Before we make an attempt to traverse it, we would need to
understand first that what exactly is the form of Moksha. Many people imagine
Moksha as the solution to all their worldly problems and treat it very
casually. In reality they have no desire for Moksha either because they are
more interested in finding solution to their day to day problems. In their
imagination Moksha has several possible attributes :
1)
To remain in the service of an almighty creator
God is Moksha.
2)
Some such life where there is neither misery nor
happiness.
3)
A perpetual sleep for ever is Moksha.
But what exactly is it ? If it is asked then people’s mind
stop working. It is a wonder that while people may argue for hours for settlement of a small amount of
money , but once the topic of death or Moksha is raised , they want to get rid
of it as early as possible , as if they have caught a tiger by the tail. But in
reality , without knowing the correct answer to this question there is no
remedy. One more reason for possible lack of interest is that in the current
times no one is seen who may be knowing properly about this subject, and those
who preach on the subject are not trustworthy. Why should he tell something for
our benefit ? Definitely he has some
personal benefit in mind. This is something not surprising since we are
witnessing the degradation in moral values as time progresses. People have lost
faith in their own , then how to believe others?
To understand the form of Moksha , the ideal way would be to
examine the possible forms and deliberate that whether they could be viable or
not ?
For example , if we think that being almighty powerful is
Moksha ; who has capability to do whatever one wishes then two problems are
seen. If the others are also equally powerful almighty then there would be a
conflict of interest i.e. while you desired to fulfill desire of a worshiper
but the other desired to punish him for wrong doing. Second problem is seen even if you are the
only almighty that if you benefit one person, it may be at the cost of other.
For example the lion is only happy when he gets to eat the deer. Now whom would
you save? Either the lion should not have been created or he should have been a
vegetarian. In humans also it is seen that happiness is felt only when they get
a chance to rule over others. Then only they can enjoy full pleasures out of
their riches. So whom do you please or favour ? Or the world should have been
of the form of only deer and just grass.
Then only they could have lived peacefully.
If you cannot be almighty because of the likely conflict
then what else can be the alternate form of Moksha ? In some other religions ,
the form of Moksha is inert senseless wherein the knowledge is nil , or there
is knowledge but no sense. In such a case people may not even desire to get
Moksha. This confusion prevails in quite a few religions. Somewhere being the
servant of almighty is the Moksha. This belief is perhaps the continuity of the
King’s rule as was practiced earlier. So long as you are alive, serve the king
, and then serve the almighty God afterwards. In other words there is no
existence of the self independently. Can such a slavery be termed Moksha ?
In
Advaita belief Moksha amounts to becoming one with the Brahma wherein there is
only one entity Brahma, so you lose your existence when you become one with
Him. Then what is there for you to experience ? In fact you do not experience,
since you do not have existence itself. This is similar to Budhha belief
wherein the soul is destroyed in Moksha. All these beliefs makes you wonder if
Moksha is really something worth aspiring for?
After
examining different ideologies, and when we look at Jain ideology , and the
form of Moksha then we feel that it could only have been told by someone who
has not just imagined it, he has truly experienced the soul and the known the
truth. Here there is no contradiction and is logical. Moksha is such a state
where the soul has reached the highest level of knowledge and consciousness,
where he knows of all the three universes at the same time, of all the
events of past present and future. It
makes sense because we do see variation of knowledge capability in person to
person ordinarily itself. Hence definitely someone could be possible who has
the highest order of such capability. He would have infinite peacefulness and
strength by which every moment he experiences happiness and there is no
perturbation at any moment. In this form he is seeing and knowing the entire
universe but does not do anything for anyone. In fact he does not have
capability to change anything for anyone. This makes it perfectly logical and
believable. Knowing and seeing all goes against the desire to make changes in
the universe because if you really know all then how can you change anything ?
