GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCH DHYAYI--03

 

Introduction to next Part

Firstly 8-14 described the indivisible existence, then 15-22 established it as Samanya-Vishesha form. Next 23-37 described its width and 38-63 described its length. Now it is being explained that from certain aspect the existence remains always stationary as it is and from  another aspect it is transitory and keeps changing every samaya in less and more form. Just as from one aspect the same jiva in Siddha and in worldly paryaya form has the  same existence as it is unchanged which is Dravya Drishti. From another aspect the worldly and Siddhas have huge difference which is transitory paryaya Drishti. This will be described in 64-70.

Description of Permanence- Transitoriness of substance 64-70

Doubt

64. Shloka- Whatever is told above is just grinding of the already ground. It would have been sufficient to describe one alone. Either dravya should have been described or paryaya. The separate description of dravya and paryaya is meaningless.

Bhavartha- His question is that parts of dravya only are paryaya. The describing of dravya and then paryaya is meaningless. Any one would have been sufficient. Either dravya or paryaya.

Solution 65-70

65. Shloka- The doubt raised is not right. The description of both dravya and paryaya is necessary and has successful objective. From aspect of Dravya the substance is permanent form and  from aspect of paryaya the substance is transitory form in experience. Therefore description as above is meaningful.

Bhavartha- The narration of dravya and paryayas is useful since from aspect of samanya i.e. Dravyarthika naya the existence is permanent and appears always the same. From aspect of Paryayarthika naya in every existence there is Vishesh (something new) continuously.

Bhavartha again- The subject of Dravyarthika naya is dravya (guna) . From this aspect the substance is trikaal same form. The subject of Paryayarthika naya is paryaya ( part of guna) . From this aspect the thing is not same at every samaya. This is the purpose of explaining dravya (guna) and paryaya( part of guna). By accepting both only the substance would be permanent from aspect of dravyarthika naya and transitory from aspect of paryayarthika naya , otherwise not.

66. Shloka- Just as collection of infinite qualities like whiteness etc. form cloth keeps changing its state every moment, and even after changing of state the whiteness etc. qualities remain consistently. Therefore the cloth is permanent. On the other hand with changes in whiteness etc. qualities, it is transitory also.

Bhavartha – The cloth is permanent from aspect of Dravya while from aspect of paryaya it is transitory.  

67. Shloka- The Gyan guna remains consistently in the soul. If gyan guna is eliminated from soul then it would cease to exist as Atma. Hence from aspect of this Guna the Atma is permanent but with the nimitta of this guna the soul manifests at every moment . Sometimes more amount of gyan guna is displayed and sometimes less amount is seen. The enhancement-shortage is observed in the gyan in worldly state. For this reason the soul is transitory also. ( In Siddhas the gyan guna is transitory with six order increase-decrease).

The same description from aspect of Nasti in 68-69-70

68-69 Shloka- If as per above description the substance is not accepted to be permanent from aspect of Dravyarthika naya and transitory from aspect of Paryayarthika naya and conversely your intent be that (1) either the dravya is without divisions equivalent to  the smallest division of Guna (2) or it is permanent like anvil without manifesting or (3) it is transitory or (4) has infinite divisions but they manifest identically without increase-decrease. Then-

70. Shloka- All four concepts are flawed since such acceptance is firstly contradictory to direct observation, secondly there is no proof to establish it. There is lack of praman to justify it since there is no allegory to support it.

Bhavartha- (1) If dravya be considered as equivalent to least part of guna  then manifestations of gunas would occur in one Desh only and activity of any Guna would not occur in  complete substance. (2) If the dravya is considered to be permanent then there would not be any activity in it. In the absence of activity there would not be any punya-pap, bandh-moksha arrangement. (3) By accepting absolutely transitory there would not be any recollection (knowledge of what was seen earlier). In such case there would not be any cause-effect relationship form vyavahara. (4) If the dravya has infinite smallest part of guna but they manifest identically without increase or decrease. Then the dravya would remain in same state without any change. Hence all these four suppositions are false and contradictory. The thing is not so in reality.

