Eighth Intermediate chapter
Divisions of Praman
(696-719)
696. Shloka- Praman form gyan has two divisions (1) Pratyaksh (direct) and
(2) Paroksh ( indirect). The gyan which does not require any other’s assistance
is Pratyaksh and the gyan which requires assistance of others is Paroksh.
697. Shloka- Pratyaksh has two types (1) Sakal (complete) Pratyaksh and
(2) Vikal (partial) Pratyaksh. The indestructible keval gyan is sakal
pratyaksh. The second vikal pratyaksh is attained with the kshayopasham of
karmas but not because of destruction of karmas hence it is destructible also.
698. Shloka- It clearly means that the gyan which is generated with
destruction of all (dravya and bhava) karmas , is direct within soul , it is
blissful beyond senses, indestructible – that
Kshayik gyan (keval gyan) is pratyaksh.
699. Shloka- The Awadhi and Manah Paryaya gyan are Desh (partial) Pratyaksh. They are called Desh since they
are generated with assistance of No-Indriya form mind and they are called
Pratyaksh since they are independent of assistance of other senses. ( The
recourse to mind is there up to 12th gunasthana.)
700. Shloka- Mati gyan is generated with contact of subject and senses
hence is Paroksh as a rule. The shruta gyan is attained after mati gyan hence
that too is Paroksh.
701. Shloka- In the incomplete knowledge state all the knowledges- mati,
shruta, Awadhi, manah paryaya all four are dependent upon the obscuration and
senses hence these four are really like Paroksh only. ( Awadhi, Manah paryaya
are also dependent upon senses hence they are similar to Paroksh.)
702. Shloka- Awadhi and Manah paryaya gyan which are called Desh Pratyaksh
but this directness in them is only formal and dependent upon implication. In
reality they are not Pratyaksh. ( In Adhyatma they are called as Paroksh only).
Reason for Upachar 703-705
703. Shloka- The reason for upachar is that just as Mati Gyan is senses
generated gyan as a rule, and the shruta gyan is also generated after Mati
Gyan, in the same way the Awadhi and Manah Paryaya gyan are not generated by
senses.
704. Shloka- The first two gyans are dependent upon Avagrah, Iha, Avaya,
Dharana. In the same way the last two are not.
705. Shloka- Awadhi and Manah Paryaya gyan, only with the assistance of
mind know the distant substances as if directly observed effortlessly. Due to
these three reasons both the gyans have been called as Desh Pratyaksh in Upachar
sense. In reality they are Paroksh.
Mati Shruta are also
Pratyaksh like Prime Pratyaksh
706. Shloka- Important thing is that the first two gyans Mati gyan and shruta gyan also become direct
like Pratyaksh gyan at the time of own soul experience and not at other times.
Bhavartha- At the time own soul experience is attained, both these gyans also
directly observe the own soul beyond senses hence they are called Pratyaksh at
that time and not Paroksh.
707. Shloka- Both these Mati Shruta gyan in knowing the subjects of
contact etc. senses and akash etc. subjects, are Paroksh as a rule and not
Pratyaksh ( like at the time of own soul experience).
Doubt
708. Shloka- If at the time of own soul experience the Mati and Shruta
gyan are Pratyaksh then why is it told in Tattvarth Sutra that the first two
gyan are Paroksh ? Secondly in them the characteristics of Paroksh i.e. ‘dependence upon other’s assistance’ is
applicable hence they appear to be paroksh only.
Answer 709-719
709. Shloka- It is right. Where there is no argument in the contemplation
of substance then it is without any greatness. Hence both these gyans in
ordinary way are Paroksh as per the declaration of this sutra.
710. Shloka- But due to destruction of fruition of Mithyatva karma for Samyak Drishti, some such indescribable
shakti is generated that it results in own soul observation as a rule.
