41. Samayasar Gatha 276-287

Now it is enquired that Nishchaya naya has been called as negator for Vyavahara naya and Vyavahara naya has been declared as worthy of negation by Nishchaya naya. Hence what is the form of these two? In reply the forms of Nishchaya and Vyavahara nayas are revealed:

Gatha 276: Scriptures like Acharang are knowledge while Jiva etc form tatvas are darshan. Protection of jivas of the six body forms is Charitra- so is told by Vyavahara naya.

Gatha 277: From Nishchaya point of view my soul itself is knowledge, my soul only is darshan , my soul only is charitra , my soul only is pratyakhyan (renunciation), my soul only is samvar, my soul only is yoga , samadhi (trance)  and dhyan ( meditation)- thus it is told by Nishchaya naya.

Commentary: Acharang etc. are written scriptures which are knowledge since they provide knowledge. Nine padartha (elements) like Jiva etc. are darshan(belief) since darshan is dependent on them. The six body form Jivas are charitra since charitra depends on them.– This is the statement of Vyavahara naya.

Pure soul alone is knowledge since knowledge depends on soul only. Pure soul alone is darshan since darshan depends on soul only. Pure soul alone is charitra since charitra depends on soul only. -This is the statement of Nishchaya naya.

There accepting Acharang etc. as cause for knowledge causes fallacy of multiplicity since in spite of Acharang , one could still not have knowledge. 

Hence Vyavahara naya cannot be accepted. On the other hand Nishchaya naya is dependent on pure soul along with knowledge etc. which is singular since wherever soul is there the knowledge-belief-conduct are also there. Hence Nishchaya naya is negator of Vyavahara naya. The same is clarified using logic as follows-

Written scriptures like Acharang etc. singularly do not support knowledge since in spite of presence of Acharang etc. in abhavya jiva, he lacks knowledge since his soul is not pure. In the same way the nine elements of Jiva etc. do not support dsarshan since in spite of their presence in abhavya jiva, he lacks darshan since he lacks pure soul. Further the six body forms jivas do not support charitra since in spite of their presence in abhavya jiva since in spite of their presence in abhavya jiva, he lacks charitra since he lacks pure soul.

Therefore pure soul only supports knowledge, since in spite of presence or absence of written scriptures like Acharang etc.,the presence of pure soul itself is presence of knowledge. Pure soul only supports darshan since in spite of presence or absence of nine elements  of Jiva etc., the presence of pure soul itself is presence of darshan. Pure soul only supports Charitra since in spite of presence or absence of six body form jivas, the presence of pure soul iself is presence of charitra.

Explanation : Knowledge of written scriptures like Acharang etc., belief in Jiva etc. nine elements and protection of six body form jivas- in spite of their existence, abhavya cannot achieve gyan-darshan-charitra, hence Vyavahara naya is negatable. Further after attaining pure soul, the gyan-darshan –charitra are present as a rule hence Nishchaya naya is negator. In this way shuddha naya is described as worthy of worship.

Now the next statement is preceded by the kalash next:

Shloka 174:  Here the disciple again enquires that ragas have been called the reason for bondage and they have been described as different from the pure conscious flame form soul. There, for ragas to attach, the soul is nimitta or someone else?

With this as the inspiration, Acharya gives the answer by means of example:

Gatha 278:    Just a a sapphire jewel is pure by itself and it does not manifest into the form of ragas etc. i.e. red etc. colour form on its own. Instead due to the presence of red, black etc. dravyas it manifests into those colour forms.

Gatha 279: In the same way gyani is pure by himself and he does not manifest on his own in the form of ragas etc. bhavas. Instead he manifests into raga form by other corrupted ragas etc. 

Commentary: Just as in reality the sapphiure stone is by nature self manifesting and due to its pure nature, it does not manifest into the forms of ragas etc. in the absence of nimitta of ragas etc.(colours etc.) on its own because it cannot become nimitta for the manifestation into the ragas etc. form by itself. Other dravyas are ragas form by themselves and hence are nimitta for the manifestation of sapphire into ragas etc. form. Due to their presence the sapphire manifests into ragas etc. form deviating from its own pure nature.  

