Seventeen Questions…15

 

Question 6

In the deed form manifestation of Upadan, does the nimitta reason assist or not?

6.1  Answer - In reality the meaning of the terms Nimitta reason and assistant imply the same. However it should be clearly understood that it has  been accepted from aspect of Vyavahara naya only and not from aspect of Nishchaya naya ( Paryayarthika Nishchaya naya).

Tattvartha Shloka Vartik- The arrangement of Utpad-Vyaya-Dhrovya (generation-destruction-permanence) of all dravyas in any form is Visrasa ( unassisted) from aspect of Nishchaya naya, from aspect of Vyavahara naya it appears to be assisted.

Counter Question 2 – The question is whether the deed is carried out by only Upadan or Upadan along with Nimitta reasons. Some place they have been described as internal and external reasons. The internal implies the Dravya shakti (capability) and external implies assistant in carrying out the deed. Whenever shakti appears in manifested form, it does so with the assistance of nimitta only. For example when Labdhi form consciousness manifests in Upayoga form then it is accomplished by means of eyes senses only. The formation of image in the eyes is physical manifestation and later its realisation and knowing the mental (internal) manifestation. If physical manifestation is not there then even in all three periods of time the internal manifestation i.e. consciousness would not proceed from Labdhi towards Upayoga. This only means Nimitta in carrying out the deed.

The substance has capability for carrying out the deed but the deed shall be carried out only when external reasons are present. Without it the capability does not appear in manifested form. This external substance only without remaining as gyeya (subject of knowledge) alone becomes desire and generates the Kashaya in the soul.

Samaysar 80- Pudgala manifest in karma form with the nimitta of Jiva’s manifestation and Jivas also manifest with the nimitta of pudgala karma. `

Mithyatva, Ignorance and Kashaya all the three are pudgala only. If they are not accepted as pudgala form only, then cause-effect relationship would not exist. Acharya Amritchandra also has accepted this.

Acharya Amritchandra (278-279)- The sapphire jewel in spite of being pure is turned red by reddish dravyas. In the same way in spite of Gyani i.e. soul being pure, does not manifest in ragas etc. form on his own but becomes raga form on account of other raga etc. form flaws.

1. If you say that deed is carried out by Upadan alone and nimitta remains present only, then the question arises that how it became nimitta? How other substances which   are present are not nimitta? Proof should be submitted for the reason.

2.  The second thing is that by accepting Upadan and Nimitta to be uncorrelated, the arrangement of Bandh etc. tattvas also would not be accomplished.

3. With the body manifestation of  small-big size only of the innumerable Pradesh jiva, the shape has been called as small-big. If jiva is accepted as devoid of effects of body then this too could not be said and it would be contradictory to the Agam.

4. In this way the arrangement of fruits of karmas would also get eliminated. If karma bandh due to vibhava and vibhava due to fruition of karmas is not accepted then the arrangement of karma fruition would not exist. Then how can it be said that this is effect of fruition of that karma?

5. There is contradiction between the nimitta reasons merely remaining present and nimitta reasons performing the deed. One is based upon presence and other  is Prerak ( instigator) or doer. There is difference between the two. In the Lok Prerak Nimitta reasons also exist which are different from  Dharmas etc. dravyas.

In brief the conclusion is as follows-

(i) The deed is carried out by Upadan reason alone - this  it is delusion, since there is lack of proofs in favour of it.

(ii) During the deed, just by its presence, some thing can be nimitta reason-  this is false since there is lack of proofs in favour of it.

(iii) The generation of deed is by means of Upadan and Nimitta reasons only- This is proper which is favoured by shastras.

6.2. Answer -  Here without paying attention to the praman of Tattvartha Shloka Vartik,  it has been tried to establish that the generation of deed is by means of Nimitta. The Nishchaya reason of Upadan has been ignored.

In the Agam, from aspect of Praman, the generation of deed has been described everywhere by means of both. There is not a single Praman wherein in the absence of Upadan (Nishchaya) reason, only by means of Nimitta the deed gets performed.

The question is whether without reaching its specific Upadan state, only by means of Nimitta some wheat seed germinates into sapling form or, when the seed reaches its specific Upadan state then only it manifests into the wheat sapling form?

Acharyas have told in very clear terms that  when any Dravya is ready to perform a specific task then the paryayas of other favourable dravyas are only Nimitta in the generation of the deed.

RajVaratik- With the readiness of the mud to be manifested into pot form by itself, then the paryayas of other favourable dravyas function as Nimitta alone in its generation.

