GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCHADHYAYI …02

                                                 

The Essence of Shloka 15-22

The dharma which indicates the continuity of the nature of a substance is called Satta (existence). It is pervasive within different substances by its nature of Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya hence it is NanaRoopa ( several forms ). There is no substance which is not existence form hence it exists in all substances. Being of the nature of Utpad,  Vyaya, Dhrovya it is TrilakshanAtmika ( three characteristics form). It is seen in all substances in concordance form hence it is one and being base for infinite paryayas it is infinite paryaya form. Although the nature of sovereignty is as described above even then it is acquired by considering only the harmonious  form. In considering exclusion form the situation becomes reversed . For this reason only it is called as opposite natured also. The implication is that the substance is neither Samanya form nor Vishesha form but is dual form. It is established by differential consideration. The naya sides is analogous to differential consideration. By it the Samanya Vishesh form dual  natured substance gets established. Since the substance is not just Samanya form nor just Vishesh form alone. That is why where the Satta has been called as existent in all substances NanaRoopa , in the same way it is called as being existent in one substance ekaRoopa.

Every Sovereignty is samanya-vishesh form and without any differentiation observing any dravya in existence form alone is MahaSatta and observing differential form as having guna, paryaya, Utpad, Vyaya, Dhruva etc. is Avantar Satta. The beauty is this that when it is observed in existence form then it appears  completely existence form only. When it is observed in Jiva form then it appeared in Jiva form totally. This only is called as two nayas or relationship. Pradesh are same and nature is same. Thing is one only but it appears to be having two forms. Observing  from one aspect is prime and not observing other aspect is secondary or insignificant.

Indivisible one existence is called as Samanya and other than this all differential form consideration is Vishesh. For example consideration of Jiva is Vishesh. The Manushya paryaya form ( Atma not body) having innumerable Pradesh, infinite qualities is all Vishesh existence. Even in one Pradesh or of the six angles of a Pradesh , one  angle, one avibhag praticcheda, paryaya of one samaya etc. all are Vishesh differentiation. Pradesh of all are same. Nature of all is same. But there is difference with respect to each other. For clarifying this specifically the Acharyas have explained Samanya- Vishesh from aspects of Dravya, Kshetra, Kaal, Bhava. It indicates that in indivisible sovereignty , how far the concept of differentiation is possible. Just as in every dravya the Samanya Vishesh is as follows- In Jiva the existence is Samanya and existence of jiva is Vishesh from aspect of Dravya. From aspect of kshetra Desh is Samanya and innumerable Pradesh are Vishesh. From aspect of kaal, paryaya is samanya and manushya paryaya is Vishesh from aspect of kaal. Guna is Samanya from aspect of bhava while Gyan guna is Vishesha from aspect of bhava. Another thing which should be kept in mind- In dravya what was called as existence, in kshetra which was called as Desh, in kaal which was called as paryaya, in bhava which was called as guna, they all imply the same indivisible Samanya existence. All four words mean existence and in vishesh the thing is same, Pradesh is same, nature is same but the Drishti for observing them are different.

Note- In this way the thing is established as indivisible Samanya Vishesh form. Now the Vistaar-kram (width)  of the substance is described.

Description of the spread (width) of the dravya

Doubt

23. Shloka – Thing is one. It is beginningless. It is infinite and Nirvikalpa (indivisible). In such a thing what is the purpose of dividing due to which you say that existence is having  different aspects  and divisions. ( In shloka 8 it was told that substance is eternal Nirvikalpa one. Then why is it being divided? Without divisions there cannot be sides. If divisions are  there then the declaration of it being Nirvikalpa indivisible is false. If it is indivisible then divisions are false?)

Bhavartha – Here the question is that when the substance is indivisible dravya, then opposition of Samanya as Vishesh, opposition of one as many, Opposition of utpad, vyaya, dhrovya as single one characteristics, opposition of infinite paryaya as one paryaya etc. several things are there which establish the divisions of dravya. Hence what is the reason by which draavya should have divisions of samanya, vishesh, ek, anek, utpad, vyaya, dhrovya etc.

Solution

24-26 Shloka – Although the dravya is indivisible Desh form and it is large also , even then it is imagined to have division of parts. Just as in the width of the Akash one can divide in parts of one inch, one foot, one yard etc, in the same way the indivisible Desh form can have divisions in the width in the form of first, second etc. innumerable Pradesh and upto infinite Pradesh form divisions can be there. The divisions of dravya which cannot be divided further, they should be understood to be dravya paryayas of that dravya. ( The imagination of Pradesh in width of dravya are known as Dravya paryaya). The imagination of segments in dravya only is the form of paryayas.

Bhavartha- The divisions are of two kinds.  One is like two parts of a wood piece which are distinct divisions. The second is imagination of ten yards in an indivisible Dhoti. The Dhoti did not get divided into ten pieces but without telling ten yards one does not realise the length of the Dhoti. Hence the division of ten yards has been carried out in the indivisible Dhoti. It does not violate the declaration of indivisible Dhoti.

In the same way the substance is Nirvikalpa (indivisible) only as per declaration but to realise the indivisibility it is properly divided. Just as Akash is indivisible Trikaal substance but in the world it is divided into one inch, one foot, one yard etc. segments . In the same way our Tattva is indivisible but to understand properly, it is divided.

Now in the indivisible thing the divisions are carried out in two ways. Just as in Dhoti  the divisions of width are 45 inches and in the length it is ten yards. Then the Dhoti is known properly. In the same way the divisions from aspect of width are carried out in Pradesh e.g. one Pradesh, innumerable Pradesh, infinite Pradesh. The other division in the substance is from aspect of length which is carried out from aspect of manifestation. By understanding these two types of divisions  properly the Nirvikalpa ( indivisible) eternal substance can be realised.

Now the description from aspect of Pradesh (width) is carried out in shloka 25-37 and from aspect of manifestation (length) is carried out in 38-63. However in spite of description of divisions, you should grasp the indivisible substance. The division has not been made for getting lost in them but to highlight the indivisible. The divisions imply raga-bandh-vyayahara-world while indivisible is veetragta, mokshamarg Nishchaya. To experience the indivisible thing only the wise ones have described the divisions and not for getting lost in divisions. The divisions are in vyavahara sense only. In Nishchaya the thing is indivisible. Although from aspect of Praman the substance is divisible-indivisible , even then  the subject of Moksha Marg is indivisible experience only. The subject of Samyaktva is indivisible only. The description is also from aspect of indivisible only.

Even then the disciple was not satisfied. He again enquires that when the division is imaginary then what is the purpose of it?

Doubt

27. Shloka – (As per you declaration in shloka 8) What is the harm in viewing the dravya as one indivisible nirviklapa form without imagination of divisions of Pradesh?

Solution 28-30

28 Shloka- If Desh is not accepted then definitely the existence  of dravya cannot be known and by not accepting divisions of Desh, all dravyas would be having just one Pradesh.

