Seventeen Questions…12

 

14. Right meanings of the terms Kram-Akram described in Agam

The term ‘Akram’ referred in Dhavla is used for meaning ‘simultaneous’ and not  in the sense of non-sequential. The Gati, indriya, kaya etc. paryayas of jiva are simultaneous while anger etc., deva etc. states are sequential paryayas.

Hence it is not proper on the part of rival group to imply that ‘ sequential and non sequential manifestations are natures of the substances and due to their predefined reasons they manifest in those forms’. In the end the rival group writes-

‘ In this way understand the cause-effect bhava for accomplishing the objective. Engage in purushartha. Accumulate necessary nimittas also, but do not become proud of them, nor be impatient and do not be miserable with lack of success. Being sensible, serious, stable minded with conviction, engage on the path of duty- this is symbol of Samyak. It represents Astikya bhava, in this only you shall attain illumination of Anekantvad.’

On the other hand, we analyse this Siddhant promoted by rival group where in it has been told that ‘Upadan has several capabilities. Out of them which capability shall manifest depends upon the nimittas.’ Then we get shocked. On one hand they are quoting these words for propounding the importance of independence and on the other hand the other statement accepting dependence in cause-effect relationship.

Gita also says that you do not have control upon the result i.e. deed, since that is dependent upon Ishwaara. The rival group says that which Upadan produces the result, it is not dependent upon the Upadan, it is dependent upon the nimitta. Then please contemplate that now where is  the control of Upadan in the karma?  

We are blamed to be Niyatvadi for this reason that we accept definite Upadan for each deed and its external implements also in definite form. On the other hand the rival group does not wish to accept themselves as Niyatvadi since they accept the external matters as Niyat for each deed while in accepting Upadan as niyat , it creates impression of Niyatvad for them.

15. Nimittavadi cannot be purusharthi

We notice that in the Lok there are infinite sentient-insentient substances and at every moment they engage in their deeds since arth-kriya is characteristics of substance. Out of them in some deeds the efforts of purush are nimitta while in rest of them they are not. All deeds are carried out with the nimitta of purush, this is not Jain philosophy but that of Ishwara-vadi. It is not right for the rival group to state that whatever has to happen shall happen- by accepting it we shall become devoid of purushartha. Upon consideration it can be known that so long as this worldly jiva keeps dreaming of accomplishing deeds with the means of others , till then his Samyak Purushartha would not awaken nor would he progress on Moksha Marga by being alert to the  deeds for  own soul.

The result of having belief that deeds can be accomplished by means of others only is cause for the world. Hence abandoning such belief only is purushartha which is right purushartha and opens the doors of Moksha.

“ Keep doing lots of purushartha” those who say this, we ask them whether doing purushartha is within their capability? When you say that deeds are accomplished according to nimittas then who is controlling the purushartha?

When rival group does not have information of their own Upadan then who is nimitta for any specific deed- this  information where from they shall get? Nimittas only would have to accumulate the necessary nimittas. Hence the way Keval Gyani has known, the Shruta Gyani also decides based upon the shruta and in this way engaging in attainment of own soul only is right purushartha.

16. Coordination between belief and duty

“ The way Veetraga  has observed  happening at whichever period of time, with the assistance  of whichever  implements, the same would occur at the same time, with the assistance of the same implements, not in any other way.” This is rationale. If he gets impatient then he should realise that his duty and belief are different. In spite of several efforts we did not find anywhere  such definition that “ where in one kaal, capability to carry out several deeds is existent, that is named as capable Upadan.”

 Now where lies the real welfare of soul and how can that be attained- this is examined.

Realising the causes for worldly transmigration as despicable hence renouncing them and engaging in Samyak Darshan etc. with sense of reverence is the prime duty of worldly jiva.

The only means of its attainment is taking recourse to nature of soul.

Samaysar (Gatha 186)- Knowing Shuddha ( different from bhavas of other dravyas) soul, the jiva attains Shuddha soul only. Knowing ashuddha soul, the jiva attains ashuddha soul only.

Samyak Drishti knowing the worldly worries to be despicable, believes engaging in purushartha of being detached from them as his prime duty. This is the right conjunction of belief and duty. For that purpose, the decision that “ all deeds happen at their own swa-kaal by themselves “ – it is not hindrance towards benevolence of soul but actually instrumental only.

The one who did not decide in this way, he does not get free from the ego of performing. He cannot be free of sankalpa-vikalpas happening by taking recourse to others. For him being alert in activities of soul by engaging in own nature is impossible like  drawing oil from sand.

17. Difference between Ekant Niyati and Samyak Niyati

In Gommatsar the Ekant Niyativad has been defined-

“ Whatever happens to whomever at whichever time, by whichever means with whichever rule, that happens at that time, by that means only to him “ – such a statement is Ekant NiyatiVad.

With respect to the subject reflected in the knowledge of Keval Gyan also, it is known that at whichever time, whatever has to happen to whomever, it would be that only and not in any other way. In this way all these statements appear to be the same to those with peripheral view.

Their difference is realised by observing the context of the subject handled in Gommatsar. There only Ekant Niyativad is not described but additionally ekant KaalVad, Ekant IshwaraVad, Ekant AtmaVad, Ekant SwabhavaVad are also narrated.

-        Believing in generation-destruction  of all events by means of Kaal only is KaalVad

-        Believing that sukh-dukh of soul , swarg-narak etc. are all created by Ishwara is IshwaraVad.

-        Believing that single soul alone is Purush, same is Deva,  all pervasive and supreme is AtmaVad.

-        The sharpness of thorns, differences of deer, birds etc. is SwabhavaVad.

There are 180 types of Ekant KriyaVadi Mithya Drishti who accept one reason out of the five given above as the cause for generation of event, by self or others, in permanent or transitory manner.