This is clarification of Prerak (instigator)  Nimitta . The mud which would manifest into pot paryaya form in the immediate next moment, that mud alone is the Upadan of the Pot paryaya. At the same time, wheel, stick, efforts of potter etc.  are nimitta, not at any other time. Dravya shakti equipped with specific paryaya shakti favourable to assisting causes only is considered as capable. Only Dravya shakti alone with the assistance of prerak or udaseen nimittas cannot generate the deed in the Dravya. If Dravya shakti alone  is believed then from grams wheat could be produced. If without specific paryaya, the Dravya samanya (general) be considered as cause for generation of wheat saplings paryaya etc. by the power of nimittas, then the pudgala grams also would start producing wheat form paryaya being pudgala.

Actually by not paying Samyak attention to the correct meaning of Upadan this argument has been created.

Vrihad Dravya Sangrah (Gatha 8)- This Jiva from  aspect of Anupacharita Asadbhoot Vyavahara naya, is karta of Gyanavarana etc. Dravya karmas, the ‘etc.’ term implying Audayik, Vaikriyik and Aharak form three bodies and pudgala mass form nine karmas suitable for  ahar etc. six paryaptis and from aspect of Upacharita Sadbhoot Vyavahara naya, is karta of external subjects pot-cloth etc.

In the statement that jiva having innumerable Pradesh has to manifest in accordance with the body - here also Samyak arrangement is made by accepting the cause-effect relationships of Upadan-nimitta . Since Upadan form jiva has capability to manifest himself;  hence with the body as nimitta, jiva himself manifests in contraction-expansion form.

Akalank Deva-  In accordance with the destiny the intellect changes accordingly and purushartha also materialises in the same way and the assisting causes (nimitta causes) also are available accordingly.

Counter Question 3: Your interpretation of the word Vyavahara as ‘imaginary’ based upon the statement of Tattvartha Shloka Vartik is baseless with which we are not agreeable. Further we examine this-

Vyavahara and Nishchaya nayas are of both kinds, word form and knowledge form. Out of them the expositor words of Vyavahara form meaning conveying  Nishchaya form meaning are Vyavahara naya. The expositor words of Nishchaya form meaning conveying  Vyavahara form meaning are Nishchaya naya. In the same way the informant  words of Vyavahara form meaning conveying Nishchaya form meaning are Vyavahara naya and informant words of Nishchaya form conveying Vyavahara form meaning are Nishchaya naya. First two should be known as divisions of speech form naya while other two should be known as divisions of gyan naya.

In reality since the subject is that of cause-effect bhava, the meaning of Nishchaya words should be sensed as Upadana-Upadeya bhava while that of Vyavahara words should be sensed as Nimitta-Naimittik bhava. Thus the meaning of shloka of Tattvartha Shloka Vartik would be as follows-

‘The arrangement of Utpad-vyaya-dhrovya of all dravyas from aspect of Nishchaya naya i.e. Upadan-Upadeya bhava is Visrasa (natural). From aspect of Vyavahara naya i.e. Nimitta-Naimittik bhava only, these Utpad etc. appear to be having a cause. ‘

You have attempted to prove the meaning of Vyavahara as Upachar thereby establishing nimitta-naimittik bhava  as imaginary in spite of lack of Praman, while the meaning of term Vyavahara by us is Praman verified nimitta-naimittik bhava which is real only. In view of Acharya Vidyanand, the nimitta-naimittik bhava is not imaginary but real.

In the substance, by nature, different predefined Upadan capabilities are present simultaneously. However when the nimitta of assisting material favourable to the Upadan capability is available then based upon the support of Nimitta material only, the substance would manifest in accordance with the Upadan capability present within itself.

In the mud the Upadan capabilities of making various pots, pans etc. are present. The potter based upon his desire and efforts capabilities with the nimitta of wheel, stick etc. manufactures the pot or the pan.

We ask you that if you have faith in your Siddhant regarding the generation of deed then being detached of the sankalpa, vikalpa and purushartha pertaining to deed and its source  materials, are you willing to sit quietly with inactivity ?

It is clear that just as Upadan-Upadeya bhava is real , in the same way nimitta-naimittik bhava is also real. It is not Upacharita or imaginary.

Ashta Sahasri- The means of pot destruction – hammer converts the existing substance to non-existent form  hence how can it be called as irrelevant ?

With this statement the irrelevancy of nimitta cause gets refuted.

5.3. Answer – The rival group says that substance has capability to perform deed and it would remain existent, but the substance would carry out the deed only when external causes are favourable. In the previous answer we had told the meaning of vyavahara as asadbhoot vyavahara appliable to the gatha of Vrihad Dravya Sangrah but they reject it saying that we call it imaginary.  

