Question 3
Believing compassion towards jivas to be dharma – is it Mithyatva ?
3.1 Answer: If the
term Dharma implies Punya Bhava then believing compassion towards jivas to be
Punya Bhava is not Mithyatva since it is auspicious manifestation. However if
the term Dharma implies Veetrag manifestation then believing compassion towards
jivas to be Dharma is Mithyatva. This is so since Punya Bhava is considered to be within the domains of
Asrava and Bandh Tattva and not within the domains of Samvar and Nirjara
Tattva.
Counter Question 2: Your statement that compassion towards Jivas does not lie within the
domains of Samvar and Nirjara is not in accordance with Agam. Adhyavasan (
state of uncertainty of soul due to ignorance) only is the cause for karma
bondage. In Samvar Bhavna (spirit) dharma has been declared as primarily
compassion.
The purified
soul is internal Tattva while compassion towards jivas is external Tattva. Upon
mating of the two one attains Moksha. Hence both should be taken recourse to.
Prasham
(spiritual calmness), Samvega (fear of worldly sufferings), Anukampa
(compassion) and Astikya (right perception) are the characteristics of Samyak
darshan with raga. Here Anukampa is compassion which being constituent of
Samyak Darshan is dharma form.
3.2 Answer : The rival
group has tried to establish with about 20 proofs that believing compassion
towards jivas as Dharma is not Mithyatva. In some of the proofs the compassion
has been described as cause for Samvar also. However is it possible to accept
punya bhava form compassion to be as means for Moksha based upon these ?
Passionate
always accrues karma bondage and dispassionate only can be rid of karmas.
Shubha bhava, whether it be compassion, tenderness , darshan of Jina image,
practice of vows or anything else, if they are Shubha manifestations then they
aways result in bondage. Attainment of Samvar, Nirjara or Moksha with them is
impossible.
Samyak
Drishti has been declared bondage free since he does not have ownership of the
raga bhava.
Samaysar 199:
Raga is pudgala karma and its fruition form after completion of its duration is
such bhava. This bhava is not mine. I am definitely one Gyayak (knower) bhava.
Samaysar 200
: In this way the Samyak Drishti knows the soul (self) as Gyayak natured and
knowing the real nature of Tattva he
abandons the results due to fruition of karma.
The compassion of the form of Shubha raga is
considered to be part of Karma Chetna hence with the fruition of karma upon its
maturity he does experience such kindness but he does not consider self to be
its owner.
Manifestation
in raga form is singular reason for bandh only, even though it may be the Sookshma
Samparaya raga manifestation of 10th Gunasthana, and Veetrag bhava
alone is means for karma destruction, even though it may be the veetrag
manifestation of Avirat Samyak Drishti of 4th Gunasthana only.
Samaysar
Kalash 107: With the nature of karma the palace
of gyan cannot be constructed hence karma is not means for Moksha.
Counter Question 3: You have not accepted kindness towards jivas as dharma and declared it to
be only punya bondage form and called punya bhava as Shubha manifestation. With
about 20 proofs we have established that kindness towards jivas is dharma and
punya bhava is dharma form. With Shubha bhavas one attains Samvar-Nirjara. You
have told the Shubha manifestation to be only bandh form. In this way you have
declared the preachment of Acharyas as Mithya (untrue).
Dhavala 13/362:
Tenderness is nature of jiva hence calling it karma generated gives rise to
contradiction.
Bhava
Sangrah 404: The punya of Samyak Drishti is not cause for the worldly stay but
is means for Moksha as a rule.
JayaDhavla
1/6: With Shubha and Shuddha bhavas the karmas get destroyed.
From 4th
to 7th Guanasthana only Shubha Upayoga is attained. With such Shubha
Upayoga manifestation of one samaya, on account of karya-karan bhava, all the
three activities of karma bandh, karma samvar and Karma nirjara form keep
happening. This punya only brings the soul closer to salvation.
Mithya
Drishti just ready for Samyaktva also carries out innumerable times Nirjara,
Sthiti Kandak Ghat and Anubhag Kandak Ghat even in the absence of Shuddha
manifestations.
The Shubha
bhava of Samyak Drishti in the form of compassion etc. is accepted to be Gyan
Chetna form rather than karma chetna form, hence terming it as cause for bandh
is contrary to the Agam.