In the same way the soul alone or by himself, in spite of being of the nature of manifesting, due to his own pure nature, in the absence of nimitta of ragas etc. does not manifest into ragas etc. form by itself because self cannot be nimitta for manifestation into ragas etc. form by himself.  The other dravyas have nature of being ragas etc. form by themselves, hence they are nimitta for the manifestation of soul into ragas etc. form. Therefore the soul deviating from his pure nature manifests into  ragas etc. form due to them – such is the nature of substance.

Explanation: Soul is pure by himself but is of the nature of manifestation. Depending upon the nimitta of others, it manifests accordingly. Therefore it manifests in ragas etc. form on account of nimitta of other dravyas. Here example of sapphire jewel is quoted which is pure by itself, but when kept on  other dravyas of red etc. colors then it manifests into red etc. colour forms – such is the nature of things and there is no scope for arguments.

The same is described in next kalash:

Shloka 175: Soul does not manifest into ragas etc. form by its own nimitta. For soul to manifest into ragas etc. form the nimitta is the company of other dravyas. Here example is quoted of Suryakant jewel – just as Suryakant jewel does not light  up on its own but for it to catch fire the nimitta of sun’s rays is the cause; in the same way it should be understood. This nature of things has fructified on its own, nobody has created it.

Now it is told that knowing the nature of things the gyani does not manifest into ragas etc. on his own, which is described in next kalash:

Shloka 176: The gyani knows the nature of self ; hence he does not manifest into ragas etc. on his own, therefore he is not the doer of ragas etc.

Same is told in next Gatha :

Gatha 280:  Gyani does not indulge in raga-dwesha-moha and bhavas of passions etc. on his own, hence that gyani is not the doer of those bhavas as karta.

Commentary: Knowing the nature of things as described above, the gyani does not discard his pure nature. Therefore he does not manifest into bhavas of raga-dwesha-moha either on his own  or on account of others. Hence the knowing nature gyani, firm like a stone carving, is non doer of the raga-dwesha-moha etc bhavas, this is the rule.

Explanation: After becoming gyani one knows that the nature of thing is such that soul is pure and from the aspect of dravya it is non manifesting by nature, while from aspect of paryaya it manifests into ragas etc. form due to nimitta of other dravyas. Hence the gyani does not remain karta of those bhavas on his own; whatever is fructified he remains knower of them.

Now it is told that agyani does not know the nature of things; hence he functions as karta of ragas etc. bhavas.  This is stated in next kalash:

Shloka 177: Agyani is not aware of the nature of things in this manner. Hence he believes the ragas etc. bhavas to be his own, and hence he becomes karta of them.

Same is described in next gatha:

Gatha 281: In the presence of karmas of raga-dwesha etc. and passions etc. which result  in different  bhavas; manifesting in their forms the agyani gets bonded to ragas etc. again and again.

Commentary: Without knowing the true nature of substance, the agyani is disconnected from his pure nature from beginingless time in this world. Hence on fruition of karmas he manifests into the forms of raga-dwesha-moha etc. bhavas and thus  he becomes karta of those raga-dwesha-moha etc. bhavas and gets attached to karmas- this is the rule.

Explanation: The agyani is unaware of the true nature of self. Hence on fruition of karmas whichever bhava materializes, he believes it to be his own and manifests accordingly. In this manner by becoming karta of those bhavas, again and again he gets attached to new karmas- this is the rule.

Hence it is told that it establishes the following:

Gatha 282: With the fruition of Kashaya karmas  of the type  of raga dwesha, the soul manifesting in those forms, again gets bonded to ragas etc.( i.e. the pudgala karmas which are nimtta for them). 

Commentary: Definitely for the agyani, the raga-dwesha-moha etc. form manifestations on account of nimitta of pudgala karmas lead to bondage of pudgala karmas which function as nimitta for raga-dwesha-moha etc. manifestations again.

Explanation: Agyani manifests into raga-dwesha-moha due to the nimitta of karmas which are cause for new karma bondage.

