MokshaMargPrakashak …32

 

Utility of Grammar-Nyaya shastras

The shastras of Grammar-Nyaya also should be practiced somewhat, since without their knowledge the meaning of big shastras does not become clear. The nature of things also becomes clear by knowing their form, by language alone it does not become clear; hence they should also be practiced knowing them to be effective traditionally. However one should not get trapped in their studies only. After their practice, one should practice shastras of importance.

For example the shastras of medicine etc. do not have any purpose in Moksha Marg; hence with intent of some Vyavahara dharma, without trouble if it gets learnt then it can be used for others benefit  without engaging in pap. If they do not get practiced then let it not be; there is no harm.

Hence knowing the shastras of Jina faith as flawless, follow their Upadesh. 

Refutation of mutual contradiction apparently seen  in Anuyogas

In Shastras, without knowledge of aspects, mutual contradiction  appears to be there, which is refuted here- As per the traditions of Prathamanuyoga etc. , the way the description has been carried out, it should be understood that way; the narration of one Anuyoga should not be compared with that of other Anuyoga and doubted.

For example- The pure SamyakDrishti has been told to have absence of doubt-desire-aversion in some place and somewhere fear, greed and  aversion are said to have fruition up to 8^th, 10^thand 8^th gunasthanas respectively; they are not contradictory. Samyak Drishti has absence of strong doubt etc. with Shraddhan  or the Samyak Drishti does not primarily doubt etc. , from that aspect in Charananuyoga the Samyak Drishti is said to have absence of doubt etc. But from aspect of sookshma shakti , the fruition of fear etc. are there in 8^th etc. gunasthana hence in Karananuyoga their presence has been told. Know the same elsewhere.

In the Upadesh of Anuyogas several examples have been  stated, they should be understood intelligently. In same Anuyoga also, out of necessity of narration the descriptions are different-

For example in Karananuyoga the Pramad is said to be absent in 7^th gunasthana. The divisions of Pramad are Kashaya etc. Now the presence of Kashaya is there till 10^th gunasthana. This should not be known to be contradictory, since here the Shubha-ashubha bhavas are treated as the Pramad which are absent in 7^th gunasthana while from aspect of sookshma bhavas, the same are present upto 10^th gunasthana.

In the same way in Charananuyoga the renunciation of stealing- seven vices of other women etc. is told in first Pratima and the same are renounced in  second Pratima. This is not contradictory , since in seven vices stealing etc. such activities are included which result in punishments etc. , which are  despised in the Lok while in Vritas such stealing etc. are renounced which are against house holder dharma and not so much criticized in Lok  - such meaning should be taken . The same should be known elsewhere.

And from different aspects same bhava is described in different ways –

For example- somewhere MahaVrita etc. are called as divisions of Charitra, some other place in spite of having MahaVritas etc. the DravyaLingi is called Asanyami. It should not be taken as contradiction since with Samyak Darshan-Gyan-Charitra the MahVritas are charitra but having Vritas without Gyan is Asanyam only.

In the same way,  just as Vinay ( respect) is called as one of the five Mithyatva and in twelve types of tapa also Vinay is there. It is not contradictory since those who are not eligible to be respected, treating their respect as dharma is Vinay Mithyatva . But those who are worthy of Vinay with dharma practice, their vinay as applicable is Vinay Tapa.

For example- somewhere the pride was denounced and somewhere it is praised, that should not be known as contradiction since with pride Kashaya , by acceptance of self as superior  if he does not respect  then that pride is condemnable only and if one does not do humility without greed , then such pride is praiseworthy.

For example- somewhere the intelligence is denounced , somewhere praised; they are not contradictions; since with deception Kashaya, if intelligence is used to cheat someone then it is condemnable while if the intelligence used for accomplishing suitable deed, it is praiseworthy. Know the same elsewhere.

In the same way, same bhava might be condemned compared to its superior bhava and somewhere praised with respect to its inferior bhava ; then they should not be treated as contradictions. 

For example- Some Shubha deed might be condemned, that should be known as in comparison with greater Shubha deed and Shuddha bhava and where it is praised, then that is from aspect of its inferior Shubha deed or ashubha deed. Know the same elsewhere.

In the same way some jiva may be condemned compared to his superior jiva, there it should not be treated as complete condemnation and somewhere compared to inferior jiva, he might be praised, there also it should not be treated as absolute praise. Their good-bad should be interpreted as applicable.

