The Shvetambar and Digambar parvas are not one date with a variant. They are separate tithi rules under one engine, and one parva is deliberately left unscoped.
Right after you choose Jain as your dharma, ZindSa asks a second question: Digambar or Shvetambar. It is not optional and it is not buried. You can change the answer later in Settings.
What that answer changes is stated on the screen where it is asked, and the app deliberately understates rather than oversells it: it changes your calendar. A Digambar profile gets Das Lakshan; a Shvetambar profile gets Paryushan and Samvatsari. It does not yet change the texts, the translations or the guidance you are shown, those are the same for both traditions. Saying so is the difference between a scoping feature and a claim to have built two separate apps.
Neither date is looked up. Both come out of the same parva engine that dates every other observance in the app, from an amanta lunar month and a tithi within it.
Paryushan opens on Bhadrapada Krishna Dwadashi. Samvatsari, the day the Shvetambar eight is built towards, falls on Bhadrapada Shukla Chaturthi. Das Lakshan runs from Bhadrapada Shukla Panchami to Shukla Chaturdashi, ten days, closing on Anant Chaturdashi.
Because they are tithi rules rather than dates, they move with the moon exactly as they should, in any year, without anyone updating a table. The engine resolves which Gregorian day a tithi belongs to in three tiers, a kaal-vyapini rule first where the parva specifies one, then udaya-vyapini, then the kshaya-tithi case where a tithi never touches a sunrise at all.
It would have been easier to compute Samvatsari and then define Das Lakshan as “the next day”. The app does not do that, and the code explains why in a comment rather than leaving the choice invisible: the Shvetambar eight-day reckoning, running from Krishna Dwadashi to Shukla Chaturthi, and the Digambar ten-day one, running Panchami to Chaturdashi, differ in both convention and day-count. They are two traditions' own parvas, not one convention quietly chosen.
So they are two independent rules, and the relationship between them was used only as a cross-check, Shukla Chaturthi is tithi four in the month numbering this file uses, so Panchami is five and Chaturdashi is fourteen, and the two rules agree about where the paksha is. Cross-verified, not derived. The distinction matters: a derived date inherits the other date's errors, and a cross-checked one only inherits the assumption that both were read correctly.
Where a parva does have a counterpart in the other tradition, the app will show you the other tradition's date beside your own rather than pretend the calendar has only one answer, and it re-queries the engine for it rather than storing a second copy.
Mahavir Janma Kalyanak carries no sect scoping at all, and the code says that is on purpose: the birth kalyanak is observed by both traditions on the same tithi, Chaitra Shukla Trayodashi, so scoping it to one sect would be a silent editorial choice.
That sentence is doing real work. The easy version of this feature scopes everything, because scoping everything looks thorough. Scoping a shared parva would have quietly told half the users that a day they keep is not theirs. Two other parvas are unscoped for the same reason: Mahavir Nirvan Kalyanak and the opening of Kartik Ashtahnika.
Seven Jain parvas ship in total. Any one profile sees five of them, its own two, plus the three that belong to both.
Kartik Ashtahnika is the honest one. The computed opening day and an older anchor disagree by a day, and rather than pick the anchor the app follows the shastriya rule, Kartik Shukla Ashtami, and records on the event itself that there is a genuine divergence of sources about when the Ashtahnika begins.
Mahavir Janma Kalyanak carries a different admission: its computed date has not been cross-checked against any outside Jain panchang. The udaya-vyapini resolution of Trayodashi is this engine's own, unverified against an external benchmark, and the app says so rather than let the absence of a warning imply one.
There is a third, and it is about text rather than dates. The Tattvartha Sutra passages the app quotes use the Shvetambara sutra numbering. The Digambara recension carries an extra sutra earlier in that chapter, so the same words are numbered differently in the two traditions. The code names this explicitly as an editorial call that has not been made, not as one that has been settled quietly in favour of one recension.
No Jain nimitta or Jyotish calculation. There is a module for it, and it returns nothing for every request. The reason recorded in the code is that this pass looked for a citable Jain nimitta-shastra source with a verbatim passage it could stand behind at the same standard the Hindu module met, and did not find one, so the module returns an honest refusal rather than a Hindu citation relabelled as Jain, or an invented Jain one.
Jain reflection covers four of the seven life domains the app asks about. Marriage, health and travel return a different message and surface no verse at all, because the twelve passages in the corpus genuinely say nothing about spousal duty, about the body, or about journeys, and stretching a general-outlook verse to wear a marriage label is the failure that refusal exists to avoid.
The corpus itself is three texts: the Namokar Mahamantra in six parts, five sutras from the Tattvartha Sutra core, and the first verse of the Bhaktamara Stotra. Against a Tattvartha Sutra of some three hundred and fifty sutras, that is a beginning. Muhurat and vastu are shown to Jain users on request and are Hindu-jyotish systems; the app states on its own screens that it carries no equivalent from any other tradition rather than relabelling them.
Related: does ZindSa follow Digambar or Shvetambar in the FAQ, and what the five angs of the panchang actually are. All posts.