Now
the same is described by means of a kalash:
Shloka 215: Acharya says that the one who has applied his
intellect in realizing the pure dravya and who experiences the Tatva – such
person never observes another dravya being manifested within one dravya. The
knowledge knows other objects of knowledge- this is fruition of pure knowing
nature , even then why does the intellect of the worldly people, restless for acquiring
other dravyas, deviate from the pure nature?
Explanation: On
consideration of the nature of pure tatva from the aspect of shuddha naya, one
dravya is not seen entering other dravya. The observation of other dravyas
within knowledge is on account of nature of purity of knowledge. Knowledge has
not captured them at all. This world, on observing the presence of other
dravyas within the knowledge, deviating from the knowing nature, desires to acquire
the subject of knowledge – this is ignorance. Here Acharya takes pity on those
Jivas and asks that why does the world
deviate from the Tatva(right path) ?
Same
meaning is confirmed in next kalash:
Shloka 216: Whatever be the own state of the dravya, that is
its own nature. The nature of soul is Gyan Chetna (knowledge consciousness)
i.e. the nature of pure soul of the form of pure dravya, its essence is gyan chetna- this being so, how can
remaining other dravyas be his? – absolutely not possible. In other words how
can other dravyas be of his nature?- absolutely not possible. Just as moonlight
illuminates the earth ; does it mean that earth belongs to moonlight? -
absolutely not.
In the same way the knowledge always knows the objects of
knowledge; then do the objects of knowledge belong to knowledge?- absolutely
not.
Explanation: From
the aspect of shuddha naya it is seen that the nature of a dravya does not
change into another dravya form at any time. Just as moonlight illuminates the
earth but earth does not belong to moonlight at all. In the same way the
knowledge knows the objects of knowledge but the objects of knowledge do not
belong to the knowledge at any time. The nature of soul is knowledge therefore
in its purity the objects of knowledge are reflected by themselves. Even then
those objects of knowledge do not enter the knowledge.
Now,
how long the raga-dwesha are generated within the knowledge? That is described
by kalash next:
Shloka 217: So long as this knowledge does not become of the
form of knowledge and the object of knowledge does not become of the form of
object of knowledge, till then raga(attraction) and dwesha(aversion) both are
generated. Hence this knowledge should become of the form of knowledge.
How should it become? - which has removed its ignorant state- it
should become since out of ignorance only the knowledge manifests in
attraction-aversion bhavas and removing them the pure nature reveals itself.
Explanation: So
long as knowledge does not become of the nature of knowledge and object of
knowledge does not remain of the nature of object of knowledge ; till such time
the raga-dwesha are generated. Hence this knowledge should remove ignorance and
manifest as knowledge form. This would cause the two states of knowledge
bhava-abhava (attraction-aversion) to be destroyed and the pure state would be
revealed – that is the prayer.
Now
it is told that with raga-dwesha-moha the darshan-gyan-charitra are destroyed
and since the darshan-gyan-charitra are not present in the pudgala dravya and
soul alone has darshan-gyan-charitra ; soul alone has raga-dwesha-moha due to
ignorance , hence ignorance causes self destruction – such conclusion can be
drawn-
Gatha 366: Darshan-gyan-charitra are absolutely not present in
insentient subjects; hence how can those subjects be destroyed by conscious
soul ?- he cannot harm them at all.
Gatha 367: Darshan-gyan –charitra are absolutely not present in
insentient karmas; hence how can those karmas be destroyed by conscious soul? –
he cannot harm them at all.
Gatha 368: Darshan-gyan –charitra are absolutely not present in
insentient body; hence how can those bodies be destroyed by conscious soul? – he cannot
harm them at all.
Gatha 369: Where Darshan-gyan-charitra are said to be destroyed ,
there no harm is said to occur to pudgala dravya.
Gatha 370: Jiva has several qualities which are not available in
other dravyas. Hence Samyakdrishti has no desire towards sensual objects.
Gatha 371: The raga-dwesha-moha are manifestations of the jiva
only, indifferent from him. For this reason there is no raga etc. in words etc.
Commentary: Definitely if something belongs to a substance then
with the destruction of that substance , that something also gets destroyed.
