GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCH DHYAYI …..07

 

First Intermediate Chapter

Asti-Nasti pair  264-308

Asti- Nasti from aspect of dravya (264-269)

264. Shloka- One is called Maha Satta and other is called Avantar Satta. In this way the satta (existence) has two divisions, even so these two satta do not have separate Pradesh and there is no difference in nature. ( Only there is difference in Drishti.)

Bhavartha- Here the intent is not that the collective satta of all the substances of the world are called Maha Satta and the individual satta of each substance is called Avantar Satta. With such meaning the interpretation of entire granth would become erroneous. Here the bhava is that every substance of world is Samanya-Vishesh form. The Samanya form is called Maha Satta and Vishesh form is called Avantar Satta. The Pradesh of both are the same. The same dravya from aspect of dravya Drishti appears in Samanya form and the same substance from aspect of Paryaya Drishti appears to be Vishesh form. It is not like a tree where leaves are different, fruits are different, in that way the Mahasatta is different in dravya and Avantar satta is different. In undifferentiated view the same is Maha Satta and with differentiated view the same is Avantar satta form. The existence which  is Samanya , the same is Vishesh Jiva. For example keep a Shuddha jiva in front of Drishti.  So long as without knowing it to be jiva, it is observed as indivisible existence form, till then the name of jiva is maha satta or samanya only since the existence dharma ignoring all the Vishesh dharmas is displaying it as only substance form. When the Drishti is changed to that ‘ it is jiva’ then the substance instead of remaining Maha satta form became Avantar Satta form. In this neither its Pradesh changed nor its nature. The thing is as it is. Thus observing it from aspect of indivisible existence is Maha Satta and the same from aspects of dravya, guna, paryaya, utpad, vyaya etc. in divided form is Avantar Satta. The prime is Asti and secondary is nasti. This only is Asti-Nasti from aspect of dravya.

265. Shloka- The existence which touches the collection of all the substances  is called as Maha Satta. It accepts Samanya and from its aspect the substance is existence form alone ( i.e. Maha Satta form).

Bhavartha- The Astitva (existence) guna of each substance is different . The same Astitva guna is also called by existence since with that only the Satta of the substance survives. That existence Guna is same from Samanya aspect in all substances. Being same it is called as one also as Maha Satta. In reality Maha Satta is not any one substance. Only due to similarity it is named as One.

266. Shloka- Avantar satta of each are different. For example dravya, guna, paryaya, utpad, vyaya, dhrovya etc. are all different. They are family of existence known as Avantar Satta.

Bhavartha- Existence pervasive in all is called Maha Satta. Comparatively what stays in smaller place is called  Avantar Satta. In Samanya Aspect the Maha Satta is existent in all substances hence there is no difference between substances and all can be called as one. But Avantar Satta differentiates between the substances. For example with respect to Maha Satta the dravya, guna, paryaya all are existent form but from aspect of Avantar Satta they are different.  With respect to Avantar satta the existences of dravya, guna, paryaya are different. Even in dravya that of watch, table, chair are different. Past, present, future are different. Thus Avantar Satta has several divisions.

267. Shloka- From aspect of Dravya ‘Syat Asti’ and ‘Syat Nasti’ means that when the substance is present in some aspect with respect to Maha Satta, the same time from aspect of  Avantar satta in some respect it is absent. From aspect of Avantar Satta only there is absence in the substance. In reality it is not absence form.

Bhavartha- When substance is seen from aspect of Dravyarthika naya, then total substance appears  to be existence form. At that time the Avantar Satta form substance is not visible. It implies absence. It does not mean that the existence of Avantar Satta is destroyed from the substance. [Praman – commentary of Pravachasar Gatha 97,98]

268. Shloka- In the same way the moment the substance is decided from aspect of Avantar Satta , at that moment it is present from its aspect but is absent in some aspect with respect to opposing Maha Satta.

Bhavartha- In reality the substance is as it is. Nothing adds and nothing subtracts. Only description style changes. When substance is observed from Drishti of Maha Satta then it is seen as existence form. At that time it cannot be called any Vishesh dravya, guna, paryaya forms. In the same way when the substance is seen from aspect of Avantar Satta then that dravya, paryaya etc. vishesh forms are  existent but Samanya existence form is not there. In this way in the substance the Astitva and Nastitva are established from certain aspects. The Nastitva in the substance is only from aspect of Drishti, in reality the substance is not absence form.

269. Shloka- The example of Astitva in some aspect and Nastitva in some aspect is clear. Just as cloth is there from aspect of dravya cloth but the same cloth is not there from aspect of non description of white etc. gunas.

Bhavartha- The agglomeration of white etc. gunas is called cloth. When cloth is primarily described then its qualities are ignored and when white etc. qualities are primary, then cloth is ignored. From aspect of speech the thing has arrangement of primary and secondary. By this arrangement only the substance has Astitva in some aspect and Nastitva in some aspect. This only is Syadvad. So long as the Drishti was upon cloth then that existence form cloth is Maha Satta form. When it is considered to be silk cloth or white cloth then it is Avantar satta form.

Asti- Nasti from aspect of Kshetra ( 270-273)

270. Shloka- The Kshetra of substance is also described in two ways. One is Samanya , other is Vishesh. The Desha (agglomeration of Pradesh) alone is called as Samanya kshetra and its divisions are called as Vishesh Kshetra.

Bhavartha- So long as the Drishti is upon the Desha of dravya, till then it is Maha Satta form Samanya Kshetra since there is no differences between the Desha. When the Drishti is directed upon the innumerable Pradesh or ek Desha or Desha of Jiva or Desha of pudgala then it becomes Avantar satta from aspect of Kshetra. Observing in Desha form is Maha Satta and observing in any divisive form adjective is Avantar Satta. The Drishti of observation is primary and other is secondary. Primary is called Asti and secondary is called Nasti. This is Asti-Nasti from aspect of Kshetra.

271. Shloka- When the substance is described from aspect of Desha in Desha form , at that time it is Desha form with respect to own kshetra but without consideration of divisions of Desha, it is not from aspect of divisions.

Bhavartha- When Jiva is viewed in Desha form then he is seen in Desha form but not in innumerable Pradesh form. Kaal also when observed in Desha form is seen in Desha form but not in one Pradesh form.

272. Shloka- Or when the substance is described from aspect of divisions of Desha , at that time it is there from aspect of the divisions but since Desha is not considered, then it is not from aspect of Desha.

Bhavartha- From this aspect Jiva would be seen having innumerable Pradesh but not Desha form. Kaal also would be seen as single Pradesh form but not Desha form.

273. Shloka- Example for Kshetra is cloth form Desha. From aspect of white etc. threads collection and different divisions it is Asti-Nasti form in certain respects. When a specific aspect is being desired to tell then that being Prime is Asti form and other being undesired are ignored and are Nasti form. In this way the Astitva and Nastitva from aspect of Kshetra should be understood.

Bhavartha- So long as Drishti is upon the Desha of cloth, then it is Maha Satta from aspect of Desha and when its divisions of 10 or 1 meter is described, it is Avantar satta. The Prime is Asti and secondary is Nasti .

