The Essence of Samaysar – 10

 

In gatha 297 the soul was embraced in general consciousness form by means of Pragya. The same is embraced in specific forms of darshan and gyan in gathas 298-299. General consciousness only is known as darshan and gyan in specific terms. Therefore by means of Pragya the soul is so embraced that the one who is observing or the one who is knowing is definitely myself and all other bhavas are different from myself. Here consciousness is replaced by its constituents darshan and gyan which too are the characteristics of the soul. Therefore six kinds of predicates can be applied with respect to darshan and gyan in the same way to differentiate the soul from all other bhavas. Subsequently even the predicates are negated and only pure soul is experienced in undifferentiated form.

At this juncture Acharya has himself raised a question that  why consciousness is being divided into two forms of darshan and gyan. The answer is that everything in the universe is of the form of general-specifics. The consciousness also has the property of being general-specifics. The general cognizance is described as Darshan while specific cognizance is described as Gyan. In this manner there is a duality in consciousness. If this duality is not accepted then two problems surface. One is that without its qualities the consciousness would become insentient. The second is without pervasive consciousness the pervaded conscious soul would also disappear. Therefore it is necessary to accept the consciousness of the form of darshan and gyan.

The reason why this subject was brought up is that the followers of Samkhya principles and others believe the consciousness to be general only in a singular manner. For negating them it is told that nature of every substance is general-specific form hence consciousness too should be accepted to be general-specific form.

So far the soul was embraced by means of consciousness and all the other bhavas were discarded as being different. Now Acharya takes up the issue of other bhavas in gatha 300 and ask that who would be the gyani who would call the other bhavas as his own knowing them to be different from pure soul. The essence is that once he knows them to be not own then why would he continue to have possession of them?

This is elaborated by means of an example in gathas 301-303. A person who has committed theft always hides thinking that he should not get arrested for being a thief. On the other hand the person who has not committed any theft roams fearlessly without worrying that he could be caught. In the same way the defaulter soul worries that ‘ I am guilty and I would be bonded’ while the guiltless soul is confidant that ‘I cannot be bonded’. In this manner the soul who has manifested in impure form by embracing other dravyas  is worried about the bondage, while the soul who manifests in pure form renouncing  all other dravyas is not doubtful of being bonded. Therefore one should embrace pure soul giving up all the bhavas pertaining to other dravyas. 

What is that guilt? This is explained in gathas 304-305. The guilty is denoted by the term Aparadhi and those souls who are Aparadhi  are known as devoid  of Radh (completeness), Siddhi(goal) or Aradhit (objective).  The soul which is guilt free is Niraparadhi and he is always confidant that “ I am pure soul” in this manner he manifests worshiping the pure soul. The guilt is caused due to embracing of other dravyas and lack of realisation of pure soul, hence he is worried about being bonded. On the other hand the one who has renounced  all other dravyas and realised pure soul is never doubtful of being bonded. In this manner being doubt free he remains immersed within own Upayoga (consciousness).

Now the follower of Vyavahara naya argues, “ what is the use of embracing pure soul? The soul become guilt free by carrying out Pratikraman ( repentance) etc. He quotes Achar Sutra:

 Quote 1: Apratikraman(non repentance), Apratisaran(non pursuit of good), Aparihar(non repudiation), Adharana(non retention), Anivratti(not discarding), Aninda(non criticism), Agarha(non confession) and Ashuddhi(non purification)- not carrying out penance for the mistakes committed by these eight ways is pot of poison.

Quote 2: And Pratikraman(repentance), Pratisaran(pursuit of good), Parihar(repudiation),Dharana(retention), Nivratti(discarding), Ninda(criticism), Garha(confession) and Shuddhi(purification) – carrying out penance for the mistakes committed by these eight ways is pot of nectar.

His argument is that these procedures have been prescribed as the means for purification of soul. When he can achieve it by following them then why worry about Shuddhopayoga and contemplation of soul?

Acharya provides answer to these in the Gathas 306-307 which describe the Nishchaya Naya view point. Pratikraman(repentance), Pratisaran(pursuit of good),Parihar(repudiation),Dharana(retention), Nivratti(discarding), Ninda(criticism), Garha(confession) and Shuddhi(purification)- these are eight types of pots of poison. ( since one may take ownership of these acts ). On the other hand Apratikraman(non repentance), Apratisaran(non pursuit of good), Aparihar(non repudiation), Adharana(non retention), Anivratti(not discarding), Aninda(non criticism), Agarha(non confession) and Ashuddhi(non purification)- these are eight pots of nectar. ( since one does not have to do anything)

Why the Nishchaya naya prescription is so much opposite Vyavahara naya procdures? The reason is that this entire preachment is for the benefit of Gyanis. Those who are Agyani, they do not have the  experience of the pure soul, then for them it is alright to carry out Pratikraman etc. as described by Vyavahara naya since it would reduce their pap karma bondage.

