Seventeen Questions…10

 6. The arrangement of karta-karma from aspect of Nishchaya naya-

The characteristics of six dravyas is ‘existence’- which by nature is of the form of Utpad-vyaya-dhrovya. Every Dravya at every moment, within its own Dravya nature, manifests in utpad-vyaya paryaya form by nature. Hence considering from aspect of cause-effect, it Is itself  karta of each of the paryayas and itself is the karma. Neither anyone else is its karta nor anything else is its karma. This is from aspect of Nishchaya naya. The same is described as ‘real’ in Agam. With this word it is implied as the ‘truth form’.

In such descriptions where indivisibility is the subject then it is described as that of Nishchaya naya of the Dravyarthika form. When divisions are considered from aspects of karta-karma , then the same is described as that of Paryayarthika Nishchaya naya. This description is the real description from aspect of one Dravya, hence considering from divisions aspect there is vyavahara of karta with respect to karma and karma with respect to karta, which is described as Sadbhoot Vyavahara.

Samaysar 310-311- The reason this soul has not been produced by anyone, it is not deed carried out by anyone and it does not produce any other one, therefore it is not cause for anyone also, since dependent upon karma the karta exists and dependent upon karta the karma exists, such is the rule; the establishment of karta-karma is not seen any other way.

Bhavartha – The manifestations of all dravyas are different. All are karta of their own manifestations. They are karta of them and those manifestations are their karmas. Definitely no one has karta-karma relationship with anyone else. For this reason jiva is karta of own manifestations and own manifestations are karma. In the same way the ajiva is karta of own manifestations and own manifestations are karma. In this way jiva is non-karta of other’s manifestations.

Therefore by accepting the form of every Dravya as self sufficient only, their vyavahara should be known as dependent upon each other.

Acharya Amrit Chadra- The one which manifests is karta; the manifestation is karma and the process is kriya. These three are not different from the substance.

This is the arrangement of karta-karma from aspect of Nishchaya.

7. Two questions and their solutions

It has to be now considered that in the context of two dravyas, the karta, karma relationship which has been described in the Agam;  can it be termed as Nishchaya and Sadbhoot Vyavahara in the above described way, or does it have any other purpose?

The second thing is that the rival group does not accept karta karma arrangement on the basis of two dravyas in the six order haani-vriddhi activities of all dravyas and accepts merely on the basis of one Dravya alone.  Here these two questions are analysed as follows-

(1) In every Dravya karta-karma etc. dharma are self established by nature e.g. in jiva Dravya or pudgala etc. Agam does not accept that in even one Dravya alone the nature of these dharmas are established with respect to each other. For this reason these dharmas are called as indifferent from own substance nature.

(2) Even then, by accepting karta dharma in one substance only, the question arises that whose karta ? In the same way by accepting karma dharma in one substance only the question arises that whose karma? Hence in agam their vyavahara has been described as relative to each other.

(3) The reality is that these karta etc. dharmas in every substance are self dependent hence dharmi and dharma have the same existence and therefore they are not available separately. For this reason they are indivisible and from aspect of name, characteristics, objective they are different. In the indifferent scenario jiva etc. dravyas are established as karta of own deeds by themselves. In the different scenario they are differentiated as means of their own deeds.

(4) All these statements in the indivisible scenario without considering from aspect of others and describing the nature of substance is called as Dravyarthika Nishchaya. In the divisible scenario with respect to those dharmas it is named as Paryayarthika Nishchaya. Although from aspect of dravyarthika nishchaya the paryayarthika naishchaya is also Vyavahara. Hence this vyavahara being sadbhoot is called as sadbhoot vyavahara.

(5) This is the reality. In the light of it, the arrangement of karta etc. between two dravyas which is available in Agam is now considered. It is well known that Nishchaya naya is dependent upon self (soul). In the light of this rule, the arrangement of karta etc. available between two dravyas can neither be considered real from aspect of Dravyarthika Nishchaya naya nor from aspect of paryayarthika nishchaya naya. Therefore the arrangement of karta etc. is established as unreal based upon two dravyas . Therefore the reason for its acceptance in Agam should be something else.

(6) The fact is that every Dravya is by nature Visrasa Utpad-vyaya-dhrovya form. In its manifestation at every moment, the differences observed within its own limits, that is in accordance with the Nishchaya Upadan form capability being done by self. At the same time it is generated with the availability of paryaya of another Dravya which is favourable to that manifestation. Hence the existence of manifestation of other Dravya in whose presence this manifestation takes place, it is treated as karta etc. nimitta form in Vyavahara sense.

Example- consider two paramanus of which one has two oily or two dry gunas (qualities) and second paramanu has four oily or four dry qualities. The manifestation of two guna paramanu into four guna form by associating with four guna paramanu is carried out by itself. It has not been generated by four guna paramanu. Even then in its presence, its own bandh form manifestation has been carried out by itself. Hence the Nishchaya karta of that manifestation is that two guna paramanu, even then the Vyavahara karta of the manifestation is described as four guna paramanu.

Here that two guna paramanu has kaal closeness with four guna paramanu, hence in this sutra , keeping this in mind, the four guna paramanu is called as the one causing manifestation of two guna paramanu. In reality both have generated their own manifestations independently. The reason of such Vyavahara is merely to indicate the kaal closeness  in which this manifestation has taken place. The same types of other events which occur in the lok, they also should be known as following the same rule.

(7) Another one or more than one dravya’s manifestations which occur favourable to the activities of another Dravya is called as Vyavahara reason.

This generates knowledge of three things clearly-

(i) Just as every deed has internal pervasiveness as a rule with its own nishchaya upadan form karta, in the same way in one or more than one paryayas of dravyas have external pervasiveness with the same which are treated as karta etc. in vyavahara sense. Since both have the same kaal, there is kaal closeness  and such an occasion keeps simply happening  Visrasa or by Prayog.

(ii) The activities of one or more than one dravyas in which Vyavahara of nimitta is carried out, those activities are different from the implied deed carried out at every moment.  It means that those substances which are called as Nimitta do not take part in the implied deed.

(iii) With the Upadan karta being engaged within its own deed, the activities of those one or more dravyas in which the Vyavahara of nimitta is carried out are favourable towards the activity. In other words, it can be inferred that at this moment this only is the capable Upadan karta of the deed.

(8) In this way every moment the simple association of Upadan and Nimitta keeps occurring favourable towards its deed and the applicable vibhava or swabhava form deeds of those dravyas keep happening. Thus in worldly state the jiva and in bonded state the vibhava form deeds of the pudgala keep occurring. And in swabhava state the swabhava form deeds of jiva, pudgala (in paramanu state) and dharma, adharma, akash and kaal keep happening.

In whichever deed is performed at any moment, in that the favourableness of Upadan from aspect of Nishchaya  and that of nimitta from aspect of vyavahara is observed. For this reason only the paryaya of other Dravya which is favourable towards the deed from aspect of vyavahara , in that the Vyavahara of nimitta is carried out. The implication is that those which are treated as nimitta in vyvahara sense, they are favourable to deed from aspect of vyavahara and the deed is favourable from aspect of vyavahara towards it.