From these it is clear that Ekant Niyativadi is one who neither believes kaal as means, nor purushartha as means, nor swabhava as means. Out of the 180 divisions of Ekant KriyaVadi there are 36 divisions of Ekant NiyatiVadi.

Jain Darshan, in spite of accepting Niyati as causal for every event, accepts it along with Swabhav, Purusharth, kaal etc. This  is the difference between Mithya Niyati and Samyak Niyati.

After understanding this, the rival group shall never wite that ‘ From aspect of shruta Gyan some deed is carried out in Niyat Kram and some deed is accomplished in Aniyat Kram’.

We are still at a loss to understand that by their statement, what  do they wish to imply?

(1) Is it that the deed which is reflected in the knowledge of Keval Gyan as happening by certain means at certain kaal, that deed can happen by the same means at some other kaal instead of happening at that kaal?

(2) Is it that the deed which is reflected in the knowledge of Keval Gyan as happening by certain means at certain kaal, that deed happens with those means at that kaal only, but that deed is not dependent upon merely Niyati at that kaal but happens by means of Niyati as well as other reasons also.

(3) Or us dim-witted people should have belief in that way only since we do not have knowledge, but since we do not know which deed is going to happen by which means at which kaal, therefore we should not pay attention upon Kaal, Niyati, Swabhava etc. and concentrate upon purushartha mainly ?

Now we consider these three options-

(1) – Since this statement does not accept Keval Gyan, by itself it is Apraman (untrue).

(2) By accepting it all the deeds are established as Kram Niyat.

(3) This is also like second option wherein the importance is given to purushartha which is logical.

Here someone enquires that when you talk about Kaal Labdhi and Bhavitavya, then where does it have scope for Purushartha? The answer is that in Paramagam it is told that one deed is accomplished with several causes together. So where the attainment of Moksha occurs, there all the causes come together and where it is not attained, there none of the reasons are available.

The rule is that the reason by which the accomplishment of objective is attained, if the soul makes efforts in the same way then other means also become available and the result is also accomplished. Hence those jivas who practice means for Moksha as preached by Jineshwara by means of purushartha, then accordingly the kaal labdhi and bhavitavya also are favourable. Also the upasham etc. of karmas are in accompaniment  that is why the jiva is making such efforts.

However those jivas who do not make effort for Moksha with purushartha, for them the kaal labdhi and bhavitavya also are not available. The upasham etc. of their Karmas have also not occurred.

Everyone listens to the preachment but only some make efforts for Moksha and not others? The answer is that those who after listening to preachment carry out purushartha, they can make efforts for Moksha and those who do not do purushartha, they cannot make efforts for Moksha. The preachment is just lesson. The result is attained based upon purushartha only.

The question arises that the reason for purushartha is also Karma? The answer is that Ekendriyas etc. do not have capability for thinking hence their external cause is karmas only. However the jiva has revealed capability to decide based upon the kshayopasham of gyanavarana etc. Hence where he would apply Upayoga, there decision can be made. But if he applies his Upayoga is deciding other things then it is his fault only, in this karmas do not have any role.

18. Consideration of Upadan

Dravya in immediately previous paryaya form is called Upadan. However the characteristics described by rival group are as follows-

‘ Dravya in the state of previous manifestation  is causal form and when it attains the next paryaya state, then definitely it becomes deed form.’ – Kartikeya Anupreksha (222-230).

But the right meaning of the Gatha is as follows- ‘ The Dravya having immediate previous manifestation state definitely manifests in causal form and the immediate next manifestation form of dravya is deed as a rule.’

The difference between the two meanings is considered-

The Dravya having immediate previous paryaya form is called as Upadan – this is the nature of Nishchaya Upadan.

However by accepting this characteristics by rival group would result in scenario of their accepting all deeds as kram-niyat hence they have generated this meaning – ‘ in the state of previous manifestation’ which is incorrect.

The dravya in the immediate previous paryaya state is Upadan Cause while rival group has called merely dravya in the state of previous paryaya as Upadan cause which is misleading.

19. The decider of deed is Upadan cause

The rival group interprets it as follows- ‘ The deed carried out by the Upadan cause is decided by the nimitta material’ and not Upadan cause.

They say that poor shrutagyani does not know that what has been reflected in the knowledge of keval gyani. Hence whatever is carried out is dependent in their view of  cause-effect bhava only.

Hence jiva existing in anger form previous paryaya state definitely manifests in the next moment but out of anger, pride, deceit, greed which shall manifest, this is dependent upon the external favourable materials. Based upon this surmise we analyse as follows-

It is our stand that the decider of the deed is Upadan cause only. The other external materials are nimitta by which we know that at this moment this Upadan has accomplished this deed with this external material as nimitta.

Defining the nimitta material as decider from aspect of Vyavahara naya is a different matter. The statement of rival group is not correct that in accordance with the fruition, upasham, kshayopasham and kshaya of karma the deed is carried out; and not in accordance with Upadan. As per them the fruition of karma etc. also is not dependent upon own Upadan but in accordance with nimitta material. In such a condition, with the availability of external materials like samosharan etc. the fruition of karmas for all should be the same ? Does it not prove that the manifestation of each dravya at every samaya is in accordance with own Upadan?

Kaal itself is detached nimitta in the manifestation of dravyas manifesting in different ways. The other dravyas also function the same way as kaal Dravya. In other words, the condition of other dravyas is same as that of kaal Dravya from aspect of being nimitta.

Hence from aspect of nishchaya naya the Upadan is decider of the cause-effect relationship and from aspect of asadbhoot vyavahara naya the nimitta material is decider of the deed. Such rule gets established.

Continued…..