In Jain philosophy, both words are about “cause” (hetu), but their role is different:

---

1. Kārak hetu (कारक हेतु)

• Meaning: Real, effective cause – the one that actually produces or brings about an effect.
• Example (general):

- Seed → sprout The seed is kārak hetu for the sprout, because from that seed the sprout is really produced.

• In strict Jain view, for one dravya (substance), its own nature is the real kārak hetu of its own modifications.

- The soul’s own qualities are the real cause of its own states.

---

2. Jñāpak / Gyāpak hetu (ज्ञापक हेतु)

• Meaning: Indicative cause – something that only indicates or reveals the presence of something else; it does not actually produce that thing.
• Example (classic logic):

- Smoke on a hill → fire Smoke is a jñāpak hetu of fire: it only tells us “there is fire”, but smoke does not create the fire.

• Jain usage (important point):

- Karma, body, external conditions etc. are generally taken as jñāpak hetu of pleasure, pain, bondage etc. – they are associated and indicate these states, but they are not accepted as the real doer (kārak) of change in the pure nature of the soul. - Between different dravyas (soul–matter etc.), Jains usually accept only nimitta–naimittik (instrumental) relation, not a strong creator–created relation.

---

3. Difference in one line

• Kārak hetu:

The cause that actually does the work and produces the effect.

• Jñāpak (gyāpak) hetu:

The cause that only shows or indicates that the effect is (or will be) there.

---

4. Digambar / Śvetāmbara view

• Both traditions use this distinction in logic and philosophy in essentially the same sense:

- Kārak hetu = productive / real cause. - Jñāpak hetu = indicative / evidential cause.

• Differences, if any, are in detailed logical classification by individual ācāryas, not in the basic meaning above.

This is the simple, Jain-siddhānt based difference between gyāpak hetu and kārak hetu.