The Ritual Circle of the Terapanth Svetambara Jains

8/14/2019 The Ritual Circle of the Terapanth Svetambara Jains

1/31

BEr13-141995-96):17'1'76

PeterFt-ucEI-

The ritual circleof the TerdpanthSvetambara ainsl

The empirical nvestigationf the changingole of pilgrimage nd religiousnetworks sforms f socio-politicalntegrations oneof the most ertile areas f SouthAsia esearchto date.Yet the related heoreticaldebatewhich broadly opposesDurkheimian2 ndWeberian3 pproachesuffers rom the act hat he proponents f both camps hare he

i. The ethnographic present of this paper is the year l99l-I992, although fieldwork in India has beenconductedn stages etween1988and 1993. he leaderof the Svetambar erapanthduring hisperiod wasacaryaTulsi (1914-1997).He renouncedhis position (whichhe held for 58 years)on health grounds n March1994 t the matyads mahotsav n SardarSaharn favour of his succrssorMahiprajia (1921) but retained hetitle


2/31

PeteTFLUGEL

Neo-Kantian iew of historyasa manifestationf cultural deals. he former argue hatreligious ituals resolveconflictsand promote social ntegration,whereas he latteremphasisehe dual unctions f rituals or the reproduction f both socialsolidarify ndthe egitimation f power. t is nowwidelyacceptedhatboth heories re undamentallya-historical nd mainly ewarding or thosewho regard he valuesof sociallydominantelitesasparadigmaticor society sa whole.A slightly ifferent, lthough till culturalist,approachwasdeveloped y Parsons nd aterapplied o SouthAsiaby Dumont (1980):

"From this poilt of view,the systbmsof ultimatc valuesare of two t)?es: in the first, all spheresoflife come immediately and formally under the samevalues; n the second, ertain sphcreshave heirown values, special but, by definition absolute within t-heir sphere. Moreover, tbe first tlpecorrespondso group-religion; n the second eligion s attached o the ndividualperson" (p.316).

Dumontarlued that although he hierarchical ggregationf the first and the secondmodel accurately epresents he ideology of the majority of the people of rural'traditionalIndia', he secondmodel alone s ncreasinglyelevantor an understandingof the processes f modernisationn the Indiancities p. 211-31).Inother words,evenfor him religion n India hasalready ostpart of its unction o represent nd o mediatethesocial rocess sa whole,although his sapparently ot yet eflectedn the structureof the dominant brdltma4ticdeology.

In contrast o Dumont who operateswith an artificiallymonolithic notion ofHinduism(p. 296),and dogmatically ssumeshat even oday (thepolitico-economicdomain s encompassedn an overall eligious etting"Gt.22S),Idon't hink it is merely,,therelationbetween he deological nd he empiricalaspects hich s at stake"here(p.a5),but a fundamentalheoreticai roblem:From a Neo-Kantian erspective ocialchange annotbe thoughtof in terms of the internalstructuralimitationsof a givenhistoricalsituation,but only as ((a momentarycompromise etween he functionalimperatives f the situationand he dominant alue-orientationatternsof the society"(Parsons 951:203).thereforeollowHabermas'(198i:338-51)uggestiono nvestigateculture symbolic ystems),ocietynorms), ndpersonalityaims)not anymoren termsof ree-floatingranscendental eanings,utas he hreeprincipal mpiricalcomponentspromoting social integration n concrete ifeworld situations notwithstanding heirnormative ontent). alsoclrop he culturalisticdentification f ifeworldandsociety ndanalyse ociety rom two complementarycrspectives:sa ('systemof actionwhich sboth socially via the three components f the ifeworld]andsystemicallythrough heunintentional onsequencesf the ongoing truggle or existence]ntegratedt' p.228).The dualism between the imperatives of culture and survival does not vanish in hmodel,which circumventshe radically unctionalist ositionof Luhmannwho focusesexclusively n the complexity f a social ystem isregardinghe self-perceptionsf theparticipants, ut it takesa more realistic orm by givingprimacynot to cultural'valuesbut to the lifeworld tself.Habermas' pproach llowsus o understandhe integration

The ritual circle of the Terapanth SveEmbara Jains

of a society s hepelpetually ontestedenewal f a compromise etween wo series fimperatives:he internal conditionsof the social ntegrationof the lifeworld,and theexternal onditionsof its functional ntegrationvis-d,-visn only partially controllableenvironment.f valuesand unctions on't match, hen a compromise oldsonly as ongas he actual unctionsof socialorientationsemain atent. n the following want toshow hat hisshift of theoretical erspective asconsequencesor our understandingfthesystemic nd he social, ersonal nd cultural ole of contemporaryainpilgrimage.

Although important studiesof contemporaryBuddhist,Vaisrava,SivaiteandLingeyatsects,and of the link befweenpilgrimageand religiousnationalism haveemergedn the ast two decades,here s a lack of monographs n pilgrimageand thevarious ectarianmovements ithin modernJainism,even hough he Jainsare widelyconsideredo be the Indian pilgrimspar excellence.arom a Jain point of view,pilgrimage s the paradigmatic orm of renunciation,and one of the keys to theunderstanding f Jainism tself.According o modernJain cosmologyhe wandering fsouls n the world is brought about by their being chargedwith karmic matter as aconsequencef theirdesire or external bjects, nd his, oo, s theprimarycause f theworld structure sarsdr) tself.The manifold orms of eistenceare seenas he resultsof differentialormsof interpenetrationf essenti ally ure ndividualsouls piu,it. life-force)on the one hand and unanimatedmatter (ajtv)on the other. Every orm of lifethusappearso embodya dual orientation oth towards he externalworld of desirableobjects, nd o the essentiallynlimitedpotentialities f the nner ife-force tself,whichcan be realised through renunciarion tydg). rf the liberation of the soul fromembodiment anbe achievedhroughactsof restraint, hen,conversely,t is the powerof humandesire rag) hat attractsmatteranclgeneratesmaterial ife and rebirth.Thedualperspectivesre not mutuallyexclusiveut hierarchicallyomplementaryithin hecontinuum f a total cosmic ield,which s considered henomenologicallyomologouswith the field of consciousness.his is why actsof self-limitationmay appearas ormsof potentialisation.5

r 1 9

1;f".,":{t has.yetbetn devoted o the investigation f the complex egionaland supraregional etworksur ootn artyand ascc(ics, or of the translocal orms of ritual ntcgrationof Jain subsects s awhole.As aconsequence'Jainismsti l l appearsas an elusive henomenon.Recent empiricalstudiesof the Jainsbaveconcentratedeither on the descriptionof local ay congregationsOldfietd 1982,Mahias 1985,Cort 1989,3,'31'Y 1tt.' Carrithcrs 1988,1991,Reynell 1991,Banks 1992,Babb 1996)or of Jain asceticsn generat,*t* ttt^ttt dist inguishingetween ndividualorganised ainsub-sects, nd neglectinghe pivotafroleoftne enouncers n thc ri tualconstitution f laycongregationsShanta1985,Gooriaseker"e986,Holmstrom198R, arr i rhers 9g9, or t l99lb) .5' According to H. Jacobi alainisrn." ERE (1914), 472 he kamta-theory s an integral part of Jainism, andltj^::i::'1":,:" s9u]1b9dv ual ismnor an mporr. rom Brahmanrsm u( based n sBcingasgiven n common\ ^r'rrrcncc"(p' 468).E. HusscrlCaftesianischeeditationen. amburg:Mciner, (1929)lgSisimilarly argued


3/31

120 Peter .luceL

From an observer's oint of view, he main deological unctionof Jainism s tosever he ritual links of the dominant socio-cosmicierarchyand to reduce t to acollection f individuals.n contrast o the brahmar,ricalocial ystemvarqta),ains, ikeBuddhists,raditionally se he ermsafiglrassembly)o delineate iscrete ocialunits.6From this perspective ocietyappears (asa mere aggregate f men)',surroundingaspirituallysuperior ndividual,whose deal autonomyalso impliesa claim to status-superiorityn hierarchical ocieties Dumont 1980:300). ccording o Jain doctrine,assembliespontaneouslymerge t theplaceof the sermonQtravacan)f thewanderingascetics.Within the context of the assembly ocial differencesand conflicts aretemporarilysuspended. veryone s a pupil (ir-ya) and equai in submission o thesupreme uthorityof the teacher guru),who shouldbe the exemplary mbodimentofthe Jain soteriological aluesof non-violenceahiansd)nd world-renunciationrya6),regardless f socialdifferencesn rank, status, asteor class utside he contextof theassembly.

However, n practice he situation s not as fluid as the ideal suggests. s inBuddhism nd Hinduism, ime enduring tructures aveemerged mongst ains hroughthe development f permanentinks befween scetic roupsand certain ay elites,whosupport eligiousnetworksand piigrimages ot only or religious ulposesbut alsoasmeansof both statusacquisitionand political and economic ntegration.The mainstabilising lement of theseemerging ower-structuress religiousproperty. n SouthAsiamonastic roupswithoutproperty end o divideandsubdivide nd split along helines of geography,charisma,demography,and lay patronage.TYet, with thecrystallisation f an nfrastructure f religious nstitutions hequestion f control arises.Until recently most Jain templesand rituals were administeredby a categoryof

that, by both living in the world and being conscious of the world, humans are constituted by a dualorientation towards the material world and towards the encompassil gsphere of tbe transcendentalconsciousness.ecause f this parallelism, henomenologicalnterprctations f intentional i tyould be morefruitful for the aralysis of Jain ontological concepts han, for instance,approaches asedon Weber's notionof subjective purpose or Peirce's objectivist concept of the indcxical symbol. All-encompassingphenomenological pproaches la Dumont (1980:3a) hould,however, e complemented y a recognitionof the tenuous co-existence of totalising ideologies and/or subjective experiences and the objectivecompartmentalisation f social ife (cf. p. 316).6. The word saigh refers to the ideal fourfold assembly cannidh sanglr) of all Jains ncluding the male andfemale laity (lrdvaks, ravikas). In Buddhism the wori saigh is reserved or the ascetic community alone,al thoughthenot ionof hefour foldassemblycauaropar is i )orcommuni tycatuddisasangha) issimi lar lyused' Different from the terms gar, gacch, akha, ponth or ihannasurgrl, which refcr cxclulively to asceticcommmities within particulr sectarian traditions (sonrpraddy, aratnjara), the word satigh k also used todescribe any category or group of Jains.Even lay organisations are called aigh. i7' Cf' Miller, David M' & Dorothy C. Wertz. Hindu Monastic Life: The Monks and Monasteies ofBhuboeswor' Montreal & London: Mc-Gill-Queen's University press, 1976:130,Goonasekere 1986:2nl-4,Cort 1989:104, . 20.

The ritual circle of the Terdpanth SvetdmbaraJains

sedentaryolitical monks,called hattara&-rmong he BisapanthiDigambarsand atisor npajyas mong he M[rtip[jak Svetimbars, ho exercisedontroloverbothreligiousproperty nd heir ay ollowers.ModernJainsects avewidelyabolishedhe nstitutionsof monasticandlordism, ecausehe centralisation f politicalpower and the collapseof feudal ributarysystems ave made hem superfluous.nstead hey revived he roleof the propertilesswanderir'g ddhu,while delegating he administrationof religiousproperty o the laity and conceding oliticalcontrol o the modernstate.There s however wide varietyof responseso the changing ocialenvironmentwithinpresent-dayainism. n thisarticle will showhowoneparticularJainsubsectthe Svetambar erapanth organiseshe ritual interaction etweenascetics nd aityon a supraregional asis, nd n whichway t is strategically rientatedwithin the overallfield of SouthAsian religionand politics oday. ain doctrineand ritual is taken as anintermediaryevel,generative f bothuniversallymeaningfuleligiousexperiences ndsocial harmony, but simultaneously erving as a vehicle for the mobilisati on andlegitimation f particularistic olitical nterests.n the irstpart describehe historyandthe internal unctioningof the ascetic ommunity dharmasangh)f the Terapanth, swellas he religious rganisation f their itualised nnual tineraryQihar).Inthesecondpart I focuson the role of the main ay association,he Terapantlt ahasabhd,or themaintenance f this ritual and, ndirectly, or the welfare of the membersof the laycommunitysamAj), eforeconcluding,n part hree,witha ewcomparative bservationson the changing olitical role of Terlpanth pilgrimagen the contextof the modernIndianstate.

