GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCH DHYAYI…24

 

Fifth Intermediate chapter

Establishment of nine Padarthas 901-957

Resolution

901. Shloka- From aspect of substance, the jiva is Shuddha i.e. having samanya  form which is established from aspect of Shuddha naya. But the same jivaa from aspect of bonded-unbonded naya i.e. paryaya Drishti is ashuddha i.e. nine tattva form which too is not unestablished i.e. established only. ( Samanya is subject of Nishchaya naya and Ashuddha is subject of Vyavahara naya . The nine tattvas are ashuddha and samanya residing within them is Shuddha )

Bhavartha- (1) In Nitya-Anitya Adhikar it has been told that just as substance is self established by nature, in the same way it manifests also by nature. Based on this rule the jiva is substance and manifests also.  (2) The substance is shuddha while manifestation is called Ashuddha . (3) Shuddha naya represents trikaal samanya while bonded-unbonded naya represents both the shuddha-ashuddha manifestations of the jiva . The bonded is ragi paryaya while unbonded is veetragi paryaya. The naya which makes Shuddha-ashuddha both paryayas as subject i.e. just paryaya alone as subject is bonded-unbonded naya. (4) The Shuddha samanya form of jiva has been described in 798-800 and now his ashuddha form i.e. nine tattvas shall be described now. The essence is that jiva is a substance which has samanya form as established earlier. Now it is told that jiva is ashuddha also and manifests in Shuddha -ashuddha form which is nine tattvas form. Here the ashuddha states of nine tattvas will be described. Naya are of two kinds. One is Shuddha naya i.e. Nishchaya naya. The other is bonded-unbonded naya which is Vyavahara naya. The subject of Shuddha naya is samanya , undifferentiated, one and subject of Vyavahara naya is specific, differentiated, several, nine tattvas form. 

The Characteristics of nayas

902. Shloka- Complete Shuddha naya is one, undifferentiated and free of vikalpa(raga). Vyavahara naya is several, differentiated and along with vikalpa (raga).

Bhavartha- In Moksha Marg the naya have two divisions- (a) Nishchaya (b) Vyavahara.

(a) (1) Nishchaya naya is one only and it does not have divisions of Shuddha ashuddha etc. (2) Differentiation is called conflict and undifferentiated is conflict free. The subject of Nishchaya naya is Samanya without divisions. Hence Nishchaya naya is conflict free. (3) Vikalpa implies raga also and divisions also. Nirvikalpa means without raga. Nishchaya naya is without raga since its subject is samanya which is beyond words. Anything described would cause differentiation. Samanya does not have any word to denote it while raga is based upon words. Hence Samanya is Nirvikalpa and subject of experience.

(b) (1) Dividing in order is Vyavahara. Hence naya having divisions as subject is Vyavahara naya. (2) There are several divisions of Vyavahara, sadbhoot, asadbhoot etc. hence it is several. (3) Its subject is paryaya-manifestation. Nine tattvas are divisions form. (4) Where raga is found that is savikalpa. Raga is dominant in Vyavahara naya hence it is called savikalpa. Thus the two nayas are described.

Subject of Nayas 903-909

903. Shloka- The subject of Shuddha naya is conscious natured Shuddha jiva (samanya) . In the subject of Vyavahara naya the jiva etc. nine Padartha are special states of jiva as subject.

Bhavartha- These nine padartha are divisions of jiva’s ashuddha state. Ashuddha jiva only attains these nine states hence from aspect of vyavahara naya nine padartha are stated.

Doubt

904. Shloka- Real Samyaktva is subject of Shuddha naya which is one samanya only, that only should be stated.  What is the purpose of second Vyavahara naya and its subject nine padartha? (The disciple does not want to accept the existence of nine paryayas and accepts only Shuddha soul i.e. samanya.)

Bhavartha- It is already told that from aspect of differentiation the Shuddha naya is describer and samanya is subject described. In undifferentiated view both are same. In the same way from aspect of differentiation Vyavahara naya is describer and nine padartha are described subjects, but from undifferentiated view it is one only. The disciple does not want to accept vyavahara naya since it is Abhootartha ( unreal) and wishes to accept only Nishchaya naya being real.

Answer 905-909

905. Shloka- Shuddha naya is beneficial and venerable and is subject of Samyaktva. Vyavahara naya is non beneficial, despicable and not subject of Samyaktva which is true . But based upon logic the Vyavahara naya is existent like Nishchaya naya . Just as Samanya exists , in the same way Vishesh (specific) also exists.

Bhavartha- The Shuddha and Ashuddha both are opponents hence by telling Shuddha the ashuddha gets implied. Hence Vyavahara naya whether it is non beneficial and unreal, even so it is existent from aspect of logic. Secondly without accepting Vyavahara the Nishchaya also cannot be accepted as follows-

906. Shloka- That Vyavahara naya is existent in the following way- When one jiva is considered from aspect of eternal bandh paryaya alone then these nine states are jiva form only.

Bhavartha- The subject of dravya drishti is Shuddha jiva . If without considering Shuddha Drishti, it is observed from aspect of eternal progeny form naimittik paryaya, then the same jiva is described in nine divisions form. Hence in this Drishti the jiva is nine forms also. Hence just as Nishchaya is samanya entity form in the same way Vyavahara is also specific entity form. In spite of being unreal it cannot be absolutely eliminated.

907. Shloka- Or these nine padartha are paryayas of jiva. However it is to be noted that they are not paryayas of jiva only. These paryayas are afflicted by impurity of raga (karma).

908. Shloka- For the worldly jiva the raga form affliction is not unestablished but it is self established. These afflictions are related to the impure paryayas of jiva   but not in Shuddha paryaya of jiva.

Accepting affliction is necessary

909. Shloka- From aspect of Vyavahara Drishti Jiva is afflicted with raga. If afflicted states are not accepted then these nine states of jiva cannot be there. Always pure jiva should be experienced. Or with negation of nine padartha the Shuddha jiva also cannot be experienced.

Bhavartha – For attaining shuddhata, ashuddhata is the cause. If ashuddhata is not accepted then shuddhata is also not possible. Hence by accepting Vyavahara naya only the Nishchaya marg can be known. Those who have not accepted Vyavahara totally, they cannot reach Nishchaya also in reality. In brief the removal of webs of vikalpas from the subject of Vyavahara naya, becomes subject of Nishchaya naya.

Just as fire of straw, cow dung, coal, leaves etc.   are vikalpas of fire as subject of Vyavahara naya. From them if all vikalpas are removed and only pure fire is is considered then it becomes subject of Nishchaya naya. Hence believing Vyavahara as Mithya is great mistake. Although in the end Nishchaya only is venerable.

Establishment of indescribability of nine padartha by the questioner 910-917

910. Shloka- (1) Is the raga real sovereignty form ? or, (2) is the raga really not sovereignty form? or, (3) is that raga is sequentially Ubhaya form i.e. first raga then Shuddha tattva and then raga and Shuddha tattva – in this form ? or, (4) is that raga without sequence Anubhaya form ( i.e. the raga and Shuddha tattva are together in completely different forms?

911. Shloka- If raga is there then with raga form cause the nine padartha form karya shall also be there, hence why disrespect- non acceptance- non veneration -despicability for nine padartha?

If the raga form cause is not there then existence of  its karya form nine tattvas is also not unestablished , then there is no disrespect at all.

Bhavartha- If raga is cause then the karya form nine padartha shall always be there. Then they should be accepted as subjects of samyaktva and why do you call them despicable and unreal?  