Asti-Nasti from aspect of Kaal (274-278)

274. Shloka- Kaal means manifestation or the nature of substance is manifestation.  Kaal also is of two types Samanya and Vishesh.

Bhavartha- So long as Drishti is upon the kaal (paryaya) of dravya, till then Maha Satta form Samanya Kaal is there since kaal is not different from kaal. When the Drishti is directed upon the kaal (paryaya) of Jiva or kaal of pudgala or present kaal or past kaal or kaal of samaya alone, then it is Avantar satta with respect to kaal. Observing the kaal is Mahasatta and observing any division of kaal form is Avantar satta. The one which is seen is primary  and other secondary which are Asti Nasti respectively from aspect of kaal.

275. Shloka- Samanya is Vidhi (natural)  form while Vishesh is Pratishedha ( non natural) . Out of the two with any one being implied  form and other being unimplied form the Astitva and Nastitva are encountered.

Bhavartha- The equivalent words for Maha Satta are Samanya, Vidhi, Shuddha , unattached while that of Avantar satta are vishesh, Pratishedh, ashuddha, attached etc. The Bhava of shloka is that Kaal is Samanya as well as Vishesh. With both being primary secondary they are asti-nasti form. The kaal which is samanya is the Jiva kaal vishesh.

276. Shloka- Manifestation without divisions- without considerations of divisions is called Vidhi e.g. the manifestation of existence. In existence samanya there is no imagination of divisions but its samanya manifestation is there, For the same existence imagination of  manifestations of different divisions is called as Pratishedh e.g. Manifestation of jiva dravya, manifestation of guna, paryaya.

Bhavartha- From aspect of samanya manifestation there is no divisions in the substance in any way. However from aspect of Vishesh manifestation the same undivided substance becomes several divisions form. The divisions in the substance only are Pratishedh form.

277. Shloka- The example of asti-nasti together with Samanya and Vishesh kaal is as follows- When the consideration of manifestation of existence samanya is carried out without differentiations in the substance; at that time that Samanya form is present with respect to swa-kaal but without consideration of divisions it is not existent with respect to Vishesh form - other-kaal. For example when Jiva is observed from manifestation aspect then he is existent with respect to manifestation but not with respect to jiva manifestation. In the same way when seen from aspect of Jiva manifestation , it is there with respect to jiva manifestation but not with respect to manifestation alone.

278. Shloka – For example the samanya manifestation of cloth form is swa-kaal of cloth from aspect of kaal samanya. Hence with respect to them it is present, however the same cloth with respect to other kaal in the form of Vishesh manifestation of threads and whiteness, it is not there.

Bhavartha- The Drishti of manifestation of indivisible cloth is Maha satta and Drishti of manifestations of its divisions is Avantar Satta. Just as manifestation of Dhoti , white etc. Prime is asti and secondary is Nasti.

Asti- Nasti from aspect of Bhava ( 279-283)

279. Shloka- The term bhava implies manifestation. The form of Tattva only is its bhava. Or the group of shaktis is called bhava. Or with bhava the essence of substance gets known.

280. Shloka- The bhava is also having two divisions i.e. Samanya form and Vishesha form. The one which is under consideration becomes primary known as swa-bhava while the undesired becomes secondary called as par-bhava.

Bhavartha- So long as Drishti is upon bhava (guna) of some dravya, till then that is Maha Satta form Samanya Bhava since bhava is not different. When the Drishti is upon Jiva bhava ( guna of jiva) or gyan bhava or touch bhava or infinite bhava or one bhava then it means Avantar Satta with respect to bhava. Observing from aspect of Bhava is Maha Satta while observing the bhava with respect to some adjective  or differences is Avantar Satta. The form which is observed is primary and remaining is secondary. Primary is called Asti and secondary is called Nasti. This is Asti-Nasti from aspect of Bhava. Whether it be called as bhava or existence, both words mean the indivisible existence only and Pradesh are same in both cases. Nature is also same. For example observing jiva in bhava form is Maha Satta and observing Jiva Bhava form is Avantar Satta.

281. Shloka- Of the two bhavas, the Samanya Bhava is Vidhi form which is Shuddha without any aspect considerations. Vishesh bhava is Pratishedh form with divisions and has aspect consideration.

282. Shloka- Out of the Samanya and Vishesh Bhavas of the substance, the bhava which is under consideration, that only is believed to be swa-bhava of substance and with respect to that swa-bhava only the substance gets existence. But the bhava which is not considered, that is called as Par-bhava. When Samanya is under consideration , at that time par-bhava is not under consideration hence that substance is believed to be absent. Hence with respect to Par-bhava the substance gets Nastitva (absence). The Astitva and Naastitva both gets applied in a substance at same time.

283. Shloka- Bhava of cloth, essence of cloth, attainment of nature of cloth, these three things have same meaning. The bhava of cloth is with respect to own nature and not with respect to pot etc. bhavas which are not under consideration. Other than the intended bhava all  other bhavas are undesired.

284. Shloka- So long as there is no consideration of divisions in the existence , till then it is called existence samanya. When its gets divided in forms of dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava then it is called as existence Vishesh.

Bhavartha- So long there is no sense of divisions in substance till then it is pure from aspect of Dravyarthika naya. In that state it does not have any aspect consideration. However when from aspect of Paryayarthika naya the divisions are considered then the substance becomes mutually relative and in that state it is Pratishedh also. The one which remains always contiguous form is called Vidhi and the one which stays in Vyatirek ( different) form is called Pratishedh. The substance in samanya state only can remain in Anvaya form continuously but in division considerations it adopts Vyatirek form. Hence Existence Samanya is called as Vidhi and existence Vishesh is called as Pratishedh. In Vishesh state of substance only Pratishedh is considered.

Bhavartha- Again Acharya has described Asti-Nasti from aspects of dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhava in different forms , now all four are gathered together and told that so long as the substance is indivisible existence  and there is no consideration of division, till then it is called as Samanya or Maha Satta. When there is any consideration of divisions, it is Vishesh . Indivisible existence is Samanya and Jiva existence, innumerable Pradesh, Gyan etc. infinite qualities, siddha paryaya, deva form Utpad, Manushya form Vyaya, all are Vishesh or Avantar Satta. The primary is Asti and secondary is Nasti.

285. Shloka- Hence this thing is established without doubt that when complete substance is described in Samanya form then at that time they are Samanya form for sure but due to lack of consideration of remaining Vishesh they are absent also. Just as in Samanya  Jiva  is present in existence form but not as Jiva form.

286. Shloka- Or when complete substance is described in Vishesh form then they are Vishesh for sure but due to lack of Samanya consideration they are absent in Samanya Drishti. Just as in Vishesh jiva is there in Jiva form but not in existence form.

Remaining Vidhi

 Now Praman Drishti is described-  The one which is Samanya form that only is Vishesh form. In other words the substance is differentiated-undifferentiated form. It is joint form. This is Praman Drishti. This Drishti establishes the opposing dharmas without opposition, with friendly bhava, with mutual aspects in a substance at the same time. Just as the substance which is existence samanya , that substance only is existence vishesh ‘jiva’.

