Preface : Around 260 years back a letter was sent
addressed to Pandit Todarmal ji in Jaipur from the city of Multan ( Now in
Pakistan). The letter shows the philosophical inquisitiveness of a group of people who had profound learning
of Jainism and were keen to understand its intricacies. One can imagine how the
letter would have survived the ordeals of travel in those times and may be it
took several months to complete the journey. This also indicates the kind of
reputation Pandit Todarmalji was having in those times as an expert of the
subject of Jainism. His reply to those
people is a masterpiece on the subject of spirituality. In very few words he
has described the entire theory of meditation and its benefits. As a result
this letter is no less than a shastra in terms of importance.
The style of Pandit Todarmalji was
unique. He would anticipate the questions in the mind of the listener and raise
that himself to answer it. This makes his letter simple to read and understand.
Overall the contribution of Pandit
Todarmalji towards Jain scriptures is enormous. Be it the field of Karananuyoga
or Drvayanuyoga , everywhere his influence is visible. One wonders how
difficult things would have been for the spread and understanding of Jainism if
he were not there.
A Mystical Letter
Todarmal writes to convey his words of
deep reverence to his brethren followers
of same religion, who are highly praiseworthy having deep spiritual interest.
Those were Shri Khanchand ji, Gangadhar
ji, Shripal ji, Siddharasdas ji and other brethren, in the highly auspicious
town of shri Multan nagar.
Peaceful bliss reins over here, hope
you all experience continued growth of your true bliss with the experience of
conscious self.
One letter of yours was received by
brother Shri Ramsingh ji Bhuvanidas ji. Its news was forwarded to me from
Jehanabad by other brethren.
So brother, people like you only can
raise such queries. In this present period there are very few who are
interested in spiritual matters. Blessed are those who talk of own soul
experience also. It is also said
Meaning: Whichever
Jiva has even heard the subject of conscious natured soul with interested mind,
he definitely is Bhavya, eligible to attain salvation soon.
So brother, I am writing some answers
with my own knowledge in reply to your questions so please note them. You are
requested to keep posting letters pertaining to spiritual matters and
scriptures quite often. Actual meeting
of ours is dependent upon fate. In any case you should continue the practice of own self experience. So here
goes.
Now the answers
pertaining to questions regarding direct-indirect etc. under state of self
experience are provided based upon my
own understanding:
Firstly the form of self experience is
depicted –
The Jiva substance is Mithyadrishti (
deluded ) from eternal times. The wrong belief pertaining to self and others,
contrary to reality is known as Mithyatva. Later at some time, on account of
subsidence, destruction, subsidence cum
destruction of the Darshan Moha karma of Jiva, the right belief pertaining to
self and others as per reality dawns, then the Jiva is called Samyaktvi.
Therefore in the right belief pertaining to
self and others the Nishchaya (true) Samyaktva of the form of realization
of pure self is implicit.
Further, if the right belief
pertaining to self and others does not exist and one believes only the Deva,
Guru, dharma as described in Jain principles alone; and believes in seven
Tatvas (elements) ; does not believe in the Tatvas or Devas etc. described in
other religions; then just by following Vyavahara (practical) Samyaktva
it does not entitle him to be called Samyaktvi ; therefore only the
right belief accompanied with differentiation of self and others is termed as
Samyaktva.
After attaining such Samyaktva, the
knowledge which was derived with five senses and sixth mind under its
subsidence cum destruction state with Mithyatva which was of the form of Kumati
– Kushruta , that knowledge is now deemed to be Mati-Shruta form Samyak Gyan.
Whatever the Samyaktvi knows is deemed to be all Samyak gyan form now.
Even
if per chance he knows the pot-clothes etc. substances wrongly, even
then it is termed as Audayik Agyan on account of obscuration of knowledge. The
explicit knowledge of the form of subsidence cum destruction is all deemed to
be Samyak Gyan only since in knowing he does not mistake the other substances as his own. Therefore this Samyak
Gyan is part of Keval Gyan only; just as with removal of obscuration of clouds
some illumination is revealed which is part of the total illumination.
