MokshaMargPrakashak …23

 

Vyavaharabhasi Mithya Drishti

Now the Mithyatva of JainaBhasi who are supporters of VyavaharaBhas side is described-

In Jinagam where the preachment is from aspect of primacy of Vyavahara, believing in that, they engage in shraddhan etc. of external means only. All parts of their dharma, being converse, attain Mithya Bhava; the same is detailed as follows-

There know this- With the engagement of Vyavahara dharma,  punya bandh accrues. Hence from  aspect of pap activities, it is not prohibited, but those jivas who are satisfied with Vyavahara activities only, and do not make effort towards the true Moksha Marga, to direct them towards Moksha Marga , that Shubha form Mithya activity is also described in negation form.

When such description is made- listening to that if you abandon Shubha activity and engage in ashubha , then it would harm you and if with real shraddhan, you engage in Moksha Marga then you would be benefited. Just as some patient, listening to prohibition of medicine without qualities, abandons the medicines itself and adopts bad diet,  then he would die, there is no fault of doctor in it. In the same way if some worldly jiva, listening to prohibition of punya form dharma, abandons the means of dharma and engages in sensory subjects-kashaya form then he would suffer Narak etc.; there is no fault of preacher. The intent of preacher is to make them relinquish the untrue shraddhan and engage towards Moksha Marga.

-          With such intent it is described here.

VyavaharaBhasi followers of Dharma from aspect of Kula

Several Jivas are Jaini due to Kula  sequence itself. They are not aware of the form of Jain Dharma but they practice in accordance with the practices of their Kula. Just as other faith followers engage in their Kula Dharma, in the same way these also engage. If the kula order itself  be dharma then Muslim etc. all  would be dharmatma; then what is the speciality of Jain Dharma? The same is told-

“ In the world this is the practice  that to some extent justice is not imparted based upon the knowledge of Kula. The one whose kula is that of thieves, if he is caught stealing, then knowing his Kula background he is not released; instead he is punished only. Then in the order of dharma of Trilok Prabhu Jinendra Deva, is it possible to get justice in accordance with the Kula background? “

In the same way if the father is poor and self is rich, then considering the order of kula, the self does not remain poor then what is the purpose of kula in dharma? If father goes to Narak and Son goes to Moksha, then how the Kula order was followed? If the Drishti is upon Kula then son also should go to Narak; hence in dharma there is no purpose of the consideration of Kula background.

Considering the meaning of the Shastras, if due to flaws of times, in Jina dharma also Papi people have introduced converse practices of serving KuGuru-Kudharma etc. and  nourishment of sensory subjects-kashayas etc., then renouncing them, it is appropriate to practice in accordance with Jina order.

Here someone says- Discarding the tradition, it is not right to proceed on new path?

He is told- If with own buddhi he follows a new path then it is not right. The form of eternal Jain dharma which has been described in shastras traditionally, eliminating those practices the Papi people have introduced converse practices in between, then how can it be called traditional path? And by giving it up and following the form of Jina dharma as described in traditional Jain shastras, it cannot be called as new path.

If in Kula the practices are in accordance with  the order of Jina deva , then it is right for us also to practice the same way. But that should not be treated as Kula practices; knowing it to be dharma, deciding upon its form and result etc., it should be followed. If the true dharma also is practiced knowing it to be practice of Kula, then he is not called dharmatma, since if all people of Kula abandon it then he also would abandon it. The reason is  that whatever he practices, it is out of fear of Kula; not because of sense of dharma; hence he is not dharmatma.

Therefore in marriage etc. activities pertaining to Kula, the order of kula should be considered , but in dharma related activities, the kula should not be considered. The dharma path which is true , that only should be followed.

VyavaharaBhasi following dharma in accordance with the order without examining

There several Jains practice in accordance with the order- the way it has been ordered in shastras, they accept it but do not examine that order. If following order only be dharma then all people having  different faiths, following the orders of their own shastras would become dharmatma; hence by examining, realising the truth of Jina words, it is appropriate to follow Jina order.