In the same way the context of the narration should be understood and accordingly its meaning interpreted.

In Shastra the same word has some meaning somewhere and elsewhere another meaning. Hence realising the context their meaning should be derived. For example – in Moksha Marg Samyak Darshan is told, there the meaning of Darshan is Shraddhan; in the context of Upayoga, the meaning of Darshan is reception  of the Samanya form of a thing and in the sensory description, the meaning of Darshan word is merely viewing with eyes.

In the same way for example- Sookshma-Badar are used in the description of the size of things . Those having small size are called sookshma and those having large size are called Badar. In the narration of Pudgala Skandh etc. those which are not detectable by senses are called sookshma and those detectable by senses are Badar- such meaning prevails. In the narration of Jivas etc. , without nimitta of Riddhi etc. those which do not get blocked, they are sookshma  and those which get blocked are Badar- such  meaning prevails. In the narration of clothes etc. the fine cloth  is called sookshma and coarse cloth is called Badar.

For example – the meaning of Pratyaksh word  in the Lok Vyavahara is the knowledge attained by means of the senses. In the divisions of Praman the clear realisation is Pratyaksh; in the context of soul experience the state of soul is called as Pratyaksh.

For example – Mithya Drishti is said to have Agyan, it does not imply absolute lack of knowledge; in the absence of Samyak Gyan it is called Agyan.

And just as in the meaning of Udeerana, where Devas etc. are not said to have Udeerana, it is when the death is with other nimitta then it is called Udeerana. In the narration of DashaKaran the Udeerana Karan is said to occur of Deva Ayu also , there the dravya of upper Nisheks is given to Udayavali then it is called Udeerana. In the same way the meaning should be known as applicable.

By adding another word as prefix to a word , different type of meaning is derived or the same word has different meaning ; hence as applicable, their meanings should be known.

For example- the one victorious is Jina but in context of dharma the one conquering the Karma enemy is known as Jina. Here the meaning accepted is the one by adding karma enemy in front, and other meaning is not taken.

In the same way – the one who accepts Pran, that is called Jiva; where the life-death are narrated in Vyavahara sense, there the acceptance of senses etc. form Pran is done by Jiva and where narration is Nishchaya form of Dravya etc., there the one who  accepts Chaitanya Pran is Jiva.

For example- Samaya word has several meanings – name of soul  is samaya; the name of all substances is Samaya, the name of kaal is samaya; kaal of only one samaya is samaya; the name of shastra is Samaya; the name of faith is Samaya. And so on.

-          In this way as applicable the meaning should be interpreted.

Somewhere the names etc. are told from  aspect of meanings; somewhere the names are told traditionally – where the names etc. are told traditionally, their word meanings should not be taken, but their traditional meanings should be accepted. For example- Samyaktva etc. are called dharma, there it causes jiva to rise to higher state; hence this name is worthwhile. The name of dharma dravya is called  as  dharma which is traditional name. Its word meaning should not be taken but it should be interpreted as the substance  having this name . Know the same elsewhere.

In the same way somewhere the meaning of the word should not be accepted but the intended meaning should be accepted. For example – something is said to be absent somewhere but if some slight presence is seen then it should not be treated as absolute absence but ignoring slight presence the absence is told. The Samyak Drishti is said to have absence of ragas, there such meaning should be applied.  In the same way the NoKashaya means the negation of Kashaya , but such meaning should not be derived; here  these are not Kashayas like anger etc. ; they are slight Kashaya form hence they are NoKashaya. In the same way know elsewhere.

Somewhere with certain logic the narration is done, there the objective should be considered. For example- In Samaysar Kalash it is told that ‘ like example of washerman, so long as the Drishti of renunciation of other bhava has not been attained, till then this experience was realised’ ; here the objective is that ‘ with renunciation of other bhava , immediately the experience appeared.’ In the Lok with the appearance of someone when some deed is accomplished then it is said that ‘ the moment he came the job was done’ – such meaning should be accepted there.

Somewhere some numbers etc. may have been told, they should not be accepted verbatim; the objective should be known. For example in Gyanarnava it is told that – in this kaal 2-3 great people are there but as a rule they are not limited to these; there are some- such is the objective.

In the same way and in different ways the words have meaning; they should be understood accordingly and not contradictorily.

