of the same book, it is written that those that have installed Jain idols solve the problem of bread from themselves and their ancestors. On of the same book, it is written that it is a very bad act to worship the idols of Shiva, Vishnu, etc. Their worship leads to hell. Now, it may be asked as to why Jain idols will not lead one to hell, if those of Shiva and Vishnu do so.. If it be said in reply that the Jaine idols are symbolic of renunciation, placidity and are such as confer blessings, the questions arises as to why Jain idols, which are installed in temples costing thousands of pounds, and to which sandal and saffron are offered, should be regarded as symbolic of renunciation, if the idols of Shiva, etc., which are sometimes under the canopy of the heaven cannot be so regarded. If you speak of placidity, all inanimate substances look placid because they cannot move.

  1. – Our idols are good, because they are not adored with clothes ornaments, etc.
  2. ~ It is a beastly act to keep idols representing human beings in a state of primitive nudity exposed to the public view.
  3. – Jus as one’s passions are excited if he looks at the idol of a female, so good qualities will be cultivated if one looks at the idol of saints, Yogis and sadhus.
  4. ~ If you believe that, by looking at a stone idol, you become possessed of good qualities, why do you not also believe that

attributes like inertness belonging to the idol are transferred to you? If you become devoid of intelligence, you will be utterly useless. Again, if you take to idol-worship, instead of keeping company with learned men, you will become greater dunces than you were before. An idol-worshipper falls prey to all the vices which have been enumerated in the th Chapter of this book. Just as the Jainees talk much nonsense about idol-worship, so their maniras also teach many absurdities.

Here is one of them:- “Salutations unto Arthant, salutations unto Sidhas (perfect beings) etc.”

This mantra is said to be holy. It is a mantra which is recited at the time of the initiation of a disciple into the Jain religion and it is said that the chanting of it confers incalculable benefits. In the matter of hyperbolic praise (bestowed) on this mantra) the Jainees have outstripped even the authors of the Puranas and the Tantras and the bards.

In the Shradhadinkritya is written that this mantra is holy and exalted. Among the mantras worthy of meditation of mediation it holds the foremost position. It is the most real of all realities. The Navakar mantra is as helpful for the worldly as a ship is for those that desire to cross the sea. This Navakar is like a ship; Those that do not seek its aid are drowned in the sea of worldliness and those that do are weaned from misery. The mantra alone keeps the soul from suffering pain, weans it from sin and enables it to attain salvation.

It is this which enables one to cross the sea of worldliness, i.e., releases one from pain consequent upon deeds done in many incarnations. At the time of the infliction of eight kinds of tortures like fire nothing is helpful except this mantra. The preceptor who is competent to teach this mantra is as much to be congratulated as the possessor of Vaidura (the prince of rubies), or of unerring weapon of warfare when one is in dread of his enemy. Of the

twelve sacred mantras this navakar mantra is the most secret. It means:-

  • Salutations to all the Tirthankaras.
  • Salutations to all the Jain saints.
  • Salutations to all the Jain teachers.
  • Salutations to all professors of Jain theology.
  • Salutations to all Jain Sadhus that are in this world.

The world Jain does not occur in the text, but we have added it in the translation, because in most Jaine books it is recorded that no non-Jainee is worthy of being saluted.

On of the Tatvaviveh is written that whoever worships stones and wood, thinking them to be God is rewarded well for his pains. Now, if it be really so why do not all the Jainees gain happiness, even though they worship idols? On of the Ratansar Bhaga it is written that by offering worship to the idol of Parasnath one is absolved from sins. On of the Kalp Bhag it is written that lac and thousand temples were repaired. There are many other statements like those which go to prove that idol-worship was originated with the Jainees.

. The evil practices of the Jain Sadhus.


On of the Viveksar it is written that a Jaine sadhu, who was paramour of a prostitute named Kosha, renounced the world and went to heaven. On of the same book it is recorded that Arnak Muni (ascetic) departed from the course of righteousness, misconducted himself for years together in the family of Dutta, the banker, and then went to heaven.

Shalia spirited away Dhandhan Muni, the sonof Shri Krishna, and afterwards became a god. On of the same book it is written that the shravaks (the pain laity) should revere Jain sadhu, even if he only bears the symbols of the Order. These sadhus are worthy of reverence, no matter whether they bear a good character or a bad one. On it is said that that a characterless Jain sadhu is to be much more respected than a sadhu of good character belonging to another persuasion. On it has been said that the Jain laity should serve the Jain Sadhus even if they be characterless,

Reprobates. On it is related that a thief tore his hair, followed the rules of good conduct, adopted a penitent attitude and, in the sixth month after this, he became a perfect man on account of his having attained true knowledge. Now mark! Of what stuff the Jain sadhus and house-holders are made!

