MokshaMargPrakashak …25

                                                  Converse form of Nirjara Tattva

He believes Nirjara is attained by means of fasting etc. form Tapa but just by external Tapa alone Nirjara is not attained. The external tapa is carried out for enhancing Shuddhopayoga; Shuddhopayoga is cause for Nirjara; hence in Upachar sense Tapa is also called as means for Nirjara. If tolerating external dukh alone be cause for Nirjara then Tiryanch etc. also tolerate hunger-thirst etc.

Then he says – They tolerate it under dependence; those who carry out fasting etc. Tapa with spirit of dharma independently, they attain Nirjara.

Its reply- They carry out external fasting etc. with spirit of dharma but there the Upayoga manifests in Ashubha-Shubha-Shuddha forms, accordingly it is attained. If with lot of fasting lot of Nirjara be attained and with less fasting little Nirjara is attained then if such rule exists then fasting alone would be prime cause of Nirjara; but this is not possible. Since with manifestations being devilish, how can Nirjara be possible with fasting etc.?

If it is said – According to the  manifestation of Upayoga in Ashubha-Shubha-Shuddha form the bandh-nirjara is attained.

Then fasting etc. tapa would not be prime cause for Nirjara. Ashubha-Shubha manifestations get to be cause for bandh and Shuddha manifestations become cause for Nirjara.

Here question- In Tattvarth Sutra it is said that with Tapa Nirjara is attained?

Its reply- In shastra the prevention of desires is called tapa. Hence with elimination of Shubha-ashubha desires the Upayoga gets to be Shuddha and there Nirjara is attained; hence with Tapa Nirjara is attained.

Here he says – With elimination of desire of food etc. form ashubha, tapa is attained but fasting and repentance etc. are Shubha activities, their desire exists?

Its reply- Gyani people do not have desire for fasting etc.; only one shuddhopayoga is desired. If with fasting etc. Shuddhopayoga enhances then they do fasting etc. and if with fasting the body or the manifestations become weak resulting in shuddhopayoga becoming weaker then they accept food etc. If with fasting etc. only the siddhi can be  attained then why Ajitnath etc. 23 Tirthankaras  would have adopted two Upavas alone after accepting ordination? They had immense capability but in accordance with the manifestations, with external means they practiced one Veetrag Shuddhopayoga only.

Here question- If it is so then why fasting etc. are called as Tapa?

Its answer- They are called external Tapa. The external implies that externally it appears to others that he is Tapaswi but results would be in accordance with the internal manifestations since body activities without manifestations do not give results.

Here question again- In shastra Nirjara is said to be without desire, there  by tolerating hunger thirst etc, without desire results in Nirjara then by tolerating hardships with fasting etc., why Nirjara would not occur?

Its answer- In Akaam Nirjara also the external nimitta is toleration of hunger-thirst without desire and if the bhavas are weak Kashaya form then Nirjara of Pap is attained; bandh of Deva etc. punya is attained. But if by tolerating hardships with strong Kashaya results in Punya bandh then all Tiryanch etc. would take birth as Devas but that does not happen. In the same way by fasting with desire the hardships of hunger-thirst are tolerated, but these are external nimitta, here according to the manifestations the results are attained.

Just as in  Upachar sense the grains have been called as Pran (life) ; in the same way with external means the internal tapa gets enhanced; hence in Upachar sense they are also called Tapa. But if only external Tapa is carried out and internal Tapa is not there, then in Upachar also it cannot be called as Tapa. The same is told-

“ Where Kashaya, Vishaya and Ahar – these are renounced, that should be known as Upavas; the remaining are called by shri Guru as merely going without food. “

Then he says- if it is so then we would not do Upavas etc.

He is told- The preachment is given for climbing upwards; if you wish to fall down then what can we do? If you do Upavas with pride etc. then do or  not do; there is no gain and if with spirit of dharma you give up interest in Ahar etc. then the raga which is abandoned, that much is reduced only, but knowing this alone as Tapa, believing Nirjara with it, do not get satisfied.