711. Shloka- The reason is as follows- at the time of Shuddha own soul
experience the contact, taste, smell, eyes and
ears these five senses are not upayoga form i.e. at the time of Shuddha
own soul experience the sensory knowledge is not generated.
712. Shloka- But only mind is engaged at that time . That mind is of two
types (1) Dravya mind and (2) Bhava mind. The mind is called as No-Indriya i.e.
(not- sense).
713. Shloka- The dravya mind is lotus form in heart which occupies
innumerable fraction of one ghan-angul ( cubic- finger) space. Although it is
non-consciousness form – corporeal , even so when bhava mind is directed upon
the subject of senses , at that time the dravya mind assists it. ( assistance
means nimitta only).
714. Shloka- Bhava mind is special manifestation of soul in knowledge
form. On account of destruction of its opponent – obscuration form karmas, it
manifests in Labdh (attainment) and
Upayoga (application) form sequentially.
715. Shloka- Touch, taste, smell, eyes and ears , all these five senses
know only corporeal substance only but mind knows corporeal-non corporeal both.
716. Shloka- Hence it is established flawlessly that for knowing own soul,
mind alone is applicable as a rule but the difference is that the mind in special state i.e. time of
own pure soul experience, it becomes gyan form by itself.
Bhavartha – It has been stated earlier that though own soul experience is Mati Gyan
form or subsequent Shruta Gyan form also
, even so it is Pratyaksh gyan form like
independent gyan. The same is clarified here. Although Mati Shruta are
Paroksh and they are generated with senses and mind, the mind is capable of
knowing non corporeal also. At the time when only own soul is being known , at
that time the mind form gyan is non corporeal only. Hence it is Pratyaksh
beyond senses. The senses know only corporeal substances hence they do not have
role in own soul Pratyaksh.
717. Shloka- This is not unestablished and has been told by sutra also
that Matigyan and subsequent shruta gyan both are generated with senses and
mind.
718. Shloka- The bhava is this that when bhava mind is engaged in knowing
own non corporeal soul then it becomes non corporeal form by itself. With that
non corporeal mind form gyan the soul is observed directly. Hence it is
Pratyaksh beyond senses for sure. In other words the gyan of mind which knows
only the own soul is surely Pratyaksh beyond senses.
Next Introduction- This mati shruta gyan form bhava mind
is accepted to be Pratyaksh at the time
of own soul experience and due to this reason only the Keval gyan gets
generated. Awadhi, Manh Paryaya gyan are not means for generation of keval
gyan.
719. Shloka- For establishment of soul properly the Mati ,Shruta , these
two gyans only are the real means. The reason is that without Awadhi and Manah
Paryaya gyans one can attain Moksha but cannot do so without Mati Shruta.
Description of divisions of Praman is
completed.
Ninth Intermediate Chapter
Description of Pramanabhas
(720-737)
720.Shloka- In the doctrines of Jains only, such
arrangement of Praman exists. It is not there in other faiths. This subject is
controversial since in several faiths the form of Praman is described
differently as follows-
721. Shloka- Mithya Gyani followers of Vedant faith say that Ved only is
Praman since they are not created by any person and they are self established
like sky.
722. Shloka- Other faith people ( Naiyayiks) believing themselves to be
Pandit, describe the form of Praman this
way – the means of Praman is Praman ( Prama is named as result of Praman. The
supreme means for Prama is Praman as per Naiyayiks). Some other say that the
means for Samyak Gyan is Praman. Those who accept such form of Praman are
Vaisheshiks and Bauddha etc. faiths who accept illumination, substance, contact
etc. to be Praman.
723. Shloka- Those who have not attained the form of soul as beyond
senses and who are unnecessarily burning
themselves with false pride of being Aapt ( omniscient) , such different faith
people describe the form of Praman as per their desire.
