Karma and the Arhant in Jainism
Summary
In this scholarly essay Arvind Sharma examines the status of karma for an enlightened soul within Jainism and compares it to the concept of jīvanmukti (liberation while living) in Advaita Vedanta and other Indian philosophical systems. Advaita holds that the fully realised being exhausts accumulated karmas and, although he continues to act in the world, accrues no new karmic consequences; residual prārabdha‑karman simply unfolds until death. The author asks whether a similar position exists in Jainism, where karma is conceived as a form of subtle matter that permeates the soul. Drawing on classical Jain texts and secondary scholarship, Sharma summarises Jain teachings on the soul’s bondage and gradual liberation through the fourteen stages of spiritual development (guṇasthānas). He notes that Jainism classifies karmas into eight fundamental types and distinguishes between ghātin karmas, which obscure the soul’s essential attributes, and aghātin karmas, which do not destroy omniscience. Through self‑discipline and austerities (tapas), the aspirant prevents new karmic influx (saṃvara) and sheds existing karmas (nirjarā). Upon reaching the state of kevala‑jñāna (omniscience), the liberated being, called an arhat or kevalin, continues to live a few moments or years before passing into siddhahood. During this intervening period the arhat is believed to dwell apart from fresh karmic matter; any karma that might accrue is instantaneously dissipated. Sharma cites M. Hiriyanna’s description of the Jain aim “to get oneself disentangled from karma” and analyses how this differs from the Advaitic idea of the jīvanmukta. He discusses Jain practices such as sallekhanā (voluntary fasting unto death) that prevent residual karmas from binding at death. He also draws parallels between Jain descriptions of karma as material particles that record past thoughts and passions and the informational models of modern science, noting that some Jain thinkers conceptualise karmic activity in ways reminiscent of physical processes. The article concludes that, according to Jainism, liberation while living does not entail total absence of karma; rather, karmic particles continue to arise but evaporate virtually as soon as they adhere, so that the arhat remains functionally free from karmic bondage. By situating Jain beliefs within a broader Indian and comparative framework, the essay clarifies subtle doctrinal distinctions and underscores Jainism’s unique contributions to discussions on karma and liberation.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
Sharma’s analysis shows that Jainism balances metaphysical realism about karmic matter with a nuanced account of liberation. Whereas Advaita posits that no karma touches the jīvanmukta, Jainism holds that karmic influx is not completely eliminated until death; however, in an arhat the binding potential is so weak and transient that he remains effectively untainted. The distinction between ghātin and aghātin karmas, the emphasis on active austerities and the allowance for practices like sallekhanā reveal a path that is both ethical and physical. This perspective enriches our understanding of Indian theories of emancipation and invites further comparative inquiry.