Fourth Intermediate Chapter
Description of Ek-Anek 434-502
Doubt
434. Shloka- Whether entity is Ek(one) or Anek(many), or is
it Ubhaya or Anubhaya or, is it single bhang form or, some other form?
Answer
435. Shloka- It is alright. The entity from aspect
of Naya is Ek as well as Anek, Ubhaya as well as Anubhaya, but this is told
only from aspects of Naya only. Without aspect of naya, entity cannot be
called as absolute Ek and Anek, or Ubhaya and Anubhaya since in
absolute ekant form the entity is not Ek Anek form.
Note- Firstly 436-492 Ek would be established then 493-498 Anek
would be established. Then 499 it is told that Ubhaya-Anubhaya remaining Bhangs
should be known like before. In 500 the mutual relative nature of Ek Anek would
be described. In 501 and 502 , the absolute Ek Anek doctrines would be refuted.
Logic of Ek in entity
436. Shloka- Having undivided Pradesh of Guna
Paryaya form parts the entity is one
since it is indivisible Desh. Hence from aspect of indivisible Samanya
the entity is Ek.
Bhavartha- The guna-paryaya in dravya are like waves in water. Just as waves do not have existence different from that of
water, in the same way the existence of guna-paryaya is not different from that
of dravya. Only in description the dravya, guna, paryaya are imagined. From
aspect of Shuddha Drishti whatever is dravya is same as guna-paryaya. Whatever
is guna that only is dravya-paryaya or, whatever is paryaya that only is
dravya-guna. Hence when all three are one only then they do not have separate
existences nor different Pradesh. Further from aspect of Shuddha Drishti they
do not have divisions but it is indivisible Desh form one entity only.
Clarification of same
437. Shloka- From aspect of dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava the entity is
indivisible as a rule. Now from aspect of each of the four the indivisible
nature of entity is established in order.
From aspect of Dravya 438-448
438. Shloka- Dravya is guna-paryaya form i.e. guna-paryaya only is body of
dravya. Hence entity is one. It is not as if in a tree like fruits, flowers and
leaves, some parts are Guna form and some are paryaya form.
439. Shloka- Just as cloth has colour etc, and thread etc. hence it has
both forms. But it is not so that in cloth some parts be colour form and some
parts be thread form. ( the colour-thread-cloth three are one substance only.
Only in consideration there is dwait bhava.)
First false Characteristics
and false example
440. Shloka- The one-ness in entity is not one Samanya entity form
generated out of agglomeration of several entities like Milk. Just as milk is
joint state of some ghee part, some water part etc., but upon combination it is
called as Milk name. In the same way in entity some parts be guna and some
parts be paryaya and their combination result in entity - such one-ness is not
there.
Bhavartha- In milk there is different existences of several substances but together
it is called milk, in the same way the guna-paryayas form several substances do
not join and be called as one entity but because of being one entity it is
called as one.
Second false
characteristics and false example
441. Shloka- Or it cannot be said either that
although entity has different existences of guna-paryayas but they cannot be
separated hence entity is called as one. Just as in gold ore the gold and
impurity are two substances but they cannot be separated hence it is called as
ore only. Just as in gold ore the gold and impurity are two different
substances, in the same way in entity guna and paryaya two different substances
are not there. The entity is having
single existence and is one only.
442. Shloka- Hence for establishing oneness neither combination of
different existences is the means or the separateness of description is the
means. But indivisible Vastutva only is the means i.e. the indivisible Pradesh
form single existence form substance is one only. In reality from aspect of
dravya one indivisible Pradesh oneness is accepted in entity.
Doubt 443-444
443. Shloka- If entity itself is dravya, guna, paryaya then it should be
one only. i.e. if dravya-guna-paryaya three are one only then any one can be
told. The remaining two should be eliminated since you have negated many-ness
itself.
444. Shloka- But it is not so. i.e. the other two do not get eliminated
since their agglomeration has been described. In Agam the agglomeration of
guna-paryaya only is called as dravya and describing dravya-guna-paryaya all
three is essential. Hence it establishes flawlessly that entity like mirror and
image is several natured one ( joint of several it is one like mirror and image
are together one substance.)
Bhavartha- If dravya-guna-paryaya three are one only then they should be called as
one. Two should be eliminated. If there are three things then it establishes
the entity to be several form and is called as one due to combination of several.
Just as mirror and image are together one substance. Are guna-paryaya together
one entity?
Solution 445-448
445. Shloka- it is alright. In some respect the
entity is anek and in some respects it is ek also. However the reason for anek
is not like mirror and image but according to realisation as follows-
446.Shloka- As a rule the reflection is image which is generated with
combination of face and mirror. If image itself be called as belonging to
mirror then with such belief the entity would be like non entity or the anvaya
would not exist.
