No other religion has given so much prominence to
Omniscience as Jainas have done. In fact others have been quite hazy and non
committal about the omniscience. Buddhists said that they do not want to enter
into argument whether someone can know all the objects of the universe. What is
important is that whether he knows the dharma/truth or not. What is the purpose of knowing the
number of insects in the universe, in the path to Moksha ? The Mimansak did not
believe that any person could have the knowledge of entire universe since he
would be weighed down with passions, attachments and ignorance. That’s why they
believed Vedas to be written by supernatural powers, not by any human being.
They said that even though one could know all objects of the universe , the
dharma could be known only through Vedas. Some others believed that knowledge is not a
quality of Jiva therefore the question of omniscience itself does not arise.
In Jainas the omniscience forms the starting step on the
route to Moksha. Acharya Kund Kund lays down the path clearly by saying that
one who knows the self , knows all. In fact if he does not know the self then
how can he know all ? The soul has inherent power to know all the objects of
the universe , hence if one knows his own soul, it automatically follows that
he knows the entire universe.
In earlier times there used to be quite lively debate
between religions on the subject of
omniscience and it would be very interesting to see how the arguments used to
be made :
1.
Acharya Samantbhadra established
omniscience in his AptMimamsa by giving argument that although we do not
see the sookshma ( atoms), antarit ( objects from the distant past), and
doorvarti ( objects at long distance) , but it does not mean that they do not
exist. Someone must have seen them and by inference it can be said that
omniscience also exists, like we accept existence of fire by seeing smoke. Just
as we have not seen atoms, Rama, Ravana etc
or places like China etc, but we accept their existence by inference,
same way we can accept the existence of Omniscient.
2.
Acharya Akalankdeo told that the soul has the
inherent power of knowing all the objects of the universe. However in worldly
state due to obscuration by karmas , that capability is not revealed. But once
that karmas are destroyed then there is no reason for obscuration and the
capability of the soul is fully revealed. Just as clouds block the sun light,
but once the clouds are dispersed the brightness of sun is fully revealed. In
the same way once there is no impediment to the soul , its true character is
demonstrated with omniscience. He also
said that since there is no proof for non existence of Omniscient , hence his
existence can be accepted.
3.
Q : Arihant cannot be omniscient because he
speaks and he is human , just as any other person roaming on the streets.
A : There is no rule that the omniscient
cannot speak or if someone speaks he cannot know. In fact we normally see in
day to day life that the one who is knowledgeable speaks better.
4.
Q : Speaking is indicative of a desire. How can
Arihant who is veetrag, can have the desire to speak ?
A: Such divine speech is acquired due to
bondage of Tirthankara karma as a result of previous punya karmas. On fruition
it results in samosharan and other divine attributes. In fact his divine speech
is not verbal but gets translated into 718 languages in the ears of listeners.
5.
Q : Since we do not see any proof for the
existence of Omniscience, hence it cannot be accepted.
A : The proof is by inference. How can inference be ignored?
Further this argument is only yours or everybody’s ? In fact even we do not
accept your argument which shows that there are people who do not accept your
viewpoint. There are innumerable objects in the universe which exist without
our knowing their existence. Lastly how can you say that nobody in the
world believes in his existence ,
because that itself would make you omniscient !
6.
Q : There can be a limit to the capability of
any person of knowing things. After all a high jumper with lot of practice can
jump only 10 feet and even with continuous practice he cannot jump a mile ?
A : This example is incorrect since the
jumping is the capability of body and is limited by agility of body. However
the knowledge is capability of soul which is unlimited. Due to obscuration by
Gyanavaraniya karma it was not revealed. However by practicing meditation etc
the karmas are destroyed and the entire capability can be revealed just as dispersal
of clouds reveal the brightness of sun.
7.
Q : If omniscient sees the beginingless and
infinity in his knowledge , then they cannot remain without beginning and infinite.
A: Every object is seen in the knowledge of
omniscient as it is. If space and time are infinite they it appears the same in
his knowledge also. If objects are infinite then they also appear infinite to
him. It does not appear any different to him.