(9) Now the question arises that those entities which are treated as Nimitta in Vyavahara sense, if they have to be necessarily favourable towards the deeds from aspect of vyavahara and the deeds have to be necessarily favourable towards them in Vyavahara sense, then how can the inactive dharma etc. dravyas and active water etc. substances  be nimitta for movement of jiva-pudgala etc. ? The explanation by Acharyas-

Doubt – If Dharma etc. dravyas are inactive then they cannot function as cause towards motion of jiva- pudgala etc. since active water etc. only have been observed to be nimitta for motion of fish etc.

Explanation- There is no anomaly. Since like eyes they are nimitta by presence only. Just as eyes are nimitta for knowing the colour, even then they are not nimitta for knowledge of colour for the insane person, in the same way it should be known clearly.

From this statement the Vyavahara of entities functioning as nimitta towards the deeds is realised in two ways-

One is by presence form and second by favourable manifestation towards the deeds. In the Lok those which are described as Udaseen (detached) nimitta, they are counted as the first type and those which are described as Prerak (motivator) nimitta , they are counted in the second type.

Further, it should be known that the other entity is not nimitta by nature. But those which function as Vyavahara cause for some deed, they are treated as nimitta in vyavahara sense.

In reality the manifestations are of two kinds- Beginningless and with beginning. The Shape of Lok , caves etc. are beginningless manifestations. The manifestations with beginning have two types Prayogik and Vaisrasik. Out of them the Upasham etc. form bhavas of consciousness resulting due to upasham of karmas etc. are called as Vaisrasik since they are not humanly made. The gyan, sheel (morality) etc. bhava of the human are caused by human beings and are Prayogaj. The insentient mud etc. pot shape manifestations are due to nimitta of potter etc. human being hence they are Prayogaj. The rainbow etc. form manifestations are Vaisrasik. In the same way manifestations pertaining to dharma etc. should be understood.

From these the following conclusions can be drawn-

(a) The Aupashamik etc. form bhavas of jivas are Vaisrasik manifestations having beginning.

(b) Donation, morality, fasting etc., bhavna etc. are Prayogaj manifestations of jiva.

(c) The Upasham of karmas etc., skandh of two and more atoms, thunder of clouds, meteor shower, rainbow etc. are Vaisrasik manifestations of pudgala.

(d) Making of pot, running of motors etc. are Prayogaj with beginning of pudgala.

From these it is clear that for the vyavahara of  deeds carried out in the world, somewhere the humanly efforts and somewhere other commodities are definitely nimitta. In Agam the Avagahana ( occupation) by Akash and samaya manifestation of kaal Dravya at every samaya, these two activities are definitely told wherein no external nimitta has been accepted in Vyavahara sense. Other than these two  in Agam no other deed has not been accepted wherein there is no external reason applicable for the act in Vyavahara sense. If the rival group had described internal reasons for these two deeds only then there was no issue. But they insist upon six order haani-vriddhi of infinite agurulaghugunas (avibhag praticchedas) as swa-pratyaya for sure which is completely against Agam. Those which rival group has been believing as infinite guna named Agurulaghu, in realty they are not guna but Avibhag Praticcheda only. That’s why in Agam their haani-vriddhi has been accepted. The haani-vriddhi is not possible in gunas but in paryayas only. Utpad-vyaya occurs in paryaya but not in guna or Dravya.

In this way these are the right answers for the two questions. From these it is clear that the karta-karma description available in Agam in context of two dravyas, has been carried out from primacy of Asadbhoot Vyavahara naya. This description being Upachrita cannot be termed as Nishchaya or Sadbhoot Vyavahara. In Agam wherever six order haani-vriddhi form swa-pratyaya has been described, it is done for indicating the nature of swabhava paryaya only. However it does not imply that for that to happen the vyvvahara of kaal Dravya as nimitta is not applicable.  

Continued…..

Seventeen Questions…09

 (7) Uncertain time of fruiton of karmas-

The above described Praman supports Aniyat paryaya. Phoolchand ji writes – undergoing 33 sagar of ayu in Narak, on account of intensity of ashubha nimittas there, the Shubha karmas existent within the entity keep manifesting in ashubha form. Opposite to  it, in Deva Gati the ashubha karmas keep manifesting in Shubha form.

Upon completion of sthiti of Nidhatti and Nikachit karmas, if the Dravya, kshetra, kaal are not available favourable for their fruition, then upon fruition they also become forced to  give result in different category form nature rather than their own nature form.

In this way the fruition of karma is not Niyat but Aniyat.

Pragbhava of pot, pan etc. are present in the mud. Now if the Dravya, kshetra, kaal and bhava are available favourable to the generation of pot, then the destruction of Pragbhava would be of a certain type and if the Dravya, kshetra, kaal and bhava are favourable to the generation of pan then the destruction of pragbhava would be of a different type.

Your statement that “ it does not imply that if Upadan is present and if Nimitta is not present, then deed would not be accomplished – deriving such meaning is not appropriate” - it is not as per the intent of Agam.

The intent of Agam is that any swa-para-pratyaya deed is carried out with conjunction of both Upadan and nimitta causes. Its meaning is that Upadan manifests in deed form and Nimitta assists in the deed form manifestation of Upadan. The intent of Agam is this also that within Upadan, similar to Swa-Pratyaya deed, the Swa-para-pratyaya deed also keeps manifesting at every samaya. The reason is that the nature of Upadan of manifesting is established by nature and there is no obstruction to availability of yoga of nimittas at every samaya in the Agam. In the deed form manifestation of Upadan, the extraordinary nature observed by the Lok is contributed by the nimitta towards the Upadan only. In the manifestation of soul, anger etc. form attitude would be produced with the presence of anger karma as nimitta  only.

Any manifestation of any substance does not happen outside the predefined nature of that substance. Either it shall be Swa-pratyaya or it would be swa-para-pratyaya. Swa-pratyaya would be generated at every moment in sequential order. But your assertion that the manifestation of swa-para-pratyaya of the substance also occurs in predefined order is against declaration of Agam which says that its can be in niyat (predefined) order as well as Aniyat (undefined) order. This is so since the availability of Nimittas is not predefined – it occurs in two ways – one is Visrasa ( suddenly or naturally) and second Prayogik ( with efforts of person). The conjunction of both types of nimittas is observed in predefined as well as undefined order.

In the absence of nimitta the deed gets stopped, just as motor does not move without using Petrol.

Beyond the Lokakash due to absence of Dharmastikaya nimitta, the upward movement of liberated souls does not occur.

Taking shelter of omniscience, if someone attempts to be free of purushartha in accumulating the suitable means for generation of deeds, then surely he becomes Mithya Drishti.

Keep faith towards the Omniscient and have belief in his knowledge and sermons also but motivate yourself to accomplish your own deeds from him. Try to improve your this lok and next lok and attempt to attain Moksha.

This is definite that purushartha of every person keeps occurring in accordance with his Sankalpa (resolution) and activities. That would not be stopped till he attains knower and seer state. Therefore he should accumulate the internal and external means for accomplishing favourable results for self.

Just because every jiva starts believing self to be knower-seer, then just by that alone can he become knower-seer? It is true that being knower-seer alone is his nature. The jivas have been preached to carry out purushartha so that they could attain knower-seer state. For this the right means is identifying the external and internal means favourable for the same, adopting them and they alone be preached to the human beings.

The pervasiveness of Updan and nimitta described by you is wrong. It is not that the moment the deed has to be accomplished, at that moment the suitable nimittas would be available accordingly only. But it is this way – If Updan convolves with favourable  nimitta then deed shall be performed and if nimitta convolves with favourable Upadan then also the deed shall be accomplished.

