Non-possession
Non-possession is a religious tenet followed in Buddhist, Hindu, and Jain traditions in South Asia. In Jainism, is the virtue of non-possessiveness, non-grasping, or non-greediness.
is the opposite of. It means keeping the desire for possessions to what is necessary or important, which depends on one's life stage and context. The precept of is a self-restraint from the type of greed and avarice where one's own material gain or happiness comes by hurting, killing, or destroying other human beings, life forms, or nature.
is related to and in part a motivator of, both from giver's and receiver's perspective.
Non-possession is one of the principles of, a philosophical system based on various religious and philosophical traditions originating in India and Asia Minor, and put into practice by Mahatma Gandhi as part of his nonviolent resistance. This particular iteration of is distinct because it is a component of Gandhi's active non-violent resistance to social problems permeating India. As such, its conception is tempered with western law. Non-possession is, by definition, concerned with defining the concept of possession. Gandhi intertwined non-possession and voluntary poverty in application, but living according to the guidelines of non-possession is not the same as living in poverty. In practice, the principle of taking what one needs, is essential to the viability of non-possession/.
Etymology and meaning
Aparigraha is a compound in Sanskrit, made of "" and "". The prefix "" means "non-", so "" is the opposite of ""—speech and actions that oppose and negate.means 'to amass', 'to crave', 'to seek', 'to seize', and 'to receive or accept' material possessions or gifts from others. The word also includes the idea of doing good with the expectation of benefit or reward, not just for the sake of merely doing good. includes the results as well as the intent; in other words, it means the attitudes of craving, possessiveness, and hoarding, but also the things that have been acquired because of those attitudes. That is a means to liberate the soul from the cycle of birth and death was first asserted by the first in Jainism, Rishabhdeva.
Monier-Williams states that the word has roots in the Vedic texts as well, referring to fencing an altar, enclosing something, assuming or putting on a dress or receiving something. In the Brahmanas and later texts, the term contextually means accepting or taking a gift; acquiring, possessing, claiming, controlling something such a property; assistance; or constraining force on others. In some texts, the root reflects the state of marriage or having a family.
The virtue of means characteristically taking what one truly needs and no more. In the Yoga school of Hinduism, this concept of virtue has also been translated as "abstaining from accepting gifts", "not expecting, asking, or accepting inappropriate gifts from any person", and "not applying for gifts which are not to be accepted". The concept includes in its scope non-covetousness and non-possessiveness. includes the psychological state of "letting go and the releasing of control, transgressions, fears" and living a content life unfettered by anxieties.
Difference from Asteya
is also one of the five vows taken by Jain ascetic monks. It is the virtue of non-stealing and not wanting to appropriate, or take by force or deceit or exploitation, by deeds or words or thoughts, what is owned by and belongs to someone else., in contrast, is the virtue of non-possessiveness and non-clinging to one's own property, non-accepting any gifts or particularly improper gifts offered by others, and of non-avarice, non-craving in the motivation of one's deeds, words and thoughts.Jainism
is one of the virtues in Jainism. It is also one of the five vows that both householders and ascetics must observe. This Jain vow is the principle of limiting one's possessions and limiting one's desires.In Jainism, worldly wealth accumulation is considered a potential source of greed, jealousy, selfishness, and desires. Giving up emotional attachments, sensual pleasures, and material possession is a means of liberation in Jain philosophy. Eating enough to survive is considered more noble than eating for indulgence. Similarly, all consumption is more appropriate if it is essential to one's survival, and inappropriate if it is a form of hoarding, showing off, or for ego. Non-possession and non-attachment are forms of virtue, and are recommended particularly in later stages of one's life. After, is the second most important virtue in Jainism.
Jainism views attachments to material or emotional possessions as what leads to passions, which in turn leads to violence. Jain texts say that "attachment to possessions" is of two kinds: attachment to internal possessions, and attachment to external possessions. The fourteen internal possessions are as follows:
External possessions are divided into two subclasses: the non-living and the living. According to Jain texts, both internal and external possessions are proved to be .
Economic and ethical application
In the Jain tradition, the principle of non-possession serves as the foundation for a distinct system of business ethics and philanthropy. While the ascetic vow demands the total renunciation of property, the lay vow interprets non-possession as the "voluntary limitation of desires".Merchant ethics
Historically, the restriction on agriculture led the Jain community to specialize in mercantile trades, banking, and law. The ethic of non-possession acted as a stabilizing force within this economic activity; by limiting personal consumption, Jain merchants accumulated surplus capital which was reinvested into the community rather than spent on lavish displays of wealth. This reputation for ethical restraint and creditworthiness allowed Jain merchant guilds to become dominant financial institutions in medieval and colonial India.Philanthropy and stewardship
The doctrine links non-possession directly to charity. Wealth exceeding the limits set by one's Iccha-parimana vow is viewed not as personal property, but as a resource held in trust for the welfare of the wider society. This structural requirement led to the proliferation of Jain-funded libraries, animal hospitals, and educational institutions, institutionalizing the concept that wealth must be discharged ethically.Hinduism
In the Yoga Sūtras, is listed as the fifth of the or code of self-restraint, after,,, and .is thus one of the five essential restraints in Hinduism, that with five essential practices are suggested for right, virtuous, enlightened living. While Yoga Sutras distill the ten and, these virtues appear, in various discussions, in Vedic texts. It is part of ethical theory in Hinduism.
James Wood states that is the virtue of abstaining from appropriating objects because one understands the disadvantages in "acquiring them, keeping them, losing them, being attached to them, or in harming them". Patanjali suggests that greed and coveting material wealth increases greed and possessiveness, a cycle that distracts from good reasons for activity that should motivate a person:
Restraint from possessiveness and greed, or, leads one away from harmful and injurious greed, refraining from harming others, and towards the spiritual state of good activity and understanding one's motives and origins. The virtue of non-coveting and non-possessing is a means of, a path of spiritual existence. In the outer world, manifests as non-possessiveness with simple living; while in psychological terms, it is a state of non-attachment, non-craving, and contentment.
Satyagraha
Gandhi's view was that possession is more trouble than it is worth:The possession of anything then became a troublesome thing and a burden. Exploring the cause of that joy, I found that if I kept anything as my own, I had to defend it against the whole world.... And I said to myself: if want it and would take it, they do so not from any malicious motive but... because theirs was a greater need than mine.
Relation to charity and conservation
Some suggest that implies charity and conservation. Taking and wasting more of nature, or from others, is inconsistent with the ethical precept of.Scholars suggest allies with ideas that inspire environmental and ecological sustainability. suggests the reduction of waste and adds a spiritual dimension to preventing destructive consumption of ecosystems and nature.