According to their religious beliefs, even a rakish sadhu attained to a state of blessedness, while Shri Krishna is believed to have gone to the third hell (vide ). On it is written that Dhanwantri* went to hell. On it is written that eh yogis and other Pauranic sadhus, Wazis (Mohammedan priests), and Mullahs (Muslim holy-men) attain to a lower state on account of their ignorance, even thought they practice austerities and consequently submit to much suffering.

On it is written that of the Vasudevais, viz., Tripriashtha Vasudeva, Daviprishtha Vasudeva, Swayambhudeva Vasudeva, Parushotam Vasudeva, Sinha Purasha Vasudeva, Purushpundrik Vasudeva, Datta Vasudeva, Lakshman Vasudeva and Shri Krishna Vasudeva went to hell in the time of the th, the th, the th, the th, th, the th, and the nd Tirthankaras and the Prati Vasudevas viz., ashvagrivaprati Vasudeva, Tarakaparti Vasudeva, Modakaprati Vasudeva, Madhuprati Vasudeva, Nishambhprati Vasudeva, Baliprati Vasudeva, Prahladprani Vasudeva, Ravanprati Vasudeva, and Jarasindhaprati Vasudeva all went to hell.

In the Kalpa Bhashya it is written that the Tirthankaras of whom the first was Rishabhdeva and the last Mahavir all attained salvation.

Let the wise consider how wrong it is to say that the Jain sadhus, house-holders, and Tirthankaras, many of whom were adulterers, pramours of prostituties, all went to heaven and attained salvation, while might souls like Shri Krishna all went to hell. To tell the truth, a good man ought not to keep company with the Jainees or even look at them, for, if he does keep their company, he will also begin to believe in absurdities.

the company, of such bigoted and biased men leads to evil results. There is, of course, no harm in associating with good people among the Jainees. On of the Viveksar, it is written that not righteous ends can be gained by visiting places of pilgrimage like Hardwar and Kashi (Benares), while the Jain places of pilgrimage like Grinar Palitana and Abu are such that by visiting them we can attain even salvation. The point to be carefully noted is that Jain places of pilgrimage are on land and water just like those of the Shivites, Vasihnavites,


* He was a great sage who is an authority on Medicine and Surgery. He is the Indian Galen. Tr.

etc. It is foolish act to denounce the latter and to hold up the former to admiration.

. The Jain concept of Salvation.


On of the Ratsar it is written, that Mahadeva Trithankar, addressing Gautam said: “There is a place in the higher region called Sidhshilla. It is higher up than heaven and and half millions of leagues long and as many leagues broad. It is leagues in thickness. It is whiter than a necklace of white pearls and cow-milk.

It is situated at the top of the th region. It is more resplendent than gold and clearer than crystal. Higher up is Shivpura where also emancipated souls dwell. There they are not subject to birth and death and enjoy bliss. They do not return to this world and are not required to do deeds.”

This is the Jain conception of salvation. On deep reflection, it appears that the Jainees have fixed upon Sidhshila and Shivpur as abode of perpetual bliss, even as the Pauraniks have fixed upon Vaikunth, Kailash, Golok, Shivpur, etc., the Christians, the fourth sky and the Mohammedans the seventh sky. Whatever is thought to be higher up by the Jainees will be thought to be lower down by people inhabiting certain portions of the globe.

Up and down are not absolute terms. Whatever is higher up for Jainees residing in India is lower down for the Americans and vice versa. Even if Sidhashila be supposed millions of leagues long, the so-called emancipated souls will remain in a state of imprisonment, for the moment they leave the place, they will cease to be in the state of salvation.

It is also natural for the emancipated souls to feel an attachment for the place and a disinclination to go outside it. How can that state be called a state of salvation which involves special attachments, inclinations and disinclinations? The true state of salvation has been described by us in the th chapter. Salvation believed in by the Jainees in like unto a state of imprisonment. In the matter of the true conception of salvation, the Jainees have fallen into an error.

The truth is that the right conception of the state of blessedness cannot be attained without a right understanding of the Veda. Now, we hall relate a few more cock-and-bull stories believe in by the Jains. The following is taken from the Viveksar:- “When Mahavir was born, he bathed with water contained in millions of buckets ( ). King Darsharam went to

Mahavir to pay his respects and displayed some hauteur. To wean him from this, ,,, men of the shape of Indra and ,,,,, Indranis (female figures of the shape of the wife of Indra) appeared on the scene. The sight struck the king dumb with astonishment.”

How many worlds (of the dimensions of our earth) were required to enable the Indras and the Indranis to find a standing place. On of this Shradhadinkritya (Atmaninda Bhawana) the injunction is laid down that wells should not be sunk, nor should tanks be dug out.

Now, if this injunction be followed, it does not appear how people will obtain their water-supply.

  1. – The Jainees do not do this, because they think that if tanks ar dug out, any sentient creatures die and the person at whose expense they are dug out commits sin.
  2. ~ What an idiot you are! If you think of the sin involved in the destruction of tiny creatures, why do you not, likewise, think of the merit to be won by making arrangements for the supply of drinking water to higher animals like men and cows.