Bhavartha- With removal of face the image gets removed from mirror and you believe
it to be part of mirror. Hence with absence of image the mirror would also have
to be accepted as absent. In this way the entity would be like non entity.
Anvaya is not seen that wherever mirror is there , the image should be there
(when image belongs to mirror); without image also mirror is seen. But in
dravya-guna-paryaya such absence of anvaya is not there. Wherever dravya is
there, the guna-paryaya are there. Hence all three in some respect are
coexistent and in some respect they are one.
447. Shloka- If the image belongs to face then this logic also appears to
be told without consideration since by accepting image to be that of face,
vyatirek is not satisfied. Wherever image is not there, there face should also
be not there – thus is vyatirek but this is also unestablished. Where face is
seen there image is not seen also. But dravya-guna-paryaya do not have such
fallacy of Vyatirek. Where dravya is not there the guna-paryaya are also not
there and where guna paryaya are not there, the dravya is also not there. All
three have oneness like colour-taste-smell -touch. Hence in the context of
entity the example of image-mirror is not valid. The entity is not produced
with combination of several ones.
Bhavartha- The example of mirror and image is applicable in the corrupted paryaya of
dravya as per JainSiddhant. Dravya is like mirror and raga is like image but
the natural samanya-vishesh or natural dravya-guna-paryaya cannot be applied
there. Here the subject is not that of corruption. It is that of self
established pure dravya. The examples of milk and gold ore were by combinations
of several entities in one entity form. But the questioner’s example of mirror
and image is meaningful since mirror and image do not have different Pradesh .
Just as Guna-paryaya do not have different Pradesh but the difference is that
in mirror the image is due to others like raga in jiva is due to others while
the guna paryaya is due to self. Hence this is false characteristics and false
example.
Conclusion
448. Shloka- With such analysis the argument of other side believing one
entity to be generated out of several got refuted. He was believing that several different entities can join together
to create one entity. The dravya entity is different, guna entity is different
and paryaya entity is different. The combination of the three together is one
Tattva entity.
Conclusion- Several entities do not make one entity but entity by dravya nature is
self established one. This is proved.
Summary of ‘ek from aspect
of Dravya’
(1) Just as several medicines are joined
together to generate a tablet, there the existences of each medicine is
different and tablet is several medicines based single existence, in the same
way the questioner assuming existences of each guna and paryaya to be different
believes the dravya to be one as their combination.
(2) Just as in milk the part of ghee is
different and that of water is different and both together generate milk as one
, in the same way the guna and paryaya are different and together they make
dravya
(3) Just as in gold ore the gold part is
different from impurity part but they are joined inseparably, in the same way
the guna paryaya have separate existences and together they form entity that
they would never separate. In this way the entity is several together based one
(4) Just as mirror and image are together
one in the same way the guna paryaya are together one entity. In this they
several together is one.
In all four examples above the questioner accepts one entity
as combination of several. In answer author tells that the entity is not
several ones based one but self established one only like mango fruit. The
questioner asked whether it is absolutely one? In answer it is told that just
as different entities are called as Anek but that Anek-ness is not absolute but
base upon aspects it is Anek. For example mango is one which is yellow, soft,
flavoured, sweet . These four are different in experience hence they are Anek.
But these cannot be separated Hence they are not Anek absolutely. The same
oneness of entity is to be realised here. Every entity of the world is self
established one – this is oneness from aspect of dravya. Although from aspect of realisation there is Anek-ness also
, but in reality it is one only in Nishchaya.
Ek from aspect of
Kshetra 449-470
449. Shloka- Call it Kshetra, Pradesh, support for entity, residence of
entity, they all mean the same and they are all entity form only. It is not
that entity is different substance and kshetra is different and in that kshetra
the entity resides. But the entity and its Pradesh mean the same thing. The kshetra of
entity is by itself entity form only.
Bhavartha- The Pradesh of Akash wherein the entity-substance is present is not
called as kshetra of entity. In that kshetra other dravyas are also present.
But the Pradesh where the entity has its own nature, they are called Pradesh of
entity i.e. the Pradesh of own dravya where entity is present is called the
kshetra of dravya.
450. Shloka – Those Pradesh are of three kinds- Some are without parts only
one Desh form, some are innumerable Pradesh form and some are infinite Pradesh
form.
Bhavartha- The single paramanu or kaal dravya has one Pradesh only. Here Pradesh
does not imply the akash which supports the kaal dravya or paramanu but the
Pradesh of paramanu or kaal dravya. Both dravya are single Pradesh form.
Dharma, Adharma and Jiva dravya have innumerable Pradesh. Akash has infinite
Pradesh.