Bhavartha- By accepting Desh one gets knowledge of dravya and by accepting the divisions of Desh the size of dravya gets known. Depending upon the number of divisions the dravya is considered to be that big. If the parts of Desh are not considered in width then all dravyas would be identical. Without having divisions of parts, all would be having one Pradesh only.

29. Shloka – It is not right to accept the thing to be non existent (absent) form since there is no Praman which establishes it to be absence form. In the same way ( by not accepting divisions of thing ) by accepting thing to be having one Pradesh, the greatness of Akash cannot be realised. It would become one Pradesh only.

Bhavartha – When divisions of a thing are imagined then it establishes that depending upon the number of divisions the thing is that big. If the divisions are less, then it is that small. Akash has largest divisions compared to all substances hence it is greatest. If the imagination of divisions is abolished then there would not be distinction of small-big.

30 Shloka- Another benefit of imagination of divisions is that it enables inference of Kayatva (body form) and Akayatva( non body form) of the dravya. For example- soul and kaal. In the same way the small and big can be inferred just as Soul and Akash.

Bhavartha- The Dravyas which have many Pradesh are considered to be Astikaya and those which have just one Pradesh are not  considered to be Astikaya. The knowledge of one and many Pradesh is gained when the Pradesh of Dravya are separately considered. Without such consideration one does not know the more or lessness of Pradesh and without such knowledge one does not know which dravya is small and which is big. Hence the imagination of divisions is meaningful.

Doubt

31. Shloka – The doubt monger says that let the concept of indivisible parts within the dravya be there but consider each indivisible part to one dravya each. Just as one paramanu is one dravya, in the same way depending upon the indivisible parts of a dravya, they should be treated as that many dravyas, instead of one dravya having so many parts. The characteristics of dravya are present in each of the part.

Bhavartha – The collection  of gunas is called dravya and this characteristics of dravya is present in each of the part of  dravya. Hence each part should be considered to be one dravya.

Solution 32-37

32. Shloka – This doubt is not valid. Since there is a lot of difference between the manifestation of quality of substance being segmented of one Desha form and unsegmented several Desha form, this is obviously seen.

Bhavartha – If each part of Desha is considered to be dravya then dravya would be in segmented one desha forms. It would not remain indivisible several Pradesh form. The flaw in such consideration is described below-

33. Shloka – By accepting  this concept i.e. by accepting the dravya of the form of one Pradesh segmented form , the manifestation of Gunas would be in one segment only instead of the entire substance. (Since the doubt monger believes one segment only to be dravya . Hence its manifestation would be limited to that segment only.)

34. Shloka – The manifestation of Gunas occur in one Desha alone – such concept is directly hindered. Where the Praman is not hinderance free- such logic cannot be right. By sensory knowledge it is established that with touch in one Desh of body the entire body of all Deshas get goose-bumped.

Bhavartha – The Atma Dravya is equivalent to the size of body.  Hence with the touch in one Desha of body entire body gets goose-bumped, or with injury to one Desha of body the entire body experiences the pain. If in accordance with doubt monger, each segment of soul be considered to be one Atma Dravya each then with injury to one  Desha the entire body should not have experienced pain. Only the Desha where the injury is received should have been painful but instead of it, the entire body experiences the pain. Hence the substance is not one Desha divisible form but indivisible several Pradesh form.

35. Shloka- By accepting the other side i.e. by accepting dravya to be indivisible several Pradesh form, the manifestation of quality would be in entire Desha of substance . This is visibly acceptable since by shaking the cane at one end, it starts shaking in entire length.

Bhavartha – The example of cane is coarse. Although cane is mass of several paramanus still from coarse aspect it is considered to be single dravya. In  such context only this example is quoted. The cane is integral substance hence with shaking of one Pradesh all the Pradesh get shaken. If every Pradesh of cane is believed to be different dravya then the Pradesh where it is shaken only should get shaken, but not all Desh. But it is not directly seen so. Hence the substance is indivisible mass of several segments of Desh.

36. Shloka – Although this establishes the substance having indivisible several Desh, even then all substances are not so. Some Dravyas have one Pradesh also and they are indivisible. For example Shuddha Paramanu of Pudgala and Kalanu both are self established Dravya having single Pradesh. They are not single Pradesh due to division.

37. Shloka – From this it can be known that anywhere by dividing several Pradesh single segment form dravya cannot be there, since everywhere ‘ this is also same dravya’ with such consideration the dravya is established to be indivisible having several Pradesh.

Note- The indivisible body of dravya is called Desh and imaginary segments of it are called Pradesh. Some places Desh and Pradesh are interchanged , this should be kept in mind to avoid mistake.

Essesnce of Shloka 23-37

From the above two things get established-

(1)  Either Dravya is indivisible having  several Pradesh.

(2)  Or it is indivisible having one Desha

 

(1)  The Dravya is indivisible having several Pradesh for the reason that upon manifestation of quality in any part of dravya, its effect is seen in entire dravya.

(2)  The dravya is indivisible having single Desha for the reason that just as two-Anu etc. skandhs can be divided, in the same way the Anu cannot be divided.

 

(1)  There are four dravyas which are indivisible having several Pradesh- Jiva, Dharma, Adharma, Akash.

(2)  Dravya having indivisible single Desha are two- Pudgala-Anu and Kaala-Anu.

Note – Skandh is called as having several Pradesh in Upachar sense. In Shuddha Adesh the Upachar is not accepted.

Description of the Vertical spread ( Length) of Dravya 38-63

38. Shloka- The Pradesh which are described above they have qualities also. Those Pradesh along with qualities are called as Dravya. The Vishesh which are existing within those Pradesh are named as Guna.

Bhavartha – Dravya is mass of infinite gunas. Hence each of the Pradesh of dravya have a part of infinite gunas. Those Pradesh with all the gunas are called as Dravya. Gunas are called as Vishesh.

39. Shloka- The conjunction of those Gunas only is the Desh (indivisible dravya). Those gunas do not have separate existence different from Desh. It cannot be said that in Desh the Guna(Vishesh) reside, but in conjunction of those Visheshas ( Gunas) it is called as Desh.

Bhavartha – The followers of Naiyayik faith believe the existence of gunas as different from that of dravya. They call dravya as the support for the gunas but Jain Siddhant does not believe so. They accept the gathering of gunas only to be Desh and do not accept existence of dravya different from that of Gunas. It is not so that Dravya is support and Gunas are supported within the dravya. But the mass of gunas constitute the dravya.

40. Shloka- Guna and Guni are indifferent. In this context there is example of thread. The thread is not different from white etc. qualities nor  can it be said that in thread the white etc. qualities reside. But the accumulation of white etc. Qualities has resulted in the thread.

Bhavartha- The gathering of white etc. qualities is called as thread. Just as thread and whiteness are indifferent , in the same way the dravya and gunas are indifferent. Just as thread is not different from whiteness etc. , in the same way the dravya is not different from gunas etc.  