Without examining , how can the true-untrue be decided? And without deciding , just as other faith people accept order of their shastras; in the same way he has followed the order of Jain Shastras- that becomes  following the order by taking sides.

Someone says- In shastras, out of ten types of Samyaktva, one is AgyaSamyaktva  and in the divisions of Dharma Dhyan one is called AgyaVichaya. In the  NihShankit Ang the doubt in Jina words has been prohibited; how is that ?

Its reply- In shastras there are several statements which can be examined by direct, inference etc. and several statements are such, which are not visible to direct, inference etc. Hence they are praman by order only. There in different shastras the statements which are similar, it is not purposeful to examine them, but those statements which are mutually converse, out of them the statements which are visible to Pratyaksha, Anuman etc., they should be examined.

There in the shastras which have been established as Praman, in those shastras the statements which are not visible to Pratyaksha or Anuman, they also can be accepted as Praman. But in the shastras which have not been established as Praman, their all statements should be considered as non-praman.

There someone says- Upon examination some statement in some shastra appears as Praman and some other statement appears as  Praman in some other shastra, then what to do?

Its answer- Those shastras which are narrated by Aapt, in them any statement is not against Praman, since if knowledge is not there or due to raga-dwesha only someone  may tell untruth, but Aapt are not such; hence you did not examine properly; therefore it is delusion.

Then he says- If the examination by Chhadmastha is erroneous then what to do?

Its answer- The true-untrue both things are mutually compared and examined abandoning pramad, then the examination is right. Where due to partiality the examination is not proper, there only the examination is unfair.

Then he says- In shastras there are several converse statements, what all can be examined?

Its answer- In  Moksha Marga Deva-Guru-Dharma, Jivas etc. Tattvas and bandh-moksha marg, are meaningful hence they should be examined. In those shastras where these are described truly, their all orders can be followed; and where these are described conversely, their orders should not be followed.

For example- in the Lok the person who does not lie in meaningful activities, why would he lie in non meaningful activities? In the same way, in the shastra in which the form of meaningful Devas etc. is not told conversely, how can  the description of island-ocean etc. be differently there? Since with converse description of Devas etc. the sensory subjects-kashaya of speaker are nourished.

Here question- The converse description of Devas etc. is done out of sensory subjects-kashaya etc., but in the same shastras why the other descriptions are made wrongly?

Its answer- If only one description is wrong then their wrongness is immediately revealed and different style does not get established; hence with several statements being different, different style can be  established. There the ones with weak intellect get confused that this is also followed and that is also followed. Hence for establishing the differentness of  meaningful, several non meaningful statements have been made differently.

For giving confidence several statements have been made true also but the wise one would not get confused. With examination of meaningful statements, where truth is revealed, all orders of that faith should be followed. 

Hence upon examination the Jain faith only appears to be true; not others, since its speaker is Veetrag omniscient; why  would he lie?

In this way by accepting Jina order, the true shraddhan is called as Agya Samyaktva  and the concentrated contemplation there only is named as AgyaVichaya Dharma Dhyan.

If this is not believed thus and if by accepting order without examination, samyaktva and dharma dhyan are  attained then those Dravya Lingi who became Muni by accepting order, they go upto Graveyak by means of following order, how did they remain Mithya Drishti?

Hence with some examination only, by accepting order Samyaktva and Dharma Dhyan are attained. In Lok also people accept something after examination only.

There you said- By having doubts in Jina words, it causes a doubt form flaw in samyaktva. But it is not clear that what is its form- believing thus if he does not take decision, then only it causes doubt form flaw. If by taking decision itself causes flaw in Samyaktva then in Ashta Sahasri ‘ the one having attitude of examination is superior to one having acceptance of order’ would not have been told. Why questioning etc. are described as the divisions of swadhyaya ? Why the preachment is given to decide upon the substances by means of praman-naya? Hence accepting order after examination is better.