The knowledge which was manifesting in
the form of Mati-Shruta gyan, that gyan
only grows continuously to take the form of Keval Gyan; the category of all
these with respect to right knowledge is the same.
The manifestations of this Samyaktvi
takes the Savikalpa (with thoughts) or Nirvikalpa (thoughts free) form, in
these two styles. In these the manifestations which are of the form of sensory
subjects-passions and are of the nature of pooja, charity, practice of
scriptures etc. are termed as Savikalpa form.
Here
question- How does one detect presence of
Samyaktva in spite of manifesting in the shubha-ashubha forms.
Answer :
Just as a Munim engages in the activities of the Seth. He treats those
activities as his own and accordingly shares the happiness-sorrow of the
business. While serving he does not bother about the absence of Seth ; even then the internal
disposition is there that he does not own this business. While serving the
Munim functions as Seth only. If he steals the money of the Seth and treats as
his own then that Munim would be a thief. In the same way, one engages in the
shubha-ashubha activities caused by fruition of karmas manifesting in those forms, even then the
internal disposition if there that this work is not mine. If he believes the
body dependent fasting-vows to be his own then he would be Mithyadrishti. In
this way the Savikalpa manifestations occur.
Now the procedure for leading into
Nirvikalpa state starting with Savikalpa manifestations is described:
At some time the Samyaktvi engages in contemplation wherein he
differentiates between self and others, meditates upon his own nature of the
form of glorious consciousness only, devoid of dravya karma, bhava karma and
nokarmas. Subsequently the contemplation of others is discarded and only self
remains under consideration. In that he visualises himself in several ways. ‘I
am conscious blissful, pure, siddha etc.’ are contemplated which automatically leads to generation of blissful
waves and goose pimples. Subsequently even those thoughts get terminated and
only consciousness form self is experienced and all manifestations occur
focussed in that form. The thoughts of gyan-darshan etc. and naya-pramana etc.
also get evaporated.
The nature of consciousness which was
earlier formulated in savikalpa form, now in that only he manifests in
pervader- pervaded form such that there is no distinction between the one
contemplating and its subject. Such a state only is called nirvikalpa
experience. Same is described in large NayaChakra scripture as:
Meaning: At
the time of realisation of the
substance, one should first realise the ‘samaya’ i.e. pure soul by means of
logic i.e. naya-pramana. Subsequently at the time of experience, there is no
naya-pramana present since experience is direct.
Example- At the time of purchasing
jewellery several considerations are taken into account, however when it is
worn in reality then there are no
considerations- only happiness of wearing is experienced. In this way the
savikalpa leads to nirvikalpa experience.
Further the knowledge which was
manifesting with the assistance of five senses and sixth mind, that knowledge
converges from all other directions inwards towards self only in this
nirvikalpa experience. This knowledge is kshayopasham (destruction cum
subsidence ) form which knows only one subject at a time. Now since that knowledge
is engaged in knowing self hence all others
are not being known automatically. This results in conditions such that even if
there is external disturbance like sound etc., the meditator focused on self is
not even aware of it. In this manner the mati gyan ( sensory knowledge) also
gets focused inwards. Also due to elimination of thoughts of naya etc. the
sruta gyan also gets focused inwards.
Such description is available in
‘Atmakhyati ‘ which is commentary on
Samayasar as well as in Atmaavalokan etc. also. That is why the
nirvikalpa experience is called as experience beyond senses. This is so, since
the task of senses is to know the touch, taste, colour, smell, sound etc. which
are not present here and the function of mind is to indulge in vikalpas of
different kinds, which too are absent.
Therefore the knowledge which was engaged in senses and mind, now manifests
in the form of experience hence this knowledge is called Atindriya ( beyond
senses).
Further this experience of self is
also attributed to mind since in this experience only mati-sruta gyan are
involved and no other gyan is involved.