Doubt

41. Shloka – If Desh be considered as different and the visheshas supported by the Desh be considered as different, then the gathering of all together can be called as Dravya. Just as the man is different and stick is different. The conjunction of both  can be called as Dandi. Then what is the harm?

Solution 42-45

42. Shloka- Such doubt is not correct. By accepting Desh as different and Gunas as Desh dependent different , it results in flaw of sarva sankar (complete mixing). It can be shown by the example as follows- If gunas are treated as different then whether in conjunction of consciousness quality the insentient substance can become sentient jiva?

Bhavartha – If gunas are accepted as different from dravya then the gunas can independently join with any substance. If consciousness guna is not considered as guna of jiva and it is believed to be independent then just as it resides in jiva, it can reside in ajiva substance also. In that case the ajiva can also be called as jiva. Then there   would be no order in the substances. Any substance can take any form. Hence accepting gunas as totally different from dravya is completely false.

43. Shloka – Another thing is that without gunas the existence of the Pradesh of dravya cannot be known and without the Pradesh the gunas cannot be known  either.

Bhavartha  - The collection of gunas is only Pradesh. Without collection the owner of collection cannot be there and without owner of collection the collection cannot exist. Both cannot live without one another. In other words both are one and the same.

44. Shloka – If obstinately without any reason the guna and guni are believed to have different existences then in that both would have equivalent existences . In such a case how can one be called as Guna and other as Guni?

Bhavartha – The collection of gunas is called as dravya (Guni) but if guna and guni are considered to be different then both would be equal. In such a case who shall be called as Guna and whom as Guni. There would not be a difference between Guna and Guni.

45. Shloka- From the above it establishes that Vishesh of Desh only are called as Guna . Guna do not reside in Gunas. These Guna are continuously manifesting but they are indestructible.

Doubt

46. Shloka- Guna and Guni are both same since they do not have different existences. With the reason of having same existence the guna and guni are established to be one , then what is the cause that in spite of being indivisible mass the dravya appears to be having Dwait nature?

Solution 47-63

47. Shloka – Any substance is stationary within its nature ( gunas form) and that nature also is indifferent from the substance. Only from aspect of implication it is considered as different.

Bhavartha- Although nature and owner of nature, both are indifferent, even then in narration the nature and its owner are considered different. In reality there is no difference.

48. Shloka – Shakti, Lakshya, Vishesh, Dharma, Roopa, Guna, Swabhava, Prakriti, Sheel, Akriti- all these words mean the same Guna.

49. Shloka- Any shakti of Desh does not become another Shakti form. In this way upon consideration of each shakti sequentially, all infinite shaktis appear different clearly.

Bhavartha- In the Dravya there are infinite shaktis. They are different from each other. One shakti never becomes other shakti form.

50. Shloka – Just as mango fruit has touch, taste, smell and colour all four together. All these Gunas are known by four different senses hence they are several.

Bhavartha – The touch of the mango fruit is detected by sparsh-sense. The taste is known by Rasana-sense. The smell is known by nose. The colour is known by eyes. Being subject of different senses, all four gunas are different. In this way the deeds of all gunas are also different. Hence the gunas are all different.

51. Shloka – All the gunas are different . Another example- in Jiva dravya the guna by the name “darshan” cannot be gyan, nor can it be sukh, or charitra or any other guna form. The darshan guna shall always remain darshan form.

52. Shloka- In this way any guna cannot become another guna form. Hence the infinite shaktis of dravya having differentness with each other are illuminating self with different deeds.

53. Shloka- In each  of these shaktis, every shakti has infinite indivisible units. With differential knowledge of being less or more, those units are known.

54. Shloka- There is simple example of white cloth. Some cloth is less white and another is more white and some other is even more white. These are all differences of whiteness. In this way the less and more -ness can be of different types. Therefore whiteness quality has infinite units which can be imagined. ( Actually whiteness is paryaya. In the example it is accepted as Guna form)

55. Shloka – The other example of gyan guna of jiva is clear. The gyan guna of jiva is although one and indivisible, even then it appears several form by differences of units.

Bhavartha- The Minimum knowledge is that of sookshma nigodiya labdhi-aparyaptak jiva which is equal to infinitesimal fraction of an Akshar(letter). In this gyan also there are infinite units (avibhag praticcheda) and the later states of that Nigodiya has gradual increase of knowledge. The two sensed and three sensed paryayas have more increase of knowledge. Sequentially the knowledge of jiva becomes so large that it can know all the paryayas of entire world of every samaya at the same time clearly. One can think that in one gyan guna what is the extent to increase which takes place with respect to minimum state. This sequential increase establishes that gyan guna has several parts which appear to be less and more form. In the same way each guna has infinite units which are called as Avibhag Praticcheda.

56. Shloka- Just as Desh has divisions, in the same way the gunas do not have divisions. The divisions of Desh occur in width dimension since Desh is  thick substance. Guna is not so and nor does it have divisions in that manner, but it occurs in less or more form.

Bhavartha- The divisions of Desh occur in different Pradesh form but the divisions of Guna remain pervasive in all the Pradesh and occur in magnitude (less or more) form.

Three shlokas 57-58-59

57. Shloka- The preachment of the division sequence is as follows. The Guna nature is sequential form which should be divided till there is no residue. The half part should be again divided till there is no residue.

58. Shloka- In this way continuously it should be divided by two till it cannot be divided any further and an indivisible part is remaining.

59. Shloka- The sum of all the factors of the gunas is infinite. The collection of factors is called Guna. The factors of guna do not have different existence from the guna. But the collection of factors is called existence form Guna.

60.  Shloka- Ansh, paryaya, bhag, haar, Vidh, Prakar, Bhed, Ccheda, Bhang they all mean same ‘paryaya’.

61. Shloka- All the factors of Guna are called guna paryaya . This is not contradictory since the paryayas are factor form only.

62.Shloka- Many wise people call Guna Paryaya by another name. Guna and Artha have the same meaning hence Guna-Paryaya are also called as Arth Paryaya.

63. Shloka- The Dravya Paryayas which have been described above in the form of parts of Desh, those Dravya Paryayas are named as Vyanjan Paryaya by the wise ones.

Note- From 38 shloka onwards the Guna and its manifestation has been described i.e. the  Length of Dravya was narrated. The width of Dravya was described in 25-37. In this way the indivisible dravya narrated in shloka no 8 was described.

Continued…

GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCHADHYAYI---01

 

Preface

As the name indicates that it was intended to be written as Granthraj i.e. the king amongst the Granths having five Adhyaya (chapters). Unfortunately it remained incomplete and even the divisions of chapters was not indicated in the written portion. It is surmised that the portion so far available is equal to one and a half adhyaya only. From this one can imagine the type of granth which was conceived by the author to create. Amongst the Adhyatma granths it is one of the foremost and quoted most extensively. Being incomplete granth, even the name of the author is not known. Based on the writing style it was  inferred to be written  by Acharya Amrit Chandra. However lately it is believed to be written by Pande Rajmalji around 400 years back.