I. THE TERApANTH lc.rAunen JarN DHanmsANGHThe Terapanthiascetics elong o the non-image-worshippingection f the SvetdmbarJainmendicants,or which here s no Digambarequivalent. his tradition emergedn1451 iis an anti-yati movement amongst the MurtipDjakJaity in Muslim-ruledAhmedabad,ed by the Rajasthani-Osv6lourt-jeweller, ndcopyist f Jainmanuscripts,t-onkaSah ca.1415-1489). nka noticeda wideningdiscrepancyetween receptandpracticeamongcontemporary scetics ecause e did not find any referenceso idol-worshipnor to sedentarymonasticismn the oldest extual radition.With the help of theJain ministerL.B. Bhansali rom Patanhe then starteda revivalist scetic raditiononhis own in I47l under circumvention f monastic ules of linear succession.lthoughl-onkanever nitiatedhimself,t washewho drafteda setof organisational rinciples orthe new I-onkaGacch n form of 69 maxims Lonkd Sahki Hutldt). These ulesplayeda paradigmaticole or all subsequentconoclastic vetdmbar ovements.heyexplicitlyrejecteddolatryandsedentarymonasticism,nd stressedhe ultimate authorityof 31 ofthe ca. 45 scriptures f the Svetdmbarcanon'(agam),and the importanceof ascetic

127


4/31

PeteTFLUGEL

wandering vihAr) or the maintenance f a propertilessaparigrah)monastic rder ntowhich on-lybanias merchants] houldbe initiated'.8The astpoint s particularlynteresting, ecauset illustrateshat often religiousreform andsocio-economicalnterests ohand n hand n Jainism. s a rule, he mpetusfor Jain religious eform arises irst within the ascetic ommunity tself, as long as tmaintainsts monopoly f religious nowledge nd stays loofof the aity.However, hemodifiedor non-image-worshippingraditions hat ater emerged n North India underMughal-ruIe,ike theSvetimbarKa{ul Gacch, oundedby KaduaSah 1438-1507), ndTdransvd.mi's1448-1515) igambarTarar.rpanthnd ts successor ovements hicharetoday associatedwith the DigambarTeripanthis,nwere all initiated by religiouslyeducated ay people which were eager o gain socio-religious utonomyvis-d-vis hetutelageof. he SrQajyas ndbhalldraks.Most of them rejected he ritualistic basisof theascetics' laim to the monopolyof socio-religiouseadership n the name of textualknowledge jndn) and rue nner eligious xperiencesamyagarSan). et the problemof such nti-authoritarian'protestant')aymovements,hichcanbe oundall overAsia,is their inability to continuously roduceexemplary eligious eaders.The presumedcompatibility f religious eadership nd householder tatusr0 as hereforeoften been

8. Lonkn's rules are only knom through Dharmasagara's 1572 polemic Prwacanapmqd (L.P. Sharma1991:31-4). athmal (1968:6)mentions nly35 rules, rd quotes ive of them: 1. One shouldmove out onlywith the preceptor's ermission. . None but Banils shouldbe initiated. . After proper est a pupi l shouldbe formally nitiated at the handsof a preceptor. . One shouldnot engagePanditas or studieswhen hcirremuneration s arranged o be paidby householders. . Professional opyists opyingmore than a thousandstanzas hould not be made o write other things...t'Similar ruleswere subsequently omposed for instanceby Kadua Shah 1.eePaul Dundas, Jainism without monks?:The Caseof Kadua Salf .InApproaches toIainism: Philosophy,Logic, Rinal and Sytnbols.Ed. O. Qvarnstr6m & M.K. Wagle, 181-195.University ofToronto: Center of South Asian Studies, orthcoming).On the scriptures f the Lonka Gacch and theSthanakvasis who additionally accepted he Vywahdra Sutra) see laini 1979:49 .12.9. The Svetambar erapanthis hould not be mixed up with the equall y eformist,but older and temple-worshipping tradition of the Digambar Terapanthrswhich are the dominant tradition among the Digambartoday. Their present orgalisation in Jaipur was apparently started by Pandit Amar Cand Badarya fromSanganern 162A.Other sourcesquotc the name Amar Singh, although he Teripanthis were clearlyinf luencedby the earlicr Adhyatma (Virinasiya) movement 1635-1669 ) f RajaTodarmal (11589)andBanarsidas (1586-1644),which they later incorporated. When the name Terdpanth bccame current, thebhattarokscalled their system Bisapanth (since the number 20 exceeds13 by 7' (Nathmal 1968:7).Closelyassociated ith the TerApanthisn Jaipur,Agra, andVaranasi re oday he DigambarTotiparthrs in Nagpurand the followersof Srmad R-jcandra (186?-1901) nd Kinjr Svami 1889-1980)n Gujarat.All of theseinsti tut ional lyndependcnt movcments are spirituallyguided by competing Pandits who derive theirinspiration from Kundakunda's mystical work Satnavasdra,which denies he necessityof ritualised asceticpractice.On the monasticcontextof Kundakunda'soriginal teaching,and his orcshadowingof the SvetamlarTerapanthis' doctrinal view of the futility of purely nternalised orms of religion unaccompaniedby externalascetic ractice, eeJohnson1995:183 . 132,309-10.10.Cf. Todarmal 1992:23.Hc should not be of low castc" (p. 21).

The ritual circle of the Teraoanth Svetimbara Jains

criticisedsa mereexpressionf greed nduncharitabi l i ty.Ithis mighthavebeenon eof the reasonsor l-onka's ecisiono steer etween he extremesn emphasisingheimportanceof 'real', i.e. propertiless nd rule-abiding, scetics. owever,someyearslater,after -onk6 wasmurderedby the followers f a rival sect, he t-onkl Gacchsplitinto factionsand the cycleof reformand routinisation tartedagain. n protestagainstthe renewed ax behaviour Sillilacdr)of the ascetics nd he re-emergence f temple-worship he munk l-avji und Dharmsinhji plitoff the Gujarati -onkagacchn 1644 nSurat nd ounded heDh[4dhiyx(seekers)ect,which hendivided tself nto 22 schools(baurcla) and later becameknown as the Sthanakvasihall dwellers) radition. Forsimilar reasonsmuni Bhikgu (1726-1803) nd four sadhw broke away from theSthanekvasicdryaRughanathn 1760n Bagri Marvar)and ounded he Terapanthganfour months ater n Kelvd througha collectiveite of self-initiation bhlw dthd).tt

In the beginninghe Terapanthwasmainlyan ascetic eform movement hatwasremarkableor its radicaldoctrinaland institutional nnovations, ome of which havesincebeen mitatedby otherJairrsects.13he mostsignificant octrinal nnovationwasBhiksu'sattempt o eradicate he legitimaryof religious ropertyonce and for all bystrictly distinguishing eligious dlnnnik) actsof penance tap or pdramdrthik dan) fuomsocial (laukik) acts of charity (vyavahdik dan), argting that ((if the act of giving isconsideredn act of rel igion hen t is the rich peoplewhowouldmonopoliseeligionand a place n heaven" L.P.Sharma1991:100). opularpuja-rituals nd materialgiftswere husdeprived f religious alue,with the notableexception f the offeringof food,drink etc. to the (Terapanth-)ascetics hemselves saryyatidan). Insread Bhiksu11.Cf. Vijayaratnasfrri, n Lath, M. Half a Tale:A sndy in the ntenelarionshipbetueen a.uobiogrsphyandhistory.TheArdhakathlnaka. Translated, rtroduced and annotated y M. Lath. Jaipur:RajasthanPrakritBharati Sanstha , 1987:21922.12.Bhiksu criticised he Sthanakvasrsn hisAcar K Cau.pat reproduced n Buddhamall 1995:22-5) hichhasbeensummarised y Nathmal (1968:5): 1. Monks of today stay n the houses uilt for them. 2. Theymake peoplepurchase ooks,papersand habitation.3. hey areabsorbedn vi l i fyingothers.4. They makehouseholders romise hat they would be ini t iatedby them aloneandnot by anyone lse.5. They purchasedisciples.6.hey do not transcribe ooks. .Theysendmessages ith householders.8.hey keepmore clothtnanprescribed r permitted. . They akedel icious iet n violationof the rules.10.Theygo to public eastsfor alms.11.They are eager o havedisciples bothmaleand emale.Theyare.on"".n"d not with the ifeot a monk but only with the continuance f their sect.12.They ry by hook or by crook to preventpeopletrom going to other monks. They sow the seedsof friction in their families. 13. To-day asceticism s on thedecl ine.What is prosperings simulation". Thepatternof this critique s conventional.t followscloselyheexample f Haribhadra's ondemnation f the aityavasrnrn the 6thcentury. he nameTerapanth ombinesrad'lr thirtcen) andtera (your) and either means he'path of the thirteen'(at one stage t comprised nlyLJ s.uaus) or 'your path' (Buddhamall 1995:69-76).It lso refers o the presumed hir(een basic ules ofMahSvir 5 nnhdvrats,5 sanitis,3 guptk) cf. Nathmal 1980:1-9).|3^For exampleby the Sthdnahvdsi ranranSangh,whosecentralised rganisation as ntroduced n 1952rn.sadari/Rajaslbanby an assembly santnelal) of 32 itcdryas ho chose carya AtmarAmas (hcir lcadcr(c l .Szrngave980:377.991) .