You have
accepted Gyan alone to be means for Moksha which is not right. Without Charitra
with Gyan only, one cannot attain salvation.
Moksha Pahud
60- Tirthanakara surely attains salvation from the same birth. With birth
itself he is holder of Mati, Shruta, Avadhi gyan and upon acceptance of Muni
Diksha he becomes holder of four gyans including Manah Paryaya Gyan. In spite
of this he practices Tapasya. Therefore person with gyan should surely practice
Tapasya. Since without charitra, with gyan alone one does not get salavation.
Statement
that with practices of vows attainment of samvar-nirjara and Moksha are
impossible; it is absolutely in contravention of scriptures. In one mixed
indivisible paryaya both disposition (raga) and renunciation both parts are
combined hence with them Asrava-Bandh is also there as well as Samvar-Nirjara. Subsequently
with continuous reduction of disposition(raga) part, the samvar-nirjara alone
are carried out. Along with ragas the renunciation of paps is present due to
which at the same time the Samvar-Nirjara are carried out simultaneously.
In the Agam
where the preachment of giving up vows is encountered, there the preachment is
meant for attaining nirvikalpa samadhi from the state of savikalpa samadhi by
means of abandoning the vikalpas of vows or the adhyavasan experienced in the
vows or the raga part tendencies of the vrita (vows) but not the vritas themselves which are renunciation form.
Even in the higher Gunasthana in the shreni (spiritual ladder) the vritas are
existent and are not abandoned.
3.3 Answer: We had
clarified that the punya (Shubha raga) bhava form compassion is not means for
Moksha but if it is construed as Veetrag bhava then being Samvar- Nirjara form
it is means for Moksha.
From our
reply the implication derived by the rival group is that although the
compassion towards jivas is Shubha manifestation form but it is not dharma
form. It is true that the kindness towards other jivas is other bhava i.e. raga
bhava hence it can never be dharma i.e. Veetrag bhava.
It is true
that in some of the proofs given by rival group, the compassion towards jivas
is called as dharma and this too is stated that with Shubha bhava the karmas
get destroyed. However understanding that from which naya aspect a sentence has
been stated and what is its implication is the task of sensible people. The rival
group should understand that declaring archaic sentence as untrue is a
different matter and explaining its meaning from the aspect it was stated using
Naya view points, is another matter. The rival group wishes to mix the Vyavahara and Nishchaya dharma and
call them Nishchaya dharma which is not acceptable to us.
In Jinagam,
these two divisions, their reasons and their results have been described in
different ways. Therefore we shall the
state the same which has been clarified by Jinagam at different places.
Pravachansar
11: If this soul having nature of manifesting in dharma form engages in
Shuddhopayoga then he attains pleasure of Moksha and if he engages in
Shubhopayoga then he enjoys the pleasures of swarga (heaven).
Does the rival
group wish that every Bhavya Jiva believing the compassion towards other jivas only
as the means for Moksha, remains busy with it and do not traverse in the
benedictory path of real soul benefit by engrossing within own soul nature?
We have
divided the kindness towards jivas into compassion towards self and others and the compassion towards self has
been counted within the veetrag bhava while the compassion towards others has
been counted as raga form punya bhava.
The rival
group while quoting from Agam as proof should clarify the meaning of the
statement. In JayaDhavla the Shubha manifestations have been called as means
for karma destruction like Shuddha manifestations. Here the rival group should
clarify that which part is stated from which aspect. Shubha bhava is means for
punya bandh only but the shuddhopyoga carried out subsequently is really the cause
for karma destruction. Hence Shubha bhava have been called as means for karma
destruction in Upachar sense.
It is for
the rival group to reflect that why does anyone who is devotee of Jina Vani,
without accepting the preachment carried out from specific aspect by the great
Acharyas in great scriptures, accepts it in absolute sense ?
Tattvarthasar
25/26: Compassion, charity, tapa, morality, truth, purification, self control,
forgiveness, VaiyyaVritya (pious service), respect, Jina Pooja, Arjava( lack of
pride), Sarag Samyam and kindness towards jivas and practitioners of vows are
means for influx of Satavedaniya.
The gist of
the statements made so far is as follows-
1) The term
compassion has been quoted in Agam in both meanings- in the sense of Shubha
bhavas as well as in the sense of Veetrag bhavas.