Now Anubhaya Drishti is described- The substance is by nature – Asti , and not of other form – Nasti, it is joint form- is Praman . These three Drishti have been described above but there is one more Drishti called Anubhaya Drishti ( neither Drishti). It is somewhat difficult to understand. Whether Pradesh of Samanya and those of Vishesh are different – No , can we take Samanya form and give Vishesh form  to someone- No. This only is Anubhaya Drishti. Anubhaya means neither of the two forms, but indivisible. This Drishti tells that Samanya and Vishesh such division itself is not existent. Neither Samanya is there nor Vishesh is there, this is indivisible, impenetrable. It has to be borne in mind that this Drishti cannot be expressed in words. Whatever we speak would become adjective form , division form. This is described as Avaktavya (indescribable), Anubhaya ( neither), Shuddha Dravyarthika Drishti etc. Here the term Shuddha means indivisible. Its subject is only experienced.

287.  Shloka- The sequence described above for Asti-Nasti etc. should be applied to all tat-atat, nitya-anitya, ek-anek pairs also. In every pair it should applied from aspects of dravya, kshetra, kaal and bhava. The one which is considered in respects of compatibility and incompatibility, that is primary and the other is secondary.

Bhavartha- Just as asti-nasti etc. are applied on samanya-vishesh of a dravya, in the same way the remaining three pairs would also be applicable to Samanya-vishesh. Just as the one applying asti-nasti on two different dravyas is ignorant , in the same way the one applying remaining three pairs on two different dravyas is ignorant and not Syadvadi.  Further just as with primary-secondary of asti-nasti the entire dravya appears as asti or nasti or joint or neither form , in the same way with remaining pairs also the entire dravya appears in primary dharma form. The one which is considered, it would appear in that form. Just as dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava are applied on asti-nasti etc. in the same way they would be applied upon remaining three pairs with aspects of dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava in primary-secondary sense.

288. Shloka- As per this procedure remaining five bhangs ( combinations) should be applied to the substance. Syat-asti and Syat-Nasti . These two have been told earlier. Remaining five bhang (combination) terms should be evolved from these two bhangs.

Bhavartha- Asti-Nasti two bhangs are told above. Remaining five bhavas  Asti-nasti, Avaktavya (indescribable), Asti Avaktavya, Nasti Avaktavya, Asti-Nasti Avaktavya should be derived. Just with  two  letters the word is created, in the same way Asti-nasti two are told. Now with their combination five more bhangs exist which as as follows- (1) where samanya or vishesh is primary that is Swa, Asti from aspect of swa (self) is first Asti Bhang (2) Where Samanya or Vishesh are secondary that is called Par (other). Nasti from aspect of Par  is the second Nasti Bhang. (3) when Samanya and Vishesh both are sequentially described then third is Asti-Nasti Bhang. Just as substance is there from aspect of Swa (samanya) and not there from aspect of Par (vishesh). (4) When both Bhangs are applied at the same time since the substance is both forms at the same time. This is Avaktavya (indescribable) naya. (5-6-7) Remaining three Bhangs  are generated with their combinations. Just  as the seven Bhangs are applied on Asti-nasti, in the same way they would be applied on tat-atat, nitya-anitya,  ek-anek pairs also. This is the procedural sutra and applicable everywhere.

Note- So far the Asti-Nasti pair was described. Now it is explained that both dharmas are Samyak with right aspect and without relation they are false. Some wise ones apply it on two different dravyas which should not be done.

(1)  Refutation  of asti-nasi without aspects 289-308

(2)  Support of asti-Nasti with aspect 289-308

Doubt 289-290

289. Shloka- Out of asti-nasti only one needs to be stated  since that would suffice, why unnecessary trouble? With both it becomes complex and more number of words make it difficult to absorb.

290. Shloka- Therefore for establishment of Tattva either ’asti’ should be told or only ‘nasti’ should be told. Absorbing both separately is not logical.

Answer 291-292

291. Shloka- The above doubt is not valid. Since the complete substance comprises of both ‘asti-nasti’ bhavas. If any one bhava is eliminated then the other bhava would also get eliminated.

292. Shloka- By not accepting any one of “asti-nasti” the remaining second also gets eliminated. If thing is believed to be only ‘asti’ form then it would always be anvaya (connection) form and would not be Vyatirek ( separateness) form. Without accepting Vyatirek the anvaya can also not be accepted.

Bhavartha- The thing which shows the sameness of bhava is called Anvaya bhava. The thing which shows difference in state is Vyatirek Bhava. The nature of thing is completed with both together. Hence both are relative. If any one is not accepted then other also cannot remain. Then the existence of thing also cannot be there. Hence both asti-nasti form anvaya and vyatirek should be accepted.

Continued….

GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCH DHYAYI …06

 

Summary

217. Shloka- The summary of the above is that from sense of differentiation the Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya all three appear as parts of existent. If the differentiation sense is removed from roots then all three get merged in existent substance.

Bhavartha- From aspect of differentiated Paryayarthika naya the same existent is Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya form and from aspect of undifferentiated Dravyarthika naya the same existent appears as existence alone. 

Doubt

218. Shloka – Let the Utpad and Vyaya be part forms but how can dhrovya which is permanent, remain in part form?

Answer 219-225

219. Shloka- The above doubt is not valid since all the three parts are themselves existence form. In reality they are not parts of existence. Just as different substances are different , they are not many in different forms. But existence itself is every part form.

Bhavartha- Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya all three are not parts of existence like flower, fruit, leaves of tree but existence itself is Utpad etc. form.

220. Shloka- In this context the example is as follows- If existence is target of Utpad then manifesting in Utpad form it is only Utpad form.

221. Shloka- Or if, existence is target of Vyaya, then  manifesting in Vyaya form that existence would only be Vyaya form for sure.

222. Shloka- If existence is target of Dhrovya manifesting in dhrovya form, then like Utpad, Vyaya the existence is only dhovya form.

Bhavartha- In the three shlokas above it has been negated that Utpad, Vyaya, Dhrovya is different from existence or they are parts of existence separately. It has been told that all three are existence form and all three occur together. Whichever is the objective of discussion, the existence is that form only. Existence is by itself Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya form.

223. Shloka- For example  mud is dravya. The moment mud is observed in pot form, at that moment it is only pot form and when it is observed in block form it is merely a block of mud.

224. Shloka – If the mud is made with an objective of mud only then it is merely mud form . In this way the same existent (dravya) has three parts of Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya.

225. Shloka- It is not so that some part of existent (dravya) has generation and some part has destruction  and another part remains dhrovya. In a tree some part has fruits, another part has flowers and another part has leaves. Just as in tree the fruit, flower and leaves are separate, in the same way the existent does not have utpad, vyaya and dhrovya. In reality existent only is utpad form, existent only is vyaya form and existent only is dhrovya form.

Doubt

226. Shloka- Whether the Utpad etc. belong to three different parts ? Or do they belong to same owner? Or these are different parts of existent? Or they are different non existent form parts?

