Seventeen Questions…..28

(2) Clarification of Bandh and Moksha from aspect of Naya

When we consider from aspect of jiva then it is realised that bandh and moksha – both are paryayas of jiva only. From this aspect both paryayas are Sadbhoot- real in Jiva. These only are named as Bhava Sansar and Bhava Moksha. This is statement of Sadbhoot Vyavahara naya.

Asadbhoot Vyavahara naya calls manifestation in gyanavarana etc. form of karamana varganas as bandh and manifestation in non-karma form abandoning the karma paryaya of those gyanavarana etc. karmas as Moksha. Although both of these ( karma paryaya form bandh paryaya of karmana varganas and non-karma form Moksha paryaya of karmas) do not belong to Jiva , these are not produced by Jiva , even then from aspect of Asadbhoot Vyavahara naya they are said to be belonging to Jiva. Jiva only is called as their karta.

The rival group said that ‘ the subject of one naya cannot be the subject of another naya,  otherwise there would not be any organisation  without their difference. The statement of Vyavahara naya cannot be made with Nishchaya naya hence setting aside the agam pramans stating that “this statement is from aspect of Vyavahara naya and not Nishchaya naya” is not in consonance with Agam. ‘

We also say that the subject of Asadbhoot Vyavahara naya cannot be that of Sadbhoot Vyavahara naya. Without their difference, the divisions into both nayas would be a waste. Hence accepting Asadbhoot Vyavahara naya as Upacharita is meaningful and calling it as Sadbhoot is not in agreement with Agam.

The rival group, without taking the names of secondary divisions of Vyavahara naya and mixing the subjects of Sadbhoot Vyavahara naya into Asadbhoot Vyavahara naya has erected the structure of counter questions. But this is not the procedure of analysis of Tattva.

(3) Insistence of Ekant is not proper

The paryaya of soul which is generated with the target  towards others ( getting engaged with raga bhava in others or in contact with others), that belongs to the target only. This is the reason that in Adhyatma Agam Jina deva has called adhyavasana etc. bhavas as Jiva which should be known as statement of unreal form Vyavahara. The question arises that why Jina deva described such unreal Vyavahara. In reply it is told that informing the Vyavahara to provide the knowledge of nimitta for Teerth practice is a different matter and believing it to be real is different matter. If Vyavahara naya is accepted as real then this jiva would not be able to attain salvation from body and ragas etc. bhavas in all three periods of time. Hence Nishchaya and Vyavahara both are real form- such ekant should not be insisted upon.

(4) Why the jiva is Subordinate ? Its complete deliberation

The rival group has written that ‘ karmas have made jiva subordinate to it and due to that he has been enslaved.’- this sentence is feeder of Ekant. They have called it a quote of Acharya Vidya nandi but they did not produce the original quote.

On the same basis they write that’ It is evident that the anger etc. form manifestation of jiva by itself is subordination and not cause for subordination.’ Further it is also their view that the agyan bhava of jiva is cause for subordination.

From these it can be known that the rival group believes only pudgala karma to be cause for subordination of jiva in ekant sense, while Acharya Vidya Nandi says that ‘ the cause for agyan etc. form flaws is the obscuring karmas and subsequent own manifestation of jiva.’

From this it is clear that Acharya Vidya Nandi has accepted not only Gyanavarana etc. karmas as cause for subordination but he has also accepted the raga, dwesha and moha also to be cause for subordination. These ragas etc. form bhavas are themselves subordination form and also are cause for subordination of jiva . It means that gyanavarana etc. karmas are cause for subordination from aspect of vyavahara but not of the form of subordination itself.

In this way there are two reasons for the subordination of jiva – external and internal. Now which one is the prime cause –

Hari Vansh Purana- For each deed the prime cause is Upadan and the different family form reason is assistant.

From the Pramans of Agam it can be known that if this jiva engages  himself in karma (raga-dwesha) and its fruits  then only gyanavarana etc. karmas are named as causal agents for manifestations of agyan etc. form, otherwise not. From this it establishes that the root cause for own subordination is Jiva himself and not gyanavarana etc. karmas. Gyanavarana etc. karmas have been called as cause for subordination by Acharya since by immersing in them jiva produces subjugation within himself by himself. They do not subjugate the jiva themselves. With the nimitta of Jiva manifestations karma vargana form pudgala attain manifestations and at later time with the jiva immersing himself in them , they function as Vyavahara cause for raga-dwesha form subordination of Jiva.

