Establishment of Vyavahara
naya 637-641
Doubt
637. Shloka- If Vyavahara naya is Mithya only, then only Nishchaya naya would
be venerable. If Vyavahara naya is Mithya and useless then why should it be
stated at all?
Answer 638-639
638. Shloka- The above doubt is not valid since upon argument on some
subject or due to doubt on some subject or upon consideration of some
substance, the recourse to Vyavahara naya is forcibly carried out for sure. For
deciding upon the boundaries of substance the gyan which takes recourse to both
Nishchaya naya and Vyavahara naya, that gyan only is considered to be Praman
gyan.
Bhavartha- In the gatha the ‘forcibly’ term is important. The Mumukshu jiva does not
have desire for Vyavahara naya even then due to raga within himself, it is
forcibly used.
639. Shloka- Hence depending upon context the Vyavahara naya is worthy of
taking recourse to for some. It is suitable for recourse to those who have
knowledge with vikalpa. For those who are in Nirvikalpa knowledge form, this naya is not
beneficial.
Bhavartha- In Nirvikalpa gyan the Praman Naya Nikshepa are not applied hence the one
who are Nirvikalpa do not have any business with Vyavahara naya.
Where one does not identify the substance described by
Nishchaya naya, there the decision of substance is carried out with Vyavahara
naya. In lower state the ‘Vyavahara naya is not venerable ‘ – keeping such
spirit of renouncement the Vyavahara naya is useful for realising the nature of
substance. In other words those who use Vyavahara in Upachar sense and decide
upon the substance, then by having spirit of renouncement towards Vyavahara
naya, it is called worthwhile but those who use Vyavahaar naya like Nishchaya
naya and accept it as real even in slightest then it become harmful.
Doubt
640. Shloka- Why the establishment of desired is
not carried out by one naya (Nishchaya) alone. The settlement of argument and
consideration of substance can also be done by Nishchaya. Hence accept only
Nishchaya naya? What is the purpose of accepting Vyavahara naya?
Answer
641. Shloka- The doubt raised above is not right since both nayas are
different. The Nishchaya naya is indescribable also. With it the substance
cannot be described. Hence for attainment of Teerth, some naya is required
which can be spoken.
Bhavartha- For these purposes the Nishchaya naya is not suitable hence only
Nishchaya naya cannot be accepted. For
attainment of Teerth i.e. (1) for removal of doubt and misunderstanding with
respect to Jain darshan (2) For elimination of wrong concept regarding the
nature of substance (3) if some doubt exists within self then for deciding
based upon thinking or attainment of special gyan by contemplation (4) for
explaining to disciple by Guru – the Vyavahara naya is suitable.
Next Introduction- With establishment of Vyavahara naya
from 637 to 641 now with 642-644 it is explained that subject of Vyavahara and
Nishchaya is one dravya only. The only difference is that Vyavahara is
differentiation form and Nishchaya is non differentiation form. The subject of
Vyavahara is revealed in words and Vikalpa . The subject of Nishchaya is not
revealed in words and vikalpa but can be experienced. “Neti” term represents
very fine word or vikalpa which is just pointer towards indivisible subject
which can be experienced. Its subject is indivisible indescribable.
Subject of Nishchaya naya
642-644
Doubt
642. Shloka- What is the subject of
Nishchaya naya, taking recourse to which the Gyan manifests in Nishchaya
form since in the absence of all Vishesh, definitely complete absence only is
experienced ?
Answer 643-644
643. Shloka- The doubt raised above is clarified that whatever is the
subject of Vyavahara naya , upon removal of all vikalpas ( differentiations)
what remains, that is the subject of Nishchaya naya.
644. Shloka- In context of subject of Nishchaya naya there is example
also. Just as the fire of straw (fire of dung- fire of coal) or hot fire – such
vikalpa form Vyavahara is there , at that time in the absence of all the
vikalpas of the form of fire of straw or coal specifics also, the fire is known
to be hot by means of contact etc.
Bhavartha- From aspect of heat calling the fire to be hot or with the nimitta of
straw calling the fire to be fire of straw is Vyavahara naya and negator of
Vyavahara is Nishchaya naya. The subject described by Vyavahara naya is
one dharma form each but the negator of
all the divisions of Vyavahara is subject of Nishchaya naya. The subject of
this Nishchaya naya being absence form of vikalpa of vyavahara naya, it has no
divisions. Just as fire is known by knowledge of touch etc. also , in the same
way the subject of Nishchaya naya in spite of being indescribable it can be known by gyan.
The negation does not imply absence of subject but Shuddha indivisible dravya.
Next Introduction- Now after informing subject of
Nishchaya naya , one secret is told that in spite of reaching so far, so long as recourse to Nishchaya naya is
there, till then also he is Para-Samayi
i.e. Mitha Drishti. When abandoning the Nishchaya naya also he attains state
beyond nayas i.e. in own experience state, then he is Samyak Drishti.