The available granth has two parts. The first one deals with Dravya and other describes Samyaktva. In the first book the description of Dravya-Guna-Paryaya has been carried out in detail in 768 shlokas. This chapter also deals with Praman-Naya-Nikshepa extensively. In the second chapter the form of Jiva, Samyaktva and its eight Angs (parts) and eight karmas etc. in 1141 shlokas which is particularly useful for knowing the characteristics of jiva.

This Granth has been adorned with Teeka written by three authors . In 1918 Pandit Makkhanlalji , in 1932 by Pandit Devakinandanji and in 1996 by Pandit Sarananam ji.

This book is divided into two Khands. The first one has three volumes and the second Khand has four volumes and thus the volumes have been numbered sequentially from one to seven. The contents of these volumes is described here-

First Khand – First Volume -  Description of Substance  (1-260 )

                        Second Volume - Narration of the Anekant state of substance (261-502)

                         Third Volume - Naya Praman Nikshep Description (503-768)

Second Khand – Fourth Volume - Description of Vishesh Substance  (769-1142)

                              Fifth Volume- Description of Samyak Darshan (1143-1588)

                              Sixth Volume- Savikalpa Nirvikalpa Samyaktva (1589-1706)

                              Seventh Volume - Description of 53 Bhavas of Soul ( 1707-1909)

FIRST KHAND /FIRST VOLUME

Inclusive of Adhyatma Chandrika Commentary

1.     Description of Substance ( Upto Shloka 260)

Invocation (Deva)

1.Shloka  – Which is divided into Five Chapters, authoring such Granthraj in accordance with my Kshayopasham Shakti, I offer obeisance to Bhagwan shri Mahaveer whose words were cause for realisation of substances.

Bhavartha – Just as even a person having eye-sight cannot view the substances without illumination, in the same way although all the Jiva etc. things are established eternally on their own, even then their real nature cannot be realised by the ignorant people blinded by the darkness of Moha without assistance of sermon of Jina. Hence the author says that the divine words of Bhagwan shri Mahaveer Swami have been the real cause for realisation of nature of substances. Hence I offer obeisance to him . With this the author has hinted of the attainment of Deshana Labdhi also since without the preachment of Gyani Guru the real realisation of substances cannot be attained. Such is the procedure for offering thanksgiving towards nimitta. In reality the nature of things is such that the moment the Jiva has the capability of real attainment of knowledge, at the same  time the preachment of real Gyani Guru also occurs due to own reasons as a rule. ( Agyanis only believe Agyani to be  Guru). 

This Granth is no ordinary Granth but is a king of sorts amongst the shastras of Dravyanuyoga, hence the author has named it as Granthraj himself.

Invocation (Deva Guru)

2.Shloka  -  Further I offer obeisance to 23 Tirthankaras and Infinite Siddhas also. I also pay respect to Dharmacharya, Dharma Teacher, Dharma Sadhu – these three types of Munishwaras.

Invocation (shastra)

3.Shloka  – Let the flawless Jain Agam remain existent which is eternal and completely venerable which  mercilessly burns the bewitched enemies (having other faiths) like fire ( in other words it completely refutes the false tattvas believed by them).

Bhavartha-  The Agam preached by Jinendra Bhagwan is without any beginning or an end from aspects of tradition. Being sermonised by omniscient Veetrag  Deva  - without any contradictions between earlier and later, without being refuted by Pramans of direct and indirect types and without leaving any scope for doubts etc. form flaws, it is flawless. Describing the  means for attainment of Shuddha Atma Tattva by the narration of Tattvas, it is worthy of veneration by all Jivas -specially Gyanis. Further it refutes the false paths and contrary natures of substances.

Praman – In the invocation the author has followed the original author and commentator of Shri Pravachansar.

Commitment

4.Shloka  – Thus offering the reverence form Invocation towards five Parameshthis the author now indicates commitment towards authoring the PanchDhyayi named desired shastra.

Reason for authoring the Granth

5.Shloka  – Although in authoring this Granth the internal cause is the purified manifestation of the poet, even then the reason for the reason is the great intelligence beneficial to all ( i.e. the great kshayopasham of gyan)

Bhavartha – The subduedness of passions in Charitra Guna and the vikalpa of authoring the Granth due to purified manifestation of poet are the prime cause towards authoring the Granth. The reason for the same is the great kshayopasham of gyan of the poet due to which all Jivas may get benefitted by the written granth. If the intent towards authoring the Granth is there but particular kshayopasham be not there, then the deed cannot be accomplished. If Kshayopasham be there but intent for authoring the Granth be not there, then also the task cannot be accomplished. Hence both reasons are indicated.

 Reason for authoring the Granth

6.Shloka  – All the jivas are desirous of listening the Lok Dharma in simplified (but sequential) narrative form. This is well known. Hence for this Jiva Lok this sequence would be beneficial for dharma absorption.

 Announcement of subject

7. Shloka - With the availability of Dharmi ( general existent substance) only the dharmas ( specifics of the existent) are considered. This is logically right. Hence firstly the Samanya (general) substance ( undifferentiated substance) should be established and then the specific dharma substance (differentiated jiva-Ajiva etc. substances) should be established. ( Firstly after describing the samanya entity, its specifics would be described e.g. some entity is conscious and some is non conscious. Some is corporeal and some non-corporeal). Some one is conjoined with Bhava shakti and some is conjoined with both bhava and kriya shakti. Some is conjoined with Vibhava shakti and some is not.

Bhavartha – The substance is Samanya- Vishesha ( general-specific) form . Hence in first chapter the Samanya substance i.e. the Dravya alone would be described. In second chapter the Vishesha substance , specific dravya, specific entity, Jiva- Ajiva etc. since the one which is general entity , that alone is specific entity and with the knowledge of both dharmas only the complete entity gets known. This is the logical procedure that firstly the general entity be told and then specific entity be told otherwise the entity cannot be known properly. The samanya entity only is jiva form specific entity or pudgala form specific entity.

Praman- In Shri Panchastikaya the first 26 gatha describe samanya entity and then specific entity. In the same way in shri Pravachansar second chapter the gathas 93-126 describe the samanya entity and then the specific. The same sequence is accepted by the author here and it is taken from there.

End Introduction

First Intermediate Chapter

Description of Dravya ( Undifferentiated view 8-70)

Characteristics of Dravya ( Undifferentiated View- Nishchaya Drishti ) 8-14

8. Shloka – Dravya has characteristics of existence ( Guna-Guni undifferentiated Drishti) or just existence alone. Since it is self established hence it is eternal, independent and Nirvikalpa ( indivisible ). ( In all six dravyas this is the samanya characteristics of Dravya)

Interpretation-  (1) Dravya is called by different names Tattva, Sattva, Satta, Sat,  Samanya, Dharmi, Desh, Samavaya, Samudaya etc. Hence the author may use any of these words in different places.

