Dr. Samani Mangal Pragya
According to Jainism, the ultimate criterion of good conduct is freedom from bondage of karmas. Conduct which takes the soul away from the bondage of karmas, is righteous conduct and the conduct which takes the soul towards the bondage of karmas, is evil-conduct. There can be some changes in the external means regarding the characteristics of the conduct according to time, place and situation. In particular situations, there may be a difference in defining good conduct and bad conduct. For example, a suicide in a normal situation is a bad conduct, but, the practice of abandonment of body by women in olden days to protect their chastity was considered as a good conduct in the Indian social system. At times good conduct becomes bad and bad conduct becomes good, in accordance to place, time and situation. The Jain ideology has a clear opinion that - the forms of conduct which generally become the causes of bondage, also become the means of salvation and those which are the causes of salvation become the causes of bondage in particular situations.
je āsavā te parisavā, je parisavā te āsavā[1]
Whilst considering good conduct and bad conduct, Acarya Umaswati has also given importance to time, place, situation. According to him, from a single point of view, neither any action (karma) is worthy of being conducted nor is it worthy of not being conducted. From this view point, he has written:
Deśaṃ kālaṃ puruṣamavasthamupaghataśuddhapariṇāmān.
prasamīkṣya bhavati kalpyaṃ naikāntat kalpyate kalpyaṃ. [2]
The practice or non-practice of any action depends upon location, time, person, situation and the mental situations. This idea has also been supported in the Mahabharata -
ya eva dharmaḥ so adharmo deśakāle pratiṣṭhitaḥ,
ādānāmanṛtaṃ himsā, dharmo vyāvasthika smṛtaḥ.[3]
In fact, the change in the criterion of good conduct takes place as per the need of time and location or place. Manu has also accepted diversity in conduct on the basis of satayuga and kalayuga, i.e. the diversity in time[4] Jain thinkers pondered well on the relativity and absolutism or changeability and unchangeability of the criterion of good conduct or morality.
