________________
XXVI : MAHĀPRATYĀKHYĀNA-PRAKĪRNAKA
use of the members of monastic institution, the fact remains that they, too, are served by offering food etc procured and prepared at the expense of some wealth at some stage by somebody. Without such employment of wealth the monastic institution will be deprived of the services of the householders, as they will not be able to procure clothes and other monastic equipage essential for practising proper monastic conduct. Again, the mentions of service of the monastic institution and that of the fellow-followers of the faith has been mentioned in the Jñātādharmakathariga as causing the gain of Tīrthankara nāma-karma. The giving of food, clothes etc in charity has been accepted as acts of piety. In support of this contention, we would like to quote from the canonical texts that even the Tīrtharikaras give an year-long charity before accepting self monastic ordination. We would like to know from Muniji if the charity practised by the Tīrtharkaras is without the employment of wealth for the purpose or whether it also falls in the category of violent practice? It is understandable that the monks do not preach violence, but how can it be accepted that they do not make the lay followers aware of their duties of charity etc.? We fail to understand as to how Muniji has tried to term a Prakirnaka like Aturapratyākhyāna, which is predominantly spiritual in character and helps in the development of monastic virtues, as unacceptable merely on the basis of mentioning of the se, vice to the monastic institution and that to the fellow followers?
About the unacceptability of Ganividyā, the argument advanced by Muniji is that it prohibits the activities like plucking of hair, giving and accepting monastic ordination, rendering
22
Jñātädharmkathāsūtra, 8/14. Ibid, 8/154.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
