Chapter 8 : Moksha Adhikar

42. Samayasar Gatha 288-299

Now the commentator says that the Moksha Tatva enters the stage.

Just as on a dance stage a masquerade enters; in the same way in the dance of Tatvas (elements) the disguise of Moksha Tatva enters.

The knowledge is knower of all the disguises. Hence in the beginning of the chapter the Samyakgyan is worshiped with the following kalash:

Shloka 180: After the description of Bandh substance, using the intelligence form sickle to crush,  the bondage and soul are separated and the total knowledge is gloriously revealed with the attainment of Moksha.    

How is that person? – who is permanently stationary with the real experience of the own nature.

How is that knowledge? – With fruition of own natural bliss which is filled with enjoyment , which is glorious. Which has completed all the required tasks which does not need to know any more.

Explanation: The knowledge reveals itself gloriously with the separation of soul and bondage, enabling the soul to attain Moksha. Here in the description  defining  it as the greatest itself is the auspicious beginning.

Now, how the Moksha is attained? – that is told. First of all it is told that those who do not try to destroy the bondage , but are satisfied with the knowledge of bandh alone, do not attain Moksha.

Gatha 288: Oh look! Just as some person, after spending considerable period in bondage, he knows the weak-strong nature of the bondage, its duration i.e. for so long he has been under bondage.

Gatha 289: Still if he does not break the shackles then he remains under bondage only; does not get liberated. In this manner in spite of spending a very long period under bondage, that person does not attain Moksha by vanquishing bondage.

Gatha 290: In the same way, some person knowing the quantity, nature, duration and intensity of karma bondage – knowing all these four divisions, he does not get separated from karmas. If he himself gets purified by discarding ragas etc then he can get liberated.

Commentary: The separation of soul with bondage itself is Moksha. Somebody says that knowing the form of bondage itself is Moksha i.e. knowledge of the nature of bondage itself is Moksha but that is untrue. Here the following inference is used: ‘For a person under bondage of karmas, the knowledge of nature of bondage alone is not cause for Moksha since that knowledge alone cannot separate the karmas. Just as a person under shackles, the knowledge of the shakcles alone is not sufficient for shckales to be broken; in the same way knowledge of nature of karma bondage alone does not enable to get rid of the karma bondage.’

With this statement,the belief of  the people belonging to other faith is refuted who believe that  the knowledge of the details of  the nature of karma bondage   alone is sufficient for attaining Moksha and they are satisfied with knowledge alone.

Explanation: Certain  people belonging to other faith believe that knowledge of bandh gives rise to Moksha. The above statement  refutes it since knowledge alone does not remove the bondage. Bondage is destroyed by destroying it.

Now it is told that thinking of bandh alone does not cause destruction of bandh:

Gatha 291: Just  as some person under bondage, mere thinking of those bonds, contemplating upon them, does not get rid of them; in the same way the jiva also does not attain moksha by contemplating upon the karma bondage.

Commentary: Some other people believe that contemplating upon the karma bondage continuously alone is cause for Moksha but such belief is also untrue. Here also the inference can be drawn as follows: ‘ The person under karma bondage is continuously thinking about that bondage and when would he get rid of it ? In this manner he is keeping his mind engaged continuously, even then that worry is not cause for Moksha in the form of destruction of bondage since the continuity of worry is not cause for getting rid of bondage. Just as some person under shackles keep contemplating upon the shackles without making an effort to get rid of  them, even then he does not get free from those shackles; in the same way continuous contemplation of karma bondage does not provide Moksha.’

With the above statement, those people,  whose wisdom has been blinded by the continuous contemplation of karma bondage in the form of pure  Dharma dhyan, are advised.

Explanation: If somebody keeps contemplating about karma-bandh continuously and keeps thinking of the same , even then he does not attain Moksha. This is so because those thoughts are of the nature of shubha manifestations of Dharma Dhyan. Hence those who believe that by shubha manifestations one could attain Moksha, are preached that one does not get Moksha by shubha manifestations.

Now it is enquired that if knowledge of the form of bondage, contemplation upon them is not cause of Moksha then what is the cause for Moksha? In answer to the path to Moksha is described:

Gatha 292: Just as some person tied with bonds attains freedon by breaking those bonds, in the same way by breaking the karma bondage, the jiva attains Moksha.

Commentary: Breaching the karma bondage is cause for Moksha, since the breaching alone is the reason there. Just as for some person under shackles, cutting those shackles is cause for freedom. By means of this statement, two types of people described above- one knowing the form of bondage and second thinking of the nature of bondage – both are addressed to separate the soul with the bondage i.e. advised to make effort with this sermon.

