Jain Journal 1995 07

Author(s): Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication

Page 21

JAIN JOURNAL: Vol-XXX, No. 1. JULY 1995
physical act which is absolutely devoid of any intention, the third is the iryapathika act and the fourth is the act done in one's dream. From the Buddhist point of view karman is not accumulated on the soul in the absence of anyone of the five causes which when combined becomes act of violence. From the Jain standpoint, during the above four types of acts ātman gets, a slight contact with the karman since the demerit is not fully matured. It is due to the non-ripening of the result of action it does not involve ātman in any bondage. Just as when a first of sand is thrown on the wall, it drops out without stricking to it despite its touching the well. Similarly the impact of the consequences of the above four acts will not cling to the atman in the form of karmic matter. According to Jain criticism, nevertheless the Buddhists who are Ekāntakriyāvādins cannot totally deny the fruits of four kinds of actions. Although the karman which is produced does not take a firm hold of the soul, it merely 'touches it'. This is the opinion of the Jains who are Kriyāvādins.47 According to them suffering is caused by one's own action and not due to the actions of others viz., fate or creator."
48
Thus the above study reveals the fact that Śramanism replaced the gods by the force of karma. Whatever man obtains is not due to the favour of any god, but only due to one's past actions and efforts. Hence the individual does not depend on any god or gods but is morally free. The individual himself is responsible for one's actions and is bound to get the moral consequences. The force of karman is inexhorable and impersonal. The Law of moral retribution is eternal and works by itself without being supported by gods. The Jain dialectic is positive and synthetic which holds that karman may be looked upon from different points of view, since the soul is identical as the substance (dravya) but different as state (paryāya). Hence karman may be described as belonging to the agent as well as not belonging to it.
10
47. Sul (PrS), pp. 183-185. 48. JS Part II, p. 317.