MOKSHA  MARG  PRAKASHAK
        
(THE ILLUMlNATOR OF THE PATH OF LIBERATION)

ENGLISH VERSION OF HINDI BOOK

Author
ACHARYAKALP Pt. TODARMALJI
JAIPUR

Translated by
Br.HEM CHAND JAIN
(D.M.E., D.T.Ed.)
Manager, Materials Management Deptt.
Thermal & Nuclear Section
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.
BHOPAL

Review and Editing by

Prof. JAMNALAL JAIN
M.Com., LL.B., Sahitya Ratna
Visiting Professor
Institute of Management, Devi Ahilya University
INDORE

Publisher
SHRI KUND-KUND KAHAN TIRTHA SURAKSHA TRUST
BOMBAY (INDIA)
Department of Publication
Shri Todarmal Smarak Bhawan
A-4 Bapu Nagar, Jaipur 302004

Published by:
Kund-Kund Kahan Tirth Suraksha Trust
BOMBAY
 Price Rs. 80/-

Printed By:
Jaipur Printer Pvt. Ltd.
M.I. Road, Jaipur-1

CONTENTS

  (i) About This Book (Translator's Prelude)  (i)

 (ii) Peculiarity of Jainism

(iii) Introduction

1. Chapter 1
   Prologue

2. Chapter 2
   Nature of Mundane Existence

3. Chapter 3
   Miseries of Mundane Existence and Bliss of Liberation  

4. Chapter 4
   Exposition of False Belief Knowledge and Conduct       

5. Chapter 5
   Analytical study of different religions                

6. Chapter 6
   Refutation of False Deity-Preceptor-Religion          

7. Chapter 7
   X-ray of Jaina-misbelievers                            

8. Chapter 8
   Nature of Sermons                                      

9. Chapter 9
   Nature of Liberation Path                            

10. Appendix I
    Nature of Noble Peaceful Death                 

11. Appendix II
    Rahasyapoorna Chitthi (Spiritual Letter)     

12. Glossary                                              

TRANSLATOR'S PRELUDE

ABOUT THIS BOOK

In this 20th century this Moksha Marg Prakashak has turned the eyes of thousands of people all over India and abroad towards the right path of salvation.  Whosoever curiously reads this book, surrenders his false belief before its author Acharyakalpa Pt.Todarmalji and accepts his treatise to be the gist of omniscient preaching and compendium of Jain Philosophy; and feels indebted to him.  I too knew the importance of this book in 1966 AD through Pujya Shri Kanji Swami of Songad (Saurashtra, India) and read it several times concentratedly.  I am highly indebted to both of them and pay my hearty tributes to them.

In fact, the whole of Jain Society is indebted to Pt.Todarmalji for his unique gift of "Moksha Marg Prakashak" and " Samyagjnan-Chandrika" because all this he wrote in the spoken language of his time.  Although he could not complete the work of " Moksha Marg Prakashak" in which he wanted to elaborate various other related topics.  However, in his short span of life, he contributed significantly to Jaina Philosophy and enriched Jaina literature with an enduring stamp of authenticity.  He re-established the faith in Tattvas in their true perspective sense through logically approved facts.  His vast knowledge and philosophical ability is reflected in this book, which in fact embraces the entire range of Jaina canon and philosophical intricacies.  It is because of this book he was conferred the title of 'Acharyakalpa' (a highly knowledgeable person like an Acharya monk).

The prime object of this book is to point out the true practical and scientific method of self-realization as laid down by the Jaina Tirthankaras who rose to the highest height of perfection with its aid.  No effort has been spared by Todarmalji to make this book as self-contained and complete in its subject.  The subject- matter is presented in a very effective manner through question-answer style, which explains Jainism both to a lay reader and to a learned scholar.

His philosophy is not a mere encyclopedia of logically approved facts but it is creative and synthetic too. It is this trait which distinguishes him from mere religious leadership.  His genius was so critical and subtle that he fused an enormous amount of knowledge into a unified whole and exerted immeasurable influence on scholars, philosophers, and religious leaders then around him.  His illustrated teachings through question-answer style of description had a wider and more popular appeal than any other Indian Scholar or saint. His teachings are based upon the belief that the moral questions could not find satisfactory answers without an integrated knowledge of seven Tattvas. The central theme of his preaching is to realize the self-soul by giving up false belief knowledge and conduct and this is possible through right understanding of seven Tattvas only because there are deeper stamps & impressions of misconceptions and distorted understandings upon our minds about these Tattvas.

With the view to keep myself engaged in the study of Jaina Scriptures and attain self-realization. I dared to translate this great work of Pt. Todarmalji into English, which took about three years (1984-86) to complete.

My sincere thanks are to my friend Prof. Shri Jamnalal Jain (Devi Ahilya University of Indore), himself a keen student of Jain Philosophy, for taking great pains in thoroughly checking and correcting the translation by rearranging the sentences for maintaining true sense of original book and giving fluency to language.  I very sincerely acknowledge and feel gratitude towards him for his whole-hearted co-operation without which this re-edition would have not been possible.

I am also thankful to Late Shri S. Gajapathi Jain of Tiruppanamoor (Madras) for his valuable suggestion regarding translation of this book, when I met him personally at his residence in May 1986. I also thank my friend Shri N. C. Mavani (M. Tech), Sion, Bombay for providing Photostat copies of my English manuscript for getting the translation checked. My thanks are also due to my friends Dr. Pt. U. C. Jain, M.A. , Ph.D, Seoni, Dr. Pt. D.K Jain, M.A., Ph.D (Professor Govt. College Neemuch) Pt. Rajmal Jain, Bhopal, Shri Suresh Jain, IAS, Bhopal, Shri V.C. Shripalan, Madras, for giving useful suggestions in this venture.

 Although I have tried my level best not to deviate from the original text and enough care has been taken to maintain the true meaning and sense, however to convey accurately the original sense by translation in English language is not easy, especially of longer sentences written by Panditji. I therefore, request the learned readers to forgive me for the errors still left and which may be entirely due to my own limitation and negligence. Readers are gratefully requested to send their valuable suggestions, which may be utilized in the next edition. Ignoring my errors in translation even if a single soul is inspired by this book to seek the truth in right direction, I shall consider my efforts amply rewarded. 

In the end I take this opportunity to express my sincere thanks to Shri Kund-Kund Kahan Tirtha Suraksha Trust Bombay, particularly Br. Shri Dhanya Kumarji Belckar, Devlali and Shri Vasant Bhai Doshi Bombay, for their decision to publish this book in English and for keeping the price below actual cost. My thanks are also due to Shri Nemichandji Patni, and Dr. Hukamchandji Bharilla both of Todarmal Smarak Trust  Jaipur, for their keen interest and whole-hearted cooperation in the early publication of this book and to Shri Sohan Lalji Jain, Jaipur Printers, Jaipur; Shri Rajmal Jain, Jaipur (Susheel Printers, Jaipur).

OM NAMO ARHANTANAM

 An humble disciple of Shri Kund-Kund Acharya & Pt. Todarmalji
          
(HEMCHAD JAIN "HEM")
Manager (MM) Thermal & Nuclear        MaterialsManagement
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.
BHOPAL462022 (India)

Bhopal, India
15 May, 1992

PECULIARITY OF JAINISM

Jainism more than any other creed gives absolute religious independence and freedom to man. Nothing can intervene between the actions, which we do and the fruits thereof. Once done, they become our masters and must fructify. As my independence is great, so my responsibility is coextensive with it. I can live as I like, but my choice is irrevocable, and I cannot escape the consequences of it. This principle distinguishes Jainism from other religions; e.g. Christianity, Muhammadanism, Hinduism. No God or his prophet, or deputy or beloved can interfere with human life. The soul, and it alone is directly and necessarily responsible for that it does. __Jugmander Lal Jain, Outlines of Jainism, pp. 344.

RIDDLE OF THE CREATION
The first question, which arises in connection with the idea of Creation is, why should God make the world at all ?  One system suggests, that he wanted to make the world, because it pleased him to do so; another, that he felt lonely and wanted company; a third, that he wanted to create beings who would praise his glory and worship, a fourth that he does it in sport and so on.

 Why should it please the creator to create a world where sorrow and pain are the inevitable lot of the majority of his creatures? Why should he not make happier beings to keep him company?

(It is really a most unchallengable argument. ---written by Barrister Champat Rai Jain, Key of Knowledge p. 135)

 SUPREME JUDGMENT
 "In conclusion let me assert my conviction, that Jainism is an original system, quite distinct and independent from all others and that, therefore, it is of great importance for the study of philosophical thought and religious life in ancient India"-- Dr Harman Jaikobi, read his paper in the 3rd International Congress of the History of Religions.

FRUIT OF AHIMSA
"The complete and flawless practice of Ahimsa raises the man to Godhood. It gives light, provides delight and bestows might to its faithful and honest aspirant."

Gandhi ji aspired to practice highest type of Ahimsa by becoming a nude Jain Monk (Muni). When Churchill had rebuked Gandhi ji by calling him 'A Naked Fakir', he had informed Churchill 'I would love to be a naked fakir, but I am not one yet'.--The life of M. K. Gandhi, L. Fisher, p. 473.

INTRODUCTION

It is a matter of great satisfaction, that the English version of Moksha Marg Prakashak is being published by Shri Kund-Kund Kahan Digamher Jain Tirtha Suraksha Trust, Bombay.

The real credit for this English Translation belongs to my friend Hemchandji Jain, who on his own initiative worked hard day and night selflessly for more than three years to complete this stupendous task of preparing a workable literal translation of this famous book of Pandit Todarmalji, bearing in mind the great need for maintaining the sense and spirit of the author all throughout. I sincerely thank him for providing me this opportunity of associating myself with the review and editing work. We have together spent scores of hours in giving it the present shape.

 The basis of this English version is the Hindi Edition, edited by the renowned Jain scholar and author of several books on Jain philosophy and who has been awarded the title of Jain Ratna by the JAINA of USA in 1984, Ph. D. on Pandit Todarmal - life & work by University of Indore in the year 1973, Dr. Hukamchand Bharilla, (Shastri, Nyayatirtha, Sahitya-Ratna, M.A., Ph.D.), and published by Pandit Todarmal Smarak Trust, Jaipur.

LIFE AND WORKS

In the true tradition of ancient Jain Saints and scholars,  Pandit Todarmalji, too, did not pay any attention towards writing anything about his life history. Therefore, nothing definite can be said on the dates of his birth, death and life span. However, on the basis of the available circumstantial and other evidence Dr. Hukamchand Bharilla in his research treatise " Pandit Todarmal - life and work" established his year of birth to be 1719-20 A.D. and the year of his passing away 1766 A.D. with a life-span of only 47 years. He was borne in Jaipur (India). His father was Shri Jogidasji Khandelwal of Godika Gotra (Jain subcaste) and Rambha Bai his mother. He was married and had two sons, Harishchandra and Gumaniram.  Shri Gumaniram was a great revolutionary genius.

He received ordinary education in the spiritual Tera Panthi Style of Jaipur, but his deep scholarship was mainly due to hard work and genius. He was a great intellectual having sharpness of understanding and a studious nature. He was well- versed in Prakrit, Sanskrit, Hindi and Kannad languages.

About his scholarship Pandit Raimalji wrote in his letter of invitation for the Indra-dhwaj Vidhana (Ritual), in the year l764, "It is very difficult to find a man of his intellect these days. All the doubts about religious matters are removed after meeting him".

About his knowledge and studies, he himself writes in Moksha Marg Prakashah, "I have studied Samayasara Panchastikaya, Prauachanasara, Niyamsara, Gomattasara, Labdhisara, Triloksara, Tattvarthasutra, with commentaries; Kshapanasara, Purushartha Siddhyupaya, Asthapahud, Atmanushasana and many other scriptures describing the conduct of monks and householders, and Puranas containing stories of great personalities according to my own understanding and knowledge".

In his short life- span, he wrote, in all, twelve books, big and small which is about a lac verses in measure and about five thousand pages.

Some of these are commentaries of popular sacred books while others are independent works of his own. These are found both in prose and poetry. They are as follows:

  1. Rahasyapurna Chitthi (Spiritual letter)
 2. Gomattasara Jivakanda-Hindi commentary
 3. Gomattasara Karmakand-Hindi commentary
 4. Arthasandrashthi-Adhikar.
 5. Labdhisara-Hindi commentary
 6. Kshapanasara-Hindi commentary
 7. Gomattasara puja
 8. Triloksara-Hindi commentary
 9. Samosharana Rachna Varnan
 10. Moksha Marg Prakashak (Incomplete)
11. Atmanushasan-Hindi commentary
12. Purusharthasiddhyupaya-Hindi commentary (incomplete). 

The last book was completed by Pandit Daulatram Kasliwal in 1770. His prose style is pure, fully developed and comprehensible.  The most beautiful form of his style can be seen in his original work Moksha Marg Prakashak. His language originally Brij, has the stiffness of Khari-Boli and also local tinge. It is strong and fine enough, to express forcefully his ideas and feelings. Though books numbers 2 to 6 were written by the author separately, yet looking to their complementary nature the author gave them a collective name Samyagjnana Chandrika".

MOKSHA MARG PRAKASHAK

Moksha Marg Prakashak is one of the most important original works of Pandit Todarmalji. The basis of this treatise is not anyone Jain spiritual shastra but the whole of the available Jain literature.  This was to be, in reality, a meaningful effort of engrossing all the fundamentals of Jain philosophy and rituals; but it is regretted that this profoundly learned treatise could not be completed due to the untimely passing away of the author. In spite of being incomplete, it is acknowledged all everywhere as a unique contribution to available Jain literature. This is one of the most popular books whose several editions have been published not only in Hindi, but in several other Indian languages like Marathi, Gujarati, Urdu, etc. Till today, in all 150000 copies have been published in various languages. Besides, hundreds of handwritten copies of this book are found in the libraries of Digambar Jain Temples throughout India.  In the whole of Digambar Jain Society this is the most popular Shastra for community collective reading and as a basis of sermons in regular religious congregations. The original handwritten copy in the hand of Pandit Todarmalji is also available in the famous temple at Jaipur- "Shri Deewanji Ka Mandir"- where Pandit Todarmalji used to lecture everyday to a gathering of more than a thousand persons.

 This book, written in simple spoken language, is the result of the inner inspiration and pious desire of the author to enlighten those curious fellow-citizens who could not understand and get the real message of Jain philosophy and fundamentals available in intricate works written in Sanskrit and Prakrit by Jain Acharyas. No other worldly ambition has been the inspiring force behind writing this book.

In the present available form the book Moksha Marg Prakashak has nine chapters. The first eight chapters are complete but the ninth chapter is incomplete. By the manner the ninth chapter was started, it clearly seems that the subject of Right Belief was to be propounded and clarified in all its details. But alas, much could not be written. Only the nomenclatures of the eight qualities of Right Belief and twenty-five blemishes to be avoided could be listed. Their characteristics could not be described as desired.

In the original manuscript, indications are available to show that the author wanted to give a second thought even to the sequence and chapter headings of various chapters. At the end of the incomplete ninth chapter Panditji had a plan to write many more chapters.  At twelve places in the available nine chapters clear indications are found to show his inner desire to throw light on various issues at appropriate places. This means that had this book been completed as per the author's hidden plan, it would have run into about five thousand handwritten pages throwing detailed light on Right- Belief, Right Knowledge and Right Conduct, the basic fundamentals of the path of liberation.

This book has been written in the analytical prose- style; through the medium of question-answer the subject matter has been deeply clarified.  The subject matter of this book is highly philosophical, but whatever topic has been chosen for discussion, it has been success-fully clarified fully, keeping in view all the possible supplementaries relating to it. While studying the book whatever question is likely to crop up in the mind of the reader, the same is found raised in the next line along with its explanation, and therefore, the curiosity of the reader is very well maintained throughout.

The construction of sentences is brief and the style of clarification logical and analytical. Though unnecessary expansion is avoided, yet no topic is left incomplete due to brevity of style. Whatever topics are touched by the author, no aspect of the same is left unclarified.  The style is so charming and unique that even the totally unknown topic has become easily graspable.

For clarifying the subject matter, sufficient use of popular examples is found. The example of the patient and physician has been profusely used in the second, third, fourth and fifth chapters.  To carry home to the reader the message of the topic under discussion and to substantiate his point of view, Panditji has largely drawn quotations and examples from innumerable Jain and non-jain philosophical and religious books.

 From the viewpoint of the subject matter, the contribution of the author is no less important.  Although each sentence of the book reflects true Jain religion and philosophy, yet a lot of such new thought is available in the book which is not found in that very lucid form in earlier Jain literature. From this angle chapters seventh and eighth need special mention.  Some such examples are as under:

 1. Classification of Nishchyaabhasi, Vyavharaabhasi Ubhayaa- bhasi etc. in the form of Jain misbelievers. 

2. True traits of Panchparmeshthis

3. Misconceptions about seven Tattvas

4. Real conventional viewpoint

5. The correct method of understanding the true meaning of Jain Shastras

6. The purpose of all the four Anuyogas, the constitution of discourses, style of description, imagination about existence of blemishes and their clarifications, etc.

Not only has Panditji provided new knowledge but he has also x-rayed and given valuable comments and suggestions upon the prevalent religious rituals and practices of the society of his times.  This clearly shows that besides self-realization and profound knowledge of scriptures, he possessed a keen sense of understanding and analyzing the intricacies of social behavior (Chapter seventh). As an example, the following graphic description relating to the so-called religious practices and rituals followed by the Jain society 230 years ago is truly applicable even in the present era: 

" Many Jivas follow religion (rituals) either because of family tradition or by observing others or under the influence of greed passion. Such persons in no way possess the religious viewpoint.  While they are worshiping, their mind gets engrossed in other thoughts, their eyes are engaged in seeing others, chanting of sermons continues through mouth.  All this is not purposeful, because they do not know as to who they are, whose adoration is being done and for what purpose, What is the meaning of the words they are chanting, etc.

Sometimes they are found worshiping even the fallacious and imaginary gods, etc. because of the want of discriminatory knowledge between fallacious gods and true gods, etc."

For drawing attention of learned scholars and pious readers, innumerable revolutionary statements are found at several places in Moksha Marg Prakashak. A few of them are quoted hereunder:
 
(1) If one's belief becomes as per the true nature of the substances then all his miseries come to an end.

(2) In Tattvarthsutra, while defining Influx Tatva, Great and Small Vows also are included under Influx. How could then these be worth adopting?

 (3) But Adoration is a form of attachment and attachment causes bondage, therefore, it is not the cause of liberation.

(4) One does not make effort for renouncing attachment- aversion passions, which cause Influx and merely makes efforts for avoiding related external activities or other instrumental causes. But by their avoidance Influx cannot be avoided.

(5) No other substance defiles forcibly. When our own thoughts and feelings get defiled then only it is an instrumental cause. Moreover, one's thoughts get defiled even without an instrumental cause; therefore, it is not a regulatory instrumental cause. Thus finding faults in others, is a fallacy.

(6) And in not ascertaining the real nature of Tattvas there is no fault of any Karma, it is your own fault. But you want to remain an ostentatious person and lay your fault on Karmas. So, for one who obeys Jinas commands, such malversation is not possible.

(7) Behold the magnanimity of deliberation on Tattvas. A person devoid of deliberation on Tattvas, may have faith on Deva etc., may study many shastras, may practice vows, may observe penances, etc., even then he is not entitled to evolve right belief, and one who engrosses himself in deliberation on Tattvas is privileged to evolve right belief even without these practices.

(8) Vyauahara-Naya describes the self and nonself substances, their modifications and cause and effect relationship, etc. by intermingling one with the other; misbelief is caused by having such faith; therefore, one should abandon it. And Nishchay-Naya describes the substances, etc. exactly as they are; it does not inter mingle one with the other. So right belief is evolved by such faith. Therefore, one should possess its faith.

 (9) Therefore, so long as such state (passionless disposition) is not evolved, one should indulge in virtuous activities but his belief should be such that these activities too are causes of bondage and worth giving up. If in belief these are taken to be the path of liberation then he is assuredly a Misbeliever (Mithya Dristhi).

Pandit Todarmalji has given prime importance to the practice of passionless conduct in the path of liberation. While attempting to define and explain Right Belief, Right Knowledge and Right Conduct, after analyzing the traits of these three jewels at length, he concludes in the following words: "What to say more, in whatever way the belief of uprooting passions emerges, the same is right belief; by whatever means the knowledge of exterminating passions, etc. is evolved, the same is right knowledge and by whatever means passions are destroyed, the same is right conduct. Such alone should be believed to be the true path of liberation"

The greatest contribution of Panditji is this that he unfolded the spiritual knowledge of Tattvas available in Sanskrit and Prakrit languages through the medium of the spoken language of his times and also provided a new insight for interpretation and analysis of spiritual knowledge. He did not view the spiritual knowledge from traditional and scriptural angle only. For him Tattvajnana is a lively process of meditation, which not only contradicts the traditional ritualistic practices, but, hits hard at the contemporary so-called religious prevalent practices. His thesis has been that no spiritual thinking is original till it has been established on the foundation of logic and self- realization.  According to him religion is not a mere tradition but a self-examined system and practice.

 Though basically he is a spiritual thinker, yet in his contemplation there lies a wonderful harmony of logic and self-realization. He pays attention not only on the thought, but also examines the ability or disability of its propagator and follower on the basis of logic. He maintains that certain essential qualities are necessary for under-standing and interpretation of Tattvajnana. According to him, the path of liberation is nothing separate but it is knowledge of the self-soul only, which he calls passionless-knowledge. Whatever practices and dispositions provide impediments in the process of self-realization, all these are false. He has divided these false traits into two - those which are newly evolved or accepted and those which are found from beginningless times. By newly accepted false belief he means those conjectures and beliefs which we accept in the company of the so-called preceptors who are devoid of spiritual knowledge and which we accept to be true; be these of other sects or of our own sect.  Under these he has logically analyzed and x-rayed all those Jain practices and beliefs which were accepted as part and parcel of Jain Tattvajnana from the sixth century up to the eighteenth century and which had no relation, whatsoever, with real spiritual knowledge.  He has firmly and logically contradicted these so-called visual Jain practices and rituals full of blemishes propagated by Bhattarakas (so-called preceptors).

His style is unique being composed of questions/answers and befitting examples.  One of the chief characteristics of his style is that the question and its answer both are his only. In the answer of the earlier question germinates the latter question. In this way, the earlier question ends only when the subject matter reaches its logical end. The other original and sparkling characteristic of his prose style is  that, he avoids giving sermons to the reader and places before him such a graphic description and analysis of the situation that the reader of his own has to reach at the desired conclusion. The same style and approach which a doctor adopts in the treatment of a disease, is visible in the style of Panditji also.

A BRIEF SUMMARY OF CONTENTS

The title of the book is Moksha Marg Prakashak, therefore, a discussion and interpretation of the path of liberation is expected to be found in the contents. But liberation is relative with bondage.

Therefore, in the beginning the mundane state of bondage and its causes have been considered.  This is mainly the subject matter of the first seven chapters.  In the Eighth Chapter a detailed and comprehensive discussion is found about the technique of understanding the essence of the real message of Jain literature. The Ninth Chapter which has remained incomplete, marks the beginning of a detailed consideration of the liberation path.

The First Chapter is the foundation chapter in which first of all in two verses obeisance is offered to the passionless science of knowledge by following which the Panchparmeshthis have become adorable. Thereafter, after adoration of Panchparmeshthis, their traits, the objective of adoration, authenticity of the book, and purpose of writing it have been logically and judiciously discussed.  This follows characteristics of Shastras worth reading and listening to, traits of discourses and listeners. In the end, the purposefulness of the name of the book and the object of writing it has, been established.

 The Second Chapter contains description of the mundane existence. Sufficient thought is given to the bonded state of the soul, the existence of the bonded state from beginning less times, separate identity of Karmas from the soul and division of Karmas into obscuring (Ghati) and non- obscuring (Aghati), substantive and psychic, etc. Thereafter, light is thrown on new bondage and its causes. At the end, the partially evolved dependent state of knowledge and the state of the soul in bonded state have been considered in detail.

In the Third Chapter, mundane miseries, basic causes of miseries i.e. perverse faith- knowledge- conduct, dispositions of the soul under the influence of passions and ways and means of freeing oneself from the same are described. Thereafter, the migratory states of the soul in the form of one- sensed being, etc, and the miseries suffered in these states along with the means of ending such miseries are discussed. This chapter ends with a description of the Siddha State and it has been logically established that all miseries come to an end in this state and endless total bliss is produced which should be the sole objective of every soul.

The subject matter of the Fourth Chapter is the involvement of the soul from beginningless times in false belief - knowledge and conduct. It also contains a graphic discussion of the need and logic for discriminating between purposeful and purposeless Tattvas. Light is also thrown in detail on the states and dispositions of the soul under influence of delusion and passions.

In the Fifth Chapter the newly developed and accepted false belief has been described at length. Under it all the important non-Jain schools of faith have been x-rayed.

The antiquity and truthfulness of Jaina faith has been logically established on the basis of quotations contained in the oldest shastras and scriptures of other faiths. Panditji considers the Swetamber faction of Jain faith also under other faiths and the falsehood of liberation in the state of womanhood, liberation in the low caste state, liberation in clothal state, etc. has been in logically exposed and refuted.

In the Sixth Chapter also, under the title of newly accepted false belief, the futility of worshiping false deity - preceptor and shastras has been logically established and Jivas are forbidden to worship the same. It also includes an analytical discussion of the futility of adoring Kshetrapal, Padmavati, Sun, Moon, Fire, Beasts, etc.

The subtle form of false belief (delusion) has been described in the Seventh Chapter. Such false belief is found both in the persons who are Jain by mere name and also in Jains who claim that they follow the commandments of Jain Shastras. This is so because they do not understand the inner message contained in Jain scriptures.  Panditji clarifies that although they do not keep company with non Jain preceptors, etc., yet they further foster their already existing wrong belief either due to their own ignorance and mistakes or due to the company of ignorant naked saints and preceptors or by study of scriptures written by them.

 Pandit Todarmalji has classified such misbelievers into the following four categories:

(1) Misbelievers having false conception about Real viewpoint (Nishchayaabhasi)

(2) Misbelievers having false conception about Conventional view-point. (Vyavaharabhasi)

(3) Misbelievers having false conception about both Real and Conventational viewpoints (Ubhayabhasi)

(4) Misbelievers' facing to Right belief (Samyaktva-ke- sanmukh Mithya drishties)

In the discussion of the traits of Nishchayabhasis, their tendencies have been analyzed at length and Jivas are forbidden to become reckless by treating the soul to be pure without understanding the reality about the purity of the self-soul.

While describing the misconceptions of vyavaharabhasi misbelievers, Panditji has strongly supported the viewpoint that in adopting religious practices and rituals one should not follow the same because it is traditional or because such is the commandment of shastras. One should examine its essence and purposefulness judiciously before adopting it.  Even the adoration of true - deity-preceptor and shastra blindly with passion worldly intentions has been forbidden.  A detailed analysis about the misconceptions about the seven Tattvas harbored by the Vyavaharabhasi misbelievers is worth paying attention. The injudicious practices adopted by such persons for attainment of Right Knowledge and Right Conduct have also been thoroughly x-rayed.

A clear cut and in depth analysis of Vyavahar and Nishchay points of views has been attempted while critically examining the misconceptions and practices of misbelievers having false conceptions about both Nishchay and Vyavhar Nayas.

In the description of misbelievers facing Right Belief, the steps involved in understanding the true nature of tattvas for attainment of Right Belief are explained at length and the traits and sequential processes of five labhdis which invariably precede the attainment of Right Belief have been thoroughly discussed.

At the end of this chapter it has been emphatically stressed that the aforesaid various types of blemishes and misconceptions are described here not for searching the same in others and censuring them but for giving up such blemishes and misunderstandings if found existing in one's own self.

 The Eighth Chapter considers the nature of sermons. The whole Jain literature is divided into four categories from the viewpoint of subject matter. These are Mythonomy (Prathamanuyoga), Aetiology (Karnanuyoga), Philosophy (Dravyanuyoga) and Ethology (Charnanuyoga). Though the style and subject matter of each Anuyoga is different from others, yet the objective of all the four Anuyogas is one and the same and it is to inspire Jivas to adopt religion in life. The essence of Jain literature cannot be grasped properly without the knowledge of the style of their descriptions. The subject matter of each and its style of interpretation has been described in detail. Each Anuyoga has its purpose, without understanding which many meaningless misgivings crop up. All these have been very well clarified with suitable examples and comparisons. At the end, great stress is laid on the study of Jain literature with particular emphasis on the study of shastras discussing the true nature of the soul and the seven Tattvas, etc., because therein lies the main purpose of the soul.

In the Ninth Chapter starts the discussion of the nature of the path of liberation. After judiciously proving the hollowness of worldly pleasures and pondering over the existence of real bliss in the state of liberation, it has been well established that attainment of liberation is possible only through one's own real efforts. One should, therefore, himself make right efforts in this direction without expecting any help from others. Then starts a detailed discussion of the first step in the path of liberation, viz. Right Belief and its various definitions available in the four Anuyogas. The misconceptions about the seeming difference in the approach of the four Anuyogas in defining Right Belief have been clearly removed with the help of suitable examples and a synthesis between the same has been established. The nature of the seven Tattvas whose correct knowledge is essential in the attainment of Right Belief has been discussed at length. The concluding lines of this chapter contain an attempt to lay stress on the eight qualities of Right Belief and avoidance of the twenty-five blemishes but this attempt has remained incomplete.

It is a pity that this great personality who was never attracted towards amassing physical comforts and worldly achievements, became a prey of communal hatred and consequently had to sacrifice his life prematurely.

It is extremely difficult and unbecoming for illustrious persons to tread the trodden path, but fewer are such personalities who find their own path and yet do not go astray. Acharyakalpa Pandit Todarmalji was one such person who did not adopt the trodden path and yet did not go astray. 

The present work Moksha Marg Prakashak is to be read and digested from beginning to end. Its study and contemplation on issues raised herein are profoundly beneficial for all the seekers of self-realization. Panditji himself has expressed this earnest desire at the end of each chapter.  Keeping in mind those persons who are wasting this precious opportunity of human existence in amassing and enjoying objects of sensual pleasures only and not availing of the opportunity of evolving knowledge of the self-soul Panditji writes:

"As for example- if a miraculous and precious diamond is offered to an extremely pauper person for looking at it but he refuses even to look at it and if a cup of nectar is offered to a leper for drinking but he refuses to drink it, similarly, if a mundane miserable jiva gets an opportunity to listen to an easy discourse on path of liberation (and of studying such simple book written in the spoken language), but he refuses to pay attention to it, then it is not possible for us to describe the glory of his misfortune. When we ponder over his future, a compassionate feeling only arises in us."

There can be no better end to my thoughts beyond the above inspiring words of Pandit Todarmalji.

                               J. L. Jain

OM

Obeisance to Siddhas
(Supreme Liberated Soul)

MOKSHA MARG PRAKASHAK
(The Illuminator of the Path of Liberation)

By 

Acharyakalpa Pt. Todarmalji, Jaipur

CHAPTER 1

PROLOGUE
Now, the sacred book titled 'Moksha Marg Prakashak'
(The illuminator of the path of liberation) is being written.

MANGLACHARAN
(BENEDICTION)

DOHA:  Mangalmey mangalkaranr, veetrag vigyan
	Namo tahi jatai bhye, Arhantadi mhan
	
	Kari mangal kari ho mha, granthkaran ko kaj
	Jatai milai samaj sab, pavai nij ped raj	

The science of non-attachment (passionlessness) is all blissful and cause of bliss; I bow to that science by virtue of which the Arihantas and Siddhas (Omniscient Gods) have attained the supreme state. Having made obeisance; I (Todarmal) endeavor to write this sacred book which may be instrumental in the manifestation of all spiritual traits and help achieve the state of self rule.

Now begins the sacred book titled Moksha Marg Prakashak (illuminator of the path of liberation).  The hymn of adoration follows:

     Namo Arhantanam, Namo Siddhanam, NamoAairiyanam,
     Namo Uvajjhayanam, Namo Loye Savva Sahoonam.

This is Namaskar-mantra (benedictory incantation) in Prakrit language and is extremely blissful. Its sanskrit version is as follows:

 Namo Arhadbhyah, Namah Siddhebhyah, Namah Acharyebhyah, Namah Upadhyayebhyah, Namo Loke Sarva Sadhubhyah

Its meaning is thus: -Obeisance to Arihanta Gods (adorable embodied omniscients), obeisance to Siddha Gods (Liberated disembodied omniscients), obeisance to Acharyas (Chief preceptors of congregation of ascetics-monks), obeisance to Upadhyaya (teacher monks, preceptors), obeisance to all Sadhus (monks) (completely possessionless naked monks) in the universe. Thus in this mantra the obeisance (Namaskar) is offered, hence it is called Namaskar Mantra. Now we ponder over their distinguishing characteristics differentias)

Characteristics of Arhantas

First, we ponder over the characteristics of the Arihantas. He (the true believer) who having renounced the house- holder's life and accepted monk's conduct (ascetic-life) has destroyed the four Ghati Karmas (obscuring karmas) through immersion in one's own soul's intrinsic-nature and in him are manifested the highest attributes of four infinities.  Through infinite knowledge Anant-Jnan (omni-science) he knows directly clearly all substances Jiva, etc., simultaneously together with their infinite attributes and modifications; through infinite perception Anant-Darshan (omni-perception) perceives all these substances in general (undifferentiatedly); through infinite energy Anant Virya he always holds such potency (of knowing & seeing); through infinite bliss (Anant Sukha) he experiences imperturbable supreme bliss of beatitude. Further, who has attained the state of perfect serenity and peace by freeing oneself from all sorts of impure dispositions like attachment-aversion etc,  and has achieved the state of supreme God of gods by becoming free from hunger, thirst, etc., (birth, death, etc.) all sorts of physical maladies and whose body has turned into a supernatural Param-Audarika body having no weapon or clothing and is devoid of censurable signs and symptoms of sex-feeling, anger, etc, foul dispositions and emotions and by whose sermons the Dharma-Tirtha (the conduction of true religious path) prevails in the universe, by means of which the mundane beings attain welfare of the self; and who is found possessing different glories (wonders) and greatens which are the cause for worldly people to believe in his supreme lordship and who is adored by the great personages like Indras (heaven's gods) and Ganadharas (the highest rank of monks' order) etc., for their own spiritual benefit; thus adorable in all respects is Shri Arihanta Deva - to Him I (Todarmal) offer my salutation.

Characteristics of Siddhas (Liberated Souls)

Now, we meditate on the characteristics of Siddhas (liberated disembodied omniscients). He (the true believer) who having renounced the house-holder's life and by following the monk's conduct has attained the four infinites (infinite knowledge perception, bliss and energy) on destruction of four Ghati karmas (obscuring karmas), and after lapse of some time, on destruction of the four Aghati Karmas (Non-obscuring Karmas) also, quitting the supernatural body, he reached at the summit of the universe by virtue of upward-motion nature; there he attained the perfect liberated state by getting release from the association of all foreign substances and whose soul's spatial units retained the shape of human form i.e., a little less than the final body; and whose counter- effect producing karmas got destroyed, hence all spiritual attributes like right belief-knowledge-perception, etc., got fully manifested in their natural states, and whose attachment with Nokarmas, body etc.) has ended; hence the immateriality etc., all spiritual traits, got manifested and whose Bhavakarmas (psychic impure dispositions like attachment- aversion, etc.) are destroyed, hence the manifestation of imperturbable wholly-blissful form of pure self-nature is continuing incessantly and by whose meditation the capable souls (Bhavya-Jivas) attain the discriminative-knowledge of the self-substance and non-self-substances and of alien impure dispositions (evolving due to rise of Karmas) and natural pure dispositions (evolved in the absence of karmas) and by virtue of which the means of attaining Siddhahood is achieved. Therefore, for attaining one's own pure nature which is only worth attaining, they (the Siddhas) serve as images for exhibiting it and who have become kritkritya (attained the supreme attainable), hence continue to dwell in such (a perfect blissful) state infinitely; our salutations to such accomplished Siddhas.

General Characteristics of Jaina Monks:
Acharya, Upadhyaya and Sadhus

Now, we look into the characteristics of Acharya, Upadhyaya Sadhu (all possessionless naked Jaina monks):

 He (the right believer) who having become dispassionate and indifferent to worldly pleasures, relinquished all kinds of possessions and attachments and accepted Shuddhopayoga (pure passionless conduct of self-absorption) form of monk's conduct, experiences internally through that Shuddhopayoga his own self to be the self-soul only; never feels I-ness in other objects and believes one's own sentient nature only as one's own, never feels mineness in alien dispositions, and whatever other substances and their characteristics appear in knowledge, he, of course, knows them but does not have attachment-aversion feelings in them by treating them as agreeable or disagreeable; the body undergoes different changes, various instrumental causes get associated externally but (in those situations) he does not feel happy or unhappy at all, and the external (bodily) activity suitable to his (spiritual) status takes place in natural course, he does not involve himself in it forcibly, and he does not allow his Upayoga' (active consciousness) to deviate or ramble too much, he rather holds deviationless (stable) condition by becoming stoical and dispassionate. And, occasionally, due to rise of mild-passion, Shubhopayoga (auspicious thought activity) is also caused, owing to which he gets inclined towards the external means of Shuddhopayoga but knowing such inclination also to be relinquishing, wishes to uproot it.  And due to the absence of rise of intense passions there exists no Ashubhopayoga (inauspicious thought activity) of indulging in violence, etc., and having attained such an internal state of self, he has accepted the Digambar posture (totally possessionless naked state) of serenity, has become free from the acts of decorating the body, etc., lives in forest, caves etc., follows unbreachedly 28 Moolgunas (basic rites), endures 22 types of Parishahas (afflictions), adores 12 kinds of Tapas (penance's), sometimes becomes motionless like an idol by holding the meditation-posture, sometimes engages himself in external pious activities such as study of scriptures etc, sometimes attentively engages oneself in food-taking and making movement, etc., which activities are fit for him for the sake of maintaining the body, being the associating cause of Muni Dharma (monk's religion).

Such is the state of a Jaina-monk and this applies to all Jaina monks.

 Characteristics of Acharya
 Chief of Congregation of Monks)

Among them (in the group of above monks) he, who has become the leader of a congregation of monks by acquiring the chief rank by virtue of the excellence in right belief, right knowledge and right conduct and who chiefly remains engrossed in Niruikalpa Swaroopaacharan (unrambling state of pure, passionless conduct of the self), and when he has compassionate feeling due to rise of slight mild attachment, preaches sermons to only those Jivas who pray for and are curious for religion; he administers Deeksha (renunciation- vow) to those who want to accept asceticism, and purifies by the process of expiation those who admit their faults.

I bow to such an ascetic chief monk Acharya who admonishes such kind of spiritual conduct.
 
Characteristics of Upadhyaya (Preceptor Monk)

And (the Jaina-monk) who having obtained the knowledge of various Jain-Shastras (scriptures) has been installed as the authority of teaching and preaching in the congregation of the monks and who by knowing the purposeful meaning of all the Shastras (sacred books of Jains) meditates concentratedly upon the nature of the self (soul) and, if sometimes, due to rise of slight mild-passion, his upayoga (active-knowledge) does not remain fixed in the self, then he himself reads the Shastras and teaches other religious-minded people.

I bow to such an Upadhyaya monk' who teaches Bhavya Jivas (souls capable of attaining liberation).

Characteristics of Sadhu (Ascetic Monk)

Further, excepting the preceding above two types of rank- holders, the rest are all those who hold monk's rank and are engrossed in attaining the nature of the soul and do not ramble their Upayoga (active consciousness) in other substances by treating them agreeable or disagreeable, thus they try to tranquilize the Upayoga and externally observe religious penances, rituals, etc., as being instrumental cause and sometimes engage themselves in invocation, obeisance and such other activities.

Such are the true Jaina monks who incessantly make efforts for the realization of the self soul; I bow to all such ascetic monks.

Purpose of Adoration

 Thus is the nature of Arihantas, etc., it is full of passionlessness with perfect knowledge. By means of that only, the Arihantas, etc., are supreme and worthy of invocation and adoration.  Because from Jiva Tattva (sentient-being) point of view, all Jivas (souls) are alike but because of attachment, etc., psychic maladies and feeble knowledge, Jivas become censurable and due to lessening of attachment, etc., and increase of knowledge deserve adoration; so in Arhantas and Siddhas due to complete absence of attachment, etc., and perfectness of knowledge, the manifestation of absolute passionlessness with perfect knowledge (omniscience) is possible.  And in Acharyas, Upadhyayas and Sadhus i.e., in all real Digambar Jain monks, due to partial lessening of attachment, etc., and specialty of knowledge, the manifestation of partial passionlessness with discriminative right knowledge is possible. Hence Arihantas etc. are to be known as Supreme, worthy of invocation and adoration.

Further, it should be remembered that amongst these Arihantas etc., (five ranks) mainly Tirthankaras and generally all omniscients are termed Arhanta in Prakrit and Arhat in Sanskrit. And just after the last moment of fourteenth Gunasthana (stage of spiritual development) the Arhantas become Siddhas. Further, those monks who have been installed as Acharyas irrespective of whether they live in the congregation of monks or solitarily do self-mediation or live solivagantly or might have attained the rank of Ganadhara by getting principal-ship among the Acharyas also, all of them are called Acharyas. Further, reading & teaching work is done by other monks too but those on whom Upadhyaya rank of monk is conferred by Acharyas, they only, even besides doing the work of self-meditation etc., get the name of Upadhyaya. And all those monks who do not possess any rank are called Sadhus. 

Here, there is no such rule that Acharya's rank is attained or termed by observing Panchaachara (five types of observances), Upadhyaya's rank by doing teaching-preaching and Sadhu's rank by practicing Moolgunas (basic-rites) because these observances, rites, etc., are common to all monks, but from the Shabda-Naya (verbal standpoint) their literal meaning is derived so. From Samabhirudha-Naya (conventional standpoint) the Acharya etc. names are to be known by the graduation of ranks only. As for example, by Shabda Naya, that which moves is called the 'cow', likewise the human beings, etc., also make the movement but from Samabhirudha Naya the names are so given from the Paryaya (embodied state) point of view. Similarly, one must understand here also.

Question: What is the reason of offering salutation to Arhantas prior to Siddhas?

Answer: Salutation is offered with the object of getting our purpose accomplished and because the purpose of sermons etc., chiefly gets accomplished from the Arhantas, therefore, the salutation is offered first to them.

Thus, the characteristics of Arhantas, etc., have been reflected on, because by reflecting on their characteristics the specific object gets accomplished. Further, these Arhantas, etc., are called Panch-Parmeshtis (the five utmost beneficial Supreme souls) because that which is utmost beneficial is named as Parameshta . The Panch (five) who are Parameshta are thus collectively named and called Panch Parmeshtis.

 Further, Rishabha, Ajita, Sambhava, Abhinandana, Sumati, Padmaprabha, Suparshva, Chandraprabha, Pushpadant, Sheetal, Shreyansa, Vasupujya, Vimal, Ananta, Dharma, Shanti, Kunthu, Ara, Malli, Munisuvrat, Nami, Nemi, Parshva, Wardhamana - so named 24 Tirthankaras - have been the pioneers of the presently existing Dharma Tirtha (spiritual voyage) in this Bharat-Kshetra; they are specifically adored by Indras (heavenly gods), etc., during their attaining auspicious occasions of conception, birth, asceticism, omniscience and salvation, and are now situated in Siddhalaya (the abode of liberated souls at the summit of the universe); I bow to them all.

Further, Seemandhara, Yugamandhara, Bahu, Subahu, Samjataka, Swayamprabh, Vrishabhanana, Ananta-virya, Surprabha, Vishalkirti, Vajradhara, Chandranana, Chandrabahu, Bhujangama, Ishwara, Nemiprabha, Veersena, Mahabhadra, Devayash, Ajttvirya - so named 20 Tirthankaras - who are at present situated with omniscience in Videhakshetras of Panch- merus (the five highest mounts), I bow to them all.

Although these are included in the Parameshtis rank, never the less, in the present time, knowing their significance and supremacy, salutation is offered separately.

Further, the naturally existing unartificial idols of Jinas (Arhantas) that are situated in Triloka (three worlds of the universe) and the artificial 'Jinas' idols that are installed with ritual-ceremony in the middle world, whose Darshan (sighting and invocation) etc., only, even without getting any (discernible) sermon from them, the accomplishment of our benediction takes place as is accomplished by the Darshan of Tirthankara-Kewali (embodied omniscients); I bow to all these 'Jinas' idols.

Further, the Anga-prakeernakas (the sacred scriptures containing omnicient's commandments) created by Ganadharas according to the sermons given in Divya-dhwani (omniscient's preachings) and according to those (Anga-Prakeernakas) the Granthas (sacred books) written by other Acharyas etc., all those are Jina-vachanas (omniscient's preachings) which are worth recognizing through the emblem of Syadvada (the theory of relative or conditional predication) and are non- contradictory to path of justice, therefore, are authentic and are the cause of Tattva-Jnana (true knowledge of substances) for Jivas, therefore, are beneficial; I bow to them.

 Further, the Chaityalaya (Jina's temple), Aaryika (Jaina- nun), Shravaka (the right-faith house-holder) of the highest vows and rank, etc., substances (Dravyas), the Tirthankshetras i.e., sacred pilgrim places, etc., lands (Kshetras), the Kalyanaka-Kalaas (benedictory periods) etc., periods (Kalas) and Ratnatraya (right faith-knowledge and conduct), etc., pure dispositions (Bhavas) which are worth saluting, I bow to all of them. And I pay due respect to them also who deserve some respect. Thus the invocation is done by giving due respect to our benefactors. 

Now we discuss as to how these Arhantas, etc., are the benefactors. The purpose (objective) is the name of that act or deed due to which happiness is obtained and misery is ended, and that by means of which the accomplishment of the purpose takes place is our benefactor. Presently, obtaining the passionless discriminative-knowledge, is the purpose, because by means of that imperturbable real happiness is attained and all sorrows and miseries, which are full of perplexities are ended.

Accomplishment of Purpose from Arhantas, etc.

Further the accomplishment of this purpose takes place by the invocation, etc., of Arhantas, etc.; how does it take place? This is being discussed:-

The dispositions of the soul are of three types:- cruel (inauspicious), ingenuous (auspicious) and pure (passionless). The instincts in the form of intense passion are cruel, in the form of mild-passion are ingenuous and passionless are pure. The destroyer of our natural-character of the form of passionless discriminative-knowledge are the Jnanavarana, etc., Ghati Karmas (knowledge, etc., obscuring karmas); their intense bondage occurs by cruel instincts and feeble-bondage by ingenueous instincts and if the ingenuous instincts are strong then the intense-bondage that had occurred in the past also gets feebled. No bondage is caused by pure (passionless) dispositions; rather only dissociation (Nirjara of those karmas takes place. The dispositions of invocations to Arhantas, etc., are assuredly of the nature of feeble passions; those are, therefore, the ingenuous instincts.  Moreover, they are the means of destroying all sorts of passions, therefore, are the cause of pure (passionless) dispositions; so by such instincts the self- obscuring Ghati-Karmas become feeble and the passionless discriminative-knowledge gets naturally evolved. The extent to which it becomes feeble, to the same extent (degrees) this gets evolved. Thus our purpose is accomplished by Arhantas, etc.

 Or the acts like looking (sighting) at the image of Arhantas, or pondering over their nature, or listening to their preachings (revelation), or being closer to them, or following the path according to their preachings, instantly reduce the delusion, attachment, etc., by becoming instrumental causes and give rise to discriminative-knowledge of Jiva (soul), AJiva (non-soul), etc. Therefore, in this way also the purpose of passionless discriminative-knowledge gets accomplished by Arhantas, etc.

Here some one may say that 'Well, such objective (purpose) gets fulfilled by them, but "that by which the sensual pleasure evolves and misery ends" - such objective is also achieved by them or not?

Answer: The ingenuous instincts of the form of invocation etc.  towards Arhantas, etc., cause the bondage of Sata, etc., pleasure-producing type of Aghati (non-obscuring) karmas and if those instincts are powerful, then they reduce the Asata, etc., misery producing type of karmas bonded in the past, or by destroying, converts them into Punya - the pleasure producing type of karmas and on rise of that Punya (auspicious karma) the objects causing sensual pleasure become available on their own, and on removal of the rise of Papa (inauspicious Karma) the objects causing misery vanish automatically.

In this way this purpose is also attained through them.  Or Devas (celestial beings) who are devotees of Jina- Shasana (Omniscient rule), they make the objects of sensual- pleasure available to that devotee and remove the objects of misery. In this way also this purpose is attained through those Arhantas, etc., But by this purpose no good of the self (soul) takes place, because due to passion emotions the soul makes conjectures of happiness-unhappiness by considering the external objects good or bad. Without passions, the external objects do not cause any pleasure or pain. And all passions are full of misery, therefore, desiring for sensual pleasures and fearing from miseries is nothing but fallacy.
 
Further, for this purpose, even adoring Arhantas, etc., being intense passion, causes bondage of inauspicious karmas (Papa- Bandha); soliciting this purpose is not desirable for us. By adoration of Arhantas, etc., such purposes are automatically accomplished.

Thus Arhantas, etc., are Parameshta (the utmost beneficial) for us. Further, those Arhantas, etc., only are the supreme auspice- Mangala and having adoration (invocation) feeling in them causes great auspice. Mang means happiness, lati means bestows. Or Mam means sins Galyati means melts away; that is called Mangala (auspice). Thus, as mentioned above, both purposes are accomplished by them, therefore, supreme auspiciousness is possible in them.

Purpose of Observing Benediction
(Mangalaacharan )

 Here someone can ask "What is the purpose of benediction right in the beginning of the book?"

Answer: Completing the book happily without any disturbance due to rise of evil (Papa) karmas is the object of performing benediction Mangalaacharan in the beginning.

Question : The people of other faiths who do not make obeisance like this, in their case also, the completion of book and non-occurrence of disturbance is seen, how is it so?

Answer: The people of other faiths who write books, they, due to rise of intense delusion, keep self-contradictory words and meanings in them which nourish the erroneous faith and passion instincts; hence its completion without disturbance is possible even without such obeisance. If by such obeisance delusion becomes feeble, how would then such contradictory work be accomplished?  And I am also writing this book; by virtue of feeble-passion, I will keep (write) in it the words nourishing the passionless science of Tattvas (essential- principles); its disturbanceless completion is possible only by performing such an obeisance. If such an obeisance is not done then the intensity of delusion will persist; how would then such noble act be possible?

Further, he says "well this is acceptable but he who does not perform such obeisance, is also seen to be happy, the rise of sinfull karmas is not seen and someone who performs such obeisance in him also happiness is not seen, rather the rise of sinful karmas is found; therefore, how is the aforesaid auspiciousness possible?

The cruel (intense) and ingenuous (mild) instincts of Jivas are of many types. The karmas bounded by them in the past in different times rise at one time. Therefore, for example, one who had accumulated lot of wealth in the past is found possessing wealth without earning and is not seen in debt and the one who had taken lot of debt in the past is found indebted even while earning wealth and wealth is not seen, but on thinking one finds that earning is always the cause of wealth only and not of debt. Similarly, the one who had bounded lot of auspicious karmas in the past, he is seen possessed of happiness even without performing such obeisance and the rise of sinful karmas is not seen and the one who had bounded lot of sinful karmas in the past he is not seen possessed of happiness even after performing such obeisance and the rise of sinful karmas is seen but on thinking one finds that performing of such obeisance is assuredly the cause of happiness and not of the rise of sinful karmas. Thus the auspiciousness of aforesaid obeisance is established.

 Again he says, "this too is accepted; but why the Devas (celestial beings) who are the devotees of Jina-Shasana (omniscients-rule) did not help the one who observed the obeisance and did not punish the one who did not observe the obeisance?

Answer: The predominating factor of Jivas getting pleasure and pain is the rise of their own karmas; according to that only the external instrumental causes are met with, so the one whose sinful karmas are in rise (operative state) does not get help-rendering cause and the one whose pious (auspicious) karmas are in rise (operative state) does not get the punishment rendering cause.

How such instrumental cause is not met with, is being explained:

The Devas (celestial beings) can not know everything simultaneously due to Kshayopashama Jnan (destruction cum subsidence type of knowledge) hence knowing of the person observing obeisance and the one not observing obeisance takes place rarely to some celestial being etc; so if they do not know them, how could they help or punish? And if they know them then if their (Devas) passion be extremely feeble, then the instinct of helping or punishing does not arise and if the passion be intense then religious feeling can not arise and if the passion for involvement in such act be of average degrees and one may not have power then what can he do? In this way, the instrumental cause of rendering help or giving punishment does not materialize.

If one has capacity and due to rise of passion of average order has compassionate feeling also and in such states he should also be knowing pious-impious form of duty towards other Jiva then some celestial being etc, helps some pious fellow - or punishes some impious fellow. Thus there is no set rule for such action.

It is to be understood here that the desire of being happy, not being miserable, seeking help, creating trouble - all that is full of passion, is painful instantly as well as in future; therefore, discarding such desire and being aspirant of passionless-science only, I have observed obeisance to Arhantas etc. in the form of invocation etc.

 Authenticity of This Book and Scriptural Tradition

After such obeisance, the meaningful book named Moksha Marg Prakashak is being written. There, for proving and establishing the fact that 'this book is authentic', the old tradition is being followed and explained thus:

 'A' etc, alphabetic letters are eternal and not created by any body. Writing of their shapes is of many types as per one's will but the spoken alphabets are always found used alike everywhere.  Therefore, it is said...  The meaning of this is that the group (tradition) of alphabets is self- existent and created from those alphabets are the words which render true meaning (of the objects), the name of their group is the Shruta (scripture), so that also is eternal.  As Jiva -this is an eternal word, it indicates the Jiva (the soul substance). Thus there are various words capable of rendering their own true meanings; the group of those words is to be known as Shruta (scripture). Further, as the pearls are self-existent, out of those someone taking a few pearls, someone taking many pearls produces the ornaments by arranging them in the way he likes.  Similarly, the words are self-existent, out of those someone taking a few words, someone taking many words produces the book by arranging them in the way he likes.  Here I am also going to create a book by arranging those words conveying true meanings as per my knowledge. I am not going to keep in this book the words conveying false meaning imagined by me.  Hence, this book is authentic.

Question: How does the tradition of those words exist up to the creation of this book?

Answer: Since eternity Kevali Tirthankaras are being found; they know each and every thing; hence they know those words and their meaning also. Further through Divya Dhwani (revelation) of those omniscient Tirthankaras such discourses are found by virtue of which other Jivas (capable souls) attain the knowledge of words and their meanings; according to that Gandhara-Devas (Head Acharyas monks) create the Granthas (sacred books) in the form of Anga-Prakeernakas and according to those books other Acharyas prepare various types of books. Some people study them, some narrate them, some listen to them. Thus, the traditional path continues.

 Now in this Bharat-Kshetra presently the Auasarpini-Kala is prevailing. During this time 24 Tirthankaras were born; amongst them Shri Wardhamana Swami was the last Tirthankara. He being omniscient, preached Jivas (all living beings) through the medium of Divya-Dhwani (divine-speech). Through the instrumentality of the opportunity of listening to it, the Ganadhara Acharya named Gautam having known its subtle and intricate meaning composed the Anga-Prakeernakas (Sacred books) out of compassionate feeling.  Thereafter, Vardhamana Swami attained salvation. After some time in this fifth era, three Kevalis (omniscients) were found: (1) Gautam (2) SudharmaAcharya (3) JambuSwami. Thereafter, due to bad times, occurrence of omniscients stopped, but for some time Shruta- Kevalis (the knowers of all 12 Angas, i.e. complete scripture) were available and thereafter their-availability also came to an end.  Further for some time more the knowers of a few Angas only were found. Later on their availability too came to an end. Thereafter, the Acharyas wrote scriptures (sacred books) on the basis of scriptures written by Anga- knowers. In this tradition more scriptures were written and their prevalence continued. In them also, due to bad times, many books (Granthas) were destroyed by wicked persons and due to discontinuance of study, the important books (Granthas) were lost, but some of the great Granthas are still found; because of feeble knowledge their study became difficult. For example, in south India near Gommatta Swami (Shravanbelgola) in Moodbidri town (near Mangalore) the Dhawala, Mahadhawala, Jai Dhawala, etc.  Granthas are existing but are available for adoration (Darshan) only. However, many other Granthas which are still available, are within the reach of our knowledge for study but amongst them too only a few Granthas are being studied. Thus, in these bad times the highest Jaina religion underwent the state of downfall, but through this tradition even now in Jaina- Shastras (sacred books of Jains) the existence of words conveying true meaning is continuing.

A Word about This Book

Here in this era, I have now got human-birth. In this birth, I developed interest in study of Jain-Shastras owing to my past (religious) impressions and present good luck. Due to which after studying in general the useful books on grammar, logic, mathematical science, etc., I have been studying as per my intellect and understanding the following various Shastras (Sacred books) with their commentaries.

(1) Samayasara, Panchastikaya, Pravachansara, Niyama-sara, Tattvarth sutra, etc. (Shastras of Drauyanuyoga, the metaphysics).

(2) Gommattasara, Labdhisara, Triloksara, Kshapanasara, etc. (Shastras of Karananuyoga-aetiology) (3)Purushartha- Siddhyupaya, Ashtapahuda, Atmanushasana etc. and books describing the code of conduct laid for Shravakas (householders) and Munis (naked possessionless monks) (the Shastras of Charananuyoga, i.e. Ethology) and (4) Mythological scriptures containing stories of the brave personages leading to salvation path, etc. (Shastras of Prathamanuyoga).

By virtue of that I too have attained some knowledge of true words with their true meanings.

 Moreover, in this bad period of downfall, many people are seen possessing knowledge poorer than my feeble knowledge. They too may obtain the knowledge of these words with their meaning- keeping this point in view, I made up my mind to write this book in spoken language out of compassionate feeling. This is the reason for writing this book. In this book also the same words with their true meanings are interpreted. The only specialty is that as in the Prakrit Sanskrit books the words (sentences) are written in Prakrit- Sanskrit; similarly, here I am writing in country's spoken language either with Apbhransha or with their exact form but there is no adulteration in the meanings of the words.

Thus the tradition of those true words exists up to this book also.

Negation of Writing False Words

Someone asks here - we have known in this way the tradition, but how could we believe that in this tradition, only the right words with their exact meanings were written and were not intermingled with false words?

Answer: Composing of false words is not possible without intense passion, because due to such false composition by which many Jivas may be badly harmed traditionally and as a consequence of such a great injury, the self will have to go to hellish and Nigoda (Nigoda- inferiorest one sensed beings undergoing 18 times births and deaths in one respiration.) form of life -such a great sinful act is possible only on being empowered by the intense anger, pride, deceit and greed passions; but in Jain religion such a highly passioned person does not take birth.

The first basic preceptor Tirthankara - Kevali (the omniscient) is free from all passions due to complete annihilation of Moha (delusion and attachment, etc.). Next originators of Shastras are the Ganadharas and Acharyas who because of feeble rise of Moha -karma (attachment) have forsaken all sorts of external and internal possessions; hence are extremely dispassionate. Owing to the presence of feeble passion in them they are found possessed with somewhat proclivity of Shubhopayoga (auspicious thought activity) and no other purpose is found. And if the right-faith Shravakas (house- holders) also compose the Shastras, they too are not highly passionate; if they had intense passions how could they cultivate interest in Jina-Dharma (Jainism) which is the destroyer of all sorts of passions by all means? Or, if someone owing to the rise of perverse faith nourishes the passions by other (temporal) deeds, he may do so but by going against Jina's preaches (Maxims), if he nourishes one's passions, he loses Jain-identity.

Thus, in Jainism such a highly passionate person is not found, who shall by composing false words, spoil others as well as his own lot in this birth and the births hereafter.

Question: If someone "so-called" Jaina under the influence of intense passion mixes false words in Jain Shastras and then his tradition continues, what to do in such case?

 Answer: As someone mixes artificial pearls in the ornament of real pearls but the shine does not match, so by examining it the examiner does not get cheated also, except the ignorant one who gets cheated in the name of real pearls, and his tradition also does not continue; soon someone starts disapproving the artificial pearls.  Similarly, in the Jain- Shastras which are a collection (treatise) of true words, someone may intermix false words, but the purpose shown in the words of Jain-Shastras is of uprooting the passions and of reducing worldly affairs. And the false words, which are mixed by that sinful person, serve the purpose of nourishing the passions and accomplishing the worldly affairs. Thus the purpose does not match; therefore, after examination, the wise person is not cheated. The ignorant alone gets cheated by the name of Jain-Shastra and his tradition also does not continue, rather someone immediately contradicts the false words.

The other aspect is this that such highly-passionate, the so- called Jains, are found here in this bad time only; many good regions and periods are also there wherein such people are not found. Therefore, it should be understood that in Jaina- Shastras the tradition of false words does not continue.

Further, he asks that one may not mix false words out of passions but since the scripture-writers possess Kshayopashama Jnan, therefore, if due to miscomprehension someone mixes wrong words then his tradition may continue? 

Answer: The basic scripture composers are Ganadhara Devas (Chief Acharyas); they themselves possess four kinds of knowledge and they listen to omniscient divine speech (Divya-Dhwani) directly; by virtue of its glory (divinity) the right meaning only is comprehended and accordingly they compose the Shastras; therefore how can the false words be entwined in those Shastras? And the other Acharyas, etc, who compose the Shastras they also possess the right knowledge as per their capacity and they compose the Shastras by following the tradition of the original scriptures. Moreover, they do not compose those words, which are not known to them and compose only those words, which are well- comprehended by them with the authenticity of right knowledge. So first by taking such due precautions, the false words are not intermixed and sometimes if they themselves have mis- comprehended the meaning of the words of original text (scripture) and also it may appear to be right in their knowledge, then there is no escape but this happens with someone rarely and not with all, therefore, those who have comprehended it rightly, they, by negating the same, do not allow the wrong tradition to continue.

 Further, let it be known that the right faith Jains do not have misconception about Deva-Guru-Dharma etc, and Jiva-AJiva , etc,  Tattvas by the misconception of which the Jivas become miserable; these are prominently described in the Jaina-Shastras. And there are some such deep meanings, which may even be misconceived under illusion, but because of faith in omniscients' preaches there will be no spiritual harm to Jiva.  If out of them someone draws wrong conclusion about some subtle meanings even then it is not his great mistake. The same is said in Gommattasara:

"Smathees jeevo uvitham pevyanram tu sadhadi
Sadhadi asambhavam ajanrmanro gurunriyoga"

 Meaning :- The right believer (Samyagdrishti-Jiva) believes in the preached true words and (sometimes) under the instruction of an ignorant teacher, believes also in wrong words.

Moreover, I also do not possess vast knowledge but I am very much afraid of going against the omniscients' preaches; due to the strength of this concept only, I am daring to write this book (Shastra).  So, in this book also I shall be describing the Tattvas exactly in the same way in which these are described in the old texts (Shastras). Or if at some places in the old books the description is unelaborated and deep, I shall describe the same here elaborately. In describing in this manner, I shall remain very careful but even besides taking all due precautions if at some place something deeper in meaning gets misinterpreted, it is my humble request to the intellectual savants to correct the same properly. In this way I have decided to write this Shastra.

Now, "what types of Shastras are worth reading and listening and what kind of discoursers and listeners of those Shastras should be there", the same is being described here.

Shastras worth Reading & Listening

 Only those Shastras, which illuminate the right path of liberation, are worth reading and listening. In this world all living beings are suffering from innumerable kinds of miseries; if through the lamp (light) of Shastras, they attain the right path of liberation, then by treading on that path they themselves can be free from those miseries. And that liberation-path is nothing but a passionless disposition. It is, therefore, desirable to read and listen to only those Shastras in which the sole purpose of passionlessness has been discoursed by judiciously contradicting delusion, attachment, aversion, etc, And all those Shastras wherein the purpose of cultivating attachment feeling by cherishing voluptuousness, merriment, etc., aversion feeling by fostering violent activities, wars etc, and the perverted belief by nourishing the faith in false elements has been advocated are not the Shastras but "weapons". Because attachment, aversion, etc, fallacious feelings on account of which the Jiva has suffered from miseries from eternity, the tendency of those instincts and feelings was already existing in him even without imparting any training and if through these Shastras the same -instincts and feelings are fostered, then what has been preached for the well being of Jiva, on the contrary it may amount to destruction of the very nature of the soul. Therefore, reading of and listening to such Shastras is not desirable.
 
As has been stated about reading and listening, similarly, one- should know about composition, learning, teaching, thinking, writing, etc., by inference.

Thus only those Shastras which promote growth of passionlessness either directly or traditionally are only worth studying.

Traits of a Discourser

Now, the traits of a (true) discourser are being described:- (1)  He must be firm in Jaina-faith; for, if he himself is a misbeliever, how can he make others true believer? The listeners by themselves possess less intellect, how would he make them true believer through some logic? And the right belief only is the basis of all religion. (2) He should have developed the ability to deliver discourses on Shastras through the study of scriptures because without attaining such ability how can he be eligible for preaching? (3) Through right knowledge, he should be able to discriminate the gist of all sorts of empirical (Vyavahara) and real (Nishchaya) etc. forms of expositions; for, if this be not there then if there be some description with some different purpose, there he might draw some other meaning and become instrumental in wrong conduct. (4) He should be very fearful of going against the omniscient commandment because if this be not so then bearing some purpose in mind he may preach against the 'Sutras' (Scripture) and create misery for Jivas. So is stated below:-

Bahugunravijyanrilyo, asutbhasee thavi mutvo
Jah varmanri juto vi hu, vighyro visehro lohai
                                         (u. si. r. mala)

 The one who possesses many virtues like forbearance, modesty, etc, and has knowledge of grammar, etc, but is a perverse discourser (wrong-interpreter) he is worth discarding. For instance, a snake though possessing costliest jewel, yet it is only a source of trouble in the world. (5) He must not have any desire of accomplishing the temporal acts like earning livelihood etc., by means of giving discourses on Shastras; for, if he has expectation then he cannot preach (the truth) correctly; he simply makes it a source of accomplishing his objective by giving lectures according to the desire of some listeners. Moreover, the preacher's rank is higher than that of listeners; but, if the preacher be greedy, then the preacher will himself become inferior and the listeners will become superior. (6) He should not have intense anger and pride, because the highly- passionate (angry & haughty) person will be criticized, the listeners will be fearful of him, then how would they be benefitted by him? (7) He should himself raise different questions and provide answers or if other people raise questions many times in different ways, then through soft (sweet) words he should clarify in such a way that their doubt is removed. In case he himself does not have the capacity to answer rightly then he should say that he himself lacks knowledge of it; for, if this be not so, the doubt of the listeners will not be removed. How will then there be good of them? And the glorification of Jaina-faith will also not be possible. (8) He should not indulge in any immoral and publicly censurable activities, for he would become a place of laughter due to indulgence in publicly censurable deeds; who would then trust his words? He will bring bad name to Jaina faith. (9) He should not be of low caste, not be a crippled fellow, not have hoarse voice, be of sweet tongue, should be influential so that he may be acceptable to the people, for, if it be not so then the orator's greatness will not be reflected in him. The above qualities are essential in the discourser.  The same is stated in Atmanushasana:-

"Pragya praptsmastshasthridya prvyaktloksthiti
Prastash pratibhaper preshmvan pragaiv drishtoter

Praya prshanseh prabhu permanoharee pranindya
Booyaduthrmkatha ganree gunree gunrnidhi prspashtmishtaksher"

The one who is brilliant, has grasped the gist of all Shastras, is graceful in public life, desire-free, lustrous, dispassionate and one who knows the answer even before the question is raised, should have great forbearance for facing several questions, be influential, could win the hearts of others because of being free from the criticism of others as well as of his own by others, be store of virtues and whose words are clear and sweet - such a leader of the congregation should deliver the discourses.

Further, the special characteristic of a discourser is such that if he knows grammar, logic, etc, and possesses deep knowledge of voluminous Jaina Shastras then his oration  will be more glorious. Moreover, in spite of all these qualities, if he has not acquired self-realization through spiritual taste, then he is not likely to know the spirit (essence) of Jina Dharma (Omniscients' religion), he is a discourser merely traditionally. How can he explain the characteristic of the true Jina Dharma which is full of spiritual taste?  Therefore, if he be an enlightened self - Atma-Jnani then only he is a true preacher. In Pravachansara also it is stated that Agama-Jnana (knowledge of scripture), Tattvartha-Sharaddhana (faith in Jiva-AJiva, etc, essential principles), Sanyama Bhava (continence) - these three if are devoid of self-knowledge (Atma-Jnana), they are ineffective. Further in Doha-Pahuda it is stated that :-

"Pandiya pandiya pandiya kanr chorhi vi tus kandiya
Pya atham tutheesi parmath nr janryi moodhosi"

 "Oh Pandey! Oh Pandey! Oh Pandey! You are leaving the grain thrashing the husk only. You are satisfied in words and their literal meanings, but do not know the reality, therefore, you are assuredly a fool".

Moreover, in fourteen types of learning's, the metaphysics (spiritual science) is described as to be the supreme of all. Therefore, the discourser who is fond of the taste of spiritual science should be known as the discourser of the mystery of Jina-Dharma. Further, the discoursers who possess extra-ordinary intellectual power and are possessed of clairvoyance, telepathy, omniscience are to be known as the  great preachers. Such should be known the distinctive traits of the discoursers.

So, if one gets the association of a discourser possessing these distinctive traits, it is highly beneficial and if not obtained then one ought to listen the Shastras from the mouth of those discoursers only who possess qualities of right belief, etc. It is desirable to listen to the Shastras from the mouth of Munis (monks) and Shravakas (house-holders) possessing such characteristics and it is not worth listening the Shastras customarily or with the greed of listening the Shastras from the mouth of sinful persons, who are not possessed of the right-belief, etc. traits. Also it is said that:-

"Tn jinr anr prainr ya dhamo soyv suguru  pasmi
Ah uchiyo seddhao, tssuv aisas kehgao // 23  (a.si.r.)"

The one who is attentive in obeying the omniscients commandments, it is worth-while for him to listen to the sermons from (the mouth of) a Nirgrantha (naked without possessions) true preceptor monk or should listen to religious discourses from the proper true believer Shravaka (householder) who interprets the sermons of the true preceptor only.

Only such discourser, who preaches with religious attitude, can do good of the self and of other Jivas (capable souls) also, and one who preaches with passion attitude, harms himself as well as other Jivas.

Characteristics of Listeners

Now the characteristics of a listener are being described. He whose future seems to be bright, thinks "Who am I? What is my inherent nature? How is this all happening to me? What will be the fruit of the thoughts and feelings arising in me? Jiva (the self) is suffering from miseries, so what is the mean of ending the miseries?  I have to find out the solution of all these questions and should do that which is beneficial to me"- with such thoughts he has become active. Believing that this object can be achieved by listening to Shastras listens to Shastras enthusiastically, asks whatever is to be asked, ponders repeatedly in his inner self over the meaning explained by the preceptors and after determining the true meaning by his own thoughts makes efforts to achieve the desirable such is the differentia of a new listener.
 
Further, those who are the firm believers of Jina-Dharma and whose intellect has been sharpened by listening to different Shastras and having known thoroughly well the differentia of Vyavahar (conventional) and Nishchay (realistic) stand points, etc, whatever sermon they listen to grasp it correctly by knowing what it really means; and whenever a question arises they most humbly raise the question or by mutual discussion on different questions and answers take decision about the things, keep deeply engrossed in the study of scripture, have discarded censurable acts with religious attitude. - Such ought to be the listeners of Shastras.

Special Characteristics of the Listeners (of Jaina-Shastras)

If a listener possesses some knowledge of grammar, logic and of voluminous Jaina Shastras, then the listener is praiseworthy.  And even if there be such a listener but be devoid of Atma-Jnana (self-knowledge) he can not understand the gist of the sermons.  Therefore, the one who has tasted (the blissful nature of) the self-soul through self- realisation, he is the real listener of the mystery of Jina- Dharma. Further, the one who possesses extra ordinary intellectual power or the clairvoyance, telepathy knowledge, then he is to be known as an excellent listener. Such are the special qualities of the listeners. Such should be the listeners of the Jina-Shatras.

Moreover, those who listen to Shastras believing that listening to Shastras will be beneficial to them but due to weakness of knowledge do not understand much, to them Punya- Bandha (bondage of auspicious karmas) occurs, but the specific purpose can not be achieved. And those who listen to Shastras either by family tradition or customarily or incidentally or simply listen but do not retain any thing, so according to their thoughts and feelings, sometimes Punya- Bandha (inauspicious bondage) or sometimes Papa Bandha (inauspicious bondage) is caused to them. And those who listen to Shastras with pride or jealousy or whose intention is only of arguing and those who listen to Shastras simply for being called the great person or for the sake of fulfilling some greed, etc. or those who listen to Shastras but do not like it - to such listeners the Papa- Bandha alone is caused. Such are the various traits of listeners.  Similarly. it should be inferred about the persons indulging in learning, teaching activities, etc.

   Thus the characteristics of discoursers and listeners of the Shastras have-been described. Hence, the right Shastra, should be read and listened to by becoming a right discourser and a right listener.

 Meaningfullness of Moksha Marg Prakasha Shastra

Now, starts the composition of the Shastra, named Moksha Marg Prakashak. Its meaningfulness is being discussed.

In this world-forest all Jivas (mundane beings) are suffering from different kinds of miseries caused due to karmic bondage and darkness of delusion is pervading every- where because of which the Jivas are not able to find the path of liberation, rather continue suffering from the miseries torment.

As an instrumental cause of benefaction of all such Jivas dawned the sun in the form of Tirthankar Kewali Bhagawan (omniscient Lord) and through the rays of his Divya- Dhwani (divine speech) the path of liberation got illuminated. As the sun has no intention to illuminate the path but automatically its rays are spread out and the path - gets illuminated.  Similarly, the Kewali (Omniscient Lord;) is devoid of attachment, so He has no intention to show the path of liberation, but automatically due to rise of Aghati- Karmas (non-obscuring karmas) the matter particles of his body turn into Divya-Dhwani (divine speech) through which the path of liberation is illuminated.

Further, the Ganadhara Devas thought that after the setting of the omniscient-sun how could Jivas obtain the liberation- path (Moksha Marg) and without treading on liberation-path, the Jivas will continue suffering from miseries; this- compassionate feeling encouraged them to compose the Shastras in the forms of Anga-Prakeernaka etc. These served as great lamps, which spread the light.

Further, as the transition of lamps continues by lighting the lamp from the (other) lamp, similarly some Acharyas. (Chief saints) composed other Shastras from those Shastras. Thus through the creation of Shastras the tradition of Shastras continues. This Shastra is also being composed on the basis of previous Shastras.

Further, as the sun and all lamps illuminate the path in the same manner, similarly, Divya-Dhwani and all Shastras illuminate the liberation-path (Moksha-Marg) in the same way. So, this Shastra too illuminates the liberation-path.  And as even on illuminating the path, the persons, who are either without eyes or have diseased eyes, are not able to see the path but the lamp has not lost the power of illuminating the path, similarly, on illuminating (the liberation-path) the Jivas who are either without mind (irrational beings) or are over-powered by delusion, etc, are not able to see the path of liberation, thereby it can not be said that the Shastra has lost the power of illuminating the liberation-path. In this way, the meaningful name of Moksha Marga Prakashak Shastra be known. 

Question: There already existed Shastras illuminating liberation-path, why then you are composing this new Shastra ?

Answer: As the illumination of big lamps is possible by means of much quantity of oil, etc. but those who do not have much quantity of oil, for them if a small lamp is lighted then they, by maintaining its means, can do their work in its illumination. Similarly, understanding of big Shastras is possible through the means of vast knowledge, etc. but those who do not have vast knowledge, for them if a small Shastra (treatise) is composed, then by means of it, they may achieve their objective. This is the aim of composing this small and easy Shastra.

Further, this Shastra is being composed neither for self- exaltation under passion nor for fulfilling some greed, or for earning name and fame or for establishing my own tradition. Those who do not possess the knowledge of grammar, logic, Naya-Pramana and distinctive meaning of the words, due to which they cannot study big Shastras and even if they study some small Shastras then they can not comprehend the true meaning, as such in the present time most of the Jivas have feeble knowledge; for their benefaction, this Shastra is being composed with pious instinct in the spoken language. 

Further, as if a Chintamani - a miraculous & precious diamond, is offered to an extremely pauper for looking at it but he refuses to even look at it and as if a cup of nectar is offered to a leper for drinking, but he refuses to drink it, similarly if a mundane miserable Jiva gets an opportunity to listen to an easy discourse on path of liberation but he refuses to pay attention to it, then it is not possible for us to describe the glory of his misfortune.  When we ponder over his future a compassionate feeling arises in us. Also it is said that:-

"Saheenrai gurujogai jainr sunrantih dhmvynryi
Tai dhithduth chit ah suhdha bhavbhey vihnra 
                                                 93 (u. si. r.)

The Jivas who even on getting the company of self-dependent discourser Guru (preceptor) do not listen to religious sermons, are haughty and possess cruel heart or they are devoid of fear of transmigration from which great personages like Tirthankaras, etc, were afraid; they seem to be very brave warriors.

In Pravachanasara also there is a chapter on Moksha Marge wherein the knowledge of scripture has been advocated as worth adopting (Upadeya) firstly. So, the prime duty of this Jiva is to attain knowledge of scripture. By its attainment the true belief of Tattvas (Jiva, Ajiva etc, realities) gets evolved and on attainment of right belief of Tattvas continence-disposition (Sanyama-Bhava) gets evolved. And on the basis of this knowledge of scriptures even self- realization materializes; then on its own, the attainment of liberation takes place.

 Further there are various components of religion; in them, excepting Dhyana (meditation) there is no other components of religion higher than study of scriptures. Therefore, one should study scriptures by making all possible efforts.

Further, reading, listening and pondering over this Shastra is very easy, even knowledge of grammar, etc. is not necessary. Therefore, all should essentially study this book. The readers are bound to achieve spiritual welfare. 

Thus ends the 1st Chapter dealing with introductory part of Shri Moksha Marg Prakashak Shastra.

CHAPTER 2

NATURE OF MUNDANE EXISTENCE

Doha: Mithyabhav abhavtay, jo prgatai nijbhav
           So Jeywant rho sada, yih hee moksh upav

Let the intrinsic nature of self (soul) remain victorious always which gets manifested due to termination of false belief, etc. This alone is the means of Liberation.

Now, in this Shastra light is thrown on the path of liberation.  Liberation is the `Release from bondage'. This soul is having bondage of Karmas (Subtle matter particles or atoms of Karman-Vargana, which are characterized with bonding power with soul.) and due to that bondage the soul is suffering from miseries.  Although Jiva is continuously trying also to ward off the misery but without attaining the right means misery does not end and misery is also unbearable; therefore, this Jiva is becoming restless.

Thus the root cause of all miseries to this Jiva is the karmic bondage. Its destruction (separation) is Emancipation (liberation) and same is the supreme welfare and the prime duty is to make true effort for the same; therefore, all preaching is for the same.

Just as a physician first tells the patient about the diagnosis of disease as to how he got diseased, thereafter he tells him about the different conditions resulting from the disease. Thereby the patient infers that he assuredly has this disease. Then the physician further tells him about the means of curing the disease in various ways and makes him believe about the appropriateness of the treatment.  Giving such advice is the duty of physician. And if that patient adopts that means then he can enjoy his natural state after freeing himself from the disease. This is the duty of the patient.

 Similarly, here the Jiva (mundane being) having karmic bondage is first being told the reason for the karmic bondage as to how he got entangled with the Karmas. Then he is told about the various conditions, which he undergoes. Thereby the Jiva concludes that he assuredly has such karmic bondage and then he is further told in various ways about the means of release from that karmic bondage and the physician makes him believe about the efficacy of the means.  So much is the sermon of the scriptures.  If this Jiva makes efforts accordingly then by freeing himself from karmic bondage he can enjoy his natural bliss.  This is the duty of Jiva.

Diagnosis of Karmic Bondage

Now the diagnosis of karmic bondage is described. Due to karmic bondage transmigration of soul in various alien dispositions is found. One fixed state is not possible. Therefore, the state with karmic bondage is called `Mundane- existence (Sansara). In this mundane-existence there are infinite times infinite Jiva Dravyas (Soul-substances); they all are having karmic-bondage from eternity. It is not so that earlier the soul (Jiva) was separate and the karmic matter was separate and later on these got intermingled.  How is it then? As in the Merugiri (Meru mountain), naturally existing molecules, there are infinite atoms existing from eternity in a single-bonded form. From them many atoms get separated, many new atoms get united and thus their union and separation continues.  Similarly, in this universe the one soul substance and infinite matter-particles (atoms) in the form of Karmas are found inbred form since eternity; afterwards many get separated, many get united and thus their union and separation continues.

Establishing Eternity of Karmic Bondage

Here arises the question as to how Karmas are eternal because matter-particles (atoms) turn into karmic matter owing to the instrumental cause (Nimitta) of attachment (Raag) etc.?

 Answer: Attributing instrumentality is possible only when there is a new modification; there is no role of Nimitta in beginningless state. As the bondage of fresh matter-particles (atoms) occurs only due to (difference in) the degrees of smoothness- roughness. But in the molecules of Mountain Merugiri, etc, the bondage of matter-particles (atoms) is from beginningless time. So what is the purpose (function) of Nimitta there? Similarly, changing of fresh matter-particles (atoms) into karmic matter results only due to attachment etc, (impure) dispositions of the soul. But the matter particles which are (already existing) in the form of karmic matter from beginningless time, what is the purpose (function) of Nimitta there? Moreover, if in the beginningless state also Nimitta is accepted then `beginninglessness' is not established. Hence, the bondage of karmic matter is to be accepted from beginningless time. In Tattava-Pradeepika commentary of Prauachansara Shastra, there is a Samanya Jneyaadhikar; therein it is stated that `The associating (instrumental) cause of attachment (Raag) etc, is karmic matter (Dravya- Karma) and the associating cause of karmic matter is attachment (Raag) etc. There, a question is raised that in believing so the inter-dependence-fault (Itaretarashraya Dosha) arises, i.e., that depends on it and it depends on that; there is no stoppage anywhere.  There the following reply is given:-

"Neivam anadi prsidh drvyakrm smbandhsya tetr haitutvainopadanat"

Meaning: In this way there is no fault of interdependence because the association of karmic matter is axiomatic from beginningless time, there it has been accepted as an instrumental cause.

This is what is stated in scripture and logically also this alone is possible that if without the instrumental cause of Karmas abinitio Jiva gets entangled in attachment, etc. then attachment etc. would become the nature of Jiva, because that which is found without any other associating cause, same is called the nature (Swabhava). Hence, the association with the karmic matter is established from eternity.

Here again the question arises: `When the two substances are distinctly separate, how could such relationship between them be possible from eternity?'

Explanation: As from the origin itself, the bondage of water and milk, gold and stone, husk and seed and oil and sesame is found, these are not intermingled newly. Similarly, the bondage of soul and karmic matter be known from begnningless time. They are not intermingled newly. As from beginningless time many substances are quite separate and in the same way many substances are in bolded form (intermingled state); thus in the possibility of being so, there appears to be no contradiction.

Question: Asserting the state of bondage or association is possible then only when the (two distinct): things are firstly separate and then get intermingled. How is here the bondage of soul and karmic matter asserted to be existing from beginningless time?

Answer: These were in intermingled state from eternity but later on got separated then it was known that they were separate, so got separated. Therefore, formerly also they were separate; thus by inference as well as by omniscience these clearly appear separate.  On account of this, their separateness exits in spite of their being in bonded state. And from that separateness point of view only their bondage or association is asserted because in intermingled state of different substances, irrespective of their intermingling afresh or already being in intermingled state, asserting in this way only is possible. Thus, the bondage of this soul and Karmas is from beginningless time.

Distinctiveness of Soul and Karmas

 Jiva-Dravya (soul substance) possesses sentience attribute (Chetana Guna) as its distinctive characteristic in the form of knowing and seeing and it being imperceptible by senses has immaterial form, a substance having innumerable spatial units (Pradeshas) with the power of contraction-expansion. And the Karma is an insentient matter devoid of sentience attribute and has material form, is a mass of infinite matter-articles (atoms), hence it is not a single substance. Thus are these Jivas (souls) and Karmas (karmic matter) having relationship since eternity. Nevertheless, none of the space-points of Jiva changes into karmic matter form and none of the atoms of karmic matter change into Jiva form, both, by retaining their own distinctive characteristics, exist distinctly separate. For example, if there be a compound molecule of gold and silver, even then the gold by retaining its yellowness, etc. attributes remains distinctly different and silver by retaining its whiteness, etc, attributes remains distinctly different. Similarly, the soul and Karmas should be known as distinct and separate.

Question: The matter to matter bondage is possible but how can the bondage of matter (material particles) with the immaterial soul substance be possible?

Answer: As the bondage of subtle matter particles (atoms) which are not perceptible to senses and the gross matter- particles (molecules) which are perceptible to senses is accepted, similarly the bondage of immaterial soul which is not perceptible to senses and material Karmas worthy of being perceptible to senses should be accepted. Moreover, in this process of bondage none acts as the doer of other; so long as the bondage continues till then these remain united, do not get separated and the relationship of cause and effect continues in them. This much alone be known as the bondage here.  So, there is no contradiction in being this type of bondage between the material Karmas and the immaterial soul. 

Thus as is explained the eternal karmic bondage to one Jiva, similarly it should be understood about each of the infinite Jivas (souls).

Obscuring (Ghati) & Non-obscuring (Aghati) Karmas and their Function

 Further those Karmas are of eight types classified into Jnanavaranr, etc. Owing to the instrumental cause of four Ghati Karmas, the intrinsic nature of soul gets obscured. Owing to the instrumentality of Jnanavarana (knowledge obscuring) -Darshanavarana (perception obscuring) type of Karmas, the knowledge and perception nature of soul does not get manifested; only according to the Kshayopashama (destruction cum subsidence) state of these Karmas, the knowledge and perception remain partially manifested. And owing to the instrumentality of Mohaniya (deluding) Karma, the dispositions which are not the true nature of the Jiva (soul), such as misbelieve, anger, pride, deceit, greed, etc., passions get manifested.  And owing to the instrumentality of Antaraya (obstructive) Karma, the nature of the soul, Virya (spiritual power) of the order of accepting asceticism does not get manifested; according to its Kshayopashama only partial spiritual power (Virya) remains manifested.

 Thus owing to the instrumentality of Ghati Karmas, the intrinsic nature of the soul is being obscured from eternity. It is not so that originally the soul was intrinsically in pure state and afterwards became impure due to the instrumentality of Karmas, resulting in the destruction of pure nature.

Question: Destruction is the name of annihilation, so, that which existed earlier, could be stated to have been annihilated. Here, when there is no existence of intrinsic nature, what has been then destroyed?

Answer: The soul possesses eternally such an intrinsic power that if the instrumental cause of Karmas be not there then the Jiva (soul) would be found with the manifestation of omniscience, etc., form of his intrinsic nature but since eternity the bondage of Karmas is found, therefore, the manifestation of that capacity has never been there.  Hence, from inherent capacity point of view, the intrinsic nature does exist; only from the standpoint of not letting it to manifest, it is said to have been destroyed. 

And there are four kinds of Aghati Karmas owing to the instrumental cause of which the soul comes in contact with external things.  There, due to Vedniya Karma (feeling producing Karma) various other (non-self) things acting as instrumental cause of happiness and misery get associated either in the body or outside the body; due to Ayu (life) Karma, the bondage with the present body does not get released till the expiry of its duration; due to Nama-Karma (physique making Karma) the Gati (state of embodied form of existence), Jati (the class of beings), the body, etc. are produced and due to Gotra-Karma (status determining Karma) one attains high or low status.

Thus by Aghati Karmas the external things get assembled. In their presence, due to the association of the rise of Moha (deluding Karma), Jiva becomes happy and miserable. And due to bondage with the body, etc., the immaterial intrinsic characteristic, etc., of the soul do not function as per their nature. For example, if someone catches the body then the soul also gets caught. Moreover, so long as the rise of Karmas continues, till then the association of external things remains as it is; does not become otherwise.  Such should be known the instrumentality of these Aghati Karmas. 
 
Destruction of Jiva's Natural Functioning and
Assembling of External Things by Strengthless Material Karma

Question: Karmas are inanimate and are not strong; how is then the destruction of Jiva's natural functioning and assembling of external things possible through them?

Answer: If karma by acting itself as a doer destroys the nature of the soul and causes association of external things effortful, then karma should possess sentience and strength. But it is not so; just cause and effect relationship (Nimitta-Naimittika Sambandha) (between them) is a natural occurrence. When the operative stage of those Karmas arises, at that time the soul of its own does not function in his natural state, rather functions alienly and the other things too are found functioning in a related manner.

For Example: Mohandhool (an enchanting type of dust) is found lying on the head of some person due to which that person has become mad; there that Mohandhool was neither having knowledge nor strength but madness appears to have been caused by that Mohandhool only. There the Mohandhool is only a Nimitta and the person of his own becomes mad. Such only exists Nimitta-Naimittika (cause and effect) relation-ship.

Further, just as at the time of sunrise Chakwa-Chakwi (the male & female birds of duck family) meet together, (but) there in the night nobody has separated them forcedly out of jealousy and in the day time nobody has brought them together out of compassion; rather they meet on their own due to Nimitta of sun-rise. Such only is the functioning of Nimitta-Naimittika. In the same way the Nimitta-Naimittika functioning of Karmas should be known. Such is the state of soul owing to the rise of Karmas.

Process of New Bondage

 `How is new bondage caused' is being clarified. The portion of light of the sun which is not perceptible due to the layers of clouds, that much is absent (unmanifested) in that time. And owing to the rarefaction of the layers of clouds, the light which is manifesting, is the part of sun's nature, is not produced by clouds. Similarly, Jnan (knowledge), Darshan (perception) and Virya (power) is the nature of soul; the portion of it which owing to the instrumentality of Jnanavarana, Darshanavarana and Antaraya Karmas is not manifesting, that much is absent (unmanifested) in that time. And owing to the Kshayopashams (destruction cum subsidence) state of those Karmas that part of Jnan, Darshan, Virya which is manifesting, all that is the part of soul's nature and is not a contrary (alien) disposition produced by Karmas. So, right from eternity, such a manifested portion of soul's intrinsic nature never comes to an end.  Only through this (inherent faculty) the consciousness of the soul is ascertained that the substance possessing the power of knowing and seeing is the soul only.

 And the bondage of new Karmas does not take place due to this nature (of soul); for, if the soul's nature itself be the cause of bondage, how could then the release from bondage be possible? Moreover, owing to the rise of those Karmas, the part of Jnan, Darshan, Virya attributes which is not manifesting, that also is not the cause of bondage, for that which itself is not existing how can it be the cause for others (bondage)? Therefore, the dispositions produced due to Nimitta of Jnanavarana, Darshanavarana and Antaraya-Karmas are not the cause of new bondage of Karmas.

Further, owing to the rise of Mohaniya Karma, the perverse belief in the form of untrue faith and passions, anger, pride, deceit, greed, etc, are evolved in the soul.  All those dispositions are although found existing in the state of soul, are not separate from soul, Jiva himself is the doer of them, those are assuredly the functional deeds of Jiva, nevertheless, their manifestation is only due to Nimitta of Moha- Karma.  These (alien dispositions) come to an end on elimination of instrumentality of karma.  Therefore, these are not Jiva's own nature but are the contrary dispositions. And due to those (alien) disposition new bondage of Karmas takes place; hence the dispositions manifesting due to rise of Moha-Karma are the cause of karmic bondage.

And owing to rise of Aghati Karmas, external things are met with; among them the physique, etc., get bonded in one (intermingled) form with Jiva-Pradeshas (spatial units of soul) by occupying the same one region (as that of the soul); and wealth, family etc., are totally separate from soul, therefore, all those are not the cause of bondage; for, the other (non-self) substances do not cause bondage, but in those objects the soul develops the feeling of mineness and perverse belief, etc.  This alone is to be known as the cause of bondage.

Yoga (Vibratory Activity) the Cause of Prakriti Bandh (Type-Bondage) and Pradesh Bandh (Space - Bondage)

 Further, it should be known that owing to rise of Nama-Karma (physique-making Karma), body, organ of speech and mind are created; due to Nimitta (instrumentality) of their movement, the space-points (Pradeshas) of soul vibrate and by virtue of it soul attains the power of getting into one bonded form with the species of karmic matter. This is termed as yoga (vibratory activity).  Due to its Nimitta at each moment, the inflow of infinite atoms transformable into karmic form, takes place.  If Yoga is feeble then inflow of atoms is less and if Yoga is intense then inflow of atoms is more. Further, the atoms of matter that are absorbed in one Samaya (an unit of time) get divided into Jnanavarana, etc., main- types and their subtypes (species) of Karmas as are stated in scripture.  According to that division atoms get transformed into those types (species) of Karmas of their own.

Further, Yoga is of two types: Auspicious Activity (Shubha Yoga) and Inauspicious Activity (Ashubha Yoga).  Inclination through mind, speech and body in pious acts is called Shubha-Yoga and inclination in impious acts is called Ashubha Yoga. Whether there be Shubha Yoga or Ashubha Yoga, without attaining right belief (Samyaktva) bondage of all sorts of species of Ghati Karmas continues incessantly. Even for a single moment bondage of any species of Karmas does not stop.  However, the specific point is that in the pair of Hasya-Shoka (laughter and lamentation), Rati-Arati (liking and disliking) and three types of sex-passions of Mohaniya (deluding) Karma in one time only in each group gets bonded.

Further, in the species of Aghati Karmas, during Shubha Yoga, Sata Vedniya (pleasure producing Karma) etc., auspicious species of Karmas, get bonded and during Ashubha Yoga Asata Vedniya (pain producing Karmas) etc., inauspicious species of Karmas get bonded and during Mishra Yoga (mixed auspicious- inauspicious activity) some auspicious and some inauspicious species of Aghati Karmas get bonded.

Thus, the inflow of Karmas takes place due to instrumentality of Yoga (Vibratory activity).  Hence, Yoga is Asrava (influx).  And the (quantity of) atoms of karmic matter so attracted through that Yoga is called Pradesha; thus, the atoms so bonded get divided into main types and sub-types of Karmas, therefore it should be known that space-bondage and type-bondage are caused by Yoga.

Duration & Fruition Bondage caused by Passions                        

 Further, wrong belief (mithyatv) and anger, etc., dispositions are evolved due to the rise of Moha (deluding karma); all these (dispositions) are collectively termed as Kasha (passions).  Due to that (passion) the duration bondage (sthiti-Bandh) of those karmic species takes place. Out of the total duration so bonded, leaving aside the Abadhakal (the period of Karmas lying bonded in inoperative state), afterwards, till the bonded duration ends, every moment the rise (Udaya) of that Prakriti (particular species of Karma) continues.  Excepting the Ayu Karma of celestial beings, human beings and subhuman beings (animals, etc.), all the other species of Ghatia and Aghatia Karmas get bonded with more duration in the state of intense passion.  And these three types of Ayu Karmas get bonded with more duration in the state of feeble passion and with less duration in the state of intense passion.  And these three types of Ayu Karmas get bonded with more duration in the state of feeble passion and with less duration in the state of intense passion.

And the passion (kashaya) is also the instrumental cause for the fruition power in those species of Karmas.  At the time of their rise, the Karmic-species produce more or less effect according to their fruition bondage.  In all the species of Ghati Karmas, and in the inauspicious (Papa) species of Aghati Karmas the fruition bondage is caused more in the state of high-passion and in the auspicious species (of Aghati Karmas) intense fruition bondage takes place in the state of low-passion and less fruition bondage in the state of high-passion.

In this way, duration and fruition bondage is governed by passions.  Therefore, it should be known that passions are instrumental cause of duration bondage and fruition bondage.

As, even if wine is more in quantity and it has less intoxicating power for lesser period then that wine is of poor quality and even if wine is less in quantity and it has more intoxicating power for larger period then that wine is of strong quality; similarly, even if the atoms of species of Karmas are more in quantity and those have less fruition power for lesser period then those species of Karmas are less effcetive; and even if the atoms of species of Karmas are less in quantity and those have more fruition power for longer period then those species of Karmas are more effective.

Hence, the type-bondage and space-bondage resulting from Yogas are not strong.  Only duration bondage and fruition bondage caused by passions are strong.  Therefore, passions should be known as the prime cause of bondage.  Those who do not want to get bound, should not indulge in passions.

Transformation of Insentient Matter-particles
 (Atoms) into Appropriate Species of Karmas

Now, here some raises a question that the matter-particles are inanimate and are devoid of knowledge; how do they then undergo transformation into appropriate species of Karmas?

 Answer: As on getting hungry, the mass of matter-particles of food swallowed through mouth gets transformed into bodily constitutes like blood, flesh, semen, etc., and the atoms (particles) of that food (morsel) get appropriately distributed in the form of some bodily constituents in a lesser measure and in the form of some bodily constituents in a greater measure.  And in them, many atoms remain bonded for quite long duration and many for a short duration.  Further, in those atoms many (atoms) possess greater power of producing their effect and many have less power.  In this process none of the mass of matter-particles of food know that it should get transformed in this particular way. Moreover, there is no one to motivate them in this transformation; such type of Nimitta-Naimittika (cause and effect) relationship is existing and owing to which such transformation takes place. 

Similarly, on the rise of passions the mass  of matter in Karma-varganas (karmic matter) so absorbed through the channel of Yoga gets transformed into Jnanavarana, etc., type of Karmas (species) and the atoms of  those Karma-varganas (Karmic-matter) get appropriately distributed into some types of Karmas (species) having less atoms and into some types of Karmas (species) having more atoms.  And in them many atoms (of some species) remain in bonded state for a longer period and many for a shorter period. And in those atoms some (atoms) possess greater potency of producing their effect and some (atoms) possess lesser potency. In this process, none of the mass of matter-particles of Karma-Varganas knows that it should get transformed in this particular way. And there is no one to motivate them in this transformation; such type of Nimitta-Naimittika (cause and effect) relationship is existing and owing to which such transformation takes place.

Like this, many Nimitta-Naimittika relations are taking place in this universe. As owing to Nimitta of Mantras (incantations) water, etc., attains the potency of curing disease and pebbles, etc, attain the potency of stopping snakes.  Similarly, owing to Nimitta of Jiva-Bhavas (dispositions of the soul) the Pudgala, i.e., the matter- particles (atoms) attain the potency of Jnanavarana, etc., types of Karmas.  Here if Karmas produce the effect after deliberation effortful then it ought to possess knowledge, but on meeting with an appropriate Nimitta the corresponding transformation takes place automatically, and so there is no need of knowledge.

Such is the set process of new bondage.

State of Existence of Bonded Karmas

 Now, the atoms which have transformed into Karmas form remain in bonded form intermingled with space-points of Jiva till they do not acquire the operative state. There, owing to Nimitta of dispositions of soul (Jiva-Bhavas) the condition of many species of Karmas also gets changed. The atoms of many different types of species of Karmas get transformed into atoms of other types of species of Karmas. And many species (of Karmas) which were bonded for longer duration with intense fruition become scant by getting decreased and many other species (of Karmas) bonded for lesser duration with the potency of feeble fruition become more by getting increased.  Thus, even the condition of atoms bonded in the past change due to Nimitta of Jiva Bhavas and if Nimitta is absent then there is no change but they remain as they were. 

In this way, the bonded Karmas remain in existence.

The Ripening (Operative State) of Bonded Karmas                            

And when the time of rise (ripening) of species of Karmas natures then automatically according to the fruition of those species of Karmas the effect gets produced; the Karmas do not produce those effects. At the time of their ripening state, the specific effect (disposition) gets evolved; only so much is to be known the cause and effect relationship (Nimitta- Naimittika Samband). And simultaneously with their fructification the karmic form ends due to the end of fruition-power of those Karmas; these (dissociated) matter- particles get changed into other forms; this is called Sauipaka-Nirjara  (Shedding-off of Karmas on their ripening in usual course of time).

In this way, the Karmas shed off every moment on rise (ripening) of the same.

After the end of karmic power, these matter-particles, irrespective of being present in the same species of molecules or getting separated from them, become ineffective. It should be known that at each moment infinite atoms (karmic matter-particles) get  bonded with soul; the atoms so bonded in one moment (in one unit of time), leaving the period of Aabadha-kal (prior to ripening), continue coming serially into operative state (Udaya) in all the moments of their duration period. And the atoms so bonded in several moments which are capable of ripening together, come into Udaya state collectively.  The collective fruition of all those atoms (species of Karmas) gets produced at one time accordingly to their combined fruition-power.  And the atoms so bonded in several moments holding the identity as karma remain in intermingled relationship with Jiva (soul) from the time of bondage till the time of their Udaya, (rise or ripening state).