There several papi people have made imaginary narrations and described them as Jina words, do not accept them as Praman considering them as shastras of Jain faith. There also after examination with Praman etc. and matching with other shastras etc. and ‘is it possible or not’ – with such consideration , ‘ converse meaning is Mithya only’ – know thus.

Just as some cheat wrote the letter himself in which he gave the name of writer as some businessman  and out of delusion of that name, someone is cheated then he becomes poor. In the same way the papi people, by creating Granth themselves have given the name of the author as ‘Jina-Ganadhar-Acharya’ , and with the delusion of that name, someone accepts false shraddhan then he becomes Mithya Drishti only.

Then he says- In Gommatsar it has been told that ‘if Samyak Drishti jiva , with the nimitta of ignorant Guru believes in false shraddhan, then by virtue of accepting order, he is Samyak Drishti only’; how this statement was made?

Its clarification- What is not directly visible, or acceptable by inference etc., which cannot be decided on account of its being sookshma; with respect to them only this statement is made. But by having converse shraddhan pertaining to primary Deva-Guru-Dharma etc. and Tattvas etc. the samyaktva does not remain at all- this should be realised; hence without examination, the Jainis who are accepting only by order should be known as Mithya Drishti only.

There several get to be Jaini after examination but they do not examine the primary subject. Believing Jina faith to be supreme and with hope of gaining desired by means of Jina dharma, impressed by activities of compassion, morality, tapa, sanyam etc. and deeds of pooja-prabhavana , miracles etc., they become Jaini but in other faiths also these deeds are seen; hence in these characteristics the AtiVyapti ( over pervasiveness) flaw exists.

Someone says- The types of deeds which are carried out in Jina dharma are not seen in other faiths; hence the AtiVyapti flaw is not there?

Its clarification- Although it is truly so, but the way you accept compassion etc., they also describe the same way. The protection of other jivas is called as compassion by you, they also say the same; the other things also should be known in the same way.

Then he says- They do not have decision since sometimes they propound compassion and sometimes they propound Himsa.

Its reply- There some part of compassion was present; hence it results in AtiVyapti – in these characteristics; by this means the right examination is not carried out.

Then how is it carried out? –

Its reply- In Jina dharma the Moksha Marga is said to be Samyak Darshan-Gyan-Charitra form. There with shraddhan of true Deva and Jivas etc. Samyaktva is attained; by knowing them Samyak Gyan is attained  and with elimination of ragas etc. in reality Samyak Charitra is attained.

-          The description of their forms have been carried out in Jina faith , such description has not been made elsewhere and except for Jains , other faiths cannot carry out such deed; hence this is the true characteristics of Jina faith – recognising this characteristics those who examine, they only are true shraddhani; and those who examine in other ways, they remain Mithya Drishti.

There several adopt Jain Dharma due to company ; several accept Jain dharma after observing other great people following Jain dharma ; several engage in Shuddha or ashuddha activities of Jina Dharma upon observing others, thus the jivas without considering themselves do not recognise the mystery of Jina dharma and adopt Jaini name, they should all be known to be Mithya Drishti.

This much is there- In Jina faith the activities of Pap cannot be specifically there and nimitta for punya are several and the reasons for true Moksha Marga are present there anyway; hence even from aspect of Kula etc. those who are Jainis, they are anyway better than others.

Dharma follower VyavaharaBhasi with worldly objectives

There those Jivas, who out of deceit for the sake of livelihood or for fame  or some objectives of sensory subjects- kashaya , become Jaini, they are anyway Papi. With highly intense Kashaya they have such buddhi, which cannot be resolved. The practice of Jain dharma is done for destruction of worldly stay ; those who wish to serve the worldly objectives by this, they indulge in treachery; hence they are Mithya Drishti only.

Here someone says- The deeds which are carried out by Himsa etc., the same deeds are carried out now by means of dharma practice then what is wrong? Both objectives are served.

He is told- With same means of the Pap activity and Dharma activity, it results in pap only.

For example- someone constructs Chaityalaya as means for dharma and the same is used for enjoying women  etc. paps, then he is Papi only; for enjoyments with Himsa etc. if he constructs the house separately then let him make, but using chaityalaya for enjoyments is not appropriate.

