ABSTRACT
It is believed by the Jains that the holistic phronesis of Sallekhanā (‘last fast’) prepares one for confronting impending death more honourably than would otherwise be the case. While at one time considered to be a closed-door religious practice, sallekhanā/santhāra might just testify to an empathic and humane approach towards the plight of the incapacitated or terminally ailing agent. There are normative and bioethical ramifications, as well as legal implications of the practice. Secular Indians argue that when a basic right is not forthcoming or abrogated by the state, the aggrieved citizen may exercise the right to die or resort to nonculpable auto-homicide. Significantly, the High Courts and the nation's Apex Court have compared such acts of attempted suicide to euthanasia (medically assisted death), adjudging the former to be constitutionally defensible. This argument, however, is compounded by the recent Rajasthan High Court order upholding a writ to prohibit sallekhanā in law on the grounds that it is a purely secular-utilitarian practice which, paradoxically, is pitted against the basics of Jaina religion; hence, the praxis is not protected by Articles 25–26 (freedom of religious practices) or by fundamental rights (Articles 14–21). The Jains argue otherwise and draw from scriptural sources and bioethical considerations to defend their communal practice. The consequences of this debate are examined and considered extensively in this chapter.
