.jpg?width=1200)
Mumbai: A 74-year-old Jain woman in Chembur's Tilak Nagar died on Monday after embracing Santhara - a ritual as old as the 2400-year-old Jain religion.
The woman had lost her husband recently and after she announced her decision to relinquish food and water, hundreds of Jains visited the flat where she lived with her son and his family. The family declined to speak about her death.
Voluntary starvation to embrace death is largely practiced by the Shwetambar sect (so-called because the monks wear white clothing). The community considers it the ultimate way to attain moksha (salvation) when one's life has served its purpose. The ritual, also called Sallekhana, is controversial.
.jpg)
A petition on the issue has been pending with the Supreme Court since 2015. The apex court stayed an order of the Rajasthan High Court which had banned the practice following a petition by a Jaipur resident Nikhil Soni.
.jpg)
The ban had led to large protest rallies by Jains. Ultimately, a group of Jain organisations appealed in the Supreme Court against the ban and got a stay on the Rajasthan High Court order. "The Supreme Court stayed the order and issued notices, but till date we have not been served with the notices," said advocate Madhav Mitra, who had represented Soni.
Soni, who is now a lawyer himself, declined to speak on the case, citing personal reasons. However, Mitra said that his client had approached the courts after an incident in his neighbourhood, Malaviya Nagar. Soni was convinced that the person who was undergoing Santhara in a neighbouring house was not doing it willingly. "He had heard the person crying for food and water. He called the police who visited the neighborhood but refused to intervene. He filed a petition in the Rajasthan High Court," said Mitra.
On August 10, 2015, nearly nine years after the petition was filed, the court banned the practice, declaring that those embracing the practice can be prosecuted under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code for attempting suicide. Family and community members who encouraged the practice can be tried under Section 306 for abetment.
The Rajasthan High Court caused a furore, with Jains holding rallies on the streets of Jaipur, asking the court to reconsider its decision to ban the ancient practice.
During the protests, Arihant Rishiji, founder of a group called the Jayam Ideal Youth Organization, had said that Santhara was never considered suicide as it is meant to get moksha from existing life and punarjanam or rebirth.
However, Mitra said it was his personal view that a majority of the cases are not voluntary. "Old people are instigated to take it up. This is the actual situation though there could be some cases where people are motivated by religion (to undergo the ritual)," said Mitra.
When Shekhar Hattangadi, a Mumbai-based lawyer and a documentary filmmaker, spoke to Jain monks and lay members of the community during his five-year-long research into the subject for his film on the subject, they harped on their conviction that the practice cannot be compared to suicide. While suicide could be driven by desperation and hopelessness, the decision to embrace Santhara was taken after introspection and a desire to cleanse oneself of karmic encumbrances, he was told.
Hattangadi's 30-minute-long film received nearly eight awards but was never released officially because of the court stalemate. "The film was still being made when there was a stay on the verdict of the Rajasthan High Court. I added a declaration in the film that the ban had been stayed," said Hattangadi.
Jain scholars said that Santhara is not a common practice and is restricted to the Sthanakwasi Shwetambar sect. "Some Jain sects actively forbade the idea," said Dr Bipin Doshi, lecturer in Jain philosophy at the University of Mumbai.
.jpg)
Doshi said that the fact that those who embrace the ritual are old and take their family's permission distinguishes it from suicide. "The whole process is gradual and guided; it is spiritual," added Doshi whose father embraced the ritual in 1984 at the age of 82 years. His decision was prompted by an illness that rendered him immobile.
