78 Spirituality Studies Jain ontology does not construe that material karma literally “sticks” to a non-material soul. Rather, soul and karmic matter are understood to occupy the same “spatial units” (Sa. pradeśa), entering a relation of spatial co-presence and causal conditioning while remaining ontologically distinct (Jaini 1979, 113–114). The interaction operates at the level of “modes” (Sa. paryāya), not “substance” (Sa. dravya). Jain thinkers employ the sun-cloud analogy to clarify modal obscuration. Just as clouds obscure the sun’s luminosity without diminishing it, karmic matter obscures the manifestation of the soul’s intrinsic qualities without altering its essential nature (Singh 1974, 118). The analogy is heuristic rather than literal, illustrating how material obstruction can be causally effective yet removable. The persistence of association across death and rebirth is explained through the doctrine of the kārmaṇa śarīra (Sa. “karmic body”), a subtle material body composed of karmic matter that remains continuously associated with the soul across successive embodiments (Bajželj 2024, S31; Jaini 1979, 125). Singh (1974, 121) describes this doctrine using the term karma-śarīra (Sa. “karmic body”), defining it as “the effects of disposition metamorphosed into material particles which form the physical basis of life.” The present study follows the more common convention kārmaṇa śarīra. Death marks dissolution of the gross physical body, while continuity is preserved through the kārmaṇa śarīra. This account, however, commits Jain metaphysics to explaining interaction between categorically distinct substances – sentient and non-sentient – a commitment that is often raised as a philosophical objection and that alternative Indian systems address through different ontological strategies. 4.3.1 Beginninglessness and SoulMaterial Interaction Problem A further question concerns the origin of bondage. If karmic association arose at a determinate moment, a previously unbound soul would lack causal explanation for incurring it. Jain thinkers therefore affirm that the association is “beginningless” (Sa. anādi), consistent with an uncreated and eternal cosmos (Singh 1974, 119). Beginninglessness does not imply essential impurity; it indicates that bondage has no first temporal moment, even though it is causally contingent and ontologically reversible. The gold analogy clarifies this: gold ore is always found mixed with impurity, yet impurity is not intrinsic to gold’s nature. Through purification, gold’s inherent luminosity manifests without alteration of substance (Singh 1974, 119). Similarly, karmic matter conditions the soul’s manifestation without constituting its essence. Liberation consists in purification rather than transformation – a distinction intelligible because the conditioning factor is separable. The mechanism of influx is sometimes clarified through the analogy of iron filings drawn toward a magnet: karmic matter pervades the cosmos, yet influx occurs only when the soul’s vibratory “activity” (Sa. yoga), intensified by “passion” (Sa. kaṣāya), renders it receptive to specific types of karmic particles. Binding thus reflects conditional affinity governed by the soul’s modal state rather than indiscriminate material fusion. The Jain appeal to spatial co-presence should not be read as a mechanistic account in a modern physical sense. Rather than proposing exchange of properties between substances, Jain metaphysics treats conditioning as a modal relation: substances share spatial units and thereby enter relations of causal conditioning while retaining ontological independence. Critics may argue that this leaves the mechanism underdetermined; Jain philosophers, however, regard such conditioning as a primitive feature of a pluralistic ontology rather than a reducible process. The adequacy of the model therefore depends on whether modal conditioning is judged intelligible within the broader metaphysical framework rather than on its conformity to external standards of physical interaction. 4.4 Samvara and Nirjarā: Reversibility of Material Bondage If material karma explains persistence and differentiation, the complementary doctrines of saṃvara (Sa. “cessation”) and nirjarā (Sa. “shedding”) explain reversibility.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUwMDU5Ng==