Now for the Gyanis, the scenario is different. If they remain indulgent in Vyavahara practices then they may lose their objective of Shuddhopayoga i.e. remaining immersed within the soul. If they are in shuddhopayoga then what is the purpose of Pratikraman etc. ? If soul remains in pure state then no offense is being committed then why would one need to do penance for them? Therefore Acharya is drawing attention to a third state beyond Pratikraman-Apratikraman wherein one is beyond these practices, immersed within the self. That third state is the real pot of nectar.

After counselling to give up even the Pratikraman etc. Acharya cautions again that one should not misinterpret his advice. Those who are ignorant and Agyani, for them it is alright to practice Pratikraman etc. so as to reduce their burden of pap karmas. For them Apratikraman is poison. However those who are gyani and who are practicing Pratikraman etc., now they being advised to climb higher in  the ladder of spirituality. That is achieved in the third state as described above wherein Shuddhopayoga is the main practice  wherein even Pratikraman is poison since it is distracting them from the objective of Moksha. Acharya cautions that the advice is given for climbing higher on spiritual ladder. But if one takes him literally and becomes negligent and careless then obviously he is going to go down the ladder. Hence one should understand his advice in right spirit.

Acharya summarises this chapter as follows:

The person who relinquishes all the other dravyas and immerses within the own dravya the soul, that person soon gets free of ragas etc. form offenses and destroys future bondage. Attaining the always illuminated form Keval Gyan, becoming pure, he destroys all the karmas and attains Moksha This is the sequence for attaining Moksha.

Now Moksha who had appeared as a disguise on the stage also exits the stage.  

Chapter 10 ( Sarva Vishuddha Gyan  Adjikar) ( Gathas 308-415) –

So far only disguises had entered the stage which exited after revealing their true form. Now Sarva Vishuddha Gyan enters the stage without any disguise. Acharya pronounces the qualities of this ultra pure knowledge form soul. Such soul is subject matter of shuddha naya which is devoid of bhavas of doer or enjoyer forms; further it is devoid of bondage-salvation activities, it is pure devoid of other dravyas and bhavas pertaining to them, overflowing with the spirit of own self it is brightly illuminated flame form, permanent like a carving in stone, it is full of grandeur.

Now Acharya re-establishes the non-doing nature of soul by means of example in gathas 308-311. Just as  gold is not different from its qualities and paryayas of the form of bangles, earrings etc., any dravya is not different from its qualities. In the same way Jiva and Ajiva are not different from their manifestations. Since it has not been created by anyone, nor does it create anyone; the soul is neither the result of someone nor it is the cause for anyone. As a rule, on taking recourse to karmas, he manifests as karta(doer) and on account of being karta, the karmas are generated. No other way the karta-karma relationship is seen.

As stated above Acharya is focusing attention to the inactive nature of soul with respect to all other dravyas. Acharya  Amritchandra also makes a startling assertion as a corollary at this juncture. He says that to begin with, the Jiva manifesting in the form of his manifestations sequentially is jiva only and not ajiva;  while ajiva also manifesting sequentially in the form of its own manifestations is ajiva only. This directly implies that the manifestations of either Jiva or Ajiva are sequentially preordained and neither of them can change anything in them. This has also been well known as principle of Krambaddha Paryaya ( sequentially preordained manifestations). Although it appears quite startling in first glance, on careful thought it is quite simple. Once jivas have no relationship with other substances as their doer then Jiva is purely doer of his own bhavas. Further we already accept the Keval Gyan to be omniscient which knows all the past, present and future at the same instant. So obviously all the manifestations of past, present and future of  any jiva would be known in his knowledge and jiva cannot transgress that knowledge. So automatically it establishes that all the events within the knowledge of omniscient are sequential and he cannot change anything in those events.  On the other hand it does not mean that jiva cannot do purushartha or change his destiny. We have to understand  that even that purushartha and change of destiny would be within the knowledge of omniscient as preordained. That is all.

Hence even though Jiva is non doer, still he accrues bondage, this is due to  unfathomable glory of ignorance. This is the purport of these gathas. In gathas 312-313, it is elaborated further. Since eternal times, the soul being ignorant of his own nature, unable to differentiate self with respect to others, believing self and others to be same, he manifests in karta form with the nimitta of karmas and takes birth and dies, while the karmas also manifest with the nimitta of soul and accrue and disperse. Thus even though soul and karmas do not have karta-karma relationship,  still they enjoy nimitta-naimittik relationship which results in bondage and the world in the process.