On of the Tatwaviveka it is written that a banker names Nandmanikar had a bauli ( a kind of well) sunk in his town. He departed from the right course and was, therefore, afflicted with terrible diseases. After he died, he was reborn as a frog doomed to pass his days in that self-same well.

When he (the frog) saw Mahavir he became conscious of his own self. Mahavir says that he recognized him as his Lord in the previous birth and ran to prostrate himself before him. He was crushed to death by the horse of a shrenik and, on account of this good thought, he became a great God named Dardurank.

On account of his limited knowledge, he thought that Mahavir was there prostrated himself and went back, after displaying his good fortune.

It is an act of folly to regard as very exalted Mahavir who could talk of such absurd things, which are opposed to the dictates of knowledge.

On of Sharadhdinkritya it is written that a Sadhu my possess himself of the clothes on the body of a dead man.

Are not these Sadhus like the Mahabrahmans? Who is to take the ornaments? Perhaps, the survivors keep them with them-

selves on account of their value. Now, what is one to think of such people?

On of the Ratnasar it is written that it is a sin to roast, to use pestle and mortar, to grind and to cook.

Now, is not this an extremely foolish injunction? How can people live if these things be not done? Even the Jains would, in that case, die of suffering.

On of the Ratnasar it is written that the gardener who plants a garden is hundred thousand times a sinner.

How foolish of the composer of this verse not to think that if the gardener was , times a sinner, he was also millions of times a doer of meritorious act because the leaves, fruits, flowers and the shade of trees afforded relief to a countless number of sentient creatures.

On L. of the Tatwaviveka it is written that a Sadhu named Labdhi once entered the house of a prostitute by a mistake and begged for alms in the name of righteousness. The prostitute replied that righteousness had no place in her scheme of life and that she thought only of wealth. On this he scattered and half lacs of mohars in her house.

Now, who would believe in such nonsense except a dunce?

On of the Ratnasar Bhaga it is written that a stone-idol rides a horse and comes to the rescue, whenever and wherever its aid is invoked.

Now why are not the Jainees defended by that idol when they are attacked by thieves or robbers or are in dread of the enemy? Why do they look for redress at the police station.

The following verses have been composed by Jinadattasuri with a view to bring into prominence the good qualities of the Jain:-

  • A yati is one who has conquered his lower self who keeps a Chowri,* begs his bread, keeps his head shaved, wears white


* A kind of brush carried by every Jain Sadhu for sweeping the place he sits on.-Tr.

garments, is given to forgiveness and keeps away from the company of other men.

  • “The Digambar Sadhus are those that do not put on any clothes, pull out their hair, and keep with them a woolen brush for sweeping the floor and eat what they get by way of alms. “Jinarshi Sadhus are those that take their food after the house-holders have partaken of it.”
  • The only difference between the Digambars and Shwetmbars (or Yatisa) is that, according to the latter, women can attain salvation, while, according to the former, they never can.”

Such are the means of salvation believe in by the Jainees. It is generally known that the Jainees pull out their hair. It is also written in their books that five handfuls of hair should be pulled out.

On of the Viveksar Bhag it is written that a person was admitted into the Order of sadhus when he had pulled out five handfuls of his hair; on of the Kalpsutra Bhashya it is written that let the hair of a sadhu be pulled till only as much remains as covers the body of a cow.

In the face of this, how can the Jainees claim that they are merciful. The pulling out of the hair causes great pain, no matter whether the act is done by the candidate himself or by his preceptor. Hinsa consits in giving pain to any sentient creature.

In the Viveksar it is written that in the year Vikram ( A>D) the Dhundias, a sect of the Dhundias) came into being. The Dhundias have not faith in the worship of stone-idols and they always keep a piece of cloth tied to their mouths, except at the time of study and at no other time.

  1. – It is absolutely necessary to tie a piece of cloth to the mouth, for the microscopic creatures that live in the air are killed by the hot breath and, therefore, those that do not tie the piece of

cloth commit a sin (because they are responsible for the death of so many creatures).

  1. ~ This argument is opposed to the dictates of knowledge and the canons of logical reasoning. The soul is eternal and cannot be killed by the hot breath. This what you also believe.
  2. – Of course, the soul does not perish but the hot breath expired by the mouth causes pain to many souls and one who causes pain to others is a sinner. For this reason it is right to tie apiece of cloth round one’s mouth.
  3. ~What you propose to do can never be done. The affairs of the world can never be carried on, without causing pain to some creatures or others. If, according to your faith, the hot air emitted by the mouth causes pain, why do not the bodily movements like walking, sitting, raising hands, or the winking of the eye cause pain. Therefore, by following your line of argument, one cannot but come to the conclusion that to live without causing pain to others is impossible.
  4. – On should try his best to protect creatures. What is to be done of sometimes a man is helpless and cannot do his duty in this matter. The air is full of creatures. If we did not tie a piece of cloth to our mouths a larger number would be killed.
  5. ~ Your statement is foolish, because if the piece of cloth is tied, a greater amount of pain is caused to the creatures concerned, for, when this id done or the mouths remain shut up the air which is to be exhaled up by the mouth, getting no egress, is collected and then forcibly pushes itself at the sides in the first case and out of the nose in the second. The air will, thus, get hotter and will, therefore, according to you, cause greater pain.