The one taking recourse to
Nishchaya naya also is Para-Samayi , only one beyond Nayas is own experience
form – its establishment 645-653
Doubt
645. Shloka- The one taking recourse to Vyavahara naya, just as he is
ParaSamayi from Samanya aspect i.e. He is Mithya Drishti devoid of own
experience, in the same way , how the one taking recourse to Nishchaya naya is
also ParaSamayi i.e. Mithya Drishti -devoid of own experience ? The intent of
our question is that the one taking recourse to Vyavahara naya is called Mithya
Drishti – that is alright but why the one taking recourse to Nishchaya naya is
also called Mithya Drishti?
Bhavartha- Earlier in 506-510 all nayas have been declared as unreal and despicable.
From this it appears that both taking recourse to Vyavahara naya and Nishchaya
naya are ParaSamayi i.e. Mithya Drishti. It may be alright to call the one
taking recourse to Vyavahara naya as ParaSamayi but why the one taking recourse
to Nishchaya naya is also called as ParaSamayi? After all the one who has
abandoned Vyavahara and come into Nishchaya, he should be called as Swa-Samayi?
The one who is engaged in Nirviklapa state
above Nishchaya should also be called as swa-samayi. The one who is dependent
upon Vyavahara naya should only be called Parasamayi i.e. Mithya Drishti. But
the one taking recourse to Nishchaya naya should not be called ParaSamayi i.e.
Mitha Drishti?
Answer 646- 653
646. Shloka- Your doubt is valid. There is something special which is
quite minute since that speciality is
worthy of being preached by Guru. The importance of own experience is different
from the side of Nishchaya naya.
Bhavartha- The Vyavahara naya preaches false meaning hence it is Mithya and
negatable. The one having Drishti upon such Vyavahara is also Mithya Drishti.
Nishchaya naya is Samyaktva – it is like Nirvikalpa and the one having Drishti
upon is Samyak Drishti (629-630). Hence
the one with Nishchaya naya is not ParaSamayi (Mithya Drishti). Such doubt is
true but there is something more – The one taking recourse to Nishchaya naya,
as per the preachment of Atma-Gyani Guru traverses beyond vikalpa (raga) and
reveals own soul experience and becomes Samyak Drishti – even then prior to own
soul experience so long as that person taking recourse to Nishchaya naya has
viklapa ( raga-knowingly), till then he also is ParaSamayi.
647. Shloka- As per the preachment of Guru, ( with Agam Praman) and being
Savikalpa form ( this logic) and experience in accordance with it, all the
nayas are ParaSamaya and the one taking recourse to them is ParaSamayi i.e. Mithya Drishti and
devoid of own soul experience.
Bhavartha- All the nayas are vikalpa form and
mixed with raga. Although between the subject of Vyavahara naya and Nishchaya
naya there is difference, even then all nayas have raga part . Hence till jiva
does not get beyond the vikalpa form raga and does not become Nirvikalpa till
then he is Parasamayi. It establishes that Samyak Drishti does not take recourse
to Nishchaya naya also. Nishchaya naya being vikalpa form is also unreal. Hence
being with vikalpa the Nishchaya naya is also established to be Mithya and in
experience also it is known that all
Nayas are Mithya. The one taking recourse to them is Mithya Drishti.
648. Shloka- The greatness of own soul experience is as follows- In
Vyavahara naya the vikalpas pertaining to viewing the parts of the substance
are generated and in Nishchaya naya on account of acceptance of indivisible
substance the negation form vikalpas are generated. In the swa-samaya state
there is neither procedural method of Vyavahara naya nor negation subject of
Nishchaya naya. Only consciousness of
soul is experienced.
Bhavartha- The greatness of own soul experience is illuminated by the state engaged
in swa-samaya which is as follows- The Vyavahara naya is preacher of
differentiation hence it generates vikalpas informing of division while
Nishchaya naya negates it hence this too is negation form vikalpa. In this way
both nayas are vikalpa form. Hence the subject of Nishchaya naya is also raga
mixed contemplation. Beyond the vikalpas the nirvikalpa own soul experience is
swa-samaya directed state and the state prior to that is called as para-samaya.
Here the message is that own soul experience does not get revealed with
Vyavahara naya and even with nishchaya
naya vikalpa is generated in the beginning and the Gyani Gurus have advised to
reveal the pure soul state by carrying out purushartha.
649. Shloka- The example is that of a person engaged in dhyan of bull. In
dhyan state he believes that this is
bull and I am serving him. With such vikalpaa he takes recourse to this naya
while its gyan exists.