When raga is non substance then its karya form nine tattvas also are non substance then saying that these are despicable – not subject of samyaktva- is not applicable. Since if the thing is non existent then how can it be despicable?

912. Shloka- The questioner continues justifying his first statement that since raga form cause is there ,due to that the karya form nine states are there , even then also they are not called venerable in Paramagam since the Shuddha naya has not been described as other than Shuddha (raga or nine padartha ).

Bhavartha- If raga is there then its karya form nine states are there even then they not being subject of Samyaktva, their description if of no use. In this way in spite of nine tattvas being existent they are not describable.

913. Shloka- Further he says that if raga form cause is not there then due to its absence the karya form nine padartha are also non existent since without cause the karya cannot be there. What is non existent need not be described. Hence he establishes the indescribability in nine tattvaas.

914. Shloka- If the nine padartha and Shuddha tattva are both there sequentially as karya of raga form cause, then logically it establishes our desired goal since Shuddha alone is venerable and other than Shuddha ( raga and nine padartha) are despicable.

Bhavartha- When both are generated sequentially then when Shuddha is generated , at that time being subject of Samyaktva, it would be acceptable and when raga or nine tattvas are generated , then it would be despicable – then what is the use of describing that despicable? In this way he again established indescribability in nine padarthas.

915. Shloka- If Shuddha tattva and nine padartha as karya of raga are both together, then also it does not establish the describability in nine padartha since only Shuddha is venerable and raga and nine padartha are different and non venerable- despicable.

Bhavartha- When both are separately together then subject of samyaktva would be Shuddha only. The raga or the nine tattvas being despicable would be discarded hence what is the purpose of describing them? Thus he again establishes indescribability of nine padartha.

916. Shloka- (another thing is that) one paryaya of one substance does not have two kriya or two karma(karya)  ( one is nine padartha form karya and other is Shuddha tattva form karya) . When both cannot be together then what is the discussion on dwait ( nine padartha are despicable) or adwait ( Shuddha tattva is venerable)? In other words when both are not existent together then what is the question of their describability? Thus he again establishes indescribability.

917. Shloka- Conclusion  Doubt – Hence with logic it appears that there is no other way and the conclusion is Shuddha is subject of Samyaktva . The description of that Shuddha by Shuddha naya alone should be described. What is the use of describing Vyavahara naya and its subject form nine padartha? Finally he has told same thing that only Shuddha should be preached and there is no purpose of nine padartha?

Bhavartha 910-917- Just as Jiva is having siddha (samanya) nature since beginningless time, in the same way he is also manifesting in nine padartha form eternally. In this way the jiva has two sides at the same time. The Samanya is Shuddha and nine padartha are Ashuddha. Now four questions are raised as follows-

(1)   Whether jiva has ashuddhata (raga) ? (2) whether jiva has shuddhata ?

(3)Whether jiva has sequential shuddhata-ashuddhata ? (4) Whether shuddhata-ashuddhata is non sequential? Now he puts up the following arguments-

(1)   If Ashuddhata is there then it should always remain and its karya form nine states would always remain then why are they  called despicable? After all they are termed despicable since subject of Samyaktva is only Shuddha tattva

(2)   If Jiva has shuddhata completely then since there is no ashuddhata , there would not be disrespect for ashuddhata which does not exist. By accepting complete shuddhata in jiva the nine padartha are not possible then calling them despicable, not being subject of Samyaktva is not valid.

(3)   If jiva has sequential shuddhata-ashuddhata then first agyani and then Kevali would be there. Then the moment he is Shuddha, he would be venerable and when he is ashuddha, at that time he would be despicable. Then what is the use of telling that ashuddhata?

(4)   If the shuddhata-ashuddhata are non sequential ( together) which are totally different, even then shuddhata is venerable. What is the use of telling ashuddhata as despicable. Another thing is that in a substance both Shuddha and ashuddha manifestation cannot be together. The Shuddha venerable and ashuddha despicable discussion is pointless. Therefore accept “ dravya is Shuddha only” and accept its describer “ only Shuddha naya”. Ashuddha dravya form nine padartha and their describer vyavahara naya need not be spoken.

In reply the author would explain in 918-941 that the nine padartha are real but being paryaya of jiva in specific form they are not subject of Samyaktva. Shuddha also which is subject of Samyaktva is not absolutely different but is found in those nine only in connectivity form.  Abandoning nine tattvas absolutely it is not experienced but by ignoring them Shuddha jiva is experienced. Hence in spite of being despicable they are describable. Their knowledge is worthwhile.

Answer – Describability of nine padartha  918-941

918. Shloka- It is not as you say  but Shuddha (samanya) and Ashuddha ( specific form nine tattva) both are established with respect to each other only and not without each other. Shuddha- Ashuddha in spite of appearing opposite are non contradictory since entity has mutual relationship i.e. entity is shudda-ashuddha form i.e. samanya-vishesh form.    

Bhavartha- The first question of disciple was that whether nine tattvas are there. The answer is yes. Second question was whether the nine tattvas are not there. The answer is that it is not so. The third question was that if they are sequential then the answer is that it is not so either. Fourth question was if nine tattvas and Shuddha are together then it is told that yes they are together but they do not have separate Pradesh that one can be accepted and other be abandoned. You had told that one substance cannot have two manifestations of Shuddha-ashuddha together. Its answer is that we do not talk of Shuddha-ashuddha manifestation . We also do not accept Shuddha -ashuddha manifestation in a substance together – we accept sequential -first ashuddha and then Shuddha. But here there is no question of ashuddhata of paryaya . Here the substance is Shuddha from aspect of dravya Drishti and asahuddha from aspect of paryaya Drishti. In the ashuddhata of paryaya the Shuddha-ashuddha both paryayas are existent. Tattva from aspect of samanya Drishti is Shuddha and its manifesting in nine tattva form. This is specific and ashuddha. Both are related , without dravya nine padartha are not there and without nine padartha dravya is not there. Shuddha-ashuddha words appear contradictory but they are not opponents. Since one is dravya form and second is paryaya form. The entity is mutually with respect to each other. Substance is one only.

919. Shloka- Shuddhata and Ashuddhata are both essential and both are same substance. Both divisions are specific states of jiva only. The substance is realised to be one samanya trikaal one Shuddha form in the vishesh.

Bhavartha- The Shuddha is not absolutely different from nine tattvas. The substance of both is the same. The only thing is that it is not experienced in vishesh form but rather experienced in samanya form alone which is realised to be in Shuddha form and vishesh is ignored.

920. Shloka- It is so that the nine tattvas are just jiva and pudgala only. By means of its own dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava the karta and karma are indifferent from aspect of substance nature i.e. substance is karta by itself and nine tattvas are its karya.

Bhavartha- Jiva is different dravaya and pudgala is different dravya. Both are eternally different. They have mutual nimitta-naimittik relationship. Both making each other nimitta themselves manifest in corrupted form i.e. naimittik bhava form -nine tattva form. They themselves become karta and their nine types of manifestations are karma. Both from aspect of dravya-kshetra-kaal-bhava function within their own foursome. Both are indifferent from their own manifestations. They are one. It is not so that for one dravya some part is Shuddha form and some part is nine tattva form. Nor is it that jiva is Shuddha form and nine tattvas are deceit form or pudgala form or some other dravya part form. But both jiva and pudgala both are karta of their own nine tattva form paryayas which are karma form.

921.Shloka-  Different from these two jiva and pudgala, in these nine padarth there is no other different dravya. These nine tattvas also do not belong to absolutely different Shuddha jiva and absolutely different Shuddha pudgala.