In the internal Tapas the engagement in activities of Prayashchita-Vinaya-VaiyaVritya-Swadhyaya-Tyag-Dhyan should be known as external Tapa form only. Just as Anashan etc. are external activities , in the same way these are also  external activities. Hence Prayashchita etc. external means are not internal Tapa. With such external engagements, the purity of internal manifestation should be known as internal tapa.

There also this is different- with  attainment of extreme shuddhata the manifestation is shuddhopayoga form; there only Nirjara is there and there is no bandh and with little shuddhata part of shubhopayoga also exists; hence depending upon the shuddhata the nirjara occurs and the part which is Shubha bhava form causes bandh- such mixed bhava simultaneously occurs, there bandh and nirjara occur together.

Here someone says- With Shubha bhavas the nirjara of pap occurs and punya gets bonded. But with Shuddha bhavas nirjara of both occur-  why not say thus?

Its reply- In Moksha Marg, the reduction of Sthiti(duration) occurs of all Prakritis there is no difference between Punya-Pap and in Punya Prakriti the reduction of intensity does not occur even with shuddhopayoga ; the Anubhag (intensity) of punya prakriti of higher order have strong bandh-fruition and the paramanus of Pap Prakriti transform into Shubha Prakriti form- such sankraman (transformation) occurs with  Shubha and Shuddha both bhavas; hence above described rule is not possible. In accordance with the purity only the rule is possible.

Look! Even if in the fourth Guanasthana one does Shastra practice, soul contemplation etc. activities ; there is no Nirjara and bandh is high; while in fifth gunasthana even if one engages in sensory enjoyments, still he has gunashreni nirjara; bandh is also less.

And in fifth gunasthana if he engages in Upavas etc. and Prayashchita etc. Tapa; in that period his Nirjara is less only; whereas in sixth gunasthana in spite of activities of Ahar-Vihar etc., in that period also the Nirjara is high and bandh is also much less.

Hence Nirjara is not in accordance with external activities; with vishuddhata(purity)  due to reduction of internal Kashaya shakti the Nirjara occurs; its nature would be described later, know from there.

In this way the Anashan etc. activities are named as Tapa in Upachar sense. Due to this only they are termed as Vyavahara Tapa. Vyavahara and Upachar have same meaning and with  the means by which the Veetraga Bhava form Vishuddhata is attained, that is real Tapa, which should be known as means for Nirjara.

Here  example is quoted- Just as money and grains are called as Prana (life) since buying grains with  money and by eating them the Pranas are nourished; hence in upachar sense money and grains are called as Prana. But if someone does not know the Pranas of the form of senses etc. and knowing these alone as Prana, protect it then he would attain death only . In the same way Anashan etc. and Prayashchita etc. are called as Tapa since by Anashan etc. means manifesting in Prayashchita etc. form, Veetrag bhava form true tapa is nourished ; hence in Upachar sense the Anashan etc. and Prayashchita etc. are called as Tapa; but if someone does not recognise the Veetraga bhava form tapa and believing these only as Tapa, engages in them then he would traverse only in the world.

What more (can be said)!  - Just understand that Nishchaya dharma is Veetrag  Bhava; others are described in Upachar sense from aspect of different external means; they should be called as Vyavahara dharma only.

-          Since he does not know this secret; hence he does not have real shraddhan of Nirjara also.

The converse form of Moksha

He believes being Siddha as Moksha. There birth-death-old age-disease-suffering etc. dukh were eliminated and with infinite gyan the Lokalok was known, was revered in all three loks, thus in several ways he knows its glory but there is desire of eliminating dukh of all jivas, knowing all the gyeyas and being venerable. If the desire of Moksha was for these only then what is the difference between shraddhan of him and other jivas?

There he has such concept also that in swarga sukh is there and infinite times sukh is there in Moksha. In such multiplication he believes the swarga and Moksha to be of the same family. In the swarga the sukh  is pertaining to sensory pleasures, its family is known to him but in Moksha the sensory subjects are not there; hence he does not realise the family of sukh there, but great people call Moksha to be superior to swarga hence he too believes it to be supreme. Just as someone does not recognise the nature of singing but since all audience is lauding it ; hence he too lauds it; in the same way he believes Moksha to be supreme.