(2) Observing the Samanya-Vishesh form substance with a view to differentiate – describing it- is Vishesh description i.e. description of dharmas and narrating the same without differentiation, in indivisible form from aspect of existence is description of Dharmi- this is the implication here. Here only Samanya segment is not there but samanya-vishesh form undifferentiated samanya is there which is called as Anubhaya naya, Nishchaya naya or Shuddha Dravyarthika naya. This characteristics is from aspect of this naya only which is not same as that of Praman Drishti.

(3) The meaning of word Nirvikalpa is not raga less but indivisible without differentiation since it is general description of six dravyas. Here the characteristics are those of samanya substance and Atma is not the subject.

(4) Self established implies that the thing is not created by some Ishwara etc. It is self established by own nature.

 (5) The term eternal implies that the entity is not momentary. Neither it is generated or destroyed. It is beginningless and would remain  for infinite period.

(6) The implication of independent is that substance does not survive due to nimitta or other substances and is not related to other substances. By itself it is independent. Eternally it manifests by own capability in own natural(swabhava) or non-natural (vibhava) form. It does not borrow some part of another substance within self nor does it loan it out to others. Eternally it is described as devoid of generation-destruction.  Independence describes its own existence freely and free manifestation.

This Gatha is the mainstay of the first part. Entire Granth i.e. 768 shlokas have explained this substance only by different methods. This sutra should be remembered. It is extremely beneficial for  contemplating upon characteristics or nature of substances.

Next Introduction

Refutation of False Beliefs (9-14)

9. Shloka – If the nature of substance is not accepted as described above i.e. the substance is not accepted to be self established then non-existent substance would be generated without any resistance ( non existent would also be produced). In the same way others would be produced from the substance ( i.e the creation of substance would be by another Ishwara etc. substance ) or it would be Yuta Siddha (combination of two substances) or the existent would be destroyed.

Bhavartha – If the substance is not accepted as self established then generation of non existent should be accepted . If it is not eternal then it should be accepted as established due to others. If it is not independent then the existent would be destroyed. If it is not accepted as indivisible then it should be accepted as Yuta Siddha ( by combination of two substances). In other words if the substance is not accepted as self  established then one of the above would have to be accepted.

Objections  with first aspect

10. Shloka- With generation of non-existent, the dravyas in the lok would be infinite. In the absence of mud also the pot would be generated without hindrance.

Bhavartha- If the non existent is accepted to be generated i.e. the substance which was not there in any form , with the generation of such substance there would not be any control on substances. When without existence itself the new thing is produced then the world would have infinite dravyas. Hence the substance should be accepted as self established only. Other wise without mud the pot would be created.

Objections with second Aspect

11. Shloka – With acceptance of establishment of substance from others it causes great anomaly of irregularity. That is as follows- The thing is established by some other. Then that other would be established by some another substance which again would be established by some another. ( since by accepting existence from other means  every substance is generated by other and that is by another and so on. Then there is no end to this imagination. Wherever  we stop the question would arise that how this was produced. Hence the substance should be accepted to be self established rather than established due to others.)

Bhavartha- Naiyayiks and certain other faiths believe the substance to be established by others. They call Ishwara etc. to be their creator but such belief is absolutely false since who created Ishwara? If Ishwara is self established then everything is self established.

Objections with Third Aspect

12. Shloka – Upon accepting YutaSiddha ( accepting substance to be due to conjunction  of substances just as Dandi  with combination of  stick and person ) the Guna and Guni would be  having different Pradesh and in that case both would be equal. Then this is Guna and this is Guni such differentiation between Guna and Guni would not be possible.

Bhavartha – If the substance is believed to be indivisible mass of infinite qualities then between the guna and guni Pradesh are not different and in such unity only from aspect of relationship the guna and guni have differentiation of characteristics. However when the substance have different Pradesh and qualities have different Pradesh then both would be independent and at that time this is Guna and  this is Guni, such differentiation of characteristics cannot be carried out. Both would be substances with equal rights or both would be qualities. Hence accepting YutaSiddha is not right but accepting Nirvikalpa ( indivisible) substance only is right. Where the Pradesh are different, that is not a single substance. Those who believe Nimitta to do the task in Upadan, believe YutaSiddha only.

Objection with Fourth Aspect

13. Shloka- Or the existent gets destroyed, this aspect is also not acceptable since Gyanis experience the dravya directly as permanent in certain aspect.

Bhavartha – If the existent is accepted to be destructible then soul would get destroyed. Then whose Moksha and what narration of Moksha Marg?

Conclusion

14. Shloka- Hence the person who does not accept the flawed  stands with several anomalies , for him it is appropriate that he accepts the flawless substance with characteristics as described above i.e. believe the substance to be self established, existent form, eternal, independent and Nirvikalpa only.

Summary of Shloka 8-14

Jain dharma has accepted every substance in this world to be existent form, self established and eternal. Every substance remaining stationary in its independent, indivisible, eternal trikaal form, manifests by means of paryayas. As opposed to this the other different faiths in the world have believed the Tattvas to be in different ways. Out of their compilation, the author has described four beliefs and they have been refuted by means of demonstration of flaws. It is the greatness of the intelligence of the author that he has condensed all the worldly faiths or the essence of Nyaya Shastras in 4-5 shlokas itself. The author has not elaborated much because for him it was paramount to author the Adhyatma Granth and the subject of Adhyatma does not have much to do with it. Here the objective is only the Tattva described in shloka no. 8. Our objective is the ‘Asti’ (presence) side and not the ‘Nasti’ (absence) side. The Nasti side has been covered in four verses for refutation and later the entire granth describes the Asti side only.

Note- The thing which has been called as existent form in shloka no. 8, now that is existent samanya-vishesha form indivisible and not just Samanya or Vishesha form alone. This is considered in 15-22.

Description of Samanya-Vishesh nature of Dravya in 15-22

Subject of shloka 8

Shloka 15- The existence which has been described in shloka 8 as the characteristics of substance, that existence is also not absolutely free without control . ( i.e. only Samanya existence without consideration of Vishesha is not there i.e. the Pradesh of Samanya be different and those of Vishesh be different, and leaving the Pradesh of Vishesh behind only Pradesh of Samanya be considered- it is not so.) But they are relative ( i.e. the Samanya is along with Vishesh.) The relation of Samanya is with own Vishesh and not with another substance ( i.e. conscious does not have relation with non-conscious or pot does not have relation with pan.)

Bhavartha- The existence which was described in shloka 8 as the characteristics of Tattva , that is not merely Samanya existence but it is inclusive of its opposite Vishesh existence since the substance is Samnaya-Vishesh form. It has to be kept in mind that here the Samanya existence of one substance is related to its own Vishesh existence only and it has nothing to do with the existence of another substance.

Here the Samanya existence does not imply the Maha-Satta ( common existence) of collection of all the substances of the world and the existence of each substance is not  meant to be Avantar-satta  ( vishesh- existence). By doing so the entire granth meaning would become false. Here the Samanya dharma of an indivisible substance has been called as existence and its Vishesh dharma only has opposition to it.

