Doctrine of Karman in Jain Philosophy

Author(s): Hiralal R Kapadia
Publisher: Vijibai Jivanlal Panalal Charity Fund Mumbai

Page 13

viii
FOREWORD
ranks of this belief to see how their creed, old and venerable to them, fits in with or contradicts, as the case may be, twentieth century views. It is in particular to this class of thinkers that the present book appcals, a class for which the Jain community has been more remarkable than many another rival creed in India. It is probably owing to their enthusiasm, conservatism and, at the same time, adaptability, that Mahāvīra's doctrine has found followers so early and unflinching, that it has lasted for more than 2000 years, and has outlived such a formidable competitor as Buddhism at one time threatened to become.
But the book before us is of importance for every student of religion, be he within or without the circle of Mahāvīra's adherents, because it treats of the Karman, a central, if not the fundamental, doctrine in most of the world's religions. Apart from the emphasis with which Karman is taught in Jainism, the Jain doctrine on this point is of uncommon interest, as it postulates such a nature of Karman which would seem to represent an extreme. For, in no other system, perhaps, has Karman been taught to be of such concrete, realistic, physical nature as here. This should not be taken to imply that other systems of philosophy and religion had not beliefs regarding Karman that seem at least to approach the Jain version, The technical terms as well as the illustrations, used in teaching and explaining Karman in Vedānta, for instance, appear to suggest that the moral element in cach action which is followed by reward or punishment would produce a physical entity, to be consumed in enduring the pain or enjoying the reward. But nowhere, if our sources and their knowlodge are comprehensive enough, has the physical nature of the Karman been asserted with such stress as in Jainism. A moral fact, then, good or bad, produces a psycho-physical quality, a real not merely symbolical mark, a characteristic in the most literal sense, affecting the soul in its physical nature. This point of view once taken, it was not unnatural, that the analysis of the production, nature and effect of the Karman should assume such an almost mathematical form as it has done in the Karmagranthas and other authoritative writings, and bring rather heterogeneous elements together under the common category Karman. Anyone, however, who should find the Jain doctrine of Karman and its psycho-physical analysis by the classical writers too minute and complicated, is referred to Buddhist psychology. There he may readily convince himself that either these writers have merely systematised for the system's sake, or have seen a good deal more than we, for some reason or other, are able to see.
The second point that before others attracts attention is the question about the age of the Karman theory. Though the doctrine has been developed with a minuteness in detail, a care in classification,