Note – This completes the first intermediate chapter describing the indivisible dravya in the Maha Adhikar of narration of substance.

Second Intermediate Chapter

Description of Dravya in Differentiated view 71-102

71. Shloka- Someone asked Acharya that Maharaj ! What is Dravya ? In answer Acharya described the nature of dravya and its characteristics well analysed by means of Praman and right nayas.

72. Shloka – Which constitutes of guna-paryaya that is dravya. This characteristics of dravya is well established without any contradiction. The clear meaning of it is that the summation of gunas and paryayas only is dravya. This characteristics of dravya is not contradicted by direct inference or Agam etc. Pramans in any way hence it is said to be well established.

Bhavartha- Dravya is constituted of Guna-Paryaya. From this one should not misinterpret that guna and paryaya are different substances which reside within the dravya and dravya is another substance which supports them.  Hence Acharya clarifies that dravya is one where guna and paryaya are found. It means that the agglomeration of guna-paryaya only is dravya. It has already been told that dravya is indivisible mass of infinite gunas and those gunas keep changing their state every moment. Hence dravya is indivisible mass of gunas having paryayas in all three periods of time. Dravya substance is not different from guna paryaya. The same is clarified by quoting some Acharya-

73. Shloka – Some wise ones describe the characteristics of dravya as ‘ collection of gunas only is dravya’ . Some well experienced wise ones call dravya as “ equal to all guna-paryayas”.

Bhavartha- Earlier shloka had described guna and paryaya both as characteristics of dravya but here parayayas are not considered as different from gunas and hence collection of gunas only are called as dravya. In reality paryayas are specific states of gunas. The paryayas are not different form gunas. Hence in undifferentiated view the collection of guna paryaya  only is dravya.  Some other wise ones call all gunas and their paryayas of all three periods of time together as dravya.

74. Shloka- The purport of the above is that those Pradesh and gunas residing in those Pradesh and the Units  of the Gunas ,i.e. Pradesh + Guna + Units of Gunas are all called together by term Dravya.

75. Shloka- It is not so that dravya is different substance, Guna is different substance and Pradesh are different substance and the fractions of Gunas are different substance and the mixture of all of them be called as Dravya.

76. Shloka- It is not so also that just as a painting is drawn on a wall, the painting remains on the wall but is different substance from the wall, in the same way the Pradesh, Guna and fractions of Gunas remain in Dravya i.e. like wall, dravya supports these together in  a Samavaya sambandh (close relationship). (The permanent close relationship between different substances is called as Samavaya Sambandh. Believing Guna and Guni as different their permanent relationship is accepted by Naiyayik philosophy.)

Bhavartha- It is not so that Desh, fraction of Desh, Guna, fraction of Guna, all four are different substances and their collection be called as Dravya. Instead all four are dravya in indivisible form. From aspect of differentiation all four are different names. In Undifferentiated view all four are one  which are  called as dravya.

77. Shloka – Just as root, trunk, branch, leaves, flowers, bunches, fruits together are called as Tree with one word since the tree constitutes of them all. There is no substance different from tree, root, trunk, branches etc. but their agglomeration only is tree.  Or other than tree the branches etc. are not different substances. In the same way the agglomeration of Desh, fraction of Desh, Guna, fraction of guna only is dravya. These are not different from dravya nor dravya is different from them.

78. Shloka – Although allegory and predicates are different as well as indifferent, here for establishment of dravya of the form of collection of gunas, the indifferent allegory as well as indifferent predicate should be accepted. It is clarified further as follows-

Allegory pertaining to difference of the two

79. Shloka- The example pertaining to difference of support-supported is like painting on the wall or curd kept inside a pot. (wall is different and painting drawn on it is different substance. In the same way the pot is different substance and the curd kept inside is different substance. Both example demonstrate the difference of support-supported) . The example of different predicates is as follows- Just as a person with the nimitta of wealth is called wealthy. Here wealth is different substance and person is different. The relation  between wealth and person is called swa-swamy-sambandh. Here the swa-swamy-sambandh pertains to difference of the two.)

