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…..