MokshaMargPrakashak …24

 

The converse form of Samyak Darshan

In the Shastra the realisation  of the  Deva-Guru-Dharma is said to be  means for Samyaktva – believing such order, they have renounced doing Namaskar etc. to others other than Arahant Deva-Nirgranth Guru-Jain Shastra , but they do not examine their good or bad qualities and even if they examine then they do not examine it properly with knowledge of Tattva; they examine based upon external characteristics – with such concept they engage in bhakti of Sudeva-Guru-Shastras.

The converse form of Deva Bhakti

The Arahant etc. devas are there who are worshipped by Indra etc., have several miraculous powers, free of hunger etc. flaws, they are beautiful in body, free of company of women etc., they give preachment with divine sound, know the LokAlok by means of Keval Gyan, they have destroyed desires, anger etc., thus several qualities exist.

-          Of these several qualities are pudgala dependent and several are Jiva dependent , they are not recognised separately. For example- In Manushya etc. paryayas of dissimilar form, without knowing the qualities of Jiva-Pudgala differently, someone attains Mithya Darshan; in the same way in dissimilar form Arahant paryaya without knowing the difference of qualities of jiva and pudgala, he also attains Mithya Darshan.

Knowing the external qualities,  he believes the Mahant-ness of Arahant deva as great and without knowing the qualities of Jiva properly, he believes the Mahant-ness of Arahant Deva as ordained or otherwise since if he knows the qualities of Jiva properly then he would not remain Mithya Drishti.

There he believes those Arahants to be giver of Swarg-Moksha, compassionate towards poor, benefactor of lowly, uplifter of fallen, thus just as other faith person believes Ishwara having buddhi of creator; in the same way he believes Arahant to be. He does not know that fruition is in accordance with own manifestations, Arahant is merely nimitta for same. Hence those qualities are possible only in Upachar sense. Without purification of own manifestations, Arahant is not giver of Swarg-Moksha etc.

With the name of Arahant etc. the dog etc. attained heaven, there the miracle of name alone is believed but without manifestations, the one reciting name does not attain Swarg, then how can one hearing name would attain? – With the nimitta of listening to name, the dog etc. have attained weak Kashaya form bhavas due to which the swarg  is attained. The primacy of name is in Upachar sense only.

Look, with the name of Arahant etc. and worship etc. believing  the destruction of undesirable materials and attainment of desirable materials , for elimination of disease etc. and attainment of wealth  etc. the name is taken and worshipped. But the cause for desirable undesirable to happen  is due to fruition of past karmas; after all, Arahant is not a karta.

With the bhakti form shubhopayoga manifestations of Arahant etc. the previous Pap get transformed hence in sense of Upachar, the cause for destruction of undesirable and attainment of desirable is said to be bhakti of Arahant etc. But the Jiva who carries out bhakti with worldly objectives only from the beginning, his intent was that of pap only. How can the bhavas of desire- disgust etc. be cause for Sankraman (transformation) of previous pap, due to which his objective was served?

Several  Jivas believing bhakti to be cause for salvation, with great interest engage in it. This shraddhan is similar to that of other followers who believe salvation through Bhakti , but bhakti is raga form and raga results in bandh; hence it is not cause for Moksha. When raga is under fruition, then if he does not engage in bhakti, it would result in their being engaged in pap; hence to avoid ashubha raga gyani engage in Bhakti and know this to be external nimitta of Moksha Marg but knowing this alone to be  as venerable they do  not remain satisfied; they remain actively engaged in attaining shuddhopayoga.  

The same is written in Panchastikaya commentary – “ Such Bhakti is practiced by Agayni Jivas for whom the Bhakti alone is primary. To certain extent it occurs to Gyani for elimination of strong raga-fever or negation of raga of some specific kind. “

There he asks – If it is so then the Bhakti of Agyani would be  more than that of Gyani?