Answer 227-228

227. Shloka- The above doubt is not valid. In Jain Darshan as a rule Anekant is strong and not absolute ekant. If the above questions are raised from aspect of Anekant then all statements are acceptable. From any aspect anything can be said without contradiction. However if discarding Anekant, the questions are raised in Ekant form then surely they are contradictory to each other. Hence all these statements are non contradictory in view of Anekant and without it they are contradictory.

Bhavartha – Jain darshan is Praman Naya form. When a substance is described from aspect of naya then it is valid. If it is done without consideration of aspect then it becomes invalid. It does not mean that  Jain darshan is not decisive and is doubt form. The reason is that a substance has several dharmas and by describing in one dharma form alone distorts its form. For example take a book. The book is bhava form as well as abhava (absence)  form. From aspect of own nature it is bhava form and from  aspect of others nature it is abhava form. That’s why book is called book and not ink, pen, table, chair etc. Hence there is no contradiction in describing its nature using Anekant. It answers the question that how can bhava and abhava stay together in same substance?

228.  Shloka- Only parts do not have Utpad, Vyaya, Dhrovya nor do these three belong to owner. But the owner has parts of the form of Utpad, Vyaya all three.

Doubt

229. Shloka- A substance may have generation and destruction both; but the same substance being Dhrovya also is just statement and directly contradictory. How can the same substance have Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya all three?

Answer 230-231

230 Shloka- The statement of the questioner can be valid when Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya may have time difference or if existent only is getting destroyed and existent is getting generated. Then the three can be contradictory.

231. Shloka- But such a thing does not happen due to any reason, at any time, in any way that Utpad occurs at different time, Vyaya occurs at different time and dhrovya may be at different time. Thus to establish the time difference of these three neither a Praman exists nor any example.

Doubt

232-233. Shloka- Doubt is raised that Utpad occurs at its own time since being generated is its characteristics. The Vyaya occurs at its own time since destruction alone is its characteristics. In the same way Dhrovya also occurs at its own time since being Dhruva is its nature. Just as seed, sprout amd tree are different characteristics at different times, in the same way the Utpad, Vyaya, Dhrovya have different characteristics and different times. Is this acceptable?

Bhavartha- Having different characteristics, do the three have different times ?

Answer 234-247

234. Shloka- On account of different characteristics it is not right to believe them at different times since there is no time difference between Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya. All three occur at the same time. This is established by logic and example below-

235 Shloka- Seed is existent at the time of its paryaya and seed cannot be said to be absent from seed paryaya. Hence vyaya of seed paryaya is not there but at the time of generation of sprout paryaya the seed paryaya can be said to be having vyaya.

236. Shloka- The time of seed paryaya cannot be called to be the time of sprout generation. At the time of seed paryaya there is absence of Utpad of sprout paryaya. Hence the sprout paryaya would be at its own time and not at any other time.

237. Shloka- Or if seed and sprout both are called as tree in general then neither the tree was produced not destroyed . Only seed paryaya was destroyed and sprout paryaya was born.

238. Shloka- Thus with power of logic it is established that Utpad, vyaya, Dhrovya have same time. The generation of tree in sprout form is the time of destruction of in seed form and the tree-ness is same in both states.  

Bhavartha- the summary of the three shlokas above is as follows- The time of seed paryaya is not the time of its Vyaya since both presence and absence cannot be both at the same time. However the time of generation of sprout is same as that of destruction of seed paryaya. It is not so that in  between seed paryaaya and sprout generation, the seed paryaya may be getting destroyed. By such belief the dravya would be devoid of paryaya since seed has been destroyed and sprout has not been generated yet. At that time which paryaya would be present? None. Surely then dravya would be free of paryaya. In the absence of paryaya the dravya cannot stay automatically. Hence the time the sprout is generated, at that time only seed gets destroyed. In other words, the destruction of seed paryaya only is the generation of sprout paryaya. It does not mean that generation and destruction have the same meaning. If both have same meaning then it can be said that the one getting destroyed, the same is  getting generated but it is not so. Destruction is that of seed and generation is that of sprout. However the fructified paryaya of destruction and generation is same. It is not so that the time of seed paryaya is same as that of sprout paryaya. In such a case the existence of two paryayas would need to be accepted at same time which is contrary to Praman. Hence at the time of seed paryaya the sprout paryaya does not get generated, but the time of destruction of seed paryaya is same as the time of sprout generation. In seed destruction and sprout generation, both states the tree-ness is present. The moment tree is destroyed from seed paryaya form, same moment it is generated in sprout paryaya form. The tree is present in both states. Hence this establishes well that Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya all three are at the same time and are not different.

Just as a Manushya died and became Deva. Now the time of destruction of manushya Paryaya and generation of Deva paryaya is same. In  generation destruction at that time Dhruva jiva has neither utpad nor Vyaya but is Dhruva only.

239. Shloka- The time of sprout generation is same as seed destruction and both of these are of the form of tree. Hence the time of seed destruction and sprout generation is same as that of Dhrovya of tree.

240. Shloka- It establishes this point flawlessly that the substance has Utpad etc. all three at the same time. They occur from aspect of Paryaya of substance and not of substance without paryaya.

241. Shloka- The moment the Utpad etc. three are believed to be that of substance without aspect of paryaya , the same moment all three would be contradictory and the times also may be different.

242. Shloka- Or the contradiction would occur that the moment there is Utpad of one paryaya, the same has Vyaya and same has Utpad also.

243. Shloka- In reality it is thus that the existent gets destroyed from aspect of same paryaya and with respect to some other paryaya the Utpad takes place and some other paryaya remains Dhrovya.

244. Shloka-  The example of tree is clear. Just as tree is generated in existent form from sprout by itself, gets destroyed from seed form and remains tree form in both as Dhruva.

245. Shloka- It is not so that the tree gets destroyed from seed form and with same seed form it gets generated and the same seed remains Dhruva since this is directly contradictory.

246. Shloka- The soul ( in Jiva) is existent in both Utpad and Vyaya. There is no two  different independent substances other than existence.

247. Shloka- From aspect of paryayarthika naya Utpad , Vyaya and Dhrovya all are there. From aspect of Dravyarthika naya neither Utpad, nor Vyaya, nor Dhrovya is there.

Doubt

248. Shloka- Either accept existent Utpad form substance or non existent Vyaya form substance or Dhrovya form substance. How do you accept all three forms?

Bhavartha- Earlier it has been established that Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya belong to one existent at one samaya from aspect of Paryayarthika naya. The questioner askes that when it is at one samaya only then telling single existence is adequate. What is the purpose of telling all three?

Answer 249-260

249. Shloka- The above question is invalid since Utpad, Vyaya, Dhrovya as a rule are together since without one the other two also cannot exist.

250. Shloka- Or,  without any two, any one cannot exist. Hence it is essential for proper establishment of substance that Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya be together.

251. Shloka- All the three are mutually dependent (on each other). The same is clarified that without Utpad the Vyaya cannot occur since the abhava  of any paryaya necessarily occurs with bhava only.