Now the question is raised that breaking of karma bondage has been called reason for Moksha, whether this much alone is sufficient reason for Moksha? – such querry is answered:

Gatha 293: Those people who, knowing the nature of bondage and nature of soul, knowing then both, get detached from bondage; those people destroy the karmas.

Commentary: That person who, knowing the definite nature of incorruptible consciousness form soul and the nature of bondage which causes corruption of the soul, knowing both quite clearly, get detached from that bondage, that person attains Moksha from all karmas.

By this statement, the rule  for  attainment of Moksha is described as separation of soul from bandh i.e. separating them both individually is the rule for attainment of Moksha. – this is the rule.

Now it is further enquired that how  does one separate  soul and bandh into two parts i.e. independently ? this querry is answered as follows:  

Gatha 294: The Jiva and bondage are separated using the intelligence form chisel which knows their individual definite characteristics by penetrating them, by which they get individually separated.

Commentary: The karta for separating the soul and bandh into two parts individually is soul itself. If the tool for this work is considered then from Nishchaya naya point of view, there cannot be any other tool than soul itself; hence knowledge  form  intelligence alone is the tool to separate the two. Using this pragya (intelliegence)  the soul and bandh can be split into two i.e. they can be separated for sure. In this way pragya alone can be used to separate the soul from bandh.

Here question is asked that soul and bandh are so close that they are alike due to the nature of knower-knowable relationship. The soul is the knower and bandh is knowable. Hence both are experienced alike together. In the absence of differentiating knowledge , in vyavahara they are observed   functioning like the knower. Then how can they be separated by intelligence?

Acharya clarifies saying that we know this. In the fine joint between soul and bondage of their definite characteristics, using the chisel of intelligence with extreme care, the two get separated.

There definitely the own characteristics of soul different from all other dravyas, which is not found elsewhere is consciousness. This consciousness form own characteristics, manifests immersing in which all paryayas and withdraws after accepting which all paryayas, conglomeration of all those simultaneously and sequentially manifesting paryayas  is the soul- this should be known.

This consciousness form characteistics is prevalent in all the gunas(qualities) and paryayas(manifestations); therefore the conglomeration of all the gunas and paryayas is the soul – this is the objective of this characteristics since the soul is of the form of this characteristics itself. Further consciousness has concomitant(inseparable) relationship with all the simultaneously as well as  sequentially manifesting infinite paryayas, hence consciousness alone is soul – this can be definitely known. This is the second statement.

Further the characteristics of bondage are ragas etc. totally different from soul since ragas etc. are not seen to be having oneness with the soul dravya. They are always seen and experienced to be different from the consciousness form soul. Whatever way  the consciousness is observed immersed in all its own paryayas,   the same is not seen with ragas etc. Even without ragas etc. it is feasible to realise the self i.e. experience the consciousness.

Whatever the togetherness of ragas etc. is observed along with consciousness, that is due to the nearness i.e. closeness of  knower-knowable relationship; not because of being the same dravya.  The ragas etc. are knowables which are known in the knowledge and they reveal the consciousness i.e. the knowing nature of the soul; not the nature of ragas etc.  Just as the illumination of pot etc. by the lamp reveals the nature of being lamp  only, not the nature of being pot etc.; same way it should be known here.

In spite of this, soul and bondage being extremely close together, it is not possible to separate the two since the difference is not seen. The agyani has eternal delusion between the two – this delusion can be split by means of chisel of intelligence only.  

Explanation: The soul and bandh should be recognized by their different characteristics ; using the chisel of intelligence they should be split separately. The soul is non corporeal and bandh is a mass of very small pudgala parmanus(atoms)  , hence they are not revealed in the knowledge of Chhadmastha (1-12^th gunasthana) separately and are observed as a single mass; therefore the ignorance is eternal. From the sermon of shri Guru, experiencing their characteristics separately one should recognize them differently that the consciousness is the nature of soul while ragas etc. are indicative of bandh. They are being observed as one due to the extreme closeness of the knower-knowable relationship.

Here the sharp intelligence is the chisel to separate them differently which should be placed very carefully at their fine joint and should be struck dispassionately, by which two get separated and are visible separately. Then the soul should be identified with the knowing bhava while bandh should be separated into the ignorant bhavas. In this way the two are separated.

The same is described by the kalash next:

Shloka 181: For separating soul from the bondage, this intelligence is the only sharp chisel. Therefore wise person, carefully dispassionately insert it into the fine joint between soul and karmas with some effort, so that with a sharp strike, the two get immediately separated in totality.

That intelligence form chisel identifies the soul by its clear stationary internal brightness, immersed within its conscious form and bandh as ignorance form as a rule; falls in between the two.