There the Upadesh should be recognised correctly and the one applicable to self should be accepted. For example – in shastras of medicine several medicines are told, they should be known but the usage should be of the one applicable to own disease . When self has disease of cold  then hot medicine should be used and not cold medicine ; this medicine is useful to others-know thus. In the same way in Jain Shastras several Upadesh are there, know them but accept the one by which own corruption  can be removed. The Upadesh which negates the corruption of self should be accepted and the one supporting the corruption should not be accepted; that Upadesh  is applicable to others- know thus.

Here example is given- In Shastras somewhere the Upadesh is pertaining to Nishchaya and somewhere supporting Vyavahara. If self has more inclination towards Vyavahara then he should absorb Upadesh pertaining to Nishchaya and manifest accordingly and if self has more inclination towards Nishchaya then he should absorb Upadesh of Vyavahara and manifest accordingly.

Look! Earlier on account of Vyavahara Shraddhan he was being corrupted from soul knowledge, later with primacy of Vyavahara Upadesh only, does not make efforts for knowledge of soul or earlier due to Nishchaya Shraddhan he was corrupted from Vairagya and had turned promiscuous, later with primacy of Nishchaya Upadesh only, he engages in sensory subjects and Kashaya.

In this way with acceptance of contrary Upadesh,  it harms only.

For example- It is told in Atmanushasan that ‘  In spite of having qualities, why did you engage in faults? If you wanted to be faulty then why did you not be fault form itself?’ Here if some jiva is having qualities and if some sin is committed then to eliminate the fault, one should follow this Upadesh. And if self is sinner and by accepting this Upadesh he belittles other people with qualities then it is bad only . Since instead of being sinner, being little fault form is not bad; hence he is better than you. [ Rather than accepting higher Muni  state and committing faults it is better to be householder who is not blamed  for any faults]

Here it is told that ‘ why did you not be fault form itself’ – here this is given as argument, it is not upadesh for being faulty. There the person with qualities is condemned for having small fault itself but totally fault free is Siddha ; in lower state some quality and some fault is present only.

Here someone says- If it is so then accepting Muni Ling even with small possession he goes to Nigod- how is  this told in Shat Pahud?

Its reply- After accepting higher state, if he carries out activities pertaining to lower state ( not acceptable to higher state), then on account of breaking of the vows he is committing great fault. Whereas in lower state if the applicable good or bad activities are there ; then they do not get counted- know thus.

In Updesh Siddhant Ratna Mala it is told- ‘ For the one who is preaching Upadesh in accordance with the order,  even his anger is acceptable as forgiveness’ but this Upadesh is not meant for the speaker- if the speaker keeps being angry then he would be harmed only; this upadesh is meant for the listeners. Even if the speaker gives right Upadesh  being angry then the listeners would treat it as quality.

Know the same elsewhere.

In the same way – if someone has very cold disease and for him very hot juice etc. medicine has been told; that medicine if someone takes who is having heat or mild cold, then he would suffer only; in the same way if someone has primacy of certain deed, for that purpose if the Upadesh is given pertaining to its negation ; if some one accepts it who does not have importance of the deed then it harms only.

Here example- Someone has prime importance of shastra practice and there is no effort for soul experience, then for him the excessive shastra practice is negated.

But if the jiva has no shastra practice or very little of it, and he gives up Shastra practice due to Upadesh and upayoga is not engaged in soul experience then it harms only.

In the same way, someone has primacy of believing as dharma, the himsa of Yagna-bath etc. For him even if the earth turns upside down, even then by committing Himsa , punya is not attained- such upadesh is given. But the jiva who does little himsa in poojan etc. activities and earns huge punya, that jiva if as a result of the above Upadesh gives up Poojan etc. activities and does not engage his Upayoga in Samayik etc. dharma free of himsa, then he is harmed only. Know the same elsewhere.

And just as some medicine is favourable, but instead of taking that medicine for the duration it is beneficial for him, after curing of the cold, he still continues to take the hot medicine then it results in disease only. In the same way if some dharma activity is there , so long as that dharma activity benefits self, one should carry that out ; how ever if in higher state also he continues to perform the lower level dharma then it results in corruption instead. Example- for eliminating pap, the Pratikraman etc. dharma deeds are told, but after attaining soul experience, if he continues the vikalpa  of Pratikraman etc. then it enhances the corruption  only; for this reason in Samaysar Pratikraaman has been declared as poison.