Now, just mark! If all the doors of a house or a cell are shut up or screened, its temperature mounts up to a higher degree than it was when they were open. By following your line of argument it is therefore, proved that you cause greater pain to living creatures, for if the mouth is tied the accumulated air, which is pushed out through the nostrils, must needs strike against the living creatures with greater force and inflict great suffering on them.

Take another example. One man sets the fire ablaze by blowing with the mouth, another tries to produce the same result by blowing through a tube. Now, the air in the mouth, being scattered over a greater area strikes the fire with less force in the first case than does the concentrated

air in the tube. The same may be said of the air which is concentrated in the nostrils on account of the mouth being closed. Those therefore, who do not tie the piece of cloth to their mouths are more righteous than those who do. Another disadvantage of this practice is that the letters cannot be properly articulated, enunciated and pronounced. Is it not faulty to utter with a nasal twaning words which ought not to be pronounced like that.

Again, the mouth begins to give forth stench which comes from within (and is not allowed to escape). All the air that comes out is foul. If it is not allowed to go out, it must give out bad smell.

A latrine which is ill-ventilated stinks more than one which is well-ventilated. The Jainees tie their mouths, do not clean their teeth, nor wash their faces, nor bathe, they, therefore, increase disease by emitting stench and thus commit a sin. Whenever there is a great fair, diseases like cholera spread on account of the increase of foulness in the air and decimate the people. if the foulness be less, the diseases do not spread so rapidly.

The Jainees contribute a good deal more to the foulness of the air than other people and are, therefore, greater sinners than those who do not tie the piece of cloth and are particular about cleaning their teeth, washing their faces and bathing and keeping their clothes clean. The latter are much better than the former, even as those that keep away from dirty outcasts* are good men.

The intellect of a Jainee cannot but be obfuscated even as that of a person who keeps company with filthy latrine-sweepers is never illumined. A diseased person who has got a perverted intellect cannot follow the precepts of Dharma. This truth must needs apply to the case of the Jainees.

  1. – The flames of fire burnt in a closed house cannot escape and give pain to creatures outside the house, even so by tying the piece of cloth to the mouth, creatures outside it are not pained. When the fire is burning in front of one and he protects himself by keeping his hand traversely before his face, he does not feel so much the effects of heat. The creatures in the air possess bodies and are, therefore, subject to pain.
  2. ~ This is a childish statement. In the first place, fire cannot be burnt in a house the walls of which possess no chinks and the air inside cannot communicate with the outside air and vice versa. You can see this for yourself. Put a lighted candle in a closed


*Such people as attend to latrines, etc.-Tr.

vessel and it will be extinguished all of a sudden. Just as sentient creatures cannot live so long as they do not momentarily get fresh supplies of air from the atmosphere, so there can be no combustion without air. If the force of a flame be checked at one end, it will escape at the other with greater vigor. If the face is protected by the hand from the effects of heat, the had itself is exposed to it to a greater degree. You, therefore, are not the right point.

  1. – Everybody knows that when a man of an inferior standing desires to whisper something to a man of superior position or draws nearer to him for conversational convenience, he puts over his mouth either a piece of cloth or his own hand, so that his companion may not feel any offensive smell or the spittle be thrown at him. When a man reads aloud from a book particles of saliva do, undoubtedly, soil it. For the reasons explained above, it is highly desirable to tie a piece of cloth over the mouth.
  2. ~ From you statement it may be safely inferred that it is foolish to cover the mouth with the object of affording relief to creatures. When a man is engaged in private conversation with a person of superior standing he covers the mouth with cloth or with hand so that the talk may not be overheard. If it be not so, why is it not covered when the conversation is not of a confidential character? Your mouth and other bodily organs give out an offensive smell, because you do no clean your teeth.

No wonder, then, that your proximity offends the olfactory sense of one who sits by you. The reason why the mouth is covered with the hand or the cloth is other than that stated by you. When something confidential is whispered in the presence of many people and the mouth be not covered, it is very likely that the vibrations of air (being unrestricted in their course) will carry the sound far and wide.

When the talk is carried on at a place where none is present except the speaker and the person spoken to, the mouth is not covered. If the object of covering the mouth is to save the face of man of superior position from being soiled with the particles of spittle (ejected from the mouth of the speaker) it may be concluded that there is no harm if the spittle falls on persons of an inferior rank. In fact, the spittle cannot but reach the person spoken to. Suppose the person talking to you is sitting at a safe distance but the air blows that way, the minute particles of spittle will, of a surety, be carried to his body with the current of air.

