GRANTHRAJ SHRI PANCH DHYAYI..38

 

1637. Shloka- Guna- Dosh ( quality-fault) both are not cause for Upayoga. Or, Upayoga is not cause for any Guna or Dosh and this Upayoga is not even nimitta cause either.

Bhavartha- (1) Just  as Mithyatva form manifestation of soul is cause for gyan becoming KuGyan form – in the same way the manifestation of Upayoga of soul is not cause for guna-dosh of soul. (2) Just as smoke has concomitance with fire , in the same way Upayoga is not means for guna-dosh form results. (3) Just as darshan Moha is nimitta cause for Samyaktva , in the same way Upayoga is not nimitta casue for guna-dosh either. In other words the Upayoga does not have any relation with guna-dosh.

1638. Shloka- Samyaktva is bhava of Jiva which is produced by non fruition of Darshan Moha karma. It is necessarily so since Samyaktva and non fruition of darshan Moha have pervasiveness.

Bhavartha- In the counting of Gunas the first one is generation of Samyak Darshan. Now it is said that its attainment has no relation with Upayoga but Darshan Moha karma has the relation. Samyaktva and its non-fruition have joint pervasiveness i.e. where Samyaktva  is existent, there darshan Moha is  not fructified. And where Samyaktva is not present, there Darshan moha also does not have non fruition. Upayoga whether in self or others- there is no relation.

1639. Shloka- As per destiny, with the non fruition ( destruction, upasham or Kshayopasham) of Darshan Moha, the samyaktva is generated at that time itself .  As per destiny with its fruition the Samyaktva is also not existent. Upayoga is not nimitta cause for Samyaktva or Darshan Moha.

Bhavartha- Here the nimitta cause for Samyaktva is described. Upayoga is neither the Upadan cause for generation of Samyaktva nor is nimitta cause. Hence it does not have any relation with Samyaktva. The nimitta cause for Samyaktva is darshan Moha.

1640. Shloka- Both of Samyaktva and non fruition of Darshan Moha do not have  pervasiveness with Upayoga since without Upayoga also, with non fruition of Darshan moha the Samyaktva is produced.

Bhavartha- Here it is told that First benefit for jiva is Samyaktva and this is generated with non fruition of darshan moha. The upayoga has no relation with Generation of Samyaktva nor does it have any relation with non fruition of Darshan moha.

1641. Shloka- Nirjara etc. having concomitance with Samyaktva do not have any pervasiveness with Upayoga.

Bhavartha- In the Gunas the second was Samvar Nirjara. Now it is told here that Samvar Nirjara have concomitance with Samyaktva and no relationship with Upayoga. Upayoga of Samyak Drishti whether it is in self or others, the Samvar Nirjara are dependent upon the Shuddhi of Samyaktva. The traversal of Upayoga in others do not destroy Samvar Nirjara but only with destruction of Samyaktva only they get destroyed. Hence in the benefit of Samvar Nirjara, the Upayoga is not a cause.

1642. Shloka- With Samyak Darshan the Nirjara etc. are surely attained. In the presence of Samyak Darshan the Nirjara etc. cannot be absent . But at that time gyan is not necessarily in own Upayoga – there is no rule. Therefore whether shuddhopayoga is there or Upayoga is in others- Nirjara etc. have concomitance with Samyaktva. In them Upayoga is not cause.

1643. Shloka- Gyan whether be engaged in soul or others, with bhava of Samyaktva the Nirjara etc. take place.

Bhavartha- The essence is that whether Gyan be engaged in own Shuddha soul experience or whether engaged in other substances- that is not cause for Guna-dosh. In Nirjara etc. gunas the Samyak darshan form manifestation of jiva only is the cause and not own soul upayoga.

1644. Shloka- And the bandh of punya, pap occurs due to raga, dwesha, moha and not with Upayoga.

Bhavartha- The third guna-dosh for soul is punya-pap bandh. Now it is told that Upayoga does not have any relationship with bandh. People think that if upayoga is in self then bandh does not accrue and if upayoga is in others then bandh accrues- this is wrong. Bandh has concomitance with raga-dwesha-moha and not with upayoga.

1645. Shloka- Bandh is pervasive with ragas etc. It is not non pervasive like that of gyan vikalpas with that of bandh. Upayoga is non pervasive with respect to bandh.

Bhavartha- Raga Dwesha are cause for bandh. For Shubha bandh the intensity of Shubha raga and mild fruition of ashubha karmas is cause while for ashubha bandh the intensity of ashubha raga and mild fruition of ashubh karmas is the cause. However for bandh alone Upayoga is not the cause. Hence bandh has concomitance with raga dwesha etc. bhavas and not with upayoga.  