Bhavartha- (1) Just as two papers are separate and with gum they are joined together, in the same way the jiva was Shuddha different and pudgalaa was Shuddha different and by means of a third dravya together these nine tattvas are generated- it is not so. (2) As if one Shuddha jiva and one Shuddha pudgala paramanu together join and generate nine tattvas- it is not so. If it were true then dharma dravya would also have produced nine tattvas. Then how nine tattvas are generated, this is answered next-

922. Shloka- With the mutual nimitta-naimittik relationship between the two in bonded form the nime padartha are generated.

Bhavartha- Since beginningless time the jiva is self established and pudgala is also self established. The bandh of the two is also self established. Making each other as nimitta cause, being himself naimittik they are manifesting in nine different tattvas forms. In this way they are themselves karta and nine padartha are their karma. The substance is one only. The nine states of jiva are in jiva. The nine tattva of pudgala are in pudgala. 

923. Shloka- Manifesting in those nine padartha form one jiva alone is existent. In those nine states also jiva is pure Shuddha without those nine forms. If the nine paryayas of ashuddha form of jiva are ignored then only Shuddha jiva is experienced and there is no other Shuddha jiva different from them.

Bhavartha- ( Ignoring pudgala it is explained) Making pudgala as nimitta this jiva is manifesting in nine tattvas form. If its naimittik nine types of manifestations are ignored and its swabhava is seen then by nature it is Shuddha at that time also. This only is the Shuddha which resides in nine tattvas and is subject of samyaktva. It is not different from them. In nine only there is samanya Shuddha.

924. Shloka- This is not impossible, i.e. by finding anvaya ( logical connection) of Shuddha jiva in nine tattvas, ignoring them, experiencing the Shuddha jiva is not difficult. Since this type of procedure is found in world as per the nine examples described next. The raga being unreal is not trikaal hence from aspect of legality it can be ignored.

Bhavartha- It is already told that raga is affliction and unreal. It is destructible. If observed from aspects of presence and absence of raga then nine tattvas are  there and nothing else. Hence accepting them, then ignoring them in Drishti the Shuddha can be experienced. Without them Shuddha cannot be experienced. This procedure is shown now with nine examples.

925. Shloka- There are several examples in this context- 1. Gold 2. Lotus leaf 3. Water 4. Fire 5. Mirror. 6. Sapphire stone 7. Gyan 8. Ocean. 9. Salt .

926. Shloka – Just as gold in conjunction with others becomes different colour forms. If the other’s effect is ignored and only gold is seen then it is Shuddha only.

Bhavartha- Just as gold has several forms in conjunction with other metals, but if the other’s conjunction is ignored and only gold is observed then the gold appears to be pure gold only. In the same way the jiva has nine different paryayas due to fruition of karmas but if the karma and the states generated by them are ignored then the Shuddha jiva only is experienced.

927. Shloka- Brother, you should not have doubt that how can that conjunction form entity be ignored so easily. The doubt that the presence of another substance in gold is justified there by which Praman and is not justified by which Praman- they should not be entertained.

Bhavartha- The disciple asks that the amalgamation of gold with different metals is directly seen then how can it be ignored? How can the impure substance be experienced as pure? In reply Acharya says that so long as you are viewing the amalgamation, you are seeing the mixture. Look at the nature of substance. One substance is absolutely absent in second substance by any means, otherwise they would have become one.

928. Shloka- The gold having affliction of other metals is not venerable- it is not so. By discarding the impure gold, you shall not have any gold.

Bhavartha- Brother, you say that being impure the gold cannot be accepted , but if you realise that there is pure gold within and accept it then by removal of impurity it is pure only. If you don’t accept it then you do not get any gold since no gold is pure since beginningless time. Similarly no soul is pure since beginningless time but if you realise that the soul can be purified then you can attain it. All you need to do is to observe the soul from dravya Drishti, then it is pure only. Otherwise you do not get anything. You cannot get soul itself.

929. Shloka- This cannot be examined that when gold is pure in paryaya form , at that time only it is pure and it is not pure in dravya form . The reason for non attainment of shuddha dravya also is non belief in the same.

Bhavartha- This also cannot be examined that the moment the gold is pure in paryaya form, at that time only it is pure and not now. By such conviction the pure gold cannot be visualised since the cause of purity is impurity. In impurity only purity is visualised. If impurity is not seen then purity also would not exist. The gold mined is never pure in paryaya form but is in conjunction with impurities, However gold is present in shakti form- if this is not accepted then one cannot get gold having Shuddha paryaya. By removal of impurity it can be purified and there is no other means. In the same way if you say that only siddha atma is pure and ours is impure and cannot be accepted, then you shall never attain Shuddha atma. The means for attainment of Shuddha atma is atma only. Realise it to be pure by nature and observe that how the impurity can be removed. The impurity is incidental and unreal.  The prime matter is pure and the unreal does not have existence in prime matter at all.

930. Shloka- At the time when in the gold in conjunction with impurities is observed as gold only then at that time the affliction of other metals is not considered. At that time only desired pure gold is visualised.

Bhavartha- You ask how can I view impure as pure? We say that why are you observing the paryayas of gold due to afflictions. Observe from aspect of dravya Drishti, then you shall experience the presence of pure gold. In the same way do not observe the jiva as bonded-unbonded. Observe from aspect of dravya Drishti and view the Paarinamik swabhava. Then you shall view the pure one.

931.  Shloka- Hence it establishes that just as gold is pure in the paryaya form without conjunction of others , in the same way in the amalgamation, in spite of conjunction with others , it is pure by nature.

Bhavartha- Just as 100% pure gold is kept with gold smith, in the same way in spite of conjunction with others, it is 100% pure only. If it were not so then how can it be pure? In the same way just as Shuddha atma is in Siddha, in the same way you are now. In all the nine forms it is always pure only. If it were not so then how can it be purified? Impurity is only in paryaya Drishti. The substance is even now pure form only.

932.  Shloka- Just as the example of gold is explained, in the same way the remaining eight examples can be applied. These examples are extremely useful for proper knowledge of desired result and the means.

Bhavartha- In the eight examples also, there is one prime substance and other is combining substance. The cause for conjunction is the spoiled states of the prime substance. Ignoring those states the prime substance is observed. Our objective is the Shuddha atma in these nine substances.

Continued…..

GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCH DHYAYI….23

 

874. Shloka- The dravya karma which is effect of vaibhavik bhava , it is also cause for same vaibhavik bhava. One bhava and one karma with these two the resultant is Ubhaya Bandh.

Bhavartha- The soul indulged in vibhava bhava  which is cause. It resulted in karma as effect. Now when the soul indulged in vibhava bhava next time, then  same karma was the cause. In this way one karma was the effect of first vaibhavik bhava and it was cause for second vaibhavik bhava. Thus one karma only was cause also  and effect also.  This only is  vibhava of soul and effect of karma is cause -effect bhava which is Ubhaya Bandh. The same is called nimitta-naimittik. In this way the question of disciple that how separate dravya karma is cause for vibhava bhava of soul and not other substance, then it is explained that soul with his vibhava bhava bonded the karma which is termed bandh and that only becomes cause for future vibhava. Now this doubt may come that one karma only is effect of vaibhavik bhava and it is also cause for same vaibhavik bhava. The same is cause and same is effect- this appears contradictory. In reply it is told that the karma was effect of first vaibhavik bhava and that karma is cause for generation of next vaibhavik bhava. Hence karma is one only which is cause and effect also. Now if someone doubts that one karma only is effect and same karma is cause- in one substance how can both cause effect bhava be there? In reply it is explained below-

875. Shloka- Just as image of eye is seen in the mirror. Hence that image formed in the shape of eye is effect as well as cause also. In the same way the dravya karma bonded with vaibhavik bhava of soul is effect  also and being cause for generation of bhava of same family, it is cause also by itself.