The same thing is established by the author using doubt clarifications up to shloka 22.

Doubt

16. Shloka – Now someone  (follower of other faith) says that the existence described as characteristics of Tattva in shloka 8 , that existence should be independent, without opposition or control ( i.e. in those Pradesh only Samanya be present and not Vishesh) since it should be independent of Vishesh remaining within its Samanya form.

Bhavartha- The doubt-monger is questioning accepting the Pradesh of Samanya existence as different and Pradesh of Vishesh existence as different in the Samanya-Vishesh form substance that when the Pradesh of both are different then where is the relation between the two ? They  should be independent . Both are existent in their own natures and own Pradesh. As per him the Vishesh is free of Samanya and Samanya is free of Vishesh which become  like horns of donkey. Such a Tattva does not exist. All the substances in the world are Samanya-Vishesh form. The existence which is Samanya that only is Vishesh existence form Jiva. 

Solution

17. Shloka- The Samnaya existence is not independent only, since the existence has a Samanya form and some Vishesh form at the same time. Both are two sides of naya. ( together they are one. The existences appear the same according to the Drishti. The one with Samanya Drishti sees it all as Samanya while with Vishesh Drishti it appears Vishesh only.) From aspect of speaker both are opposite facets. In narration of Samanya the Vishesh is opposite which is ignored in the substance and in the narration of Vishesh the Samanya is opposite which is existent but ignored.)

Bhavartha- Every substance has Samanya-Vishesh form existence hence both dharmas are present together. Both are relative. Depending upon interest of speaker he deals with one side with other remaining in opposition. But it does not imply that they are independent ( with different Pradesh). The substance is Praman form. Both sides are subject of one naya each and naya with relation is Samyak. Naya without relation is false.

Doubt

18. Shloka- Upon this the Mithya Drishti says that let both naya sides be there, it does not do any harm since the existence of substance can be established by anyone.

Bhavartha- The doubt-monger says that you also accept the Samanya and Vishesh existences ,then what is the issue? Our objective would be met by either one of them i.e. instead of accepting the substance as samanya-vishesh form with indivisible Pradesh he wants to accept any one form. Instead of Anekant form he wishes to accept it as Ekant form.

Solution 19-21

19. Shloka- It is not so that the thing can be established by any one since the substance is dravya paryaya dual form or it is subject of Dravyarthika and Paryayarthika  form dual nayas ( It is samanya vishesh form). If one of them is eliminated then the other also gets eliminated, this is the flaw. ( It would become zero).

Bhavartha- You wish to discard one and accept other one which is not possible. The thing is one only. Hence it would become zero and get eliminated.

Note- Refuting the substance without having relations, the form of substance with relations is explained with shloka 20-21-22.

20. Shloka – First Half- Just as the opposite of existence is non-existence, in the same way the opposite of non-existence is existence.

Bhavartha- The moment the MahaSatta is implied in existence form , at the same time the Avantar Satta becomes non existence form and the moment the Avantar Satta is implied in existence form, at that time the Maha satta becomes non existence form. Since out of the Samanya or Vishesh the form which speaker wishes to talk about , that only is implied as existent and other becomes insignificant. Here the non existence does not mean absence but insignificant or inessential.

Second Half- But definitely the opposite of one form is several forms.

Bhavartha – The single form is Avantar Satta and many forms is Maha satta.

21. Shloka – Here the opposite of  existence of all substances (Maha Satta) is one substance existence ( Avantar Satta) and Opposite of Dhrovya-Utpad-Vayaya form Maha Satta is only Dhrovya, only Utpad, only Vyaya form Avantar Satta.

Bhavartha- Existent in all substances does not mean that single existence which is present in all the substances together but its meaning is given by author in shloka 265 later that touching the mass of substances since from aspect of existence all are same. From aspect of Samanya Dharma there is no differentiation in substance and denotes similarity of all and not the single existence of all.

22. Shloka – The opposite of single Satta ( Maha Satta) is several ( Avantar Satta). The infinite paryaya form (Maha Satta) has opposite of single paryaya form (Avantar Satta).

Bhavartha- The adjectives Satta- Asatta are used for both i.e. Maha satta is called Satta also as well as Asatta. In the same way the Avantar Satta is called Satta as well as Asatta But other adjectives are not inter changeable.

Maha Satta is called as Nana Roopa ( SaVishwa Roopa) . Sarva Padartha Sthita, Dhrovya Utpad Vyayatmoika ( trilakshana), Eka, AnanatParyaya .

Avantar Satta is called as Ek Roopa, Ek Padartha Sthita, A Trilakshana, Aneka, Ek Paryaya .

Maha Satta (Samanya) is subject of Dravyarthika naya and Avantar Satta ( Vishesh) is subject of Paryayarthika naya. In the substance from aspect of Shruta Gyan there are two parts which are indicated by two nayas. In reality the substance is Praman form which is the objective of relationship. Hence naya with relation is Samyak while without aspect is false. From Drishtri of non differentiation it is called Samanya and from Drishti of differentiation same is called Vishesh. From aspect of  Praman Drishti the same is differentiation-non differentiation form.

Praman- The shlokas 15-22 are based upon Panchastikaya Gatha 8, 9.

Continued…..

Gyan Goshthi….18 (Concluding part)

 

18. Vividh ( Miscelleneous)

640. Q: By believing the wife-son etc. to be gang of looters, it results in quarrel in the home?

A: By accepting other dravya to be own, internally a big quarrel of Mithyatva results, due to which the dukh of four gati is being suffered. The family people are own with selfish motive, this is a fact. For serving own selfish motives they love – realising this give up internal oneness. This is meant to relinquish the eternal quarrel. People call 15^th August as independence day. Renouncing the humiliation of desiring sukh from others , believing sukh in swabhava only is real independence. Samyak Drishti is dharmatma enjoying that indestructible kingdom of self , he is real king. The king enjoying external kingdom enjoys the restlessness of deriving sukh from others, but not peace of atma.

641. Q: The leprosy disease of shri Vadiraj Muniraj was cured by performing stuti itself, the locks in the jail of Mantungacharya Deva were shattered by performing stuti, the fire also became water form by the pure sheel of Sitaji – such description is there in shastras- what do we understand with this ?

A: With the yog of previous punya the leprosy of Vadiraj Muniraj was cured,  the locks of Mantungacharya got shattered and the fire pond of Sitaji also became water lake, then that fruition of punya was alleged to be due to present Prabhu Bhakti and practice of Bramhacharya etc. – such is the style of narration in Prathamanuyoga which should be understood properly. In Moksha Marg Prakashak it has been specifically clarified, see it from there.

642. Q: Whether the one siding with Dravyanuyoga can be Nishchayabhasi ?

A: Yes, if he attains knowledge of Nishchaya but does not experience and considers himself to be experienced, then he is Nishchayabhasi.

