________________
१६२
भ० महावीर-स्मृति-ग्रंथ ।
there is no Himsā although an actual hurt is committed, while in the latter case, though there is no actual hurt there is Himsā as the heart is impure. The sine qua non of Himsã, therefore, is the presence of Kasaya. This leads the Jain Moralists to recognise four modes of Violence. In the first mode of Himsā, there is passionate cxcitation in the mind, the words or the body of a man. Such presence of Kasaya is nevertheless Himsā, as thereby the 'Bhäva Prâna' or the tranquility of the man's soul is hurt. When owing to the extreme strongness of the passions, the man makes violent move. ments of his limbs or even kills himself he commits the second mode of Hims which consists in hurting one's own 'Dravya-Pränā.' The third mode of violence consists in giving paid to another man's heart by deriaire laughter, by show of force or use of hard words etc , --burting thereby the 'Bhāva-Prana' or the subjective state of that man. When, however, the man blinded by the fervour of his passions actually causes hurt to the body of another man, he commits the fourth mode of Himsā, whereby the 'DraxsaPrâna' or the gross material body of the other man is adversely affected. It would be seen that in all these forms of 'Himsä' Kasaya or passionate excitation is there and along with that and as a result of that, some sort of violence or disturbance of the tranquil state or order, either of the mind of of the body, cıther of the author or of the victim (person other than the author ) of the passions
The presence of passionate excitation in the mind being the characteristic of Himsā, a comparison of an immoral act with a crime, as defined in the penal code may be conveniently made here It will scarcely be said that all acts which are prompted by eyil motives and end in injury to others, are crimes in the eye of law as well as immoral acts according to all ethical judgment, A pon-intentional and purely accidental act of violence is neither a crime nor a sin A patient dies on account of some medicine administered to him by the doctor with the best of his intentions and selected as the true medicine with the best of knowledge Here the doctor is guilty of no crime and his act is not bad from the moral stand-point also. If, however, he was careless about the selection of the medicine or about its proper dose, his act 18 immoral because the No-Kasaya of Pramad, tainted his heart and prompted his action His act is a crime also, because he failed to act with the ordinary intelligence of the deligence of a prudeat doctor. In the next case the act of a man who abets the commission of a crime is a crime, from the moral stand-point also, the act of an abettor is sinful. Thirdly the attempt of a man to do some crime though not suco cessful has been held in some cases to be criminal 10 the eye of law. Moral also, such an act is sinful, because the motive of the man ir tainted with Kapaya.
The lists of criminal acts and moral acts, however, are not parallel. The latter has within its scope, many acts and matters which are beyond the