724. Shloka- The forms of Praman described above are all defective since
the characteristics of Praman itself is not satisfied with it. Whatever
characteristics are provided they are defective with flaws of characteristics
and unintelligent. They all appear like flowers of the sky and are contradictory
as follows-
725. Shloka- In any way, other than gyan any corporeal substance
cannot be Praman. Without gyan who would accept insentient means, contact,
senses etc. to be Praman? No one.
Bhavartha- The result of Praman is Prama – removal of ignorance. Hence its reason
should also be of the form of eliminator of agyan necessarily. Hence Praman
should also be agyan eliminator gyan form. The corporeal substances are Prameya
( subjects of knowledge) . They cannot be Praman. The one knowing self only can
be knower of others. The one who is
himself Agyan form , he cannot know self or others anyone. Hence the means etc.
which are corporeal cannot be Praman. But gyan only is Praman.
726. Shloka- If it is said that the means etc. are external cause and
internally they are known by gyan only hence with gyan being merged with them,
it can be said that means etc. along with gyan are Praman – then it is told
that this establishes what Jains are telling that Gyan only is Praman. Why not
accept it?
Doubt
727. Shloka- The questioner says that gyan is result form hence gyan
should be accepted as result of Praman. The means for that gyan should be
accepted to be Praman.
If gyan itself is accepted to be Praman then the purpose of gyan is already
over- Praman would be without result?
Bhavartha- It is the intent of questioner that Praman and its result should be
separate and Praman should be with result only. In such conditions the gyan can
be accepted to be result of Praman and the means of that gyan ( corporeal
senses etc. ) can be accepted to be Praman. If it is not accepted and gyan is
accepted as Praman then what would be result of Praman? It would be absent?
Answer 728-737
728. Shloka- It is not so since Praman, its result and its means, is gyan
itself . Example- Just as lamp illuminates others as well as itself , hence
lamp is illuminator as well as illuminated both.
Bhavartha- Like example of lamp the Praman is also Gyan. The cause for Praman is
also Gyan and result of Praman is also gyan. There is no Praman different from
gyan nor its result. Here the doubt still remains that by accepting both to be
gyan form all would become same i.e. Praman would be without result and result
would be without Praman. But upon consideration this doubt is invalid. In Jain
Siddhant Praman and result of Praman are not absolutely different but different
in some aspect. In the differentiation
in some aspect the previous paryaya of gyan is Praman form and later paryaya is
result form. Since the result of Praman is elimination of agyan and veneration
& rejection and detachment are also results of Praman. The Praman form gyan
has eliminated agyan and in the same the intellect of veneration &
rejection and detachment are the results
of Praman. Hence gyan only is Praman and gyan only is result. Thus Praman and
result of Praman both would be same, or the Praman would be without result –
this doubt is clarified.
729. Shloka- Sometimes senses, sometimes senses in contact with its
subjects, sometimes gyan, in this way three types of Prama ( result of Praman)
are told by Vaisheshiks.
730. Shloka- In these three the first is cause and next is its result as
per them. With this logic it establishes that gyan itself is the result and
gyan only is Praman.
Bhavartha- (1) Sometimes senses have been called as Praman. Sometimes Praman and
contact with subjects is called Praman. Sometimes gyan only is called Praman.
In this way the reasons of Prama (result) have been declared. All the three are
states of soul. First senses form state is that of soul. Next the contact form
specific state is also that of soul. Thirdly the state of gyan is also state of
soul hence all the three are gyan form. In these three the first is cause and
next is result. Hence it establishes with logic that gyan is result and gyan
only is Praman (2) In Vaisheshiks the three causes for Prama are accepted. 1.
Senses 2. Contact and senses and 3. Gyan. Of them the result of senses is
senses along with contact and result of contact and senses is Praman. In this
way in Vaisheshiks the middle cause is result form with respect to previous
cause and with respect to later cause
the middle cause is result as well as cause form , in the same way gyan is
result form with respect to elimination of agyan and from aspect of Praman
generation it is Praman form. Hence
Praman form gyan only is itself result and giver of result- this acceptance is
logical.