t23


5/31

PeterFlUcelemphasisedhe importanceof a renunciatory isposition tyag) and of the ,gift, ofknowledge jndn dan) and of non-violent onductas such abhayadan)AK I:56,Tulsi1985:173),nd recommendedigorousasceticismtap) as well as nternalisedormsofreligiouspractice, ike meditation dhydn)or religiousstudy svadhyaya),ven or thelaity: (Tydgais possible venwithoutofferinganythingo anybody,' p. 15g).On a doctrinal evel he strictseparationetweeneligionandsociety, ropagatedby the Terdpanth,dissolveshe characteristicmbiguityof key conceptsof ,popularJainism'14 y differentiatingbetween pure and impure forms (e.g. religious merit(lokottar uuya) and social merit (laukikpuuya)).,s he consequencef this doublingof traditionalJain conceptss that the social itualism hat pewades he life of everyIndian amify s consideredo be 'non-Jain'or 'Hindu'.r6 et, the overariemphasis nthe internal rather than the externalaspects f religion doesnot suggest galitarian('protestant')ormsof lay-dominatedeligious ndividualism, sone might assume. nthe contrary, he additional mportancegiven o outwardascetic onductassureshereaffirmationof the authorityof the dcdryaand,he ascetic rder and its constitutiveprinciple of 'hierarchical'individualism.lT he difference ehveenBhiksu'sTeraoanth14. Cf' WilUams (1983:xix),Carritbers (1991:266-7,285). orr (1989:449-70), ohnson (1995:310),Laidlaw(195:35a), and Babb (1996:98-101) n the ambiguoususe of the termsguna, sama1, bn, nuigal, udhar,sakh etc. among image-worshippingJains. nterestingly,only few of theseconcept , ike paja or biya, wereincorporated :mlo the fivakacard systemsof collective ay-rituals.Jains are ""riful to distinguishsemanticambiguity from philosophicalperspectivism anekdntovhd,ryadvad. niksepo), which is seen as an analyticinstrument for disambiguation: *Whereas in the fallacy of chhal (fraud),-one word has two meanings,noword in this argument [ofsyadvad] is ofsuch nature. ... To declare h" "*i.t"o." ofan objcct from oneipointof view and to declare ts non-existencerom anotherpoint of view, s not to irdulge rapan, and thus oe guilty of this fallacy" (L. Kannoomal. Tlrc Saptabhangi Naya or The Pluralit Aspec* of the lainaDialectics.Agra: Atmanard Jain PustakPracharakMandal, 1917, . 16.cf. C.R. Jain.Farr , Knowledgeandconduct. Allahabad: The Indian Press, 1929, p. 8, 16-1g). see my paper (power and Insight in JainDiscourse'' n Doctines and Dialogues. d. A. Henn & H. v. Skyhaw( 6elhi: Manohar (fortbcoming).15. Cf. Tulsi (1985:68-71)on the Terapanth notion of pure merit (iubhkarm punya) as a side-effect ofpenance. On the anbiguous case of the two-fold causal function of punya-ginerating penance, .e. thedestruction as well as bondageof karma, see the concep(of lcsoyopafana'(de-struction--cum-subsidencefkarmas) (p. aa, 63, 70, 80).16. Cf. Dumont 7980..275.17' The presentTeripanth dcdryaMablprajLiaquotesUtS 5.19-20 n order to demonstrate hat Mahinrhimselfconcededhe possibi l i ty f householderseaching nlightenmentf they are both knowledgeable ndrestrained.For him, preparation or enlightenmentwithin a monasticsetting s entirely conventional(Nathmal 1980:15?-163).Cf. Johnson (1995:306-7)on the difference between h"epersonal (intentionalist)and. he social rule-oriented) iew o[ renunciation, nd his theoryof the strategic olc of the Jain doctrineofthe manifold aspects anekan,tovad ndsyadvad) or holding together thesecJntradictory perspectives p.232), evadingconfrontation with other schools p. 253),anA nriA "g the gap between u.."ti." und lairy ip.i79-90).with regard o Jain ay practices, aidlaw 1995)similarlyuigu..llut athe conflicrsbetween hesedifferentwaysof beingJainare resolved, n so ar s theyare, n a wider domainof sociality" p. 20-l). Fora different nterpretation eeK.W. Folkert,scnpnlre nd Community:CollectcdEssays n the Jains.Ed. J.E.

The ri tual c i rc le of the Terapanth Svetdmbara ains

andmany raditional 'hinduised')mage-worshippingects, hichambiguously ombineconsideratiorls f ascetic urity and socialpower or auspiciousnessithin hierarchicalcosmological ystems, ivotingarounda notionof moralkingship dharmaraj),s that nthe TerApanthsystem he 'world-transcending'dcdryaalone can be the ideal kineQnattaral."The refusal o recognisehe religiousmerttof paja ritualsand charitable iving,whichare essentialor the traditional itual egitimation f power and the developmentof popular ormsof religion,has ed the idol-worshipping urtipujaksand Bisapanthisto question he religious alueof the absolutistekanta) octrinal iteralismof the newsectas, formof islamisationJaini 1979:314,n.63);an aliegationwhichwascounteredby the,Terzpanthi'slaim or greater eligious urity: (Somepeoplesay hat by dividingreligion nto worldlyand spiritualsegments cdryaBhiksuhas eallycut down ife itselfintovarious ections. e do not deny he charge ut mustalsoadmit at the same imethatwe cannothelp such ragmentation f life. [.ord Mahavirahasdivided eligion ntosecular and religiousparts in 'Nik5epa Vyavastha"' Nathmal 196g:15).DigambarTerlpanthis, n theotherhand, ejected utomatic laims o spiritualsuperiorifyhat arebasedon the outward characteristicsf monkhood alone.leHowever,the strongestopposition o Bhiksu'sdeascame rom Sthanakvasiscetics,ike the ex-Sraman angh

r25

Cort. Atlanta : Scholars ress,1993: 15-27.18 on cosmic ingshipand he hybridnatureof traditional'populr rel igioncf. Dumont (19g0:229,300-34),Y:::1"1-un (1985),Tambiah.(1984),Kapferer (1983),and Gombrich L ob.y"..k"." iuss,r5-zo;. co.t(1989) has recently observed hat, although "kingly notions of power have almost totally disappeared romthe,contemporaryJain ideologicaluniverse", "thJ wo dominant realmsof value within the Jain context aref:::y"-\u'?: and.well-being' (p. 15). He notices hat there is a "differenr siruarionamong rhe Jains ofrvtaruar"'who sti l l"tend to imitateRajputs n manysocial[sic lcustomst p. 80, n. 80).But strictly peaking,lherecanbe nothing'Jain'about deologies fpol i t icalor economical ower1onno7,ihut.u.r their historicalcfficacy' Precisety his is one of the mlin agendasof present day revivalism, which, as we have seen, sparticuJarlystrong n Marwar._Terapanthislearlydo noi recognise separate ealmof worldly.Jain,values.'^1tj:1q,'h",y:..-,.yt"9 o implant ascetic rincipies f conduct nro social ife. Accordingly, he 21 qualir ies:"l.:",t:t", Teripanth layman frovakgun), which were codif iedonry ecenrlyby Tursrlax II:317),differrrom Hemacandra's ist of 35 qualities,which is popular among he Mirrtip[j;ks (yS I.47-56,Wil l iamsll l l^T "n,,tort 1991a),by 6eing unequivocal ly therworldly-. o.eover, iopular social functions n;"":".:"t::lijo rh.e omplction of fastsetc.were ruled out by Tulsi again n 1960 Mahiprajfra 1987:34). berdLt na[ terapanthisconfcr royal attributesexclusivelyo the dcarya'maharaj', s not unusual or Jainascetics cf' Carrithers 1988:830-1,1989:223-9). lready the medievalJain commentaries emphasised hecquivalenceof the administrative irtuesdcmanded romboth rel igious uperiors nd kings Caillat 1975:5-5).f,::t^1lq l" '1ttt: the ideal king is a renouncer, ot a worldly ruJer, nd moral aurhoriry he utrimare;:::_:1flY": lndeed, he predominant oci of 'group rerigion' evenamongmosrmodern Svetambar nduridlfantnrJarnsects are odaynot quasi acred ings, ike the medievalbhattdroks ndiapujyaror today'ssaiSlryais' but the acdrvar hemselvei,who fulhl .".Lin'roy^l'functions with respect o rel igion amongstthcir followers,wbile caving he surrounding ociery landingas t is.l9' For a critiqueof theuneasy oexistence f renunciatory itual behaviour nd njuriouseveryday chaviourmong'Dhoondhakar'laity seeTodarmal 1992:225-22b.


6/31

126 PeteTFLUGEL

t '?U'? isusi l (1g26-1tq/g4)whoadvocatedsocia l reformandservicestomankind.Theyobjectedn particularo the selfishness'and he a-humanism'of Bhiksu'sadicalpursuitof world-renunciation, hichshowedno concern or the alleviation f suffering n theworld.2o ike KundakundaBhiksuwas indeedconvinced hat the protectionof lifecould onlycountas an act of socialcompassion(taukikdaya)btttot as a religiousactof liberation (lokottar )aya). n the eyesof many Sthanakvasis,his doctrine waspredicatedon ((theeconomic erspective f the 'survivalof the fittest' n a societyoffamines nd droughts, overty, tarvation nd deatht'and hereforemerely (thenaturalproductof the miserable ocial onditions revalentn Rajasthann the daysof Bhiksu"lNul . t lo l . : l ) : . .Bikhanj i 'smessageofdel iverance[throughsei f-help lwasagreatboonto th" ".ond*ically weak, he miserly,heungenerousnd he selfish eople'The

moneysaved rom givingcharitycouldbe accumulatedo one'sown benefit" (p. 37-8)'

obviously, he question f the social mplications f sucha radicalseparation freligionand societys a point of intensedisputewithin the Jain radition tself'From aDurkheimianpoint of view he doctrinaldistinction etween pure'and impure' formsof givingmustbe seenasan deological xpression f the experience f increasing ocialdifferentiation nd of the growing mportance f organicsolidarity'or the adherents fJainism cf. Dumont |980:227).Parry1986), or instance,uggested.thatan elaboratedideologyof the 'pure'gift is most ikely to develop n statesocieties ith an advanceddivisionof labour anda significantommercial ector" p. a67).Thisarguments widelyaccepted, lthough ts precise mplications re obscure. ertainly,BhikSu's mphasis nthe internal, renunciatoryaspects f giving, n opposition o the external'materialaspects, annot be explained n terms of the calculatory long-term' function ofdiiinterested iving, sParrysuggests,ecausehiswould nvolvepreciselyhe reductionof the gift to exchangewhich the Terapanthiscriticise.2lThey interpret 'the gift' nottransactionallyut primarilyontologically,sa non-violent orm of existence' ife itself'they argue, should be a perennial sacrifice, deally embodied in the exemplaryrenunciatory onductof the dcaryawho, as a symbolof the corporatepurity of the

20. Cf. Dumont (1980:27+5). n his eagernesso demonstrate he futility of intervcning nto worldly affairs'both for one,s own uod otnerl. ,piritu""f progress,Bhiksu gave many controversial exampleswhy asceticssbould not help saving rir"r, "*'o ir *rey ciuta (tulsi r9'a5:rez-76, Nair 1969:App'1)'

From his purelymonastic and liberation-orienieJ point of ui"* 'il,i,r',ra lies solely h the spirit of non-cooperation" aperspectivewhich renders the world empty of religious meaning n which charity is not only irreligious butalso rends o perpetrate ,".i"1 i;;;;dity: iTh. uniu" emphasis"oncharity indirectly accepts he practice ofexploitation. Terapanth ,"u"r,"r'iil piri.iple of non-explo'itationand nonlaccumulation' (Nagaraj 195912)'

21. J. Dcrrida Given Time: I. CounterfeitMoney.Chicago: The University of chicago Press,1991:76makesthis point and shows n turn ho* tUeg"ne.ul paiadoxcsJf'donating consciousness' ay be better underJtoodin terms of Heidegger's heory of Diein as ire constitutiveontological ground for subjecrobject distinctionsper se, which are presupposedby 'thc figure of the circle of eichange' (p' 2a)' I cannot enter into theepistemology/ontology-debateero.