The mati-sruta gyan do not result
without involvement of senses and mind. Here the senses are not involved since
subject of senses are corporeal objects only. However the knowledge of mind is
present since subject of mind is non corporeal objects also. Therefore the
manifestations pertaining to mind focus on self preventing extraneous thoughts, therefore the mind is
also given the credit. ‘Ekagra chnita nirodham dhyanam’ – such characteristics
of dhyan (meditation) are feasible in the state of experience.
In a verse of Samayasar Natak it is
stated:
In this way the manifestations towards
self did not occur without involvement of mind, hence the experience of self is
also called as generated by means of mind. Hence in describing it as beyond
senses or generated by means of mind, there is no contradiction, only a
difference of perception.
Further, you have written that “ soul
is beyond senses hence can be experienced by means beyond senses”, so brother,
mind is capable of knowing non corporeal subjects also, since the subjects of
mati-sruta gyan are described as all substances. It is also said in Tatvarth
Sutra-
And you have raised the question of
direct-indirect, so brother, direct-indirect are not divisions of Samyaktva.
Even in fourth Gunasthana one can attain Kshayik Samyaktva similar to that of
Siddha, hence Samyaktva just denotes right belief alone. The Jiva still
continues to be engaged in shubha-ashubha activities. Hence the point that you
had written that “Nishchaya Samyaktva is direct and Vyavahara Samyaktva is
indirect “, but it is not so. Samyaktva has three divisions – there Upasham
Samyaktva and Kshayik Samyaktva are pure since they are devoid of fruition of
Mithyatva and Kshayopasham Samyaktva is polluted since it is caused by fruition
of Samyaktva Mohaniya. Even so, there is no distinction of direct-indirect in
this Samyaktva also.
For the Kshayik Samyaktvi, manifesting
in shubha-ashubha form or in the state of self experience, the quality of
Samyaktva is the same. Hence Samyaktva does not have divisions of
direct-indirect.
Further, Praman has divisions of
direct-indirect, hence Praman is Samyak
Gyaan. Therefore Mati-Sruta Gyan are indirect Praman while
Avadhi-ManahParyaya-Keval Gyan are direct
Praman. Same things are stated in
Tatvartha Sutra and Tark Shastra.
The knowledge which knows its subject
clearly with purity and totally is Direct and the one which does not know
clearly and totally is Indirect. The subjects of Mati-Sruta Gyan are quite
large , even then it does not know even one subject totally hence it is
indirect, while the subjects of Avadhi-ManahParyaya gyans are limited even so
it knows its subject pretty clearly hence it is partially direct. The Keval
Gyan knows all its subjects totally and clearly hence it is completely Direct.
Further the Direct knowledge has two
divisions – One is really direct , the second is SamVyavaharik (Practically)
Direct. In these the Avadhi-ManahParyaya and Keval Gyan know their subjects
directly hence it is really Direct. On the other hand the colours etc. are seen
by the eyes, there it is stated practically that the colours are known
directly. It is partially correct hence it is called as Practically direct. But
suppose one object has several colours mixed then they are not clearly
distinguished by the eyes, hence it cannot be called really direct.
Further, the Indirect Praman has five
divisions – Memory, Recognition, Logic, Inference and Scripture.
There a thing which was known earlier,
recalling it again is remembrance or
memory. Where an object is identified by an example it is known as recognition.
The knowledge accompanied with causal arguments is Logic. The knowledge derived
with causal arguments about an object is inference. Knowing a thing as laid
down in scriptures is defined as Scriptural Praman.
In this way the Direct-Indirect Praman
are divided.
Under this own experience state the
soul that is known, is known by means of Sruta Gyan and that sruta gyan is by
means of Mati gyan only. These Mati gyan- sruta gyan are called indirect hence
the knowledge of the soul is not direct. Further the subject of Avadhi- Manah
Paryaya Gyans are corporeal objects, and Keval gyan is not available to
Chhadmstha ( jiva in 1-12 gunasthana) , hence by means of experience the
knowing of soul is not possible using Avadhi-Manah Paryaya-Keval Gyans (for the
Chhadmastha). Further the soul is not known clearly totally therefore real
direct knowledge is not feasible.