In fact
this is one characteristic which generally people find it difficult to
reconcile because people wonder that since they cannot do anything then how to
pass time ? If we cannot do something for your own kith and kin then what is
the benefit of such a Moksha? But if we really examine with impartiality, then
we find that this is the true declaration of independence. No one can change
anything for you, just as you cannot change anything for them. There cannot be
a better principle of governance than this because if we could have done so
then there would have been nothing but calamity and disorderliness. No one
could be happy since he would have someone to blame for his misery.
This
philosophy is confirmed by one more fact that those who have left the world
have never come again back to take care of their kith and kin , one way or the
other. This tells us that these relationships are only created in our
imagination by us which have value within the existing world only. Once someone
leaves this world, he gives up all those imaginary family and friends. In my
opinion the form of Moksha cannot be more independent with equal opportunity to all. Where no
recommendations or certificates are required from others. Your own efforts only
count. In fact there cannot be more honest system then this. But the problem is
that we do not want to get out of our own imaginary world. Then we must also
realise that if this world looks more enjoyable to us then we have not yet been
tired of infinite transmigrations suffered so far. We must think that we are
fortunate that even this much could be analysed and known since we do not know
if other births or forms would provide us an opportunity to know even this
much.
Once we accept this form of Moksha as the most logical and
systematic , worth aspiring for , then the next question arises that what is
the means to attain it ? The best part is that you do not need a recommendation
from anyone, nor serve anyone to achieve it. In reality the path is also
accessible to you and can virtually be attained in house. It may inspire you to
know that even animals have the capability of realizing the self and proceeding
on this path , thus there is nothing which really prevents us in realizing our
goal. Just as Moksha is independent, so is the means for it. It is absolutely
within our own reach and truly it should have been like this only. Then only
you will be happy to traverse it. The only thorns on the way are not put by
others, but they are also our own creations. So if we are not successful then
nobody else need to be blamed.
After
understanding the form of Moksha , it is time now to understand the form of
soul also, then only this path can be traversed with some certainty. If the
form of soul is not known and its weakness or strengths are not known then how
can we proceed on this path ?
However
before understanding the soul it is worthwhile to first understand the theory
of Anekanta or Pluralism. Although
Anekanta is used in our daily life without our own knowledge , we do not notice
it explicitly and it is generally taken for granted. Nevertheless in the case
of soul it is useful to explicitly highlight its principle so that there is no
contradiction. For example when we say that “ I am soul “ , immediately the
question arises that who is “ I”? Without knowing “I “ how can we know the soul
? Anekanta is the method of defining an object by highlighting it opposite
natures. Actually with single statement of Ekanta(one sided view) nature no sentence conveys its proper meaning. For
example “ I am soul” is ekanta since I can be anything in the universe. However
when we say that “I am soul and not body “ , it tells us that the soul is
different than the body even though they are together. In this manner by two
opposite attributes of “ asti” and “ nasti “ ( isness and isnotness) anekanta defines an object in
totality. Another simple example is that when we say “ This is a chair” it
inherently precludes all other objects of the room like table , sofa etc. from
the object called chair. Thus without
our knowledge Anekanta is understood to be present.
The reason why Anekanta is first told is because when we
want to describe the soul then we have to exclude all other external objects
from the soul one by one and thus proceed towards separating the soul from
other entities. This is required because unlike table and chair the soul and
the matter are so closely interspersed that it is difficult to separate them
without resorting to anekanta. In a manner of speaking we proceed from outside
to inside of the soul. To begin with we first say that “ soul is not wife, son
or house , property etc ”. From this
statement we know that all those external objects which we believe to be our
own do not have any relation with the soul and will never be either. It is just
in our imagination, we believe to be ours. In Jain scripture it is said to be
ours from a specific practical point of view but not in reality. Such a view
point or “ naya” is called “ Asadbhut Upacharit Vyavahar naya”. Since the
objects are ours only for a limited duration, it is accepted as practical or
Vyavahara , but in reality they are not ours. Since it is for limited duration
, it is called “ Upachar “ or formal. Since it is untrue relationship it is
called “ Asadbhut”. Thus this logic of viewpoint provides a practical means to
carry our day to day routine even though in reality , it is not
acceptable.