In reality Jiva due to his own  guilt gets subjugated.

When Agam accepts in clear words that one dravya cannot be real karta of another dravya in all three periods of time, in such a state accepting specific paryaya of one dravya as the deed of a different dravya in Vyavahara sense  only, is in consonance with Agam.

Upto 14^th Gunasthana this jiva has remained subjugated; the internal reason for the same is the incapability of the jiva himself. Acharya VidyaNandi has mentioned karmas everywhere as cause for subordination in the nimitta sense so that someone should not accept dravya karma fruition as the prime karta  for the subordination of jiva. While calling dravya karmas as nimitta for subordination he has given allegory of shackles. The shackles do not make someone as subordinate themselves. When  they are wore on account of crime then they are external nimitta in subordination, otherwise not.

It is clear that the root of subordination of jiva is Mithya Darshan, Mithya Gyan and Mithya Charitra only. The word karma is used for Dravya karma and primarily for Bhava karma. In  reality dravya karma is not own task of jiva and carrying out bhava karma is the own task of jiva. Therefore in reality Mithyatva etc. bhava only are accepted as obscurer for Samyaktva.

Samaysar Gatha 161-3- JinaDeva has called Mithyatva as the obscurer for samyaktva. Due to its fruition Jiva is Mithya Drishti. The agyan has been called as obscurer of Gyan. With its fruition jiva is agyani. Kashaya has been called as the obscurer of Charitra. With its fruition the jiva is non-charitra form.

When this jiva manifests in Mithyatva etc. form on account of spirit of raga or oneness with others , then only gyanavarana etc. karmas are vyavahara cause for subordination, otherwise not.

Pravachansar 45- In  spite of the fruition of dravya moha, if with the spirit of shuddhatma bhavna, the jiva does not manifest in bhava moha form , then the bandh does not accrue at that time.

(5) All the Arhat preachments are Praman

The rival group have tried to give a distorted colour to the veetrag discussion by quoting  our comment that ‘Samaysar is Agam Granth dealing primarily with Adhyatma while other granths have been written with primacy of Vyavahara naya’, which is not praiseworthy.  In Panchastikaya 132, Acharya Amritchandra has clarified that in Samaysar the statements are made primarily from aspect of Nishchaya naya while the Vyavahara naya is stated in secondary manner. In other granths Vyavahara naya is primary and Nishchaya naya is secondary.

The rival group has accused us of calling Vyavahara naya as imaginary. This we cannot understand. If we call pot of mud as pot of ghee due to  some reason then is it called imaginary? Even then Nishchaya naya would call it as pot of mud only.

Irrespective of whether they are authored by householder or Munis, all the agam following Veetrag vani is Praman only.

(6) Vyavahara Tapa, Vrita etc. are not real means for Moksha

The rival group says that in Digamber Jain Agam the attainment of Moksha or the Nishchaya form Shuddhatma has been described only by means of Vyavahara dharma. The Shubha form activities of mind, speech and body are considered as means of salvation in traditional sense.

Now if these activities imply as dravya mind, speech form paryaya of bhasha varganas and audarik etc. body activities, then is it not right since all three are manifestations of pudgala dravya. They are neither Shubha nor Ashubha. If the above terms imply three yogas then also it is not right since due to Shubha manifestations only the three yogas are called  Shubha. Hence this term would imply soul manifested in Shubha form only.

Now the question arises that what is the idea behind calling the Shubha vrita etc. as traditional cause for Moksha in Agam? The answer is that if these Vrita etc. were traditional cause for Moksha i.e. means for partial soul purity and in this way if the jiva could attain Moksha by attaining progressive partial purity, then in Agam (Pravachasar) it would not have been written (187)  that ‘ when this soul manifests in Shubha and ashubha form indulging in raga-dwesha then gyanavaraniya etc. karmas get bonded. It would not have been written (181) that ‘ shubha manifestation directed towards others is punya while ashubha manifestations are pap and  the manifestations which are carried out without targeting others are means for destruction of misery.’