Thus should be known the bondage, the rise or ripening and the existence states of Karmas. Every moment the atoms (karmic species) equal to one Samaya-Prabaddha only get bonded and equal to one Samaya-Prabaddha only get dissociated (shed off). There the Karmas remain always in existence equal to one and a half Gunahani times Samaya-Prabaddha only. The details of all these will be written in the forthcoming chapter on Karmas.

Characteristics of Dravya-Karmas & Bhava- Karmas                     

 Thus, Karma is a product of infinite matter-particles in atomic form; therefore its' name is Dravya- Karma (material Karma). Due to the instrumentality of rise of Moha, impure dispositions like perverse belief, anger, etc., are caused. These are the product of Jiva's own impure dispositions; therefore, its name is Bhava-Karma.  Bhava-Karma is caused due to instrumentality of Dravya-Karma and Dravya-Karma's bondage is caused due to instrumentality of Bhava-Karma. Bhava-Karma from Dravya-Karma and Dravya-Karma from Bhava- Karma; thus due to mutual cause and effect relationship Jiva transmigrates in the world.

The specific point to be known is that due to bondage being intense or feeble or due to internal transformation, etc., or due to rise in different moments of Karmas bonded in one moment or due to rise in one moment of Karmas bonded in different moments, if in some particular moment the rise be intense then  the passions would be intense and the resulting fresh bondage would also be intense; and if in some particular moment rise be feeble then the passions would also be feeble and the fresh bondage would also be feeble. And exactly according to those intense or feeble passions the internal transformation etc., of Karmas bonded formerly in the past moments may also take place.

In this way, the automatic process of Dravya-Karma and Bhava- Karma has been taking place continuously from eternity.

Characteristics and Tendency of Nokarmas  (Quasi-Passions)

Owing to rise of Nama-Karma (physique-making Karma) body is produced. It is somewhat instrumental cause of happiness and misery similar to Dravya-Karma. Therefore, the body is called Nokarma. Here the word `No' is to be known as denoting lesser measure. The body is a mass of matter-particles (atoms) and Dravya Indriyas (sense organs), Dravya-Mana (material mind), respiration and vocal organs all these are also the parts of body; therefore, these also are to be known as mass of matter-particles (atoms).

 In this way, Jiva with Dravya-Karma and body is found bonded occupying same space points ((Eka-Kshetraavagaha (Eka' means one or the same, `Kshetra' means region, `Avagah' means to occupy or occupying.) form of bond-age)).  The relation of body remains with Jiva from the moment of birth till the duration of Ayu (life) Karma; and at the end of (the period of) Ayu- karma, death takes place, then the relation with that body comes to an end; body and soul get separated and either in the same very moment or in second, third, fourth moment (Samaya), Jiva acquires new body owing to the Nimitta of rise of Karmas; there also similar relation  continues up to the end of one's Ayu (life Karma) and again death occurs, then relation ends with that body. Like this, leaving of former body and acquiring new body continues successively. 

Further, this soul, although possesses innumerable space- points (Pradeshas) but by virtue of the quality of contraction and expansion it remains equal to the extent of the size of the body occupied; however, the specific point is this that at the time of Samudghat (emanation of soul's space-points) the Pradeshas of soul emanate even outside the body and thereafter (on end of emanation period) remain equal  in size of the last body left (before emanation).

Further, the functioning of knowing activity takes place to this Jiva through the instrumentality of Dravya-lndriya and Mana, which are the parts (organs) of the body. And according to the condition of the body, Jiva experiences happiness and sorrow owing to the rise of Mohakarma. And sometimes body functions as per the will of Jiva, sometimes Jiva acts as per the condition of the body; sometimes Jiva acts in a different way according to its will and body (mass of matter-particles) functions in a different way.

Thus, the tendency of Nokarmas is to be understood.

Nitya (Eternal) Nigoda and Itara (Non-eternal)
                Nigoda State of Jiva

Originally since eternity Jiva is found bonded in Nitya-Nigoda form of body.  There, the Jiva occupying Nitya (eternal) Nigoda form of body dies on completion of Ayu-karma and again acquires Nitya (eternal) Nigoda form of body only and then again dies after the expiry of Ayu karma and again acquires Nitya Nigoda body only. In this way, there are infinite times infinite Jivas which are continuously dying and taking birth from eternity there only. Further, from (Nitya Nigoda) state 608 Jivas get out in six months and eight Samayas. They assume other forms of bodies after getting out from there. They continue transmigration in earth, water, fire, air and single plant-life forms of one-sensed beings, in the forms of two-sensed, three-sensed and four-sensed beings or in infernal, animal, human and celestial forms of five-sensed beings.  After undergoing transmigration for a long time if Jiva again attains the Nigoda form of existence then it is termed as Itara (non-eternal) Nigoda.

 And after having stayed there for long time and getting out from there, Jivas continue transmigration in other forms of existence.  There, the maximum period of transmigration in earth, etc., immobile forms of beings (Sthavara Jivas) is innumerable Kalpas only and in mobile forms of two to five sensed beings (Trasa-Jivas) it is somewhat more than two thousand Sagaras. In Itara Nigoda it is two and a half Pudgal-Paravartanas (wandering in matter-cycle of time) which is infinite period. Some Jivas after getting out from Itara-Nigoda and getting Sthavara (immobile) form of existence again go back to Nigoda.

Thus, in one-sensed forms of existence the maximum period of transmigration is innumerable Pudgal-Paravartanas only and the minimum period is of one Antar-Muhurta in all states of existence.
 In this way, the maximum embodied forms occupied (by this Jiva) are of one-sensed beings only and acquiring other (higher) forms of existence is just like Kaktaliya Nyaya- a flying crow catching falling down fruit by chance.

Thus, this Jiva is having the disease of karmic bondage from beginningless time. Thus ends the diagnosis of karmic bondage.

 States of Jiva Caused Due to the Disease of Karmic Bondage

Now, the states of Jiva caused by instrumentality of disease of karmic bondage are being described:

Inherently the nature of this Jiva is Chaitanya (sentience); it possesses the power of cognizing general and specific nature of all existing substances. Chaitanya is the name of (soul's) that attribute in which the real nature of substances is reflected as they are.  Cognition of general (common) nature (of substances) is called perception (Darshan) and cognition of specific (uncommon) nature (of substances) is called knowledge (Jnan). Due to such nature the soul always possesses the power of perceiving and knowing all substances directly and simultaneously with their all attributes and modifications of the past, present and future without any help or means; but from eternity, knowledge- obscuring and perception-obscuring Karmas are found bonded with Jiva, due to its Nimitta the manifestation of this power does not take place. Owing to Kshayopashama (destruction-cum- subsidence) of these Karmas somewhat (a little) manifestation of Mati- Jnan (sensory knowledge) and Shruta-Jnan (scriptural knowledge) is found and very rarely Avadhi- Jnan (clairvoyance) is also found; Achakshu-Darshan (non-ocular perception) is found and rarely Chakshu-Darshan (ocular perception) and Avadhi-Darshan (clairvoyant perception) are also found.

Now, the tendency of these is explained below:

Dependent Functioning of Mati-Jnan

 Mati-Jnana knows with the help of Dravya-Indriyas- the bodily organs namely tongue, nose, eyes, ears, touch and Dravya- Mana- the material mind situated in heart in the shape of an eight-petal open lotus. For example, he whose eye- sight is weak though sees through his eyes only but sees only after putting on eye- glass and can not see without eye- glass. Similarly, soul's knowing power is feeble, he knows by his knowledge only but knows only with the instrumentality of dravya-Indriyas & Mana; can not know without them. And even when the eyes are alright but if some defect develops in the eye-glass then he can not see or sees unclearly or sees differently; similarly, one's Kshayopashama-Jnan is as it is but if the matter-particles (atoms) of Dravya-Indriya and Mana turn otherwise then he can not know or knows unclearly or knows differently; because, there exists cause and effect relationship between the modification of atoms of Dravya Indriya & Mana and Mati-Jnana. Therefore, according to their modifications the modification of knowledge also takes place. As for example, in childhood and oldage of human beings, Dravya-Indriyas and Mana, etc, are feeble, then knowing power is also found feeble; and further as owing to the instrumentality of cold atmosphere, etc. the particles of senses of touch etc, and mind act differently, then either nothing is known or a very little is known.

Further, Nimitta-Naimittika (cause and effect) relationship is found also in-between knowledge and external objects. For instance, if the particles (atoms) of darkness or the particles, forming cataract, etc., or the opaque particles of stone, etc., come before eyes then eyes can not see. And if a red glass comes before eyes then all appears red.  If green glass comes before eyes then all appears green. Thus, erroneous knowing takes place. 

Further, if telescope, eye- glass, etc., come before eyes then the things appear in magnified form. If particles of light, water, plain glass come before eyes then also things appear as they are. Similarly, one should know about other senses and mind also appropriately.  Owing to the use of incantation, etc. or owing to the drunkenness, etc. or owing to the Nimitta of ghost, etc. either no knowing or a very little knowing or knowing differently takes place. In this way, this knowledge is dependent on external things also. 

Moreover, whatever is known through this knowledge is known unclearly; from remote position knows in one way, from vicinity knows in other way, instantly knows in a different way, if there be delay in knowing then knows differently, knows some objects with suspicion, knows some objects erroneously, knows some objects a little only - in all these ways clear knowing is not possible.

 In this way, Mati Jnana (sensory knowledge) functions depending upon the medium of senses and mind. It knows through the medium of those senses only such molecules of matter which lie in the area within the reach of senses, are present in gross form and are knowable by self. Even in those molecules, the modes of touch, etc. of some molecules only are known through different-different senses in different- different moments of time. And through the mind it knows quite unclearly a little bit about the material and immaterial substances and their modifications of past, present and future knowable to oneself of the remote areas or of the nearer areas. That too, it knows only that thing which has been deduced through deductive-reasoning. And some times it knows about the non-existing things through his own conjecture. For example, as in dream or in conscious state also it contemplates about such things, forms, etc. which are perhaps found nowhere and believes them contrary to their nature. In this way, knowing takes place through mind. So the knowledge which functions through senses and mind is called Mati-Jnana (sensory knowledge).

Further, the one-sensed beings viz. earth, water, fire, air and vegetables (plants) have the knowledge of touch only; earth worm, conch, etc., two-sensed beings have the knowledge of touch and taste; ant, bug, etc. three-sensed beings have the knowledge of touch, taste and smell; large-black-bee, fly, moths, etc. four-sensed beings have the knowledge of touch, taste, smell and colour; crocodile, cow, pigeon, etc. animals (sub-human beings) and human beings, celestial beings, infernal beings - these are five-sensed beings; they have the knowledge of touch, taste, smell, colour and words (sound). In animals (Tiryanchas) many are rational, i.e., with mind and many are irrational, i.e., without mind. There, the rational beings have the knowledge arising through mind; the irrational beings do not have the same. And the human beings, celestial beings, infernal beings are only rational beings; all of them are found possessed with the knowledge arising through the medium of mind.

Thus is to be known the functioning of Mati-Jnana.

Dependent Functioning of Shrut-Jnana (Scriptural Knowledge)

 Now, whatever object has been known by Mati Jnana, through its reference the knowledge by which another object is known is called Shrut-Jnana (scriptural knowledge). It is of two kinds:- 1.  Aksharatmaka (lettered or verbal) and 2.Anaksharatmaka (letterless or non-verbal). For example, someone listens to or sees the word `JAR' - that knowledge (produced in the person) is Mati-Jnana (sensory knowledge) and the knowledge of the object `JAR' arising with its reference is called Shrut-Jnana (scriptural knowledge). Likewise other examples also are to be known. This is `Aksharatmaka Shrut-Jnana'. Further, knowledge of cold arising through sense of touch is Mati- Jnana, with its reference the knowledge evolved that `this is not beneficial, hence better to run away (from here)' - is Shrut-Jnana. Similarly, other examples can also be given. This is Anaksharatmaka Shrut-Jnana.

The one-sensed etc., irrational beings (Jivas without mind) possess `Anaksharatmaka-Shrut-Jnana' only and rational beings (Jivas with mind) possess both types of Shrut- Jnana.  So this Shrut-Jnana is thus dependent even on Mati-Jnana- which itself is dependent in many ways and it (shrut-Jnana) is dependent on various other factors also; hence, it is to be known as extremely dependent.
 
 Functioning of Clairvoyance, Telepathy & Omniscience                

Now, that (knowledge) by which the material objects are known distinctly and clearly according to its limitations of the extent of area (region) and time is called Avadhi Jnana (clairvoyance). It is found manifested in all celestial and infernal beings and is also found rarely in any of the rational five-second animals and human beings.  This is not found in irrational beings. ((Irrational Beings-Jivas without `mind', (Asanji-Jivas)). So this knowledge is also dependent on body, etc.  Pudgalas (matter-particles).  The clairvoyance is of three kinds- 1.  Deshaavadhi (partial clairvoyance), 2.  Parmaavadhi (excellent clairvoyance) and 3. Sarvaavadhi (full clairvoyance). In these Deshaavadhi knows material objects with somewhat clarity and limitation of limited area and time, that too is found in some Jiva only.

And Parmaavadhi, Sarvaavadhi and Manah-Paryaya Jnana (telepathy) these (three types of direct) knowledge get manifested in Moksh Marg (path to liberation) only. Kewal - Jnana (omniscience) is itself the form of liberation (Moksha); hence in this beginningless mundane existence these are not found existing. Thus is found the functioning of knowledge.

Functioning of Ocular, Non-ocular, Clairvoyant and Omni-perception

Now, on getting association of objects of touch, etc. with senses and mind, the perception that occurs in the form of appearance of mere existence (of something) in the first moment just before the occurrence of sensory knowledge is called Chakshu-Darshan and Achakshu-Darshan. The perception that occurs through the eye-sense is known Chakshu-Darshan (ocular perception); it is found in the four-sensed and five-sensed beings only. And the perception that occurs through the touch, tongue, nose, ears - these four senses and mind is called Achakshu-Darshan (non-ocular perception); it is found in the one-sensed, etc.  beings as per their capacities.

 Now on getting association of objects of clairvoyance the perception that occurs in the form of appearance of mere existence just before the occurrence of clairvoyance- knowledge is called Avadhi-Darshan (clairvoyance-perception). This is found only in them who possess Avadhi Jnana, the clairvoyance- knowledge.

These Chakshu-Achakshu- Avadhi Darshan are to be known dependent similar to Mati-Jnana and Avadhi-Jnana. And Kewal- Darshan (omni perception) is itself the form of liberation; its existence is not found here.

Thus is found the existence (functioning) of Darshan (perception-attribute).

Functioning of Knowledge & Perception

In this way, the existence (manifestation) of Jnan and Darshan is found according to the Kshayopashama (destruction cum subsidence) of Jnana Varana (knowledge- obscuring) and Darshan-Varana (perception obscuring) Karmas. When the Kshayopashama is less, the power of Jnana and Darshan is also less and when it is more, the power (of Jnana & Darshan) is also more.  Further, due to Kshayopashama the power (of knowing and perceiving) remains as such but in the process of utilization only one object is known or seen in one unit of time (Samaya) by a Jiva. The name of this activity is Upayoga (active  consciousness). There, in one Samaya (in one unit of time) only one Upayoga either Jnan-Upayoga or Darshan- Upayoga is found in action to a Jiva. And even in one Upayoga only one of its kind is found functioning. For example, when Mati-Jnana is functioning, the other kinds of Jnanas are not found functioning. Even in its one kind only one object is visualized. For instance, when it knows touch then it does not know taste, etc. Moreover, in one object also it is found engaged in any one part of it only. For instance, when it knows about hot touch then it does not know about roughness, etc.

Thus, in one moment of time (in one Samaya) a Jiva knows only one knowledge or perceivable object through active knowledge or perception. And it appears to be so only. When Upayoga is busy in hearing then even the object situated very near to the eyes is not seen. In the same way other tendency is found.

 Moreover, rambling of Upayoga is very fast. Due to this in some particular moment it appears that knowing and seeing of many objects takes place simultaneously, but it does not happen simultaneously, rather happens serially. Due to instinctive force their instrumentality (of knowing & seeing) continues. For example, there are two sockets in the crow's eye but the pupil is only one, it moves very swiftly owing to which it serves the purpose of both the sockets.  Similarly, for this Jiva, there are several doors but Upayoga is one; it moves very swiftly due to which the instrumentality (of knowing) through all doors remains existing.

Question: Since in one moment of time only one object is known or seen, then it should be asserted that the Kshayopashama is only so much, why is it stated to be more? It is further stated that owing to the Kshayopashama such power is found existing but the power of omniscience and omniperception is also found in the soul.
 
Answer: As a person has power of going to many villages but someone stops him and tells visit five villages but visit only one village in one day. Now this person possesses the power of visiting several villages from substance (inherent potentiality) point of view, however, that (power) may get manifested at some other time; but it is not found manifested in the present time, because he can not visit more than five villages at present, and also the power of going to five villages exits in him at present from the manifestation power point of view, because he can go to these five villages but the instantaneous manifestation of that power is of visiting only one village in one day.

Similarly, this Jiva has the power of knowing and seeing all the substances but the Karmas obstructed it, and only so much Kshayopashama resulted (manifested) that the objects of touch sense, etc. only can be known or seen but only one object in one Samaya (moment of time) can be known or perceived. The Jiva has the power of knowing and seeing all objects from substance (inherent potentiality) point view which may get manifested at some other time but does not exist manifested at present because he cannot know or see the objects more than the objects of one's own manifested capability of knowing and seeing. And also the power of knowing and seeing the objects as per his capability in the present manifestation form exists from the modification point of view, because he can know and see those objects but the instantaneous manifested capacity is found of knowing or seeing only one object in one Samaya (unit of time).

Question: This is understood, but the Kshayopashama (of Karmas) is found (manifested) and on there being contrary instrumental cause of external sense etc. knowing and seeing (of the objects) does not materialize or materializes less or otherwise, so in such instance how can the instrumentality (Nimitta) of Karma alone be established ?

 Answer: As (in the above example) the man obstructing (the going person) says- `Out of five villages go to one village in one day but go along with these servants'. There, if those servants act contrarily then going may not be possible or may be possible to some extent or in opposite direction. Similarly, the Kshayopashama of Karmas is of such type that out of so many objects only one object can be known or seen in one `Samaya', but that too on being the Nimitta (presence) of so many external objects.  There, if those external objects modify contrarily then knowing and seeing may not be possible or may be possible to some extent or otherwise. All this is the peculiarity of Karmas Kshayopashama only. Hence, the Nimitta of Karmas only is to be known, for example, someone is not able to see due to the obstruction by the atoms of darkness but the owl, cat, etc. are able to see even in the presence of obstruction created by them.  All this is the peculiarity of Kshayopashama only. Thus, knowing and seeing materializes in accordance with the degrees of Kshayopashama only.

In this way is found the functioning of Kshayopashama Jnana (knowledge) to this Jiva.

The clairvoyance and telepathy knowledge's found in the path of liberation are also the (types of) Kshayopashama- Jnana only. (Hence) similarly, these also know and see only one object in one Samaya (moment) and are dependent on other objects. And whatever are their details (specialties) should be known in detail.

Thus, owing to the instrumentality of the rise of Jnanavarana and Darshanavarana Karmas, most of the degrees of Jnana and Darshan are non-existent and owing to their Kshayopashama a few degrees (of Jnana & Darshan) are found existing.

Jiva's State Due to Rise of Mohaniya-Karma

Due to rise of Mohaniya-Karma the perverse-belief (mithyatv) and passionate dispositions (Kashaya Bhavas) are caused to this Jiva.

Jiva's Condition Due to the Rise of Darshan- Moha (Faith-deluding) Karma

Owing to the rise of Darshan-Moha the disposition of perverse-belief (Mithyatva-Bhava) is caused, due to which this Jiva believes the Tattvas (substance) contrary to their nature in the form of erroneous ascertainment. He does not believe as they are but believes as they are not.

 "A mass of immaterial Pradeshas (spatial units), possessor of the celebrated knowledge, etc., attributes and an eternal substance is the self (soul); and the mass of material-matter substances, devoid of celebrated knowledge, etc., attributes, which are newly associated-such bodies, etc., Pudgala are the non-self (non-soul)". And in their association the Jiva assumes various types of bodily modifications like that of human beings, animals etc. In those bodily modifications the Jiva holds the feelings of I-ness (or oneness), can not discriminate between the self and non-self. Whatever (bodily form of) modification he obtains, the same modification he treats as to be the self.

Further, in that modification the knowledge, etc., are his own attributes and the attachments, etc., are the impure (alien) dispositions produced due to the instrumentality of Karmas and complexion, etc., are the attributes of the bodies, etc., Pudgalas and the various changes that take place of atomic particles and complexion, etc., in the body, etc., are the modifications of matter (Pudgalas); he identifies all these modifications as to be his own nature; the discrimination between the nature of the self and non-self can not be possible.

And in the human, etc., embodied modifications, the association of family, wealth, etc., is met with; these are clearly different from the self and they do not act or modify under one's control; even then he feels mineness in them that these are mine. They in no way become his own. He himself considers them as his own by his own belief.  Further, on acquiring human, etc., embodied modifications, he sometimes believes the self-imagined false nature of the deity, etc., or of the Tattvas (substances), etc., but does not believe in their true nature as they really are.

Thus, owing to the rise of Darshan Moha (faith- deluding Karma) the disposition of perverse belief in the form of non- substantial faith is caused in this Jiva. Where its rise is found intense, a more perverse faith contrary to true faith is caused, when its rise is feeble then less perverse faith contrary to true faith is caused.

Jiva's Condition Due to the Rise of Charitra Moha 

When Jiva indulges in passions due to the rise of Charitra- Moha (conduct-deluding Karma), then even knowingly and seemingly involves himself in anger, etc., believing the other objects beneficial and harmful.

Due to the rise of anger passion, believing other objects to be harmful, the Jiva wishes ill (evil) of them. When some temple, etc., inanimate objects appear to be disagreeable then he wants to damage them by way of breaking and destroying, etc., and when the foes etc., animate objects appear to be bad then he wishes evil of them by inflicting pain through killing, chaining or beating, etc. And if he himself or the other living and non-living objects get modified in some form which he does not like then he wishes ill of that modification by turning it into other form.

Thus the desire of wishing ill of others is caused due to (the rise of) anger-passion but its harm depends on destiny. 

 And on rise of pride-passion, believing other object to be harmful, he desires to undermine it and desires to extol himself. Due to the feeling of dislike and disrespect in excreta-dust, etc., inanimate objects, he desires these to remain inferior and self to remain superior.  And by bending and keeping under his control, he wishes other people, etc., animate substances, to remain inferior and self to remain superior.  And for establishing one's own superiority in the world by decorating the body and spending money and other such acts, he desires others to remain inferior and himself to become superior. And if someone performs more commendable act in comparison to his own act then he tries to prove it inferior through some means and wants to show his inferior act as superior.

Thus owing to pride-passion, the desire to establish one's own superiority arises, but achieving superiority depends on destiny.

And on rise of deceit-passion, believing other object to be beneficial, he desires to achieve it through various fraudulent ways. He indulges in various types of frauds for obtaining jewels, gold, etc., inanimate things and for acquiring women, male-female servants, etc., animate objects. For the purpose of cheating, he assumes different poses and changes the conditions of other animate and inanimate objects. Through such forms of deception he wants to accomplish his goal.

Thus owing to the deceit-passion, one commits fraud for the accomplishment of one's goal but accomplishment of cherished goal depends on destiny.

And on rise of greed-passion, believing other objects to be beneficial, he desires to obtain them. The avarice of cloths, ornaments, wealth & grains, etc., inanimate objects, is induced and avarice of wife, sons, etc. animate objects is induced.  Further, believing some particular modification to be beneficial to self or to other animate-inanimate objects, he wants to change them into that form or modification.

Thus owing to greed-passion, the desire of obtaining beneficial objects is induced but obtaining beneficial objects depends on destiny.

Thus due to rise of anger, etc., passions, the soul undergoes (alien) modifications.

These passions (Kasha's) are of four kinds:

1. Anantanubandhi- (Intense type of anger, pride, deceit & greed-passions).

2. Apratyakhyanavarana-(Intense type of passions).

 3. Pratyakhyanavarana- (intense type of passions).

4. Samjwalana- (mild-gleaming passion).

The passions on rise of which Samyaktva (right belief) and Swaroopacharana Charitra (self-absorption conduct) can not be evolved in the soul, are called Anantanubandhi Kasha's. Those passions, on rise of which the partial right conduct (Desha-Charitra) is not evolved, and even partial abstinence can not be observed, are called Apratyakhyanavarana Kasha's. And those passions on rise of which complete right conduct (sakal-charitra) is not evolved and complete abstinence can not be observed, are called Pratyakhyanavarana Kasha's. And those passions on rise of which transgressions continue evolving in Sakal-charitra and hence perfect conduct (Yathakhyata-charitra) can not be evolved, are called Samjwalana Kashas.

In beginningless mundane existence (of Jivas), continuous rise of all these four passions is found. There, when the passion is intense in the form of Krishna-Leshya (black thought-coloration) and when the passion is feeble in the form of Shukla-Leshya (white thought-coloration) an incessant rise of all those four passions is found existing in both the conditions.  Because the divisions of Anantanubandhi, etc. passions are not from the viewpoint of their being intense or feeble but are from the viewpoint of obliterating Samyaktva (right belief), etc. On intense rise of fruition of those Karmic species, intense anger, etc (alien dispositions) are caused and on feeble rise of fruition (of these species of Karmas) feeble anger etc. are caused.

Further, on attaining the right path of liberation, the rise of last three, two and one species out of these four kinds (of conduct-deluding Karma) is found and afterwards all the four get destroyed in the end.

Further, out of anger, etc., four passions, the rise of only one passion is found in one unit of time. Also these passions have mutual cause and effect relationship. Anger turns into pride, etc., pride turns into anger, etc; that is why sometimes the difference is recognized and sometimes it is not recognized. This is to be known as the passionate form of modification.

 Further, owing to the rise of Charitra-Moha only the quasi- passions (No-kasha's) are caused; there, due to rise of laughter (Hasya) passion, believing some object beneficial, one becomes cheerful and feels happy. And due to rise of `Liking' (Rati) passion, believing something good, one makes love with it & gets attached therein. And due to rise of `disliking' (Arati) passion, believing something harmful, one feels aversion & becomes desperate. And due to rise of `sorrow' (shoka) passion, believing something harmful, one feels dejected, feels sorry.  And due to rise of fear (Bhaya) passion, believing some object harmful, one feels afraid of it & does not like its association. And due to rise of `disgust' (Jugupsa) passion, believing some object harmful, one hates it & wants to get rid of it.

Thus, one should know these laughter (Hasya), etc., six quasi- passions. And due to rise of sex-passions, the feeling or desire of co-habitation is caused. There, due to rise of `female' sex-passion, the desire of cohabiting with man is caused and due to rise of `male sex' passion, the desire of cohabiting with woman is caused, and due to rise of neuter sex-passion the desire of cohabiting with both man and woman is caused.

Thus, these are the nine types of NoKashayas (quasi- passions).  These are not so strong as anger, etc; that is why these are termed as Ishat (quasi). Here the word 'No' is to be known synonym of Ishat.  The rise of these quasi- passions is found along with the anger, etc. passions as per their rise.

In this way, due to rise of Moha (deluding karma) perverse belief and passions (alien dispositions) are caused and these (alien-dispositions) alone are the root cause of Samsara (transmigration). Because of these passions only the Jiva is unhappy at present and these only are the causes of future Karmic bondage also. The name of these very passions is also Raga (attachment)- Dwesha (aversion), Moha delusion).

There, the name of mithyatv (perverse belief) is Moha because there is absence of adversity (about the self-soul). Further the name of deceit, greed passions and laughter, liking and three kinds of sex-passions is Raga                                           (attachment), because love (affinity) is found there with agreeable feeling And the name of anger, pride passions and disliking, sorrow, fear, disgust is `oweIsha' (aversion), because hatred (ill- will) is found there with disagreeable feeling. And in general the name of all kinds of passions and quasi-passions is Moha (delusion), because in all these passions inadvertence is found all everywhere.

Jiva's Condition Due to Rise of Antaraya-Karma 
(Obstructive Karma
 
Further, due to rise of Antaraya-Karma whatever Jiva wishes does not happen. If he wishes to give donation he can not give, wishes to obtain a thing but cannot obtain, wishes to enjoy but cannot enjoy, wishes to enjoy again and again but can not do so, wishes to exert for manifesting his power of knowledge, etc., but can not get manifested.  In this way, whatever one wishes does not happen due to the rise of Antaraya-Karma (obstructive-Karma); And due to its Kshayopashama the desired thing materializes to some extent. One's desire is great but he can donate only a little; some profit is achieved and only some power of knowledge, etc., is manifested; there too several outward instrumental causes are required.

Thus Jiva's state is caused due to rise of Ghati-Karmas.

   Jiva's Condition Due to Rise of Vedniya-Karma
             (Feeling-producing Karma)

Further, in `Aghati-Karmas' (non-destructive Karmas), due to rise of Vedniya-Karma (feeling-producing Karma), the causes of external happiness-unhappiness are produced in the body. Healthiness, powerfulness, etc., and hunger, thirst, disease, sorrow, pain, etc., the causes of happiness-unhappiness are developed in the body.  Externally pleasant season (weather), wind, etc., favorite wife, son, etc., and friend, wealth, etc., unpleasant season (weather), wind, etc., unfavorable wife, son, etc., and foe, poverty, assassination, bondage (imprisonment) become the cause of happiness-unhappiness. 

In these external causes as mentioned above, many causes are of such type due to instrumentality of which the condition of body becomes the cause of happiness-unhappiness and those very causes become the cause of happiness-unhappiness. And many causes are of such type which themselves become the causes of happiness-unhappiness. The association of such cause takes place due to rise of Veniya Karma. There, the causes of happiness are met with due to rise of Sata-Veniya (pleasant feeling-producing) Karma and the cause of misery are met with due to rise of Asata Vedniya (unpleasant feeling-producing) Karma.

Here it should be known that those causes themselves do not produce happiness or misery, (but) owing to the rise of Mohakarma (deluding Karma) the soul of his own believes & feels happiness-unhappiness. Such is the relationship between the rise of Vedniya Karma and the rise of Moha-karma. When the external cause produced by Sata Vedniya is met with, then the rise of Moha-karma of the type of believing happiness is found and when the external cause produced by Asata Vedniya is met with then the rise of Moha karma of the type of believing unhappiness is found.

 And the same cause becomes the cause of happiness to someone and of unhappiness to other. For example, the type of cloth which becomes the cause of happiness to someone due to rise of Sata Vedniya, the same cloth becomes the cause of misery to someone else due to rise of Asata Vedniya. Hence, the external object is simply an instrumental cause of happiness and unhappiness. Whatever happiness-unhappiness is caused is due to Nimitta (rise) of Moha only. The disillusion monks possess many supernatural powers (Riddhis) and face afflictions (Parishahas), but the feeling of happiness-unhappiness is not caused in them. The illusion Jiva, on meeting external cause or even without meeting any cause, is assuredly found feeling happiness-unhappiness due to his own conjecture only.  There too, on meeting with that particular cause by which a highly- illusion Jiva becomes more happy- unhappy, by meeting with the same cause a less-illusion Jiva becomes less happy-unhappy.

 Therefore, the principal strong cause of happiness- unhappiness is the rise of Moha (deluding) Karma; the other external things are not strong cause; but the prime cause and effect relationship between other (non- self) objects and the dispositions of the illusion Jiva is found, due to which the illusion Jiva believes other external objects only as to be the cause of happiness-unhappiness. 
In this way, the cause of happiness-unhappiness is produced due to (rise of) Vedniya-Karma.

       Jiva's Condition Due to Rise of Ayu (Life) Karma

And due to rise of Ayu-karma, the duration of human, etc., embodied forms is found existing. So long as the rise of Ayu- karma continues, till then even on meeting with several diseases, etc.  (external) causes, the bondage with the body does not end. And when the rise of (species of) Ayu-karma ends, then even on making several efforts there remains no bondage with body; at the same very instant soul and body become separate.

In this world (of transmigratory existence) the cause of birth, life and death is Ayu-karma only. When rise of new Ayu-karma starts, then birth in new embodied form takes place.  And so long as the rise of Ayu-karma continues, till then life remains by existence of vitality's in that embodied form. And when the rise of Ayu-karma ends then death is caused by dissociation of vitality's in that embodied form.

One should know that such is the natural instrumentality of Ayu-karma; none else is the creator, destroyer or protector. 

Further, as someone wears new dress (cloth), he keeps on wearing it for some period, then quits it and puts on other dress; similarly, Jiva occupies new body, he keeps on occupying that body for some period, then quits it and (again) occupies another body.  Therefore, birth, etc., are from bodily association point of view.

Jiva (soul) is assuredly eternal and devoid of birth, etc., never-the less, the illusion Jiva does not think of past and future, therefore, he keeps himself continuously busy in the activities concerning to the present embodied form only, believing his own existence to be only till the duration of the present embodied form.

 In this way, the duration of embodied existence due to rise of Ayu-karma is to be known.

        Jiva's Condition Due to Rise of Nama-Karma
               (Physique-making Karma)

Further, due to rise of Nama-karma, Jiva attains human body, etc., (different) forms of existence and accordingly he is found in that state of existence. There, the different kinds of Trasa (mobile beings), Sthavara (immobile beings) are born. And there the soul holds Jati (class) of one-sensed beings, etc. It should be known that there exists cause and effect relationship between the rise of Jati Nama-karma and Kshayopashama of Mati-Jnanauarana Karma. The soul acquires the Jati (class of embodied form) in accordance with his Kshayopashama.

And the association of bodies takes place; the atoms of body and Pradeshas (spatial units) of the soul get bonded in one form and the soul by getting contracted or expanded becomes equal to the extent of the body. And in Nokarma from of body, the appropriate positions of different limbs and sub-limbs are found proportionately. From this only the touch, taste, etc. material senses (Dravya-Indriyas) are formed and in the heart place a material mind (Dravya-Mana) of the shape of a lotus-flowered into eight petals is found. And in the same body it self particular shape etc., particular color or complexion, etc. and grossness or subtleties, etc. are produced; thus, the atoms transformed into body form undergo such type of modifications.

Further, respiration and voice are produced; they too are the mass of Pudgala (atoms) and remain in one bonded form with the body. The Pradeshas of soul are found co-extensive in the Pudgala also. There, the respiration is (nothing but) the air. As one takes the food and discharges the excreta then only he remains alive; similarly, when one inhales external air and exhales internal air, then only the life exits. Hence, respiration is the cause of life. As bones, flesh, etc. are found in the body, similarly air is also found in the body. And as one does the work by hands, etc., similarly, he does the work by air (respiration). The morsel of food which is put in the mouth is swallowed by air, the excreta, etc., is also discharged by air.  Similarly, other things should be known. And the pulse, gastric disease etc. are also to be known as the parts of the body in air form.

 The voice is sound. As on vibrating the string of guitar, the matter molecules (Skandhas) capable of transforming into speech species get modified into lettered or non-lettered form of sound; similarly, on vibrating the palate, lip, etc., parts (of the mouth), the Pudgal-skandhas (matter-particles) taken in during Bhasha-Paryapti (accomplishment of speech- species) get modified into lettered or non-lettered form of sound.

 Further, graceful and awkward movement, etc., in embodied beings occur. Here it should be known that among the two persons chained by a common fetter, if one person wants to move and the other person also moves then movement can take place, but if one of the two remains sitting then movement can not take place and if one out of the two be strong then he might carry away the other person also.  Similarly, the soul and the body form of Pudgala (matter-particles) have one common region occupying form of bondage (eka- kshetravagaha form of bondage). There, if soul desires to make movement and Pudgala (matter of body) being devoid of the power of movement do not make movement, or if Pudgala are having power (of making movement) but the soul does not have desire (to move) then movement can not occur. And if among them, the Pudgala by acquiring power, make movement then along with it the soul, even without having any desire, makes movement. Thus happens the activity of movement, etc. And this Jiva meets with external Nimitta of defamation, etc. In this way, these acts are produced. And due to these external causes in accordance with the rise of Moha, the soul becomes happy and miserable also.

Thus, due to rise of Nama-karma, various types of formations take place of their own; none else is the creator. And the Tirthankara, etc., types (species) of Nama-karma are not found here.

Jiva's Condition Due to Rise of Gotra-Karma
(Status-determining Karma)

Due to rise of Gotra-Karma, birth in high or low caste is caused; there one gets high or low status. Owing to rise of Moha, the soul becomes happy and miserable.

In this way, the state of Jiva is found due to the instrumentality of Aghati-Karmas .

In this way, in this eternal world, the states of soul are caused due to rise of Ghati and Aghati Karmas.

“Oh Bhavya Jiva! (oh capable soul!) you should think your inner heart and see whether it is so only or not. On contemplation it would appear to be so only. If it is so then do accept that you are being afflicted since eternity by transmigration form of disease. You should make efforts to destroy it. Such meditation will bring true happiness to you".

Thus ends the 2nd Chapter describing the mundane state of existence of Jivas in this Moksha Marg Prakashak named Shastra.

CHAPTER 3

EXPOSITION OF MISERIES OF
MUNDANE EXISTENCE AND BLISS OF
LIBERATION

Doha: So Nijbhav sada sukhad, apnai karo prakash
           Jo Bahuvidhi bhavdukhniko  karihai Sata nash

(Since) the nature of self soul is always blissful, thou ought to emit the light of self which will destroy the existence of the different the forms of miseries of mundane existence.

Many types of miseries are found in this Sansara (mundane existence); these are being narrated here, for if there be happiness in Sansara also, why should then we make effort for liberation from Sansara? Since there are several kinds of miseries in this Sansara so efforts are to be made for liberation.

As a physician, by making diagnosis of disease and describing its condition, convinces the patient about his disease and thereafter creates interest in him for its treatment; similarly, here also by making diagnosis of Sansara and describing its condition, (Acharya) convinces the mundane being of his Sansara - disease and creates interest in him for making efforts to get rid of it.

For example, the patient is suffering from the disease but does not know its root cause, does not know the right treatment and also cannot bear the pain. Then, whatever appears to be the right treatment he takes it; therefore, the misery does not come to an end, then tormented, being helpless, he bears those pains; when the physician tells him the root cause of pain, tells the nature of the pain, proves all his efforts wrong, then he gets interested in making the right effort. Similarly, the mundane being is suffering from Sansara (transmigratory existence) but does not know its root cause, does not know the right means and also cannot bear the miseries. Then, whatever appears the right effort he makes it; therefore, the misery does not come to an end, then tormented, being helpless, he bears those miseries. He is shown here the root cause of miseries; the nature of the misery is explained and all his efforts are proved to be wrong; then he gets interested in making the right efforts. For this purpose this description is being made here:

 Root Cause of Miseries

(A) From Karm's Bondage Point of View

The root cause of all miseries is wrong faith, wrong knowledge and wrong conduct. The misbelief in Tattvas (realities) due to rise of Darshan-Moha (faith-deluding Karma) is wrong faith (Mithya Darshan) because of it the true-realization of the nature of substances is not possible, rather false-realization is caused. And due to the instrumentality (Nimitta) of that wrong faith only whatever knowledge of Kshayopashama form exists, it is all perverse- knowledge; owing to that, right knowledge of the nature of substances does not evolve; rather contrary knowing is caused.  And the passionate dispositions caused due to the rise of Charitra Moha (conduct-deluding Karma) is Asanyama (wrong conduct) because of which the Jiva does not act in accordance with the nature of the substances, rather acts contrarily.

Thus, these false belief etc. only are the root cause of all miseries; why is it so is being explained:

Misery caused by Kshayopashama of Jnanavarana and Darshanavarana and Release from it.

Because of wrong faith etc. Jiva can not attain discriminative knowledge of self and non-self. The self is a soul (living substance) and the body is the mass of infinite matter particles (Pudgala-Parvenus); by their union human, etc. embodied forms (Paryaya) are produced, Jiva believes that Paryaya (embodied form) to be self.  The nature of soul is knowledge, perception etc., through it a little knowing and seeing takes place and anger etc. dispositions are evolved owing to Karmic bondage; and touch, taste, smell, colour (complexion) is the nature of the body which is obvious and it undergoes various modifications like becoming obese, lean etc. and changing of touch (complexion) etc. - he knows all these as his own nature.

The functioning of knowledge and perception takes place through senses and mind; therefore, he believes that skin, tongue, nose, eyes, ears and mind are his organs. "I know and see through these organs"; because of this belief, the feeling of belonging's & affection is found in the senses. 
 
Further, due to force of Moha (delusion) the desire of knowing and enjoying the objects through those senses is produced and on enjoying those objects he feels satisfied on fulfilling of that desire and feels delighted. Just as a dog masticates the bone, due to that its own blood starts coming out. By its taste it believes that this is the taste of the bones; similarly, this Jiva knows the objects due to which his knowledge gets entangled in them; taking its taste he believes that this is the taste of objects, but the taste is not in the objects. He himself created the desire, by knowing it himself, believed himself to be happy; but "I am an eternal soul characterized by knowledge (sentience)" such realization of "self being an embodiment of knowledge only" is not there. And "I saw dance, heard melody, smelt the flowers, tasted and touched the objects, knew the Shastra (scripture), I should know this" - like this he possesses the realization of knowledge mixed with the objects known; because of this the pre-dominance of objects alone is perceived. In this way, owing to Nimitta of Moha the desire of objects is found to this Jiva.

He has the desire of knowing and enjoying all the objects of past, present and future. "I should touch all, taste all, smell all, see all, hear all and know all" - so much is the desire, but power is limited to touch, taste, smell, seeing and hearing only such objects which come into contact with the senses; out of them only a few are partly known and enjoyed and a few are known partly through remembrance by mind, etc. Even this much materializes on meeting several external causes. Hence, the desire never gets fulfilled. Such desire can only be fulfilled on attainment of (Kevala Jnana) omniscience.

The desire does not get fulfilled through the senses because of the state of Kshayopashama. So, owing to Nimitta of Moha continuous desire of knowing and enjoying concerned objects through senses persists; due to which, getting perturbed, the Jiva is suffering from misery. So much is the misery that even for knowing and enjoying a single object he is not even afraid of death. As an elephant has vehement desire of embracing the artificial female elephant, the fish of tasting of meat attached with the fisherman's stick, the bee of enjoying the smell of lotus flower, the moths of seeing the color of lighted lamp and the deer of hearing the melody (of music) due to which even if instant death be sensed yet they are not afraid of it.  On one hand death was sure if the objects were enjoyed and on the other hand misery of senses was felt to be greater if the objects were not enjoyed. Being afflicted from the agony of these senses, all Jivas irrationally plunge into the objects of senses just as some miserable person jumps from the top of the mountain.  Jivas earn wealth by undergoing several types of pains, spend it for - obtaining the objects of senses and for the acquisition of those objects they knowingly go even to such places where death is sure to occur. They also indulge into the acts of injury, etc. and involve into passions of anger, etc.

 What can they do? The pang of the senses becomes unbearable; hence no other idea comes to their mind. The Indras (celestial beings) etc. are also afflicted from this pang. They too are found very much engrossed in the objects of the senses. Just as a person afflicted from eczema rubs the affected part engrossingly; if there be no pain why would he rub; similarly, the (celestial beings) etc. afflicted from the sensual disease, indulge engrossingly in the objects of senses. If there be no pain why would they indulge in sensual objects?  Such is the sensual knowledge produced by Kshayopashama of Jnanavarana-Darshanavarana Karmas. It acts as a cause of misery owing to Nimitta (association) of Mithya Darshan (wrong belief), etc. in association with desire.

 Now, the means that this Jiva adopts for getting rid of miseries, is being explained: With the understanding that "My desire will be fulfilled by enjoying the objects through senses", he firstly strengthens the senses by taking different types of meals, etc. and knows thus only that if the senses are strong he will have more power of enjoying the objects. Moreover, various external causes are required there; he tries to acquire them.

Further, the senses enjoy the objects on coming in contact with them. Hence, he tries to bring about the contact of the objects with the senses through different external resources. Thus, for the sake of gathering together different types of garments, foods, flowers, temple ornaments, etc. and songs, musical instruments, etc. he undergoes severe stress and strain.

Further, so long as the object remains in contact with the senses, till then somewhat knowledge of that object continues, later on only its remembrance in the mind remains. By the lapse of time the remembrance also fades out. So, he makes effort to keep those objects under his control and frequently-frequently indulges in them. And the senses can enjoy only one object in one time, but he wants to enjoy many objects and rushes towards the other object, and leaves it also, rushes towards the other object - thus behaves ravenously.

In this way whatever means come to his mind, he adopts them but all those means are false. Because, firstly availability of the desired objects is not under one's control, it is extremely difficult, and if by chance according to the rise of Karmas the desired situation is also met with then by strengthening the senses the power of enjoying the objects does not increase; that power increases only by increasing the power of knowledge and perception but this depends on the Kshayopashama of Karmas. Someone whose body is strong he is seen possessing such power in a lesser measure; Someone whose body is lean and thin, he is found possessing such power in greater measure. Therefore, by strengthening the senses through the meals, etc. nothing is accomplished. By decrease in passions & on getting Kshayopashama of Karmas if the power of knowledge and perception increases then accordingly the power of enjoying the objects increases.

 Further, he tries to gather the sensual objects, (but) it either does not remain associated for long time or mostly the company of all the desired objects is never met with. So this anxiety continues.  And by keeping those objects under his control, he very frequently indulges in them, but they do not remain under his control. Those separate substances change, independently on their own, or depend on the rise of Karmas. Such bondage of Karmas takes place on the evolution of suitable auspicious disposition (pious thoughts) and later on they come to rise state which is clearly seen. Even on making several efforts, without the Nimitta of Karmas, the external objects are not met with.

Further, leaving one object he indulges in other object, thus behaves ravenously; what can be achieved from it? As a voracious person requiring a quintal food gets a particle of food; can his hunger be quenched? Similarly, can the desire of the one who is desirous of obtaining all the objects, be satisfied by obtaining only one object?  Happiness is not possible without the end of desire; hence this effort is false.

Question: Many Jivas are seen becoming happy by adopting such means (efforts); how do you say it to be totally false?

Answer: The Jivas do not become happy, but fallaciously consider themselves to be happy. If they have become happy, how will there remain the desire for other objects? As on getting the disease cured, why one would like to take other medicine? Similarly, on the end of misery, why one would like to have other objects? Therefore, if by enjoying the object, the desire ends then we may treat it to be happiness. But so long as the particular objects is not enjoyed, till then its desire persists, and the moment that object is enjoyed, at the same moment the desire of enjoying the other object is seen developing; how can this be treated as happiness? For example, some voracious poor person got a particle of food and feels happiness by eating it, similarly this great greedy person got one desired object and he feels happy to obtain it, (but) in real sense there is no happiness.

Question: What is wrong if one satisfies his desire by enjoying the objects one after the other similar to the person who satisfies his hunger by eating the corn bit by bit?

 Answer: This may be accepted provided those corn-bits get accumulated, but when the next bit is eaten, by then the earlier bit gets driven out, how will then the appetite be quenched ? Similarly, (if) in the knowing process the knowledge of objects gets accumulated then the desire may get fulfilled, consummated, but when he starts knowing the next object by then the knowledge of the object known earlier vanishes; how will then the desire get fulfilled?  Without consummation of desire the commotion does not end and without end of commotion how can it be called happiness? 

Further, the enjoyment of even one object takes place under the influence of wrong-faith etc., therefore, the bondage of Karmas being the cause of forthcoming many miseries takes place. Hence, in the present moment also it is not happiness, nor is the cause of happiness in future; so it is assuredly misery. 

The same is stated in Pravachanasara as below:

Sapram badhasahim, vichinram bandhkaranmm vismam
Jam idiahin ladha tan, sokukham dukhmaiv tha

Meaning: Happiness derived through sense organs is dependent, amenable to disturbances, terminable, cause of bondage and fluctuating, hence, it is assuredly misery in disguise. 

In this way the efforts made by this mandane being should be known as false.

What is the right effort then? When the desire comes to an end and the enjoyment of all objects continues simultaneously then this misery ends, but the desire comes to an end only when Moha (delusion) perishes, and simultaneous enjoyment of all the objects is possible only on attainment of Kevala Jnana (Omniscience). The means of these is the attainment of Samyag-darshan (right belief) etc. and the same should be known as the right means.

In this way the Kshayopashama of Jnanavarana and Darshanavarana also becomes cause of misery owing to Nimitta (association) of Moha (delusion).

Question: Knowing (of the objects) does not materialize owing to rise of Jnanavarana and Darshanavarana Karmas hence regard them to be the cause of misery; why do you say the Kshayopashama as to be the cause of misery?

Answer: If 'not knowing' be the cause of misery then the Pudgalas (matter) should also suffer from misery; but the root cause of misery is the desire and the desire is evolved owing to the Kshayopashama only, therefore, Kashayopashama is said to be the cause of misery but in reality Kashayopashama also is not the cause of misery. The desire of sensual objects which evolves due to Moha (delusion), that (desire) alone is to be known as the cause of misery.

Misery caused by Rise of 'Mohaniya Karma' and Release from it

Firstly, owing to rise of darshan Moha wrong belief is caused due to which the substance is not found as per one's belief and his belief is not according to as the substance is; therefore, he always remains agitated.

 For example, someone puts on a cloth on a mad man. That mad man knowing that cloth as his own limb believes the self and the cloth as one entity. That cloth being under the control of dresser, he (the dresser) sometimes tears it, sometimes joins it, sometimes snatches it, sometimes puts on new cloth, thus behaves in many ways. That mad man believes it under his control, whereas its functioning is under other's control, due to which he feels very much dejected. Similarly, the rise of Karmas produced the association of body to this Jiva. This Jiva, knowing that body as one's own limb, believes the self and the body as one entity (mass). That body being dependent on Karmas, sometimes becomes thin, sometimes becomes obese, sometimes gets destroyed, sometimes gets newly created -thus different conditions are produced. This Jiva believes it to be under his control, whereas its functioning is under other's control, due to which he feels very much dejected.

Further, where that mad man was staying, there came from somewhere some persons, horses, wealth, etc. and halted there. That mad man knows them as his own but they being under their own control, some come, some depart and some modify into different forms; that mad person believes all those (objects) under his control and their actions take place under other's control due to which he feels very much dejected.  Similarly, wherever this Jiva obtains (new) embodied form, there come from somewhere, son, horse, wealth, etc. on their own. This Jiva knows them to be his own. But they being under their own control, some arrive, some depart and some modify into different forms.  This Jiva believes all those (objects) under his control and their actions take place under other's control, due to that he feels very much dejected.

Question: Sometimes the functioning or actions of body and son, etc. also appear to be under the control of this Jiva; then at least at that time, this Jiva feels happy?

Answer: Coincidently, on meeting of the tendency of the desire of Jiva and of the destined change of the body, etc., some object modifies in a particular way as per his desire, therefore, at some moment, while thinking about the same event, one feels it to be happiness, but all the objects do not modify in all respects according to his desire, hence, in his thought-process, various forms of agitation continue incessantly.

Further, sometime, seeing the objects modifying in someway according to his desire, this Jiva feels oneness and mineness in the body, son, etc. So owing to this understanding, he always remains agitated from the anxiety of producing, nourishing and protecting them. Even by bearing several types of pains he wishes good of them.

 And the desire of enjoying the objects, occurrence of passions, agreeable-disagreeable feeling in external objects, adoption of contrary means, disbelief in right means and misconjecturing - the single root cause of all these is wrong faith (misbelief).  On its destruction, all (perversities) get destroyed; therefore, the root of all miseries is this wrong faith only.

 Further, he does not make effort to destroy that wrong faith also since he has accepted the wrong faith as to be the right faith; why would then he make effort?

Further, if by chance the five-sensed rational being contemplates about the means of ascertaining the Tattvas (realities), there upon, if due to misfortune, he comes into contact with the false deity, false preceptor, false scripture, then the misbelief in Tattvas gets fostered. His understanding was that he will be benefited by these but they provide such a means due to which he may become unconscious. He was making efforts for ascertaining the true nature of substances (reality) but contrarily becomes firm in false-belief and consequently due to increase of passions and sensual desires, becomes more miserable.

Further, if by chance the Nimitta of true deity-preceptor- scripture is also met with, even then he does not develop belief in the real sense of their preaches, (but) remains a misbeliever of Tattvas (realities) owing to faith in conventional preaching. There, if passions become feeble and the desire for objects is reduced then he becomes less miserable, but afterwards reverts to same condition. Therefore, whatever efforts this mundane being makes, they, too, are false.

Moreover, the other effort that this mundane being adopts is that he wishes to modify the substances according to his belief. If those objects get modified (accordingly) then his belief may be true; but the substances are eternal, separate from each other and modify within their respective limits. None is dependent on other, none modifies by any other causing it to modify.  Desiring to modify them is no remedy; it is assuredly wrong faith.

 What is the right means then? If one's belief becomes as per the nature of the substances then all miseries come to an end.  Just as someone deludingly believes the corpse to be alive or tries to make it alive, then he himself becomes miserable.  And believing it to be dead and having the faith that this will not become alive by trying to make it alive, is the only means to get rid of that misery. Similarly, if someone holding wrong faith misbelieves the substances, tries to change them otherwise, then he himself becomes miserable. And believing them correctly and having the faith that these will not change otherwise by trying to get them changed, is the only means to get rid of that misery.  The remedy of the misery caused by delusion is to remove the delusion only. So on removal of delusion right belief originates and that alone is to be known as the real remedy.

Misery due to Charitra Moha and Release from it                            

Owing to rise of Charitra Moha (conduct-deluding Karma) (impure) dispositions of Jiva in the form of anger, etc. passions and laughter, etc. quasi-passions are caused, then this Jiva sorrowfully feeling much afflicted indulges in several types of evil-deeds anxiously. The same is being explained: When a person is overpowered by anger passion then he desires to harm others and for that purpose he thinks about various means, utters heart-breaking words by using abusive language. He starts killing by his own limbs (hands, etc.), and by arms, stones, etc. He tries to harm others even by harming the self through undergoing lot of pains by spending money and by committing suicide or if he knows that the one can be harmed through others, then he tries to get him harmed through others or, if one gets harmed on his own then he approbates it. Even if by other's harm none of his purpose gets fulfilled yet he harms him, and on rise of anger if some venerable or well-wishers, also intervene in the matter then he abuses them also, starts beating (them) and becomes irrational. And if no harm be caused to other person then he feels very sorry in his heart of his own and cuts his own limbs and even dies by swallowing poison, etc.; such condition happens on rise of anger-passion.

And when a person is over-powered by pride-passion then he desires to humiliate others and exalts himself and for this purpose he plans many schemes. He censures others and exalts himself and undermines other's image (prestige) through various ways and means and magnifies his own image. The wealth which he has collected with great pains, spends in marriages, etc. and spends even by taking loans thinking that his name and fame will remain even after his death; he tries to magnify his self-esteem even by committing suicide. If someone does not pay respect then he tries to earn respect even by giving threats and creating trouble for others. Moreover, under the pressure of pride, he does not pay respect even to honorable and elderly persons and becomes irrational. If he does not find others in the let-down position and himself in the higher position then he inwardly feels very sorry and cuts his own limbs and even dies by taking poison, etc. Such condition happens on rise of pride- passion.

 And when a person is overpowered by deceit passion then he desires to accomplish his objective deceptively. For the purpose of accomplishing it he plans many schemes, utters deceitful words in different ways, poses his body deceitfully, tries to show external things otherwise, even indulges in such deceitful actions which may end his life. On exposure of his deception he may get badly harmed, even death may occur, yet he remains undaunted. Under the influence of deception even if some venerable and adorable persons come in his contact, he acts deceitfully with them also and becomes irrational. If his objective does not get accomplished by deception then he feels extremely sorry and cuts his own limbs and commits suicide by taking poison, etc. Such condition happens on rise of deceit passion.

And when a person is overpowered by greed-passion, then the desire of obtaining the favorite objects arises and for the purpose of accomplishing it he plans in various ways. He utters words in support of his objective, poses his body in different ways, tolerates lot of miseries, serves others, visits foreign countries, even he indulges in that work which may lead to his death and starts such activities which may cause great sufferings to him. And on the rise of greed- passion, even if there be some work related to the venerable and adorable persons, then also he tries to achieve his goal and becomes irrational. And whatever desired thing he has obtained, he tries to protect it by various means. If the desired object is not obtained or the favorite thing is lost then he himself feels very much distressed, cuts his limbs and dies by taking poison, etc.; such condition happens when one is overpowered by greed-passion.

Thus, the person afflicted by passions indulges in these various activities.

And along with these passions the quasi-passions (No- Kashayas) are also found; there, when laughter-passion is evolved then one himself feels elated and joyful. This is to be known as the laughing of a hysteric patient; (although) he is suffering from several types of diseases even then he starts laughing by making some conjecture.  Similarly, this Jiva (mundane being) is suffering from different maladies even then by making some conjecture he feels happy considering it to be pleasing to one-self but in reality he is miserable.  He will become happy only after the eradication of the disease of passion.

When the 'liking-passion' arises then one feels excessive doting in the favorite thing. Just as a cat gets engrossed fondingly on catching a rat, does not leave it even if someone beats it; likewise, here also one feels excessive fondness (in one's favorite object) considering that it is obtained with a great difficulty and may get separated; therefore, it is assuredly misery.

 When the disliking passion arises, then on getting the association of repugnant thing one feels highly dejected. The association of repugnant thing is not liked by him and the resulting agony becomes unbearable; so, he feels highly distressed for its desertion. This itself is misery.

When the sorrow (grief) passion is evolved, then on dissociation of favorite thing and association of unfavorable thing, getting highly upset, he feels very much afflicted, weeps, cries, becomes unmindful and dies by cutting his limbs; nothing is achieved by all this, even then he makes himself miserable.

When the fear-passion arises, then knowing someone to be the cause of dissociation of favorite thing and association of unfavorable thing he feels fearful, feels highly dismayed, runs away, hides, becomes nervous, reaches the place of misery and dies; hence all this is nothing but misery.

When the disgust passion arises, then he hates the unfavorable thing. That thing got associated on its own and he tries to escape disdainfully or wants to remove it away and getting dejected he experiences great pain.

When the carnal desire arises due to rise of three types of sex-passions, then the desire of cohabiting with female sex due to rise of male sex passion, the desire of cohabiting with male sex, due to rise of female sex-passion and the desire of cohabiting with both male and female sex due to rise of neuter sex-passion gets evolved. On account of that one feels very much distressed, sex-fever develops, becomes shameless, spends money, does not bother about defame, does not care for the consequential miseries and punishment, etc. One becomes mad owing to the vehemence of carnal desire and dies.  In the books on sex-passion ten states of carnal desire are described.  Becoming mad and losing life are also included there in those ten states. In medical books under the types of fevers sex-fever is also stated to be the cause of death. Even occurrence of death due to sex-passion is seen apparently. The sex-blind person becomes irrational.  The father with one's own daughter, the man with female animal, etc. starts copulating. Such is the pain of carnal desire which itself is great misery.

Thus are found the conditions owing to the rise of passions and quasi-passions.

Here a thought comes to the mind that if one does not indulge in these conditions then anger, etc. passions produce pain and if one indulges in these conditions then miseries continue till the end of life. There, the Jivas accept the miseries till the end of life but are not prepared to bear the agony of anger, etc. passions. From this discussion it is ascertained that the pain of passions is more than even the agony of death.

And when the rise of passion-causing Karma takes place then he cannot resist the temptation of indulging in passion. If the external causes of passions are met with then one indulges in passions entangling in them. If no causes are met with then he himself creates the causes.  For example, if the cause of involving in business, etc. passions be not there, then he himself creates the causes, e.g. gambling and playing various other games that are the causes of anger, etc. and narrating and hearing to the wicked tales, etc. Moreover, if the carnal desire, anger passion, etc. produce agony and the body does not possess the power of acting according to those passions then he prepares and takes the medicines and adopts various other means. And if no cause is met with then he himself indulges in passions on his own by thinking in his Upayoga (active consciousness) about the objects, which cause passions. In this way, this Jiva being afflicted from passion dispositions becomes extremely miserable.

And "If the purpose for which the passion disposition has occurred gets accomplished then my this misery may end and I may become happy" - thinking so, he arranges various means for getting that purpose accomplished and treats it to be the means of ending that misery.

Now, here the misery which is caused due to passion dispositions, is really true and one obviously himself suffers from such misery, but the means which he adopts are false, Why so? This is being explained below:

In anger to harm other, in pride to exalt self by humiliating others, in deceit to accomplish one's object through deceptive means, in greed to acquire the favorite thing, in laughter the continuation of cause of laughing, in liking the continuance of the association of favorite thing, in disliking the dissociation of unfavorite thing, in grief the elimination of the cause of sorrow, in fear the elimination of the cause of fear, in disgust vanishing the cause of disgust, in male sex-passion uniting sexually with female sex, in female-sex-passion uniting sexually with male sex, in neuter-sex-passion uniting sexually with both (male and female) sex - such purposes are found.

If these are fulfilled then by mitigation of passions misery may come to an end and one may become happy, but the accomplishment of those purposes is not under the control of efforts made by him; it depends on destiny. Because one is seen making various efforts but the object is not fulfilled. Moreover, making of efforts is also not under one's own control, it depends on destiny. Because, one thinks of making various efforts but not a single effort is seen materializing. 

And if by Kakataleeya-Nyaya the destiny be in accordance with one's objective and the effort made be also in congruence with it and by it even if the objective be achieved then some passion related to that objective may get mitigated but there is no end to it. So long as the objective was not accomplished till then only the passion related to that objective was persisting and the moment the particular objective got fulfilled at the same time passion related to another objective gets generated; even for a moment he does not become free from anxiety. Just as someone was thinking ill of other and the other got harmed then by becoming angry on some other person he started wishing ill of him or when his power was less then he used to wish ill of younger persons and when his power increased then he started wishing ill of elderly persons. Similarly, when the objective which he wanted to accomplish through pride, deceit, greed, etc. gets accomplished then he wishes to accomplish another objective by creating the feeling of pride, etc. in the other persons.  When his power was less he wanted to accomplish the smaller objective, when his power increased then the desire to accomplish bigger objective got originated. If there be any limitation of the objectives in his passions then he may become happy by the accomplishment of that objective, but there is no limitation, desire goes on increasing. The same is stated in Atmanushasana:

Ashagrt pratipranree, yasmin vishvmnrupmam
Ksya ki kiydayati, vritha vo vishyaishiya

Meaning: The pit of desires exists in each and every being. The beings (Jivas) are infinite times infinite in number. All of them are found having desires and the magnitude of that well of desires is such that in that single pit the whole universe appears to be just like an atom. Further, the universe is only one; then tell here in this instant how much (portion) would fall in whose share? Hence, whatever desire of objects one has it is all worthless.

The desire never gets accomplished; hence, even on fulfillment of an objective the misery does not come to an end. Or if one passion disappears then immediately another passion crops up.  For example, there be many persons to beat one person, if one stops beating then some other starts beating. Similarly, there are various types of passions to create misery to this Jiva and when anger is not there then pride crops up; when pride is not there then anger etc. crop up.  In this way the existence of passion is always there; none is found without passion even for a moment.  Hence, even on meeting any purpose of any passion how can the misery come to an end?  And one's intention is to accomplish all purposes of all passions. If this happens then he can be happy but it can never happen; therefore, psychically he always remains miserable. In this way, by fulfilling the objective of passions and ending the misery he wants to be happy; but this means is also false.

 Then what is the real remedy? When through right belief and knowledge correct faith & knowledge are acquired then good and bad feelings get removed and by their strength only the fruition of Charitra Moha gets reduced. When this happens then passions are destroyed and the misery caused by them may end and there after no objective remains. Thus on being free from anxiety one can be extremely happy. Therefore, right belief, etc. only are the true means of getting rid of this misery.

Misery caused by the rise of Antaraya Karma
Obstructive Karma) and Release from it

And owing to the rise of Moha (deluding Karma) the zeal of donating, gaining, enjoying, re-enjoying and increasing energy arises in this Jiva but due to the rise of Antaraya Karma (obstructive Karma) all this cannot materialize; then extreme agitation is caused.  Hence, this itself is obviously misery.

The means that he adopts to get rid of this (misery) is that whatever external causes of obstruction come to his mind, he makes effort to remove the same but this means is false. Even on making efforts, the obstruction takes place owing to the rise of Antaraya Karma. And due to Kshayopashama of Antaraya Karma no obstruction is caused even in the absence of effort. Therefore, the root cause of obstruction is Antaraya Karma. 

For example, a man beats a dog by a stick; the dog in vain develops envy towards the stick; similarly, obstructions are caused to this Jiva by external living and non-living objects due to the instrumental cause of Antaraya Karma. This Jiva in vain develops envy towards those external objects. The other (external) objects may like to create obstruction to him but obstruction may not be caused and other objects may not like to create obstruction to him but obstruction may be caused. Therefore, it is deduced that the other substances are not the controlling factors; why should one fight with those which have no effect? Therefore, adopting this means is also false.

What then is the real means? The prompter which was caused by desires owing to misbelief ends on attainment of right belief, etc. and by attainment of right belief, etc. only the fruition of Unitary Karma decreases, then the desire vanishes and the power of soul increases; in consequence, that misery ends and imperturbable bliss is evolved. Hence, right belief etc. is only the right means.

Misery caused by rise of Vedaniya Karma and Release from it

Further, owing to rise of Vedaniya Karma (feeling-producing Karma) association of causes of happiness and misery take place.  There, various conditions are produced in the body itself, various types of external associations acting as instrumental cause to the conditions of the body are met with and many associations of external things only are found. There, due to rise of Asata Vedaniya Karma (unpleasant- feeling-producing Karma) hunger, thirst, respiration, ache disease, etc. are caused and the association of external - objects viz. extreme-cold and hot weathers, wind, bonds, etc. acting as instrumental cause of disagreeable conditions of body are met with and the associations of foes, bad sons etc. and molecules with bad complexions, etc. are met with externally; so, due to Moha (delusion) the feeling of disliking is caused in these objects. When these (Asata Prakritis) are in operative state then the rise of Moha is invariably of such order that due to which the Jiva, becoming highly perturbed, wants to remove them, and so long as those objects are not removed till then he remains miserable. All beings feel miserable in their association.

Further, owing to rise of Sata Vedaniya Karma (pleasant-feeling-producing Karma) wholesomeness and vigorousness, etc. are found in the body and associations of external objects viz.  Eatables drinks and pleasant wheather, etc. acting as instrumental cause of agreeable conditions of the body are met with; and the external associations of friends, obedient son, wife, servant, elephant, horse, wealth, grains, house, clothes, etc. are met with and through Moha (delusion) the feeling of liking in these objects is caused. When these (Sata Prakritis) are in operative state then the rise of Moha (deluding Karma) is invariably of such order that due to which the Jiva feels happiness and wants their security; so long as those remain associated till then he feels happy. This feeling of happiness is just like a person who was suffering from many diseases and by taking some treatment he got one of his diseases subsided to some extent for sometime. Then he believes himself to be happy in comparison to earlier condition but in reality it is not happiness. Similarly, this Jiva was suffering too much from his miseries; by some means he got one of his miseries subsided to some extent for some period only.  Then he believes himself to be happy in comparison to earlier condition but in spiritual sense this is not happiness.

Further, from whatever happens to him due to rise of Asata, he feels unhappiness; so he makes efforts to remove it; and from whatever happens to him due to rise of Sata, he feels happiness; so, he makes efforts of retaining it, but this effort is false.

 Firstly, nothing is under his control; it depends on the rise of Vedaniya Karma. All make efforts for removing Asata and for retaining Sata; but someone gets his purpose served either by making some effort or without any effort; someone may not get his purpose served even after great efforts; therefore, it is deduced that the means are not in his control.

And if by chance he makes effort also and rise (of Vedaniya Karma) is also in congruence to it, then for sometime the cause of some particular type of Asata subsides and the cause of Sata may arise; there also due to existence of Moha he becomes agitated by the desire of enjoying them. The desire of enjoying an object of enjoyment arises; so long as that object is not obtained till then he becomes agitated by its desire and as soon as it is obtained the desire of enjoying another object arises; then he becomes unhappy due to that. For example, someone had the desire of tasting something; the moment he tasted it the desire to taste and touch some other object arises.

Or, earlier, there may be the desire of enjoying only one object in a particular manner; so long as it is not obtained till then its anxiety persists and as soon as that enjoyment is over, the desire of enjoying it in another way arises. For example, someone wanted to see a woman, the moment he saw her, at the same moment the desire of coition arises. And also while enjoying such kind of sensual pleasure the anxiety of adopting other means is created. Then leaving those means he starts adopting other means; there also many types of anxieties are experienced.

Is it not a fact that in making effort for obtaining wealth a great degree of restlessness is experienced in doing business and observing precautions for keeping it safe? Moreover, the rise of Asata Vedaniya continues in the form of hunger, thirst, cold and hot states of body and secretion of excreta & phlegm, etc. from the body; Jiva feels happy by their removal; is this happiness? It is simply a remedial measure of the disease. So long as hunger, etc. persist till then the anxiety of removing them persists. As soon as one desire is fulfilled some other desire crops up and that creates agitation and again hunger, etc. may arise, then these create agitation.

In this way while making efforts, by chance, Asata may turn into Sata; there also anxiety persist; hence only misery continues.

Further, even the above mentioned state may not continue; while making efforts one may have such rise of Asata that none of his efforts may succeed and it may cause severe agony which may be unbearable; then due to its agitation one may become distracted, there he feels extreme sorrow.

 So, in this world, the rise of Sata Vedaniya is very rarely found to someone due to the rise of some Punya Karma (auspicious Karma); most of the Jivas are found having the rise of Asata Vedaniya for a long time. Therefore, whatever efforts one makes are false.

Or, believing happiness and unhappiness by association of external things, is nothing but fallacy. It is obviously seen that happiness and unhappiness are caused due to the rise of Sata and Asata Vedniya Karma through the instrumentality of  Mohaniya (deluding) Karma. The person possessing one lakh rupees feels unhappy by an expenditure of one thousand rupees and the person possessing one hundred rupees feels happy by gaining one thousand rupees. The external wealth of the former is ninety nine times more than that of the latter one. Or if the possessor of one lakh Rupees is desirous of gaining more wealth then he is unhappy and if the possessor of one hundred rupees has contentment then he is happy.  And on getting similar things one feels happy and other feels unhappy. For example, on getting a coarse cloth someone feels unhappy and some one feels happy. And on rise of pain of hunger, etc. in body, dissociation of external favorite thing, association of unfavorable thing, someone feels more miserable. Hence, happiness- unhappiness do not depend on external things; rather on rise of Sata-Asata Karma, due to association of disposition of Moha, happiness- unhappiness are caused.

Question: About external objects your above statement is accepted but on getting pain in body one assuredly feels unhappy and on not having pain one feels happy - this happiness unhappiness appear to be dependent on the condition of the body only?

 Answer: The functioning of the knowledge of the soul is dependent on senses and senses are the parts of body; so whatever condition is produced in this (body) the knowledge gets engrossed in knowing it; if Moha Bhava (deluded feeling) be also associated with it, then the happiness- unhappiness is specifically known through the condition of the body. And when there be great attachment towards son, wealth, etc. then one bears bodily pain and considers it to be less misery and on their becoming unhappy or on their association being lost, feels more miserable. Whereas the monks (naked possessionless saints) do not feel any unhappiness even on having physical pain; therefore, the feeling and believing of happiness- unhappiness is dependent on the rise of Moha (deluding Karma) only. Mohaniya and Vedaniya Karmas have cause and effect relationship, that is why the feeling of happiness- unhappiness appear to be caused by the rise of Sata-Asata. And mostly the association of various external things is found due to the rise of Sata and many others due to the rise of Asata. Therefore, happiness-unhappiness appear to be caused by the external things. But on ascertaining thoughtfully, happiness-unhappiness is believed to be caused by Moha (deluding Karma) only, there is no rule about happiness - unhappiness being caused by others. The rise of Sata-Asata and the association of external objects which are the cause of happiness-unhappiness is found to an omniscient lord also; but due to absence of Moha (deluding Karma), he does not have even the slightest feeling of happiness- unhappiness.  Hence, the feeling of happiness-unhappiness should be believed to be caused by Moha (deluding Karma) only.  Therefore, if one wants to end misery and wants to become happy by means of removing or keeping the associated external objects then this means is false.

What is the right means? When delusion is destroyed by attainment of right belief, etc., then happiness-unhappiness do not appear to be arising due to the external associated objects, rather it appears to be arising due to one's own disposition only. And through the practice of real thinking one should adopt such means by which in his dispositions he would not feel happiness-unhappiness being caused by external things and by the spirit of right belief etc. only, Moha (delusion) may become feeble then such a condition develops that even on meeting with several external causes, one does not feel happy-unhappy; then he experiences the real bliss by holding the state of serenity and imperturance and then by end of all miseries he becomes happy; this is the right means.

 Misery caused by rise of Ayu Karma and release from it

Holding life in the form of a particular embodied state owing to rise of Ayu Karma (life-Karma) is aliveness and end of that embodied state is death. Due to perverse faith, etc. this Jiva experiences & believes the embodied form of existence (Paryaya) only as to be the Self; therefore, he believes his existence on being in embodied form and believes his non- existence on death. Only due to this reason he always remains fearful of death, and due to that fear the anxiety persists. He is very much afraid of those causes, which he knows to be the cause of death. He becomes highly upset if by chance he comes in their contact. In this way, he remains very much unhappy.

 The means that he adopts is that he keeps the causes of death away from him or, himself runs away from them. And he takes medicines, etc., builds fort, boundary wall, adopts such various means. So, all these means are false because on exhaustion of Ayu-Karma, although he makes various efforts and many others may be helpful, never the less, death is certain; he does not survive even for a moment. And as long as Ayu (Life Karma) is not exhausted, till then even if various causes are met with, death does not occur. Therefore, death cannot be avoided by any means. The duration of Ayu (Life) ends without fail, therefore, death also is bound to occur. Hence, making efforts for this is totally false.

What is then the right means? When the belief of I-ness in the embodied state (Paryaya) is uprooted on attainment of right belief, etc. and by believing himself to be an eternal sentient substance (Chaitanya-Dravya) he developes I-ness feeling in self soul and knows present embodied state to be merely a disguise, then the fear of death disappears.  Moreover, when through right belief etc., one attains the highest stage of Siddha (disembodied omniscient) then the death ends for ever. Hence, the right belief etc., are only the right means.

Misery caused by rise of Name-Karma and release from it

Due to the rise of Name-Karma (Physique-making Karma), Gati (State of existence), Jati (class or group of a like beings) and body, etc. are created. Out of them those which are created owing to rise of Punya (virtue) act as the cause of pleasure and those which are created owing to rise of Papa (vice) act as the cause of misery; so, it is a fallacy to believe happiness in these conditions. And this mundane being tries to make effort of removing the cause of misery and getting the cause of happiness; so, this effort is false. The real means is right belief, etc. In this context, for details, one should refer to the description given earlier under Vedaniya Karma.  Because of similarity of causation of happiness and misery between Vedaniya and Name Karmas the description of their effectiveness should be known to be similar.

 Misery caused by rise of Gotra-Karma and release from it

Owing to the rise of Gotra Karma (high and low status determining Karma) one gets birth in high or low family.  There, on getting birth in family of high status, one considers himself to be high and on getting birth in a family of low status considers himself to be low.  Since he does not know the means of change of birth in high or low family, he feels oneness with the family status obtained by him. But to consider oneself high or low with regard to the family status is fallacy. If someone of high family status indulges in mean activity then he becomes low and if someone belonging to low family status indulges in commendable activity then he becomes high. Owing to greed-passion, etc., many people belonging to high family status start doing the service of the people belonging to low family status.

After all, how long does the family status exist?

 On termination of embodied form, the family status also changes; hence considering oneself high or low by birth in family of high-low status, the person of high status family is afraid of becoming low and one belonging to low status family is unhappy due to the lowness of the status obtained by him.

By attainment of right belief etc., not believing happiness- unhappiness to arise due to high or low status, is the right means; and by the same means he attains such a supreme and the highest state of Siddha which never changes; then all miseries end and he becomes perfectly blissful.

Thus, from the point of view of the rise of Karmas, owing to the instrumentality of wrong belief etc., only miseries and miseries alone are found in the world.

(B) Miseries from embodied modifications point of view

Now the same miseries are further described from the embodied modification point of view:

The Miseries of One-sensed beings

In this universe most of the time is spent in one-sensed embodied modifications only.  Therefore, assuredly from the beginningless time Jivas are found living in the Nitya Nigoda state and getting out from there is liking jumping out of a gram (grain) from the baking cauldron.  Thus, after coming out from there the Jiva attains other embodied modification.  There in Trasa-Paryaya (Mobile beings having two or more sense) the Jiva lives for a very short duration.  Most of the time is spent in one-sensed embodied form.

There, in Itar- Nigoda, he lives for a very long period and for quite sometime he lives in earth, water, fire, air and gross vegetables-bodies.  After getting out from Nitya-Nigoda the maximum period of living in Trasa (Mobile beings) bodies is two thousand and a little more Sagars only and maximum period of living in one-sensed beings is innumerable Pudgala Paravartans only, and the period of one Pudgala Paravartan itself is such that in infinitesimal part of it inifinite Sagars are found.  So, mainly the period of this mundane being is passed in one-sensed bodies only.

There, in one-sensed beings the manifestation of power of knowledge and perception is found in extremely poor measure.  Those (one-sensed) beings know and see only a little bit of cold and heat, etc. through Mati-Jnan (sensory knowledge) produced by the instrumentality of touch sense and through Shruta Jnan (the knowledge derived through Mati Jnan) and through non-ocular perception pertaining to touch sense.  Owing to the intense rise of knowledge-obscuring and perception is not found more than this but the desire of (enjoying the) objects is found due to which they are extremely miserable.  And owing to the rise of Darshan Moha (faith-deluding Karma) perverse belief is found, due to which they believe the embodied modification only to be the self; they possess no other thinking power.

Further, due to rise of Charitra Moha (conduct-deluding Karma) they are found imbued with intense anger passion, etc; for, the omniscient Lord has revealed that they only possess black, blue and gray type of three inauspicious Leshya (thought-complexion) and those are found only during the rise of intense passions. There (in that state of existence) the passions are more but the manifested power is extremely poor in all respects; therefore, they are experiencing extreme misery but there is no go.

Question: Since their knowledge is extremely poor (rather negligible) how do they indulge in passions? 

Answer: There is no such rule that the degree of passions should be in accordance with the knowledge. The power of knowledge is found in accordance with Kashayopa- sham. For example, a blind and deaf person possessing less power of knowledge, is found having more passion; similarly, it is agreed to that the one-sensed beings having very less power of knowledge, can have high degree of passion.

Further, the external passion gets exhibited then only when one exerts according to one's internal passion but they are without strength; therefore, they can not make any effort; due to this, their passion is not visible. For example, some person is weak and due to some reason he has intense passion but cannot do anything, so his passion is not visible outwardly but he feels very unhappy. Similarly, the one- sensed beings are powerless; due to some reason they have passion but cannot do any thing. So, their passion is not visible outwardly and they themselves become miserable.

It is to be known that wherever the passion is more and the strength is less, the anguish is more, and gradually as the passion diminishes and strength increases then accordingly the anguish goes on lessening by and by. But the one-sensed beings have more passion and less strength; therefore, one-sensed beings are extremely miserable. They alone experience their misery and the omniscient knows it. For instance, the knowledge of a hysteric Patient gets lessened and due to external physical weakness may also not be able to express his sufferings, but he is extremely distressed. Similarly, the knowledge possessed by one-sensed beings is less and due to weak external strength they cannot express their anguish but experience extreme anguish. 

And due to intense rise of Antaraya-Karma the desired objectives do not materialize much; on account of this also, they are extremely distressed.

Further, in Aghati Karmas the rise of Papa-prakriti (vice-Karmas) is predominant; there, on getting the rise of Asata Vedaniya they feel extremely miserable owing to its instrumentality. The vegetables are broken by wind-pressure, get dried by cold and heat, are also dried in want of water, are burnt by fire, some-one pierces them, cuts them, crushes them, eats them, breaks them; such various conditions are found. Similarly, the one-sensed earth beings, etc. undergo all such possible conditions. Because of persistence of all those conditions they feel extremely distressed.

As pain is caused in human body on facing above-stated conditions, similarly, one-sensed beings also experience pain. Since knowledge of these conditions is caused through touch-sense and they do possess touch-sense, knowing them through it they feel extremely distressed being overpowered by delusion; but they do not have strength of feeling, fighting or of crying, that is why the ignorant people do not know their miseries. And by chance a little rise of Sata may be found, but it is not strong. 

Further, owing to Ayu Karma in these one-sensed beings, those who are Aparyaptas(Those who have not attained completion of the molecules forming the body and the development of the body, sense organs, respiratory organ.)
 the duration of their life (Paryaya) is only one-eighteenth part of the time of one respiration and that of Periapts (Those who have attained completion of the body, sense organs, etc.) the life duration is found varying from one Antarmuhurta to many years. There being very short span of age Karma, the birth and death continue incessantly and owing to this, they always remain miserable.

In Name-Karma, the rise of Tiryanchgati etc. inauspicious Prakritis only is particularly found. Even if some weak auspicious prakriti may come to rise, it is not strong; therefore, in their existence also they remain miserable due to the influence of Moha. 

In Gotra Karma, only the rise of low status determining Karma exists; therefore, they do not get respectability and as such they are unhappy only.

In this way, the one-sensed beings are extremely miserable. As in this world the stone having some base remains resting for a long time, but in the baseless space (sky) it rarely remains for a very short duration, similarly, Jiva remains in the state of one-sensed being for a very long duration but in other forms of existence he sometimes remains for a very short duration. Therefore, the Jiva is extremely miserable in this world.

Miseries of Mobile (Incomplete-sensed souls) and irrational Five-sensed beings

In the two-sensed, three-sensed, four-sensed and irrational five-sensed forms of bodies also, this Jiva experiences miseries similar to those experienced by one-sensed beings. The only difference is that here the Jiva obtains successively increased knowledge, perception and energy related to each sense and attains the power of speaking
and moving. Here also the Jivas who are Aparyaptas and even those who are paryaptas possessing weak strength and are smaller beings, all these do not possess much power. And there are many paryaptas Jivas also possessing lot of strength & are big in size; they possess some power; therefore, they try for getting the objects of senses and
try for getting rid of miseries. Out of anger, etc., they indulge in the acts of biting, killing, fighting, deceiving, hoarding grains, etc., fleeing etc., they wriggle and cry out of pain; so, their sorrow is somewhat visible also. Thus, the worms, ants, etc. Jivas are seen extremely miserable due to cold, heat, severing, piercing, etc. and hunger, thirst, etc. One should think over their miseries which are clearly seen; what more to describe here? Thus, the two-sensed beings, etc. also should be known as extremely miserable.

Miseries of Rational Five-sensed beings

(1) Miseries of Infernal State of Existence: In the rational five-sensed beings the inhabitants of hell are extremely distressed in all respects.  They have somewhat power of knowledge, but the desire of the objects of senses is too much and they do not get even a little bit material of favorite objects.  Therefore, the possession of that power (of knowledge, etc.) is also a cause of great misery.  Extreme severity of anger, etc. passion is found in them, because they possess black Leshya, etc. (inauspicious thought coloration) only.

The act of causing misery to one another is found there continuously due to wrath and pride.  If they establish friendship with one another then the sufferings may end.  Moreover, by causing pain to others none of their purpose is served, but vehemence of anger and pride found more in them, because of which they have tendency of causing only misery to one another by means of Vaikriya (transformation, ability to change appearance at will.); they make limbs in the body for causing pain to others and others cause affliction to them.  The passion never subsides.  And the vehemence of deceit and greed passion is also more in them, but no act of those passions; because of those passions they are extremely afflicted internally.  And sometimes, by chance, some object of those passions is also materialized due to some reason.

Further indulgence in laughter and liking (Quasi) passions is also there but in the absence of external causes, their action is not visible; rarely on account of some reason, those become visible.  And the external causes of disliking, sorrow, fear, disgust (Quasi-passions) are found; therefore, those passions are intensely manifested.  And in sex-passions, only neuter sex-passion is found in them; so, the sex desire is great and the facility of copulation with women and men is not available there, therefore, they are extremely anguished.  In this way, they are extremely miserable because of passions.

Moreover, in Vedaniya Karma there exists only the rise of Asata (unpleasant feeling producing) Karma, due to which there exists the causes of various types of agonies.  In the body, different diseases like leprosy, cough, asthma, etc. are found together and hunger, thirst are so intense that they want to eat and drink everything and the food available is only of clay of that region.  And that clay also is of such kind that if it comes here (on this earth) then due to its bad smell the human beings of many miles will die.  And cold and heat is such that if there be a round of iron having a diameter of 1 lakh yojana (approx. 8 lakhs miles) it will also turn into ashes.  At some places there is cold and at some places there is heat.  Further, the land there is full of thorns sharper than even the weapons.  The forests in that land are full of leaves like the edge of weapons.  The forests in that land are full of leaves like the edge of weapons.  The river is full of such kind of water that on getting its touch the body will split into pieces.  The wind is so strong that due to it the body gets scorched.  And the infernal beings cause agony in different ways to one another, viz. crush in the oil press, cut into pieces, parch in the big pots (in the ovens), beat with whips, touch read hot iron bars, etc. and thus in many ways, they torment one another.  The Asura Kumar Devas (malevolent celestial beings) go up to third infernal region.  They themselves cause pain and make them to fight with each other.  In spite of such agony severance of body is not possible; even on getting cut into pieces it rejoins just like mercury.  Such extreme agony is there.

Further, no object of Sata is there.  By chance, in some measure, to someone as per his belief, from some point of view, the rise of Sata is found but it is not powerful.  There Ayu (life) is very long.  The minimum life time is ten thousand years and the maximum life-time is thirty-three Saguaros.  For such a long period, one has to bear such kinds of sufferings.  The rise of only all inauspicious (papa) prakriti of Name-karma is found there; not a single auspicious (Punya) Prakriti is found in the operative state; due to those (papa-prakriti) they are extremely distressed.  And in Gotra-karma there exists the rise of Neecha Gotra (Low status karma) only due to that they do not get respectability; so also they are extremely miserable only.  In this way, one should know that in the infernal state of existence there are extreme agonies only.

Miseries of Tiryanch Gati (Animals)

In Tiryanch Gati many Jivas are Labdhi Aparyaptas (undeveloped beings).  Their Ayu (life-time) is only 1/18th part of the time of one respiration.  And many Paryaptas (developed beings) also are of very small size, but their power is not visibly seen manifested.  Their miseries are to be known like that of one-sensed beings; knowledge, etc. are somewhat more. And many big-sized Paryaptas beings are spontaneously born beings; many are of uterus birth. In them knowledge, etc. are found manifested, but they are found agitated by the desire of objects. Among them, many Jivas do not get favorite objects; someone rarely gets a few objects. 

Owing to perverse faith, they are assuredly having fallacy in Tattvas and passion is chiefly found of intense type. Due to anger & pride, they fight, eat and cause pain to one another; due to deceit &  greed, they indulge in deceitful acts and desired objects. They indulge in the acts of those passions through laughter, etc. Rarely someone is found having feeble passion; but this happens to only a
few Jivas; hence, its predominance is not there.

In Vedaniya Karma there is chiefly the rise of Asata; due to which disease, anguish, hunger, thirst, piercing, severing, carrying too much load, cold, heat, maiming etc. conditions are caused. Because of that they are clearly seen afflicted; therefore, much is not described here. Rarely someone meets with the rise of somewhat Sata also but it is limited to a few Jivas only; it is not predominant. And the Ayu (life-time) is found from one Antar Muhurta (less than 48 minutes) up to crores of years. There, most of the Jivas possess only a very short span of life (age) and hence, they suffer from the pangs of birth and death. And the Jivas of enjoyment-land (Bhoga-Bhumi) have a greater span of life (age) and they have the rise of Sata (Karma causing pleasure) also, but those Jivas are limited in number. Moreover, mostly there is found the rise of Tiryanch Gati etc. inauspicious (Papa) prakritis of Name-Karma. Rarely someone meets with the rise of a few auspicious (Punya) prakritis also, but it is found in lesser measure to some Jivas; it is not predominant. And in Gotra-Karma only, the rise of low status determining Karma is found, so they are suffering from lowness. Thus, there is extreme misery in Tiryanch Gati (animals). 

Miseries of Human State of Existence

In the human state of existence, innumerable Jivas are Labdhi-Aparyaptas (undeveloped souls), those all are Sammoorchchhanas (spontaneously generated); their span of life (age) is just 1/18th part of the time of one respiration. And many of the Jivas after coming into mother's womb die in a very short period; their potentiality does not get manifested, their miseries are to be known similar to those of one-sensed beings and other specialties are also found which are to be known accordingly.

The beings of uterine birth are born after living for some period in the womb; their miseries have been described earlier from the karmic bondage point of view. All that description is possible for human beings of uterine birth. Or it should be known similar to that of the Tiryanchas as described earlier.

The special point is this that here in human beings some particular power is found. The kings, etc. have more rise of Sata Karma and the Ksatriyas (militants) have the rise of high family status determining Karmas also. And the association of wealth, relatives (kith and kin) etc. is found particularly.

Or, the distresses of womb state, etc. are known clearly. As a worm is generated in feces, similarly, this Jiva is born in the womb, forming his body out of the union of sperm and ovum. There the growth of knowledge, etc. and of body takes place gradually. The pain of staying in womb is extreme. There, one completes the period in the
contract form and procumbent state with hunger and thirst feeling, etc. When he comes out of the womb then he suffers from great misery in childhood. Some people say that in childhood misery is less; it is not so, but due to weak power it is not manifested. Afterwards the miseries of indulging in business, etc. and satisfying the passion desires, etc. get manifested. The perturbation caused due to agreeable and disagreeable feelings continues persisting and in old age he becomes languid and then he becomes extremely unhappy. These miseries are evidently seen happening. What more should be stated? One who does not recognize the evidently happening miseries of human life, how would he like to listen to their description? Someone, by chance, meets with the rise of somewhat Sata (auspicious prakritis) that too is full of perturbation. And the ranks of the personages like Tirthankaras, etc. are not attained without attaining the path of liberation. Thus, in the human life, miseries alone exist.

In human life, if someone wishes to make effort for self-benefaction then he can do so.  For example, the root and the top insipid portions of a worm-eaten sugarcane are not at all worth sucking and the middle pieces being worm-eaten are also not worth sucking.  If someone greedy to taste spoils them he is free to do so, but if those are sown then many sugarcanes will be produced out of them and their taste will also be very sweet.  Similarly, the childhood and the old age of human life are not worth enjoying and the middle age is full of diseases and distresses; happiness cannot be there.  If someone greedy of carnal pleasures spoils it he is free to do so, but if it is used in the observance of religious conduct then he will attain a very high spiritual status.  There, high degree of imperturbable happiness is found.  Hence, here (in this human birth) one should make effort for self-benefaction and should not lose it in vain under the delusion of happiness.

Miseries of Celestial beings

In the celestial state of existence, the power of knowledge etc. is somewhat more than the others.  They have false-belief about the Tattvas due to perverse faith.  Their passions are some what feeble.  The passions of the Residential (Bhavanavasi), the peripatetic (Ventura) and the Stellar (Jyotiska) orders of celestial beings are not very feeble and tehir Upayoga (active consciousness) is very fickle; they possess some power is increasingly more.  Hence, due to decrease in restlessness anguish also decreases.

Here in the celestial beings, the anger and pride passions are found but the motivating cause is less; so, the acts of those passions are not predominant.  The lower classes of Devas (celestial beings) are found indulging in causing harm and humiliating others due to forlicsomenss, etc. But this type of behavior is found in lesser measure in the higher class of Devas (Vaimanika).  It is not predominant.  And the causes of deceit and greed passions are found there; that is why the acts of those passions are predominant.  As such the acts of deceiving, desiring the objects of sensual pleasures, etc. are chiefly found in them.  These acts too are found in lesser measure in higher and higher Devas.

Further, the motivating causes of laughter, liking quasi-passions are found in greater measure; hence, the acts of these passions are predominant.  And the causes of disliking, sorrow, fear, disgust, quasi-passions are less; hence, the acts of these passions are not predominant.  And the rise of female sex-passion and male sex-passion is also found and the cause of dalliance is also present, so they enjoy copulation; these passions are too feeble in the higher and higher Devas.  The sexual desire is absent in the Ahmindras (Self-Gods) due to feebleness of sex-passion.

In this way, the celestial beings too have passions and anguish is caused by the passions only.

And as the degree of passions in Devas is of lesser measure; accordingly, the degree of misery is also less.  That is why they are said to be happy in comparison to others.  In spiritual sense the passions are alive; hence, they are only unhappy.

In Vedaniya Karma the rise of Sata Vedaniya is more.  There also it is less in the three (residential, peripatetic and stellar) classes of Devas and is found in increasingly greater measure in higher & higher Vaimanika (heavenly Gods).  The association of favorite state of body, goddesses (wives), palaces, etc. is found there.  And rarely due to some reason somewhat rise of Asta Vedaniya is also found.  It is found somewhat manifested also in the lower classes of Devas, but it is not found manifested more apparently in the higher class of Devas.  And Ayu (life-time) is very long.  The minimum life-time is ten thousand years and maximum is thirty-one Saguaros.  Without attaining the right path of liberation no one can have more Ayu (life-time) than this.  So, for such a long period they (the Devas) remain engrossed in the carnal pleasures.  And the rise of all (Punya) auspicious prakritis of Name-Karma like Devagati etc. is found there; hence, are the causes, of happiness.  And in Gotra Karma, there exists the rise of Uchcha Gotra only, hence, they hold respectable position.

Thus, owing to the specialty of the rise of Punya Karmas they possess the association of agreeable things and due to rise of passions the carnal desire is found.  Therefore, they are found engrossed in enjoying them. But the desire is excessively more; therefore, they do not become happy. The higher class of Devas possess the rise of highest degree of Punya (auspicious Karmas) and the passion is extremely feeble, nevertheless the absence of desire is not found in them also; therefore, in spiritual sense, they are assuredly unhappy.

In this way, everywhere in the world only miseries and miseries are found. Here ends the description of miseries from the modifications (Paryaya) point of view.

General Characteristics of Miseries

Now, the general characteristics of all sorts of miseries are being described. The differentia of misery is perturbation and the perturbation is caused by desire.

Four kinds of desires
 
Many kinds of desires are found in this mundane being:

(1) One type of desire is of enjoying the objects of senses, due to which one wants to know and see; for example, the desire of seeing color, listening to melody, knowing the unknown, etc. arises. No other pain is there but so long as one does not know and see, he feels extremely perturbed. This type of desire is called Carnal Desire (Vishaya Ichchha).

(2) The Second type of desire is of acting according to one's passionate emotions, due to which one wants to indulge in actions like that of harming others, humiliating others, etc. Here, no other pain is there but so long as that work is not completed he remains highly perturbed. This type of desire is called Passionate desire (Kashaya- Ichchha).

(3) The third type of desire is of removing those harmful causes which are met with either in the body, or are external to the body owing to the rise of Papa-Karmas. For example, on association of disease, ache, hunger, etc., the desire of removing these arises. So, here one believes this only as to be the anguish. So long as it is not removed he remains highly perturbed. This type of desire is called the rise of Vice (Papa).

In this way, all Jivas feel unhappy on the rise of these three types of desires. This is assuredly misery.

(4) The fourth type of desire is produced due to some external cause because of which one desires to act according to above three types of desires.  In these three types of desires each type of desire has many varieties. The causes of satisfaction of many varieties of desires are met with due to the rise of Punya-Karma but their means are not met with simultaneously; that is why leaving indulgence in one desire he engages himself in other desire and afterwards leaves this also and involves himself in another one. As someone has got different kinds of things, out of them he sees any one thing, leaving it starts listening to melody; again leaves it only; after seeing one object starts seeing some other object. Similarly, the desire of indulging in various types of activities arises. So, this desire is called the rise of Punya-Karmas (Virtue).

The world believes this to be happiness, but this is not happiness; this is misery only. Because, firstly nobody gets the means of satisfying all sorts of desires. And if in someway, the resources of fulfilling the desire are met with then their availability is not simultaneous. So long as the means of (satisfying) one desire is not obtained, the perturbation due to the same continues. And after getting its means, at the same time the desire of getting the means of another desire arises; then it causes perturbation. He does not remain unperturbed even for a single moment. Therefore, it is nothing but misery. Or he tries somewhat to eradicate the disease in the form of three kinds of desires; so the anguish gets somewhat reduced. But the misery is not fully removed.  Therefore, it is nothing but misery. In this way, the mundane beings suffer from miseries in every respect.

Further, it should be known here that the whole world is afflicted by these three types of desires and the fourth type of desire, is evolved on the rise of Punya and the bondage of Punya is caused by engrossment in religious acts; but the Jiva engages himself in religious acts only sometimes. Mostly Jiva indulges in sinful acts.  Therefore, the fourth type of desire is found in some Jivas at sometime only.

It is to be remembered that from the point of view of Jivas having similar desires the Jiva having the fourth type of desire is said to be happy owing to the partial decrease in three types of desires. And in comparison to the Jiva having fourth type of desire the Jiva having very intense desire, though found with fourth type of desire, is more miserable. Someone possesses lot of wealth and desires it too much, then he is very much perturbed; and one who has got less wealth and his desire is also less, then he is less perturbed. Or someone has got the (association of) disagreeable thing but has less desire of removing it, then he is less agitated. And someone has the association of agreeable things but he has more desire of enjoying them and of collecting various other things, then that Jiva is more agitated. Therefore, it is to be known that happiness or misery are not dependent on external causes but are governed by desire.

It is stated that the infernal (hellish) beings are unhappy and celestial beings are happy; this also is stated from the desire point of view. Because the infernal beings have too much desire due to vehement passions and the celestial beings have less desire due to feeble passions. Also human beings and sub-human beings (animals, birds, etc.) are happy or unhappy on account of desires only. Owing to intense passions, one who has excessive desire is said to be unhappy and owing to mild passion, one who has less desire is said to be happy. Spiritually, the anguish only is either more or less but there is no happiness. The celestial beings, etc. are also believed to be happy; this too is only fallacy. In them, the fourth desire predominates, so they are perturbed.

Thus, the desire is caused due to wrong faith, wrong knowledge and wrong conduct (incontinence). The desire is full of perturbation and perturbation is nothing but misery. In this way all mundane beings are assuredly suffering from different types of miseries.

Bliss of Liberation and the Means of its Attainment

Now, those Jivas who want to get rid of misery should make effort to root out desire. And the desire gets rooted out only then, when wrong faith, wrong knowledge and wrong conduct (incontinence) are destroyed and the right faith, right knowledge and right conduct are attained. It is, therefore, worthwhile to make effort for achieving this only. By making such effort, the misery gets destroyed in the same measure in which the desire gets rooted out.

And when due to total extermination of Moha (delusion) all desires are destroyed then all sorts of miseries get destroyed, and real bliss is evolved. And when Jnanavarana, Darshanavarana and Antaraya Karmas are destroyed then the desire causing Kshayopashamik Jnan darshan & Virya also comes to an end; and the infinite knowledge, perception and energy are attained. And after lapse of sometime, the Aghati Karmas also get destroyed; then the external causes of desire also get destroyed. Because, after eradication of Moha (delusion) these (Aghati-Karmas) are not capable of producing any desire at any time. These become causes only in existence of Moha. Therefore, these (Aghati-Karmas are said to be the causes; on their destruction the Jiva attains Siddhahood (liberated state of the soul). There being the total absence of sorrow and causes of sorrow, the emancipated souls always remain situated in the state of peerless, irrevocable supreme bliss (beatitude) for infinite time. The same is being explained:

 Absence of Miseries in Liberated State

In the state of Kshayopashama and Udaya (rise of Jnanavarana and Darshanavarana Karmas) being over-powered by Moha (deluding Karma) and due to the desire of seeing and knowing each and every item, this Jiva used to remain extremely perturbed, now (in Siddha state) due to absence for Moha, the desire also ends; consequently, misery also ends. And due to kashaya (destruction) of Jnanavarana and Darshanavarana Karmas all objects of all senses are being known together; hence, the cause of misery is also removed. For example, one wanted to see every object one after the other through eyes, now he sees all color soft the whole universe and of all times (past, present and future) simultaneously, none remains unseen for which the desire of seeing may arise. Similarly, he (mundane being) wanted to know every object one by one through the touch and other senses, now, he (Siddha) knows all sorts of touch, taste, odor and words of the whole universe and of all times (present, past and future) simultaneously; nothing remains unattained for which the desire of attaining may arise. 