After
discarding all external objects we proceed inside then we say that “ this body
is also not mine “. This is called mine in Asadbhut Anupacharit Vyavahara naya.
Here the difference with respect to previous view is that the body is with soul
inseparably for a certain duration hence it said to be Anupachar i.e. informal.
Still it is vyavahara or practical view, not real.
Till
now it appears quite acceptable since we are used to make such statements
sometime or other even though not really intending so, since it is not really
experienced in that manner. For example, it is common to say that “ my house is
yours” but he is not handed over the property papers and key of the house. But
Jainism insists in experiencing it in that manner, not just making a verbal
statement. In fact it proceeds further and says that “ the manifestation of
Anger, pride, deceit, greed do not belong to soul “ They are called to be soul
from “Asuddha Nischaya naya” i.e. impure real view. In reality these
manifestations belong to soul only since he only indulges in them , but they
are not in the true nature of soul hence are impure. In worldly state the soul
undergoes such manifestations hence he is responsible for them, but also is
reminded that they are not in his nature.
In Jain
philosophy two of the most important
scriptures were written by Acharya Kundakundadeo about 2000 years back; these
are Samaysaar and Pravachansaar. In Samaysaar the true nature of soul is
described and it says that your nature is knowing and seeing and blissfulness.
The desires etc. are not yours. Such contemplation is called Dravya Drishti
i.e. focusing on the true nature of self. On the other hand Pravachansaar says
that the impurities of desires do to belong to inert objects, you alone are
responsible for it , and you only have to disassociate yourself from them. Such
a statement is made from the aspect of knowledge so that you do not believe
yourself to be pure at all times, because if that is so then there would be no
requirement for any effort. Therefore it is important to know that in the
present manifestation from parayaya
drishti point of view, I am impure and corrupt but by nature I am pure which is
my goal.
The
manifestations of anger, pride, deceit and
greed are not in the nature of soul . This is the true form of the soul
as described by Jain philosophy. Compare this with that of other religions then
you find that even the Gods are not exempted by such manifestation where in we
read about the destructive anger, sensual desires and divine weapons wielded by
the Gods. When we read about Gods indulging in such traits then how can we
expect the devotees to be devoid of such
attributes? In fact we find that they take pride in showing their greatness of
anger etc. On the other hand Jainism says that these manifestations are not in
your nature and mistakenly you believe them to be belonging to you. This is
what is known as false belief or Mithyatva or Moha which is root cause of worldly transmigration
of all beings. Realising that these are not in your nature is a very important
step towards right belief , which is the first requirement of the path to
Moksha. In fact we can easily see that this should be logical. After all how
can anyone experience bliss or happiness when mind is perturbed with thoughts
of anger , pride etc.
Question
arises that if they are in our nature then why do we indulge in them ? The
answer is that from beginingless time, the soul has been deluded with Mithyatva
karmas which are attached with him and fructify in his manifestation at all
times. There are eight types of karmas in all, which keep giving fruitation in
the form of body, delusion, desires, happiness or unhappiness etc. at every
given moment of time , known as paryaya. On account of these fruitations the
Jiva experiences manifestations of those kind within himself independently and
believes them to be his own. For example if red colour is mixed in water, it
appears red and impure. However if we look at the true nature of water , it ( H2O
) has not changed, but it is pure even though the mix is not. Same is the case
of Jiva in association with karmas. Inherently Jiva is pure by nature but is
manifesting impurely in presence of karmas.
This
relationship with karmas is from beginingless time due to which fruitation of
past karmas give rise to manifestation of impure nature within the Jiva. For
example in the presence of fruitation of anger particles, the Jiva imagines
himself to be angry which give rise to attachment of future karmas. Thus the
cycle continues and Jiva keeps getting attached to karmas which keep giving
fruits of different nature.