The ri tual c i rc le of the Teraoanth Svetambara ains

sangha sa whole, egenerateshe bifurcationof the spheres f religion and society stheprecondition f the ritualcircleof ascetic andering nd ts mplied socialexchanges.While acknowledginghe possibility f cheating y performingobjectifiedrituals'withdual purposesn mind, which hasbeen stressed y t-aidlaw 1995:230) nd Johnson(1995:310), erapanthishave always nsisted hat the difference between religious(samyam rrnytti) and worldly orientations laukik prwytfi) is not only subjectively eltbut alsovisiblymanifest n the overali conductof an individual.22rom their point ofview,ascetic ower nvariablyencompassesransactionalationality.In spiteof these onceptualefinementshe newdoctrine f Bhiksuhaseffectivelynot been able to overcome he fundamental roblemof routinisationas described yWebei (1985:1a2-8).t merelygenerated newsetof practical aradoxes. enerally, heincreased egreeof differentiationof religion and societyproducedboth a greaterimmediacy nd a greater ndirectnessf the inksbetween hedharmasangh nd he aity.But the role of religiouspropertyhaseffectively ot changed. s I will show n greaterdetail in the secondpart, a popular TerdpanthJainismexists oday, and there areTerapanthi itualsof charitable iving, ontrary o the officialdoctrine, lthough heyareless isible and deprivedof immediate eligious aiue.Comparedo Bhiksu's isionofa purelyascetic ainism, he Terapanthof todayhas considerably hanged, articularlythrougha series fcontroversialnnovationshat were ntroduced y acaryaTulsi n thefirst decades fter Indian Independence1949-1981).n order to secure he growinginfluence f the Terapanth nder he changed ocial onditions, ulsigradually evertedback o a traditionalJain system y forming closerbondswith the laity andpromotingprograms f religiousandmoraleducation or the society s awhole. He showed reatingenuity n the construction f an all-inclusive orporative ectarianorganisation ycreating newnetworkof 'socio-religious'institutions or the aity, o carry beAnuvrat(smali vow, 7949),Prel


7/31

128 PETCTLUGEL

lay-movementsf theTeripanth weresimplydefinedaspurelysocialactivities. he onlyproblemwas that, in order to attractsufficient unds or the massive ublishingandbuildingprojectsnvolved, ulsi had to amendBhiklu'stheoryof the gift.His modifiedversion f 1970s knownas he doctrin of visarianlit. dispersion, bandonment,artingfrom possessions),nd asks he laity to practiceacquisition ogetherwith renunciation(visarjan) f ownership.t concedeshat undercertainconditionsmonetarydonationsmay count as religious acts of renunciation tyad^ and promisesan influx ofmeritorious armas purlyo) epending n the ntentionof the giver. t is said hatgivingfor a good causedan) both contributeso the iberationof the self from attachments(apaigrah, anasakti)and generatesgood karma (fubh knrma) for the giver' But givingin order o increase ne's ocialprestige nan) diminisheshe chances f liberationandgenerates ad karmaQ)Ap, subh arma).Criticssay hat giving or the purificationofthe soui (dtmasuddhi) as only been nvented n order to raisemoney or the 'goodpurpose' f Tulsi'sconstruction rograms, nd point to the fact hat, by publiclyaskingfor donations nd promisingmerit, today's scetics erelycreateopportunities or 'bigmen' to put their name plaqueson the new Terapanthbuildings.The ideology hatdonations re only meritoriousf theyare not given o anybody pecific ut Justbeingleft for the use of society'(Mahaprajna 987:16) that is the religious rustsof theTerdpanth AK II:15a) has not onlyprovokedqmical comments ut also motivated

renunciation (vkarjatr) of ownership.To limit the enjoyment of an object. 6. Pure food and release romaddiction: foie"j to the pure .u-oo". of eating and diinking - To give up eggs,hsh, meat etc. To live al i fe free of addiction To avoid alcohol, ntoxicating ubstances, ambling etc-7. Anekant: Not to becontumacious nd,as ar as possible, ttempting o settlecontroversialmattersharmoniously' ' Worship ofresemblance:Studying the si.iptures, "quuni.Ity etc. To do the prescribed ap of 5 Noukar Mantras tfueetimes every day - ai dam afier g"iti"g up, bifore meals, and before sleeping. 9. Affection for the co-religionist: To behave rate nally to-one of ti.,. .u.. faith or religion (one who faithfully repeats he Nm'kdrMitr),' (tr.Tulsi, in: Manakcaid Patavari (ed.). UpasanA.Mitra ParisadAtma SadhanaKendra: Calcutta,1997:21-8).24. AK II:153-5. According to Mahaprajfra there is a differencebetweendonation and renunciation'(1gga:10g).Theoretically "a-cquisitionLn b" ,""n as (1) its psychological ounterpart (non-discrimination)and (z) the overt cause (the object)" (NathmalUSd:iAe;.bne of the four possible ombinations f theserwoaspectsbeingpresento.ob.entsthevkar jandan,wl t i chshouldbebasedontbeideal " toposscssonlythe bare necessities' (p. 187). Surrendering possessionsmerely in order to gain selfawareness -ndsocialcontrol is a form of acquisition (p. f88). Wia4an thus acts as an ambiguous ntermediary cztegorybetween,worldly transactions'and the thiee'reiigious gifts' of fearlessnessalhay), knowledge Qnan), and food etc'to the ascetics sat.nyati)-not unlike th; Kha;tar Gacchpracticesd".".ib"d by Laidlaw (1995:294--301)andBabb (1g6:190). T[e only difference s that, even f the intention is religious,materially monetary donationsare st i l l considered ocialor socio-religous.Vsarjur is thus the result of an extensionofthe cognit iveprinciple (ittbh upayoga)underlying he estraineclgift (sat.nyati)o money,which, n contrast o food, cannotbe handled by ascetics.

The ri tual c i rc le of the Terapanth Svetdmbara ains

several iscontented erEpanth sceticso split off.^ Tulsi's eply that all the fundshehadcollected ad been or the benefitof humanity, nd hat t is necessaryo movewiththe imes,has,on the other hand,beenwell received y the Sthdnakvasisnd he moretraditionalmage-worshippingain sects Muni RajyaS,n: Nair 1969:roo


8/31

PeterFt-ucel

importantfor the monasticurisprudence, ut of diminished eligiousvalue: ((Non-violenceandmereorganisationalulesare wo hings" Nathmal1968:114). oday,oneof the distinctive rganisationaleatures f the Terdpanth scetic rder s ts constitution(maryedaatr),written downby Bhikgu n 1802 maghSukla aptamr) hortlybeforehisdeath. t determineshat therecanbe only oneacArya ithin the sect,and that t is healonewho initiatesnovices, xcommunicates,nd determines is successoryuvdcdrya),as well as the overall poliry of the sect.26 \e dcdrya ulfils both spiritual andadminis6ative,egislative nd udicative unctionswithin the order.By meansof suchaconstitutionallyixed, entralised rganisation,ndarigorous olicyof excommunication,permanent chisms avebeenpreventable o ar.27TUB MONASTIC ORGA]TISATIONTheTerapanthisubsectgan) istoday(1991)oneofthelargestorganisedasceticgroupsamong he Jains,with 149sAdhusmale ascetics), 54 sa.dllrs femaleascetics)4 ndabout 80 novices f differentcategoriessama4,mumul


9/31

PeterFLucEt-

The various scetic roups pend7-8monthsof theyearon theirviharwrthor away romtheacdtya bahirvihar)and he four monthsof the rainy seasoncaturmar)n residencein oneparticularplace.Because empleworship s rejected, he viharof the asceticssthe major orm of ritual integrationof the Terlpanth sect,and carefullyplanned.Theway n which his s done odaydeservesloseattention, ot onlybecauset involves hepivotalpolitical processesithin the sect,but especially ecauset comprises new setof religious nstitutions,ormerly unknown o Jainism,which combineancientasceticritualswith modernprinciples f organisation. heyhavebeen ntroducedn 1853-1864byacaryalitmal 1803-1881)o prevent he ragmentationf theexpanding scetic rder.Jitmal(Jayacdrya) as he major consolidato r nd egislator f the sect.Not onl y did here-introduci sanskritic iteracy nto monasticeducation, nd invented an innovativesystem f monastic ivisjonof labour (gatha ranali),but he alsocompiled, ondensedand codifiedBhiksu's ikhats n variousways or their recitationn ceremonial ontexts'In order o guarantee he continuousmplementation f these ules,he Setup a systemof three interconnected ituals: the likhat, the hajan, and the maryadAmahotsav,eachbeingbasedon the compulsory erformance f an oath of acceptance f certain ulespeculiar o the Terapanth monasticorganisation. he lekltpatr or likhat (formular)containshe thirteenessential ules of the orderand has o be individually ecitedandsigned irst thing every morning.32 \e hujari (presence) s a ceremony of grouppurification um eaching ga4viSuddht-kara4).t was irstorganised yJayacaryan 1853as a fortnightly assemblyof all the asceticsof the rai (and each singhdT) or therecitation, xplanation ndacceptance f the iklnt andother ules,aswell as or publicexaminations f novices.Nowadays he hdjan s onlyperformedat specialoccasions, ndthemaryaddatr - anewcompilation f Bhikqu's ndJaydcarya'sulesmadeby Tulsi -is readout in the presence f a large audience.n this way he generalpublic s madefamiiiar with the maryddds nd can monitor the conductof the asceticsndependently.Afterwards the sadhus a;nd adhv-s, ll standing n a row according o the seniority ofinitiation dtkd patyEa), recite he ekhpatr andacceptt oneafter heother.The hdiaidiffers rom the Buddhistpatimokkha because enances nd confessions o not take

32. Vows (vras) are accepted ither by real or mental signature mong he Terapanth.The thirteen rulesof the ekh'patr'are: 1. I ihal l not disobey ou. 2. I shal l ollowyour commandsn everyactivity undertaketo do. 3. I ihui l al*aysproceedon ascetic amblings, ainy etreat etc.as orderedby you. 4- shall havenodisciptesof my own. 5. I shall never indulge in forming factions.6. I shaltnot meddle with your affairs. 7.I shall not use undesirable anguage n the lcast againstyou or my of the monks and nuns. 8. If any faultis foundor comes o my notice n anymonk or nun,wanting n conducq shal lapprise im or the Acarya-Srirather than propagati;g it clsewhere. . In any controversial isputepcrtahing to principles, ules andregulations t tiaditioni, I shalt abideby your verdictwith all revereoce. 0. sball have no connec(ionwh'atsoever ith anybody ithcrexcommunicated r resigned rom the ordcr. 11. shall claimno ownershipover he books,manuscripts nd documentsof the order. 1.2. shallnot becomea candidate or any post.13. shal lunbesitatingly bideby the orders of your successor"tr. Tulsi & Mahaprajfra 983:480).

The ritualcircleof the TeripanthSvetambaraains

place eforeor during hehajon Tulsi& Mahaprajna 983:186-198).owever, he mostimportant eremony f the Terapanth s he annualmaryadamahotsav= MM) (festivalof restraint). ike the hajart, t wasoriginally 186a)a ritual or theasceticsnly,but hasdevelopednto a meetingof the whole ourfold assembly, hich akes lace or threeormoredays n January/February,nd often attractsup to 50.000 ilgrims.The festivalcelebrateshe dateof the recording f Bhiksu'sast ikhat, he constitution f the sect,through he recitationof the original ext samnhikmarydda) nd heperformance f anoathof allegi ance o the'dhanna, an,Acarya, nd he marytula' y the asceticsp. 467-70)."

,This annual meetingof all ascetics nd mportant eadersof the sect s uniqueamong Jain sects (although vaguely resembling he Buddhist uposatha). n itsbureaucraticorm it resembles tributary oyal itual,and s the ody festival f theyearwhere if possible all the ascetics re assembled round he acdrya,ogetherwithrepresentativesf the various Terlpanth lay communities rom all over India. Theeffective ommunityof the Teripanth sectas a whole s manifest nlyon thisoccasion,where ll theorganisational,oliticaland eligious ffairs f theTerdpanthis redecided.Today not only the ascetics, ho are obliged to participate,but also the laity areencouragedo vowallegianceo thedcAtya, nd o resolve heirdisputes,edistributehefruits@hal) of their past year'ssocio-religious ork (karya), iscuss ew projectsandreceivenew directivesor the comingyear.The importanceof the collectiveoath ofloyalty visvasanryatdt Sapath)s underlinedby the fact hat t is considered s a formof self-sacrifice,enerating he organisational nity and hus he potenry$akti) for atlthe religiousactivitiesof the year to come. n this way the amual cycleof asceticwandering ynthesisesraditional religiousand modern organisational ituals into aunitaryprocess. he overallpatternof the Terdpanth eligious ear akes he shapeofa polarised rocess f fragmentation nd reintegration f both the sanghapuru; thecorporate nity of thesangh, mbodiedn the dcdrya s he moving entreof the sectand the locaI cdturmdsassemblies f the laiw at the Doles of the annual vihar.fnterwoven ilh the agriculturalrycleand elated easonalestivalsutsavs),theres aninbuilt alternation between traditional asceticJainism.which is prominent duringcatumus,andmodern estive ainism fter he rains the raditional eason f marriages,33.Cf. Buddhamall1995:401-17, enou& Renou1951,Nagaraj1959:4-6, athmal 796fl:t4i-9,L.P.Sharma1991:169-70.Terapanthi scripturesmention three sect-specificestivalsntroducedby Jitmal: Jayicdrya'ssttccession-dayQtallotsn),Bhiksu's ast day caranolsau), nd he MM. The succession ndnindrla days fd,tt caryos re holidays oday.Historic.allyhe separate eneration f the organisationalules n addit ion otnc succcssion-daysdevelopcd hrough the generalisation nd thcreby depersonalisationf the pal lotsavL(rcDratrons.The MM, it is said, reprcsents he palgotsavs f all Teripanth acaryas.Original ly t wasccrcbratedtogethcrwith the Jay-aciryaallotsa' (mdghukla pamima)which ate r was plit nto two diffcrcnt''rttvrls (Buddhamall 1995:4Ot


10/31

PCTET LUGEL

wars, and businessventures), when the fruits of asceticismare harvested andredistributed, articularlyat the MM.