Just as a lamp has illumination ; therefore with destruction of lamp the
illumination also gets destroyed. Conversely if the substance has something
then with the destruction of something the substance also get destroyed. Just
as with the destruction of illumination the lamp gets destroyed.
In
the same way if something does not belong to a substance then with the
destruction of substance , that something does not get destroyed. Just as with
the destruction of the pot, its illuminator lamp is not destroyed. Further if
substance does not have something then with the destruction of something, the
substance does not get destroyed. Just as with the destruction of lamp illuminating
pot, the pot does not get destroyed.
-
Using the same principle it is told that the dharma, darshan-gyan-charitra of
the soul do not get destroyed with the destruction of pudgala dravya and with
the destruction of darshan-gyan-charitra the pudgala dravya does not get
destroyed. This proves that darshan-gyan-charitra are not existent in pudgala
dravya. If it were not so then with the destruction of darshan-gyan-charitra
the destruction of pudgala dravya would have been necessary and conversely with
the destruction of pudgala dravya the darshan-gyan-charitra must also be
destroyed.
If
it is like this then Acharya says that whatever be the qualities of Jiva
dravya, they are not existent in other dravyas- so we see rightly and if it is
not so then with the destruction of qualities of jiva, the destruction of
pudgala dravya is a necessity which is unavoidable and with the destruction of
pudgala dravya, the destruction of qualities of jiva is necessary and
unavoidable but such is not the case.
Now
it is considered- If it is so then why does the samyakdrishti have desire
towards sensual objects?
There
the Acharya says- there is no reason at all.
Again
enquiry- which is the mine from which the desires are generated?
This
is answered – Raga-dwesha-moha are ignorance form manifestations of the Jiva.
This ignorance is the mine for the generation of the raga etc since sensual
objects are other dravyas which do not manifest themselves into ignorant form
raga etc. Further when ignorance is not
there then Jiva becomes Samyakdrishti and he does not indulge in raga etc
either. In this way since the ragas etc. are not existent in sensual objects
and since samyakdrishti also does not have them then they are really non
existent.
Explanation:
The qualities of Jiva are darshan-gyan-charitra
etc. which are non existent in insentient pudgala dravya. Therefore the
ignorant manifestations of soul are the cause for generation of
raga-dwesha-moha and due to them only
his own qualities of darshan-gyan-charitra etc. are destroyed. The
raga-dwesha-moha are produced in the being of the Jiva out of ignorance but
when the ignorance is eliminated then the soul becomes Samyakdrishti and then
thay are not generated. In this way from the aspect of shuddha dravya the
raga-dwesha-moha are non existent in the pudgala, nor in the Samyakdrishti Jiva
either. Since it is not existent in either , therefore it does not exist
really, however from the aspect of paryaya, they are existent in the ignorant
stage of Jiva – so it should be known.
Same
meaning is described by a kalash next:
Shloka 218: In this soul the knowledge only manifests in the
form of ignorance bhavas of raga-dwesha form. However observing from the aspect
of dravya, those ragas etc. are nothing i.e. not of the form of different
dravya. Hence Acharya inspires by saying that Samyakdrishti people should
observe them from aspect of dravya clearly and destroy them, eradicate them;
such that pure natural knowledge form
flame with stable bright illumination is gloriously illuminated.
Explanation: Raga-dwesha
are not different dravyas. They are manifested out of ignorance of Jiva. Hence
being Samyakdrishti one should observe them from the aspect of dravya that they
are non entities. With such observation, the Ghati karmas get destoyed and
Keval gyan gets revealed.
Now
one dravya does not produce the qualities of another dravya, this is informed
by the next kalash:
Shloka 219: Observing from the aspect of Tatva, no other
dravya is seen to be cause for generation of raga –dwesha.These are
manifestations of the consciousness only since it is logical that the manifestation
of all dravyas is highlighted in their internal own nature. The qualities and
paryayas of another dravya do not get manifested within another dravya.
Same
meaning is described by the gatha next:
Gatha 372: One dravya does
not cause generation of qualities of another dravya since the rule is that all
dravyas are generated by their own individual nature.