2) Shubha
bhava being par (other) bhava, it is counted in the category of asrava and
bandh tattva in reality only. Wherever it has been called as means for Nirjara,
it is from aspect of Vyavahara naya only.
3) Veetrag
bhava being own bhava is treated in the category of samvar, nirjara and Moksha Tattva only.
4) Veetrag
bhava is cause for asrava and bandh in Vyavahara sense – such vyavahara does not apply on veetrag bhava. Since
veetrag bhava has been generated ignoring all kinds of vyavahara, taking
recourse to singular nishchaya form Gyayak soul in engrossed form. Hence by
nature it is beyond all kinds of Vyavahara. Therefore no upachar can be
applicable to it.
Definitely
the result of Shubha bhava is only Asrava and Bandh while the job of Nishchaya
jewel trio is just Samvar, Nirjara and Moksha in the end- this only gets established. Raga bhava and
Raga paryaya both being corrupted and having vibhava bhava nature are by
themselves bandh form. In such a condition how can it be cause for Samvar and
Nirjara? It cannot happen in all three periods of time. The cause for Samvar
and Nirjara would be one which by itself is Samvar and Nirjara form. Raga
cannot generate Veetrag bhava in all three periods of time for sure. In Agam
raga has been called as means for Nishchaya jewel trio from aspect of
Vyavahara. This has been done viewing their coexistence in Upachar sense.
This refutes
the doctrine of the rival group that in fourth gunasthanas etc. the mixed
Shubha bhava of raga part and jewel trio part is cause for Asrava and Bandh as
well as Samvar and Nirjara. It only establishes that the raga part alone is
cause for Asrava and bandh while jewel trio part is cause for Samvar Nirjara.
The rival
group has tried to describe the manifestations of 4-7th gunasthanas
as similar to that of 3rd Gunasthana wherein Karma bandh, karma
samvar and Karma Nirjara occur together-
this is completely wrong and with it the system of Moksha Marg becomes haywire.
This
statement too is also not right that in 4-7th gunasthana
shuddhopayoga does not exist. In 4th Gunasthana the experience of
the soul is not attained – saying this is contrary to Agam. In 7th
Gunasthana the Muni experiences Shuddhopayoga as a rule since there the
business of the form of activities of speech-body of Shubha and Ashubha form
pertaining to external subjects and internal Shubha Ashubha mental vikalpa form
activities have been totally blocked; hence this soul by means of the nature of inactive permanent pure gyan
darshan gets engrossed within own soul. This alone is called as Supreme Dhyan
and this only is called soul experience. If such soul experience is not
experienced by the Muni then he is not worthy of being called Muni. The
characteristics of gyani is this only that he should manifest in gyan nature
form. Opposite to this, the one who manifests in raga nature form, he is
Agyani. Samyak Drishti knows the nature of self to be different from others as
it is and the manifestation of soul different from other bhavas in knowing
natured form is the experience of soul. The subject of shubhopayoga is other
substances while experience of soul is different from it. Hence it is
established that in 4th gunasthana also shuddhopayoga is present but
the experience of the soul is for a limited duration after a long interval
hence it has not been declared in gunasthanas. It is definite that the
experience of the soul in these gunasthanas are called as dharma dhyan only and
not Shukla dhyan. In Shukla dhyan only shuddhopayoga is present.
Only one
Upayoga is present at a specific time. In the period of Shuddhopayoga samvar
and nirjara are present while in period of shubhopayoga asrava and bandh are there.
For the
Mithya Drishti jiva ready to attain Samyaktva in first gunasthana, while
getting engrossed in nature of soul different from the bhavas of other dravyas,
the type of purity which is generated, that purity only is cause for
innumerable times nirjara etc., but not the shubhopayoga manifestations engaged
in bhavas of the other dravyas. Since
this jiva is Mithya Drsithi, it would not be appropriate to call it
shubhopayoga similar to shuddhopayoga. Here the uniqueness is due to readiness
of soul for experiencing own nature.
The
vyavahara of the vows etc. told from the aspect of vyavahara naya are called as
Charitra, Samyam and dharma dhyan only. Hence telling that they enable
attainment of samvar, nirjara and moksha from aspect of nishchaya is against
the doctrine of Agam.
Continued……
No comments:
Post a Comment