The difference of raga and upayoga 1646 -1654

1646. Shloka- It is established fact that raga, dwesha, moha and Upayoga are different entities and both of them do not have mutual pervasiveness. In fact any of them do not have expectation from the other. Both are independent without having any relation.

Form of raga and its means

1647. Shloka- Manifestations of soul tainted with Kashaya are called ragas . Ragas are Audayik bhavas of soul since they are generated with the fruition of Charitra Mohaniya and Darshan Mohaniya and not in any other way.

Bhavartha- Moha, Raga, Dwesha are audayik bhavas since moha is converse manifestation of shraddha guna while raga-dwesha is converse manifestation of charitra guna. Its experience is Kashaya form . In generation of Moha bhava, the fruition of Darshan Moha and in the generation of raga-dwesha bhava, the fruition of charitra moha is nimitta. The bhavas generated in accordance with fruition are termed as Audayik bhavas. In Raga-Dwesha anger, pride, deceit, greed , laughter, like, dislike, sorrow, fear, aversion, stree Veda, purush veda, and napunsak veda these 13 bhavas are incorporated.

From of Upayoga and its means

1648. Shloka- The Kshayopashamik gyan is called Upayoga since it is generated by the kshayopasham of its obscuring (Gyana varana) karma.

Bhavartha- Upayoga is Kshayopashamik bhava since it is partial swabhava form manifestation of Gyan guna. Its experience is knowledge form. In its generation the kshayopasham of gyanavarana is nimitta.

1649. Shloka- Raga is generated due to own reasons ( since the fruition of darshan moha and charitra moha is nimitta cause for it) and Gyan is generated due to own reasons ( since the kshayopasham of gyanavarana is the nimitta cause for it.) From aspect of nature both are totally different since raga is audayik bhava of shraddha and charitra guna and its experience is Kashaya form while Upayoga is Kshayopashamik gyan whose experience is knowledge form. The cause for generation of both are also different and nature are also different. Then how can they have the same source? Not possible. They do not have any relation.

1650. Shloka- Since the means for both are different and natures are different hence when gyan is produced then gyan only occurs- raga does not occur and when ragas etc. are generated then these ragas etc. only happen and gyan does not occur.

Bhavartha- Gyan and Raga are directly experienced differently. The raga is directly experienced as Kashaya form and gyan is experienced directly as carrying out knowing activity. Here this meaning should not be taken that the time of gyan is different and that of ragas is different. The time is same for both. But gyan occurs due to own nature and ragas etc. from their own nature.

1651. Shloka- To establish the above statement the example is also there- With increase of gyan explicitly the ragas etc. do not increase accordingly since they are not pervasive. Therefore with increase of gyan the ragas do not increase.

Bhavartha- If gyan and raga were pervasive then with increase of gyan the raga should also increase but it is directly seen that for some Mumukshu the gyan increases but raga reduces. This shows that they do not have any relation. From 4^th to 12^th, gyan keeps enhancing but raga keeps getting destroyed.

1652. Shloka- And somewhere with increase of ragas etc. the gyan does not enhance. Even if the increase of gyan is there, it is due to own reasons. In this way both may have equal enhancement.

Bhavartha- Sometimes it is seen that in some Papi the raga keeps increasing but gyan does not increase and some places it is seen that in some papi the raga increases and gyan also increases- but they do not increase  due to each other but due to their own reasons individually. The nimitta cause for increase of gyan is kshayopasham of gyanavarana and capability of gyan. The cause for increase of raga is conversely intense purushartha of Jiva and intense fruition of moha. Hence it is clear that both are different.

1653. Shloka – Sometimes due to destruction of its opponent Gyanavarana karma the gyan increases, even then due to fruition of Mohaniya karma the raga etc. do not reduce.

Bhavartha- At the same time if destruction of Gyanavarana karma and fruition of Mohaniya is taking place then gyan increases but raga does not reduce.

1654. Shloka- Or due to destiny, with the availability of suitable reasons both may be reduced together – but that reduction is due to own individual reasons- not due to each other, i.e. the reduction of one cannot be reason for reduction of other.

Bhavartha- Sometimes it is seen that in old age, in some Mumukshu jiva the gyan reduces and raga also reduces.  But it should not be misunderstood that they have occurred due to each other. Due to destiny the fruition of gyanavarana has increased and at the same time the fruition of Mohaniya has reduced, hence both have reduced due to their own reasons. Not due to each other. Thus gyan and raga are totally different.

1655. Shloka- Just as Upayoga does not have pervasiveness with raga-dwesha-moha bhava , in the same way Upayoga does not have pervasiveness with dravya moha. The pervasiveness of ragas etc. is with gyanavarana etc.