Bhavartha- The image of eye is seen in mirror. Hence that shape is effect since it is produced by the eye. But when we see that shape then that shape is cause for showing us. Hence same substance is functioning as cause-effect both. In the same way the vaibhavik bhava of soul bonds with karma hence it is effect and when soul indulges in vibhava again then the same becomes nimitta cause. Thus the same karma functions as  cause and effect.

877. Shloka- The dravya karma is cause for corrupted bhava of jiva and the cause for dravya karma is corruption of jiva. Just as two people help each other.

Bhavartha- In my daughter’s marriage you helped and then your daughter’s marriage I helped. In this way you were cause in my karya and I was cause for your karya. This is termed as mutual help. For corruption of jiva the dravya karma functioned as cause then jiva indulging in raga became cause for dravya karma. In this way he helped the cause. Thus in Ubhaya bandh both help each other in cause-effect form . Therefore Acharya says that the fruition of dravya karma only becomes cause for corruption of jiva and not other substance.

Conclusion 878-879

878. Shloka- In this way the corrupted form of consciousness is accepted as vaibhavik bhava of soul. On account of that vaibhavik bhava the separately existent substance ( fruition of dravya karma) becomes nimitta cause for the corrupted bhava.

Bhavartha- It is important to note that nimitta is not cause for karma being bonded but it is fruition of previously bonded karma. When soul indulges in own bhava karma independently then previously bonded karma becomes nimitta. The whole world believes that fruition is nimitta and jiva bhava is the naimitttik therefore under fruition of dravya karma jiva has to engage in raga only. But author says that the fruition is nimitta only but when jiva independently engages in vibhava then only the fruition of karma would be naimittik otherwise not. It clarifies that the fruition of karma is only dispassionate  cause.

879. Shloka- For the same reason without Ubhaya bandh the eternally bonded and residing in same kshetra, the other corporeal dravya (visrasopachaya) is not cause for bandh. Just as unbonded and totally different dharma etc. substances are not cause.

Bhavartha 862-879- The bhava of the doubt is that eternally infinite every dravya independently manifests in swabhava and vibhava form within own foursome. Then in the description of bondage you have told that in the presence of nimitta cause the soul manifests in change in quality form vibhava and due to that vibhava gets bonded due to own fault. Then I ask you that why the fruition of corporeal dravya karma only is nimitta cause for it? Why not other substances like dharma etc. of the world? Or the Visrasopachaya bonded with jiva are not cause? In reply it has been explained that when soul indulges in vibhava then with that as nimitta the karmana varganas manifest in karma form and those karmas bond with soul. Now fruition of those karmas only is the cause for new vibhava of soul and any other substance of the world is not the cause. Such is the cause effect relationship. Thus the nimitta-naimittik relationship between the vibhava of soul and karma is established. It is as follows- Firstly vibhava of soul is cause and bondage of dravya karma is effect. In this way karma is effect. Now when the jiva indulges in vibhava again then the previously bonded dravya karma functions as cause . In this way the same karma is effect of vibhava and same karma is cause for next vibhava. This cause-effect bhava is called as nimitta-naimittik bhava or Ubhaya bandh. Karma does not forcibly cause raga or in its fruition the soul is required to do raga- this is not the meaning. Only when soul does raga independently then its presence is nimitta cause. That only is the meaning. Thus “ raga of jiva cause karmas or due to raga of jiva the karmas have to be generated only” – this meaning is not there. But when the karmana varganas with their own capability manifest in karma form then raga of jiva is present as nimitta form and with that only the nimitta-naimittik is existent.

Description of bondage concluded.

Description of Ashuddhata (impurity) 880-895

Introduction- What is ashuddhata can  be understood from the example. One quality of soul is gyan whose nature is knowing and knowing the entire Lok-Alok in one samaya. Deviating from this nature, the ignorant state of gyan is asahuddhata. In Ashuddha state the gyan forgoes its natural karya and knowing only one substance in one samaya, imagining favourable-unfavourable in it, he starts manifesting in raga-dwesha form. This state of gyan is called Ashuddhata. The cause for this Ashuddhata is bandh i.e. influx of raga in gyan. In other words gyan conjoins with fruition of moha and manifests in vibhava form according to its shape. Bondage is cause . Ashuddhata is effect. Both are at same time.

Nature of Ashuddhata 880-881

880. Shloka-  The ashuddhata does not exist without presence of bondage and they occur at the same time. Its characteristics is as follows- by itself it is advait and different from it Vibhava bhava results in Dvait-ness leading to ashuddhata . Just as raga in gyan causes the gyan to be ashuddha. The ashuddha state of gyan i.e. agyan state only is ashuddhata.

Bhavartha- when gyan conjoins with nimitta and generates vibhava , then it deviates from its natural state and becomes ashuddha. Gyan is a substance and with influx of raga form other substance it turned from advait to Dvait. It turned from Shuddha to Ashuddha. This is ashuddhata. Due to this ashuddhata it gave up its task of knowing Lok-Alok in one samaya and started manifesting towards others. This was the result of ashuddhata.

881. Shloka- In that ashuddhata also the dwait-ness is formal only. In that the first part is own and second part is affected. Just as in corrupted gyan the gyan part is own while raga part is other’s imposition.

Bhavartha- In reality the gyan only manifests in agyan form in indivisible state. The substance in reality is indivisible but it cannot be explained without resorting to divisions. Hence for explaining ashuddhata acharya says that imagine a gyan part and a raga part. Gyan part is unaffected part while raga is affected part. The manifestation of a thing from unaffected state to affected state only is ashuddhata. For understanding the ashuddhata only the two parts are imagined.

Note- This is clarified further by raising the doubt that ashuddhata is non existent.

Doubt 882-883

882. Shloka- One entity is samanya form i.e. guna form while one entity is specific form i.e. paryaya form. In that specific substance where is the difference of affected specific and unaffected specific. It does not exist. In other words the disciple does not accept two types of paryayas as affected and unaffected form.

Bhavartha- The disciple accepts guna and its paryaya. He does not accept the difference of swabhava paryaya and vibhava paryaya in paryaya. Just as he accepts gyan guna but he does not accept the gyan to have agyan state and keval state. This he establishes with example-

883. Shloka- For example the gyan of taste and colour is not of the form of colour or taste. Gyan of colour is gyan alone ( gyan has not turned into colour). Hence gyan is not affected  and is only unaffected. If gyan had turned colour or taste form then it would have been affected, but it is not so. Hence gyan is samanya and gyan is specific also. But there is no difference of affected unaffected specifics in gyan.

Bhavartha- The questioner accepts guna and its manifestation (paryaya) . But he does not accept the differences of unaffected and affected paryaya.  He quotes an example of gyan guna which is samanya. Knowing colour taste etc. is its paryaya-specific. Besides these what is affected, unaffected gyan? If while knowing the taste the gyan had turned into taste form then it would have been affected but it does not happen so. Hence gyan does not have affected unaffected differences. Only gyan is there and its paryaya is there. He believes the gyan being gyeya form is affected gyan but he does not believe corruption of gyan to be affected gyan. When gyan does not become gyeya form then he says that gyan is only unaffected. His mistake is due to believing other substance to be affect. But actually raga or vibhava is also affect which he has not considered.