643. Q: What is the duty of Manushya? What is Manav dharma? Please tell. 

A: Brother! First of all ‘I am manushya’ this belief itself is great delusion. Being  Manushya is coincidental paryaya, it is paryaya of dissimilar category with conjunction of jiva-pudgala , not the nature of soul. Hence Manushya paryaya is not mine, I am gyan form soul- understand this, this is the first duty- dharma. After attaining Manushya birth if something is worth doing then it is this only. Against this ‘I am manushya ‘ thus believing what all activities are performed, they are all Vyavahara of Agyani jivas.

644. Q: It appears that money-wealth have great attracting power ?

A: There is no attraction in money-wealth, this is the foolishness of the moha of jiva – madness. Indulging in moha with others, spoiling own rebirths, he goes for travelling in the order of 84.

645. Q: Till infinite period the soul has not been understood, then how can it be understood now?

A: For infinite period it was not understood, it does not mean that it would never be understood. Has the capability to understand has been lost? Just as water remains warm with the nimitta of fire for 100 years, then does it destroy its cold nature? If the vessel with hot water kept on stove falls upon the fire, then also its has extinguishing nature only. In the same way due to converse interests the soul was not understood for infinite period, but if the interest takes a U turn then within moments the soul can be understood and you can  be benefited.

646. Q:  What is the meaning of promiscuity?

A: The corrupted paryaya is not mine- thus believing he practices corruption , although the impurity keeps enhancing , even then he indulges in them  and reading that ‘enjoyments of gyani are nimitta for nirjara’ -he starts believing that with his bhavas of enjoyments also, those bhavas of sensual pleasures are leading to Nirjara- then he is promiscuous. The true Mumukshu does not practice such promiscuity. He considers the corruption of paryaya to be his fault- knows it alright in gyan . Does not remain ignorant about pap. His heart is flooded with compassion and detachment.

647. Q: On one hand the body is called as temple of Bhagwan Atma ; on the other hand it is described as dead body, then what is right?

A: Body is dead body only, this is true; but while telling the glory of Bhagwan Atma, the Deva is also installed in Devalaya in Upachar sense and Deva is glorified.

648.  Q: With the dhyan of dravya paramanu and bhava paramanu Keval Gyan is attained. What does it mean?

A: Dravya Paramanu means atma dravya and bhava paramanu means Shuddha pure paryaya. With the dhyan of atma dravya Shuddha paryaya and Moksha are attained.

649. Q: Whether corporeal has experience?

A: Yes, the corporeal also gets experience. Manifesting in Utpad-Vyaya-Dhruva form only is called as experience of the corporeal.

650. Q: After listening to all the Pravachan it cannot be remembered, what to do for it?

A: If some person has abused you with sharp abuse then  is it  remembered? If that is remembered then why the gunas cannot be remembered? The reality is that he does not have real need for it, hence it gets forgotten; if real need is there then surely it would be remembered.

651. Q: How many diseases of human body are described in shastras?

A: In BhavaPahud Gatha 37 it is told that in the body of this human being, in one angul area there are 96 diseases. ( as per this the entire body would have 56899584 diseases.)

652. Q: You preach more of Samaysar instead of Pravachansar. What is the reason?

A:  In Pravachansar the description is with gyan as primary subject while in Samaysar the objective is to preach Drishti. In Samaysar the objective is to  make one to engage in Drishti upon  dravya relinquishing the Drishti from non-swabhava bhava form corruption which is generated with the aim  of pudgala. With that dravya Drishti only Samyak darshan and Moksha marg is initiated.

653. Q: Why the name of one of the constituents of Darshan Mohaniya is ‘Samyaktva Prakriti’?

A: Since with its fruition samyaktva also occurs, i.e. being coexistent with Samyaktva its name is called ‘Samyaktva Prakriti.’ Its fruition occurs along with Kshayopashamik Samyaktva.

654. Q: From aspect of numbers which is the highest infinity?

A: The avibhag praticcheda of Keval Gyan is the greatest infinity. With respect to the Pradesh of Alokakash etc. form other infinities, it is infinite times- in spite of saying so, its magnitude cannot be conceived. This is some unimaginable capability of soul dravya. Just as with vikalpa its shakti cannot be gauged, in the same way with mathematics also its capability cannot be imagined.

655. Q: The jiva of Bharat Kshetra after death, does he take birth in Videh Kshetra?

A: Yes. If he is MithyaDrishti then he can take birth in Videh. But worshiper person does not take birth in Manushya of Karma Bhoomi ( Videh etc. kshetras) – such is rule. Non believer jiva can take birth anywhere. If some person in Mithyatva state earlier has bonded with Manushya Ayu and later attained Samyaktva (Kshayik) then that worshiper jiva after death would take birth as Manushya but he would be Manushya in Bhog Bhoomi having ayu of innumerable years , and not karma Bhoomi , such is the rule. Videh Kshetra is also Karma Bhoomi. In Bhog Bhoomi there is no gunasthana higher than fourth and its jivas as a rule go to swarga only after death.

656. Q: In the body of Keval Gyani , do the Nigod Jivas exist?

A: No. The body of Keval Gyani is Param Audarik , hence with its recourse the Nigod jivas  do not exist. Although in lok the Nigod jivas are present everywhere including the same kshetra of akash, even then those jivas are not dependent upon  the Param Audarik body for support. The Param Audarik jiva of Kevali, the Aharak sharir of Muni, The Vaikriyik sharir of devas and Narakis, PrithviKaya , Apakaya, VayuKaya and AgniKaya – Nigod jivas do not exist dependent upon these bodies.

657.How can in  one Pradesh of Akash infinite paramanu and Pradesh of infinite jivas stay together ?

A: In one’s nature there is no limit of boundary; the nature is always without boundary and limits. Infinite paramanu stationary within lok, in sookshma form can occupy in one Pradesh of akash. Akash has such unlimited nature of providing accommodation . In one Pradesh of Akash such unlimited capability is there that infinite pudgalas and Pradesh of infinite jivas and dharmastikaya, adharmastikaya and one  Pradesh of kaal can be accommodated together.

The kshetra within which one paramanu can reside, the Pradesh of Akash has that much size. But it has unlimited capability of accommodating infinite . Look! The prime objective of telling all this is to tell the capability of the gyan paryaya of one samaya knowing all this.

The gyan paryaya of one samaya knows infinitely infinite substances along with their past and future paryayas . Oh! When the corporeal form one Pradesh of Akash can give space to infinite particles then what can be told about the capability of the gyayak nature of jiva knowing it. That is limitless, unmeasurable and infinite only. It is astonishing! Oh! This is for our own benefit, not for explaining to others. Understanding the capability of own gyan, absorbing in shraddha, one should immerse in self.

Shrimad raj Chadra ji says that “ the one who understood went within- did not stay to do external things.” Oh! The paryaya which realised the glory of such swabhava, that paryaya can not avoid entering within and meet Bhagwan Atma for sure.

658.  Q : One pudgala paramanu cannot have two divisions since its is extremely small, then how can it have infinite qualities?