Bhavartha- Just as wealthy person has swa-swamy-sambandh in spite of having difference, the same relationship is not there in guna-paryaya form dravya. Or, just as support-supported bhava is there between wall and painting, the same is not there in guna and dravya. Predicate as well as support-supported both are indifferent.

Allegory pertaining to indifference of the two

80. Shloka- The example pertaining to indifference of support-supported is as follows- Just branch and tree or house and pillar. The example of indifference of predicate is as follows- this tree has branches.

Bhavartha – The tree and branch or house and pillar both are examples pertaining to indifference. The branch is not different from tree and pillar is not different from the house. In  the same way “this tree  has branches” is an example of indifference of swa-swamy-sambandh. The same relationship should be treated between guna, paryaya and dravya like indifferent support-supported or indifferent predicate.

Doubt

81. Shloka- Samvaya and Samvayi i.e. guna and dravya both are totally same. In this state only guna collection should be said and there is no need to call it dravya.

Answer 82-84

82. Shloka -The above doubt is not right since collection definitely belongs to the owner (of collection). This point is established with famous Praman. With famous example also this point gets established.

Bhavartha- Although collection of spits only is broom even then with collection of spits only the dust is cleaned and not with spits. Hence the collection and its owner are different in some aspect and indifferent in some other aspect.

83. Shloka- Although in the fruit of mango the touch, taste, smell and colour are different since their characteristics are different, even so all are same form collectively. No way they can be separated.

Bhavartha- The knowledge of touch is with sparsh-sense. The taste is known by Rasana-sense. The smell is known by nose and colour is known by eyes. Hence all four have different characteristics. But all four have relationship of oneness and they cannot be separated. Hence from point of characteristics they are  different  but collectively they are indifferent. Hence the difference and indifference between Guna and Guni gets established clearly.

84. Shloka- Therefore, while  from aspect of Paryayarthika naya the Desh- fraction of Desh, Guna- fraction of Guna should be described, from aspect of Dravyarthika naya in place of all of these only dravya is there- thus it should be stated.

Description of Dravya from aspect of differentiation 85-102

85. Shloka – The dravya comprises of guna paryaya- this characteristics is described by wise ones by another way also.

Bhavartha - Now the other characteristics of dravya is described but it is not different from the above characteristics but it reveals the same in more detail.

86. Shloka- That sentence is as follows- Existence comprising of Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya these three is the characteristics of dravya. It is to be noted that that entity gets established only by accepting all three together. By accepting them individually it does not establish the dravya i.e. by accepting different Utpad, different Vyaya and different dhrovya and then compiling them together does not establish the dravya.

87. Shloka- To summarise, the Dhrovya, Utpad and Vyaya these three factors belong to one existence quality hence these three together are called as existence alone while these three are different sequentially.

Bhavartha – Dravya has one Astitva (existence) named quality which is named as entity also. This existence quality alone is Utpad-Vyaya-Dhrovya (generation-destruction-permanence) form. Hence individually these three are different but together they are only existence quality form.

88.  Shloka- From aspect of differentiation of characteristics and the target , the existence is quality ( of dravya) only. However with Drishti of Dravyarthika naya the existence itself is Dravya form.

Bhavartha – The substance has infinite qualities. If each of those qualities is accepted to be characteristics of dravya then in that case the dravya would be target and the quality would be characteristics. From aspect of target and characteristics only the Guna and Guni are different from  certain aspect. From this aspect the existence and dravya are somewhat different.

But upon directing attention away from vikalpa of differentiation, only from aspect of Dravyarthika Drishti there is no difference between existence and dravya. The dravya is same as existence. By such statement the term existence also denotes dravya only and dravya-ness also denotes dravya. Vastu-ness also denotes dravya(Vastu). From aspect of naya the existence, Dravya-ness and Vastu-ness describes only those Gunas. In undifferentiated view the Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya these three states belong to dravya. Hence dravya only is Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya form.

89. Shloka – Just as the substance is eternal, self established and indestructible, in the same way it has nature of manifesting. Hence the same existence (dravya) is utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya form as a rule.