Question:  How would it be feasible to know without the body, etc.?

Answer:  In the presence of sensory knowledge, one was not able to know the objects without physical sense, etc.; now such characteristic got manifested that even without physical senses knowing of objects takes place.

Question:  In Siddha state, knowing would be taking place in the same manner as the mundane beings know the touch, etc. through mind and would not be in the manner in which the mundane beings know through touch and tongue, etc.?

Answer: It is not so; because on remembering, etc. through mind, one knows a little indistinctly.  As in mundane state, one knows clearly the touch, taste, etc. through the sense of touch, tongue, etc. by touching, taking taste, smelling, seeing and hearing, even infinite times more clear than that is known here in Siddha state.

The difference is only this much that there in mundane state one used to know on getting contact between senses and the objects, whereas here in Siddha state similar knowing takes place in spite of the objects remaining far off; this is the excellence of the power of knowledge.  Further, he (the mundane rational being) wanted to know some objects of past, future and the unmanifested through the mind; now (in Siddha state) he knows the substance, place, time and dispositions (traits) of all kinds of substances simultaneously from beginningless to endless period; nothing remains unknown for which the desire of knowing may arise.  In this way, one should know the absence of misery and its causes in the Siddha state.

Further, (in mundane state) owing to the rise of Moha (deluding Karma) perverse belief and the passion dispositions used to arise, all those got totally destroyed (in Siddha state); consequently, the misery also ended and because the causes of misery have also got destroyed.  The absence of those causes is being explained here:

On having realized (known) the true nature of all the substances, how can there remain the perverse belief of the form of disbelief in Tattvas? Nothing remained harmful, the censurer himself gets harmed; on whom should he (Siddha) become angry? None is higher than Siddhas.  The Lord Indra, etc. themselves bow to them and achieve the desired object; with whom should he feel exalted? All destiny is known, nothing is left undone, no purpose remains with any object; in which thing should he have greed? No other agreeable thing remains unattained; due to what reason should he indulge in laughter? No other agreeable object remains worth loving; where should he have liking? No distress causing external association remains; where should he have disliking? No favorable disfavorable association-dissociation take place; why should he feel lamentation about anything? No cause creating harm remains, why should he have fear from anything? All things are cognized by him with their inherent characteristics, nothing is disagreeable to him; where should he have disgust? Due to absence of sexual affiliation no purpose remains of cohabiting with woman and man both; what for should he feel the sex-passion peculiar to man, woman or eunuch? Thus, in Siddha state there is total absence of the causes producing Moha.

Further, because of feeble power due to rise of Antaraya (obstructing) Karma the soul’s energy was not manifested fully; now it is destroyed; so, the misery also got destroyed.  And infinite energy of soul is manifested; hence, the cause of misery ahs also disappeared.

Question:  The Siddha Gods do not perform the acts of charity, benefit, enjoyment, re-enjoyment; how has their power got manifested?

Answer:  These acts were the treatment of the disease; when there is no disease why should one take treatment? Hence, there is no existence of these acts and the Karmas obstructing these acts got destroyed, that is why the power is said to have got manifested.  For example, someone wanted to go somewhere; some other person obstructed him, then he was unhappy and when the obstruction is removed then the purpose for which he wanted to go is now no more.  Therefore, he did not go.  There, even without his going, the power of going is said to be manifested; similarly, one should know here also.  Further, they are found possessing infinite energy in the form of infinite knowledge, etc.

Further, on getting the rise of inauspicious prakritis of Aghati- Karmas (non-destructive Karmas) he (the mundane being) was feeling distressed and on getting the rise of auspicious (Punya) prakritis was feeling happiness but in spiritual sense due to perturbation all that was anguish only. Now (in Siddha state) due to destruction of Moha (deluding Karma) on getting all sorts of perturbation rooted out, the anguish of all kinds is destroyed. And the causes by which he was feeling distressed, got destroyed and due to certain reasons, because of some lessening in misery, he was feeling  happiness. Now the misery is rooted out; therefore, there remains no necessity of the means of treatment of misery by which he (the Siddha God) may like to accomplish the purpose. Its accomplishment is taking place on its own. The details of the same are explained here:
 
In Vedaniya due to rise of Asatya the diseases hunger, etc. used to evolve in the body as cause of anguish. Now (in Siddha state) since there is no corporal body, there is no corporeal body, where would these generate? Moreover, the fever, etc. were the causes of harmful state of the body but now (in Siddha state) without body where would the causes remain? And in the mundane life) the external harmful instrumental causes were associated, but now nothing disagreeable remains for them. In this way (in Siddhahood) the causes of misery have ended.

And due to rise of Sata, the medicines, food, etc. were the cause of mitigating somewhat misery, now (in Siddha state) their purpose does not remain and the agreeable purposes are not dependent on anything; therefore, externally also there remains no purpose of considering friends, etc. to be beneficial; in the mundane state, he wanted to end misery by means of them and wanted to obtain agreeable state, now (in the Siddha state) all misery has ended and everything agreeable has been obtained. And (in the mundane state) birth and death were caused due to Ayu Karma. There, one used to feel anguish due to death but now he has attained an immortal state; hence, there remains no cause of anguish. Further, by holding the material vitality's he used to feel happiness (in mundane state) for quite a long period by keeping alive and dying. There also, in the hellish life, due to intensity of agonies, he did not want to survive; but now in this Siddha state he keeps alive for ever by his sentient vitality even without having material vitality's and there remains even no trace of anguish.

Further, (in mundane existence) due to name-Karma on association of inauspicious Gati (condition of existence) and Jati (genus) etc. he used to feel anguish, but now (in Siddha state) all those have ended where from now anguish arise? And on association of auspicious Gati, Jati, etc. by reduction of some misery, he used to feel happy but now (in Siddha state) even without all these, all miseries have ended and absolute happiness has been manifested. Therefore, no purpose remains with them.

And on getting birth in a low status family due to instrumental cause of Gotra-Karma he used to feel misery; now (in Siddha state), owing to its absence, there remains no cause of misery, and on getting birth in a high status family he used to feel happiness but now (in Siddha state) even without having the high status family, he has attained the highest status worshipable by three worlds.

In this way in Siddha-Gods, due to destruction (shedding off) of all kinds of Karmas, all miseries have ended.

The characteristic of misery is perturbation, and perturbation is caused only when desire arises, but now in Siddha state the desire and the causes of desire have totally ended; therefore, by becoming social one experiences infinite bliss devoid of all miseries, because non-perturbation only is the characteristic of bliss. In the world also, everyone believes happiness by somehow becoming unperturbed.  Why should not one believe full happiness to arise when one becomes totally unperturbed?

Thus, on attaining the Siddhahood by means of right belief, etc. all kinds of miseries end and infinite bliss manifests.

Now, here the sermon is given ": 'O' Bhavya ! 'O' Brother! think yourself as to the worldly miseries described here are experienced by you or not. And whatever means you adopt to remove them are false or not. And also ponder over whether happiness is caused or not on attaining Siddhahood. If you believe in whatever is stated above then adopt those measures, which we have suggested for getting release from mundane existence and obtaining Siddhahood; don't delay. By adopting these measures, you will achieve self-benefaction."

Thus ends the 3rd chapter describing "The miseries of mundane existence and bliss of liberation" in this Moksha Marga Prakashaka  named Shastra.

CHAPTER 4

EXPOSITION OF FALSE BELIEF
KNOWLEDGE & CONDUCT

Couplet:  Is bhav kai sab dukhnikai, karanr Mithyabhav
	    Tin kee sata nash kari, pragtai moksh upaav

The main causes of all miseries of this mundane existence are fallacious (alien) dispositions of belief-knowledge and conduct. By uprooting their existence, the right means of attaining liberation gets manifested.

The fundamental causes of all worldly miseries are perverse belief, perverse knowledge and perverse conduct. Their characteristics are being elaborately described here. As a physician tells in detail the causes of the disease and the patient does not take unsuitable diet then he gets free from the disease. Similarly, a detailed exposition of the cause of transmigration (mundane existence) is given here; by knowing which if the mundane beings do not indulge in perverse belief, etc., then they would get free from mundane existence. Hence, a detailed exposition of the perverse belief, etc. is being given here:

The Characteristics of Perverse Belief

This Jiva is having bondage of karmic matter from times immemorial. The misbelief in Tattvas (reality) caused in him owing to the rise of Darshan Moha (faith-deluding) karma is termed as MithyaDarshan (wrong belief). For, the Quality of thatness is the reality (Tattva) i.e. the intrinsic characteristics of the substance which is worth ascertaining is termed as Tattva (the reality). That which is not a Tattva is Atattva (non-reality). Therefore, that which is Atattva (non-reality) is false, so the name of this (falsity) is perversity (Mithya). And "this is thus only"- having such ascertainment, is called Shraddha (belief).

Here Shraddha (belief) is to be taken as Darshan (Faith). Al- though the literal meaning of the word Darshan is general (undifferentiated) perception, yet with reference to the context here the meaning of this verb should be known as "to believe." Similar interpretation is given in Tattvarthsutra's commentary Sarvartha Siddhi. Because general perception is neither the cause of transmigratory existence nor of liberation; rather the belief alone is the cause of transmigration or liberation; hence, in the context of the cause of transmigration-liberation, the meaning of Darshan should be known as belief only.

Thus, the wrong form of perception, i.e., belief is to be understood as Mithya Darshan (wrong belief). Believing contrary to the nature of the substance and not believing as it really is such fallacious determination, i.e. misconception is Mithya Darshan (perverse belief).

Question: Without omniscience (perfect knowledge) all the substances are not comprehended rightly and without having right comprehension the right belief does not evolve; how could then the wrong belief be abandoned?

Answer: Knowing, not knowing or wrong knowing of the substances depends on the Kshayopashama or Udaya of Jnana Varana karma and the ascertainment (belief) evolves only on knowing; how could ascertainment take place without knowing - this is true. But as some person know incorrectly or correctly those objects with which he has got nothing to do and believes them exactly as he knows them, even due to that there is no harm or benefit to him; because of this he does not get the name of an insane or an ingenious person. And if he knows incorrectly the objects with which he is concerned and believes them accordingly then he gets harmed; so, he is called an insane person and if he knows those objects correctly and believes accordingly then he is benefited; so, he is called a wise person.  Similarly, if the Jiva knows incorrectly or correctly those things with which he is not concemed and believes them accordingly then there is no harm or gain to him; because of this he does not get the title of misbeliever or true believer, but if he knows incorrectly the substances or elements with which he is concerned and believes them accordingly then he is harmed; therefore, he is called misbeliever and if he knows them correctly and believes them accordingly then he is benefitted: therefore, he is called true believer.

Here it should be known that in not knowing or knowing correctly-incorrectly the non-concerned or concerned substances, there happens the decrease or increase of one's knowledge; so, this much is the loss or gain of the Jiva and its instrumental cause is the Jnanavarana karma. But due to holding false or right belief about the concerned 
(essential) substances, there happens some more harm or benefit to this Jiva; so, its instrumental cause is Darshan Moha karma.

Question: Since belief is according to the knowledge, hence, belief appears to be related with Jnana Varana karma; how could the specific instrumentality of Darshan Moha karma be established here?

Answer: All five-sensed rational beings possess the Kshayopashama (destruction cum subsidence) of Jnanavarana karma (i.e., manifestation of knowledge) necessary for effectuating belief of the Jiva etc., essential principles (Purposeful Tattvas).  But the Dravyalingi Muni (a possessionless ascetic following complete conduct without right belief) studies even up to eleven Angas (out of the total 12 Angas of the whole scripture) and the Devas (Gods) of Graiveyaka heavens possess clairvoyance knowledge (Avadhijnan) etc.; in spite of possessing such a high degree of Kshayopashama of Jnana varana karma they do not possess the right belief of Jiva etc., essential principles whereas the Tiryanchas (rational five-sensed animals) in spite of their having lesser degree of Kshayopashama of Jnanavarana karma may be found possessed with right belief of Jiva etc., essential principles. It is, therefore, understood that the belief does not evolve according to. (the Kshayopashama of) Jnanavarana only; some other (instrumental) karma is there and that is Darshan Moha (faith-deluding karma). Owing to its rise, the Jiva is found with false belief; then he perversely believes the Jiva etc.  essential Tattvas.

Purposeful and Purposeless Substances (Principles)

Question: Which are the purposeful and purposeless substances?

Answer: This Jiva has only one purpose and it is that he should not be miserable but be happy. No Jiva has any other purpose. And non-occurrence of sorrow and occurrence of happiness is one and the same thing, because the absence of misery is nothing but happiness and the accomplishment of this purpose takes place by acquiring right belief of Jiva etc. Tattvas (realities).

Question: How does it happen?

Answer: First of all for eradicating miseries, one must possess the discriminating knowledge of the self and the non- self. If one does not have the discriminative knowledge of the self and non-self then how can he eradicate his misery without identifying the self? Or knowing the self & non-self as to be one thing, if for rooting out the sorrow of the self, one does the treatment of the other non-self thing, how can then the sorrow of the self be rooted out? Or the non- self things are distinctly different from the self, but if one holds the feeling of I-ness and mineness in those non- self things, then misery alone results. The misery gets eradicated only on attaining the discriminative knowledge of the self and non-self. And the knowledge of the self and non- self is attained only after having got the discriminative knowledge of Jiva (soul) and Ajiva (non-soul) substances, because the one himself is Jiva (soul) and the body, etc. are Ajiva (non-soul).

If through distinctive characteristics (differences) etc., the Jiva-Ajiva are identified, then the separateness of self and non-self may be comprehended; hence one ought to know Jiva-Ajiva. Or, on acquiring the knowledge of Jiva-Ajiva, the substances by contrary belief of which one used to suffer from misery, now by attaining the right knowledge of the same, misery gets eradicated; hence, acquiring knowledge of Jiva-Ajiva is a must.

Further, the cause of sorrow is bondage of karmic matter and its causes are false belief, etc. influx (instincts). If one does not identify these, does not know these as to be the root cause of sorrow, how can then he uproot them? And if one does not eradicate these instincts, how would not then the karmic bondage take place? Therefore, misery alone is caused. Or the false belief, etc. instincts (dispositions) are misery -incarnate. If those are not identified correctly as they really are, then one cannot eradicate them and consequently, one would remain miserable only; hence, one must know Asrava (influx).

Further, the cause of all miseries is karmic bondage. If one does not know this then one would not make effort to get rid of it; then due to its instrumentality one would remain miserable. Therefore, one must know Bandha (Bondage).

And uprooting of Asrava (influx) is Samvara (stoppage); if one does not know its (Samvara 's) differentia then one would not indulge in it; then influx (Asrava) only would continue, due to which misery alone would be caused both in present and in future. Therefore, one must know Samvara (stoppage).

Further, somewhat partial eradication of karmic bondage is termed as Nirjara (partial sheddingoff). If one does not know it, then he would not make effort to follow it; consequently, the karmic bondage would persist wholly, due to which misery alone would continue. Hence, one must know Nirjara (partial shedding off of impurity).

And the absolute up rooting of all sorts of karmic bondage is termed as Moksha (perfect liberation). If one does not identify it, he would not make effort for evolving it, then he will continue suffering from the agonies in the world produced by karmic bondage. Hence, one must know Moksha (liberation).  Thus, one should know Jiva, Ajiva etc. seven Tattvas (realities).

Further, if someone may know the seven Tattvas from scripture but until "those are exactly so only" - such sort of a crystal clear conception is not evolved, what is then the advantage of such knowledge? Therefore, right belief of Tattvas is fruitful. Thus, only on acquiring the true belief of Jiva etc. Tattvas, the purpose of eradicating miseries is accomplished. Hence, one should know that the Jiva etc. substances only are the purposeful substances (Tattvas).

Further, specific details of these (Tattvas) are Punya (virtue) and Papa (vice) etc; their true belief also is fruitful because detailed exposition is more effective than general exposition. Thus, these substances are purposeful; hence, on acquiring their right belief, misery ends and real happiness evolves and without their right belief misery continues and happiness does not evolve.

And besides above stated Padarthas (substances) there are other innumerable substances; all those are purposeless because possessing or not possessing their right belief is in no way the cause of happiness or misery.

Question: Basically, you have described Jiva and Ajiva the two substances, in which rest all substances are covered; besides them, what other substances are left out which are described as purposeless?

Answer: All substances are, of course, covered in Jiva-Ajiva but there are many specialties of those Jiva-Ajiva substances. Out of those specialities of Jiva-Ajiva, the right belief of such specialities which leads to the right belief of self and non-self, gives rise to the belief of forsaking Raag (attachment) etc. and will produce happiness; and by having wrong belief, of which the right belief of self and non-self is not evolved, the belief of forsaking attachment, etc. is not generated and will result in misery. Knowledge of Jiva & Ajiva substances with such specialties is to be known as purposeful.  Moreover, the Jiva-Ajiva substances with their those specialties are to be known purposeless by having or not having the right belief of which the belief of self and non-self may or may not get generated and the belief of uprooting attachment, etc. may or may not get evolved; there is no surety.

For instance, having belief of Jiva and body (person) with Caitanya (consciousness) and Murtatva (corporeality) etc. respectively is purposeful and having belief of human, etc. embodied and jar, cloth, etc. forms of matter (specific forms of Jiva & matter) is purposeless. Similarly, other examples are to be known.

Thus, wrong belief of the aforesaid purposeful Jiva etc. Tattvas should be known as Mithya Darshan (perverse faith). 

The Tendency of Wrong Belief

Now the tendency of wrong belief found in mundane beings is described here. Though belief is to be described, yet the description is being given with emphasis on cognizance, because belief follows knowledge.

Wrong Belief about the Self (Jiva) and Non-self (Ajiva) Tattvas

The self Jiva is from the beginningless time; he assumes different modifications owing to the instrumentality of karmic matter.  There, he relinquishes the former modification and assumes new modification. And that modification is a conglomerated form of bondage of the one- self (soul) and corporal body of infinite matter-particles (atoms). And "I am this" such sort of I-ness feeling in that modification is found to this Jiva. And he himself is Jiva (soul), his intrinsic nature is knowledge, perception, etc. and the alien dispositions are anger, etc. and the color, smell, taste, touch, etc. are the nature of matter-particles (atoms) - all these characteristics, he believe to be as his own nature.

`These are mine' - this type of mineness feeling is found in them (non-self things). And he himself is a Jiva, the increasing-decreasing states of knowledge, etc. and anger- passion, etc. are his modifications and the changing of color, etc. is the modification of matter-particles (atoms) - all these forms he believes to be as his own modifications. `This is my state' such sort of mineness feeling is held by him.

Further, there exists cause and effect relationship between the Jiva (soul) and body, hence, whatever movement or action takes place, he believes it to be as his own. Perception, knowledge (sentience) is one's nature and the touch, etc. material senses which are parts (limbs) of the body are merely instrumental to his activity.  This (misbeliever) treating these as one with himself, believes that "I touched by hand, etc., tasted by tongue, smelled by nose, saw by eyes, heard by ears". Further, situated in the heart is the material-mind made up of (specific material-particles called) Manovargana in the form of eight-petal lotus. It is not visible to eyes, and is a part of body; thus on its being instrumental, the knowledge functions in the form of remembrance, etc. Treating the material mind and the knowledge as one, he believes that "I knew by material mind". 
Further, when the desire of speaking arises then he vibrates his Pradeshas (spatial units) in- a way that speaking materializes.  Thereby, owing to (the instrumentality of) common-space occupancy-relationship, the organs of the body also vibrate.  Owing to their instrumentality, the Bhasha- Varganakind of Pudgala (matter-particles) turn into the vocal-words-form.  Treating all these as one, he believes "I speak".

Further, the desire of making movement, etc. action or acquiring (enjoying) a thing, etc., arises in the self, then he vibrates his Pradeshas in a way that the desired action takes place. There, owing to the common-space-occupancy- relationship; the organs of the body vibrate then that action takes place; or without one's desire the body vibrates; then one's (soul's) Pradeshas also vibrate. Treating all these as one, he believes "I make movement, etc. I acquire (enjoy) the objects or I have acquired (enjoyed) it, etc." Thus he believes in several ways.

Further, when the passion dispositions arise in this Jiva then the bodily movements also become according to those passions; for example, eyes become red on the rise of anger- passion, etc., the face becomes cheerful on the rise of laughter-passion, the penis becomes stiff (erect) on the rise of male sex-passion; this (misbeliever) treating all these as one, believes, "I do all these acts". And the states of cold, warm, hunger, thirst, disease, etc. are generated in the body; through their instrumentality, being overpowered by delusion, he himself believes happiness and sorrow; knowing all these as one, he believes the cold, etc. (states of body) and happiness-sorrow as if all this has happened in him. 

Further, because of union and disunion of the atoms of the body or because of changes in their states or because of cuts in the bodily parts, etc., one (embodied self) becomes (physically) obese-gaunt (lean and thin) etc., young-old, etc. or crippled, and accordingly, one's soul's Pradeshas get contracted or expanded; this (misbeliever) treating all these as one, believes: I am obese, I am lean and thin (gaunt), I am child, I am old (aged), my these limbs have been cut" believes in such many ways.

Further, the Gati (state of existence), Kul (race) etc. are found from the viewpoints of the body. Treating them as one's own, he believes, "I am human, I am animal or plant (Tiryanch), I am Kshatriya (warrior), I am Vaishya (trader) etc." And from the union and disunion of the body point of view, birth and death take place; treating it as his own birth-death, he believes: "I took birth, I will die".

Due to the relationship with the body only, he believes having kinship with other things. He treats them to be his parents who have been instrumental in giving birth to his body, to her who dallys his body amorously accepts as his wife, to him who got birth by his body accepts as his son, to him who is beneficent (helpful) to his body accepts as his friend, to him who harms his body accepts as his foe; such sorts of belief are found in him.

What more to say? He believes himself and the body as one in all respects. Here the names of the senses, etc. have been described but he is totally unaware of all this. Senselessly, he holds I-ness feeling in the embodied form (Paryaya); What is its reason? The same is being explained now:

This Jiva is having sensory knowledge from the beginningless time, due to that reason, "the self who is of non-corporeal (immaterial) form" this is not cognized by him, but 'the body which is of material form' - that only is cognized by him. And it is the nature of the self to definitely possess I-ness feeling by knowing something as to be the self. Hence, so long as the self (soul) is not cognized as to be a separate entity till then he possesses I-ness feeling in their combined form of modification (embodied form) only.

There exists an uttermost cause and effect relationship between the self (soul) and the body, that is why the separateness (discrimination) is not cognized and the thought by which the separateness is cognized cannot evolve owing to intense influence of wrong belief.  Therefore, I-ness feeling is found in the embodied form (Paryaya) only.

Further, sometimes on association of external things (wealth, etc.), this Jiva treats all these things as his own due to wrong belief.  Although son, wife, wealth, grain, elephant, horse, house (palace), servant, etc. appear to the self as distinctly different from the self and always not dependent on the self, even then he (this misbeliever) feels mineness in them.

Sometimes such sort of hallucination about the son, etc. arises that "their existence is my existence". And due to wrong belief, the characteristics of the body, etc. are perceived only contrary to their nature. He believes transitory as permanent, separate as not separate, cause of sorrow as cause of happiness, sorrow as happiness; such contrary feeling generates.

Thus, owing to wrong knowledge of Jiva-Ajiva Tattvas wrong belief persists.

 Wrong Belief about Asrava-Tattva

Further, owing to the rise of Mohaniya karma (deluding karma) mithyatv (wrong belief) and kasayas (attachment & aversion passions) etc. dispositions are caused in this Jiva; he (the misbeliever) believes them to be as his nature, does not know them as caused by the rise of karmas. He believes perception and knowledge (Upayoga) and these influx dispositions (Asrava Bhavas) to be as one thing, because their substratum is the same one soul and the change of their modification happens on the same moment of time, therefore, the distinct nature of these is not comprehended by him and the thought (knowledge) which is the cause of realizing distinct nature cannot evolve owing to the force (severity) of wrong belief.

"These wrong belief and passions are found with restlessness, hence are distressing in the present and are the cause of karmic bondage; therefore, will produce misery in future" -he (the misbeliever) does not believe them so and knowing advantageous, indulges himself by engrossing in these dispositions. Further, he becomes miserable because of his own wrong belief and passions and in vain considers others to be the cause of misery. For example, (the Jiva) becomes miserable due to wrong belief but considers that substance irksome which does not modify according to his belief. And one becomes sorrowful due to anger-passion but he considers that thing distressing with which he got angry. One becomes miserable due to greed-passion but he considers misery being caused by not getting the desired thing. Similarly, one should understand in other respects also.

Further, whatever fruition of these influx dispositions takes place, same is not cognized by him. Due to severity of these (passions) one gets birth in the hell, etc. and due to mildness of these, one gets birth in the heaven, etc.; there he experiences more-less restlessness misery but one does not cognizes it to be so and as such those dispositions (influx) do not appear to be bad. The reason is this that those dispositions appear to be produced by him, therefore, how to believe them to be bad?

Thus, owing to wrong knowledge of Asrava-Tattva wrong belief is caused.

Wrong Belief about Bandha-Tattva (Bondage)

Further, karmic bondage of knowledge-obscuring, etc. type of karmas is caused by these influx dispositions (Asrava Bhavas); on rise of those karmas, decrease in knowledge and perception, evolution of perverse belief and passions, non- fulfillment of desired object, meeting with causes of happiness and unhappiness, continued association with the body, getting birth with particular Gati (state of existence), Jati (class of Jivas) body, etc. and obtaining of high-low status take place.

In the causation of these, the prime cause is the karmic matter, which he (the misbeliever) does not identify, because it is extremely subtle in form, it is not visible to him and that karma does not appear to him to be doer (instrumental cause) of these deeds; therefore, in their occurrence, either he believes himself as the doer or someone else as the doer. And when he fails in determining the doer (creator) to be either himself or someone else, then thoughtlessly believes destiny to be the creator.

Thus, owing to wrong knowledge of Bandha-Tattva (principle of bondage) wrong belief is caused.

Wrong Belief about Samvara Tattva

Absence of influx (Asrava) is stoppage (Samvara). How can one effectuate the right belief of Samvara (stoppage of inflow of karmic matter) who does not correctly recognize influx (Asrava)?  For instance, someone follows unwholesome conduct; (if) it does not appear unwholesome to him how would then he believe its absence to be wholesome? Similarly, Jiva (mundane being) is engrossed in influx Asrava; (if) it does not appear harmful to him, how then would he believe Samvara to be beneficial which evolves in the absence of influx (Asrava)?

Since eternity, only Asrava Bhavas are found evolving to this Jiva.  Samvara (stoppage of influx) has never been evolved; therefore, evolution of Samvara is not comprehended by him. On evolution of Samvara the spiritual bliss is produced; this is not believed by him. By Samvara there will be no sorrow in future, is not believed by him. Therefore, he makes no effort for stoppage of influx (Samvara of Asrava) and believing other objects to be distress-causing, makes efforts for their dissociation but those are not under his control; he unnecessarily feels melancholic.

Thus, due to wrong knowledge of Samvara Tattva, wrong belief is caused.

Wrong Belief about Nirjara Tattva

Further, partial destruction of bondage (of karmas) is Nirjara (shedding off). How can he who does not recognize Bandha correctly, evolve the right belief of Nirjara? For example, if someone does not know that misery will be caused by the poison etc. eaten by him, why would then he know beneficial the remedy of destroying it?  Similarly, if one does not know that the misery will be caused by the karmas bonded in the past, how would then he know beneficial the remedy of their destruction (Nirjara)?

Further, this Jiva cannot acquire the knowledge of subtle karmic particles through senses and also does not know their power of causing misery. Therefore, knowing other objects as instrumental in producing misery, he tries to destroy them only, but those objects are not under his control. Moreover, if by chance, for the sake of removing sorrow, some agreeable association takes place, then that too takes place as per one's karmas. Therefore, he unnecessarily becomes miserable by making effort about them.

Thus, due to wrong knowledge of Nirjara Tattva, wrong belief is caused.

Wrong Belief about Moksha Tattva

And (the state of) complete destruction of all sorts of karmic bondage is termed Moksha (perfect liberation). How can one, who does not recognize karmic bondage and all sorts of miseries caused by bondage, have right belief of Moksha? For example, someone is having a disease; if he does not know that disease and the anguish caused by that disease, how would then he believe beneficial the complete eradication of disease? Similarly, this Jiva is having karmic bondage; if he does not know that bondage and the misery caused by that bondage, how would then he know beneficial the complete eradication of karmic bondage?

And this Jiva does not have the knowledge of karmic matter and their potentiality; therefore, knowing the external objects as to be the cause of misery, he tries to destroy them totally. And he knows that he will become perfectly happy by accumulating the desired materials which he believes to be the cause of complete destruction of miseries, but this can never happen.  He unnecessarily becomes miserable.

Thus, due to perverse faith and owing to wrong knowledge of Moksha Tattva the wrong belief is caused. In this way, this Jiva entertains wrong belief about Jiva etc. seven purposeful Tattvas (elements) due to perverse faith.

Wrong Belief about Punya-Papa (Virtue & Vice)

Further, Punya-Papa Tattvas (virtue & vice) are the details of aforesaid Tattvas and the class of both Punya and Papa is one and the same; nevertheless, he understands Punya beneficial and Papa harmful due to wrong belief. Owing to rise of Punya if according to one's desire some work is accomplished then he feels it beneficial and owing to rise of Papa if the desired work does not materialize then he feels it bad; but both are the cause of agitation; hence, both are bad only.

And this Jiva, due to his own conviction, feels happiness- unhappiness in such conditions. Spiritually speaking, wherever there is agitation there is sorrow only. Therefore, treating the rise of Punya and Papa as beneficial and harmful is nothing but delusion.

And many Jivas, at times, consider the auspicious- inauspicious thoughts which are the cause of bondage of Punya and Papa as good or bad; that also is delusion, because both (types of thoughts) are the cause of karmic bondage.

Thus, owing to wrong knowledge of Punya-Papa wrong belief takes place. In this way, the nature of perverse faith in the form of misbelief of Tattvas has been described.  This is false; hence, its name is mithyatv (perverseness) and this is devoid of true belief; hence, the same is termed as Adarshan (no-belief).

The Nature of Wrong Knowledge

Now the nature of wrong knowledge is described. Knowing incorrectly the Jiva etc. purposeful Tattvas is termed Mithya-Jnan (false knowledge). Due to this, doubt, perverseness and indecisiveness are caused in knowing the Tattvas. There, "is it this or that?" - such sort of mutually contradictory dual form of knowledge is termed doubt (Sanshaya); e.g.- "Am I a soul or a material body?" such knowledge - And "It is like this only"- such sort of one form of knowledge contradictory to the intrinsic nature of the substance is termed perverseness (Viparyaya); e.g.- "I am a material body" - such knowledge. And "Something is there" such sort of indeterminate form of thought (knowledge) is termed indecisiveness (Anadhyavasaya), e.g. "I am something"- such knowledge. Thus, doubt, perverseness, indecisiveness form of knowledge about the purposeful essential Jiva etc. Tattvas is termed wrong knowledge (Mithya-Jnan).

Further, the name of false knowledge or right knowledge is not attributed from the viewpoint of knowing correctly or incorrectly the purposeless substances (Tattvas). For instance, if a misbeliever knows a rope as a rope, it is not termed as right knowledge and if a true believer knows a rope as a snake, it is not termed as false knowledge.

Question: Why should not one call right knowledge or wrong knowledge to the clearly perceptible right-wrong knowledge? 

Answer: Where the purpose is only of knowing or ascertaining right-wrong, then whatever substance is there, the name right knowledge, wrong knowledge is given according to the viewpoint of knowing it right or wrong. For example, in describing direct-indirect form of comprehensive knowledge (Pramana) some substance is taken in view; there knowing it correctly is taken as right knowledge and knowing it doubtfully etc. is stated as the invalid form of wrong knowledge. But here the object is to determine the right and wrong knowledge, which are the cause of transmigration or liberation. In this connection the right or wrong knowledge of rope, serpent etc.; is not the cause of transmigration or liberation; that is why the right knowledge or wrong knowledge are not described here from their point of view. Here the right knowledge - wrong knowledge are described from the viewpoint of knowing of the purposeful Jiva, etc. Tattvas.

From this purport point of view only, in the scripture, all knowledge of a misbeliever is termed as false knowledge only and all knowledge of a true believer is termed as right knowledge.

Question: The misbeliever's knowledge about the Jiva etc. Tattvas is wrong; you may call it wrong knowledge, but at least call his correct knowledge about rope, serpent, etc. as to be the right knowledge?

Answer: Whatever a misbeliever knows, he does not perceive there the difference of substantial existence and non- existence, that is why it produces cause-perversity, nature- perversity and discriminative-perversity. There, whatsoever he knows, he does not identify its root cause and believes the contrary cause as to be the real cause; this is cause- perversity. And whatever he knows, there he does not identify its basic substantial nature; rather believes the contrary nature as to be the real nature. This is nature-perversity. And whatever he knows, there he does not identify that this is different from these and indivisible from these; rather believes divisibility and indivisibility contrarily; so, this is discriminative perversity.  Thus, perversity (contrariness) is found in the knowledge of a misbeliever.

Just as an insane person understands mother as wife and wife as mother; in the same way the misbeliever knows (the Tattvas) contrarily. And just as that insane person also in some particular moment knows mother as mother and wife as wife, even then, his knowledge is not backed by definite and assertive belief. Therefore, his knowledge is not said to be right knowledge. Similarly, a misbeliever if in some particular moment knows some thing correctly also, even then his knowledge is not backed by definite and assertive belief or if he knows correctly also from it he fulfills his purpose contrarily only. Therefore, his knowledge is not termed the right knowledge. Thus, misbelieve knowledge is called wrong knowledge.

Question: What's the cause of this wrong knowledge?

Answer: Due to rise of Moha (faith-deluding karma) the wrong belief is caused and the right belief is not evolved, this is the cause of this wrong knowledge; e.g. as due to mixing of poison, the food also is termed as poison; similarly, due to relation with wrong belief, the knowledge is also termed as wrong knowledge.

Question: Why don't you call Jnanavarana karma as to be the instrumental cause?

Answer: Due to rise of Jnanavarana karma ignorance in the form of absence of knowledge is caused and on account of its Kshayopashama somewhat manifestation of knowledge in the form of Mati Jnan (sensory knowledge) etc. takes place. If out of these we regard some aspect as wrong knowledge and some aspect as right knowledge then both of these aspects are found in the misbeliever as well as in the true believer; hence, both of them will be found possessing wrong knowledge and right knowledge and this is against the fundamental principle; therefore, Jnanavarana karma is not established as to be the instrumental cause (of wrong or right knowledge). 

Question: What is the cause of wrong-right knowledge about rope, snake, etc.? Why should not the same be described as the cause of wrong-right knowledge about the Jiva, Ajiva, etc. Tattvas ?

Answer: Whatever incorrectness is there in the knowing process, it is due to the rise of Jnana Varana karma and whatever correctness is found, that is due to the Kshayopashama of Jnana Varana karma. For example, someone knew a rope as a snake; there is the rise of the obstructing cause of the power of knowing correctly; that is why he knows incorrectly; and when he knew a rope as a rope, there the cause of the power of knowing correctly is the Kshayopashama (of Jnanavarana karma); that is why he knows correctly. Similarly, the instrumental cause in the manifestation and non-manifestation of the power of knowing the Jiva-Ajiva etc. Tattvas correctly is only of Jnanavarana karma, but for example, if due to Kshayopashama some person possesses the power of knowing correctly the substances which are the cause of sorrow and happiness, there the one who has got the rise of Asata Vedania karma experiences those objects only which are the cause of sorrow, and does not experience the objects which are the cause of happiness. If he could experience the objects which cause happiness, then he may become happy but that cannot be due to the rise of Asata Vedaniya karma. Therefore, here in experiencing the objects which cause sorrow and happiness, the instrumentality is not of the Jnanavarana karma but the rise of Asata-Sata Vedaniya karma alone is the instrumental cause.  Similarly, Jiva possesses the power of knowing correctly the Jiva etc. purposeful Tattvas and the other purposeless objects. There, one who has the rise of faith-deluding karma, experiences and knows only those objects which are purposeless and does not know the purposeful Tattvas. If he could know the purposeful Tattvas, he may attain the right belief but that cannot be due to the rise of Mithyatva (faith-deluding karma). Therefore, here in knowing the purposeful and purposeless objects, the instrumental cause is not of the Jnanavarana karma but only that of the rise and non-rise of mithyatv (faith-deluding karma). Here one should know that in the one-sensed, etc. irrational beings, where the power of knowing Jiva etc.  Tattvas correctly is not found, there the rise of Jnanavarana karma and the wrong belief caused due to the rise of faith-deluding karma both are instrumental cause. And in the rational human beings etc., where the power of knowing exists due to attainment of Kshayopashama etc. and even then if one does not know (the purposeful Tattvas), there lies the instrumentality of faith-deluding karma only. Therefore, Jnanavarana karma is not stated to be the main cause of wrong knowledge, (but) the disposition caused due to the rise of mithyatv (faith-deluding karma) only is stated to be the cause of wrong knowledge.

Question: Belief evolves on knowing, therefore, why not say that wrong faith is preceded by wrong knowledge?

Answer: It is so only; how can belief evolve without knowing? But the name wrong and `right' is attributed to knowledge on account of instrumentality of wrong belief and right belief respectively. For example, both misbeliever and true believer know the gold etc. objects alike but the knowledge of misbeliever is termed wrong knowledge and knowledge of true believer is termed right knowledge. Similarly, it should be known that the cause of all wrong knowledge and right knowledge is wrong belief and right belief respectively.

Therefore, where knowledge and belief are described in the general sense, there, knowledge is the cause; it should be mentioned first and belief is the effect; so it should be mentioned later. And where wrong-right knowledge-belief are being described, there belief is the cause; it should be stated first and knowledge is the effect; so it should be stated later.

Question: Knowledge and belief both are produced together; how do you establish cause and effect relationship between them? If the cause is present, the effect will also be there? 

Answer: The cause and effect relationship is stated from the point of view that if one is there the other is there; For example, the lamp and light are found together but the light will be there only when the lamp is there; therefore, the lamp is the cause and the light is the effect. Similarly, relationship exists between knowledge and belief. In other words the cause and effect relationship should be known between wrong belief wrong knowledge and right belief right knowledge.

Question: If knowledge gets the name of wrong knowledge when accompanied by wrong belief then why not state the wrong belief only the cause of Samsara (mundane existence); why is wrong knowledge stated separately?

Answer: From the knowledge point of view only there is no specialty in the correct knowledge produced due to Kshayopashama in both the misbeliever and the true believer; and finally the knowledge attains the form of omniscience also in the same way as a river joins the sea. Therefore, there is no fault in the knowledge; but wherever Kshayopashama knowledge gets attached, there it knows (is attached in) only one object (knowable), and due to instrumentality of this wrong belief; that knowledge gets attached in the other purposeless objects (knowable) but it does not get engrossed in ascertaining correctly the purposeful Jiva etc. Tattuas. So, this is the fault of knowledge. This is termed as wrong knowledge. And the right faith about Jiva etc. Tattvas is not evolved; so, it is the fault of belief; this is termed as wrong belief. Thus, due to characteristic difference, the wrong belief and the wrong knowledge are stated to be different.

In this way, the nature of wrong knowledge has been described.  This itself is termed as Ajnana (ignorance) owing to the absence of knowledge of Tattvas (realities), and (since) it does not accomplish the purpose of the self so the same is termed as Kujnana (folly).

The Nature of Wrong Conduct

Now the nature of wrong conduct is being described: The passion disposition which is produced due to the rise of Charitra Mohaniya (conduct-deluding karma) is termed as Mithya Charitra (wrong conduct). Here one is not found with the conduct of the self intrinsic nature and instead wants to follow the false conduct of the non-self nature, which does not materialize; therefore, its name is wrong conduct. The same is being explained.

The nature of the self (soul) is knowing and seeing but the self does not remain a seer and a knower only; whatever objects he sees and knows, he believes them to be beneficial- harmful; therefore, due to attachment-aversion feeling, he wants the association of some object and dissociation of some object, but their association or dissociation is not in his hand, because no substance is the creator or destroyer of any other substance; all substances modify according to their respective nature; he unnecessarily becomes agitated due to passion disposition.

And if, by chance, a substance modifies according to his desire it has not modified by his effort to modify it that way.  As a cart moves and if a child by giving a push to it believes that "I am moving it" -then his belief is false. If it moves due to his effort then why does he not move it when it does not move? Similarly, the substances modify on their own and this Jiva by knowing that modification believes that "I am modifying these this way", but his belief is false. If the substances modify due to his effort then why does he not modify them when they do not modify in the desired fashion? Rarely, it happens so, that the substance modifies incidentally according to his desire.  Most of the modifications, which he does not like, are seen modifying in their own way; hence, this is a confirmed fact that the association or dissociation of anything is not caused by our effort.

And if the association - dissociation (of the objects) are not caused by our effort, then what is the sense in indulging in passions? Only the self becomes miserable; as in some marriage ceremony, etc., someone's advice is not followed at all, then he of his own indulges in passions, then he himself becomes miserable; similarly, one should know here.

Therefore, indulging in passions is in vain, like churning of the water. Hence, the tendency of these passions is called Mithya-Charitra (wrong conduct).

Misconjecture About Good & Bad

The passionate dispositions are produced owing to believing the substances either good or bad, but believing good or bad is also false, because no substance is good or bad. The same is being explained here: -

That, which is pleasurable and beneficial to us, is termed good, and that, which is distressing and uneneficial, is termed bad. In the universe, all substances are the producer of their individual natural functions only, none is pleasurable or distressing, beneficial or unbeneficial to anybody. This Jiva himself, in his thoughts, by believing them pleasurable beneficial knows them to be agreeable or knows them bad by believing them distressing and unbeneficial; for same substance appears to be good to someone and bad to someone.  For example, one who does not get the cloth, to him a coarse cloth appears to be good and the one who gets the fine cloth, to him the coarse cloth appears to be bad; to swine, etc. the faces appears to be good and to celestial beings, etc. it appear to be bad. To someone the torrents appear to be good and to someone it appears to be bad.  Similarly, other examples are to be understood.

And in the same way, to some Jiva, one substance appears to be good in some particular instant and the same substance appears to be bad in some other particular instant. Moreover, it should be known that this Jiva considers chiefly a particular substance to be good but the same substance sometime appears to be bad. For example, the body is agreeable but when it gets diseased then it becomes disagreeable; the son, etc. are agreeable but under some circumstances they appear to be disagreeable. And those objects which this Jiva chiefly considers to be disagreeable appear to be agreeable sometime. For example, an abuse (usually) is not agreeable but the same appears to be agreeable in father-in-law's house.

Thus, benefit - harmfulness are not the characteristics of substance. Had there been benefit -harmfulness in the substance, then the substance which would have been beneficial by itself it should be beneficial to all and which would have been harmful by itself it should be harmful to all; but it is not so. This Jiva himself believes them in his imagination to be beneficial or harmful; so, this imagination is false.

Further, the substance, which appears to be pleasurable- beneficial or distressing - not beneficial is not of its own but due to the rise of Punya-Papa karmas. The one who has got the rise of Punya (merit) karma to him the association of substances is found to be pleasurable-beneficial and the one who has got the rise of Papa (demerit) karma to him the association of substances is found to be distressing-  not beneficial. This is practically found to be so. To someone, wife, son, etc. are pleasurable and to someone are distressing; someone earns profit by doing the business and someone gets loss; to someone even the foes become slaves and to someone even the son becomes inimical. Therefore, it is ascertained that the substances do not become good or bad on their own but they act according to the rise of karmas. As the servants, according to their master's order, produce good or bad situation to someone then it is not the work of the servants but is the work of their master. If someone considers the servants only to be good or bad then it is wrong; similarly, if the substances, associated due to rise of karmas, produce good or bad situation to Jiva according to karmas then it is not the work of the substances; it is the work of karmas. If someone believes the substances only to be good or bad, then it is wrong.

Hence, this is proved that indulging in attachment-aversion feeling, by believing the substances to be good or bad, is a fallacy.

Question: The association of external objects is caused due to the instrumentality of karmas, then should we have attachment-aversion feeling in the karmas?

Answer: The karmas are material (Inanimate matter-particles), they have no desire to give pleasure or pain.  Moreover, they on their own do not turn into karmic form but assume the karmic form due to the instrumentality of his (impure) dispositions. For example, if someone breaks his head by picking stone in his hand then what is the fault of the stone?  Similarly, if this Jiva harms himself by turning the matter-particles into karmic form by means of his attachment, etc. (impure) dispositions, then what is the fault of the karmas?  Therefore, it is wrong to entertain the feeling of attachment-aversion in karmas-even.

Thus, having attachment-aversion feeling in other objects, by considering them good or bad, is wrong. Had the other objects been good or bad and if he used to feel attachment-aversion towards them then it would have not been termed to be wrong. Those objects are not good or bad but this Jiva (mundane being) entertains the feeling of attachment-aversion towards them by considering them good or bad; that is why this type of conduct is described to be wrong, and the conduct which is wrong is termed as wrong conduct.

Constitution and Growth of Raag-Dwesha

Now the constitution and growth of attachment (Raag) and aversion (Dwesha) in this Jiva are being analyzed.

Primarily, this Jiva is possessing I-ness feeling in the embodied form; so, he acts by knowing self and body to be one. When a pleasurable condition is produced in this body, agreeable to self, he feels attachment in it and when an unpleasing condition is produced, disagreeable to self, he feels aversion in it. He feels attachment in the external objects which are the cause of pleasurable state of the body and develops aversion in the destroyers of that state. And he develops aversion in the external objects which are the cause of unpleasing state of the body and feels attachment in the destroyers of that state. And further, he develops attachment is those objects which are the instrumental cause of above external objects and feels aversion is their destroyers. And further, develops aversion in those objects which are the instrumental cause of external objects in which he was already having aversion feeling and feels attachment in their destroyers. And among these objects also in which he feels affection, he entertains the feeling of aversion- attachment in the other objects, acting as the associating cause and destroyers of them. And the objects in which he has developed aversion, he entertains the feeling of aversion- attachment in the other objects, acting as the associating cause and destroyers of them.  In this way, the tradition of attachment-aversion continues.

Further, in those many external objects which are not the cause of producing any condition in the body, in them too, he feels attachment-aversion. For example, nothing good of the body is caused to the cows, etc. from its calves, even then they (cows, etc.) feel affection in them and nothing bad of the body is caused to the dogs, etc. from the cats, etc., yet they entertain the feeling of aversion in them. Further, nothing good of the body is caused by perceiving, etc. of many of the colors, smells, words (tune) etc.; even then this Jiva feels affection in them, and nothing bad of the body is caused by perceiving etc. of many of the colors etc., yet the Jiva feels aversion in them. In this way, the attachment-aversion feeling is generated towards different external objects.

Further, in these objects too in which he feels attachment, he develops attachment-aversion in other objects too, acting as the supporting cause and the destroyers of them.  And one object in which he feels aversion, he develops aversion attachment in other objects too acting as the supporting cause and the destroyers of them.  Similarly, here too the tradition of attachment-aversion continues.

Question: The purpose of having attachment-aversion feeling in the other non-self objects is understood but primarily what is the purpose of believing good or bad in the basic states of the body and in the objects which are not the cause of the state of the  body?

Answer: Firstly, whatever basic states of the body are, there, even in them, if he feels attachment-aversion keeping the purpose in view, why would it then be termed as Mithya Charitra (wrong conduct)? In them, purposelessly, he develops the feeling of attachment-aversion and for the sake of them only he feels attachment-aversion in the other objects, therefore, all passion modifications (all sorts of attachment-aversion, etc.) are termed Mithya Charitra (wrong conduct).

Question: This much seems to be clear that no purpose is served in developing the feeling of good or bad in the state of the body and in the external objects, yet one is not able to abstain from developing the feeling of good or bad in the same; what is the reason?

Answer: Owing to the rise of Charitra Moha karma the attachment-aversion feelings are caused to this Jiva and those feelings cannot be caused without developing association with some object.  For example, if attachment feeling is developed, it must be based on some object and if aversion feeling is developed, it too must be based on some object. Thus, there exists the cause and effect relationship between those objects and the attachment-aversion feelings. There, the specific point is only this that many objects are predominantly the cause of attachment feeling and many other objects are predominantly the cause of aversion feeling. Many objects act as the cause of attachment feeling to someone in some particular time and act as the cause of aversion feeling to someone in some particular time.

Here it should be known that there are many instrumental causes in the evolution of a modification. In the evolution of attachment feelings, etc., the internal cause is the rise of Mohaniya karma; it is the strong cause and the external cause is the associated object; it is not a strong cause. Due to feeble rise of Mohaniya karma, the great ascetics do not develop the feeling of attachment-aversion in spite of the instrumentality of external objects. On the other hand, even in the absence of external causes, due to intense rise of Mohaniya karma, the wicked Jivas develop the feeling of attachment in those objects by mere imagination. Therefore, attachment, etc. (passionate dispositions) are evolved due to rise of Moha karma.  There, that external object with the association of which attachment feeling is to be evolved, in that object without any purpose or with some purpose attachment feeling is developed. And that external object, with the association of which aversion feeling is to be developed, in that object without any purpose or with some purpose, aversion feeling is developed. Therefore, due to the rise of Mohaniya one is not able to abstain from developing the feeling of good or bad in the objects. In this way, whatever attachment-aversion form of conduct is caused due to believing the objects good or bad, that is termed Mithya Charitra.

And the anger, pride, deceit, greed, laughter, liking, disliking, sorrow, fear, disgust, female sex-passion, male sex-passion, neuter sex-passion, forms of passionate dispositions are nothing but the details of these attachment- aversion feelings only. All these are the sub-divisions of Mithya Charitra only. All these have already been described earlier.

And in this conduct, there is absence of self-absorption form of conduct; therefore, it is also termed as Acharitra (non- conduct). And here those (passionate) thoughts are not destroyed or are not free from attachment; therefore, this is called Asamyam (incontinence) or Avirati (vowlessness). Because, if there is unrestrained involvement in the objects of five senses and mind and in the injury of five kinds of immobile being as well as mobile beings and the thoughts of renouncing them do not arise, the same is termed as twelve kinds of incontinence or vowlessness. Such activities take place on the evolution of the passionate dispositions. Hence, know that Mithya Charitra is called Asamyam or Avirati. This is also termed as Avert (Vowlessness) because indulgence in sinful acts of injury, falsehood, theft, unchaste and hoarding is called Avert.  The root cause of all these tendencies is the Pramattayoga i.e., the activity actuated by passions. The Pramattayoga is full of passions; therefore, Mithya Charitra is also called Avert, (Vowlessness). In this way, the nature of wrong conduct, (Mithya Charitra) has been described.

In this way, the tendency of wrong belief, wrong knowledge and wrong conduct is found in the mundane beings since eternity. This type of conduct is found in all kinds of Jivas from one-sensed etc., up to the irrational five-sensed beings. And excepting true believers, such kind of conduct is found in all the rational five-sensed beings.  Whatever type of conduct be possible in which ever state of existence, the same should be understood in that context. For example, the one-sensed beings, etc., are found possessed with less or more senses and the attachment of wealth, son, etc. is found in the human beings only.  With the consideration of these things only the wrong belief, etc. are described here. And whatever peculiarities are possible in whichever state of existence the same should be understood in that context.

Further, the one-sensed beings, etc., do not know the name of the senses, body, etc. but the disposition which signifies the meaning of that name, they are found indulging in them in the aforesaid manner. For instance, "I touch with the touch- sense, body is mine"- such word or name is not known to him, nevertheless, it indulges in that disposition which signifies its meaning. And the human beings etc., know many of the names too and tend to indulge according to their characteristics; such many types of peculiarities are possible in different contexts.

The Glory of Delusion

Such dispositions of wrong belief, etc. are found in this Jiva since eternity; these are not imbibed afresh. Behold its greatness; whatever embodied form (this Jiva) attains there at (in that particular state of existence) such sort of aforesaid conduct only is found automatically to this Jiva even without any sermons, due to the rise of Moha (deluding karma). And in the human beings etc., even on meeting the causes of right thinking, right form of conduct is not evolved and even if the chance of the discourse of a real monk is available and he may admonish repeatedly but he does not pay any attention.  And if he also perceives the truth rightly even then he does not believe in it and believes contrarily. The same is being explained hereunder. 

When death occurs, the body and the soul clearly get separated.  Leaving one body, the soul reincarnates in other body; there the peripatetic Devas etc. are seen disclosing the relations of their previous births, but he cannot discriminate the self from the body.  The wife, son, etc. are clearly seen to be the companions of their selfish motto. If 
their self-interest is not served, instantaneously they are seen turning inimical, (but) this misbeliever feels mineness in them and for fulfilling their desires, he indulges in various types of sinful acts which become instrumental cause of his going to hell, etc. Wealth, property, etc. are seen changing hands, but he believes the same to be his own. Further, the condition of the body and the external property, etc. are seen getting created and destroyed of their own; he unnecessarily becomes the doer of them. There the work which goes right according to his will, about it he says- `I did it' and if it goes wrong then he says, `What can I do? Rather he thinks "so was to happen or why did it happen like this?" But either he should have been the doer of all such deeds or should have remained the non-doer, (but) he does not think so.

Although he knows that death is certain, yet being sure of his death he does not do any thing worth doing; rather he indulges in the activities concerning the present embodied existence only. And being sure of his death, he sometimes says, "I will die and the body will be burnt"; sometimes says, "If my fame remains, I remain alive"; sometimes says, "If the sons, etc. will survive, I will survive". In this way, he prattles like a mad man and thus remains unconscious (about the self).

Although he knows well that he has to leave for next embodied life, yet he makes no effort for getting agreeable and avoiding unagreeable associations for the next birth and instead makes ceaseless effort in order that the generation of his sons, grandsons, etc. may remain in agreeable condition; nothing unagreeable may happen to them.

Although, after someone's death, the property collected in the present existence is not seen rendering any help, yet in spite of being sure of next birth, he continues to protect and acquire property, etc. in this birth.

And due to indulgence in sensual pleasures, passionate acts and acts of injury, etc., he himself becomes unhappy and miserable; becomes foe of others and reproachable in this world and becomes miserable in the next world also. All this he knows well, yet indulges in the aforesaid acts only. Although in many ways he himself perceives all this well, yet he believes, knows and follows contrarily.  So, all this is the glory of delusion.

In this way, this Jiva is found indulging in wrong belief- knowledge-conduct from beginningless time. Due to this indulgence, the association of karmas creating several kinds of miseries in this world is found. These (perverse) dispositions alone are the seeds of all sorrows and none else. 

Therefore, Oh! Bhavya! (O! capable soul!) If you wish to get rid of sorrows then eradicating of these wrong belief etc., alienated dispositions, is the only act worth doing; by this way only, you will achieve the highest benediction.

Thus, the 4th chapter describing the wrong belief-knowledge- conduct in the Moksha Marg Prakashak Shastra is concluded. 

CHAPTER 5

AN ANALYTICAL STUDY OF
DIFFERENT RELIGION

Doha: "Bahuvidhi Mithya gehankari, malin bhyo nij bhav
      	   Tako hot abhav hey, sehajroop darsav"

[ Due to deep false belief, knowledge and conduct of different kinds, our natural disposition has become foul. When such delusion is destroyed then automatically natural form of self-qualities get manifested]

As described earlier, this mundane being is found indulging in wrong belief-knowledge-conduct since eternity.  Due to that, bearing the sorrows in the world, he, rarely, in the human state of existence, attains the power of having distinct belief etc.  There, if by indulgence in the specific causes of wrong belief, etc., he fosters the same wrong belief, etc., then getting rid of sorrows becomes extremely difficult.

For example, some person is sick; if he after getting some relief, starts taking unwholesome diet then it will be very difficult for him to get rid of that disease.  Similarly, this Jiva is having wrong belief etc., if he after obtaining some greater power of knowledge etc., starts indulging in the specific cause of perverse belief etc. then his liberation (from karmic bondage) will become extremely difficult. Therefore, as a physician, by pointing out the details of unwholesome diet, advises the patient not to take those things, similarly, by explaining the specific causes of wrong belief etc. he is advised not to indulge in those causes.

Here the false belief etc., dispositions, which are found from eternity, are to be known as Agraheet-Mithyatv (not newly adopted false belief etc.) because those are not newly adopted.  And their supporting causes further boost up those wrong belief etc.; such supporting causes are to be known as Graheet Mithyatv i.e., newly adopted false belief etc.

The Agraheet type of false belief etc. has already been described earlier. Now the Graheet (newly adopted) type of false belief etc. is being discussed here :-

Faith in the untrue deity (Kudeva), untrue preceptor (Kuguru), untrue religion (Kudharm) and imaginary principles (false Tattvas) is false belief (Mithyadarshan). And the study of such untrue scripture (Kushastras) with due respect, wherein the attachment, etc. passions are fostered by way of wrong interpretation, is false knowledge (Mithya Jnan). And the conduct in which the indulgence in passions is fostered and acceptance of such conduct is termed as religion is false conduct (Mithya Charitra). Now the details of these (perversities) are being explained:-

Indra (heavenly God), Lokpal (so-called protecting deity) etc., monotheistic Brahma, Rama, Krishna, Mahadeva, Buddha, Khuda, Peer, Paigamber etc., Hanuman, Bhairon, Kshetrapal, Devi, Dahadi, Sati etc., Sheetala (so-called Goddess of smallpox), Chauth (4th lunar day), Sanjhi, Gangaur, Holi (burning the heap of wood) etc., sun, moon, planets, Auta- ancestors, peripatetic gods, cow, snake etc., and fire, water, tree etc., and weapon, inkpot, utensils etc., many things are there (in India particularly) which the misbelievers worship; then by having wrong faith in them they want to fulfill their object but those things are not the causes of fulfulling the objects. Therefore, this type of faith is called newly adopted false belief (Graheeta mithyatv).

`How their belief is wrong, this is now being described:-

Analysis of the Theory of Ubiquitous Monotheism (Addvait Brahma)Many people believe Addvait Brahma (monism) as to be the ubiquitous and the creator of whole world but no such person is there. First, they believe him ubiquitous but all kinds of substances are distinctly separate and their nature are perceived distinctly separate; how to believe them as one? The following are the different ways of believing him to be ubiquitous:

The one way of such belief is this: Though all things are separate-separate but conjecturing them altogether some common name is given.  For example, the horses, the elephants etc. are separate-separate but their collective name is army reality there is no such thing as army different from horses etc.  So in this way all substances which are termed Brahma, that Brahma is not proved to be a distinct entity; it is mere imagination.

Another way of such belief is this: From individual point of view all things are separate-separate, but those are conjecturally treated as one from common character point of view. For example, one hundred horses are there; from individual point of view, those are separately- separately one hundred only. Seeing their common features, they are collectively treated as one class but that class is not something different from those individual horses. In this way, looking at some common specific features of all substances, if their collective name is one Brahma, then in reality no separate existence of Brahma is proved.

A third way of such belief is this: Though all substances are separate from each other, owing to their conglomeration, one lump is formed, that is called one. As the molecules of water are separate-separate, on their getting conglomerated, their collective name is called sea etc. and on getting the conglomeration of the molecules of clay, it is termed as `pot' (Jar) etc. But in these examples, there is nothing like a separate sea or a separate pot different from the molecules from which they are formed. Thus, all kinds of substances are separate-separate, but" sometimes by getting conglomerated those (substances) become one and that is Brahma. If this is to be accepted then no Brahma is proved to be something separate distinct entity.

A fourth way of such belief is this: Though the limbs are separate-separate, yet he who has those limbs is one corporal form.  As the eyes, hands, legs etc. are separate-separate but the man who has those limbs is one human being. Thus, all these substances are limbs and the one who possesses these, in the corporal form is one Brahma. This whole universe in gigantic form is the limb of Brahma - this is what they believe. But, if there be any gap in the form of disconnection between hands, legs, etc., limbs of the human body, there remains no oneness; only on their remaining connected, those are collectively called one body. In the universe, the substances are seen mutually disconnected from one another; how then to believe in its oneness? Even if in such disconnected state of existence oneness is believed, then where would the separateness of all substances be believed?

Question: In the center of all substances, the limbs of Brahma, in the subtle form, are existing, by means of which all remain connected.

Answer: Whichever limb is connected to whatever other limb, does it remain connected so with it or continues getting connected with the other different limbs by breaking repeatedly? If the first side of the argument is accepted then the sun etc. make movement; with them by which subtle limbs it gets connected, those will also move. And due to their movement, the subtle limbs, which remain connected with the other massive limbs, will also move; in this way, the whole universe will become unstable. As on pulling any one limb of the body all the limbs get pulled, similarly, by making movement etc. of any one substance, all the substances will start making movement.  But this does not seem to be logical.  And if the second side of the argument is accepted then due to breaking of the limbs the separateness is definitely caused; how would then oneness remain existing? Therefore, how can it be possible to believe Brahma to be the oneness of the whole universe?

Another way, of such belief is this: Originally he was one, later on became many, again becomes one, so he is one. For example, water was one but in different utensils it got divided, when it meets again, it becomes one. And as there was a lump of gold, later on it was turned into bangle, ring, etc., it again becomes the lump of the gold by reunion. Similarly, there was one Brahma, later on he modified into many forms and again he will become one, therefore he is one. 

In this way, the monist believes the oneness. Here our query is that when he assumed different forms then he remained united or got disconnected? If he will say that `He' remained united then the aforesaid fault will arise. If he will say that `He' got disconnected then at that moment there remained no oneness. Further, they (the monists) call water, gold etc. as to be one even on their getting separated but this (oneness) is stated from one specific point of view.  But here the class of all kinds of substances does not appear to be as one. Some are animate and some are inanimate; thus, the substances are of various kinds; how can their class be described to be as one?

Further, they believe that originally he was one, later on he got separated; so as a stone turns into pieces by splitting up, similarly.  The Brahma, got turned into pieces. Further, the monist believes that those pieces get reunited; so does their character remains separate there or it becomes one? If, it remains separate then, there, those are assuredly separate by their individual characteristics and if they become one then the inanimate things also will turn into animate beings and the animate beings will turn into the inanimate things. When many (different) things become one thing, it will be necessary to call them many in some moment and one in some moment; then it will not be possible to say- "there is one eternal infinite Brahma"

And if he will say that by creation or non-creation of the universe the Brahma remains one and unchanged, therefore the Brahma is eternal & infinite, then our question is -"In the universe, the earth, the water etc. are seen. Are all these things created newly and separately or the Brahma himself has obtained these forms? If these are created newly and separately then these things are separate and Brahma remains separate. This means there is no ubiquitous Addvait Brahma. And if the Brahma has transformed himself in the form of these things then sometimes he became universe and sometimes remained as Brahma; how did then he remain unchanged?

Further, he says that whole of the Brahma does not transform into the universe, its some portion only transforms. There, we ask him-' as one drop of the sea is transformed into poison then from gross-vision point of view it is beyond perception but from one drop point of view the sea has changed.  Similarly, Brahma's one portion on getting separated transformed into the universe; nothing is comprehensible there by gross-vision but on thinking minutely the Brahma has changed from the one portion point of view. This change has not occurred to anything else.

In this way, believing the universal form of Brahma is nothing but a fallacy only.

Further, another way of such belief is this- "As the space (sky) is an ubiquitous one, similarly, the Brahma is an ubiquitous one. If you (the monist) believe so, then believe the Brahma also as big as space and wherever the material objects, jar, cloth, etc. are found, the space is also found there; in the same way, believe the existence of Brahma too. But how could the jar, cloth, etc. and the space be treated and called as one only? Similarly, how the universe and the Brahma could be believed to be as one? And the differentia of space is perceived to be everywhere; so, its existence is believed to be everywhere; but the differentia of the Brahma is not perceived everywhere; so how could then his existence be believed everywhere? In this way also. no universal form of Brahma is established."

From all these considerations, the existence of one Brahma is in no way established. All substances appear to be separate- separate entities.

Here the respondent says- "All is one only, but you are under delusion, that's why you are not able to perceive him as one. And you have put up your logic but the nature of Brahma is beyond logic. And his nature is not describable in words. He is one as well as many. He is separate as well as united. His glory is so great".

Our answer to him is- "What I, you and all are perceiving clearly, you call it delusion. And if we deduce by logic then you say that the real nature is beyond logic. And if you say that the real nature is not describable in words then how can one ascertain without words?  "Further he says- "He is one as well as many, is separate as well as united", but you do not specify the viewpoint and instead like an insane person you are magnifying his glory by asserting that he is like this and also like that. But, where there is no justice, the liars indulge there in such garrulousness only. So, let them do so but justice will remain unchanged.

Revocation of World-creatorship

Further, some people believe that Brahma is the creator of the universe: the falsehood of the same is being shown hereunder :-

    Firstly, they believe that such a desire arose to Brahma that (H) "I am single, so I would like to be many". There we ask them-" If one was unhappy in earlier state then he would like to change that state". Brahma desired to obtain many forms discarding the earlier one form. What was the sorrow in that state of one form? Then the monist says that there was no sorrow but it was just an inquisitive instinct. Then we say to him- "If earlier one be less happy and if by inquisitiveness, he becomes more happy, then he may think of indulging in inquisitiveness.  So, how is it possible for Brahma to have become more happy by changing into many forms from one form.  And if he was perfectly happy in the earlier state, why should he change that state or form? Without any purpose, no body wants to indulge in any activity.

And suppose he was happy earlier and also remained happy after completing the desired act but would he not be unhappy at the moment of rise of the desire? Then he says- "the moment desire arises in Brahma, at the same moment the desire is fulfilled, so he does not become unhappy. Then we say- "One can accept this from relatively longer period point of view but from the instantaneous time period point of view the fulfillment of desire is not possible the moment it arises. The desire arises only when the act is not fulfilled; and when it is fulfilled there remains no desire. So, he must have become unhappy at least in that minute interval of time. Because the desire itself is misery and none else is misery. Therefore, the rise of desire in Brahma is inconceivable."

Further, they (the monists) say that on evolution of desire the Maya (illusion) of Brahma got produced. Since Maya got produced in Brahma then Brahma also became an illusive (deceitful) person; how did then here main of pure nature? And Brahma and Maya have the coherent relation just like a staff-bearer and the staff or both have an inseparable relation just like fire and heat. If it is a coherent relation then the Brahma is separate and the Maya is separate; how did `He' remain undivided (Addvait) Brahma? And as the staff-bearer holds the staff knowing it to be helpful, similarly Brahma knows the Maya as to be helpful to him, that's why he holds it, otherwise why should he hold it?  And the Maya which Brahma himself holds, how is it possible to deny (forbid) it?  Rather, it is proved useful. And if it is an inseparable relation then as heat is the nature of fire, similarly Maya is proved to be the nature of Brahma.  That which is the nature of Brahma, how its denial is possible? Thus Maya is proved to be useful.

Further, they say that the Brahma is a sentient being, Maya is insentient. But in inseparable relation such two (contrary) natures (of a thing) are not possible; e.g., how can light and darkness both be found together?

Further, they say that Brahma himself does not become deluded by Maya, rather (other) Jiva gets deluded by his Maya. Our answer is: As a treacherous knows his treachery himself, so he himself does not get deluded, rather the other persons get deluded by his treachery. But he who indulges in treachery, is called a treacherous; the others who got deluded due to his treachery are not called treacherous.  Similarly, the Brahma knows his Maya; the other Jivas get deluded.  There, the Brahma only will be called treacherous (Mayavi); how the other Jivas who got deluded by his Maya could be called treacherous (Mayavi)?

Further we ask them - whether Jivas are one with the Brahma or are separate entities? If they are one then as someone himself starts giving pain to his own limbs so he is called an insane person, similarly, the Brahma himself by his Maya starts giving pain to those Jivas who are not separate from him; so, how would this be possible? If the (Jivas) are separate from him, then as some ghost (peripatetic god) without any purpose creates delusion to other Jivas and makes them miserable., similarly, without any purpose the Brahma creates Maya for other Jivas and makes them miserable; this also seems illogical.

Thus, saying that Maya is of Brahma cannot be established. Further, they say that on evolution of Maya the universe got created; there the consciousness found in Jivas is part of Brahma's nature and their bodies etc. are Maya.  For example, water is filled in many separate utensils; in (the water of) all those utensils moon appears separately-separately, whereas the moon is one.  Similarly, the consciousness light of Brahma is found separately-separately in many separate- separate bodies, where as the Brahma is one, therefore, the consciousness found in Jivas is that of the Brahma.

This statement is also full of delusion because the body is inanimate; if in this body the consciousness got created due to the image of Brahma, why could not then the image of Brahma fall in other inanimate substances like jar, cloth, etc. and create consciousness in them?

Further, the monist says that the Brahma does not make the body conscious but makes the Jivas conscious.

Then we ask him - "Is the nature of Jiva Chetana (conscious) or acetone (non-conscious)? If it is conscious then what would new consciousness be created in the already conscious Jivas? If Jiva is non-conscious then the category of body, jar, etc. and that of the Jiva proves to be the same. "Further, we ask him," - `Is the consciousness of the Brahma and that of the "Jivas one and the same or separate?  If it is one and the same then how is the knowledge seen more or less in different Jivas?" And why one Jiva does not know whatever is known by other Jiva?' You might say that this is due to difference in embodiment of various Jivas. Then due to difference in embodiments, the consciousness of different Jivas is proved to be separate-separate. On destruction of embodiment, will the consciousness of the Jivas get intermingled in Brahma or get destroyed? If it will get destroyed then this Jiva will become inanimate. And if you will say that the Jiva itself gets intermingled with Brahma then there on intermingling with Brahma its own existence remains or does not remain? If Jivas existence remains separate then that Jiva along with his own consciousness also existed (remained intact); what did then intermingle with Brahma? And if existence does not remain then it means it got destroyed; who did then intermingle with Brahma? If you will say that the consciousness of Brahma and that of the Jivas are separate then the Brahma and all Jivas prove to be separate-separate. Thus, the belief that the consciousness of the Jivas and that of the Brahma are one and the same is also disproved.

You call the bodies etc. as to be of the Maya; so, does the Maya itself turn into the bone-flesh etc. or due to the instrumentality of Maya someone else turns in those forms? If the Maya itself converts then were the color, smell etc. of Maya existing formerly or are produced afresh? If those were existing formerly then Maya was formerly of Brahma but Brahma is of immaterial form; how are the color etc. attributes possible in him? And if those are produced afresh then he being of the immaterial form, got turned into the material form; hence, consequently the immaterial form did not prove to be eternal. And if you will say that due to the instrumentality of Maya someone else turns then the question is that when you do not prove or accept existence of the other substances who else got turned then?

If you will say that the new substance gets created, then does it get created separate from Maya or inseparable with it? If it is produced separate from Maya, why do you call then Miyamae Sharira i.e., the bodies etc. to have formed from Maya? But those prove to be of their own substances. And if those substances are created as inseparable then Maya itself became tantamount; why do you then say that the new substances got created? Thus, your this statement that the body etc. are of the nature of Maya is fallacious.

Further, they say that three qualities (constituents) got produced out of Maya, (i) Rajas- the quality of passion, of love and pleasure (ii) Tamas- the quality of malignancy and (iii) Satvik- the quality of goodness and virtues. This statement is also not maintainable; because the disposition of pride-passion-form is called Rajas, the disposition of anger-passion-form is called Tamas and disposition of feeble- passion-form is called Satvik. So, these dispositions are clearly seen full of consciousness but the nature of Maya according to you is inanimate. So, how would these dispositions be created out of the inanimate objects ? If the inanimate objects too have these (qualities) then stone etc. will also have these dispositions; but only the Jivas of conscious nature are seen possessing these dispositions; therefore, these dispositions are not produced out of Maya. If Maya is considered to be of conscious nature, then this can be believed. So, on accepting the Maya as to be conscious, if you will say the bodies etc. as produced out of Maya then nobody will believe it. Hence, you should ascertain properly; what is the gain in believing fallaciously?

Further, they say that from those three qualities, Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh, these three deities are born; so how is it possible?  Because the quality is produced from the substance possessing qualities; how would the substance of qualities be produced from the quality? The anger passion will get produced from man, but how will man be produced from anger passion? Moreover, these qualities are censured; how are Brahma etc. produced from these (qualities) considered venerable? Further, these qualities are full of Maya and the same are described as to be the incarnation of Brahma; but these are proved to be the incarnation of Maya, how are these described as to be the incarnation (Vishnu Puran, chapter 22/58. Vayu Puran, chapter 7/68-69.)  of Brahma?  And those who are found having even a little of these qualities they are sermonized to give up them, but how could those who are the idols of these qualities only be treated as venerable? Is it not delusion?

Further, their actions also seem to be full of these traits. They indulge in the acts of sportiveness etc., sexual intercourse etc. and combating etc.; so, from those Rajas etc. qualities, only these acts are caused; therefore, you should say that the Rajas etc. traits are found in them. Treating them venerable and supreme God etc. is not befitting. They too are like other mundane beings.

Further, you might say that the mundane beings are under the influence of Maya, so unknowingly they indulge in those acts. But Maya is under the control of Brahma etc., so they indulge in these acts knowingly. So, this too is fallacy. Because by being under the control of Maya, sex-passion, anger-passion etc. only are created, what else is created? Only the vehemency of sex-passion, anger etc.  is found in those Brahma etc. Due to the vehemence of sex-passion, they being overpowered by women, started dancing and singing, started becoming impatient, started indulging in bad demeanor in many ways and started combating in various ways under the influence of anger, started adopting various means for exhibiting one's excellence under the influence of pride, started making lot of frauds under the pressure of deceit, started accumulating belongings (paraphernalia) being overpowered by greed and so on, - what more to describe? Thus being overpowered by passions, they started doing many censurable acts, such as the immodests' act of snatching off the cloths of the ladies, the thieves' act of looting the curd, the mads' act of wearing the wreath of human heads*, `the ghosts' act of making different forms of the body and the plebeians' act of cow- keeping (herdsmanship) etc.; what more censurable acts would have resulted on being overpowered by Maya is beyond comprehension!

Believing Brahma etc. who are found with censurable external acts and intense carnal desires etc. to be deceitless is similar to believing cloudy no-moon night as without darkness.

Further, he says that the sex-passion, anger etc. do not over power them; this also is a sportive act of supreme God. Our question is "Such passional acts which he does are done with desire or without desire?' If he does with desire then the name of desire of sexual intercourse itself is sex-passion, the name of desire of combating itself is the anger passion and so on. And if he does without desire then the act, which he himself does not want to do, is caused only on being dependent on someone; so, how is dependence possible in Brahma? Further, you regard this as to be a sportive act; so, if the God performs such sportive acts by reincarnating, then why do they preach the other Jivas forgetting liberation by detaching themselves from such acts?  The discourse of observing forbearance, contentment, chastity, continence, etc. all is proved useless.

Further, he says that God has no motive; just for the sake of keeping the worldly phenomena running he incarnates (Paritranraye sadhunam, vinashaye cha dushkritam; Dharm sansthapnarthaye sambhvami yugai yugai) for protecting the devotees and punishing the cruel. Then we ask him: Without any motive even an ant does not do anything, why would then God do so?" And you have also told the purpose that "He acts for the sake of keeping the worldly phenomena running". So as some man himself teaches his sons with ill intention and when they start behaving in that fashion then he beats them; how would then such a father be called good? Similarly, if Brahma etc.  by his passionate form of activity causes his own creation to indulge in untoward acts and when they do so then why he places them in the hell etc.? In the scriptures, the consequence of these dispositions is described as getting birth in hell etc.; so, how can such a God be believed to be good?

And you have stated that the motive of God is to protect the devotees and punish the cruel. Here we ask you that the cruel who torture the devotees were created by the desire of God, or without his desire? If they were created by God's desire then tell us as to how such a master be called good who firstly gets his own subordinates beaten by others and later on beats those beaters? Similarly, how such a God be called good who himself willingly causes his devotees to be afflicted by the cruel and then he starts killing those cruel by incarnating (into embodied form)?

If you will say that the cruel got created without his desire then either the God might not be having such a foresight that these cruelwill torture his devotees or earlier he might not be having such sort of power that this should not be allowed to happen. Further, we ask him- 'If God incarnated for the purpose of performing such activity, so, did he possess such power without incarnating or not? If he was possessing such power, why did then he incarnate? And if he did not possess such power then what was the cause of obtaining such power later on?'

Then he says- `How would the glory (importance) of God be reflected without doing so?' Then we tell him- "Protecting one's followers and punishing opponents for establishing one's glory is nothing but attachment-aversion passions (Raag & Dwesha) and Raag-Dwesha is the characteristic of the mundane being (Sansari-Jiva). If God also is found having Raag-Dwesha then why to preach the other Jivas for effectuating equanimity by quitting Raag-Dwesha?  Moreover, as he thought to act according to Raag-Dwesha, so no work is accomplished without consumption of some more or less time; then during that period God would remain restless. If the king himself undertakes to do the work which can be performed by a person of lower status then this does not glorify the king, rather it becomes a cause of his censure. Similarly, if God himself undertakes to do, through incarnation that work which can be accomplished by a king and a peripatetic deva etc., then this does not glorify God, rather it becomes a cause of his censure.

Further, the importance is shown to someone else if someone else be there, but you believe in one ubiquitous `Addvait Brahma' only; to whom he shows the importance? And the effect of showing the importance is to cause others to pray him; so, by whom does he want to be prayed? And you say that all Jivas function as per the will of the God, so, if the self has the desire of causing others to pray him then direct all the Jivas to pray him. Why should people engage themselves in other activities? Therefore, Gods, action for being glorified by others also does not seem to be logical.

Further, he says that God, even by doing all these acts remains non-doer; this cannot be ascertained. We say to him- "If you would say that this is my mother as well as is a barren lady" then how to believe your saying so? The one who does the work, how to believe him to be a non-doer? And you say that the ascertainment is not possible, so this means believing something without its ascertainment; then you should also believe that sky produces flowers and asses have horns; but such statement supporting impossible phenomenon is not logical.

In this way, belief in the existence of Brahma, Vishnu & Mahesh is false belief.

Further, they say that Brahma creates the Srishti (universe), Vishnu protects it and Mahesh destroys it; all this is also not possible, because while performing these duties someone would like to do one thing whereas the other would like to do the contrary thing; then there will arise mutual contradiction.

And if you will say that this also is a characteristic of God, why would there be any contradiction? Then "creating (the universe) himself and destroying it himself" - in performing such a task, what is the result? If the Srishti (creation) is harmful to the self, why did he create it then? And if it is beneficial why did he destroy it? And "if earlier he felt it beneficial so he created it, later on he felt it harmful so he destroyed it"- if it is so then either God's characteristic is wrong or the creation's characteristic is wrong. If you will favor first side of the logic then God's character is not proved to be of one nature. So tell us what is the reason of not having one nature? Why would the turning of the nature happen without the cause? And if you will favor second side of the logic then when the creation was under the control of God, why did he allow it to happen so, that it appeared harmful to himself ?

Further, we ask him- "Brahma creates the universe; so how does he create it?" The one way is this that as the builder of the temple makes the shape (of the building) etc. by collecting lime, (cement) stones etc. material. Similarly, Brahma creates the universe by collecting the material. Let us know that place where from he brought and collected the material and if only Brahma alone created the whole universe then either he might have made it in parts - some parts earlier and some parts later or might have made his hands etc. many?  Whatever answer you will give, it will also prove contradictory on thinking over it.

And the one way is this that as the work is performed as per king's order, similarly the universe is created by the order of Brahma, (If this be so) then whom did he order? And where from the persons who were ordered brought the material and how did they create the universe?

And the one way is this that the work gets accomplished automatically as per the desire of the person possessing supernatural powers. Similarly, the universe gets automatically created as per the wish of Brahma. If this be so, then Brahma's role remained confined to desiring only and the universe got automatically created.  Moreover, the desire arose in Parma Brahma, what was then the role of Brahma whom you advocate creator of the universe?

If you will say that Parma Brahma also desired and Brahma also desired then the universe got created. Then it appears that the desire of Parma Brahma alone is not efficacious. This shows lack of power in Parma Brahma.

Further, we ask, 'If the universe is created only by creating it then the creator will surely create it for the sake of happiness and then he will create the favorite things only. But in this universe the favorite things are found in lesser number and unfavorable things are found in greater number. Amongst the Jivas, Devas (celestial beings) etc. were created as favorite beings for the sake of enjoyment and for adoration. But what for worm, ant, dog, pig, lion, etc.  were created? Those are neither pleasing nor do they worship; rather, they are harmful in all respects. And why were such harmful objects like poor-wretched, unhappy-hellish beings, etc. created by seeing which disgust, aversion, sorrow are caused?'

There he says that the Jivas suffer due to their own sins in the embodied forms of worm, ant, pauper, hellish beings, etc. We ask him, ultimately you may say that these embodied forms Paryaya are produced owing to the consequence of vicious acts only, but why were these created earlier at the time of creating the universe? And later on the Jivas turned sinful, so why did they turn sinful? If you will say that they themselves turned so, then it appears that Brahma first created them and afterwards they did not remain under his control; for this reason Brahma felt sorry.

And if you will say that Brahma activates them to become active then why did he activate them for sinful deeds? The Jivas were created by him; why did he mean ill of them? Therefore, this too is illogical.

And amongst the insentient objects, he created many things of good color, good smell etc. for the sake of enjoyment but what for did he create the distressing things having bad colors, bad smell, etc.?  Brahma would not be happy by seeing these things. And if you will say that he created these things for torturing the wicked Jivas; then what for did he do such cruelty with the self-created Jivas that for them he created distressing things earlier? Further, dust, mountain, etc. are some such things also which are neither pleasing (delightful) nor distressing; what for did he create these things? Of their own those things may get any shape or size, but if there is a creator of them then he will create them with some purpose only. How is therefore Brahma called creator of the universe?

And they call Vishnu as protector of the universe. The protector performs only two acts; firstly he does not allow development of the causes of misery and secondly he does not allow development of the causes of destruction or devastation. But in the universe all everywhere only the causes of growth of miseries are seen and those things are seen causing misery to Jivas. The Jivas are suffering from hunger, thirst, etc., sorrow is caused due to cold and heat, etc., Jivas produce pain & misery to one another; weapons, etc., are the cause, of sorrow and various other causes of devastation are found.  The different diseases etc., and fire, poison, weapons, etc.  are seen as instrumental causes for the end of Jivas lives and in the insentient material objects also the causes of mutual destruction are seen. Thus, both types of objects could not be protected; what did then Vishnu protect being a protector?

He says - "Vishnu is the protector only. For the remedy of hunger, thirst, etc., grain seeds, water, etc. are created, ants get grain particles and elephants get ample food; He helps in difficulty. Even when the causes of death arise, he protects as he did in the case of lapwing (peewit)[A king of bird which used to live on seashore. The sea used to sweep away her eggs. Sorrowfully she prayed to Lord Vishnu through the adjutant bird , so , he caused those eggs to be given back to her from the sea. Such sort of story is there in Hindu mythology.] - thus, in many ways Vishnu protects". There, we say to him- "If it is so, then where hunger, thirst, etc. cause excessive pain & misery to the Jivas and food grain, water, etc. are not avail-able, when one is in difficulty no help is rendered, even a slight cause causes death - in all these cases either Vishnu's power became week or he did not have the knowledge of these things? In the universe; many Jivas generally live unhappy and die; why then did Vishnu not protect them?

Then he says- "It is the outcome of the Jivas own acts & conduct".  Our answer to him is - "As an ignorant greedy- liar-physician, finding someone benefited somewhat by his medicine, says that he has cured him but when the case gets spoiled or the patient dies then he says that it was his destiny. Similarly, you say, if something happened good (agreeable) to someone then it is attributed to as done by Vishnu and if something happened bad (disagreeable) then it is said to be the outcome of his own acts & conduct. Why should therefore one have such a misconjecture? Either say that both the good and bad conditions are caused by Vishnu or say that both are the outcome of one's own acts & conduct. If everything is done by Vishnu then how can he be called a protector when many Jivas are seen unhappy and dying quickly? And if it is the outcome of one's own acts & conduct then "as he will sow so shall he reap"- what will then Vishnu protect?

Then he says - "Those who are the devotees of Vishnu, he protects them." We say to him- 'Ants, elephants etc., are not his devotees then, believing the duty of Vishnu in supplying food grain, etc. to them, in helping in difficulty and in not letting one die, why do you then believe him to be the protector of all? Rather believe him to be the protector of the devotees only. But he does not seem to be the protector even of the devotees, because the non-devotees also are seen torturing the devotees.'

Then he says- On many occasions he has helped Prahlad etc., we say to him - 'Wherever he has helped, there you may believe him to be so. 'But we find that the devotees are afflicted by the wicked barbarian, Mohammedan, etc., 'non- devotees and temples etc. are being destroyed by such persons then why does he not help in such situations? So, either he does not possess the power or he is not aware of it. If he does not possess the power then he is proved to be weaker than the non-devotees too. If he is not aware of it then one who does not know even this much, he is proved to be an ignorant.

And if you say that Vishnu possesses the power also and knows also, but he desired this way only. Why do you then call him kind to devotees? Thus, believing Vishnu as the protector of the universe is not proved.

Further, they, the monists, say- 'Lord Mahesh is the destroyer'.  We ask them - Whether Mahesh indulges in the act of destruction always or does so only at the time of total destruction of the world?  If he always does so, then as you have adored Vishnu for protecting the universe, similarly you should censure Mahesh for destroying the universe. Because the protection and destruction are contradictory.

And how does he do the destruction? As a person beats someone by his hands, etc. or gets him beaten by others, so similarly does Mahesh do the destruction by his own limbs or gets destroyed by ordering someone else? In whole of the universe the destruction of many Jivas is continuously taking place every moment; then how does he destroy all together simultaneously, by what kinds of limbs and by ordering whom? Moreover, if you say that Mahesh merely desires and the destruction takes place automatically by his desiring only; then he would always be having cruel thoughts of the form of killing others and how would the desire of killing many Jivas altogether simultaneously be produced in him? And if he destroys at the time of total destruction of the world, then does he do so at the instance of Parma Brahma or does he do so without his wish? If he does so at Parma Brahma's wish then how did such intense anger arise to Parma Brahma that he desired to destroy all? Because, without any reason, the desire of destruction cannot arise and the desire of destruction itself is anger. So, tell us the reason for such anger.

And if you say that Parma Brahma had created this game of universe; later on he demolished it - for this no reason can be given.  The game-maker creates the game when he likes it and finishes it when he dislikes it. Similarly, if this universe appears to be good or bad to him (the Parma Brahma), then it shows that he has attachment aversion with the universe. Why do you then say Brahma's nature to be that of a mere observer? A mere observer is the name of that person who merely remains knower and seer of what automatically happens. How could he be called a mere observer if he creates or destroys the universe by treating it to be good or bad (agreeable or disagreeable). Because remaining a mere observer and also being doer & destroyer are contradictory to each other. Both these things are not possible in one person. Originally, Parma Brahma desired that "I am one, so I shall be many", then he became many. Now this desire cropped up- "I am many, so I will become less". So, as out of innocence, someone indulges in some work and then gives it up, similarly Parma Brahma also after becoming many desired back to become one; so, it appears that the work of becoming many he might have done out of innocence only.  Had it been done with foresightedness then why for did he desire to give it up?

And if without the desire of Parma Brahma, Mahesh indulges in destruction then he is proved to be an opponent of Parma Brahma and Brahma.

Further, we ask- 'How does Mahesh destroy the universe? Does he do so by his own limbs or destruction takes place automatically just on his desiring? If he destroys by his own limbs then how does he destroy all things at once?' And if destruction takes place automatically by his (Mahesh's) desire, then we ask - as to why did he destroy the universe when the desire originated in Parma Brahma?

Further, we ask him- "Where have the Jivas and Ajiva (i.e. living and non-living substances) of the universe gone on complete destruction?' Then he says- 'Among the Jivas those who were the devotees, they got united with Brahma and the rest got united with Maya'. Now, we ask him- 'Does Maya remain separate from Brahma or later on it gets unified with him? If it remains separate, then Maya is also proved to be eternal just like Brahma, then Brahma did not remain an Addvait (single undivided) Brahma. And if Maya gets unified with Brahma then the Jivas who intermixed with Maya, they also got intermixed with Brahma along with Maya; then it is established that at the time of total destruction all Jivas got inter-mixed with Parma Brahma; why should then the Jivas make effort for liberation (Moksha)?'

'Further, the Jivas who were united with Maya, will the same Jivas come back into the universe on recreation of the universe or because these were united with Brahma so will the new Jivas be created? If the same Jivas will come back then 
it appears that those Jivas remain separate-separate; why do you call them united? And if the new Jivas are created then the Jiva's existence remains for a very short duration only; why should then the Jivas make effort for getting liberated?' 

Then he says- 'Only the earth etc. (inanimate objects) get united with Maya;' then we ask whether Maya is an immaterial animate object or a material inanimate object? If it is an immaterial animate object then how would the material in animate object get united with the immaterial one? And if it is a material in animate object then does it get united with Brahma or not? If it gets united with Brahma then due to this union Brahma would also got intermixed with the material inanimate object. And if it does not intermix then the undividedness (monotheism) did not remain intact. And if you say- "All these become immaterial inanimate", then the soul and the body etc. proved to have become one, and this is what a mundane being believes (in the oneness of the soul and the body); why to call him an ignorant self?

Further, we ask- 'On total destruction of the universe., Mahesh is also destroyed or not?' If he is destroyed then his destruction takes place along with that of universe or some-what earlier or later. If Mahesh and the universe get destroyed simultaneously then how could he destroy the universe who himself gets destroyed simultaneously. If the destruction takes place somewhat earlier and later then where did Mahesh reside after distrusting the universe, because he himself was a part of the universe. Thus, believing Mahesh to be the destroyer of universe is proved impossible.

In this way, believing Brahma, Vishnu, Mahesh respectively as to be the creator, protector and destroyer of the universe is proved to be wrong by the logic given above and by various other reasons; hence. believe the universe as eternal uncreated and endless.

The Vindication of the Eternity & Infinity of the Universe

In this universe whatever Jivas etc. substances are, they all are separate-separate and eternal and their states (modes) always continue changing; from this point of view they are said to be getting created and destroyed. And whatever heaven, hell, islands, etc. are there, they too are existing in the same form as they are from the beginningless time and will remain always existing in the same form infinitely.

Perhaps you may ask- 'How would such shapes, etc. be formed without making them? Therefore, the various shapes, etc. which are found existing, are there only after being created?' This is not so.  How could any logic be advanced about the substances which are found existing from the beginningless time? The way in which you believe Parma Brahma's nature as to be beginningless and endless, so similarly the Jivas etc. and heaven, etc. are believed to be eternal and uncreated. If you ask- "How the Jivas etc. and heaven, etc. came into being?" Our rejoinder is- "How Parma Brahma came into being?" You might ask- 'Who made all these like this?' We will ask- 'Who created Parma Brahma like this?' You may say- "Parma Brahma is self-established"; we will say- "The Jivas etc. and the heaven, etc. are self- established".  You will say- "How is the parity between these and Parma Brahma possible?" Then you should spell out the flaw or fault in the possibility of their existence. We have already pointed out many flaws and faults in the belief that the universe is newly created and gets destroyed. Now you tell us what is the fault in believing the universe beginningless and endless.

You believe in the existence of Parma Brahma, but no such separate entity is there. There are Jivas in this world; they attain the state of passionlessness and omniscience by acquiring the right path of liberation through right knowledge.

Further, he argues- "You are maintaining that the Jivas are separate-separate and eternal, but after their attaining liberation they become formless, how is then their remaining separate-separate possible there?

Answer: After attaining liberation, they are seen by omniscients or not? If they are seen, some configuration of them would also be visible. What did the omniscient see without seeing the form? And if they are not visible then either the substance itself is not there or the omniscient is not there! Hence from the viewpoint of knowing through material senses they have no form; from this angle they, the liberated souls, are formless. But because they are known by omniscients, so they have an immaterial form. When their immaterial form is established then what is wrong in accepting them separate-separate? And if you say that they are one from one class point of view, then we also believe like that. For example, each grain of wheat is separate- separate but their class is one; in this way, if they (the liberated souls) are believed to be one then their is no fault.

Thus on the basis of right faith, all substances in the universe are to be believed to be uncreated, separate- separate and eternal. If someone under fallacy does not ascertain the truth or falsehood then it is up to him; he will bear the fruit of his own belief.

Negation of Hereditary Succession from Brahma

And they (the monists) maintain that the hereditary succession through son, grandson, etc. is from Brahma and they uphold that amongst the races there exists mutual sexual relationship between demons, humans, gods and animals. There they believe that birth of son - daughter from any mother and any father such as human from god, god from human and human from animals, etc. takes place; how is this possible?

Further, they say that birth takes place through mental imagination, inhaling air and smelling semen, etc. All this clearly appears to be wrong. If this be true then how could the rule of hereditary succession of son, grandson, etc. prevail? And they further believe that the big noble saints are born from different mothers and different fathers, but how would the noble persons take birth from the unchaste mothers and fathers? This is an abuse in the world; why then they ascribe nobility to those persons?

Further, they ascribe the birth of Ganesha etc. to have taken place from filth, etc. and say that someone's limbs are found joined with someone other's limbs. All this is clearly contradictory and false.

X-ray of Incarnation Theory

Further, they say that there have been 24 incarnations of the God.
(1. Sanat Kumar, 2. Shookaravatar, 3. Devarshi Narad, 4. Nar-Narayana, 5. Kapil, 6. Dattatraya, 7. Yajna Purush, 8. Rishabha avatar, 9. Part avatar, 10. Matsya, 11. Kachchhapa, 12. Dhanvantari, 13.  Mohini, 14. Nrisinghavatar, 15. Vaman, 16. Parasuram, 17. Vyas, 18. Hansa, 19. Ram avatar, 20. Krishna avatar, 21. Haya Greeva, 22 . Hari, 23. Buddha and 24. Kalki; these are believed to be the 24 Avatars (incarnations of God). of the God. Some of these Avatars are said to be complete incarnations and some others incomplete incarnations. When complete incarnations took place, then Brahma remained pervasive elsewhere or not?  If so, then why call these incarnations as complete? If it did not remain pervasive then Brahma remained only of this much extent.  And when incomplete incarnations took place then what extra event happened, since Brahma's part is found present all everywhere?  Moreover, this act was insignificant; why then Brahma himself took the incarnation. This shows that without taking the incarnation Brahma did not possess the power of doing that act; why should one make more effort when the same act can be accomplished by small effort there?

And in these Avatars the Matsya (Fish) Kachchhapa (Tortoise) etc., incarnations are said to have taken place; so, for minor acts, why did he incarnate in the form of inferior beasts? And for protecting Prahlad he incarnated in the form of Nrisingh. But why did he allow Harinankush to act that way and cause sorrow to his devotee for such a long period? And what for did he assume such a form? Further, they uphold that the King Nabhi was blessed with Vrashabha-Avatara, and he (Brahma) incarnated for blessing King Nabhi with son's pleasure. Why did he observe severe austerities in that incarnation?  There was nothing to be accomplished by him. You might say that he acted so just to show to the world; then he showed some incarnations with the austerities and some incarnations with enjoyment, etc. In this condition, to which incarnation the world will believe god?

Further, he says that there had been a king named Arihanta who discovered the Jaina-faith by accepting the religion of Vrishabha Avatar. Then we say to him that in Jaina tradition not only one Arihanta had been there but any man who on acquiring omniscience becomes adorable, his name is called `Arhat'.

And they (the monists) regard Ram & Krishna, these two in- carnations, as to be the main incarnations, so what did Ram avatar do? He moaned for Sita (his queen), fought with Ravana and killed him and then ruled. And in Krishna avatar, first he became a cow-keeper and indulged in many contemptible gestures and bodily actions for fascinating other cow-keepers-wives and became a king after killing Jarasindhu etc. So what is achieved by such acts?

Moreover, they mention that Ram and Krishna had one identity. But where did they live during such a long gap of time? If they lived in Brahma, then did they remain separate or united? If they remained separate then it appears that they live separate from Brahma. And if they remained united then how do you say that Ram himself became Krishna, Sita herself became Rukmani?

And in Ram avatar, they lay emphasis on Sita (Ram's wife) and in Krishna avatar they say that Sita is born as Rukmani (Krishna's wife) but they do not regard her as superior lady and instead regard Raadhika Kumari as superior lady. When asked, then they say- 'Raadhika was a devotee of Krishna, but how is it justified to regard a maid servant superior to one's own wife. And Krishna is said to have indulged in all sorts of actions in the form of illegal relationship with other's wives including Raadhika. How could this be called adoration?  Such acts are certainly highly condemnable.  And he treated Raadha as superior to Rukmani; this means that he might have established illegal relations with other's wives knowing this as a good thing. Moreover, he did not remain captivated in one Raadha lady only but also got involved with  Gopika Kubja (Bhagwat - skandh-10, chapter 48,1-11).  etc., other ladies.  Thus, this incarnation was Perhaps meant for all such acts only.

Further they say- `Lakshmi is his (Brahma's) wife and the wealth, etc. is called Lakshmi'. But as the stones, dust, etc. are found in the earth, etc., similarly, gems, gold, etc. wealth are also found; who else is then this Lakshmi whose husband is Narayana?  And they say that Sita etc. are the form (nature) of Maya (illusion). And when they (those Ram, Krishna incarnations) got captivated in them then how did they not got captivated in Maya? How long! how more to describe; whatever they say all that is found contradictory. But the Jivas feel gratification in the fables of sensual pleasures, etc.,that is why narration of the same is pleasing to them.

Such Avatars (incarnations) are said to be the form of Brahma.  And many other things also they describe to be the form of Brahma.  One is Mahadeva whom they believe Brahma- swaroopa. They call him a recluse (yogi), what for did he accept the yoga (penance's)? And he uses skin of deer and smears the body with ashes. What purpose is served by this? And he wears the garland of the trunks of human heads but even touching of bone is contemptible. Then why does he put it round his neck? He wears snakes, etc. like a garland but what is the greatness in this act? He eats susallow-wort and thoru-apple; so what benefit flows out of it? He keeps the trident, so whose fear he has? And he keeps Parvati with him but being an ascetic he keeps woman, so why did he indulge in such contrariety? If he was so passionate, he should have remained at home. And he indulged in various types of contrary activities; no purpose seems to be served by these acts. All these actions seems to be that of a mad-man. Such a person is said to be the personification of Brahma.

And sometimes they call Krishna to be the attendant of him (Mahadava) and some other times call him to be the attendant of Krishna. Sometimes they call both to be one and the same. All seems to be baseless.

Further, they call the Sun etc. as the personification of Brahma.  And they put up Vishnu as saying - "Gold in metals, kalpa-vraksha in trees, lie in gambling etc. -I am found in all these". All this is irrational. One who is described great by mundane beings from a particular aspect, the same is said to be the personification of Brahma. But if Brahma is omnipresent then why is such specific personification imagined? And if Brahma is found in Sun, gold, etc., then the sun gives light, gold is wealth; due to these qualities you consider these things as parts of Brahma. If this is so then treat the lamp also which gives light like Sun; and silver- iron, etc. also which are wealth like gold, -such qualities 
are found in other substances also; so this way accept them also as parts of Brahma.  You may treat them big or small Brahma but their class is one. This shows that for proving false greatness they put up different illogical arguments.

Further, they describe Jwalamalini etc., many goddesses as the personification of Maya (illusion) and regard them as adorable by creating sin of injury (sacrifice) etc., but Maya is censurable; how is its worshipping possible? And how could the act of committing injury be good? And they regard cows, snakes, etc. animals as adorable, which eat non-eatables, etc. And they describe fire, air, water, etc., venerable by regarding them as gods and also describe trees, etc. as venerable by supporting with false reasoning.

What more to say? All objects with a masculine name are imagined to be Brahma personified and all objects with a feminine name are treated as Maya personified and regard all those adorable.  They do not apply their mind as to what will come out of their adoration. They misguide the world by ascribing false causes of temporal gains and purposes in these objects.

Further, they say that the creator Brahma makes the body and the god of death (called Yama) kills, and at the time of death the messengers of Yama come to take him; after death lot of time is spent in the way, there they prepare the balance account of Punya (virtue) and Papa (vice) and there they give him punishment, etc., but all this is fictitious, false conjecture. At each unit of time, i.e., every moment, infinite Jivas take birth and die; how is such simultaneous happening possible? And also there appears to be no reason for this belief.

They further say that the dead person is benefited by performing Shraaddh etc. after his death, but in the alive state none is seen becoming happy-unhappy by other's pious- impious acts; how would then he become happy-unhappy after death? This illogic is put up for the purpose of fulfilling one's greed by befouling people.

