Seventeen Questions…03

 

Question 2

Whether the activities of live body result in dharma adharma for the soul or not?

2.1. Answer : The activities of live body are  paryayas of pudgala Dravya hence they are constituted as ajiva tattva, therefore by themselves they are neither dharma bhava of jiva nor adharma bhava.

Even so, the activities of live body have nimitta-naimittik relationship with dharma-adharma in nokarma form. Hence considering the manifestations of the jiva in Shubha, ashubha and Shuddha forms from aspect of Upachar (formal) naya, it is generally stated that the activities of live body result in dharma-adharma. 

Counter Question 2 : Your statement is contrary to Agam, experience and direct observations, since by considering the live body to be absolutely Ajiva Tattva, no difference exists between the live and the dead body. If eating drinking etc. activities belong to Ajiva tattva then why the soul has to experience honour, dishonour, punishment, jail etc. from these activities? Why does he have to go to heaven and hell ?

The Anuvrita, Mahavrita etc. are practiced by means of live body only. The movements of Arihant Bhagwan and the divine sermon are carried out by the body only. The body, related speech and Dravya mind are cause for karma asrava (influx). The preachment, pravachan etc. are carried out by live body only.

Live body having Vajra Vrishabh Narach Sanhanan only can attain salvation by means of Shukla Dhyan. With the same body by indulging in pap activities one goes to 7^th Narak also.

You have  accepted nokarma body as nimitta cause for the ashubha, Shubha and Shuddha bhavas yourselves, but  you have tried to mislead by inserting unnecessary Upachar word in your answer. 

2.2. Answer: In the Agam the Nishchaya jewel trio has been declared as the real dharma. Along with it the practices of worship of devas etc., manifestations in the form of  Sanyam-asanyam and Sanyam etc. are declared as Vyavahara dharma. If some jiva believes the activities of the body as the activities of the soul by having spirit of oneness with the body, then he has been declared as ignorant in the scriptures.

Pravachansar 160: I am neither body nor mind nor speech. I am not their cause, not their karta, not their instigator, nor do I concur with their karta.

Pravachansar 161: The body, mind and speech are pudgala Dravya form. This has been stated by Jina Deva, and those pudgala Dravya are mass of paramanu drvayas.

Wherever the body etc. substances are called as nimitta, it is from aspect of heterogeneous asadbhoot vyavahara naya only.

If the activities of live body were treated as dharma then for a muni while travelling observing Irya Samati, if some jiva comes under his feet and dies then that act would result in pap bondage for the muni. But it is not so.

Therefore for each jiva, in accordance with his own manifestations only the punya, pap and dharma are carried out and not in accordance with the activities of live body, this should be the conclusion.

Counter Question 3: Dharma Adharma are the manifestations of the soul only which are expressed by the activities of the live body in nimitta form. If it were not so then the right and wrong activities carried out by the body would be useless. For attainment of deed both nimitta and Upadan are essential. With acceptance of Upadan alone the karya (deed) – karan (causal) management cannot be carried out. By calling it mere Upachar (formal), you wish to establish it as non real – untrue. If it is unreal only then there would not be any requirement of the body of man of Karma Bhoomi for  attainment of Moksha and essentiality of Uttam Sanhanan for attainment of dhyan as prescribed in shastras.

In spite of being Bhavya some cannot attain Siddha state, just as it is not definite that all gold can be separated from  gold ore containing gold. In the same way Siddha state cannot be attained in spite of having capability for attaining Siddha state, on account of non availability of suitable commodities.

In this way in spite of having eligibility, the Bhavya jiva on account of lack of nimitta of the form of preachment etc. commodities cannot attain Siddha state. Every act is accomplished with the conjunction of nimitta and Upadan causes. With just one ingredient alone the deed cannot be carried out.

You have asserted that ‘When the Upadan is ready for the deed it cannot happen that the suitable nimitta are not available for the same. ‘ – Such statement  is contrary to Agam.

As per Pravachansar the Sanyam can be undone in two ways. One is external and other is internal. The external undoing is dependent upon efforts and internal is dependent upon the Upayoga. The external damage can be rectified by means of Alochana form repentance. The internal damage is rectified taking recourse to wise Shraman for conducting Alochana. This establishes the fact that even body activities alone can result in adharma.

Arhant have fruition of supreme punya and his kriya is Audayiki,  however since he is devoid of Moha etc. hence his Kriya is accepted to be Kshayiki. Hence the activities of his body are not cause for bandh but being Kshayiki are cause for Moksha.