Bhavartha- The substance is  permanent  from some aspect and transitory from another aspect. From aspect of Dravya it is Nitya (permanent) and from aspect of paryaya, Utpad etc. are Anitya (transitory).

Flaw upon not accepting Manifesting nature of substance

90. Shloka-  If the substance is accepted to be Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya form without manifestation then it would lead to generation of non-existent and destruction of existent surely.

Bhavartha- Accepting the substance to have manifesting nature, if the Utpad etc. three are accepted then the permanence of substance remains. However, if without accepting it to be manifesting nature, it’s Utpad etc. are accepted then the substance would become absolutely transitory. It would lead to generation of new substance and the one that exists would get destroyed. But such arrangement is contrary to Praman. Hence the substance should be accepted to have manifesting nature. Then from aspect of some manifestation it would be generated, from another aspect it would be destroyed and from some aspect it would be stationary also. The same is clarified further-

91. Shloka- From the above statement the dravya is established to be manifesting natured. Hence from some aspect it is generated, from aspect of another state it gets destroyed also. From aspect of substance state the generation and destruction both do not occur.

Bhavartha- From certain aspect the substance remains permanent also.

Example of Utpad etc. three

92. Shloka- Just as in the Lok the pot is generated from mud form in one samaya and mud  is destroyed from pind ( block) form while from aspect of mud nothing has changed. All three states are there at the same time but they do not have the same form.

Doubt

93. Shloka- The questioner asks that this is all your imagination which is useless. By accepting Utpad etc. three, there is no benefit and by not accepting there no harm either.

Answer 94-96

94. Shloka- The doubt of the questioner is not right since by accepting the Utpad etc. trio form substance only there is benefit. By not accepting there is no benefit. Since with non acceptance of Utpad etc. with elimination of all dravya etc. every thing becomes zero which is big flaw.

95. Shloka- By non acceptance of manifestation the dravya would remain same always. In that case the Parlok, cause, effect etc. nothing  would exist.

Bhavartha- For example take Jiva dravya. If manifestation of Jiva dravya is not accepted and it is always believed to be same then there is not fruition of punya-pap, therefore all efforts for Moksha are waste. In the same way by not accepting change of state, the cause effect etc. relationship cannot remain.

96. Shloka- If the substance is not accepted to have nature of manifesting then the substance would become momentary manifestation form alone which is not acceptable, since by means of recollection the soul is experienced to be permanent also.

Bhavartha- Without accepting permanence in the soul “this is same jiva” such recollection cannot materialise. Hence from the two shlokas above it can be concluded that the substance does not forgo its nature hence it is permanent while it keeps changing state hence it is transitory also. Therefore it is neither absolutely permanent nor absolutely temporary as Samkhya and Bauddhas believe.

Doubt

97. Shloka- Earlier the characteristics of dravya was told to be Guna paryaya form dravya and now with different sentence, togetherness of Utpad, Vyaya and Dhrovya is told to be characteristics of dravya. These two characteristics are contradictory.

Answer 98-102

98. Shloka- It is not right to show contradiction between the two characteristics since with proper consideration both sentences have the same meaning. Upon this the questioner says that if both characteristics have the same meaning then what is the use of telling both. Anyone would suffice. The reply is that it is not so. Both are illuminator of each other.

99. Shloka- Both characteristics are illuminator of each other, its explanation is as follows- Permanence and quality are pervasive ( i.e. quality denotes permanence ) Hence by telling that the dravya has quality, it establishes the dravya to be permanent dhrovya form.

Bhavartha – Permanence is called Dhrovya in certain aspect. Dravya is called dhrovya to establish the permanence in certain aspect by means of gunas.

100. Shloka- In other words it is said that quality is target and dhrovya is its characteristics. Hence here target is objective and characteristics is the means to establish it.

Bhavartha- With characteristics of dhrovya of Gunas the permanence of gunas gets established well.