Here he says- In Shastra also the sukh of Siddhas is described as infinite times of that  of Indra etc. ?

Its reply- Just as – The brightness  of the body of Tirthankara is said to be infinite times that of sun light, there they do not have same family but in the Lok the sun light is glorious hence for describing  higher glory than that, such metaphor is used; in the same way the sukh of siddha is described as infinite times that of Indra, there they do not have same family  but in the Lok the sukh of Indra etc. is glorious ; to describe much higher glory they use such metaphor.

Here question- He believes the Siddha sukh and Indra etc. sukh to be of the  same family- how did you decide this?

Its answer- Since he believes swarga as result of dharma practice and Moksha also to be result of the same dharma practice. Some jiva attains Indra etc. status , another attains Moksha , in both of them he believes to be result of the same family of dharma.

He believes thus- Where the practice of dharma is less, he attains Indra etc. status; where the practice is complete, he attains Moksha but he believes the family of dharma to be the same. Hence where the family of cause is same, the family of effect would also be the same since with specific reason only the specific deed is carried out. Hence we have concluded that in his belief the sukh of Indra etc. and sukh of Siddha have the same family.
There with nimitta of karma the soul used to have aupadhik bhavas, with their absence, he has become pure soul in Shuddha nature form . Just as by separating from skandh the paramanu becomes Shuddha; in the same way by separating from Karmas etc. he becomes Shuddha.

The difference is – The paramanu was not having sukh-dukh in both states, but soul was having dukh in ashuddha state and with its elimination, he has attained infinite sukh having perturbation free characteristics. And the sukh attained by Indra etc. that has perturbation due to Kashaya bhavas; hence in reality it is dukh only; hence that and this do not have the same family.

There the cause for swarga sukh is auspicious raga and cause for Moksha sukh  is Veetrag bhava; hence there is difference even in the causes but such bhava is not realised by him.

Hence he does not have real shraddhan of Moksha also.

In this way he does not have real Tattva shraddhan . Hence in Samaysar it is said that in spite of having Tattva shraddhan the Abhavya remains Mithya Drishti.  And in Pravachansar it is told that Tattvartha Shraddhan  devoid of Atma Gyan is not functional.

There from aspect of Vyavahara Drishti this Samyak Darshan is said to have eight angs (elements) which he practices; twenty five faults are described which he avoids; Samvega etc. qualities are told which he adopts but just as without sowing the seed, by adopting all means in the field, the grains are not produced; in the same way without real Tattva shraddhan , samyaktva is not attained. 

In the same way in commentary of Panchastikaya where the VyavaharaBhasi is described,  there also it is similar description.

In this way in spite of accomplishing means for Samyak darshan , he does not attain Samyak darshan.

Converse form of Samyak Gyan

In the shastra it is told that by practice of shastras, SamyakGyan is attained, hence he remains active in practice of shastra. There his attention is over the activities  of learning, teaching, remembering, reading, speaking etc. in which he engages his Upayoga but his attention is not upon its objective.

In this preachment what is effective for me, that is not his intent. By practicing shastras he keeps intent of preaching others and lots of jivas following  his preachment make him satisfied. But the practice of gyan  is done for self and incidentally others get benefited then let it be.

If someone does not listen to preachment then let them, why should he worry? Understanding the meaning and bhava of shastra , one should care for  own benefit.

In Shastra practice also several practice grammar, logic, poetry etc. shastras extensively but all that is for establishing wisdom in the Lok; in that there is no mention of self  benefit. Actually there objective is that if the intellect is more then  by practicing these somewhat, later practice shastras which benefit own soul; if the intellect is less than one should only practice shastras which benefit own soul. It should not be that in practicing grammar etc. the ayu gets depleted and tattva gyan is not attained.

Here someone says- if it is so than one should not practice grammar etc. ?

He is told- without their practice the meaning of great granths is not realised; hence their practice is also useful.