Ant, Moth, Lion, etc. Jivas also take birth and die. All these are regarded to be Jivas of destruction. But the birth and death of these animals too are seen like that of human beings, etc., what is the gain in misconjecturing? Further, they narrate the fables in the Shastras (scriptures), but on thinking over them they are found to be contradictory.

Further, they regard Yajna (sacrificial-oblation-ceremony) as a religious activity; there they sacrifice (burn) the big animals into the fire. They indulge in the sinful act of producing lot of fire, etc. and in that a lot of Jivas die; but in their own scripture and in the world also killing of Jivas is forbidden. But they are so cruel that they do not bother at all and say that Yagyarth pashva srishta": the beast are created for sacrifice in Yajna only; there is no sin in killing them"

Further, for the sake of accomplishing their greed, they misguide the kings, etc. by asserting that the performance of Yajna would result in heavy rains and destruction of enemy, etc. This is as contradictory as saying that by devouring poison people will become alive. Similarly, advocating the act of killing to be religion and the means of fulfillment of desire, is clearly contradictory. But the Jivas whose sacrificing is advocated do not possess much power and no body feels afflicted by their killing. It would have been befitting if the sacrificing of some powerful and beloved one would have been approbated. But there is no fear of sin, that is why the wicked people are engaged in doing ill of the self as well as of others by killing the weaker beings for the sake of fulfillment of their greed.

A Discussion on Yoga Theory

Further they, the monists, say that the path of salvation is achievable by two streams Bhakti Yoga (adoration process) and Jnan Yoga (knowledge process).

Analysis of Bhakti-Yoga: Now the characteristics of salvation-path through Bhakti-Yoga (adoration process) are being described:-

They describe the adoration (Bhakti) as of two kinds:- Nirguna (undivided & formless) and Saguna (with forms & qualities).

Adoration of an absolute & undivided God (Parma-Brahma) is called Nirguna-Bhakti and same is explained as under:-

"Thou art formless, faultless, not knowable by mind and speech (words), limitless, ubiquitous, one, savior of all, exonerater of sinners, creator and destroyer of all". They thus invocate by these and other such qualities. Out of these, many of the qualities such as formless, etc. are of non-existence form; by believing them in totally to be so, the non-existence of God only is established, because how can there be any substance without any form? And many of the qualities like ubiquitous, etc., are impossible and have already been proved so earlier.

Further, they say that "from Jiva point of view I am your devotee, from scripture point of view I am your part, and from Tattva (reality) point of view You and I are one"; all these three concepts are mere fallacies.  This devotee himself is an animateentity or is an in animate object? If it is animate then is this animation (sentience) of Brahma or of his own? If it of Brahma then the belief that "I am devotee" is possible in the consciousness only.  Therefore, conscious- ness is proved to be the nature of Brahma and the Swabhava (intrinsic nature) and Swabhavi (substance possessing that nature) have an indivisible relationship (Tadatmya Sambandha). How can then there be the relationship of devotee and lord between them?  The relationship of devotee and Lord is possible only between two separate substances. And if this consciousness is of his own then he is proved to be a separate entity as the master of his own consciousness.

Then "I am part" and "You and I are one" this statement is false.  And if the devotee is an inanimate object then the presence of sense in an inanimate object is impossible; how could such sense be there?  Therefore, "I am devotee" this statement is possible only when two, substances are separate entities. And "I am your part" this statement is also not maintainable because saying 'You' and 'I' is possible only when there are two separate substances but how could the 'part' and the 'whole' be separate entities? The 'whole entity is not separate from its parts because the mass of parts itself is the whole entity.  And "You and I are one" this statement itself is contradictory.  How is it possible to believe mineness and separateness in one and the same substance? Therefore, one should ascertain the truth by giving up fallacy.

And many of them recite the name only. How would simply reciting the name be fruitful without ascertaining the nature of the person whose name is being recited? If you will say that the grandeur is in the name only, then our question is that if the same name of a wicked person is kept as that of the name of the God then in reciting the name of both, there would be commonness of fruit. How could this be possible? Therefore, only after ascertaining the nature and characteristics of the adorable, one should adore him. Thus, the differentia of Nirguna-Bhakti has been explained.

And adoration of God by describing his deeds generated under passions of lust, anger, etc., is called Saguna-Bhakti, (adoration of forms & qualities). In Saguna-Bhakti, the description of God -Thakur and Goddess-Thakurani is done on the same lines as that of Hero-Heroine with worldly adornment. There they describe all kinds of behavior pertaining to relationship with one's own wife as well as with other's wife under circumstances of attachment and detachment. Further, they associate with God the acts like stealing of cloths of ladies, taking bath, looting of curd, touching the feet of ladies, dancing before ladies, etc., in performing of which even an ordinary person would feel ashamed. Such acts are possible only under intense desire of sex.

Further, He is said to have fought the wars, etc. but these 
are acts of anger. He is said to have made efforts for showing his importance; but those are the acts of pride. Indulgence in the acts of duplicity is also associated with God's name but those are the acts of deceit. He is said to have made efforts for gaining the objects of senses. But these are the acts of greed. He is said to have indulged in sportive acts, but those are the acts of laughter, etc. Hence, such kinds of acts are possible only under the influence of anger, etc.

In this way, by attributing the acts of sex, anger, etc. to God, they say that they are praying, but which acts would then be called censurable if acts of sex, anger, etc. are stated to be adorable?  Adoring of God by ascribing to him such acts which are censured in world as well as in scripture is an act like that of a sycophant. Now our question is- `Will you regard him gentle or wicked who without naming the person starts describing the acts that someone has done such and such acts? If you will regard him gentle then the wicked people are proved gentle; who else would then remain wicked? And if you will regard him wicked then who so ever does such acts, he is wicked. Justice should be done without prejudice. If you will say prejudicially that describing the Thakur with such traits is also an invocation, then we ask you "Why did Thakur indulge in such acts? What did he accomplish by indulging in such censurable acts? If you say that for establishing the tradition he did so, then our question is- 'What benefit did he and others get in establishing such a tradition of contemptible acts of enjoying other's wife, etc.? Therefore, indulgement of Thakur God in such acts is not possible. And if Thakur did not indulge in such acts and you yourself attributed such traits to him, then you have blamed a person without blemish. Therefore, such a description is not adoration but censure.

Moreover, while invocating, one gets the same type of ideas and harbors affection in the same qualities which are being described.  So, while describing the acts of sex, anger, etc. one would also develop the feelings of sex, anger etc., or will become interested in such passions. But such thoughts and feelings are not praise-worthy. If you will say- "The devotees do not get involved in such feelings, then we will ask you as to how one would describe without being affected by such ideas? How could one adore without the feelings of affection?  If these thoughts and feelings are supposed to be good then why celibacy and forbearance, etc. are said to be beneficial?  Because, these are contradictory to each other. 

Moreover, for the purpose of doing Saguna-Bhakti, they adorn the idols of Ram -Krishna, etc., with curvature accompanied by woman, etc. Merely on seeing them passionate feelings of sex, anger, etc. arise. And they worship Mahadeva in the form of phallus. See the Mockery! By taking the name of which one feels ashamed, which the world keeps covered, they adore the same in an idol form. Did he not have other limbs? But excessive mockery is exhibited only by doing so.

Further, for the purpose of Saguna-Bhakti, they hoard different kinds of sensual objects. In the name of God (Thakur) they themselves enjoy the objects. They prepare the food, etc. for offering to God (Thakur), but they themselves eat it by imagining it to be gift of God. Here we ask- "Perhaps Thakur would be suffering from hunger and thirst, if not so, then how such imagination is possible? "And when he would be suffering from hunger, etc., then he (the God) being restless would become unhappy; how will then he remove sorrow of others? And you have offered the food, etc. material to God for his use; therefore, it could be called a gift of God only when Thakur himself gives it. But taking food, etc. by one's own hand cannot be called God's gift. For example, if someone gives a present to the king and then the king gives him reward then its acceptance is commendable but if someone gives a present to the king and without king's saying anything; one himself takes back the present by his own hands saying that the king has given me the gift, then this is proved to be a mockery. Similarly, here in the case of God, all this cannot be called adoration, it is mere mockery.

Further, Thakur and you are two or one? If Thakur and you are separate then the present that you have offered should be accepted back only if Thakur gives it to you, but why do you take on your own?  And if you will say that because God (Thakur) is in idol form, there-fore, I myself make the imagination; then, this means that you yourself did the work which was to be done by Thakur, then you yourself became Thakur. And if Thakur and you are one, then presenting and taking back in the form of gift is false and imaginary. This behavior is not possible when both are one. Therefore, this shows that food greedy persons themselves indulge in such imagination.

Further, they indulge in the arrangement of activities like dancing, singing and accumulating such sensual objects which are agreeable to all mundane beings in different seasons of winter, summer, autumn, etc. for pleasing God (Thakur ji). Although they show that they are doing all this for pleasing Thakur ji but in reality they cherish the objects of senses for themselves. This shows that all such arrangement is done by the sensualist Jivas. And by mere imagination they celebrate birthday, marriage, etc. and show acts of sleeping, awakening, etc. (of Thakur ji). This, in reality, is similar to the game of dolls which girls arrange for their amusement. So, this has nothing to do with spirituality. Moreover, they dramatize the various actions of childhood of God and through it they cherish their sensual urges and say that this also is an adoration. What more to say, such many contrarieties are 
found in Saguna-Bhakti.

In this way, both these types of adoration, though propagated as path of salvation, are proved to be false.

Analysis of Jnana-Yoga Theory

Now the nature of the Salvation-path as described through Jnana-yoga (knowledge-means) by different sects is being explained:-

There, the believers of this theory regard knowing of an absolute ubiquitous Para-Brahma (Supreme God) as Jnana (knowledge); so, its falsehood has already been explained earlier.

Believing oneself totally pure and of the nature of God and knowing sex, anger, etc. and bodily existence, etc. as delusion, is regarded as Jnana (knowledge). So, this too is fallacy; if the self (soul) is, pure then why do you endeavor for salvation? When himself is pure Brahma then what remains to be achieved? And the sex, anger, etc. are clearly seen arising to the self and the association of the body, etc. is also seen; hence, when their dissociation will take place at its proper time, how then their association in the present state of existence is treated as delusion?

They further say that "Making effort for Moksha (final release) is also delusion. As the rope is a rope only, knowing it a snake was delusion, on removal of delusion it is a rope only.  Similarly, one is Brahma himself, knowing (or believing) oneself impure was the delusion, when this delusion ends, the self remains Brahma only".  All this statement is false. If the self is pure and one knows it to be impure then it is delusion; but the self is in impure state due to sex, anger, etc. How would then believing impure as impure be called delusion? Rather knowing pure would be delusion. Therefore, what is gained by believing oneself as pure Brahma due to false delusion?

And if you will say that "These sex, anger, etc. impure dispositions are the traits of mind and Brahma is separate". then we ask you- "Whether the mind is your own functionary or not?" If it is, then the impure dispositions of sex, anger, etc. are also your own. And if those are not yours then tell us- 'Whether you are of sentience nature or of material (insentience) nature?' If you are of sentience nature then the knowledge in you is seen functioning through the mind and the senses only. If anybody can establish the knowledge functioning without these (mind and senses) then that can be accepted to be your separate nature, but it is not discernible. Moreover, the word Mana (mind) is derived from the root Mana-Jnan (in grammar), i.e., Mana means 'To know', so the mind (mana) is of the knowledge form, so tell us whose is this knowledge?  But knowledge does not appear to be separate from you. And if you are a material (insentient) object then without knowledge how do you think of the nature of self ? This does not seem to be possible.  And you say that Brahma is separate", so whether you yourself are that separate Brahma or someone else is?  If you yourself are, then your knowledge which believes that "I am Brahma", is the function of the mind only, it is not separate from the mind and believing I-ness i.e., belief of self is found in oneself only.  In a separate entity, one cannot develop the feeling of oneness. If Brahma is separate from the mind, then why does the knowledge of mind-form establish oneness in Brahma? And if Brahma is an entity separate from you then why do you believe oneness with Brahma?  Hence, give up your fallacy and know that as the touch, etc. senses are the nature of the body so those are lifeless (insentient) but the knowledge which is caused through them is the nature of the soul. Similarly, the mind also is a heap of subtle particles of matter and is a Part of the body only. The knowing activity and the feeling of sex, anger, etc. which are generated through it are all nature (function) of the soul.

The specific point to be noted here is that the act of knowing is one's own nature and the feeling of sex, anger, etc. are the perverse (impure) dispositions (of the self); owing to them, the soul is in impure state. When in due course of time, the sex, anger, etc. (impure dispositions) will vanish and the dependence of knowing act on mind and senses will end then on manifestation of omniscience-nature of soul, the soul will become pure.

Similarly, know about the intellect, egotism, etc. also, because the mind and the intellect, etc. are synonyms and the egotism, etc. are also the perverse impure dispositions like sex, anger, etc.; knowing these separate from the self is a fallacy. Rather, knowing these as one's own dispositions, it is desirable to make effort for uprooting these impure dispositions. Those Jivas who are unable to uproot them and want to establish their superiority, behave in an unrestrained manner by not accepting these impure dispositions to be of the self. Rather, they remain engaged in sensual objects and acts of injury, etc., by intensifying the feelings of sex, anger, etc. 

Moreover, giving up of egotism, etc., is also not correctly under-stood by them. Believing all as Par-Brahma; not establishing I-ness in any object and dispositions, is regarded by them as giving up of egotism. But this is a fallacy.  Because, is he himself a separate entity or not?' If he is a separate entity then how not to believe I-ness in the self.  If the self is not an entity then who believes everything to be Brahma? Therefore, uprooting egotism consists in giving up the sense of I-ness and doing in the body, etc. which are non-self (foreign) objects. But having I-ness feeling in the self (soul) is not wrong.

Treating all equal, not differentiating in objects of different nature, is stated to be uprooting of attachment- aversion (Raag-Dwesh). This (belief) also is wrong because all kinds of substances are not of similar nature. Some substances are Chetan (sentient) and some substances are Achetan (insentient), each is different from the other; how can all those be believed to be similar? Therefore, not believing the non-self objects agreeable-disagreeable is relinquishing of Raag-Dwesh; however, there is nothing wrong in knowing the details of various substances.

In the same way, they imagine contrarily other dispositions (modes) pertaining to salvation-path and due to such false imagination they indulge in adultery, eat the non-eatables, do not differentiate between various castes, etc.; adopt low conduct which is perverse conduct. When someone questions then they say- "This is the function of the body or things change according to destiny or things happen as per God's desire; we should not ramble.

See the lie! The one himself knowingly indulges in various aforesaid activities and states it as to be the function of the body. He himself knowingly makes efforts for the said acts and puts the blame on providence. Further, he willfully indulges in passionate acts and acclaims it to be the wish of God.  He involves himself in rambling, yet absolves himself from its responsibility. Because he wants to enjoy sensual pleasures under the shelter of religion. So, he puts forward such false logic. If he does not involve himself interestedly in such acts then we will not hold him responsible for the same. For example, suppose someone is sitting in meditation posture and someone else covers him by cloth, there, if the meditator does not entertain any feeling of happiness, then it is true that there is no involvement on his part. But, if he accepts the cloth and wears it and feels happy by ending his suffering from cold, etc., then how is it possible that this is not treated as his own act? And the acts of indulging in adultery, eating the non-eatables, etc. cannot take place without one's own thoughts and desire. How can this be accepted as non-involvement by him? Therefore, only where the desire of sex, anger, etc. (impure dispositions) have ended, there only, one's involvement in any kind of activities is not maintainable. And if one cannot get rid of the passions of sex, anger, etc., then one should act in a manner by which these passions can be minimized. It is not desirable to increase them by behaving unrestrainedly.

Refutation of being called Enlightened by Breath-control

And many Jivas consider themselves enlightened by practicing
breath-control. When the air exhales out from the Ida, Pingla, Sushumna forms of the nose-doors, there, they, through the difference of colors, etc., imagine the air itself as to be the form of earthen element, etc. By way of practicing through that technique, one attains some knowledge of instrumental causes, so they foretell the world about the good or bad events and they are called learned; but this is nothing but a worldly act only and has no relation with the salvation-path. What is achieved by foretelling the good or bad events to Jivas causing them to enhance their attachment- aversion feelings and developing one's own pride & greed, etc. passions?

Further, he practices the Pranayam etc. yoga practice (physical exercises) and claims to have taken Samadhi by stopping breathing.  This act of yoga practice by controlling air is just like that of an acrobat who, through constant practice, performs various actions by hands, etc. The hands and breath are the limbs of the body only; how would the self-benediction be possible by controlling these limbs?

Further, you may say that the rambling state of mind stops, happiness arises and one is not overpowered by death. So, all this is false. As in sleep, the outward actions of sentience stop, similarly, in breath-control also the outward activity
of the sentience stops.  There, he has controlled the mind but the carnal desire in not destroyed, that is why the rambling state of mind cannot be said to have stopped and without sentience who experiences the happiness?  Therefore, the happiness cannot be said to have arisen.  Moreover, many practitioners of this technique have been there in this field but none of them is seen immortal.  By setting fire, they are also seen dying.  Hence, saying that they are not under the control of the God of death, is mere false imagination.

     And in the process of devotion, where some conscious awareness remains and then he hears some word, he calls it to be the Anhad-Naad (unique pleasure).  So, as one feels pleasure by listening to the sound of lyre (a stringed musical instrument) etc., similarly, he feels pleasure by listening to that Anhad-Naad.  So, here the sensuality only is fostered; no spiritual purpose is served.  And by imagining the word Soaham (that I am) in the process of inhaling and exhaling air, he calls it to be Ajapa- Jaap (silent utterance of deity's name without rosary). As in the sound of partridge, he imagines the word Too-hi (you yourself, are that), but the partridge does not intentionally make such sound for conveying any meanings; similarly, no intention could be imposed on the process of controlled breath for producing the word Soaham.  It is mere imagination.  Nothing is achieved by mere chanting and listening to words.  Only by grasping the meaning of the word, some achievement is possible.

     The meaning of the word Soaham is "I am that".  Here one should know who is "That" with whom he is comparing the self. He should ascertain "That" because the word "That" and the word "Who" are always inter-related terms.  Therefore, the word Soaham could be used after ascertaining the substance and then developing the feeling of `I-ness' in that substance.  There also if he experiences the `self' to be the self only then the use of the word Soaham is not possible. Saying the word Soaham is possible only when some other object is to be shown as the self.  For example, some person knows himself as the `self'; why would then he think so "I am the same".  Some other Jiva who is not able to identify himself and does not know the nature of the self, then he is sermonized that the one who possesses so and so qualities, the same I am.  Similarly, understand here also.

     Further, by concentrating on forehead, eyebrows and tip of the nose, one maintains that he meditated on Trikuti etc. and thus claims to have achieved Parmarth (spiritual excellence). There, he saw the material thing by turning the pupil of the eye; what is the spiritual achievement in that? And if through such means someone acquires somewhat knowledge of the past and future, etc., gains the power of words and the power of fast movement on the earth on the earth and in the sky, etc. and gains the power of restoration of health, etc. in the body, all these are only wordily achievements. The celestial beings are naturally found possessed with such powers.  By such powers no spiritual benefit is obtainable. Real spiritual benefit is obtained by uprooting carnal desires; whereas these powers are the means are not at all really beneficial to the self.  In the achievement of these, a lot of affliction is caused till death and no benefaction of the self is attained.  Hence, the spiritual persons do not unnecessarily entangle themselves in such activities; only the passionate people indulge in such acts.

     Further, they assert that some people have attained liberation with difficulty through the observance of many austerities, etc., and on the other hand, some people are said to have attained liberation easily.  Uddhava etc. who were stated to be great devotees were advised to undergo severe austerities and while the prostitutes, etc. are said to have achieved salvation by mere chanting of God's name. Thus, there is no consistency at all.

     In this way, they interpret the liberation-path contrarily.

Analysis of Liberation-path imagined by Other Sects

     Further, they (the monists) describe the nature of Moksha (liberation) also wrongly and of various types:-

     The one type of Moksha (liberation) is this "In the abode of liberation (Vaikuntha- dham), the Thakur along with Thakurani enjoys different sensual pleasures.  If one reaches there and remains engrossed in their service, so this his Moksha.  But this is contradictory.  Firstly, the Thakur himself is said to be indulging in sensual pleasures like other wordily persons.  So, the Thakur also is portrayed like a king.  Moreover, He has to be attainted by others which shows the dependence of Thakur.  And if the devotee even after Moksha remains a servant then it is just like being servant.  How would there he be happy on being dependant? Hence, this type of Moksha is also not possible.

     Another type of Moksha is stated thus: "In Moksha the self becomes similar to God".  So, this too is wrong.  If the other Jivas are also found separately similar to God then there would be many Gods.  Who would then be the creator and destroyer of the universe?  If all are accepted to be Gods then due to rise of different desires, contradiction will arise amongst them.  And if only one God is there then equality is not proved; one who has some deficiency will remain restless for attaining higher status from lower status; how will then he be happy?  As the difference between a small king and a big king is found in the world, so similarly, the difference between a small God and a big God would be found in the liberated state also, but this is not possible.

     Yet, another type of Moksha is described thus: "In Vaikuntha (liberated state) there is a light (Jyoti) similar to the flame of a lamp; there in that light, gets united. So, this concept, too, is wrong.  The light of the lamp is of material and inanimate form; how is such kind of light possible there?  And on union of one light with the other light, whether this light (Jyoti) exists or gets destroyed? If it remains existing then the light (Jyoti) will go on increasing then there will be decrease-increase in the light (Jyoti) and if it gets destroyed then how can such an act be believed to be worth achieving due to which our own existence gets destroyed?  Therefore, this concept also is not possible.

One other form of Moksha is this: " The soul is Brahma only; on destruction of Maya's (illusion) cover, liberation gets manifested".  So, this concept also is wrong.  When he was under the cover of Maya, then was he one with Brahma or separate from him? If he was one then Brahma himself became Maya (illusion) and if he was separate then on destruction of Maya he gets united with Brahma; thereafter, his separate existence remains or not?  If it remains then the omniscient would definitely be knowing his existence to be separate; then you should say them to have got united due to their meeting together, but from spiritual or realistic point of view they are not united.  And if his existence is lost then who would like to get his own existence destroyed? Therefore, this concept too is not maintainable.

Yet, another kind of Moksha is advocated by many people thus: "On destruction of intellect, etc. Moksha is attained".  It means the knowledge did not remain dependent on mind and senses, etc., which are the limbs of the body.  This statement is possible on eradication of sex, anger, etc., impure dispositions and if the sentience is also believed to have ended there then how can the inanimate condition like stones, etc., be accepted as beneficial?  Moreover, by adopting good means, the knowledge increases, then on adopting good means, the knowledge increases, then on adopting much better means how could the destruction of the act of knowledge be acceptable?  And in the universe, the greatness of materialism (inanimation) is not more than the greatness of the consciousness.

In this way, they (the monists) describe Moksha (liberated state) in various ways by imagination.  But they do not know the reality; rather misconjecturing the mundane state as the liberated state, they prate according to their will.  Thus, in Vedanta (monistic theory), and other sects, the form of Moksha is described perversely.

A Discussion about Mohammedanism

And in Mohammedanism also, false interpretations are found in the aforesaid manner.  As they, the monists, believe Brahma to be an ubiquitous, one faultless and the creator and destroyer of all, similarly, these (Mohammedan) believe Khuda God.  And as they (the monists) believe the incarnations of God, similarly these (Mohammedan) believe Paigamberas (prophets).  As, they (the monists) assert that Brahma takes an account of Punya- Papa (virtues and vices) of Jivas and accordingly gives punishment, etc., similarly, these (Mohammedans) attribute these deeds to Khuda.  And as these (monists) worship cow, etc., similarly, those (Mohammedans) pay same regard to pig, etc.  All these are the animals (of Tiryanch state of existence).  And as they (the monists) at some place foster kindness (Ahimsa) and at other place foster injury (Hinsa), similarly, these (Mohammedans) also at one place foster kindness and at other place foster killing.  And as they (the monists) at some place advocate observing of penance and at some other place indulgence in sensual objects, in the same way these (Mohammedans) also foster different contrary things at different places.  And as they somewhere prohibit use of meat-eating, alcohol-drinking, preying, etc., and at some other place support its its use by noble persons, similarly, these also support at different places prohibition and use of these things.  Thus, in many ways, the parity in the views of monists and Mohammedans is found.  Although the names, etc., are different-different, nevertheless, the harmony is found in their concepts and purposes.

Moreover, there is found similarly in their fundamental belief of Ishwar (God-Brahma) and Khuda God but in the details of their belief, various differences are found. These Mohammedans lay even greater emphasis on contrary acts of fostering of sensual desires, acts of injury, etc. and assert many things clearly against logic and reasoning as compared to monists.

Hence, the Mohammedanism is to be known as highly perverse and contradictory.

Thus, the falsehood of all those schools of faiths, which are abundantly followed in this region and time, has been established.

Someone may argue here "If these various faiths are false then why do the great kings and great learned persons follow them?"

Answer: The Jivas are found having false longing from the times immemorial and in these faiths the misbelief alone is fostered.  And the desire of indulging in the acts of sensuality exists in all the Jivas; so in these sects, the acts of carnal desires only are fostered.  And the purpose of carnal desires of the kings and learned persons is supported in such faiths.  And the acts which a Jiva wants to do even by ignoring public slander and knowing them vicious, and advocating indulgence in such religion?  Therefore, these religions are followed in great measure.

And perhaps you might say that in these religions detachment (renunciation), kindness, etc., virtues are also preached. But as a false coin is not accepted in circulation without giving a coating of superior metal, similarly, the false statement does not become acceptable without mixing the truth, but for the purpose of general benefit, the carnal desires only have been fostered.  As in Geeta (the sacred book of Hindus monists) the purpose of waging war is supported under the garb of religion; in Vedanta the unrestrained behavior is supported by describing the self to be pure (in the present state also); similarly, one should know at other places.  Moreover, the present time is very bad, so in this era, particularly, the worthless religions only prosper.

See the tragedy! In the present time, the Mohammedans have increased in power and in number and the Hindus have decreased; amongst Hindus also others have increased and the Jains have decreased.  So, this is the effect of bad time.

Examining the Elements Propounded in Other Sects

Many schools of thoughts have emerged on the basis of misconjectures under the power of erudition.  The main elements of philosophy discussed therein are being examined here:-

 The Sankhya - faith

In Sankhya faith, 25 Tattvas (elements) are stated, 

(Prkritmhansttahankarstsmad ganrshch shodshak   
Tsmadpi shodshkatpanshya panchbhootani
                            Sankhya ka. 12)

amongst which the basis ones are three Satva (virtue), Rajah (passions) and Tama (ignorance).  The Satva quality causes happiness, the Rajah quality produces wavering state in mind and the Tama quality generates ignorance.  The collective name of conditions produced by these qualities is called prakriti and it gives birth to Buddhi (intellect) which is termed Mah-tattva.  The Mah-tattva produces ego, which further generates sixteen Matras (divisions).  Of these, five are Jnan-Indriyas i.e., senses instrumental in knowing activity, namely Sparshan (touch-sense), Rasna (tongue-sense), Ghraan (nose-sense), Chakshu (Eye-sense) and Shrotra (ear-sense) and the one is Mana (mind).  And five are Karma-Indriyas (senses or limbs of action) Vachan (voice), Charan (foot), Hasta (hand), Linga (sex-organ), Guda (anus). And five are the Tanmatras (i) Roop (color), Ras (taste), Gandha (smell), Sparsha (touch) and Shabda (words or sound).  Further they describe that fire from Roop, water from Ras, earth from Gandha, air from Sparsha and space or sky from Shabda are created.  Thus, the aforesaid 24 Tattvas are of prakriti form and different from these is one Purush who is Nirguna (undivided one absolute soul), Karta (doer) and Bhokta (enjoyer).

Thus, they describe the twenty-five Tattvas, which are imaginary because how would the Rajas etc., qualities be evolved without some shelter?  The shelter of these could only be the Chetan-Dravya (soul-substance).  And Buddhi (intellect) is said to be generated from these qualities, but intellect is nothing but knowledge and it is found only in the substance possessing knowledge; how could then the knowledge be said to have been originated from this?  If he says that intellect is separate and knowledge is separate, then our query is that the mind has been included earlier in sixteen Matras and if you assert knowledge to be separate, what else then would be called intellect?  And ego is said to 
be generated from it but ego lies in doing in other objects.  Ego does not consist in knowing something in detached manner.  How could then ego be a product of knowledge?

And sixteen Matras are described to have evolved from ego; amongst them five are described as Jnan-Indriyas (senses instrumental in knowing activity). But in the body there are material senses (Dravya-Indriyas) in the form of eyes, etc.; those are seen to be insentient like the earth, etc. and there are psychic senses (Bhava-Indriyas) in the form of eyes, etc.; those are seen to be insentient like the earth, etc. and there are psychic senses (Bhava-Indriyas) which are of knowledge form and their function is knowing the color, etc.  What is then the purpose of ego (I-ness) there? Someone may be found possessing knowledge but without the feeling of ego (I-ness); therefore, how is it possible to treat knowledge as a by-product of the feeling of ego (I- ness)?  And the Mana (mind) in nothing but like other material senses, because the material mind (Dravya-Mana) is a part of body and the psychic mind (Bhava-Mana) is a form of knowledge. And the five so-called Karma-Indriyas (senses or limbs of actions) are nothing but the limbs of the body and are of material form.  How can these be believed to have evolved from the immaterial ego (I-ness-feeling)?

     Moreover, the Karma-Indriyas are not five only but all the limbs of the body are useful.  And the whole description is concerning with all Jivas and not concerned with human beings only.  Therefore, trunk, tail, etc. limbs are also the senses of action.  Why do you limit them to be the five only?

     And five Tan-Matras, touch, color, etc., are not separate entities but those are modes (qualities) inseparable from atoms; how are those said to be produced separately? Moreover, ego is the disposition of immaterial Jiva (soul); how can, therefore, these material modes be believed to have been produced from that Jiva?

     Further, they say that the fire, etc. are produced from these five Tan-Matras.  This is clearly false; color, etc. and fire, etc. have coexisting relationship of qualities (Guna) and substance (Guni) possessing those qualities.  In description only, those appear to be separate but substantially they are not separate.  In no way, these
can be sensed as separate.  Separation is created only in description.  How can, therefore, fire, etc. be described to have been produced from color, etc.?  Even in description, the correct statement would be that qualities (Gunas) are found in the substance but how can the substance (Guni) be believed to have been produced from the qualities (Gunas)?

Further, they say that there is a `Purush' (living entity) quite different from all these (above mentioned things); but 
when asked about his nature, they reply that he is indescribable, then who would understand the indescribable? They are not able to answer how is he, where is he, how is he a doer and destroyer?  Whatever answer they might give could be proved to be false on examination.  Thus, the Tattvas as imagined in Sankhya philosophy are to be known false.

     Further, knowing the Purush separate from the prakriti (nature) is stated to be the path of salvation by them.  In reality, there is nothing like prakriti and Purush. Moreover, nothing is achieved be mere knowing.  Salvation (Moksha) can be obtained only by uprooting the passions like attachment, etc. after knowing their nature.  But by knowing what they say, attachment, etc. are not reduced.  So long as one believes prakriti to be the doer (of attachment, etc.) and the self as non-doer, why would then he try to reduce attachment, etc.?  Therefore, this is not the path of salvation or liberation.

     Further, they say that separation between prakriti and Purush is salvation (Moksha).  But out of the twenty-five Tattvas, twenty-four Tattvas are related with Prakriti, only one Purush is said to be different.  But those are already separate and no Jiva (soul) substance has been included in the twenty-five Tattvas.  And Purush itself is termed Jiva (soul) on union with Prakriti.  But different Purush are found associated with different types of prakriti and afterwards by adopting some means some Purush may get dissociated from Prakriti,- this is proved.  So in reality, there is no one single Purush.

     Further, "Is the Prakriti a mistake of Purush or is separate like a Vyantari (peripatetic goddess) who over- powers the Jiva?"  If it is his mistake then how could the senses, etc. and the touch, etc. Tattvas be believed to have been produced from Prakriti?  And if it is separate then that also is proved to be a substance, hence everything is governed by it, nothing is in the hands of Purush.  Then with what object do you preach?  Thus believing this type of Moksha (liberation) is also erroneous.

     Further, they describe three kinds of Pramana (valid knowledge's) Pratyaksha (direct knowledge), anuman (inference) and Agama (scripture).  But ascertainment of their true or false nature can be done only from Jainas' books on logic.

     Moreover, some followers of Sankhya religion do not believe in God; some others believe in one Purush to be God, some believe Shiva and some others Narayana as God.  All of them make imaginations as per their understanding without any firm decision and many followers of this sect keep long hair, (matted and braided hair), some others keep Choti (i.e., a lock of hair on the crown of the head left after tonsure.) some are without hair, many wear clothes of catechu color. Thus by adopting various disguising dress styles, they are called great under the garb of Tattva-Jnan (possessing knowledge of Tattvas-reality).

     Thus ends the discussion of Sankhya religion.

Shivamat (Followers of Shiva)

     The Shivamat is of two types, Naiyayika and Vaisheshika

     In the Naiyayika sect, sixteen Tattvas (elements) are described, which are Pramana, Premeya, Santhaya, Prayojana, Drushtanta, Siddhanta, Avayava, Tarka, Nirnaya, Vaada, Jalpa, Vitanda, Hetvabhasa, Chhala, Jati and Nigraha-Sthana.

     There, the Pramana (valid-knowledge) is described to be of four kinds: Pratyaksha (direct knowledge), anuman (inference), Shabda (words), Upama (comparison).  Soul, body, wealth and intellect, etc. are described to be the Premeya (knowable).  And the query `What is this' is Sanshaya (doubt).  The purpose or object for which the effort is made is Prayojana.  That which is acceptable to both plaintiff and defendant is Drushtanta (Example).  Whatever is decided through example is Siddhanta (principle).  And the Pratigya (pledge) etc. five parts of anuman (inference) are the Avayava (components).  On removal of Sanshaya (doubt), finding something correct from some angle, is Tarka (logic). Later on, knowing (something) is ascertained form, is Nirnaya (decision).  Learning by discussion between the teacher (Acharya) and the taught (pupil) in the form of `for and against a subject' is the vada (debate).  In the inquisitiveness form of tale, whatever faults like duplicity, etc. found, is called Jalpa (prattling).  A discussion without opposite viewpoint is Vitanda (perverse argumentation).  Where there is no true reasoning such sub- divisions like unapproved reasoning, etc., are Hetvabhasa (fallacy).  The words or speech with duplicity is Chhala (fraud).  Such imposed defects which are not real defects, are called Jati (class or category).  And by which the subjugation of opponent is caused, that is Nigraha Sthana (stoppage of argument).

Thus, the aforesaid Sanshya etc. Tattvas are in fact not substantially any Tattva (reality).  The Tattvas are described for involving thinking and being the cause for ascertaining the knowledge and for showing the profound learning through discussion.  But what spiritual achievement would result from these Tattvas.?  To remain unperturbed by uprooting sex-anger, etc. impure dispositions, is real achievement; that object is not highlighted here at all, rather different tactics of pedantry are put forth.  So, this too is mere cleverness; therefore, this theory is not rudimental.

Further, you will say that without knowing these (Tattvas)
the purposeful Tattvas cannot be ascertained; therefore, these are called Tattvas, but the grammarians also put forth such type of tradition that by reading grammar the meaning (of words, etc.) is determined and the specialists of food, etc. also maintain that on getting stableness of the body by taking food, the people become capable in ascertaining the Tattvas; so, such as argument is not purposeful.

And if you will say that the grammar, food, etc. are certainly not the cause of Tattva-Jnan i.e., attaining knowledge of Tattvas, but are the cause of accomplishing worldly objects.  Similar to these (cause) the Tattvas described by you are instrumental causes of accomplishing temporal deeds.  Knowing through senses, etc. has been described to be the direct knowledge, etc., and in taking decision about stump or person is stated to be the doubt etc. Hence, those Tattvas only are useful by knowing of which the sex-anger, etc. impure dispositions are uprooted and unperturbation is produced.

Further, you may say that in Premeya Tattvas (knowable elements) the ascertainment of soul, etc. takes place; so it is purposeful, but everything is knowable (Premeya), no such substance is there which is not the object of Pramiti (knowledge), so what for are the Premeya Tattvas described? The soul, etc. Tattvas should only have been described.

And also the nature of the soul has been propounded contrarily; such a decision is reached on thinking without prejudice.  For example, they describe two kinds of souls, Paramatma (supreme soul) and Jivatma (mundane souls).  The Paramatma is said to be the creator of all.  They conjecture that this world is created by the doer (creator) because it is a creation.  And whatever creation is there that is created by the creator, e.g., Jar (pot) etc.  But this too is a misconjecture because the other facet of this conjecture is also possible which is that this world is not created by the creator, because many uncreated (self-existing) substances are also found in this world.  Those, which are self-existing, are not created by any creator, e.g., sun, etc. For in the world of conglomerate form of different substances, some objects are created by human beings, etc., but many other things are self-existing.  So none is the creator of them. These are imperceptible by direct knowledge.  Therefore believing God as creator is false.

Further, they describe each Jivatma (soul) has separate- separate bodies, so this is quite true but after their attaining liberation also each liberated soul should be believed to be separate-separate.  This has already been discussed in detail earlier.  Similarly other Tattvas are described contrarily.  Moreover, the differentia of Pramana (valid knowledge) etc. are also imagined contrarily by them. This can be clearly understood by study of Jaina-scripture. In this way the Tattvas described in the Naiyayika-sect are to be known as imaginary.

Vaisheshika-Sect:- In Vaisheshika-sect, six kinds of Tattvas are described: 1. Dravya (substances), 2. Guna (attributes), 3. Karma (the actions), 4.Samanya (common), 5. Vishesha (specific) and 6. Samvaya (inseparable).

Dravyas are stated to be of nine kinds:- 1. Prithvi (earth), 2. Jal (water), 3. Agni (fire), 4. Vayu (air), 5. Akash (space), 6. Kal (time), 7. Disha (direction), 8. Atma (soul)
and 9. Man (mind).

There the atoms of the earth, water, fire, and air are separate-separate; those atoms are eternal, from them Prithvi (earth) etc. are formed which are unstable.  But this is contrary to actual experience and knowledge.  The fuel-form atoms of the earth, etc. are seen converting into fire-form and the fire-form atoms are seen converting into ash-form of earth.  The atoms of water are seen converting into the pearl form of earth.  Again you will say that those atoms disappear and some different atoms only turn into those forms.  By saying so, you are clearly falsifying what is clearly evident.  If you are able to put up some very strong logic then we may consider it; but simply stating so it is not proved.  Therefore, it is clear that all atoms belong to the one Pudgala (matter) form of material class which modifies into various forms like earth, etc. conditions.

And at some places they (the Vaisheshika) state that the Prithvi (earth) etc. possess separate body, but that is false only, because it has no proof.  Moreover, the earth, etc. are the mass of atoms; this is not possible that their body be elsewhere and these be elsewhere; hence, this too is false. And where no substance gets obstructed such a hollowness they term as to be the Akash (space).  They describe the moment, an instant, etc. as to be to be the Kal (time).  But both of these are non-entities because these are not the substantive objects.  They imagine these objects for the sake of considering from various angles the area, modification, etc. of substances.  And (according to them) there is no substance like direction (Disha), they believe directions as substance simply by imagining the divisions in the space.  And soul is described in two ways.  So this has been discussed earlier. And Man (mind) is not any separate substance.  The psychic mind (Bhavaman) is of knowing form so it is the nature of the soul and the physical or material-mind (Dravya-man) is a mass of atoms (mental-vargandas) which is the part of the body. Thus, these substances are imaginary.

Further, they describe twenty-four types of qualities (Gunas):
Sparsh (touch), Rasa (taste), Gandha (smell), Varna (color), Shabda (words or sound), Sankhya (number), Vibhaga (division) Sanyoga (union), Parinaama (consequence), Prithakatva (separateness), Paratva (difference),  Aparatva (similarity), Buddhi (intellect), Sukha (happiness), Dukha (sorrow), Ichchha (desire), Dharma (virtue or piety), Adharma (vice or impiety), Prayatna (effort), Samskara (impression), Dwesha (aversion), Sneha (smoothness or oily), Gurutva (heaviness), Dravyatva (substantiality).  Out of these touch etc. qualities are found in atoms but describing earth odorous only, describing water having cold touch only, etc. is false; for nowhere in earth, prominence of smell is found, somewhere water is seen hot; hence, it is all against clear-cut knowledge and experience.  And they describe the words (i.e., sound) as to be the attribute of space (Akash), but it is false, for the words or sound is obstructed by the wall, etc.; so, it is of material form and the space (Akash) is an immaterial and ubiquitous substance.  When space is found in the wall and the word or sound attribute (Shabda-Guna) which is asserted to be the quality of space cannot enter the wall, how would this be possible?  And the number, etc. are not there in the substance itself but we imagine the number, etc. in our knowledge for knowing the numerical strength of any particular substance in comparison to other substances.  And the intellect is the name of knowledge and it is definitely an attribute of the soul.  And when the Man (mind) has already been stated under nine substances why has it now been described as an attribute separately again?  And happiness (Sukha) etc. are found sometimes in the soul, those are not the characteristics (attributes) of the soul, rather these are seemingly so-called characteristics because they are not found in all states of soul.  And smoothness, heaviness, etc. are found in the atoms of matter and are known through the sense of touch, hence these are covered under Sparsh Guna (touch attribute); why are then these described separately? And fluidity is described to be the quality of water, but the fire, etc. are also found having the quality of upward motion, etc.  So, either all qualities (Gunas) should have been described or should have been generalized.  Thus, all the aforesaid qualities (Gunas) are imaginary.

Further, they describe karmas as of five kinds:-

1. Utkshepana (Throwing Outward or exhaling)
2. Avakshepana (Throwing inward or Inhaling)
3. Aakunchana (Contraction)
4. Prasarana (Expansion)
5. Yaman (Mortification)

But all these are mere bodily actions, what is the purpose of 
describing these separately?  Moreover, these are not the only ones but are of many types.  And these are stated as separate Tattvas; but had these been separate substances then you should have described them as the separate Tattvas, or had these been specifically purposeful in rooting out the sex-anger, etc. passions, then these should have been described as Tattvas but both these specialties are not there.  And if there is just a casual approach in describing these then the stones, etc. are also found having different forms which could also be described.  Nothing is achieved by believing these.

And the Samanya (generalisation) is of two types: Par and Apar.  Par is of existence form. Apar is of substance form, etc.  And those which are always found functioning in the substance are called its details (Vishesha).  The name of a not united and inseparable relationship between a substance and its qualities is called Samavaya.  These Samanya etc. appear in our thoughts only, either by believing many as to be of one kind or by imagining the divisions in one substance or by believing the relationship from the divisions-imagination point of view.  These are not separate-separate substances. Moreover, by knowing these (Tattvas) even the specific purpose of uprooting sex-anger, etc. passions is not accomplished; why for then these are called Tattvas? And if only such Tattvas were to be stated then Prameyatva (knowledge) etc. infinite qualities are there in the substance and various types of cases like relationship base, etc. are possible in the substance; so, either all things should have been described or only purposeful ones.  Hence, these Samanya etc.  Tattvas also are purposelessly described.

Thus, the Tattvas (principles) described by the Vaisheshika are to be known as imaginary.  Besides this, the Vaisheshika believe only two kinds of Pramana (valid knowledge):-
1. Pratyaksha (direct knowledge) and 2. anuman (inferential knowledge).  So, the correctness-incorrectness of these may be ascertained from Jaina- scriptures pertaining to logic.

(Daivagam, yuktyanushasan, asht-sehsree, nyaye-vinishchya, prmanr-sangreh, tatvarth-shlokvartik, rajvartik, prameykamalmartend, nyaykumudchander adee darshnik  Jain-nyaya granth haen) 

And the Naiyayika say that the state of the soul manifested in the absence of objects, senses, intellect, body, happiness and sorrows is liberation.  And the Vaisheshika say that out of twenty-four Gunas (qualities) the absence of intellect is described, but the intellect is the name of knowledge and the substratum of knowledge was described as differentia, i.e., intrinsic nature of soul. Now, on effacement of knowledge both the characteristics and the object possessing that characteristics, i.e., soul will also get effaced.  Then what would be the state of the soul? And if the intellect is the name of mind then the Bhava-man (psychic mind) is of knowledge form only and the Dravya-man (material mind) is a part of body.  So, on liberation the association with material mind (Dravya-man) ends.  How could then the name of insentient material mind (Achetan Dravya-man) be the intellect?  And the senses are like mind.  And if the object is destroyed then the knowing of the touch etc. objects would also get effaced.  Then, what will remain of knowledge? And on effacement of objects, the universe too will get effaced. Further, they say that happiness also ends; but all Jivas make efforts for happiness only.  When it will get effaced, how would then it remain worth obtaining? And if the sensuous pleasure which can perturb is said to have got effaced there, then it is true; for the supersensible happiness having the imperturbability as its characteristic is all possible in liberation, hence happiness is not lost. However, it is correct to say that in liberation, body, misery, aversion etc. come to an end.

Further, in Shivamat (Shiva's followers) the doer or creator is an absolute single (undivided) God Shiva, they believe him to be the God.  The falsehood of his (God's) existence has already been proved established earlier, it should be known from there.  And in this sect the Bhesha (attire of body) consists of cinders, lion-cloth, matted hair, sacred thread, etc; so, from the conduct code point of view, those Bhesha (attires) are of four kinds: Shaiva, Pasupat, Mahavrati, Kaalmukha.  All these Bhesha are nothing but the facets of attachment, etc. passions; these are, therefore, not the correct Bhesha (Sulingas).  Thus has been discussed and concluded the Shivamat (Shiva faith).

Meemansaka-mat (One of the 6 Systems of Hindu Philosophy)

Now, the characteristics of Meemansaka faith are described. The Meemansaka (those who reflect deeply on a subject) are of two kinds 1. Brahmavadi and  2. Karmavada.

The Brahma vadis believe in one absolute undivided Brahma and describe in Vedanta philosophy that "This whole universe is Brahma, none else is there" and "to remain engrossed in the self (soul) is liberation".  The falsehood of these have already been explained earlier which needs reflection.

And the Karma vadis believe in performing the rituals- religious duties, sacrificial ceremonies, etc.  But in these activities, the presence of fostering of attachment, etc. alone is found; therefore, indulging in such activities is not at all useful.

Further, there are two types of customs established by Bhatta and Prabhakara.  As per Bhatta there are six kinds of Pramanas (valid forms of knowledge) - Pratyaksha (direct knowledge, i.e., perceptible to senses), Anemone (inference), Veda (scripture), Upama (analogy), Arthaapatti (corollary) and Abhava (absence or negation).  And as per Prabhakara only five Pramana excepting the Abhava are 
accepted.  So, their truth or falsehood should be known by study of Jaina-scriptures.

And those who follow Shat-karmas, i.e., six kinds of daily duties, wear the sacred thread of Brahma, have forsaken taking food-grains, etc. from the Shudras (persons belonging to fourth caste in Hindus) and live as house-holders are called Bhattas.  And in Vedanta sect the people who do not wear the sacred thread and accept the food, etc. from the Brahmins' house are named as Bhagwat; they are of four kinds- Kutichar, Bahoodak, Hansa, Parmahansa.  So, these are found to be satisfied with some external renunciation but perversity of knowledge and faith and presence of fostering of attachment, etc. are found in them.  Hence, these garbed or ungarbed Bhesha (postures of the body) are not beneficial.

Jaimineeya-mat. (Followers of Jaimineeya Faith)

There is one Jaimineeya school of faith which states as follows:- "No omniscient (all knowing Lord) is there, the Veda-Vachanas (the wordings or aphorisms of Veda-scripture) are eternal; the right ascertainment of truth is possible from them.  Hence, one should first observe the religious acts by following Veda path which is called Nodana (inspiration) and that alone is the emblem of a religion which one should practice.  For example, they say, ("Sva kamoagni yajait") i.e., one, who aspires heavenly abode ought to worship the fire.

Here we ask them- "The Shiva, the Samkhyas, the Naiyayika, etc., all believe the Vedas in which you too believe but in your and in their interpretation of Tattvas etc. mutual contradiction is found, what is the reason for this? If in the Vedas itself, somewhere something and somewhere something else then first of all, you people, by discussing mutually yourselves decide who is real follower of Vedas and who is not? But to us it appears that in the Vedas itself, the interpretations given earlier are contradictory to those given later.  That is why there have been different enunciators of different sects by having grasped its meaning differently according to their own wills.  But how can such Vedas be proved authentic? And by worshipping fire, one attains the heavenly abode! So, how can the fire be believed to be better than the human being? This is evidently wrong. And how would it be the provider of heaven? In the same way, the other aphorisms of Vedas are against authentic knowledge. When Vedas advocate the existence of Brahma why then you not accept the existence of omniscient? Thus, the Jaimineeya sect is also to be known as imaginary.

The Bauddha-mat (Bauddha Faith)

Now the differentia of Bauddha-mat (the Bauddha school of faith) is described:

In Bauddha-mat four Arya Satyas*. 
 
(Dukhmayatn chaet tta, samudyomat, margshchaityasya cha vyakhya krmainr shryutamat 36 v.v)

 (Fundamental truths or principles) are stated :-

1. Dukha (sorrows or miseries)
2. Aayatana (senses and their objects, etc.)
3. Someday (combination), and
4. Marge (path).

There, the bodily form of mundane beings is Dukha (sorrow). It is of five kinds : (dukh sansarinr skandhastai che panch prkeertit vaidna sangya, sanskaro roopmaiv cha ): Vijnana, Vedana, Sanjna, Samskara, Roop.

Knowing of Roop (color) etc.  is Vijnana (knowledge).  The feeling of happiness and sorrow is Vedana (affliction); awakening from sleep is Sanjna (consciousness); memorizing what was read is Samskara (impression); formation of body is Roop. Describing the Vijnana (knowledge) etc. as sorrow is false.  The sex-anger, etc. passions are sorrows, knowledge is not sorrow.  It is evidently seen that someone has less knowledge but has more anger-greed, etc. passion, so he is unhappy; some other has more knowledge but has less or no sex-anger, etc. passions, so he is happy; hence, the Vijnana (knowledge) etc. are not the sorrows.

And Aayatana are stated to be twelve :- Five senses and their five objects (the words etc.), the mind (mana) and Dharmaayatana (the abode of religion).  What for are these Aayatana described? When all are said to be momentary, What is then the purpose of all these?

And the combination of soul and passions (dispositions of soul) which produces further intense passions is form is soul's disposition; but owing to believing called Samudaya.  There the I-ness form is soul and mineness form is soul's disposition but owing to everything momentary, there lie no purpose of describing these too.

And "all kinds of impressions (Sanskaras) are momentary" holding such feeling is the Marge (path). But things are evidently seen existing for a longer duration.  You may argue that same condition (of an object) does never exist, so we too believe this.  The subtle modification is momentary, i.e., exists for a moment only.  Further, they the Buddhists believe the complete destruction of the same substance, but this is not seen happening; how can we believe? And in all young, old age, etc. conditions of the body the existence of only one soul is realized (perceived); if the soul is not the same one then how do you believe the one doer of the former and posterior conditions.  If you will say -" This is due to impressions (Sanskaras)".  Then our question is - "whose are these Sanskaras?"  He whose these Sanskaras (impression) are, is perpetual or momentary?  If perpetual, then how do you state everything momentary wolly?  If momentary, how can then that sanskaras (impression) whose basis itself is momentary, keep its continuance? And if all is momentary, then you too are momentary. You have described the Marge (path) to be holding of the feeling of momentariness.  But why do you tread on this path when you are not likely to get the fruit of this treading? And what for have the useless scriptures been created in your sect? The discourse is given for the purpose of gaining the fruit by doing some duty.  Thus, the Marga (path) stated by you is false.

Further, they described Moksha (final liberation) to be the destruction of attachment etc., knowledge and their off- shoots.  But who attains liberation or beatitude when everything is momentary? We also believe in the uprooting of attachment, etc., passion; but on destruction of knowledge which is our own intrinsic nature, we would also get destroyed, how would then making efforts for destruction of knowledge be beneficial? Ascertaining what is beneficial and what is not beneficial is the function of knowledge only; how would then the wise-person treat beneficial his own destruction?

And in Bauddha religion two kinds of Pramanas (valid knowledge) are described :- 1. Pratyaksha (direct knowledge) and 2. Anumaana (inferential knowledge). Their truth and falsehood can be ascertained by study of Jaina scriptures. And if these two only are the Pramaanas (valid then their scriptures (shastras) would be proved to be unauthentic? for what purpose have those been written?  The Jivas will themselves ascertain what is Pratyaksha (direct or clear-cut knowledge) and what is Anumaana (inferential knowledge).  Why did then you compose the Shastras (scriptures)?

Further, they regard Sugata (Buddha) as god and establish his nature to be naked and in different poses. This is nothing but mockery.  And the hall-mark of Bauddha-saint (Buddhists saints) is a water-pot in hand, red cloth on body and taking meal in forenoon, etc. So, what is the purpose of assuming such a posture when everything is momentary? But acceptance of such a posture and imaginary description of Tattvas is done establishing one's superiority.

The Buddhists are of four kinds :- 1. Vaibhashika, 2. Sautrantika, 3. Yogachara and 4. Maadhysmika.

The Vaibhashika believe the substance with knowledge, the Sautrantika believe in the existence of those things, only which are directly visible, nothing beyond that.  The Yogachara believe in following a particular conduct and the Maashyamikas believe in knowledge independent of any substance.  Thus, these four groups have developed different types of imaginations about Tattvas; but on analyzing their concepts are found to be baseless.

In this way, the Bauddha religion has been discussed.

The Charvaka Philosophy

Now the differentia of Charvaka philosophy is described:- The Charvaka negates the existence of all these things - omniscient, religion, no religion, liberation, the fruit of virtue and vice, birth after death and states that whatever is perceptible or can be seen and sensed by material senses that is the only world.

Here we ask him, "Is omniscient not there in this present time and region or is he not present at all times and anywhere in the world?" We too believe that omniscient is not found in the present time and region but who did know this without omniscient that omniscient is not present anywhere and at any time?  One who knows about all regions and all times is omniscient and if he does not know, then how does he negate it?

Further, religion-no religion are well-known in the world.  If these were merely fancied then how would those have been very well-known to all persons? Moreover, religion-no religion form of conduct is clearly seen, owing to which the Jivas feel happiness and sorrow even in the present time, why not to believe these? And the existence of Moksha (liberation) is also well known by inference.  The anger, etc. blemishes (impure dispositions) are found less in someone and are more in some others.  This proves that there should be someone who should not have these blemishes at all.  Similarly manifestation of knowledge, etc. appears to be less in someone and more in some others. Therefore, it can be concluded that there should be someone, who  would have these (knowledge, etc.) in full measure.  In this way, the state of Moksha is achieved by one, who has uprooted all vices and evolved all qualities.

Moreover, we see the Jivas reaping the fruit of their virtues and vices.  Someone remains pauper even besides his making the efforts; someone gets wealth on its own; someone remains diseased even besides taking due care of the body; someone enjoys good health without efforts, etc. - is seen clearly. So, there should be some reason of all these contradictory conditions?  Whatever is the cause of these, the same is virtues and vices.

The existence after death i.e., rebirth also can be conjectured directly and by inference.  The Vyantaras (peripatetic gods) etc. are seen stating, "I was so and so and I have now become a god".  And if you say - "This is the Pavan (air) only but we call (believe) soul to be that substance in which "I am" etc. form of consciousness is found; you call same as Pavan (air).  But Pavan (air) is obstructed by wall, etc; whereas soul, even besides its being enclosed by body, cannot be obstructed by any thing; therefore, how can it treated as Pavan (air)?

Further, you say that the world is confined to that much only, which is seen and sensed by material senses, but you cannot know by senses even about the objects of regions, which are a few miles distant only and about times a few years past and a few years hence.  Yet, we have been hearing traditionally about far distant places and of immemorial times.  This proves that you do not possess the capacity of knowing all, how do you then say that world is confined to what you know?

Further, in Charvaka sect it is said that by intermingling of earth (clay), water, fire, air, sky (space) the animate object  gets created.  But on death, the earth (material body) etc. are left here and the sentient substance departed and became a Vyantara (peripatetic god) etc; thus these (earthen body and soul) are seen clearly separate-separate. And in a body the earth, etc. clearly appear to be separate- separate, the sentience appears to be one.  If the sentience be based on earth, etc. then bones, blood, breath, etc. will be having separate-separate sentience.  And on cutting the hand, etc. the color (pigment) etc. remains with it; similarly, the sentience will also remain there (which is not so).  Further, egoism and intellect are found in a sentient object.  When (on death) the earth, etc. constituents of body remained here itself, but in the Vyantaras (peripatetic god) etc. state of existence the feeling of I-ness about the previous life is found, how does it happen so?  And the Vyantaras etc.  disclose the secrets of last life; so with whom the knowing activity remained intact is the soul itself.

And the Charvaka sect unrestrained activities like eating, drinking, enjoying sensual pleasures, etc. have been advised but the world is found indulging in such unrestrained activities of its own.  What benefit have you bestowed by writing such books and sermonizing through them?  You might say that the object of giving such sermons was to dissociate people from penance, chastity, continence, etc. but by following these acts the passions are reduced which result in reduction of perturbation and misery.  This, in reality, is happiness, which also brings name and fame.  What benefit do you propose to do by advising people to give up these?  You are not afraid of harming the self as well as others by telling agreeable things to sensualist Jivas; you indulge in 
such false logic by becoming unrestrained for the sake of enjoying sensuous pleasures.

Thus, the Charvaka faith has been x-rayed (explained).

Concluding Remarks about Falsehood in Other Faiths

Similarly, there are many other faiths (so-called religions) in which false logic has been adopted and which are propounded by wicked and passionate people.  So, harm is caused to Jivas who believe in them.  And the Jina's religion or Jaina-faith is the only interpreter of reality being discoursed by the omniscient passionless God (Arihant-deva); only by having faith in it the Jivas are benefited, i.e., they get real happiness.

In Jinamat i.e. in the religion discoursed by omniscient Jina, the Jiva-Ajiva etc. Tattvas (essential purposeful principles) are described.  The Pratyaksha (direct knowledge) and Paroksha (indirect edge) are stated.  Completely passionless and omniscient is the Lord Arihanta Deva.  Having no external and internal possessions or paraphernalia- such naked monk is the Nirgrantha Guru (preceptor).  Detailed characteristics of these will be discussed later on in this book.

Here someone may say- "You have attachment-aversion feeling, that is why you establish your faith by negating other faiths."

Our answer to this is that "There is no attachment-aversion feeling in describing the right thing.  If contrary exposition is done with some self-interest then it can be regarded as prompted by attachment-aversion feeling".

Then he says- "If you do not have any attachment-aversion feeling then how do you say that other faiths are false and only Jaina-faith is true?  If you have feeling of equanimity then you ought to treat all as equal; why do you take side with your faith?"

Our answer is that "What is wrong we call it wrong, what is right" we call it right.  How is attachment-aversion feeling involved in it?  Moreover equanimity does not consist in treating both wrong and right as similar, this is rather insensibility.

He further says that the purpose of all faiths is one and the same; hence, one should know all as equal?

Our answer is that `Why are there so many faiths (philosophies) if all have the same objective.  In one specific faith discourse can be given in different ways from different angles but with one object only; who calls it a separate faith?  But the objects of various faiths are 
different, the same is being explained here as under:-

Comparison of Jaina Faith with Other Faiths

In Jaina-faith the sole purpose is of fostering passionless disposition (conduct) Veetaraagbhava only.  Therefore, through mythological stories, description of universe, etc., code of conduct and essential principles or Tattvas etc., thus everywhere, only passionlessness (Veetraagata) has been fostered.  But in other faiths the sole purpose is of fostering passional dispositions (Saraag Bhava).  Because imaginary exposition of substances, etc. is done only by passionate beings who foster only passions by putting forth various tactics.  For example, the followers of Addvait Brahma (monists) by believing all to be one Brahma, the followers of Sankhya by believing the self to be a purely non-doer by treating whole of the functioning to be the act of Prakriti (nature) and the followers of Shiva be believing the fulfillment of objectives by knowledge of Tattvas only, the follower of Meemansaka by believing religion in passionless conduct, the followers of Buddha by believing everything momentary, the Charvakas by not believing in the continuance of life after-death- all these foster the propensity of living unrestrained in the sensuous pleasures through indulgence in passionless acts.  Although at some places, they support the viewpoint of reducing passions also but under that pretext they foster some other kind of passions.  They advise people to leave householders's state, and foster and engage in the invocation of God, by quitting householders's state and foster their sensuous pleasure under the garb of God's characteristics to be Saraagi, i.e., full of passions, whereas in Jaina religion only Veetraagata i.e., passionlessness and no attachment alone is fostered by specifying the characteristics of the omniscient God, preceptor and religion to be Veetaraaga passionless, i.e., free from all sorts of passions, attachment-aversion feelings; so, this is an established fact.

Not only we say, even Bhatrihari- a non-Jain monk (poet) has described in context with renunciation as under:

"Aiko ragishu rajtai priytmadaihardhdharee haro
Neeragaishu jino vimukt lalnasango ne ysmatpar
Durvarsmrvanr pannagvishi vyasakt mugdheejan
Shaish kam vidvito hi vishyan bhoktum ne bhoktum ksham
                                                                   -11-

[Amongst passionate persons, Shiva is unique, sharing half his body with his beloved and again amongst the dispassionate, Jina the conqueror is unique who is totally unattached to the company of women and none is superior to him, while the rest of mankind smitten and stupefied by the irresistible, serpent like poisoned arrows of cupid and being overpowered by intense feeling of sex-can neither enjoy their desires nor renounce them at will.]

In this verse, amongst Saraagis (passionate) Mahadeva has been found to be supreme and amongst Veetaraagis (dispassionate) Jina Deva is supreme.  Moreover, there is contrariety in the Saraaga Bhava (passional dispositions). So, both are not praiseworthy but in these only one is beneficial and that is passionlessness (Veetaraaga-Bhava) only, by evolution of which, owing to immediate end of perturbation one becomes adorable.  Not only we but even people perturbed one becomes adorable.  Not only we but even people following other faiths agree that passionlessness is the basis of future happiness also.  On the other hand, on evolution of Saraaga Bhava (passional dispositions) perturbation is caused immediately; the person becomes censurable and future also becomes miserable.  Therefore, the Jaina-faith wherein the purpose of Veetaraaga-Bhava (passionless conduct) alone is supported is only beneficial.  The other faiths wherein the purpose of Saraaga-Bhava (passional dispositions) are supported and fostered- such kinds of other non-Jaina faiths are harmful; how could these be treated as equal?

Further, they say that this is true but by criticizing other faiths, the followers of other faiths will afflicted, dissension will be caused, therefore, why should you criticize others?

Our answer is that if we criticize any body out of passion and hurt others feelings, then we are certainly sinners.  But knowing that due to faith in other (non-Jaina) religions Jivas' belief in wrong Tattvas or wrong principles will be reinforced and because of that the Jivas will suffer miseries in the world, out of compassion, we have described the truth. What could we do if someone is hurt and dissension results without our fault?  For example- by censuring use of wine the vintner feels unhappy, by condemning adultery the whores, etc. become unhappy and by describing the method of differentiating between wrong and right things, the swindler gets hurt, what could then we do?  Similarly, if due to the fear of sinners, the religious discoursers are not given, how could then the benediction of Jivas be possible?  There is no such discourse by virtue of which everybody will feel happy and if they create dissension then disharmony will result when we too partake in it; but we will not indulge in any quarrel; so, they will themselves become calm, we shall reap the fruit of our own thoughts and actions.

Further, if someone says that by erroneous faith in purposeful Jiva etc. Tattvas the wrong belief, etc. are caused; how would the wrong belief, etc. be caused by faith in other religions?

Answer: In other religions, by putting forth contrary, logic an effort is made to misguide Jivas about the real nature of Jiva etc.  Tattvas; what for have they done so? When the true nature of Jiva etc. Tattvas is ascertained by someone then after the emergence of Veetaraaga-Bhava (passionless pure disposition) only, his superiority is established but the Jivas who are not Veetaraagi (passionless) and want to establish their superiority or greatness even besides having passional dispositions have interpreted the Tattvas contrarily through misconjectures for the sake of establishing superiority.  They foster false faith of Jiva- Ajiva by describing an Addvait Brahma etc., Asrava (influx) Samvara (stoppage of influx) by supporting unrestrained conduct and Moksha (liberation) by stating Moksha to be like a passionate and inanimate state; that is why the falsehood of the other (non-Jaina) faiths is revealed. When one realizes the falsehood of these then he may develop interest in the ascertainment and belief of real Tattvas and misconception may not be caused by their contrary logic.

Thus, the different (non-Jaina) faiths have been discussed here as above.

Establishment of Antiquity & Correctness of Jainism on the Basis of Extracts from the Scriptures of Other (non-Jaina) Faiths

Now the correctness and antiquity of Jaina faith is shown (proved) on the basis of evidence from scriptures of other faiths (non-Jaina religions):-

The Bada Yoga Vasishtha is equal to 36,000 verses (couplets).  In its chapter on the negation of egotism under renunciation topic in the dialogue between Vasishtha and Ram it is described that:-

Ramvach - "Naham Ramo ne mai banchha bhavaishu che ne mai mana
Shantimasthatumichchhami, svatmnyaiv jinotha

Here in this verse Lord Ram has expressed his desire "Neither I am Ram, nor I have any desire, nor my mind is entangled in the thoughts and objects, rather I want to establish or attain peace in my own soul similar to the Jina (the conqueror omniscient Lord).

Here Ram has expressed his desire to become like a Jina; hence, the supremacy and the antiquity of Jina Deva is proved in comparison to Lord Ram.

And in Dakshinamurty- Sahasranaama it is said- ("Shivovach jainbargrato Jain jinkrodho jitamya") Here Bhagwat's name is described to be a Jain who is engrossed in the Jaina- path (Jaina way of life).  This also proves the prominence and antiquity of Jaina-path.

And in the Vaishampayna-Sahasranaama it is said, Here the Bhagwan's (God's) name is said to be Jineshwara; so, Jineshwara (passionless omniscient) is the Bhagwan (the God).

And in the Mahimni- Stotra by Durwasa-Rishi (saint) it is said-

Taddarshan mukhyashaktiritee che tvam brahm krmaishvaree
Krtahrm purusho harishch savita budhh shivstvam guru

Here "Thou art Arhanta" by these words God has been prayed. Therefore, it is accepted that Arihanta is God.

And in the "Hanumannataka" it is said-

"Yam Shaiva samupastai shiv iti brahamoti vaidantin
Boudha budh iti prmanr patva katoti naiyayik
Arhinityath jain shashanrat krmotimeemansaka
Soyam vo viddhatu banchhitphalam trilokinath: prabhu
                            -(3rd verse of Hanumannataka)

In this verse, in the six systems of Indian philosophies only one God is stated. Thus Arihanta Deva, i.e., Jina is also accepted as God.

Here someone may ask- "You (Jaina) should also believe in one God as stated in all the systems of philosophies?"

Our answer to him is - "This is your statement and not ours; hence, in your faith also Arihanta Deva is proved to be God. If we too describe in our faith as done by you then it would mean that we too accept Shiva etc. as God. For example, some trader shows real gems and some other shows counterfeit gems. Here if the man possessing counterfeit gems describes both types of gems as of the same (real) quality for selling his gems at the price of the real gems then how would the real gems seller agree to both gems being treated at par? Similarly, the Jainas describe the true Deva (God) etc. whereas the rest (non-Jaina) describe the false. There the believers of other (non-Jaina) faith describe all faiths as equal for the sake of gaining their equal importance (dignity) but how can the Jainas agree to this?

Further, in Rudrayaamal Tantra in Bhavaani Sahasranaam it is said -

Kudasna jdhatree, budhmata jinaishwari
Jinmata jinaindra cha, sharda hansvahinee

Here in this verse the Bhavaani's names are stated as Jineshwari etc.; hence, the superiority of Jina is established.

And in the Ganesh Purana it is stated so (HINDI) (Jainam Pashupatam Sankhyam).

And in Vyaskrit Sutra it is stated thus,

(Jainas Ekasminneva Vastuni Ubhayam Praroopayanti Syadvadinah). Thus at many places in their scriptures, the description of Jain religion is found; hence, the antiquity of Jaina-faith is established.

And in the fifth chapter of Bhagwat, the description of Rishabh incarnation is found. There, He is described as benevolent, devoid of passions, etc., possessor of meditation posture and adorable by all.  And they say that the king Arhat has followed the path shown by Him. So, as the other faiths are the followers of the reincarnations of Ram- Krishna, etc., similarly, the Jaina-faith is also the follower of Rishabha incarnation. Therefore, according to their belief too the Jaina-faith is established.

Here one must think this also that according to incarnations of Krishna, etc., the tradition of indulgence in passional acts is established, whereas according to the incarnation of Rishabha the tradition of passionless or attachmentless tranquillity is established.  Here treating alike both the traditions, there will remain no distinction between the religious and irreligious practices and by accepting the specific difference between the two, one should follow the tradition which is beneficial.

Further, in Dash avatar Charitra, etc., the differentia of Buddha avatar is written identical to Arihanta Deva; so, if such sort of differentia (posture) is adorable then the Arihanta Dev a is automatically established as adorable.

And in Kaashi-Khanda it is stated that on being sermonized the king Deva Das relinquished his kingdom.

It is, further, stated that the Narayana became the Vinaya- Kirti, Yati (monk), Laxmi became Vinayshree Aaryika (nun) and Garuda accepted the vows of Shravaka (house-holder's religion. So, wherever sermonizing was required there the Jaina vows and postures were adopted. This proves that the Jaina-path is beneficial and very old.

And in Prabhasa Purana it is stated that:-

Bhavsya pashchamai bhagai vamain tapa kritam
Tainan tapsakrisht shiva prtykshtan gata
Padmasanmaseen shyammurti digambara
Neminath shivaityaivam nam chakrai asyavaman
Kalikalai mhadhorai srvpap pranrshaka
Darshanatsparshanadev koteeyagya phalprada

Here Vamana is said to have got the Darshana (glimpse) of Digamber God Neminath in Padmaasana posture and He is described as Shiva also. And his adoration, Darshana, etc. is described to be resulting in the fruit equal to one crore Yajnas (oblations); so, such fruit of adoration of Neminath God the Jainas too advocate; therefore. Jaina-faith is proved to be authentic.

And in Prabhasa-Purana is stated thus:-

Raivtadro jino nemiryugdirvimlachalai
Rishinramashrmadaiv muktimargsyakaranram

Here Lord Neminath is called Jina, His abode is described as the hermitage of saints and the cause of liberation and the abode of Yuga, etc. is also stated to be alike; hence, He (Neminath) is proved to be supreme and adorable.

Further, in the Nagar-Puraana under Bhavaavatara Rahasya it is stated thus:-

Akaradihkaraantmuttheedhorai phsanyutam
Nadbindukalakrantam chandramndalsanibham
Aitdaivi param tatam yee vijanati tatvata
Sansar bandhanam chhitva sagachaiv parman gatim

Here the word Arhat is described to be the supreme Tattva (reality). And it is stated that by its knowledge one attains liberation. So, this word Arhat is taken from Jaina-faith. 
Further, in Nagar Purana it is stated:-

Dashbhibhorjitai virprai yatphalam jayitai kritai
Munairhrtsu bhaktsya tatphlam jaytai kalo

Here it is stated that the fruit which results by feeding ten Brahmans in Krit- yuga, the same fruit results in offering food to one Jaina saint devout of Arihanta in Kal yuga. This establishes the superiority of Jaina saint.

And in Manu-smriti it is written that:-

Kuladibeejam srvaishan prthamo vimalvahan
Chakshuman Yashsvee Vamichandro ath Prasainjit
Marudevi cha Nabhishch Bharte kul satma
Ashtmo marudevyan tu nabhaijati urkarm
Darshyan vatram veeranran surasur namaskrit
Neeti tritya karta yo yugado prathmo jina

Here Vimalvaahana, etc. Manus (personages) are described; so the same names of the Kulkaras are described in Jaina- mythology and here further the first Jina is described to have been the guide of the salvation-path in the beginning of the aeon and worshipped by the celestial gods and demons. This proves that the Jaina-faith is existing from the beginning of the aeon, and how is then the Jaina-faith not proved to be authentic?

And in Rigaveda it is mentioned thus:-

"Om traelokay prtishthan chaturvishti teerthkran rishbhadyan vrthmaanantan sithan, shranram prpdyai .
Om pvitr ngnmupvisprisamhai asham nagnam yaisham jatan yaisham veeram suveeram……..itiyadi."

Here it is stated that I (the aspirant of liberation) take the refuge of 24 Tirthankaras from Rishabha etc. to Vardhmana -all liberated souls who are worshipped by whole of the universe,... etc. And in Yajurveda it is written so

"Om namo Arhato rishbhaye"

 in the same Veda it is further stated so:

Om rishmpvitran puruhootmdhvangyam ygyaishu nagnam
Parman mahsanstutam varan shatrun jyantam pashuyidrmahtiritisvaha. Om tratarmindram rishbhan vdanti amritarmindram havai sumtam supashvrmindram
Havai Shakrmrjitam tdvarthmanpuruhootmindram mahriti
Svaha. Om nagnam sudheeram digvasasam brahmgbarbh snatnam upaemi  veeram purshmrhatmaditye vranr tmsa
Prstat svaha. Om svasti nah indro vrithshrava svasti  nah poosha vishvvaida  svastinstashryo arishtnaimi svastino vrihaspatirdadhatu. Deerghayustvayurva shubhajatayu. Om raksh raksh Asishtnaimi svaha. Vamdaiv shantyarth manuvidheeyatai so smakam arishtnomi svaha.
  _____ (Yajurvaid a. 25,  m. 16,  ashth  91,  a  6,  varg 1)       

So here whatever names of Jaina Tirthankaras are spelled out above those are stated to be adorable. This proves that the Vedas were written after the incarnations of Jaina- Tirthankaras.

In this way, the superiority and antiquity of Jaina-faith is confirmed even by the evidence of the scripture of other (non-Jaina) faiths. Moreover, after studying Jaina-religion all the other faiths & religions appear to be imaginary. Therefore, one who is desirous of his own benefaction should accept the true Jaina-religion by giving up all sorts of preconceived notions.

Further, in other faiths there appear to be contradiction in what is stated earlier and thereafter. In the first Avatar (birth) the Vedas are said to be regenerated.  In these violence (hinsa), etc. is supported in the Yajnas (religious ceremonies) and in Buddhavataara by censuring Yajnas, violence, etc. was prohibited. In Vrishabhaavataara the path of passionless continence is supported and in Krishnaavatara the path of enjoying others women, etc. sensual pleasures, etc.  is advocated. Now the problem is which path this mudane being should accept? And according to whom he should mould his conduct? Further, they describe all these Avatddars as to be one and the same.  Even if they be one, they at some place support one path and at other places reject the same path and are found to be indulging in contradictory conduct, then how can one believe their words and the mode of conduct preached by them?

Further, at some places they prohibit indulging in passional acts like anger, etc., and objects of senses; at other places 
they preach fighting [combating] and enjoying the sensual pleasures; there they regard it as to be the result of destiny (Praarabdha). But if fighting or combating, etc. be possible without indulgence in anger-passion, etc., then one can/may accept this argument; but it does not happen like this. And even on indulging in the acts of fighting or combating, etc. if anger, etc. passions are not believed to have generated then what else are anger-passion, etc., which have been prohibited?  Hence, this conception is not possible, for there is contradiction in the earlier and latter expositions. In Geeta while supporting passionlessness (Veetragata) fighting is preached; this clearly appears to be contradictory. And they also describe the act of cursing by the great sages, etc., so on indulgence in such acts of anger, how is it not a contemptible act?

Further, they also say that
"Aputrsygatinasti"
 (`The sonless persons do not get good rebirth') and on the other hand in Bharata it is stated thus:-

"Anaikani sehsranri kumar brahmcharinram
Divam gatani rajendr akritva kul santim"

Here the bachelor celibates are described to have achieved heaven, so this is contradictory. And in Rishishwar-Bharat it is written so:-

Mymansashanam ratro bhojan kandkshanram
Yai kurvantivrithastaishan teerthyatran jpstapa
Vritha aikadashee prvata vritha jagranr harai
Vritha cha poshkaree yatra kritsnam chandraynram vritha
Chaturmasya tu smpraptai ratri bhojyam kroti ye
Tasye shuthirn vichait chandraynrshtaerpi

Here in these couplets drinking wine, etc., eating flesh etc., taking food in night: particularly taking food in night during four months of rainy season and eating tuber-roots (sweet-potatoes, onion, squills, etc.) are strictly prohibited and on the other hand, they support drinking wine, etc., and eating meat, etc. by the people of high status; further, they recommened taking food in night and eating tuber-roots, sweet-potatoes, etc. on vow days. Thus, they advocate contradictory things.

Similarly, many self-contradictory statements are found in the scriptures of other faiths (non-Jaina religions); so, what to do?

Keeping in view the old tradition somewhere they have supported good conduct for the sake of creating faith in people and at other places they have supported bad conduct for the sake of fostering passions, sensuous pleasures, etc., so how can their words be treated as authentic when such contradictions are found?

The words of other sects (non-Jaina faiths) which foster forbearance, chastity, contentment, etc., are found in Jaina- faith too and the contradictory statements found in their scriptures are imaginary.  Due to faith in their words ,which are found in accordance with Jainism people start believing their contradictory words also.  Therefore, one should not believe in the scriptures of other religions even if they contain some good aspect. As food mixed with poison is not wholesome, similarly one should be vigilant here also.

Further, if any aspect of good conduct is not found in Jaina- faith but is found in other faiths, or some prohibited aspect of conduct is found supported in Jaina-faith and is not found in other (non-Jaina) religions, then one can respect the scriptures of other sects, but this never happens so, because nothing is hidden or unknown in the omniscient's knowledge. Therefore, by giving up belief of other religions, one must develop staunchly firm belief in Jaina-faith.

An Analytical Study of Swetamber Jaina Sect

Due to bad times, lot of imaginary scriptures are written by the passionate Jivas in the garb of Jaina-faith also. The same is being discussed here:-

Someone, belonging to Swetamber Jain sect, composed the Sutras (aphorisms) but proclaimed them to have been written by Ganadharas. (The great Ascetics who possess four types of knowledge and translate & compile omniscient's revelation) Our question to them is- "You maintain that Aacharanga, etc. Shastras (scriptures ethics, etc.) presently available in your sect are written by Gandharvas.  So, whether these were written in the same measure in which they are available or were written in greater measure?" If those were made in the same measure as are available with you then the extent or measure of the words (Padas) of Aacharanga, etc. in your Shastras is described to be eighteen thousand, so can you prove its authenticity?

What is the measure of Padas (words)? If you will call the end of declension to be a Pada (word) then the word will become more than the aforesaid measure and if you say that the word itself is an authentic measure then there are more than fifty-one crore couplets of that one Pada only. So, in comparison to this measure, your scriptures are of very small measure. Therefore, this is not possible.  Moreover, the measure of Dasha- Vaikalika etc. is described to be lesser than that of Aacharanga, etc., whereas in your sect these are found in greater measure, so how is it possible?

Further, you may say - "Originally the Aacharanga, etc. were more in measure but due to bad times, we have prepared these Shastras by taking out several Sutras (aphorisms) from them". But firstly the incomplete Shastras are not authentic. And also there is a rule that if a big book (shastra) is written then in that everything is described in detail and if a small book (Shastra) is written then the same things are described there in short but the link is not disturbed and if only some description is extracted from any big book then the link is lost and the sequence of the description is broken. But in your aphorisms (books) the link even of the stories, etc., 
appears to be inter-connected and the discontinuity is not seen.

Moreover, the intellect of Ganadharas (chief ascetics) would definitely be more than that of other composers (writers); there should be more meaning in less words in the books written by them, but in the books of your sect, there is no profoundness even as is found in the works of other composers.

Further, whosoever writes the book, he does not mention his name in the style "so and so says", rather mentions "I say so", but in your Sutras Hey Gautama!" and "Gautam says" -such words are written.  But such style of addressing is possible only when someone else is the writer of that book. Therefore, these Sutras are not written by the Ganadharas, but some other persons have written them.  You want to establish authenticity of your imaginary works (scriptures) by the name of Ganadhara, but the intelligent persons believe only after investigating; they do not believe in mere statements.

Further, they say thus also- "There have been some saints who according to Ganadhara-Sutras possessed the knowledge of ten Purvas; they have composed these sutras"  Here we ask- "If new books were written then new names should have been kept? Why are the names of the Angas, etc. are kept?  For example- someone pretends to prove his wealth by keeping the name on his residence of some big wealthy person.  So, your effort seems to be like this.  Had you been truthful you should have named your scriptures in the name of their real author, a practice followed in Digamber-Shastras.  Why had the fallacy been created by keeping the name of Angas, etc. as written by Ganadharas?  Hence, your Sutras (aphorisms) are not the words of Ganadharas or of the knowers of the Purvas.  Further, for creating faith in these Sutras whatever description is in line with Jina's (omniscient's) religion, that is assuredly correct, the Digambers also describe in the same way.

And whatever imaginary compositions are made, in them there appears to be contradiction in the earlier and latter statements and are also found to be incompatible with direct knowledge; the same is being explained hereunder:-

Negation of Liberation by Other than Digambers Jaina-path

The Swetamber believe that the other sectarians, the house-holders, the woman and the untouchable low caste persons (Shoodras etc.) can attain liberation directly by the same birth, but it is not possible.  The unity of right belief knowledge and conduct constitutes the right path of liberation; but they- the Swetamber describe the differentia of right belief as follows:-

"Arhanto mhadevi javjeevan suhasanro gurunro
Jinpanratan tatam aismatam mye ghiyam"

So, how is the believing of Arhanta-Deva, true monk, preceptor and the Tattvas preached by the omniscient Jina possible in other sectarians?  When even right belief is not possible how would then the direct liberation be possible?

IF you will say that by having faith in the inner-self they attain right belief; so, when even praising of the perverse- path followers is described to be a transgression of right belief, then after attaining the right belief, how will one remain the follower of the perverse-path?  After attainment of right belief, the right conduct gets generated on accepting the five great vows (Maha vrata); how would it be feasible in the follower of other (non-Jains) path?  If right conduct is possible even in the followers of perverse-path then Digambar Jain-path and the other paths both become equal.  It is, therefore, wrong to say that attainment of liberation is possible by the followers of other (non-Jaina) paths?

The Negation of Liberation to Householders

They, the Swetamber describe attainment of liberation even in householder's life; but right conduct is evolved only on giving up all sorts of sinful activities of injury, etc., then on giving up all sorts of sinful activities how is the householder's life possible?  If you will say that "the internal renunciation has been achieved", but here in Jaina- path renunciation takes place through all the three (mind, body and speech) channels of activities, then how could renunciation be possible through body?  Moreover, in Swetamber even on keeping the external paraphernalia (belongings and possessions) the Mahavrat one takes the resolve of renouncing the external things only; without renunciation the great vows (Mahavrat) are not possible and without Mahavrat the sixth, etc. stages of spiritual development (Gunasthan) cannot be achieved, how would then the liberation (Moksha) be possible?  It is, therefore, wrong to say that the Moksha is also possible to householders.

Negation of Woman Attaining Liberation

Further, they- the Swetamber describe direct liberation to woman also; but who cannot commit the sin resulting in the birth in seventh hell, how can she effectuate perfectly pure (passionless) disposition instrumental for attaining liberation?  Because of one who has firm determination only can effectuate sin or religion of the highest order. Moreover, it is not possible for a woman to meditate fearlessly in lonely place and to renunciate all paraphernalia's, etc.  If you will contend- "Attaining of liberation in one unit of time by all the three sexes-male, female and neuter is described in the scriptures; therefore, we believe (direct) liberation to woman also".  But here in 
this context, is he a Bhava-Vedi (psychically having the feeling of any of three (sex-passions) or is a Dravya-Vedi (physically having any of the three sexes)?  If he is a Bhava-Vedi then we too believe so, and if he is a Dravya-Vedi, then in the world the male and female persons are seen many and the neuter persons are seen rarely, then the question is that how are so many neuter persons possible attaining the Moksha (liberation) in one unit of time? Hence, the interpretation from Dravya-Veda (physical sex) point of view is not correct.

Further, you will say that the sex-passions are described to be persisting up to the ninth Gunasthan; but this statement is also from the Bhava-Veda (psychic-sex feeling) point of view.  If the statement would have been from the Dravya-Veda (physical-sex) point of view then asserting the existence of sex-passion up to the end of fourteenth Gunasthan would also become possible.

Therefore, believing direct liberation to woman is false.

Negation of Liberation to Shoodras

Further, they- the Swetamber assert that the untouchable ignoble low caste persons (Shoodras) can also attain liberation; but how would the householders offer food, etc. to slaughterers, etc. respectfully?  It is against the set public tradition.  And the auspicious thoughts are not possible in the ignoble (low caste people.)  Moreover, the rise of low status determining karma is only up to the fifth Gunasthan; how would the liberation be attained without ascending the upper Gunasthan?  If you will say that after accepting the continence he is said to have attained the high status karma.  If it be so then rise of low and high status determining karma would be governed by accepting continence or not accepting continence.  But on believing so the incontinent men even Tirthankaras, Ksatriyas  etc. (of noble high status family) could be found having the rise of low status determining karma.  If you will believe them to be having the rise of high status karma due to birth in high status family then you should accept the rise of low status karma in ignoble (slaughterers), etc. due to birth in low status family.  In your scriptures (Sutras) also the existence or rise of low status karma is accepted up to the fifth Gunasthan only; so, there will assuredly be contradiction in describing the imaginary things; hence, believing liberation to Shoodras (ignoble/slaughterers, etc.) is false.

Thus, they- the Swetamber have described the attainment of liberation by all human beings; so the purpose of such description is to appear to be benevolent in everyone's eyes and by giving allurement of liberation to propound their 
imaginary faith.  But on deep thinking all such description appears to be false (fabricated).

 Refutation of Achheras (fancied peculiarities)

And in their Shastras (Swetamber scriptures) the Achheras, i.e., some fancied peculiarities and acts are described. There they say - " These Achheras are created due to the instrumentality of Hundaawasarpini period, i.e., a peculiar aeon which comes after innumerable years of time; so these are not to be questioned".  But though many uncommon things happen due to bad time, yet nothing happens contrary to nature.  If things do happen even contrary to nature then blossoming of flowers in sky and possession of horns by donkey, etc. would also be possible, which is not possible. The Achheras that they describe are contrary to the nature i.e., against the nature's law.  How is it contrary? Same is being discussed here:-

They describe that Vardhamana Jina, for some period remained in the womb of a Ksatriya lady.  But keeping someone's fetus into someone else's womb is not possible; even it cannot be contemplated.  And if they describe this to have taken place in case of a Tirthankara, then the auspicious ceremony of conception took place at someone's home and the auspicious birth ceremony took place for a few days at someone else's home.  The shower of gems took place for a few days at someone's home and for a few days at someone else's home. The sixteen dreams were dreamt by someone else and the son's birth took place to someone else; and likewise other things appear to be impossible.  Moreover, the mothers became two and the father remained the one Brahman only.  During the auspicious birth ceremony, he was not honored and some other imaginary father was honored.  Thus, stating two fathers of a Tirthankara appears to be totally contradictory.  Even listening to such words about a personage possessed of the highest rank is not worthwhile.

Moreover, if all this is possible even in the case of a Tirthankar then everywhere the transferring of fetus from the womb of one lady to that of another lady would become possible.  So, as the Vaishnavas describe in many ways the birth of son or daughter, similarly, it would become acceptable in Jaina-faith also.  But when in such bad times such events are not possible then how can it be thought of there in that era?  Therefore, this statement is false.

Further, they describe the Lord Millionth Tirthankara to be a girl.  But sitting at one place and giving discourse by a lady in the congregation of the monks and celestial beings, etc. is not possible. Moreover, the woman state of existence is inferior, so it cannot be assumed in a personage who is 
possessed of the highest rank of Tirthankara.  And the Tirthankaras (embodied omniscients) are always in the naked posture but adopting a naked posture by a woman is not possible. Thus on deep thinking, all such statements appear to be impossible.

Further, they describe the Jivas of land of enjoyment, living in Harikshetra to have taken birth in hell, but in karmic bondage theory the Jivas of the land of enjoyment are stated to acquire the bondage of celestial life and age karma; how did then they go to hell?  In the doctrinal scripture descriptions are available even of events which happen in endless time.  The existence of Tirthankara-Prakriti (Nama- karma) is described to be up to the third hell but the bondage of Nark Ayu and Gati (hellish age karma and hellish life) is not described to the Jiva of land of enjoyment.  So, the omniscient does never commit an error, hence this is false.

Thus, all Achheras, i.e., fancied peculiarities, are assuredly impossible.

Further, they say- "Don't raise any question or doubt about these (peculiarities)."  So the liar tells this only

seth

And if you Swetamber will say- "In Digambers scripture too, it is stated that the birth of a daughter to a Tirthankara and dishonor of a Chakravarti (king of kings) etc. have taken place due to bad times; similarly, we also believe these Achheras (pecularities) to have taken place. But these acts (viz. taking birth of a daughter to a Tirthankara and dishonour of a Chakravarti) are not contradictory to the law of nature, these were happening to the commoners, so same also could happen to the personages, that is why these are said to be due to bad times. (But) the acts of shifting the foetus from one lady's womb to another lady's womb, etc. are clearly contrary to the evidence and inference: how is happening of such acts possible?

They further make many statements which are also contrary to the law of nature.  For example- they say that the heavenly gods of Sarvartha Siddhi raise questions through mind only and the omniscient Lord gives answers through mind only; but the object or question existing in the common Jivas' mind cannot be known without telepathy (Manah Parayaya Jnana), then how would the gods of Sarvartha Siddhi come to know the things situated in the mind of the omniscient?  Moreover, the Bhava Mana (psychic mind) is absent in the omniscient and only the existence of Dravya-Mana (material mind) is found in material form; who did then reply there?  Hence, this statement too is false.

In this way, many of their (Shwetamberas) statements are contrary to valid knowledge; therefore, their scriptures are 
to be known as imaginary only.

Contrary Characteristics attributed to Deva, Guru, Dharma in Shwetambera sect

Further, they (the believers of Shwetambera sect) describe the characteristics of Deva (the omniscient God) Guru (the Preceptor) and Dharma (the religion) totally false.

Attribution of Contrary Characteristics to Omniscient God

They describe the hunger, etc. blemishes being found in the omniscient Lord, but this is false characteristic of Deva, because owing to the hunger, etc. blemishes the restlesness will be caused then how would the infinite bliss be possible? Further, if you will say that the hunger takes place in the body, the soul does not feel absorbed in it; then why do you say that the omniscient takes food, etc. for quenching hunger, etc.?  One will take food only when he suffers from hunger, etc.  Further, if you will say, as the movement of the omniscient is found due to the rise of karmic matter, similarly, the act of taking food is caused.  But the movement is caused due to the uneasiness feeling; moreover, movement is seen in some Jiva even without any desire.  And taking of food is not due to the rise of any Prakriti (Karma); rather one takes it only on suffering from hunger. Moreover, when the soul impels the air, etc. then only the act of swallowing takes place; hence, taking of food is not similar to that of making movement.

You will say that taking of food is caused due to the rise of Sata Vedaniya Karma (pleasure-producing Karmas); but this too is not correct.  If the Jiva is suffering from hunger, etc. and after taking food, etc. he feels happy, then his taking of food, etc. are described to have caused due to the rise of Sata Vedaniya.  If you say that taking of food, etc. happens automatically due to the rise of Sata Vedaniya is chiefly found in the heavenly gods (celestial beings), why then they do not take food continuously?  Moreover, the great ascetics when observe complete fast, etc. then also the rise of Sata Vedaniya is possible to them and those who are found taking food continuously the rise of Asata is also possible to them.

Therefore, as without desire the movement is possible due to the rise of Vihayogati Karma, similarly, without any desire, the act of taking food is not possible simply due to the rise of Sata Vedaniya only.

Again they say- "In the scriptures, the hunger, etc., eleven afflictions, are described occurring to omniscient Jina; so, the existence of hunger is possible to him.  And without 
taking the food, etc., how would it get mitigated?  We, therefore, believe the taking of food to be possible in the omniscient Jina."

Answer:  The rise of karmic Prakritis is found with feeble and intense variation.  There, in the omniscient Jina, due to extremely feebled rise of karmas, the manifestation of the act consequent on the rise of karmas is found; therefore, mainly it is said to be non-existent; but minutely speaking, its existence is accepted.  For example- in the ninth Gunasthanaa the rise of sex-passion is extremely feeble, the act of copulation is not present there; therefore, the complete celibacy is described there.  But minutely speaking, the existence of sex-passion, etc. is accepted there. Similarly, the rise of Asata Vedaniya is extremely feebled in the case of omniscient Jina; because on each one Kandakas ( the species of karmas which are due to rise every moment with certain fruition power and it contains infinitesimal parts and divisions.) there exists infinitesimal parts and divisions; so out of such types of many Anubhaga-Kandakas and Guna Samkramanas etc., the fruition (potency) of Asata Vedaniya in Satta (existence state) has become extremely feebled, so in the state of its rise, no such hunger gets manifested which may cause the body to become weak.  And also owing to the absence of Moha (deluding karma) there is no affliction caused by hunger, etc. is described to be absent but minutely speaking, its existence is accepted.

Further, you say- "Without taking the food, etc. how would hunger subside?" But if the hunger requiring food for its mitigation be found in the omniscient Jina how can then the rise of hunger causing passion be treated as very feeble? Even in the state of feeble rise of Asata karma to the Devas (celestial beings) and the Jivas of Bhoga-Bhumi (enjoyment land) very little intake of food is found after a very long interval of time, whereas He- (the omniscient Jina) has got extremely feebled rise of Asata karma, therefore, the absence of taking of food is possible in the omniscient.

Further, he says that the constitution of the body of Devas (celestial beings) and Jivas of Bhoga-Bhumi (enjoyment land) is such that the feeling of hunger is very feeble and that too occurs after a long interval of time, whereas His, (omniscient's) body is the Audarika (gross) body of the Jivas belonging to Karma-Bhumi (land of action); therefore, how does His body remain in the excellent form up to a period a little less than one crore Purva (1), without taking food?

(1) Purva- A measure of innumerable years period.

Answer: Such a constitution of the bodies of Devas etc. too is due to the instrumentality of the rise of appropriate karmas only.  Here on manifestation of omniscience, the rise of karma is of such a state that no hunger is caused to it. 
As the hair, nails used to grow before the manifestation of omniscience, now they do not grow, the shadow of the body was cast (prior to attainment of omniscience) but now it is not cast; earlier Nigoda beings were found in the body but now they are not found.  As the condition of the body has turned totally, accordingly, the condition (of the body) has also become such that even without food the body remains as it is. See the tangible proof that when the other people are embraced by senility then their bodies become languid whereas His (omniscient's) body does not become languid till the end of Ayu-karma; therefore, the comparison between other people's bodies and the omniscient's body is not possible.

Further, if you will say that the Devas' food itself is such type that hunger gets subsided for a very long time but by which thing did the omniscient's hunger get subsided and how body remained sturdy? Our answer is that the hunger got subsided due to very feeble rise of Asata Vedaniya Karma and every moment the best quality of gross body particles are sucked, so this is the Nokarma-Ahar, i.e., taking of food of particles which forms the excellent gross body; therefore, such kinds of Varganas (matter-particles) are sucked owing to which the hunger, etc. are not caused and the body  does not get languid.  In the scriptures (doctrine) the taking of food by the omniscient Lord is described from this viewpoint only.

Moreover, the cereals food is not the main cause of the sturdiness of the body.  The tangible proof is that even if someone takes little quantity of food his body becomes sturdy, while someone takes large quantity of food and still his body remains weak.  And people following the yogic exercises of respiration control, etc. do not take food for a longer period and yet their bodies remain sturdy; the monks possessed of supernatural powers observe complete fasts, etc., yet their bodies remain strong.  The omniscient Jina is having the supremeness in all respects, what is the wonder if His body remains strong even without taking cereals food, etc.?  Moreover, how would the omniscient Jina go for taking food?  How would He beg?

And if He- the omniscient Jina goes to take food then how would the Samavasarana (Jina's auditorium or preaching Arena) remain vacant?  Or if you will support bringing food by others then who will bring? Who will know of His mind?  How would the oath of observing the fast, etc. taken earlier be sustained?  How would He accept food where obstacle caused by living beings appears to be present all everywhere?  Thus in many ways, the contrariety is quite obvious.  Further, they say- " the omniscient Jina takes food but it is not visible to anybody".  Further, they accept that taking of food is censurable act, therefore, they established its non- visibility as glory; but the contemptibility remained present in Him, even if others do not see it, so what?  Thus in many ways, contrariety is established.

Further, there are many other things full of imprudence in their scriptures.  They mention occurrence of motion to the omniscient Jina and say that diseases, etc. are found in Him and further say that someone threw Tejo Leshya (effect of electric body) on Him, due to which Lord Vardhamaan Jina suffered from the disease of dysentery (colic pain) and because of it He had frequent motions.  If there be found the rise of such type of karma even to the Tirthankara Kewali (omniscient Jina) and no glory took place then how could reverence by Indras, etc. be treated as graceful?  And how does He evacuate the bowels, where does He do it?  None of these things are possible.  Further, they establish the same type of activities in an omniscient which are found in the non-omniscient mundane beings having attachment, etc. passions.

They (the Shwetamberas) believe that Lord Vardhamaan Jina addressed Gautam! by name several times in His discourses. But in His natural divine speech (called Divyadhwani) which takes place in its usual time, the sermons are meant for all; how then addressing Gautam is possible? further, they believe that the omniscient salutes others, but without affection salutation is not possible.  Moreover, salutation is done to more meritorious person but none else was more meritorious than Him; so, how then this is possible?

Further, they say that His (omniscient Vardhamana's) Samavasarana (preaching-arena) alighted in the market place but how would the Samvasarana arranged by Indra be accommodated in the market place?  How such a large arena be accommodated in the market?  and why should he (the omniscient) stay in the market? Is Indra not capable of creating an organization similar to a market place, because of which taking shelter in the market would be necessary?

They further say, that the omniscient Lord went to somebody's house for sermonising but sermonising by going to someone's house is possible due to excessive attachment feeling only and such a feeling is not possible even in a monk, how could it then be imagined in the omniscient Lord?  Several such contrarieties are found in their scriptures.  The omniscient Lord has, in fact, turned into an absolutely passionless and attachment-less state full of pure omniscience and omniperception; only some activity possible due to the rise of non-destructive types of karmas takes place in Him.  But He is totally free from delusion and passions, etc., hence, such activities which might occur only by diversion of Upayoga (attention) are not possible in Him.  The fruition of inauspicious Prakritis have become extremely feeble, such as is not found in any body else, therefore, the activity which is seen occurring due to the rise of inauspicious Prakritis in other Jivas is unimaginable in the omniscient Lord.

Thus, they describe the characteristics of omniscient God false by ascribing to Him such activities which are found i ordinary human beings.

         Attribution of False Characteristics to the
                            Monks

And they describe the characteristics of preceptor monk contrarily.  They mention the clothings, etc. fourteen types of appendages (1) (paraphernalias) permissible to a monk.  We ask - "You describe monk as a Nigrantha (totally possessionless and occupationless saint) and at the time of adopting the monkhood one accepts the great vows by abandoning the nine kinds of all possessions (paraphernalias); so, whether these clothing, etc. are possessions or not? If those are possessions then why do they keep same after abandoning? And if those are not possessions then the clothing, etc. which are possessed by householders should also not be called possessions, only gold, etc. should be called possession.

(1) Patra-1, Patrabandh-2, Patrakesarikar-3, patalikas 4-5, Gochchhaka-7, Rajoharana-8, Mukha-vastrika-9, two cotton cloths-10,11, one woolen cloth-12, Matrak-13, Cholapatta- 14 (See Vrihatk, shu.U.-3/3962-3965)

Further, if you will say- "As they (the monks) take food for subsiding hunger, similarly they keep clothing, etc. for the purpose of protecting from cold, heat, etc."  But while accepting the monkhood they have not given up taking of food but have relinquished possessions.  Moreover, hoarding food, etc. is assuredly possession but going to take food is not possession.  And hoarding as well as wearing the clothings, etc. is certainly possession all everywhere and is known such in the world.

