I can’t know your inner intention, so I’ll answer on both possibilities and keep it grounded in Jain Dharma.

1. Teaching Jain Dharma to secular students

Yes, Jain Dharma can be explored and shared in a secular context without demanding religious belief. A Jain approach here would be:

• Start with principles, not authority

- Ahimsa (non‑violence, non‑harm) - Anekāntavāda (many‑sidedness of truth) - Aparigraha (non‑possessiveness, simplicity) - Careful speech, careful consumption, careful livelihood These can be discussed as practices and ethical frameworks, not as “you must believe this scripture.”

• Use experience and inquiry

- “When I reduce anger, what happens to my mind?” - “When I consume less, what happens to my stress and relationships?” This matches a secular style: test in life, don’t just accept by faith.

• Present karma and rebirth carefully

- In traditional Jain Dharma, karma is a real, subtle matter that binds the soul, and rebirth is real. - For secular students, you can: - Present these as the classical Jain view, clearly and honestly, and - Also explore “psychological” readings (e.g., habits, consequences, mental impressions), while being explicit that this is an interpretive, not the full traditional, understanding.

• Be transparent about what is non‑negotiable in Jain tradition

- Jina are real enlightened beings. - The soul (jīva) is real and distinct from body. - Liberation (moksha) is the highest goal. A secular course can still say: “This is what Jain Dharma actually teaches; you are free to agree or not, but I will not distort it.”

In this mode, you are genuinely trying to communicate Jain Dharma faithfully to people who may not share its metaphysics.

---

2. Using Jain Dharma mainly to test or critique secular Buddhism

If your main aim is: “Can secular Buddhism stand up to Jain critique?” that is a different project.

Jain Dharma is not against honest comparison, but its spirit (especially through anekāntavāda) encourages:

• Seeing partial truths

- Anekāntavāda says each viewpoint sees a part, not the whole. - From that angle, a purely secular frame (Buddhist or Jain) may be seen as: - Helpful in ethics and psychology, - But incomplete from the standpoint of full Jain metaphysics (soul, karma as matter, liberation, etc.).

• Avoiding one‑sided attacks

- Anekāntavāda warns against absolutist claims like “Only a secular view is rational” or “Only my tradition is valid.” - A Jain critique, if done in the right spirit, would be: - “From the Jain standpoint, these are the limits of a purely secular path,” not “You are simply wrong and we are simply right.”

• Staying aware of your own lens

- If you are rooted in secular Buddhism, you will naturally read Jain ideas through that lens. - Anekāntavāda would gently push you to recognize that as one standpoint among many, not the “neutral” one.

If the purpose is primarily to test secular Buddhism, rather than to understand Jain Dharma on its own terms, then you are not really teaching Jain Dharma—you are using it as a tool in a different debate.

---

A clear Jain answer to your question

So, from a Jain-Dharma perspective, your real choice is:

1. “I want to understand and present Jain Dharma as it is, faithfully, to secular people.”

- Then you emphasize clarity, honesty about metaphysics, and openness: “Here is what Jain Dharma actually teaches. Take what is useful; I won’t water it down, but I won’t force belief.”

1. “I mainly want to test secular Buddhism against Jain ideas.”

- Then you’re doing a comparative‑philosophy or intra‑Buddhist project, in which Jain Dharma is a reference point, not the central subject.

Both are possible activities, but they are not the same. Jain Dharma would encourage you to be clear with yourself—and your audience—about which one you are actually doing.