Bhavartha – The nimitta cause for raga is Mohaniya karma  which does not have any relation  with Upayoga. The nimitta of Upayoga is Gyanavarana. Now it is considered if Gyanavarana has some relationship with raga-  then it is told that raga does have pervasiveness with gyanavarana but not similar, it is dissimilar. It is this way- where sovereignty of raga is there, the sovereignty of gyanavarana is also there but where the sovereignty of gyanavarana is there the sovereignty of raga is not there. Till 10^th sovereignty of raga is there and that of gyanavarana is also there. But in 11^th , 12^th the sovereignty of gyanavarana is there but that of raga is not there. Hence dissimilar pervasiveness is established and not similar pervasiveness.

1656. Shloka- Ragas etc. have dissimilar pervasiveness with gyanavarana  from aspect of Anvaya and Vyatirak both. Then due to any other reason they do not have similarity in pervasiveness.

1657. Shloka- Here the objective is to establish non pervasiveness     and the reason is corruption. In other words if ragas etc. and Gyanavarana are believed to have similar pervasiveness then it results in corruption fault. It is this way – With existence of one the other is not present and  even if it is present then it is due to own reasons. ( with gyanavarana the raga etc. bhavas are not there and even if they are there , then it is due to own reasons.)

Bhavartha- Where Gyanavarana is there  , if raga were also there then it is similar pervasiveness , but in 11^th and 12^th Gyanavarana is there and raga is not there. This is corruption which establishes that gyanavarana and raga do not have similar pervasiveness. i.e. raga is not due to gyanavarana and it also establishes that  the raga upto 10^th is not due to gyanavarana but due to own reasons.

What is Vyapti ( pervasiveness)

1658. Shloka- The rule of coexistence is called as Vyapti . The thing which exists with the presence of other and with the absence of other the thing also does not exist. This is the rule of Vyapti between two entities.

Bhavartha- Here the characteristics of Sam Vyapti (similar pervasiveness) is described. Ex.- where gyan darshan is there , the jiva is present and where gyan darshan are not there, the jiva is also absent. Similarly where jiva is there, the gyan darshan are present and where jiva is not there- the gyan darshan are also absent. This is Sam Vyapti ( similar pervasiveness.)  

1659. Shloka- Ragas etc. and Gyanavarana do not have SamVypati since in the presence of raga, definitely bandh of Gyanavarana etc. is there and in the absence of ragas etc. the bandh of Gyanavarana etc. is not there. Therefore in presence of ragas the Gyanavarana is there but opposite side is not true since it is dissimilar.

1660. Shloka- It is so that in spite of Gyanavarana etc. karmas the absence of raga bhava is seen . Even if the presence of ragas etc. is seen , then it is due to own reasons only and not due to gyanavarana etc.

Bhavartha – It would have been SamVyapti if in the presence of gyanavarana etc. the ragas etc. were also present. But it is not so in 11^th and 12^th gunasthana . In lower gunasthana both ragas and gyanavarana etc. are there but that is due to own reasons. Therefore it is dissimilar pervasiveness. It was earlier established that Upayoga does not have any relation with raga. Now it has been established that Gyanavarana - nimitta of Upayoga also does not have relationship with raga.

1661. Shloka- Gyanavarana etc. eight karmas have non pervasiveness with Upayoga since in spite of Upayoga being there the bandh of gyanavarana etc. eight karmas do not take place, or any of them do not have bondage ( like in Siddha state) and it is not so that without Upayoga it is bondage free ( like in Vigrah gati) where bandh continues without upayoga. This establishes that with Upayoga the bandh of gyanavarana etc. eight karmas do not have pervasiveness.

Bhavartha- Upayoga and bandh can have pervasiveness when in the presence of Upayoga any of the eight karmas get bonded and where upayoga is not present, there the bandh of karmas should not be there. But both things are contradicted. Siddha have Upayoga but there is no bandh of any of the eight karmas. In Vigrah Gati there is no Upayoga but all karmas are bonded. Hence Upayoga and Bandh do not have pervasiveness. Thus the Anvaya is not established . Now Vyatirek is considered-

1662. Shloka- Jiva has Upayoga in own soul but it is not so that at any time the Jiva is without Upayoga. Hence there is no scope for Vyatirek.

Bhavartha- The Vyatirek is possible if “ where bandh is not there – there Upayoga is also not there” . Now siddhas do not have bandh at all but Upayoga is fully there. Hence Jiva is never without Upayoga . Thus Vyatirek does not get established.

Bhavartha- Upayoga and bandh do not have Anvaya- Vyatirek hence there is no SamVyapti between them. Therefore Upayoga is not cause for bandh.

Conclusion

1663. Shloka- With all this argument it establishes that the Upayoga is neither cause for Samyak Darshan nor is cause for bandh moksha.