The regulator of the deed is not just its previous paryaya alone, but the nimitta materials which are present at that moment along with it are also regulators. Further the absence of obstructing causes also would be regulators.

We wish to clarify that a specific substance manifesting in the form of paryaya a moment a priori to the deed does not have only a specific eligibility alone, but in that substance at that moment also several eligibilities are ready for manifesting in the deed form in next moment. Only that eligibility would manifest in deed form for which the suitable favourable materials are completely existent and the obstructive causes are absent. 

Your statement is incorrect that “ if the arrangement of deed were dependent upon nimitta then the assertion that Dravya has nature of Utpad-vyaya-dhrovya would not have been possible.” This is also not correct that “ is it so that some Dravya did not find suitable nimitta at some time and therefore it did not carry out its deed at that samaya”.

The meaning of Upadan is that the substance which accepts or carries out manifestation. The meaning of nimitta is the friendly substance which assists the manifesting substance like oil in manifestation.

You have quoted the verse of Pandit Banarasidas –

‘ Nature of substance, fruition of past (nimitta), Nishchaya (Upadan), purushartha (effort) and kaal – these five are reasons. In association of them the deed gets accomplished. Taking sides with anyone alone is Mithyatva and accepting the deed in coexistence of all is Moksha Marg’.

Further you say that – ‘ In Gommatsar karma kand kaal, Ishwara (nimitta), Atma (soul), Niyati (destiny) and swabhava(nature) , these five ekants have been described with  the same objective.

If both of them are joined together then in your view it would be as follows-

In this if your purport with soul is purushartha and Niyati is Upadan then both can be combined in equal form as follows-

Gommatsar Karma kand                                      Pandit Banarsidasji’s verse

Kaal                                                                         Kaal

Ishwara ( Nimitta)                                                   Nimitta (fruition of past)

Atma                                                                        Purushartha ( effort)

Niyati                                                                       Upadan ( Nishchaya)

Swabhava                                                                 Swabhava

However when you believe the Siddhant that “ all paryayas manifesting in dravyas occur in predefined order only” or “ all the events transpire upon attainment of swa-kaal only” then what is the necessity of conjunction of these five for production of event in your view? If conjunction is essential then ‘ all the paryayas occur in predefined order only’ or ‘ all events occur upon attainment of swa-kaal’ - these beliefs do not have any validity.

You have not clarified that these you believe to be Upacharita reasons or Anupacharita reasons. In their context what is the view from aspects of Nishchaya and Vyavahara naya, kindly clarify.

You have stated that “ every deed of every Dravya is predefined from aspect of conjunction of the above described five and does not happen in uncertain order- accepting such Anekant only is Moksha Marg.”

The definition of Anekant given by you is wrong. As per samaysar in one substance alone, the highlighting of opposing dual capabilities defining its Vastutva alone has been accepted as Anekant, then how shall it be implemented?

The implication is that Vidhi (yes) and Nishedh (No) form two opposing dharmas have been accepted for  the substance. You please tell us that in five samavayas ( togetherness) which two opposing dharmas are existent in the substance of the form of ‘ occurs in predefined order’ and ‘does not occur in uncertain order’.

Here only one dharma is established to be existent in the substance, then how can it have Anekant-ness?

In Gommatsar karma kand the meaning of Ishwara as nimitta and in Pandit Banarasidasji’s past fruition as nimitta has been construed on which basis?

In Gommatsar this view has not been there that those believing production of deed by means of Ishwara etc. one each are Mithya Drishti and those believing the deed upon conjunction of all these are Samyak Drishti.

This statement is merely that which ParaSamayaVadi believes in production of deed upon which basis.  

5.3. Answer :  

1. Rival group accepts happening of each deed in their swa-kaal-

The rival group  has accepted based upon the Pramans of 5 Agams that ‘ every deed occurs in swa-kaal only’ their words are as follows-

We accept that Jinendra deva knows the time of generation of each event by means of Keval Gyan. The reason is that Keval Gyan has been accepted to have capability of knowing all the paryayas pertaining to all the three periods of time of all the substances of the world simultaneously by Jain Sanskriti. On the same basis we also believe that the production of every event occurs at the same time which is being reflected in the knowledge of Keval Gyani jiva as the time of its occurrence.

2. Keval Gyan is knower but not instigator –

Further they have this indicated that – “ But the generation of any event does not occur at any specific kaal on the basis  that it is  being reflected in the knowledge of the omniscient; since the task of omniscience is merely to know the state of the substance at any specific time but the occurrence of that event is not the task of omniscience. “

So this statement being in accordance with the tradition of Agam, is acceptable but we would like to add- “ just as Keval Gyan knows the event occurring at any specific time, as it is, in the same way it also knows the causal agencies for the same. “

3. Samavaya of five is acceptable in Karak Sakalya –

We have not stated that the cause of event generation is only swakaal since it is not so. Generation of each event occurs at its own swakaal by the influence of its own karak sakalya (conjunction of predicates). Thus it should be understood. Just as Upadan-nimitta agencies have been accepted in the event generation , in the same way the swakaal is also given importance of being indispensable part of the same agency.

Jain Tattva Mimamsa – It is general rule that for the generation of any event these five causal agencies occur as a rule- Swabhava, purushartha, kaal, Niyati and karma ( state of other substance). Here swabhava implies own capability of Dravya or Nitya Upadan , purushartha implies its power-veerya, kaal implies its own swakaal, Niyati implies capable Upadan or primacy of Nishchaya and karma implies nimitta.

In Gommatsar karma kand five types of Ekantvadies are described. Its purport is this much only that the one who accepts any one to be the cause of event , he is Mithya Drishti and the one who accepts the conjunction of all five for the generation of event, he is Samyak Drishti.

In Ashta Sahastri also it is written that- in accordance with the Bhavitavyata (destiny) of a jiva, his intellect also functions the same way. He makes efforts in accordance with the same and he gets support also accordingly.

What is Bhavitavyata ? The capable Upadan shakti of jiva only is called as Bhavitavyata. The one which is eligible to happen is called as Bhavitavya and its bhava is called Bhavitavyata. The one which we describe as capability , it is named as Bhavitavyata otherwise. The capable Upadan shakti of Dravya is capable of being manifested into event form , hence capable Upadan shakti, bhavitavyata and eligibility – all three denote the same meaning.

We do not accept at any time that just by swakaal alone the event gets generated.

4. The real meaning of Alanghya Shakti-

 The real meaning of the term ‘Alanghya Shakti’ as per Bhatta Akalank Deo is that  in accordance with Bhavitavyata i.e. in accordance with paryaya shakti equipped Dravya shakti, at that moment, in accordance with that only desire to carry out deed arises. The activities are also in accordance and nimittas also are available accordingly. The deed is never carried out beyond the capabilities of Dravya nature.

5. In every deed the internal and external commodities  provide  acceptance-

Every moment, in whichever deed is performed, the concurrence  of internal and external materials is a must. In this swakaal, bhavitavyata etc. all get included. The primacy and non primacy of any reason is in description but not in the deed. With respect to the deed which ever reason is applicable, it is necessary for it to be present in that form whether in Upacharita or Anupacharita form. Then only the completeness of internal and external reasons can be considered to be available.