Further just as colours etc. are known
by means of eyes etc. , in the same way, the innumerable spaces of the soul are
not known even with partial clarity. Therefore the practical direct knowledge
is also not possible.
Here the experience of the soul is
attained by means of the scriptural knowledge and inference etc. form indirect
knowledge. Knowing the form of the soul as described in the Jain scriptures,
one manifests into such meditation hence it is known as scriptural indirect
pramana. In other words, “ I am soul
only, since I have knowledge; where all the knowledge is there, there all the
soul is present – just as Sidhha etc. are there; further where the soul is not
there the knowledge is also not present – just as dead body etc. are there.” –
In this manner by inference the form of substance is established and the own
manifestations are engaged into the same. Therefore the inference is described
as Indirect Pramana. Or, otherwise, the thing which was known by means of
scripture-inference etc. , keeping it in memory, he engages self in such
thoughts, therefore it is called as memory. In these ways by means of indirect
pramana, the soul is experienced and known. There firstly a thing is known ,
later what is known in that the manifestations are engaged. On engagement of manifestations, nothing
further is known specifically.
Here the question is raised again –
In case there is no specific knowledge gained in the Savikalpa-Nirvikalpa states, then why there is
more pleasure ?
Its answer – In the savikalpa state the knowledge
was engaged in knowing several subjects, in nirvikalpa state only the soul is
known, one is this speciality. The second speciality is that, the
manifestations which were engaged in several vikalpas, now engage in the self
immersing in it. ‘
Due to these specialities, certain
indescribable extraordinary pleasure is experienced of which even minutest
amount is not there in the enjoyments of sensual pleasures. Hence that pleasure
is called beyond senses.
Further question: If the soul is experienced
indirectly only, then why is it called direct experience in scriptures ? Even
in the gatha
above it is said that. So how is it possible?Its
Answer: In experience the soul is felt indirectly only
since the spatial elements of the soul are not observed. However by immersing
in the experience of self, the manifestation that occurred is direct experience
of the self. The taste of the self experience is not known indirectly by means
of scriptures or inference pramans but is known by self directly in the form of
experience. Just as a blind person tastes sugar, there he does not know the
shape etc. of sugar, but the taste experienced by the tongue is direct. In
the same way the soul is experienced indirectly but the resulting manifestation
in terms of taste is direct. Know this.
Or, otherwise also, the thing which is
similar to direct is also called direct. Just
as people say that ,” I saw that person in my dream or in dhyan.” There
nothing is seen directly but was seen similar to direct observation hence it is
called direct. In the same way in the experience the soul is experienced like a
real direct observation, hence with this logic if it is said that soul is
directly observed- there is no harm. Statements are made in several ways, there
by analysis one should accept those which do not contradict the scriptures.
Here question : In which Gunasthana
such experience is felt?
Its
answer : It is experienced in fourth gunasthana itself.
However it happens after considerable duration in fourth and in the higher
gunasthanas it occurs more frequently.
Question again : The experience is
Nirvikalpa then why is there difference
between upper and lower gunasthanas?
Its
reply : The difference lies in the involvement of
manifestations. For example two people utter the same name, therefore both are
manifesting in the same way. There one of them is more involved having more
intensity while other one has limited. The same way it applies here.
Again question : When the
nirvikalpa experience does not entail any vikalpa, then why the first division
of Shukla Dhyan has been named as Prithakatva Vitark Veechar , where
Prithakatva Vitark implies contemplation of different kinds of sruta which is
defined as arth-vyanjan-yog-sankraman?
Answer
: Statements are of two kinds- one is coarse and
other is fine form. For example in sixth gunasthana itself, total celibacy
vow is stated in coarse form and on the other hand the desire for sex is
stated to be present in ninth gunasthana in a minute form. In the same way the
nirvikalpa state of experience is defined to be present in coarse manner.
