Prof. G.C. Pande's Contribution to Jaina Thought

Summary

Mukul Raj Mehta’s article surveys the contributions of the historian and philosopher Professor Govind Chandra Pande (1923–2011) to Jain studies. Although best known for his work on Buddhism and Indian history, Pande was one of the first modern scholars to analyse Jain thought from a philosophical perspective. The article chronicles his engagement with Jainism beginning with his 1963 book on the early history of Jainism, which argued that Jaina literature provides invaluable insights into ancient Indian social and cultural history. In lectures delivered in 1974 and 1977, Pande highlighted the Śramaṇa heritage of Jainism and Buddhism. He characterised Śramaṇism as a rational, universal and non‑sectarian religio‑philosophical movement that opposed Vedic ritualism and caste hierarchy. In these lectures he emphasised that Jainism upholds moral equality, non‑violence and individual responsibility; he contended that its critique of caste and authoritarianism is relevant for modern society. The article summarises Pande’s 1984 lectures on Jaina political thought, which examined Jain responses to kingship and social organisation. Pande argued that Jaina political theory centres on ahiṃsā (non‑violence), self‑restraint and decentralised power; he pointed out that Jainism advocates limited state authority, protection of living beings and moral leadership rather than coercive control. Mehta also discusses Pande’s exploration of the doctrine of karma. Pande explained that karma in Jainism is not mere moral retribution but a complex of material particles that bind to the soul due to actions of body, speech and mind. This view distinguishes Jainism from Buddhist and Brahmanical theories of karma and underscores the religion’s emphasis on personal effort to cleanse the soul. The article notes Pande’s appreciation for Jain epistemology, particularly the doctrine of anekāntavāda (many‑sidedness), which promotes intellectual humility and tolerance. Pande saw this principle as a model for pluralistic dialogue. Mehta concludes that Pande’s work broadened the scope of Jain studies by integrating historical, philosophical and ethical dimensions. His writings brought Jainism into comparative discussions with other Indian philosophies and highlighted its contemporary relevance. The author suggests that future scholars can build on Pande’s insights by examining how Jain principles can inform debates on environmental ethics, non‑violence and social justice.