With respect to any deed any reason cannot have primacy or non primacy. Just as other nimittas are considered as reasons, in the same way it is right to consider kaal as reason.

Now, here this point has to be considered that if there are any deeds which are produced by only internal (Upadan) reasons; since the rival group has written that those deeds which are produced only by internal reason- Upadan reason only. In them only internal reason is prime. On this subject it is discussed further-

Continued…..

Seventeen Questions ….08

 Based upon your replies in round two we discuss here the issues in following paragraphs -

(1) Three gathas of Kartikeya Anupreksha-

It is our stand that while Samyak Drishti is faithful towards the subject of Keval Gyan but he acts in accordance with the subject of Shruta Gyan.

In reality either of the deaths, whether it be akaal maran (untimely death) or kaal maran ( timely death), both are vyavahara form hence both are subjects of Vyavahara naya since soul is immortal. You call the kaal maran to be subject of Nishchaya naya which  is wrong. You have accepted Vyavahara naya to be Upacharita Naya, which too is incorrect. In accordance with Agam the Vyavahara also it real Sadbhoot , true and Sadbhavatmak  (existent).

The words or defining knowledge explaining the part or nishchaya form meaning of the substance is called as Nishchaya naya. While word or defining vyavahara form meaning is called Vyavahara naya. In this way both are considered as dharmas of the substance.

You wish to establish that all the events occur upon attainment of their opportune moment which is incorrect. In Agam the Lok has been preached to engage in duty for attainment of objective and for attainment of salvation they have been preached to traverse on path of dharma.

You are believing the manifestation of substance to be in sequential order, even then for attainment of objective you traverse on the cause effect relationship, then what can that be called? If you accept it as subject of vyavahara naya then it remains imaginary asadbhoot mithya only.

It is our stand that the anger etc. form shades experienced in the manifestation of soul having nature of self dependent manifestation, is due to the nimitta reason of anger etc. form karmas only. In the same way the self established nature of mirror is to reflect the substances but the arrangement of which substance is being reflected is dependent upon that substance only.

(2) Why do Siddhas  not accrue karma bondage ? –

You have stated that the Vaibhavik capability of Siddhas exist even in this state and the external nimittas are existent everywhere in the Lok then who can prevent them from being worldly?

The answer is that nimitta cause for making the jivas as worldly is Dravya karma which is not existent in Siddhas . Although the Lok is flooded with karamana varganas, even so they are not of the form of Dravya karma hence they cannot be nimitta for making the jiva worldly.

With complete destruction of Dravya karmas only, Siddhahood is attained and on account of absence of ragas etc. which are cause for accrual of new Dravya karma bondage, the bondage of new Dravya karmas do not occur.

To say that nimitta causes are flooded in the Lok is incorrect. When the form of Siddhas believed by you, who are capable of carrying out deeds by means of Upadan alone, are equipped with Vaibhavik capability then who can prevent them from becoming worldly by means of their own Upadan  alone? And why do you not become Siddha by means of your Upadan capability now itself?

The external means for activities of jivas are karma-nokarma form accumulated pudgala. Due to the lack of the pudgala means the Siddhas are inactive. Hence they do not accrue karma bondage.

If it is said that everything is manifesting  in accordance with the eternal sequential order only then if it is not described as Niyativad then what else can be described as Ekant Niyativad ? This only has been declared as Mithyatva in Jain Agam granths.

(3) Consideration of some topics pertaining to Karanuyoga –

You have manufactured some rules based upon your own wishes contrary to Agam. The contradiction observed in them would be revealed to you along with proof of Agam next.

First of all, the fact is that there is no definite time for Jiva to attain Samyak darshan, Sanyam, Tapa, Shreni, Moksha etc.  Then how can the time of occurrence of apakarshan, Utkarshan, sthitighat, anubhagghat, sankraman and avipak nirjara of karmas with the manifestations of jiva be definite ?

You have created two rules contrary to Agam-

(1) The karmas which have capability of being Utkarshit, Apakarshit, Sankramit and Udeerit due to nimitta of those manifestations, in that time in the same quantity with the nimitta of those manifestations they undergo Apakarshan, Utkarshan, Sankraman and Udderana.

(2) At the time of bandh, the sthiti bandh and anubhag bandh which accrues, at that time itself such capability gets established in those karmas that upon attainment of right moment, with the nimitta of external nokarmas and predefined manifestations those karmas undergo apakarshan etc. form manifestations.

Both of these are contrary to Agam.

From the arguments given , it appears to establish that all the deeds are carried out by Upadan alone and nimitta is irrelevant.

You have tried to establish that with one nimitta cause only one deed can be carried out and not different ones. But with one reason different deeds can be carried out. With different assisting causes, the same manifestation of Jiva results in different duration and intensity of bondage. The Praman is as follows-

Dhavla 12- By means of Sanklesh, how can six orders of bondage of innumerable lok praman anubhag can accrue?

Answer- This is no problem. In one Sanklesh, anubhag bandh with innumerable lok praman six orders adhyavasans with anubhag bandh sthan are feasible.

The other issue which you have raised is pertaining to Nimitta-Upadan. You have asked that if business of the Nimitta is for self as well as Upadan then it has to carry out two deeds which is contrary to Agam.

From this you have concluded that each dravya carries out its own deed. Only upon observing the external pervasiveness between the two such Nimitta-Naimittik relation is accepted.

The view point of Agam is as follows-

Although Upadan only manifests into the deed form, but it is not carried out till Nimitta does not function in favourable manner. There is no doubt that nimitta engages in one activity  which is Upadan for its own manifestation while at the same time it is assisting as nimitta in the manifestation of other substance. Thus our stand is that same deed is upadan for self and nimitta for the other. This eliminates the fear due to which you desire to call Nimitta as irrelevant.

A substance, in spite of being Upadan for its own deeds, is also nimitta for deed of another substance on the basis of anvaya-vyatirek ( logical connection-distinction).

It has to be kept in mind that the thing which is Upadan for its own deed , with the same action, it is nimitta for the deed of another substance. Therefore the objection which is raised for the thing to be having dual activity at the same time, is not applicable.

It appears that you wish to call all nimittas as being of the same type but it is not so. This too is contrary to Agam.

In Agam Nimitta have been described to be two kinds Prerak ( motivating) and Udaseen (detached). The one which instigates the substance to engage in its activity is Prerak nimitta like hammer of goldsmith etc. The one which do not motivate for activity and remain detached are Udaseen nimitta like akash,  dharma, kaal etc.

The other topic is pertaining to Akaal Maran-

In reality whatever description of kaal maran and akaal maran is observed in the Agam , all that is Vyavahara description only since from aspect of Nishchaya naya the soul is immortal only. It is surprising that you call kaal maran and akaal maran to be the same as kaal maran and treat it as subjects of Nishchaya naya.

Your assertion that by accepting akaal maran one would have to accept akaal janma also, is wrong. The reason is that the death does not occur without bandh . The ayu being enjoyed can undergo Udeerana hence akaal maran is possible. However the birth takes place in accordance with previously bonded ayu hence the issue of akaal birth does not arise.

The jiva undergoing kaal maran or akaal maran has identical fruition of next ayu hence just the way jiva undergoing kaal maran reaches destination by means of Anu Poorvi karma, gati karma etc. insentient karmas, in the same way the arrangement exists for those undergoing akaal maran.