In accordance ith thisoverallcosmologicalesign,he mainorganisationalasksof the MM are he rotatingof the ascetics mongsthesinghdrs,nd decisions bout henext cdturmlisresidenciesas well as the vihar route for each of the singhars.v t is animportant ule that the choices f caturmdsocalities or all the groupsare determinedby the acaryaalone.However, he local ay communities re competing or visits romthe ascetics, ecausehereare more ay communitieshansinghdTs.his s donepubliclyin a series f rel igious ssembliesrior o the MM, where ay epresentativesraise hemeritsof their local communities e.g.moral restraint, harity),and through nvitationletters vijnapti atr) repeatedly sk he dcarya o sendascetics. ompetitive nvitationsare he onlyTerlpanth equivalento the customaryuctioning boII)of ritual actsamongidol-worshipping ains,and herefore articularly laborated. he Terdpanth aity havea strongdesire o be close o their saints, ecausehe opportunity o worship he asceticsdirectlys crucial or non-image-worshippingains, ot only or religious easons, ut alsoin terms of the mplicatedprestigeQndn)and he auspiciousnessmaigal), hat n theireyes s generated articularly y avisit of theacarya imself.Often he acarya'mahdraj'is treated ike an dol, andveneratedor his life-giving'andmiraculously ish-fulfilling'(camatkarik) powers hrough the practice of secretly akingvows duringdartan'. lf youhelp me to become rosperous, will donate ..Voof nryeamingsoyour religious roiects.'SuchpopularJainpractices re consideredo be inconsistent ith the main eachings fthe religion (Schubring 978:316-7),ut they are often "so thoroughly ssimilated iththem now hat theyareno longerperceived salientt Jaini 1991:187).t the end of theMM, when all decisions re taken, he assembly isperses,nd the small groupsofascetics et out for their rrewcaturmasdestinations, hich might be a considerabledistance nd,after catunnas, n to the placewhere he dcilryawill hold the next MM.In thisway, he undamental itualstructureor the nteraction etween sceticsnd aityis organised ne year n advance.

TERRIToRIAT- RGAI.ISATIONTheTerSpanthis sea formalsystem f geographicalategorieso allocate ircumscribedregions (vihar ksetr) for each singhar. t takes the territorial boundariesof thecontemporaryndian statesQtrant. rovince) s ts basis, ut givesa specialpriority toRajasthan,he placeof origin and he major ocusof activity or the sect.Rajasthan asbeen urther sub-dividednto five regions sambhag), hich do not correspondo the

34. Bisapanthiand Murtip[jak subsects o not rotate (he ascetics f their subgroups. hantl (1985:330-1),Cort (1989:105,n.21),arrithers 1989:229) nd Banks 1992:29)eport a similar'scriptedness'or rheiir ihdr,but do not mention any particularsub-sect rganisation.

The ritual circle of the Terdpanth Svetambara Jains

administrativeistricts f modernRajasthan,ut o he ormer erri tories f theprinciplerajputkingd'oms.he elementary dministrative nitsare the local regionor circleofvillages/laycommunities grAmmandal), the village (Sa,nr) and the household(glrcr).UnlikeMrrtip[jak or Sthanakvasiscetics, ho residen community uildings upairays)or meditation alltssthanaks),erapanthi sceticsannot tay n purpose-built esidencesbut rely on the homesof their lay followers or accomodationwhich requiresgreaterrestraintand gives be laity more influence).$To avoiddisputes, ach ascetic roupreceives written ist Qtarct) f villageso be visited. heseareaswhichare demarcatedby a mental boundary $tna) are called cokhld (Buddhamall 1995:417,Nathmal1968:L37,l41-8).she free acceptance f such limitations of movement (drg) isconsideredsa form of religious elf-denialn Jainism BKB I.51-2). n any egionwhichhasmore than one singharallocated o it, the most seniorof the singhd4parrsulfillssupervisionalunctions or all the othersiighdrsand organiseshe further distributionof villagesand housesamong hem with the help of local lay-supporters.mportantdecisions,owever, re alwaysakenby thedcdrya imself,who keeps n contactwith allsinghdlpatishroughwrittenmessageshich arepersonally elivered y the aity whoactas channels f communication s Jain ascetics re traditionally not allowed o usemodernmeansof communicatjon r transport.

The modeof distributing .sceticsround he geographical onesand the routesof their vihdras hanges very ear. t reflects he general olitico-religious ims of theacdryawhoselects ertaincentres s oci or sectarian ctivity, nd determineshe basicstructure f the viharwith regard o changing ocialcircumstances.\e prant systemitself, or instance, asonly adoptedafter1.949,whencarya ulsi inally recognisedhedemands f the lay diasporaand decided o 'modernise'his sect and to extend hepermitted angeof the viharof his asceticsn order o spiritually ncorporatehe wholeterritoryof the new Indian state (and Nepal) (cf. map in Mahaprajna1987:61). einitiated his process y symbolicallyurninghis backon his ormer allies, he onceall-powertulGangaSingh 1880-i913) nd his sonSadulSingh 1902-1950) the ajas fBikaner by selectingirst he newstatecapitalof Jaipurand hen he national apital,Delhi, or hiscatunndsn 1949-1950 an llustration fhow

powerand religiongo handl-5 Cf. Buddhamall 1995:71-2). xceptions are the sevakendras scrwcecentres) or elderly asceticsn(aJrsthan, and the soDlrtbAalars (assemblyhouses) of local Terapanthi lay communities,which aresometimesusedby visi t ingasceticsn big cities. n Rajasthanhe ascetics se he mostly empty ancestralnouscsof their followers.36' In-parts of Rajasthan he word cokhtd s sti l l used o signify egionalmarriagecirclcs, .e. "an unit ofcasteGub-caste) preadover a number of contiguous i l tagcs, inding hc membirs of the caste o certain::des.and regulations onsidered o be falli ng within the traditionaljurisdictionof thc casre sub-caste)orSa.nizationin that area,and subjecting he mimbers to someeffectivt controls hrough collcctive ction"1ur t1 aj Chauhan. Rajasthan l lage.NcwDelhi :Associatcdubl ishingHouse,1967:119) .

135


11/31

Peter FI-UCEL

in hand' (L.P. sharma 7991:252; f. Mahaprajn 1994:64-70).oday,asa rule, half of theasceticsespeciallyhe older and weakeroneswho cannotwalk ong distances)emainin Rajasthan r close o theacarya. he otherhalfare distributedn sucha way hat thesect can be said to have covered he whole of India (including Nepal). This newnationwide rientation istinguishesheTerapanth alt rom heM[rtipfjak gacchas ho,due o a lack of centralised rganisation,o not form effective roups eyond he evelof sdkhds (branches)and operate oniy regionally, although there are nationalorganisationsor the aity.However, t present venTerapanth ransregionalis mppearsmerely as an example of a 'maskedexpansion' f a particular regional religiousmovementBalbir 1983:44).able showshat he centres f Terapanth ctivity n 1991were Bikader and Jodhpur, he traditionalheartland f the Terapanth ect.

TABLE : TERzuTORI{ DISTRIBTITION FTERAPANTH SCETICS ATURMAS 991Groupslraman Sramonl

A5ceticsiromdn Jr4mcnt

1. Rajasthan Pranta. Jodhpur Sa mbhagTulsTs groupother

b. Bikaner Sambhagc. Udaipur Samb hagd. Jaipur Sambhage. Ajmer Sambhag

sum2. Madhyapradesh PrAnt3. Maharashfa Prent4. Gujarat Prant5, Andhrapradesh Prant6. Karnataka Prant7. Tamil Nadu Prant8. Orissa Prant9. BenSal Prent10. Bfiar Prent11. Assam Prant12. Haryana Prant13. Putrjab Prant14. Delhi1 5 . N e p a t

sum

x4962

54 8876 87139 178BB IO 7t5 22B 8380 490o 1 ,25 2524 335 51 1 1 45 t 15 5 41 0 1 05 7

42 4823 265 B5 5774 273

341 139r 97

3642o33

39

x l16 201 8 2 719 253 5

2 258 795 55 71 12 31 31 1 I2 2T 29 1 15 61 21 1

36 48

211212l1211

1.2

11 039

7033 r49(Source:N-alTatanmal 1991

The ritual circle of the Teraoanth Svetdmbara Jains

Helns oF INFLUENCEFormal territorial divisions ike prdnt and sambhdghave to be distinguished romfunctionalegions, hat s the places ffectively isitedby ascetics. raditionally heyareco,lled


12/31

PeteTFLUGEL

austeritiesrap), eligious rograms, nd he numberof (lay-)conversions@rabodhit).37The agrants eep diaries(kul yatravivaran) n which theywrite the namesof the villagestheyvisited, ow manydays heystayed, ow muchcloth (valrr)andmedicine au;adhi)they eceived, nd rom whom,specialachievements f each ascelic tapasyQ vadhydya),religious rograms prek$ahyan), acifications f quarrels vigrah aman),he numberand type of vows administered, nd the services ivenand received rom other asceticgroups bhakti).These diaries have to be sc rutinised veryyear during MM by thedcArya, ho then evaluateshe conductof eachascetic sdrana arand), nd distributesrewards so,called alya4ak oints)and punishments trayascitt)ccordingly.sParticularly ierce is the rivalry betweenascetics f differentorganisedJainsubsectsoaming n thesame egion.They compete sgroups or statusn terms of theidiom of behavioural urity and non-violence. hese ivalriesare foughtwith the helpof the laity and sometimesake the form of open conllict for sectarian uperiority ncertain egions. he presentdominance f the Terapanth alt n Bidasarand l-adnun(Bikaner),or instance, asgained hrougha ocused ampaign yacarya ayacirya rom1872-1877 gainsthis Sthanakvasi ival dcdrya Jahvarlal.The Terf,panthismaintainedtheir commandingposition in the region ever since, although n 7922 and 1926Sthanakvasisnd Murtipojaks ogether ried to end their dominance y systematicallydisrupting he BikanercAtunntu,ncludingan alleged ttempt o assassinatehe acarya.The defamationcampaignwas averted,however, hrough he interventionof GangaSingh, he ruler of Bikaner,who inallyexpelled omeSthanakvdsi endicants nd aity(L.P.Sharma 99I:171229-34).egative ampaigning as ater (1954)uledout byTulsi,who- in the nterestof the renewed roselytizationf Jainism advocatedor a morepositive pproach owards ublic elations:(Viewsof others houldbe olerated.Hatredor disrespectowardsothersects nd heir monksshouldnot be preachedttin Nagaraj1959:28).