Further, if you will say- "They (the monks) keep the clothings, etc. for the purpose of maintaining the body, there is no feeling of attachment or mineness, that is why these are not termed possessions."  But in belief the moment one becomes a right believer, from the same moment the feeling of attachment or mineness in all kinds of non-self substances is finished; so from that point of view, you should accept the fourth Gunasthana itself as a state of possessionlessness.  And if the attachment of mineness is not there in the conduct or proclivity then how do they (monks) keep them?  Therefore, only when relinquishment of accepting and keeping clothings, etc. would take place then only one will become possessionless.

If you say- "If someone takes away his clothings, etc. then he (the monk) does not become angry and when he feels hungry then he does not sell them and by wearing cloths, etc. he does not become reckless, rather by developing unperturbed 
state of thoughts engages himself in religious activities, so there is no feeling of attachment or mineness."  Though he may not be found to be angry outwardly, yet there will necessarily arise the feeling of dejection in the deprivation of those things, in the possession of which he has feeling of affection and agreeableness.  If he does not have the feeling of agreeableness then what for does he beg these commodities? The reason why he does not sell any of these possessions or things is the avoidance of the feeling of inferiority caused due to keeping of money.  But keeping of money, etc. is like keeping of cloths, etc.  In the world the Jivas who long for possessions desire both types of possessions.  Hence, keeping both types of possessions are alike from the point of view of fear of stealing by thieves, etc.  And if keeping of possessions is allowable for the sake of maintaining unperturbed state of thoughts then somebody would follow religious practices by maintaining unperturbedness of thoughts by putting on quilt when he feels severe cold. According to you, such a person should also be called possessionless?  Thus, what difference would remain between the householders's religion and the monk's religion?  The one who does not have the strength of enduring the afflictions, he practices the religious activities by keeping the possessions, is called a householder, and on the other hand one whose thoughts are pure so that he does not become perturbed by afflictious, does not keep the possessions and practices the religious activities, is called a monk; this much only is the difference between the two.

Further, you may say- "How will He not become restless due to afflictions of cold, etc.?"  But restlessness is caused owing to the instrumentality of rise of deluding karma (Mohaniya); and in the sixth, etc. Gunasthanas of the monk, there is no rise of the three categories of four kinds of passions, and Samjwalana (the fourth category of four passions), the rise of the Sarvaghati Spardhakas, i.e., wholly destroying type of karmic veil is not found there, only the rise of Deshaghati Spardhakas i.e., partially destroying type of karmic veil is found there, but these are not powerful.  For example- the rise of Samyag-Mohaniya, i.e., the mildest form of faith deluding Darshan Moha Karma is found to a Vedaka Samyag- drishti (a true believer having Kshayopashamic form of right belief); but it cannot destroy the right belief.  Similarly, the rise of Deshaghati Samjualana cannot perturb the thoughts (i.e., pure dispositions of a monk). Oh! there is no parity of thoughts between monks and ordinary persons.  All others have the rise of Sarvaghati Karmas, whereas the monks have the rise of Sarvaghati Kashayas (intense passions) they remain in the state of householders only and those who have the rise of Deshaghati-Kashyas (mildest form of passions) accept the monk's religion; their thoughts are not perturbed by cold, etc; therefore, they do not keep clothes, etc. possessions.

You might say- "In Jaina- scripture it is described that a monk can keep fourteen types of appendages (Upakaranas); but this is described in your shastras (scripture) only, it is nowhere described in your shastras (scripture) only, it is nowhere described in Digamber-Shastras (scripture) rather there in the Digamberas even on keeping a lion cloth only the votary or observer of the eleventh Pratima (pledge) is called a Shravaka, i.e., one situated in the highest spiritual grade possible in the house-holder's life.

Now, ponder over here that out of these two words (interpretations) are fabulous?  Primarily the fabulous compositions are made by him who is overpowered by passions and the passionate person only pretends to hold and emient status though he possesses low status.  Here in Digamberas it is not described that by keeping cloths, etc. the religion (or partial purity of thoughts) is not at all evolved but there in that condition Shravaka-Dharma- the householder's religion gets evolved; whereas in such status in Shwetamberas- Muni Dharma the monks religion is said to have evolved.  Therefore, he only is the passionate person who pretends to show eminence even on following the conduct of low order.  Due to this fabulous statement, the people have started believing themselves as monks even on keeping the cloths, etc., so they have cherished the pride-passion and shown eminence (higher status) in the easy conduct to others; hence, many people got engaged in it.  The fabulous sects, which have come up, have prospered this way only.  Therefore, in your scriptures persons indulging in passion and keeping cloths, etc. are described as monks.  So, this is proved to be contrary in the light of aforesaid logic.  Therefore, let it be known that your statements are mere fabulous statements.

Further, you may say- "In Digamberas too, the shastra (book) and pinchhi (soft brush of peacock-feather), etc. are described as the appendages (upakaranas) of the monk; similarly, in our scriptures fourteen appendages are stated?'

Answer: That by which assistance is rendered is termed Upakarana (appendage).  So here, if and appendage is allowed for mitigating the affliction caused by cold then all possessions and things would get the name of appendage (upakarana).  But what is the purpose of keeping them in the practice of religion?  Those things are the cause of sin only but in religion those appendages (upakaranas).  The shastra (scripture) is the cause of knowledge, the pinchhi of compassion and the kamandal (a wooden pot for keeping water) is the cause of cleanliness, i.e., the cause of ablution after evacuation of bowels), so these things are helpful in the practice of religion.  How would cloths, etc. be helpful in the practice of religion?  These are possessed only for the sake of comfort of the body.

If a monk poses to be great by possessing shastras, sweeps by Pinchhi, drinks water, etc. from Kamandal or removes dirt, etc. of the body, then the shastras, etc. also are the possessions only; but the (true) monk does not indulge in such acts.  Therefore, the means of appendages which are helpful in the practice of religion are not called possessions; rather the means (objects) of enjoyment only are called the possessions.

Further, you may say- "The monks keep kamandal (water-pot) only for ablution after evacuation of bowels"  But the monks do not keep the kamandal with such desire.  Since they engage themselves in reading of shastras, if at that time their body remains in impure state then it would amount to disrespect of shastras and also will e censured by people; hence, for religious practice he keeps the water-pot (kamandal).  With the same object keeping of pinchhi etc. appendages is desirable but regarding the cloths, etc. as to be the appendages is not possible.

To avoid external manifestation through the body of passions like sex-inclination, disliking, etc. which are caused due to rise of conduct-deluding karma and to avoid display of lack of forbearance of cold, etc., they keep cloths, etc.  Also due to rise of pride-passion, they desire people to treat them adorable; therefore, they regard cloths, etc. as appendages by fabulous logic.

Further, they approve bringing of food from different houses by begging.  Our question to them is- "Is begging (of food) a religious act or sinful practice?  If it is the religious act then all beggars would become religious persons and if it is a sinful act then how is it possible by a monk?"

Again if you will say- "If he begs some wealth, etc. out of greed-passion then it is a sin, but for the sake of practising religion he wants to maintain the stability of body, therefore, he indulges in begging of food, etc.?"

Answer: Taking food, etc. is not instrumental for religion, rather it is the cause of bodily happiness; hence, they beg for the sake of bodily happiness due to excessive greed- passion.  Had excessive greed-passion not been there for what purpose would he indulge in begging?  Giving or not giving of food is the concern of the householders only.  And the excessive greed itself is a sin, then there remained no monk's religion; so, what other religion would he practise?

Now he says- "If the desire of taking food is existing in the mind and he does not beg then it is deceit-passion and in inferiority complex arises, so if he does not beg due to pride then it is pride-passion.  The desire of food arose, so he begged it; how is this excessive greed? And how is monk's religion destroyed by this?

We say to him - "For example, some trader has feeble desire of earning, so he runs his shop and has also the desire of trading but he does not request any body to trade with him in the form of transaction of goods; if someone wants to trade with him according to his conditions then his greed-passion is feeble; the deceit and pride passions are not fostered by him.  The deceit and pride passions will be there only when he assumes such appearance for deceiving and establishing his superiority.  But a good trader does not possess any such objective; therefore, deceit-pride passions are not said to be nourished by him.  Similarly, monk's desire of taking food, etc. is feeble.  They come in the town for taking food and also have the desire of taking food, but they do not beg food.  If someone offers food on his own then he on getting his conditions fulfilled takes food; there his greed-passion
is feeble, deceit and pride passions are not found in him. The deceit and pride-passions will be there only when he assumes such disguise for deceiving and establishing his superiority; but no such purpose is found in the monks; therefore, deceit and pride passions then all those, who commit sins by mind only and do not indulge in sins by words and bodily acts, will be said to be possessing deceit-passion and those holding high status do not indulge in means acts, they all will be said to be possessing pride-passion; such interpretation would be highly damaging.

And you said- "How begging of food is regarded as possession of extreme greed-passion?"  But one wants to accomplish his desire by indulging in publicly censurable acts only when he is overpowered by intense passions.  Moreover, begging is a publicly censurable act and if he adopts begging as a means of fulfilling his desire of food, then intense greed-passion is proved to be there.

Further, you asked- "How is monk's religion destroyed?" Because in monk's religion such intense passion is not imaginable.  Moreover, someone may not be having the desire of offering food but he entered his house and begged food; there the householder felt embarrassment and offered food under the fear of public-censure, if food was not offered. But this amounted to hurting the inner feelings of the householder and so the monk is deemed to have committed injury (Hinsa).  Had he (the Shwetamber monk) not entered his house and the householder himself would have offered food of his own, then he would have felt pleasure by offering food. But this act materialised under pressure.  Moreover, for fulfilling one's own desire, if he (the monk) utters words of begging then it amounts to be a sinful act; therefore, this is proved to be an act of false utterance also.  And he (the householder) was not willing to offer food but he begged food, then he (the house-holder) offered food unwillingly under pressure.  Therefore, this also amounted to accepting without being offered.  Further, in the householder's home. 
ladies were sitting unmindfully and this monk went in; so this amounted to be the breach of fencing of celibacy too. And after collecting food he kept it for some time and for keeping the food he possessed the receptacle (bowls) etc. so this amounted to keeping possessions.  Thus, due to breach of five great vows (Mahavratas) the monk's religion is destroyed.  Hence, collecting food by begging is not proper for a monk.

Further, he argues- "In the twenty-two afflictions which are to be endured by a monk, there is one Yaachana-Parishaha (begging-affliction); so how would the enduring of that affliction be possible without begging?"

Answer: Begging is not the begging affliction.  Rather not begging is the begging affliction.  For example- the attitude of disliking is not the disliking affliction, but not having the feeling of disliking is not the disliking is disliking- affliction.  If begging be treated as an affliction then the beggars. etc. indulge too much in begging, as such they will be called highly religious persons.  And if you will say that because of reducing pride-passion this begging is termed as an affliction, then also one remains a sinner even on forsaking some kind of passion for the sake of cherishing some other kind of passional act.  For example- if someone due to greed-passion does not mind even his being insulted then he is to be possessing intense greed-passion and being insulted in this way also amounts to great sin.  If one does not have any desire and someone else insulted him on his own accord then he (the endurer) is said to be highly religious. But in this case he (the Shwetamber monk) for the sake of greed of food gets insulted by begging the food; therefore, it is assuredly the sin and not a religious practice. Moreover, he begs for the sake of cloths, etc. also, but putting on cloth, etc. is not at all any part of the religion, rather it is the cause of bodily pleasure; hence, this too is negated in the aforesaid manner.  Let it be known that such practice of begging, etc. is not possible in monk's religion, but they (the Swetamberas) regard the possessor of such sort of impossible acts to be a monk and preceptor. Thus, they describe the preceptor's to be a monk and preceptor.  Thus, they describe the preceptor's characteristics contrarily.

False Description of the Nature of Religion

Further, they describe the religion's characteristics contrarily.  The oneness of right belief, knowledge and conduct (these three) is the path of liberation, the same is the religion but they describe its characteristics contrarily.  The same is explained hereunder:

In reality, belief in the real nature of substance (Tattvas) is right belief but they do not give due emphasis to this. 
They regard right belief to be the belief in Arhanta God, monk-preceptor, compassion religion  as per their interpretation.  But firstly they describe the nature of Arhanta God, etc. contrarily.  So, how with this much faith only, would the right belief evolve without faith in the true nature of Tattvas?  Therefore it is false.

Though, somewhere they describe faith in Tattvas to be the right belief, yet they do not emphasise the purpose involved in such belief of Tattvas.  The nature of the spiritual stages and the quest places, etc. of the Jivas (soul), atom and molecules, etc. form of Ajivas (non-souls), the dispositions of vice and virtue (Papa and Punya), non- restraint (vowlessness) etc. form of influxes (Asravas), observing of vows, etc. form of stoppage (samvara), observing of religious penances, etc. form of partial destruction of karmas (Nirjara) and of Moksha (complete annihilation of karmas) through the differentiating characteristics of becoming Siddha (liberated state of soul)- knowing all these as described in their shastras (scriptures) and believing that the "revelation of the omniscient is authentic"- such belief of the Tattvarthas (essential principles) is stated by them (Shwetamberas) to be the attainment of right belief.

Here we ask them- "Is such sort of faith found to a Dravya- lingi Muni (Naked possessionless Digamber monk who although has not attained the real right belief, practises 28 Mulguna (essential rites) without blemish.) who gets birth in the Graiveyaka heavens or not?  If it is found then why is he called a misbeliever?  And if it is not found, although he has accepted the Jaina- monkhood with religious feeling and attitude, how has he then not got the conviction of Arhanta God, etc.?  He is also well versed in shastras (scriptural studies) then how has he not known the differentia of Jivas etc.?  Moreover, he does not have the slightest regard in his inner-self about other sects; how then he has not got the conviction of the revelation of Arhanta God?  Hence, he does possess such sort of faith but the right belief is not evolved in him.  And the infernal beings, Bhogabhumi beings (Jivas of enjoyment land) and the beasts, etc. sub-human beings do not have the instrumental cause of attaining such sort of faith, nevertheless, they are found possessing the right belief for a very long period; therefore, although they are not found having such sort of faith, yet the right belief is possessed by them.

Therefore, what you say is not the characteristic mark of the right belief. The real characteristic mark of right belief will be described later on and the same be known from there.

Further, they say that Samyag-Jnana (right knowledge) consists in the study of their shastras (scriptures), but the Dravya-Lingi Muni is described to be possessing wrong knowledge even though he has studied many shastras whereas a 
vowless true believer's knowledge of the objects of senses, etc. is described to be possessing wrong knowledge even though he has studied many shastras whereas a vowless true believer's knowledge of the objects of senses, etc. is described as the right knowledge.

Therefore, this is not the characteristic mark.  The right nature will be described later on.

Further, they believe that Samyak-charita (right conduct) consists in observing the householder's and the monk's religion (rites) in the form of Anuvratas (small vows) and Mahvratas (great vows) as described by them; but firstly the nature of the vows, etc. is described by them contrarily; this has been discussed earlier in the elucidation of the preceptor's characteristics.  Secondly a Dravya-lingi-muni even after observing the Mahavratas (great vows) is not found to be possessing the Samyak-charita whereas according to their belief, the householders, etc. are said to have attained the right conduct even without accepting the Mahavratas etc.

This is, therefore, not the characteristic mark, the true nature is different, same will be described later on.

Here they say- "The aforesaid faith, etc. qualities have not evolved internally in Dravyalingi-muni, those are observed externally only; therefore, the right belief, etc. are not found?"

Answer:  If these (faith, etc. qualities) are not evolved internally and are being observed only externally, then this means that he observes them deceitfully.  But, if he is engrossed in deceit, how can he then go up to the Graiveyaka heaven?  Rather he ought to go in hells, etc.?  The bondage of karmas is the result of internal thoughts and dispositions , therefore, obtaining birth in Graiveyakas heaven is not possible without evolving internal thoughts and belief according to Jaina religion.

Further, they (the Shwetamberas) believe that the bondage of karmas resulting in heavenly life occurs due to the auspicious thoughts and disposition in the form of observing vows, etc and the same cause is believed to be the liberation-path by them, but this is false because they believe the same cause to be instrumental for both bondage and liberation.

And in the conventional religion-path, many contrary practices are described.  They say there is no sin in killing the calumniator, but the calumniators belonging to other (non-Jaina) faith were found in the time of Tirthankaras too; the Lord Indra, etc. did not kill the calumniators.  And they adore the Jina is installed for inculcating the 
passionlessness; but by adoring with ornaments finery, etc., the Jina's idol too become similar to the idols of other (non-Jaina) faiths.  Likewise, many contrarieties are found in their scriptures.  Thus, the Shwetambera sect is to known as the fabricate sect.  Here in this sect, owing to misinterpretations of right belief, etc., the perverse faith, etc. only are fostered; hence, one should not have faith, etc. in it.

Analysis of Dhoondhaka Sect in Shwetamberas

Further, in Shwetamberas there is a sub-sect called Dhoondhaka and its followers as Dhoondhiyas.  They proclaim themselves to be the true pious persons; so, this too is a fallacy as discussed hereunder:-

Many persons by adopting the outward appearance of a saint (i.e., impersonators) are called saints, but they do not observe even the Vratas (vows), Samitis (carefulnesses), Guptis (control over mind, body and speech) etc. as described in their Shastras.  Further they take oath of renouncing all sorts of sinful acts by mind, speech and body and also of not performing, nor getting performed, nor supporting such acts, but later on they do not follow and observe the same.  They confer monk's initiation on boys of minor age, innocent people and even on Shoodras (low cast persons) etc.  Thus, they adopt renunciation and while renouncing do not apply thought and mind as to "What is being renounced?"; later on they even do not follow the vows, etc. and sitill they are treated by all to be the saints.

Further, the Dhoondhiyas say- "They will attain spiritual benefit afterwards when religious feeling and attitude is evolved in them, but the preceptor initiated the vow even though he knew that the vow is likely to be broken and the vow-oath-taker after accepting the oath broke it; so, who is responsible for this sin?  How did he ascertain that such a person will become the true follower afterwards?  And if after accepting the vows of monk's religion one does not follow the same properly should he be believed to be a monk or not?  If he is believed to be a monk then all those who are treated to be the monks but are corrupt should be revered as monks by you.  If he is not believed to be a monk then all those cannot be treated (as monks) possessing monkhood. Moreover, with whatever conduct you believe one to be a monk, even the observance of the same is rarely found in someone: why then you regard all as monks?

Here someone may say- "We will regard as monks only those persons in whom we will find the proper conduct and will not pay regard to others."  There we ask him- "In a congregation there are many who appear to be monks; but the one to whom you regard monk possessing proper conduct, whether he himself 
regards others in the congregation as monks or not?  If he regards them as monks then he is proved to be a greater misbeliever than yourself, how do you then believe him to be a venerable person?  And if he does not regard others as monks then why do you treat him as a monk?  Further, if he himself does not regard them as monks, why does he then indulge in the deceitful act of keeping such fellows in his congregation and inducing others to regard them as monks and thus make others misbelievers?

And the one whom you will not regard as monk then you will advise other colleagues also not to regard him as monks, but due to this, there arises contrariety in the religious tradition.  And the one to whom you regard as monk, with him also your relation will be like that of an opponent because he regards the other one as monk.  And the one whom you regard as the follower of proper conduct-you will find on thoughtful consideration that he too is not following the real religion of the monk.  If someone says that they (the Swetambera monks) are better than the other impersonators, so we pay regard to them.  But in the other sects different kinds of impersonations are possible, because the negation of passions (attachment-feelings) is not found there.  Whereas here in Jaina-faith one gets the title of a monk only if he follows into the correct path of a monk as described therein.

Here someone argues- " They observe chastity, continence, etc., undergo penances etc. hence to the extent they follow the path of a monk to that extent it is good?"

Answer: It is true in whatever small measure religion is practised, it is good; but if someone takes the oath of high order of religious status and practises less then it amounts to great sin due to breaking of the oath.  For example- if someone after taking the oath of observing fast takes food only once, then he is called a sinner even though he has restrained himself from taking food several times. Similarly, if someone having taken the oath of a monk's religion does not observe that religion even in a small measure then he is called a sinner in spite of his following chastity, continence, etc.  And as someone, by taking the oath of one time meal, takes the food once only, then he is assuredly a religious person. Similarly, if someone by accepting the householders status practices religion even in small measure as per his oath, then he is assuredly a religious person. Here sinfulness is possible in observing the conduct of lower status by keeping the name of higher status. But sinfulness is not caused by observing the religious practice by holding the name (or rank) to one's status of conduct; thus to the extent one follows religious practices to that extent it is good.

	 Someone further argues- "In the scripture it is stated that the existence of the four kinds of religious 
congregations will be found till the end of fifth era. Therefore, if these are not to be regarded as monks then who are to be regarded as such ?"

	 Answer: In the present time the existence of swans is accepted but if in the approachable area the swans are not seen then the other birds cannot be treated to be the swans; only those birds in which the differentia of swan is found can be called swans. Similarly, in the present time the existence of monks is described but if in the approachable area the monks (with their definite characteristics) are not found then the other impersonators cannot be regarded as monks; only those in whom the definite characteristics of a monk are found are to be treated as monks. Moreover, their ability too is found in a limited area only, how to accept the existence of monks in the area farther away from such area ? If monkhood is decided by the characteristics of a monk, then here also the same principle. And if somebody is to be regarded as a monk even though he does not possess the characteristics of a monk, then the impersonators found there (in those farther areas) should be treated as monks." Thus the contrariness is obvious. Hence your arguments are not correct.

	 Someone may say. "The monkhood of this type also is found in this fifth era." If it is so, then show the relevant scriptural proof, then you are a sinner. Thus in the light of all this logic, the monkhood, cannot be established in them and in the absence of monkhood, if they are regarded as monks and preceptors then it fosters wrong faith, because only by believing true monk (naked possession-less saint) as preceptor right faith can be evolved.

Negation of the Belief of not Becoming a Jaina-Shravaka following the Pratimas (Oaths)

	 Further, they (the Shwetamberas) encourage contrary practices of Shravaka-Dharma (householder's religion). They regard such persons as observers of partial vows in whose life the sins of injury to mobile beings with two or more senses and indulgence in big lies etc. are found, by causing them to accept some meaningless renunciation; and he continues to indulge in such acts in which the injury to mobile beings with two or more senses is caused; but in Deshavrata Gunasthana (fifth stage of spiritual development) eleven non-abstinences are mentioned; so, how is the injury to mobile beings with two or more senses possible there ?
And the eleven kinds of Pratimas (oaths) are of the Shravakas (Jaina-householders), but in your sect no Shravaka is found observing the vows of the order of tenth and eleventh Pratimas and directly becomes monk.

When asked, they say- "The Shravakas observing the vows of Pratimas are not possible in this era". Behold! Shravakas religion is difficult and the monk's religion is easy "-such contradictory statements are given by them. And they advocate less belongings and possessions to a Shravaka of eleventh Pratima and more belongings and possessions to a monk, so this is impossible. Further, they say - "Shravakas give up this Pratima after observing it for a short period." But, if this pious practice is excellent, then, why will a devout person leave the higher grade of conduct an if it is a low grade practice, then why will he accept it ? All this is not at all possible.

	 Further, they support that householder's religion is possible by offering salutation, etc, to the false deities and preceptors, etc. They argue that they do not salute them with some religious attitude; it is merely a worldly formality. But in the doctrines even the act of praising and invocating them is stated as the transgression of the right belief and here for pleasing the householders, they do not oppose such practice of salutation.

	 Further, if you will say- "We salute them because of fear, shamefulness, sport, etc"., then on the ground of these very reasons, you should not regard sin even in their indulgences in the acts of unchastity, etc.; only know them to be sin internally. Thus, contradiction will arise in all religious practices.

	 In this way, no prominence is given to forsaking of indulgence in the great sin like Mithyatva (false belief) and prominence is given to the sin of injury to air beings by denying the practice of speaking with uncovered mouth, so this is clearly a non-sequential discourse. Moreover, the aspects of religion are many; out of them, they emphasise only compassion towards other beings, but in this also they do not have any prudentiality. The prominence is not given to the practice of filtering of water, cleaning of food grains, etc., non-eating of impure things, non-indulgence in trading activities involving injury, etc.

Negation of Mukha-Patti (A Clothpiece for Covering Mouth)

	 And they give importance to the acts of tieing of a clothpiece over the mouth, using less amount of water in ablution but the organisms are created due to the contact of the spittle with the dirty clothpiece tied over the mouth; they are unmindful of these acts and lay stress on avoiding the injury to air beings, a lot of air is exhaled through the nose but they do not bother about it. And according to their scripture, if care is to be taken while speaking only, then why do they always keep it over the mouth ? While speaking they should take care of it. If they say- "We forget, then the question is that when even this much is not remembered how will then other aspects of religion  (rituals) be followed?  And they advocate use of less amount of water in ablution, etc. but the necessary is done by the monks also; hence, the householders should also do the ablution as per their status.  Observing the act of Samayiaka (meditation) etc. without doing ablution after sexual intercourse, etc., sin is caused due to disrespect, madness, etc. Thus, the practices they stress, too, are not strictly followed. And they observe many of the aspects of compassion correctly, forsake eating of vegetables, etc., consume less amount of water; so we do not negate them.

Refutation of the Negation of Idolatry

And they (a group of Shwetamberas) refute Pratima (installation of omniscient's idol), Chaityalaya (temple of Arhantadeva, Jina) and rituals of worshipping, etc.  by holding one-sided view of Ahimsa (non-injury). But in their own shastras (scriptures) description of Pratima (Jina's idol's worshipping) etc. is found; that aspect they hide with bigotry feeling. In their Bhagwati-Sutra Shastra there is found the description of a monk possessing supernatural powers; therein it is written that he went to Merugiri (mount Meru) and offered salutation to Jina 's idols.  The meaning of this is that there he makes obeisance to the Chaityas and the word Chaitya is popular in the sense of Pratima (Jina's idol). And they obstinately hold that the word Chaitya is used to denote knowledge, etc., so, it has a different meaning, its meaning is not the Pratima.  Our question is - "By repeatedly going to the land of Merugiri and continent Nandishwara he offered obeisance to the Chaitya, but how is the meaning of offering obeisance to knowledge, etc. possible there? The obeisance to knowledge, etc. is possible everywhere. The offering of obeisance to the particular adorable Chaitya is possible there only where it is found and nowhere else found. So, such possible meaning could be Pratima (Jina's idol) only, because main meaning of the word Chitya is Pratima only which is famous. By this meaning only, the name as Chaityalaya (Jina's temple) is possible, why to hide it by showing obstinacy?

Moreover, adoration by heavenly gods by going to Nandishwara continent, etc. has been described in their scripture at several places.  And the description of naturally existing Pratimas (Idols of Jina) in the universe are found in the scripture, so, such uncreated existence is found from beginningless time. That uncreated (self-existing) formation is not for the purpose of sensuous pleasures, etc. and there in the abodes of heavenly gods, Indras, etc. the purposeless formation is not possible. What do Indras, etc. do to see it? To see the purposeless formation in their temples, either they might be becoming apathetic with it and feeling unhappy but this is not possible; or by seeing suck attractive formation they might be fostering the objects of senses but it is not possible that by seeing the Arhanta's idol the true believers would foster their objects of senses.  Therefore, the only possibility is that they do their adoration, etc. only there.

In their scripture there is a story of Suryaabha Deva; there the ritual of worshipping Pratimaji (Jina's Idol) is specifically described.

For concealing it they say- "Devas ' duty is of such type only". So, this is true but there is always found some fruit of the duty or activity (that one does). So, what is its result - religion or sin i.e., virtue or vice. If religion is its result then it would mean that elsewhere there used to be sin and here the result is religion; so, how could this be treated similar to others? This is befitting act. If sin is its result, but he recited the hymn of Namotthunam. Why did he then recite the hymn of salutation which is the place of sin?

And one thought arose here is this that in the recitation of the hymn Namotthunam there is invocation of Arhantadeva; so they recited this hymn before the Jina's idol; hence the act of Arhantas' adoration done before the Jina's Idol is logical.

They further say- "Such act is possible for Devas (celestial beings) only and not for human beings because in making idol, etc., injury is caused by human beings." But in their own shastras there is such description that Queen Draupadi started worshipping the Jina's idol as was done by Suryaabhadeva; hence, such act is also the duty of human beings.

Another idea arose here that if the tradition of making Chaityalayas (Jina's temples) and Pratimas (Jina's idols) was not prevalent, then, how did Draupadi queen worship the Jina's idol?  And if the tradition was prevalent then were the makers of the temples, etc. religious persons or sinners? If they were religious persons then such act of worshipping, etc. is commendable for householders and if they were sinners, why did then they make these things when there was no purpose of enjoying the sensual pleasures?  And Draupadi recited the hymn of Namotthunam there and per-formed the worship, etc.; was this done for mere fun or religion? If this was done for mere fun, then she was a great sinner. How could there be sportive act in the religion? And if she did this as a religious practice, then others also ought to worship and adore Jina's idol.

Further, they put up such false logic- "As by installation of Indra's idol, our purpose from Indra is not served, similarly by installation of Arhanta Jina's idol, our purpose is not served. If the Arhanta God does good of some person by considering him as his devotee then what you say can be accepted, but He is totally passionless. The devotee himself obtains the auspicious fruit by his thoughts and dispositions of devotion. For example, if someone, by seeing the idol of woman made from wood or stone, develops affection by becoming lustful then he will have the bondage of inauspicious karmas; similarly, if someone, by seeing the idol of Jina made from metal or stone, develops the feeling of devotion by religious attitude, then, why will he not have the bondage of auspicious karmas? There they say- "We will develop auspicious thoughts by devotional feelings towards Arhanta God even without His idol." Our logic is- "The type of thoughts which arise by seeing the form (idol) do not arise by remembering indirectly (the Arhanta God). This is why the lovers of woman make the portrait of woman in this world also; therefore, by taking the recourse to Jina's idol, special types of auspicious thoughts and dispositions are generated due to specific devotional feelings.

Further, someone argues- "One may see the idol but what is the purpose in worshipping it?"

Answer: For example, if someone after making the effigy of some Jiva destroys it, then he commits the type of sin similar to that of killing that Jiva and if someone after making the effigy of some Jiva spoils it with the feeling of aversion, then he gets the fruit of the type similar to that of actually harming that Jiva. In the same way, if someone by making the idol of Arhanta God worships it with religious devotion and regard, then in him rises the auspicious thought as similar to that of worshipping the real Arhanta God and he gets the same type of fruit; under the feelings of intense devotion and regard one worships the idol of Arhata God due to non-availability of Darshan (seeing) of actual omniscient Lord Arhanta Deva. This devotional regard results in the bondage of auspicious karmas of very high order.

Further, they put up such illogical argument- "It is a mockery of a person to offer him those articles which he has relinquished, therefore, worshipping Arhanta Deva by offering sandal, etc. before His idol is inappropriate.

Answer: While accepting the monkhood (homeless ascetic life) all kinds of possessions and occupations were renounced (by the Shravaka), and after attainment of omniscience Lord Indra created Samavasarana (omniscient's preaching arena), Chhatra (umbrella) and Chamvar (flapper) etc. for adoring Tirthankara Deva. Was this a mockery or adoration? If this was a mockery, then the Indra committed great sin. But this is not possible. If by all this he adored Lord Arhanta Deva then in the worshipping of the idol of Arhanta Deva the devotee does the adoration only. And mockery lies in offering to a non- omniscient person the things which he has already forsaken because it may result in upsetting him; but no fault lies in putting before the omniscient or His idol the best faultless articles with devotional feeling. Upsetting is not caused to them. Rather due to religious devotion the devotee is benefitted.

They further say- "The injury (Hinsa) is caused in making the idol, in constructing the temple (chaityalaya) etc., in doing the worship, etc. where as the religion is Ahinsa (non- injury); therefore, great sin is caused in believing religion by committing Hinsa (injury); we, therefore, forbid, these rituals."

Answer: There is a statement found in their own shastras:-

Succha janreyi kallanram, succha janreyi pavgan
Ubhyam pi janryai succha jan saiye tam smayir

Here it is said that an aspirant should know these three things i) the benediction or virtue, ii) the vice and iii) the mixed or both virtue and vice. So, the mixed disposition is possible by mixing (togetherness) of both virtue and vice, hence occurrence of such kind of act (mixed-disposition) is also established there. Here we ask- "the mixed-disposition is definitely worse than the virtue or benediction alone but is the mixed disposition worse or better than the vice alone? If it is worse, then in this (mixed-disposition) some part of the virtue (religion) is also mixed, how can it be stated worse than the vice (sin) alone? If it is better, then indulging in such mixed acts by leaving only vicious and sinful acts is advisable. Logically also this seems to be correct. No recluse (votary) gets the temple, etc.
constructed, rather practices Samayika (vow of equanimity) etc.  injuriless activities, then by leaving these activities it is not desirable for him to install the idol, etc. and perform worship, etc. But as someone builds house for his own residence, then in comparison to this constructing temple (chaityalaya) etc. is not inferior act. Injury is caused there but in the case of building of house there is increase in greed-passion, which is inauspicious attachment, whereas in the case of building of the temple auspicious attachment is evolved in place of greed-passion. And the activities of worship etc. are in no way inferior to the activities of trading, etc. In trading etc., a lot of injury, etc. is involved, greed, etc. increases, all activities are full of sin only, whereas in worshipping etc. some injury is involved, greed, etc. decreases and the religious devotion increases.

In this way, those who are not recluse (votaries) and spend their wealth in sinful acts are advised to build the Chaityalaya etc. And those who cannot engross their Upayoga (active consciousness) in the injuriless acts like Samayika etc. are not restricted to perform worship, etc.

You may further argue- "Why shall we not keep engaged our- selves in injuriless Samayika etc. acts only? Why should we engage ourselves in acts like worship, etc. instead of religious (injuriless) activities like Samayika etc.?

Answer: If injuriless religious state could be achieved by giving up sinful acts committed through body only then one should do so only, but injuriless state is evolved on relinquishment of sins from thoughts and dispositions. Hence, whose thoughts do not get engrossed in Samayika etc. without recourse to other objects he tries to engross his Upayoga (active consciousness) in worshipping, etc.  There one's Upayoga gets concentrated by taking recourse to different means. If one does not engross his Upayoga there (in worship- ping acts) then his Upayoga will wander in impious acts which will be harmful. Hence, it is proper to engage oneself in such acts (like worshipping, etc.)

And you say- "Great sin is caused by indulging in Hinsa (injury) for the sake of religion and less sin is caused by indulging in Hinsa elsewhere, i.e., in occupations, etc." But firstly this is not the doctrinal statement and does not seem logical too; because by believing so the Lord Indra who performs Abhisheka (bathing ceremony of babe Tirthankara) by large quantity of water in Janma-Kalyanaka (auspicious birth ceremony of babe Tirthankara) and devas (heavenly gods) who indulge in many activities like pouring of flowers in Samavasarana and waving the whisk (over the head of Jina) etc. acts will prove to be the great sinner.

If you will say- "Their demeanour is of such type only," but the activity always bears its fruit.  If it is a sin then Indras etc. being right believers, why shall they indulge in such act and if it is a pious act then why do you forbid it? 

Here we ask you- "The kings, etc. went to offer obeisance and invocation to Tirthankar, even they go to far off places for the obeisance of monks, they move on the road for listening to discourses, so injury is involved in the way; food is offered to the co-religionists, necessary rituals (cremation and consecration, etc.) are performed on death of a monk. When a householder becomes monk, celebration takes place. All these practices are seen even today; so in all these acts injury is involved, but these acts are meant for the purpose of religion, no other purpose is there. If great sin is caused here in these acts, then you should negate all such acts done in the past. And now also those householders who perform such acts should relinquish them.  And if these are religious acts, then, why do you confuse people by propagating that injury involved in religious acts is a great sin?

Therefore, it is proper to believe that if by spending some money, lot of money can be earned, then it is worthwhile; similarly, if some injury, etc. sin is involved in such activities which lead to the evolution of high degree of religious thoughts and dispositions then such acts are worthwhile. If a greedy, person spoils his work by not spending even a small amount of money, then he is a fool. Similarly, due to fear of some injury, great pious acts are forsaken, then he is assuredly a sinner. And if someone, by sacrificing more money, earns some money or does not earn at all, then he is a fool. In the same way, if someone, by indulging in highly injurious acts, creates lot of sins and engrosses himself somewhat in invocation, etc. religious activities, or does not engross at all, then he is assuredly a sinner. And as someone earns wealth without any sacrifice and afterwards unnecessarily spends money, then he is a fool. Similarly, if one's Upayoga remains engaged in religious activities involving no injury, then it is not desirable to engage one's Upayoga in the religious activities where injury is envolved.

Thus by considering the state of one's thoughts and dispositions, one should engage himself in those acts which are beneficial to him; but one-sided view is not efficacious. Moreover, Ahinsa (non-injury) alone is not the only part of religion; the main part of religion lies in lessening of the attachment, etc. passions. Hence, one should engage himself in such acts which result in lessening of attachment, etc. passions in one's thoughts and dispositions.

Further, they (the Shwetamberas) encourage the householders to practice chiefly the conventional conduct of Samayika (equanimity), Pratikramana (repentence), Proshadha (fasting) etc. even without adopting the means of Anuvratas (small vows of non-killing etc.).  But Samayika lies in the evolution of the state of equanimity devoid of attachment-aversion; it does not consists in merely reciting the hymns or in standing and sitting postures of the body.

You may, further, say- "This is better than other impious acts".  This is true but in Samayika he takes a vow of not indulging nor causing others to indulge in any activity involving injury through mind, speech and body, but various undesirable thoughts continue arising in the mind and sometimes undesirable actions take place through speech and body also; there the vow is broken. So, instead of breaking the vow, it is better not to take the vow, because breaking the vow is a big sin.

Further we ask- "Someone does not take a vow even and recites the hymn in his own language and keeps engaged his Upayoga in it by knowing its meaning. And someone other takes a vow but does not observe it judiciously and reads the religious text in Prakrit (or in Sanskrit) language, etc. but he does not know its meaning. So, without knowing its meaning, his Upayoga does not remain fixed there, then the Upayoga wanders elsewhere. Who is more religious person in-between these two? If you say that the first one is more religious, then, why, do not preach accordingly? And if you say that the other fellow is more religious, then this could be justified only because of reading hymns but religiosity is not established according to his thoughts, but rather sin is proved due to breach of vow.

Therefore, one should indulge in activities which keep his Upayoga pure. That vow which can be followed should be taken. One should read such religious texts which he can understand. There is no benefit in keeping the name by tradition only. 

And Pratikramana consists in repenting and not repeating the fault committed in the past, but simply by expressing Michchhaami Dukkadam, i.e., ("May my wrong deeds be condoned") the vicious deeds are not nullified; only on evolution of (pure) thoughts capable of making the vicious deeds false, the vicious deeds are fahsified; hence, reciting alone is not efficacious.

Further, in the text of Pratikramana there is a statement that- "Whatever inappropriateness in the observance of twelve vows, etc.  might have been caused be nullified". But without taking the vow, how is it possible to do Pratikramana of them? One who has not observed the fast if he tends to nullify the faults which are deemed to have occurred in the observance of fast then this is mere impossibility. Hence, how can such reading of text be meaningful?

Further, in Proshadha* too, they do not observe properly the vow taken as they do in Samayika. Therefore, the aforesaid fault arises.  Moreover, Proshadha is the name of Parva, i.e., an auspicious day but the indulges in sinful activities even on the day of Parva for many hours and afterwards he takes the vow of Proshadha. There is no harm in keeping engaged in pious activities for as long a time as is possible. But taking the vow of Proshadha and not following it properly is not justifiable. The Proshadha consists in keeping oneself totally devoid of injury throughout the Parva day. If observing the fast even for a few hours could be called Proshadha then call Samayika also as Proshadha, otherwise show scriptural proof that so much is the time of the small Proshadha. In all these there appears to be the purpose of keeping people confused under the pretention of real great Proshadha.

*Thus is concluded the fifth chapter throwing light about different religions and sects in the Moksha Marg Prakashak Shastra.

And the text of taking vow (Akhadi) is read by someone and some other takes the vow. But in the text of vow the statement is- "I forsake", therefore, the one who forsakes, he only should read the text. If he is unable to read the text, then he should speak in the spoken language itself but this custom is for the sake of following the tradition.

Further, (in Shwetamberas) great stress is laid on taking vows and inducing others to take vows but there is languidness in following (the vows) appropriately and there is no prudentiality of keeping one's thoughts pure (passionless). By observing the fasts etc. in painful state of mind and with greed, etc., he believes that religion (passionlessness) is evolved but the fruit is obtained according to one's thoughts and passions.

In this way, they talk of many fabricated things which are not possible in the Jaina-religion.

This is the Shwetambera sect found in Jainas; that also describes the characteristics of Deva (omniscient Lord), Tattvas (Jiva etc. essential principles) and the path to liberation, etc. contrarily.  Hence, it is a nourisher of wrong faith, etc. So, it is worth giving up.  The nature of the true Jina-dharma will be described later on, one should follow the right path to liberation as shown therein. By treading over the right path of liberation, one will attain the spiritual benediction.

CHAPTER 6

REFUTATION OF FALSE DEITY, PRECEPTOR-RELIGION

Mithyadaivadik bhajain ho hea mithyabhav
Taj tinkon sanchai bhajo, yih hit hait upav

Meaning: Instincts like false belief, etc. are found in mundane being from beginningless time and the cause of their reinforcement is the adoration of false deity, false preceptor and false religion.  Stepping in the path of liberation is possible only on their abdication.  Therefore, the same are being discussed hereunder:

Characteristics of false Deities and Denial of Faith in them

Adoration of those who are not benefactors of the self but are fallaciously treated as benefactors are false deities.

The adoration of false deities is done with three types of purposes: Some adore them with the purpose of attaining Moksha (liberation), some for gaining benefit in the next birth and some others for temporal gains in this birth.  But no purpose is served, rather some specific harm is caused, that is why their adoration is a fallacy.  The same being explained here:

Many people adore those deities for the purpose of attaining liberation whose adoration is advocated in other (non-Jaina) sects as instrumental for liberation, but liberation is not achieved.  Their description has already been done in the previous chapter about different non-Jaina faiths.  And many people adore the deities described in other sects (non-Jaina religions) with the purpose of gaining happiness and avoiding miseries in the next birth.  But fulfillment of this purpose is possible only by engaging in virtuous deeds and avoiding vicious deeds.  But they indulge in vicious deeds and say that the Almighty will do good to us. But this is injustice, because it has not been possible that the Almighty would punish someone and would not punish some others for their vicious deeds; one would obtain the fruits according to his inner instincts. God is not the doer of any body's good or bad.

In the process of adoring such Devas (deities) they kill other Jivas and foster their sensual pleasures by Pating, dancing, etc. in the name of Devas. But one cannot escape from suffering the consequences of vicious instincts. Everybody regards Hinsa (injury), and passional acts as sin and the consequence of sinful acts (Papa) is believed by all to be harmful and in the adoration of false deities there lies the involvement in injury and passional acts only. Therefore, by adoration of false deities no benefit is obtainable in the next birth.

Characteristics of Peripatetic Devas And Denialof their Worship

Many people adore false deities (gods & goddesses) with different purposes of ending the misery and obtaining happiness such as killing of foes, etc., eradicating diseases, etc., obtaining wealth and son, etc. related to this present life (paryaya) only. They worship Hanumana, goddesses, Gangaur, Sanjhi, Chauth, Sheetala, Dahari, etc., ghost, goblin, ancestors, peripatetic celestial beings, etc., sun, moon, Saturn, etc. stellar gods, Peer (a Mohammedan saint), Paigambera (prophet) etc., cow, horse, and other animals, fire, water, etc. and weapons (sword) etc. What to describe more, they worship even the pieces of stones, etc. for fulfillment of the aforesaid purposes.

So, this type of adoration of false deities, etc. is done only due to wrong belief, because firstly many of those whose adoration is done are only imaginary gods (deities), how would, therefore, their adoration be purposeful? And many amongst them are the peripatetic gods (Vyantaras Devas); they are not capable of doing good or bad to others. If they would be capable (of doing good or bad) then they only would become the doers (of good or bad), but nothing is seen happening by their acts, they cannot give wealth, etc. by becoming cheerful nor can they do harm to anyone by becoming envious. 

Here someone says- "They (the peripatetic Devas) are seen causing pain and misery and if respected they refrain from causing pain?"

Answer: When he (the misbeliever) suffers from the rise of inauspicious karmas then they (the Vyantaras) too are found having sportive mood of this type only, due to which they indulge in sportive actions and because of their such acts the person becomes miserable.  And if out of fun they utter something and this fellow does not act accordingly then they stop teasing him and finding him weak continue making fun. If he has the rise of Punya (auspicious karmas) then they cannot do anything.

It is also seen, that some persons do not worship them and rather criticize them or they (the Vyantaras) also have aversion with him but they (the Vyantaras) cannot harm him. They are also found saying that the particular person does not pay regard to us, still we cannot do anything. Therefore, the peripatetic devas, etc. are not capable of doing anything, rather happiness-unhappiness is caused due to his own Punya-Papa (virtu and vice) karmas only; on the contrary by regarding and worshipping them, miseries are intensified, no Purpose is accomplished.

Further, it should be known that whatever glory and miracles are found associated with imaginary deities, these all are creations of peripatetic devas. Someone was his devotee in the previous birth, after death he became a Vyantara (peripatetic Deva). In that state owing to some reason such conjecture developed due to which he (Vyantara) creates some miracle for inducing people to worship that Deva or false deity. The worldly ignorant people indulge in his worship by seeing some miracle (uncommon happening). As we listen and see the miracles associated with Jina-Pratimas (Idols), but these are not the acts of Jina, rather these are created by some Jaina-Vyantaras. Similarly, whatever miracle is found associated with false deities is the creation of their devotees Vyantaras, etc.

Further, in the other sects it is stated that the God helped the devotees and gave Darshan (sight) directly by appearing before them.  But most of these statements are imaginary. Many such acts are performed by their devotee Vyantara Devas which are stated to have been performed by God. If those acts are done by God then the God is omniscient, is capable in all respects; why would He allow the devotees to suffer from miseries. Even today we see that the low caste people inflict afflictions to devotees, destroy religion and break idols. If God is unaware of these acts then He no longer remains an omniscient. Even after knowing if He does not help the devotee then the kindness towards devotees is lost and He is proved powerless.  And if He remains only a withess then the earlier statement that He helped devotees in the past is false; because His tendency is equanimous.

Further, if you will say- "The devotion is not of high order;" but in any case the devotee is better than the low caste persons and after all his own idol, etc. was installed, at least He should have not allowed its destruction. And if the low caste wicked people become powerful, so is this an act of God or not?  If it is an act of God then what happened to His kind-heartedness towards devotees, because He makes the calumniators happy and produces trouble creators for the devotees ? And if it is not an act of God, then the God is proved to be powerless.  Therefore, it is not the act of God. Some devotee Vyantara only shows the miracle-you should ascertain like this only.

Someone asks here - "Some Vyantara narrates his power, tells the imperceivable things, narrates his inferiority by telling his dirty place of habitation, does not reply to our questions, makes confusing statements, causes others to act contrarily, inflicts misery, etc.--how these astonishing things happen?

Answer: In different Vyantaras comparatively more and less power is found, but those who show their inferiority by telling about their dirty place of habitation, etc. do so out of fun. The Vyantaras continue indulging in sportive actions like children. As a child for the sake of making fun shows himself inferior, teases and abuses others, cries loudly and afterwards starts laughing. Similarly, the Vyantaras also indulge in all such actions. If they are inhabitants of dirty places then when they come into good (clean) places, who brings them there? If they come themselves then having such power why do they live in dirty places? Therefore, their residence where they take birth which is under and above this earth is lovely and attractive. For the sake of fun, they utter whatever they like. If they have any sufferance then how do they start laughing immediately after weeping?

It is true that the Mantras (incantations) have unlimited (and unimaginable) power. Some true Mantra possesses such instru-mental cause and effect relationship that due to it the Vyantara is not able to move from a place and also becomes somewhat miserable.  If some powerful Mantra checks him then he remains stationary or remains stuck up of his own accord; so all this is the power of Mantra butburning, etc. is not possible. The knower of Mantras (incantator) says that he has burnt the Vyantara but the Vyantara appears again because it is not possible to burn the Vaikriyaka (transformable) body.

The range of clairvoyance knowledge found in some of the Vyantaras (peripatetic Devas) is of knowing the things of less area and time and in some ones it is more. There, if they have desire to reply and have knowledge of the question asked then they reply to our question related with unknown objects. If they possess less knowledge then they reply after asking from other Vyantara possessing more knowledge. It should be known that if they possess less knowledge and have no desire to reply then they do not reply to our question. After taking birth the Vyantaras possessing less (clair- voyance) knowledge can know about the events of their previous life for some period only, then afterwards only the remembrance of those events remains. Therefore, if the desire arises then they indulge in various activities and tell about the previous life; but when someone asks something different then, their clairvoyance knowledge being limited, how can then they tell without knowing? The question that they cannot reply and have no desire to reply they do not reply either due to pride or sportive instinct or sometimes tell lies. 

The devas (celestial beings) possess such power that they can change or turn their own as well as other Jivas body and material things according to their desire; therefore, they transform themselves into different shapes and sizes, etc. and indulge in various peculiar activities. They create diseases, etc. in other Jiva's body.

It should be remembered that they can turn or transform their own body and other material things to the extent of their power.  Therefore, they do not possess the power of doing all kind of acts.  They can change or turn the body, etc. of other Jivas, only according to the rise of Punya-Papa karmas of that Jiva. If that Jiva is having the rise of Punya (auspicious karma) then the Vyantara Devas cannot make his body diseased, etc. and if he is having the rise of Papa (inauspicious karma) then Vyantara-Deva cannot do his desired work.

Thus, one should know the power of the Vayantara devas, etc. 

Someone may ask here- "What is wrong in believing and wor- shipping those who possess so much power?"

Answer: When one is having the rise of Papa-karma the Vyantaras, etc. cannot cause or bestow happiness and when there is rise of Punya-karma they cannot cause misery. Moreover by worshipping them, no bondage of auspicious karmas takes place, on the other hand due to increase in attachment passions, etc., only the bondage of inauspicious karmas is caused; hence paying regard and worshiping them is not beneficial; rather it is harmful. And the Vyantaras' motive in inducing others to believe and worship them is only to make fun and no other specific purpose is there. The one who believes and worships them, with him only they continue making fun. Those who do not believe and worship them, to them they do not say anything. If at all they have any purpose then they should cause more pain and misery to those who do not believe and worship them; but those who have firm determination of not believing and worshiping them, to them they are not seen telling anything. And the purpose would lie only, if they have the suffering of hunger, etc., but such sufferings not found in them. If such suffering be there why do they not accept sweets - oblation which are offered to them?  And why do they encourage the followers to serve food, etc.  to others only? So, they have simply the objective of fun. If anyone becomes a party to their activity of fun, etc., then he would become miserable and feel inferiority; hence, it is not worthwhile to believe and worship them.

Further, someone asks that the Vyantaras say so- "Offer Pinda-daan (oblation of cooked rice to the manes in Gaya, etc. then we shall get released and will never come again." What is all this?

Answer:  The Jivas normally carry the impressions and experiences of their previous birth to the next birth. The Vyantaras also by remembrance, etc. possess the specific impressions of their previous birth; therefore, because the Vyantaras might be having in their previous birth the conjecture that by doing Pinda-Daan, etc. in Gaya, etc, one gets better rebirth; that is why they induce people to do such acts. If the Muslims, etc.  become Vyantaras after death, they do not say so, rather they narrate their experiences and impressions of the past life only; hence, if the state of mind of all Vyantaras be of uniform type then all will pray in the same manner but it is not so. Therefore, one should know the real characteristics of the Vyantaras etc.

Further, sun, moon, planets, etc. are the stellars kinds of celestial beings (Jyotishi Devas), some people worship them, that also is a fallacy. Some worship sun, etc. by believing it as the part of God; there in the sun lies the only specialty of excessive light, however gems like diamonds etc. also possess light. No other specialty seems to be there in the sun for treating it to be part of God. And people worship moon, etc. for the sake of acquiring wealth, etc., but if wealth could be obtained by worshipping them then all the paupers should worship; therefore, this is a false notion. And some people worship them with the view of astrology during the advent of bad planets, etc. and give donations, etc. for the same purpose. As the deers, etc. make movement of their own and they are treated to be the indicator of pre- intimation of likely future happiness and sorrow respectively on their crossing from right and left sides, but they are not at all capable of giving pleasure and pain; similarly, the planets, etc. make movement of their own and are treated as pre-indicators of the knowledge of likely future pleasure or pain on rise of appropriate association of karmas in Jivas, but they, the planets, are not at all capable of giving pleasure or pain. Some people, who worship them, do not get the desired objective fulfilled and some others, who do not worship them, get their desired objective fulfilled. Therefore, worshipping them is not worthwhile and is a fallacy.

Here someone says- "Giving donations is a pious act; therefore, it is good?"

Answer: Donating with the objective of religion is a pious act (Punya); but in the aforesaid cases donation and worship take place due to fear of misery and greed of pleasures; hence, it is assuredly vice (Papa). Likewise, in many ways, they worship the Jyotishi Devas - stellar kinds of celestial goods, which too is a fallacy.

Further, goddesses, Devees and Daharees, etc. are found there; many of them are Vyantarees (peripatetic goddesses and Jyotishinees (stellar goddesses).  People worship them with contrary belief of their characteristics. Several of them are imaginary goddesses, yet people worship them on the basis of their imaginary characteristics.

Thus, worshipping Vyantara gods-goddesses etc. is forbidden 

Denial of Worshipping Kshetrapal, Padmavati, etc.

Someone may say here that no fault lies in worshipping the Kshetrapal, Dahari, Padmavati, etc. goddesses Yaksha-Yakshini, etc. because all of them follow Jainism?

Answer: In Jina's religion worshipability is acquired by accepting and following the continence (vows), etc. but continence is not at all found in Devas (celestial beings). And people worship these by believing them as true believers; but in Bhavanatrikas (residentials, peripatetic and stellars - 3 kinds of celestial beings) there is no prominence of possessing right belief. If people worship these Devas presuming them to possess right belief then why not to worship the gods of Sarvartha Siddhi heaven and Laukantika Devas (of fifth heaven) who certainly possess right belief? You may further say- "These Kshetrapal Padmavati etc. are excessively engrossed in Jina's adoration". But Saudharma Indra also indulges in Jina's adoration excessively and also possesses true belief; why then to worship these (Kshetrapsl, Padnzavati, etc.) by ignoring him? Further, if you will say- "As the king has chamberlains as attendants so also the Tirthankaras have Kshterapalas, etc. as attendants. " But in Samavasarana (preaching arena of omniscient Lord) these Kshetrapalas, etc. have no status; hence all such belief is false.  Moreover, as the chamberlains help the visitors in meeting the king, similarly, these (Kshetrapalas, etc.) do not have any role in arranging meeting with the Tirthankaras. In the case of Tirthankara whosoever has the desire to worship he can have His Darshan (Sighting). There is no question of dependence on any one.

And see the height of ignorance ! Those who have fearful form possessed with sword, spear, etc. arms, are being worshipped by singing and dancing. It is a pity that even in Jainism the fearful form has become worshipable. So, this too became similar to other non-Jaina faiths. Belief in such contrary is possible in Jaina's religion only under the influence of the rise of intense delusion.

In this way, worshipping of Kshetrapalas etc. also is not worth-while.

Further, animals like cows, snakes, etc. are clearly found to be inferior to human beings, they are to be disparaged, their culpable condition is clearly seen. And trees, fire, water, etc. are the immobile (one-sensed)- beings, those are clearly found inferior than the animals. And weapons, inkpot, etc. are inanimate objects; those things clearly appear to be destitute of all sorts of power; in no way worshipability can be thought in them. Therefore, worshipping of all these things is a great fallacy. Nothing seems to be achievable directly or indirectly by worshipping all these things. Therefore, it is useless to worship them.

Therefore, from all angles, believing and worshipping of all kinds of false deities-gods and goddesses, is forbidden.

Behold ! the power of false belief. In public life it is considered censurable and below dignity to bow to persons lower in status than ourselves; whereas under the influence of delusion censurability is not felt even in worshipping the pieces of stone. And in public life people are found serving and attending on only those persons from whom they expect their purpose being fulfilled. But due to fallacious belief- "how will my purpose be accomplished by worshipping the false deities" -without such thinking, the people worship the false deities. And while adoring the false deities, thousands of impediments occur but one does not pay attention to them and if due to the rise of auspicious karmas the desired objective is fulfilled then he says and believes that this achievement is the result of adoring false deities. Moreover, if some objective is fulfilled without their adoration, he does not pay any attention to it but if something undesirable takes place then he says that this undesirable has happened because of not worshipping the false deities.  He does not think even this much that if benefitting and harming anybody be in the hands of these false deities then those who worship them would achieve the desirable and those who do not worship will achieve the undesirable; but this does not seem to be happening so. For example, even the sons of those persons who adores' excessively are found to be dieing while in the case of others', sons, etc. are found living without such adoration.

Therefore, believing and adoring of Sheetals (an imaginary goddess) is not at all purposeful.

In the same way, believing and adoring of all other kinds of false deities (gods-goddesses) is not at all useful.

Here someone may say- "Let it not be useful but by believing and adoring them no harm is caused?"

Answer: If there be no harm then why would we forbid? But firstly due to fostering of false belief the right path of liberation becomes remote and inaccessible; this is a big harm and secondly, owing to the bondage of inauspicious karmas (Papa), miseries are caused in future; this is another harm.

Further, someone asks that- "The false belief, etc. dispositions are caused by belief in false Tattvas and the bondage of inauspicious karmas takes place by indulging in evil deeds (vicious acts). Therefore, how would false belief, etc. and the bondage of inauspicious karmas be caused by believing in them?"

Answer: Firstly, it is a fallacy to believe other objects to be agreeable and non-agreeable, because no substance is friend or foe of any body, and whatever agreeable non- agreeable substances are found associated with this Jiva are caused by the rise of auspicious - inauspicious karmas (Punya-Papa) respectively; therefore, one should act in a manner by which bondage of auspicious karmas occur and the bondage of inauspicious karmas do not occur. One may not have conviction even of the rise of one's own karmas and may make effort of getting and avoiding the association of external causes of agreeable and disagreeable objects; but by believing and adoring the false deities, the instinct of considering objects agreeable-non-agree-able is not removed, it rather gets intensified. Due to that even the bondage of Punya (auspicious karmas) is not caused and insted bondage of Papa (inauspicious-karmas) takes place. Moreover, false deities are not seen giving or snatching from someone the wealth, etc., therefore, they are not even the external causes. Why then are they adored? When one is extremely puzzled and is in utter confusion, where even a trace of belief and knowledge about Jiva etc.  essential Tattvas, (principles) is not found and attachment-aversion feelings exist in vehement state, then those things which are not the cause are believed to be the causes of agreeable and non- agreeable conditions. Then (in such state of mind) one starts believing and adoring the false deities.

Thus, under such intense false belief, etc. the path of liberation becomes extremely difficult to attain.

Characteristics of False Preceptor and Denial of Faith in them

Those Jivas who are found indulging in irreligious activities of satisfying sensual pleasures and believe themselves to be religious persons under the influence of pride passion, induce others to offer salutation, etc. to them by believing them religious persons or, by practising some part of religious ritual, wish to be called highly religious persons, force others to observe all the manners befitting to a big religious person; in this way, under the shelter of religion they persuade others to believe them as superior persons, all such persons are to be known as false preceptors, because in religious tradition after relinquishment of sensual pleasures and passions, one should adopt such status which is in conformity with the actual stage of religion.

Negation of Preceptorship from Caste or Family Point of View

There are many people who believe themselves to be preceptors by inheritance, caste and tradition. Among them are Brahmanas, etc. who maintain that because our caste is high, so we are preceptors of all. But the greatness of caste lies in practising religion (virtuous conduct) in life. If someone born in high caste indulges in disgraceful conduct then how can he be treated high? If birth in high caste be the criteria of high status then even people eating meat, etc. would have to be treated as high. But this is not maintainable. In the book Bharata also many (kinds of) Brahmanas are described. Therein it is said- "The one born in Brahmana caste if performs the acts of a Chaandal (sinful person) call him a Chaandal Brahmana". If greatness is decided by caste only then why is such low name given herein? 

Further, in Vaishnavas scripture it is stated that Vedvyasa etc.  are born from fish, etc. How did there remain the sequence of caste or family? And original creation, they say, is from the Brahma; hence, everybody's caste is one, where lies the caste difference?  Moreover, the progeny is seen taking place on copulation to a woman of high caste with the man of low caste and to a woman of low caste with the man of high caste. How did there remain the authenticity of caste or family?

Perhaps you might say- "If it is so then why do you believe in the divisions of high and low castes?"

Answer: In the worldly affairs contrary practices too are possible but in religious affairs contrary practices are not acceptable; hence, in religious tradition greatness or preceptorship is not possible on the basis of caste. Preceptorship or greatness is attained only by following religious conduct. The greatness of the caste of Brahmanas etc. is due to religious practice (virtuous conduct); how would greatness or preceptorship remain there by giving up virtuous conduct and indulging in sinful acts like injury, etc.?

Further, some people say that- "Our ancestors have been great devotees, Siddhas (the possessors of extraordinary talents) and highly religious and since we are born in their progeny, therefore, we are the preceptors. But the elders of those (ancestors or forefathers) were not spiritually so great. Therefore, if in their lineage people are believed to be great by their noble deeds then in the lineage of those noble persons he who does not perform noble deeds, how should be treated as noble person? As per scriptures and in actual life it is well-known that the father may attain high status by doing pious deeds whereas the son gets low status by indulging in impious acts; the father may achieve low status due to impious acts but the son attains high status by pious deeds. It is, therefore, not correct to believe someone great only because of being born in the lineage of noble persons. 

Thus, it should be known that it is a fallacy to believe someone to be a preceptor because 
he belongs to high caste. 

Further, some people believe preceptorship to be a matter of succession. Earlier, there might have been some great person and in his succession a tradition of disciples is found. In them if some disciple does not possess the qualities of a noble person even then he is treated as a preceptor. If this be logical then in that tradition some disciple might indulge in the great sinful act of sexual copulation with other's wife, etc. then he also will become the pious person and will attain the heavenly life; but this is not possible. Moreover, if he is a sinner then how can he be treated the rightful occupier of the seat? The one who performs the acts worthy of a preceptorship only can be a preceptor (Guru).

And many people earlier were the abductors of the woman (coition), etc., later on they became debauched and house- holders by getting married; their successors believe themselves to be preceptors (Guru); but after debauchery how is preceptorship possible? So, these too are similar to other householders. The only sepciality in them is that they became householders after debauchery; how can these be accepted as preceptor (Guru) by the persons who basically are found following householder's religion?

Further, many people are found indulging in all kinds of sinful acts but do not marry and because of this - so-called pious practice - believe themselves to be preceptor (Guru) . But the unchastity alone is not a sin; injury (Hinsa), attachment and hoarding (Parigraha), etc.  are also sins. How people indulging in such acts could be treated as religious preceptors? Moreover, he has not given up marriage, etc. with religious instincts but he does not marry either forgetting some means of livelihood or due to ignominy. Had he any religious instincts, then why would he indulge in increasingly injurious acts?  And one who does not have religious attitude cannot be firm in chastity and if he does not marry then he indulges in the great sin of sexual copulation with other's wife, etc. Hence, people who believe persons found involved in the aforesaid (sinful) acts as preceptors (Guru) are highly misguided and intellectually bankrupt.

And many people consider such persons as preceptors who put on a particular attire; but by assuming a particular dress what type of religion is evolved due to which he should be considered a religious preceptor? Someone wears cap, some keeps Gudari (patched quilt), some others put on a Chola (gown), a few keep their body covered by long cloth sheet, some wear red cloths, some white cloths, some wear Bhagwa saffron-coloured cloth, a few put on hessian cloths, some others put on deer-skin, while others rub their body with ash, etc. -in this way different disguises are adopted by them. But if cold, heat, etc. could not be endured and lacked confidence in remaining nude then why did he forsake the commonly worn cloths such as Pagadi (turban), Jama (shirt), etc.? Leaving the common attire, why did they indulge in aforesaid disguises and what aspect of religion is accomplished? All these disguises are assumed merely to cheat the householders. If they keep their robe like that of a (common) householder, how could then the householders be cheated? Their objective is to earn livelihood, acquire wealth and fulfill pride-passion, etc. by adopting such disguises, that is why they put on such disguises. The ignorant people get cheated by seeing such persons in different disguises and believe that he has followed religion, but this is a fallacy. The same is stated in Upadesha Siddhanta Ratnamala as under :-

Jeh kuvi vaisarttai, musijjmanro vimanryai harisan
The michhvaismusiya  gyan pi nr munrati dham nrihan

As some fellow fond of strumpet feels pleasure even on losing his money, similarly, some persons being cheated by false sanctimony do not realise that their religious wealth is being destroyed. The gist is - "By attending on and adoring such false disguised persons, one's religious wealth gets destroyed but alas ! the people instead of feeling distressed feel happy owing to false belief". Some people assume those disguises which are described in false scriptures; but with the perverse intention of establishing their tradition and increasing the number of their followers, the sinful writers of those scriptures have preached in them simple rituals for obtaining higher spiritual status.  The thoughtless Jivas, ignorant of their tradition, do not even ponder over the fact that there is some deception because they preach obtaining high spiritual status through simple rituals, rather move (follow) thoughtlessly in the path shown by them.

Further, they believe that the tough path suggested in some other Shastras (scriptures) will be difficult to follow and people cannot be convinced without keeping high name, with this intention they keep high names like Yati, Muni, Acharya, Upadhyaya, Sadhu, Bhattaraka, Sanyasi, Yogi, Tapasvi, Nagna, etc. but are not able to follow the rituals prescribed for these various spiritual ranks; therefore, they assume different disguises according to their free will. And many of them keep new names (aliases) and adopt various disguises according to their own will. In this way, they believe preceptorship by assuming different disguises; so this is false.

One may ask here- "Various types of disguises (Bheshas) are found, how would one be able to distinguish as to which is right and which is wrong?"

Answer :- Only those outward appearances in which there is not the slightest trace of attachment and passions, are the true ascetic garbs. Those true ascetic garbs are of three types, rest all are false (sanctimonies). The same is descibed by shri Kund-Kund Acharya in Shat-Pahuda*

(* Now known as Ashta Pahuda)

Aigan jinrssruran vidyan ukitth savyanran tu
Avardivyanr tyian chauthh punr ling dansanran nrith  (Darshanpahunrh -18)

Meaning: One ascetic garb is that of possessionless naked monk Nirgrantha-Digamber Muni similar to that of Jina (omni- scient conqueror), the second one is that of the householder of the highest status of Shravaka i.e., a votary belonging to the order of tenth and eleventh Pratima or vow, and the third one is that of a Jaina-nun (Aaryika) as per Digamber scripture; thus, these three ascetic garbs only are to be revered and no fourth ascetic garb is associated with right belief. The gist of above verse is that the one who believes adorable any other posture excepting these three postures or garbs is not a true but a false believer.  Moreover, among these disguisers many of the disguisers observe some religious rituals for the sake of inducing people to adore their postures. As for example, someone desirous of making current a counterfeit rupee-coin also mixes some silver in it, similarly, these disguisers proclaim themselves to be possessing high status by practising part of religious rituals.

Here someone says- "Some appropriate fruit will be reaped by whatever religions one has followed?"

Answer: As someone having accepted the vow of Upavasa (observing complete fast) eats even a particle of food then he is a sinner and if by taking the vow of Ekaashana (taking pure meal only once in a day) takes some quantity of food even then he is a religious person.  Similarly, if someone by assuming high spiritual status violates it even slightly, he is a great sinner and if by accepting the vow of lower spiritual status practices even some part of religion then he is a religious person. Hence, one should practice religion according to one's capacity, no fault lies in this; but if someone proclaiming one-self to be possessing high spiritual status indulges in mean practice then he is assuredly a great sinner. The same is described in Shat-Pahuda by shri Kund- Kund Acharya :-

Jehjayroovsrisee tiltusmaitan nre gihdi hatthaisu
Jeh laiei apbhuyan tato punr jah niggodma

i.e.,the bodily posture of a true saint (muni) is found to be always naked just like the naked state of a child at his birth. He does not accept the slightest material possession; but if a saint accepts even the slightest material possession he assuredly goes to Nigoda (the lowermost one-sensed state of downfall of Jivas existence where one dies and rebirths 18 times per respiration of time).

Let it be kown that- "In the householder's status, if someone keeping a lot of possessions, makes some limitation (with a vow not to increase it any further) then also he deserves the right of attaining the heaven and subsequently liberation; but by adopting monk's status if one keeps the slightest possession even then he attains Nigoda state. Hence, keeping big name and practising lower order of conduct is not correct.

It is to be known that in Hundaavasarpini (1) aeon this the present running time is Kalikala (2) In Jina's religion the characteristics of a monk are such that there should be no attachment with either external or internal possessions; he should keep engrossed in the self soul with the feeling of I- ness in it and should keep himself detached from pious and impious thoughts and dispositions; but now due to dawn of this bad time (i.e.  fifth era) the people who are passionate and fond of sensual pleasures accept monkhood by taking the vow of forsaking all sorts of injury and adopting the five great vows, etc. but such persons in monk's disguise are found wearing white or saffron-coloured cloths and have become voracious of food, etc., make efforts of increasing their tradition; many of them keep money, etc. also; commit injury, etc. and indulge in various unbecoming acts. But the consequence of accepting even the slightest possession is described to be Nigoda; therefore, it is certain that the consequence of such sinful acts would assuredly be unending transmigration.

1. The acon of descendency in all respects.
2. The period of ill-conduct and religious downfall is called 5th era in Jaina scripture.

See the ignorance of the people ! If someone breaks even a small vow, he is called a sinner; but one who breaks such a great vow he is believed to be the Guru (preceptor) and revered as a monk. In the scripture it is stated that one who performs an act, gets it perfomed or praises the performer - in all these three states the same consequence results.

The prescribed sequence of accepting monkhood is that one should first of all obtain the knowledge of true Tattvas, thereafter, should develop apathy (towards sensual pleasures) and acquire power of enduring the afflictions, etc., after all this he should himself express the desire of becoming a monk and then the Acharya (head of monks' congregation) should confer monkhood on him as per rules.

It is a pity to see this contrariness that conferring of monkhood on sensual and passionate persons through deception and greed has become prevalent. Later on such persons are encouraged to follow wrong conduct; so, this is a great injustice.

Thus ends the negation of false preceptor and their adoration.

Now starts the evidence from Shastras (scriptures) in rein- forcement of the aforsesaid description.

There in Upadesha Siddhanta Ratnamala it is said so-

Gurun.o bhatta  jaya, sadai thun. Oon.  Liti dan.ayin
Don.‑vi amun.iysara, dusmismyami buddhanti  (31)

Meaning - Due to bad times the preceptors (Gurus) have become minstrels. They accept gift and donation, etc. by praising the donors in the words of a minstrel.  So, in this distressful era (Dukhama-Kal) both the donor and the recipient are to drown in the ocean of worldly transmigration. It is further stated there :-

Sappai dithai n.asyee loao n.hi kovi kimpi akkhaiyi
Jo chayi kuguroo sappan ha moodha bhan.yi tan dutthan  (36)

Meaning: If after seeing a snake, somebody runs away from it, people do not say anything to him. But alas ! Behold ! To him who quits the company of snake-like false preceptors the ignorant ones call him wicked and speak ill of him.

 Sappo ikan mran.  Kuguru an.antyi daih bran.ayee
To var sappan ghiyan ma kuguroo saivan. Bhadan   (37)

Meaning: Oh ! by snake-bite death is caused only once, whereas, the false preceptor causes infinite deaths, is an instrumental cause of infinite times births and deaths. Therefore, O ! Judicious person!  it is better to keep company with a snake but never adore or keep company with a false preceptor.

Further, many more verses are quoted there for strengthening right belief, same may be studied from that book.

And in Sanghapatta it is said so :-

Kshutksham kil kopi rankshishuk prvrijya chaetyai kvchit
Kritva kinchanpkshmakshtakli praptstdacharykam
Chitram chaetyagrihai griheeyati nijai gachhai kutumbeeyati
Svan shkreeyati balisheeyati budhan vishv varakeeyti

Meaning: See ! some poor man's boy weakened by starvation took the oath of a monk in some temple and without forsaking sins he got installed as Acharya by some group. He now lives in the temple as one lives in his own house, treats the monks of his congregation as members of his own family, thinks himself to be very great like Indra, considers knowledgeable persons as ignorant ones like children and treats other householders as paupers. So, this is all a great wonder.

Further, there is a poetical composition, Yaerjatee na cha vrdhito na cha na cha kroto    etc., its meaning is as follows. The householders with whom he (the so-called monk) has relation neither by birth nor by being nourished, nor has he any business relation and also has not to pay anything, treats them all like bullocks and forcibly takes gifts, donation, etc., none is there to administer justice. 
Thus, there are many verses supporting the right faith and the same should be known from that book.

Here someone says- "These are the sermons quoted from Shwetambera's scriptures, why did you quote them as evidence? 
Answer: For example, if something which is forbidden by a degraded person then the same is naturally forbidden for a high status person . Similarly, something which is forbidden even by those people for whom appendages of cloths, etc. are allowed then in Digamber religion such contrary practices are naturally forbidden.

Moreover, in Digamber Shastras (scriptures) also there are several verses supporting right faith. There in Shat-Pahuda composed by shri Kund-Kund Acharya, it is said so:-

Dansn.moolo dhammee uvittho jin..vraihin sissan.an
Tan soun. Skan.ai  dansn.heen.o  n. vdivo

Meaning: Jinendra Deva's exhortation to disciples is that the root cause of religion is right belief. Therefore, let the disciples of Jinendra Deva possessing ears be aware that the man without right belief is not adorable.

How can a false preceptor be instrumental in invoking right belief in a person who believes in that false preceptor? Without right belief no other aspect of religion is possible. How could one be adorable without religion?

Further. it is mentioned:

Jai dansn.aisu  bhat.t.t.ha charit bhat.t.t.ha ya
Aidai bhat.t.t.h vi  bhat.t.t.ha, saisan pi jan.an  vin.asati    (8)  Darshanpahudh

Meaning: Those, who have fallen from right belief, right knowledge and right conduct, are the worst polluted (led astray) amongst the polluted. Such persons being themselves spoilt spoil other persons also who follow their preachings. 
Further, it is mentioned:

Jai dansn.aisu bhat.t.t.ha payai padanti dansn.dhran.an
Tai hoti lalmooa, bohee pun. Dulha taisin                        (12) Darshanpahudh

Meaning: Those people who have themselves fallen from right belief, but seek adoration from other right believers will become crippled and dumb in the next birth i.e., they will be born as one-sensed immobile beings like trees or plants and achievement of self-knowledge will become extremely difficult, a rarity to them.

Jai vi pad.anti taisin, jan.anta lajjagarav bhyain.
Taisin pi n.antthi bohi pavan an.moyyman.anan            (13) Darshanpahudh

Meaning: '"These saints have fallen from right belief" - even after knowing this thing, those persons also who out of shyness, false prestige and fear bow to them, being supporters of evil, are devoid of i.e., not able to attain right knowledge.  What types of Jivas are these?  They support the vice (sins) ! Even by honoring the sinners one has to suffer from the consequence of supporting the sins. 
Further, it is mentioned :-

Jass pariggeh gehan.an appan bhuyan cha haveyi lingass
So garhiu jin.vyan.ai  parigeh rhio n‑irayaro                            (119, Sootrpahung )

Meaning: That outward posture of a monk in which even a little or more possession is found is censurable in omniscient's preachings.  Only possessionless naked saint is to be revered astrue monk.

Further, it is said-

Dhmmammi n.ippvaso dosavaso ya uchchhuphullsamo
n.ipphaln.iggun.yaro n.angsavan.o  n.aggroovain.                    (71, Bhavpahung)

Meaning: "The one who is indolent in practising religious conduct, is full of blemishes, is worthless like flowers of sugarcane, is devoid of virtuous conduct, he is an acrobat monk in the garb of nakedness, is a disguiser like a buffoon." Here in the naked posture the example of a buffoon is possible, but if someone is found with possessions then this comparison too is not substainable.

Jai pav mohiymayee lingan ghaitoon. Jin. Varidan.an
Pavan kun.anti pava tai chata mokkhmaggammi                     (78, Mokshpahung)

Meaning: Such Jivas whose intellect is infatuated by sins, if they indulge in sinful acts even by adopting the naked posture of Jina (omniscient) are to be known as the idols of sins and fallen from the right path of liberation.

It is further stated :-

Jai panchchailsata ganthggahee ya jayn.aseela
Adhakammammi rya  tai mokkhmaggammi                             (79, Mokshpahung)

Meaning: Those who have excessive love in cloths of five kinds*, keep possessions, indulge in begging and are engaged in Adhah-karma-type of faults concerning preparation and taking of food all such persons (so-called monks) are to be known as fallen from the right path of liberation.

* Cloths of tree-bark/leaves, cotton, jUtl 'eather, silk, wool.

Many such Gatha-Sutras (couplets, verses) are found in Ashta- Pahuda for reinforcement of right belief; one should read them. And in Linga-Pahuda composedby shri Kund-Kund Acharya, very strong criticism is found written about such so-called monks who having adopted the naked posture of Jina indulge in injury, householder's acts and acts of incantations, etc.

And in Atmaanushasana written by Gunabhadra Acharya,it is stated :-

Itstshch tresyanto vibhavvarya yatha mriga
Vanadhishantyupgraman kalo kantan  tapasvin            (197)

Meaning: It is a great pity that in this Kalikala (5th era) the ascetics after wandering here and there out of fear like a deer come near the town in the night from the forest.  Here even staying near the town is prohibited, therefore, living in the town is assuredly forbidden.

Vran garhasthymaivadya tapso bhavijanman
Suratree ktaksh luntak lupt vaeragya sampada                     (200)

Meaning: Here it is stated that "A house holder's status is better than holding such ascetic posture which may result in infinite births.  What kind of ascetic is this whose wealth of non-attachment gets robbed in the morning by the robbers in the forms of beautiful women's side-long glances."

And in the Paramatma-Prakash composed by Monk Yogindra
Deva, it is stated :-

Chillachilliputthyahin, tusai moodh  n.ibhantu
Aiyhin lajjayee n.an.iyu, bandhanh  haiu mun.antu            (215/219)

Meaning: The foolish saints (so-called monks) only take pleasure in the congregation of pupils - male & female, and in books but the wise saints (real monks), devoid of fallacy, feel ashamed in keeping them knowing that these are the cause of bondage.

Kain.vi appau bandhiyu bandhiyu siru lunchivi chharain.
Seyal vi sang n.a  parihariy jin.varling dharain.                                     (218/218)

Meaning:  Who is he whose soul is cheated by himself? He is that Jiva who having adopted the naked Digamber posture of great Jina, Dulls out his hair with ashes but does not give up all possessions.

Meaning: Oh Jiva ! those ascetics who having adopted the naked posture of Jina keep agreeable possessions are eating the same vomit which they have vomited earlier, i.e., they are censurable.

Such many statements are found therein.

Thus, in the Shastras (Jina's preachings) the false preceptors, their false conduct and attending on them is totally forbidden.

And wherein the scriptures Dhatri Dosa, Duta Dosa, etc. forty-sixfaults concerning the activity of preparation of food by householders and taking of food by a monk (Muni) are described, there pleasing the children of householders, conveying messages, indulging in the acts of teaching Mantras (incantations), prescribing medicines, foretelling future, etc. and taking the food that has been prepared by self or got prepared by others and approved by self, etc. - all such activities are totally forbidden for a monk but now due to bad times the monks take food, etc. by indulging in the aforesaid faults.

Further, the corrupt monks of the category of Parshwastha, Kusheela, etc. are forbidden; and now so-called monks are found possessing such Characteristics. It is to be noted that those Parshwastha, etc. kinds of monks live naked and possessionless physically whereas these - the present so- called monks keep different types of paraphernalias. And there in the scriptures the Bhramari etc. method of taking the food is described for the monks; but this so-called saint having excessive desire takes food, etc. by afflicting the vitality of the donor. And they are clearly seen indulging in the injudicious, censurable and sinful acts which are unbecoming of even the householders.

Further, they disrespect the most venerable Jina-Bimba (Jins's installed idols) and the Shastras (scriptures), etc. and rather considering oneself to be superior to them they sit at a higher level (seat) and likewise many perversities are apparently seen and yet they consider themselves to be true monks and like to be called the possessors of the Mulgunas (basic virtues). In this way, they get their importance (venerableness) established and the innocent house-holders getting cheated by their praise do not ponder over the real religion, rather remain engrossed in their eulogy; but how will the great sin of perverse-belief in terms of treating great sin as great religion not result in infinite transmigration? In Shastras the one whom misbelieves even a single word of Jina's preachings is stated to be the great sinner, whereas here (in such behavior of a monk) there is total disregard of Jina's preachings. What else could be a greater sin than this?

Arguments Supporting Negligence in Conduct and their Refutation

Refutation of those false arguments by which worship of false preceptors is established:

Here someone argues- "In the absence of preceptor(Guru) we shall be treated as having no preceptor (Nigura) and the real preceptors are not found in the present times, should we, therefore, not believe these (monks) as preceptors?"

Answer: Those persons only can be treated as Niguras (preceptorless) who do not believe in preceptors. And the one who has belief in the true preceptor but not finding the true characteristics of a real preceptor in the so-called Gurus in this region, does not believe in them, he cannot be treated as a Nigura (preceptorless). For example, one who does not believe in God is called an atheist and one who believes in God but not finding the true characteristics of real God in the so-called Gods in this region, does not believe in them, then he does not become an atheist.

He further argues- "In Jaina scripture, the absence of omniscient (Kewali-Jina) is described in the present time, but the presence of a real preceptor (possessionless naked ascetic) is not denied?"

Answer: It is not stated that the true preceptor monks will be found in particular regions but it is stated that they will be found in Bharat-Kshetra. Bharat-Kshetra is very vast region, the existence of true monks may be found in some part of it, that is why absence of true monks is not described. If you believe the existence of true monks in the same region where you live, then if you go in a region where even such kind of monks will not be available, then whom shall you regard as preceptor (Guru)? For example, the availability of swans is described in the present time, but if the swans are not actually seen then the other kind of birds cannot be treated to be swans. Similarly, the availability of true monks is described in the present time, but if the true monks are not actually found then others (so-called monks) cannot be treated to be true monks.

Further, he says- "Even the imparter of knowledge of one syllable is believed to be the Guru (preceptor), how should then one not be believed to be a Guru who teaches us Shastras and gives discourses on them?"

Answer: The word Guru denotes a highly respected person. So, in whomsoever whatever type of greatness be possible he is respected as Guru in that sense. For example, from the family status point of view the parents are termed as Guru, similarly the teacher who imparts education is termed as Guru in that sense. But here the issue is that of religion, therefore, in the context of religion he who is great from the conduct (Dharma) point of view is to be treated as Guru. But Dharma is the name of Charitra (true passionless conduct). In the scripture it is stated that (Charitan khalu dhamo )1 true conduct only is religion (Dharma), therefore, the possessor of true conduct can only be termed as Guru. For example, the Bhutas (demons) etc.  are also called devas (Gods), but here in the context of true belief of deva only Arihanta Deva (omniscient God) is accepted as Deva (God).  Similarly, the term Guru though used in various contexts, yet here with reference to true belief the Nirgrantha Guru i.e., totally possessionless naked homeless ascetic monk only is to be believed as Guru. In Jaina religion the terms Arihanta Deva, Nirgrantha Guru are profusely used.
(1. Pravachanasara verse 7.)

Here someone asks- "What is the reason that none else except that Nigrantha (naked possessionless monk) is believed to be the Guru?

Answer: Excepting the Nirgrantha, no other Jiva possesses the supremacy in all respects. For example, if a greedy person delivers lectures on Shastra then the listeners regard him superior because he delivers discourses whereas the discourser regards the listeners superior because they offer him wealth, cloths, etc. Although out wardly the discourser is superior yet being greedy internally he does not possess superiority in all respects.

Question: "The Nigranthas also take food."

Answer: The Nirgranthas do not take food with inferiority complex and greed passion by praising the donor; so, their supremacy is not affected. The greedy only suffers from complexes.

Therefore, the Nirgranthas only possess supremacy in all respects; no other Jivas excepting the Nirgranthas are meritorious in all respects; therefore, superiority and inferiority are to be considered only from the viewpoint of possession of merits and demerits respectively. Therefore, dauntless adoration is not possible.

Moreover, excepting the Nirgranthas whatever religious conduct is observed by other Jivas (so-called monks) can be followed in the same degree or of higher degree even by the householders, then in such a case who should be regarded as Guru? Therefore, only those Nirgrantha monks who have no external and internal possessions and attachments are to be known as true Gurus (real preceptors).

Here someone may ask- "Such Gurus are not found here in the present time, hence as the installation of Arihanta God is his idol, similarly, the installations of the Gurus are these sanctimonious persons?

Answer: For example, if someone treats the portrait of a king to be the king then that portrait is not a rival of the king but if some ordinary person wantshimselfto be treated askingthen thatperson is the rival of the king; similarly, if someone makes the installation of Arihanta God etc. in stone, etc. then that idol is not a rival of him, but if some ordinary person wants himself to be treated as monk then such a person is the rival of the monks. If even in this way, the installation be possible then get yourself be treated as Arihanta also.  And if an ordinary person is installed as a true monk then at least outwardly he must possess the characteristics of a true monk but the true monk (Nirgrantha) is totally possessionless naked homeless ascetic whereas the so-called monks (Gurus) are having lot of possessions - how such installation is possible?

Question: In the present time the Shravakas (Jaina house- holders), too are not found as they ought to be; therefore, the monks are also not found as they ought to be. (So, we worship them).

Answer: In the scripture the term Shravaka is used for all Jaina householders (irrespective of whether he is a votary or a non-votary).  King Shrainika also was an incontinent (non- votary) but in Uttar-Purana he has been stated as the best Shravaka .  In the twelve kinds of assembly halls (in omni scient Jina's Samavasarana) one arena is meant for Shravakas but all of them were not votaries. If all were votaries then the number of the non-votaries (incontinent persons) should have been specified separately, but it is not specified; hence,  all Jaina householders are given the name of Shravaka.  But the term monk (Guru) has nowhere been used for any person except the Nirgranthas.

Further, the Shravakas (all Jaina householders) are stated to possess eight basic right, i.e., eight primary moral characters called Mulgunas. Therefore, the eating and taking of wine, meat, honey and five types of Udumberas figs-fruits (which contain Trasa Jivas) is not found in the Shravakas; so, somehow Shravakaship is possible, but the monk's basic rites (Mulgunas) are twenty-eight which are not seen in the sanctimonious persons; hence, the monkship is not at all possible from any point of view. Further, in the household- ers state Jambu-Kumar, etc. are described to have indulged excessively in the acts of injury, etc., but after accepting monkhood (asceticism) none indulged in any acts of injury, etc., nor kept any possessions and attachment; therefore, your above-stated argument cannot be maintained.

Further, it is stated in the scripture that four thousand kings after adopting asceticism (monkhood) along with Lord Adinathji, became corrupt later on; Then Devas (gods of heaven) warned them- "If you will follow wrong conduct after accepting Jina-Linga (Nirgrantha monkhood), we will punish you. After giving up Jina-Linga you may indulge in whatever practice you like." Therefore, those who follow wrong conduct after accepting Jaina-monkhood are Punishable. How could such persons be revered?

What more to say ! those who indulge in perverse practices after accepting Jina-Linga (Nirgrantha monkhood) they are great sinners. Other Jivas who attend on them and worship them are also great sinners. There is a story in Padma-Purana Shastra that one devout Shravaka (named Shreshthi) did not offer food to the monks possessed of supernatural power (of moving in sky) by believing them corrupt under suspicion. How is then offering of food, etc.  possible to those who are clearly corrupt?

One may say- "In our inner-self we have true belief, but out- wardly due to fear of public censure we respect them, therefore, we will reap the fruit according to our inner belief?"

Answer: In Ashta-Pahuda Shastra paying regard due to shy-ness is negated, this was stated earlier. If someone forcibly makes you bow your head with folded hands then one can argue that it is not according to our inner-self. But if you yourself offer salutation, etc.  due to pride-passion, etc., then how not to attribute involvement of inner conscious in such act? For example, if someone internally believes meat- eating as bad but for the sake of pleasing the king, etc.  he eats the meat, then how could he be treated as a votary (continent)? Similarly, if someone internally believes adoration etc. of false preceptors as bad but for the sake of pleasing them and other persons he adores them then how could he be called a true believer?  Hence, on outward renunciation only the internal renunciation is possible. Therefore, for the true believer the adoration, etc. of false preceptors, etc. is not, justifiable from any point of view.

In this way, the adoration of false preceptors is prohibited. 

One may ask here- "How can false belief be attributed to a true believer of Tattvas if he adores the false preceptors?" 

Answer: As a chaste woman never cohabits with any other man except her husband; similarly, a true believer of Tattvas never offers salutation, etc. to a false preceptor as he does to a true preceptor.  Because he has firm belief, in Jiva etc. Tattvas, i.e., in his belief, there is total negation of attachment, etc. passions, and highest regard for passionlessness. Therefore, he offers salutation, etc. to those monks (true preceptors) only who possess passionlessness knowing them adorable and never offers salutations, etc. to those so-called monks who possess attachment, etc. passions knowing them unadorable.

Someone may say- "We offer salutations, etc. to the so-called monks with the same view with which we offer salutations, etc. to the kings, etc.

Answer: The kings, etc. have no place in religious tradition, but the preceptor's adoration is a part of religious tradition. Reverence to the kings, etc. is done with the motive of greed, etc.  where the rise of Charitra Moha (conduct-deluding karma) only is possible, but the adoration of false preceptors in place of true preceptors is a contrary practice, because the instrumental cause of right belief in Tattvas is the true preceptor. Therefore, due to shyness if someone adopts perverse instrumental cause then how could he attain staunch belief in Tattvas which is the desired result? Hence, the rise of Darshan Moha (faith-deluding karma) is possible there.

Thus ends the discussion of the characteristics of a false preceptor.

Exposition of False Religion and Denial of Faith in It

Now the false religion is being discussed:-

Believing such acts and dispositions to be religion which involve injury, etc. sins and which cause increase in carnal desires, etc. is to be known as false religion. Indulging in the activities of oblation wherein great injury is involved, killing of big animals is caused, sensual pleasures are fostered, cruel concentration is developed due to injurious attitude towards Jivas, desire of fulfillment of selfish ends arises by harming others due to intense greed, believing all such acts to be religious acts is false religion.

Further, people take bath, etc. in (so-called) holy places which causes injury to innumerous big and small living beings; it provides relaxation to the body, therefore, it fosters sensual pleasures and increases carnal desires. Thus, one increases his passions out of sport and wrongly believes all such activities to be religion. But all this is the false religion.

Further, he gives donation during the period of transition (Samkranti), eclipse and great calamity, etc. and gives donation for the purpose of (neutralizing the effect of) the planets of bad omen, gives donation to the greedy persons by knowing them worthy recipients. In donation he gives gold, elephant, house, sesame, etc.  articles. But Samkranti, etc. are not the religious festivals. By movement of the planets, etc. stellars, the Samkranti (transition), etc. are caused. And donation given for the mitigation of the effect of bad planets, etc. is not religious donation because it is given due to fear and excessive greed, etc. Moreover, the greedy persons are not worthy recipients of donation because the greedy persons cheat through many false tactics, they do not do even a little good.  Benefaction is actually caused only when the donee practices religion with the help of the donation received (But) on the other hand he indulges in sinful conduct. How would benefaction be caused to a person who helps in sinful acts?

The same thing is stated in Ravanasara-Shastra:-

Sappurisan.an dan.an kaptroon.an phlan.an sohan va
Loheen.an   dan.an jyee viman.soha savass  jan.aih                 (26)

Meaning:  Giving charity to pious persons is like the splendor of the fruits of Kalpa-Vrikshas (The trees yielding anything desired). This act is splendorous as well as pleasure-giving. And the charity given to greedy persons is like decorating the bier of a dead-body. Though splendor results, yet it causes extreme distress to the owner (kinsmen). Hence, there is no religion in giving charity to the greedy persons.

Moreover, such things should only be given in charity which foster religion in the donee, but the donation of gold, elephant, etc.  creates injury, etc. and increases pride- greed etc. passions which result in great sin. How could virtue (Punya) be caused to the donor of such things?

Moreover, the passionate persons claim that there is virtue (Punya) in providing the objects of sexual pleasure; but how could virtue be claimed in the acts of unchastity which are sinful? And they put up false logic by saying that this gives satisfaction to a lady.  Though a woman gets pleasure by fulfillment of sexual desire, why is then the observance of chastity preached? Even after sexual pleasure if her other desires are not fulfilled then she feels distressed. Therefore, such false logic is fabricated only for gratifying the carnal desires.

Similarly, believing religion in the activities other than compassion and donation to worthy recipients is all false religion.

Moreover, by observing the vows, etc., they foster injury and objects of sensual pleasures, etc. but the vows, etc. are observed for decreasing them. And people forsake eating food grains and instead eat the tuber roots. In such acts, greater injury is caused and relishment of sensual objects increases. 

Further, such people do not take meal in the day time and instead take food in the night. So, in this act of taking meals in the night instead of taking food in the day, greater injury is caused and recklessness increases. And by observing the vows (fast), etc. people indulge in excessive adornment of the body, sportive acts, gambling, etc. - all these are sinful acts. But they desire that the fruit of observing vows should be obtained in the form of attainment of worldly agreeable objects and destruction of disagreeable objects; all this results in increasing passions.

Thus, believing religion to consist in the observance of vows (in above-said manner) is false religion.

Further, many people increase injury, etc. sins through adoration, etc. They foster the objects of senses by way of songs, dancing, singing and taking the desired food, etc. and other articles. They indulge in sportive acts and pass time recklessly. In such acts, they create lot of sin but do not have even a little recourse to religion and yet believe it to be religion. So, all this is false religion.

And many people produce affliction to the body and indulge in injury and passional acts. For example, they observe penance by heating their body in five types of fires. In this process, small and big living beings get burnt by fire, lot of injury is caused. How is religion possible in such acts? And some persons swing by keeping the body turned upside down; some keep the arms raised upwards. Thus, in different ways they practice the (false) religion; but anguish only is caused by such acts. These are not the parts of religious practices.

Further, some people control respiration and practice Neti- Dhoti etc. Yogic exercises. In such acts, lot of injury, etc. are caused by consumption of water, etc. If some miracle is produced then pride and other passions increase in him. Hence, in no way, such acts can be called religious acts. Thus, they involve themselves in acts causing distress, but do not bother about reducing indulgence in passional acts. Internally, they possess the intention of anger, pride, deceit and greed passions; they uselessly engage themselves in painful acts and believe them to be religious acts. This too is false religion.

And many people commit suicide because they cannot endure miseries in this world or desire to get agreeable objects in the next birth. Many kill themselves for earning name and fame or under pressure of anger passion, etc. For example, many women burn themselves in the pyre-fire on account of bereavement of their husbands and are called Sati (chaste lady). Some people get dissolved in the snow of Himalaya mountain, some others get sawed in the Kashi (Benaras) city, some people die willfully; thus, these acts are believed to be religious acts; but committing suicide is a great sin.  If attachment in body, etc. was lessened then one should have accepted real penances. But what part of religion is evolved in dieing in the aforesaid manner? Therefore, committing suicide is false religion.

Likewise, there are many facets of false religion. How long to describe ! Believing to be religious all such acts which foster passions and sensuousness is false religion.

Behold ! Due to bad times in the Jina's religion also the practice of false religion has started. Whatever religious festivals are described, in all those festivals it is desirable to observe continence by giving up passional acts. But they do not adopt this practice and instead in the name of vows, etc. adorn the body in various ways, take relishing food, indulge in sportive acts and in the acts which increase the passions and indulge in great sinful acts like gambling, etc.

Further, in the acts of worshipping, etc., this was the preaching that, Savidyalaisho bahupunyasho doshaynal i.e., "In the acts producing excessive virtue (Punya) if some little sinful acts are involved then the same are ignorable". Under this pretext in the name of worship and propagation of religion (Jina's teachings) people burn the lamps in the night, collect the objects containing infinite living beings (such as flowers, vegetables, etc.) and indulge in practices involving injury and other sins (before the Jina's idol). They pay scant respect to virtuous acts, like that of worship, invocation, etc. In all these acts, loss is more, profit (gain) is less or even nil. All such acts are clearly irreligious.

Moreover, the temple of Jina is abode of religion. In the temple people engage themselves in various irreligious talks, sleep and behave indolently; and they foster passions and sensual pleasures by developing orchard and flower garden, etc. (inside temple premises).  Further, they give charity, etc. to the greedy persons believing them to be preceptors (Gurus) and feel exhalted by their false praise. Thus, in various ways they increase their passional desires and believe same to be religion, but the emblem of Jina's religion is passionlessness. Entry of such perverse practices in Jaina religion is due to bad times.

In this way, the adoration and practicing of false religion is forbidden.

Now the involvement of false belief in such practices is being explained:-

The one basic objective in the right belief of Tattvas is to give up passions. This very disposition is called religion. If by increasing passional dispositions one believes that religion is evolved then where remains the right belief in Tattvas? This is against the Jina's commandment. Passions are sinful dispositions; believing these to be religion is false belief Therefore, in the practice of false religion false belief is invariably involved.

In this way, know well that the adoration and believing false deity, false preceptor and false scriptures (false religion) results in strengthening false belief. Therefore, this is described here. The same is stated in the Ashta-Pahuda:

Kuchhiydaivan dhaman kuchhiylingin cha vandya jodu
Lajjabhygarvado michhaditthee havai so hu                                   (92,  Mokshpahung)

Meaning: If someone adores false deity, false religion and false preceptor out of shyness, fear and false prestige, he is assuredly a false believer.

Therefore, those who want to forsake false belief, first of all they should forsake adoring false deity, false preceptor and false religion.

In the abdication of twenty-five types of faults of right belief, under Amoorhadrishti (follilessness) and six places of misbelief, the renouncement of these false deity, etc. only has been preached. Hence, one must invariably forsake them.

Further, false belief resulting from adoration of false deity, etc.  is a bigger sin than the sins of injury, etc. In its fruitation one gets birth in Nigoda and hell, etc. In such births intense agonies and afflictions have got to be suffered for infinite period and attainment of right knowledge becomes extremely difficult.

The same is stated in Ashta-Pahuda:

Kuchchhiydhamamirokuchhiyypasandibhtisanjuto
Kuchhytvan kun.ato  kuchhiygyeebhayan,o hoyee                        (140,   Bhavpahung)

Meaning: One who is engrossed in the practice of false religion, adores the hypocrites and false preceptors, observes false penances, he has to suffer from the miseries of evil state of existence.

So oh ! Bhauyas ! by adoring the false deities, etc. even with the slightest greed and fear, one has to suffer from intense agonies for infinite period; therefore, false belief is in no way worth harnessing.

In Jina's religion it is an eternal tradition that first of all the bigger sin is advised to be forsaken before a smaller sin. Therefore, believing the false belief to be a greater sin than indulgence in seven evil habits, it is to be forsaken first of all. Therefore, those who are afraid of the fruits of sinful acts and do not desire to sink their soul in the ocean of agony should invariably give up false belief. It is not desirable to be of fickle mind due to fear of censure or desire of praise.  Because in ethics also, the same is stated as follows:

Nindantu neetinipun.a  yadi va stuvantu
Lakshmee samavishtu gachhtu va yathaishtam
Adaev vastu mran.an  tu yugantrai va
Nyayatpatha prvichlanti padam na dheera                              (184,    Neetishtak)

If someone criticizes, let him criticize; someone praises, let him do so; wealth is obtained or lost, death is instant or comes after long time - in all such contradictory situations the wise persons do not budge an inch from the path of justice.

Remembering this doctrine, it is not proper to indulge in unjustifiable forms of false belief under pressure of censure, praise, fearor greed.

Oh ! the true omniscient God, true preceptor and true religion are the supreme objects; the religion rests on them. How could religion be evolved by fickleness and indecision about them? What more to speak? It is extremely necessary to forsake in every way, the company of false deity, false preceptor and false religion.

By not abdicating the false deity, etc., the false belief is greatly strengthened and in the present times, the tendency of adoring them is found specifically more here. Therefore, their abdication is force-fully described here. Knowing all this, one should adopt the path of liberation by forsaking false belief.

Thus ends the 6th chapter of the treatise Moksha Marg Prakashak in which the description of false deity, false preceptor, false religion is done for abdicating them.