252. Shloka- Utpad cannot occur without Vyaya since it it can be felt that bhava taking new birth is adorned with abhava.

Bhavartha- With destruction of any paryaya only new paryaya can be generated. The substance remains the same in all states. Hence it is essential that with destruction of previous state only the new state may exist.

253. Shloka- Or, without dhrovya, Utpad and Vyaya both cannot exist since only with existence of substance with its support Utpad and Vyaya ( Bhava and abhava) can exist.

254. Shloka- Or without Utpad and Vyaya both, dhrovya also cannot exist surely since in the absence of Vishesh the samanya existence also is absent.

Bhavartha-The substance is samanya vishesh form. Vishesh cannot be there without samanya and without Vishesh the Samanya also cannot exist. Utpad, Vyaya are Vishesh and Dhrovya is Samanya. Hence without Utpad, Vyaya, Vishesh the Dhrovya Samanya cannot be there. In the same way without Dhrovya Samanya , Utpad Vyaya Vishesh cannot be there.

255. Shloka- In this way the arrangement of Utpad, Vyaya, Dhrovya should be established in substance. No other way their arrangement can be there since by not accepting any the remaining also get negated.

Bhavartha- The above described arrangement only is suitable and with acceptance of all three together only it can be workable. By not accepting any one or two of the three the remaining two or one also cannot be valid.

256. Shloka- The above is clarified that the one who accepts only one Utpad only, in his existence the non existent would also be generated or due to lack of reason the Utpad itself would not take place.

257. Shloka- The one who accepts only Vyaya independent of Utpad side, for him the existent would surely get destroyed without residue or without cause his accepted form also would not get destroyed.

258. Shloka- In the same way those who accept only dhrovya side independent of utpad vyaya , in his belief the dravya would remain non manifesting and due to dravya being non manifesting, it cannot have dhrovya also.

259. Shloka- The one who accepts only Utpad and Vyaya to be Praman form independent of Dhrovya, in his principle everything would become transitory. Or in the absence of existent neither Vyaya is possible nor Utpad is possible.

260. Shloka- People desirous of Astikya (faith in Paramatma) and fearful of the above described flaws should in reality accept the togetherness of Utpad etc. all three.

Bhavartha- All three are relative to each other , this is established without flaw.

Note- In the Maha Adhikar describing form of substance the fifth intermediate chapter describing Utpad Vyaya Dhrovya  is completed and the first Maha Adhikar describing substance also got concluded.

GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCHADHYAYI

FIRST KHAND / SECOND VOLUME

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

Resolution

261. Shloka – The dravya which is guna paryaya form, that only accompanied with utpad, Vyaya, Dhrovya is existent. This is the characteristics of dravya from aspect of Praman ( since the substance is Praman form i.e. Anekant by nature). Now for purification of Anekant gyan the Anekant form state of substance is described.

Anekant form state of Substance

262. Shloka- Syat Asti, Syat Nasti, Syat Nitya, Syat Anitya, Syat Ek, Syat Anek, Syat Tat, Syat Atat in this way with these four pairs the substance is woven. ( The substance is entwined with these dharmas).

Clarification of same

263. Shloka- The same is elaborated. The one which is there from certain aspect is not there from another aspect. In the same way the one which is Nitya from  certain aspect is Anitya from another aspect. That which is one from certain aspect is Anek in another aspect. That which  is same in some aspect is not same in some other aspect. In this way these four pairs exist from aspects of dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava.  

Explanation – The substance which from Samanya nature of dravya, kshetra, kaal, Bhava is Asti form, the same substance at the same time in Vishesh nature is Nasti form with respect to dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhava. Or it can also be said this way – the substance which in Vishesh form is asti with respect to dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhava , the same thing in samanya nature is nasti with respect to dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhava. At the same time the thing from samanya nature of dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhava is Nitya and the same thing from vishesh nature of dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhava is Anitya form also. At the same time the same substance from Samanya aspects of dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhava is ek form and the same substance at same time from Vishesh aspects of dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhava is anek form. At the same time same substance from samanya aspects of dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhava is Tat form and the same substance at the same time from vishesh aspects of dravya, kshetra, kaal bhava is Atat form. In this way the same substance at the same time appears to be entwined with above described four pairs. Therefore the substance itself is Anekant form i.e. several dharma form. Other than Jain dharma all other dharmas have accepted the substance to be specific dharma form in absolutely ekant manner. For example the Samkhya say that substance is Nitya only while Bauddha call it Anitya only. Such faiths are called as followers of Ekant. Jain dharma follows Anekant. The substance is Anekant form and Syadvad i.e. from some aspect it is so – this is the method of describing the  substance. By this the ekant is avoided and Anekant is supported.

There is another Drishti which says that a dravya from aspects of dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava is existent and the same dravya from aspects of another dravya’s dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava is not existent. Such procedure is also followed in Jain dharma but that is not applicable here. Here the dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava of samanya is absent in the dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava of vishesh and vice versa. Error in this realisation would make the meaning of first part of granth erroneous. The same four pairs are there in shri Samayasar Parishisht also . But there is a difference between the two. There the dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava of a dravya is called as nasti form in dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava of another dravya. There the subject is that of Atma and Gyan-Gyeya. The dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava of Gyan(atma) is not existent in that of Gyeya and dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava of gyeya is not existent in gyan. Here the subject of one dravya only . To establish the Anekant nature of substance the dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava of samanya is shown to be different from dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava of vishesh. The other three pairs in Shri Samaysar are also from aspect of Samanya-Vishesh which is same as here. There the subject is not that of another dravya. But there is one difference -  there  between soul and others and that too from aspect of Gyana form and Gyeya form it is shown. Here all six dravyas are the subject. The view is that just as substance is self established, in the same way it manifests also by itself. In Samaysar the subject is that of soul while here that of Samanya substance.

Here the description of ‘asti-nasti’ pair is there upto shloka 308, ‘Tat-Atat’ pair upto 335, ‘Nitya-Anitya’ pair upto 433, ‘ek-anek’ pair upto 502 shloka. The author has applied the dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava on ‘asti-nasti; and ‘ek-anek’ pairs and for remaining two he has told to apply it by similarity. In Samaysar only on ‘asti-nasti’ pair the dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava has been applied hence there are 8 kalash pertaining to ‘asti-nasti’ pair and for remaining three pairs there are only 6 kalash. Thus a total of 14 kalash are pertaining to this subject.