650. Shloka- After long time or carrying out dhyan again and again with
capability of swa-kaal , he transforms into bull form . Then at that time being
only bull form i.e. experiencing as bull it is called as experience of bull.
651. Shloka- In the same way some person is engaged in the dhyan of his
soul. While in dhyan he generates vikalpa that I am soul and I only experience
it. So long as such vikalpa form knowledge is there till then he is engaged in
naya.
652. Shloka- After long period or with capability of swa-kaal that soul
becomes Nirvikalpa therefore I am worshiper and I only am worshipped – in this
way removing vikalpa of worshipped-worshiper he gets immersed in own soul ,
then he experiences own soul and at that time only soul experience is attained.
Bhavartha- example- Just as person engaged in dhyan of bull firstly “ I am worshiper
of bull- want to be bull” he imagines in such way , till then being engaged in
imaginations- differentiations , that person is engaged in Vyavahara naya .
When eliminating the imaginations “ I am bull” such vikalpa is generated then
he is taking recourse to Nishchaya naya. When with dhyan he immersed in it then
he experiences the bull form in nirvikalpa manner. At that time he has only
bull experience. In the same way the person engaged in own soul experience , so
long as “ this soul is mine – I am engaged in its experience” etc. form
imaginations , till then he is engaged
in Vyavahara naya. Subsequently he becomes engaged in Nishchaya naya. At that
time “ I am indivisible Shuddha consciousness form soul” such indivisible vikalpa is generated – this
is state of Nishchaya naya. Later when he becomes immersed in own soul dhyan
and gets beyond viklapas with knowledge , then the nirvikalpa state which is
generated is called as own soul experience. This is beyond Nishchaya naya.
653. Shloka- Hence like Vyavahara naya, Nishchaya naya is also not means
for soul experience since even in that “ this is soul. I am it’s owner” such
vikalpa gets generated for sure.
Bhavartha- The subject of Vyavahara naya is anyway Mithya since by its means the
soul experience is not attained. Even Nishchaya naya is Vikalpa form and the
soul experience is attained in a later state, hence Nishchaya naya is also not
real means for nirvikalpa own soul experience since even in that “ this is
nature of soul, and I am its swamy” such vikalpa gets generated.
Next Introduction – Now it is told that so long as
recourse to Nishchaya naya is there, till then the recourse to Vyavahara is
also there since one naya does not remain alone. Both are mutually relative.
When positive vikalpa is there then negative vikalpa is also required.
The mutual dependence of
both naya and Mithya Drishti taking recourse to them 654-655
Doubt
654. Shloka- If only Nishchaya naya
side is followed independent of Vyavahara naya then it would be means
for soul experience ? If we believe thus?
Answer
655. Shloka- It is not so. In such belief anomaly of impossible nature is
incurred. No naya is independent nor can it be. For positive, negative is also
necessary and with negation the positive is required.
Bhavartha- In describing nayas as independent there is flaw of impossibility. The
reason is that in the primacy of positive the negative is present in secondary
form and vice versa. Then only naya is suitable as naya statement. Hence the
above doubt of independent nayas is not valid. Naya makes one aspect of
substance as subject. Hence describing a specific aspect it surely keeps
expectation of second part. Otherwise in
independent state it cannot be called naya at all. In the statement of positive
the aspect of negation and vice versa is essential. Therefore the Vyavahara and
Nishchaya naya are mutually relative.
Next Introduction- Nishchaya naya deals with indivisible
dravya and Vyavahara naya deals with each part of it. Hence as a rule Nishchaya
naya can be one and Vyavahara naya would be many. Same is analysed.
Nishchaya naya is not many
– is one only 656-661
Doubt
656. Shloka- Just as Vyavahara naya accepts one part each and thus are
many, in the same way the Nishchaya naya should be many by joining all of them
together?
Bhavartha- Just as by accepting each part the
Vyavahara naya are many, in the same way for negating each Vyavahara naya, the
Nishchaya naya should also be many. Hence accepting Nishchaya naya to be one is
not right?
Answer 657-661
657. Shloka- It is not so since the Vyavahara naya by making each dharma
of the infinite dharmas as subject is many, but Nishchaya naya is one only and
not many. Since
its characteristics is “not so”. Therefore whatever Vyavahara naya states ,
negating same is its characteristics. Hence whatever be the number of dharmas
described, negating all alone is the job of Nishchaya naya. Hence it is one
only and not many.
Bhavartha- The statement of questioner is not valid since the substance has infinite
dharmas and by dealing each dharma as subject, the Vyavahara naya are many.
However in negating Vyavahara naya the
Nishchaya naya does not become many since it jus implies “ not so” which is one
only. It is always of one type.
658. Shloka- Why Nishchaya naya is one only, in this aspect there is
example of gold also. Just as gold free of impurity of copper is different, the
same way it is free of impurity of silver. Thus free of all impurities the gold
is one only.