CHAPTER 7

X-RAY OF JAINA-MISBELIEVERS

Doha:  Is bhavatrooka mool ik, janhu mithyabhav
Tako kari nirmal ab,  kariye moksh upav

Meaning Oh ! Bhavya Jina ! the false belief is to be known as the only root cause of this world-tree (the ocean of transmigration).  You should immediately uproot it and must make effort for attaining liberation.

Now such false belief which is found in Jivas who are Jains and obey the commandments of omniscient Jina is being described; because even the slightest trace of this false belief is suicidal; hence even the subtle and latent false belief too must be forsaken.

In Jina's scripture (Agama) descriptions are found from two angles - the one is Nishchaya (the real standpoint) and the other Vyavahara (the unreal and conventional standpoint. In them the real standpoint (Yathartha) is called Nishchaya and the unreal or conventional standpoint (Upachara) is called Vyavahara. Without knowing their real nature people indulge in contrary practices, the same is being described here:

The Misbelievers Possessing Wrong Concept of Nishchaya

Many Jivas believe themselves to be the true followers of the path of liberation although they have misconception about Nishchaya and do not know its real nature. They believe as if they have realized the self-soul like Siddha’s.  Actually, they are worldly people but due to delusion they believe that they are like Siddhas. This is their wrong conception.

In Shastras wherever the soul has been described to be like Siddha Gods is from the substantial (Dravya-drishti) point of view; but from the modificational (Paryaya) point of view it is not like Siddha Gods. For example, a king and a pauper man both are alike from the manhood point of view but they are not alike from the king-hood and poorness point of view. Similarly, the Siddhas and the mundane beings are alike from the sentience (Jivatva) point of view but from the Siddhahood and the Mundaneness point of view they are not alike; yet these misbelievers believe themselves to be as pure as are the Siddhas. But the pure and impure state is a modification. If alikeness is believed from the modificational (Paryaya) point of view then it is false belief.

Further, they believe themselves to be possessing omniscience (Kewal-Jnan, i.e., Kshayik-Jnan) but clearly they are found possessing the sensory and scriptural knowledge (Mati and Shrut-jnan) only which is of Kshayopashamic form of knowledge only. But the Kshayik-Bhava is evolved on destruction of its obscuring karma and these people under fallacy believe evolution of Kshayik-Bhava even without the destruction of karmas, so, this is their false belief.

Wherever in the Shastras omniscience is stated to be the nature of Jivas, it is from the potentiality point of view; because all Jivas possess the potentiality of the evolution of omniscience (Kewal-Jnan).  But only on its manifestation in the present state its existence is accepted.

Someone believes that "In the spatial units (Predates) of the soul the omniscience (Kewal-Jnan) always exists manifested, but it is not clearly visible being hidden under the veil of karmas." But this is a fallacy. If omniscience is found manifested then it knows the things clearly even on getting obstructed by the layers of adamantine like things. How could it be obstructed by barricade of karmas? Therefore, due to instrumentality of karmas the omniscience is non-existent. If omniscience were found in all states of Jivas then it would have been termed as Parinamik-Bhava but it is a Kshayik-Bhava.  Such Chaitanya-Bhava (eternal consciousness) in which all kinds of qualities are found existing is termed as Parinamik-Bhava. Its various states are of the form of sensory & scriptural knowledge (Mati-Shrut Jnan etc.) and of omniscience (Kewal-Jnan) form; these states are not Parinamik-Bhava. Therefore, the existence of the state of omniscience (Kewal-Jnan) is not found always.

Moreover, in the Shastras the example of sun (with reference to omniscience) is to be interpreted to mean that as due to the obstruction caused by clouds the light of sun is not visible, similarly, due to the rise of karmas omniscience is not manifested. But it should not be understood to mean that omniscience always remains in the soul in all states as the light remains in the sun; because the example is not found fit in all respects.  For example, the color attribute is found in the matter (Pudgal) substance; green-yellow, etc. are its various states but if any one of these states is found in the present, the other states are absent. Similarly, the Chaitanya Guna (consciousness-attribute) is found in the soul; sensory knowledge, scriptural knowledge, etc. are its states but if any one of these states are found in the presentation the nature is said to have been manifested. Sometimes it is found manifested. Similarly, due to the instrumentality of (rise of) karma the soul assumes alienated (contrary) disposition. In such a situation, there is only absence of omniscience (Kewal-Jnan); but on the removal of the instrumentality of karmas omniscience is evolved for ever.  Therefore, omniscience is said to be the nature of the soul for all times, because such power is always found. On its manifestation, the nature is said to have been manifested.

For example, however, if someone drinks hot water due to the belief that the nature of water is always cool, then burning (of mouth) only will be caused. Similarly, if because of the omniscience nature of the soul, someone (due to misconception) believes that he is realizing the pure soul though his soul is in an impure state, he himself becomes miserable only. In this way, those who realize the soul to be possessing the omniscience state are misbelievers.

Moreover, due to misconception they believe their soul to be devoid of passional dispositions, though the passional dispositions are clearly found in them. To such persons our question is - "The passional dispositions (feelings) are clearly seen in you; tell us as to in which substance's existence these are found? If these are found existing in the body or karmic-matter, then these dispositions should either be insentient or of material form; but these passional dispositions are clearly seen to be of immaterial form with sentience.  These dispositions are, therefore, of the soul substance only. This is what is stated in the Samayasara Kalasha also:

Karyatvadkrint na karm na cha tajjeevprkrityordvayo
Rakshaya prkritai svkaryphalbhugbhavanushangatkriti
Naeksya prkritairchitvalsanajjeevosth karta tato
Jeevsyaev cha karm tachidnugan gyata yat pudgala                    (203)

The meaning of this verse is this:

As the psychic passional dispositions (Bhavakarma) are found existing, therefore, it cannot be said that they are not generated by some body, because these are definitely deeds of some doer. Further, these cannot be treated as being produced by both Jiva and karmic matter; because if it be so, then the material karmas should also bear the consequence of psychic dispositions in the form of happiness and misery, which is impossible. Further, it is not the act of karmic matter alone, because it obviously possesses insentient nature. Therefore, the producer of these psychic passional dispositions is soul only and these passional dispositions are the deeds of soul only; because the psychic dispositions are sentient by nature, these cannot be produced without sentience and matter does not possess sentience.

Thus, the psychic passional dispositions are found in the existence of Jiva.

Now, those Jivas who believe that passional dispositions are produced only by the instrumentality of karma maintain that they are non-doers of the same; although they are the real doers. But because they want to remain reckless and irresponsible, therefore, they put the full blame for these dispositions on karmas. So, this is their distressing delusion.

The same is stated in Samayasara Kalasha also:

Ragjanmani nimitan pardravymaiv klyanti yai tu tai
Utaranti na hi mohvahinee shudhbodhvidhurandhbudhya                      (221)

The meaning of this is:

Those Jivas who believe in the instrumentality of other substance only in the evolution of passional dispositions are devoid of right knowledge and are blindwitted, being so, they are incapable of crossing the river of delusion.

Further, in the Sarva Vishuddha Jnana Adhikara of Samayasara such a person who believes the soul to be the non-doer (Akarta and says that a Karmas alone make Jivas sleep and awake, injury is caused by Parghata-Karma, unchastity by Veda-karma, therefore, the karma alone is the doer," - a Jain having such belief is a Sankhymati (believer of Sankhya faith) because like that of a Sankhyamati he too lives unrestrained treating the soul to be always pure.

Moreover, such a faith resulted in the fault of disowning passional dispositions and one considered oneself as non- doer.  Therefore, one became fearless in indulging in passional acts and so did not make any effort for removal of such feelings of attachment, etc. Due to such belief, one becomes unrestrained and indulges in evil acts which cause bondage of karmas and result in infinite transmigration in the world.

Here one argues that in Samayasara too it is stated so:

Varn.adya va ragmohadyo va bhinna  bhava sarv aivasya puns
Tainaevantstatvat pshyatomo na drishta syurdrishtmaikam pran syat            (37)

Meaning: "The color, etc. and attachment aversion, etc. are the dispositions which are separate from the soul." Further it is stated there that attachment, etc. dispositions bear the imprint of matter and in the other Shastras also the soul is described as unconcerned with attachment, etc. How this is so?

Answer: The attachment, etc. feelings are evolved as impure dispositions (Aupadhik-Bhavas) due to instrumentality of other substance and this Jiva believes them to be his natural dispositions.  Why would one believe as bad and try to uproot such feelings which he believes to be natural instincts? Therefore, this faith also is perverse. To extricate one from such belief, the attachment, etc.  impure dispositions are described to be different from the nature of the soul and the same are described to be of material by laying emphasis on instrumental cause. For example, a physician wants to cure the disease; if he finds excess of cold then he prescribes hot medicine and if he finds excess heat then he prescribes cold medicine. Similarly, the true preceptor wishes to extricate the attachment, etc. passional feelings.  To such Jivas who become unrestrained and indolent by believing the attachment, etc. feelings to be the product of other substance, the true preceptor makes them believes, by laying emphasis on the substantive cause (upadan karan), that the attachment, etc. feelings are of the soul; and to such Jivas who do not try to uproot the impure dispositions, believing them to be the nature of the soul, the true preceptor make, them believe by laying emphasis on instrumental cause, that the attachment, etc. impure dispositions are the products of other substance.

The true belief would be evolved only on forsaking both the contrary types of faiths. Then one would believe that these passional feelings are not natural dispositions of the soul but get evolved in the soul in the form of contrary dispositions due to the instrumentality of the karmas. On removal of the instrumental cause, 'soul's true nature remains as it is.  Therefore, one should make effort for uprooting them.

Here the question arises that "If these attachment, etc. impure dispositions are produced due to the instrumentality of karmas then how could these impure dispositions be eliminated in the continued rise of karmas? Therefore, making effort for their removal is useless.

Answer: In the accomplishment of one act several causes are required. In them, those causes which are consciously gathered, should be gathered and on meeting of those causes which cannot be consciously gathered but are met with on their own, the act gets accomplished. For example, for the birth of a son the conscious causes are marriage, etc. and the unconscious cause is the destiny.  Therefore, one who wishes to have a son should consciously get married and when fortune also favours, the son will be born.  Similarly, for uprooting impure dispositions, the conscious causes are pondering over and ascertaining the Tattvas and unconscious causes are the subsidence, etc. of Moha (deluding) karma. Therefore, one who wishes to eliminate one's impure dispositions should consciously ponder over and ascertain the Tattvas and when the subsidence, etc. of Moha (deluding) karma takes place, the impure dispositions get eliminated.

Question: As marriage, etc. are dependent on destiny, similarly, ascertaining of Tattvas (reality) too is dependent on Kshayopashama  etc. of the karmas, hence making efforts is useless.

Answer: You have got Kshayopashama of Jnanavarana karma (knowledge obscuring karma) so you can ascertain the Tattvas. Therefore, you are advised to make effort of engaging your knowledge there.  The irrational beings do not possess such Kshayopashama; so, how can they be preached?

Then he further says- " If fortune favors then only one's Upayoga (attentive consciousness) can get engrossed there. How would Upayoga be engrossed without such fortune?

Answer:  If your belief  be so then you should not make effort for any work anywhere.  You willfully engage yourself in eating-drinking and doing business, etc. and here you put up the excuse of the destiny.  This shows that your interest does not lie here and only due to pride you are putting up such false excuses.

In this way, such people should be known as false believers who, in spite of being absorbed in passional acts, believe, their soul to be free from them.

Further, there are people who although are having the bondage of karmas and Nokarmas (body, etc.), yet believe the soul to be free from bondage, but their bondage is clearly seen. The Jnanavarana, etc. karmas are seen obscuring the knowledge, etc. and according to their rise, etc., the conditions of the soul are seen changing through the medium of body.  How is then the bondage not there? If there be no bondage why should then the aspirants of liberation make efforts for destroying them?

Question: How is then the soul described in the Shastras as separate from and unbounded and untouched by karmas and Nokarmas?

Answer: The relationship are of several kinds.  From one identity relationship ( Tadatmya-Sambandha) point of view, the soul is described to be separate from Karmas and Nokarmas, etc., because the different substances do not become one by transforming (into one another) and it is from this point of view that the soul is described as unbounded and untouched.  But from the instrumental cause and effect relationship point of view, bondage the soul assuredly assumes different forms.  Therefore, believing the soul as having no bondage is false belief.

Someone may argue here that we do not want to ramble our attention in thoughts of bondage and liberation because in scripture (Yogasara) it is stated so:

Jayee baddhu mukku mun.hi so banhiyahi n.ibhantu
Sehaj saroovyu jyee ramhi to pavhi siv santu                       (87)

Meaning: "That Jiva who believes himself to be bonded or liberated he undoubtedly gets bonded".

Our answer to him is- "There are Jivas who always hold the modificational view point (Paryaya Drishti), believe only in the bonded- liberated states of the soul but do not know the intrinsic nature (Dravya-Swabhava) of the soul.  Such Jivas are preached to remember that those, who do not have belief in the intrinsic nature of the soul and believe only in the bonded -liberated states, are always bonded.  And if bondage- liberation be totally not there then why is it described that the Jiva gets bonded?  And why should one make efforts to destroy the bondage and get liberated?  And why should one exert for self realization? Therefore, one should believe that from substantial (Dravya-Drishti) point of view the soul holds one unchanged form and from modificational (Paryaya Drishti) point of view it assumes different states.

Thus, in various ways he holds perverse belief due to wrong understanding of Nishchaya-Naya (real standpoint) only.

In Jina Vani (omniscient Jina's preachings) different types of descriptions are found from different angles of different Nayas (standpoints) in different contexts.  But this person (misunderstanding Nischyas-Naya) holds misbelief by accepting as per his imagination such descriptions which are stated chiefly from realistic standpoint.

Moreover, in Jina's preachings, the path of liberation is described to be in the union of right belief, knowledge and conduct.  So, in his belief and knowledge he should hold the faith and knowledge of seven Tattvas but he does not think of them.  In this his conduct he should make effort for uprooting  attachment, etc. passions but he does not exert for it; and instead he remains contented by knowing the liberation path to consist in the pure realization of his own soul only.  For practicing the same he internally continuously thinks -"I am pure like Siddha god, I possess omniscience, etc., I am devoid of Dravya-karmas and No- karmas, I am full of beatitude, the miseries of birth-death, etc. are not in me".

So, here we ask him "If you contemplate in this way from the substantial (Dravya-Drishti) point of view, then the substance (soul) is a mass of all sorts of pure and impure modifications, why do you then contemplate the soul as pure only?  And if you contemplate from the modificational (Paryaya-drishti) point of view, then presently you are having impure modifications; how do you then believe yourself to be pure?

Further, if you believe yourself to be pure from the potentiality point of view then you should believe that "I am capable to become so".  Why do you believe "I am so"? Therefore, contemplating oneself to be in pure form is a fallacy.  Because, if you consider yourself to be like Siddha God then whose is this mundane state?  And if you possess omniscience, etc. (presently) then whose are these states of sensory knowledge, etc.?  And if you consider yourself to be devoid of Dravya-karma and No-karmas (body, etc.) then why is not the full manifestation of knowledge, etc. (in you)?  And if you are having beatitude then what else remains to be done? If you do not have the miseries of birth-death, etc. then why do you experience misery?  Therefore, believing the existence of some other states when other different states are found is fallacy.

Question: How is then the discourse of meditating on the pure soul given in the Shastras?

Answer: Purity of soul is described in Shastras from two angles -the substantial point of view and the modificational point of view.  There, from the substantial point of view the separateness from other non-self substances and inseparability from one's own intrinsic attributes (qualities) is termed as purity.  And from the modificational point of view the elimination of alienated (impure) dispositions is termed as purity.  So, in the meditation of soul's purity, the purity from the substantial point of view is admonished.  The same is described in the exposition of Samayasara:  Aish aivashaishadravyantrharvabhyao bhignatvainopasyaman shudh ityabhilapyatai This means that the soul is neither passionate (Pramatta) nor dispassionate (Apramatta).  So, this alone is described to be pure being adored to be as separate from the attributes of all other non-self substances. Further, in Samayasara itself it is stated so: Samastkakachkraprakriyoteern.nirmalanubhootimatratvachchhaddh This means- " Such unpolluted realization is pure which is unaffected by all forms of cases (karakas) like doer (karta), deed (karma), etc. and is one is one with the indivisible knowledge form of self-soul".  Hence, you should know such meaning of the word "pure".  Similarly, one should know the meaning of the word Kewal (only) to be "That which is separate from the attributes and modifications of all other non-self things and is purely solely the self-soul". Similarly, you should grasp the true meanings of other words.

Believing oneself to be pure and omniscient from modificational standpoint, results in great perverseness; therefore, one should perceive oneself in both substance and modification forms.  From substance form point of view one should perceive the one general undivided identity and from the modification form point of view one should perceive the particular existing state of the self.

By meditating in the aforesaid manner only one becomes the true believer, because without perceiving the true nature how can one be called Samyagdrishti (true believer)?

 The Unrestrained conduct of Nischayaabhasi and Refutation of the same

Further, in the path of liberation, the faith-knowledge and conduct are to be directed towards uprooting the feeling of attachment, etc., but his attention is not on this, instead, emphasizing realization of pure self only, he neglects all other external means of liberation by believing himself a true believer.

He advocates study of the Shastras as useless, considers contemplation about substances, etc., spiritual stages (Guna-Sthanas), quest-places (Margana-Sthanas) and the three worlds (universe), etc. as Vikalpa (rambling of Upayoga attention); believes observing of penance to be useless exercise, treats observance of vows, etc., as falling in bondage and knowing the acts of worship, etc. as pious influx, describes them to be worth giving up; in this way, by discarding all sorts of external means, he lives indolently.

If studying of Shastras be useless then for the monks also meditation and study, only these two, are the main activities.  When they are not able to engage their Upayoga (attention); meditation then they engage it in study only, because no other act than these two is worthy of their attention.  Moreover, by knowing the intricacies of Tattvas in detail through study of Shastras, the right belief and knowledge become purer.  And so long as Upayoga remains engrossed there, passions remain feeble and it results in increase of passionlessness.  How could then such activities be believed as useless?

He further says that only those Shastras should be studied in which the spiritual discourse is found.  Nothing is achieved by study of other Shastras.

Our answer to him is -"If you have attained the right vision (right belief) than all Jain-Shastras are useful.  There also, chiefly in the spiritual Shastras, the nature of the soul is mainly discussed.  But on evolution of right belief, the true nature of the soul has been ascertained. Thereafter, for the sake of purity of knowledge and for keeping the Upayoga engrossed in pious acts (of feeble- passion), study of other Shastras also; but you should not have ascertained the nature of the soul then for maintaining it you should study the spiritual Shastras also; but you should not have disliking for other Shastras.  One who has disliking of other Shastras does not possess true liking for the soul.  For example, one who is a sensualist, he listens to the stories of sensual pleasures and believes to be useful all those means which are instrumental in sensual pleasures. Similarly, he who has developed liking for the soul, should also know the mythology of the Tirthankaras, etc., personages who have realized the soul, and for knowing the various details about the soul, he should know the Guna-Sthanas (stages of spiritual development), etc., also.  Further, he should believe vows, etc. which are the means of soul's pure conduct to be useful and should also understand well the distinct nature of the soul.  Therefore, all the four Anuyogas (branches of scriptures) are useful.

Further, for the sake of gaining thorough knowledge of them one should also study the books of etymology and logic. Therefore, it is desirable to study in small or big measure all relevant Shastras according to one's own capability.

He further argues- "In Padmanandi Pachchisi* it is stated that the Upayoga which comes out of the soul ad rambles in the study of Shastras is unchaste".

Answer:  "This statement is true.  The Upayoga is of the soul; if it becomes enamored of the other non-self substance, i.e., Shastras by leaving the self-soul then it is assuredly unchaste.  However, if a woman maintains her chastity, it is praiseworthy and if she is not able to remain chaste then leaving a noble person  if she develops sexual relationships with a low caste person then she is extremely censurable, similarly, if the Upayoga remains engrossed in the self-soul then it is praise-worthy and if it does not remains so then leaving the study of pious Shastras, etc., on-self substances, if it gets engaged in the inauspicious sensual objects, etc., then it is extremely, censurable.  How could your Upayoga remains engrossed in the self-engrossed in the self-soul for a long time?

It is, therefore, desirable to engage one's Upayoga in the study of scripture (Shastras).

And if you consider deliberating on substances, etc. and Guna-Sthanas etc. to be the Vikalpa (rambling of mind), it is no doubt Vikalpa but so long as the Upayoga does not cherish these Vikalpa (free from Vikalpas), till then if one does not cherish these Vikalpas then other types of Vikalpas will arise which will be full of excessive attachment, etc. passions.  Moreover, the unrambling state of Upayoga of non- omniscient can remain fixed only for an Antarmuhurta**.

(**Bahyshastgehnai viharin.ee  ya matirbahunikalpdharin.ee
Chitsvroopkulsadyanirgata sa satee na  sadrishee kuoshita             (38)

And if you say that you will continue meditating on the nature of self-soul only in different ways, then our answer is that in ordinary meditation different ways are not possible and if you wish to meditation from various angles then the deliberation on the substance, attribute, modification, spiritual stages, quest places and the pure-impure states, etc., of the self will be invariably involved.

Further listen! the path of liberation does not consists in knowing the self-soul only.  The liberation path is attained on evolution of the right belief-knowledge of seven Tattvas (essential principles) and on eliminating the feeling of attachment, aversion, etc. passions.  Therefore, for knowing the specialties of seven Tattvas the specialties of soul-non- soul, influx and bondage of karmas, etc. are to be known inevitably which are instrumental in attaining right faith and knowledge.

And thereafter you should make efforts for uprooting the attachment, etc.  passion.  So, by forsaking those causes which are instrumental in increasing the feeling of attachment, etc. you should engage your Upayoga in the causes which are instrumental in reducing the attachment, etc. Deliberating on substances, etc. and Guna-sthana etc. are the causes of reducing the attachment, etc. None of these is instrumental cause of attachment, etc.  Hence, even after becoming a true believer you should concentrate your Upayoga in their deliberation only.

Further, he agrees that Upayoga should be engaged in those causes which are instrumental in uprooting the feelings of attachment, etc., but questions as to what is the utility of deliberating on states of existence of all living beings in the universe and on specialties of karmas like bondage, rise, existence, etc. and also on the shape, magnitude etc.  of the universe?

Answer:  By deliberating on those also the attachment, etc. are not fostered because those knowables are not agreeable- disagreeable  to him; therefore, are not the causes of attachment, etc. presently.  Moreover, by knowing these in detail the Tattva-jnana (knowledge of Tattvas) becomes clearer, hence, these are causes only of reducing the attachment, etc. passion in future.  Therefore, deliberation on them is beneficial.

Further, he argues that knowing of heaven, hell, etc. does cause attachment-aversion feelings?

Answer: Such feelings do not  arise in a true believer but arise in the mind of a deluded person (misbeliever).  By leaving sinful acts, one engages himself in virtuous acts then the attachment, etc. are assuredly partially reduced.

Question: In Shastras it is advised that knowing even in a smaller measure the purposeful object is fruitful; therefore, why should one involve oneself in different Vikalpas?

Answer: Such advise is given to those Jivas who either know much about other things and do not know the purposeful things or whose capacity of knowing is limited.  But whose capacity of knowing is more, he is not advised that knowing more would be harmful.  The more, he would know about the aforesaid objects the greater will be the clarity in his knowledge of purposeful things; for in the Shastras it is stated thus:
Samanyshastratonoonnisharshaishobalvanbhavait  This means that "The detailed (comprehensive) knowledge of Shastras is more efficacious than their general knowledge". A detailed (comprehensive) knowledge alone is good for right ascertainment; therefore, one should know in detail.

Further, he considers observing of penances as useless torturing of the body.  But on the becoming a true believer of liberation path one's conduct must be just opposite to that of a mundane being.  The mundane beings develop feelings of attachment-aversion in agreeable-disagreeable objects. But this person (so- called true believer) should not develop the attachment-aversion feelings.  For giving up the feelings of attachment (Raaga) he, the true believer, forsakes agreeable things like food, etc. and for freeing himself of the feelings of aversion (Dwesha), he accepts disagreeable things like fasting, etc.  If such means are adopted independently with self-control then even on coming across with unwanted agreeable-disagreeable things the attachment- aversion feelings would not arise  This is what should be; but you have malice towards fasting, etc., that is why you regard it as distressing.  If this is distressing then automatically taking food is regarded as pleasant.  This generates Raaga (attachment).  So, such kind of proclivity is already existing in mundane beings, what did you achieve by becoming a true follower of the liberation path?

If you argue- "many true believers also do not observe penance".

Answer: Due to some particular reason, penance may not be possible but they believe and know the penance as beneficial and make efforts towards adopting it.  But you hold the belief that observing penance is distressing and further no inclination is found in you for adopting penance.  Therefore, how can you be a true believer?

He further pleads- "In Shastras it is stated that one may undergo the misery of penance, etc. but without right knowledge desired object cannot be obtained?

Answer:  Such Jivas who are averse to obtained the knowledge of Tattvas (reality) and believe Moksha (liberation) achievable by penance only, are admonished that without the knowledge of Tattvas, merely by observance of penance only, the path of liberation is not attainable; and on attainment of Tattvas, for uprooting the attachment, etc., the observance of penance is not prohibited.  If it be prohibited, then why would the Ganadharas (chief monks) undergo penance, etc.  Hence, it is desirable to observe penance according to one's capability.

Further, he believes observance of vows, etc. to be a bondage; but the unrestrained proclivity was already there in the state of ignorance; on attainment of knowledge, one definitely controls his unrestrained tendencies.  And for controlling that tendency one must abandon causes of outward injury, etc.

He further maintains -"My intentions are pure, how does it matter if outward abstention is not observed?

Answer: If the acts of injury, etc. take place on their own without your intentions, then we would believe what you say. And if you indulge knowingly in some act, how could then your intentions be called as pure? How can indulgence in sensual pleasures, etc. and negligent movement, etc. be possible without intentions? But you make efforts for such acts knowingly and when injury, etc. sins are caused, you do not pay attention on them but still maintain that my intentions are pure.  So, by such belief, your intentions will remain impure (alienated) only.  He further argues- "Though thoughts may be restrained and indulgence in outward injury, etc. also be reduced but because taking oath creates bondage; therefore acceptance of vows by oath is not desirable".

Answer:  So long as the chance of involvement in a particular act remains, till then, the oath of abstaining from it is not taken.  And because of such chance. attachment in that act persists.  Due to existence of this attachment feeling bondage of relevant karma continues because of non-abstention even without indulgence in that act.  It is, therefore, necessary to take oath.  How could the relevant thoughts be checked without accepting the bondage (oath) of not indulging in that act? Under the pressure of circumstances, the inner intention of indulging in it persists.  Therefore, it is necessary to take oath.

He further argues- "The rise karmas in future is unpredictable and if later on oath is broken, then it would result in great sin.  Let the act take its own course as per providence.  One should not think in terms of taking oath".

Answer: While taking oath if one thinks that this is not likely to be observed, one should not take such oath; but if at the time of taking oath the inner intention be- "I will breach it during the hour of necessity", then what is the effectiveness of such oath? At the time of taking oath, one's intention should be such that even if death occurs he will not give up.  So, taking such oath is assuredly commendable. Without taking oath, the bondage of karmas resulting from vowlessness is not stopped.

Further, if the oath is not taken due to fear of rise of relevant karmas in future, then by giving thought to the rise of karmas all kinds of duties and actions are lost.  For example, one should take as much quantity of food as could be digested.  If someone gets indigestion by taking food and because of fear of indigestion if he gives up taking food then death only will result.  Similarly, one should take only such an oath which he believes that he will be able to maintain.  If by chance some body became corrupt by breaching the oath and due to such fear if one does not take any oath at all, then incontinence will only result.  Therefore, one should take such oath which he can maintain.

Moreover, events do occur as destined, why then do you make effort for taking food, etc.  If effort is necessary there, then the effort for renunciation is also desirable.  When you will attain the state like that of an idol then we would accept the logic of destiny and will not attribute it to you. Therefore, why do you put up logic supporting unrestrained conduct? It is desirable to take the oath of the vow which one can maintain.

Further, he believes worshipping, etc. to be useless by knowing them as cause of auspicious influx of karmas.  So, this in fact, is true, but if by giving up these acts one keeps oneself engrossed in Shuddhopayoga (pure passionless conduct), then it is assuredly beneficial and if one indulges in inauspicious acts like sensual pleasures, etc., then one would only harm oneself.

By engrossing one's Upayoga (attentive consciousness) in auspicious acts, one may get birth in heaven or if by pious intention or due to instrumentality of pious acts, the duration and fruition of karmas get reduced, then one may get birth in hell or Nigoda; or if by impious intention or due to instrumentality of evil acts, the duration and fruition of karmas get increased, then the evolution of right belief, etc. may become extremely difficult.

Moreover, in Shubhopayoga (engrossing in virtuous conduct) one's passions become feeble and in Ashubhopayoga (engrossing in vicious conduct) the passion by giving up the acts of mild passion is comparable to that of eating poison by leaving bitter objects.  So, this is ignorance.

Further, he pleads- "In Shastras' (scriptures) the Shubha (pious) and Ashubha (impious) both types of acts are treated alike; therefore, it is not worthwhile to go into their details".

Answer:  The Jivas who, considering the Shubhopayoga to be the cause of liberation (Moksha), believe it worth adopting (Upadeya) and are not able to identify Shubhopayoga (passionless conduct), to them, from the impurity point of view and from the bondage causation point of view, both Shubha (pious) and Ashubha (impious) are advocated to be
alike.

But on considering the difference between Shubha and Ashubha thoughts and acts, it becomes clear that passions become feeble in Shubha-bhavas (auspicious thoughts) and therefore bondage of karmas also gets reduced.  In Ashubha-bhavas (inauspicious thoughts) the passions gets increased.  Thus, deliberating from this angle, Shubha (pious thoughts and acts is stated to be better than Ashubha (impious thoughts and acts) in the scripture.  For instance, the disease is harmful only whether it is less or more severe; but in comparison to more severity less severity is said to be better also.

Therefore, so long as Shuddhopayoga (state of pure passionless conduct) is not attained it is desirable to keep oneself engaged in Shubha (virtuous conduct) by getting rid of Ashubha (vicious conduct).  But it is not desirable to engross oneself in the Ashubha (vicious conduct) by forsaking Shubha (virtuous conduct).

Again he says -"The inauspicious tendency of satisfying the desire of lust or hunger, etc. cannot be avoided and one has to indulge in auspicious proclivity willfully; but the true believer wants to avoid desires, therefore, making efforts of Shubha (pious conduct) is not desirable.

Answer: Engagement of Upayoga in auspicious acts increases the feeling of renunciation which in turn reduces passional (sexual) feeling and restlessness caused by hunger, etc. Hence, one should practice Shubhopayoga.  If in spite of making such efforts, lust and hunger, etc. cause distress, then for their remedy, one should engage oneself in those acts which are less sinful. But indulging freely in sinful acts by forsaking the Shubhopayoga is not desirable.

Further, your argument is that the true believer does not want  to have any desire and Shubhopayoga is practiced willfully.  Our reply is that though a person does not want to give even a little amount of his money yet wherever he feels that great amount of money is likely to be lost, he make efforts willfully to give some quantity of money. Similarly, the true believer does not want to engage even in act involving slightest amount of passion but wherever he feels possibility of involvement in inauspicious acts causing great passion, he willfully makes efforts to engage his Upayoga in acts involving less passions.

Thus, it is proved that wherever there is possibility of evolution of Shuddhopayoga (pure, passionless conduct), there, of course, involvement in auspicious acts is forbidden but where Ashubhopayoga (impious conduct) seems to persists, in such situation, one should make effort to engage oneself in Shubhopayoga willfully.

In this way, the one who establishes practice of unrestrained conduct by refuting all kinds of conventional religious practices, has been contradicted.

The conduct of Nischayaabhasi Jivas

Now the conduct of a Nischayaabhasi Jiva is being discussed: He believes that only by knowing one's pure soul one becomes the true believer and nothing else is to  be done.  Knowing this, he sometimes sits in solitude in meditation posture and feels contented contemplating "I am soul like Siddha devoid of all karmic bondage"; But he never contemplates as to how such a quality is possible.  Sometimes he meditates upon self soul through the medium of qualities like immovable (Achala), indivisible (Akhanda) and unrivalled (Anupama), etc.  So, these qualities are possible in other substances also. Further, he does not think as to from what point of view these qualities are possible.  And sometimes while sleeping or sitting, in such thoughts.

It is stated in scriptures that a true believer is free from influx and bondage.  Therefore, (under the veil of this statement) he sometimes indulges in sensual pleasures and passional acts.  There he has no fear of bondage and indulges in passional acts unrestrainedly.

But the sign of evolution of knowledge of 'self' and 'non- self' is the spirit of renunciation.  The same is stated in Samayasara  Smygdrishairbhavti niyantan gyanvaeragyashakti 1i.e., "A true believer assuredly possesses the power of right knowledge and renunciation".

( 1. Samyagdrishtairbhavti niyantam gyanvairagyshakti svan
       Vastutvankalyitumyansvanyrupaptimuktya
        Yasmajgyatva vytikrmind tatvata svan pran cha
        Savsminnastai virmati pratsarvato ragyogat   )

Further, it is stated there:-

Samyagdrishti svyamayamahan jatu bandho na mai syadityutano
Tpulkavdana ragin.opyacharantu

Alambantan samiti paratan tai yatodyapi papa
Atmanatmavagamavirhatsanti                                        Samyasar kalash   137

"Here I myself am a true believer (samyagdrishiti, in no way, I have any bondage" - the passionate persons who talk in terms of such pride may indulge in acts devoid of renunciation power, may practice five Samitis (regulations) attentively, yet being devoid of the power of true knowledge, they are, even presently, sinful persons only.  They are assuredly without true belief because they do not possess the right knowledge of soul and non-soul.

Again we ask you _ "What is the purpose of indulgence in attachment, etc. passions in other substance after knowing the other substances as separate?"  there he says- "The attachment, etc. feelings are produced due to rise of Moha (deluding karma).  It is well-known that in ‘the past even true believers like Bharata etc. are stated to have indulged in sensual pleasures and passional acts".

Clarification-  It is true that even a true believer indulges in passional acts due to rise of Moha karma but does not indulge in such passional acts wishfully.  The same will be explained in detail later on.

Further, the one, who does not feel sorry while indulging in passions, makes no effort for uprooting them.  Even the belief that the attachment, etc. feelings are harmful is not possible in him.  How can one become a true believer without such understanding.  The purpose of the knowledge of Jiva, Ajiva, etc.  Tattvas is only to evolve such right belief.

Further, the type of indulgence in sensual pleasures and passional acts found in true believers like Bharat etc. will be described later on in detail.  By following their example, if you become unrestrained then you will undergo intense influx and bondage of karmas.  The same is stated in (Samayasara).

Magna gyannyeshin.opi yadtisvchhandmandodyma1

Meaning:  Even the followers of the standpoint of knowledge who become unrestrained and tardy get drowned in the ocean of transmigration (Samsara).

Furthermore, there in the verse  Gyanin karm na jatu chartumuchit 2and  in the verse Tathami na nirgrlam charitumishyatai3 etc., the unrestrained conduct has been prohibited.  An action which is not done willfully is the cause of bondage of karma.  Indulging in an act willfully by becoming its doer and claiming to remain its knower only is not possible.  So is described in above verses.  Therefore, knowing attachment, etc. passions as bad and harmful, one must make effort to uproot them.

(1.	Magna krmnyavalmbnpra gyanam na jananti yana
Magna gyannyaishin.opi yadtisvchhandmandodya
Vishvsyopari tai tranti satatan gyanan bhvanta svyam
Yai kurvanti na karm jatu na vansh yanti prmadsya cha       --111

2.   Gyanin karm na jatu krtumuchitan kinchitthapyupyuchya tai
Munkshai hant na jatu mai yadi pran durbhukt aivasi bho
Bandh syadupbhogto yadi na tatkin kamcharosti tai
Gyanan sanvas bandhmaishypartha svsyapradhadoodhuvamu         --151

3.	Tathapi na nirgrlan charitumishyantai gyaninan tadaytnamaiv
Sa kil nirgrla vyapriti
Akamkritkarm tnmatmkaran..gyaninan dvyan na hi viruhyatai
Kimu karoti janati cha                                                               --166     
                                                                               ------ Samyasar kalash------)

There, step by step, first of all, one should give up inauspicious acts for forsaking intense passions, etc. and should engage oneself in auspicious acts.  Thereafter, even for forsaking feeble passions, one should give up auspicious acts also and evolve the state of passionless conduct (Shuddhopayoga).

Further, many people reduce activities relating to business, etc. as well as cohabitation etc. feeling anguish in the inauspicious acts, and knowing the auspicious conduct to be worthless, do not study the scripture, etc. and have also not attained passionless form of pure conduct of self absorbedness (Shuddhopayoga).  Therefore, they become idle, inactive by forsaking endeavor for wealth, sex, piety and liberation.

They have been censured in the commentary of Pancha-stikaya. The example given with regard to them is this -as a person becomes idle by eating huge quantity of kheer (rice cooked with milk and sugar) and a tree stands effortless, similarly, these Nischayaabhasi have become idle and inactive.

Now we ask them, "though you have reduced the external acts of Shubha (virtuous) and Ashubha (vicious) acts but the Upayoga (active knowledge) cannot remain engaged without engrossing it in some object.  So, tell us, where do you engage your Upayoga?"

If you say that I meditate on soul then you have earlier maintained that contemplation on soul through study of scriptures is involvement in Vikalpa (rambling of Upayoga) and much time is not required in knowing any quality of the soul.  The Upayoga of a non-omniscient cannot remain fixed by repeatedly meditating in one way.  Even the Upayoga of Ganadharas (chief monks), etc. cannot remain fixed in this way; therefore, they too engage themselves in the study of scriptures, etc.  How could we believe your Upayoga to be purer than that of the Ganadharas, etc.?  therefore, your statement is not authentic.

As someone in business remains idle and indolently passes time somehow, similarly, Nishachayaabhasi  also by remaining idle in religious conduct, uselessly wastes time indolently. Sometimes he pretends contemplating on something, sometimes indulges in worthless talks, at other times takes food, etc., but for purifying his Upayoga he does not engross it in the study of Shastras (scriptures), penances, worship, etc. Remaining inactive and idle, he says he is engrossed in Shuddhopayoga (pure passionless conduct).  In such a state, there being less anguish, he believes that he is happy, in the same way as an idle person feels pleasure in idleness.

Or, as someone in dream, feels happy considering himself to have become a king, similarly, he feels pleasure by believing himself fallaciously to be pure like Siddha God. Or, as someone feels pleasure considering himself in an agreeable thought, he feels happy and treats it to be happiness evolved by self-realization.  Further, as someone believing some state to be unagreeable, feels, dejected, similarly, considering business, etc., son, etc. to be the cause  of sorrow, he remains dejected from them and treats it to be the renunciation -so all such type of knowledge and renunciation is full of passions.  The feeling of unperturbed tranquillity which results from attachments form of dispassionate state, that true bliss, knowledge and renunciation is evolved only to right believers in the state of feeble rise of Charitra Moha (conduct-deluding karma).

Further, by giving up  business, etc., afflictive acts, and by taking agreeable food, etc., he remains inactive and feels pleasure.  In such a state he believes as if he has become passionless but the feeling of happiness in such a state causes cruel meditation (Raudra-Dhyana).  Wherever by renunciation of objects of pleasure and association of objects of misery, one does not feel afflicted and also does not become happy or miserable, then in such a state passionless disposition is evolved.

Thus, the Nischayaabhasis (perverse knowledge of real standpoint) only, are to be known as misbelievers.  Such Jivas are to be known like Vedantins and Sankhyamatis who believe the soul to be pure only.  Because due to similarity of faiths, the Nischayaabhasis find their precept agreeable and these people find the approach of Nishchayaabhasis to be agreeable.

Further, those Jivas possess such type of faith that only by contemplation of pure soul, samvara (stoppage of influx and Nirjara (partial dissociation of past  karmas) are caused and in such a state a part of bliss like that of liberated soul is manifested; and by contemplation on impure dispositions of Jiva like Gunasthanas etc., and by thinking about other Jivas, Pudgalas (matter) etc., excepting the self, Asrava (influx) and Bandha (bondage) of karmas are caused. Therefore, they remain averse to other kind of thoughts.

So, such type of belief is also not correct, because whether one contemplates on pure self-soul or on other non-self objects, if this contemplation be free from attachment, etc., then only Samvara Nirjara result.  However, if such meditation be full of attachment, etc., then Asrava-Bandha only are caused.  If the Asrava-bandha be caused only by knowing the other objects then the omniscient (Kewali) will also be found having Asrava-Bandha (influx and bondage), because all other substances are known to them.

He further says- "Asrava-bandha is caused to non-omniscients by the contemplation of other non-self objects". But this is not so, because in scriptures it is stated that in the state of Shukla-Dhyana (pure meditation) even monks contemplate on all six substances, their attributes and modifications. Moreover, in clairvoyance and telepathy type of knowledge, only knowing of other substances specially is found.  And in fourth Gunasthana one who contemplates on self-soul, to him also the Asrava-Bandha is more and the Guna-Shreni Nirjara(1) is not found, whereas in the fifth and sixth Gunasthanas in the process of meditation on other non-self objects Asrava- Bandha is less in spite of involvement in the activity of taking food and movement, etc. and the Guna-Shreni Nirjara continuously takes place.  Therefore, Nirjara (dissociation and Bandha (bondage) of karmas are not caused by contemplation on either self-soul substance or other non-self substances; rather by decrease in passions, attachment, etc., Bandha is caused.  But the Nishchayabhasia does not possess the true knowledge of the nature of attachment, etc.; therefore, he believes contrarily.

Now he asks- "If it is so, then how is it that in the Nirvikalpa Anubhav Dasha (rambleless state of self- realization) the thoughts (Vikalpas) relating to Naya- Pramana-Nikshepas (2) etc. and even of perception knowledge, etc. are forbidden?"

Answer: The Jivas who are engrossed in these thoughts (Vikalpas) only and do not realize the one indivisible self- soul, they are advised that all these thoughts are instrumental in true ascertainment of substances.  But after such ascertainment these thoughts have no role to play; hence, by giving up these Vikalpas also one should engross himself in the realization of one indivisible self-soul; it is desirable to remain engrossed in these thoughts only.

Further, after ascertainment of the true nature of the substances it is not possible to remain engrossed in the contemplation of self-soul in a general way.  Knowledge of self-soul and other objects persists in both general and specific (detailed) forms but with the feeling of passionlessness.  The same is called Nirvikalpa-Dasha (rambleless state of Upayoga).

There he asks- "All this means generation of various thoughts; how can this be called the Nirvikalpa (unperturbed) state of Upayoga?"

Answer: Thoughtlessness is not called the Nirvikalpa (unperturbed) state of mind, because all knowing of non- omniscients is found with thought.  Believing Nirvikalpa- Dasha to be devoid of thoughts would mean absence of knowledge itself, that is to say, the state of senselessness which is not possible in case of soul.  Therefore, thought always exists.

One may say here that "(In such state) the concentration of thought is only on the indivisible self-soul and on its specialties".  But the concentration of thought on the indivisible soul cannot continue for long time and without the knowledge of its specialties the real nature of the indivisible soul cannot be realized.

And if  he says that "(In such a Nirvikalpa state) the thought of the self-soul only continues and not of other non- self objects", then (we ask him) how can the I-ness feeling be evolved in the self-soul without developing non-self feeling in non-self substances?

There he says that in Samayasara it is stated as follows:

Bhavyaidvigyan midmachhandharya
Tavdyavtprachyutva gyanan gyanai pratishthatai      --     Kalash   130

It means that the discriminating knowledge should be persisted with so song as the Upayoga does not become free from the thoughts of other substances and gets engrossed in self-soul only.  Therefore, on disengagement of Upayoga (discriminating knowledge) from thoughts of self-non-self, the knowing of other substances stops and knowing of the self- soul only continues.

Answer: (This is not the correct sense of above verse).  What is stated here is that formerly he was knowing the self and non-self to be one, then for knowing them separate the discriminating knowledge should be persisted with till one's knowledge (Upayoga) gets engrossed in the knowing nature of self-soul only by knowing the non-self objects to be separate from the self.  Afterwards no role remains for discriminating knowledge, it naturally continues knowing the non-self objects to be non-self and the self to be the self.  It is not so that the knowing of other non-self substance stops. Therefore, knowing of other non-self objects or knowing the details (specialties) of self soul substance is not termed Vikalpa (rambling state of mind).

How is it then? The same is explained: Due to attachment- aversion feeling, engaging one's Upayoga in knowing some particular object (knowable) thus diverting one's Upayoga (attention) repeatedly is called Vikalpa (rambling of Upayoga).  And where whatever one knows dispassionately, knows it correctly and does not ramble his Upayoga for knowing different-different knowables, there lies Nirvikapa Dasha-rambleless state of Upayoga.

Here someone may say that the non-omniscient's Upayoga assuredly rambles in the several knowables; how is the Nirvikalpa state possible there?

Answer: So long as the Upayoga remains engaged in one object, till then it is termed as Nirvikalpa.  In scriptural doctrine the differentia of meditation (Dhyana) also is stated thus: 
 Aikagrchintanirodho dhyanam     --Tatvarthsootr   9/27

which means "Where the concentration of thought be mainly in one object only and other thoughts stop" - it is termed as meditation (Dhyana).  In the commentary Sarvartha-Siddhi of Tattvarth Sutra book, this is specifically described -"If meditation be the name of stopping all sports of thoughts then it would amount to senselessness.  And there is another aspect also that (in meditation state) from the continuance point of view the knowing of several knowables (objects) can also be there but so long as the state of passionlessness exists and one does not ramble Upayoga by attachment- aversion, etc. feeling, till then, it is called Nirvikalpa- Dasha.

Further, he says- "If it is so, then why is the discourse given engrossing the Upayoga into the intrinsic nature of the self-soul by withdrawing it from other non-self substance?

Answer: The Jivas who develop attachment-aversion feelings by engaging their Upayoga in substances which are the instrumental cause of auspicious and inauspicious dispositions and if they contemplate on the nature of the self-soul then  their attachment-aversion feelings are reduced- such Jivas of lower spiritual state are admonished to meditate in the aforesaid way.  For example, some woman used to go to other's house with carnal desire; she was forbidden to go to other's house and was advised to remain at her own house.  But if a woman visits some other person's house without any lustful desire and behaves in a befitting manner then there is no fault.  Similarly, the state of Upayoga which used to indulge in other substances with attachment-aversion feelings is forbidden to engage itself in the other substances and advised to remain engrossed in self- soul.  But that disposition of knowledge (Upayoga) which engages itself in the other non-self objects with the feeling of passiolessness and behaves righteously is not censurable.

Again he says, "If it is so then why do the great ascetics renounce thoughts of possessions, etc.?"

Answer: As a chast woman avoids going to other's houses which are the cause of unchastity, similarly the passionless disposition of Upayoga avoids engaging in other non-self substances which are the cause of attachment-aversion feelings.  And visiting of such houses which are not the cause of adultery is not forbidden.  Similarly, knowing of other substances which are not the causes of attachment- aversion feelings is not prohibited.

Again he says, "For example, if a woman goes to her father's house with some purpose, she may go; but going to this or that person's house purposelessly is not desirable. Similarly, one should engage his Upayoga in contemplation of seven tattvas with some purpose but engaging one's Upayoga purposelessly in contemplation about Guna-Sthanas, etc. is not desirable?"

Answer: For example, a woman can go to her father's friend's house with some purpose; similarly, for knowing the specialties of Tattvas the Upayoga can remain engrossed in contemplation about Guna-Sthanas and Karmas, etc. also. Further, it should be known here that as a chaste woman willfully should not go to the house of wicked men but being compelled by circumstances if she has to go there but does not indulge in adultery then she is assuredly chaste. Similarly, the passionless state of Upayoga should not be engaged deliberately in the other objects which are the causes of attachment-aversion, etc. and if effortlessly such objects are known and feelings of attachment, etc. are not developed then such state of Upayoga is pure only. Therefore, believing that on undergoing the afflictions of woman, etc., the monks do not know them at all and remain engrossed in the self-soul only, is wrong.  They do know them but do not develop attachment, etc.

Thus, it should be known that the passionless disposition of Upayoga can persist even on knowing the other non-self substance.

Further, he says- "If it is so, then how is in the Shastras stated that the belief-knowledge-conduct of self-soul is the right-belief-knowledge-conduct?"

Answer: Above discourse is meant for getting rid of the belief-knowledge-conduct of oneness in other non-self substances persisting in Jivas from times immemorial.  On evolution of belief-knowledge-conduct of the self in the self-soul only when the belief-knowledge-conduct of keeping proclivity of attachment-aversion, etc. in the non-self substances get mitigated then the right belief, etc. are produced.  If the right belief, etc. are not evolved by believing the other non-self substances to be the non-self substances then the Kewali (omniscient) also would not be found possessing these.  So long as one believes the non-self substances to be bad and self-soul substance to be good till then the attachment-aversion feelings are obviously found persisting.  But when one knows the self-soul to be the self and the non-self to be the non-self and believes and acts accordingly, then only the right belief, etc. are evolved.

Therefore, what more to state- "By whatever way, the faith of uprooting the attachment, etc. passions is evolved, the same faith is the right belief; by whatever way knowledge of uprooting the same faith is the right belief; by whatever way knowledge of uprooting the attachment, etc. passions is evolved, the same is the right knowledge and by whatever way the attachment, etc. passions are uprooted, the same very conduct is the right conduct- believing the path of liberation to be this only is desirable.

In this way, the false belief of the so-called Jainas possessing one-sided view with wrong concept of Nischaya (real standpoint) has been described.

The Vyavaharaabhasis (Misbelievers of Conventional Standpoint & Religion)

Now the false belief found in so-called Jainas possessing one-sided view about the conventional standpoint is being described:-

In Jina's scripture, at many places, the preachings are found giving prominence to conventional standpoint.  The Jivas who consider the conventional standpoint to be true, believe religion to consist only in external practices.  All of their such religious practices, being contrary to the spirit of real religion, become false.  The same is being described in detail.

Here it should be known that by following conventional religious practices the auspicious bondage is caused; therefore, in comparison to indulgence in sinful acts, such conventional religious practices are not prohibited.  But the Jivas who feel satisfied by mere observance of such conventional practices and who do not make effort for attainment of right path of liberation, for diverting their attention towards the right path of liberation, their pious practices in the form of false conduct are also described as worth forsaking.

Listening to such description, if someone gives up pious practices and indulges in impious acts, he would harm himself.  On the other hand, if one engages himself in the path of liberation by evolving right belief then he will be benefited.  For example, by listening to the advice of forsaking ineffective medicine, if some patient gives up taking medicine and takes unwholesome diet, he will die. Physician is not to be blamed for this.  Similarly, listening to the advice of forsaking conventional religion in the form of pious practices, if some mundane being gives up real religious practices and starts indulging in passional acts then he himself will suffer from the miseries of hellish birth, etc. The preceptor is not to be blamed for this.  The intention of the preceptor is to advise such persons to give up wrong belief, etc. and to adopt the right path of liberation.

With this intention only the following description is made:

	            The Vyavaharaabhasis Observing
	                 Hereditary Religion

Many people are Jainas only because of birth in a Jain family.  They do not know the differentia of Jain religion but follow the hereditary religious practices.  Such Jainas adopt hereditary religious practices as do other people of non-Jaina faiths about their religious practices.  If religion lies in observing hereditary practices than the Mohammedans, etc. would also be treated as religious persons. where then lies specialty of Jain religion?

The same is stated thus in Upadesh Siddhant Ratnamala:

Loymmi rayn.yee n.‑ayan n.a  kulkami kyavi
Ki pun. Tiloyai phun.o jin.anddhmmahigarairami        --7
.
Meaning: In the world, in government policy also, justice is never administered on the basis of heredity.  If a person is caught being involved in theft then he is not set free because he belongs to a family of thieves by heredity.  He is definitely punished.  How is it possible then to administer justice with reference to religious practices in the religion of omniscient Jina God on the basis of heredity?

And if the father be a pauper and the son becomes rich then son does not remain a pauper by considering heredity.  What then is the purpose of heredity in religion? And the father may obtain hellish birth and the son may attain Moksha (liberation), how is heredity maintained here? If the heredity be the determining factor the son also should have a hellish birth.  therefore, heredity has no role to play in religion.

If due to bad times, even in Jain religion, sinful persons have started the contrary practices of fostering objects of sensual pleasures by adoration of false deity-preceptor- religion then by interpreting the Shastras correctly one should give up such practices and act according to Jina's commandments.

Here someone may say that it is not justifiable to give up traditions and start new path of religion?

Answer:  If one starts following a new path by his own understanding then it is not proper.  By abandoning the eternal tradition of Jain religion described in Jain Shastras the sinful persons have in-between started contrary tradition; how can such sinful practices be termed as traditional religious path?  And by forsaking such new practices if someone follows the old traditional practices as described in Jain Shastras, how can this be called a new path?

Further, if the religious practices followed in the family tradition are in accordance with Jina's commandment then one should also  follow such practice.  But it should be adopted not knowing it to be traditional but believing it to be religious and after ascertaining its nature, fruit, etc.  The one, who follows even the real religion knowing it to be hereditary, cannot be called a religious person because if his family members give up such practices he will also do so. His such conduct is not with a religious instinct but by fear of heredity.  Therefore, he is not a religious person.

Therefore, one may consider heredity as a determining factor in the activities of marriage, etc. but in activities pertaining to religion one should not consider heredity.  One should follow practices in accordance with the true religion.

The Vyavaharaabhasis Following Conventional Religious Practices Blindly

Further, many people are Jains because they follow Jaina's commandment.  They obey the commandment as described in Shastras but do not examine the truth involved in the commandments.  If following the commandments only is religion then the followers of different faiths would be called religious persons because they follow the commandments of their own Shastras; therefore, following Jain's commandments by verifying the truth involved in Jina's preachings is desirable.

Without examining it, how is the ascertainment of right or wrong possible?  Such persons obey the commandments of Jain scripture without ascertaining the true meaning as do the followers of other religious about their Shastras.  This is nothing but obeying the commandments with partisan spirit.

Question:  In (Jaina) Shastras there is described Aajna- Samyaktva Further, in the description of Nih-shankit Anga

(1) Aajna-Samyaktva = Belief based on precepts.
(2) Aajna-Vichaya   = Contemplation on Jina's preachings.
(3) Nih-Shankit Anga= Unshakable faith being one of the eight qualities of right belief

In the Shastra many statements are such, the truth of which can be verified by direct (Pratyaksha) and deductive (Anumaan) knowledge.  And many statements are such which are not cognizable through direct or deductive knowledge.  These are to be believed to be valid as per the commandments. There the statements which are similar in different Shastras need no verification but the statements which are mutually contradictory, out of them the statements which are cognizable by direct and deductive knowledge should be verified by examination.  Such statements also should be treated to be valid.  And all statements of such Shastras should be treated as invalid whose (some) statements are found invalid (on verification).

here one may say that on examination some statements may be found to be valid in one Shastras and some other statements are found to be valid in another Shastras then what should one do?

Answer:  The Shastras which are based on omniscient's preachings do not contain any invalid statements.  Because false statement results only when either one is not having the true knowledge or is influenced by attachment-aversion feelings; but the omniscient God is not of that type.  You have not examined properly that is why delusion persists.

Further he say- "What should be done if the verification by non-omniscient is not done correctly?"

Answer: On assaying both true and false objects and by examining them carefully true examination takes place.  Where due to partisan spirit one does not verify properly there only contrary examination takes place.

Question:  In the Shastras mutually contradictory statements are many; which are to be verified?

Answer:  In the path of liberation Deva, Guru and Dharma (i.e., omniscient god, naked possessionless monk and non- violence religion), the Jiva, etc.  Tattvas and the bondage and liberation path are purposeful; so, there are to be examined.  In whichever Shastras these are described truly their all commandments should be accepted and in whichever Shastras these are described contrarily, their commandments are not to be obeyed.

In the world, if a person does not tell lie in purposeful acts, why will he tell lie in purposeless acts?  Similarly, the Shastras in which the differentia of the purposeful Deva (omniscient God), etc. is not described contrarily, how then would the statement about purposeless islands, oceans, etc. be described contrarily; because by describing differentia of Deva etc., contrarily.  Only the passional desires of speaker are fostered.

Question: In such Shastras even if the nature of Deva, etc. is contrarily described under the influence of passional desires but why in the same Shastras other statements are found contrary?

Answer: If only one statement is contrary then its contrary character would be discovered soon and different tradition would not be established; therefore, by making many contrary statements different tradition would be established.  There, the ignorant persons are confused and believe mutually contrary statements to be true.  Hence, for establishing the contrariety of purposeful things many purposeless statements are intermixed contrarily.  And for making people believe, some true statements are also made.  But the intelligent people cannot be misguided; by verifying the purposeful statements and being convinced about its truth, one should believe all statements of that tradition.

So on verification, no other tradition except the Jaina tradition only, is realized to be true because the preacher of this tradition is an passionless omniscient, why would he tell a lie?  In this manner, the right belief which is evolved by believing the Jina's commandments is termed as Aajna-Samyaktva.  And concentration of thought on one particular object (as per Jina's commandments) is called Aajna-Vichaya type of Dharma-Dhyana (virtuous meditation).

If not believing in this manner and simply by believing the commandments without examination, right belief and virtuous meditation are evolved, how then the Dravya-lingi(1) monks who became ascetics by obeying the Jina's commandments and obtained birth in Graiveyaka heavens by adopting monk's ritual practices as per Jina's commandments, still remained misbeliever?  Therefore, only on believing the commandments by some verification, the right belief and virtuous meditation are evolved.  In worldly affairs also the true character of a person is ascertained only after some verification.

Further, you have stated that by raising doubt in Jina's preachings, the transgression of right belief termed Shanka (doubting) is caused.  But, "I do not know how is it so?" Under such doubtful state of mind no ascertainment takes place; there the transgression termed "doubting"  (Shanka) is caused.  And if the transgression of right belief consists in the process of ascertainment only then why is in Ashta- Sahasri (a great book on Jain logic) the person believing after verification described to be better than the person who believes the commandments without verification?  How are the Prachchhana (putting questions for clarification), etc. described as part of study (Swadhyaya)?  Why is the discourse for ascertaining the nature of Tattvas and substances by means of Pramana (2)- Nayas (3) given?  Therefore, believing the commandments after verification is desirable.  And many wicked persons have made imaginary statements (in the Shastras) and propagated them to be the Jina-Vachana (Jina's preachings); one should not consider them to be authentic by knowing them to be the Shastras of Jaina faith.  There also, after examining through Pramana-Naya, etc., by comparing them with other Shastras and by reflecting on the possibility of truth involved in them, one should know the contradictory statements to be false only.

For example, some cunning fellow himself wrote a letter and mentioned the name of some wealthy person as its writer; if somebody loses wealth by being cheated by the name then he would become a pauper. Similarly, the wicked persons have themselves written some Shastras and the author's name is mentioned to be that of some Jina, Ganadhara or Acharya monk, etc.; if someone develops wrong belief due to delusion created by such name then he would remain a false believer only.

Further, he says- "In Gommatasara it is stated that if a true believer believes contrarily something due to the instrumentality of the commandments of ignorant teacher (preceptor) even then he remains a true believer. How is this statement made?"

Answer: This statement is made from the point of view of such objects which are not cognizable by direct and deductive knowledge, etc. and which can not be ascertained minutely; but one should know this clearly that true belief cannot be substained at all by having wrong knowledge and belief about the true nature of Deva-Guru-Dharma (God - preceptor and religion) & basic Tattvas (Jiva-Ajiva, etc.). Therefore, those persons who are called Jains simply by obeying the commandments of Jina without verifying them are also to be known as false believers.

And many persons accept Jainism even after verification but do not examine fundamentally. They become Jains, with hearty pleasure, knowing the Jina's religion to be the best of all by virtuous acts of compassion, chastity, penance, continence, etc. or by the acts of worship and magnanimity, etc. or by glories and miracles, etc. or by treating it to be the cause of obtaining agreeable objects. But such virtuous acts are advocated in other religions also. Therefore, these differentias involve the fault of general commonness (Ati- Vyapti).

Someone may say that the pious acts as are found in Jain religion are not found in the same measure in other religions; therefore, Ati-Vyapti (the fault of general commonness) is not there?

Answer: This is, of course, true and it is so also. But as you believe the differentia of compassion, etc., in the same way they also describe it. You regard compassion to consist in the protection of other Jivas; they too say the same thing. Similarly, one should know about other aspects of various pious acts.

Again he says- "Their standpoint is not correct, because sometimes they lay emphasis on compassion and sometimes support injurious acts?"

Answer: However, in their religions, advocation of only some aspects of compassion, etc. is found; therefore, the character of general commonness is found in these differentias. Through these differentias. correct verification cannot be done.

How then to verify correctly?

Answer: In Jina's religion the oneness of right belief, knowledge and conduct is described as the path of liberation. The right belief is evolved by having firm faith in true Deva (omniscient God), etc. and Jiva etc. Tattvas; by knowing them correctly the right knowledge is attained and the right conduct is evolved by virtual destruction of inner attachment, etc. passions. So, the correct description of these is not found in other religions as is found in Jain religion. And besides Jains, the followers of any other religion cannot evolve and practice these correctly. Therefore, this1 is the true differentia of Jina's religion. Those only who by identifying this differentia examine the truth, are only true believers. Except in this way, those who examine in a different way, remain only.

And many persons accept Jain religion by company of others, several persons adopt it by seeing great persons following Jina's religion, many others adopt correct or incorrect practices of Jain religion by seeing others observing them. Likewise, many types of persons without themselves recognizing the mystery involved in Jina's religion, follow it and are called Jains. So, all such persons are to be known as false believers only.

This much specialty is, of course, there that in the Jina's religion the tendency of sinful acts cannot be found chiefly and the instrumental causes of virtues (Punya) are many. And the environment for the true path of liberation also remains available there.  Hence, those who are Jains even by heredity are much better than others.

The Vyauaharaabhasis Observing Religion for Temporal gains

Further, those persons who become Jains or follow Jainism deceitfully with the object of earning livelihood or for gaining name & fame or with the purpose of achieving some object pertaining to sensual pleasures, are assuredly the sinners only. On the rise of extreme intense passions only such an intention is found. Their disentanglement also is difficult.

Jain religion is followed only for bringing an end to the worldly transmigration; those who wish to accomplish the worldly objects through it do a great injustice to it. Therefore, they are obviously false believers only.

Here someone argues- "The objectives which are fulfilled through injury, etc. if achieved by adopting religious practices then what is wrong in it? Both the purposes are attained?

Answer: By adopting only one and the same means for fulfilling sinful and religious objects vice alone is caused. For example, if someone constructs a temple (chaityalaya) for religious practices and uses it as a means of indulging in vicious acts like adultery, etc., then the sin alone will be caused. If he constructs a separate house for the purpose of enjoying sensuous adultery, etc., by involvement in injurious acts, he may do so, but indulging in acts of sensuous pleasures in the temple (chaityalaya) is not desirable. Similarly worshipping Jinas, studying the Shastras etc. are means of religious practices.  If these are also used as means of sinful acts like earning livelihood, etc., then such a person is a sinner only. By adopting injurious means, if one indulges in business, etc.  for earning livelihood, etc. he may do so, but it is not at all worthwhile to think of earning livelihood, etc. through religious acts like worshipping, etc.

Question: If it is so, then the monks too take food at other's house for observing religious practices and the co-religionists mutually help each other. How is it justifiable?

Answer: They do not observe religious practices with the intention of earning livelihood, etc. Knowing them religious persons, many householders of their own help them by offering food, etc. No fault lies in it. And if they practice religion for fulfilling the object of getting food, etc., then they are assuredly sinners. Those who accept monkhood after renouncing worldly pleasures do not have the purpose of obtaining food, etc. For maintenance of the body if someone offers food etc.  of his own then they take it, otherwise remain unperturbed and do not become agitated.  Further, they practice religion for their own benefit. They have no intention of getting help from others and accept only such help which they have not renounced. If some co-religionist offers some help of his own, he may do so, and if someone does not help then they do not feel distressed.  So, this is as it should be. But if one adopts external religious practices with the intention of fulfilling the objective of earning livelihood, etc. and if some other person does not offer help by giving food, etc.  then he feels distressed, begs for help, makes other efforts or develops negligence in religious practices, then he is to be known assuredly as a sinner only.

In this way, those who practice religion with temporal purpose are sinners only besides definitely being the false believers.

As stated above, even such followers of Jain religion are also to be known as false believers.

General Conduct of Above-said Vyavaharaabhasis Religionists

Now we deliberate specifically on the religious practices followed by such persons:

There, many Jivas motivated by greed passions, follow religious practices either due to heredity or by seeing others following them; so, they have no religious intention. 

If they indulge in adoration (Bhakti) etc. then their attention is somewhere else, the eyes are moving here and there, mouth is busy in chanting invocation, etc. and the head is in the state of salutation, etc. But this is not proper. "Who am I, whose invocation I do, for what purpose I pray, what is the meaning of the hymn, etc." -thus nothing is known (to Vyavaharaabhasi).

And sometimes he indulges in the adoration even of false gods etc. He does not know the distinctive characteristics of true and false Deva (God), Guru (preceptor monk), Shastra (scripture).

Further, if he gives donation, he gives with the intention of getting name and fame without discriminating between worthy- unworthy recipients. And if he observes penance then by remaining hungry he wishes to be recognized as a great person; attention is not on inner motives. And if he accepts vows, his attention is on external activities; even here he follows some correct activity and some false activity but does not pay attention on the inner feelings of attachment, etc. and outwardly also he engages himself in activities fostering attachment, etc.

And when he busies himself in acts of worship and outward show of religion, he adopts such practices which bring him praise in the world and foster sensuous pleasures. Further, he indulges in lot of injurious acts.

The aforesaid religious practices are meant for purifying one's own thoughts and those of others. In such practices though some injury is involved, yet those practices are to be adopted which involve less sin and produce more virtue. But the inner intentions are not identified by him and he does not know the degree of transgression involved and the virtue attained.  The knowledge of this type of profit and loss and the correct-incorrect manner of practicing vows, etc. is not possessed by him.

In study of scripture (Shastra) he simply follows the prevalent tradition. He reads it only for making others to listen; when he studies it he simply goes through it; if he listens to it then merely listens whatever is being said. But the real object of studying scripture is not grasped internally; thus he is not able to identify the inner purpose involved in all these activities.

Many Jivas follow the unreal conventional religion (Abhootartha-Dharma) thinking that we should follow the traditional practice which our elders have been following or we should follow the practices as others do or that by following these our greed, etc.  passions would be fulfilled. 

Further, there are many other Jivas some of whom willfully follow the hereditary practices and some others follow the practices with religious attitude also. Thus, they practice religion in the aforesaid manner and there are who lay emphasis on the improvement of thoughts and feelings also which will be described later on, such mixture of thoughts and practices is found in many Jivas.

 The Vyavaharaabhasis Observing Religious Practices with Religious Attitude

Many Jivas practice religion with religious aptitude but they do not know the real religion (Nishchaya Dharma), therefore, they practice the unreal conventional religion (Vyavahara- Dharma).  Knowing the conventional (Vyavahara) form of right belief, knowledge and conduct to be the path of liberation, they practice them.

Contrary Form of Right Belief

In the Shastras (scripture) it is stated that the right belief is evolved by having faith in Deva-Guru-Dharma. Obeying such commandment they have given up bowing to others excepting Arhant Deva, Nirgrantha-Guru and Jain Shastras; but they do not verify their merits-demerits, or even if they verify them then they do not verify correctly with true knowledge of Tattvas, rather verify by external differentias. With such faith they indulge in Bhakti (adoration) of true Deva-Guru-Shastra.

Contrary Form of Deva's Adoration

Numerous special qualities are described as possessed by Devas.  For example, he is adorable by Indra, etc., is possessed of many glories and wonders, is free from demerits like hunger, etc., possesses beautiful body, is devoid of the company of women, etc., gives sermons through divine speech (Divya-Dhawani), knows universe and non-universe through omniscience, has destroyed lust, anger, etc. Amongst these qualities many are related with Pudgalas (matter substance) and many others with Jiva (soul-substance); they do not discriminate them separately-separately. As someone not knowing distinctively the attributes of soul and matter in the dissimilar embodied state of human being etc. holds false faith, similarly, this (Vyavharaabhasi) too not knowing distinctly the attributes of soul and matter in the dissimilar embodied state of Arihanta, possesses false faith. 
Moreover, knowing the external qualities he believes Arihanta Deva to be great by such qualities but, not knowing correctly the special qualities related with Jiva (soul), he believes Arihanta Deva to be great through commandments or believes contrarily. Because if he knows Jiva's qualities correctly he would not remain a misbeliever.

Further, he believes those Arihantas to be bestowers of heaven and salvation, bountiful to miserables, savior of ignobles and uplifter of the downtrodden. As the follower of other faiths believes God having doership quality, this (Vyavaharaabhasi) too believes Arihanta Deva similarly. He does not know that he will reap the fruit of his own dispositions. Arihanta is a mere instrumental cause, therefore, those qualities are possible only conventionally. 

In the absence of purity in our disposition Arihanta alone is not the bestower of heaven and salvation. It is said that dog, etc. attained heaven by hearing the name of Arihanta. Here he believes that this wonder is caused by remembering the name etc. only, but without purification of thoughts merely by chanting Arihanta 's name heaven cannot be attained, how could then the listener attain it? By means of listening the name of Arihanta some disposition of feeble passion is produced in the dog, etc.; heavenly birth is caused by such dispositions; conventionally prominence is given to the chanting of Arihanta's name only.

Further, believing that "by chanting Arihanta's name and worshipping, the disagreeable associations (harmful things) are destroyed and agreeable (desirable) things are obtained," he remembers and worships Arihanta for eradication of disease etc. and attaining wealth, etc. But the cause of association of agreeable-disagreeable things is the rise of one's own past karmas. Arihants Deva is not the doer. By virtue of Arhanta's adoration, etc., forms of auspicious thoughts (Shubhopayoga), the transformation, etc. of the past inauspicious karmas take place; hence, the adoration of Arihantas etc. is conventionally said to be the cause of ending disagreeable things and gaining agreeable (desirable) things. But the Jiva who initially adores with the purpose of temporal gains has only a sinful intention. How could the transformation, etc. of the previously bonded inauspicious karmas be caused by the thoughts evolved in the form of craving and repugnance feelings? This is why his objective is not achieved.

Further, many Jivas knowing adoration (Bhakti) to be the cause of liberation (Mukti) indulge in it with deep interest. As the people of other faiths believe liberation (Mukti) by adoration (Bhakti), so these Vyauaharaabhasis too hold similar belief. But the adoration of Arihanta etc. is an attachment feeling and attachment causes bondage. Therefore, it is not the cause of liberation. When the rise of attachment karma takes place then if one does not do adoration then he will indulge in sinful pleasures. So, for giving up sinful attachment the true believers engage themselves in adoration and know it to be merely an external instrumental cause of liberation path, but they never feel satisfied by believing such acts only to be beneficial, rather they continue making efforts for Shuddhopayoga (pure passionless conduct of the self).

Same thing is stated in the commentary of Panchastikaya -

Iyam bhakti kaivalbhaktiprdhansyagyanino bhavti. Teevrragajvarvinodarthmasthanram-
Nishaidharth kvchit gyaninopi bhavti 
Ayan hi sthoollakshatya kaivalbhaktipradhanysyagyanino bhavti
Upritnabhoomikayamalabdhaspdsyasthanrag  nishaidharth teevragjvaravinodarth va kadachijgyaninopi

which means this adoration only is observed by such ignorant persons who chiefly indulge in adoration only. And sometimes true believers also are found indulging in adoration, etc. for mitigating the fever of intense attachment or for avoiding involvement of attachment in unworthy acts.

Here he asks- "If it is so, then engrossment in adoration will be found more in the ignorant person in comparison to that of a true believer?"

Answer: From the realistic point of view, the spirit of true adoration is found in the true believer and not in the ignorant person .  And from the attachment disposition point of view, the ignorant is found having excessive interest in adoration because he believes it to be the cause of liberation. But the true believer knowing it to be the cause of bondage of auspicious karmas, does not have such deep interest in it. Externally sometimes the true believer seems to have more attachment in it and sometimes the ignorant is found having deep interest in it.

Thus, the discussion about the differentia of adoration of Arihanta Deva is concluded.

Contrary Form of Guru-Bhakti (Preceptor Monk's Adoration)

Now the type of Guru-bhakti (preceptor monk's adoration) which a Vyavaharaabhasi practices is being described.

Many Jivas are the followers of the word of commandment. "These are Jain monks, they are our Guru (preceptor monk), so, we should adore them"- with these feelings they adore them.  And many others do verify their conduct. They adore them considering the following traits found in them: "These monks observe compassion, maintain chastity, do not keep wealth, etc., undergo the penances like fasting, etc., endure afflictions like hunger, etc., do not become angry with any body, encourage others to follow religion through preachings". But such virtues are found also in the Paramahansa, naked saints of other faiths and also in Jain- misbelievers; therefore, in these virtues lies the fault of general commonness(Ati-Vyapti).True verification is not possible through these virtues.

On consideration, some of the aforesaid qualities are found related with Jiva (soul) and some others with the Pudgalas (matter); without knowing this difference such Jivas remain misbelievers only by developing the feeling of oneness in the dissimilar embodied monk state. The oneness of right belief, knowledge and conduct constitutes the path of liberation and this alone is the real characteristic of the monks but they do not identify it. Because if this identification is evolved then they cannot remain misbelievers. How would they engross themselves in true adoration without knowing the characteristics of the monks? By knowing the virtuous practices and qualities which are instrumental causes of bondage of auspicious karmas and by believing that by their adoration they will be benefited, they indulge in their adoration with deep interest.

Thus, discussion about Guru-bhakti (preceptor monk's adoration) is concluded.

Contrary Form of Scriptures Adoration(Shastra-Bhakti)

Now the type of Shastra-bhakti (scriptures adoration) found in such persons (Vyauaharaabhasis) is being discussed:

Many Jivas adore Shastras (scriptures) knowing that "these contain the preachings of omniscient, therefore, due to omniscient's adorableness these Shastras also are adorable". And many other Jivas adore them by verifying that the practice of passionlessness, compassion, forgiveness, chastity, contentment, etc. is advocated in them, hence these are supreme. But such type of description is also found in the Shastras of other faiths like Vedanta, etc.

Further, in these Shastras the description of universe, etc. is highly deep and detailed, therefore knowing this supremeness they adore them. But in these things there is no scope for verification by means of inference, etc. How could, therefore, the greatness of these descriptions be ascertained without verifying their truth-untruth?  Therefore, real examination is not possible in this way.

In these Shastras the description of real Jiva etc. Tattvas (elements) with their multifaceted nature is found and the real path of liberation of the order of triple jewels-form, i.e., oneness of right belief, knowledge & conduct is advocated. Because of this fact only, the Jain Shastras possess supremeness. But they do not identify this. Because if this identification is done then the misbelief will not remain. 

Thus, the discussion about the differentia of Shastra-bhakti (scriptures adoration) is concluded.

In the aforesaid manner, the Vyavaharaabhasi has ascertained the characteristics of Deva-Shastra-Guru and therefore, he believes that he possesses Vyavahara Samyaktva (conventional right belief).  But their true characteristics are not grasped by him, therefore, his belief is also not true. Without true ascertainment, the right belief can-not be attained, hence he is a mis-believer only.

Contrary Form of Seven Tattvas(Elements)

Further, in the Shastra Tattvartha Sutra 1/2-

(Sanskrit sentence)

-such maxim is described. Therefore as per the description of Jiva etc. Tattvas written in the Shastras, he learns their characteristics, engrosses his Upayoga (thoughts) in them and preaches others accordingly, but the true nature of these Tattvas is not grasped by him and here the true nature of the substance is termed as Tattva.

So, how would the real belief in Tattvas be evolved without grasping their true nature? As to what is meant by "grasping the true nature, is explained here under:

As for becoming an expert (in music) some person learns through Shastras the accent, gamut, modulation, characteristic of melodies and kinds of rhythm and tune. But he does not identify the true nature of the tune of gamut, etc. Without identification of characteristic of melodies, etc. he assumes one particular form of accent or rhythm, etc. to be the different form of accent or rhythm, etc. or even if he discriminates them correctly he does not do so by ascertaining them properly; therefore, he does not possess expertise. Similarly, for becoming a true believer some person learns through Shastras the differentias of Jiva etc. Tattvas but he does not identify their true nature correctly. Without identifying their true nature, he assumes one particular Tattva to be a different Tattva or even if he under-stands them correctly he does not believe after ascertaining them properly; therefore, he does not attain right belief. Further, as someone who has studied or has not studied the Shastras but knows and identifies correctly the differentias of accent or rhythm, etc. then he is assuredly an expert. Similarly, someone who has studied or has not studied the Shastra if he knows and identifies the differentias of Jiva etc. Tattvas correctly then he is assuredly a true believer. As a deer does not know the name, etc. of the accent & melodies, etc. but grasps their true nature, similarly, an uneducated person though does not know the names of the Jiva etc. Tattvas yet he grasps their nature correctly that "I myself am a soul and the rest all are different from me, these feelings or thoughts are bad and these other feelings are good - identifying the true nature in this way is called correct grasping of Tattvas' nature (Bhava-Bhasna). The monk Shivabhuti was not knowing the name of Jiva etc. Tattvas and continued reciting  Tushmashbhin.  So, this was not a doctrinal word, but he became an omniscient by concentrating his meditation on the true nature of the self and non-self. On the other hand, the scholarly monk (Drauyalingi) learns and memories eleven Angas of Jain scripture and also knows the specific details of Jiva etc.  Tattvas but does not grasp correctly their true nature, therefore, remains a misbeliever only.

Now the type of belief in Tattvas as attained by him is being explained here:

	         Contrary Concept of Jiva-Ajiva Tattvas

Through Jaina's scripture the Vyavaharaabhasi gains the knowledge of various states of Jivas like mobile-immobile beings, etc., stages of spiritual development, quest places, etc., the kinds of inanimate substances like matter, etc. and their specialties like color attributes, etc., but he does not ascertain their true nature as described in Adhyatma Shastras (metaphysics) which is the instrumental cause of attaining Bheda-Vijnana (discriminating knowledge between the self & non-self) and Veetaraaga-Dasha (passionless pure state of the soul).

And if by some chance he gains their knowledge correctly then knows only on the basis of Shastras, but "identifying oneself to be the self and not to intermix any disposition or quality of other non-self substances in the self and any disposition or quality of the self in other non-self substances"- such true belief is not attained by him.  As the other misbelievers, without ascertainment, hold I-ness feeling in knowing activity as well as in complexion (body) etc. due to Paryaya Buddhi - mineness instinct in the knowing activity of the soul and discoursing-fasting, etc.  activities of the body, Similarly, he also holds I-ness feeling in knouring activity of the soul and observance of vows etc.  which are the activities of the body.

Though sometimes he narrates truly also as per the Shastra, but he does not possess true belief by internally ascertaining their differentias. Therefore, as an insane person calls his mother as mother also, even then he is not a wise man; similarly, this Vyavaharaabhasi is not a true believer.

Further, he talks about the soul in the same way in which he talks about other things but "I myself am this soul" - such inner sense is not grasped by him.

Further, he explains to others the difference between the soul and the body in the same way in which he explains to others the difference between them and someone else; but "I am distinctly different from these body, etc. things"- such inner sense is not grasped by him.

Further, in the embodied form many activities take place in the Jiva (soul) and the body (at one and the same time) due to mutual instrumentality; he knows them to have taken place by the combination of both the substances; "this is Jiva's activity and the Pudgala (matter) is the instrumental cause of it, this is Pudgala's activity and the Jiva is the instrumental cause of it" - such inner sense, of their separate activities is not realized by him. Without evolution of such inner sense he cannot be called a true believer of the real nature of Jiva-Ajiva, because this only was the purpose of knowing Jiva-Ajiva, which he has not attained.

	           Contrary Concept of Asrava-Tattva

And in Asrava-Tattva (Influx of karmas), he knows the inauspicious influx (Papaasrava) like committing Hinsa (injury), etc. as worth giving up and auspicious influx (Punyaasrava) like Ahinsa (non-violence) etc. as worth adopting. But both of these influxes are the causes of karmic bondage; believing them to be adaptable is false concept only. The same is described in Bandhaadhikara Chapter of Samayasara*.

(*Samayasara Gatha No. 254 to 256 and following verses from its commentary:

Sarv sadaev niyant bhavti svkeeykarmodyanmran. Jeevit dukhsokhyam
Agyanmaitdih yatu pra prasya kuryatpumanmaran.jeevitdusokhyam      --168

Agyanmaitdadhigmya pratprasya pshyanti yai muan.jeevitdukhsokhyam
Karmarn.yhankritirsain chikeershvstai mityadrisho niyamatmahano bhavanti   --169

The instrumental cause of life & death, happiness & sorrow for all mundane beings is their own karmas. When someone believes that these are caused to one Jiva by another Jiva, his such false concept is the cause of bondage. The false concept of making other beings happy and helping them to remain alive is the cause of Punya-bandha (bondage of auspicious karmas) and the misconcept of killing or causing sorrow is the cause of Papa-bandha (bondage of inauspicious karmas).

Thus like Ahinsa (non-violence), speaking truth, etc. are the causes of auspicious bondage and like Hinsa (violence) telling lies, etc. are the causes of inauspicious bondage. All these fallacies are to be renounced. Hence, knowing Ahinsa etc. (virtuous acts) also as the cause of bondage like Hinsa etc. (vicious acts), one should believe these (virtuous acts of Ahinsa etc.) worth giving up only.

In Hinsa (violence) one has the tendency of killing other Jivas, but no Jiva dies without the end of his age karma; this person due to his own malicious feelings binds himself by inauspicious karmas.  In Ahinsa (non-violence) one has the tendency of protecting the other Jiva but no Jiva remains alive without existence of his age karma.  This person due to his own auspicious attachment feeling binds himself by auspicious karmas. Thus both of these are worth giving up. When one remains a seer-knower only by evolving passionless state no bondage is caused - such a state is worth evolving. 

Therefore, till such a state of passionless is not attained, one should engage himself in auspicious form of conduct but at the same time he should maintain his belief that this too is the cause of bondage and hence worth giving up; if in his belief he treats it to be the path of liberation then he assuredly is a misbeliever.

Further, wrong belief (Mithyatva), non-abstinence (Avirati), passions (Kashayas) and Vibrational activity of soul (Yoga) all these are the causes of Asrava (influx).  The Vyavaharaabhasi believes these apparently but he does not identify correctly their inner nature.

He believes Graheeta-Mithyatva (newly acquired disbelief) in the form of adoration of false gods, etc. only to be the Mithyatva (wrong belief), but he does not identify the Agraheeta-Mithyatva (disbelief not acquired newly) which is found existing from beginningless time.

Further, he understands Avirati (vowlessness) to consist in external indulgence in injury of mobile and immobile beings and the objects of senses and mind. "But in injury (Hinsa) the basic factor is inattentiveness and in indulgence in sensual pleasures the basic factor is inner attachment", he does not pay attention on these.  Further, he knows that passions (Kashayas) consist in external acts of anger, etc. but the attachment-aversion feelings which are persisting in the inner-self, he does not identify them. He considers the external actions of body, mind & speech to be Yoga (vibrational activity), but he does not identify the vibrations (Yogas) existing in the soul potentially.

In this way he knows contrarily the nature of Asravas (influx).

And the psychic influxes which are existing in the form of delusion, attachment-aversion, he does not bother to exterminate them, rather makes effort for controlling external actions or for removing the external instrumental causes. But by removing them the psychic influx (Bhavaasrava) is not uprooted. The Dravyalingi monk does not adore other Devas etc., does not indulge in injury, etc.  and sensuous pleasures, does not become angry, controls mind - speech and body; nevertheless all the four kinds of Asravas (influxes) i.e., false belief, vowlessness, etc. are found in him. He does not indulge in these acts even deceitfully; if he indulges deceitfully then how would he attain birth up to Graiveyaka-heaven? Therefore, the attachment, etc. dispositions found along with false belief in the inner-self are the real Asravas (psychic influxes). But he does not identify them; therefore, he does not; have the true belief of Asrava-tattva also.

           Contrary Form of Bandha-tattva (Bondage)

As regards Bandha-tattva he understands the bondage of Papa (inauspicious karmas) in the form of hellish life, etc. caused due to inauspicious dispositions as harmful and bondage of Punya (auspicious karmas) in the form of heavenly life, etc., caused due to auspicious dispositions, as beneficial. But all Jivas are found having malice towards distressing objects (disagreeable associations) and attachment-feeling in pleasant objects (agreeable associations). He too possesses the same type of belief of indulging in attachment-aversion feelings. As he indulges in attachment-aversion feelings pertaining to agreeable- disagreeable objects in the present embodied state, similar type of aptitude is found about indulgence in attachment- aversion feelings pertaining to agreeable-disagree-able objects regarding future embodied existence.

Further, the specific difference of Punya & Papa (virtue & vice) is caused in the Aghati (non-destructive) karmas only due to auspicious and inauspicious thought activity; but the Aghati-karmas are not the destroyers of soul's attributes.  Moreover, by auspicious-inauspicious thoughts, the continuous bondage of Ghati (destructive) karmas takes place, all of which are of vicious nature only and the same are the destroyers of soul's attributes. Thus karmic bondage results from impure thoughts, therefore, differentiating them as good or bad is false belief only. 
So, by having such faith, he does not have true belief even of the Bandha-tattva (bondage).

               Contrary From of Samvara-tattva
                     (Stoppage of Influx)

And in Samvara-tattva he knows the Ahinsa (non-injury), etc. forms of auspicious influxes to be Samvara. But believing both Punyabandha (auspicious bondage) as well as Samvara (stoppage of influx) also by one and the same single cause only is not possible.

Question: The monks have only one disposition in one unit of time; there, both bondage as well as stoppage and shedding of karmas (Samvara & Nirjara) also are caused to them; how is it so?

Answer: That disposition is of mixed form. Partly it has become passionless and partly it contains passions. The parts which have become passionless cause Samvara (stoppage of influx) and the parts which contain passions cause Bandha (bondage). Thus, by one disposition two types of actions are caused but believing that both Punya-asrava (auspicious influx & bondage) and Samvara-Nirjara (stoppage & shedding of karmas) also are caused by one and the same disposition of auspicious attachment only is a fallacy. In the mixed state of a disposition also "this part consists of passions and this part consists of passionlessness" - such identification is possessed by a true believer only; therefore, he believes the remaining part of passion as worth giving up. The misbeliever does not have such discrimination, therefore, fallaciously understanding Samvara to consist in passional disposition, he believes the acts of auspicious attachment as worth adopting.

Further, in the scripture, it is described that Samvara is effected by Gupti (control), Samiti (carefulness) Dharma (virtue), Anupreksha (contemplation) Parishaha-Jaya (conquest over afflictions) and Charitra (conduct)* (.Saguptisamiti dharmanupraigyaparishahjycharibha I --Tatvartha sutra  9-2)  But he does not have right faith of these also.  The same is explained here- under:

(a) Gupti (Control): He believes Gupti to consist in controlling external activities of mind, speech and body, not contemplating on sinful activities, observing silence and not making movement, etc.  But here different kinds of thoughts (ruminations) are found arising in the mind due to auspicious attachment in the form of Bhakti (adoration) etc. There is willful control of speech and body. But all this is nothing but indulgence in auspicious activities and indulgence in activities is not Gupti (control). Therefore, on evolution of passionless disposition when no indulgence is found in the activities of mind, speech and body, that very state of the soul is real Gupti.

(b) Samiti (Carefulness): He believes Samiti to consist in careful movement, etc. for protecting other Jivas. But sin is caused due to injurious thoughts and if Samvara (stoppage of influx) is believed to consist in thoughts of protection then what will be the cause of auspicious bondage? And in the observance of Eshana-Samiti (carefulness in taking of food) he avoids transgressions but there the purpose is not that of protection; therefore, the Samiti does not consist merely in protection.

Then what is the differentia of Samiti? On evolution of slight attachment feeling in monks, movement, etc. activities are found.  But due to absence of excessive attachment feelings careless indulgence in those activities is not found. Moreover, the monks do not attain their purpose of movement, etc. by causing misery to other Jivas. Therefore, the compassion is automatically observed. Such is the differentia of real Samiti (carefulness).

(c) Dharma (Virtue): Further, they, - the Vyavaharaabhasis do not indulge in anger, etc. externally due to fear of karmic bondage, etc. or due to desire of heaven and liberation; but the intention of internal indulgence in anger, etc. is not uprooted. For example, if someone does not cohabit with other's wife due to fear of king, etc. or due to greed of one's name & fame, then he is not a renouncer (Tyagi). Similarly, this Vyavaharaabhasi is not a real renouncer of anger, etc. passions.

Question: How then one becomes a real renouncer?

Answer: Anger, etc. passions are caused due to the feeling of agreeableness and disagreeableness in other objects. On evolution of true knowledge of Tattvas when no object appears to be agreeable or disagreeable then automatically anger, etc. passions are not evolved and real virtue (Dharma), i.e., pure passionless state of the soul is thus produced.

(d) Anupreksha (Contemplation): Through contemplation on transitoriness, etc. knowing the body, etc. to be bad and non-beneficial he becomes apathetic towards it. This he believes to be Anupreksha (contemplation). So, this is analogous to the example, that there was some friend with whom one had affection and after knowing his demirits he became dejected towards him. Similarly, one had attachment feelings towards the body, etc., but afterwards realizing the demirits like perishableness, etc., he became apathetic towards it; but such an apathy is malicious only. "By identifying the true nature of the self (soul) and the body, etc. and thus uprooting delusion about them neither to develop attachment feeling nor eversion feeling towards body, etc. by treating them to be good or bad respectively" - thus, for the sake of evolving true apathy, reflecting on transitoriness, etc. is only the real Anupreksha (contemplation).

(e) Parishaha-Jaya (Conquest Over Afflictions): Further, he believes enduring of afflictions to consist in not making effort for pacifying hunger, etc.  on their rise.  Though he did not make effort yet on rise of feelings of hunger, etc., disagreeable things, he felt afflicted internally and on meeting the objects causing sensual pleasure, etc., he became happy. But these feelings of distress and happiness are nothing but the sorrowful and cruel meditation only. How can Samvara (stoppage of influx) be evolved by such thoughts? Therefore, not feeling distressed on meeting the cause of misery and not becoming happy on meeting the cause of pleasure but remaining only a knower, treating them as knowables, is the real enduring of afflictions.

(f) Charitra (Conduct): And he (the Vyavaharaabhasi) believes renouncing of indulgence in sinful activities like violence etc.  to be the Charitra (conduct). There, he believes the auspicious activities like observance of great vows, etc. to be worth adopting, treating them beneficial. But in Tattvartha-sutra under the description of Asrava- Pathartha (influx element) even the great vows (Mahavratas) and small vows (Aunvratas) are described to be the forms of Asrava. How can those be worth adopting? Moreover, Asrava (influx) is the cause of bondage whereas Charitra (conduct) is the cause of liberation. Therefore, treating as real conduct the observance of great vows, etc. which are forms of influx is not possible. 

Only the nonchalant state of the self, devoid of all sorts of passions, is termed Charitra (right conduct).

The extremely feeble form of auspicious attachment which is evolved due to the rise of partially destructive type of conduct deluding karmas is the impurity in Charitra (conduct).  Knowing that its renunciation is not possible presently, the (true monks) do not renounce it and renounce sinful activities only. But as some person for sakes tuber roots etc. kind of vegetables which involve lot of injury and eats many other types of vegetables but does not believe such eating to be virtuous, Similarly, the monks renounce the thoughts of intense passions like injury, etc. and observe great vows, etc., acts of mild passion, but do not believe it to be the true path of liberation.

Question: If it is so, then how are the great vows etc. mentioned under the thirteen kinds of conduct (Charitra)? 

Answer: That is described as Vyavahara Charitra (conventional conduct) and the Vyavahara means conventional name (upachara). And only on true observance of great vows, etc., the passionless (pure) conduct is evolved - knowing such relationship, the great vows are conventionally described as Charitra; but from the realistic standpoint, the) passionless disposition of the soul only is the true conduct.

In this way, knowing the causes of Samvara contrarily, he, the Vyavaharaabhasi, does not become a true believer of Samvara.

Contrary Concept of Nirjara-tattva
(Shedding of Karmas)

Further, he believes that the Nirjara (shedding of karmas) consists in practicing penance like fasting, etc. but merely by practicing external penances only, shedding of karmas does not occur. External penances are practiced for increasing the Shuddhopayoga (pure passionless conduct of self absorption). Shuddhopayoga is the (direct) cause of Nirjara; therefore conventionally the penance is also described as the cause of Nirjara. If enduring of the external afflictions only be the cause of Nirjara then the Tiryanchas (animals) etc. also endure hunger, thirst, etc. (afflictions).

Then he argues- "They (the animals) endure the afflictions due to helplessness but Nirjara is caused to him who practices fasting, etc. penances willfully with religious feeling."

Answer: One may practice external fasting, etc. with religious feeling and Upayoga (attention) may be found engrossed in inauspicious, auspicious or pure (passionless) state. If the rule be that "by practicing more fasts, etc. more Nirjara (shedding of karmas) is caused and by practicing less fasts, etc. less Nirjara is caused", then fasting, etc. only would be proved to be the main cause of Nirjara. But this is not correct (valid). How is Nirjara possible by practicing fast, etc. with vicious thoughts?

If it is said that bondage and shedding of karmas occur in accordance with inauspicious, auspicious & pure states of Upayoga, then how could fasting, etc. penances be treated as the main cause of Nirjara? The inauspicious and auspicious thoughts are proved to be the cause of bondage and the pure thought activity (Shuddha Bhava) the cause of Nirjara.

Question: Why then in Tattvarthasutra this maxim - i.e., Nirjara is caused by penance is stated?

Answer: In the Shastra it is also stated  -- which means restraining the desire is penance. So, if on mitigation of auspicious and inauspicious type of desires, the Upayoga becomes pure (passionless), there Nirajara is caused. Therefore, Nirjara is said to be caused by penance.

Here he says- "The penance is possible only on giving up the inauspicious desires of taking food, etc. but the desire of auspicious acts like fasting and expiation still persists?"         

Answer: The true believers have no desire of fasting, etc., they have only the desire of Shuddhopayoga and because Shuddhopayoga increases by observing fast, etc., therefore, they observe fast, etc.  And if they feel that Shuddhopayoga is likely to become weak due to weakness in the body or lack of enthusiasm in thoughts by observing fast, etc., then they take food, etc. If the purpose (of Shuddhopayoga) is achieved only by fasting, etc., then why did Ajitnatha etc., twenty-three Tirthankaras, after accepting asceticism, took the oath of fasting two days only? They had immense power, but they practiced Veetaraaga Shuddhopayoga (passionless pure state of Upayoga) by adopting such external means which were suitable to the state of their inner feelings.

Question: If it is so, why then fasting, etc. are termed as `Penance'?

Answer: Those are described as external penances. The meaning of the word `external' here is - "It should be visible outwardly to the others that he is an ascetic"; but one will reap the fruit according to his internal thoughts because the thoughtless activity of the body does not bear fruit.

Here he asks- "In scripture Akama-Nirjara i.e., shedding of karmas effected by enduring afflictions with patience, is also stated, which means that Nirjara is caused by enduring hunger, thirst, etc.  without desire of any fruit. How then the Nirjara is not caused by enduring afflictions through fasting, etc.?

Answer: In Akama Nirjara also, the external instrumental cause is enduring of hunger, thirst, etc. without any desire and if, there, the inner thoughts are of the order of feeble passion then the shedding of the inauspicious karmas takes place and the bondage of auspicious karmas like birth in heaven, etc.  is caused. But if auspicious bondage be caused by enduring the afflictions even in the state of intense passions, then all Tiryanchas (animals) etc. would definitely get heavenly birth. But this is not possible. Similarly, someone endures the afflictions of hunger, thirst, etc. by observing fast, etc. willfully which is an external instrumental cause, but the fruit is obtained in accordance with inner feelings. This is analogous to calling grain as life (vitality) itself. By adopting such external means the internal penance gets boosted; therefore, conventionally fasting, etc. are called penance. But if someone observes external penance only and internal penance is not evolved then even conventionally it cannot be termed as penance.

Also it is stated:

Kashaye vishyaharo tyago yatr vidheeyatai
Upvas sa vigyay shaishan langhnkan vidu

which means- "Where passions, carnal pleasures and food are forsaken, it is called a fast (Upavasa); mere for saking of food is termed Langhan (missing a meal) by the preceptors." 
Here he argues- "If this be so, then we will not observe fast etc.?"

Answer: Discourse is meant for upward movement (in spiritual path); what can we do if you adopt the path of reversion? If you observe fast, etc. with pride passion, etc., then observing or not observing (the fast, etc.) both are meaningless. And if you give up affection towards food, etc. with religious attitude then in whatever measure attachment is reduced, it is real reduction; but you should not feel contented by knowing and believing this (fasting, etc.) itself to be the penance and also cause of Nirjara (shedding of karmas).

And under the internal penances, the external observance in the activities performed in the form of expiation, reverence, service, study, renunciation and meditation, is to be known similar to that of external penances only. As fasting, etc. are external activities, similarly these too are also external activities; therefore, external observances of expiation, etc. are not internal penance. In such external activities if there be internal purity of thoughts, the same is called internal penance.

There too it should be particularly noted that on evolution of high degree of purity the thoughts get turned into Shuddhopayoga form which causes shedding of karmas (Nirjara) only; bondage is not caused. And on evolution of lower degree of purity, some degrees of Shubhopayoga (auspicious thought activity) also exist; therefore, in whatever measure purity is evolved, it causes Nirjara and whatever degrees of auspicious dispositions are still found, the same cause bondage. Such a mixed state of disposition is found in one and the same unit of time due to which both bondage and Nirjara (shedding are caused.

Here someone may say- "By auspicious dispositions the shed- ding of Papa (vice) karmas and bondage of Punya (virtue) karmas take place, but why do you not accept that by pure (passionless dispositions shedding of both Papa & Punya karmas is caused?

Answer: While ascending in the path of liberation, reduction of duration of all kinds of Prakrities (karmas) takes place; there lies no discrimination between Punya and Papa. And reduction of fruition in Punya-Prakritis is not caused even by pure passionless dispositions (Shuddhopayoga). Rather in the higher spiritual stages, intense bondage and rise of fruition of Punya-Prakritis is caused and the atoms of Papa- Prakritis get transformed into the form of Punya-Prakritis - such transformation is caused on evolution of both the Shubha (auspicious) and Shuddha (pure passionless) forms of dis- positions. Therefore, the aforesaid rule is not possible; only according to the degrees of purity the rule is possible. 

It should be noted that though the Jiva of fourth Gunasthana engrosses himself in the study of scripture and meditation of self-soul, etc., yet Nirjara (shedding of karmas) is not caused and excessive bondage too is caused. And though the Jiva of fifth Gunasthana (observing partial conduct) may be indulging in the acts of carnal pleasures, etc., yet Gunashreni Nirjara (shedding of karmas in geometrical progression) continues and only feeble bondage is caused. Further, the Jiva of fifth Gunasthana may be practicing penances like fasting, expiation etc., in that time also Nirjara (shedding of karmas) caused is of lower order.  But the monk of sixth Gunasthana may be found engaged in the activity of taking food or making movement, etc., in that time also Nirjara caused is of higher order and bondage caused is also of lower order as compared to the Jiva of fifth Gunasthana (observing the penance, etc.).

Therefore, Nirjara (shedding of karmas) is not caused according to external observances; but Nirjara takes place on evolution of purity (passionlessness) due to lessening of internal power of passions. The details of the same will be described later on; one should know the same from there.

Therefore, the activities of fasting, etc. are to be known as penance (Tapa) only conventionally. This is why it is described as Vyavahara Tapa. The meaning of Vyavahara and Upachara is one and the same. And the passionless form of purity evolved by adopting such (external) means is the real penance which is to be known as the cause of Nirjara.

Here an example is being given: Wealth and food grains are stated to be the Prana (vitality). Because by wealth the food grains are purchased and the Pranas (vitalities) are fostered by eating the same; therefore, conventionally the wealth and food grains are described to be the Prana (vitality) itself. If someone does not know the senses, etc. as Pranas and stocks food grains, etc. believing them to be the Pranas, he will certainly die. Similarly, fasting and expiation, etc. are called as penance because by adopting means like fasting, etc. and undergoing expiation, etc. the real penance of the form of passionless disposition is fostered. Therefore, conventionally fasting, etc. and expiation, etc., are described as penances. If someone does not know the passionless disposition form of penance and knowing these external observances to be penances adopts them only then he will continue transmigrating in the world only.