The meaning of the term ‘Nasti’ is not total absence but ‘insignificant’ . The meaning of Syat is ‘ from certain aspect’. That aspect is not described  but it is understood. For example ‘ dravya is syat nitya’ . Here the term syat implies Dravyarthika Drishti. Dravya is Nitya from Dravyarthika Drishti. In the same way ‘ Dravya is Syat Anitya’. Here Syat means Paryaya Drishti. i.e. Dravya from aspect of Paryayarthika Drishti is Anitya. Drishti is implied in the intent of speaker. The rest should also be understood the same way. For example Dravya is Syat Tat. This is Samanya Drishti. Dravya is Syat Atat, this is Vishesh Drishti. According to this Drishti the dravya at every samaya is different. All these four pairs are true from their own aspects. Without aspect they are untrue since the substance is Samanya Vishesh form. Every pair is observed from aspect of four Drishti. For example it would apply on Nitya Anitya as follows- (1)Thing from dravya Drishti is Nitya  (2) Thing from paryaya Drishti is Anitya (3) Thing from Praman Drishti is Nitya-Anitya form together (4) Thing from Shuddha drishti is Anubhaya i.e. indivisible . Every pair is of this form.

Continued…..

GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCH DHYAYI …05

                                               

Fourth Intermediate Chapter

Description of paryayas 164-198

164. Shloka- In this Granth the objectives and characteristics of Gunas were narrated as per Agam. Now the objectives and characteristics of paryayas are described.

165. Shloka – Paryayas are Kramvarty (sequential), Anitya ( transitory), Utpad-Vyaya form ( generation-destruction form) and in some respect Dhrovya (permanent).

166. Shloka- The Vyatirek (distinct) nature of the paryayas has already been established in the description of gunas. Now the remaining characteristics are described sequentially as per my capability.

Bhavartha- The mutual absence between Pradesh of a dravya is Desh Vyatireki paryaya. Each Pradesh has own kshetra which is different. This is Kshetra Vyatireki paryaya. The paryaya of each samaya is different. This is kaal vyatireki paryaya. For each guna the infinite avibhag praticcheda are mutually different. This is Bhava Vyatireki paryaya.

Description of Kramavarty (sequential) 167-169

167-168. Shloka - Sequentially which manifests or moves is called  as kramavarty or whose activities are sequential. The paryayas are kramavarty.

Bhavartha- Just as in walking one foot follows next, both feet do not move together. In the same way the paryayas also move one after another and never two together.

169. Shloka- Paryayas are kramavarty, it means that with destruction of first paryaya, next would take place and then third and so on. These are sequential. All paryayas with the support of same dravya generate and get destroyed.  

Difference between Vyatirek and Krama (170-175)

170. Shloka- If between Vyatirek and Kramavarty only word difference is told then it is alright since both mean the same. If there is difference in meaning then it should be told that what is the difference.

Bhavartha- In Vyatireki the Vyatirek with respect to Dravya-Kshetra-Kaal-Bhava was told. Of these the Kaal Vyatirek is there in paryaya. The paryaya of one samaya is different from that of another samaya which is kaal vyatirek. Now the questioner asks that Vyatireki is also called paryayas of different samaya and kramavarty is also called the same. Then is there only name difference or some difference of bhava?

Answer 171 to 175

171. Shloka- The assertion of questioner that Vyatireki and kramavarty are same is not valid, since between the dravya of previous samaya and that of next samaya, in spite of partial similarity there is some difference also. Just as the fine paryayas get merged in coarse paryayas but there is difference through characteristics. In the same way the Vyatirek is contained within kram but the characteristics are different.

Bhavartha- In the manifestation of dravya which occurs every moment, there are two divisions. Compared to manifestation of one samaya, in the manifestation in second samaya there are some similarities and some dissimilarities. For example take a child. At every samaya his state keeps changing. If this is not accepted then after one year the child should not have been stronger and taller which did not happen in a day. It was growing at every samaya but in our visions the state of two samaya was the same. The dissimilar manifestation of every samaya is fine and invisible which is not detected by senses. The similar manifestation   is there for several samaya. Hence it is told that coarse paryaya is long lasting. The sookshma paryaya is contained within the coarse paryaya even then by characteristics they are different. In the same way although Vyatirek is contained within kram but there is difference of characteristics which is described below-

172-173. Shloka – In the substances manifesting in similar way, the differentiation of the segments which are mutually dissimilar is named as Vyatirek. The paryaya of one samaya is not same as the paryaya of second samaya. This establishes the Vyatirek quite sufficiently.

Bhavartha- The dissimilarity of paryaya of one samaya with that of second samaya is called as Vyatirek. Although coarse paryayas manifest in similar way, even then the paryaya of one samaya is different from that of second samaya. The establishment of the difference between the paryayas of different samayas is called as Vyatirek.

Form of Kram

174-175. Shloka- The one which is accompanied with expansion is called Kram. Kram is cause for flow. Kram does not bother that it is same or different. The Kramavarty-ness is present prior to Vyatirek and as a rule accompanied with Vyatirek. The flow of the form of one paryaya followed by second, second by third, third by fourth is called as Kram. The mutual difference between them as ‘this is not same’ is called as Vyatirek.

Bhavartha- The continuous flow of one by second, third, fourth is called as Kram. Kram does not care that ‘it is not same’. In Vyatirek it is considered that ‘this is not same’. Hence Kram is prior to Vyatirek and is cause of Vyatirek. Vyatirek is its karya. Kram and Vyatirek have karan-karya bhava.

Highlighting upon the natures of Kram and Vyatirek

Dravya by nature is self established and naturally it manifests at every samaya. For example one Jiva is there. Upon manifesting he became Deva from Manushya. Now the Jiva is same which was earlier which is called ‘sameness’  and from Manushya he became Deva which is not same as earlier which is called ‘differentness’. Now manifesting  at every samaya is called ‘Kram’ since it occurs sequentially. Two manifestations do not occur together. Hence the paryaya of every samaya is called as ‘Kramavarty’. Although  in kram the sameness and differentness both are present but in the characteristics of kramavarty the focus is not upon sameness and differentness, but the focus is upon the sequential manifestation. Now in that kram the paryaya of first samaya belongs to first samaya only and not to second samaya and the one which pertains to second samaya belongs to that samaya only and not first samaya. The mutual difference between the two is called as ‘Vyatirek’. In this the focus is upon sameness and differentness only. Mutual difference is its characteristics. Kram is called coarse. The differentness between the paryaya of second samaya and that of first samaya is sookshma hence Vyatirek is Sookshma. Whatever kramavarty manifestation would occur, it would comprise of Vyatireki-ness also. Hence  in spite of kram and Vyatirek occurring in one samaya, first kram and then vyatirek is told since firstly change is carried out and then it is told that it is not same.Hence Kram occurs prior to Vyatirek.

Although Paryaya is called kramavarty as well as Vyatireki but there is a difference (1) Kramavarti is coarse and Vyatireki is sookshma. (2) The characteristics of kram is manifesting sequentially and characteristics of Vyatireki is ‘mutual difference’. (3) Kram does not consider sameness and differentness while Vyatireki considers sameness and differentness. (4) Just as in coarse paryayas the sookshma paryayas are inherent, in the same way the Vyatirek is inherent in kram. Manushya, Deva are coarse paryayas and in one manushya paryaya, the manifestation of gyan etc. occurring every samaya  is sookshma paryaya. This manifestation is inherent in manushya paryaya. Being Deva from Manushya is Kramavarty since it occurs with kram and not together. In the wide spread Manushya paryaya the mutual sookshma difference at every samaya is Vyatireki-ness. In this way the Vyatirek is inherent within the kram. In Vyatireki-ness new existence fractions are not generated and previous existence fractions are not lost either. They remain the same only. Only all the existent fractions undergo changes of colour-bhava etc. The innumerable Pradesh of Manushya and Deva are same but they have undergone a change from shape of Manushya to that of Deva. For this reason the Vyatirekiness is present. The existent fractions of Matigyan are same but there is Vyatirekiness with respect to Lokalok shape and  pot shape etc. The essence is that in Vyatirek the focus is upon the mutual difference only while Kramavarty focuses upon sequential manifestation. This is the difference between Vyatirek and Kramavarty.