Answer 884-892

884. Shloka- The questioner says that gyan does not have agyan form at all. In other words the ashuddhata is non existent. Acharya answers that substance has two divisions of samanya and specifc. That specific is having speciality which is established by means of anvaya( with coexistence)  and vyatirek ( with mutual absence).

Bhavartha- Acharya says that paryaya has real differences which are swabhavik and vaibhavik paryaya form . The swabhavik paryaya is unaffected and vaibhavik paryaya is affected paryaya. With presence of vibhava the presence of ashuddhata is anvaya. With absence of vibhava the absence of ashuddhata is vyatirek. Both anvaya and vyatirek paryayas are directly observed.

The agyan state of gyan is vibhava state which is anvaya . The keval gyan state of gyan is swabhava which is vyatirek. Both are directly observed. Hence affected specific is there as well as unaffected specific is also there. Both are described next –

885. Shloka- The anvaya is as follows – with the nimitta of others the gyan becomes agyan form just as cold water becomes hot with nimitta of fire. The agyan state of gyan is affected specific just as hot water is affected  water.

886. Shloka- This example is not without basis since the entity form gyan is seen to be in agyan form. While the nature of gyan is knowing the entire Lok-Alok in one samaya completely , the second state of agyan – ragi-dweshi state is observed.

Bhavartha- The disciple was accepting gyan and its paryaya but was not accepting affected paryaya. Here it is told that in the agyan state, the affected gyan is directly observed. The nature of gyan is knowing in one samaya all the substances of Lok-Alok,  but forgoing that nature the gyan knows only one substance at one samaya , or does not know at all, and imagining favourable-unfavourable he manifests in raga dwesha form accordingly. This manifestation of gyan in raga-dwesha-moha form in accordance with gyeya substance only is the affected gyan. The change of gyan into gyeya form is not called affected gyan and this affected gyan is directly observed. Hence gyan is samanya also and keval gyan form unaffected gyan is specific also and in agyan state the affected gyan specific is also there. This affected gyan only is ashuddhata. The raga-dwesha-moha in gyan is bondage . The affected gyan is bonded only and unaffected gyan is bondage free. Such are the relationships. Now example of vyatirek is quoted-

887. Shloka- Just as anvaya applies in gyan, in the same way the vyatirek also applies. Vyatirek is the absence of a thing in the absence of another. Just as gyan with the nimitta of others become Mithya state, in the same way, in the absence of others it remains pure only. Therefore with nimitta of karma the gyan manifests in agyan form and in the absence of karma it remains Shuddha gyan  form. This only is Anvaya Vyatirek.

Bhavartha- Here in anvaya vyatirek it has been told that the ashuddhata of soul occurs with the nimitta of others. What is proved by anvaya vyatirek is accepted as definite. Hence the ashuddhata of soul has to be accepted.

888. Shloka- Kshayik (Keval) Gyan which observes all the substances directly is Shuddha gyan since it does not have nimitta of any other one. It is natural own form only. The same gyan is bondage free also since there is no affect due to other substances.

Bhavartha- The Kshayik (keval) gyan has two features. Shudddhata and non bondage. The nature of gyan is knowing all in one samaya. This is own nature and remaining so is shuddhata. Just as cold water is natural. The absence of raga in gyan is being bondage free. Raga is affect. Keval gyan is unaffected hence bondage free, just as water by not being hot is bondage free. On the other hand the affected gyan is ashuddha also and bonded also.

889. Shloka- Kshayopashamik gyan due to non destruction of karmas in the sovereignty is bonded.( Due to fruition of moha, manifesting in vibhava form it is bonded) and due to deviation from its nature it is ashuddha at the same time ( the nature of gyan was to know lok-alok in one samaya. It deviated from that nature and knowing only one substance at a time, imagining favourable-unfavourable in them he manifests in ragi-dweshi form. This state is his ashuddhata.) In this was the bondage and ashuddhata is at the same time. Both are together only.

Bhavartha- One Brahman started living in the house of a cobbler. Then in joining with cobbler the corruption experienced by him is his bonded state and giving up Brahman’s work he started doing cobbler’s work, that is his ashuddhatva state. In the same way the gyan under fruition of moha became ragi , that is his bonded state and started doing agyan form activity, this is his ashuddha state. Now it is explained that if gyan does not have both Shuddha-ashuddha states then what flaws are experienced. If ashuddha state of gyan is not accepted then ashuddhata would be absent. In the absence of ashuddhata the bandh which is accrued would also be absent and in the absence of bandh , its resultant worldly activities would be absent. But this is directly contradictory since worldly activities are directly observed. Now if it is said that we shall accept bandh without ashuddhata form  reason then bandh would always exist since things without reason always remain. Secondly you accept ashuddha gyan then in its absence the gyan becomes Shuddha also. If gyan is accepted to be ashuddha only then  its negation form Shuddha would not exist and Keval gyan would be absent. Hence the message is that accepting gyan of one form alone is not right. Only bonded form is not right and absolutely unbonded is also not right. The bonded gyan is also directly observed by us.

890. Shloka- If gyan is absolutely Shuddha and not ashudddha then in the absence of reason for bandh, neither bandh would remain nor its result worldly activities.

891. Shloka- If without ashuddhata form reason bandh is accepted then bandh would always remain and would never be bondage free since without reason the thing does not get eliminated. By accepting only one type of gyan, this gyan would remain since it is directly observed but the bondage free gyan of Kevali would be absent since you do not accept the second type of gyan. Believing so is faulty since both types of gyans are existent.

892. Shloka- Hence absolute bandh is not right since bondage free gyan is also well known. Absolutely bondage free is also not right, since the activities of bandh are also seen. Thus gyan is unaffected as well as affected both.

Establishment of bondage free gyan

893. Shloka- Hence it establishes that Kshayik gyan is observant of all substances directly without having impurity and indestructible which is bondage free upon destruction of bondage. The bondage free only is called unaffected.

Establishment of bonded gyan

894.  Shloka- All are bonded anyway since the worldly activities are directly observed hence bonded gyan gets established. If the worldly gyan is not accepted as affected then it would not be means for miseries.

Bhavartha- The bonded affected gyan is directly observed by us since its result is miseries. The activity of gyan was knowing lok-alok in one samaya, giving up that nature its has become ragi, dweshi, mohi knowing only one substance. This opposite activity of gyan establishes its bonded nature which is affected gyan.

Establishment of shuddhava and Ashuddhatva

895. Shloka- With the above description the gyan is established to be affected (bonded) as well as unaffected ( unbonded) . The affected is ashuddha and unaffected  is Shuddha. In this way Shuddha and ashuddha both get established.

The description of ashuddhatva is concluded.

Difference between bondage and ashuddhatva 896-900

896. Shloka- What is the difference between bondage and ashuddha-ness since from aspect of substance both are  same. If there is a difference please explain.

Answer 897-900

897. Shloka- It is not so that there is no difference between bondage and ashuddha-ness since there is difference. From one aspect bondage is cause and ashuddha-ness is karya, this is the difference. Or from another aspect, bondage is karya and ashuddhata is cause , this is the difference. In this way the two are different.

The cause-effect bhava between bondage and ashuddha-ness

898. Shloka- Bondage is manifestation of the soul due to his own vaibhaviki shakti, due to his own fault in the shape of nimitta. On account of bondage the deviation of both from their own qualities is ashuddhata.