Its reply- From aspect of reality Gyani has true Bhakti while Agyani does not have it. From aspect of raga bhava, Agyani believing it to be cause for salvation in shraddhan also has high attachment towards it; where as the Gyani knowing it to be cause for Shubha bandh does not have such attachment. Externally to some extent the Gyani has high attachment, some times Agyani also has it- know thus.

-          Thus the form of Deva Bhakti was highlighted.

Converse nature of Guru Bhakti

Now , what type of Guru Bhakti is practiced by him? That is told- Several  Jivas follow the order only. They consider that these are sadhus of the Jains and are our Guru, hence we should do their Bhakti  and hence they do it. And several Jivas examine also. There these Munis practice compassion, sheel, do not keep wealth etc. and carry out fasting etc. tapa and undergo hunger etc. hardship, do not get angry with anyone, with preachment direct others into dharma , thus considering their qualities, carry out bhakti bhava towards them  but such qualities are found in Param Hans and other followers and Jaini Mithya Drishti also; hence it has Ati Vyapti ( over pervasiveness), therefore one cannot examine  this way truly.

These qualities are considered- Of these several are dependent upon Jiva and several are dependent upon pudgala. Without knowing their difference, due to spirit of oneness in dissimilar natured Muni paryaya they remain Mithya Drishti. The true characteristics of Munis is oneness of Samyak Darshan-Gyan-Charitra form Moksha Marg, which they do not recognise since if they recognise it then they would not remain Mithya Drishti. In this way if the true form of Munis is not known then how can they practice true bhakti? Recognising the Shubha activity form qualities which are cause for punya bandh, believing that to be beneficial, being attached towards it they practice Bhakti.

-          Thus the form of Guru Bhakti was described.

Converse form of Shastra Bhakti

Now the converse form of shastra bhakti is described- several jivas  considering that  ‘this is speech of Kevali Bhagwan ; hence due to auspicious nature of Kevali, these are also venerable’ – they engage in bhakti towards them, Several engage in examination in following way- ‘ in these shastras , the detachment, compassion, forgiveness, morality, satisfaction etc. are narrated; hence these are supreme’ – knowing this they engage in bhakti but such statements are seen in other shastras- Vedant etc. also.

In these shastras serious description of Trilok etc. is provided; hence knowing its supremacy they engage in Bhakti , but in these there is no scope for inference etc. ; hence how can they know its glory without examining  true-false?  Hence the true examination is not done this way. Here Anekant form true jivas etc. tattvas have been narrated and true jewel trio form Moksha Marg is highlighted; with them only the Jina shastras are supreme, which they do not recognise , since if they recognise then Mithya Drishti cannot  remain.

-          Thus the form of shastra bhakti was described.

In this manner,  they have interest towards Deva-Guru-Shastra; hence believes self to have Vyavahara Samyaktva but he has not realised the true form; hence the realisation is also not true. Without true realisation the Samyaktva is not attained; hence he is Mithya drishti only.

Converse form of seven tattvas

In Shastra it is told that ‘ Tattvarth shraddhan is Samyak Darshan’. Hence the way the Jiva etc. Tattvas are described in shastras, he learns it from there and engages his Upayoga towards them , preaches others  but he does not have realisation of the bhava of those Tattvas. Here the bhava of the substance only is named as ‘Tattva’, hence without realisation of bhava, how can Tattvarth Shraddhan be attained?

What is ‘realisation of Bhava’ is narrated-

Just as some person for being artist, learns the divisions of swara-raga-taal-taan etc. from shastra but does not recognise the form of swara etc. Without realisation of their form one swara is believed to be other swara form and even if he knows correctly then also he cannot decide it; hence he is not expert. In the same way some jiva learns the form of Jivas etc. Tattvas from shastras for being Samyaktvi but he does not realise its form. Without realisation of form, he believes one tattva as another tattva form and even if he knows correctly, he is not able to decide it; hence he does not have Samyaktva.

