Spiritual Biophilia in Jain Literature
Back To Blogs
Yet Jain literature doesn’t necessarily romanticize nature. The wildness of natural forces is repeatedly presented as dangerous, mirroring the untamed condition of the human mind. What distinguishes the Tīrthaṅkara is not escape from hardship but the manner in which it is met. Whether adversity arises from natural forces, humans, animals, or circumstances aligned or opposed to nature, Mahāvīra responds with complete equipoise, “tolerance and forgiveness (kṣama), and patience (titikṣā)” (KS 117, 158). This disciplined endurance reflects a core Jain insight: spiritual cultivation requires confronting both external and internal turbulence without violence or reactivity.
Spiritual Biophilia in Jain Literature
06/24/2026
In the previous blog article, I suggested that the biophilia hypothesis becomes especially compelling when read alongside the dharma traditions, where nature is not merely a backdrop for spiritual life but an active participant in ethical and contemplative formation. Jain literature offers one of the clearest and most sustained articulations of this insight. Across canonical narratives, metaphors, and ascetic ideals, nature consistently appears as the locus of spiritual cultivation, a space in which psychological clarity, ethical restraint, and ontological insight emerge together. This motif aligns strikingly with what environmental psychologists such as Roger Ulrich and Stephen Kellert describe as the restorative, integrative, and cognitively expansive effects of natural environments (Ulrich 1993; Kellert 1993), but it does so within a rigorously ethical and soteriological framework.
One of the most vivid sources for this vision is the Kalpa-sūtra (KS), a foundational Jain text that narrates the lives of the Tīrthaṅkaras. Here, the natural world is not incidental to spiritual achievement; it structures the very rhythm of awakening. The lives of the Tīrthaṅkaras are aligned with lunar cycles (KS 2, 149, 170, 205), their initiation into mendicancy takes place beneath specific trees in carefully named parks and groves (KS 116, 157, 173, 211), and their highest realizations occur in equally specific natural settings—under trees (KS 120, 159, 174), on farms (KS 120), on mountains (KS 174, 182), and in rural or mountainous parks (KS 128, 227). Spiritual attainment unfolds not despite nature, but through it.
More striking still is how the Kalpa-sūtra describes the inner transformation that accompanies these moments. Both the initiation into mendicancy and the attainment of omniscience are characterized by a profound collapse of perceived boundaries between self and world. The text states that the Tīrthaṅkara “no longer had a sense of strict delimitations (ṇatthiṇaṃ … katthai paḍibaṃdhe)” across what are ordinarily understood as distinct domains: “substances (davvao), space (khittao), time (kālao), and psychological conditions (bhāvao)” (KS 118, 159). This realization extends across animate and inanimate beings—“animate objects (sacittā), inanimate objects (acita), and of these in a mixed state (mīsaesu)”—as well as across spatial distinctions such as “a village (game vā), a town (ṇagare vā), a forest (araṇṇe vā), a farm (khitte vā), a house (ākhale vā), or a yard (aṃgaṇe vā).” Even time itself loses rigid segmentation, encompassing moments as brief as a breath and as extended as years and seasons. Psychological afflictions likewise dissolve: anger (kohe vā), pride (māṇe vā), attachment (māyāe vā), greed (lobhe vā), fear (bhaye vā), pleasure and pain (arai-raī vā), and even the anguish of false belief (micchā-daṃsaṇa-salle vā) are said to be absent— “the Bhagavān had none of these” (tassa naṃ bhagavaṃtassa ṇo evaṃ bhavai) (KS 118).
This description bears a striking resemblance to what Kellert calls an integrative mode of consciousness, in which the self no longer experiences itself as isolated but as embedded within a larger web of life (Kellert 1993, 46–47; see also Bohanec 2025b). In Jain terms, this realization is not merely metaphysical; it carries immediate ethical consequences. Mendicants are therefore instructed to cultivate a “constant, incessant awareness” (abhikkhaṇaṃ abhikkhaṇaṃ) of life in all its forms. As the Kalpa-sūtra puts it, monks and nuns must always be “considering (jāṇiyavvā), envisioning (pāsiyavvā), and sensing (paḍīlehiyavvā)” the presence of minute beings (KS 7.44–45). Here, heightened awareness of ecological interconnectedness becomes the ground for non-violence, vigilance, and care.
Jain texts also align spiritual ideals with the qualities of animals and natural elements, suggesting that ethical virtues are already exemplified within the living world. Mahāvīra, for example, is described as withdrawing his senses “like a tortoise (kummo iva guttiṃdie),” dwelling alone “like the horn of a rhinoceros (khaggi-visāṇaṃ va ega jāe),” free “like the mythical bhāruṇḍa bird (vippamukke bhāruṃḍa-pakkhī iva),” dignified “like an elephant (appamatte kuṃjar iva),” strong “like a bull (soḍīre vasabho iva),” and unconquerable “like a lion (jāyathāme sīho iva)” (KS 118). Such imagery suggests more than poetic ornamentation. Because these texts are designed for recitation and contemplation, they invite practitioners to internalize these natural exemplars, and perhaps also to seek environments where such qualities are encountered not only imaginatively but sensorially.