Bhavartha- With the nimitta of fruition of karma the manifestation of soul in the shape of anger form kriya is bandh. The manifestation of gyan in raga form is bandh and with gyan being of raga form, the nature of gyan of being illuminator of Lok-Alok deviates from own nature and becomes agyan form which is ashuddhata. In the same way the manifestation of karmana varganas in gyanavarana etc. form is bondage and their transformation in karma state from their nature is ashuddhatva. Here bondage is cause and ashuddhata is karya since due to bondage, definitely the swabhava gets corrupted which is ashuddhata.

Bandh is cause and Ashuddhata is karya

899. Shloka- in this way bandh is cause and ashuddhata is karya such is conclusion since without bandh the ashuddhata does not happen.

Bhavartha- The influx of raga in gyan or manifestation of gyan in raga form is bandh. The manifestation of gyan in agyan form is ashuddhatava. The bondage is cause and ashuddhatavais karya. It means that gyan joining with nimitta became ragi hence deviating from own nature it became agyan form otherwise it were not possible. In this way bondage is cause and ashuddhatava is karya and this is the reason that without bondage ashuddhata does not happen. The time for both is same. From which aspect it is called bonded and from which aspect it is called ashuddha, this is the only subject to be understood.

Bondage is karya and Ashuddhata is cause

900. Shloka- That bandh is karya form since that occurs due to fruition of previously bonded karmas. The Ashuddhata is cause form since it draws the new karmas to be bonded i.e. it is nimitta cause for the bondage of new karmas.

Bhavartha- The previously bonded karmas fruition is cause and raga is karya. In this way bandh is karya. Only raga is called bandh . When do future karmas get bonded? When jiva manifests in agyan form . Hence agyan form ashuddhata is cause and new bondage is karya. In this way asahuddhata is cause. Remember that only raga is not called as cause for new bandh but the agyan form ashuddha state of gyan is called as cause. Differentiating between gyan and raga, raga is not called as cause for bandh but the raga mixed agyan form ashuddha state of gyan is called as cause for bandh. Ashuddhatva is not just raga or only gyan but the agyan form manifested state of gyan is called ashuddhatva.

The difference between bondage and ashuddhatva is concluded

Continued…..

GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCH DHYAYI…22

                                                           

Fourth Intermediate chapter

(1)   Bondedness (2) Impurity (3) Difference of the two 839-900

Declaration

839. Shloka- What is bondedness and impurity in substances- such question is raised by some one who wishes to understand it minutely. This is explained sequentially.

Description of bondedness 840-879

Characteristics of bandh

840. Shloka- The substance has a Vaibhaviki shakti. Under influence of this shakti, it results in the transition (corruption)  of qualities  of soul. The corruption of qualities from their nature only is called bandh. This bandh is on account of others.

Bhavartha- Out of six dravyas the jiva and pudgala have vaibhaviki shakti  which is self established quality. This is not cause for bondage since it is there in Siddhas also. Which ever shakti is present , it manifests in natural form also. Hence this shakti has Shuddha natural manifestation in Siddhas and Paramanus. That manifestation is not cause for bandh. However under presence of nimitta, when this shakti manifests in vibhava form in conjunction with nimitta, then that manifestation in vibhava form only is bandh. This is present in jiva and pudgala only. The manifestation of gyan in raga form only is bandh. The manifestation of pudgala in karma form is also bandh. The same is clarified further-

841. Shloka- In that bandh i.e. vibhava, the cause is not just vaibhaviki shakti nor is swabhava paryaya. But the cause is dependence i.e. manifestation under influence of nimitta.

Bhavartha- If cause for bandh be just vaibhaviki shakti then this shakti being nitya which remains in soul forever would result in bandh in soul forever. The soul would never be liberated or the liberated soul would also engage in bandh. Hence only this shakti is not cause for bandh. Upayoga is also not cause. Upayoga implies manifestation of shakti. That Upayoga occurs in swabhava state as well as vibhava state. If the Shuddha upayoga of shakti be cause for bandh then the same flaw accrues as above. Hence with the nimitta of pudgala the vibhava form upayoga of vaibhaviki shakti is the cause for bandh.

Next Introduction- The vaibhaviki shakti i.e. quality is not cause for bandh since quality is eternal. It is told in 842 later. The swabhava manifestation of shakti is also not cause since swabhava manifestation occurs in Siddhas and Shuddha pudgala paramanus. This is told in 843. But this shakti in conjunction with suitable nimitta generates  vibhava within self. That results in bandh of substance due to vibhava dependence. This is told in 844. The dependence in vibhava form is cause for bandh.

842. Shloka- Vaibhaviki shakti is Anujivi guna of jiva and Pudgala dravya. If the shakti itself be cause for bandh then jiva would never attain salvation since the guna is eternal.

Bhavartha- In the jiva, gyan, darshan, sukh, charitra etc. infinite gunas are there which manifest in bhava form and hence called Anujivi gunas. In the same way the vaibhavik shakti is also a Shuddha guna . Just as pudgala has touch, taste, smell, colour etc. gunas, in the same way the vaibhavik shakti is also guna. Since the gunas are eternal hence if gunas are cause for bandh then jiva would never have chance for salvation. Hence accepting shakti as cause for bandh is not right. Shakti is not cause for bandh.

Upayoga is also not cause for bandh

843. Shloka- Upayoga is the expression of the shakti in complete revelation form of own nature due to self established swabhava. If this expression be cause for bandh then all substances would be bonded ( since the swabhava of revelation of paryaya is existent in all dravyas by own nature).Hence the swabhava manifestation of vaibhaviki shakti cannot be cause for bandh.

Bhavartha- The revelation of vaibhaviki shakti occurs in pure state from its nature. This is called swabhava manifestation  of the shakti. That swabhava manifestation is not cause for bandh. If that be cause for bandh then siddhas shall also accrue bandh forever. This flaw becomes applicable. Hence the guna is not cause. When swabhava paryaya is not cause then what is the cause is told next-

Clarification of bandh

844. Shloka- In the presence of suitable reasons for bandh the faulty soul himself being dependent gets bonded. At that time the soul renouncing its own guna nature manifests in vibhava (corrupted) state.

Bhavartha- For vibhava to occur the presence of suitable nimitta is required. Just as for anger bhava the nimitta of fruition of dravya anger is required. In its presence the original guna  of the original dravya e.g. the gyan guna of soul – that guna manifests in the form of guna of nimitta. The gyan guna adopts the shape of the guna of dravya anger i.e. becomes bhava anger form . With that bhava anger the gyan guna by his own fault i.e. by vibhava manifestation in conjunction with nimitta gets bonded with vibhava. This is called bandh. In the same way the karmana varganas form pudgala in the presence of raga of jiva deviate from original nature and manifest in gyanavarana etc. karma form. The manifestation of pudgala in karma form is their bandh state. Same is further clarified-

845.  Shloka- That dependence is not unestablished but is established with famous example. Just as the agyani soul with the nimitta of hot or cold substances believes self to be hot or cold. In the same way all the jivas with the nimitta of dravya karma of raga-dwesha-moha form believe themselves to be ragi-dweshi-mohi.

 846. Shloka- That is as follows- The hot and cold are completely qualities of pudgala dravya. Even then the non corporeal soul experiences hot and cold in bonded state, this is directly observed. The bonded state is agyan state. In Adhyatma the agyani is described as bonded and ashuddha .

