What are differences between views on "antkaran" between shrimad rajchandra, acharya hemchandrasuriji, acharya haribhadrasuriji, acharya pujyapadswami and atmarasi banarasidasji

In Jain philosophy, Antkaran (inner instrument or internal organ) is a subtle entity responsible for cognition and mental processes, but its interpretation varies among key Jain thinkers. Shrimad Rajchandra emphasizes Antkaran as the subtle internal faculty that enables self-realization and spiritual progress, closely linking it to the soul's purity and liberation path. Acharya Hemchandrasuriji, a classical scholar, treats Antkaran as comprising the fourfold internal modifications (manas, buddhi, chitta, ahamkara) that function collectively to produce knowledge and perception, consistent with orthodox Jain metaphysics. Acharya Haribhadrasuriji adopts a more inclusive and syncretic approach, recognizing multiple viewpoints and emphasizing the latitudinarian nature of Jain epistemology; he views Antkaran as an instrument that integrates various cognitive faculties and allows for the synthesis of diverse philosophical truths. Acharya Pujyapadswami, in his commentaries such as Sarvarthasiddhi, elaborates Antkaran as the internal cause of knowledge and perception, highlighting its role in the interaction between the soul and karmic matter. Atmarasi Banarasidasji, a later Jain poet-philosopher, reflects on Antkaran in a devotional and experiential manner, focusing on its purification through ethical conduct and meditation, thus facilitating liberation. These differences reflect the evolution of Jain thought from metaphysical analysis to experiential spirituality, while all agree on Antkaran's central role in cognition and liberation. The distinctions also illustrate Jainism's characteristic pluralism and depth in understanding the mind-soul relationship.