8.
Q : Omniscience is achieved by learning of Agam
( scripture) and practicing of the same. But Omniscient only tells the Agam .
Hence both are interdependent therefore not acceptable.
A:
Yes omniscient only is the cause of Agam. Present omniscient learns and
practices the Agam described by previous omniscient who himself learnt from the
Agam described by his predecessor. Hence this chain is beginingless like that
of tree and the seed. Hence the interdependence argument does not apply in
beginingless case. The main issue is whether Agam can exist without omniscient
? And whether a human can become omniscient ? The answer to both questions is
that a person can become omniscient by his spiritual development. And then his
qualities are demonstrated in his speech which are then called Agam.
9.
Q: We see most of the people today as full of
passions, attachments and ignorance. Then how can we accept the existence of
somebody in the past or future becoming omniscient? Because there is a limit to
human capabilities.
A; Just because we are not able to observe
the glory does not mean that it cannot exist. Even today we do not see anyone
knowing all the Vedas but that does not imply that Gemini did not have the
knowledge of all the vedas. What we have to consider is whether the knowledge
of the soul can develop to that extent or not ? And if nature of soul is having
infinite knowledge then what is the hindrance to such a development . The
hindrance due to obscuration can be removed by conduct just as gold is purified
with fire.
10.
Q: If omniscient observes the desires and
unhappiness of all the people then he
will also become unhappy ?
A : Just because he knows the pains and
unhappiness of the universe, he cannot become unhappy. Unhappiness is due to
manifestation of soul into that state. Can a noble Brahman be called a drunkard
just because he knows the effect of liquor? The omniscient is totally
veetrag and he has no Mohaniya karma
attachment now. Knowing the unhappiness of the universe cannot make him
unhappy.
11.
Q : Since omniscient knows the unclean objects
he would suffer with their taste also ?
A : Knowledge is different from tasting an
object. Tasting is done by senses while Omniscient is beyond senses. Even his
knowledge is beyond senses. Hence knowing does not imply tasting the objects.
He never manifests into the objects to taste them.
12.
Q : Since we do not have proof of the existence
or non existence of omniscient , it
should be treated as uncertain ?
A: Proof for existence have been provided
above and the non existence has been negated. Hence there is no uncertainty. In
entire universe , and in the limitless time span, the absence of Omniscient
cannot be proved without becoming omniscient himself. Till we do not have
information of all the people of the world belonging to this endless time span,
how can we call the universe devoid of Omniscient? If someone can, he himself
becomes Omniscient.
13.
Q : It is not possible for one person to know
all because of limitation of senses and there is no proof of knowledge without
senses. Further senses cannot derive knowledge of past and future.
A : Its not correct. The sensory knowledge
is derived by the Kshayopasham of gyanavaraniya karma in the form of Labdhi (
capability) and Upayoga ( manifestation of soul towards the object to know it).
However with the destruction of gyanavaraniya karma , the inherent capability
of soul of knowing all is revealed.
14.
Q : Why only Bhava Indriya are destroyed for
omniscient , why not dravya Indriya ?
A: The bhava Indriya are dependent upon
obscuration due to gynavaraniya karmas while dravya indriya are physically
formed by means of Naam Karma. The destruction of Gyanaraniya is the cause of attaining
Omniscience in the form of Keval Gyana which is not dependent upon the senses
and the mind. The Naam karma is destroyed along with ayu karma at the end of 14th
gunasthana.
15.
Q : Since we do not accept the existence of
Omniscient, and you accept it, therefore it should be treated as doubtful ?
A : Even that is not correct. You do not
accept his existence therefore Omniscient does not exist for you. We accept his
existence because there is no proof of
his non existence , hence Omniscient exists for us. So neither you have
doubt nor we have any doubt. Yes if a third person comes, he may have doubt
that which one of these two is correct.
16.
Mimansak : Q : How do you say that knowing is
the nature of soul and he can know everything due to his nature?
A:
Then how do you make the statement that Vedas are capable of letting
people know the past, present , future and near and distant objects ? If you
accept that Vedas can impart that knowledge then how do you say that knowing is not nature of
soul and remain in good health?