-17. hat is vowsgiven.Practices f self-sacrificryAgl arcscen o genera(e cspect vunduta) and o attractsupport dan).38.Thc present ulesof tbe Tcrapanth ask adhusnot to staynore than one month n onevi l lage sadhvls:two months), not to carry more than 69 hands (hoth) of cloth (which shouldnot be acceptedduringcdtunnAs),o pcrform 30 daysof fasteachyear, o avoidmedical reatmentetc. f an ascctic amot complywith thesebasic ules, he/shc has o atone or eac h mistakeat the end of thevihar. The ascetic ules ofconductunderwentnumerous hanges uring he centuries, nd no prcsent ain sectcan egitioatcly claimto be orthodoxanymore cf.Nair 1969:50). ulsi'smain nnovations re describedn Mahdprajia 1994:170-1.The paradigmatic atrd vivarur s Sadhnpramukha a nakaprabha's ccountof Tulsi 's cl igiousconquest fsouthcrn ndia 1907-lq7l (4can'a Tulsi:Daksi|tkc uncelnrcnt.Chlru: Adar3 SahitySengh. q77: 88.5-9q0).

The ri tual c i rc le of the Teraoanth Svetambara ains

RELIGION AND POLITICS.l-hestructureof the Terlpanth vihar as a whole appearsat first sight as an idealrnanifestationf an ancientperipatetic sceticism. closer iew,however, eveals otonly how a centralisedbureaucraticorganisationhas been added to the pristinesegmentaryystemof personalguru-ii4'arelationships,ut also how the laity weregradually ncorporated nto an overarching ramework,which nowadayscombinestraditional orms of moral sovereigntydharmaraj)over a population-cum-territory(anpad)with modern democratic'waysof political-territorial rganisation cf.Dumont1980:229,32).3eMost of thesechanges ere introducedonly recentlyunder dcarya'Iulsi in an attempt both to preserve he traditional way of life of the monasticcc,mmLnity nd to maintain its social influenceunder changed social c onditionslterritorialunification, patialmobility,emancipationf economics,lobalisation).ulsiemployed asically our strategies fter 1949:{ (1) the expansion nd systematisationof asceticwandering, 2) the use of modern media of mass-communication,3) theregulationof popular religion and (4) the differentiationof monastic nstitutions. norder o createan ntegral eligious ystemhat s capableo address nationwidemassaudience,without violating he Terapanthprinciplesof centralisation nd of directinteractionbetween ascetics nd the laity, Tulsi first tried to stretch the ascetics'capability or barefootwalking o its physical imits (having overedmore than 70.000mileshimself). n order o compensateor theself-createdentrifugalendencies e henhad o improve he communicationetweenhe nowevenmorewidelyscattered roupsand o organise ay support n remoteareas.He thereforedecided a) to draft a moralcode of conduct for the laity (AK) (while remaining silent about their actualconvictions)41nd (b) to reform he monastic rganisation:y modernising ertain ulesof conduct (use of nricrophones,lush toilets etc.), introducing a new system ofadninistration(nikdya),and institutionalising nd expanding he novicestatus.Thereformprogramwas inaliy completed ith the ntroduction f lhe samanorder, hat sa thirdcategorymidwaybetween he ascetic nd he householderor the proselytization

39.The monasticorganisation as bccn described y acaryaMahaprajnahirnselfas a feudal mixture ofocspotism nd democracy', because t combineshe ideal principleof scgmentationwith an elementoftunctionaldifferentiation nd centralised ureaucraticulc (Nathmal 1968:123, albir 1983:43) . emocracy,bccause ulesare not mposed, ut are reelyaccepted; espotism, ecause ne of the main functions f thedcarya s the 'royal' privi lcgc o settle disputes nd o imposesanctions D ransgressors f monastic ules.40.Cf. Singer's 1968:a38ff., 985:35) ather negative oti on of'adaptive'strategies.aI. A tnical 'church' stratcgy o accounl for the hiatus between dogma and practice which Luhmam(19.32:30-5-?)contrastswith thc three strategies f popular el igion:1. unreflcctive rthodory,2. nterruptionot tnterdependence,3. reflective oubt. A vcrsionof the second trategy, here bel iefis not bel ievedas asystembut as it werc topological: oint for point' (p. 3O7), a s rccentlybeen describcdby Humphrey &Laidlaw 1994:123-4) .

13 9


13/31

14 0 PeteTFLUGELof Jainism abroad, in i980. The media could now be legitimatelyused by thedharmasanglt ithoutconceding ontrolentirely o the laity,or blurring he distinctionbetween eligionand society.Bechert's 1970) emarkson recentchangesn SinhalaBuddhism lso apply o the Terdpanth oday:

"Practically, dualstructure adcomc nto existencen the historical evelopment f the Theravidasangho: L was organizedalong more modern organizational ines, but it had to keep the oldstructuresas prescribed ry the vinoya.Thc new structureswere Decessary,o doubt, for the survivalof the sugha - but the old one had to be preserved n order (o make the proceedingsof thesanghalawful" (p.7?3).How are he spheres f religionandsociefy elated n practice? he crucialpointis hat,eve4 houghBhiksu enouncedraditional otions f group eligion nd herebyratifiedthe relativeautonomyof social ife, from a devotee's oint of view, religiousvalues houldstill encompassll socialpursuits.But in contrasto the formerSnpiljyasand bhattdrakshe Terdpanthacaryar indeedmost moderndcdryas) annotdirectlycontrol religious) ropertyor the social ife of their ay ollorvers nymore. rocessesfcontrol thereforeoperate ndirectly, hrough 'secular'institutions,and through theindividual eligious ersonaof their followers,which may becomeprogressivelyixed(ethicised)hrougha competitive itualsystem f self-imposedehavioural omnitments(vrats)hatareassociatedith specified eligious tatus ategories hich mply he moralright o expect espect nd eligious ervicesromthe ower anks. t is mportant o notethat abstract ain religious rinciples, ike ahirysd,n practicealways arrypragmarrceven egal implications nd presupposeystems f religious anctions nd customarybehavioural pecifications hichare ess isible.The actualobservancef vowscan, fat all, only be enforced nformallyvia public opinion and sanctionedhrougha systemof freelyacceptable enances hich s aclministeredhroughvarious ormsof religiousbook-keeping. ucha religioussystem f control hroughseelsorgeweber 19g5:2g3)differs rom modernstate-bureaucracyecauset doesnot operaten a disemboclieday,but is predicatedon the personal nteractionof guru and r;ya and on the exemplaryconductof the acdrya,who is the final authorityof religious nowledge nd sectarianreligious aw. However t shows eaturesof the old patrimonial bureaucrary loyalty,personal uthority,and avor)(p. 127-131,692ff.)hichprevailed n the formerprincelystates Rudolph & Rudolph 1983:194). ut although he monastic ommunity tself sgovernedike a ittle kingdomon thebasis f organisationalules tnaryadd) ndcentraloffices@ad), ts jurisdiction does not formally extend owards he laity. ReligioussanctionsQtrayascitt)an only be imposed n their own demand.There s no space ere o providea detailecl nalysis f the multiple ayers f Jain(socio-)eligious egulations nd he history f theiremergence.t is sufficient o re-state

The ritual circleof the TerEpanthSveti.mbaraains 14l1le general rincipleof self-referential i ty:a2nternalprocessesf rule-selectionndspecificationlwayseflectwiderprocessesf social ifferentiation ndhistorical hange.'rheycombineat eachstage he pastand he present, niversal eligiousprinciplesandspecificnstitutional ules,as s manifestn our sketchof the historicalelaborationofTerapanthimonasticaw through he extension f the traditional methodof imposingreligious ows' nvolution s evident n the existence f at least wo different ayersofrituals nd rules, enerated y the doctrinal istinction etween redominantly eligiousandsocialorientations:1) Jain canonica|rituals e.g.avasyak,akkhi,paryusa4) and(2) Terapanthi organisational'rituars(e.g. ikhat,hdjari, marytutantahotsw);a3 lusanalogoustructures mong he laitv,who additionally articipaten .Hindu,groupreligioh.This esult eadsus o the question f the relevance f the (post-)colonialsettingfor he emergence f newdoctrinal nterpretationsnd he development f bureaucraticandcommunal tructures mong he Terdpanth.n hiscelebrated aperNa ionarism ndContmunalisnl umont (1980)argued hat communalism s ,,the affirmation of thereligious om-rnunitysa politicalgroup" p. 315) s a hybridphenomenon, anus-facedtransitionalstate - intermediarybetween raditionalgroup rerigions and modernreligionsof the individual. He further argued hat cornmunalisms the ideological

manifestationf an emerging lass-curture,hichdevelopedmainly hrough he mpactof colonial ule and he christianmissionary odel:4Particularlyhe middle-classliteswere enabled to free themselvesrom traditional forms of religious and politicalhegemony, nd to transform hemselvesnto dominantsocialg.oupr. n the contextofoverall social change,many of theseelites drifted increasinglyowards the newly

42 SceParsons'argumenthat hc.increasing xlernal iffercntiation fa sub-system as o be compensatedoth by a higher levcl of internal arjriiiitiltln una th" g"n".utoation of its principle of differentiation; anJ-oonasekeres.(1986:39) nd cort's (199lb) obseruationhat within the Svetimbar mendicanto.d".. .ooJIrnd-s replication^ofmany elements .f he;ocial order" (p. 652) and viceyersa Bants 1992:122-3).hccrapantb.caseof an asceticorder that combinesboth'ihe pi inciplesor ."g-"o\u.y aifferentiationandxreaucrat icorganisar ionrhoy: j l : . "91,g:neral isabi l i tyof therhesisofcai l rat( r975:2: / ) ,Reynei l (1985:1) ,;;3111aser.ere.1986:39), orr (1991b:661-1) nd Babb '(1996:51,(hat Jain u.."ii. groui, are modcled onnc urganisal ionalpr inciplcs f k inship nd caste.43' n practicc he distinctionbetwecnpersonal nd socialaspects f Jain practices roposedby Johnsoni:;t::ll :,'-*'"'':: (1ee5)erc.dissorvcs. tr,ougi-'car,ooical rirualsnominarry ddress he ndividuar,::r:;iifiJJ,nfiJ?i:ilx'J.llf::: [1l,ffi*:}::il".i",";:"1,:::"A5;#i,:+:'fr[ttrit:.|;ogrouP leader ndarehighly itualised"*"r"i.". among ains-and-Buddhiitslike cf.l;3.:l:l''l (1980: 29, I5)view hatsocial hangen conremporaryndiashould orbe undersroods"'"' u cof nralmDosltlonuteither sa mixture'or a combination'of theoldand he new p. 229, 15)a\bccnechoedven y hiscritics cf.vandcr yccr 7 f)4::l6).


14/31

142 PeterFt-UcEt-

emerging orms of lay religiosity, asedon doctrines f 'this-worldlyasceticism' n theone hand and corporate ay association s n the other.as

As we haveseen, he samecombination f modernised eligiousdoctrinesandbureaucraticorganisationcan be found among the Terdpant h as well. But a layrevoiutionhasnot takenplace,and the continuous ominance f the ascetic rthodoxyand caste revented ttempts o combineold and new eatures nto a newcommunalistform of Jainism.Moreover, he fundamental rinciplesof the Jain lay-revolution'goback o the 15thC., and Svetambareformers ever ejectedmonasticismssuch,whileDigambar ay movements etainedmost featuresof traditional Jain group religion(image-worship tc). The emergence f theseprinciplescannotbe attributed o thehistorical nfluenceof colonialisn or christian rotestantism.n contrast o TheravadaBuddhism,aincodes f this-worldlyasceticism'iravakacara)ave canonical'rootsandcanhardlybe nterpreted sa modernphenomenon.hus,everything peaks or a morecautious heory of Jain religious efornr.Acarya Tulsi himself,who has worried fornational integrationand Jain unity throughouthis life, "is not in favour of theamalgamationof different sects nto one" (Mahdprajna 1994:i88)and has alwaysopposedcommunalismn the name of 'pure' religion and freedom of thought. InDumontian erms, he Ter6panth resently mploys 'mi-xed' trategy f modernisation,by striving o hierarchically ncompass n increasingly odernsocialsystemwithin atraditional eligious ystem.n accordance ith the overallpattern, he egislation f themodernstatehad a greater mpacton the formationof contemporary erapanthi ay-associations,hich mediatebetweensecularand religious aw, than on the monasticorder itself. Within the monasticorder adaptation o changed ocial circumsrancesoccurred mainly through hierarchical differentiation, hat is the developmentofintermediarynstitutions etween he ascetics roper and the laity. But on secondarylevelshe tenuous o-existencef religious nd socialorientationss ntenselyelt by thelaity.As t becomesmore unctionally ifferentiated, odern ndiansociety orrespondsless nd ess o the ancient ystem f hierarchically ifferentiated lassesvama)and, orthe middle classes t least, he relevanceof the religiousprinciple of hierarchy sprogressivelyeduced o guarantyinghe psychologicai ompatibility f an increasinglycompartmentalizeday of life with the deal of an ntegralpersonality.n the wordsofMahaprajna 1994) ('The individual today representshe capitalistaspectof vestedinterests. y presenting im with the principleof renunciation, charyaSri hasgivenextensiono the ndividualand addeda newdimen-siono his social haracter,,p. 187).