Doubt

847. Shloka- It is alright that the vaibhaviki shakti in the presence of nimitta cause, manifests in this way i.e. gets bonded and manifests in vibhava form but (1) can it not exist without other’s influence i.e. with absence of nimitta does this existence of this shakti itself becomes absent or (2) Does it remain Shuddha in paryaya or does it remain ashuddha in paryaya?

Bhavartha- The disciple  has understood that Vaibhaviki shakti manifests in vibhava form in conjunction with nimitta. Now he enquires that with removal of nimitta does this shakti get destroyed along with nimitta? If it gets destroyed then its alright. If not destroyed then this shakti manifests in Shuddha form or ashuddha form?

Answer 848-850

848. Shloka- The answer to first question is that Vaibhaviki shakti is Nitya since it is shakti (guna) like other Shuddha shaktis. Otherwise with sequential loss of shaktis the entity itself would get destroyed. Therefore like other shaktis the vaibhaviki shakti is also trikaal shakti. With removal of nimitta it does not get destroyed since guna can never be destroyed. If gunas get destroyed then dravya also would be destroyed since collection of gunas only is dravya.

Bhavartha- Acharya says that vaibhavik shakti is real and it is Nitya since all shaktis are always Nitya. Just as soul has Shuddha shaktis of gyan, darshan etc. which are Nitya. In the same way this is also Nitya. Now if this Vaibhavik shakti is not accepted to be Nitya then existent thing would itself get destroyed. Hence vaibhaviki shakti is nitya guna of soul.

849. Shloka- The answer to second question is that it manifests in vibhava bhava form in the presence of nimitta, from Shuddha state. Without the nimitta it remains only Shuddha bhava form.

Bhavartha- The shakti is nitya and it would always have manifestation . In the presence of nimitta the vibhava manifestation is there and then swabhava manifestation occurs.

850. Shloka- In the presence of nimitta the vaibhaviki shakti manifests in vibhava form and in its absence it manifests in swabhava form- this Siddhant is not invalid. It is well proven with famous example that just as water is hot with nimitta of fire , the same water becomes cold without nimitta of fire.

Bhavartha- The water form dravya or guna is nitya. In the presence of fire as nimitta it manifests in hot vibhava form and in absence it manifests in cold swabhava form. With removal of nimitta of fire the water does not get destroyed nor can be manifestation be absent. In the same way the vaibhaviki shakti form guna is nitya. With fruition of dravya karma form nimitta it manifests in vibhava form and in absence it manifests in swabhava form.

Doubt 851-855

851-852. Shloka- As per your statement, there is one shakti which manifests in two ways- one is swabhavik bhava and other is Vaibhavik bhava.

If it is so then the substance has swabhava and vibhava two types of manifestations. Then why not accept two different shaktis in the substance rather than two manifestations of one shakti- what is the harm there? Swabhaviki would manifest in swabhava bhava and Vaibhaviki in vibhava bhava form.

Bhavartha- Why not accept two independent shaktis with independent manifestations ?

853. Shloka- In the presence or absence of fruition of pudgala karmas, let  the swabhaviki shakti manifest in Shuddha bhava form since it is independent of nimitta.

854. Shloka- And let the Vaibhaviki shakti manifest in conjunction with karmas, remaining non manifesting in absence of fruition of karmas (remaining dormant in dravya). Therefore so long as soul has relationship with karmas , till then the vaibhaviki shakti shall manifest. When karmas do not fructify then the manifestation of vaibhaviki shakti shall also not be there.

855. Shloka- The questioner strengthens his view with an example. Just as wheel rotates with the assistance of stick and without assistance of stick it becomes stationary. In the same way so long as the nimitta is present , let the vaibhaviki shakti manifest within self and with absence of nimitta, like stick it becomes dormant and remain within the dravya. You have already told that with absence of nimitta the shakti does not get destroyed. Then becoming dormant is alright since then it does not need to manifest.

Answer 856-861

856. Shloka- It is not so i.e. with absence of nimitta the vaibhaviki shakti cannot become dormant since all the agglomeration of shaktis of entity is manifesting by nature. Then why vaibhaviki shakti would not remain manifesting? It is not so that some shakti is manifesting and some are  not . All have nature of manifestation.

857. Shloka- There is no Praman which establishes that some shakti has manifesting nature and some shakti does not have. There is absence of example also. Therefore all shaktis by self established nature have manifestation.

Bhavartha- All the shaktis of dravya manifest at every moment. There is no Praman nor example which tell that some shakti be considered manifesting for some time.

858. Shloka- Hence with absence of all karmas the manifesting vaibhaviki shakti, by own nature starts manifesting in swabhaviki form.

Bhavartha- All shaktis have manifestation and vaibhaviki shakti also manifests at every moment. The result is that the vaibhavik shakti only changes the state from swabhava to vibhava. So long as there is conjunction with karmas, till then the vaibhaviki shakti manifests in vibhava form and when all karmas are absent then the vaibhaviki shakti manifests in swabhava form. In this way the same vaibhaviki shakti has two different states of swabhaviki and vaibhavik.

859. Shloka- With the above logic it establishes that entity has two shaktis of swabhaviki and vaibhaviki from aspect of different states ( from aspect of manifestation- paryaya Drishti). But it is not so that basically there are two different shaktis which manifests in swabhava and vibhava forms together.

Bhavartha- The substance has one paryaya at one samaya. With this rule the vaibhaviki shakti manifests in two states sequentially. But if someone says that both swabhaviki and vaibhavik be together then it can never happen. Since if both are together at same time then they would be two qualities and not two paryayas. Paryaya is one only at one samaya. Hence Vaibhaviki and swabhavik both states can be there sequentially but not at the same time. 

860. Shloka- With coexistence of swabhaviki and vaibhaviki shakti there is great flaw of legality also since the cause-effect gets destroyed and bandh-moksha gets destroyed.

Bhavartha- Although vaibhaviki shakti is one only and it has two states sequentially – this is the Siddhant, even so there is duality due to different states i.e. from aspect of paryaya swabhaviki and vaibhavik two types are there. If both are accepted together then it is not right. This results in several flaws. One is that cause-effect bhava would not remain since after vaibhavik state only swabhavik state is generated. Just as after world only Moksha is attained hence world is the cause for Moksha attainment. In the same way without the vaibhaviki state, the swabhaviki state also cannot be there. By accepting them together this cause-effect bhava would not be there. Secondly bandh and moksha arrangement also would not be there. Since by accepting vaibhavik state first the moksha after bandh gets established. But with both being together the bandh and moksha shall also be together or due to permanent  presence of bandh there would never be Moksha. 

861. Shloka- One shakti cannot have two types of manifestation together since with such presumption the vibhava manifestation also becomes permanent without hindrance ( which is directly hindered since there would not be arrangement of bandh moksha).

Bhavartha- Although one shakti (vaibhaviki) has two states i.e. one shakti assumes two forms but the shakti cannot have two divisions together. If both divisions are together then vaibhavik state would be permanent and with its permanence the effort of soul to attain Moksha would be futile. Hence one guna only has swabhaviki and vaibhavik states sequentially and not together at same time.

Upon this the question is raised that when two dravyas have absolutely absence with respect to each other and jiva pudgala do not have karta-karma relationship either, then how can totally different pudgala matter be cause for vibhava of jiva and why that alone and none else?

Doubt 862-867

862. Shloka- The gathering of six dravyas is eternally established without any reason and its manifestation is also self established without any reason. In other words just as dravya is self established with beginningless endless nature, in the same way it has manifesting nature by itself eternally. 

863. Shloka- Self established substance and its self established manifestation is surely there, otherwise all mixed and all zero etc. form flaws arise which are cause for destruction of substances. In other words the dravyas would not have independent existence itself.