Therefore it is told in gathas 314-315 that so long as soul does not give up the manifestations in accordance with dictates of karmas, he is ignorant and Mithyadrishti. When the soul realises the difference between the natures of self and Prakriti (karmas) by their individual characteristics then  he can give up the reasons for bondage. At such moments by the differentiating knowledge of self and others he is knower, by observing  the  difference between self and others he is observer and manifesting in the form differently with respect to others he is Samyat ( careful) and at such moments he is non doer of others.

Thus soul is not doer of karmas and he is merely knower as stated above. As a corollary it is stated in in gatha 316 that he is not enjoyer of the karmas also by his nature. Only Agyani enjoys the fruition of karmas while Gyani remains knower of the fruition of karmas but does not experience it. The agyani does not realise the nature of pure soul and remains merged within the nature of karma prakriti as one, hence he enjoys the fruitions of karmas as ‘ this is me’. On the other hand the gyani has experienced the pure soul hence he does not accept the fruition of karmas to be his own nature and therefore he remains knower and not enjoyer.  The same is highlighted with example in gatha 317 that just as by drinking sweet milk a serpent does not give up his poisonous nature, in the same way, the abhavya jiva ( jiva incapable to attaining Moksha) does not relinquish the nature of Prakriti in spite of knowledge of all the dravya shruta. An abhavya jiva can never attain Moksha even though he might have learnt the scriptures since he has not realised the form of pure soul. Hence so long as ignorance is there the soul is enjoyer of fruition of karmas.

Therefore it leads to the maxim in Gatha 318 that detached Gyani is knower of sweet and sour experiences of fruition of karmas hence he is non enjoyer. He does not experience the other dravya as ‘mine’ and remains merely the knower of their fruition be it sweet or sour. Even though he might be forced to experience the fruition of karmas but due to his detachment he cannot be called as enjoyer of the same. Only in Vyavahara sense he can be called enjoyer. But Vyavahara is ignored in this discussion pertaining to shuddha naya. Hence he is non enjoyer.

It is therefore summarised in Gatha 319 that Gyani neither indulges in various types of karmas nor enjoys  them. He remains knower of karma bondage in the form of punya and pap and fruition of karmas.

Here Acharya has described three types of chetna (consciousness) of soul. These are known as Karma chetna, Karma Phal chetna and Gyan chetna. The Gyan chetna is pure knowledge form consciousness experienced by the Samyak drishti jiva. Karma Phal chetna is sense of happiness or unhappiness on fruition of karmas while karma chetna is the sense of doing something on fruition of karmas. The last two are experienced by the Mithyadrishti jiva. The Gyani jiva experiences Gyan chetna but not the other two and he remains knower of them.

Now in reply to a question that why Gyani is just knower and not doer-enjoyer of karmas, an important gatha 320 is told. Just as eyes observes a scene without doing or experiencing the scene, in the same way Gyan is non doer and non enjoyer only. He remains knower of bandh, moksha, karma fruition and Nirjara. If eyes were doer or enjoyer of the scene then by seeing fire, the eyes should experience the heat and burning but that does not happen. Due to the nature of being observer, the eyes merely observe the scene. In the same way the gyan is like vision  and very different from karmas. Hence the gyan does not do the karmas nor enjoys them but remains knowledge natured gyan of  karma bondage,  moksha and karma fruition and Nirjara.

Here someone enquires that such attributes are there with Keval Gyan but so long as there is fruition of Moha Karma till then one manifests in the form of happiness, unhappiness, ragas etc. and also due to fruition of Darshanavaraniya (vision obscuring karmas) , Gyanavaraniya (knowledge obscuring karmas) and Antaraya(ability obscuring karmas) there is lack of knowledge, vision and ability. Hence how can someone be declared as knower-seer even before KevalGyan ? Its answer- This has been told earlier that the one who indulges in acts independently is called doer-enjoyer. Hence when the Mithyatva form ignorance is absent, from then onwards the ownership of other dravyas is also not there. Then the Jiva is Gyani and does not independently become doer-enjoyer of any activity and due to fruition of karmas whatever acts are conceded on account of weakness, he cannot be called doer-enjoyer of them in reality. Further on account of those deeds whatever karmas are accrued are not counted as  bondage. So long as Mithyatva is there the world exists, and after departure of Mithyatva, the worldly existence is minimal like a drop of water in the ocean.

Hence Acharya declares that those who believe soul to be doer under influence of ignorance form darkness, even though they are desirous of Moksha, like common folk they never can  attain salvation. The same is highlighted in Gathas 321-323. As per the belief of the common folk, Vishnu  causes the jivas to be Deva, Naraki, Manushya, Tiryanch. If Munis also believe soul to be doer of six types of life forms then there is no difference between the common folk and the Munis; since both believe the same from aspect of  authorship of soul. Hence both have ignorance of Mithytva , therefore like common folk the Munis also cannot attain Moksha.

Continued…..