It is foolish to thing that contamination of the heat of the exhales air could kill animalcules living in the air or give pain to them; because that case the heat of midsummer would kill them all. It is, therefore, wrong to say that they are killed that way. Your religious belief (as regards tying the cloth) is, therefore, false. If your Tirthankaras had been profoundly learned men, they would not have made such foolish statements.

. Who feels pain?

Again, only those creatures are capable of feeling pain whose thinking faculty is provided with all the sense-organs.

Here is our authority for this statement:- “The soul feels pleasure or pain only when the five organs of sense come in contact with their objects.” SANKHA SHASTRA., -.

Just as a shower of vituperative epithets cannot produce any change in the consciousness if one is deaf; the flitting in front of one of various forms and animals like the snake and the wolf cannot affect him who is blind; odors cannot affect one whose olfactory apparatus is out of order; tactile sensations cannot be felt by one suffering from anesthesia, and sensations of taste cannot be experienced by one who had got no tongue. In like manner these little creatures do not feel pain.

Just Mark! At the time of profound slumber the soul of man does not feel pleasure or pain; for though it is even then present in the body, its connection with the bodily organs is interrupted. When a surgeon puts his patient under chloroform with a view to operate on his diseased organ, the patient is quite insensible to pain; similarly the atmospheric and other (microscopic) animalcules are not sensible to pleasure and pain (because they do not possess the sense-organs). Just as a being who is comatose cannot feel pleasure or pain, so cannot these creatures, because they are always in a state of stupor. Why, then, talk of saving them from pain?

  1. – When all souls are subject to pleasure and pain, why are not theirs so?
  2. ~ Credulous people! tell us why you do not feel pleasure or pain, when you are in the enjoyment of dreamless sleep. The cause of pleasure and pain is evidently the connection (between the soul and the sense-organs). We have already stated that when surgeons amputate limbs, or open bodily cavities of their patients under chloroform, they are not at all sensible to a pain; similarly,

the souls that are in perpetual stupor cannot experience the sensations of pleasure or pain, because they have not the means of doing so.

< those pain inflicting killing sin committing be shall we things, these eat were If them. number infinite an latter creatures many contain former because tubers, roots vegetables, green Mark>

  1. ~ This belief of your has its roots in ignorance. How can it be believed that, by eating vegetables, any creatures are pained or killed? Do you know by direct cognition that they feel. If so, please tell us how we many also attain this knowledge. Neither you know it yourself, nor can you demonstrate it to us. If this knowledge cannot be gained by direct cognition, it is no use appealing to the inferential mode of reasoning, analogy and authority.

Again, as we have explained above, it is a mistake on the part of your tirthankaras to think that souls that are enveloped in great darkness and are in an extreme stupor or coma can experience pleasurable or painful sensations. Your tirthankaras have preached to you doctrines utterly opposed to sound reasoning and dictates of knowledge.

How can an infinite number of creatures reside in an object which is limited as regards extension? When we know that a great root such as a radish is limited in size, how can it be believed that it can hold an infinite number of animalcules. The argument advanced by you is, therefore, foolish.

  1. – You commit a sin in drinking water that has not been heated by fire. You should, like us, drink the water that has been heated.
  2. ~ This is also foolish. When you heat the water, all the animalcules in it must needs die. The particles of their bodies are so thoroughly mixed with water which is being boiled, you in a way drink a decoction of the dead bodies of those tiny creatures.* You are, therefore, very great sinners.

Those that drink water that ahs not been heated commit no sin because when the cold water will be heated in the stomach the animalcules will escape with the hot air which will be exhaled. To speak the truth, neither the one set of people commits a sin nor the other, for the tiny (microscopic) creatures, as has been proved above, are insensible to pleasure and pain.


* The author has here tried to fight the Jainees with their own weapons. It should not be understood that he is against the use of boiled water.-Tr.

  1. – If the fire in the stomach can send up the animalcules, why cannot the heat, applied externally, drive them away?
  2. ~ Of course, they are driven away. But, according to you, animalcules are killed even by the hot exhalations from the mouth, why will they not, then, be killed by the heat of the water or be excessively pained before they go out of their bodies or be completely mixed up with the water. Will you not be greater sinners in that way?
  3. – We never heat water with our own hands, nor do we ask any householder among us to do so. We, therefore, commit no sin.
  4. ~ If you refused to sue boiled water or to drink it, the householder would not heat it (for you), you are, therefore, answerable for the sin. You are, we think, greater sinners than the householders, because if you had asked a particular householder to heat water, it would have been heated only once at a time. Now, because the householders do not know when one of you sadhus will turn up, each one keeps boiled water are, therefore, the chief sinner.

By following the same line of argument, it may be proved that it is you that are chiefly answerable for the sin involved in combustion, in cooking of food and in carrying on agricultural operations and, therefore, deserve to be sent to hell. Being the chief cause of water being heated and the chief preachers of the desirability of drinking boiled water and not using cold unboiled water you are the chief sinners, and those that follow are also sinners.

