The concept of Agama/“Scripture” in the Jain Tradition is very hazy. The two primary Jain sects have their own canons. A large portion of the Svetambara canon (the “Purva” portion) is considered to be missing. Large “Secondary Canons” have also been developed within each sect and these writings can also be considered authoritative. Even texts from acaryas/teachers which are outside of these secondary canons can, at times, be given the title of Scripture.
Scripture is a very obviously a “loose thing” in Jainism.
Even in traditions which have stronger concepts of the boundaries of Scripture, things aren’t as tidy as they seem. Although early local Christian councils debated various texts and produced their own lists, no fully ecumenical (full Church) council of early Christianity (1) defines the books of the New Testament. The New Testament Canon was still being debated by Protestants during the Reformation of the 1500s and the Catholic Church only finally definitively defines the NT Canon at the Council of Trent in 1546. There are also still disagreements between Catholics and Protestants on what constitutes the full extent of the Hebrew (“Old Testament”) Scriptures.
And even if the texts are set and agreed upon, how those texts are interpreted and applied in present day communities are widely divergent. One can use the Bible to justify just about anything, for example from dying for one’s enemies to conquering a people group by force and taking their land in the name of God.
Contemplatives in the Christian tradition often interpret Scripture in what is sometimes referred to as the “Spiritual sense.”
As Catholic interpretation developed, “the four senses of Scripture” became a well-known way to understand Biblical interpretation (Catechism (115-119)). On this model there are multiple “senses” of Scripture, including the Literal sense and the Spiritual sense – the Spiritual sense being further sub-divided into the Allegorical, Moral, and Anagogical sense.
While the Catholic Church has used the allegorical method to interpret Old Testament texts as allegories for Christ (Jonah being in the belly of whale for three days represents Christ dying and rising on the third day, etc.), Christian contemplatives uniquely interpret Scripture as a direct Allegory for Their Own Experience. Contemplatives sometimes do this by making use of analogy (“just as God made the sun stand still, so he can still your heart,” etc.) and even at times see the primary meaning of a text as directly speaking about their situation (“These three nights pass through a soul, or better, the soul passes through them in order to reach union with God. They are represented in the Book of Tobias (Tb. 6:18-22), where we read that the angel ordered the young Tobias to wait three nights before any union with his bride. On the first night he was to burn the fish heart in the fire. That heart signified the human heart that is attached to worldly things…”) – St. John of the Cross, Ascent of Mount Carmel.
When contemplatives interpret the text in this way, they view the text through their own experience and interpret it in light of their journey toward their final spiritual goal (for Christian contemplatives, this goal is typically to achieve “Union with God”). In this interpretive context, the literal or historical meaning of a text doesn’t matter, or matters minimally; what matters is how the text speaks to, illuminates, or frames one’s present experience and how it speaks to one’s soul (i.e. “How God speaks to one’s soul through the text”) in the present moment.
“Taking Scripture as our guide we do not err, since the Holy Spirit speaks to us through it.” – St. John of the Cross, Ascent of Mount Carmel Prologue
“He who was able…to make the sun stand still, can still the faculties and all the interior part of the soul…” – Teresa of Avila, Interior Castle Book VI, Ch. III
“For the love of God, then, sisters, let us profit by these faults and learn from them…, and may they give us clearer sight, as did the clay to the blind man who was healed by our Spouse.” – Teresa of Avila, Interior Castle Book VI, Ch. VI
“Yet that single word which it hears: ‘It is I, fear not,’ takes all its fear from it, and it is most marvelously comforted, and believes that no one will ever be able to make it feel otherwise.” – St. Teresa of Avila, Interior Castle Book VI, Ch. III (On Locutions)
“These three nights pass through a soul, or better, the soul passes through them in order to reach union with God. They are represented in the Book of Tobias (Tb. 6:18-22), where we read that the angel ordered the young Tobias to wait three nights before any union with his bride. On the first night he was to burn the fish heart in the fire. That heart signified the human heart that is attached to worldly things…” St. John of the Cross, Ascent of Mount Carmel Book I, Ch. II
“All creatures of heaven and earth are nothing when compared to God, as Jeremiah points out: ‘I looked at the earth, and it was empty and nothing, and at the heavens, and I saw they had no light.’ … in stating that he looked up to the heavens and beheld no light, he meant that all the heavenly luminaries were pure darkness in comparison to God.” St. John of the Cross, Ascent of Mount Carmel Book I, Ch. IV
“There is a saying of the wise man, ‘When all things lay in the midst of silence, then leapt there down into me from on high, from the royal throne, a secret word’ (Wis. of Solomon 18). This sermon is about this word… First we will take the words, ‘In the midst of the silence there was spoken in me a secret word.’ But sir, where is the silence and where the place in which the word is spoken? As I said just now, it is in the purest part of the soul, in the noblest, in her ground, yes in the very essence of the soul. That is mid-silence, for no creature ever entered there, nor any image, nor has the soul there either activity or understanding…” – Meister Eckhart, Sermons
Scripture, and its interpretation, are looser concepts than most realize, even in traditions with more defined texts. Contemplatives use Scripture as a lens through which to understand their own experience, but their direct spiritual experience itself – not necessarily the historical context of Scripture – is arguably primary and drives interpretation (even if they might not say it that way). In this way Scriptures are flexible tools, means of Grace, which help push contemplatives toward their goal. Within this framework, it doesn’t matter if there is haze around what constitutes “Canonical literature” in one’s given tradition. “God can speak to the soul through anything”. But seeing a text as Scripture, can open one to hearing something deeply through it.
Each tradition’s Scriptures, however they are defined, are unique lenses – providing unique categories and mental frameworks – through which contemplatives view their journey toward their Absolute or Ultimate Goal. They are flexible tools which speak to the individual on that journey, with their own direct spiritual experience driving interpretation.