In the same way, for example- The prabhavana etc. Dharma deeds which are prescribed for non-vrati and if vrati engages in them then he accrues pap only. Renouncing himsa of business etc. activities, if he gets to be in charge of activities of Chaityalaya etc. – then how does it help? Know the same elsewhere.

For example some medicines are strongly healthy but if a feverish person consumes them then it would be harmful ; in the same way the high dharma is quite beneficial but if own corrupted bhavas are not eliminated and high dharma is accepted then it results in great flaw. Here example- own ashubha corruption has not been renounced and if he accepts nirvikalpa state then it enhances the corruption instead. Just as someone is  obsessed with food etc. sensory objects and he adopts dharma of renunciation of himsa etc. then it results in fault only. Just as the corruption of business etc. has not been renounced but he accepts tyag form dharma then it results in great flaw. Know the same elsewhere.

In the same way knowing the Upadesh rightly with proper consideration, one should follow them.

What more can be said?- Upon attainment of SamyakGyan, self realises correctly . The Upadesh is words form and in words several meanings cannot be described simultaneously ; hence Upadesh is given with primacy of one meaning only.

The meaning which is described, that is the primary; if another meaning is made primary there then both Upadesh would have conflict. Hence establish one meaning of Upadesh, but the symbol of entire Jina faith is Syadvad and the meaning of ‘syat’ is ‘ in some aspect’ ; hence the Upadesh should not be considered as absolute. After knowing the meaning of Upadesh, consider that ‘ what is the form of this Upadesh? What is its objective? To which jiva it is applicable? etc.’  with these considerations the real meaning should be derived and accepted, then own state should be seen.

The updesh which is applicable to self , that should be adopted in the same way and the Upadesh which is only for knowledge, it should be known correctly. In this way the benefit of Upadesh should be derived.

Here someone says- The dim-witted who cannot consider these, what should he do?

Its reply- Just as businessman in accordance with his intelligence ventures into more or less business , but the knowledge of loss-profit should surely be there; in the same way the rational person with his intelligence , should accept more or less of Upadesh  but ‘ this is applicable to me and this is not applicable’ – this much gyan should surely be there.

The task is this much only - ‘ with proper shraddhan-gyan, reduce ragas etc.’  Hence the way own objective is served , the purpose of same upadesh should be accepted; if specific knowledge is not there then he should not forget the objective, he should be careful enough that own benefit should not be lost. Hence wrong meaning of Upadesh should not be derived.

In this way with the Drishti of Syadvad, by practicing Jain Shastras, own benefaction is attained.

Here someone asks- Where different types are possible, there Syadvad is possible. But if mutual contradiction is seen in shastras   of same kind, what should be done? For example in Prathamanuyoga ‘ along with one Tirthankara thousands of jivas went to Moksha ‘ is told. Whereas in Karananuyoga in six months and eight samaya, 608 jivas attain Moksha is told.- such rule is stated.

In the same way in Prathamanuyoga it is told – Deva, Devi after birth , then after death , together take birth in Manushya Paryaya etc. form . In Karananuyoga the ayu of Devas is Sagars while that of Devi is palyas. Hence how does it reconcile?

Its reply- In Karananuyoga the statement is hierarchical where as in other anuyoga it is based upon  objective. Hence the statement of Karananuyoga is as it is, while that of other Anuyogas should be reconciled with it .

‘Thousands of Munis went to Moksha along with Tirthankara’ – this is told. Know that ‘ in the same kaal so many did not go to Moksha’ but after departure of Tirthankara , so many Munis who were present, they went to Moksha sooner or later.

In this way the contradiction of Prathamanuyoga and Karananuyoga gets eliminated.

In the same way the Deva and Devis were born together, then Devis took birth in other paryayas and later they were born together  in Manushya paryaya form. The in between paryayas of Devis are not described since they are out of context.

In this way by reconciling the contradiction is avoided. In the  same way other issues are resolved.

Then question- In these descriptions somehow the contradictions are avoided.  But somewhere the birth of Neminath Swamy is told in Sauripura and somewhere in Dwaravati. The story of Ramchandra has also been written in different ways. Somewhere ekendriya is said to have Sasadan Gunasthana, somewhere it is not so. How does one resolve those contradictions?