Again, it cannot be gainsaid that you are engrossed in ignorance. Is it not a sin to take pity upon tiny creatures and to malign and injure non-Jainees? If the doctrines preached by your Tirthankaras are true tell us why (your) God ahs caused so many rivers to flow and created so much water since the beginning of the world. He ought not to have produced even the sun, for, according to your belief, its heat must be causing the death of billions of creatures. When those to whom you ascribe Divine power (i.e., your Tirthankaras) have been eternally present, why did they not, out of their mercy, deprive the sin of its heat and stop the formation of clouds.

We have already proved that it is only the creatures and not those living on green roots and tubers, etc., creatures possessing


* The questioner here is supposed to be the Jain Sadhu as distinguished from a Jain householder.

visible bodies that can experience the feelings of pleasure and pain. Again, it is a source of pain to be always merciful towards all creatures, for if all (these creatures) were, according to your belief, to be re-incarnated as human beings, and even the thieves and robbers among them were not punished, sin would increase fearfully. Hence (true) mercy consists in inflicting condign punishment on the wicked and protecting the righteous.

The reverse of this is a negation of mercy and forgiveness. There are many Jainees who are shopkeepers, tell lies in the course of business, gain money by fraud, and cheat the poor. Why do you not, in you sermons, lay special stress on the desirability of their giving up such wicked practices? Why do you resort to trickery like that of covering the mouth.

When you initiate a new votary (male or female) why do you lay yourself open to the charge of cruelty towards self and others by pulling the hair and compelling the novitiate to fast and thus giving him as well as yourself pain. Why do you not consider it a sin to ride elephants, horses, oxen and camels and so make other people labor for you?

If the ordinary men among you cannot prove to be true what is obviously foolish and nonsensical, even your tirthankaras cannot do it. When you recite portions of your religious books it is clear that, according to your belief, your disciples and yourself kill many creatures. Why should you become the chief factor in the commission of this sin?

We have not treated the subject in detail but is should be clearly understood that creatures in a state of stupor that possess bodies devoid of the power locomotion cannot experience sensations of pleasures and pain.

. The height an age of the Jain tirthankaras (teachers).

Now, we shall comment on few more fatuities taught by the Jain religion. It should be borne in mind that a Dhanush is for the purpose measurement, three and a half times the length of a human hand, the true measure we have already treated. In the Ratnasar, Part ( and ), it is written:- The body of –

The above-named twenty-four were the chief preceptors and teachers of the Jainees, who founded the Jain religion. The Jainees ascribe to them the attributes of God. All of them are believed to have attained salvation. Let the wise consider if it is possible for any man to have so gigantic a body and live so long.

If the globe were inhabited by people of such dimensions, very few would be contained by it. Following the example of the Jainees, the Pauraniks have written of persons who lived for , years and of others again who lived for , years and even for , years. All this is absurd and so is what the Jainees say. Here are few more absurd statements made by the Jain teachers.

o Nagket lifted on his finger a stone as big as a village. – Kalp Bhashya, ).

o Mahavir pressed the earth with his finger. This caused the snake (which supports the earth) to tremble (ibid., ).

o Rice pudding was cooked on the foot of Mahavir but the limb was not burnt. (Ibid., ).

o A camel was made to stand in a small vessel (Ibid., ).

o The dirt on the body should not be removed or rubbed away. (Ranasar, part , ).

o A Jain Sadhu, named Damsar who was beloved of the Tirthankar Mahavir, chanted the aphorism which brings on terrible calamities and a city was set on fire (Viveksar, part , )

o The king must needs be obeyed (Viveksar, part , ).

o A prostitute named Koshar heaped up oil-seeds in a plate and fixed in the heap a needle covered with flowers and danced on it. The food, however, was not pricked by the needle, nor was the heap of oil-seeds scattered (Ibid., ).

o The sage Sothulmuni misconducted with this very prostitute for years, afterwards he got himself initiated and attained final beatitude, and so did the prostitute, because she followed the precepts of the Jain religion (Tatvaviveka,).

o The loose jacket of an ascetic always bestowed mohars on a prostitute (Viveksar, part , ).

o If the precepts of religion are disregarded in obedience to the commands of a physically strong man, of a God, of a spiritual guide, of one’s parents, family priest and relations and at the critical conjuncture of time in the jungle, the merit (to be earned by the following those precepts) is not lost (Viveksar, part , .

Now, mark! How false all these statements are? Is it ever possible for a man to lift a stone as big as a village on his finger or to press down the earth with his thumb? When there is no snake underground, hoe could it be said that it trembled? Why were the feet of Mahavir not burnt when pudding and rice was cooked upon them? Can a camel ever be contained in small vessel?