Bhavartha- Just gold free of copper is one , in the same way it is free of silver
also. Thus free of impurities the pure gold does not have many forms. Hence in
the absence of differentiations, the drvaya samanya does not have many-ness.
Hence Nishchaya naya cannot be many.
659. Shloka- Thus those people are refuted who believe nishchaya naya to
be many due to fault of their gyan. For example-
660. Shloka- Shuddha Dravyarthika naya is one . Its name is Shuddha
Nishchaya naya. Second is Ashuddha Dravyarthika naya. Its name is ashuddha
Nishchaya naya. Thus Nishchaya naya has two divisions.
661. Shloka- Thus those faiths accepting different divisions of Nishchaya
naya are Mithya Drishti. Definitely it is against the doctrine of omniscient.
Bhavartha- Nishchaya naya does not have divisions of Shuddha, Ashuddha etc. such is
Jain Siddhant. It is only negation form one and represents indivisible samanya
substance. Those who divide it are against the doctrine of omniscient. Hence they
are Mithya Drishti. The indivisible
Samanya has different parts which are represented by Vyavahara naya hence they
surely are many.
Bhavartha again- In Dravya Sangrah etc. granths the divisions of Shuddha
Dravyarthika naya and ashuddha Dravyarthika naya are seen , those are another
names for Paryayarthika ( Vyavahara) naya only – only word is different. The
purpose is same. In other granths for nimitta i.e. other substance the
Vyavahara naya is described, which should be treated as statement of nimitta.
Only style of Acharya is different . The reason is those acharyas had to show
samanya different, swabhava paryaya different, vibhava paryaya different and
other dravya of the form of nimitta as different. Hence to explain to beginner
disciple they divided into so many nayas. Upon analysing the objective is same
as that of Panch Dhyayi. For example the raga is called as Ashuddha
Dravyarthika naya , its bhava is the Asadbhoot Vyavahara naya describing the
raga. Shuddha Dravyarthika naya is Upacharita Sadbhoot Vyavahara naya
describing swabhava paryaya. The Vyavahara naya of kartritva of one substance
in another should be understood as statement of nimitta then he is not Mithya
Drishti since he has realised the objective of Acharya. But if he treats the
same as reality then he is Mithya Drishti. Samyak Drishti and Mithya Drishti is
depending upon the intent. The words are the intent of speaker. If wrong intent
is taken then he is Mithya Drishti. Such is the meaning of author.
Next Introduction- Now it is told that substance is
Ubhaya (joint) form. Hence firstly the relative aspects of both nayas should be
understood and then with Moksha Marga of
samyak Gyan darshan charitra one should
purify the soul. Should not remain stuck in vikalpas.
The relative aspects of the
two nayas and the benefit of their knowledge
662. Shloka- The Jiva etc. substances should be known by Vyavahara and
Nishchaya naya without contradiction with mutual aspects ( not independent) and
thus known substances can be nimitta for soul purification.
Bhavartha- Without contradiction between Vyavahara and Nishchaya naya, the Jivas
etc. substances should be known by Vyavahara and Nishchaya such that the gyan
could be nimitta for soul purification. Remember that the Vyavahara Nishchaya
nayas should be applied upon foursome of one substance only in Jivas etc.
substances. Then the real knowledge of substance would be applied for soul
purification otherwise it would be converse as follows-
If it is understood that what is raga and subject of which
naya then understand that it is bhava of
soul and belongs of foursome of soul. Hence naya can be applied on it. It is
not nayabhas – and since that is naimittik bhava – guest bhava – transitory
hence Vyavahara naya would be applicable. When he understands this then he
would realise that this bhava can be removed from soul with purushartha and
soul can be purified and the Samanya Shuddha Atma which is subject of Nishchaya
would remain behind. In this way by understanding the two nayas relatively the
soul purification can be attained. However if he considers the foursome of own
substance as Nishchaya and the statements of other substance as sadbhoot
vyavahara – if he understands the mutual
relationship as activity of one substance in another then that naya gyan would
be nayabhas and cause for strengthening Mithyatva. Hence nayas should be used
very carefully.
Next Introduction- In previous shloka, the preachment was with respect to gyan, now
it is given with respect to belief. Knowing subjects of both nayas by means of
gyan the subject of Vyavahara should be despised and subject of Nishchaya
should be treated as venerable since the subject of Nishchaya is Samanya
substance only. With recourse to it only, attaining Nirvikalpa state the soul can be realised.
Success of Nishchaya Naya
663. Shloka- The cause for Nishchaya naya is Samanya substance as a rule
and attainment of gyan form soul free of all karma impurities is the benefit of
Nishchaya naya.
Continued…..
No comments:
Post a Comment