Minutely speaking the Prithakatva Vitark Veechar etc. divisions and passions
etc. are stated to be present upto tenth gunasthana. There such thoughts which
are sensed by self as well as others, are defined as coarse and those which are
not known to self and known only by Kevali Bhagwan – such thoughts are known as
fine. In Charananuyoga the statements are predominantly coarse while in
Karanauyoga the statements are predominantly fine. Such distinction should be
applied elsewhere also.
In this way the form of nirvikalpa experience was described.
And borther, you have quoted three
illustrations and raised the question pertaining to them, so actually the
illustrations are not applicable
totally. Illustrations represent one particular aspect of the objective. Here
the moon(light) on the second day (of
moon cycle), drop of water, spark of flame- all these represent partially while
full moon, ocean and ball of fire – these represent totality. In the same way, in fourth gunasthana , the knowledge etc. qualities of the soul have
been partially revealed while in thirteenth gunasthana, the knowledge etc.
qualities of the soul are totally revealed. Just as illustrations are
applicable for certain aspect, in the same way the qualities which are revealed
of the avirat samyak drishti and the
qualities which are revealed in thirteenth gunasthana are of the same kind.
There you have enquired that if
they are the same kind then just as Kevali knows all the objectives of
knowledge directly, in the same way the one in the fourth gunasthana would also be knowing the
soul directly ?
Answer : Brother,
the sameness does not apply in the
context of directness, it applies in the context of Samyak gyan. The one in the
fourth gunasthana has samyak gyan in the form of Mati-Sruta gyan while the one
in thirteenth gunasthana has samyak gyan of the form of Keval gyan. The
difference between partial and total lies in the sense that the one having
mati-sruta gyan knows the non corporeal objects
indirectly, and corporeal objects as direct-indirectly in certain order,
while the keval gyan knows totally all the objects directly simultaneously. First one knows indirectly and this one knows directly,
this is the difference. If we apply the sameness everywhere then just as kevali
knows unrequired objects also simultaneously and directly in nirvikalpa
form, in the same way the other one also
should know it- but it is not so. In this way one should know the difference
between direct-indirect.
It is also told in
Ashtasahasri :
Meaning: Syadwad, i.e. sruta gyan and keval gyan – both of them illuminate all the substances. The only idfference is that keval gyan is direct and sruta gyan is indirect. But there is no difference in terms of knowing.
Further you have
written the form of Nishchaya Samyaktva and
Vyavahara Samyaktva , so it is right, but you must know that in the
Vyavahara Samyaktva of Samyaktvi and at other times, internally nishchaya
samyaktva is implicit, is always present.
Then you have asked –
Some cofollower says that if soul is known directly then why not know the
karma vargana also directly ?
So the reply is that
soul is known directly to Kevali only while karma vargana is known to Avadhi
gyani also.
Then you have written
- similar to the moon visibility on
second moon(day), the spatial elements of soul should also be visible?
Answer : This
illustration is not in the context of spatial elements, it is from the aspect
of qualties.
The questions that
you have asked with respect to samyaktva and experience and direct-indirect
etc., their answers I have written as per my knowledge; you also should verify
them from Jinavani and your own
experience.
So brother, what all
can we write, many of the things that we know, cannot be written. Some of the
things can be told in meeting, but that
is dependent upon the influence of karmas. Hence the best course is to remain
active in experiencing the nature of consciousness.
At the present times,
the philosophical material is available in Atma Khyati – the Sanskrita
commentary on Samayasar Granth by Acharya Amrit Chandra – and the description
of Agam is available in Gommatsar and other granths.
What all is known
cannot be put to words, hence you too should keep practicing Adhyatma and Agam
granths, and remain immersed in nature of self.
And if you have come
to know some specific granths, then do
please let me know. Cofollowers should continue interaction. Although I am not
very wise, but interaction with people like
you helps quite a lot.
Till we could meet,
do keep writing letters.
Date : Falgun Badi 5,
Samvat 1811.
The End
No comments:
Post a Comment