Doubt

176. Shloka- What is the Praman to establish the Kram and Vyatirek since the thing is as it was earlier. ( the substance is permanent as it is.)

Answer 177-180

177. Shloka- This doubt is not valid since with Pratyaksha (Direct) Praman and  own experience or inference Praman, the thing is the  same – in this way a permanent and it is not the same – in this way transitory also gets experienced.

178. Shloka- The meaning of the above is that the way the dravya is self established, it is manifesting also as a rule. Just as the flame of lamp continuously manifests, in the same way the dravya also manifests every samaya.

179. Shloka- With the destruction of previous bhava and destruction of some fraction (paryaya), the new bhava or the new fraction (paryaya) is generated which leads to manifestation.

180. Shloka-The destruction of previous bhava and generation of later bhava is as follows- The Jiva who was in Manushya paryaya died and became Deva which is different in some aspects from Manushya Jiva. Just as milk become curd by undergoing some change of bhava, in the same way Jiva undergoes change of bhava.

Doubt 181-182

181-182. Shloka- By accepting such changes, it appears that along with existent some non existent also gets generated while some existent gets destroyed. By observing sameness and differentness it appear so.

Something gets produced in same way and some things gets produced in different way. The heat from manifestation of fire is its generation in same way while the change of colour of mango from green to yellow is generation in different way. In this way some non existent is produced and whether some existent gets destroyed?

Bhavartha- Observing the manifestation of substance at every samaya, believers of thing itself to be getting produced and destroyed, have such doubt.

Answer 183-192

183. Shloka- The doubt posed is not valid since it is natural that neither non existent substance gets generated, nor existent substance gets destroyed. The Utpad-Vyaya-Dhrovya are bhavas changing into different bhava at every samaya.

Bhavartha- The non existent cannot come  from anywhere and the existent cannot go any where. Hence neither new substance is produced nor existent substance gets destroyed. But in every substance a change of bhava occurs at every samaya.

Clarification of change of Bhava

184. Shloka- It means that the earlier bhava form becomes later bhava form. The change in spite of remaining existent is bhava. No bhava gets absolutely destroyed or generated.

Bhavartha- Shape is called bhava. Changing from one shape to another of the substance is called change of bhava. In every substance at every samaya, a change of shape keeps taking place. No new substance gets produced nor does an existent substance get destroyed.

185. Shloka- As an example the flow of water which manifests in first samaya, same water flows in second samaya also.

186. Shloka- The difference between the first state of dravya to that of second state is observed with the nimitta of Avagahan Guna of the fractions of Desh which sequentially manifest without forgoing their nature.

Bhavartha- The corruption of Dravya is called as Vyanjan Paryaya which keeps changing at every samaya. With respect to Vyanjan paryaya of one samaya, that of second samaya has similarity and dissimilarity both. In dissimilarity also the nature of dravya does not get destroyed. However the dravya which was occupying a certain shape now started occupying a different shape. This only is the change and no other one.

First Example

187. Shloka- Jiva has innumerable Pradesh equal to that Lok. Their increase or decrease occurs only from aspect of Avagahan (occupancy) only and not from aspect of Dravya.

Bhavartha- The innumerable Pradesh of Jiva always remain the same without any increase or decrease. However depending upon the size of the body, those Pradesh get expanded or compressed on their own. In the body of ant also same soul with innumerable Pradesh is there and in the body of elephant also same soul with innumerable Pradesh is there. The soul is same in both equivalent to his size. Only from one shape it changes into another shape. Only from aspect of change of shape the increase-decrease of the Pradesh of soul are considered. In reality no increase or decrease occurs in them. Call it increase-decrease or Utpad-Vyaya or differentness, dissimilarity – they mean the same. That change of shape has not occurred due to body, but due to own capability of swa-kaal at that moment.

Second Example

188. Shloka- Second example is that of lamp. The number of rays of lamp remain the same. However there is increase or decrease , experienced in the presence of home etc. form specific nimitta form hindrance due to avagahan (occupancy).

Bhavartha- Depending upon the size of the box in which the lamp is kept, the illumination of lamp occupies that kshetra due to own reason and not due to nimitta.

Third example

189. Shloka- With respect to Avagahan(occupancy) of fractions, there is example that the gyan guna is stationary within its own fractions ( Avibhag Praticcheda) . This sometimes increase or decreases which depends upon the shape of the gyeya. The shape of gyan becomes as large as that of gyeya. In reality the fractions of gyan guna do not undergo change.

Bhavartha- The less-more is with respect to knowing. The amount of  work is with respect to strength. Jiva knows gyeya not because of gyeya but due to capability of swa-kaal.

190. Shloka- The example is as follows- When the gyan is knowing pot, at that moment it is pot size alone. And at the moment it is knowing the entire Lok, at that moment it is of the size of Lok.

Bhavartha - at the time of knowing pot, the gyan becomes of the shape of pot, and while knowing the entire Lok it becomes of the  size of Lok.   

191. Shloka- While being of the shape of the pot, the remaining fractions of gyan do not get destroyed and while being of the shape of Lok, other than regular fractions, no new fractions get generated. (The term  shape does not mean image but knowledge.)

192. Shloka – But in those Gunas there is one called AguruLaghu which is beyond words . It is self established. Its direct visualisation is only to omniscient ( param guru) or the Chhadmastha also knows based upon experience.

Bhavartha – The Agurulaghu guna is separately there in each substance. With  its nimitta,  no shakti gets destroyed. The form in which a shakti exists, always remain in the same form. The same is also called permanency. Hence in spite of being less or more the fractions of gyan guna never get destroyed. Even with the increase-decrease of fractions of guna in Vishesh, the fractions of Samanya guna remain the same due to AguruLaghu Guna. This is directly known to Kevali. With the attainment of Kevali-hood , they get revealed in the Jiva. These gunas were existent , therefore only they got revealed in paryaya. They have not come from somewhere else. By  such inference of own experience the Pratyaksh is visualised.

Doubt 193-194

193-194. Shloka- “The shakti never gets destroyed nor does it get generated new.” If it is believed so then the Utpad-Vyaya-Dhrovya cannot exist in Gunas. Neither  Upadan (Dhruva) is there nor it can be a cause, and no fruition can be there. Since with the above statement you have accepted Gunas to be consistently same.

Another thing is that sometimes the fractions of each Guna appear to be small , in such case the guna should be weak ? Sometimes the guna appears to be more, then it should be strong? This is a great flaw. Its refutation is difficult.