731. Shloka- In them also when Gyan is cause, at that time result is attained since
previous gyan functions as cause and later gyan results and this is not
unestablished.
Bhavartha- When in gyan is accepted as cause form Praman, at that time, with
coexistent with gyan the rejection of despicable, acceptance of venerable and
elimination of agyan form result of Praman gets established.
732. Shloka- The means is also Gyan and objective is also Gyan – this is
not unestablished but famous with example. It is well known that without gyan
the rejection of snake etc. harmful substances and acceptance of garland etc.
desirable substances is not done.
Bhavartha- The form of Praman is described as follows- “ Which is capable of
attainment of desirable and rejection of undesirable- that is Praman and that
can be Gyan only and not other contacts etc.” The desirable are sukh and means
for sukh while undesirable are dukh and means for dukh. The one which is
capable of attainment of desirable and rejection of undesirable , that only is Praman and such Praman can be
Gyan only. Since knowledge of sukh and causes for sukh and knowledge of dukh
and causes for dukh can only be there from
Gyan and not corporeal substances. Gyan has the capability that it
provides intellect to discard snake etc. form undesirable substances and accept
garland etc. form desirable substances. Hence Praman can be Gyan only and
result is also Gyan form. This is generally well established since the result
of Praman should be elimination of Agyan. Such result can be gyan only and not
corporeal.
733. Shloka- Whatever has been told as
characteristics of Praman by the false doctrines with their own desire, that is
not characteristics declared by Arhat (Jain). It has defects of
characteristics. Hence that is apparent characteristics ( lakshana-bhas)
Bhavartha- The characteristics of Praman believed by other faiths have defects of
Avyapti ( non-pervasive) , Ati Vyapti (over pervasive) and Asambhava (
impossible). The same is clarified as follows-
734. Shloka- If Praman is target and PramaKaran ( the cause for Praman) is the characteristics then it
gives rise to non-pervasive defect since in their faith that characteristics is
always absent.
Bhavartha- Naiyayiks believe Ishwara to be Praman but they do not accept Ishwara as
the cause for Praman but they accept him as support for Praman. In their faith
Ishwara is Praman even then he does not have characteristics of being cause for
Praman. Hence in absence of characteristics of Praman in the single Desh
-Ishwara of the target, it results in non pervasive defect.
735. Shloka- In the same way the cause for Praman as the characteristics of Praman is not valid in
the Gyan of Yogis also. Since those people have accepted the Gyan of Yogis as
divine and they believe that it directly observes the sookshma and non
corporeal substances , but in Parmanu etc. substances the contact of senses is
not possible as a rule.
Bhavartha- Vaisheshiks have accepted the gyan of yogis as Praman and they believe
that those Yogis know the Paramanu etc. sookshma substances by means of
capability beyond senses and not due to direct sense vision. Hence in the Gyan
of the yogis also the characteristics of Praman of the form of cause for Praman
is not valid since in their faith the contact with senses has been accepted as
cause for Praman but senses cannot have contact with Paramanu etc. sookshma
substances which are not visible to senses. Hence the characteristics of praman
is defective with non pervasive fault.
Consideration of Ved as
Praman
736. Shloka- Ved is Praman ( such is the belief of Vedant) and the cause
for Praman is due to being created by non-human being, But that cause of being
non-human is dependent upon Agam where it is written. Hence that cause is
other’s dependent.
Bhavartha – The believers of Ved as Praman believe its non human nature as the means
of Praman of Ved. They say that the people are corrupted with raga-dwesha hence
the nature of substance described by people cannot be valid (true) and that narrated by non humans can only be
true. Ved are created by non human hence they are Praman. In this way they
establish Praman nature of Ved. But this cause for validity of Ved as being non
human is established by Agam only and not by logic. Hence this cause being
dependent upon Agam is dependent upon others which cannot be accepted as proper
justification since each faith believes their Agam only to be Praman. But
common people can be made to accept Praman
by logic only. In short this means of non humanity being dependent upon
Agam is not accepted
737. Shloka- In this way whichever different faiths of false nature are
prevalent, they are all invalid and not acceptable by experienced knowledgeable
Syadvadi people.