Those that do not wash away or rub away the dirt on their bodies must feel extreme discomfort on account of stench. The sadhu who burnt the city must be utterly cruel and merciless. When even the company of Mahavir could not purify his soul, hoe can the Jainees obtain salvation through him? Now that he is dead. Of course, it is right to obey the king but the Jains being banias* it is probable that this injunction was inspired by fear. It is utterly false to say that the prostitute Kosha – no matter hoe light her body was – could


* An Indian caste notorious for its cowardice.-Tr

have danced on a needle fixed in a heap of oil-seeds, without her foot being pinched or the seeds being scattered. One must always follow the precepts of Dharma, not matter what happens.

How can a garment which is only cloth bestow gold mohars for ever?

If we were to go on quoting such absurd stories, our books would become as voluminous as the Jain books. All that the Jain religion teaches is false, except a few injunctions.

Mark! What their books teach:- The Jambu region has an area of , leagues. It is the first of the great regions. It contains two moons and two suns. In the salt-water ocean there are moons. In the (Dhatki) metal, region there are suns and moons. by is and add to this the suns and moons belonging to Jambu region and belonging to salt-water ocean and you find that there are suns and moons in the Kalodahdhi black ocean.

In like manner by = , add to this number of suns and moons, the suns and moons belonging to the salt-water ocean, belonging to the region of Dhakti and two belonging to the Jambu region and you will find that there are moons in the Pushkar.

This calculation embraces only the inhabited portion of the globe which is half the whole. There are many suns and moons in the uninhabited portion also. But they are stationary. by = , add of jambu, of salt-water ocean, of Dhatki, and of Kalodadhi, and you will find that there are suns and moons in the Pushkar region.

All this has been taught by Shri Jina Bhadra Ganik Sahma Shramana in the large and important books in Sanghyani, Yetisakarandak Payanna, Charndrapannati and Surapannati – books which treat of Jain beliefs. Prakaran Ratnakar, -.

Now mark! Ye scholars of Geography and Geology. The Jainees believe that in this earth there are moons according to one mode of calculation and innumerable suns and moons according to anther mode of calculation. You are very fortunate that, by the study of Surya Siddhant andother astronomical

works written by followers in the Veda, you have learnt the ral teachings of these sciences. If you have been enveloped in the darkness of Jainism, you would be groping in the dark as the Jainees are. These ignorant people must have thought that one sun and one moons world not do for the whole Jambu region, for it would be impossible for one sun and one moon to light up so huge a body as the earth in hours. People who believe he earth to be larger than the sun fall into mistakes like this.

Again the Jain books teach:- “Now we shall deal with the number of chains of the suns and the moons. There are two chains of the suns and the moons. Each moves at a distance of , leagues from the one next to it. There is a chain of moons next to a chain of suns and a chain suns next to a chain of moons. In this way there are chains after circumvallating the Mound Meru of the Jambu region, move about in the inhabited portion of the globe.

When one sun moves to the south of the Meru anther moves to the north if it. In each direction of the salt-water ocean two suns move about, in the region of Dhatki suns move about, in the region of Kalodadhi and in the Pushkar region . in this way suns fly about in the northerly direction and in the southerly direction according to the laws of their motion. If we add up, we find that suns and moons move about in the inhabited portion of the globe.

There are many chains of constellations in connection with the moons.” Prakaran Ratnakar, -.

Now, mark! Perhaps suns and moons are to be found in the houses of the Jainees and, if they are, it would be a wonder how the inmates can stand the heat of so many suns and are not frozen by cold night. Such preposterous stories can e credited only by those that are ignorant of the sciences of Geography and Geology. When one sun actually lights up many planets like ours how can its capacity to light up our little earth be doubted?

If the earth were to remain stationary and the sun were to move round the earth, we would be in light or darkness fro many a year. Sumeru is another name for the Himalayas. It is even smaller in comparison with the sun as the mustard seed

is in comparison with the pitcher. The Jainees will never understand these (scientific) facts and will continue to grope in the dark so long as they continue in their own religion.

Again the Jain teachers say:- “Righteous souls that have attained salvation will, on account of being free, roam about the kingdoms. This is due to the power of their psychic faculties.” On the crest of the th kingdom a little above the flag of the airship which secures the gratification of all desires there is, according to the Jainees, Siddhshila or the Divyakash otherwise called Shivpura. Only perfect beings, that is those that have attained the state of omniscience and perfect purity, go this region and become All-knowing, on account of their psychic powers.” Prakaran Ratnakar

Now, what is limited by space cannot be All-pervading, and what is not All-pervading can never be All-knowing. It can only be predicated of a soul which is circumscribed that it is enclosed (in a fleshy tenement) or emancipated, or possessed of knowledge or devoid of it.

This can be never be said of the All-pervading and All-knowing spirit. If the Trithankaras of the Jainees were of limited capacities and were circumscribed by space, they could never be Omnipresent and Omniscient, All-holy, and All-knowing. It is a pity that the Jainees do not believe in the Being who possesses these attributes.

Again, the Jain scripture say:- “Human beings are divided into classes. There are:-

. Man who are born as the result of sexual intercourse.

. Those that are born without sexual congress.

The latter live for Palyopamas and are kosas long.” Prakarna Ratnakar.