Answer 195-198

195. Shloka- The doubt raise above is baseless since it has been told earlier that dravya has nature of manifestation. Hence in permanent substance only Utpad, Vyaya, Dhrovya are applicable and not in transitory substances.

Bhavartha- When complete Gyan is existent in Guna then only it would manifest more or less form in paryaya. That manifestation of more or less does not happen on account of gyanavarana karma or other nimittas, but due to own established nature of manifestation of substance and due to capability in swa-kaal. Such is the purport of author and the same is called as momentary. Another objective is that in spite of paryaya being less or more, the guna is  always present in the substance which is called as permanent. If this is not accepted then on what basis the manifestation would occur. Whom would gyanis take recourse to for carrying out purushartha for Moksha? Since the guna is whole, then only in paryaya it is revealed through purushartha.

196. Shloka – After accepting the existence of gold only the bhavas of earing etc. are applicable to it. With bhavas of earing etc. only the Uptad etc. are applicable to it.

Bhavartha- When the gold takes the form of earing, then firstly the gold dice form paryaya gets destroyed for generation of earing form paryaya. Gold is present in both states. Hence in gold utpad etc. trio are applicable but in the Pradesh of gold in reality any form of new generation or destruction does not occur. Only from  one shape another shape changes. If gold itself is believed to be temporary then with destruction of dice, where from the earing would be produced? Hence in permanent substance only Utpad etc. trio are applicable and not in transitory.

197. Shloka – In the same way the cause and effect are applicable only to the substance permanent in certain aspect as described above since both can belong to existent substance only.

198. Shloka- From aspect of dravya, leave apart the generation of non existent and destruction of existent in gunas, in its magnitude the strongness or weakness also does not happen.

Bhavartha- On account of AguruLaghu guna the guna always is existent with complete strength at all times. In the paryaaya the capability of knowing more or less is revealed is on account of capability of swa-kaal and not on account of gyanavaraniya  as told in shloka 195. The gyanavaraniya is present in nimitta form for sure and when manifestation occurs then that too also would be blamed. That indicates the transitory nature of vibhava. In Jain dharma the manifestation of each dravya in swabhava or vibhava form occurs on account of capability of swa-kaal and not due to some other dravya. The substance is completely independent  in trikaal. Blaming it on gyanavaraniya is termed as nayabhas (false naya) later.

Note – The fourth intermediate chapter describing the paryaya in the maha adhikar of substance is completed.

Fifth Intermediate Chapter

Description of Utpad-Vyaya-Dhrovya  199-260

199. Shloka – In this way the characteristics of paryayas were described. Now the different forms of Utpad-Vyaya-Dhrovya are described as per capability of author.

200. Shloka- The Utpad and sthiti ( permanence) and vyaya (destruction) all three events belong to paryayas only and not substance. The agglomeration of paryayas is called as Dravya. Hence all three together are called  as dravya.

Bhavartha- If the Utpad Vyaya are believed to be that of dravya then dravya would need to undergo destruction and generation. But it has been told earlier that neither the substance gets destroyed nor any new substance is created. Hence all three are different states of substance and they together are called as dravya. Hence the gathering of the three is the complete form of dravya.

Form of Utpad

201. Shloka- Of the three the new state of the manifesting dravya is called as Utpad. This Utpad also from aspect of Dravyarthika and Paryayarthika naya is accompanied with existent and non existent bhava.

Form of Vyaya

202. Shloka – The Vyaya also does not happen in the substance but occurs in the state of manifesting dravya. The same is called as Pradhwansa Bhava. This Pradhwansa Bhava occurs in manifesting dravya by nature.

Form of Dhrovya

203. Shloka- Dhrovya also occurs from certain aspect of Paryayarthika naya in substance. Only substance does not become Dhrovya without Paryaya Drishti. Like Utpad and Vyaya, this too is partial  natured and not complete nature.

Bhavartha- Just as Utpad and Vyaya do not occur from aspect of Dravya Drishti, in the same way Dhrovya is also not from aspect of Dravya Drishti but it is from aspect of paryaya Drishti hence that too is described as a fraction of substance. If all three are accepted from  dravya Drishti then the substance would be absolutely temporary and absolutely permanent.

Another form of Dhrovya

204. Shloka- The characteristics of Dhrovya also means that the bhava of substance does not get destroyed i.e. whatever is the manifestation of substance earlier, the same occurs later also.

Example

205. Shloka- Just as the flower manifests in smell form. The smell keeps manifesting at every moment and does not have the nature of not manifesting. It is not so that the flower was earlier without smell and later it developed smell.

Bhavartha- The smell quality is manifesting natured hence it is always there in flower. It is never absent from flower. The same is called as Dhrovya. The smell form manifestation which was there earlier, remains later also.

Consideration of Nitya and Anitya

206. Shloka- Of the three Utpad and Vyaya are cause of Anitya nature in manifesting dravya while the Dhruva is cause of being Nitya. All three are different in parts form.

It is not so

207. Shloka- Someone should not doubt that existence is absolutely Nitya in dravya and remaining any other guna is not Nitya and has absolutely different nature of Utpad, Vyaya both manifestations. Since-

Flaw in above thinking

208. Shloka- By accepting as per above all would become subject of arguments. By accepting different Pradesh in dravya neither guna would be established nor paryaya. Neither dravya nor existence would be established since by accepting everything to be different, even one does not get established.

Second Flaw

209. Shloka- By accepting Utpad and Vyaya to be absolutely different paryaya form alone and accepting dravya to be different from them being absolutely Nitya, gives rise to the flaw that the Nitya would remain Nitya forever and the Anitya would remain Anitya forever since one cannot have several dharmas.

Bhavartha- By accepting dravya to be several dharma form its permits to have arrangement of being Nitya and Anitya in certain aspects. By accepting substance to have only one dharma form, the entire arrangement gets destroyed.

Third Flaw

210 Shloka- The imaginary arrangement of this is dravya, this is guna, this is paryaya, also would get eliminated since in differentness all would be called as different dravyas like another dravya.

Doubt

211. Shloka- The dravya and Guna are Nitya like ocean and paryayas are generated like waves and get destroyed. What is wrong in such  belief ?

Answer 212-217

212. Shloka- This doubt is not right since the quoted example of ocean and waves causes hindrance to his own meaning and supports opposite meaning from his intent. How it supports opposite side is explained-

213. Shloka- Ocean along with waves is one only. It is not so that waves are different from ocean but ocean is same as the waves. In the same way the existent dravya is not completely different from paryayas of any guna.

214. Shloka- But the ocean only is garland of waves since that ocean only manifests in waves form.

215. Shloka- Hence existent itself is Utpad and existent itself is Vyaya and that only is dhrovya. Other than existent there is no other Utpad or Vyaya or Dhrovya.

216. Shloka – Or from aspect of undifferentiated Dravyarthika naya neither there is Utpad, Nor Vyaya, Nor guna , Nor paryaya.  Only indivisible existence form substance is there.

Continued….