Now it is again enquired that if the ragas etc. of agyani are cause for karma bondage then why soul has been called non doer of ragas etc. earlier? – the same is clarified:

Gatha 283: Apratikraman( non repentance) should be known to be of two types. In the same way Apratyakhyan ( non renunciation) is also of two tyes. By means of this sermon the conscious soul has been called non doer.

Gatha 284: That Apratikraman is of two types – one is dravya form and other bhava form. In the same way Apratyakhyan is also of two types – one is dravya form and other bhava form. By means of this sermon the conscious soul has been called non doer.   

Gatha 285: So long as the soul indulges in apratikraman and apratyakhyan of both dravya and bhava forms , till then he is the karta, so it should be known.

Commentary : The soul is non doer of the ragas etc. bhavas on his own, since if he were the doer then there is no reason for the sermons of apratikraman and apratyakhyan being of two types namely dravya and bhava. In fact the sermon of two types of apratikraman and apratyakhyan definitely denotes the dravya and bhava have nimitta-naimittik bhava ( cause-effect) relationship, which indicates the non doer nature of the soul. From this it establishes that other dravya is nimitta and ragas etc. bhavas of soul are naimittik.

If it is not accepted then the sermon describing dravya-apratikraman  and dravya-apratyakhyan as nimitta karta would be a waste. In that case, one soul alone would be nimitta for the ragas etc. bhavas, which leads to the case of him being permanent doer, which would cause the Moksha to be non existent. Hence it is necessary that other dravya be the nimitta for the ragas etc. bhavas of the soul.

In that case, soul is established to be non doer of the ragas etc. bhavas. Even then, so long as this jiva does not undertake pratikraman(repentence) –pratyakhyan(renunciation) of the other dravya which are nimitta of ragas etc. bhavas, till then the pratikraman –pratyakhyan of the naimittik form ragas etc. bhavas is not attained. So long as the pratikraman-pratyakhyan of those bhavas is not attained, the soul is doer only of the ragas etc. bhavas. Further, the moment he undertakes pratikraman-pratyakhyan of the other dravyas which are nimitta for the ragas etc. bhavas, at moment only the pratikraman-pratyakhyan of the naimittik ragas etc. bhavas is also attained and at that moment he is really non doer only.

Explanation: Pratikraman and Pratyakhyan have been sermonized in two ways with respect to dravya and bhava.  In this scripture, the preachment is with the predominance of shuddha naya which is primarily from the aspect of negation.

The implication of Apratikraman and Apratyakhyan is that whatever other dravyas were used in the past, they are considered as beneficial in the present . Having oneness and samsakar(desire) with respect to them is Dravya Apratikraman. With the nimitta of usage of those other dravyas, the ragas etc bhavas which were generated earlier ; considering them to be beneficial and having oneness and samsakar with respect to them is bhava Apratikraman. Further having desire for those other dravyas in future and having oneness with them is Dravya Apratyakhyan. Further with their nimitta , the bhavas of ragas etc. that would be realized in future; having desire and oneness with them is bhava Apratyakhyan.

The sermon with respect to dravya  and bhava Apratikraman  and dravya and bhava Apratyakhyan is of two types each. This denotes the nimitta-naimittik bhava of dravya and bhava. Other dravya is nimitta and ragas etc. bhava are naimittik. So long as this soul has Apratikraman and Apratyakhyan of the nimitta form other dravyas, till then he has Apratikraman and Apratyakhyan of the ragas etc. bhavas also. So long as he has Apratikraman and Apratyakhyan of the ragas etc. bhavas , till then he is karta of those ragas etc. bhavas. Further, when he carries out Pratikraman and Pratyakhyan of the nimitta form other dravyas, at that moment the Pratikraman and Pratyakhyan of the naimittik form ragas etc. bhavas is also attained. With the Pratikraman and Pratyakhyan of the ragas etc. bhavas , he is virtually   Akarta (non doer) only. In this manner the soul is akarta of the ragas etc. bhavas – that is known by calling other dravya as nimitta.

