3. SAMAYASAR – GATHA 5-7

Now Acharya demonstrates  the unity of the soul with itself different from others as follows:

Gatha 5 : This soul is one with itself and different from others. I shall demonstrate it through the glory of my own soul. If I am able to do so then only accept it as true , if not, then do not accept falsehood.

Commentary: Acharya says that he shall demonstrate the oneness of soul with itself , different from others using the glory of his own soul.

How is the glory of my own soul ? – Illuminates all the objects of the universe and is born out of the study and worship of the Param Agam ( holy scripture) as revealed by Arihant Bhagwan  which is characterized by word “ Syat “ ( certain aspect) and  is known as “Shabd Bramha”

Here the word  “ Syat” implies “ In certain aspect” i.e. making a statement in certain aspect. There are several Dharmas ( properties) which are general and can be described; they are described here , and there are several special dharmas which are not describable, they are described using inference. In this manner this holy scripture illuminates all the objects of the universe hence it is called “ sarva vyapi “ ( encompassing the universe) and therefore this scripture is also known as “ Shabda Bramha”. By worshiping (studying) this Shabda Bramha only the glory of my knowledge has been revealed.

And how is it ? It is capable of rejecting the belief of followers of other faith which is absolutely Ekantik ( one sided),by using very strong logical arguments.

And how is it ? It has been born out of the chain of omniscient - the highest Guru who is immersed within his own pure soul, his disciples including Ganadharas and other Gurus till my own Guru who have benefited from the divine sermon and realized their own glorious soul.

And how is it ? It is born out of beautiful experience mixed with extreme pleasure which is tasted continuously.

Using the glory of my knowledge, I shall exhibit the soul unified with self and different from others. If I am able   to do so then accept it by examining it with your own direct experience. If I make a mistake in the letters, vowels, simile, logic etc. then do not be alert for accepting wrong meaning because in  the ocean of scriptures there are vast amount of subjects. Out of them the self experienced meaning  is primary hence examine the correct meaning  using own experience.

Explanation : The Acharya has promised to reveal the pure form of soul which is different from others and united with self, attained through the glory of his knowledge realized through four means : study of scriptures, recourse to logic, sermons of chain of gurus and the own experience. Hence he calls upon the listeners to verify by means of their own experiences directly. If he falls short in some particular explanation, do not accept a wrong meaning . Here experiencing the truth is the right acceptance of fact and realise through that means alone.   This is what he implies.

Now the question arises that which is that pure soul whose form should be known. In reply he says the following Gatha :

Gatha 6 : The one who is of the nature of knower , is neither Apramatta nor Pramatta hence he is pure . The one who is known by the knower is himself and none other.

Commentary : The knower has been of the nature of knowing from beginingless time and has not been imparted this nature by someone else. Nor it is destructible hence it would remain so for endless time. It is an ever illustrious , bright flame which is permanent and  not transient.

In the worldly state, if examined from the point of view of manifestation then it is always in bondage from beginingless time with pudgala dravya in karma form , similar to water with milk. Even then if examined from the point of view of nature of substance the knowing nature  does not change into insentient nature by manifesting into shubha and ashubha bhavas on account of   the strange  manifestation of  passions whose fruition results in various punya and pap.  Therefore he is neither Apramatta not Pramatta ( these terms imply seventh and sixth gunasthana respectively in spiritual development which also imply vigilance and non vigilance of duties). This knowing self is called pure, different from the bhavas of all other dravyas.

His knowing nature is well known by manifesting into the forms of known objects. Just as flame is of the form of burnable fuel, hence flame is called fire, even then flame is flame alone and burning substance/fuel if not flame. In the same manner, soul is not knowable objects, he is knower alone. Hence he is not polluted by the knowable objects.

Even at the time of knowing the objects, what is known by the knowing nature, is the knowing self only which knows the self only and not the knowable objects. In the non differentiating  aspect the knowing soul himself is the doer and the deed. In this manner both are soul only and not different.

Just as lamp illuminates the pot and cloth etc. At that moment also lamp is lamp only not pot or the cloth. Even while illuminating its own flame, it is lamp only and nothing else.

Explanation : Impurity is produced due to interaction with other substances. Although original substance does not change into the form of other substances, it is somewhat polluted due to the nimitta of other dravyas. If examined from the aspect of dravya then the dravya is as it is unchanged but if examined from the aspect of manifestation or the paryaya then it is seen to be impure. The true nature of soul is just knowing alone but due to nimitta of pudgala karma it is manifested in raga etc form , hence when seen from manifestation point of view it is impure while from dravya point of view, knower is knower only and there is no insentience.