In respect of akaal maran your views are as follows-

1. You are Niyativadi hence in your view point kaal maran and akaal maran do not have any difference i.e. the time of akaal maran is destined the same way as that of kaal maran.

2. The description of akaal maran in Agam is from aspect of Vyavahara naya only.

3. In your view, we accept akaal maran to be from Nishchaya aspect.

In respect of the last issue we have already stated that in our view both kaal maran and akaal maran are Vyavahara sides.

In respect of second issue both of us accept it as Vyavahara side but you believe Vyavahara naya to be untrue. However in view of Agam the Vyavahara naya is equally true like Nishchaya naya is true. If you accept Vyavahara naya to be imaginary then why did Agam need to describe it ?

You have not clarified how you accept both kaal maran as well  as akaal maran as Nishchaya side. Since the soul is immortal then both of these events should be taken as Vyavahara statements only.

(4) SwaKaal-

In support of Kram Baddha paryaya, you have used the term SwaKaal several times, which is analysed now-

SwaKaal is contemplated from two aspects (1) From aspect of swa-chatushtaya (own four-some)  and (2) Nimitta karan form kaal Dravya for manifestation of dravyas.

(1) When considered from aspect of swa-chatushtaya then the implication of swakaal term is sequence of manifestation of Dravya at every moment. That manifestation is also dependent upon the activities of causes. Since the activities of cause can be sequential as well as non sequential, therefore generating the Siddhant of Kram Baddha Paryaya based upon the principle of swakaal is of no consequence.

(2) If the kaal Dravya nimitta in the manifestation is accepted as SwaKaal , then that Kaal Dravya being detached is equally supportive for both types of sequential and non sequential manifestations depending upon their own sequential and non sequential nimitta reasons. Hence that kaal is also not supportive of the sequential order.

In 47 Nayas shri Amrit Chadra Suri has said that the manifestation occurs at the right time from aspect of Kaal naya. From aspect of Akaal naya it is not at the right time. In this way in the manifestation of paryaya he is clearly refuting the Ekant sequential order of kaal.

He has dealt with the Niyati and Aniyati Naya also-

The one which is independent of reasons is Niyati, like heat in fire and the one which is dependent upon the reasons is Aniyati, like heat in water.

Pandit Phoolchandji has written that-

There is such as belief that every event has Niyat (predefined) kaal and the event occurs at that moment only and not at any other time. Those who believe so, they do not accept any other nimitta other than kaal. But upon consideration it can be realised that this belief is not logical since in the production of deed just as kaal is nimitta, in the same way others are also nimitta. Hence accepting only kaal as the prime reason for production of event is not correct.

Further- Sometimes prior to  Niyat kaal the karma carries out its deed and sometimes long after Niyat kaal the fruits of the same are observed.

In this way with support of Kaal Labdhi the Ekant Siddhant of Kram Baddha Paryaya does not get established.

(5) Aniyat (Undefined) samaya of Divine sermon-

You have tried to convert Aniyat kaal of Divya Dwani (divine sermon) into Niyat kaal which is not logical since neither the time for generation of doubt in the mind of Ganadhar is Niyat nor time of arrival of Chakravarthy in Samosharan is definite. If you believe this to be kaal labdhi or SwaKaal then it would be Aniyat kaal form only.

From the episode of Divya Dwani not transpiring for 66 days, this belief gets demolished that with presence of Upadan cause, the Nimitta cause becomes present automatically.

With the fulfilment of causal materials the Divya Dwani form event transpired, that only is kaal labdhi.

(6) Aniyat Kaal of salvation and karma Nirjara-

‘Paryayas are non sequential also’- this we had established earlier also. The time of generation of Samyak Darshan which denotes the beginning of Moksha Marg is also indefinite. The person who makes efforts and when he gets suitable supporting materials , then at Aniyat samaya Samyak darshan gets generated. In this way the time of Nirjara and salvation is uncertain.

Continued…..

Seventeen Questions …07

 

(2) Unscheduled divine sermon- By quoting reference of Jayadhavala it has been shown that the divine sermon of Tirthankara happens even at akaal (unscheduled time). However in Jayadhavala it is described as other kaals and not akaal. There is a difference. Here the times of divine sermons have been described which are their own swa-kaal and not akaal.

The one who is treated as Upadan, its every manifestation occurs at its own kaal. In the  same way, the one who is treated as Nimitta, that  too is Upadan with respect to own deeds hence even its manifestation occurs at its own kaal. In this manner the nimitta upadan  are compatible to each other with respect to each deed and there is no controversy.

The same principle has been established in Jaydhavala quite well by enquiring why Indra had to wait for 66 days ? In the answer it is stated that without Kaal Labdhi (attainment of right time) it was not feasible. This  term kaal labdhi has been accepted everywhere for fulfilment of a task. All events are carried out upon attainment of kaal labdhi only. Such is the definite rule. Therefore deriving that the divine sermon of Tirthankara takes place even in akaal – such interpretation is not right.

(3) Unscheduled times of Nirjara and Salvation- If the times of nirjara and salvation are treated as unscheduled then nimitta-upadan cannot have proper relationship.

In Shlokavartik (p70) it is stated- In reality the destruction of Moha accompanied with attainment of kaal etc. is cause for generation of Keval Gyan and not (Moha) alone since it  appears like that.

Further- doubt- In the first samaya of Ksheen Kashaya (gunasthana) the Keval Gyan should be generated ?

Answer- It should not be said this way since the assisting cause of specific kaal is absent at that moment.

From these,  it can be known that upon attainment of swa-kaal of any event only that event gets generated and not at other times. Therefore just as Keval Gyan is produced at specific kaal  only, in the same way the Nirjara and salvation occur at specific kaal. This should be surmised.

4) Aniyat (un scheduled) guna-paryaya- Interpretation of Prakrit terms ‘Niyat’ and ‘Aniyat’ in Gatha 155 of Panchastikaya as being Niyat and Aniyat discarding their Prakrit meaning is incorrect. There the terms imply ‘engrossed in the nature’ and ‘engrossed in vibhava qualities and paryayas’ respectively since in this gatha ‘swa-samaya’ and para-samaya’ have been defined. Hence it is told that the one who engages in swa-samaya, he gets rid of karma bondage. Therefore it is incorrect  to derive the meaning that worldly jiva has both niyat and aniyat paryayas.

Gatha 155- In spite of being stationary in swabhava if the jiva is engaged in vibhava guna-paryayas then he is para-samaya. If he attains swa-samaya then he gets rid of karma bondage.

Commentary- With adoption of swa-samaya and renunciation of para-samaya the karmas gets destroyed. Here ‘ niyat charitra in jiva swabhava is moksha marga’- this has been shown. Worldly jiva, in spite of being niyat ( remaining in stationary form)  in gyan-darshan ( from aspect of Dravya), manifesting   in accordance with the fruition of eternal mohaniya,  when he manifests in ashuddha upayoga, then by adopting several bhavas pertaining to world form, he gets to be having aniyat guna paryaya which is nothing but para-samaya. When the same jiva abandoning the manifestation pertaining to fruition of eternal mohaniya, he gets to be having Shuddha upayoga then he attains niyat guna-paryaya which is swa-samaya.