101. Shloka – Paryayas as a rule have pervasiveness with Utpad and Vyaya. ( i.e. by saying paryaya it denotes Utpad and destruction). Hence the dravya has paryaya indicates that the dravya has Utpad and Vyaya.

Bhavartha- Change of state of substance is called  Utpad and Vyaya. State denotes paryaya. To establish transitoriness in paryayas only, dravya is called as having Utpad Vyaya.

102. Shloka- Paryayas stay in dravya i.e. they are generated in dravya and are not different from dravya. Secondly, they have nature also, generation and destruction is their nature.

Bhavartha- Guna and paryaya they reside in target or dravya. The nature or characteristics  of Gunas is Dhrovya while that of Paryayas is Utpad and Vyaya. The prime identity of gunas is their permanence and that of paryayas is their generation and destruction. These Utpad etc. are called as nature of Guna and paryayas since they are their natural dharma.

Third Intermediate Chapter

Description of Guna 103-164

103. Shloka – What is Guna-ness? Someone asked Acharya which he replied with examples .

Characteristics of Guna

104. Shloka- Supported by dravya, the vishesh (specifics) which themselves are devoid of further vishesh, are called Guna. With these gunas only the substance become clear like a thing kept in hand.

Bhavartha- Gunas are always supported by dravya but the bhava of support and supported is not same as that between book and table but is like that of cloth with thread or book with words. Although cloth is not different from thread but it is said to be supported by threads. Similarly book is not different from words, even then it is said to be support for the words. In the same way the gunas and dravya have supported and support bhava. Guna and Vishesh are the same. Gunas do not reside in guna. If Guna are there in Gunas also then they would become dravya and it would lead to flaw of irregularity.  Those which are supported by dravya and do not have qualities themselves are called Guna.

Explanation

105. Shloka – Gunas are supported by dravya. The Pradesh of one Guna is the same as that for all the Gunas hence all the gunas have the same Pradesh. Now when these gunas residing in those Pradesh are intelligently divided, then sequentially infinite Gunas are observed. ( I.e. upon dividing intelligently, all the Pradesh of dravya appear to be Guna  form only. There  is no independent support form Pradesh other than Gunas.)

Example

106. Shloka- In a cloth the whiteness etc. qualities are residing together depending upon the number of threads of the same. If those whiteness etc, qualities are divided intelligently then sequentially they would appear to have infinite qualities.

107. Shloka- In the context of qualities different faiths have different views. Some call the qualities to be permanent and some absolutely transitory. Hence it is essential to consider the permanence and temporary nature of qualities.

108. Shloka- It is the Siddhant of Jains that just as dravya is permanent in some respect and transitory in another respect, in the same way the Gunas are also permanent and transitory from different aspects, since they are one with dravya( the agglomeration of gunas only is dravya and gunas are not absolutely different from dravya).

Consideration of permanence of qualities

109. Shloka- It is the characteristics of permanence that nature of the thing does not get destroyed. Such characteristics is observed in qualities hence they are permanent. The nature of Gunas do not get destroyed hence the characteristics of gunas as “this is same” -with such recollection, it gets established.

110. Shloka- For example the gyan which was manifesting in the shape of pot earlier, now changes into shape of pan, then does it destroy the knowingness? If it is told that the knowingness has not been destroyed then why it would not be called as permanent? Surely it would be.

Bhavartha- The gyan guna of soul has nature of manifestation. Sometimes it takes shape of pot and sometimes that of pan. Does it destroy the gyan guna because it changed from shape of pot to that of pan? No. The Gyan guna has not been destroyed, only state has changed. Earlier it was knowing pot and now it is knowing pan. This only is the difference. Knowingness has remained in both states. Hence the gyan has never been destroyed. Then surely it is permanent.

Another example

111. Shloka- Just as the colour quality of mango keeps changing. In the raw state it was green and upon ripening it has become yellow. Does it destroy the colour by changing from green to yellow? If the colour quality has not been destroyed then surely it should be accepted as permanent.

Bhavartha- The state of colour has changed but colour has nevertheless remained. Hence colour is permanent quality. This example is that of Ajiva. Earlier it was that of Jiva.

Continued….