This also would not have been told that (160) ‘I am neither body, nor mind nor speech, I am not their cause or karta. I am not getting them done nor approving the activities of karta.’ This would also not have been told that (samaysar 38) ‘ I am one, Shuddha , gyan darshan form, without shape. Even paramanu also is not mine.’

“If this jiva just continues to do bhakti of Deva etc. and practicing Vrita etc. then with generation of partial purity he would attain Moksha traditionally.”-  Has  rival  group  contemplated anytime  that why Agam has given such preachment? If analysed deeply then he would realise that Shubha manifestations are merely cause for bondage and hence they are despicable in Moksha Marga. They cannot be means for real Salvation, they are not even cause for partial purity. Even if this manifestation belongs to Samyak Drishti, it is still cause for bondage; since the category of this manifestation is different from the partial purity form manifestations resulting in Moksha.

Then how Shubha vrita etc. are  called cause for salvation? The answer is given by Acharya Amritchandra in kalash 149, that Gyani in spite of being immersed in karmas does not get tainted by them. Therefore raga-dwesha form Shubha manifestations do not become a hindrance in the progressive enhancement of the soul purity. Therefore these Vrita etc. form vyvahara is called traditional means for Moksha.

(7) Meaning of term “Gyan” in reality

The extraordinary nature of soul is gyan only and in this treatise with gyan only as primary, the dissertation is carried out. Hence ‘Samyak Darshan- Gyan-Charitra-  in these three forms gyan only manifests ‘  saying thus gyan only has been declared as means for Moksha. Gyan in undifferentiated deposition is soul only- In this there is no contradiction. Therefore Acharya has addressed gyan form soul by the term gyan at several places.

Todarmalji-  “ and from aspect of  renouncing the nimitta of other dravya, the vrita, sheel, Sanyam etc. have been called Moksha Marg, but do not accept them as Moksha Marg itself. If the acceptance- renunciation of other dravya is carried out by soul , then only soul would be karta-harta of other dravya.”

Therefore Vrita etc. have been called Moksha Marg for attaining renunciation of nimitta of other dravyas in Vyavahara sense.

In this way gyan only is the means for Moksha.

(8) Predestined deed is carried out at predestined time only

The rival group giving reference of Pariksha Mukh have written that ‘ Just as there is no defined time for knowing the pot and pan etc. by bringing attention towards them, in the same way by engrossing within self, there is no defined time for knowing self  since there is no defined time for accomplishing all the deeds. Only external-internal capable materials are the regulator of the deed.’

The answer is that in the external-internal materials the predestined time is also included. Hence it establishes that at predestined time only the predestined materials are acquired and with them as nimitta the predestined deed gets carried out. No one waits for anyone. At their own time, the predestined materials are acquired. At the predestined time of other materials (non desired), it cannot be acquired since that is the own time for acquisition of other materials.

Therefore predestined purushartha should be accepted along with predestined internal-external materials at the predestined time for accomplishment of predestined deed.  

(9) Implication  of association-dissociation with specific support in reality

The rival group has written that “ The specialists of Karananuyoga know that in 7^th due to absence of Pratyakhyana Kashaya fruition, compared to the 5^th gunasthana of shravak the Muni of 7^th has infinite times more purity of manifestations . Therefore the highest purity of shravak gets assimilated within the purity of 7^th gunasthana .”

In our sentence the renunciation of support of supremely purified manifestations of shravak has been mentioned. The jiva who attains 7^th from 5^th, he as a rule has Sakar Upayoga ( Upayoga with shape) , therefore abandoning the recourse to purely  manifested soul  of 5^th , he takes recourse to pure manifestations of soul of 7^th gunasthana – this is the implication of the above statement.

The rival group says that the purity is not abandoned but keeps enhancing in every gunasthana. If we take a look at the principle of Utpad-Vyaya ( generation-destruction) then it would be realised that with destruction of previous paryaya only the new paryaya gets generated. The previous paryaya does not get absorbed in the next paryaya.

Continued…..