When the jiva abandoning para-samaya adopts swa-samaya, then surely he gets rid of karma bondage. Hence it establishes that the niyat charitra within jiva swabhava is Moksha Marg.

(5) sequential-non sequential manifestation: From Jayadhavala (1/289) rival group has derived this conclusion that ‘ the destruction  of Prag bhava ( non existence of present paryaya  in past paryaya) is dependent upon Dravya, kshetra, kaal. So long as Dravya, kshetra, kaal are not favourable, till then the prag bhava does not get destroyed. All the events do not have a scheduled moment hence the event occurs sequentially as well as non-sequentially.’

Here we have to analyse whether this meaning is correct.

The actual words are – The destruction of Prag Bhava also occurs from aspects of  Dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhav ( birth).

Here Prag Bhava and Upadan both have the same meaning.  Here only this is stated that the destruction of Prag Bhava occurs from aspects of drvya, kshetra, kaal and bhav. Here this has not been told that if the Dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhav are not favourable then the deed is not carried out. Hence deriving the concurrence of sequential, non sequential manifestations is not right.

Therefore with Upadan belonging to Nishchaya side and Nimitta belonging to Vyavahara side, it should be accepted that in conjunction of both, the deed is carried out. Siddhant is that with availability of Nishchaya Upadan, the paryaya of other Dravya which is nimitta  for the deed at that moment, it is Nishchaya Upadan also at the same time for its own manifestation, hence with the right mating of Nishchaya and Vyavahara  at every samaya every deed occurs at its own kaal  only. This should be the conclusion.

(6) Aniyat paryaya of Dravya karma- For generation of a deed, Upadan and Nimitta, these  two are mentioned as reasons; it does not mean that if Upadan is present and Nimitta is absent then the deed would not be carried out- deriving such meaning is incorrect. The authors of scriptures have told that Upadan is existent in internal pervasive form and Nimitta is present in external pervasive form therefore pervasiveness of both is present together at every samaya. In every samaya, every Dravya has been carrying out its own deed of the form of Utpad-Vyaya (generation-destruction). Otherwise the manifestation of Dravya at every samaya is not possible and nor can an odd pervasiveness criterion be laid down for upadan and nimitta.

In this way upon consideration from aspects of nimitta-upadan it is appropriate to conclude that all deeds are generated in sequential order only. The destined deed is performed according to the Upadan and at the same time the assistance of nimittas is also present for the deed.

(7) Nimitta-Upadan causes – The deed of Upadan and nimitta have joint pervasiveness. Therefore writing that whenever  suitable nimittas are available for the deed then accordingly the deed is performed- it is incorrect logic. This is because every substance being Upadan is carrying out its own deed. If the arrangement for the deed were dependent upon nimitta, then the Dravya cannot have utpad-vyaya-dhrovya (generation-destruction-permanence) nature as mentioned in scriptures.

When nature of Dravya is to manifest at every samaya then it cannot be said that in the absence of suitable nimitta the deed was not carried out. This may be true that the job did not happen as was desired. But no substance has taken a contract to manifest in accordance with someone else’s wishes.

Every substance carries out its own task itself, nimitta does not perform its task. However, with the favourability of nimitta applicable for the task and absence of unfavourable nimitta only, the task is carried out.

Therefore just as it has been established in Agam praman that every deed happens at its own time, this principle should be accepted.

Pandit Banarasidas- Nature of substance, fruition of past (Nimita), Nishchaya Upadan, effort (purushartha) and kaal- these are the five reasons with whose samavaya (assemblage) the deed gets performed. Taking  sides with any of them is Mithyatva and accepting that in the presence of all, the deed gets carried out is Moksha Marg.

 In Gommatsar also kaal, Ishwara (nimitta), soul, nityati ( destiny), and swabhava(nature) these five ekants  have been informed for the same reason as above. Therefore where ekant Niyati has been disapproved, there Samyak Niyati has been accepted. Thus the deed of every Dravya is carried out from aspect of these five  samavaya (assemblage) in sequential order and not non sequential order.

In the end we present again the commentary  by Acharya Shubhchanda on Gatha 321-323 of Kartikeya Anupreksha:

Jinendra is aware of the birth, death, happiness-unhappiness, loss-profit, etc. of the jiva in whichever country, city, village or forest etc. ordained by whichever weapon, poison, fire, water, diseases in whichever period of time, in the same way, means and time. No one has the capability to avoid it including Jinendra, kings etc.

That Bhavya soul is pure Samyak Drishti devoid of three foolishness, 25 impurities who believes, knows and experiences in the above described way the artha  paryayas of jiva, pudgala etc. six dravyas inclusive of generation-destruction and nara-narak etc. vyanajan paryayas in the same way. He is Samyak drishti.

Contrary to this the jiva who doubts the words of jinendra and deva-guru-dharma and tattvas, he is Mithya Drishti. This is clear.

Counter Question 3: You are saying that the time of generation of each paryaya of every Dravya is definite. Here we would examine this belief of yours.

We also accept that every deed is produced at the same time at which the event of its generation is reflected in the knowledge of omniscient. However the production of that deed does not occur because it is being so reflected in the knowledge of omniscient, since merely knowing the state of the thing alone is the task of Keval Gyan but the accomplishment of that deed is not the job of keval gyan.

Gatha 321-323 also intimate the same thing that in spite of the deed happening at the time it is known in the Keval gyan, it is accomplished by means of its predefined reasons only. Pandit Phoolchand ji also has written that establishment of KramBaddha paryayas should be carried out keeping in mind the cause-effect tradition only. In other words the knowledge of Keval Gyani is not cause for production of the event. The deed is generated at its own time, due to its own predefined reasons only and not otherwise.

The meaning of Bhavitavyata (destiny) is the self established capability in the substance of accomplishment of the task. The internal means implies the previous paryaya form Upadan capability and the external means implies nimitta cause.

In this way there are two opinions under consideration-

1) The time at which the event takes place due to its predefined reasons, that only should be accepted to be the prime reason for the event.

2) Whenever the event takes place, it occurs due to its predefined reasons only and at time when it occurs is  called its swa-kaal (own time). Therefore both the internal and external reasons of the event should be accepted as the prime reasons for the event.

Here your principle gives prominence to the time of the event as the prime reason. Our Siddhant does not give primacy to the time in the generation of event but gives primacy to the internal means (Upadan) and external means (nimitta). Therefore though the event occurs due to its predefined reasons only but the time at which it is accomplished gets called as its own time of fulfilment.

The question arises that your philosophy is unable to answer the all the issues faced by the shruta gyani jivas. Every jiva is facing this question that the paryaya in which he is at present, why it is so? Why is he being happy? Why is he being unhappy? Why does he adopt different extraordinary paryayas? In one paryaya if he is a king then in some other paryaya why is he  a pauper? Why does he go to heaven or hell? Why are you engaged in promotion of your Siddhant or viewpoint ? etc. etc.

Is this only the solution that it was so reflected in the knowledge of the omniscient? The Siddhant that you have accepted, in accordance with that you should remain as only knower and seer and that too not by mind or brain or senses since they are dependent upon others . So long as you do not become knower seer alone, till then you cannot be immersed in inactivity. Then it cannot be described as anything other that Niyativad form Mithyatva in accordance with karma kand etc. agam scriptures.