Further, in your philosophy knowing is
accepted as attribute of soul in some respect unlike Naiyayik or Yog philosophy which believes knowledge to be
totally different from the soul and is attached to soul using Samvaya
attribute.
17.
Mimansak : Q : If such is the case then why
people appear ignorant in the world? Why they do not appear as omniscient ?
A: It is due to bondage of Gyanavaraniya
karmas under the influence of fruition of Mohaniya karmas that Jivas appear to
have lack of knowledge. The Mohaniya karma influences him like drinking of wine
and makes him disoriented and Gyanavaraniya karma obscures his knowledge. It is
practically seen in the world that two sensed insect has more knowledge than
one sensed. Thus it is not difficult to believe the existence of a person
without obscuration of knowledge.
18.
Mimansak : Q: Even without Moha , a person can
know of nearby things but not distant objects?
A : Nearness of distance is not cause of
knowledge. Just as kajal ( eyeliner) in
the eye is not seen in spite of being so near , and moon /sun are seen in spite
of being so distant. Hence the distance is immaterial. It is obscuration due to
Gynavaraniya karmas which is responsible for lack of knowledge. Reading
scripture cannot impart knowledge without capability of soul in the form of
lack of obscuration. Once the entire Gyanavaraniya is destroyed, it would illuminate the entire universe.
19.
Mimansak: Q:
Even omniscient should know by means of senses like us ?
A: Our sensory knowledge is dependent upon light and other parameters.
But it can be seen that with tools sensory knowledge is improved and even cats
and owl see better in dark. It proves that knowledge is not dependent upon
senses alone. People can see mountains in the dream and talk to relatives
without using senses. The knowledge of omniscient is not dependent upon any
senses. In fact sensory knowledge is quite weak and limited with capability to
know things sequentially. The knowledge of Omniscient is beyond senses, direct
and without any obstruction. He knows everything at the same time.
20.
Bouddha: Q : Destruction of karmas
would cause destruction of knowledge also in Kevali since his mati gyana, sruta
gyana, avadhi gyana and Manah paryaya gyana are destroyed ?
A: Karmas are not Jivas. The karmas
which were bonded to Jiva have now become unbonded from Jiva and are not
physically destroyed since no matter is ever destroyed. The Jiva which was
under the influence of karma reverts to his true nature of knowing all since knowledge is nature of Jiva. Just as
gold become pure once the impurity is removed, the jiva attains his keval
gyana.
Acharya Kunda Kunda and Omniscient
Acharya Kunda Kunda has laid down the
description of omniscient quite elaborately in Pravachansar. He tells in gatha
38 that all the paryayas ( manifestations) which have been passed and all those
which are not born yet are directly seen in the knowledge of the Omniscient ,
otherwise who would call that knowledge as divine ? In fact all those paryayas
of all Dravyas are presently seen in his knowledge simultaneously (gatha 37) . That knowledge is beyond senses
since sensory knowledge only knows indirectly and does not have capability to
sense the past and future manifestations ( gatha 40). That knowledge is called
Kshayik which is generated with the destruction of karmas and knows all by
means of all the pradeshas of the soul directly ( gatha 47). He also declares
that the one who does not know his soul of the form of infinite paryaya cannot
know all the dravyas and their infinite manifestations ( gatha 49). On the
other hand he knows all without going into all the spaces of the universe , and
he remains within himself. All the universe is knowable and is reflected in the
knowledge of the Omniscient . This is called a statement of Vyavahar naya (
practical view point) . Some times this statement is misunderstood as saying
that Omniscient does not really know the universe but he knows it formally
only( as a figure of speech). But what is implied by practical view point is
that he is not immersed in to the objects of knowledge while knowing them. Otherwise
he would be experiencing the pains, sufferings, happiness etc of all the
beings. He knows their pains and sufferings but he does not experience them.
That is why it is called Vyavahara Naya. That is why he has clearly told above
that if he does not know all then how can his knowledge be called divine?