We believe, very few men having so much age and such size can be contained in this world. Again, if they live for the full period, then the children that they will beget will also be like them. In a city like Bombay only such men can live, and in a city like Calcutta or . the Jainees say that in towns lacs of such people lived. Then those towns must have extended over lakhs of miles. The entire universe cannot form one such town.

“Siddhshila, which is at a distance of leagues above the flag of the air-ship that secures the fulfillment of all desires, is lakhs of leagues in area.

Sidha bhumi is the abode of perfect saints which is located in the Didhshila, white, resplendent, golden and transparent like crystal. Some people call it Ishat pragbhra. At a distance of miles from the air-ship that secures the fulfillment of all desire there is the Alok (the region that cannot be felt).

This mystery is known to the emancipated beings. The air-ship is leagues thick in the middle. The Siddhshila is situated in directions and then curbs from there. It is shaped like an open umbrella and is then like the wing of a very small fly. At the distance of mile above that shila is the extremity of the region of bliss. Beings that have attained to a state of perfection dwell there.” Prakaran Ratnakar

Now mark! The Jain abode of bliss is above the flag of the air-ship and ahs an area of and half million of leagues. The emancipated souls are there in a state of imprisonment, no matter how beautiful and transparent it is, because the moment they quit they will cease to enjoy the bliss which is an accompaniment of a state of salvation. Besides, if the live cooped up in that abode they cannot breathe fresh air. All this is a net of fraud spread with a view to ensnare ignorant people.

Again, it is written in the Jain books:- “The greatest length of the body of a creature possessing only one organ of sense is , leagues, of that of a creature possessing two organs of sense (like the conch-shell) is leagues, of that of a creature possessing five organs of sense , leagues. Prakaran Ratnakar

If there were beings of the bodily length of , leagues, the entire globe would become full to overflowing and will, perhaps,

accommodate only a few hundreds. If a that time, people ask them where they should live and also hoe to find their way, and what is written in the books would be looked up in their own houses. But for a person of the bodily length of kosas a house of the light of , kosas at least is required. Even if the Jain community were to spend all its accumulated wealth, a house of such dimensions could not be built. How will they obtain beams to build a roof extending over miles? How could a pillar be placed into a house like this? All that is, therefore, false.

Again, in the same book it is written:- ” A well kosas in width and kosas in depth is filled with hair each of the length of afinger. All the parts into which the hair of the length, of a finger can be divided are ,, in number. The hairs contained in a palyopama of the extent of ,,, ,,,,,,,, constitute sankhyat kal number. If one conceives of so many parts of a hair that it is beyond the power of man to count them, he will be forming a conception of the Asankhyatqa.” Prakaran Ratnakar, -.

Now, look at the Jain mode of calculation! How can a hair be the unit of calculation? When it is adi that to form the conception of the asankhyata divisions of a hair must be imagined, it is implied that in the first calculation (that of sankhyat kal) the hair was divided into so many billions of parts by means of the hand. When the hand could not do this work, the powers of imagination were enlisted. Is it even possible to divide into sankhyat parts a hair of the length of a finger? Again the same book says:

“The Jambu region is lakhs of leagues in area and is hollow in the center. There are in all seven Dwipas like the Jambu Dwipa and seven oceans like the salt oceans, etc., on this earth (as mentioned before). Each is twice the size of the Jambu Dwipa, i.e., one preceding it in order.” Prakaran Ratnakar, -.

Now, how can the dwipas the second of which is , yojans greater in size than the Jambu Dwipa, the third , yojans, the fourth , yojans, the fifth ,, yojans, the sixth ,, yojans and the seventh ,, yojans, and the seven seas of an equal or a greater size be contained in the globe the circumference of which is , yojans?

  1. ~ There are , rivers within the area of Kurukshetra (ibid, ).
  2. ~ Kurukshetra is a small plot of land. Did not the Jain writers feel ashamed when they wrote down a falsehood without having ever visited the place.

The same books says:- There are thrones to the due south and due north of this shila. The place to the due south is called Atipandu Kambla and that to the due north Atirike kambla. The Tirthankaras sit on these thrones.” Prakaran Ratnakar.

Such is the place wher ethe birth-day of the Tirthankaras is celebrated and such is the Jain abode of bliss. There are many such cock-and-bull stories recorded in the Jain books. It is no use treating of them all. There are three good points in the Jain religion:-

. Drinking filtered water.

. Showing mercy to tiny creatures (even though the mercy is only nominal).

. Abstaining from food at night-time.

All the rest of their teachings are absurd to thoroughly incredible extent. In order to discuss all the stupid things written in the Jain books such a large number of books will have to be written that it would be impossible to go through them all in

a life-time. Just as a straw shows which way the wind blows, so the few specimens of the Jain teachings given by us will apprise the gently reader of the main current of the Jain thought. It is no use going into very great detail; a few words always suffice for the wise.

Now we shall treat of Christianity in the next chapter.