(1) Vyavahara naya and its subject

The rival group has not given any Agam praman for verification of the characteristics of Vyavahara naya and Nishchaya naya as defined by them. We now view it from the viewpoint of Acharyas-

Alaap Paddhati- Implying dharma famous elsewhere  upon another situation is Asadbhoot Vyavahara. The meaning of Asadbhoot Vyavahara itself is Upachar. After Upachar also if Upachar is carried out then it is called as Upacharita Asadbhoot Vyavahara. The differentiation of Guna-Guni, Paryaya-Paryayi, Swabhava and Swabhavavan, Karak -Karakvan is Sadbhoot Vyavahara. Upachar of Dravya in Dravya, Upachar of paryaya in paryaya, Upachar of Guna in guna, Upachar of paryaya in Guna, Upachar of Dravya in paryaya, Upachar of guna in paryaya, Upachar of Dravya in paryaya, upachar of guna in paryaya, in this way nine types of meanings of asadbhoot vyavahara should be known.

The pot of ghee is example of Asadbhoot Vyavahara.

The one which establishes the Nishchaya, that only is named as Vyavahara. In spite of being Upacharita it is accepted in Agam.

Here the substance in which the nimitta vyavahara is carried out, that is not the real cause  for the specific deed carried out by  other Dravya. Even so, it surely has external pervasiveness in the form of time closeness with the Upadan cause of the deed. For this reason, the causal dharma residing in Upadan gets established by the same and in this external substance also nimitta i.e. causal dharma is implied in Upachar sense. This is the meaning of Upacharita Asadbhoot Vyavahara.

It should be noted that Jiva and karmas have nimitta-naimittik relationship form synthetic relationship since long. Hence in the karma bondage accrued with the nimitta of raga-dwesha manifestations of the jiva, there the upachar of carrying out  karta dharma of the form of performing the karmas due to  the manifestations of the jiva is primary. Hence jiva carried out karmas, such a statement would be Anupacharita Asadbhoot Vyavahara.

The conclusion is that where synthetic relationship is not existing, there the attribution of karta etc. dharma of one substance upon the second substance is named as Upachrita Asadbhoot Vyavahara. Where synthetic relationship is with nimitta-naimittik bhava , there the allegation of karta etc. dharma of one substance upon another substance is Anupacharita asadbhoot vyavahara.

Vrihad Dravya Sangrah- Devoid of spirit of Shuddha Atma Tattva which is free of activities of mind, speech, body, this jiva from aspect of anupacharita asadbhoot vyavahara is karta of gyanavarana etc. Dravya karmas wherein the ‘etc.’ term implies three bodies of Audarik, Vaikriyik and Aharak and pudgala mass form nokarmas suitable for ahar etc. six paryaptis while from aspect of upacharita asadbhoot vyavahara naya he is karta of external subjects pots and pans etc.

(2) Samyak Nishchaya Naya and its subject

The way every substance is permanent by nature, in the same way it has nature of utpad-Vyaya also. The entity from aspect of general nature is neither generated nor destroyed from aspect of continuity dharma. Here the generation-destruction should be known from aspect of paryaya only. Hence sovereignty of any substance is Utpad etc. three forms.

Now the point to be considered is whether that generation-destruction is self created or others created or created by both? Creation by others is not possible since both do not have common existence. In spite of having different existence, by carrying out deed of the form of manifestation in another substance, it results in contradiction- By accepting deed in other’s existence different from own, the two cannot have different existences. Therefore Acharyas have not accepted one Dravya or its guna dharma as real karta of another Dravya or its guna dharma. Under such conditions the utpad-vyaya of another Dravya cannot be created by both also. Therefore in reality every deed is self created only. This should be the Nishchaya. By this the real reason and karta etc. dharmas from aspect of each individual deeds also get established.

Sarvartha Siiddhi 1/1- The one who sees, the means by which seen or viewing alone is Darshan. The one who knows, the means by which known or knowing alone is Gyan. The one who conducts, the means by which conduct is practiced or conducting alone is Charitra.

In this way same is karta and the same is the means. This is statement from aspect of differentiation of the own manifestation and the one who manifests, just as fire burns the fuel by means of burning manifestation.

PravachanSar (Gatha 16)- In this way this soul attaining own nature is Omniscient, being himself   worshipped by all the kings of all the Loks is therefore Swayambhoo- thus has been told by Jinendra.

Here himself term denotes all the six predicates in Nishchaya form. Therefore soul does not have predicate form relationship with others definitely, due to which searching for the materials for attainment of Shuddha soul nature, the restless jivas become dependent.

In this way manifesting by himself in undifferentiated six predicates form  this soul,  in the proposal for generation of keval gyan with  Paramatma nature, does not expect presence of different predicates hence is Swayambhoo.

This also establishes that where this jiva has expectation of others in  vikalpa form, there the generation of ragas etc. form vibhava paryaya takes place.

Continued…..