Aparigraha is About Anticapitalism

The lay-practice of aparigraha is not about owning less. It's about rejecting ownership.

In today’s global context, where capitalism’s excesses have led to massive inequality, environmental destruction, and social harm, the Jain principle of Aparigraha—non-possession—offers a compelling critique of both individual materialism and the broader systems of accumulation. While traditionally understood as a call for personal restraint, Aparigraha can be expanded to align with anti-capitalist thought, providing a framework for rejecting systems that perpetuate inequality and exploitation.

In this essay, I will distinguish between individual ethical practices and the broader systemic changes required to achieve true non-violence, using commodity Ahimsa and structural Ahimsa.

Individual Consumerism and the Limits of Commodity Ahimsa

In recent years, ethical consumerism has gained popularity as a way to combat the social and environmental harms of capitalism. People are encouraged to make ethical purchasing decisions—opting for fair-trade, eco-friendly, or cruelty-free products to reduce harm. This approach, which in Jainism we can call commodity Ahimsa, refers to non-violence in the marketplace: reducing harm through individual consumer choices. Examples of commodity Ahimsa include adopting a plant-based diet, buying sustainably sourced goods, or avoiding products from exploitative companies.

However, while commodity Ahimsa is important, it tends to place the burden of change on the individual rather than addressing the larger systemic drivers of exploitation and harm. Ethical consumerism, in many ways, commodifies non-violence, turning it into a purchasable product while leaving the structures of capitalism—the root cause of many forms of violence—intact. This focus on individual choices diverts attention away from the need for deeper systemic changes. For instance, the ability to buy ethical goods is often only available to those with economic privilege, leaving the broader system of inequality untouched.

Expanding Aparigraha Through Structural Ahimsa

In contrast, structural Ahimsa focuses on transforming the systems that perpetuate violence, exploitation, and inequality. Rather than emphasizing individual restraint, structural Ahimsa addresses the broader economic and social structures that enable accumulation at the expense of human and ecological well-being. From the perspective of Aparigraha, the pursuit of wealth and material goods on a systemic scale perpetuates harm by concentrating power and resources in the hands of a few, while impoverishing the many.

Structural Ahimsa calls for dismantling systems that inherently cause harm, such as exploitative labor practices, environmental destruction, and the commodification of essential resources. This means advocating for systemic changes, such as fair labor laws, wealth redistribution, and communal ownership of resources, to ensure that non-violence is embedded in the very structures that govern society. Structural Ahimsa aligns closely with anti-capitalist movements that critique the way capitalism commodifies everything, from labor to land, leading to widespread harm.

Aparigraha as a Critique of Accumulation

Jain texts, such as the Tattvartha Sutra, explain that all possessions—whether wealth, land, or even relationships—are transient and impermanent. The desire to possess creates karmic bonds, which trap the soul in the cycle of birth and rebirth.

When we interpret Aparigraha in a broader context, it becomes a powerful critique of capitalism’s emphasis on accumulation. Figures like Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Peter Kropotkin offer insights that align with this interpretation. Proudhon’s famous declaration, “property is theft,” critiques how wealth is accumulated through exploitation and ownership, a direct contradiction of Aparigraha’s call to renounce attachment to material possessions. His work reveals how the capitalist system relies on property rights to perpetuate inequality, which is at odds with the principle of non-possession.

Similarly, Kropotkin’s theory of mutual aid, which emphasizes cooperation and shared resources over competition and individual accumulation, mirrors Aparigraha’s broader call for non-violence through the rejection of wealth-hoarding and materialism. Both perspectives advocate for systems of shared resources, cooperation, and collective well-being, offering alternatives to capitalism’s focus on competition and accumulation.

Collective Responsibility and Ecological Sustainability

Both commodity and structural Ahimsa highlight the need for non-violence in economic and social practices, but structural Ahimsa emphasizes collective responsibility over individual action. In a capitalist economy, where profit is prioritized over people and the environment, the systems that drive accumulation lead to widespread harm. True Aparigraha requires not just individual restraint but also collective responsibility for reducing harm through systemic changes.

In this context, social ecology, a framework developed by Murray Bookchin, overlaps with structural Ahimsa. Social ecology argues for the dismantling of hierarchical systems that dominate nature and exploit human labor. It advocates for decentralized, cooperative societies that prioritize ecological sustainability and human welfare, principles that are deeply aligned with Aparigraha. Like structural Ahimsa, social ecology calls for a restructuring of society where non-violence is embedded in the very structures that govern social and environmental interactions.

Bookchin's emphasis on the interconnectedness of human society and nature resonates with the Jain concept of Ahimsa, which extends non-violence not only to human beings but to all forms of life. Both perspectives argue for the dismantling of exploitative systems and advocate for a society that prioritizes harmony between humans and nature, rejecting capitalist exploitation in favor of sustainable and ethical systems of governance.

Aparigraha as Anticapitalism

At its core, Aparigraha critiques not only individual material attachment but also the broader capitalist systems that perpetuate harm. By distinguishing between commodity Ahimsa—individual consumer ethics—and structural Ahimsa—the systemic application of non-violence—we can better understand how Aparigraha offers a powerful framework for rejecting capitalism’s emphasis on accumulation, exploitation, and inequality.

True Aparigraha requires systemic change, moving beyond individual ethical consumerism to address the root causes of harm in our economic and social systems. By aligning Aparigraha with structural Ahimsa, we see that it calls for the dismantling of exploitative systems and the creation of a society based on collective well-being, ecological sustainability, and non-violence at every level.

In this way, Aparigraha is not just a personal ethic but a revolutionary tool for anti-capitalism and social justice.