What more to say, it should be understood that passionlessness is real religion. Many other details of the same are described conventionally to be religion from external means point of view only.  So, these are to be known simply as conventional forms of religion.  But the Vyavaharaabhasi does not know this secret, that is why he does not possess true belief of Nirjara-tattva also.

         Contrary Concept of Moksha-tattva (Liberation)

Further, he believes the attainment of Siddha state to be the Moksha (liberation). In such a state, birth, death, disease, etc. afflictions are destroyed, infinite knowledge of universe-non-universe is evolved and adorability by whole of the universe is attained - by these things he knows Siddhas to be supreme. But all Jivas have the desire of destroying miseries, knowing the knowables and becoming adorable. If he desires liberation for the sake of these things only then how is his belief different from those of other Jivas?

Further, he also has such inner understanding that happiness in the state of liberation is infinite times more than the happiness found in heaven. In this process of multiplication, he identifies the happiness found in both heaven and liberation to be of the same type.  There in heaven, the happiness is caused by enjoyment of objects of sensual pleasures; this type of happiness is known to him but in the state of liberation, the objects of sensuous pleasures are not present, therefore, he does not understand the type of happiness found there.  But because great persons describe happiness found in liberation to be superior to that found in heaven also, therefore, he too believes it to be superior. For example, some person does not understand the true nature of music (rhythm) of the song, etc. but because all persons in the assembly praise it, so, he also praises it. Similarly, this (Vyavaharaabhasi) believes Moksha (liberation) superior.

Here he questions- "In scriptures also happiness of Siddhas (liberated souls) is described to be infinite times more than that of the Indras (heavenly gods) etc.?"

Answer: For example, the luster of the Tirthankara's body is described to be crores times more than that of the sun's radiance, but the two luster’s are not of the same type, but because in the world sun's radiance is considered to be highly significant, so, for showing greater significance in comparison the rhetorical simile is given.  Similarly, the happiness found in Siddhas' is described to be infinite times more than that found in Indras etc. heavenly gods.  But both the types of happiness are not alike.  However, in the world Indra's happiness is considered to be very significant, so, for showing greater significance in comparison the rhetorical simile is given.

Again he questions "How did you conclude that he understands the Siddha's happiness and Indra's happiness to be of the same type?"

Answer: He believes that the attainment of heavenly birth and the state of liberation is the fruit of the same type of religious activity.  Some Jiva may attain the status of Indra etc. and some other Jiva may attain liberation.  In this he believes the attainment of both as the fruit of the same type of religion.  Although he holds this belief that one who practices such religious activity in a smaller measure he attains liberation.  But he knows the type of religious activity in both the cases to be of the same type. Therefore, one who believes the causes to be of the same type, also believes the resulting fruit of the same type; because on meeting a particular cause only, a particular fruit is obtained.  Therefore, we have concluded that he understands the happiness of Indras etc. and the happiness of the Siddhas (liberated souls) to be of the same type.

And due to instrumentality of karmas, the soul was having impure (contrary) dispositions; on their dissociation, the self-soul attains its pure intrinsic form.  For example, the atom becomes pure on its separation from the molecule, similarly this, the embodied self-soul, becomes pure after separation from the (bondage of) karmas etc.  The only difference is that the atom is neither miserable nor happy in both the states; but the soul was miserable in the impure (mundane) state, now on its extinction the imperturbable (natural) type of infinite bliss is attained.

Further, the type of happiness found Indras etc. is able to be perturbed due to passional dispositions.  So, from spiritual point of view, it is sorrow only.  Therefore, both the types of happiness are not identical.  Moreover, the cause of heavenly happiness is auspicious attachment and the cause of happiness attained in liberation is passionless disposition; therefore, their causes are also different, but such distinctive character is not realized by him.  Therefore, he does not have the true belief of Moksha (liberation) also.

Thus, he does not have true belief to the Tattvas, that is why in Samaysara (Atmakhyati commentary on Gatha No 276-277) it is stated that even if an incapable soul develops faith in Tattvas he still possesses false belief only.  And in Pravachansara it is stated that belief in Tattvas, devoid of knowledge, of self-soul, is not efficacious.

Further, he observes the eight characteristics of right belief, avoids the twenty-five blemishes, practices Samvega (awe of worldly existence) etc. qualities as described in the scripture from conventional point of view; but, as without sowing the seeds, the corn is not produced in spite of adopting all other means (of cultivation), similarly, without attainment of true faith in Tattvas right belief is not evolved.  In Panchastikaya commentary, where in the end of description of so-called religionist (Vyavaharaabhasi) is given, there too the same type of statement is found.

In this way, even on his making efforts for attaining right belief, the right belief is not evolved.

             Contrary Concept of Right Knowledge

In the scripture it is stated that true knowledge (Samyag- Jnan) is attained by the study of scriptures. Therefore, he zealously engages himself in the study of Shastras.  There, he engages his Upayoga in the activities like learning, teaching memorizing, studying, reading, etc. but he does not pay attention on its purpose.  In this sermon, it is not realized by him "what is purposeful for him"; rather he holds the intention of preaching others by studying the Shastras himself and where many Jivas accept and follow his discourse, he becomes satisfied.  But the attainment of knowledge is meant for one's own benefit; however, if occasion arises for benefiting others also he discourses them also.  And if somebody does not listen to his discourses he may not listen, but why should the discourser feel sorry for it? By grasping the real sense of the scripture, one should benefit himself.

Even in the study of scriptures, many Jivas engage themselves in the study of Shastras pertaining to grammar, logic, poetry, etc. but these are the cause of showing scholarship in the world; they do not contain description relating to the benefit of the self-soul.  The purpose of their study is only this that if one possesses sharp intellect then he should, after studying these in smaller or greater measure, study the Shastras which are beneficial for the self-soul.  But, if someone possesses average intellect, he should study only the easily graspable Shastras which are helpful in self-realization.  One should not engage himself in the study of grammar, etc. so much so that his life may come to an end without obtaining true knowledge of Tattvas.

here someone may say- "If this be so, then one should not study grammar, etc.?"

Answer: Without the study of grammar, etc., the inner meaning of the great books does not become clear, hence their study is also desirable.

He again questions: "Why are the great books written in a manner that without study of grammar, etc. their meaning does not become clear?  Why did the Acharyas not write the Shastras containing wholesome preachings in simple understandable language?  They were not having any selfish motive?"

Answer:  In dialectal language also, the words of Prakrit and Sanskrit etc.  only are used but those are in corrupt form (Apbbhransha).  Moreover, the dialectal language is found in different-different forms from place to place, then how could the great persons (saints) write the Apbharansha words in the Shastras?  The young child may speak stutteringly but the elder ones do not speak in this way.  And if the Shastras, written in the language of one place, are taken to another place then how would its meaning become clear there? Therefore, the Shastras are written in the form of pure words of Prakrit, Sanskrit, etc.

Further, without grammar the real meaning of the words does not become clear; without logic the differentia and verification, etc. cannot be ascertained properly.  So, knowing that without the knowledge of grammar, etc., the ascertainment of the true nature of the substances cannot be done correctly through the words, the scriptures are written in accordance with their orthographical tradition.  In the dialectal language also, only by making some use of their orthographical tradition the discourses are possible but by making greater use of their orthographical teadition the ascertainment cannot be done more clearly.

Question: "If it is so, why then books are now written in spoken language?"

Answer: Knowing that Jivas level of knowledge is reduced due to bad times and considering that people will understand to the extent they possess knowledge, the scriptures are not able to learn grammar, etc., should study through such books only.

And the Jivas who learn grammar etc. in detail with the purpose of expanding the meaning of various words in different ways and study books on logic, etc. for proving their greatness through arguments and counter-arguments and study poetry for showing their cleverness, study these with the object of fulfilling worldly desires,  are not religious persons.  Only such persons should be known to be religious and wise persons who study in some measure these books as per their capacity with the purpose of self-enlightenment through the ascertainment of Tattvas (substances) etc.

And many people study the mythological books (Puranas) describing the consequences (fruits) of virtue and vice (Punya and Papa), the ethical books describing the virtuous and vicious activities and the books of aetiology (karnanuyoga) describing Jiva's spiritual stage of development (Gunasthanas), quest places (Margana-sthanas), karma Prakritis (types etc. of karmic matter) and the details of three worlds (universe) etc.; but if they do not think over the purpose of their study, then their all such study is nothing but the memorization and repetition like that of a parrot only.  And if they think over the purpose of these Shastras also then come to know the Papa (vice) as harmful, Punya (virtue) as beneficial and also know the differentias of spiritual stages and believe that they will be benefited to the extent to which they study these Shastras; only this much purpose is kept in view by them.  So, by such study and attitude, at least this much will be achieved that they will not get a hellish birth and will get heavenly birth; but the real right path of liberation will not be achieved.

First of all one must acquire the correct knowledge of the Tattvas, then he should know that the fruit of Tattvas, then he should know that the fruit of Punya-Papa (Virtue and vice) is transmigration (sansara), should believe that liberation (Moksha) is attainable by Shuddhopayoga (passion-less pure conduct) and should know that Gunasthanas (spiritual stages) etc. are described as the states of Jivas from conventional point of view.  Thus by believing these (Tattvas etc.) as they really are, if he devotes himself in their study, then the right knowledge will be evolved.

In fact, the means of attaining true knowledge of Tattvas are the Shastras of Dravyaanuyoga (metaphysics) wherein the real nature of soul is described.  Many Jivas study these Shastras also but they do not believe the self to be the self, non- self to be the non-self and Asrava (influx) etc. to be the Asrava etc. with due ascertainment as is described in those Shastras.  By mouth the Vyavaharaabhasi may described the Tattvas exactly (as described in Shastras), by listening to whose discourses the other Jivas may become true believers.  For example, a boy under disguise of a woman, sings such a song by listening to which lustful feelings may be evolved in other men- women, etc., but that boy merely repeats what he has learnt; he does not grasp the true meaning of it and therefore, he himself does not become lustful.  Similarly, this (Vyavaharaabhasi) preaches exactly as written in the Shastra but himself does not grasp the true sense of it.  Had he evolved true belief in him, he would have not mixed the part of different tattva into other Tattva, but he is not aware of this.  Therefore, right knowledge is evolved in him.

In this way, he may study up to eleven Angas (of Jain scripture), even then he does not attain self-realization. From this angle, in Samayasara etc., attainment of knowledge up to eleven Angas by perverse believer is stated to be possible.

Question: So much knowledge is attained by him but is his knowledge of the same type as was possessed by Abhavyasen without belief in it?
Answer: He (Abhavyasen) was a sinner who was not afraid of the activities involving injury, etc. but the Jiva who obtains birth in Graivieyaka, etc. heavens possesses such knowledge which is not without belief.  He holds such belief that these books are true but true belief in Tattvas is not attained by him.  In Samayasara it is stated that any one Jiva can obtain belief of religion, knowledge of eleven Angas and may be found observing the conduct of great vows, etc. also.  In Pravachansara it is stated that a Jiva may obtain such a knowledge of the scriptures (Agama-jnana) by which he knows this too that I am the knower of these things but :such realization that I myself am an embodiment of knowledge (Jnana-swaroopa), only a sentient substance distinctly separate from other objects", is not attained by him. Therefore, knowledge of Shastras also, devoid of the knowledge of the self, is not fruitful.

In this way, although he (the Vyavaharaabhasi) studies the Jain-Shastra’s for obtaining true knowledge, yet the true knowledge is not attained by him.

The Contrary Form of Right Conduct

The type of conduct practiced by such persons for the sake of right conduct is now being described:

They (Vyavaharaabhasis) pay attention on the observance of external conduct but they do not bother about the purity or impurity (improvement of defilement) of inner dispositions. And even if they pay attention on inner thoughts then too their attention remains fixed on the prevalent thoughts; but on close analysis of the tradition of those thoughts and dispositions it seems that they don not care about the inner desire (for sensual pleasure).  And the fruit reaped is that of the longing existing in inner feelings.  The same will be discussed in detail later on where its real characteristics will become clear.  So in the absence of such identification they are found making effort for external conduct only.

There, many Jivas follow the external (religious) conduct either due to family-tradition or by observing others or under the influence of anger, pride, deceit and greed passions.  Such people do not have even a religious bent of mind; how could they evolve right conduct?  In such Jivas (followers of external conduct) some are ignorant and some others are passionate; so due to ignorance and passional feelings the right conduct can not be evolved.

And many Jivas believe: "What is there in knowing, fruit will be reaped only on practicing religion."  Under such thoughts they continue making efforts of observing external religious conduct like vow, penance, etc. and do not make effort for attaining Tattva-Jnana (true knowledge of Tattvas).  So without attaining the right knowledge of Tattvas one gets the title of vowless true believer even without practicing vows, etc.  Therefore, first of all one should make effort for attaining the right knowledge of Tattvas and thereafter, for the sake of lessening and destroying the passions, he should adopt the external means of right conduct.  The same is described in Shravakaachara written by monk Shri Yogeendra Deva thus:

Dasan.bhoominh vahira jiyavyrookankh n.a hunti

Meaning: "O Jiva! without the base of this right belief the trees of vows, etc. are not possible, i.e., the Jivas who do not possess the right knowledge of Tattvas cannot practice the real right conduct".

The same is being clarified here under: Many Jivas from the very beginning take (the oath of ) higher vows without destruction of internal carnal desires and passions. Therefore, they want to fulfill the vow somehow.  There, in such observance of vows, their inner feelings are hurt.  For example, someone observes too many fasts and later on by becoming miserable like a patient passes the time somehow and does not practice the religious code.  So, in the beginning itself, why should he not take such a vow only which he can observe?  In such distressed feelings the Aarta-Dhyana (sorrowful concentration) only results, how could its fruit be agreeable? Or when the pain of that vow is not endured then in its place he adopts other means for fostering sensuality.  For example, when he feels thirsty he does not take water and instead adopts other various types of treatments producing cooling effect or he gives up Ghee (clarified butter) and instead eats other oily substances with effort.  Similarly, one should know about other conventional observances.

If the Parishahas (afflictions) could not be endured, the carnal desires were not overcome, why did he then take such type of vow?  Why should one engage himself in such activities which might result in giving up simple means of satisfying one's desire and involve oneself in complicated means of satisfying desires?  On the other hand, in such states, the attachment feeling gets intensified there.

Further, when misery is felt in observing vows then, for engaging one's attention, he thinks of other recourses.  For example, after accepting the vow of fast he starts playing games; many wicked persons indulge in vicious activities like gambling, etc. or keep on sleeping.  They knowingly and will- fully want to pass time anyhow.  Similarly, one should know about other vows.

There are many wicked persons who first take the vow but when they feel afflicted by it then they give up.  Taking and giving up of vow is a mere sport for them, but breaking of vow is great sin.  It would be better if such persons do not take a vow.  In this way, the Vyavaharaabhasis first take the vow thoughtlessly and later on get involved in such state of affairs.

In Jain religion not taking a vow is not punishable.  The preaching of Jain religion is that one should first know the real nature of Tattvas; after wards whatever object he forsakes he should know its flaws and should know the merit involved in such forsaking; then he should modify his thoughts accordingly; should not take a vow merely on the strength of present thoughts only, rather should take the vow after being convinced of sustaining it in future and should also take into consideration his physical strength as well as suitability of environment related with substance, region, time and feelings etc.  In this way, one should take a vow after giving due thoughts to all these things.  Further, the vow taken too, should be of such a degree which would not cause feelings of disrespect towards it, and on the other hand would accelerate the feelings of taking higher vows. Such is the tradition of Jain religion.  Here someone may ask that the Chandalas etc. untouchable (low category) persons also take the vows; how do they take into consideration all these things?

Answer: They take the vow with strong determination that they will not give up the vow even if they have to suffer from miseries ending in death.  They have no feeling of disrespect towards the vow.

And whatever vows the true believers take they do so on the basis of right knowledge of Tattvas.

Further, those who do not have internal feeling of detachment and dispassion and take some external vow, they indulge with excessive fondness in the beginning and end of the meals taken before and after observing the fast, they take heavy rich food with excessive greed passion and do this hurriedly. So, as the flow of water was obstructed, when the obstruction got removed then immediately excessive flow started. Similarly by means of vow the indulgence in the objects of senses was kept checked but the internal fondness towards it went on increasing and at the end of the period of vow towards it went on increasing and at the end of the period of vow excessive indulgence in the object of senses started. This means that even during the period of the vow the longing for sensuous objects (carnal desire) was not really controlled; before and after the period of the vow, excessive fondness towards it arose but the fruit (of taking vow) could be repeated only on the destruction of attachment feeling.  Therefore, one should take the vow in the measure in which dispassionate feeling is evolved.  Even the great monks, after taking the vow of lower degree, gradually reduce the quantity of food, etc.  And if they take the vow of higher degree, they do so after ascertaining their strength (of body and soul).  Thus, they act in a manner which is conductive to acceleration of higher thoughts.  Only such type of religious practice is fruitful which neither cause negligence nor result in restlessness.

Further, those who do not have religious attitude they sometimes follow higher religious practices but at other times indulge in unrestrained practices.  For example, in some religious festivals they take meals, etc. many times.  If there be religious attitude then they should observe suitable continence, etc. in all the religious festivals.  Further, sometimes in some religious acts they spend lot of money but if suddenly some religious activity is organized they do not spend even a little amount of money in it.  However, if they have real religious aptitude then they should continue spending money as per their capacity suitably in all religious activities.  Similarly, one should know in other matters.

Further, those who do not have true understanding of religious practices accept some religious rite (vow) of higher order and practice other rites (vows) of lower order. For example, they forsake wealth, etc. but they indulge interestedly in sensual pleasures like taking rich food and wearing fancy clothes, etc.  And some people show their devout-ness by forsaking woman and wearing the special robes, etc. and later on they indulge in forbidden trades and slanderous sinful activities.  In this way, they adopt some practices of very high order and some other practices of very low order.  Thus, becoming slanderous they cause mockery of religion and people pointedly say that behold! the so-called devout person is indulging in such practices.  For example, some person wears one cloth of very superior quality and another cloth of very inferior quality then he becomes an object of mockery; similarly, such religious person also becomes and object of ridicule.

The tradition of true religion is this that one should accept all religious activities (vows) possible in what so ever status one exits to the extent one’s passions are destroyed.  If passions are destroyed in lesser measure then one should accept the rites of lower status but after accepting higher status one should not practice activities possible in lower status.

Here is a question that the renunciation of coition etc. is admonished in higher stages of householder’s vows (Pratimas); therefore, whether a person belonging to lower status should renounce them or not?

Answer:  A person of lower status cannot renounce them totally, some fault may persist; therefore, renunciation is admonished in higher stages of householder's vows (Pratimas),.  Whatever  type of renunciation is possible in lower states, the person belonging to lower stages should also observe it; but the acceptance of that vow which is not at all possible in lower stages is done only due to pressure of passional feelings.  For example, if someone who indulges in seven bad habits, renounces cohabitation with his wife then how is this justifiable?  Although renouncing one’s wife is a religious act, nevertheless, first of all, seven bad habits are to be given up, then only renouncing of one’s wife is desirable.  Similarly, one should know about other things.  

Further, some Jiva who has not acquired the knowledge of religious conduct from all angles, lays more emphasis on some (particular) religious rites while ignores other rites. For example, many Jivas while emphasizing benevolence towards living beings, propagate refutation of other religious activities like worshipping, glorification, etc.  Many others while emphasizing religious acts like worshipping, glorification, etc., do not bother about activities involving injury, etc.  Many people while emphasizing penances (Tapa) observe fast, etc. even in the state of painful meditation and, considering themselves to be ascetics (Tapaswi), indulge in anger-passion, etc. undauntedly.  Many others laying emphasis on charity, give donation even by earning wealth through indulgence in sinful activities, indulge in begging etc.- in many such ways these people indulge in sinful acts by emphasizing some aspect of religion while totally neglecting the other aspects of religious activities.

All the aforesaid activities of such persons are similar to that of an injudicious trader who gets more loss in many ways through some business activity which he adopts for the sake of profit.  The object of a business man being earning of profit, what is desirable is that after considering all aspects he should act in such a manner which results in more profit.  Similarly, the object of a true believer is evolution of passionless; therefore, after considering all aspects he should act in a manner which results in a greater degree of passionlessnes; because the basic religion is passionlessness (Veetaragabhava).

In this way, the injudicious persons accept religious conduct perversely; therefore, they do not possess even the slightest trace of right conduct.

Further, many Jivas follow correctly small vows-great vows form of conduct and their thoughts are also in accordance with their conduct.  They do not have any intention of  (fulfilling the object of) deceit or greed passion, etc.; they follow such conduct believing it to be religion for the sake of liberation.  They do not even have the longing for heavenly pleasures; but since they have not firstly acquired the right knowledge of Tattvas, therefore, they believe that they are adopting the means of liberation but they even do not know the means of liberation and instead adopt the means of heavenly birth only. If someone eats the clarified sugar lump knowing it to be the nectar then he can not achieve the object resulting from eating nectar; the fruit is not reaped according t one’s own conviction, rather it is reaped in accordance with the means adopted.

In Shastra (scripture) it is stated that the word Samyak (right or true) prefixed to the word Charitra (conduct) is meant for refuting the conduct followed in the state of ignorance.  Therefore, first of all one should attain real knowledge of Tattvas and thereafter the Charitra (conduct) should be practiced; then only it gets the name Samyak Charitra (right conduct).  For example, if some farmer does not sow the see and performs other related activities then how would he reap the corn? Only grass, etc. would be obtained.  Similarly, the ignorant person does not make effort for acquiring real knowledge of Tattvas but adopts other conventional rites then how could he obtain liberation? Only heavenly birth, etc. will be possible.

There are many such Jivas who do not even know the names of the Tattvas correctly and follow the external vows, etc. only.  There are many other Jivas who indulge in the observance of vows, etc. in the aforesaid manner on the basis of false knowledge of right belief and knowledge.  Although they correctly observe the conduct of vows, etc., nevertheless, without attaining right belief and knowledge, the whole of the conduct is false conduct only.

The same thing is stated in Samayasara Kalasha

Klishyantan svyamaiv dushkartarae morgyonmukhae
Klishyantan cha parai mhavratpobharin.  Bhagnashricharm
Sakshanmokshmind niramypdansanvaidyamanaan svyan
Gyanan gyangun.an  bina kathmapi praptun kshmantai na hi          ---141

Meaning:  Some Jivas, averse to liberation-path, might indulge in severe austerities in involving penance of the type of heating of body, etc. and some other Jivas might be thinning their body and bearing afflictions by the weight of observing great vows and penance for a pretty long time, they may do so, but without attaining right knowledge they are not capable for obtaining this explicit liberated nature of soul which is devoid of all kinds of diseases, and the sentient nature which is realizable by itself.

And, in Panchastikaya, at the end, where the description about Vyavaharaabhasi is given, it is stated that even observance of thirteen-kinds of conventional conduct does not lead to the path of liberation.

Further, in Pravachansara, observance of continence without realization of self-soul has been stated to be fruitless.  In these Shastras as well as in Paramatma-Prakash etc., other Shastras also, description emphasizing this aspect is found at several places.

Therefore, the observance of conduct is efficacious only on attaining the Tattva-jnana (right knowledge of Tattvas) first.

Here somebody may understand that some Jivas externally observe the small vows or great vows, but the internal thoughts are desire of getting heavenly birth, etc. But observance with such intention results in bondage of inauspicious karmas.  The Dravyalingi Muni can obtain births even up to the last Graiveyaka heaven and in the five kinds of transmigration’s attaining of Deva-ayu (heavenly life) of thirty-one Sagaras is described to be possible only when one observes the great vows with internal thoughts and inclination, possesses extremely feeble passions, has no desire of carnal pleasures either of this world or of the next world and adopts such means (vows) etc. with religious aptitude only having desire of liberation.  Therefore, the Drayalingi Muni is not found in him which can be grasped by the true believer only.

Now it is being explained how they practice religious conduct and what perversity lies in it:

Firstly, in the world knowing the agonies and sorrows of hellish life, etc. and also the agonies of birth and death, etc. even in the heavenly life, they desire liberation being dejected from the world.  So, everybody knows these agonies to be sorrowful. The Indras- Ahimindras heavenly gods enjoy sensual pleasures due to affection in carnal desires.  Therefore, those persons who believe even such sensual pleasures to be sorrow only, and by identifying the imperturbable blissful state, desire to attain liberation, are t be known as true believers.

Secondly, the fruit of carnal pleasures, etc. results in hellish birth, etc.; body is impure, perishable and not worth fostering; relatives, etc. are selfish companions only; thus, considering the faults of other non-self objects, they forsake them.  And the fruit of observing vows, etc. is birth in heaven or attaining liberation; observance of penances, etc. produces pure imperishable fruit; torturing the body through them is desirable; the Deva-Guru-Shastra etc. are benefactors-likewise thinking the aforesaid qualities of other non-self objects, they (the Vyavaharaabhasis) accept and practice them only.  Thus, in various ways, knowing some other non-self object to be good, believe it to be agreeable.  Therefore, believing non-self objects to be agreeable-disagreeable is perverse belief.  

And due to such faith only, their feeling of renunciation is also of malicious form; because malice consists in knowing other things to be bad.

Someone may say- “The right believers too renounce other substances knowing them to be bad?”

Answer:  The true believers do not treat other substances to be bad, rather they know their attachment feeling to be bad.  They give up the feeling of attachment due to which the cause of attachment is also renounced.  On thinking over the nature of substance, it becomes clear that no substance (non-self object) is bad or good.

Someone may say- “Is it not instrumental cause?”

Answer:  None other substance defiles forcible; when our own thoughts get defiled then only it is called an external instrumental cause.  Moreover, one’s thoughts get defiled even without that instrumental cause, therefore it is not even an indispensable instrumental cause also.  Thus, finding fault in other substance, is wrong belief.  The feelings of attachment, etc. only are bad but he (Vyavaharaabhasi) does not understand this.  Finding fault in other substances, he develops in them feeling of dejection full of malice.  The real apathy consists in not finding fault or merit in any other substance; therefore, one should not know anything bad or good, should know the ‘self’ to be the self and ‘non-self’ to be the non-self; “I have no concern with other non-self substance at all”; having such belief one should remain only a person who knows and a seer.  Such type of apathy is found in a true believer only.

Further, with the feeling of apathy he accepts small vows or great vows form of conventional conduct as described in Shastras, renounces, partially or wholly, indulgence in sinful acts like injury, etc. and instead engages himself in auspicious form of activities like non-injury, etc.  And earlier as he used to believe his doership in the sinful activities related to embodied modifications, similarly, now he started believing his doership in virtuous activities related to embodied modifications.  Thus there became parity of believing I-ness feeling in the activities related to embodied modifications.  For example, “I kill Jivas, I am possessor of professions”- such was his belief.  Similarly, “I protect Jivas, I am naked and possession-less”, now he believes so.  Therefore, I-ness feeling in activities related to embodied modifications is false belief only.

The same is stated in Samayasara Kalasha also.

Yai tu kartarmatmanan pshyanti tamsa tata 
Samanyajnavtaishan na mokshopi mumukshutan ---------   199

Meaning:  The Jivas, who, being covered by the darkness of falsehood, believe themselves to be the doer of the activity related to embodied modification, may even be the aspirants of liberation; but as the ordinary people belonging to non-Jaina faiths do not attain liberation, similarly, these Vyavaharaa-bhasis also do not attain liberation because of the parity of faith of doership.

And in this way, he, treating himself to be the doer, constantly engages himself through mind, speech and body in the activities of householder’s or monks’ religion; practices these rites in such a way that there is no transgression in them.  But such thoughts are Saraaga (tinged with auspicious attachment feelings) whereas the Charitra (conduct) is a Veetaraaga Bhava (an attachment-less disposition of the soul).  Therefore, believing such means to be the path of liberation is false belief.

Question:  The Charitra (conduct) is described to be of two kinds:  Saraaga, i.e., with attachment and Veetaraaga i.e., without attachment.  How is it so?

Answer:  For example, rice is of two types:  one is with husk and one without husk.  There, one should know that the husk is not the nature of the rice, it is a blemish in rice.  Some wise person was collecting the rice with husk, seeing him, if some ignorant person, considering husk itself to be the rice, starts collecting husk only then he will uselessly become miserable only.  Similarly, Charitra (conduct) is of two kinds:  Saraaga (with attachment) and Veetaraaga (without attachment).  There, one should know that the Raaga (attachment feeling) is not the nature of conduct, but is a blemish in conduct.  Further, many true believes observe conduct with auspicious attachment; seeing them, if some ignorant person considering the auspicious attachment (conventional conduct only) then he will uselessly become miserable only.

Question:  Someone may ask here- “By indulging in sinful activities intense passions were caused, now on observing the aforesaid religious activities, feeble passions resulted; therefore, to the extent to which passions exist, you may call it passions.  In this way, the conduct with auspicious attachment is possible.  

Answer:  I f it be so, preceded by real knowledge of Tattvas then what you say is correct.  Without Tattvas’ knowledge even the highest degree of conventional conduct is termed incontinent (Asanyama) only; because the intention of indulging in passions is not eradicated.  The same is being explained:

The Dravyalingi Muni accepts Nirgrantha (naked possession-less) state by renouncing kingdom, etc., observes the twenty-eight basic codes of conduct, practices the highest degree of penance in great measure, endures hunger, etc. twenty-two kinds of Parishahas (afflictions), does not become perturbed even if the body is cut into several pieces, remains firm even on meeting several causes of breach of vow, does not become angry with any body, does not boast of such practices, does not follow these practices with the intent of deceit, does not become angry with any body, does not boast of such practices, does not follow these practices with the intent of deceit, does not desire to obtain carnal pleasures pertaining to this world or other world by such practices-such is his state of body and mind.  If his state be not of such type, how would then he reach up to the Graiveyaka heaven? But in scripture he is termed as incontinent false believer only.  The reason for this is that he has not evolved right belief and knowledge of Tattvas. His knowledge & belief of Tattvas is of the type described earlier; with such intention only he practices all the aforesaid activities, but on thinking over the tradition of the intention of these means, the intention of indulging in passions is found.

How is it so? The same is being described:  “He renounces attachment feeling etc.  which are the causes of vice (Papa) knowing them worth giving up but believes worth accepting and adopting the auspicious type of attachment which is the cause of virtue (Punya), makes effort for its growth; but the auspicious type of attachment also is passion (Kashaya) only.  Since he believes passions worth adopting, then the belief of indulging in passions only persisted.  Thus the intention remained only of envy towards inauspicious non-self objects; but the intention of detachment feeling in non-self objects is not involved.”

Question:  Even the true believer also makes efforts for revolution of auspicious attachment (virtuous conduct)?

Answer:  As someone who was to undergo great punishment, makes effort for reduction in punishment and feels happy by accepting less punishment but in faith he believes undergoing punishment to be disgraceful only.  Similarly, intense vicious passions were found existing in a true believer, so he makes effort for reducing passions by taking recourse to virtuous passions, feels happy also on evolution of virtuous (feeble) passions but in faith he believes passions to be worth giving up only.  Further, for example, someone makes efforts for business activity, etc. knowing it to be cause of earning and feels happy if the effort becomes successful.  Similarly, the Dravylingi Muni makes effort for evolution of auspicious (feeble) passions believing it to be the cause of liberation and feels happy if he succeeds in this effort. Thus, even though there lies parity in the efforts for virtuous (feeble) passions and feeling of happiness, the true believer believes it to be a punishment whereas the false believer believes it to be like a business activity.  Therefore, the difference lies in the inner intention.

Further, even when this Vyavaharaabhasi feels miserable by undergoing the afflictions (Parishahas) and penance (Tapa), etc., he does not make effort for its mitigation but experiences the agony of these afflictions; so experiencing the agony (involved in these rites) is passion (Kashaya) only.  Where there is passionlessness, there one knows only the things that can be known causing misery in the same way as he knows only the other things that can be known; such a state (of knowledge & belief) is not involved in him.  And if he bears them he does so only with the intention of involving in passions.  That intention is such that “I suffered badly lot of pangs in hellish life being helpless; now this misery of Parishahas etc. is less intense.  By bearing this willfully, happiness in heaven and liberation will be caused.  If I do not bear it and get involved in sensual pleasures then I will get hellish birth, etc. where I will have to undergo intense misery;” with such concept he possesses disagreeable feeling in the Parishahas.  Only with the fear of hellish birth and with the greed of happiness, he tolerates them; so, all this is nothing but passional feelings only.  Further, he thinks that “the bonded karmas do not get quit without reaping their fruit, therefore I had to bear them”.  So, with such thoughts he keeps on experiencing the fruit of karmas (Karmafal-chetna).  Further, from Paryaya-drishti (modificational point of view) whatever state of misery is caused by undergoing Parishahas (afflictions), etc., he believes it to have been caused to self-soul, but from Dravya-drishti (substantial point of view) he does not identify the difference between the self-soul and the states of the body, etc.  In this way, thinking from the angle of various conventional practices, he bears the Parishahas, etc.

Further, he has renounced the objects of worldly pleasures like kingdom, etc. and continues forsaking the favorite food, etc. So, as someone suffering from fever causing burning sensation, gives up eating of cold things due to fear of gastric trouble, but so long as he likes taking cold things till then he is not said to have got rid of the fever; similarly, the Jiva having attachment feeling, gives up carnal pleasures owing to the fear of hellish birth, etc., but so long as he likes indulging in carnal pleasures, till then he is not said to have got rid of attachment feeling.  Moreover, as no other food is naturally liked by celestial being who relishes nectar, similarly, disliking of carnal pleasures is not evolved in him which results form the relishing of self-realization.  In this way, from the viewpoint of fruition, etc., he believes enduring of Parishahas (afflictions), etc. to be the cause of happiness and enjoying of carnal pleasures to be the cause of sorrow.

Further, he simultaneously believes that sorrow is caused from bearing afflictions, etc. and happiness is caused by enjoying carnal pleasures, etc.  The intention of indulging with the feeling of attachment-aversion is not given up in the objects and activities which are believed to the cause of happiness and sorrow.  And there, where feeling of attachment-aversion exists, no conduct (charitra) is possible there.  Therefore, although this Dravyalingi Muni undergoes penances, etc.  by renouncing carnal pleasures, nevertheless, he is an incontinent (Asanyami) only.  In scriptures he is treated to be inferior even to an incontinent (Asanyat) and partially continent (Desha Sanyat) true believer because these respectively belong to fourth and fifth Gunasthanas (spiritual stages) whereas this (Dravyalingi Muni) belongs to first Gunasthana only.

Here someone may say that the proclivity of passions is more in an incontinent and partially continent true believer and that in a Dravyalingi Muni these are in lesser measure due to which the incontinent and partially continent true believers can take birth up to sixteenth heaven only and the Dravyalingi Muni goes up to the Graiveyaka heaven.  Therefore, you may regard a Dravyalingi Muni to be inferior to a Bhavalingi Muni (true monk of 6th-7th spiritual stage); but how can he (Dravyalingi Muni) be treated to be inferior to incontinent (Asanyat) and partially continent (Desh Sanyat) true believers?

Answer:  The incontinent and partially continent true believers do have proclivity of passions but in faith they have no intention of indulging in any type of passions; whereas a Dravylingi Muni is found possessing the intention of indulging in auspicious passions, knows them in faith to be beneficial.  Therefore, from the belief point of view, he (the Dravyalingi) has more passions than an incontinent (vowless) true believer also.

Moreover, the auspicious form of proclivity of Yogas i.e., activity of mind, speech & body is found more in a Dravyalingi Muni and the specific difference in the bondage of auspicious-inauspicious type of karmas in Aghati karmas (non-obscuring karmas) is caused in accordance with auspicious -inauspicious Yogas (activities), that is why he goes up to the last Graiveyaka heaven, but it is not at all efficacious; because the Aghati-karmas do not obscure the main qualities of the soul.  What is there if he secures high or low status due to their rise? Those are merely the external associated changing facets of the mundane existence only, whereas he is a soul; therefore, the lessening of the effectiveness of Ghati-karmas (obscuring karmas) which are the obscurers of the main qualities of the soul is desirable.

The bondage of those Ghati-karmas is not according to the external proclivity, but it is according to the inner strength of passions.  Therefore, in comparison to a Dravyalingi Muni, the bondage of Ghati-karmas is less in incontinent (Asanyat) and partially continent (Desh-Sanyat) true believers.  The bondage of all types of Ghati-karmas to a Dravyalingi Muni occurs with more duration and fruition, whereas the bondage of Mithyatva (faith-deluding) and Anantanubandhi (interests type of passions) karmas, etc. is not at all caused to incontinent and partially continent true believers; the bondage of remaining karmas only is found, that too is with less duration & fruition.  Further, Guna Shreni Nirjara (dissociation of bonded karmas in geometrical progression) never occurs to a Dravyalingi Muni but it sometimes occurs to a vowless (incontinent) true believer and on evolution of partial continence (small vows) and complete continence (great vows) it occurs continuously.  Because of this only, he (the true believer) is termed as the treader of the right path of liberation.  Therefore, in scripture, the Dravyalingi Muni is treated to be inferior to incontinent and partially continent true believers.

In Samayasara Shastra, inferiority of a Dravyalingi Muni is shown in Gathas (verses), commentary and couplets, etc.  And in the commentary of Panchastikaya, where the description of the observers of Vyavahara (conventional) conduct only is given, there even on his following the five types of conventional conduct his inferiority only has been asserted.  And in Pravachansara Shastra the Dravyalingi Muni is stated to be a Sansara-tattva (representative of mundane existence).  The same point of view has been clarified in other Shastras Like Paramatma Prakasha, etc.  For further details, one should refer to other Shastras where the conventional conduct of Dravyalingi Muni in the form of Chanting of Mantras, observing penance, chastity, continence, etc.  activities is described to be ineffective at several places.  Such details are not discussed here due to the fear of this treatise becoming voluminous.

Thus ends the description of the false believer who follows the conventional conduct only.

The False Believers Possessing Fallacious Knowledge of Both the Real & Conventional Points of Views (UBHAYABHASI-MITYADRISHTIS)

Now follows the discussion of such type of false believers who have a wrong concept about and take recourse to both the real and conventional standpoints (Nayas).

Such Jivas who believe that because in Jina’s faith both Nishchaya (real) and Vyavahara (conventional) standpoints (Nayas) are stated, therefore, we should follow both of them-with such consideration, they follow the Nischaya (real standpoint) as described in the discussion of the followers of fallacious knowledge of Nishchaya Maya and follow Vyavahara Naya as described in the discussion of the followers of fallacious knowledge of Vyavahara Naya.

Although in their such understanding of both Nayas, there lies a clear contradiction, but what can they do? The true nature of both the Nayas has not been grasped by them and in Jina’s faith two Nayas are described, so none of them can be given up; therefore, they take recourse to both Nays fallaciously.  Such Jivas to should be known as false believers.

Now the details of their proclivity are being described:

In their inner-self they have not correctly identified by ascertainment the true nature of real and conventional path of liberation.  They merely believe the path of liberation to be of two kinds, the real and the conventional, on the basis of Jina’s commandment.  But the path of liberation is not of two kinds, only the interpretation of liberation path is of two kinds.  Where the true liberation path is described as liberation path, it is the real liberation path.  And where, that which is not the liberation path but is an instrumental cause of and is coexistent with liberation path, describing it conventionally to be liberation path, is the conventional liberation path.  Because everywhere the differentia of real (Nishchaya) and conventional (Vyavahara) is of this type only.  True statement is called Nischaya (real), empirical statement is called Vyavahara (conventional); hence for the sake of interpretation only, the liberation path is to be known as of two kinds.  But one is real liberation path and one is conventional liberation path-believing in this way, two kinds of liberation path, is false.

Further, he believes both Nishchaya and Vyavahara to be worth adopting, this too is a fallacy; because the nature of Nishchaya and Vyavahara is contradictory to each other.  For, in Samayasara it is stated so:

Vavharobhooyattho bhooyattho, bhoooyattho daision. Sudhan.u
Vavharobhooyattho bhooyattho, bhoooyattho daisido du sudhan.ao
Bhooyatthmassido khalu samaeetthee havah jeevo

Meaning: Vyavahara is abhootartha (unreal), it does not state the true nature (of the substance), rather states contrarily from some empirical point of view.  And the Shuddha Naya (pure stand point) which is true (Nishchaya), it is Bhootartha (real), it states the nature of substance as it is.  In this way, the nature of these two Nayas is contradictory to each other.

Further, you believe that the realization of pure self-soul like Siddha (liberated soul) is Nishchaya and the conduct of the form of vows, chastity, continence, etc. is Vyavahara; so, your such belief is not correct, because it is not that the name of some particular quality or mode of a substance is Nishchaya and name of some other quality or mode is Vyavahara. Describing a mode or quality of a particular substance to be of the same substance only is Nishchaya Naya (real standpoint) and describing conventionally the mode. or quality of that particular substance to be the mode or quality of some other substance is Vyavahara. For example, describing a clay pot to be the pot of clay is Nishchaya and calling the same clay pot conventionally to be the pot of Ghee (clarified butter) because it contains Ghee, is Vyavahara. Similarly, one should know everywhere also.

Therefore, your believing something to be Nishchaya and something to be Vyavahara is a fallacy. Moreover, in your such belief also their lies contradiction between Nishchaya and Vyavahara. If you believe yourself to be pure (Shuddha, i.e., devoid of blemishes) like Siddha (liberated soul) then why do you observe vows, etc.? If you want to attain Siddhahood by observing vows, etc. then in the present state your realization of pure soul is proved false. In this way, there lies contradiction between the two Nayas. Therefore, believing both the Nayas as adaptable, is not correct.

Here lies a question that in Samayasara, etc., the realization of pure soul is stated to be Nishchaya and observance of vows, continence, etc. is stated to be Vyavahara, we too believe in the same way?

Answer: Realization of the pure self-soul is the true path of liberation, that is why it is stated to be Nishchaya.  Here the meaning of word Shuddha (pure) be understood as "inseparate from the intrinsic nature of the self and separate from all non-self substances (including their qualities and modifications)". 

But believing the mundane being to be a Siddha (liberated soul) - such type of fallacious meaning of the word Shuddha should not be understood.
Further, the observance of vows, penance, etc., is not the liberation path; however, merely from the instrumental cause point of view, these are described conventionally to be the liberation path, therefore, these are called Vyavahara. In this way, from the view-point of Bhootartha (real) and Abhootartha (unreal) liberation path, these are respectively described as Nishchaya and Vyavahara. So, you should believe like this only. But both of these are not true liberation paths; believing both of these to be worth adopting is nothing but the false understanding only.

There he says that in belief we keep Nishchaya and in practice we follow Vyavahara -in this way we accept and adopt both (Nayas).  

This is also not correct because believing Nishchaya (real) as it is and Vyavahara (unreal) as it is, is desirable. Belief in one Naya (standpoint) only results in Ekanta Mithyatva (one-sided erroneous belief). And in modifications, there is no role of Naya. The modification is the state of substance; describing the modification of a substance to be the modification of the same substance is Nishchaya Naya and describing the same modification to be the modification of some other substance is Vyavahara Naya; describing that modification with such intention constitutes the involvement of both Nayas. But the modification itself does not constitute Naya. Hence, believing the acceptance of both the Nayas in the aforesaid manner -also is false.

What to do then? The same is being explained:

Whatever is stated from Nishchaya Naya point of view should be treated as true and believed as such and whatever is stated from Vyavahara Naya point of view should be treated as untrue and its belief should be given up.

The same is stated in Samayasara Kalasha also: 

Sarvatradhyavsanmaivmakhilan tyajyan yaduktan jinae
Stanmanyaivyavhar aiv nikhilopyanyashryajit
Samyanga nishchyamaikmaiv tadmee nishkanpmakramye kin
Shudhgyandhain mhimn na nijai bdhnanti  santo dhritim     ------- 173

Meaning:  The Jina Devas (omniscient Gods) have stated that all types of conjectures like intention of causing injury, etc. and not causing injury, etc. i.e., killing as well as protecting living beings, etc. are to be renounced. Therefore, I believe that all kinds of conjectures which are based on other substances are to be given up; why do then the saintly persons not remain firmly engrossed in the embodiment of pure knowledge form of one's own greatness by accepting unwaveringly well the one supreme Nischaya Naya only?

The gist is this that the Vyavahara is required to be given up, therefore, it is desirable to remain engrossed in one's own glory by accepting the Nishchaya.  

Further, it is stated in Shatpahuda: 

Jo suto vavharai, so joyee jaggye sakajjami
Jo jaggadi vavharai so suto apan.ai kajjai       -------(31,  Mokshpahung)

Meaning One who sleeps in (ignores) Vyauahara that monk is awake in his objective. And one who is awake (engrosses) in Vyavahara, he sleeps in (ignores) his objective.

It is, therefore, desirable to develop faith in Nishchaya Naya by giving up faith in Vyavahara Naya.  

Vyavahara Naya describes by intermingling self-substance non- self-substance, their modifications and the cause and effect relationship, etc. in one another; so, by such belief only wrong faith is caused. Therefore, it should be given up. Where as the Nishchaya Naya describes the substances as they are, it does not intermingle one thing into the other thing; so, by such belief only right faith is caused.  Therefore, such faith is worth evolving.

Here is a question that if this be so, then how is in Jiva's path the acceptance of both Nayas advocated?

Answer: In Jina's path, at some places, description is found with the prominence of Nishchaya Naya; the same should be known "to be exactly true". And at other places description is found with the prominence of Vyavahara Naya; the same should be known that" it is not so, it is described to be so conventionally from the instrumental cause, etc. point of view." Knowing in this way only constitutes the acceptance of both the Nayas. But knowing the description of both the Nayas as equally true i.e., "this is also true and that is also true" - in this way knowing and accepting both Nayas fallaciously, is not advocated.

Again there lies a question, "If Vyavahara Naya is untrue, then why has it been discoursed in Jina's path? Only the one Nishchaya Naya should have been discoursed.

Answer: A similar type of question is raised in Samayasara also.  There the answer given is this:-

Jeh n.avi skkaman.jjo, an.jjbhasan vin.a u gahaiun
Tah vavharain. Vin.a parmtthuveysan.maskkan     ------- (8,  Samyasad)
 
Meaning. Just as nobody is capable in making an Anarya (a barbarian person) understand some meaning without use of his (barbarian's) language, similarly, without use of Vyavahara the discourse of Paramartha (Nishchaya) is impossible, therefore, the discourse of Vyavahara is given.

Further, in the commentary of this verse it is stated that 

Vyavharnyo nanusartavya avam mlaichhasthaneeyatvajjjgato vyvaharnyopi mlaichhabhasha  sthaneeytvain parmarth pratipadktvadupanysaneeyoth cha brahman.o na mlaichhitvya iti vachanaddhyavharnyo nanusrtavya
                                                             -----Samyasargatha -- 8

The meaning of this is that for the sake of accepting and adopting this Nishchaya (real standpoint) the discourse is given through Vyavahara (conventional standpoint). Bit Vyavahara Naya is not worth adopting.

Question: Now is the discourse of Nishchaya not possible without Vyavahara? And how is the Vyavahara Naya not to be accepted?

Answer: From Nishchaya (reality) point of view, the soul substance is a self-evident entity separate from other substances and inseparable from its own qualities; those who are not able to identify it, if discoursed repeatedly in this way, then they would not be able to understand. Therefore, to make them understand Jiva is explained by means of Vyavahara 
Naya through its embodied forms of human-hellish-earthen beings in association with other substances like body, etc.; then "the human being is Jiva, the hellish being is Jiva" - they are able to identify the Jiva along with its embodied forms.

Or (for the sake of explanation) by creating divisions in the indivisible substance, the details of Jiva are stated through knowledge, perception, etc. attributes and modifications. Then the knower is the Jiva, the seer is the Jiva - with these different traits, they are able to identify the Jiva. 

Further, from Nishchaya (reality) point of view, passionlessness is the path of liberation. Those who do not understand this, if discoursed repeatedly in this way, then they would not be able to understand. Therefore, by means of Vyavahara Naya, the details of passionlessness are explained to them in the form of observance of vows, chastity, continence, etc. with right knowledge and belief of Tattvas in relation to dissociation of the instrumentality of other substances; then they are able to identify passionlessness. Similarly, else where also one should know the impossibility of discoursing Nishchaya (reality) without Vyavahara.  

Further, here the embodied forms (Paryayas) of human hellish beings, etc. are stated to be the Jiva from Vyavahara standpoint; but one should not understand Jiva as an embodied form only. Because the embodied form (Paraya) is a combined state of Jiva (soul) and Pudgalas (matter). In such state, from Nishchaya standpoint, the Jiva (soul) substance is a separate entity. That alone should be believed to be the Jiva (soul). Due to combination with Jiva, even the bodies, etc. are conventionally called Jiva; such statement is for the sake of statement only. In reality, the bodies etc. cannot become Jiva (soul) - one should evolve such belief only. 

And in the indivisible soul substance, the divisions of knowledge, perception, etc. attributes are indicated, but one should not understand the soul to be having such divisions; because the divisions are indicated only for the sake of explanation. In reality, the soul is an indivisible entity only; one should believe the same only to be the soul substance. The divisions which are stated from the viewpoint of name, quantity, etc. are for the sake of statement only. In reality, those divisions are not there one should evolve such belief only.

Further, from the viewpoint of getting rid of the instrumental cause of other substances, the observance of vows, chastity, continence, etc. is stated to be the liberation path; so one should not believe their observance only to be the liberation path; for, if adopting and forsaking of other substances be possible for the soul then the soul would become the doer and the destroyer of other substances. But no substance is dependent on other substance. Therefore, the soul becomes passionless by renouncing the feelings of attachment, etc. So, in reality, passionlessness only is the liberation path. In some way, there is cause and effect relationship between passionlessness and observance of vows, etc., therefore, observance of vows, etc. is stated to be the liberation path; this statement is for the sake of statement only. In reality, the external conduct is not the liberation path - one should evolve such belief only.

Similarly, one should know that elsewhere also the statement of Vyavahara Naya is not to be accepted.
Here is a question: "Whether Vyavahara Naya is helpful only in preaching others or it accomplishes our purpose also?

Answer: So long as one is not able to identify the substance as stated by Nishchaya Naya, till then he should try to ascertain it through the path of Vyavahara (conventional means); therefore in the lower stages Vyavahara Naya is useful for us also, but it would be useful only when one considers the Vyavahara to be a conventional method and ascertains the substance correctly through it; but, if by considering Vyavahara also to be as true as Nishchaya one believes- "the substance is of this type only" - then such belief, on the other hand, would become ineffective.

The same is stated in Purushartha Siddhyupaya

Abudhasya bodhnarth muneeshvara daishyantybhootartham
Vyvharmaiv kevilmvaeti yastasya daishna nasti
Man.vak aiv sinho yatha bhavatyanvageet sinhsya
Vyvhar aiv hi tatha nishchyatan yatyanishchyakshasya      ---7

Meaning: For making the ignorant person understand (the nature of the substance), the great monks preach him through Naya which is untrue. It is not worthwhile to preach him at all who knows and adopts Vyavahara only. For example, to the one who does not know the real lion, the cat itself is a lion. Similarly, for him who does not know Nishchaya, 
Vyavahara alone takes the place of Nishchaya.

Here some thoughtless person might say -"Since you declare Vyavahara to be untrue and worth giving up, what for then should we follow the conventional rites like vows, chastity, 
continence, etc.?  We shall give up them all."

Answer: Observance of vows, chastity, continence, etc. is not called Vyavahara; believing these (rites, etc.) to be the liberation path is Vyavahara; you should give up this belief and should believe that these are stated conventionally to be the liberation path by knowing them to be externally coexistent. These (auspicious dispositions) are dependent on other substances, whereas the true liberation path is passionlessness (an attachmentless disposition), so, it is based on self-soul substance. In this way, one should know Vyavahara to be untrue and worth giving up. Moreover, by giving up vows, etc., Vyavahara does not become worthless. 

Further, we ask him- "What shall you do after giving up vows, etc.? If you will indulge in the acts of injury, etc. then even naming it conventionally to be liberation path is not possible there; what benefit will result by such practices? Only hellish life, etc. will be attained? Hence, such indulgence is nothing but thoughtlessness. However, by rooting out the state of virtuous conduct like observance of vows, etc., if only passionless nonchalant state is evolved then it is really commendable only. But this is not possible in the lower stages, therefore, it is not worthwhile to become unrestrained by giving up vows, etc. Thus, keeping Nishchaya in faith and believing Vyavahara to be useful in practice, is also fallacious belief only.

Further, for the sake of adopting both the Nayas, this Jiva sometimes pretends to realize himself as if (in the present state) he is a pure soul like Siddha, devoid of attachment, etc. and possessed of omniscience, etc., engrosses himself in such type of thoughts by holding meditation posture, but he is not in such a state and fallaciously believes- “In reality, I am so only," becomes contented with such belief. And sometimes verbally also he talks like this only.

But the Nishchaya (real standpoint) states the substance as it is.  How can it be named as Nishchaya if one believes oneself to be what he is not explicitly? His understanding should be known to be as fallacious as that of the Nishchayabhasi Jiva described earlier.

Or, otherwise he believes that "from this Naya the soul is like this and from that Naya the soul is like that." But the soul is only as it is; but he does not understand the objective of describing it through the Naya . For example, he believes that from Nishchaya point of view, the soul is like Siddha, possessed of omniscience, devoid of Dravya-karmas (karmic matter), Nokarma (body, etc.) and Bhavakarma (passional dispositions; and form Vyavahara Naya point of view, it is a mundane being, possessed of sensory knowledge, etc. with Dravya-karma, Nokarma & Bhavakarma. But such two natures of the one soul are not possible . How can it be possible for one substance only to be possessed of a particular quality and dispossessed of same quality? Therefore, believing so is a fallacy.

How is it then? As a king and a pauper both are similar from the manhood point of view, similarly, the Siddha (liberated soul) and the Sansari (mundane being) both are described to be similar from consciousness point of view. If similarity is believed to be from the viewpoint of omniscience, etc. then it is not so; in reality, the Sansari possesses sensory knowledge, etc. only and the Siddha possesses omniscience. But this much is certain that Sansari Jiva possesses sensory knowledge, etc. due to instrumentality of karmas; therefore, from the intrinsic nature point of view, if the potency of omniscience is stated to be in Sansari Jiva then it is not wrong. For example, the pauper possesses the potency of becoming a king; similarly, one should know about this potency also. Further, the Dravya-karmas and Nokarmas are the products of Pudgalas (matter-substance), so, from Nishchaya point of view, the Sansari Jiva also is devoid of them; but if (in the mundane state) the relationship is not accepted from the cause and effect point of view, which is not in Siddhas, then it is assuredly a fallacy. And the Bhavakarma (passional dispositions) is the disposition of soul and is so from the Nishchaya point of view, but it is produced due to the instrumental cause of karmas, therefore, from Vyavahara point of view it is stated to be the product of karmas. And like Siddha not accepting the presence of attachment, etc. passions even in the Sansari Jivas (mundane beings) and believing them to be the product of karmas only, is also a fallacy.

Thus through different  Nayas, believing the same one substance with respect to one particular state or quality to be "like this also and to be like that also", is nothing but the false understanding; but statements of different Nayas are made from different-different aspects, accepting this, the right faith lies in believing a substance exactly as it is found. Although the misbeliever believes a substance to be of many faces nature but he cannot believe (or grasp) it by identifying it correctly - this should be known.

Further, the observance of vows, chastity, continence, etc. is found to this Jiva; so from Vyavahara point of view, "these also are the cause of liberation" - by believing so, he believes them adaptable.  So, such belief of this Jiva should be known to be as perverse as that of the Jiva following conventional conduct only which was described earlier. So, similarly one should know about this (Ubhayabhasi Jiva) also.

Further, he believes this way also that "the observance of vows, etc., where whatever is  necessary, is worth practicing but one should not have the mineness feeling in it." But how would one not have the feeling of mineness in an act of which he is the doer? If the self is not the doer, then how could one have in it the feeling that it is worth adopting for me? And if he is the doer then it becomes his deed (karma); then automatically, the doer-deed relationship is established; so such belief is fallacious.

Question: What is then the right belief?

Answer: The observance of external vows, etc. is dependent on body, etc., the non-self-substances, but the self is not the doer of the other substances; therefore, one should neither have the feeling of doership nor the feeling of mineness in it. Since in the observance of vows, etc., one has the feeling of auspicious thought activity (Shubhopayoga) in the form of accepting & forsaking of some objects, this is one's own act and so, he is doer of it. Therefore, one should believe the self to be its doer and should also have the feeling of mineness in it. But one should know this Shubhopayoga as the cause of bondage only and not that of liberation; because the bondage and liberation are contrary to one another; therefore, believing one and the same disposition to be the cause of both auspicious bondage and liberation is fallacy.

Hence, such a nonchalant passionless pure disposition of the soul "Shuddhopayoga" which is devoid of the thoughts of both vows and non-vows and wherein there remains no concern with acceptance and forsaking of other non-self substances, is the only path to liberation. And in the lower spiritual stages, many Jivas are found having both Shubhopayoga and Shuddhopayoga together. That is why Shubhopayoga in the form of observance of vows, etc. is mentioned conventionally to be the liberation path, but on pondering over the reality, Shubhopayoga, i.e., auspicious conduct, is assuredly only the destroyer of liberation, because that which is the cause of bondage, the same is the destroyer of liberation; one should have such belief only.

In this way by accepting Shuddhopayoga only to be worth adopting, one should make effort to evolve it and by knowing both Shuddhopayoga and Ashubhopayoga to be worth giving up one should make effort for relinquishing them. If one is not capable of evolving Shuddhopayoga then he should dwell in the state of Shubhopayoga by discarding Ashubhopayoga, because in comparison to Shubhopayoga there is more impurity in Ashubhopayoga. And when one attains the state of Shuddhopayoga he only becomes an unattached knower of other non-self substances; there remains no purpose with other non- self substances.  In the state of Shubhopayoga, the tendency of observing external vows, etc. is found and in Ashubhopayoga one indulges in external vow-less activities, etc., because there exists cause and effect relationship between Ashuddhopayoga (impure thought activity) and the activities of other non-self substances. Moreover, the sequence of evolution of dispositions is such that first Ashubhopayoga disappears on manifestation of Shubhopayoga and thereafter Shubhopayoga automatically ends on evolution of Shuddhopayoga.  

Further, some persons believe that Shubhopayoga is the cause of Shuddhopayoga; but this is not true because if such be the cause and effect relationship then Ashubhopayoga would become the cause of  Shubhopayoga. The fact is that the Shubhopayoga is evolved on disappearance of Ashubhopayoga and Shuddhopayoga is evolved on disappearance of Shubhopayoga. Further, the Drauyalingi Muni is found possessing Shubhopayoga of the highest order but Shuddhopayoga is not evolved, therefore, in reality there exists no cause and effect relationship between Shubhopayoga and Shuddhopayoga. For example, earlier a patient was suffering from intense disease but afterwards disease became less intense (mild), then this mild disease is not the cause of diseaselessness. This much is true that in the state of mild disease if he tries to become disease-less then he can become disease-less. But, if by knowing the mild disease to be beneficial, he maintains it then how would he become disease-less?  Similarly, a passionate person was having Ashubhopayoga of in- tense form of passions, later on feeble passions form of Shubhopayoga was evolved, then that Shubhopayoga is not the cause of the evolution of passionless Shuddhopayoga. This much of course, is true that on persistence of Shubhopayoga if he tries for attaining Shuddhopayoga then he can attain it, but, if by knowing Shubhopayoga itself to be beneficial, he maintains it then how would Shuddhopayoga be evolved? Hence, the Shubhopayoga of mis-believer is in no way the cause of Shuddhopayoga, however, assuming that the true believer, found possessed with Shubhopayoga, might in the near future evolve Shuddopayoga - with such understanding, at some places, Shubhopayoga also is stated to be the cause of  Shuddhopayoga.  

Further, this Jiva (Ubhayabhasi) believes himself to be the follower of both real and conventional (Nishchaya & Vyavahara) forms of liberation path. In the aforesaid manner, he believes his soul to be pure and regards such belief to be the right belief and such knowledge to be the right knowledge and conduct based on such thoughts to be the right conduct. In this way, he believes to have attained the real triple jewels (Ratnatraya consisting of right belief, knowledge and conduct). But being devoid of the rational thinking, he believes, knows and thinks himself to be pure although he is presently in impure state - thus deludedly he feels satisfied. Further, he thinks that because he has faith in Arihanta Deva, etc. and not in any other deity, etc., and has faith in the characteristics of Jiva, etc. Tattvas as learnt from Jaina scriptures and not as described in non-Jaina scriptures, so, he has attained right belief; he further, thinks that because he engrosses himself deeply in the study of Jaina Shastras, so, he has attained right knowledge. And because he indulges in the practice of vows, etc., so, he believes that he has acquired right conduct - in this manner, he believes that he possesses conventional form of triple jewels (Vayavahara Ratnatraya). But Vyavahara (conventional) is the name of Upachara (formalizing) and Upachara also is possible only when the conventional rites, etc. are found to have resulted in the evolution of real tripe jewels (Nishchaya Ratnatraya). In whatever way Nishchaya Ratnatraya is attained then only those instrumental causes can possibly be termed as conventional causes; but he has not even identified the true Nischaya Ratnatraya; how would he then be able to attain it in this way?  Simply, having become the follower of Jina's commandments, he practices the conventional path by seeing others. That is why he has not attained the real and conventional form of liberation path.

The real and conventional forms of liberation path will be described ahead; so by following that only, the liberation path could be attained.

In this way, this Jiva believes and knows the Nishchayaabhasa (false apprehension of Nishchaya) only but simultaneously knows the Vyavahara (conventional practices) also to be beneficial; therefore, without becoming unrestrained he does not indulge in inauspicious activities, that is why he gets birth up to the last Graiveyaka heaven. And if due to predominance of false apprehension of Nishchaya, his conduct becomes inauspicious then he may even take birth in miserable state of existence. Thus, he reaps the fruit of his thoughts & dispositions but continues to remain in mundane life only. Without attaining the right path of liberation, he does not achieve Siddha state (liberated non-corporeal state). Thus ends the description of mis-believers who take recourse to both Nishchayaabhasa and Vyavaharaabhasa.

Misbelievers Nearer to Attainment of Right
Belief (Samyaktva Sanmukha Mithyadrishti)

Now starts the description of misbelievers who are nearer to attainment of right belief :-

Under the state of feeble passions, etc., one got the Kshayopashama (destruction cum subsidence) of knowledge obscuring karmas due to which the Jiva attained the potency of rational thinking about Tattvas; and due to feeble state of delusion (Mohakarma) one got interested in thinking about Tattvas; and because of external association of true deity, preceptor and scriptures, he got the benefit of true sermons. 

There, by listening attentively to such sermons about purposeful path of liberation, characteristics of Deva-Guru- Dharma, etc., Jiva-Ajiva, etc., Tattvas, the self-non-self and beneficial-harmful dispositions to the self, he starts thinking deeply thus- "Oh ! I was unmindful of all these things and forgetful, under delusion, was engrossed in the present embodied form (Paryaya) only, but the duration of this Paryaya is very short; moreover, all sorts of agree-able Nimittas (instrumental causes) are available to me; I must, therefore, understand all these things correctly because therein lies my own real purpose." With such thinking, he starts pondering over the contents of the sermons which he listened to.

There, the ascertainment of those things is materialized by knowing Uddesha (nomenclature), Lakshana-Nirdesha (differentias or characteristics) and Parizsha (logical examination);  therefore, first of all he should learn their names this is Uddesha.  Then he should know their differentias or characteristics and afterwards should start examining logically as to whether "whatever is written is possible or not".

There, learning the names and knowing the characteristics, these two things, are based on the sermons; one should memorize these as discoursed; however, in the process of their verification, one's own rational thinking is required. Therefore, one should ponder over them judiciously in his Upayoga (active consciousness) in solitude that "whether the facts are as sermonized or otherwise?" There he should try to understand properly through inference, etc., types of Pramana-Jnan (comprehensive knowledge). Or the sermon states like this and if it is not believed to be like that then it would be otherwise. So, among these alternatives which reasoning has more weight and which has less weight? Whichever appears to have more weight should be taken to be true. And if the truth seems to be otherwise than what is sermonized or if there remains some doubt or ascertainment is difficult, then he should consult the specialists and ponder over the answer received. In this manner, only one should raise questions and ponder over answers till ascertainment is not reached. Alternatively, one should discuss with co-religionists possessing similar knowledge through the process of questions and answers convey his own understanding to them, get their response and ponder over it. And one should ponder over in solitude whatever conclusion is drawn in the question-answer process. In this manner, one should continue making efforts till he is not able to grasp the gist in his inner-self in accordance with true sermons. 

If Jaina's sermons appear to be contrary to imaginary Tattvas sermonized in other non-Jaina scriptures or there remains some doubt about the Tattvas, then also one should continue making efforts in the aforesaid manner.

On making efforts in this way, such decision is reached- "I too am convinced that the truth is as preached in Jina's sermons"- because the omniscient Jina cannot be wrong preacher.

Here someone may say- "If Jinadeva is not a wrong preacher, the none should believe his sermons to be true; why should one verify them?"

Answer: Without verification, this type of understanding is possible that whatever Jinadeva has preached is true, but the true sense cannot be grasped by him. And without grasping the true sense, the faultless pure belief cannot be evolved, because if one's faith in truth is based simply on someone's statement only then his faith may change also by listening to the statement of someone else.  Therefore, from the viewpoint of strength of conviction, the belief based on mere statement is just like no faith. Further, if the real sense of a thing is grasped, then one does not deviate from it in spite of several contrary reasoning; therefore, the conviction based on the basis of the grasping of the true sense is only the 
true belief.

If one argues here that the authenticity of a statement should be accepted on the basis of the authenticity of the person making the statement? Then answer is that the authenticity of a   person is not proved automatically but it is based on the earlier examination of some of his 
statements.

Question: The sermons are of various types; which ones are to be verified?

Answer: In sermons, some Upadeya (acceptable and adaptable), some Heya (rejectable and worth giving up) and some Jneya (knowledge) Tattvas, essential elements, are described. There one must verify the adoptable and rejectable Tattvas because misunderstanding about these Tattvas causes harm to oneself If the adoptable is considered to be rejectable and rejectable is considered adoptable, then one would harm 
oneself.

Again he asks- How would harm be caused, if without verification adoptable is considered as adoptable and rejectable as rejectable on the basis of Jina's preaching?" 

Answer:  The true meaning of a statement cannot be understood without grasping its inner sense. This much is granted that one accepts the truth as per Jina's preaching but it is possible that such understanding may be reversed without grasping its true sense. In worldly affairs also, when we send a servant for accomplishing some work, the possibility of right accomplishment is there if he has grasped the true objective. If the objective is not properly grasped, he is likely to commit mistake. Therefore, for grasping the inner sense of a statement, one must necessarily do the verification of rejectable & adoptable Tattvas.  

Further, he says- "What should one do if verification goes wrong?"

Answer: If there be identity in Jina's preaching and the result of verification done by him then he should conclude that the verification is true. For example, if someone checks the account and accounts are not found tallying as per rules then he tries to locate the mistake. Similarly, one should continue verifying one's convictions till they are found to be in accordance with Jina's preaching.

And about the Jneya (knowable) Tattvas, one should try to verify in so far as they are within his reach or else one should draw the inference that why should Jinadeva (omniscient) preach contrarily about knowable objects when no contrary statement is found in his preaching about adoptable and rejectable Tattvas? For example, why would one with out purpose tell a lie when he does not tell a lie even about purposeful objects? Therefore, one should know the differentia of the knowable Tattvas also either by verification or on the basis of Jinadeva’s commandment. Even if the real sense of the knowable objects is not grasped then also there is no harm.

Therefore, in Jaina Shastras where the Tattvas, etc. are described, the description is done in such a manner that the ascertainment of the same by inference is possible through reasoning & logic, etc. And the description about three worlds (universe), Gunasthanas (spiritual stages), Marganas (quest places), Puranas (mythology), etc. are found as per Jina's commandment. Therefore, verification about rejectable and adoptable Tattvas is necessary.

There, one should identify distinctly the Jiva, etc. substances and Tattvas and the self-non-self. Further, one should identify rightly the nature of rejectable false belief, attachment, etc. passions and adoptable right belief, etc. And one should know the cause and effect relationship (Nimitta-Naimittikas), etc. as it really is. Thus, one must know all such things, the knowledge of which is necessary for entry into the path of liberation. Hence, one must verify all these.  One should know these basically through reasoning and logic, by Pramana (comprehensive knowledge view) and Naya (partial view) and should know their details by means of Nirdesha (description), Swamitva (ownership), etc. and by Sat (existence), Sankhya (number), etc. One should know these basically and in details as per one's power of grasping and the available instrumental means (Nimitta).  Moreover, in this knowing process the knowledge of useful things like Gunasthanas, Marganas, etc. and Puranas, etc. and vows, conventional rites, etc., is also desirable. Here those Tattvas, etc. which can be verified should be verified and those which cannot be verified should be known as per Jina's commandment. 

In this way for the sake of such knowledge, one sometimes ponders over, sometimes reads the Shastras, sometimes listens to discourses, sometimes engrosses himself in the study of scriptures, sometimes discusses through question-answer - such are his activities. He takes great pleasure in doing his work; therefore, he adopts such means with inner interest. Making efforts in this way, so long as (i) true belief of the Tattvas is not evolved, (ii) "This is like this only", with such sort of conviction the nature of the Jiva etc. Tattvas is not realized, (iii) till the I-ness feeling which one possesses in the embodied form is not evolved in the self- soul only, (iv) until and unless one does not identify and discriminate the beneficial and harmful forms of one's own thoughts and dispositions - till then he is a mis-believer heading towards right belief. This Jiva will shortly attain the right belief; he will attain right belief either in this birth itself or in the next birth.

By making such efforts in this birth, even if he is born as an animal in the next birth (in Tiryancha state of existence) then, on the strength of impressions of the previous birth, even without the instrumental cause of Deva-Guru-Shastra, he can evolve right belief. Because, on the basis of such efforts, the fruition of Mithyatva (faith-deluding karma) gets feeble. Where its rise is not found, there right belief is produced.

The chief cause (for the evolution of right belief) is this (the absence of the rise of Mithyatva karma) only. The external instrumental cause is the association of Deva (omniscient Jina) etc.; so, chiefly right belief is evolved through their instrumentality only. In some cases right beliefs evolved in the present birth on the strength of past efforts even without the instrumentality of Deva etc. In doctrines Tannisgradadhigmadha -- Tatvarth suta 1-3,  such aphorism is given.  Its meaning is this that right belief is attained by intuition or by acquisition of knowledge. There, that right belief which is evolved without external instrumental cause of Deva etc., is stated to be produced by the acquisition of knowledge. 

See ! the glory of reflection on Tattvas ! Without reflection on Tattvas one may have staunch faith in true Deva, etc., may study many Shastras, observe vows, etc., undergo penances, etc., even then he is not entitled to evolve right belief, whereas one who reflects on Tattvas is entitled to evolve right belief even without these (conventional activities). 

Further, some Jiva, under some circumstances, before reflecting on Tattvas, may develop faith in true deity, etc., observes vows and penances and afterwards may start reflecting on Tattvas but he is entitled to evolve right belief only on reflection on Tattvas.  

And someone even after reflection on Tattvas may not evolve right belief due to lack of ascertainment of faith in Tattvas and becomes interested in conventional religious practices, therefore, he develops faith in true deity, etc. and engages himself in observance of vows, penances, etc. Some other person may develop faith in true deity, etc. and simultaneously evolves right belief and in some cases observance of vows, penances, etc. maybe found along with evolution of right belief or may be before or afterwards too. However, faith in true deity, etc. is essential because without it right belief cannot be evolved, but there is no such rule regarding observance of vows, etc.  Many Jivas, first of all, attain right belief and only afterwards start observance of vows, etc., whereas in the case of some Jivas evolution of right belief and observance of vows, etc. is found together. In this way, the Jiva who reflects on Tattvas is entitled to evolve right belief but there is no such rule that he would invariably attain right belief because in the scriptures attainment of five types of capacities (Labdhis) is stated to be essential before manifestation of right belief.

Characteristics of Five Labdhis
(Five Types of Capacity Attainments)

The attainment of capacities (Labdhis) is of five types:-

(1) Kshayopashama: (Specific state of destruction cum subsidence of knowledge obscuring karmas), i.e., attainment of rational knowledge,

(2) Vishuddhi: (Feeble state of passions),

(3) Deshana: (Listening to and grasping of the Jina's preaching)

(4) Prayogya: (Competency of thought activity)

(5) Karana: (Efficiency attainment to engross in self-soul). 

on evolution of which the reflection on Tattvas (Tattva- Vichara) is possible - such a kind of Kshayopashama be evolved, i.e., the absence of the rise of the Nishekas (atoms) of totally destructive type of Spardhakas (karmas) of which the rise- time has fallen due is the Kshya (destruction) and their remaining in the inoperative existing form with the capability of coming into rise in future instants is Upashma (subsidence) and followed by risen state of partially destructive type of Spardhakas - such a condition of the karmas is named as Kshayopashama; attainment of such capacity is the Kshayopashama Labdhi.  

And due to feeble rise of Moha (deluding karma) the evolution of mild passion form of thoughts takes place wherein the reflection on Tattvas (Tattvavichara) be possible; attainment of such capacity is called Vishuddhi-Labdhi (feeble state of passions).

Further, where the grasping of and deliberation on Tattvas preached by Jinadeva (omniscient Lord) takes place - attainment of this capacity is Deshana-Labdhi (precept attainment). In hells, etc.  where the instrumentality of (listening to) precepts is not possible, this capacity is evolved by virtue of impressions gained in the past birth. 

Further, when the previously bonded duration of karmas (excepting age karma) gets reduced to the level of an Antar Koda-Kodi Sagaras (within crores into crores Sagaras, i.e., innumerable years) and the duration of fresh bondage of the level of an Antar Koda-Kodi Sagaras would have got reduced to its numerable division, that too, right from the start of the time of that Labdhi shall continue getting reduced gradually and the fresh bondage of many of the demeritorious Prakritis (inauspicious karmas) shall be going on ending gradually - thus attaining of such a worthy state of thoughts & dispositions is Prayogya Labdhi (competence attainment).

Attainments of these four capacities are possible to both Bhavya (capable) and Abhavya (incapable) souls. It is stated in Labdhisara that after attainment of these four Labdhis (capacities) the right belief may or may not get evolved. Therefore, there is no rule about the evolution of right belief to the Jiva who reflects on Tattvas. For example, someone was imparted instruction for his well being;  knowing it, he may ponder over it as to how is this instruction beneficial to him? Later on after deliberation he may conclude that “It is so only"-such conviction about that instruction may be evolved; alternatively, he might think contrarily or get involved in other thoughts and may not ascertain about the benefit from that instruction and so, he may not develop faith in it. Similarly, the revered preceptor preached him about Tattvas, knowing it he may ponder over it as to how is this preaching beneficial? Later on, after deliberation he may conclude that "It is so only" - such conviction may get evolved, alternatively, he might think contrarily or get involved in other thoughts and may not ascertain about the benefit from that preaching and so he may not develop faith in it. So, the prime cause is the rise of Mithyatva karma (faith-deluding karma); when there is no rise of it then true faith gets evolved; if its rise is not subsided then true faith is also not evolved. This is the rule. One's duty is only to make efforts for reflection on Tattvas (Tattva-vichara).  

And it is the rule that on evolution of fifth Karana-Labdhi (efficiency attainment) the right belief invariably gets manifested.  Karana-Labdhi is evolved to such Jiva only who has already attained the first four Labdhis and who is definitely to attain right belief after one Antar-Muhurta. 

Therefore, the duty of this Jiva of Karana-Labdhi is only to willfully engross his Upayoga with concentration in reflection on Tattvas; due to this, at every moment, his thoughts & dispositions get more and more purified. For example, some Jiva developed such pure thinking about the instruction which he received that because of which he would shortly attain staunch faith in it. Similarly, the thought activity of this Jiva (of Karana-Labdhi) about the preaching of Tattvas started becoming so pure that due to which he would soon attain right belief. Further, the sequential (instant after instant) manifestation of these thoughts as seen by omniscience is described in Karanaanuyoga (aetiology).

There are three stages of this Karana-Labdhi: (i)Adhah-Karana, (ii) Apoorva-Karana, and (iii) Anivritti Karana respectively. The detailed exposition of these is given in Labdhisara Shastra. One should know the details from there. Here it is being described in short:

These three names are from the viewpoint of thoughts of all Jivas of Karana-Labdhi of all the three times (present, past & future). Karana is the name of Jiva's thoughts & 
dispositions (Parinaamas).  

Where the dispositions of prior and posterior moments are uniform, it is called Adhah-Karana (slow progressive thought activity). For example, the dispositions of some particular Jiva in the first moment of that Karana were having less purity; afterwards, moment after moment, the purity in dispositions went on increasing infinite times progressively. And whatever types of dispositions he may be having in the second-third, etc. moments, similar dispositions can be found in some other Jiva in the first moment and the purity indisposition’s of these other Jivas maybe increasing moment after moment infinite times progressively in comparison to the first Jiva. Such is the state of dispositions in Adhah-Pravritti Karana.  

And where the dispositions of prior and posterior moments are not uniform but are necessarily unique (Apoorva) only, such stage is called Apoorva-Karana (highly progressive thought activity). For example, the dispositions of that Karana found in its first moment are not found to be of the same purity of any other Jiva who is in the second, etc. moments, rather are increasingly more and more pure.  And here in this state, like  Adhah-Karana, the Jivas who are found to be in the first moment only, the dispositions of all those Jivas may be found to be uniformly pure or may be with more or less degree of purity also; but here the speciality is this that the lowest order purity of dispositions of the Jivas belonging to second, etc. moments are found to be having infinite times more purity than that of the highest degree of purity of the Jiva of first moment. Similarly, the dispositions of all those Jivas who after entering this Karana have reached in the second, etc. moments, may be either uniformly pure or may have different degrees of purity, but the dispositions of Jivas of higher moments are not at all found to be of identical purity but are found to be of greater and greater degree of purity in comparison to the Jiva of lower moments. Such are dispositions in the state of Apoorva-Karana (highly progressive thought activity). 

Samye samye bhin.a bhava tmha apuvvkaran.o hu
Jmha uvrimbhava haitthimbhavaihin n.atthi sarisatan
Tmha vidiyan karan.  Apuvvkarn.aiti nidhtthan      ---(51, Labdhisar)
Karan.an paripamo apuvvan.i cha tan.i karan.an.i cha apuvvakan.an.i  asaman.parin.ama ti jan utan hodi     --------  ( Dhavala,   1-9-8-4)

And wherein the dispositions of Jivas of the same moments are of uniform purity only and are not of different degrees of purity - such state of dispositions is called Anivritti- Karana. The dispositions of all Jivas in the first moment of this Karana are necessarily identical; similarly all Jivas of the second, etc. moments also have identical purity of dispositions. Further, the purity of dispositions of all Jivas of second, etc. moments are always with infinite times more purity than the Jivas of the first moments.

In this way, one should know these three stages of Karanas. 

Aigsamye vatthantan. Jeevan.an parin.amaihi n.a vijadai n.iytthee n.ivvitee jatth tai an.iyttheeparin.ama ------   (Dhavala   1-9-8-4)
Aikkmhi kalsamyai santhn.adeehin jeh n.ivattati
n.a n.ivatthati taha viya parin.amaihin miho jaihin    -------(56,  Go. Sa. / Jee. Ka.)

There, the duration of Adhah-Karana is one Antar-Muhurta wherein four essentials take place: (i) moment after moment infinite times more purity arises, (ii) the duration of fresh karmic bondage goes on decreasing by one Antar-Muhurta at every moment, this is Sthiti-Bandhaapasarana (reduction in duration of bondage), (iii) the fruition of auspicious Prakritis (karmas) goes on increasing by infinite times more at every moment and (iv) the fruition-bondage of inauspicious Prakritis goes on decreasing by infinite part at every 
moment; thus the four essentials take place.

Thereafter, Apoorva-Karana starts. Its duration is a fractional numerical part of the period of Adhah-Karana. Here also the aforesaid four essentials take place: (i) whatever was the duration of the existing past karmas, he decreases it by one-one Antar-Muhurta every moment, this is Sthiti Kandak- Ghata (destruction of duration bondage); (ii) further he decreases the fruition of the existing past karmas by one-one Antar-Muhurta of lesser time than the earlier one; this is Anubhaga Kandak-Ghata (destruction of fruition bondage) and (iii) in the period of Guna-Shreni (dissociation of old karmas in increasing geometrical progression) he causes innumerable fold times of karmas' stock to become suitable for dissociation (Nirjara); this is Guna Shreni Nirjara. And Guna-Sankramana (transformation of Prakritis into one another) does not occur here, but occurs at some other place in Apoorva-Karana.  

In this way, Anivrittikarana takes place after Apoorva-Karana. Its period is equal to a numerable fractional part of Apoorva-Karana period. In it, after lapse of sometime and with aforesaid essentials, the Jiva performs Antar Karana,
 
 (Antar karama: Operation of dislodging the due duration of Nishekas due for rise. Kimantrakarn. N.am ? vivikkhyakamman.an haitthimovarimatthideeao motoon.majjhai antomuhutmaitan.an tthidin.an parin.amvisaisain.isaign.bhaveekaran.mantarkran.midi bhan.n.dai
                                                         ------(Jeydhavala  a. p. 953)

 i.e., he makes the Nishekas of Mithyatva Karma of one Muhurata period only to remain suspended which were due for coming into rise after the end of Anivritti-Karana period; he causes those atoms to get converted into other duration form. And after Antar-Karana, he performs Upashama Karana (subsiding operation). The Nishekas of Mithyatva Karma which are situated just above the Nishekas which have been suspended through the Antar-Karana operation, he makes them incapable of coming into rise. By this kind of process the Nishekas which were falling due for rise just after the last moment of Anivritti-Karana were suspended; at the time of rise of such Nishekas what Nishekas will come to rise in the absence of those suspended Nishekas? Therefore, in the absence of the rise of Mithyatva, first subsidential type of right belief (Prathamopashama Samyaktva) is attained. The eternal misbeliever does not have the existence of  Samyaktva Mohaniya and Mishra Mohaniya Prakritis; therefore, by causing the subsidence of only one Mithyatva-Karma, he becomes Upashama Samyagdrishti (one possessing subsidential type of true belief). And if some Jiva, after attaining right belief, again gets defiled then his condition also becomes similar to that of an eternal misbeliever.

Here arises a question- "Tattva-Shraddhana, i.e., faith in Tattvas was attained after verification, how can it end?" 

Answer: For example, some person was given instruction. By verification, he acquired faith in it that a “It is so only"; later on, somehow, different thought arose, therefore, such doubt arose in that instruction - "It is this way or that way?" or “Do not know how is it?" Or considering that instruction to be false, contrary understanding was developed about it, then lack of faith arose in it and the faith in that instruction disappeared. Alternatively, earlier, he was already having wrong faith; in-between true faith was evolved due to deliberation on that instruction. But a lot of time lapsed after deliberation on that instruction, so by forgetting it, wrong faith, as existed earlier, again got evolved automatically. In this way, faith in that instruction disappeared. Or, earlier, he developed true faith but afterwards neither some contrary thought arose nor much time lapsed, but due to rise of related karmas and as per destiny automatically that faith disappeared and contrary faith arose. Thus, in many ways, true faith in that instruction finished. Similarly, some Jiva got the opportunity of listening to Jinadeva’s (omniscient's) preaching about the Tattvas, etc.; after verifying it, he acquired such faith in it that "It is so only"; later on, as described earlier, in several ways, the true faith disappears. This description is given in a general way, the minute details and intricacies are known in Kewaljnana (omniscience) that at this moment true belief is existing and at this moment it is not existing; because here the prime cause is the rise of Mithyatva-karma (faith-deluding karma). If its rise be there then other causes like thoughts, etc. may or may not be there; automatically true belief ends. And if its rise is not there, then other causes may or may not be there, automatically the true belief gets manifested. So, knowing of such sort of internal subtle state related to every moment, is not possible in the case of a Chhadmastha (non-omniscient); therefore, he can not ascertain the subtleties of the state of his own false or right belief. It is known in omniscience. From this point of view, the changing of Guna-Sthanas (stages of spiritual development) is described in Shastras (scriptures).

In this way, one who has fallen from true belief, is called a Saadi Mithyadrishti (a non-eternal misbeliever). For the re-attainment of true belief, he has also to undergo the process of aforesaid five Labdhis. The special point is this that here some Jiva has the existence of all the three Prakritis (atoms) of Darshan-Moha (faith-deluding karma), so, by subsiding the three Prakritis, he becomes a Prathamopashama Samyagdrishti. Or someone gets the rise of Samyakva Mohaniya (Prakriti that blurs slightly the right belief) and the rise of other two Prakritis (Mithyatva & Samyagmithyatva) is not there; he becomes a Kshayopashama Samyaktvi (true believer). In his case Guna-Shreni operation does not take place and Anivritti Karana is also not there. And someone may get the rise of Mishra-Mohaniya (Samyakva-Mithyatva), the other two Prakritis (Mithyatva & Samyaktva Mohaniya) are not found; he attains Mishra Gunasthana; no Karanas are found there. Such state is found in the case of a Saadi Mithyadrishti (non-eternal misbeliever) on disappearance of Mithyatva. Kshyaika- Samyaktva (destructive type of right belief) is attained by Vedaka-Samyagdrishti (true believer possessing Kshayopashama Samyaktva) only, hence, description about him is not done here. In this way, the duration of the state of Saadi Mithyadrishti is found to be minimum one middle Antar Muhurta (less than 48 minutes time is one Antar Muhurta) and maximum a little less than the duration of half a matter cycle, i.e., one cycle of quasi karmic matter.

Behold ! the peculiarity of Jiva's thought activities ! Some Jiva after attaining Yathakhyat-Charitra (perfect passionless conduct of subsidential type) in the eleventh Gunasthana, again by becoming a false believer, transmigrates in the world for a period of little less than half a matter-cycle and some other Jiva just after coming out from the state of Nitya-Nigoda and by taking birth in the form of man after disappearance of Mithyatva, attains omniscience within an Antar Muhurta. Knowing this fact, one should be fearful of degeneration of one's thoughts and should make efforts for improving them.

And if in the case of that Saadi Mithyadrishti (non-eternal misbeliever) the rise of Mithyatva is found only for a short period then his external Jainahood is not destroyed and disbelief in Tattvas is not discernible; and he again attains right belief even without deliberation or by some deliberation only. And if the rise of Mithyatva exists for a longer period then his state becomes similar to that of an eternal misbeliever. He even accepts and follows the Grihita Mithyatva (newly adopted false belief) also and wanders even in the Nigoda, etc. states of existence. There is no limit or measure of it.

And some Jiva, after falling from right belief (4th Gunasthana), reaches the stages of Sasadana (down- fall, state of 2nd Gunasthana) and he stays there for a minimum 
period of one moment and maximum period of six weeks (Avalis). It is not possible to narrate the condition of his thoughts through words. Some particular type of thoughts which are known in omniscience are found for a very short duration.  The rise of Anantanubandhi (intensest passions) is found there but the rise of Mithyatva is not there. So, one should know all this from the study of Agama (scriptures).

And some Jiva, after falling from right belief (4th Gunasthana), reaches the stage of Mishra Gunasthana (3rd Gunasthana). There the rise of Mishra Mohaniya (Samyaktva Mithyatva Prakriti) is found. Its duration is one middle Antar Muhurta only. Its duration also is very short, therefore, his thoughts also are known in omniscience only. Hence, it is perceived that as someone was given some instruction, he believes it to be true and untrue at one and the same time.  Similarly, that state in which belief and disbelief in Tattvas is found in one and the same time is called mixed state (of right and wrong belief).

Many people say- "For us Jinadeva (omniscient Jina) and other Devas, (deities) all are worshipable - such type of mixed belief they call Mishra Gunasthana; it is not so; this is clearly the state of Mithyatva (wrong belief). Even on existence of Vyavahara (conventional) form of belief true Deva (omniscient Jina) etc., Mithyatva (wrong belief) persists but in the afore said case even the ascertainment about true and false deity is not existent. Therefore, it is to be known that such person possesses Vinaya-Mithyatva.  

In this way, the description has been made about the false believers heading towards right belief. In this context, other related matters have also been discussed.

Thus, the characteristics of false believers of Jaina faith have been described.

Here various types of false believers have been discussed. Its purpose is this that by identifying these different kinds, if one finds any blemish in himself, then he should try to remove it and should evolve right belief. He should not become passionate by finding and seeing such blemishes in others, because one's own good or bad is caused by one's own thoughts & dispositions (Parinaamas). If one finds others interested in such discussion then one should benefit them also by giving discourses. It is, therefore, imperative to make efforts for improving one's own thoughts and dispositions; it is highly desirable to become a true believer by giving up all sorts of false convictions and perverse faiths (Mithyatva Bhavas), because the root cause of transmigration (mundane existence) is Mithyatva (false 
belief); there is no sin greater than Mithyatva.  

On destruction of Mithyatva (false belief) along with Anantaanubandhi Kashayas (error feeding interests passions), the bondage of forty-one Prakritis (karmas) also stops, the Sthiti (du-ration of karmas) gets decreased to the limit of Antah Koda-Kodi Sagaras (within crore of crore Sagaras), the Anubhaga (fruition of karmas) becomes very less only, such a Jiva attains Moksha (liberation state) shortly. And due to the existence of Mithyatva, the liberation path cannot be attained even besides making many other efforts. Therefore, by all sorts of means, it is necessary to destroy Mithyatva totally.

[ Thus, in Moksha Marga Prakashak Shastra the Seventh Chapter Dealing with Characteristics of Different False Believers of Jaina Faith is Concluded. ]

============================================================
(1) Dissociation of karmas from soul in geometrical progression is termed Guna Shreni Nirjara

(2) Naya= Stand-point, Pramana= Comprehensive knowledge,
Nikshepa=Installation.

*as one of the ten types of right belief and Aaja-Vichaya
** as a type of Dharma-Dhyana (virtuous meditation).
*** it is forbidden to raise any query in Jina's preachings; how is it so?
****Dravyalingi monk= The naked possessionless monks who have not attained right belief.
*****Pramana= Comprehensive knowledge (knowing a thing from all angles)
****** Naya= Standpoint (knowing a thing from some particular angle)

1The oneness of right belief, knowledge & conduct constitute the path of liberation
2Samayasara Gatha No. 254 to 256 and following verses from its commentary:

seth

 CHAPTER 8

NATURE OF SERMONS
 
Showing the right path of liberation to the mis-believers, mundane beings, is the greatest benefaction of them.  Even the Tirthankaras (omniscients), Ganadharas (chief monks) etc., render such type of benefaction only; Therefore, in this Shastra (Moksha Marga Prakashaka) also the discourses are given according to their sermons.

For clarifying the nature of sermon, some explanation is given here because if one does not identify or know the sermon properly in its true sense then he may follow the wrong path by believing otherwise.  Therefore, the nature of sermon is described.

In Jina's faith the sermon is given through four kinds of Anuyogas (branches of scriptures). Prathamaanuyoga (mythonomy), Karanaanuyoga (Aetiology & cosmology), Charanaanuyoga (Ethics or religious rituals) and Dravyaanuyoga (Metaphysics) - these are the four Anuyogas.

That branch of scriptures in which the life sketches (biographies) of great personages like Tirthankaras, Chakravarties, etc. are described, is called Prathamaanuyoga. And that branch of scriptures in which the Gunasthanas (spiritual stages), Marganas (quest-places), etc. forms of the Jivas and karmas and cosmology, etc. are described, is called Karanaanuyoga.   And that branch of scriptures in which the religious conduct, vows & rituals to be followed by householders and monks are described is called Charanaanuyoga, whereas that branch of scriptures in which six kinds of substances, seven Tattvas etc. and the science of self-nonself discrimination, etc. are discussed is called Dravyaanuyoga.

The Purpose of 4-Anuyogas

Now the purpose of these Anuyogas is being described:

The Purpose of Prathamaanuyoga

In the Prathamaanuyoga the Jivas are encouraged to follow the religion by way of describing the peculiarity of mundane existence, the consequences of Punya (virtue) and Papa (vice) and the conduct of the great personages, etc.  Even the persons having low level of understanding get interested in religion through it, because they do not understand the minute details but understand the worldly parables; their Upayoga (mind) gets engaged in them.  And in Prathamaanuyoga the description is found in the form of worldly tendencies only which they understand very well.  In the wordly stories of kings, etc., fostering of sins is found.  Here too, the legends of high persons like kings, etc. are found but their purpose is to detach persons from vices and to actuate them to practise religion.  Therefore, those persons, due to attraction of legends read and listen to them and then knowing the Papa (vices) to be harmful and Dharma (virtuous conduct) to be beneficial, they take interest in religion.

In this way, this Anuyoga is meant for the people of low level of understanding.  Parathama means  slow-whited mis-believers, hence the Anuyoga which is meant for them is Prathamaanuyoga.  "Such meaning is given in the commentary of Gommattasara”.

Pratham mithyadrishtimavrtikmtyutpannan va pratipadyamashritya prvritonuyogodhikar prathmanuyog --- (Gomattsar Jee. Pr. Tee.  Gatha 361-62

Further, if the Jivas having attained the knowledge of Tattvas read or listen to this Prathamaanuyoga, then for them this serves the purpose of examples.  For instance, "such Jiva knew that the Jiva (soul) is an eternal substance; the body, etc. are the external associations".  And in mythology the rebirths (transmigration’s) of the Jivas are described; those become the examples of that knowledge.  And he had learnt about Shubha (pious), Ashubha (impious) and Shuddha (pure/passionless) Upayogas i.e., conduct of the self and their consequences also.  In mythology the proclivity of those Upayogas (pious, impious and pure conduct of the self) and their fruition experienced by the Jiva is described, the same serves as an example of that knowledge.  Similar is the purpose of other descriptions.

Here the meaning of example is that he found similar happenings in the life of some Jiva which corroborated his knowledge about such Jiva; so, this became an evidence for such knowledge.

For example, a warrior gets highly encouraged in valor by listening to such stories of mythological personages in which the praise of warrior and censure of coward persons is found. Similarly, a religious person gets highly encouraged in religious practices by listening to such stories of mythological personages in which the praise of religious persons and censure of the wicked persons is found.

Thus, one should know the purpose of this Prathamaanuyoga.

The purpose of Karananuyoga

In Karanaanuyoga the Jivas are actuated to follow the religion through descriptions of the details of Jivas as well as of karmas and structure of the universe, etc.  The Jivas who  wish to engage their Upayoga (active knowledge) in religion, they get engaged in religion and become detached from vices by knowing and identifying the details of the Jivas' Gunasthanas (spiritual stages), Marganas (quest places) etc. and the details of the various kinds of karmas, their causes-conditions and fruits in different Jivas and hellish-heavenly abodes in the universe (three worlds).  And if the Upayoga gets engrossed in such thoughts then at once automatically religion (serenity) gets evolved and vicious tendency ends.  By its practice even the attainment of Tattva-jnana (true knowledge and belief of the Tattvas) takes place soon.  And he becomes a true description is found in Jina's religion only and nowhere else it is found.

And to such Jivas who study this Karanaanuyoga after attaining true knowledge of Tattvas, this appears to be the adjectival form of that (Tattva-jnana).  The details and specialties of these Jiva etc. Tattvas are found in Karanaanuyoga about which he has learnt.  There many details are described in their true (Nishchaya) form and many other details in conventional (Vyavahara) form being attributed to be so.  Many are of Pramana (1) etc. form relating to the characteristics of Dravya (substance), Kshetra (specialty), Kaal (time) and Bhava (qualities) etc., many other are described with the relativity of instrumental cause and dependence of Upayoga etc. - thus various forms of details are described.  By believing them precisely in to such Jiva engrosses himself in the study of Karanaanuyoga.

By the study of this Anuyoga one's Tattva-jnana becomes pure (faultless).  For example, someone was knowing that a particular object is a jewel but only on knowing the various specialties of that jewel he becomes a true assayer of the flawless (pure) jewel.  Similarly, he was knowing the Tattvas that these are Jiva, etc. but only on knowing the various details of those Tattvas he acquires faultless knowledge of those Tattvas.  On acquiring the faultless knowledge of Tattvas one becomes, of his own, a distinguished devout person.

Further, if he engages his Upayoga (active knowledge) elsewhere, then passions, etc. are increased and the non- omniscient's Upayoga does not remain incessantly concentrated or fixed on one particular object; therefore, the true believer engages his Upayoga in the study of Karanaanuyoga due to which the knowledge of substances as seen in omniscience is evolved.  There remains the difference of Pratyaksha (direct) and Apratyaksha (indirect) knowledge only.  There is no contrariness in grasping or knowing the Tattvas etc.

In this way, one should know the purpose of studying Karanaanuyoga.  Karana means formulae concerning to mathematical calculations; that book which deals with this Anuyoga (topic) is called Karanaanuyoga (aetiology).  In this Anuyoga the prominence of mathematical description is found.

The Purpose of Charanaanuyoga (Ethics)

Now the purpose of Charanaanuyoga (ethics) is being described.  In Charanaanuyoga the Jivas are actuated to follow the religious practices by explaining the different means of observing religion.  The Jivas who do not know as to what is beneficial and what is harmful for them and remain engrossed in sinful acts like injury, etc., are discoursed in such a way that they give up vicious acts and adopt religious practices. Knowing this those who are inclined towards religious practices they engage themselves in such religious practices which they can follow after listening to the details (rituals) of householder's and monk's religious rituals (duties).

By such practices passions become feeble and consequently so much is achieved that they do not suffer from miseries in bad states of existence but obtain happiness in good states of existence and by observance of such practices, the instrumentality of Jina's faith (religion) is maintained and in such state if the attainment of Tattva-jnana be destined, then it gets evolved.

And those Jivas who practice Charanaanuyoga after attaining the knowledge of Tattvas, to them all these observances appear to be in accordance with their passionless dispositions (Veetaraaga Bhavas).  On evolution of partial and complete passionlessness, such sort of householder's state and monk's state respectively is attained because the instrumental cause and effect relationship is found in these observances.  Knowing this and identifying the characteristics of the householder's and monk's religion (duties), they indulge in such suitable religious practices as is warranted by the degree of passionlessness (Veetaraagata) is evolved in them, they know it to be beneficial and whatever degree of passions (Raaga) persists, they know it to be worthless and believe total passionlessness to be the supreme religion.

Such is the purpose of Charanaanuyoga (ethics).

	     The Purpose of Dravyaanuyoga (Metaphysics)

Now the purpose of Dravyaanuyoga (metaphysics) is being described.  In Dravyaanuyoga the Jivas are actuated to follow the religion by describing the substances and the Tattvas (essential principles).  The Jivas who do not know and identify the Jiva (soul) etc. substances and the Tattvas and do not know the self-nonself to be different entities, are discoursed through reasoning, examples, logic and through Pramana (comprehensive viewpoint) and Nayas (partial viewpoints) etc. in such a way that they are able to grasp the true nature of Tattvas etc. and develop right faith in them.  By its regular study the eternal ignorance is removed. When the Tattvas etc., fancied or fabricated by the other (non-Jaina) faiths, appear to be false then the belief of Jaina's faith gets evolved and if one makes efforts for identifying their true nature then he may attain right belief in Tattvas very soon.

Further, if such Jivas who have attained Tattva-jnana, regularly study Dravyaanuyoga then all those descriptions appear to them to be according to their belief.  For example, someone has acquired some skill but if he continues to practice it then it remains in his memory; if he does not practice it, he forgets it.  Similarly, after one has attained Tattva-jnana if he continues to study Dravyaanuyoga which deals with it, then that Tattva-jnana persists, if he does not do so, he forgets it.  Or the Tattva-jnana which was attained in brief form, if becomes clear or lucid through different logic reasoning examples, etc., then there can be no laxity in it.  Moreover, due to lessening of passions (Raaga) etc., by this sort of practice and study, the Moksha (liberation) is attained soon.

In this way, one should know the purpose of Dravyaanuyoga (metaphysics).

	     The Methodology of Exposition in Anuyogas

Now, the methodology of exposition found in these Anuyogas is being described.

	  The Methodology of Exposition in Prathamaanuyoga

In Prathamaanuyoga whatever main stories are, the same are described as they are.  And in them the relevant expositions pertaining to the topic under discussion are also given; some are described as it is and some are given according to the thoughts of the author of the book, but the purpose is not changed.