In this way the activities of body are assisting reasons for dharma-adhrma but in certain conditions the activities of body result in  Adharma of the form of  destruction  of Sanyam and dharma of the form of salvation from world  also.

2.3. Answer:  Activities of the live body is considered to be part of Ajiva tattva hence they are neither dharma bhava nor adharma bhava. They are nimitta in jiva bhava from aspect of asadbhoot vyavahara naya, therefore it is formal- Upacharita.

Based upon the Shubha or ashubha manifestations of the soul, the tendencies of the jiva have been declared as proper or improper. By themselves they are not proper or improper. If by themselves they happen to be proper or improper then there would not be any need for taking care of own manifestations. It is written in Sagar Dharmamrita- If the bhavas of bandh and Moksha were not the singular reason then in this entire Lok pervaded with jivas, any jiva wandering anywhere would attain Moksha.

It is clear that the activities of the live body by themselves are not proper or improper but based upon the Shubha-ashubha manifestations of the jiva, they are construed as proper or improper in vyavahara sense.

Who grants Moksha? Is it the activities of body, Vajra Vrishabh Narach Sanhanan or the body? Or kaal? If it were so, then why is it said that Samyak Darshan- Gyan-Charitra is Moksha Marg? All these external and internal commodities should have been informed. For carrying out any deed the presence of external materials along with internal materials is a different subject and believing the external materials to be producer of the deed in the same way as internal materials is a different matter. There is a vast difference. Why do we call the external materials as Upacharita Karan (formal) and internal materials as Anupacharita Karan ? Nobody has  the audacity to state that the activities of live body generate jewel trio or Moksha.

On account of spirit of like-dislike in external subjects, the activities of body which occur in accompaniment are called as nimitta for Adharma in Upachar sense. In the same way at the moment of manifesting in dharma form by engrossing within own soul, the activities of the body which take place at the same time are called as nimitta for dharma in Upachar sense.

Samyak Darshan Gyan Charitra only is Moksha Marg- is this statement made from aspect of Ekant (singular view) ? No, because this statement is from aspect of Nishchaya naya where such Ekant is favoured. The arrangement of Anekant is applicable from aspect of Praman. In certain aspect Samayak Darshan etc. individually and from certain aspect Samyak Darshan etc. all three together are stated as cause for Moksha which is known as Praman view. The Nishchaya naya view is that soul manifested in Samyak Darshan etc. all three together form is cause for Moksha in reality.

These are the statements from aspects of Praman and Nishchaya naya. From these it can be clearly known that calling Samyak Darshan etc. each individually as cause for Moksha, in spite of being Sadbhoot is indicator of Vyavahara naya. Under such conditions calling the specific kaal or the activities of body as the cause will be a statement from aspect of Asadbhoot Vyavahara naya. Calling it real would be like stating two dravyas together as one.

At the moment  any deed is carried out, at that time along with the presence of favourable internal materials, the presence of external favourable materials is also necessarily there. This only is known as nature of Dravya. Now external materials can be causal only from aspect of Asadbhoot Vyavahara naya. The way the internal materials are Sadbhoot (real), the external materials are not. The rival group has considered both as them as identical which is incorrect.

Neglecting  the aspect of Nishchaya naya acceptor of Param Bhava and treating the Sadbhoot and Asadbhoot Vyavahara as prime is a characteristics of Mithya Drishti, not that of Samyak Drishti.

In the Agam the arrangement of karya-karan from  aspect of Praman view combining both the views of Upachrita and Anupacharita entails that in the presence of external and internal materials only every deed is accomplished. This is the nature of Dravya. In the presence of both, the deed is accomplished that is  real and not imaginary. However of these the internal reason is real and external reason is unreal. Why they are real and unreal , this is a different matter. The one who believes them in the right spirit he is the real knower of karya-karan bhava.

The person who believes the external materials to be real reason and on account of his deluded knowledge or spirit of raga remains tied to it, he remains worldly at all times. And the person who, knowing his own soul only to be the real reason and treating the external materials as discardable,  although they are described as causal from aspect of Vyavahara, takes recourse to  his own soul , he attains Paramatma state.

At the moment Upadan is engaged in the deed, the external materials which function as nimitta in Vyavahara sense are automatically present.

If the rival group is trying to establish that in  the activity of the soul, in spite of absence of careful internal manifestations , with the activities of the body alone, dharma can be accomplished then they are sadly mistaken.

Continued…..