Just as someone may not have learnt music shastra etc. but if he recognises the form of swara etc. then he is expert only; in the same way if shastra (Jinagam) is read or not read, if he knows the form of Jivas etc. then he is Samyak Drishti only. In the same way just as deer does not know the names of swara-raga etc. but he knows their form; in the same way those with weak intellect do not know the names of Jiva etc. but they know their form that this is myself and this is other, these bhavas are bad and these are good- thus if he recognises their nature then he has realisation of bhava.

Look ! ShivaBhooti Muni did not know the names of Jiva etc. but he kept reciting ‘tush-mash-bhinna’ , although it is not word of Siddhant but he contemplated upon the bhava form of self-others hence he became Kevali. Whereas dravya lingi being student of eleven angs know the Jivas etc. tattvas specifically but they do not realise its bhava; hence they remain Mithya Drishti only.

Now how do they have converse Tattva Shraddhan,  that is told-

The converse form of Jiva-Ajiva Tattva

( This VyavaharaBhasi Jiva) knows the divisions of gunasthana, Margana etc., trasa-sthavar forms  of jivas ; knows the divisions of pudgala etc. and their colour etc. specifics of ajiva but he does not know the way it has been described in Adhyatma shastras which is cause for having differentiating knowledge and Veetrag state.

Even if per chance he does know it then he knows in accordance with shastra but he does not carry of true shraddhan of knowing self in own form without mixing even a bit of others in self, nor mixing bit of self in others. Just as – other Mithya Drishti without decision, with paryaya buddhi adopt oneness with knowledge and colour etc; in the same way he believes oneness with the soul dependent knowledge etc. and body dependent preachment-fasting etc. activities.

Even if he tells true thing in accordance with shastra but internal decision form shraddhan does not exist ; hence just as a drunkard calls mother as mother, even then he is not sober; in the same way he cannot be called Samyaktvi.

There, as if he is talking about someone else only, in the same way he talks about the soul but this  soul is myself- such bhava he does not realise.

And just as – someone is described as different from someone else , in the same   way soul and body are described differently but  myself am different from this body- such bhava is not realised.

There in this dissimilar family paryaya with the mutual nimitta of Jiva-pudgala several activities take place, he knows them to be generated due to conjunction of two dravyas; this is activity of Jiva, for which pudgala is nimitta ; this is activity of pudgala for which jiva is nimitta- such different bhavas are not realised; and without realisation of such bhavas, he cannot be called as true shraddhani of jiva-ajiva, since this was the objective of knowing jiva-ajiva, which did not happen.

Converse form of Asrava

There , he knows the Himsa etc. form Pap asravas as despicable Asrava tattva and believes the Ahimsa form punya Asrava as venerable, but both of them are cause  for karma bandh ; believing venerability in them only is Mithya Darshan. The same is told in Bandh Adhikar of Samaysar-

“ The birth-death , sukh-dukh of all jivas occur with the nimitta of their own karmas. Where one jiva is karta of these deeds of other jiva ; that only is Mthya Adhyavasaya (concept) , cause for bandh. Where the adhyavasaya of saving other jiva or making them happy is there, that is cause for punya bandh and where the adhyavasaya is that of killing or making unhappy is there , that is cause for pap bandh.”

-          Such Ahimsa form truth etc. are cause for punya bandh and Himsa form untruth etc. are cause for pap bandh- all these are Mithya Adhyavasaya; they are rejectable; hence like himsa, knowing Ahimsa etc. also to be cause for bandh, know it to be  despicable.

There may be budhhi of killing in himsa, but without completing his Ayu, one does not die; he accrues pap bandh himself due to his dwesha form manifestations. There may be buddhi of protecting in Ahimsa but without the Ayu balance being there, he cannot survive; he accrues punya by himself due to his virtuous raga manifestations- thus both of these are despicable; whereas being Veetrag, manifests in knower-seer form, that only is bandh free; that is venerable.