Here the statement is made from aspect of dravya, that the difference of pramatta and apramatta states is due to manifestation in  interaction with other dravyas.   This impurity is immaterial from the aspect of dravya since it is Vyavahara ( practical view), not real, not true , and is formality only. From the aspect of dravya , he is pure, indivisible, real, true and is a reality, hence soul is knower. There is no division hence it is not called Pramatta and Apramatta.

The name knower is given since it knows the objects of knowledge,  because when objects are imaged into the soul, they are experienced as they are, but even then the knower is not corrupted since when the objects   appear in the knowledge, at that moment also the knower is knowing himself and remains the knower only. “The one who is knower is myself only and none else “ – in this manner the self experiences himself in indivisible form. Then the doer of the act of knowing is self and what is known is the karma or the act is also himself. Thus the knowing nature alone is pure – it is subject of real view. All other differences on account of other dravyas is subject of impure dravyarthika naya, which is paryayarthika naya from the aspect of pure dravya, hence is a practical view only. That is how it should be understood.

Here it should also be known that the statements of Jina are in syadvad form ( multifaceted). There purity and impurity both are dharmas(  nature ) of the substances. Hence impure naya ( aspect) should not be taken as totally false. Because that that nature of substance is also within the domain of the substance although it is manifested due to interaction of other dravya – which is the only difference. Here the impure view is called discardable because the subject of impure view is the world and the soul experiences sufferings there. Hence when he detaches himself from other dravyas then the world and sufferings are overcome.  

In this manner to overcome the sufferings the sermon is given from predominantly  pure naya(aspect).

Since impure naya is called untrue, it should not be mistaken that  such a nature of substance is non existent like flowers in the sky. In this manner adopting a singular aspect become the cause for Mithyatva. Hence pure naya should be adopted by taking recourse to syadvad. After realsing the self then even pure naya becomes irrelevant. Whatever is the nature of a thing; it is that – this is aspect of Pramana ( right knowledge) and the result of it is Veetrag ( total detachment) – this way it  should be decided.

Here in the gatha it is said that he is neither pramatta or apramatta , since in the accordance with gunasthana ( ladder of spirituality) , upto sixth gunasthana are called Pramatta and seventh onwards are called Apramatta. Hence all the Gunasthana belong to impure aspect while from pure aspect the soul is knower alone.

Now, the question arises that the three divisions of Darshan- Gyana- Charitra ( belief- knowledge-conduct) are called nature of soul , but due to such statements of divisions it creates impurity in the soul ? – In answer to this the next Gatha is stated-

Gatha 7 : The three states of soul  charitra-darshan- gyana- (conduct -belief-knowledge) are acceptable from Vyavahara ( practical) aspect but in reality the soul is neither knowledge, nor conduct, nor belief either. Soul is just knower and that is how it is called pure.

Commentary: Acharya says that leave apart the impurity on account of bondage in manifestation, the knower soul does not even have the three divisions of belief-knowledge-conduct also. In reality the substance has infinite dharmas ( qualities) hence it is called Dharmi ( owner of the dharmas) and the students are unaware of it. To teach them about the soul being the owner of the infinite qualities, few of the qualities are described by the Acharya with a rider that although the qualities and the owner of qualities by nature are one and the same, even so they are named differently saying that soul has belief, knowledge or conduct. But such distinction is by Vyavahara (formal) only.

In reality if we examine it then we find that one dravya has swallowed infinite paryayas (manifestations) hence those who experience the soul , experience a mixed taste of an indivisible single entity. To such Pandit people soul is neither belief, nor knowledge , nor conduct , but is just knower and that alone is pure.

Explanation : Forget about the impurity in the pure soul on account of bondage of karmas, it does not even have the division of belief-knowledge-conduct also. This is so , because the soul is a singular entity with  infinite qualities but the people understand the qualities only without knowing the owner of the qualities in practice. Hence few extraordinary qualities are used as a basis to describe the thing. Although the thing is indivisible but it is described by naming the division of qualities e.g. the knower has belief, knowledge, conduct . Actually it is like dividing the indivisible hence it a vyavahara (formal). In reality , if we examine it then we find that a single dravya has swallowed infinite paryayas and is indivisible and there is no distinction.

Here someone enquires that even the paryayas belong to the dravya and are not nonexistent hence how can they be called as vyavahara ? Answer – Although that is true but here the aspect of Dravya is primary when sermonized. Because in indivisible aspect , the divisions are ignored and then only the indivisible is visible. Therefore the divisions are ignored in this sermon. Here the objective is that one cannot achieve Nirvikalpa (unperturbed contemplation) state in the aspect of divisions. As long as the Jiva  with ragas (attachments)  is engaged in vikalpas ( perturbed contemplation) , he cannot give up the ragas. Hence divisions are suppressed and the indivisible state is experienced in Nirvikalpa form. Once veetaraga (detached)state is achieved then he remains just knower of the divisions-indivisible  thing and he does not require the support of Nayas ( multi aspect views).