A: One paramanu cannot have two divisions; in spite of being so small it has infinite qualities ( like that of jiva). Oh! Upon seeing and knowing such nature of things only omniscient has told this. Soul by itself is omniscient natured. One  paramanu and skandh of its infinite paramanus and maha skandh of such infinite skandhs – all these are known by soul having omniscient nature. True belief in such omniscient soul is required, since without shraddha-gyan being Samyak the entire tapa-tyag is cause for worldly wandering.

659. Q: Does one sookshma paramanu or sookshma skandh manifest in coarse form alone?

A: No. After joining with other coarse skandh only, it can manifest in coarse form. Just as the eternal agyani jiva with the nimitta of gyani only becomes gyani ; in the same way with the nimitta of coarse skandh , other sookshma skandh or paramanu can manifest in coarse form. This is eternal law.

660. Q: Whether one paramanu can be observed by eye or microscope etc.?

A: No. This is not subject of the gyan related to five senses. With awadhigyan the paramanu can be known but outside awadhigyan it cannot be known by some means. Awadhigyan also does not know by eye ; and capability of knowing paramanu is possible to sookshma awadhigyani only. Agyani does not have such awadhigyan. It is a rule that the one who knows singular form param atma , he only can know paramanu.

661.Q:  In your samaysar the subject of adhyatma is very intricate. We are pilgrims, hence please  tell us some simple thing.

A: We observe all as Bhagwan. Inside ever blissful Prabhu trikaali Chaitanya Bhagwan is existent, with recourse to him dharma is attained. Leaving the vikalpa and aim of others, taking recourse to the real natured Bhagwan within self only is suitable deed.

662. Q: At present no keval gyani is seen hence it does not establish keval gyan?

A:  Keval gyan is not unestablished- this is told in Kashya Prabhrit-Jayadhavala book 1, page 44. Since by own direct experience the gyan which is part of kevalgyan, is attained in unobscured manner. In other words the Matigyan etc. are parts of keval gyan and their attainment is by own direct experience to everyone, hence the segments part of keval gyan are explicit and with the segments being explicit the owner (keval gyan) cannot be called as indirect.

663. What is  Anekant and what is Jain Shasan and its arrangement?

A: Illumination  of two mutually opposite shaktis indicating the nature of thing in a substance is Anekant. The thing which is Nitya, same is Anitya ; what is one , is many, - in this way the one which illuminates , that is the secret of Jain Shasan. In other words, the one which described the sovereignty as undifferentiated dravya form is Nishchaya and the one which described the same sovereignty as differentiated  qualities form, that is Vyavahara – this is Anekant. In Anekant it is the speciality that in the substance there are two opposing shaktis. The substance by itself is Nitya and Anitya. This paryaya of gyan has been generated fresh after listening to word, it is not due to word , but on its own. The paryaya of gyan keeps changing into new every time, it is not produced by studies of shastras , but by itself. The illumination of  two opposing capabilities of Nitya and Anitya dharma form by itself is called as Anekant in Jain Sahsan . In one tattva there is absence of second Tattva. The tattva is by itself and not by others- this is Anekant- Jain shasan. The arrangement of the substance is organised by itself – this only is the arrangement of Jain shasan.

664.  Q: Does Keval Gyanavarani obscures the keval gyan of Abhavya jiva?

A: Yes. Even for Abhavya the Keval gyan is there from aspect of shakti i.e. he also has capability of having keval gyan , hence the obscuration due to Keval Gyanavarana is there.

665. Q: Pravachan we have been listening for years. Now please tell a simple path for entering within. The life is short.

A: Atma is gyan swabhava , mass of consciousness, undifferentiated; direct Drishti upon it. By directing Drishti upon differentiation, raga is generated in the ragi jiva, hence giving up the aim of differentiation direct Drishti upon undifferentiated- this is the brief essence.

666. Q: What is the mistake committed by the one who believes raga to be means for sukh?

A: The one who believed raga to be means for sukh, in his belief this was established that where raga is not there, the sukh would also not be there. Without raga the veetrag sukh beyond senses exist- this thing never appeared in his shraddha and where there is no shraddha for sukh beyond senses, there how can means for it also be there? Even one vikalpa of raga, the jiva who considers as means for sukh or gyan , that jiva believes sukh in sensory subjects only and does not believe the swayambhoo sukh nature of soul.

667. Q: All this comes into knowledge, but even then the soul does not get to be known?

A: All this is being known, who is the knower? The sovereignty in which it is being known, its knower does not get to be known – this is the delusion. This body, house, wealth, wife-son etc. are being known, who  does know them? All this is being known, it is being known in the sovereignty of the knower.  The knower is not being known , nor accepted- this delusion only is the cause for wandering in the 84 yonis. The body etc. are different from this knower; the knower remaining within his own sovereignty knows . Once he knows and accepts this knower then the rebirth wandering can be prevented.

669. Q: What is the world of agyani purush and what is the world of scholar with zero atma gyan ?

A: The person who is agyani, i.e he does not know good or bad in real manner, his world is wife,  children etc. But who is  scholar, who has studied the shastras very elaborately and remembers several gathas, shlokas etc., but is zero with atma gyan , his world is shastra.

670. Q: What is Anantanubandhi greed?

A: The real satisfaction is to reveal own swabhava paryaya of Samyak darshan etc. – not believing this the agyani jiva believes satisfaction in coming from  ashubha to Shubha , i.e. satisfied with Shubha raga he gets tied up there. Such jiva has really greed of raga only and the same is called Anantanubandhi greed.

671. In Gyan of Mithya Drishti the dravya swabhava is not felt, then does he have absence of dravya?

A: Mithya Drishti does not feel the dravya, therefore in his gyan the dravya is absence form. To Gyani even the dravya of others is felt , hence the dravya of agyani is seen by gyani as Bhagwan form. But the agyani does not see the dravya , hence in his Drishti the dravya is absence form only.

672.  Q: Does  Agyani jiva have shraddha in Moksha?

A: Agyani does not have shraddha of Moksha , since he does not know the Shuddha gyan form atma ; hence he does not have shraddha of moksha also. Without Shraddha of Moksha, whatever number of shastras he may study  even then benefit of soul cannot be attained – Samyak gyan cannot be attained. The purpose of shastras is to indicate the Shuddha gyan form soul and instigate one to make efforts for Moksha, but those who do not have shraddha of Moksha , to him how can the study of shastras be beneficial? In spite of reading 11 Angs the abhavya remains agyani.

673. Q: With logic and argument this thing is acceptable but why the confidence of entering within is not there?

A: Whatever amount of Purushartha is required for entering within is not realised, hence keeps wandering outside. The interest of entering within is not there therefore the upayoga does not go within.

674.  Q: The swabhava of gyan is to know only, then why does he not know himself?

A: Gyan knows himself; his nature is to know himself; but the Drishti of agyani is upon others, hence he does not know self , the others are given weightage i.e. by giving importance to others, he does not know himself. The weightage is given to others, hence he does not know self. 

                                                                        The End