Jaina Ethics

Author(s): Dayanand Bhargav
Publisher: Motilal Banarasidas

Page 83

66
Faina Ethics vajñāna), which is the means of liberation. Thus desireless performance of the moral duties is the indirect means whereas the real knowledge is the direct means of liberation. The mimāṁsā views
According to pūrvamimāṁsā, karmans lead to bondage as well as liberation. There are two theories about the performance of karman. According to Kumārilabhatta, actions can be performed only when one is sure about their yielding the desired fruit (istasādhanatājñāna) whereas, according to Prabhākara, the knowledge that such and such action is prescribed by the Vedas (kāryatājñāna) is enough for engaging one in that duty. Thus, according to Kumārilabhatta, an action is always motivated by a desire whereas according to Prahhākara desire is not necessary. The theory of Prabhākara comes to the niskāmakarmayoga of the Gitā.8
The Pūrvamimāmsā, in any case, lays it down yery clearly that the actions prescribed by the Vedas should be performed, but actions which have been prohibited (nisiddha) by the vedas should be avoided. The actions prescribed by the Vedas are, again, of two kinds : (i) Wishfulfilling actions (kāmyakarma), which include those actions which are to be performed with certain desire in view e.g. svargakāmo yajeta. (ii) Daily and occasional (niytyanaimittika karman), which include such actions as sandhyā and śräddha which are to be performed without any particular motive. 4
Coming so Vedānta, the Sarkara school believes that knowledge is the only means of liberation. This principle has been subsequently elaborated by two followers of Sarkara, Vācaspati Miśra and Suresvarācārya who wrote Bhāmati and Vivarana commentaries, respectively, on the Sārkara Bhāsya of Vedānta. The main difference between the two can be summarised thus :
. 1. JANTAIA:STA I
-Vaiseșika sūtra, 1.1.4. 2. तत्त्वज्ञानकर्मणोर्मोक्षं प्रति तत्त्वज्ञानस्य साक्षाज्जनकता कर्मणस्तु परम्परयेCOTSTU: I
--Kirnävalibhaskara, Benaras, 1920, p. 21. 3. Upadhyāya, Baladeya, Bharatiyadarśana, p. 394 4. Ibid,. pp. 394-395.