45. The detailsof this gencral rend vary.They includedevotionalorms of worship (bhal


15/31

PCTET LUGEL

U. THE Tnnepalru LAIrY AND THEIR oRGANISATIONS

also the specific institutional regulations of the sect as a corporate group' rcommi tment to thesevows isnominal l ySt lengthenedthroughthe i rco l lec t i verec i ta t i

t44

There are today about 500.000 someTerf,panthis ay: 1 million] foliowers of theTerapanth scetics.heyareorganised nd ightly ntegrated ith the^t"": t-:Tl:Tt:l,;;;;;; ;f ways.Mtst oi themwereborn nto rhe sect, owever,or convertst ismandatorytohaveantnterviewwi ththeacarya,andtoundergotheformal layin i t ia t ion. . l - - ^ t ^ : - a ^in tother ightbel ief(samyakwadiha).Thisr i tual ,whichtransformsindividualsinsecond-order scetics, , '.rul' brahntar.s Schubring1978:285),s usually publilperformedundertheguidanceofthedcarya,whoonlyunderspecialcircumstancesalsoexcommunicatesrdvaks.Ideallyhe candidatesakea vow to accept he Jain doctrineand practice in general (anuvrat), and another vow to accept the marya'dd of dcaryBhiksu, tosupport theTerapanthascet i cs , tomoni tor the i rbehav iour ,andtomainta iexclusiveoyalty o thedcaryahroughout heir ife (lrnak ni;thpatr) (AK I:360-376).Acandidate,therefore,acceptsnotonlytheuniversalmoralpr incip lesofJain ism'br

ffi;;;;, i;-, ; jurisdictionreligious,ociar,egal). his s manifest oth

inpubl ica^ssembl ies(hajan)andbyaSystemofre l ig ioussanct ions,whichtheascetiupity ,o adjudicate onfessedransgressions.osteffective, owever, re nformalsoci,1".r,"r. attact d o prevail ing otions f honour nd ace,whichneed ot be enforcbythesabhapal r( theleadersofthelocal lay-communi t ies)whoonlyinterveneint- L - J L ^ . , ^caseo fc r ime. In th i swayast rongmora land indeed lega lbond ises tab l i shedbe twetheacdryaandhis aity,who areexpectedo adhere trictly o his politicalguidanceregulations cf. Sangave 980:379j. lthough the actuya annotexercise ny politiauthor i tyoverhis la i ty,h isdi rect iveshavegreatpersuasivepowerandbecomeruleal lpract icalpurposes's implybythefactofh isconst i tut iverolebothforthereprtof iain religionand of the Terdpanth ommunity'n practice' here s a certain

,8.,,1. I dedicatemysclf o themaryadaof Acarya Bhikqu, he disciples f.t 9 Tela.nanth ltann' andheadof he order.Z.I r ruup"rp" iuluyrcmainvi l i lant , regardingtheindi r is ibi l i tyof thcorder '3 ' Ishal lgive efugc o anyoncwho has beencxcommunicated y the orii.r. 4. I shallnot concurwith any attittwh i charenot i nconcord* , i t t " - o ra" r , o t t hedcarya . 5 . I ff i ndany f au l t s i nanysddhuorsadhv i o f ,lli:l i'ffiLffi";"# ii,".,ryo, the carya.rhall ot ubticisei. o.1 hitl llT:1L the uritv rfoodanddr ink.T.Ishal ldevoteeverydayonesdntayik[4Sminuteslorat leasttwenty.minutestorel igiobservances' r. AK 1991 ,: i i ; ' l 'fiftougtt he asceiics-p'opagatehis'boro Teripanthis rarely acceptsutrvaktva frksd or rheottuvratsbecause hese u'".u"ty g"n"'J -d 9,trnT.d t]lltJllt ::T::T:i:"Y;fiitri#lH;; ffi;';;,p".in. ;i""uut uti'.ga' p,ary-akhydn)hichre rincipallvakenpart of rhc sixrhaval jak .bl;;;;;;i;1, .iri., to. a limited periodorl i [elong (1vs 6.1-10 n AK I:29'cor t lggg:260,Laidlaw1EJ5:1t4) .TheAnuvratmovementhasonlygained' lo.000adhcrentsinnear ly50yeand s seenby manyTeraparthtJ rn"t" ^i " -toia sbowand * ***ttuty formalism'

The Sravaknisfu ,has eenntroduced' 1e82;;;;i;" a"*-a of he ormerdulatignT:ll'l:1 :-l,R#i:tT:::*:j;::i,ffiffi;:;"i'i ","#,0""tohavcsect_specificmatyaddsforthelaityaswelt..rtremainsrobe[o* "ffe.tiu"thisattempiofexpanding .nastic rganisationalules o thc aitywill be'

The ritual circleof the TerapanthSvetambaraains

theoccasionalmediating ole of thedcaryan socialdisputes etweenmembers, nd ofhismirror-image,he Terhpanth awyer,who acts n the courtson behalfof the sect. nsum,he Terdpanth,ike other Indiansects, ombineseligious niversalism ith socialexclusivism,nd husconstitutes well-organisednd herefore owerfulpressure-groupthatmediates etween tate,casteand amily.The greatmajorityof the Terdpanthaity andascetics) re Rajasthani isaOsvIIbanids.The fact that the Terdpanth, ike most Jain subsectsSangave1980,Banks1992:121-2),s closelyassociated ith a particularcasteAtuD is also the historicalconsequencef an explicit ule whichprescribedhat onlyBisaOsvalbanitushouldbeinitiatedand accepted s ay followers. t was abandoned nly n the 1950s, nder theimpactof the anti-caste oliticsof the Indiangovernment.aehe RajasthaniOsvEls reseen sa subcategoryf the Marv5ris,whoare odaya verymobileandwealthy egmentof the Indian population G.D. Sharma1984:200).50ver the last 300 yearsmany ofrhemmigrated rom Rajasthan, hichat timesoffered ew economicprospects,o theniajorcitiesof India, where heynow orm small,semi-permanentradingcommunities(Timberg1978:93). raditionally heyoperate hroughkinship inks and maintainwellorganisedoint-family irms with communal ssets hich are controlledby the head ofthe family. Like the Terdpanthacdrya,he head of t he Marvali family firms exercisescivil urisdictionover his sonsandemployees nd otates ispersonnel mainly elativesand long-termassociates f the family from Rajasthan) n order to prevent theirattachmento a particular ocal branchand thus tendenciesowards he prematuredivision f the family businessp. 131,135). e alsodecides n the locations or anetworkof branches iakha, kolli) in promising rading ocationswhere he sendshisyounger ons, ften ('bya process f uncles allingnephews,nd ather s-in-law ons-in-Iaw" Timbergl9Tll.76).Even odaydiaspora erlpanthismaintain nattachmento thehouses&aveiis) f their ancestorspir1s)n Rajasthan, here he cooperatingmembersof the famiiy lineage fu1umb)periodically ssembleor marriages nd funerals i.e.

49.This rule goesback to l-onka. Similarly,Terapanth accepted only those witb whom they can eattogcther" (Singh, Munshi H. The Cqrtesof Marwar. Being a CensusReport of 1891.Jodhpur: Bookslreasure, 1991:110). istorically, t is rulcs ike theseand the political nterestsbchird them, which areprimarilyresponsible or the presentclose ink bptween ainismand commerce, n addition o the quasi'protestantethos' embodied n th e Svetambar ravakacaraiterature tself (cf. Webcr 19?8:207,Williams1983:mi i ) .'10. h" Guju.uti Osvils nrigratedearlier,mainly during he periodof the Chalukya ule (974-1238 .D.),t'om Rajasthan o Gujarat. Today they speak Gujarati and are predominately ollowers of the localMirrtipljak ascetics. hey do not intermarryor interdinewith RajasthaniOsvals,which they consideras alowerstatusgroup (bccause hey'stitl cat onions').RajasthaniOsvalsare intcrnallydividcd n up to foursr'atusclirssss Heta,Paica, Dasa, Blsa).The Bisa Osvals Mv. Bal S ajan)arc consideredstatus-higher hanthc Dasa OsvertsMv. ChoP Sajan). Cf. Babb (1996137-73)on Osvil origin myths, and Sopher (I968:d,24)0n he asting nfluenceof the Chalukyaempire on currentpatterns f Mnrtiptjak pilgrimagecirculation.

145


16/31

PeteTFLUGEL

feastswhich nvolve he pooling and transferof resources),s well as to Osiyan, helegendary lace of or igin of the Osv[l iAti neatJodhpur,where the lineagegodde(kutdevi) aciya Durga) s worshippe


17/31

PeterFI-Ucel14 8

1978:195).Howciosetherelat ionshipbetweenBikanerandtheCalcuttaMarval iswas(andis) i l lustratestheremarkofMahdrajaSuratSinghfromBikaner in lS83:((CalcuttaandBikaner s one" (G.D. Sharma198a;200)' ostof the Mdrvaris raded n cloth andjute,andslowlyestablishedhemselvesn thebusiness orldof calcuttaby gainingmore ,and more baniasl'ripsguaranteedcommissionagencies) rom British. rntt:nu": icompanies.Dur ingtheFirstWorldWartheyachievedaneconomicbreakthroughand.{establ ishedtheinst i tut ionalandfinancia lbasisforthei rpresentposi t ionasoneoftheimost nfluentialbusiness ommunitiesn post-independencendia' \

The history of the Marvalis is well known and it is sufficient o stress hat,'talthoughtherewasaculturalbonilwhichunitedtheRajasthanibaniasinBengal,a'greatdiversity f social circlesexistedwithin the general egional ategory f

'Mawdtis'' Notonlybecausenitially their familieshad to remain n RajastharlsserapanthiMarvariskeptmainlytothemselves,maintainingcloserl inkstotheirancestralhomes,andtootherBisaOsval fami l iesa]Iover lndia,ratherthanwi ththei rneighbours(Jain1988).Theypar t i c ipa tedo fcourse in theact i v i t i eso f themainMarvar io rgan isa t i ons(Mawa lclwmber of commerce,luteAssociation,Marva4samai calcutta (1898),All India MarvariFederation,Mdn,art ReliefSociety) nd other cross-cutting conomic nterest groups'aswell as the main Jain organisations ,Iain sabha,Jain svetambarPancayatiMandir)(Sukhalal i1991:41).T.heemergenceofthesetwoseparatetypesofspecial interestgroupsillustrateshe increasrng om-pa.tmentalizationf economic nd socio-culturalpheresamong ndian business "opi" (Singer 1968:438)' owever' he focus of the socio-religious ctivities f theTerapanthis ecameheTerapanth ablta,whichwasmodelledonsimi larsel f- regulat inginst i tut ionsamong.othersects 'sTheestabl ishmentofthesablta asa ormally registeredeligiousassociation ccurred nly n 1913' n lesponseto theNwalik CelaRefistration iIt of 15.9.1913,hich hreatenedo classify oungJainmendicants ith 'profJssionalbeggars" nd o imprison hem f caughtbeggingon thes t ree ts 'L .S.S inghproposeda four -po in t reso lu t i on to the leg is la t i vecounc i l o f the