Then there is question- then why such great granths were created, whose meaning cannot be understood without grammar etc. ? Why simple beneficial preachment was not written in local language? They did not have any purpose.

Its answer- In local language also the words of Prakrit-Sanskrit only are there but they have distorted forms and in different states it is of different forms. The Mahant people did not wish to write shastras with corrupted words. If the child stutters the elders do not do so.

And if the shastra of language of one state goes to other state then how would its meaning be realised? Hence in Prakrit-Sanskrit etc. Shuddha language form granths have been created.

Without grammar the meaning of word is not realised correctly; without logic , the examination of characteristics cannot be done correctly, etc. The decision of the nature of thing cannot be made properly with words alone without usage of grammar etc. – knowing this based upon its tradition the description is made. In local language also with some amount of tradition only preachment can be made but with lot of practice of the same only the right decision can be taken.

If you say- If it is so then why do you make granth in local language form  now?

Its reply- Due to degradation of times the intellect of the Jivas have become weaker. Knowing this with the intent of benefitting as many jivas as possible, the granths in local language are created. Hence those jivas who cannot learn the grammar etc., they should practice with such granths.

There those jivas who make use of grammar  for describing the words along with different arguments ; make use of logic for being mahant with debate etc.  and for revealing  intellect they make use of poetry; - with such worldly objectives they practice it but  they are not dharmatma.

To the extent possible, by practicing it , those who decide of the Tattva etc. for own soul  benefit , they only should be known as Dharmatma-Pandit.

Several jivas practice Purana etc. shastras which describe the results of punya-pap etc., several practice shastras of conduct etc. which describe the activities of punya-pap,  several practice shastras of Karananuyoga which describe the gunasthana-margana-karma Prakriti-Trilok etc.; but if they themselves do not consider its objective then it is like the reading of a parrot. If the objective is considered then they know the pap to be bad and punya to be good; they  know the forms of gunasthana and whatever would be practiced by them would be beneficial for them. As a result at least the Narak etc. would not be attained and swarga etc. would be attained, but Moksha Marga would not be attained.

There,  firstly true Tattva Gyan should be attained, then know the world as result of punya-pap,  know that Moksha is attained with shuddhopayoga; know the Vyavahara description of Jiva with gunasthana etc. form, thus with their shraddhan if it is practiced then Samyak Gyan is attained.

The cause for Tattva Gyan are shastras of Adhyatma form dravyanuyoga.  Several Jivas practice those shastras also but they do not arrive at right shraddhan by knowing the forms of self, others and asrava etc.

Orally he may narrate it such that with their preachment other jivas may become Samyak Drishti , but just as some boy masquerading as woman sings such that other man-woman become aroused , but he is just speaking the way he has learnt; himself he does not realise the bhava ; hence he does not get aroused; in the same way he preaches the way it is written but he himself does not experience it.

If he had attained Shraddhan then he would not have mixed part of other tattva  in another tattva, but since he does not have the conviction; hence he does not have Samyak Gyan.

In this way he also studies upto eleven Angs even then Siddhi is not attained- thus it is written in Samaysar etc. that Mithya Drishti may have knowledge of upto eleven Angs.

Here someone says- Gyan is that much but just as – Abhavya Sen had knowledge without shraddhan, it is such.

Its reply- He was Papi  who did not have fear of activities of Himsa etc. but the jiva who goes upto Graveyak etc., he has such knowledge, he is not without shraddhan; he has the shraddhan that these granths are true but  his Tattva shraddhan is not right.

In Samaysar the same jiva is said to have shraddhan of dharma, knowledge of eleven angs and practice of mahavrita etc. In Pravachansar it is written that he has such Agam Gyan that he knows all the things like a berry kept in the palm.

And he knows this also – I know them but “I am gyan form” – thus he does not experience self to be different from other dravya, only consciousness form; hence devoid of knowledge of soul, Agam Gyan is not useful.

In this way he has practice of Jain Shastras for Samyak Gyan, even then he does not have Samyak Gyan.

Continued…..