Doubt Clarification
451. Shloka- Just as dravyas having one Pradesh,
Innumerable Pradesh and infinite Pradesh
have been described, in the same way numerable Pradesh dravya should also be
described since such dravyas could be two-anu form, three-anu form pudgala
skandhas. Why they are left out? But such doubt is not valid, since here the
statement is pertaining to Shuddha dravyas and not Upacharit ( formal) dravyas.
Bhavartha- There is no dravya with numerable Pradesh, but it is skandh generated out
of mixing of several pudgala dravyas. Here that is not the subject. Paramanu
and Kaal dravya are not called having numerable Pradesh but they are called
Apradesh having single Pradesh only. In Jain dharma the numerical number starts
with two Pradesh. One is called Apradesh.
452. Shloka- In essence the entity has two
divisions- (1) One Pradesh (2) Several
Pradesh . In both of these for each from aspects of naya there are one and many
forms.
Bhavartha- Here the divisions of Pradesh have been described as two only instead of
three. The innumerable and infinite Pradesh are included in several Pradesh.
The one having one Pradesh , that dravya also from aspect of naya samanya is
one and from aspect of naya Vishesh is several. In the same way the Anek
Pradesh dravya also from aspect of naya samanya is ek and from aspect of naya
vishesh is anek.
Characteristics of oneness
of Kshetra
453. Shloka- How the entity from aspect of kshetra is one is
explained- The entity which is existent
in one Desh of dravya at whichever time, at the same time, for the same dravya,
in all the Desh also, same entity is existent. ( Kaalanu and Shuddha Pudgala
Paramanu have six angles and this characteristics should be applied from
aspects of six angles. From that aspect in them the Anek-ness from aspect of
kshetra would be established in them. This Sutra is basis for Ek-ness characteristics-
it should be borne in mind).
454. Shloka- In this way this is flawless characteristics of entity is
described from aspect of kshetra. Since it is indivisible from aspect of
kshetra hence entity is one .
First false characteristics
and false example 455-456
455. Shloka- Just as in some house one lamp, then second lamp, then third,
then fourth etc. several lamps are lit sequentially then the illumination would
keep enhancing as their number increases. The Kshetra (entity) is not like
that. This Kshetra (entity) does not enhance like illumination of lamp.
456. Shloka- It is not so that just as with extinguishing of some lamp out
of the several lamps kept in the house , the illumination reduces, in the same
way the kshetra ( entity) also reduces. But it remains the same and it does not reduce in any place.
Bhavartha- In this example the illumination of lamps is considered as Kshetra. Just
as the illumination of lamps increases or decreases, in the same way the entity
(kshetra) does not increase or decrease. It always remain the same and
believing increase or decrease in it is the first false characteristics. The
bhava is as follows- Just as in a room the illumination is one due to several
causes i.e. with joining of different parts of Desha the entity has one kshetra
– such belief is false characteristics – therefore it is not so. The entity by
nature is indivisible Desha form. Just as the illumination of lamps increases
or decreases , in the same way the kshetra (entity) does not increase or
decrease. The Desha of soul is innumerable Pradesh which is indivisible one. The
Pradesh are not like pearls in a
necklace wherein they increase or decrease. The innumerable Pradesh of soul are
not like that wherein they have been joint together and they could reduce or
increase. The Kshetra of soul is not one caused by several but is self
established single. In its Kshetra the Anek-ness is from aspect of segments of
Desha which is not similar to illumination of several lamps but instead it is
from aspect of experience. Just as the Pradesh of ant are contracted and that of
elephant are expanded which are directly experienced and for knowledge of kaya
and non-kaya and small-great the imagination of segments of Desha are carried
out, hence they are described as Anek. In reality the indivisible Desha is Ek
only.
Second false
characteristics and false example 457-459
457. Shloka- Just as the entity has defined own Pradesh which always
remain the same hence the same is applicable for Ekness of Kshetra – it is not
so. Since if this way the Ekness is accepted then that usage Kshetra never
changes and always remains same for all, then how can the Anek from aspect of
Kshetra be established? Hence it is not right to establish the Ekness of
kshetra with respect to usage Desha.
Bhavartha- Here the subject is not of Akash kshetra but the own Pradesh of one
dravya is its usage kshetra. Dharma-Adharma soul have innumerable Pradesh which
are their usage Kshetra. Paramanu and Kaalanu have single Pradesh usage
Kshetra. Akash has infinite Pradesh usage Kshetra. The bhava of usage kshetra
is that the dravya experiences own sukh-dukh or the manifestation of own
qualities form deed within himself. His usage kshetra is one only which is
indivisible. Hence the questioner says that since each dravya has fixed usage
Kshetra hence the dravya from aspect of Kshetra is Ek only. Acharya says that
it is ok but now establish the Anek from aspect of kshetra for same. The only
possible way is that they start using more or less Pradesh for usage but this
never happens. Thus Anek cannot be established this way but Jains accepts both
dharmas and not one alone.