Question
arises that if it is so then it would never be possible to break this pattern
since Jiva is controlled by the fruitation of
karmas endlessly , hence there is no chance of him purifying himself and
achieving his natural form.
This is
a vital question and here only we get to see the real beauty of Jain
philosophy. In fact without realizing this issue, the Jiva keeps engaged in
various rituals hoping to achieve salvation. Only when understand the true
nature and capability of self, then and then only he can break the shackles of
karmas. All other efforts are superficial only.
In
answer to this question Acharya Kundakund
tells the nature of Jiva in
Samaysaar that you are untouched by the karmas and their impure manifestations.
The mistake lies in your belief wherein you believe that the anger etc are
mine. So long as you will keep believing them to be your own , your
manifestations will also be impure. When you take recourse to your own true
nature and experience the pure self; at that very moment you will be disassociated from the
fruitation of karmas.
In
simple language it can be said as follows: The moment the Jiva realises his
true nature and becomes one with it , even though there may be fruitation of
anger etc karmas at that moment, the Jiva does no become one with those
manifestations. Therefore even with fruitation of anger etc karmas, he does not
manifest in anger etc forms and the karmas wither away without giving their
fruitation. This alone is the key to Moksha.
This
alone is the Declaration of independence where it is stated that Jiva is the
owner /doer of his pure manifestations. By his own mistake he has been
believing his own nature to be impure of the form of desires, greed anger etc
which is false belief or Mithyatva. We have been indulging in all these acts of
anger etc without once thinking about our own true nature of soul. We have
worshipped the Gods several times but never thought about their form. Those
Tirthankaras have called us several times and told that we were similar to you
, and we were not different type of people from some other world. If you
traverse on the same path which we did, then there is no reason that you shall
also become one of us. This part of logic and philosophy is not really seen in
any other religion which makes Jainism truly great. Totally logical and devoid
of contradictions.
Question
may arise what would happen when Jiva is not one with his own pure nature ?
This is pertaining to the Jiva who has right belief that he is of the nature of
knowledge etc , but at a given moment his manifestation is of the form of
anger. Is there a difference between a person having belief and not having
belief, even though the anger manifestation may be identical. Yes says the
scripture . How ? There is a vast difference between the two. One believes that
anger is his nature and has no knowledge of the self and is thus Mithya
Drishti. The other one knows that anger is not in his nature and his nature is
that of peace and bliss, however due to weakness of his own conduct he is
manifesting in anger form. Therefore he does not have attachment towards that
anger as a doer or owner. Therefore even though two people may look identical
in terms of anger, there may be a huge difference internally. The ignorant one
is bound with karmas of Mithyatva as well as anger, and the other one does not
bind with Mithyatva hence his bondage due to anger alone is much inferior. Just
as example the maximum duration of anger for a ignorant one can be 40 koda kodi
sagar whereas for the wise one is less
than one koda kodi sagar. Another important point is that the ignorant is bound with Anantanubandhi karmas which are
ever lasting whereas the wise one does not accrue it. Thus Karananuyoga (
mathematical scripture) highlights a detail difference between the two types of Jivas.
At this
juncture it may be important to tell one mistake which is invariably committed.
Samyak Darshan does not mean taking birth in Jain family or indulging in
practices of prayers, fasting and rituals. Many people consider it as an
achievement if they are born Jains. Although they might be fortunate to be born
Jain since it provides better opportunity or environment, but it does not mean
that a person is Samyak Drishti. Actually one does not have to ask anyone. By
observing the manifestation of the self one can tell if he has the right belief
or not. It is important to realise that external rituals have no value unless
thay are carried out in the presence of internal belief.
Continuing
further towards the process of cleansing the soul , we have identified that the
manifestations of anger, deceit, pride and greed do not belong to the Jiva .