So long as such state not be attained, till then manifest in virtuous raga form, but keep the shraddhan such that this too is cause for bandh and is despicable; if he believes it to be Moksha Marg in shraddhan then he becomes Mithya Drishti.

And Mithyatva, Avirati, Kashaya, Yog are divisions of Asrava. He believes in them externally but internally he does not recognise the family of such bhavas.

He knows the Graheet Mithyatva of worshipping other Devas as Mithyatva but since beginningless time there is Agraheet Mithyatva which  he does not recognise.

Externally himsa of trasa-sthavar and engagement in subjects of senses-mind, he knows them as Avirati but in Himsa the Pramad (careless) manifestation is the root and in enjoyments of sensory subjects, the desire is the root which he does not notice. 

He knows the external anger etc. as Kashaya but in the intent raga-dwesha are present which  he does not recognise.

And he knows the external efforts as Yog but he does not know the Shakti form yogs.

-          Thus he knows the form of Asrava conversely.

There he does not have worry of destroying the raga-dwesha-moha form asrava bhavas; but he makes provisions of eliminating external activity or external nimitta but with their elimination the asrava does not get eliminated.

Dravya Lingi muni does not worship other Devas etc., does not engage in Himsa or sensory subjects, does not get angry etc., prevents the activities of mind-speech-body even then he has all four asravas of Mithyatva  etc. There he does not carry out these acts in deception; if he deceives then how can he reach up to Graveyak etc. ? Hence the Mithyatva etc. form bhavas of raga etc. in the internal intent alone are the asrava; which he does not recognise.

In this way he does not have true shraddhan of Asrava Tattva also.

The converse form of Bandh Tattva

He knows the bandh of narak etc. pap forms due to ashubha bhavas in bandh tattva as bad while with Shubha bhavas the deva etc. punya form bandh accrues  which he knows as good; but in all jivas there is dwesha in objects of dukh and raga in objects of sukh, in the same way he also has shraddhan of raga-dwesha. Just as there is raga-dwesha in objects of sukh-dukh pertaining to present paryaya, in the same way there is raga-dwesha in objects of sukh-dukh  pertaining to future paryayas.

There with Shubha-ashubha bhavas the differentiation of punya-pap occurs in Aghati karmas but Aghati karmas are not damaging to qualities of soul and with Shubha-ashubha bhavas the bondage of Ghati karmas occurs continuously which are all pap form and they only are damager of the qualities of soul; hence with ashuddha bhavas karma bandh accrues, knowing them as good-bad only is Mithya Shraddhan.

In this way with such shraddhan he does not have true shraddhan of Bandh Tattva also.

Converse form of Samvar Tattva

In Samvar tattva, he  knows the Ahimsa form Shubha asrava bhavas as samvar but with same reason he believes the accrual of punya bandh as well as samvar which cannot be true.

Question- Munis have one bhava at one time where they accrue bandh as well as samvar-nirjara also, how does it happen?

Answer- That Bhava is mixed form – some part is Veetrag and some is raga form. The part which is veetrag causes samvar and the part which is with raga, causes bandh- thus with one bhava two deeds are accomplished. But with one virtuous raga believing punya asrava as well as Samvar-nirjara is delusion. In mixed bhava this part is with raga and this part is veetraga- such recognition is there to Samyak Drishti only; hence he treats the balance raga form in despicable form.

Mithya Drishti does not have such recognition; hence in good raga bhava he believes samvar to be there and has shraddha of veneration towards virtuous raga form acts.

And in Siddhant the Gupti-Samiti-Dharma-Anupreksha-ParishahJaya-charitra cause Samvar – this is told but in them also he does not have true shraddha.

How is that ? This is told-

Gupti- Eliminates the activities of external mind-speech-body, does not contemplate of Pap, keeps silent, does not travel etc., he believes that to be Gupti. But in the mind due to bhakti etc. form  auspicious raga several vikalpas occur and he himself has blocked the activities of speech-body, there Shubha tendency is there and in such  tendency the gupti is not applicable ; hence with Veetrag bhava where the activities of mind-speech-body do not  occur that only is true Gupti.