If you say that the one accepting Gatha 323 alone is pure Samyak Drishti then in reply we have to say this much only- In Agam granths of Jain Sanskriti the generation of event has been described in two ways for the Shruta Gyani jivas – one is from aspect of belief with respect to the subject of Keval Gyan and the second aspect is with respect to duty as subject of Shruta Gyan.

Why has this analysis been carried out for the shruta gyani jivas ? The reason is that the shruta gyani jivas are existing in completely different state as against Keval Gyani jivas. Whereas the keval gyani jivas do not need to do any more, on the other hand the shruta gyani jiva is always facing the issue of carrying out deeds. Whereas the Keval Gyani jiva is remaining knower and seer of the activities happening at every moment , the shruta gyani jiva has to be busy in adjusting things under present conditions in accordance with experience. Hence shruta gyani does not have any other solution than adopting cause-effect methodology for generation of deeds.

In this way if considered from aspect of shruta gyan then every event, being swa-pratyaya and swa-para-pratyaya, is being accomplished accordingly by only Upadan means or Upadan and nimitta means together. For them the subject of keval gyan is pertaining to faith alone .  Hence for them the cause-effect methodology has been advised to be adopted. If someone tries to abolish the cause-effect methodology for generation of deed, then he would become Niyatvadi, Ekant Mithya Drishti only.

If based upon the faith alone the shruta gyani jiva becomes astray being devoid of purushartha and thankfulness  then due to effect of this Mithyatva what else can happen other than transmigration in this infinite world ?

In this way from aspect of shruta gyan some paryayas of every substance are in sequential order and some are in non sequential order also.

If considered from aspect of Praman then both the Keval Gyan and Shruta Gyan are Praman (true) only. Hence based upon the cause-effect relationship, the known sequential order and non sequential order of paryayas by means of shruta gyan is true only.

In this way the things happen as they are known by Keval Gyani as a rule. The shruta gyani also considers it essential that without knowing the cause-effect relationship and without making necessary purushartha the deed would not be accomplished.

However, without doing so, if some person believing the Niyativad to be the basis for generation of event, becomes devoid of purushrtha then the deed would never be accomplished. If the deed has to be accomplished then purushartha is a must.

Definition of Niyativad as per Gommatsar- the thing which has to happen for someone, that happens at that moment in the same way.

Poor shrutagyani does  not know what has been reflected in the knowledge of kevalgyani! Hence whatever happens is in accordance with cause effect relationship from his viewpoint. Therefore at the second moment, that paryaya only gets produced for which the favourable external paraphernalia is available in all readiness.

Though manifestation of jiva is assured in the second moment after manifestation of previous paryaya in anger form, but out of anger, pride, deceit, greed which one shall manifest is dependent upon the suitable external events only.

You wish to declare the nimittas as irrelevant which is incorrect. Akalank Deva has said that- Without demolishing the incapability of Updan, if the  assisting cause remain irrelevant then how can it be called assisting cause?

That Upadan capability only manifests into event form for which the nimitta material is available incidentally or by means of manual effort. This statement of yours is absolutely wrong that when the Upadan is present for carrying out the deed, then nimitta material automatically becomes available.

Continued…..

Seventeen Questions….06

 

Question 5

All the paryayas manifesting in the Dravya occur  in pre-ordained sequence only or non sequential manner also?

5.1. Answer: All the paryayas of Dravya occur in preordained sequence only. All the deeds occur depending upon attainment of swa-kaal (own time) only.

Kartikeya Anupreksha 321/323- The birth or death, or in other words happiness, unhappiness, sickness, poverty etc. which have been known to the omniscient of whichever Jiva, in whichever country, in whichever period of time, by whichever means, they shall definitely materialize for sure. That particular Jiva shall be in that country, in that period of time, with the same  means definitely. This cannot be prevented by Indra, Jinendra, Tirthankara himself. In this way the one who knows all the dravyas and their all paryayas to be like this definitely, he is Shuddha Samyak Drishti and the one who doubts is KuDrishti.

Kartikeya Anupreksha 230-  Dravya conjoined with immediately previous manifestation manifests in causal form (upadan cause form) and same Dravya incorporating immediately next manifestation manifests in deed form as a rule.

In this way all the paryayas of Dravya occur in predefined sequence only. Generation of deed in nonsequential manner is not possible in all the three periods of time.

Tattvartha Shloka Vartik- The jewel trio form manifestation of the Ayog Kevali at the last moment of his life, subsequent to which Moksha is attained is the prime cause (Upadan Karan) of Moksha,  from  aspect of Nishchaya naya.

In this way, at every samaya the preordained deed only is produced and its Upadan karan is also preordained.

Counter Question 2 : In any Siddhant Granth all the paryayas have not been stated to be occurring in preordained sequence. Nowhere there is a mention of Kram Baddha Paryaya.

The Gathas that you have quoted were written by the author for averting worship of false Deva etc. carried out by people to prevent death etc. When Samyak Drishti has belief in Anekant then how can he be preached the Ekant Niyativad ( one sided view of destiny) which has been denounced as Mithyatva?

In these Gathas the Samyak Drishti has contemplated that when Indra and Jinendra also cannot evade the karmas then how can other inferior Devas evade the effect of  your karmas?

Here against the Ekant Niyativad, the Shubha-ashubha karmas have been described as clear nimitta cause for the benefit-loss of jiva. It means that the benefit-loss of Jiva is not dependent upon the kaal merely but is dependent upon the fruition of Shubha-ashubha karmas in accordance with external reasons.

In 219^th Gatha the substances are said to have different kinds of capabilities. However the substances manifest in those deed forms only at the later moment for which Dravya, kshetra etc. form nimitta causes are available favourably. It means that the deed carried out by later paryaya is not predestined.

If Jiva cannot attain Avipak nirjara ( unscheduled shedding) of karmas by destroying their duration-intensity by means of his manifestations then Moksha would not exist and tapa would not lead to nirjara. In fact here it has been told that the karma paryaya which cannot be changed even by Jinendra, Indra, that paryaya can be  averted by jiva by means of his own purushartha.

Further such Ekant (one sided view) also does not exist that in accordance with previously bonded Ayu Karma,  at the predestined moment the Jivas definitely die, since omniscient has described  provision of Akaal mrityu ( unforeseen death) also.

Unforeseen death is also seen. Just as the mango is ripened prior to predestined period by means of techniques, in the same way the Ayu can be expired by means of Udeerana (premature fruition) prior to predestined death.

By means of his own Purushartha the jiva, acquiring internal and external favourable nimitta causes, attaining nirjara of karmas attains salvation . Therefore the moments of karma nirjara and salvation from karmas are not predestined.

In this way the worldly jiva has paryayas of both types which are niyat(predestined) as well as aniyat (unscheduled).

Even with fixation of  Prakriti(nature), Sthiti (duration), Anubhag (intensity) upon karma bondage, on account of internal-external nimitta causes the accrued Dravya karmas undergo Utkarshan ( increase), Apakarshan ( decrease), Sankraman  (conversion), udeerana (premature fruition) form changes  in their Prakriti, sthiti, anubhag. This establishes that the paryaya of bonded karmas can both be niyat (scheduled) as well as Aniyat (unscheduled). King Shrenik reduced his Ayu of 33000 Sagar by means of his own efforts to 84000 years.

From Jaya Dhavla 1/289 , two things get established-

1) The deed occurs in accordance with the nimitta - upadan causes only. It does not take place in accordance with some destiny or Keval Gyan.