Now when we proceed further then we find that the Jain Darshan is becoming
still finer. Now it says that the manifestation of knowledge which occurs in
the presence of objects of knowledge at all times , even those are not in your
nature . Effectively speaking the vastness of knowledge of which you were quite
proud is also not your nature but is an impure manifestation. One may be
shocked to hear this. As if all that he had learnt so far was a waste ? Sadly
it is true. To understand this , we have to first understand the knowledge
itself.
Normally
knowledge is measured in terms of the degrees accumulated i.e. B.A, or M.A.
etc. by which one defines the extent of his knowledge. One may say that he has
done Engineering and is now doing Masters. Is that the definition of knowledge
? As per Jainism, that person is ignorant , without knowledge. Why ? Because he is measuring his knowledge
by the quantum of objects of knowledge without knowing the knower. He believes
that how many objects I know is the content of knowledge. It is similar to
having a cheque with several zeros but without a figure of one inscribed over
it i.e. it is zero only.
The
Jiva who does not know the self is called ignorant only even if he were an
Einstein or an Ambani. He may be highly successful in his life but as far as
knowledge is concerned , Jainism says that he is ignorant because they do not know themselves even if they know the rest of
the world.
Because
the one who does not know the self, believes himself to be something else like
the body or some other object as per other beliefs. He establishes his oneness
with some other object then his own nature. Hence he is Mithyadrishti and so
long he is Mithydrishti he is called ignorant not the right believer having
right knowledge. Only when he realizes his own nature of the self and
establishes oneness with it he can be called Samyak Drishti or right believer.
It may
appear a strange rule but there is a reason for it. When someone does not know
the self then whatever he knows about others will always be tainted with
ownership , oneness, mineness etc. That is say that the knowledge is having foundation
of ignorance then how can one construct the building of knowledge ?
For
example , if we ask someone to measure 100 meters with tape, then he shall ask
us , wherefrom to measure. Unless we know wherefrom to start, the measurement
is erroneous because the origin is wrong. The same applies for knowledge also.
Soul is the origin and till soul is not known , whatever is known does not have
a support or base. That knowledge is in the air, it has no value in Jainism.
And the
one who knows the soul, knows that the knowledge is not due to objects of
knowledge. The knowledge is not acquired from the objects. How can an inert
object like book give you knowledge. If it were so then why do all those who
read the same book do not have same knowledge ? It is our mistake to believe
that we saw the object through senses like eyes , and acquired its knowledge. By
touch or sound or taste or smell etc we do not get knowledge since the senses
are inert and do not know anything. Knowledge is acquired by the Jiva in his
own soul with the capability of the soul at given moment in his manifestation (
paryaya). Although it is true that the object of knowledge is present, but only
as a catalyst, not as a cause for the knowledge. Otherwise all students should
have equal knowledge since it was imparted equally to the class. But someone
learnt more and other less. This is due to individual’s manifestation at that
moment. The other catalysts present at that moment were objects of knowledge,
unblocking of knowledge by karmas , presence of teacher etc but they did not
accomplish anything.
Suppose
one saw a mango tree then where is the ignorance there ? The ignorant Mithya
Drishti sees it as a nice Mango tree which does not belong to his field hence
not his. He attaches ownership to each of his observation. Even thought of non
ownership of tree implies that he believes that there is something which
belongs to him. This is Mithyatva. The
other Samyak Drishti also sees it as a Mango tree which is anyway different
from self , as yet another object of knowledge without any thought of ownership.
He knows that all these objects do not belong to the soul and are different
from self. In this manner if we examine then we shall find that in each and
every observation there is ignorance behind the knowledge of any object be it a
book or pen.
In
Samaysaar Gatha 31 the real prayer of the omniscient is described. The
differentiation of the knower with the object of knowledge , and establishing
oneness with the self is the real prayer. The object of knowledge is matter
which is different from soul. The sensory knowledge is also matter and the
objects of senses are also inert matter. Therefore the belief that the knower
and objects of knowledge are one and same is Mithyatva since it is believed that
that I learnt from the object of knowledge. Thus realizing the nature of
knowledge as different from objects and experiencing the self is real prayer of
the soul.