The description of Pramanabas is
completed.
Tenth Intermediate Chapter
Description of Nikshep (738-745)
Resolution
738. Shloka- The characteristics of Praman which can be experienced was
described in accordance with knowledge of Agam. Now briefly the form of Nikshep
is described as per their characteristics.
Doubt
739. Shloka- Nikshep is neither Naya nor Praman and nor their part. The purpose of Nikshep is
different from Naya Praman. Having different purpose their characteristics are
different. Hence the objective should also be independent. Therefore Nikshep
being different from Naya Praman should have independent description like them?
Answer
740. Shloka- Its alright. The substance has qualities in accordance with
the naya and at the same time is expects opposite naya also but Nikshep does
not have such characteristics. The imposition of qualities upon a substance is
Nikshep. This Nikshep is only formal for managing in Vyavahara sense.
Bhavartha- By describing the forms of Naya and Nikshep the doubt gets clarified. The
biggest difference is that naya is real gyan vikalpa and Nikshep is only
pointers used in Vyavahara sense. In four types of Niksheps it is applied in
this way- Naam- In substance not having
those qualities it is imposition for purpose of vyavahara in the substance.
Sthapana- imposition of qualities on a substance not having them. Dravya –
Imposition of future qualities in present. Bhava- Imposition of present
qualities only in Present substance . In this way Nikshep is imposition of
qualities.
741. Shloka- That Nikshep is of four types (1) Naam (2) Sthapana (3)
Dravya (4) Bhava. Now their characteristics are described in accordance with
their nature.
742. Shloka- (1) In a substance though the qualities do not exist in
accordance with its name, even then for practical purposes giving it a name is
Naam Nikshep. Just as if some person does not have qualities to conquer the
karmas and he is Mithya Drishti. Even then his calling name is given as ‘Jin’.
(2) Some similar shaped substance, even though not having those qualities are
called with the spirit of them as ‘this is same’. Such Vyavahara is Sthapana
Nikshep like an idol. ( worshipping idol of Mahveer in temple which is made of
stone and not having those qualities.)
743. Shloka- Where there is no consideration of Riju Sutra Naya ( which
deals with only present) but which is spoken from aspect of future Naigam etc.
Nayas , that is Dravya Nikshep. For example calling a Chhadmastha jiva to be
Jin is dravya nikshep.
Bhavartha- The subject of Riju Sutra Naya is present and that of Bhavi Naigam Naya
is “ surely going to happen” . Without consideration of RijuSutra naya only
from aspect of Bhavi Naigam Naya the one going to happen is described in
present is Dravya Nikshep. For example present Chhadmastha jiva to be called as
Jin is dravya Nikshep. Bhagwan also is called in garbh, birth, house holder states also as
Kevali Jina from aspect of this naya.
744. Shloka- The paryaya of a substance in present being described
accordingly is Bhava Nikshep. For example calling the Arihant stationary in
Samosharan , without four ghatia karmas, equipped with infinite gyan etc.
foursome, having divine param audarik body as Jin is Bhava Nikshep. Now Agam proof is
provided by author-
Shloka- The person with Jin name is Naam Jin. The idol of Jinendra
Deva is Sthapana Jin. The one going to
become Jin in future is dravya Jin and the Bhagwan stationary in Samosharan is
Bhava Jin.
Conclusion
745.Shloka- Here brief nature of the four Nikshep is provided. Its detail
form should be known from Agam in Jivas etc. different substance with example.
Bhavartha- The author has not described Nikshep much since they are not used in
Adhyatma much. They are used more in Agam hence author has included them.
Continued…..
No comments:
Post a Comment