55.Terapanthdc_aryasforbadethei rascet ic.stovis i tlargeci t iesandplacesoutsideRajasthanunt i l1949(Narhmal 196g:147-8, . f"--'i".J p.30). Following-ancientpricedent'Bengal was dcclared as aforbiddenarea(anaryaksetr) ot only for ascc(ics_butt.o-to, *o."o a-nd hi ldrcn Timberg 1978:195'193)unti l 1959, hend.aryo ur.t .p""oi'ri**ru, i" C^rcutta Mahaprajna 994:197-8)'onsequently' o rel igious-community could be formed, and the ravaks had to return i'"qu"*tv to o"]i:lll: :::illt *t"t the end otthe ute season March-tune;.*n si-lfu, pu,,.* canbe oundamotg i"t generation xpatriate ainsoutsidelndia QtaceBanks 192:8)-56. For irstance thesetlt Anutdjl Katyaryii rust (fountlcd in 1821 n Ahmedabad,undcr the control of thoBrsa osval Nagarieths) (Tripathi, Dwijendra' nte Dynamicsof Tradirion:.Kytyrblai' Lalbhai and hisEnrrepreneunhip. ew lett t:tilano[-, tssr,c,rs9ff., Banks19i:103-5) or theJain.SvetdmbarConference(founded 1g03 by Ahrnedabad millcxvners) n"tra r*1:roo-2), both of _which contributed to thcdisappearancef the nstitutionof theyati and o the-conte-p"t".V."t** of the reformed sa4tvegi) api iGacchas.etic. (cf. Cort 1989:100, 991a:402-5,991b:659)'

The ritual circleof the TerapanthSveEmbara ains

government f the United Provinces,(topreventminorboysandgirls rom being urnedinto beggars,mendicants r sf,dhus uring he period of their minority either by theparentswho make hem over o the so-called adhus r by sadhuswho make hemsuchby orceor false epresentations"singh 1914:518).ll Jainswerealarmedby the plansof the legislative ouncil,which, f passed s a biil, would havemade the traditionalitinerant life of the Jain mendicants who distance hemselves ehemently rom'brahmarlisslbeggars') mpossible.The Ter1panthis n calcutta joined with theMlrtipDjaks o protestagainst he resolution whichneverbecameaw: he beggars ctof 1948 istinguishesadhw rom beggars')andR.B.G.Mukim rom Bikaner, he rrusteeof the Jain SvetambarPancayatMandir in Calcutta, was invited to coordinate Jainprotest.But verysoonproblemsn working ogether merged, pparently egarding heaccountability f the trustee,who was orced o declare hat the M[rtip[jaks .did nottakeanymoney'forrunning he emple or all the ocalJains sukhalal1991:46-7)..c .Kolhari then decided hat the Ter5panth radition sampraday)ould establishts ownindependent rganisation. sabha meetingunder the presidency f Talu Ram wascalled, and Dh adevawas electedpresidentand KC. Kothiri secretaryof the newTerapanthiSabha.TheSabha huscame nto beingasa formalorganisation ot only oresist heNavalik CelaRegistration ill, and o please he colonial governmentwith socialreforms, ut also o Protect he shares f the Terdpanthisn thereligious ropertyof theJain community n Calcutta.

Although t fulfilled secondaryocial, oliticalandeconomicunctions,heSabhdwas rimarilya vehicle or the defence f communitynterestsn the courts.One of themainactivists nd the second residentof the Terapanth abhdwas chogmal copra(1883-1976).e wasan osvii, born in Derajsar Bikaner),wherehis motherstayednthe amily house haveb),while his fatherp[sraj copra worked n Rangapur Bengal)tlsan accountantmunlm)of I.c. Nahata,an mportant ute merchant..c. Nahatawasthe irst Jain Osvil who broke he religious ule againstravellingoverseas nd went otheUK in 1887.He was hereforedeclared n outcaste y the Bisa Osval ancayat orthe rest of his life, and evenChogmal's ather suffered rom his closecontactswithNahatd.C. Copla differed rom the restof the Terdpanthbusinessommunity hroughhishighereducation.n 1908 e gained law degreen Calcutta,he first of the Marvarifamiliesrom Bikaner o do so, and workedasa specialistn insuranceaw until he was60.He was famed for the free legal advice he gave o 'people in need' - mostlyprominentTerf,panthMirvaris (who odaycontrol he majorityof the great aw irms nCalcutta) and developednto one of the mostactivesocialworkers karyakartas)ftheTerapanthcommunity p. 39,46).The fact that not a businessman,ut a lawyer,rnanof education,ecamehe most nfluential ommunityeader s notuntypical or Jaincommunities.Jainbusinessmeno usually ot dispose f the necessaryculturalcapital'to be able to constructa sufficient deologicalplatform on which to build a lay

r49


18/31

150 PeteTFLUGEL

community.This is why they need intellectuals o do this on their behalf. Theintellectuals,on the other hand, often do not possesseconomiccapital'. Thecharacteristicelationship f hierarchical omplementarityetween scetics nd aity sthus eplicatedwithin he aity tself,whose eadingmembers re ntellectualsn the onehandand businessmenn the other.

Most of the decisiveSabhamembers f the time belonged o the conservative,wing of the TerapanthSravaks nd were supporters f the National Congress. heyreactedo state-legislationut did not press or reformswithin heTeripanth sect tself.They were opposed y the young adicalsof the now defunctTerdpanthTarury angh'(youth assembly), eadedby Bhanvarmal inghi and SiddharajThalha1ha, ho evenchallengedhe monasticortho


19/31

PeterFt-ucel The ritual circle of the Terdoanth Svetambara Jains

STATUS ND POWEROne of the main ncentivesor beinga candidate or any of the key positions s to gaincontrolover he management f the assets f the MS trusts. he community ropertiesof the Terapanth ectare, ike tlroseof other contemporar y ain sub-sects,eld n thenameof the sect sangh), ut managed y the elected, suallymale eadersof the laycommunitiessamaj),husestablishing system f balanceshat are crucially ependenton the maintenance f a strict separation etweenascetics nd aity. Decisions boutinvestmentsn new socio-religiousrojects re usually akenby leadingmembers f theTerapanthcommunitywhich assembleat the feet' of the dctuya o discuss he issueinformally(antaik go$lht). he dcdryadoes not legally own any property,but he isinforn\edof all newdevelopments nd always sked or his adviceon where o donatesurplusmoney or charitable educational) urposes nd how to spend he fundsof theTerapanth oundations. e will givehis blessings nly f he agreeswith a project,andnobody will act againsthis recommendations.his arrangements the norm amongcontemporary ains,with the exception f the DigambarTerdpanthmovements.fl

It is necessaryo distinguish etween he charitablenstitutions, n the onehand,and the trusts and andedpropertyownedby them and their members, n the other.Whethera particular und s treatedas secular'or as socio-religious'propertydependsentirelyon the context. he statute hat "anyproprietary oncernwhose roprietor s anassociate f (the) Mahasabha" JSTM 1981:4) an also be a member, acilitates hetemporary ransformation f anybusiness ontrolledby Teripanthis nto a charitableinstitution.Charitable undsare sometimes sedascommunal ources f creditand ulfilmajor economic unctionswithin Jain communities.n fact, he crux of disputes verpilgrimage ites nd he nternalpoliticaldynamic f Jain associationss often he battlefor the controlof community ssets hichhavebeenaccumulated ver decades r evencenturies.6l hese unds have to be invested n the best nterestsof the community.Therefore he mostprosperous nd capable ndividuals re usually lected o the postsof chief rustee, reasurer nd general ecretary, ho ake all economic ecisionsor theMS trustsandmanagehe fundsof the association s f it were a businessMahaprajna19&7:17).62luspotlatch-like ystem avours he rich and supplieshem with accesso60. Cf. Sangave1980:376-9,Mehta 1982:100-2, anks 1992:101-8,123, arrithers 1989:.231,?3.3.(r1.Cf. Sangavc 980:329, eynell1991:51, 3,Banks 1992:6, arrithers1988:817-8, albir 1990:178.62.They have o prcserve,maintain, evelop nd safcguard ll heproperties nd undsof the Mahasabhatt(JSTM 1987:22), nd can ('giveloans on interest .. without securities'(p. 23, cf. Oldfield 1982:87-8).Generally, he management f Jain rel igiousproperty s basedon trust.However,sometimes he powerfulfcw do not repay what they have withdrawn from the community funds, and accusations bout themishandl ing f communityaccounts re commonplace. ee or instancc he allegedmisuse fJ\fB-funds byits secretaryC.R. Bhansali P. Mukherjee CPI intensifies robe nto swindle...", heAsianAge2j.5.l$)1,p . 10-11) .

l) Jt52oretl icatedn discipleshipo thedcaryu.Thisartly xplainsheacarya'sower' ecauseffi:;;;"^,"'o '"o'"'oual canremain n the MS'seThe organisationalrameworkof the MS is designedo guarantee centralisednationwidecoordinat io[ofsocio.re l ig iousact iv i t iesofthe,TeraPanth ' l i 'o . ' " formalstructure smodernanddemocratic'andcombineseaturesof bureaucrattt "Ylt'1t]'""1- *andterri torialsegmentation,paral leltothedhatmasahglt,Thehighestrepresentatlve.bodyoftheMSistheGeneralMeetingofal lmembers.Butmoreimportantwi thregardto therunn ingo f theday{o .daya f fa i rso f theorgan isa t i on i s theb iannua lAnnua lGeneralMeetingof at least51 members'who asslmbleat the site of the maryetda"ma l to ts (N. I tsma in func t ion i s thee lec t i ono fapres iden t ,whoactsaSthesabhapat i( l eadero f the laycommun i ty )and is the fo ' *u lequ iva len t to theacaryawi th in theoveral lh ierarchicalstructure,ofdual leadership,whichistypical formodernJainsects.T\esabhdpa,i fu l f i lsmainlyrepresentat iveandgeneralsupervis ional funct ions'Heshould ensure hat the rules and reguiationsof tle araryo and the MS are correctlyobserved,andhastherighttocriticisethebehavioural.laxity'ofi tsmembers.Duringhispresidencyt" is notinuiif fo""O to neglect is. wnbusinessecause e s preoccupiedwithvisitingandsupervisingmeetingsandfunctionsofthelocalsabllasthroughoutlndia.Like the acarya ortheheal of a traditionai

Marv6{ 'greatfirm' he is constantly n themove.However,effectively, he MS is managed ndsupervise by a Working, ottttttitteeof l00members( incl . thepresident)whoaredi rect lynominatedbythepresident(andwi ththeconsento| theacarya)foratwoyearsterrn.T\eWorkingCommitteet lansactsal lnecessarybusinessoftheMs.Itmeetsfourt imesayearandismainlyresponsib leforthe framingof regulations'he creationof new departments r committees'and

thesettingupandmanagementofcharitiesandfunds.Italsoappointsthegeneralsecretary'thetreasurer,andtheheads(scnyojaks)ofState-committees'andprescribestheirduties(p. 15-S). he key personn the actual unningof the organisltl*.t:^tot the presidentbut the general ".r.oo. t" u.,, as he publi spokesman f the MS and opelates

tsoffice in Calcutta,*t'"'" tt'" accountsand the voters ist etc' are kept' His

mainresponsib i l i t iesaretokeepproperaccoun| \ toundertakeanylegalact ions,andtosignall necessaryapers n ttrenameof the MS (p' 26-30)'The two'otherkey persons

rethe treasurer nd the chief rustee.R ryrt"- of mutualcontrols etween hem and

hegeneral ecretar

The Ritual Circle of the Terapanth Svetambara Jains

Documents

Transcript of The Ritual Circle of the Terapanth Svetambara Jains