But the
matter does not end here. Jainism says that in the impure householder state, the
knowledge of the types of Mati Gyan, Sruta Gyan ( which are sensory knowledge
and analytical knowledge of mind) know the object in parts , not in total,
which is not the nature of knowledge. This knowledge is called mine by Sadbhut
Upacharit Vyavahara Naya. This is also practical aspect only and not real as
the clear from the name. It occurs in the soul hence is called sadbhut or true
but accepted in formality only hence Upacharit since it is not nature of Jiva
but impure manifestation. Thus by these practical aspects the Mati Gyan and
Sruta Gyan are accepted as manifestation of Jiva. Even if the Jiva has right
belief , the knowledge through senses and mind are treated as impure state of
the Jiva and the knowledge is said to be Kshayopashamik i.e dependent upon the
fruitation, suppression of karmas , and therefore are not pure manifestation of
knowledge. Another thing is that every sense knows its subject separately hence
Mati Gyan and Sruta Gyan know the object in parts, for example the taste,
smell, colour, touch etc of mango is known through different senses separately
. They are not even known together since the Upayoga or the consciousness of
Jiva indulges in knowing subject of one sense at a time ( although it may
appear altogether). On the other hand
the real pure knowledge knows all objects at the same time in totality.
Actually we have to establish oneness with that real knowledge. I am that
knower who knows all the objects of all three types of universes and three
types of periods at the same instant together. Thus we identify that nature by
separating the Mati Gyan, Sruta Gyan as
mere practical knowledges at lower levels.
Even
then the totality has not been established. Now they say that even though the
omniscience is the true manifestation of Jiva in pure state called Kshayik
Gyan, but it is still manifestation. Hence is known as Jiva’s manifestation by
Sadbhut Anupacharit Vyavahar Naya. Although omniscience is pure manifestation
but it is nevertheless Paryaya or manifestation. It is still accepted in
practical view although informal and true.
The Moksha Marg is not realised by taking recourse to paryaya which is
perishable. Our objective was to know the goal for traversing the Moksha marg
which is known as Drishti ka Vishay or objective of contemplation. This
objective was our real nature. Omniscience is a manifestation of that nature in
real form , hence is a result but not in nature from beginingless time. From
the beginingless time aspect, the knowing nature is there at all times.
Therefore establishing oneness with omniscience which is a paryaya is a
mistake. Establishing oneness with omniscient nature is correct since that
nature was ever present but not revealed explicitly.
Thus
beginning with separation of external objects, identifying body also as
different from soul, then we identified anger etc also as impurities , and not
the nature of soul. Then we identified
Mati Gyan and Sruta Gyan as not true nature of soul. Lastly we identified even
omniscience as different from soul in dravya form since it is just paryaya.
The
journey is still not completed. Now it is said that the qualities of knowledge,
seeing, peace, strength etc by which the soul is known and glorified are also
not dravya or totality since they differentiate the totality. For example we
can talk about one quality at a time. But all are present at the same time. So
how to describe ? Each of this description is cause of Vikalpa or perturbation
of mind. In house holder stage al lower level of spirituality, the vikalpa is
cause for raga or perturbation. Hence it prevents achieving unperturbed
nirvikapa state. The objective is to establish oneness with soul without
identifying qualities separately. That soul which has all those infinite
properties, omniscience paryaya etc but
by directing our attention to that dravya only having such undivided nature. I
am such a soul. That is all.
In this
manner by separating the qualities of
soul different from the matter and then separating the anger etc also as
different , establishing oneness with real nature of soul undivided in its
qualities , is the real Shuddhopayoga or the pure contemplation which is
Nirvikalpa and this alone is the path of Moksha. There is no other path. This
alone manifests resultantly in infinite knowledge, seeing, peace, strength etc.
This is known as Moksha , which again is a paryaya or manifestation. Hence even
this paryaya is not object of contemplation.
No comments:
Post a Comment