Samiti- The efforts form activity  for protection of other jivas is believed to be Samiti; there with manifestations  of Himsa the Pap accrues and if you call manifestations of protection as Samvar then what would be called as cause for punya bandh? And in Eishana Samiti he avoids fault, there the objective is not that of protection; hence samiti is not for protection alone.

Then how does the Samiti occur ? – Due to some raga, the travel etc. activity of Munis occur. In those activities,  with  lack of high obsessiveness, the tendency is not of Pramad form. And by making other jivas unhappy, they do not accomplish their objectives of travel etc.; hence automatically compassion is served- such is ‘True Samiti’.

Dharma-  Due to fear of bandh etc. or with desire of swarg-moksha, they do not get angry, but the intent of being angry has not been eliminated. Just as due to fear of king etc. or with greed of Mahant-ness one does not enjoy the other women, then he is not called Tyagi. In the same way he is not Tyagi of anger etc.

Then how is the Tyagi? – With the objects appearing as favourable or unfavourable the anger etc. are  generated; when with practice of Tattva Gyan , something does not appear favourable-unfavourable then automatically anger etc. do not get generated and true dharma is practiced.

Anupreksha- With contemplation of Anitya etc., knowing the body etc. to be bad, not favourable, being detached from it is called Anupreksha by him- just as some friend was there then there was raga with him, later seeing  his bad qualities he became detached from him; in the same way earlier there was raga with body etc., later after observing its Anitya form bad qualities he became detached with it; but such detachment is dwesha form. Hence knowing the natures of self and body etc. properly, eliminating delusion, do not have raga knowing it to be good and not have dwesha knowing it to be bad- with such detachment contemplation of true Anitya etc. nature is called true Anupreksha.

Parishah-Jaya- Not making efforts for satiation of hunger etc. is called Parishah-Jaya. If no efforts are made and internally with attainment of unfavourable conditions of hunger etc. he became unhappy and with attainment of favourable conditions he became happy, then these are manifestations of happy-unhappy form which are nothing but ArtaDhyan-Raudra Dhyan – with such bhavas Samvar cannot be attained. Hence with reasons of dukh not being dukhi and with reasons of sukh not being sukhi; thus remaining knower of them in gyeya form is real Parishah-Jaya.

Charitra- Renunciation of all Himsa etc. violent acts are considered to be ‘Charitra’ by him. The MahaVrita etc. form Shubha yog being venerable is  considered as acceptable but in Tattvartha Sutra in the description of Asrava substance the MahaVrita and AnuVrita are also called as Asrava form, how can they be venerable ? And Asrava is means for bandh and Charitra is means for Moksha ; hence MahaVrita etc. form Asrava bhavas cannot be Charitra. Bhava without any Kashaya which is totally detached is called as Charitra.

With the fruition of DeshGhati Spardhaks of CharitraMoha, very mild auspicious raga is generated, which is impurity of Charitra. That is not renounced knowing it not to be discardable  but all violent Yog only is renounced. Just as some person renounces green vegetables of the form of roots etc. and  eats several greens but he does not consider it as dharma; in the same way the Munis renounce Himsa etc. form strong Kashaya form bhavas and practice weak Kashaya form MahaVrita etc. but they do not believe it to be Moksha Marga.

Question – If it is so then how in the thirteen divisions of Charitra, MahaVrita etc. are mentioned ?

Answer- This is told as Vyavahar Charitra and Vyavahara means Upachar. After MahaVrita etc. only Veetrag Charitra is attained- knowing such relationship, the upachar of Charitra is implied in MahaVrita etc. From aspect of Nishchaya the bhava totally free of Kashaya only is real Charitra.

In this way knowing the causes of Samvar conversely, he is not real shraddhani of Samvar.

Continued…..