Its reply- Such statements with contradiction have occurred due to vagaries of time. In this kaal those who have direct knowledge and learned are lacking and those with limited knowledge have written the granth. Out of delusion, the way it appeared to them, they have written or even in this kaal also some Jain followers out of Kashaya have written such contradictions due to some reason.

In this way with different statements the contradictions in Jain Shastras were seen.

Where contradictions appear, there do this way- Consider that those who are making one statement are more reliable or the one making  other statement are more reliable? With such considerations, the statements of senior Acharyas should  be accepted. In Jina faith  there are several shastras , they should be matched in hierarchy and the one which matches with the traditional hierarchy, that should be accepted.

In spite of such considerations if the right or wrong cannot be decided then ‘ the way it appeared to Kevali is true ‘ this should be believed since without deciding upon Devas and Tattvas the Moksha Marg cannot be  attained; they can be decided also ; hence if someone tells their form differently then it can be realised . Even if their some statement is not decided and doubted  or if it is known wrongly then ‘ the words of Kevali are true’- with such shraddhan the Moksha Marga does not get obstructed- know thus.

Here someone argues – For example lots of statements are made in Jina faith; the same way in other faiths also they are found. You have established the statements of your faith somehow or other,  but for other faith you imply them to be erroneous – this is your raga-dwesha.

Its reply- Statements are of different types, but if they serve the same objective then there is no harm , but if somewhere the objectives are contradictory, then surely they are erroneous.

In Jina faith the objective is that of eliminating  ragas etc.; hence somewhere by giving up lots of ragas the objective of having less ragas is served, somewhere the objective of eliminating all the ragas is served but nowhere the objective is that of increasing the ragas etc. Hence the statements of Jina faith are totally flawless.

Whereas in other faith somewhere the objective is that of eliminating ragas etc. and somewhere that of increasing the ragas etc. Thus the statements are made with contradictory objectives; hence their statements are faulty. 

In the Lok also  different statements serving the same objective are made then they  are considered reliable whereas if the statements are made with different objectives then people call him mad.

Look! In Jina faith different types of statements are made with different aspects, there is no fault there. In other faith, different statements are made with same aspect then there is fault. For example Jina Deva has veetrag bhava and Samosharan etc. glory is seen, there is no contradiction. The construction of Samosharan etc. is carried out by Indra etc., Jina does not have raga in them; hence both things are possible. But in other faith the Ishwara is called as Veetrag also and he is described to have desire anger etc. bhavas. How can same soul have veetraga bhava and desire-anger etc. bhavas? The same should be known elsewhere.

Due to vagaries of kaal in Jina faith some statements are made in contradictory manner for same aspect but that is due to folly of dim-witted people and not flaw of the faith. Even then the miracle of Jina faith is such that no one can make statements against Praman. For example- The birth of Neminath swamy is written somewhere as Sauripura and somewhere as Dwaravati. Where ever it is , the birth in town is not against Praman,  the same is seen even now.

In the other faith the granths are said to have been created by real Gyanis omniscient etc. but in them mutual contradictions are seen. Somewhere child Bramhachari is praised and somewhere it is told that ‘without son there is no Gati’ hence how can both be true? Such statements are found in plenty. The statements are found contradictory to praman also.  For example- with spillage  of Veerya in mouth,  the fish gave birth to son. But such things are not seen in this kaal and by inference also it does not appear to be true. 

Similar statements are found in plenty. If they are considered as fault of omniscient then how can he make mistake? Contradictory statements cannot be accepted hence their faith is declared as faulty- knowing thus the Upadesh of Jina faith alone is acceptable.

The  Sequence of practicing Anuyogas

In this way practice Prathamanuyoga etc. There is no such rule that this has to be practiced first then this next, but observing the state of own manifestations, the practice which engages self in dharma  should be practiced. Or, sometimes practice one shastra and then practice another.

For example in accounts book, the different amounts are written in different places, if they are entered properly then the loss-profit could be decided; in the same way in shastras different types of Upadesh is given  here and there. If they are recognised by Samyak Gyan with their real objectives then benefit and loss could be decided.

Therefore with the relationship of Syat term, by means of Samyak Gyan those jivas who engross in words of Jina, those jivas attain shuddhatma state soon.

In Moksha Marg the first means is said to be Agam Gyan . Without Agam Gyan, the practice of dharma is not possible; hence you should also practice Agam  with real buddhi so as to attain benediction.

This concludes Chapter 8 on Form of Upadesh.

Continued…..