In the same way the means for dharma are pooja, shastra etc.; if they are made means for  livelihood etc. also then he is papi only. With Himsa for livelihood if he engages in business etc. then let him, but in activities of pooja etc. the objective of livelihood etc. is not appropriate.

Here question – If it is so, then even Munis for dharma practice take food in other’s house and Co-followers carries out benefaction of other co-followers , how is that accepted?

Its reply- The dharma practice is not from aspect of livelihood etc. for self; knowing them to  be dharmatma, someone himself provide food , benefaction etc. then there is no harm. If himself with objective of food etc. practices dharma then he is Papi only.

Those who out of detachment adopt Munihood, they do not have objective of food etc. For maintaining the body if someone himself provides food then they accept ; otherwise they keep equanimity , and do not get perturbed. They practice dharma for their own benefit; they do not have objective of making others do benevolence and the things which are not renounced, those only are provided by them.

Some co-follower himself engages in benevolence, then let it be and if he does not do then the self is not perturbed – this is proper but if himself from aspect of livelihood practices external dharma and if someone does not do benefaction of food etc., then indulges in perturbation and begs and makes some efforts or becomes careless in dharma practice then he should be known as Papi.

In this way those who practice dharma with worldly objective, they are Papi as well as Mithya Drishti.

In this way know such Jina faith followers also as Mithya Drishti.

The common practices of those VyavaharaBhasi Dharma Practitioners

Now, how do they practice Dharma, its specifics are described-

There those jivas who out of Kula practices or by seeing each other or out of greed etc. practice dharma , they actually do not have dharma Drishti.

If they perform Bhakti, then mind is elsewhere, the eyes are roaming and with lips they are engaged in recital and do Namaskar etc. but this is not right. Who am I? Whom do I worship? With which objective I do stuti? What is the meaning of recital? – nothing is known.

Sometimes he starts serving Kudeva etc. also , there he does not recognise the difference between SuDeva-Guru-Shastra etc. and KuDeva-Guru-Shastra etc.

If he gives Daan(charity), it is  without consideration of suitable- unsuitable recipient, the way it leads to his praise, he gives Daan accordingly.

And if he does Tapa then ‘by being hungry the Mahanthood is attained’ – such deeds are carried out; there is no consideration of manifestations.

And accepts Vrita etc. then there is Drishti upon the external activity, in them also he does some true activity and some false activity  and there is no consideration of internal ragas etc. bhavas and externally he arranges for nourishment of ragas etc.

And if he engages in Pooja Prabhavana etc. activities then the way he gets fame in Lok and sensory subjects-kashaya are serviced, such deeds are carried out and generates lot of Himsa.

-          These activities have been told to improve the manifestations of self and other jivas. Although  here also certain amount of Himsa is generated, even then where fault is minimal and benefit is more, those deeds have been suggested. But there is no idea about the results that how much harm is accrued , and how much benefit is accrued – thus there is no knowledge of loss-profit  and there is no knowledge of procedure- duration etc.

If he practices Shastras then he proceeds mechanically- if he speaks then he narrates it to others ;  if he reads then himself pronounces it; if he listens then what is being told he hears but the purpose of shastra practice is not absorbed within self. Thus he does not recognise the essence of dharma activities.

Or just as the seniors in the Kula engage, we should also do the same or since others do it then the same we should do or by doing thus our greed etc. would be served, with such ideas they practice unreal dharma.

Or, there are several jivas who have buddhi of the form of Kula and some have Dharma Buddhi also; hence they practice dharma as described above and some improve their manifestations as described later; thus mixed results are seen.

Dharma practitioner VyavaharaBhasi with  Dharma Buddhi

There several people practice dharma with Dharma Buddhi but they do not know the Nishchaya Dharma; hence they practice unreal form dharma. There knowing Vyavahara Samyak Darshan-Gyan-Charitra as Moksha Marg, they practice it-

Continued…..