Explanation: Here soul and bondage, both need to be separated- this is the job, the doer is soul but what is the tool by which the doer can accompalish it? Hence tool should also exist. If considered from the aspect of Nishchaya naya, the tool cannot be different from the doer. Hence not different from the soul, this intelligence only is the tool to accompalish the job.

In the soul the gyanavarana etc. karmas are bonded from eternal times. Their work in the form of bhava karma are ragas etc. and in the form of nokarmas  are body etc. Hence using intelligence, separating the soul from the body etc(nokarmas), gyanavarana etc.(dravya karmas) and ragas etc.(bhava karmas)  by experiencing the conscious form self alone, remaining immersed in the knowledge alone is  separating the soul with bondage. By this means alone, all the karmas are destroyed and siddhahood is attained- this should be known.

Now it is enquired that by separating soul from bondage, what next needs to be done. This is answered as follows:

Gatha 295: Jiva and bondage, the two are separated by means of their own definite characteristics, in the same way the bondage should be separated and kept aside and pure soul should be realised. 

Commentary: First of all, the soul and bondage should be identified by the knowledge of their own definite characteristics and then separated in all ways. Further all the bondage having characteristics of ragas etc. should be discarded and the pure soul having characteristcs of upayoga (consciousness) alone should be accepted- this alone is the definite objective  of separation of soul with bondage i.e. discarding the bondage, accept the pure soul.

Explanation: The disciple had enquired that what should be done after separating the soul from bondage? The answer is that bandh has to be discarded and the pure soul has to be accepted.

Now the disciple enquires that soul and bandh were separated by the intelligence, but by which means the soul should be accepted?  That is answered innext gatha:

Gatha 296: The disciple enquires that which is the means to accept the pure  soul?- In reply Acharya says that pure soul should be accepted with the intelligence itself. Just as intelligence was used to separate it, in the same way, intelligence should be used to accept it.

Commentary: Here the disciple has asked that which is the means by which soul should be accepted? The Guru replies that pure soul should be accepted by intelligence only. Just as intelligence was the tool to separate the pure soul, in the same way to accept the pure soul, intelligence alone is the tool. There is no different tool. Hence just as intelligence was used to separate it , in the same way, same intelligence should be used to accept the soul.

Explanation: For separating and accepting there are no different tools. Hence they were separated by intelligence, the same intelligence should be used to accept the soul.

Further the disciple enquires that how should the soul be accepted by means of intelligence ? That is answered next:

Gatha 297: That consciousness form soul is definitely myself- this should be accepted by the intelligence and all the remaining bhavas are different from myself. In this manner the soul should be accepted. 

  

Commentary: Definitely separated by means of intelligence making use of own characteristics “consciousness nature self is myself”. Remaining bhavas which are of the nature of vyavahara which are identified by their characterstics, are different from the conscious nature of the soul, hence they are totally different from myself.Therefore “ myself, from myself, for myself, out of myself, in me, accept myself, visible accept myself, since consciousness alone is the activity of soul, with that only I know, knowingly I know, from knowing I know, for knowing I know, out of knowing I know, in knowing I know, the one knowing only I know. Otherwise I do not know, not knowing I know, from not knowing I know, for not knowing I know, out of not knowing I know, in not knowing I know, the one not knowing only I know.”

So how am I? –“ I am  Pure consciousness nature bhava”

Explanation: Just as using intelligence soul was separated from bandh, in the same way this consciousness nature soul is myself, all the remaining bhavas are different from myself; so it should be accepted. Here the indifferent predicates can be used as follows: ‘ I, mine, by me, for me, out of me and within me , I accept myself’.

What is this accepting? – This is the knowing nature act of the consciousness. 

Using that I know, I experience ; after applying these later these predicates are also negated that ‘ I am pure consciousness form bhava, I am undivided, from the aspect of dravya drishti the divisions of doer-act etc. predicates is also not within myself ’. In the same way, for  ‘I do not know’ etc the same should be applied. Thus using intelligence soul should be accepted.

Same is described by the kalash as follows:

Shloka 182: Wise people say that separating all others by means of their own dinstinguished characteristics; I am identifiable with the consciousness characteristics and indivisible glorious pure conscious self only. In which the  six predicates namely karta, karm, karan, sampradan, apadan, adhikaran ; existence-non existence, permanence- transitoriness, oneness- being many, etc dharmas, knowledge, vision etc. qualities, are divisive, so let them be but devoid of all vibhava bhavas pure, one and Vibhu i.e. permeated within all the qualities and paryayas(modes) – such conscious bhava does not have any divisions.