Water imagery provides another powerful illustration of spiritual biophilia in Jain literature. As in the Buddhist Dhammapada, in the Kalpa-sūtra, water appears ambivalently, symbolizing both impurity and purification. Mahāvīra is said to be “liberated like bell-metal unstained by water (ṇiruvaleve kaṃsa-pāī va mukka-toe)” and “without impurity like a spotless white conch (saṃkho iva ṇiraṃjaṇe).” At the same time, his heart is described as “pure like autumn rain (sāraya-salilaṃ va suddha-hiyae),” while also remaining untouched “like a lotus leaf without a droplet (pukkhara-pattaṃ piva ṇiruvaleve)” (KS 118). These images resonate closely with biophilic research on water as a particularly potent restorative environment, associated with emotional regulation and psychological clarity (Ulrich 1993, 100–109).
Beyond aquatic metaphors, Mahāvīra’s virtues are repeatedly likened to broader natural forces. He is “steadfast like Mount Mandara (duddharise maṃdaro iva),” “deep like an ocean (appakaṃpe sāgaro iva),” “solemn like the moon (gaṃbhīre caṃdo iva),” and radiant “like the sun (soma-lese sūro iva).” He is said to endure all contact “like the earth (vasuṃdharā iva savva-phāsa-visahe)” and to blaze forth with splendor “like fire receiving many offerings (suhaya-huyāsaṇo iva)” (KS 118). Nature here is not morally neutral; it is saturated with ethical meaning.
Yet Jain literature doesn’t necessarily romanticize nature. The wildness of natural forces is repeatedly presented as dangerous, mirroring the untamed condition of the human mind. What distinguishes the Tīrthaṅkara is not escape from hardship but the manner in which it is met. Whether adversity arises from natural forces, humans, animals, or circumstances aligned or opposed to nature, Mahāvīra responds with complete equipoise, “tolerance and forgiveness (kṣama), and patience (titikṣā)” (KS 117, 158). This disciplined endurance reflects a core Jain insight: spiritual cultivation requires confronting both external and internal turbulence without violence or reactivity.
Taken together, these motifs suggest a distinctively Jain form of spiritual biophilia. Nature is simultaneously teacher, mirror, and testing ground. To cultivate the virtues embodied in natural landscapes—steadiness, clarity, restraint, resilience—one must remain exposed to their challenges rather than insulated from them. In this sense, the Jain tradition articulates a vision that aligns closely with the biophilia hypothesis while extending it ethically: our psychological and spiritual flourishing depends not only on access to nature, but on how attentively and responsibly we dwell within it.
In my next blog article, I will turn to the Buddhist tradition to explore how similar biophilic insights are reframed through impermanence, mindfulness, and the cultivation of liberating attention.
(To explore this topic in full scholarly detail, see my peer-reviewed article, “Exploring the Connection: Biophilia & Natural Landscape in the Dharma Traditions,” published in The Journal of Dharma Studies (Springer, 2026). This post builds directly on the overview developed in the previous blog essay on spiritual biophilia across the dharma traditions. All translations are my own.)
References
Bohanec, Cogen. 2026. “Exploring the Connection: Biophilia & Natural Landscape in the Dharma Traditions.” Journal of Dharma Studies. Springer.
———. 2025b. “Jain Ecotheology Engaging with Ecopsychology.” In Engaged Jainism: Critical and Constructive Studies of Jain Social Engagement, edited by Christopher Jain Miller and Cogen Bohanec. New York: State University of New York Press.
Kellert, Stephen R. 1993. “The Biological Basis for Human Values of Nature.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, edited by Stephen R. Kellert and Edward O. Wilson, 20–61. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Ulrich, Roger S. 1993. “Biophilia, Biophobia, and Natural Landscapes.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, edited by Stephen R. Kellert and Edward O. Wilson, 73–137. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Related Articles
Cogen Bohanec, MA, PhD holds the position of Assistant Professor of Sanskrit and Jain Studies at Arihanta Institute where he leads the Center for South Asian Languages (CSAL). He received his doctorate in Historical and Cultural Studies of Religion from the Graduate Theological Union (GTU) in Berkeley, California where his research emphasized comparative dharmic traditions and the philosophy of religion. He teaches several foundational self-paced, online courses based in Jain philosophy, yoga, ecology, languages, and interfaith peace-building, including: