27. Samayasar Gatha 143-144

Now question is that what is the form of the one who is beyond the sides of nayas? That is answered as follows:

Gatha 143 :  The person whose objective is only “Samaya” i.e. his own pure soul, who knows agam(scripture) as well as soul, he just knows the two types of nayas, however he does not take sides of the nayas in the least. How is that person? – He is beyond the sides of nayas.

Commentary : Firstly an example is quoted: Just as Omniscient, veetarag, kevali, Bhagwan is witness to all substances, knower and observer; he just  knows the forms of both nayas of Vyavahara and Nishchaya which are divisions of Srutagyana. However he does not take sides of any naya, since Kevali Bhagwan is owner of the continuous naturally  generated Keval Gyana, hence he is himself of permanent dense knowledge block form. Therefore he is beyond the subjects of Srutagyana and thus very distant from the interest of taking sides of nayas. 

In the same way, the Mati-Sruta Gyani also just knows the divisions of Srutagyana namely Nishchaya and Vyavahara as two sides of the nayas. Although he is endowed with Kshyayopashamik gyana, and due to that he indulges in the vikalpas of srutagyana again and again, even so he is not desirous of knowing the others any more. Therefore he remains knower alone of the form  of nayas  and he does not take sides with either naya. Since his concentration is focused towards pure permanent ever conscious form “samaya” i.e. the conscious form of  pure soul experienced by means of sharply refined knowledge; therefore at the moment of experiencing the self he himself becomes similar to Kevali with the dense knowledge block form.

For this reason the nature of srutagyana is beyond the domain of internal as well as external verbal vikalpas and identical to kevali, beyond taking sides of either naya. In this manner mati-sruta gyani also is definitely beyond all vikalpas, of the nature of experience of the Samayasar like paramatma, Gyanatma, Atmakhyati and flame of knowledge.

Explanation : Just as Kevali Bhagwan is just the knower and viewer of all the sides of the nayas, in the same manner at the moment the srutagyani  experiences his own pure conscious self without taking sides of the nayas, at that moment he is just the knower of the nayas alone. If he takes side of either naya totally then he would accrue raga mixed with Mithyatva.    

If purposefully he takes side with a particular naya treating it as primary then he accrues raga on account of charitra moha without Mithyatva. When he gives up all sides of naya and just knows the nature of substance then at that moment that sruta gyani is also veetraga like the Kevali – so it should be known.

Keeping this meaning in mind the disciple experiences in the following way, as described in the next kalash:  

Shloka 92: Myself, the knower of the reality, experience the supreme soul (paramatma) in the form of Samayasar.

How is that Samayasar?- Filled with the conscious nature, i.e. generated in the form of bhava-abhava nature , in reality it is one only. It means that there are no vilakpas of pro or con either way in reality.

How is that experienced ? – Discarding all the thoughts of bondage and its lineage I experience it. It means that earlier due to thoughts of being karta-karma of the other dravyas, the lineage of bondage was prevalent. Now after discarding it, I experience Samayasar.

Ans how is that (samayasar)?- Unlimited, i.e. there is no end to its qualities like keval gyana etc.

Now it is established as a rule that beyond the sides of nayas alone is samayasar:

Gatha 144: The one which is beyond all sides of nayas , that alone is samayasar- so it is said. That samayasar alone gets to be called as Samyakdarshan and Samyakgyan. Although it is called by two names but the thing is one only.

Commentary : It definitely is not divided by the theory of nayas – such conscious form in which all the activities of vikalpas have evaporated -  such pure form is Samayasar. That alone is called Samyakdarshan and Samyakgyan although in reality it is one only.

First of all, the soul decides of the nature of soul being that of knowledge by recourse to Srutagyana. Subsequently for revealing the true nature of soul, he ignores the attention being drawn by the  senses and the mind into the objects other than the soul i.e. he directs the Matigyan towards the soul.

In the same way he ignores the contemplations of the srutagyan which cause perturbations due to vikalpas i.e. thoughts of taking sides of various nayas. Thus he directs the srutagyan also towards the substance of soul. Thus by engrossing within self, totally devoid of vikalpas, immediately he reveals himself by his own experience. Without differences of beginning-middle or the end , unperturbed, single, only, floating over the entire substances of the universe – such undivided conscious form, indestructible, infinite, dense knowledge block form, supreme soul form samayasar is experienced. He observes and believes in the right way, knows in the right way; therefore this alone is Samyakdarshan, Samyakgyan, and the same is Samayasar.

Explanation : Firstly by means of scriptural knowledge the soul was realized as that of the nature of knowledge. Then the sensory knowledge form Matigyan was also directed into the knowledge alone. Then by discarding the vikalpas of nayas of srutagyan also thus by removing vikalpas from srutagyan  also, experiencing an undivided conscious form of the nature of knowledge alone is called Samyakdarshan  and samyakgyan. There is nothing else other than this.

Now the same is told by means of kalash:

Shloka 93: The one who gives up taking sides of nayas, and attains nirvikalpa bhava (contemplation free) and becomes stationary within self, at that moment he is glorified with samayasar i.e. scripture or essence of soul.

 How is that samayasar ? – It can be experienced themselves by the people stationary within self i.e. they can taste it themselves. The essence of which is right knowledge alone- it is bhagwan himself, that alone is highest personality; call it knowledge or darshan or by any other name; whatever it is this is the only one, although called by different names.

Now it is said that the soul which had been separated from knowledge, now merges with the same knowledge:

Shloka 94: Separating himself from the dense block of knowledge form, the soul was wandering in the dense forest of different vikalpas. That wanderer was mated with the original dense block of knowledge form by traversing on sloping route of wisdom, like water.

How is it ? – Those who have desire for tasting the right knowledge , they experience only the nature of right knowledge- such a soul , by bringing his own natural form of soul within his own nature of soul, merges with his own nature in the same way it had separated.

Explanation : Here example of water is quoted. Just as water has lost its way in the forest and traversed different routes, then joins with original stream by traversing on a sloping route; in the same way the soul had also separated from his own nature, was wandering on the path of various vikalpas, then drawing self  by itself on a sloping path of wisdom or differentiating knowledge it merges with its own nature of dense block of knowledge form.

Now in conclusion of karta-karma adhikar, a kalash is recited describing the brief meaning of karta-karma:

Shloka 95: The one indulging in vikalpas alone is karta and those vikalpas alone are karma. Nobody else is karta-karma. Hence those who are indulgent in vikalpas, they can never destroy the karta-karma hood.

Explanation : So long as there are vikalpa bhavas, the karta-karma nature prolongs. The moment the vikalpas are doused, at the same moment the karta-karma nature is also doused.

Now it is told that the one who does is a doer only and the one who knows is a knower only:

Shloka 96 : the one who indulges in doing is a doer only, and the one who knows remains a knower only. Further the one who indulges in doing, does not know anything and the one who knows, does not do anything.

Explanation: the one who is karta , he is not the knower and the one who is knower, is not a karta.

Now it is said that in this way the act of doing and the act of knowing both are different: 

Shloka 97 : The act of knowing is not observed within the act of doing, and the act of doing is not observed within the act of knowing. Therefore the act of knowing and the act of doing both are different. Hence it establishes that the one who knows is not a karta.

Explanation : The moment the soul indulges in the bhava, “I do the other dravya” – at that moment he is karta of the act of manifestation of that  bhava. The moment he manifests in the bhava “ I know the other dravya” – at that moment he is knower of the act of knowing only.

Here somebody enquires that so long as Avirat Samyakdrishti etc. have fruition of charitra moha, till such time they indulge in passion forms , hence whether they can be called karta or not ?

Answer- The Avirat Samyakdrishti etc. do not have intent of the ownership of the act of doing the other dravyas in their knowledge-belief. Whatever is the manifestation in passionate forms is on account of the force of the fruition of karmas and he is a knower of it. Therefore he does not have karta hood due to ignorance. Further the results of manifestation under the influence of the nimitta are negligible, and are not cause of transmigration. Just as after chopping the root of the tree, the leaves remain green for some time only, same way it should be understood here.

The same is strengthened in the following kalash:

Shloka 98: Definitely the karta(Jiva) is not within karma (pudgala) and karma is not within karta. In this manner if the two are specifically examined together then how can there be a karta-karma relationship between them? Definitely it cannot be. Therefore the nature of substance is decreed explicitly that the knowledge is always within knowledge only, and karma is always within karma only. Even so why does this Moha i.e. delusion keep dancing in the background ? –this is a big mystery. 

   

The background is peaceful, pretty, elevated and patient- in which ordained with these four adjectives the substances are dancing; why does Moha dance within the same ?- particularly because karta karma bhava is not part of the decorations of the dance in the background; such sorrowful words are uttered by the Acharya. 

Explanation : Karma is pudgala, and if Jiva is called its karta then there is vast difference between the two since Jiva is not pdgala nor pudgala is jiva. Hence how can there be karta-karma relationship between the two? Since Jiva is knower hence he is knower alone, not karta of pudgala, and pudgala is karma then it is karma alone. Here Acharya is quite sorry to say that both of them are quite explicitly different dravyas , even so how does the Moha dance within the agyani (ignorant)? That I am the karta and this pudgala is my karma – this is great ignorance.

Now he says that if it dances, let it dance, it does not change the reality-

Shloka 99 : This flame of knowledge is revealed in a stationary form, which is internally overwhelmed with magnificent powers and so deep that one cannot fathom it. Earlier in ignorant stage the soul used to appear as karta, now he does not appear as karta. Further with the nimitta of agyan the pudgala used to appear as karma, now it does not appear as karma. Now gyan appears as gyan and pudgala remains pudgala only – so it is seen.

Explanation : When soul becomes Gyani, then Gyan manifests in gyan form only , and it does not become karta of pudgala karma. Pudgala remains pudgala form only and it does not manifest in karma form. In this manner with the real knowledge of the soul, the two dravyas do not manifest in nimitta-naimittik sense- that is realized by the Samyakdrishti.

In this manner Jiva and Ajiva entered the stage in the form of karta-karma as a single entity, but the samayakdrishti observes them rightly and with his knowledge he has differentiated the two by their different characteristics. Then those two, discarding their disguise, exit from the stage. This is a nature of impersonators that so long as someone does not recognize them, they continue to impersonate, but after being recognized , they reveal their own form and discontinue impersonation. Same should be realized here.

This way the second chapter of karta-karma is completed.

The translator adds further:

Due to eternal ignorance, the Jiva engages as karta of other dravya due to his impurity, and this karta-karma relationship causes accrual of future karmas bondage. Due to fruition of those karmas he continues in the world and keeps enjoying happiness and sorrow. When he is bestowed with Samyakgyan then he does not engage as karta of other dravyas , and he does not accrue future karma bondage either. The previously bonded karmas also get discarded i.e. the past karmas are shedded as Nirjara. When this soul  remains within his own soul at all times then attaining Moksha , he continues to remain there.

This concludes the second chapter of Karta-karma Adhikar  of  ( Acharya Kundakundacharya written) shri Samayasara granth on which (Acharya Amritchandracharya  has written) Sanskrita commentary  is AtmaKhyati (and Pandit jayachandra have written Samayasar Vachanika).