458. Shloka- If in reply it is said that the Pradesh of entity undergo
expansion-contraction, thus the usage Kshetra of entity would become Anek. But
such hypothesis is not correct. If with expansion-contraction of Pradesh it is
called as Anek then Anek-ness would not be possible to establish in Akash etc.
all pervasive substances since they do not undergo expansion-contraction.
459. Shloka- And Paramanu and Kaalanu, these two
dravyas have one Pradesh only which also cannot undergo expansion-contraction.
Here also Anek-ness cannot be established. When Anek-ness cannot be established
then Ek-ness of entity from aspect of usage Kshetra also cannot be established.
Third False characteristics
and false example 460-469
460. Shloka- Since the numbers of equal Pradesh of different dravyas
cannot be divided , hence entity is Ek , but from aspect of differentiation the
different dravyas have equal Pradesh of Anek numbers , from this aspect it is
Anek- if this be proposed?
Bhavartha- Just as Jiva is innumerable Pradesh hence it is Anek and since the
Pradesh cannot be separated hence it is Ek. In fact several experts believe so.
But even this is false characteristics. That is explained-
461. Shloka-No. Although several dravyas occupying
the same kshetra like Akash, dharma, adharma, kaal cannot be separated by
kshetra. Since these substances do not have Anek-ness from aspect of Kshetra
hence they cannot have Ek-ness and Anek-ness.
Doubt
462. Shloka- Questioner says that just as Pradesh of a dravya are knitted
in a string, in the same way it is not so for Anek dravyas occupying the same
Kshetra. Since their existences are different.
Bhavartha- The questioner is trying to justify his doubt that just as Pradesh of a
dravya are indivisible , in the same way
in spite of several dravyas sharing same Kshetra they do not have indivisible
Pradesh since they are Anek dravya. Their existences are different. Here only
one dravya is the subject.
Answer
463. Shloka- Just as Pradesh of a substance are indivisible in the same
way it is not so for Anek substances occupying the same space- your this logic
is right but what is the reason due to which in spite of having Anek Pradesh
the entity appears Ek indivisible to you?
Bhavartha- The author wishes to know from questioner that how the Anek Pradesh
entity is called as indivisible Ek ?
Questioner
464. Shloka- The questioner says that the reason the entity appears to be
indivisible in spite of having several Pradesh is that with manifestation
(vibration) in one Desha of entity , all the Desha undergo manifestation(
vibration). Just as with a section of cane undergoing movement results in all
sections undergoing movement. This is the proof for its indivisible nature.
Answer
465. Shloka- The movement of all Desha due to movement of single Desha
cannot be cause for indivisible nature of substance since its does not have
establishing Praman. For Praman it requires Anvaya- Vyatirek establishing
example. If both are applicable then only it can be established. Not by Anvaya
or Vyatirek alone.
Questioner
466. Shloka- The Anvaya sentence is that with vibration of one Desha, all
the Desha vibrate since all Desha have the same existence.
Answer
467. Shloka- The Anvaya sentence is not right. The example is defective
since it makes use of several Paramanu of cane joint together. Every Paramanu
has individual manifestation and together it is called as one in Vyavahara
sense. While in soul with vibration of one desha all the desha do not vibrate.
Bhavartha- This Anvaya is not valid.
Vyatirek sentence of
questioner
468. Shloka- With the non manifestation of one Desha of entity, in all the
Pradesh the manifestation (of Guna) does not occur since they all have same
entity in all the Desha.
Answer
469. Shloka- It is not so. Since the entity is
Utpad-Vyaya-Dhrovya form which keeps continuously manifesting.
Bhavartha- The Vyatirek is invalid since the entity keeps manifesting at all times and in the absence
of manifestation the substance would not exist. Hence without Anvaya-Vaytirek
his example of cane is invalid.
470. Shloka- In the same way other false characteristics should be
discarded completely. Since they do not establish anything.
Summary of Ek-ness from
aspect of Kshetra
Generally experts say that the Pradesh of dravya are
indivisible hence it is Ek and Pradesh are Anek hence it is Anek- just as soul
has innumerable Pradesh hence it is Anek and Pradesh are indivisible hence it
is Ek. But this has been declared as third false characteristics by author. The
reason is that Kaal and Pudgala dravya are single Pradesh form hence Anek would
not apply there. The real rule is that the entity in own one Desha , whichever
way it is existent , that entity is existent in same way in all Desha in same
way. Just as in one Desha of soul the way the entity exists , in the same way
it is everywhere. In the same way the Kaal has six angles. The way the entity
exists in one angle, it is present in the same way in all angles. This is the
right logic.
Continued…..
No comments:
Post a Comment