864. Shloka- With this it establishes that whichever conscious or insentient form substance is  there, they are one with their nature and the nature cannot be changed by anyone. In other words every substance functions within own Pradesh at all times and does not interfere with another dravya.

865. Shloka- The essence is that any substance does not have any relation with another substance since from aspects of dravya, kshetra, kaal, bhava the substance does not transgress its limits. In other words the substance remains within own foursome and does not even touch the foursome of other substance.

866. Shloka- When the nature of substance is as described above and jiva and pudgala do not have karta-karma bhava relations also, then how can corporeal dravya be cause for vibhava of jiva ? In that vibhava also why that karma only is the cause and not dharma etc. other dravyas occupying the same location?

Bhavartha- The disciple enquires that when two dravyas have absolute separateness with each other and they all function within their own foursome, they do not even touch others, then why one dravya could be cause for another dravya? You call pudgala as the cause for vibhava manifestation but jiva and pudgala do not even have karta-karma relationship, they are not karta of each other’s bhava. Jiva is conscious and pudgala is corporeal. How can corporeal generate bhava of consciousness? Hence how does the fruition of karmas generate bhava of jiva? If it is a cause then why the fruition of karma only is the cause? If you say that soul and karma reside in same area and this is the reason then all six dravyas reside in same area and Dharma etc. anyone can be cause. If you say that jiva and pudgala have special close relationship hence pudgala only can be the cause and dharma etc. then Maharaj, the close relationship also exists with the Visrasopachaya karma vargana existent in the same place with jiva , even they should be cause, but you do not accept them as cause as follows-

867. Shloka- If you say  that the corporeal karma only is the cause for vaibhavik bhava due to special close relationship and not dharma etc. other dravyas then tell us why the other corporeal dravya ( visrasopachaya karma vargana) residing in same place can not be the cause since they too reside in same place with special close relationship. Hence Maharaj, why fruition of absolutely separate pudgala karma can be cause for vibhava manifestation of vaibhaviki shakti is not clear to me. Kindly explain.

Bhavartha 862-867- The disciple enquires that you have told us that just as substance is self established, it is also self manifesting by nature and manifests in swabhava or vibhava form due to own capability. The foursome of one dravya does not have any relation with the foursome of other dravya. Now you say that when soul manifests in vibhava form , at that time the fruition of dravya karma is nimitta for the same . I ask you, how can that be nimitta and if nimitta does exist then any one of the six dravyas could be nimitta. Why dravya karma only? If you say that other dravyas are not nimitta and only pudgala karma is nimitta since they are close to soul and in contact with him , then I say that close contact exists with visrasopachaya karma vargana also, why they are not cause ? In the reply it would be explained that those karmas which were bonded by soul due to raga, they only would be nimitta since the bonded  name applies to them only and nimitta-naimittik relationship also exists with them only. The other dravyas of the world and visrasopachaya are neither bandh form nor they have nimitta-naimittik relationship. For explaining the nimitta-naimittik relationship only this doubt has been raised by author.

Answer 868-879

868. Shloka- Your doubt is valid. The conscious dravya and corporeal dravya are bonded as well as not bonded. They are bonded with their relations and not bonded with non-relations. ( with whom they have nimitta-naimittik relationship , they only are their relations, and they are bonded with them only. With other they are unbonded.)

Bhavartha- It is true that every dravya is independent and their manifestation is also independent. They function within their own foursome and do not touch the areas of others al all. In spite of this there is a speciality due to which the fruition of karmas become nimitta for the corruption of jiva. It is this that the worldly jiva since eternal times is bonded with gyanavarana etc. karma paramanus. The jiva who is bonded with karmas, they are termed as mutually bonded and remaining dravyas and visrasopachaya are called as unbonded. With whom it is bonded, with them they have cause-effect relationship  and not with others. The cause effect means nimitta-naimittik only and nothing else. And-

869. Shloka-  In the bonded and unbonded there is real difference. Out of the two the bonded in spite of having  different types, have difference due to cause-effect relationship

Bhavartha- Jiva and the gyanavarana etc. dravya karma bonded with him are both mutually bonded. For them all other substances are unbonded. Although jiva is conscious and karma are corporeal, even then in that jiva and in those karmas there is mutual cause-effect capability. The meaning of cause-effect capability is that the fruition of karma is nimitta cause and bhava of jiva is effect. This cause effect bhava exists within mutually bonded only and not in unbonded.

870. Shloka- The bonded have bhava of bondage and unbonded have bhava of non-bondage. In contemporaries there is bondage and in the opponents there is no bondage.

Bhavartha- The bhava of bondage exists in bonded. It means that the jiva and karma who are mutually bonded, in them only the above described cause-effect bhava is applicable mutually. In unbonded there is bhava of non bondage which means that the unbonded do not have mutual cause effect relationship. The contemporaries are bonded which means that those having cause-effect relationship only get bonded. In opponents there is no bondage which means that those not having cause-effect relationship do not get bonded.

871. Shloka- In reality bandh is of three types and their characteristics are also different. Out of the three two are independent by nature, described earlier and third (Ubhaya bandh) is combination of the two which is described now-

Bhavartha- Bandh have three types, dravya bandh, bhava bandh and Ubhaya bandh. Raga dwesha bhava only are called bhava bandh wherein soul alone is the actor. The corruption of charitra quality of soul with the nimitta of karmas is called raga-dwesha. In dravya bandh only pudgala is involved. Hence both bandhs are independent. But the third Ubhaya bandh occurs due to relationship between soul and pudgala hence that is described now-

872. Shloka- The bandh between jiva and karmas is mutually dependent upon each other . Jiva is bonded with karmas and karma are bonded with jiva .

Bhavartha- Saying that jiva is bonded with karmas is not enough. It is also not right to say that karma are bonded with jiva. Then what is right? Jiva is bonded with karma and karma are bonded with jiva is right since cause effect is not of one only but between two mutually.

873. Shloka- The change of qualities of jiva into another form is called as vaibhavik bhava. This bhava of jiva is the cause for bondage of karma. With the karma generated with the nimitta of vaibhavik bhava only is the cause for capability of generation of same vaibhavik bhava.

Bhavartha- Soul indulges in independent vibhava bhava. What is that vibhava bhava? Soul manifests in two ways. One is in accordance with its form of quality is swabhavik bhava which is not cause for bandh. Another manifestation is in accordance with the shape of the nimitta which is called vaibhavik bhava. For example samyaktva is quality of soul and manifestation in Samyak darshan form is natural manifestation. With the fruition of darshan moha manifesting in Mithyatva form is vaibhavik bhava of soul. Swabhavik bhava is not nimitta for bandh but vaibhavik bhava is nimitta for bandh. This is the meaning of first half above. Now the second half means that with the nimitta of vaibhavik bhava the karmana varganas manifest into karma form. Under fructification of those karmas it becomes nimitta cause for the generation of same vaibhavik bhava. For example with Mithyatva form vaibhavik bhava of soul the Mithtava karma was bonded and then same Mithyatva karma becomes nimitta cause for future Mithyatva bhava of soul. Remember the question of disciple  was there that how fruition of dravya karma becomes cause for vibhava manifestation of soul. So in reply it is being told that soul manifests in vibhava bhava. It results in bandh of same family and when that karma generates same bhava in future then it becomes nimitta cause. In this way totally different karma also is cause   and that only is cause and not any other dravya since soul is bonded with the same only. The same is called Ubhaya bandh and not others.

Continued….