Practicing Jainism can be extremely difficult for the individual follower. The Jain disciple takes full karmic responsibility for all his actions, and yet his good intentions do not in themselves confer upon him additional good karma. He can neither receive good karma from others nor transfer his bad karma to anyone else. If he is to achieve mokāa, or freedom from all karma and saāsara – the cycle of rebirth, reincarnation and re-death – he must not only adopt a strict ascetic lifestyle, but also achieve complete omniscience and be able to see, know and understand everything in the loka, or the universe. Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism all emphasize individual responsibility to act in a morally right manner and adhere to certain guidelines if they intend to seek liberation, but of the three, Jainism places the greatest burden of responsibility on the individual following it. to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay There are several ways in which the three religions do not differ in the responsibilities they impose on their followers. All three religions emphasize essentially individual responsibilities for managing one's karma and achieving liberation. All three posit that only humans can achieve liberation. This belief adds a certain urgency to the quest for liberation and increases the sense of individual responsibility: followers want to strive for liberation in order to enjoy the religious human life into which they were fortunate to be born, and they cannot know for a long time. I am sure of the kind of life into which they will subsequently be born (Laws of Manu 12.16-81, Appleton 21). In Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism, each individual is therefore primarily responsible for his or her own destiny, both in this life and in all future lives. However, Jainism is distinguished from Hinduism and Buddhism by its particularly demanding views on the achievement of liberation. In Jainism, achieving mokāa involves acquiring total omniscience. Paul Dundas of the University of Edinburgh describes the Jain concept of omniscience as “the ability to know and see everything in the universe at all times and in all possible modifications simultaneously” (76). Needless to say, achieving this state of omniscience represents an enormous burden of individual responsibility. Hindu and Buddhist conceptions of liberation are nowhere near as intimidating. The Hindu view of mokāa is based on the understanding of the unity of the atman, the individual soul, and brahman, the universe (Chandogya Upaniād 6.13.1-3). In Buddhism, liberation is called nirva?a and involves the abandonment of all earthly desires, seen as the cause of all suffering (Gethin 74-5). Gaining a true understanding of the unity of the universe in accordance with Hinduism is in itself a significant challenge, as is the rejection of all earthly pleasures in Buddhism, but they both seem much more plausible than the Jain concept of 'omniscience. Critics of Jainism have frequently pointed out the unfathomability of this goal (Dundas 76-7). The personal responsibility that Jainism imposes on its followers who desire to attain mokāa is overwhelming. Jainism is also unique in its categorical rejection of the possibility of transferring karma from one soul to another. Many Hindu and Buddhist writers have argued against the possibility of one person's actions affecting another person's rebirth; nevertheless, Hindu beliefs and practices andCommon Buddhists have not shown consistency with this doctrine. For example, Hindus commonly believe and practice sraddha, in which a young man performs a ritual after his father's death to transfer good karma to his father's soul and improve his father's chances of a desirable rebirth (Jaini 235-6). Sraddha directly contradicts the doctrinal principle that the actions of a single person cannot affect the karma or rebirth of another. Buddhists further have several canonical stories in which animals receive celestial rebirth simply by listening to the Buddha's teachings, a process known as prasada. In one story, a god reveals that he was a frog in his previous life. He was born again as a god because he died listening to the Buddha's sermon (Appleton 27-9). This story and others like it do not necessarily imply that the Buddha transferred his own good karma to the animals through his sermon, but they do imply that the animals were somehow capable of receiving good karma of the actions of the Buddha and not of their own actions. The Jains could never accept this possibility. Jain doctrine does not allow the actions of one soul to affect the karma of another, and Jains have held this belief much more consistently than Buddhists and Hindus. This is another way in which the Jain emphasis on individual responsibility for one's actions is stronger than those of Hinduism and Buddhism. Jainism also diverges from Buddhism and Hinduism on the question of how the intentions behind a person's actions may or may not affect their karma. Buddhist and Hindu doctrines both affirm that good intentions result in good karma, placing more emphasis on the thoughts and beliefs of each follower (Lecture 10/7). For example, the Hindu B?hadara?yaka Upani?ad, while explaining the process of rebirth, states: “He who is attached to his action, he goes where his inner spirit is attached” (4.4.6). The idea that the "spirit within" is what guides the soul toward true rebirth reflects the Hindu belief that an individual's thoughts and beliefs are more important than their actions; thus, if he does harm by accident, it does not count against him. To take an example from Buddhism: the Dhammapada, a collection of quotations from the Buddha, guarantees: “The monk who delights in attention and looks with fear at carelessness will not fall. He is close to [nirva?a]” (2.32). Like the Upani?ad passage, this emphasis on alertness indicates the Buddhist belief that an individual's inner mind is karmically important, more so than their outward actions. A Jain, on the other hand, could not accept the passage from the Dhammapada because it promises the reader proximity to nirva?a based solely on his attitude toward vigilance. In Jainism, acquiring good karma and attaining mokāa requires much more than simply “rejoicing” in mindfulness; on the contrary, the Jain devotee must practice vigilance so rigorously that he avoids causing harm or killing any living creature, even by accident, otherwise he will receive bad karma. For this reason, Jain monks often strive to avoid killing even the smallest insects and microorganisms (nigoda). For example, monks often carry brooms to sweep the path in front of them so as not to accidentally step on a small creature and kill it. Jain monks may also spend part of their daily routine repenting for every moment of the day when they might have accidentally killed something through negligence (Golecha). Additionally, bad karma.