Now the example of nimitta-naimittik bhava of dravya and bhava is described in next gatha:

Gatha 286: The Adhahkarma(fault of accepting flawed food) etc. are faults of pudgala karma. How can gyani indulge in them since they are qualities of pudgala dravya.

Gatha 287 : Gyani treats the Adhahkarma and Uddeshik(intentionally prepared food) faults in  this manner that how can they be my deeds? Since they are always said to be non conscious.

Commenatary: Just as food etc. pudgala dravya generated out of Adhahkarma and Uddeshik activities is nimitta for bhavas of the Jiva. Depending upon the kind of food consumed, the bhavas are in accordance with it. Hence by not carrying out Apratyakhyan i.e. not discarding such dravya, the Muni does not discard the naimittik bondage causing bhavas also of that dravya. Hence in this manner, the one who does not discard all the other dravyas , he does not discard the bhavas generated out of nimitta of them.

Just as Adhahkarma etc. pudgala dravya are not undertaken by the soul since they are manifestations of other pudgala dravya. For this reason they are caused by the soul. Hence the Gyani knows that these Adhahkarma and Uddeshik pudgala dravya are not my deeds, since being permanently non conscious they have not been carried out by me. In this manner with the knowledge of the substances, discarding the nimitta form pudgala dravyas, the Muni also discards the naimittik form bhavas which cause bondage. Same way discarding all the other dravyas, he discards the naimittik bhavas pertaining to them. Such is the nimitta-naimittik bhava between the dravya and bhava.  

Explanation: Here the nimitta-naimittik relationship between dravya and bhava is clarified by means of example. Just as worldly people have saying that ‘ just as the food you partake, your mind is also like that’ , in the same way here in this scripture an example is given. The food prepared out of pap-karma is called Adhahkarma generated and the food prepared intentionally for someone is called Uddeshik. The person who consumes such flawed food has similar bhavas accordingly. In this way there is nimitta-naimittik relationship between dravya and bhava. In the same way the nimitta-naimittik relationship should be understood with respect to  all dravyas. Hence the one who accepts other dravyas, he has ragas etc. bhavas accordingly, he is also doer of them, he accrues karma bondage also. However when he is Gyani then he does not have ragas pertaining to acceptance of other dravyas, he does not manifest into ragas etc. form and new bondage is also not accrued. In this way, Gyani is non doer of other dravyas.

Same is described in the kalash next wherein he preaches to giveup other dravyas:

Shloka 178: In this way the person, considering the nimitta-naimittik relationship between other dravyas and own bhavas, discards all the other dravyas by means of strength, bravery and effort. Wishing to discard the lineage of all the bhavas which have their roots in other dravyas, he engrosses in the experience of his soul which is of the nature of continuously and strongly  flowing stream form. By this the Godlike soul reveals itself destroying all the karma bondage from their roots.

Explanation: When the soul realizing the nimitta-naimittik relationship between other dravyas and own bhavas, discards all the  other dravyas,  the lineage of all the ragas etc. bhavas get broken. Then soul experiencing itself, breaking the karma bondage, reveals himself in the illuminated form. Hence those desirous of their well being should undertake this only.

Now completing the chapter on Bandh Adhikar, in the end, the glory of knowledge is recited by means of this auspicious kalash: 

 

Shloka 179: This flame of knowledge has destroyed the darkness of ignorance i.e. turned it away, which is so rightly decorated that no one can prevent its expansion and spreading.

What has the flame of knowledge completed first so as to be decorated?

-First of all the fruition of ragas etc bhavas  which are cause for bondage has been mercilessly destroyed before revealing itself. Further with the elimination of the cause the effect form karma bondage of gyanavarana etc. has been immediately removed  for it to be now ready.

 Explanation: When ragas etc. are not there nor their effect form bondage is there then knowledge is revealed. Then there is nobody to obscure it and it always remains illuminated.

In this manner the disguise of bandh had entered the stage. With the revealation of flame of knowledge, Bandh has discarded its disguise and exited the stage.

This completes the seventh chapter of bandh Adhikar with 287 gathas and 179 shlokas.