Explanation: Those which were identified and separated by means of their own characteristics such different substances, the different predicates, different qualities, different dharmas etc are different from pure conscious bhava, so let them be. Still pure conscious bhava does not have any divisions; the indivisible soul  should be so realized and experienced by means of shuddha naya.

Now it is told that although here the pure conscious nature alone has been described and accepted, but the general consciousness is of the nature of darshan-gyanness in general, hence one should experience the darshan-gyan form soul in the following manner:

Gatha 298: One should comprehend by means of intelligence as follows, ‘ the drishta i.e. the observer, is definitely myself and remaining bhavas are different from me’ ; in this way it should be known.

Gatha 299: Using intelligence only one should comprehend ‘ the gyata i.e. the knower is definitely myself and remaining bhavas are different from me’; in this way it should be known.

Commentary: Since in the consciousness there is no division by means of  darshan and gyan, hence like consciousness seeing-ness, knowing-ness, both are own characteristics of the soul only.

Hence one should experience that  ‘ I comprehend the seeing natured soul. Definitely whatever I comprehend; I see only, by seeing only I see, by means of seeing only I see, for seeing only I see, out of seeing only I see, in seeing only I see, the one seeing only I see, OR  I do not see, not seeing only I see, by means of not seeing only I see, for not seeing only I see, out of not seeing only I see, in not seeing only I see, The one not seeing only I see.

Then how am I ? – Totally pure only darshan(seeing )bhava is myself.   

In this manner on the term darshan, the six predicates of karta, karma, karan, sampradan, apadan, adhikaran should be applied and negated. Thus only darshan bhava natured soul should be experienced.

In the same way it should be applied to knowledge that ‘I comprehend the knowing natured soul. Definitely whatever I comprehend; I know only, by knowing only I know, by means of knowing only I know, for knowing only I know, out of knowing only I know, in knowing only I know, the one knowing only I know, OR I do not know, not knowing only I know, by means of not knowing only I know, for not knowing only I know, out of not knowing only I know, in not knowing only I know, The one not knowing only I know.’

Then how am I? – Totally pure only knowing bhava is myself.

In this manner on the term knowledge the six predicates should be applied, later the same should be negated for indivisible form, thus only knowing bhava natured soul should be experienced.

Explanation: Firstly in Gatha 297, the general form of consciousness was introduced for experiencing. There it was told that soul should be comprehended using the intelligence; experiencing the consciousness alone is comprehension; and not comprehending any other object. Here the experience ( karm), the one experiencing (karta), by which it is experienced (karan), etc. are divisions of predicates. Later in the indivisible form of description the predicates were negated and soul was described as pure consciousness alone. Now here it is told that the general form of consciousness does not transgress the specific forms of darshan and gyan. Hence the one seeing and knowing are made to be experienced. Here also the six predicates are described for experiencing and then they are negated for experiencing the indivisible form of seeing and knowing soul.

Commentary: Here the disciple enquires that how consciousness does not transgress the divisions of darshan and gyan by which conscious soul is of the nature of seeing and knowing?

That is replied – First of all the consciousness is of the form of experience which does not transgress the duality since the nature of all  substances is of the form of general-specific. The consciousness is also a substance hence how can it transgress the general-specific nature? It has two forms darshan and gyan. Hence this consciousness does not transgress the forms of darshan and gyan. If it transgresses these two forms then by transgressing the forms of general-specific, the consciousness itself does not remain existent. In the absence of consciousness two faults appear- firstly due to destruction of its quality the conscious becomes non conscious and secondly, in the absence of permeable consciousness the permeated conscious soul also becomes non existent. Hence to avoid these faults the consciousness should be accepted  of the form of darshan –gyan.

Same is described by kalash next:

Shloka 183 : Definitely in this world in spite of being without duality, if the consciousness gives up its nature of darshan and gyan then  due to absence of general-specific forms, that consciousness would give up its own existence. When consciousness gives up its existence then it would become corporeal, and the permeated soul without the permeating consciousness would be finished i.e. it would be destroyed. Hence consciousness is by rule of the form of darshan and gyan only.

Explanation: The nature of substance is of the form of   general-specific. The consciousness is also substance and if it gives up its nature of being general (darshan) and specific (gyan) then its nature of being substance would be destroyed and due to absence of consciousness it would become corporeal. In other words, the consousness is found in all the states of the soul and hence it is permeating while soul being conscious is permeated. Therefore with the absence of permeating consciousness the permeated conscious soul also becomes non existent. Hence consciousness should be treated as darshan-gyan form only.

Here the objective is that some followers of Samkhya philosophy accept only general form of consciousness singularly. For negating them it is told that the nature of substance is of general-specific form hence consciousness should also be accepted in general-specific form only.- So it is told.