2) The result of Dravya karma is also changeable therefore it is not predestined.

The moment a paryaya occurs, that surely is its swa-kaal (own time) however the swa-kaal of that paryaya is not predestined in Ekant form. The reason is that the deed is not carried out by the Upadan reasons only but for that to happen the activities of nimitta causes also are compulsorily required. Any swa-para-pratyaya paryaya does not happen without nimitta causes.

The activities of nimitta reasons are destined in accordance with Kaal only, such Ekant does not exist. For the completion of a deed whenever  favourable reasons are available in sequential order or in nonsequential order, then only in accordance with the activities of the nimitta causes the deed would be carried out in sequential or non sequential order.

This establishes that culmination of a deed is in accordance with the activities of nimitta causes.

With respect to Keval Gyan- The sequential non sequential paryayas of substances manifesting in accordance with the available sequential non-sequential nimitta and Upadan reasons are reflected in Keval Gyan in the same sequential non sequential form.

 In this way with respect to sequential, non sequential order of the paryaya there is no Ekant principle but Anekant applies.

5.2. Answer: In the counter question 2, the subjects have been classified as follows-

(1) 3 Gathas of Swamy Kartikeya Anupreksha.

(2) Unscheduled divine sermon.

(3) Unscheduled time of Nirjara and Salvation

(4) Aniyat (un scheduled) guna-paryaya

(5) sequential-non sequential manifestation

(6) Aniyat paryaya of Dravya karma

(7) Nimitta-Upadan causes

These are discussed  here –

(1)  3 Gathas of Swamy Kartikeya Anupreksha-  In Gatha 323 it has been stated “ The one who knows and believes all Dravyas- Jiva-Pudgala-Dharma-Adharma-Akash-Kaal and all their paryayas really  in accordance with the Agam of omniscient, he is Shuddha Samyak Drishti. The one against it is Mithya Drishti.

This statement has been made from aspect of Nishchaya (Real) naya with primacy of Upadan. Conversely from this it can also be known that in Agam where the mention of Akaal Mrityu (unforeseen death) etc. is made , it is carried out from aspect of Vyavahara naya (upacharita naya) only.

From these gathas deriving such a meaning that ‘ it has been stated to enlighten someone who is worshipping specific Devi/Deva for preventing death’ – it is incorrect. Here mere bhavna of SamyakDrishti has not been stated but the reality itself has been described.

In this way the Gathas 321-322 do not express mere feelings – here the Siddhant has been laid down that nobody can do good or bad of anyone. All activities transpire in accordance with own karmas.

In every substance at every moment there is a Dravya-paryaya form capability which is called as Nishchaya Upadan and in accordance with  it only the deed is carried out. If it is so believed that the deeds are carried out in accordance with the availability of external nimitta, then who can prevent Siddhas to become worldly who have Vaibhavik ( non natural ) capability present even in this state and external nimittas are present in the Lok everywhere? The Siddhant itself gets dispelled that only with the manifestation of Jivas in raga-dwesha form, with their nimitta the Dravya karmas get bonded. Then we shall have to accept that even if someone carried out cruel manifestations pertaining to taking birth in 7^th Narak but if the external nimittas are pertaining to Deva Gati then instead of bonding Narak Gati he shall bond with Deva Gati.  When it is accepted that the karya(deed) occurs in accordance with external nimittas, then the dictum of the Agam that certain types of manifestations only result in specific types of bandh becomes haywire.

When the Nishchaya Upadan is present ready to engage in deed then the nimittas are also present accordingly. This too is decreed. In rules Anekant cannot be applied. Otherwise in Dravyas, the permanence, which is accepted from aspect of Samanya (general) and transitoriness from aspect of Paryaya, such Anekant would not be applicable. Instead it would have to be accepted that Dravya (samanya) with respect to itself is permanent in certain aspect and transitory in some other aspect. (which is untrue).

At the moment that the Upadan manifests in karan-karya (causal-deed) form, at that moment does the nimitta cause engage in generating own paryaya being Updan itself or does it engage in performing the business of the Upadan for which it is nimitta? If both carried out their own deeds at that moment together then how can such a rule be framed that in accordance with nimitta the upadan has to manifest?

Hence accepting this only is right that with respect to the deed of the upadan, all those dravyas whose specific paryayas are described as nimitta, they engage in their own deeds individually. No one performs deeds of others, but all those dravyas have capability of manifesting at that moment in Dravya-paryaya Updan form. All of them manifest independently in accordance with the requirement of the Updan. Merely upon observing the external pervasion between the upadan and nimitta their nimitta-naimittik relationship has been accepted. Such acceptance is in accordance with Agam.

Any narration should be understood after applying specific aspect of the naya with respect to which it has been stated and derive the intended Praman form meaning. This is the proper way of deriving meaning of shastras.

The narration can be of three forms – from aspect of Praman, from aspect of  Nishchaya naya and from aspect of Vyavahara naya. Therefore suitable meaning should be derived applying the applicable naya.

In the Gathas 321-322 the narration is primarily from aspect of Nishchaya naya hence it is inappropriate to narrate them in accordance with own desire.

Padma Puran- Whatever has to be attained in whichever kaal, in whatever quantity due to whatever reason by the Jiva, that jiva definitely attains the same in that kaal , in the same quantity due to the same reason.

Bhai Bhagwati das - whatever has been observed by Veetrag (omniscient), it occurs accordingly. It can never be unforeseen, then why are you restless?

All these statements above are from aspect of Nishchaya Naya.

Generally we talk about Purushartha but its success is accepted by carrying out deed of another Dravya which is impossible to perform as such. The worldly jiva has imagined the real purushartha to be activity carried out in accordance with vikalpa. But the worldly jiva, without presence of destiny, in spite of having several assisting factors, in incapable of carrying out the deed. 

The duration of Ayu-bondage  carried out in the previously bonded  Ayu Karma cannot be enhanced while it is in fruition, however its Nishek sthiti ( duration of karma molecules) can undergo decrement. The ayu karma of certain jivas (Devas, Naraki, Bhog Bhoomi) is exception to this rule  wherein their Nishek Sthiti cannot undergo decrement. This rule has been stated in Tattvartha sutra (2/52). Now we have to consider that whether this is a Nishchaya statement or has been stated in Vyavahara form for informing about specific nimittas. (Bhavartha – the point to be decided is whether the Ayu is uncertain i.e. Akaal Maran really exists or whether it is told in Vyavahara sense only. The rival group believes that it is Nishchaya statement. )

After death, the jiva undergoes next birth within 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th samaya definitely with the intervening period being spent in Vigrah gati. Now if a jiva undergoes akaal maran (unforeseen death) then where would that jiva go and take birth? There is no specific rule pertaining to them. One undergoing akaal maran cannot say that his birth place is preordained, nor can they say that the necessary nimittas of womb etc. are ready for them to take birth. In such a situation they shall have to take akaal birth ( unforeseen birth) wherein it is not definite where the jiva would take birth. The Aanupoorvi, gati etc. karmas are insentient who do not know that under such uncertain conditions where the jiva has to be carried. But when in the Lok, the Gati-Agati (departure-arrival) etc. in all four Gati have definite system then such a situation is imaginary only. This proves that the statement of Akaal Maran should be accepted from aspect of Vyavahara naya only and not real.

Continued…….