Bhavartha- This topic was started at 1625 that when the Upayoga of Samyak Drishti is within self then does it have any benefit? And if Upayoga of Samyak Drishti goes in others – then does it have any loss? The benefit for soul is from Samyak darshan but Samyak Darshan is not cause for Upayoga. The cause for Samyak darshan is absence of Moha karma. Secondly the benefit of soul is by Samvar Nirjara since that leads to Moksha. But in Samvar Nirjara also the Upayoga is not cause. Hence Upayoga does not benefit. Now loss is considered. The loss of soul is by bandh. The cause for bandh is raga-dwesha-moha and not Upayoga. Hence Upayoga also does not cause loss either. Hence it establishes that Upayoga is neither cause for Samyak darshan, nor Moksha , nor Bandh. Hence Upayoga does not have any relation with loss and benefit. This is mistake to believe that Upayoga remaining in self is beneficial and its traversal in others  causes loss. The Upayoga of Samyak Drishti which engages towards knowing others, for that reason believing him not to have Samyak darshan or gyan Chetana or samvar nirjara or believing him to be Savikalpa Samyak Drishti – all are wrong.  This is the essence.

Doubt

1664-5. Shloka- This has resulted in the same meaning as earlier- that only some Veetrag Samyak Drishti attains Gyan Chetana since with engagement of Gyan(Upayoga) in some other substance the loss of gyan Chetana is established as a rule.

Bhavartha- The questioner calls the Samyak Drishti as Nirvikalpa Samyak Drishti when his Upayoga is within self and when his Upayoga goes in others then his name as Savikalpa Samyak Drishti since he has used the meaning of the term Vikalpa  as Sankranti i.e. change from one padartha to next. Based on this he says that Nirvikalpa Samyak Drishti only would have Upayoga form Gyan Chetana and the moment the Upayoga went into others – at that time he became Savikalpa Samyak Drishti and the Upayoga form Gyan Chetana got destroyed. Hence he asks that with Upayoga going in others, the Upayoga form Gyan Chetana got destroyed- this much loss is there ? ( The questioner was not accepting Gyan Chetana for Savikalpa Samyak Drishti  but now he accepts Labdhi form gyan Chetana but he does not accept Upayoga form Gyan Chetana. )

Answer

1666-67. Shloka- It is right. With Upayoga going into others there is loss of gyan Chetana of the form of Upayoga within self but the objective (Nirjara etc.) are not harmed in any way. The subject of Upayoga ( Upayoga form Gyan Chetana) is soul and it is not cause for nirjara  attained based upon the Shuddhi of Samyaktva . Due to Samyak Darshan the nirjara of eight karmas which is the objective, is attained based upon  the Shuddhi of samyaktva and its cause is not upayoga.

Bhavartha- It is true that with Upayoga going into others the own upayoga form gyan Chetana does not remain but the fact is that the gyani does not lose anything due to it. Since the upayoga form Gyan Chetana does not have relation with samvar nirjara. Whether the Upayoga of gyani is in others or self, but the samvar nirjara in the sovereignty of samyaktva occurs with Upayoga remaining in self as well as others. The relationship of Samvar Nirjara is with the Shuddhi of Samyak darshan. Hence so long as Samyak darshan is there the Samvar Nirjara will keep happening. Hence there is no harm. The essence is that if Upayoga form Chetana is damaged , then so be it- it does not make difference to the Moksha objective .

This concept is wrong that some Samyak Drishtis do not have Gyan Chetana. All have labdhi form Chetana. Yes it is true that with Upayoga going in others ,the Upayoga form  Chetana does not remain but our objective is Moksha whose cause is Samvar Nirjara. It is concurrent with Shuddhi of Samyaktva. Hence upyoga going into others does not harm as it has been established that Upayoga (knowing) does not have relation with loss-gain.

The second doubt was that Samyak Darshan has savikalpa and Nirvikalpa two divisions. The answer is that Gyan is Savikalpa but Samyaktva is only Nirvikalpa. From 4^th till Siddhas it is the same. Then he questions that why Samyaktva is called Savikalpa?

1668.  Shloka- In Agam the Samyaktva has been called Vikalpa form which is like flower in the sky which is unestablished. Then as per omniscient’s agam which is the famous cause by which it could be known that Samyaktva has been called as Savikalpa?

Bhavartha- It is now understood that Upayoga being in self or others is task of gyan and it does not have relation with Samyaktva. It is nirvikalpa in both states. Then why in Agam the Samyaktva has been called as Savikalpa and Nirvikalpa? In reply it shall be told that so long as raga with knowledge is present in Charitra Guna , till then with their association the samyaktva of gyani has been called Savikalpa. Where it is veetrag i.e. the raga with knowledge is not present , with such charitra the Samyaktva is called Nirvikalpa.  It really did not imply two divisions of Samyaktva .

Continued….