Commentary: Other dravyas cause generation of ragas etc. in
Jiva- this should not be doubted since another dravya is incapable of
generating qualities in other dravya. All dravyas are generated by their own
nature. This is demonstrated with an example-
Does
the mud taking form of a pot is created
by the nature of potter or the nature of
mud? – On enquiring between the two options, if it is told that it is created
out of nature of the potter then pot should have been of the shape of the
potter’s body since pot has been created out of the ego of the potter and
efforts of his hands. However it is not so since one dravya is not seen to be responsible
for the manifestation of another dravya.
Thus mud does not manifest out of the nature of the potter.
Then
how does it get created? – Mud manifests due to its own nature since by its own
nature the dravya is seen to be manifesting . Since mud does not transgress its
own nature , hence potter is not creater of the pot. Mud only takes form of the
pot without touching the nature of the potter, by its own nature. In this way
all dravyas get manifested in their own paryaya forms on their own.
Are
they generated out of the nature of the
nimitta form other dravyas ? Or are they generated out of their own nature ? –
On enquiring between these two options, if it is said that they are generated
out of the nature of the nimitta form other dravya then its manifestation
should have been of the shape of other nimitta form dravya, but that is not
seen since manifestation of one dravya is not caused by the manifestation of
another dravya. Therefore all dravyas are not generated out of the nature
of nimitta form another dravya.
Then
how is it created? – All dravyas manifest by their own nature since all dravyas
are seen to be manifesting by their own nature. Hence in all dravyas the
manifestation is not caused by the nature of nimitta form another dravya. All
dravyas manifest by their own nature without touching the manifestation of
nimitta form another dravya.
For
this reason Acharya says that we do not see other dravyas as cause of
generating raga etc. in Jiva on whom we could be angry.
Explanation: Ragas
etc. are generated within the soul; these are own imure manifestations.
Considering from the aspect of Nishchaya naya, these are not generated by
another dravya. Other dravya is merely nimitta only since one dravya does not
generate guna and paryayas of another dravya –such is the rule. Hence those who
believe that other dravya only has caused raga-dwesha to be generated within
self, they indulge in singularity and do not understand the divisions of naya;
hence are Mithyadrishti. On the other hand the ragas etc. are generated within
the being of the Jiva, other dravya is nimitta only – such belief is Samyak
Gyan. Hence Acharya has told that why should we be angry on other dravyas for
the generation of raga-dwesha? The generation of raga-dwesha is by fault of our
own.
Same
meaning is described by Kalash next:
Shloka 220: Whatever generation of the faults of raga-dwesha
occur within this soul, it is not on account of other dravyas at all. In that
soul the ignorance alone is culprit which spreads. When soul realizes it then
his ignorance subsides since ‘ I am of the nature of knowledge’ such belief
alone is Samyakgyan.
Explanation:
The ignorant Jiva believes the other dravyas to be
the cause for generation of raga-dwesha hence indulges in anger against them,
‘Other dravyas cause raga-dwesha within me , hence I should keep them away’.
Those ignorant people are explained that the generation of raga-dwesha occurs
within the self due to own ignorance only; they are impure manifestations of
the self alone. By understanding this, the ignorance gets destroyed and the
SamyakGyan is revealed. Hence one should experience that ‘soul is of the nature
of knowledge’. One should not be angry on other dravyas believing them to be
cause for generation of raga-dwesha- this is the message.
To
firm the same meaning and informing the next gatha a kalash is recited:
Shloka 221: Those
people who believe the other dravyas alone as the nimitta for the generation of
raga-dwesha ; do not believe self to be the cause at all, they do not cross the
river of the form of Moha since they lack the knowledge of the nature of self
which is subject of Shuddha naya and their intelligence is blind.
Explanation:
The subject of shuddha naya – soul is permanent,
one, indivisible, consciousness form magnificient having infinite powers. It
has such purity that depending upon the form of nimitta, it manifests
accordingly. It is not so that as per
the influence of others, it manifests accordingly and it does not have its
own individuality. Those who do not know the nature of soul, they believe that
according to the influence of other dravya the soul manifests in the same way.
Such believers do not ever cross the river of Moha i.e. the manifestations of
raga-dwesha of self. Their raga-dwesha
are not destroyed since if they are generated due to our efforts then our
efforts could destroy them too. On the other hand it they are generated by
others then others can keep generating them and how can they be destroyed by
us? Hence they are generated due to our efforts and destroyed by our efforts –
believing this in certain aspect is Samyak Gyan.
No comments:
Post a Comment