For example, on the auspicious occasions of the Tirthankara, Devas the Indras (chief gods of heaven) came to celebrate the function.  So this story is true and the Indras offered invocation to them which is described in this Anuyoga. Although the Indras offered invocation in different words and here (in prathamaanuyoga) the author has described it in some other words, but the purpose of invocation is not changed. Further, some conversation took place between some persons; there the words uttered were different, whereas here the author has used some other words, but the same purpose is maintained.  And the names of town, forest, battlefields, etc. used here are the same but, maintaining the same purpose, the description is found in less or more words. Other descriptions should also be known likewise.

Further, the relevant stories also are written by the authors as per their own thoughts.  For example, in Dharma-pariksha the story of the stupid fellows is found.  There is no such rule that the same story was narrated by Manovega but some tale fostering stupidity was narrated.  So, they have supported the same purpose.  Similarly, one should know elsewhere also.

Here someone may say, - "Untrue statements are not possible in Jain Shastras?"

Answer: That which fosters a different purpose is called untrue.  For example, " someone tells a person that you should say so".  he did not speak in the same words, but spoke with the same purpose; therefore, he is not called a liar.  If the rule be that the same words be used then, if someone had contemplated on renunciation in various ways, describing all that, would increase the volume of the book and if nothing is written about it then its concept will not be clear.  Therefore, in the context of renunciation, the authors will write descriptions fostering renunciation only in less or more words as per their thoughts, but will not write any thing fostering passions.  Here the purpose is not changed.  Therefore, it is not untrue.  In the same way, one should know elsewhere also.

Further, in Prathamaanuyoga, only the prominent things are supported.  For example, someone observed  fast; although its fruit was insignificant but he attained higher state of existence due to his other religious observances simultaneously.  Here such attainment is described to be the result of observance of fast only.  In the same way, one should know elsewhere also.

And as someone firmly observed the vow of chastity, etc., chanted Namaskar Mantra (obeisance to five supreme souls) and also observed other religious practices, his miseries came to an end and miracles appeared; so all this is not caused only by such religious practices but such (agreeable) events took place due to the rise of some other karma, nevertheless, such events are described to be fruit of observance of chastity, etc. only.  Similarly, someone indulged in some wicked act (and obtained hellish birth); so, this is not the result of that wicked act only, but owing to the rise of some other karma, he got birth in the lower state of existence or suffered from miseries, etc.  But it is described to be the fruit of that wicked act only.  Likewise, one should know the other examples.

Here someone may say “Describing such false fruit is not desirable; how can such statement be believed to be authentic?"

Answer: For the benefit of those ignorant persons who do not take interest in religious practices and are not afraid of wicked acts without showing more fruit of such acts, such descriptions are found. When the fruit of religion be described to be the fruit of sin, the fruit of sin be described to be the fruit of religion then it is false, but here it is not so.  For example, ten persons jointly do some work, there, if it is not wrong.  Or somebody's ancestors performed some act; if from one caste point of view it is described conventionally to be the work of one person only then it is not wrong.  Or somebody's ancestors performed some act; if from one caste point of view it is described conventionally to be the performance of their sons, etc. then there is nothing wrong.  Similarly, one event took place as a result of several virtuous and vicious acts; if conventionally it is described to be the result of one virtuous or vicious act, then there is nothing wrong.  Or whatever has been the result of any other virtuous or vicious act, if from the similar category point of view, the same is described conventionally to be the result of any other virtuous or vicious act only, then there is nothing wrong.

In preachings, statements are made at some places from conventional (Vyavahara) point of view and at some places from realistic (Nishchaya) point of view.  Here (in Prathamaanuyoga) the Upachara (superimposed) form of Vyavahara (conventional) practices are described.  In this way, it is authentic.  But one should not treat this to be corrected degree to degree.  It should be known that degree to degree description is found in Karanaanuyoga.

Further, in Prathamaanuyoga, if someone is found to be observing one particular conventional form of religious practice, he is said to be following the religion in to. For examples, those Jivas who are found not having any doubt in religion or craving for worldly enjoyments, etc., are said to have attained the right belief; but only by not having doubt, desire, etc. in any one particular religious aspect, the right belief cannot be evolved; the right belief is evolved on developing staunch faith in Tattvas; but here the real right belief has been superimposed in the conventional right belief and the conventional right belief, -thus by, "Upachara", (superimposition) the right belief is said to have been evolved.

Further, on attaining knowledge of one part (Anga) of any Jain-Shastra, the right knowledge is said to have been evolved.  But on attaining the knowledge of Tattvas, devoid of doubt, etc. perversities, the right knowledge is evolved. Here also the right knowledge is termed so by Upachara (conventionally) as stated above.

Further, if someone observes some pious conduct, he is said to have attained right conduct.  And if one has accepted Jaina religion and practices some vow in smaller or greater measure, he is called a Shravaka- a true believer householder observing small vows or partial conduct.  (In reality) on attainment of fifth Gunasthana (spiritual stage) only, one is called a Shravaka, but in the aforesaid manner conventionally (by Upachara) he is called a Shravaka. In the Shastra "Uttar- Purana" the king Shrenika is termed a supreme Shravaka, though he was a vowless (incontinent) householder; but because he was a Jaina so he is described so.  Likewise, one should know elsewhere.

Further, one who accepts Munilinga (possessionless necked monk state) without right belief and even if externally he is found with some blemish, he is still called a Muni (mink). Although on attainment of sixth Gunasthana etc., one becomes a Muni, but in the aforesaid manner, conventionally (by Upachara) he - the monk - with blemishes is called a Muni. In Samavasarana Sabha (omniscient's preaching arena) the presence of a particular number of monks is stated (in the Shastra); but all of them were not the true Bhavalingi Munis (true spiritual monks with right belief), but because of acceptance of external Jain monk's posture, all are termed as monks (munis).  Similarly, one should know elsewhere.

Further, in Prathamaanuyoga, if someone indulges in some undesirable act with religious attitude, even then he is praised.  For instance, Vishnukumar (a Jain monk possessed with super-natural power) removed the affliction of the other monks with religious attitude; but it was not desirable to indulge in this act by forsaking the status of a monk, because such an act is possible in  householder’s religion only and monk’s religion is higher than the householder’s religion.  Therefore, it is not praiseworthy to accept lower religious status by giving up higher religious status; but monk Vishnukumarji has been praised due to the prominence of Vatsalya Anga, i.e., affectionate feeling towards the coreligionists.  Under this pretext, it is not desirable for others to accept lower religious status by giving up higher status.

Further, (it is described that) a cowherd created hot atmosphere around a Jain monk by burning fire.  He did so out of compassion.  One should surely remove the Upasarga (affliction) caused externally by others.  But removing the natural Parishaha (disagreeable condition) of cold, etc. is the cause of arousing liking passions.  Therefore, such an act causes affliction (instead of removing it).  That is why the judicious persons do not make effort for removing cold.  The cowherd was an ignorant person; he did so out of compassion, therefore, he is praised.  But under this pretext, it is not desirable for others to indulge in such acts which are contrary to religious practice.

Further, the King Vajrakarana did not salute the King Simhodara and kept the idol of Jina carved in the ring.  Even the great true believers salute the kings, etc., there is no fault in it.  But disrespect is caused in keeping the idol in the ring, because no such adorable idol is possible as per set norms; therefore, this act faulty.  But he was not aware of this; out of religious affection he developed a feeling - "I will not salute anybody else".  Therefore he is praised. But under this pretext, it is not desirable for others to indulge in such acts.

Further, for the sake of getting a son, etc. or mitigating disease and other calamities, etc., some people built temples (Chaityalayas) and worshipped Jina's idol, etc.; chanted hymns and recited Namaskar mantra, etc.; but such practices destroy the Nihkankshita Guna (the virtue of desirelessness) and amount to indulgence in Nidanbandha types sorrowful concentration.  Because of inner inauspicious purpose, it causes the bondage of inauspicious karmas only.  But even being deluded, he did not worship false deities, etc. which are the cause of enormous and intense bondage of Papa karmas; considering this aspect, he has been praised.  Under this pretext, it is not desirable for others to adopt religious practices for temporal gains.  Likewise, one should know elsewhere also.

Thus there are found many such descriptions in Prathamaanuyoga; knowing their real sense, one should not get deluded.

		     Methodology of Exposition of Karanaanuyoga

Now the style of exposition in Karanaanuyoga is being described:  The description found in Karanaanuyoga is as known in omniscience.  Though all is known in omniscience, yet, only that which is useful to Jiva, e.g., the relationship of Jiva-karmas, etc. and cosmology (universe) etc. are described here in this "Anuyoga".  Even all details of them cannot be described, therefore, whatever could be possibly described in words and could be known and perceived in non-omniscient's knowledge, is described in an abridged form.  For example, the Gunasthanas (spiritual stages) are described from the viewpoint of instincts and dispositions of the Jivas; those dispositions being infinite cannot be described through words, therefore, by combining many dispositions into one category, fourteen Gunasthanas are specified.  And there are various ways of knowing the Jivas, but only main fourteen Marganas (quest-places) are specified. Although karmic matter (atoms) possesses infinite potency, yet, in them, by combining many atoms into one category, the eight types of main prakritis (karmas) and one hundred and forty-eight subdivisions of them are described.  And in the universe (3 worlds) many objects are found but herein some of the main objects with their details are described.  And Pramana (measure) is of infinite kinds; the Sankhyat (numerable) etc. three main divisions and further twenty-one divisions of these are specified.

In the same way, one should know elsewhere.

Although the spatiality, time, qualities (modes) etc. of the substance are indivisible, nevertheless, with the object that the non-omniscient may also attain some knowledge of the substances, in Karanaanuyoga, time unit (Samaya), units measuring the degrees of quality manifested (Avibhaga- Practichchhedas) are described.  And one and the same substance is described by making divisions of different- different Gunas (attributes) and Paryayas (modifications). Although the Jivas (souls) and the Pudgalas (matter) etc. are separate-separate substances, nevertheless, through the instrumentality of relationship (bondage) etc. the Gati (state of existence) produced out of many substances, the Jati (category) etc. divisions are described to be of one Jiva only.  All this exposition should be known to be with the prominence of conventional standpoint (Vyavahara Naya) because details and specialties cannot be understood without Vyavahara (conventional divisions).  And at some places the description is found from Nischaya (real) standpoint also. For example, Pramana (numerical measures etc.) of Jivas etc. substances are described; the separate-separate substances are that much only.  One should know the same appropriately.

Further, many statements given in Karanaanuyoga are comprehensible by non-omniscient directly or through inference and those which are not so comprehensible should be believed as per Jina's commandment.  The embodied forms of human beings, etc., which are the gross and longer and longer-lasting combined modifications of Jiva and Pudgalas and the jars, etc. modes of matter can be known directly or through inference, but the degrees of knowledge, etc. and smooth-rough attributes, etc. which are described from the viewpoint of subtle changes taking place every moment, are known only by Jinas commandment.  Likewise, one should know elsewhere also.

Further, in Karanaanuyoga the description is not done according to the proclivity of non-omniscients but is done of the substances known in Kewal-jnan (omniscience).  For example, many Jivas contemplate on the nature of substances and observe vows, etc. but they do not possess the internal power of right belief and right conduct.  Therefore, they are called mis-believers and incontinent (vowless) persons.  On the other hand, many Jivas neither contemplate on the nature of substances nor follow vows, etc. and either indulge in other acts or remain asleep thoughtlessly, but they possess the power of right belief, etc.; therefore, they are called right believers and votaries (continent persons).

Further, some Jiva is found indulging more in passional acts but possess feeble internal-passional power; therefore, he is called a feeble-passioned person.  And some Jiva is found indulging less in passional activities but possesses intense internal passional power, so he is called a highly-passioned person.  For example, the peripatetic gods (Vyantaras) destroy the town, etc. by passions, nevertheless, they are stated to possess Peeta-Leshya, due to feeble passional power.  And the one-sensed, etc. beings are not seen indulging in passional acts, yet they are stated to possess Krishna Leshyas etc. due to intense passional power.  And the Devas of Sarvartha Siddhi are found indulging very less in passions but they are called incontinent because they possess more passional power.  And the Jiva of fifth Gunasthana indulges more in passional acts like business, sex, etc., yet he is stated to possess partial continence or conduct because of feeble passional power.  Likewise, one should know at other places.

Further, the activity of mind, speech and body of some Jiva is found to be less, yet he is stated to possess more Yoga (vibratory activity) because of power of attracting the karmas; one may be found indulging too much in external activities, nevertheless, he is stated to possess less Yoga due to weak power.  For example, though the omniscient is not having any activity of movement, etc., nevertheless he is stated to possess more Yoga (vibratory activity).  The two- sensed, etc. beings make movement, etc., yet they are stated to have less Yoga.  In the same way, one should know elsewhere.

Further, that which is not seen apparently, nevertheless, it is stated to be present there because of presence of subtle power.  For example, the true monk is not found indulging in any sexual activity but the inner instinct for copulation is stated to be present in him up to the ninth Gunasthana.  The cause of misery is not apparent in Ahmindra (self Gods), nevertheless, rarely, the rise Asata (pain-producing karma) is stated to be present there.  Similarly, one should know elsewhere.

Further, the Karanaanuyoga describes the right belief, knowledge, conduct, etc. religion with the relativity of subsidence, etc. of karma-prakritis and with their subtle power with reference to different Gunasthanas and it also describes the Jiva etc. Tattvas with their minute details and classifications, etc. which are the cause of right belief, etc.  Here is someone tries to make effort according to Karanaanuyoga, it cannot be possible; the main object of Karanaanuyoga is to describe the true nature of substances; there is not prominence of putting anything into practice. Therefore, one should follow the conduct as per Charanaanuyoga etc., due to which, whatever is to happen happens automatically.  For example, if one wishes to subside the karmas, how can he do it?  One should rather make effort for ascertaining the Tattvas etc., owing to which subsidential, etc. form of right belief is evolved of its own.  Similarly, one should know elsewhere.

In one Antarmuhurta (1) a monk falling from the eleventh Gunasthana, gradually becomes a false believer and again by ascending (the ladder of destruction of karmas) he evolves Kewal-jnan (omniscience).  Such subtle dispositions of right belief, etc. are not the subject of comprehension. Therefore, one should know the nature of substances as per the Karanaanuyoga but follow such conduct knowingly which is beneficial.

And in the Karanaanuyoga also, at some places, the exposition is found with emphasis on preaching, so that should not believed in its totality.  For example, making effort for injury, etc. is called Kumati-jnana (perverse sensory knowledge); study of scriptures of other religions is called Kushruta-jnana (perverse scriptural knowledge); always perceiving bad aspect and not perceiving good aspect is called Vibhanga-jnan (perverse clairvoyance)- all these are preached so for forsaking them.  From subtle point of view, all knowledge of a true believer is right knowledge. Similarly, one should know elsewhere.

And if somewhere general statements are found, the same should not be treated as correct degree to degree.  For example, the circumference is described to be three times of the diameter but minutely speaking it is somewhat more than three times.  Likewise, one should know elsewhere.

And, somewhere, the exposition is found from the predominance point of view, the same should not be taken as stated, in all respects.  For example, the Jivas of Mithyadrishti Gunasthana i.e., first Gunasthana and of Sasadan Gunasthana i.e., second Gunasthana are described as Papa Jivas (vicious souls), the Jivas of the fourth Gunasthana, i.e., vowless right believers, etc., are described as Punya Jivas (virtuous souls).  This is stated from the predominance point of view but minutely speaking both the types of Jivas may be found in smaller or greater measure having virtuous and vicious dispositions.  Similarly, one should know elsewhere.

In the same way, many other different descriptions are found; the same should be known appropriately.

Thus, the methodology of exposition in Karanaanuyoga is concluded.

Methodology of Exposition in Charanaanuyoga

Now the methodology of exposition in Charanaanuyoga is explained:-

In Charanaanuyoga, that aspect of religious conduct has been preached, in the manner, which is comprehensible by Jivas. In fact, the religion is the real form of liberation-path and its instrumental causes are conventionally called religion. Therefore, form the predominance of Vyavahara Naya (conventional standpoint) the kinds and subdivisions of various types of conventional religion (Upachar Dharma) are described in this Anuyoga, because in real aspect of religion (Nishchaya Dharma) there is no place for acceptance and renunciation of any thing and in the lower spiritual stages it is not possible for Jivas to give up rambling state of thoughts, therefore, here this Jivas is preached to give up irreligious acts and adopt religious practices.

Such sermons are given in two forms; the one form consists of adopting conventional practices only and the other form consists of adopting conventional practices along with real aspect of religion.

Those Jivas who do not possess the knowledge of Nishchaya (real aspect of religion) and even on preaching they are not able to grasp it, such false believers are preached only through Vyavahara (conventional path) when they show some interest in religion.  And those Jivas who possess the knowledge of Nishchaya & Vyavahara both or who might evolve such knowledge on being preached- such true believers- and those false believers who are likely to attain right belief shortly, are given sermons of conventional practices along with real aspect of religion, because the true monk (preceptor) is the benefactor of all Jivas.

The irrational (mindless) Jivas are not capable of grasping the sermon; the true monks have benefited such Jivas by preaching other (rational) Jivas to have compassion towards such Jivas.

Further, there are some Jivas who cannot attain the right path of liberation due to the  predominance of karmas; (the preceptor monks) have benefited such Jivas through the discourse of Vyavahara Dharma (conventional form of religion) by engaging them to adopt virtuous conduct, being the cause of sensual pleasures and good state of existence and by discouraging them from vicious acts, being the cause of miseries and evil state of existence.  Such Jivas are benefited to the extent to which miseries are reduced.

Further, the sinner is found possessing sinful instincts and attains evil state of existence where the instrumental cause of religion does not exist; therefore, traditionally he continues suffering from miseries only.  And the pious person is found possessing pious instincts and attains good state of existence where the instrumental causes of religion are found; therefore, traditionally he attains happiness or if the power of karmas gets reduced, then he may even attain the liberation path also.  Therefore, the preceptors encourage Jivas through conventional discourses to adopt virtuous acts and discourage them to give up vicious acts.

And the Jivas, who have attained the liberation path of are capable of attaining it, are benefited by actuating them to follow liberation path through preachings of conventional practices along with real aspect of religion.  In this way, the true preceptor monks render benefaction to all Jivas but if such benefaction is not availed by some Jivas then what can the true preceptors do?  Whatever benefaction is possible, they do it.  Therefore, the sermons are given in two forms.

In conventional form of preachings, there is the predominance of external activities only.  By following them, the Jivas quits the vicious acts and adopts virtuous acts.  There, according to the external activities, the inner thoughts also get released from intense passion and become of the order of feeble passion.  So, chiefly it is so but someone may or may not evolve feeble passion; the true preceptors, give sermons of observing external rituals only with the object of improving thoughts and the dispositions.

And in the sermons of Vyavahara (conventional path) along with Nishchaya (real aspect of religion) the predominance is of the thoughts and dispositions only.  Through its preachings, if someone tries to improve his thoughts by means of practice of Tattva-jnana and contemplation about renunciation, then one's external activities also get improved in accordance with thoughts.  On improvement of thoughts, the external activities also invariably get improved.  Therefore, the true preceptors predominantly give sermons of improving the thoughts.

Thus, out of two forms of these sermons, where the Vyavahara religion only is preached, there, for attaining right belief, the preceptors preach to develop faith in Arhanta Deva (passionless omniscient God), Nigrantha-Guru (possession-less naked monk preceptor) and Daya-Dharma (non-violence religion) only and not to have faith in any other deity, etc. and to have faith in Vyavahara form of Jivas etc. Tattvas, not to get involved in doubt, etc. twenty-five blemishes and to develop qualities like doubtlessness Nihshankita-Anga etc. and Samvega (awe towards miseries of worldly existence) etc.

And for attaining right knowledge, the preceptors preach to study the scriptures containing Jina's preachings and to make effort for understanding the true meaning of the words, etc. properly.  And for evolving right conduct, the true preceptors preach to give up sins like injury, etc. partially or completely and to observe vows, etc.  And if some Jiva is not found capable of following the higher grade of religion (vows, etc.) then the preceptor sermonizes him to take of follow one particular vow only.  For example, the tribal person (Bhil) was advised to give up eating the meat of crow, the coward was preached to chant Namaskar Mantra and the householders to construct the Jina's temple and to engage in worship, propagation of religion, etc.; thus sermons are given as per the capacity of Jiva.

Further, where the discourse is given of Vyavahara along with Nishchaya, there, for attaining right belief, the preceptors sermonize to evolve faith in real Tattvas (realities).  "The real nature of Tattvas is true (Bhhootartha) and their conventional form is superimposed" - with such faith and through the discrimination of self-nonself and with the object of giving up attachment, etc. in non-self substances, the preceptor preaches to evolve faith in those Tattvas. This is also explained that by developing such faith, the deities other than Arhanta etc. are perceived to be false, then automatically the belief in them gets quit.  And for attaining right knowledge, the preceptors preach to know these Tattvas doubtlessly in their real form; the instrumental cause for attaining such knowledge, is the study of Jain Shastras (Jina's scriptures).  Therefore, for achieving this purpose, the study of Jina's scripture automatically takes place.  And for evolving right conduct, the preceptors preach to give up passions like attachment, etc.  There, on partial or total destruction of intense attachment, etc. passions, the sinful activity, which was existing partially or completely due to their instrumental effect, gets quit; and in the presence of feeble passion, the practicing of vows, worthy of a Shravaka (votary householder) and a Muni (homeless and possessionless naked ascetic) is found and on destruction of feeble attachment also, the conduct of Shuddhopayoga (pure passionless conduct of the self) is evolved.  This is also described in this Anuyoga.

Further, whatever real vow, invocation, worship, propagation of religion or meditation, etc. are found associated with a true believer having right faith, the same are preached here. The preachings are given in accordance with the true traditional path described in Jina's religion.  Thus, one should know the two forms of discoursing the people.

Further, in Charanaanuyoga, discourse is given for giving up the acts of intense passions and adopting the acts of feeble passions.  Although indulging in passion is assuredly harmful, yet if total renunciation of passions is not possible, then in whatever measure passions are reduced, to that extent one is benefited- such is the purpose of these preachings.  For example, such Jivas who are not able to give up totally the desire of indulging in household activities, constructing temple, etc., are preached to engage themselves in the acts of worshipping, spreading the truth, constructing and decorating the Jina's temple, etc. or dancing, singing (religious songs) before Jina's idol, etc. or helping the religious persons, etc.  because traditionally in these activities passions are not fostered; therefore, the Jivas are preached to give up sinful acts and to engage in aforesaid acts.  Further, in whatever small or great measure, sinful acts are likely to be given up, in that measure the Jiva is preached to give up sinful acts and to develop right belief and partial vows, etc.  And those Jivas who have totally given up the desire of indulging in household activities like worship, etc. and by relinquishing all sinful acts, etc., to adopt the great vows, etc.  But if it is known that the passions are only partially reduced, then such Jivas are preached to adopt the activities of compassion, religious preaching, observing Pratikramana (repentance for the faults done knowingly or unknowingly), etc.  wherever passions in their totality are found to have been destroyed, there remains nothing to be done; therefore, they need no preachings.  Such is the sequence to be followed in the path to liberation.

Further, in Charanaanuyoga even by arousing passion, the passionate beings are encouraged to give up sinful acts and to follow religious practices.  For example, by arousing fear passion through description of hellish miseries to be the result of sinful acts, the Jivas are encouraged to give up sinful acts and by arousing greed passion through the description of pleasures of heavens, etc. to be the fruit of virtuous deeds, the Jivas are actuated to follow religious deeds.  And this Jiva indulges in sins due to feeling of attachment towards sensuous pleasures, body, son, wealth, etc. and remains disinterested in religion.  By describing the sensuous pleasures to be the cause of death, afflictions etc., the feeling of detachment is aroused in them.  By describing the body, etc. to be impure, the disgust passion is aroused there; by describing the sons, etc. to be the partaker of wealth, etc., aversion is aroused in them and by describing wealth, etc. to be the cause of death, afflictions, etc., the feeling of disliking is aroused in them.  By adopting such different means, the intense attachment in the sensuous objects is destroyed and they are encouraged to give up sinful acts and start following religious practices.  Further, by chanting the name (of supreme souls), invocation, worship in this world and son, wealth, etc. are attained-through such descriptions, greed passion is aroused and Jivas are encouraged to follow religious practices.  Similarly, one should know other examples.

Here lies a question as to what is the purpose of arousing one type of passion by discouraging to give up another type of passion?

Answer: Severe cold (typhus) and fever both are diseases. But if the physician diagnoses that someone is dying due to severe cold (typhus) then he makes effort to develop fever in him and after the fever has developed, if the chance of his surviving be there, then afterwards he tries to eradicate the fever also.  Similarly, all passions are worth giving up but knowing that some Jivas are indulging in sinful acts due to passional feelings, the true preceptors try to arouse such passions in them which encourages them to follow virtuous acts.  Later on, if it is found that such persons have developed religious instincts, then they encourage them to uproot the passions.  Such is the purpose.

Further, in Charanaanuyoga, through different reasoning, descriptions are made in such a manner that the Jivas are encouraged to follow religion by quitting sinful acts.  The true preceptors explain through worldly illustrations, logic, examples, judiciously; and sometimes they quote examples from other religions also.  As in Suktamuktavali the goddess Laxmi is described to be an inhabitant of lotus flower and from the viewpoint that both poison and Laxmi are the product of ocean, she is stated to be the sister of poison.  In the same way, descriptions are made elsewhere also.

Although many of such examples, etc. are false, yet they foster the real purpose; therefore, there is no fault in this.

Somebody may say here that the fault of falsehood lies here?

Answer: Even if it is false but fosters, the real purpose then it is not treated to be false.  And if it is true also but fosters false purpose then in reality it is false only.

In the use of rhetoric, logic, naming etc., the truth and falsehood are not decided on the basis of words but on the basis of purpose.  For example, a town with some decoration is stated to be similar to Indrapuri (heavenly town); this is obviously false but because it fosters the purpose of decoration, it is not treated to be false.  And in this town "stick is found with the umbrella and nowhere else"- this is obviously false because use of stick is found elsewhere also but because unlawful persons are very few there and lawful persons are not punished- since it fosters this purpose- hence it is not false.  Further, Jupiter (Brihaspati's) name is written as Surguru (the preceptor of Gods) and Mars (Mangal’s) name is written as Kuja; so such names are taken from other faiths.  Their literal meaning is false but that name signifies the meaning of that particular thing, therefore, it is not false.

Thus, the examples, etc. drawn from other faiths are false. Here the objectives is not to foster faith in those examples but to foster faith in the purpose and because the purpose is true hence there lies no fault.

Further, in Charanaanuyoga such discourses comprehensible by non-omniscients are given from general point of view with the prominence of worldly tendencies, but the discourses are not given from the subtleness point of view, comprehensible by omniscience, because it cannot be practiced.  Here the purpose is to encourage the religious practice.

For instance, it is stated that an Anuvrati (the follower of small vows) does not commit injury to mobile beings whereas in the activities like sexual intercourse, etc. injury to mobile beings is caused; he too knows that in Jinavani (omniscients preachings) it is stated that here mobile beings are found but he has no intention of causing injury to mobile beings and he does not indulge in such injury which in worldly affairs is called injury of mobile beings. Therefore, from this point of view, he is the renouncer of injury to mobile beings.

Further, the monk (muni) is said to be the renouncer of injury even to one-sensed (immobile) beings, but the monks make movement, etc. on earth and in water etc.; there the total absence of even mobile beings is not found because the space occupied even by mobile beings is so small that it may not be perceivable by eyes and their existence is found on earth and in water, etc. only- this, the monks know from Jinavani (scriptures) and some monks know this through clairvoyance, etc. also, but they do not have intention of committing injury to mobile-immobile beings by negligence. And in the world, indulgence in activities like digging of earth and causing injury to gross mobile beings is called injury to mobile beings.  The monks do not indulge in these activities, therefore, the monk is said to be the total renouncer of injury.  From the same point of view he is stated to be the renouncer of untruth, theft, chastity and possessions.

From the viewpoint of omniscience, the false- speech- vibration (in the soul) is stated to be present up to twelfth Gunasthana, the assimilation of Adatta-karma Parmanus (specific atoms), etc. other non-self substance upto thirteenth Gunasthana, the rise of sex-passion upto tenth Gunasthana.  The external possessions like Samavasarana etc. (congregation) are found associated with omniscient also; but due to absence of negligence, the monk does not have any sinful intention.  And those activities which in the world are stated as "this person tells lies, steals, commits adultery, keeps possessions etc." are not found in the monks, therefore, they are stated to be renouncers of untruth, etc.

And among the Mulgunas (fundamental rites of a monk) the renunciation of the objects of five senses is described, but knowing through the senses has not stopped and if the attachment-aversion passion in the objects (of senses) would have been totally destroyed then the Yathakhyat-Charitra (perfect right conduct) would have been evolved to them but this has not happened, yet in broad sense the desire of objects of senses has ended; therefore, they are stated to have renounced the objects of senses.  Similarly, one should know elsewhere also.

Moreover, whatever a votary renounces and practices all that is according to the system of Charanaanuyoga and worldly tradition.  For example, someone renounces injury to mobile beings; here he has renounced that injury which in Charanaanuyoga and worldly tradition is called injury to mobile beings.  The renunciation of such injuries to mobile beings which are perceived in omniscience cannot be possible.  Here that injury to mobile beings which has renounced is like this - " not to think of it is renunciation by mind, not to talk of it is renunciation by words, not to act through body is renunciation by body".  It should be known that other renunciations and practices are also followed in the same way and by this method only.

Here arises a question that in Karanaanuyoga the description is found "precisely as it is" from the omniscience point of view.  There, in the sixth Gunasthanas, the total absence of the twelve kinds of non-abstinence (Aviratis) is stated; how is it so?

Answer: "Non-abstinence" also is included in vibratory activity (Yoga) and passions (Kashayas), but there also the non-abstinence is defined to be the absence of renunciation from Charanaanuyoga point of view; hence, those are absent there.  The metal non-absinence is stated to be absent but the mental thoughts are found in the monk, yet it should be known that due to absence of vicious proclivity of unrestrained mind the absence of mental non-abstinence is described.

Moreover, in Charanaanuyoga, the names, etc., various terms, are stated from the conventional worldly tradition point of view.  For example, the true believer is stated to be a true recipient and misbeliever as unworthy recipient.  Here one who has faith in Jinadeva (the conqueror omniscient God) etc. should be known as true believer and one who does not have such faith as misbeliever.  Because giving of donation is advised in Charanaanuyoga, therefore, one should understand the meaning of right belief, wrong belief as stated in Charanaanuyoga only.  But if the right belief, wrong belief are considered as per Karanaanuyoga then same Jiva who was in eleven Gunasthana might fall in the first Gunasthana in one Antarmuhurta (within 48 minutes) only.  In such a situation how could the decision about the true recipient and the unworthy recipient be taken by the donor?

Further, if the viewpoint of Dravyaanuyoga is taken about the existence of right belief, wrong belief, then in the congregation of monks, there are both Dravyalingis (1) and Bhavalingis (2) monks also.  Firstly, correct decision about them is very difficult, because the external conduct of both is found to be similar and even if by chance a true believer may be able to judge correctly (a Dravyalingi) on the basis of some symptom and if he does not adore him then others will doubt as to why did he not adore him? In this way, if the false status of a monk gets disclosed, then it will create controversy in the congregation of monks, therefore, here the statement should be understood from the viewpoint of conventional right belief and wrong belief.

Here someone may ask -"How would a right believer adore a Dravyalingi monk because he considers the Dravyalingi to be inferior in qualities even to himself?"

Answer: In a Dravyalingi monk the practice of conventional religion is found in very great measure and adoration is also a conventional practice only.  For example, there is a rich person but he offers respect to a person who is elder in age from the parentage point of view.  Similarly, the true believer possesses right faith but he offers adoration from the viewpoint of conventional religion point of view, treating him to be possessing greater merits.  Similarly, those Jivas who observe fasts in greater measore are called Tapaswi (ascetic observing penance).  Although one, who indulges greatly in meditation and scriptural studies, is a superior ascetic; nevertheless, here in Charanaanuyoga, there is prominence of external penance, therefore, he is called an ascetic Tapaswi.  Similarly, one should know about other terminology used herein.

Thus the methodology of exposition in Charanaanuyoga should be known with various other different forms as stated above.

		     Methodology of Exposition in Dravyaanuyoga

Now the methodology of exposition in Dravyaanuyoga is being described:-

The way by which right belief of Jiva, etc. substances is attained by Jivas, in that way, the description of their details, logic, reasoning, illustrations (examples), etc. is done here. Because here the purpose is of the evolution of right belief.  Although Jiva etc. substances are indivisible (Abheda), nevertheless, by assuming divisions in them, the description of Dravya (substances), Guna (attributes) and Paryayas (modifications), etc. divisions is done conventionally.  And for arousing faith, discourses are given through different logic and reasonings or by means of Pramana (comprehensive view) and Nayas (partial view).  This is also a method.  Further, logic (Hetu) is put up & illustrations (Drishtantas) are given for evolving Anumana (inference), Pratyabhijnana (recognition of an object by noticing similarities and differences) about the substance.  Thus, here the discourses are given for arousing faith in the substance.

Further, for evolving faith in liberation path, the Jiva- Ajiva etc. Tattvas are described by means of their specialties, logic, reasoning, illustration etc.  There, the way by which the discriminative knowledge of self and non- self is evolved, in that way the ascertainment of the nature of Jiva-Ajiva is done, and the way by which the passionless disposition is evolved in that way by the nature of Asrava (influx) etc. is explained; and there, chiefly the glory of self-realization (Atmaanubhavan) is shown for the sake of evolution of true knowledge and detachment towards worldly things.

Further, in Dravyaanuyoga wherever there is predominance of real spiritual sermons, there the conventional religion (Vyavahara Dharma) is also contradicted.  The Jivas who do not try for self-realization and are engrossed in external conventional practices, by detaching them from there and for diverting them towards self-realization, the insignificance of vows, chastity, continence, etc. is emphasized.  There one should not know that he should start indulging in sinful acts by relinquishing these (virtuous acts).  Because the purpose of that discourse is not to encourage Ashubhopayoga (in- auspicious dispositions); but for evolving Shuddhopayoga (passionless conduct) the Shubhopayoga (auspicious conduct) is contradicted.

Someone may say here that in metaphysics (Adhyatma Shastras) Punya (virtue) and Papa (vice) both described to be alike, so if Shuddhopayoga is evolved then it is good, but if it is not evolved then one may either engage himself in Punya (virtuous acts) or in Papa (vicious acts)?

Answer: For example, from the lower caste (shudra) point of view, the Jaat and the Chandala are said to be alike but comparatively jaat is somewhat better than Chandala, because one is untouchable, the other is touchable.  Similarly, from the bondage cause point of view, the Punya and the Papa both are alike but Punya is somewhat better than Papa; because one should know that it is not desirable to indulge in Papa by giving up Punya.

Further, those Jivas who are engrossed in activities like adoration of Jina's idol only, for diverting them towards self-realization, etc. - "God is in the body and not in the temple" - such discourse is given.  Here one should not know that he is being encouraged to give up adoration and get happiness by taking food, etc.; because this is not the purpose of such preachings.

In the same way, wherever such conventional practices are contradicted, one should not become negligent (towards pious acts); one should rather know that the Jivas who are engrossed in conventional practices only, for creating interest in real religion (Nishchaya Dharma) in them, the conventional religion (Vyavahara Dharma) is described to be insignificant.

And in the same Shastras the true believer's indulgence in carnal pleasures, etc. has been described as not to be the cause of bondage but the cause of Nirjara (shedding of karmas); but one should not understand here the carnal pleasures to be beneficial or worth indulgence.  There, for emphasizing the glory of true believer, the carnal pleasures, etc. which are well-known as the causes of intense bondage, have been ignored because in spite of their persistence, due to the strength of right belief, feeble bondage is caused and due to the same power, the Shedding of Karmas (Nirjara) increases.  Therefore, conventionally the carnal pleasures are not stated to be the cause of bondage but the cause of Nirjara (dissociation of karmas).  Even if on deliberation carnal pleasures appear to be the cause of Nirjara then why should the true believer give up them and accept monkhood? Here the purpose of this statement is only to show the glory of the true belief due to the power of which even the carnal pleasures are not able to show their effect.  In the same way, the true meaning of other such statements should also be known.

Further, the object of Dravyaanuyoga is also to actuate Jivas to accept and give up some things like that of Charanaanuyoga; Therefore, here the description is made from the viewpoint of thoughts and dispositions which can be comprehended by non-omniscients.  The main difference is that in Charnaanuyoga the emphasis is laid on the external activities whereas in Dravyaanuyoga the emphasis is inner spiritual thoughts and dispositions, but the description is not as subtle as is found in Karanaanuyoga.  The same is illustrated hereunder:-

Shubha (auspicious), Ashubha (inauspicious) and Shuddha (pure) such three states of Upayoga (active thought activity) are described.  The thoughts with religious attachment are termed as Shubhopayoga, sinful thoughts and aversion are termed as Ashubhopayoga and passionless thoughts (devoid of attachment-aversion) are termed as Shuddhopayoga.  This statement is from the viewpoint of the thoughts comprehensible by non-omniscients.  In Karanaanuyoga the description is found from the viewpoint of inauspicious- auspicious thoughts as per Jivas' passional power in different Gunasthana; this aspect is not considered here.

According to Karanaanuyoga the passionless Shuddhopayoga is evolved on attainment of Yathakhyata-Charitra (perfect right conduct); it will be attained automatically on destruction of Moha (conduct-deluding karma); how can a person of lower spiritual stage effectuate Shuddhopayoga?  Whereas in Dravyaanuyoga the emphasis in sermons is laid on the evolution of Shuddhopayoga only; therefore, at that time when a non-omniscient engrosses his Upayoga in self-realization, etc. by relinquishing the thoughts engrossed in comprehensible activities like adoration, injury, etc., he is called the possessor of Shuddhopayoga.  Although there exists subtle passions comprehensible in omniscience, yet that view- point is not considered here.  He is stated to be possessing Shuddhopayoga because he relinquishes attachment, etc. passions which are comprehensible in his knowledge.

Similarly, the evolution of right belief is stated on attainment of right faith in self-nonself Tattvas etc.  This statement is from the viewpoint of comprehensibility.  From subtle point of view, the description of right belief, etc. in different Gunasthanas etc. is found in Karanaanuyoga. Likewise, one should know elsewhere.

Therefore, if someone tries to equate the style of description of Dravyaanuyoga with Karanaanuyoga then at some places it tallies and at some places it does not tally.  For example, on evolution of Yathakhyat Charitra (perfect right conduct) Shuddhopayoga is found from both points of view; but in lower spiritual stages Shuddhopayoga is possible sometimes from Dravyaanuyoga point of view, but from the Karanaanuyoga point of view, due to existence of different degrees of passions always, Shuddhopayoga is not accepted.  Similarly, one should know about the other statements also.

Further, in Dravyaanuyoga, for proving the Tattvas etc. described in other faiths to be wrong, the same are contradicted.  This is not done maliciously.  The purpose is to evolve the right belief by proving them to be untrue.

Similarly, in other ways also, the methodology of exposition is found in Drvyaanuyoga.

Thus, the methodology of exposition in all the four Anuyogas has been explained.  There, in some Shastra, the exposition is found with the prominence of one Anuyoga, in some with two Anuyogas, in some with three Anuyogas and in some others with all the four Anuyogas.  So where whatever is possible, one should understand the same.

		       The Tradition of Exposition in Anuyoga

Now the prominence of the tradition found in these Anuyoga is being described here.

In Prathamaanuyoga the tradition of rhetorical Shastras and metrical Shastras is prominent, because by rhetoric statements the mind gets delighted; by narrating directly one's Upayoga is not engrossed to the same extent to which it is engrossed with rhetorical reasoning.  Further, if a distant object is described with some exaggeration then its nature becomes easily comprehensible.

In Karanaanuyoga the tradition of mathematical expressions is prominent, because therein the measure (Pramana) etc. of substances, space (region), time, qualities, etc. are described. So, by using the tradition of mathematics, it becomes easily comprehensible.

In Charanaanuyoga the tradition of moral instructions and ethical science is prominent, because the object there is that of putting into practice, i.e., to actuate the people to follow the conduct.  Therefore, on explaining the ethical path according to worldly traditions the true aspirant starts following religious practices.

In Dravyanaanuyoga the tradition of logic or the science of reasoning is prominent, because there the purpose is making decision. i.e., ascertaining the Tattvas etc. and in logic the path of making decision is shown.

These are the prominent traditions found in different Anuyogas; the descriptions are found with other traditions also.

Here someone may ask that only the learned scholars (punditas) have the knowledge of rhetoric, mathematics, ethics and logic.  An ordinary person does not understand these; why therefore, direct description is not given?

Answer: The Shastras are chiefly meant for being studied by punditas (learned scholars) and sagacious persons; if the descriptions follow rhetoric tradition then their mind gets engrossed.  And the scholars can explain the same to ordinary persons and those who do not understand then they should explain to them directly, but by writing the direct description in Shastras the talented persons may not devote more time in their studies; therefore, the tradition of rhetoric, etc. is followed.

In this way, the tradition of description in the four Anuyogas is found.  And in Jaina faith most of the Shastras are in these four Anuyogas.  And the Shastras pertaining to grammar, logic, meters, words-book etc. and the Shastras on medical science, astrology, incantations, etc. are also found in the Jina's religion.  Their purpose is being described hereunder:-

		    The Purpose of Works on Grammar, Logic, etc.

The study of Anuyogas-Shastras is possible by the study of books on grammar, logic, etc.  This is the purpose of grammar etc. Shastras.

Someone may say, if the Shastras are written in direct dialectal form then what remains the purpose of grammar, etc.?
Answer: The dialect is an imperfect and unsound language and is different-different in different places.  How could scholars write books in such language?  The correct, subtle description which is possible through grammar, logic, etc. is not possible in common language.  Therefore, the Shastras are written following the tradition of grammar, etc.; so one should study in smaller or greater measure these books also as per one's capacity and should then study the purposeful Anuyogas Shastras.

Further, through the miracles of medical science, etc., the glory of Jina's religion may spread and medicines, etc., the benefaction also may be caused to persons, or the Jivas who are engrossed in worldly affairs; they may be attracted by the miracles of medical science, etc. and may adopt Jain religion and obtain spiritual benefit with such purpose the books on medical science etc., are written.

Here one should remember that by knowing these to be Jaina Shastras one should not devote himself too much in the study of these Shastras.  If due to sagacity these are studied in natural way and by such study if one's attachment, etc. passions are controlled then their knowledge is useful.  But these Shastras are not as useful as Anuyoga Shastras. Therefore, it is not desirable to engage oneself too much in their study.

Question: If it be so, then why did Ganadhara Acharyas (chief preceptors) compose these Shastras?

Answer: Knowing the aforesaid somewhat purpose, theses Shastras are composed.  For example, a very rich man sometimes accumulates less useful things also but if a less wealthy person accumulates those things then his wealth is spent there, then by what means would he collect more useful things? Similarly, the sagacious persons like Ganadhara Acharya (chief preceptors), etc. may compose less useful books on medical science, etc. also but if a person with average intelligence engages himself in their study then his intellect gets involved in it; how could he then study the highly beneficial Shastras?

Further, if a person with feeble passions composes in mythology descriptions relating to adornment of body, etc., he does not become passionate but of a highly passionate person composes descriptions of such bodily adornment, etc, then he would certainly get involved in sinful bondage. Similarly, the feeble-passioned Ganadhara Acharyas etc. compose the books of medical science, etc., even then they do not become passionate, but if the highly passionate people engage themselves in their study then due to increased feelings of attachment, etc. passions they would get involved in the bondage of sinful karmas.  Such is the nature of sermons of Jaina faith.

Removal of Misconjectures about Anuyogas

(1) Removal of Misconjectures about Prathamaanuyoga

Many Jivas argue that in Prathamaanuyoga the descriptions are found in great measure about adornment of body, etc. and battles, etc. due to which attachment, etc. passions increase; therefore, such statement should not have been there and one should not listen to such narrations.

Answer: If a story is to be narrated, then all events should be described and if the narration is exaggerated by use of rhetoric, etc., even then the words of scholars are always logical.  Further if you say that for correlating the reference to the context the general description would have been sufficient, why is the description exaggerated?

Its answer is this that without exaggeration of the indirect statement, it does not become clear.  Further, earlier someone enjoyed carnal pleasures, fought wars, etc., but later on after renouncing all this, he accepted monkhood; such astonishing contrast would be perceived only when statements are done with exaggeration.

Question: Such descriptions increase passions?

Answer: For example, someone constructs a Chaityalaya (temple); his objective is to encourage persons to practice religion there, but if some indulges in sinful acts there, then there is no fault of the person who constructed the temple (Chaityalaya). Similarly, the preceptors described adornment of body, etc. in mythology.  Here their purpose is not of encouraging passional acts, rather that of actuating religious acts; but is some sinner does not practice religion and increases attachment, etc. passional feelings then what is the fault of the preceptor?

Question: Such descriptions should have been there which are likely to arouse passions?

Answer: The mind of an ordinary passionate person is not attracted in the statement of renunciation only.  Therefore, as the medicine is given to a child in a sugar-coated form, similarly the interest of passionate person is aroused in religion through the description of carnal pleasures, etc.

Question: If this be so, then at least the dispassionate persons should not study such Shastras?

Answer: In the hearts of those persons who do not have attachment feeling, the hearing of narrations relating to bodily adornment, etc. does not generate attachment feeling. They know that such is the tradition of narration here.

Question: At least such persons, who become passionate on listening to such narrations of bodily adornment, etc., should not listen to such narrations?

Answer: In Jain mythology where the purpose is of religion only in which everywhere religion is fostered, the narration of adornment of body, etc. is done under the force of circumstances.  If one becomes highly passionate even on listening to this then where would such a person become dispassionate; rather by giving up listening to mythology he would indulge in such other acts only which would encourage intense attachment feelings, etc.  Therefore, even such person is likely to develop  religious instincts in smaller or greater measure by listening to mythology.  This act is definitely better than other acts.

Question:  In Prathamaanuyoga there are the stories of other Jivas; how is our purpose served by them?

Answer: For example, by listening to the stories of lewd persons, lewdness is increased in us also.  Similarly, by listening to the stories of devout persons, great affection for religion is aroused in us also. Therefore, it is desirable to study Prathamaanuyoga.

(2) Removal of Misconjectures About Karanaanuyoga

Many Jivas argue that in Karanaanuyoga the Gunasthanas (spiritual stages), the Marganas (quest-places), etc. are described.  So one knows them that "this is so and that is so," But how is our purpose served by this?  Our benefaction is possible either by worship or observing vows or giving charity, etc. or by self-realization.

Answer: The God (omniscient) is passionless; by adoration He does not do anything by getting pleased.  By adoration one's passions become feeble; automatically its fruit is beneficial.  So in the study of Karanaanuyoga, the passions can become more feeble.  Therefore, its fruit is more beneficial.  And the activities of observing vows, and giving charity, etc. are the means of external instrumental causes of reducing passions.  If one's Upayoga gets engrossed in the study of Karanaanuyoga then the attachment, etc. passions are removed which is the means of the internal instrumental cause; therefore, this is more useful.  After accepting the vows, etc., the Jivas study the scriptures.  And the self- realization is the paramount act; but in the ordinary process of self-realization the Upayoga does not remain fixed, and when it does not remain fixed then other thoughts arise in such a state; if one studies Karanaanuyoga then he engages his Upayoga in that thought.

Such engagement of Upayoga reduces attachment, etc. passions in the present and is the cause of reducing the attachment, etc. in future also; hence one should engage one's Upayoga here.

One knows the kinds and classifications of Jivas & Karmas etc. in various ways; in such knowledge there is no purpose of indulgence in attachment, etc., therefore, attachment, etc. are not increased, rather everywhere the purpose of evolving passionlessness is proved.  Hence, such study is the cause of uprooting the attachment, etc. passions.

Question: Though some statements are of this purpose only, but what is achieved through the description of Yojanas (unit of distance measurement), etc. of islands, oceans, etc.?

Answer: On knowing them, agreeable-disagreeable feeling is not aroused; therefore, the aforesaid purpose is served.

Question: If this be so, then even knowing of things like stones, etc. which serves no purpose, does not give rise to agreeable-disagreeable feeling, therefore, such knowledge also proves to be useful?

Answer: An ordinary passionate person does not make effort of knowing any thing without the purpose of attachment, etc.; if its knowledge takes place on its own then due to the intention of internal attachment, he wants to untangle his upayoga from there.  Here he knows the islands, oceans, etc. full of effort, engages upayoga there, so such act is possible only on reduction of attachment, etc. passions. And in knowing stones, etc., if any worldly purpose is perceived, then attachment, etc. passions arise but in knowing the islands, etc., no worldly purpose is involved; therefore, it is not the cause of attachment, etc. passions.

If by listening to the structure of heavens, etc., attachment (passion) is aroused, then it will be about the next birth only.  Here, by knowing the virtuous conduct (Punya) to be its cause, by giving up vicious conduct (Papa), he would follow virtuous conduct.  This much benefit only will be there.  Further, on knowing islands, etc., the exact structure of the universe is known, then by perceiving the descriptions of other faiths to be false, he would become true believer and on removal of fallacy by knowing the exact structure of the universe, purity of Upayoga emerges. Therefore, such study of Karanaanuyoga is efficacious.

Question: Study of Karanaanuyoga is very difficult therefore, its study causes uneasiness?

Answer: If the object is known easily, then Upayoga (active knowledge) does not get engrossed in it and the zeal of knowing a known thing repeatedly does not arise, then the Upayoga gets engrossed in sinful acts; hence one should study that also which according to his ability can be studied with difficulty; but how would one study that which he cannot study?

Further, you say that "Such study causes weariness".  But religion does not consist in remaining idle.  If one feels happiness in idleness then sin alone is caused; hence it is desirable to make effort for the sake of religion. With such thoughts, one should engage oneself in the study of Karanaanuyoga.

(3) Removal of Misconjectures About Charanaanuyoga.

Many Jivas say “In Charanaanuyoga the discourse is for observing the external vows, (rites) etc. but no purpose is served by them; our thoughts and dispositions should be pure whatever be the external activity; therefore, one need not pay attention to such discourse.

Answer: There exists instrumental cause and effect relationship between soul's dispositions and external activities, because the actions of a non-omniscient Jiva are found in accordance with thoughts; sometimes some activity also takes place unrelated with thoughts; sometimes some activity also takes place unrelated with thoughts; this happens helplessly.  When one engages himself willfully in some act and says that "my thoughts are not such', - this is his fallacy.  Or, thoughts may be aroused by paying attention to external objects.  Therefore, for detaching one's Upayoga, in Samayasara Shastras etc., its dissociation from the external objects is advised.  Hence, on lessening of attachment, etc. passions, sequentially the house-holder's and monk's religion are evolved externally.  Or, on accepting in this way householder's and monk's religion in the state of fifth and sixth Gunasthanas on lessening of attachment, etc. feelings, appropriate dispositions are evolved.  Such exposition is found in Charanaanuyoga.

And if there be no achievement by observance of external continence, then what is the reason that the gods of Sarvarthasiddhi heaven, who are true believers, are stated to have forth Gunathasna only, whereas the householders Shravakas possess the fifth Gunasthana.  Moreover, why should the Tirthankaras, etc. accept continence (great vows) by renouncing the householder's life?  Therefore, this is the rule that without the means of external continence and vows, etc. one's thoughts and dispositions cannot become pure, hence for the knowledge of code of external conduct, one must study Charanaanuyoga.

(4) Removal of Misconjectures About Dravyaanuyoga

Many Jivas say that in Dravyaanuyoga the inferiority of vows, continence, etc. conventional religion (Vyavahara Dharma) is shown.  A true believer's indulgence in carnal pleasures, etc. is stated to be the cause of Nirjara (shedding of karmas).  By listening to such statements, the Jiva will become unrestrained by giving up virtuous activities and adopting sinful acts.  Therefore, reading and listening to these Shastras is not desirable.

Answer: "Though a donkey may die by eating sugarcandy, yet the human beings will not give up eating sugarcandy". Similarly, if a person with perverse understanding becomes unrestrained by listening to spiritual Shastras then the judicious persons will not give up study of spiritual Shastras.  What is necessary is that if someone seems to be becoming unrestrained he should be discoursed in such a manner by which he would not become unrestrained.  Moreover, in spiritual Shastras also at several places unrestrained behavior has been contradicted, therefore, the one who listens to them attentively, does not become unrestrained; but by listening to one aspect, if one becomes unrestrained due to his misunderstanding, there is no fault of Shastras; his own fault is there.

And if by imaging false faults, the reading and listening of spiritual Shastras is contradicted, then by such contradiction the liberation path is contradicted, because therein lie the basic preachings about the path of liberation.  For example, most of the Jivas are benefited by rains and if someone is harmed then by giving importance to it, one should not contradict rains.  Similarly, most of the Jivas are encouraged to follow the path of liberation but contrarily if somebody indulges in sinful acts, then giving prominence to it, one should not contradict the study of spiritual Shastras.

Further, one may become unrestrained by listening to spiritual Shastras but earlier also he was false believer and now too he remains a false believer only.  The only harm would be that he may not get birth in good state of existence and may get birth in a miserable state of existence.  But if spiritual discourses are not given then many Jivas are restrained from attaining the true path of liberation and this results in great harm to most of the Jivas; therefore, one should not contradict the spiritual discourses.

Further, many Jivas say that the spiritual discourses found in Dravyaanuyoga are of very high order and so it is useful for persons of higher spiritual stages, but the persons found in the lower state should be discoursed to adopt practices of vows, continence, etc. only?

Answer;  In Jina's faith the tradition is that first of all right belief is attained and afterwards vows, etc. are accepted.  The right belief is attained on acquiring the faith of self-nonself and that faith is acquired by the study of Dravyaanuyoga.  Hence, first one should become a true believer by generating faith in accordance with Dravyaanuyoga and afterwards he should become a votary by accepting the vows, etc. according to Charanaanuyoga.  Thus, primarily in the lower stages only Dravyaanuyoga is useful; only secondarily if it seems that someone is not capable of attaining right path of liberation, then he is discoursed to follow vows, etc.  Therefore, believing that  the study of spiritual Shastras is desirable for persons of higher spiritual stages, persons of lower stages should not avoid the study of Drvyaanuyoga.

Question: The nature of sermons of higher order is not grasped by persons of lower stages?

Answer: It is not desirable by such persons to plead ignorance here who exhibit great capacities in other activities.  The true nature of Dravyaanuyoga can be properly perceived by constant study; it may be that one is able to grasp in smaller or greater measure according to his level of intelligence, but if someone supports avoidance of such study then it amounts to being envious of Jaina fait.

Question: The time now is bad, therefore, the highest spiritual sermons should not be given prominently?

Answer: The present time is bad from the viewpoint of non attainment of liberation directly; but in the present time attainment of right belief through self-realization, etc. is not forbidden, therefore, for self-realization, etc., one must study Drvyaanuyoga.

The same is stated in Shat-Pahuda (Moksha-Pahuda):

Ajjavi tiransuddha appa gaoon. Janti surloye
Loyantiyedaik that dhua  n.ivudin janti      771

Meaning: Even today the Jivas purified by evolution of three jewels (right belief, knowledge and conduct) get birth in heavens through meditation on self-soul and also attain goodhood in Laukantika heaven; after completing the heavenly duration they attain liberation (through one birth in human male body). Therefore, in this era also there should be prominence of discourses of Drvyaanuyoga.

Question: Spiritual Shastras are part of Dravyaanuyoga.  In such Shastras discourses are given about the discriminative knowledge of the self-nonself, etc.; this is very useful and also easily understandable; but there the description of substance attribute modifications, etc. and of Pramana (comprehensive knowledge viewpoint), Nayas (partial viewpoints) etc. and the refutation of the Tattvas mentioned in other non-Jaina faiths is also found.  By the study of these (Shastras) various types of notions and thoughts arise,
their knowledge is acquired after great efforts; hence, one should not study them?

Answer: "Knowing something in detail is more effective than knowing it in general". More and more one goes into details, greater and greater clarity and purity about the nature of the substances is attained, faith becomes firm, attachment, etc. are reduced; therefore, it is justifiable to study these Shastras.

Thus, by misconjectures about all the four Anuyogas one should not be averse towards their study.

		          Utility of the Study of Books on
		                Grammar, Logic, etc.

There are books on grammar, logic, etc.; one should study these Shastras also in smaller or greater measure, because without their knowledge, the meaning of the higher Shastras is not properly perceived.  And the clarity which is obtained about the nature of the substance with the help of the knowledge of these (grammar, logic, etc.) - that degree of clarity is not obtained through the knowledge of ordinary language, etc. only.  Hence knowing these traditionally useful, one should study these also but should not get entangled in their study.  After gaining their basic knowledge, one should devote himself in the study of purposeful Shastras.

And books on medical science (physiology) etc. have no role to play in the liberation path; therefore, if in the ordinary course with the object of conventional religion their knowledge is obtained, then one should do good to others but should not indulge in sinful acts. And if their study is not done, there is no harm.

In this way knowing the Jina's scriptures to be faultless, one should believe in their preachings.

		        Removal of Seemingly - Contradiction
		                   Among Anuyoga

Now the seemingly - contradiction among Anuyogas, which arises due to lack of understanding of different points of views, is being removed.

Wherever the description is found on the tradition of Prathamaanuyoga etc. Anuyogas, the same should be known there as per its tradition.  By knowing one Anuyoga's statement to be different from the statement of another Anuyoga one should not raise doubt.  For example, at some places the faultless true believer only is stated as not having doubt, worldly desire, digest, etc. but at other places the rise of fear is stated upto eighth Gunasthana, of greed upto tenth and of disgust upto eighth Gunasthana; these should not be known to be contradictory.  There is the absence of intense doubts, etc. in a true believer because of right belief.  Chiefly speaking, the true believer does not have any doubt, etc.; from this point of view, in Charanaanuyoga, the doubts, etc. are described to be absent in a true believer, but from the subtle power point of view, the rise of fear, etc. (quasi- passions) is found upto eighth etc. Gunasthana; therefore, in Karanaanuyoga, their presence is stated upto that stage.  In the same way, one should know elsewhere.

Earlier many examples have been cited in the discussion of methodology of Anuyoga, from different points of view, differing statements are found.  For instance, in Karanaanuyoga absence of recklessness (Pramada) is stated in the seventh Gunasthana; there the passions (Kashayas) are treated as subdivisions of recklessness (Pramadas) and in the same Anuyoga the existence of passions (Kashayas) is stated upto the tenth Gunasthana.  One should not know such statements to be contradictory because here, under Pramadas, those Kashayas (passions) which are caused knowingly in the form of auspicious-inauspicious dispositions, are included and in the seventh Gunasthana such diversion of Upayoga (knowingly) is not found, therefore, their absence is described there.  And from the viewpoint of subtleness of dispositions, etc., the same (passions) are described to be present upto the tenth Gunasthana.

Further, in Charanaanuyoga, the renunciation of seven bad habits like theft, adultery, etc. is described in the first Pratima (householder's first vow) and there itself their renunciation is described in the second Pratima; one should not sense any contradiction in this; because in the seven bad habits such thefts, etc. are included which cause punishment, etc. and are highly censured in public life.  And in vows such thefts, etc. are described to be renounced which are against the householder's religion and publicity also are treated to be bad- one should know such meaning elsewhere also.

Further, with reference to different-different dispositions, one and the same disposition is described differently- differently.  For example, at some places the `great vows, etc., are described to be subdivisions of Charitra (conduct) and at other places even on observance of `great vows', etc., the Dravyalingi Muni is described to be incontinent (vowless).  One should not know any contradiction in this; because along with the right knowledge, the great vows, etc. are termed as Charitra and along with false knowledge even on observance of vows, etc., one is incontinent (vowless) only.

Further, Vinaya (veneration) is included in five kinds of Mithyatva (false belief) also and is described as one of the twelve penances (Tapas) also; one should not sense any contradiction in this, because offering veneration to those who do not deserve to be venerated and treating this to be religion is called Vinaya Mithyatva; but appropriate veneration of those who are venerable in the religious tradition is Vinaya Tapa.

Further, at some places pride has been censured and at other places it is praised; one should not see any contradiction in this, because for inspiring others to treat oneself as superior due to pride-passion, if one does not pay reverence etc. to others, then such pride-passion is censurable only; and because of absence of greed-passion if one does not bow or feel inferiority complex, then such pride is praiseworthy.

Further, at some places cleverness has been censured whereas at other places it has been praised; there is no contradiction in this.  Because under the influence of deceit-passion, if one exhibits cleverness for cheating someone, then such cleverness is censurable only.  But that cleverness which is exhibited in accomplishment of some act appropriately and judiciously is praiseworthy only. Similarly, one should know elsewhere also.
Further, at some place some dispositions might have been censured in comparison to a superior disposition of the same type and at other place the same disposition might have been praised in comparison to an inferior disposition of the same type.  One should not think this to be contradictory.  For example, wherever a particular type of auspicious activity is censured then one should understand that this has been done in comparison to a higher auspicious activity or pure (passionless) disposition and where it has been praised, there one should know that this has been done in comparison to an inferior activity or inauspicious activity.

Further, likewise. some Jiva might have been censured in comparison to some Jiva of higher status.  There, one should not know him to be totally censurable; and some Jiva might have been praised in comparison to some other Jiva of lower status; there one should not know to be fully praiseworthy, but should know his merits-demerits appropriately.

Similarly, one should understand the meaning of various preachings from the viewpoint from which they have been described.

Further, in the Shastras, at some places, one particular word is used in one sense and at other place in another sense; by identifying the topic, one should understand its possible meaning.  For example, the Samyag darshan (right belief) has been described in liberation path; there the meaning of the word Darshan is faith and in the description of Upayoga the meaning of the word Darshan is faith and in the description of Upayoga the meaning of the word Darshan is perception of the general nature of the substance and in the description of senses, the meaning of the word Darshan is only to see through the eyes.  And in the description about the measure (magnitude) etc. of the substances the meaning of Sukshma (subtle) and Badar (gross) is to be understood as that which has smaller magnitude is called Sukshma (subtle) and that which has bigger magnitude is called Badar (gross).  And in the description of matter-molecules, etc. that which may not be perceivable by senses is called Sukshma and that which is perceivable by senses is called Badar.  In the context of the description of Jivas (embodied beings) etc. that which automatically does not get obstructed without the instrumentality of supernatural power, etc. is called Sukshma (subtle-bodied Jiva) and that which gets obstructed is called Badar (gross-bodied Jiva).  In the description of cloths, etc., the thin (not coarse) means Sukshma (fine) and thick (coarse) means Badar (not fine).

Further, the meaning of the word Pratyaksha (direct knowledge) in worldly affairs is knowing directly through senses; in the divisions of Pramana (comprehensive knowledge) clear discernment is called Pratyaksha; with reference to self-realization, etc., the state of being stationary of one's Upayoga in the self-soul is called Pratyaksha.  Further for example, the misbeliever is said to be devoid of knowledge; the absence of knowledge is stated from the viewpoint of true knowledge.  For example, with reference to celestial beings where the word Udirana (1) has not been used, there the meaning of the word Udirana should be understood to be the death due to other instrumental causes and with reference to the description of ten Karmas (modes of karmas) where Udiranankarana has been described to Devaayu (age karma of celestial beings) also, its meaning should be understood to be the throwing of upper Nishekas (2) of karmas in Udayaavali (3) Similarly, one should know elsewhere also appropriately.

Further, by prefixing some words before one particular word only many kinds of meaning become evident and the same word has different meanings.  In whatever context whichever meaning is suitable, the same should be known to be its meaning.  For example, "one who conquers" is called Jina (conqueror) but in the context of religion, one who conquers the Karma-enemy, is known to be the Jina.  Hence, the meaning which is connoted by adding the word Karma-enemy before the word Jina is relevant; the other meaning is irrelevant.  And for example, one who possesses life (sentience) is called Jiva (living being).  Where the description of life and death be from Vyavahara (conventional) point of view, there, one who possesses senses, etc. vitalities is called Jiva.  And where the description of the substances, etc. be from the Nishchaya (real) point of view, there, one who possesses the sentience vitality is called Jiva.  Similarly, the word Samaya has many meanings, e.g., soul is Samaya all substances are Samaya, time substance is Samaya, unit of (conventional) time only is Samaya, Shastra is Samaya, faith is Samaya.  In this way, out of several meanings, whichever is appropriate in a particular place, the same should be known to be its meaning.

Further, at some places names, etc. are used from the view-point of the meaning of that word; at other places name, etc. are used in a customary sense.  Where names etc. are used from customary point of view, there one should not grasp their literal meaning, but whatever be its traditional meaning, the same should be accepted.

For example, right belief, etc. has been described as Dharma (religion).  So, hence the word Dharma used is in its true sense, because Dharma is that which causes evolution of blissful state in the soul.  Where the substance Dharma (ether) is described as Dharma, here, the word Dharma is used in customary sense; one should not grasp its literal meaning but should understand that it denotes a substance of this name.  Similarly, one should know elsewhere also.

Further, at some places the literal meaning of the word should not be accepted, but its purposeful meaning in that context should be grasped.  For example, if somewhere something is described to be absent and its meager existence is found there, then one should not understand its total absence there but should know that keeping in view its meager presence, absence has been described.  For example, it is stated that true believer is devoid of attachment feeling, etc. There, one should draw the meaning in the aforesaid manner, i.e., presence of meager attachment, etc. is found). Further, the literal meaning of the word Nokashaya (quasi- passions) is "the negation of passion". but this sense should not be accepted because here the purpose is to show that it is not a passion like anger, etc. but it is a minor type of passion, therefore, the word Nokashaya is used.  Similarly one should know elsewhere.

Further, at some place the description may be found with some logic, so there one should grasp its purpose.  In Samayasara Kalasha * it is stated that "just like the example of washerman, until one's belief of renouncing the alien dispositions is not put into practice, till then, this self- realization is evolved".  

(* Avtarti na yavdvritimtyantvaigadnavamparbavtyag drishtant drishti
Jhatti sakal bhavaeranydeeyaevirmukta svyamiyamnubhootistavadavirbbhoot  --29

So here the purpose is to show that the moment alien dispositions are renounced, the self- realization is evolved.  In worldly affairs if an act is accomplished the moment someone comes, it is customary to say that "though he did not come and yet this work was accomplished."  Such purpose only should be grasped here. Similarly, one should know elsewhere.

Further, at some place, some quantity (magnitude) etc. are mentioned; so, there one should not take the literal meaning but should grasp its purpose.  In Jnanarnava * Shastra it is stated- "In this era only two-three sagacious persons (true believers) are found."  So, literally, only so many persons are not there, but the purpose is to say that very few persons (true believers) are there.  Similarly, one should know elsewhere.

(Dupragyaballupt vastunichya vigyanshoonyashya, vighantai pratimandiran nij-nij svarthodyta daihin. Anandamritasindhusheekarchyae nirvapya janmjvran, yai muktaivardnainduveekshan.prastai santi dvishra yadi  -- 24

On this pattern, there are many more words used with different meanings; so, the same should be known appropriately; contrary meaning should not be grasped.

And whatever be the sermons, by distinguishing it correctly that which is found suitable to the self, the same should be accepted.  For example, in the books on medical science several medicines are described; one should know them but he should take those medicines which might cure one's disease. If one is suffering from `cold', then he should take that medicine which produces cold; one should know that this medicine is useful for others (and not for himself).

Similarly, one should acquire the knowledge of various preachings found in Jain Shastra but should follow only such preachings which might remove his perversities.  He should accept that preaching which contradicts the perversity which one has and should not follow such preachings which support it.  He should know that such preaching is useful for others.

Some examples are cited here.  In the Shastras at some places preachings supporting Nishchaya (real standpoint) are found and at other places those supporting Vyavahara (conventional standpoint) are found.  There if one has the excessive leaning towards Vyavahara then he should follow correct practice by accepting the preachings fostering the Nishchaya (real standpoint) and if one has excessive leaning toward Nishchaya then he should follow correct practices by accepting the sermons fostering the Vyavahara (conventional standpoint).  Further, one may be already devoid of self- knowledge due to conventional faith; afterwards also he may not make effort for gaining. self-knowledge by giving prominence to conventional sermons only; or due to faith in Nishchaya (real standpoint), one had become unrestrained by falling from renunciation and afterwards also, by giving prominence to sermons based on real standpoint, he fosters the carnal pleasures.  In this way, by following contrary sermons, harm alone is caused.

Further, it is stated in Atmaanushasana (1) that- "Being meritorious why do you indulge in blemishes? 
(1)	Hai chandrma kimit lanchhnvanbhoostvan.  Tadvan bhavai kimit tnmey aiv nabhu. Kin jyotsnya malmalan tav ghoshyantya. Svrbhavbhatoo tatha sati nasi lakshya - 140
 If you desired to become demeritorious then why did you not become fully demeritorious?"  So, if a person be meritorious but may be having some blemish, then he should accept such preaching for removing that blemish.  But if one is himself full of blemishes and by accepting such preachings wishes to defame meritorious persons, then he would harm himself only.  It is not worse to have some blemish in comparison to one who is full of blemishes; therefore, such a person is better that yourself (a person full of blemishes).  Further, here it is stated "Why did you not become full of blemishes?"  So, this is just a logical argument; this sermon is not meant for encouraging someone to become full of blemishes.  And if a meritorious person is criticized because of some blemish, it should be known that only the Siddhas (non-corporeal omniscients) are totally free from blemishes.  In the lower spiritual stages, some merit or some demerit is always to be found.

Someone may say here- "If this be so, then how is it stated in Shat-Pahuda (2) that after accepting monkhood, if one keeps the slightest possession, then he also goes to Nigoda (i.e., host souled one-sensed beings)?

(2)Jehjayroovsariso tiltushmaitan n.a gihdihatyaisu
Jehad laid appbhuyan tato pun.  Jayee  n.iggodam   -----(Sootr Pahung  18)

Answer: By accepting higher spiritual status, if one indulges in some such mean practice which is not possible in that status, then due to breach of vows, etc., he involves himself in great sin and one should know that in the lower spiritual status where some such merits and demerits are possible, it is not desirable to highlight his demerits.

Further, it is stated in Upadesha Siddhanta Ratna Mala (3)- "Even the anger of the preacher who gives sermons according to Jina's commandment, is a treasury of forbearance."  

(3)	Rosovi khamakoso sutan bhasant jssan.dhan.asya
Assutain.  Khamvid dos mhamoh avaso       ----- (Updaishsidhant Ratnmala    14)

But this sermon is not meant for the discourser.  If on the basis of this sermon, the discourser continues to indulge in anger, then he would harm himself only.  This sermon is meant for acceptance by listeners.  Sometimes even being angry, if the discourser gives a true sermon, then too the listeners will treat it to be beneficial only.  Likewise, one should know elsewhere.

Further, intense heat-producing medicines are prescribed for the persons suffering from extreme cold, (typhus).  If one is suffering from heat or from minor cold, takes such medicines then he would become miserable only.  For one who has excessive prominence of some activity, the discourse may be given with great emphasis for its contradiction, if a person who does not have the prominence of such act or has little prominence, follows such sermon, then he would harm himself only.

For example, someone has very great liking for study of Shastras and does not make effort for self-realization; for such person, too much study of Shastras has been negated. But a person who does not study the Shastras or studies Shastras rarely, if gives up study of the  Shastras by such preachings and does not engage his Upayoga in self- realization, then he would harm himself only.

Further, for a person who strongly believes to consist in committing injury through the act of oblation (religious sacrifice) and bathing, etc., the preaching is- "Even if the earth gets turned upside down no auspicious fruit can result by committing injury."  But if a Jiva who accumulates lot of Punya (auspicious karmas) by practicing acts of worship, etc.  in which some injury is also caused, gives up worshipping, etc. by following such preachings and does not adopt injuriless practices like Samayika (1) etc., then he would assuredly harm himself only.  In the same way, one should know elsewhere.

For example, some medicine might be potentially effective, but one should continue taking it so long as it is beneficial to oneself.  If even on mitigation of cold, one continues to take heat producing medicine, then it would rather cause the disease.  Similarly, there is some religious activity, but one should continue its practice only till such time it benefits the self.  If even on evolution of higher spiritual status, one continues observance of the religious practice pertaining to lower spiritual spiritual status, it would rather cause harm only.

 Further for example, religious practices like Pratikramana (1) etc. are advised for eradicating sin but if even after self-realization, one indulges in the thoughts of Pratikarmana, etc. then it would rather increase perversity. From this very point of view Pratikarmana etc. have been stated to be poison in Samayasara.  Further, the religious activities like the glorification, etc. are advised to be followed by a vowless person; if even on becoming a votary, one indulges in these activities, then he would assuredly get bondage of vicious karmas only.  How is it justifiable (for a votary) to become controller of the activities like managing temple, etc. after giving up activities like business, etc. Similarly, one should know elsewhere also.

Further the medicines like elixir, etc. are invigorating but if a person suffering from fever takes them, then great harm would be caused.  Similarly, practice of high religion is very beneficial but if without the removal of one's passional dispositions, one adopts such high religious practices, then it would cause great harm only.  For example, if one has not freed himself from inauspicious passions and adopts rambleless state of Upayoga then it would rather increase his passions.  Further, if a person who is engrossed in sensual pleasures like taking food, etc. adopts religious practices like renunciation of worldly occupations and possessions, etc., then it would rather cause harm only.  Further, if one has not renounced the perverse activities like indulgence in business, etc. and adopts religion in sanctimonious form of renunciation, then great harm would be caused to him. Similarly, one should know elsewhere also.

Likewise, after true deliberation and understanding the true sense of the preachings, one should adopt the same.  Enough details have been considered so far.  In fact, on evolution of right knowledge, one himself perceives the real sense of preachings.  The sermons (preachings) are in the form of words and through words several meanings cannot be explained simultaneously; therefore, the preachings are generally given with the prominence of one meaning only.

Further, where whatever particular meaning is described, there the prominence is of that particular meaning only.  If someone gives prominence to its second aspect (meaning) then both aspects (meanings) of the preachings will be grasped firmly one aspect (meaning) but the emblem of whole of the Jain scripture is Syadvada and the meaning of the word Syad is Kathanchit i.e., partially true from a particular point of view.  Therefore, whatever sermon is received, it should be taken to be the whole truth.  After knowing the sense of preaching, one should ponder over as to how is this sermon? What is its purpose? and to which Jiva it is useful/ with such deliberation, one should accept its true meaning. Afterwards, one should analyze his present state. In the manner in which the sermon seems to be useful to oneself, one should accept it in the same form and if sermon is worth knowing only, then he should know correctly.  In this way, one should get benefited from the preachings.

Question: What should a person with ordinary intelligence, who is not able to ponder so much, do?

Answer: For example, a businessman should engage himself in smaller or greater measure in that business which he understands according to his wisdom, but he must necessarily possess the knowledge of profit and loss.  Similarly, a judicious person should accept that sermon in smaller or greater measure which he understands according to his wisdom, but one must have such knowledge as to what is beneficial to him and what is not beneficial to him.  The real purpose is to mitigate attachment, etc. by attaining true belief and knowledge.  Therefore, one should accept the purpose of that preaching only which fulfills his such purpose.  Even if he does not possess detailed knowledge, he should at least not forget his purpose.  So, much caution is extremely necessary. It is not desirable to understand the meaning of the preachings in such a form which may hurt the self- benefaction.

In this way, studying the Jain Shastras with the outlook of Syadvada, the benefaction of the self takes place.

Question: Where different-different viewpoints be possible, there the use of Syadvada is justified but what should one do when from one viewpoint only mutual contraction is perceived in the Shastras? For example, in Prathamaanuyoga it is stated that thousands of monks have attained liberation along with one Tirthankara; and in Karanaanuyoga it is stated as a rule that six hundred and eight Jivas (monks) attain liberation in a duration of six months and eight Samayas (units of time). Further, it is described in Prathamaanuyoga that gods and goddess are born (in heaven) to gather and after death they are born together in human state of existence.  In Karanaanuyoga the age of a god is stated in Sagaras and that of goddess in Palyas; how are these statements reconciled?

Answer: The statements in Karananuyoga are subtle and correct degree whereas in other Anuyogas the statements are according to the relevant purpose.  Hence, the statement of Karanaanuyoga are true as they are, and in other Anuyogas, the statements are to be reconciled with the relevant purpose. Where it is stated that thousands of monks have attained liberation (Moksha) along with one Tirthankara, it should be known that so many have not attained liberation at one point of time but should be understood that the place where the Tirthankara (omniscient lord) stopped all activities of movement, etc. and became stationary, along with him many monks were present and afterwards they attained liberation at different times.  In this way, the apparent contradiction in Prathamaanuyoga and Karanaanuyoga is removed.  Further, the god and goddess took birth together; afterwards the goddess died and obtained several rebirths.  These being purposeless, are not described.  Afterwards they again took birth together in human embodied form.  By such reconciliation the apparent contradiction is removed. Similarly, one reconcile other statements.

Question: Although reconciliation in such statements is possible in some way but at some place it is stated that Neminath Swami was born in Sauripur and at other place it is stated that he was born in Dwaravati.  Further, the story of Ramchandra, etc. is found written differently-differently; at some places the one-sensed beings are stated to be in Sasadana Gunasthana and at other places it is not written so; how can one reconcile such contradictory statements?

Answer: Such contradictory statements are the results of bad times.  In this era the persons possessing direct (independent) knowledge and persons highly versed in scriptural knowledge are not found and the Shastras have been composed by the persons of ordinary intelligence; due to lack of knowledge some meaning might not have been understood truly by them; therefore it is written so.  Or, in this era, in Jaina faith too passionate persons are found and such persons might have written such statements due to some purpose.  In this way such statements are found; that is why in Jain Shastras contradiction seems to be existing.

Wherever such contradictions are found, one should ascertain as to who is more authentic - the author making this statement.  After such deliberation, one should treat the statement of great preceptors to be authentic.  Further, many Shastras are found in Jaina faith; one should compare their tradition.  Those statements, which are in accordance with the set tradition, should be treated as authentic.  Even after such deliberation, if it is not possible to ascertain the truth-untruth, then one should believe that "whatever is reflected in omniscience is only authentic", because without ascertainment of truth about Devas (omniscient Arihanta God) and Tattvas etc., the path of liberation is not at all possible.  In any case, such ascertainment is possible; therefore, if someone states their nature contrarily then one can himself perceive the truth.  Further, if other statements cannot be ascertained or there remains some doubt about them, or even their contrary knowledge is obtained and yet such belief exists that whatever is known by omniscient is authentic, then there will be no impediment in the path of liberation.

Question: As the different types of statements are found in Jina's religion, similarly in Shastras of other faiths also different contradictory statements are found.  You have somehow clarified the contradictions found in the statements of your faith and you impute blemishes to such statements found in other faiths.  This shows that you suffer from attachment-aversion feeling?

Answer: Though the statements may be of various types, yet if they foster one and the same purpose then there is no fault; but if they foster one purpose at one place and the other purpose at other place, then assuredly they are faulty.  Now the one and only purpose of Jina's religion is of uprooting the Raag (attachment-aversion etc. passions).  Therefore, at some places the purpose of quitting intense attachment, etc. by indulgence in feeble attachment, etc. is supported and at other places the purpose of uprooting passions totally is fostered, but nowhere the purpose of increasing the attachments, etc. passions is found.  Therefore, whole of the description in Jina's religion is faultless.  And in other faiths at some places the description is found with the purpose of quitting attachment, etc., and at other place the description is found with the purpose of increasing attachment, etc.; in the same manner other descriptions also are found with the contradiction in purposes.  Therefore, the descriptions of other (non-Jina) faiths are faulty.  In worldly affairs also, one who makes different statements with the view of fostering one purpose only is said to be authentic and he who makes statements for fostering different-different purposes is said to be confused (insane) person.

Further, in Jina's religion whatever different types of statements are found, are from different-different viewpoints; there is no fault; whereas in other (non-Jaina) faiths different-different statements are found with one viewpoint only, so are faulty.  For example, the Jinadeva (omniscient God) possesses perfect passionless disposition and also found having the majesty of Samavasarana, etc. Here, there is no contradiction.  The majesty of Samavasarana, etc. is created by Indra ( chief God). He, the Arihanta Deva (omniscient God), does not have any attachment, etc. in it; therefore, both things are possible.  And in other (non- Jaina) faiths, the God is described to be a more observer and passionless also and the lust - anger, etc. dispositions are stated to be his creations; so how is it possible for one and the same soul to have passionless disposition and the lust anger, etc. passions?  Similarly, one should know elsewhere also.

Further, due to bad times, in Jina's religion, some statements are found contradictory from one viewpoint only. So, this is the fault of ignorant persons but not the fault of Jina's religion.  There too the glory of Jina's religion is such that no one can write inauthentic statements.  The birthplace of Lord Neminath Tirthankara is stated to be in Sauripur at one place and  Dwaravati at other place. So, at whatever place he might have been born but taking of birth in a town is not inauthentic because even today persons are born in towns.

Further, in other (non-Jaina) faiths, their scriptures are stated to have been composed by persons having true knowledge like the omniscient, etc., but in them the statements are found to be contradictory.  At some place the celibate from childhood is praised, at other place it is stated that "Benefaction is not possible without the birth of son".  So, how can both statements be true?  Such contradictory statements are found abundant there.  Further, many inauthentic statements are found therein.  For example, one such statement is "Semen fell in the mouth of a fish and it gave birth to a son".  Such an event is not found associated with any one in the present era and by inference also this is not possible.  Such innumerable statements are found there. If in these cases it is inferred that these are faults of omniscients then how could he make such mistakes?  And contradictory statements cannot be believed.  therefore, it concluded that faults lie in their faiths.  With such ascertainment, one should follow the preachings found in Jina's religion only.

		        The Sequence of Studying the Anuyoga

One should study the Prathamaanuyoga etc.  There is no such rule that first one should study this Anuyoga and then study that Anuyoga; But keeping in view the state of one's own thoughts and dispositions, one should study the same Anuyoga which might encourage him to follow religion.  Alternatively, one may study sometimes one Shastras and at other time some other Shastras.  For example, in the journal, various transactions in the account, one can ascertain the state of debits and credits.  Similarly, in the Shastras different types of sermons are found at different places; so, if in true knowledge one identifies it with the true purpose, then he may determine one's real and woe.

Therefore, those Jivas who engross themselves in Jina's preachings through right knowledge with the relatively of Syat style of narration, attain self-realization soon.  In the path of liberation, first step is the knowledge of scriptures; without knowledge of scripture, the religion cannot be practiced.  Therefore, you too (the reader) should study scripture with unprejudiced understanding.  Your benefaction is certain.

Thus ends, in Moksha Marga Prakashaka Shastras, the Eight Chapter, containing deliberation on the nature of the preachings.

(1) Udirana= The stated of premature rise of karmas.
(2) Nisheka= The sum total of atoms (karmas) coming into rise in an unit of time.
(3) Udayavali= Karmas beings ready to get dissociated; (state of karmas just prior to their rise).

(1) Samayika= Vow of self-contemplation, state of equanimity.

Chapter 9

	              NATURE OF LIBERATION PATH

(Doha:   Shiv upaye karatai prathm, karan mangalroop
              Vighan vinashak sukhkaran, namo shudh shivbhoop

(Meaning: While making effort for liberation, I first bow to the pure self-soul - the monarch of liberation who is the cause of benediction, destroyer of impediments and the cause of bliss.)

Now the nature of liberation path is being described. Firstly the nature of wrong faith, etc. which are contrary to liberation path have been explained.  Knowing them irksome and cause of sorrow, one should give up them by treating them renounce-able.  And in the middle portion, the nature of preachings has been described; knowing it correctly, one should understand the true sense of preachings.  Now the nature of right belief, etc., which constitute the path of liberation are being explained.  Knowing them blissful and the cause of bliss, one should accept them by believing them to be worth adopting; because the weal of soul is liberation only; the duty of soul is to make effort for its evolution only.  Therefore, the same is being preached here.

	           Soul's Weal is Liberation Only.

"The weal of the soul is attained of liberation only and nothing else" - how does such ascertainment take place - the same is being described:-

The soul is found in various states of attributes and modifications.  Amongst these, whatever else be the state, no harm or benefit is caused to the soul; harm or benefit is caused to it only by the state of misery and happiness.  Here no logic or example is required because it is clearly perceived.

All souls in the world are found making effort for avoiding miseries and evolving happiness. Whatever other efforts are made by them, are for this purpose only, there is no other purpose.  Whatever causes misery is being avoided and whatever is supposed to cause happiness is being pursued.

Further, the states of contraction - expansion, etc. are, too, caused to the soul only and the association of many other substances is also found but no effort is made for those things which are not perceived to be causing pleasure or pain. Here one should know the nature of the soul to be such only. One can forbear all sorts of conditions but cannot forbear the state of misery. What can one do if misery is caused due to helplessness (subservience), one has to bear it; but left to oneself, one does not want to undergo even the slightest misery. Further, whatever be the states of contraction -expansion, etc., one bears it in the natural course, because no logic is applicable in the state of nature. Such should be known to be nature of the soul.

One should know that when one suffers from misery, he wants to sleep; in the state of sleeping, one's active knowledge, etc. become feeble, but even by becoming like an inanimate object, he wishes to eliminate misery. And even he wishes to die. Although in death one believes his absolute destruction, yet one wishes to eliminate misery even by finishing one's existence. Therefore, one's sole purpose is only to end the state of misery.

Further, absence of misery only is happiness, because misery consists in perturbed-ness and its absence itself is happiness consisting in unperturbed-ness. This too is clearly perceived. Whatever association of external things may be found, one who is not internally perturbed, is happy.  Further, perturbed-ness is caused due to rise of attachment, etc., passions because due to feelings of attachment, etc., one wishes to modify other substances differently and those substances modify differently. This causes perturbedness. Therefore, for mitigation of perturbed-ness, either one's attachment, etc. (passions) be uprooted or other substances should modify according to one's desire; but all other substances are not subservient to him.  Sometimes some substance may be found modifying as per one's desire, even then his perturbedness does not get mitigated totally; when everything happens as per his desire and nothing happens contrarily then alone one would remain unperturbed; but this can never be possible, because the modification of any substance is not dependent on any other substance. Therefore, unperturbedness is possible only on eradication of one's feelings of attachment, etc. (passions).  So, this act can be attained, because attachment, etc.  dispositions are not the natural dispositions, but are perverse dispositions, are produced due to instrumentality of other substances and that instrumental cause is the rise of Moha (deluding) karma; on its destruction, all sorts of attachment, etc. passions get eradicated and then on removal of perturbedness, misery ends and bliss is evolved. Hence, the destruction of the Moha karma is beneficial.

Further, the coexisting cause of perturbedness is the rise of Jnanavarana (knowledge-obscuring karma) etc. Due to the rise of Jnanavarana and Darshanavarana (perception-obscuring karma) knowledge and perception are not fully manifested; therefore, perturbedness is caused due to the desire of knowing and seeing (the things). Or he does not know the exact complete nature of the substance, due to which the feelings of attachment, etc. arise which cause perturbedness.

Further, due to the rise of Antarya karma (obstructive karma) the desired acts of charity, etc. are not fulfilled, then perturbedness is caused. The rise of Antarayakarma along with the rise of Moha-karma become the associating cause of perturbedness. On destruction of Moha-karma they become ineffective and those karmas get automatically destroyed (without any effort) in one Antar Muhurta, i.e., within very- very short period; but when the coexisting cause also gets destroyed then the fully manifested state of unperturbedness is realized. There, the omniscient God is said to have attained the state of infinite bliss.

Further, due to the instrumentality of the rise of Aghati karmas (non-destructive karmas) the union of body, etc. is found. There, due to rise of Moha-karma, the union of the body, etc. acts as an external coexisting cause of perturbedness. Perturbedness is caused due to the feeling of attachment, etc. whose internal cause is the rise of Moha- karma and external cause is the rise of Aghati karmas due to which the union of body, etc. is found.  Although the rise of Aghati karmas continues even after the destruction of Moha- karma, it in no way can cause perturbedness. But since earlier it was a coexisting cause of perturbedness, therefore, the destruction of Aghati karmas also is desirable for the soul.  The state of misery is not found in the omniscient God even on the rise of these (Aghati) karmas. Therefore, no effort is necessary for their destruction; but on destruction of Moha-karma these (Aghati) karmas also get automatically destroyed in a short period of time.

In this way, the benediction of soul lies in the destruction of all karmas and liberation (Moksha) is the name of destruction of all karmas.  Thus, the only weal of the soul is attainment of Moksha and nothing else; one should clearly ascertain this.

Someone may ask here - " In mundane existence also due to the rise of Punya (auspicious) karmas the Jiva becomes happy; hence, why do you say that Moksha only is the weal of the soul?

Answer: In mundane existence, there is no happiness at all in any way, there is only misery.  But sometimes someone is found in intense state of misery and someone is found suffering from feeble state of misery.  So, from the point of view that earlier there was intense misery or some Jivas are found in the state of intense misery, the Jiva found suffering from feeble misery is said to be happy.  And from the same point of view, the Jiva suffering from feeble misery treats himself to be happy; in reality there is no happiness. Further, even if the state of feeble misery remains for all times, it may also be treated as beneficial but this also is not so.  The rise of Punya karma is short-lived and during that time feeble misery is found but afterwards intense misery gets evolved.  Therefore, the mundane existence is not at all beneficial.

For example, someone is suffering from typhoid fever; sometimes he is more restless, sometimes he is less restless. When he is less restless, he treats himself to be happy. People also say - "He is well"; but in reality so long as fever exists, he is not well.  Similarly, the mundane being is having the rise of Moha-karma.  Sometimes he feels more perturbed, sometimes less perturbed.  When he feels less perturbed, he believes himself to be happy.  People also say-  "He is happy"; but in reality so long as there is rise of Moha, he is not happy.

Further, it should be known that even in mundane existence one is said to be happy on lessening of perturbedness and one is called miserable on increase in perturbedness.  Happiness- unhappiness is not caused by association of external objects. For example, some pauper acquired wealth, here also he is called happy due to lessening of perturbedness and he also treats himself to be happy.  And a very rich person suffered some loss of wealth; there he is called unhappy due to increase in perturbedness and he also believes himself to be unhappy.

One should know the same all everywhere.

Moreover, the decrease-increase in perturbedness too is not in accordance with association of external things, rather it is according to the decrease-increase in passions.  For example, someone possesses less wealth and he feels contented.  Therefore, he is less perturbed.  And someone possesses enough wealth but it is avarice (greedy) then he is found to be more perturbed.  Further, someone highly abused somebody but he did not become angry even by a little abuse, then he feels highly perturbed.  For example, although the cow has no expectation from its calf, yet it entertains intense feeling of attachment towards it; therefore, the cow is highly perturbed due to the feeling of protecting it. Further, the body of the warrior is useful in many ways but due to rise of pride passion, etc., if the Moha (attachment) towards body, etc. gets lessened in the battle-field then he feels less perturbed even in mundane existence happiness and sorrow are believed to be caused only on lessening and increase in perturbedness.  And decrease-increase in perturbedness is caused by decrease-increase in attachment passions, etc.

Further, happiness and sorrow are not caused by other external substances.  Desire arises in a person out of passions and if external things are obtained as per his desire, then due to some lessening of passions, perturbedness is reduced, then he feels happy; and when one does not get the external things as per his desire, then due to increase in passions, perturbedness increases and he feels unhappy. This is the reality; but he believes that happiness-sorrow are caused to him due to the instrumentality of other substances.  Such understanding is delusion only.  Therefore, one should know that in mundane existence, the Jivas feel happy due to somewhat decrease in passions and believes it to be beneficial, then, where on total destruction of passions and causes there of, infinite bliss is attained due to evolution of supreme unperturbedness, how then such sate of liberation be not believed to be the weal of the soul?

Further, in mundane existence, even if one acquires a high status, then also either the perturbedness of gathering articles of carnal pleasures is caused or the perturbedness of enjoying the carnal pleasure persists, or the if due to some other passion like anger, etc., some desire is evolved, then the perturbedness of fulfilling it is caused; never does he become totally unperturbed.  Internally, several types of perturbedness are found existing.  And if one makes external effort for ending perturbedness, then firstly, this objective is not accomplished; and if due to destiny that objective gets fulfilled then immediately he busies himself in making effort for mitigating some other perturbedness.  Thus perturbedness of mitigating perturbedness continues incessantly.  If this sort of perturbedness be not there, then why does he indulge in the newer-newer types of acts of sensual pleasures, etc.?  Therefore, in the mundane existence, due to rise of Punya karmas, if someone attains the rank of Indra-Ahimindra, etc., even then, imperturbedness is not evolved and he remains miserable only.  Therefore, in no way mundane existence is beneficial.

And in the state of liberation, none of the types of perturbedness exists, therefore, the purpose of making effort for ending perturbedness is not found there; the liberated souls (Siddha Gods) always remains blissful by the spiritually evolved quietude; therefore, the state of liberation only is beneficial.  Earlier also the detailed description of the sorrows and miseries of mundane existence and bliss of liberated state has been given, that too has been given with this very purpose.  Pondering over that too,
believing liberation to be the weal of the soul, one should make effort for liberation.  The purpose of all preachings is this much only.

	         Liberation through Right Effort Only

The question here is whether effort for liberation materializes according to destiny on advent of opportune time or on subsidence of delusion, etc. or through one's own persistent right effort.  If the answer be that in materializes on union of first two causes, then why do you sermonise us?  And if it materializes through right effort, then what is the reason that some are able to make right effort while others are not able to do so, although all listen the sermon?

Answer: Union of many causes takes place in accomplishment of one act.  So, where the effort for liberation materializes, there the union of all the three causes is found and where it does not materialize, there the union of all the three causes is not found.  Amongst the aforesaid three causes, opportune time and destiny are not any (achievable) entities.  The time (moment) of the accomplishment of an act is its opportune time and the accomplished act itself is the destiny.  And the subsidence, etc. of karmas is the potency of karmic matter, of which the soul is not the doer or destroyer.  And making of right effort for liberation is the duty of the soul. Therefore, the soul is sermonised to make right effort for liberation.

If the soul makes effort for adopting those means through which the accomplishment assuredly takes place, there the union of other causes is invariably found and the act is also invariably accomplished.  And if the soul adopts such means through which accomplishment of act may or may not materialize, there if other causes are met with, then the act gets accomplished and if not met with, then the act does not materialize.

By the adoption of means of liberation advocated in Jina's religion, liberation invariably takes place.  Therefore, that Jiva who makes effort for liberation according to the preachings of omniscient Jina, automatically gets association of opportune time and destiny and the adoption of such effort is itself the result of subsidence, etc. of karmas. Therefore, the one who makes right effort for liberation, invariably gets the union of all other causes and he assuredly attains Moksha (liberation)- this is to be believed.  And the Jiva who does not make right effort for liberation, for him, the opportune time and destiny are not there and because the subsidence, etc. of karmas has not taken place that is why he does not make the right effort. Therefore, one who does not make the right effort for liberation, to him other causes are also not available and Moksha (liberation) is not attained by him.  Such should be one's belief.

Question:  Many people listen the sermons but only some can make effort for liberation, some others cannot make -why is it so?

Answer:  The reason is that those who make right effort by listening the sermons, can adopt the means of liberation and those who do not make right effort, cannot adopt the means of liberation.  Sermonisation is merely a process of education; the fruit reaped is always according to the effort made.

Question: Dravyalingi Muni undergoes religious penances, etc. by renouncing the householder's life for the sake of attaining liberation.  Here, he has made effort but the objective is not attained; therefore, nothing is accomplished by making effort.

Answer: How could the objective be attained by contrary effort? The fruit of indulging affectionately in penance, etc., form of conventional conduct, is described in the scripture to be the auspicious bondage of karmas, but he (the Dravyalingi Muni) wishes to obtain liberation through such effort; how is this possible?  This is mere delusion.

Question: the cause of delusion, too, is the rise of karmas only.  How can effort be fruitful?

Answer: the delusion is removed on ascertainment (of truth) on the basis of right preachings, but he (the Drvyalingi Muni) does not make such effort, so the delusion persists. If he makes effort for ascertainment (of truth) then the rise of Moksha- karma (deluding karma) which is the cause of delusion also gets subsided and then delusion is removed, because, in the process of ascertainment, the thoughts gets purified which results in the reduction of duration and fruit on of Maha-karma.

Question: The reason why one's Upayoga (active knowledge) does not get engaged in the ascertainment (of truth) is also the rise of karma?

Answer: The one-sensed etc. beings do not have the power of thinking; in their case, the rise of karma is only the reason.  But he (the Drvyalingi monk) possesses the power of thinking, and ascertaining by virtue of Kshayopashama (destruction cum subsidence) state of Jnanavarana karmas, etc.; wherever he engages his attention (Upayoga), ascertainment of the same is possible.  But he engages his attention in the ascertainment of other things and does not engage it here (in the path of liberation), so this is his own fault.  There is no role of karmas in this.

Question: The obscurer of right belief and right conduct is Moha (deluding karma) how can right-effort for liberation be possible without its removal?

Answer: Not engaging one's Upayoga (active knowledge) in ascertaining the Tattvas is his own fault only.  And if through right effort one engages his Upayoga in ascertainment of Tattvas then, on destruction of Moha karma on its own, the right effort (Purushartha) for the path of liberation in the form of right belief, etc. materializes.  Therefore, chiefly one should make effort to engage one's Upayoga in the ascertainment of Tattvas.  And whatever sermons are given, they are meant for effectuating such effort (Purushartha) only, and by such Purushartha, the Purushartha of liberation would get effectuated on its own.

Further, the non-ascertainment of Tattvas is not the fault of any karma but your own fault only; but you pretend to remain faultless and want to put the blame of your fault on karmas, etc. Such misconduct is not possible for one who claims to obey Jina's commandment.  You wish to continue indulgence in sensual pleasures; therefore, you are lying.  Why would one put up such argument, if one has real urge for liberation?

Even when you do not seem to attain your objective in worldly affairs, you continue making effort in that direction, but here you do not want to make effort, therefore, it is concluded that you are praising the state of liberation by following others.  You do not believe it to be beneficial after ascertaining its true nature.  It is impossible that one may not make effort for achieving an objective which is ascertained to be beneficial.

Question: Whatever you have stated is true but the rise of material karmas (Dravya karmas) causes passions, etc. disposition (Bhava-karma) and (Bhava-karma) causes the bondage of Dravyakarma and again its rise causes, Bhava-karma -this has been happening since eternity.  How then the effort for liberation be possible?

Answer: If for all time, the bondage and rise of material karmas be found to be uniform, then it can be true, but due to instrumentality of Jiva's dispositions, the formerly bonded karmas too undergo the process of Utkarshana (increase in duration), Apskarshana (decrease of duration) and Samkramana (transformation) etc., which causes reduction and increase in their potency; therefore, their rise (operation state) also becomes feeble and intense.  Due to their instrumentality, the fresh bondage of karmas also happens to be feeble or intense.  Therefore, due to instrumentality of the rise of karmas, the manifestation of knowledge, etc. in the mundane beings, sometimes, is found more and sometimes less; sometimes passions like attachment, etc. become feeble and sometimes intense.  In this way, transmigration continues.

There, sometimes, the Jiva attains the status of rational five-sensed developed being, then the power of thinking through mind gets manifested.  Such Jiva sometimes is found having intense attachment, etc. and sometimes feeble.  There due to intense rise of attachment, etc., the indulgence in voluptuous acts only is found.  And due to feeble rise of attachment, etc., if the instrumental cause of external discourses, etc. through his own effort, then engagement in religions activities becomes possible and if the instrumental cause is not met with and he too does not make effort (for liberation), then he may continue indulging in other acts but with feeble feelings of attachment, etc.; so, in such moments, the preaching is efficacious.

Those one-sensed, etc. beings, who are devoid of thinking power, do not possess the knowledge of understanding the sermons and the Upayoga of the Jivas having intense attachment, etc., does not get engrossed in sermons. Therefore, such Jivas who possess thinking power and whose attachment, etc. passions have become feeble, if through instrumental cause of sermons adopt religion, then they are benefited.  Under such conditions only right effort becomes efficacious.

The one-sensed, etc. beings are not at all capable in observing religious acts; how can they make effort (Purushartha)?  And if a highly passionate being makes effort then such effort will be for sinful acts only,; the effort for religious acts is not possible.

Therefore, he who possesses thinking power and whose attachment, etc., engrossed his Upayoga effortfully in the ascertainment of Tattvas, etc., then his Upayoga gets engrossed there and then he is benefited.  if under such conditions also, he does not make effort (Purushartha) for ascertaining the Tattvas, passes the time recklessly, either he may keep indulging in voluptuous and passionate activities with feeble attachment, etc. or may keep engaged in conventional religious acts; then the opportunity will be lost and wandering in mundane existence only will continue.

Further, with such opportunity, those Jivas who continue the practice of engrossing their Upayoga effortfully in the ascertainment of Tattvas, their thoughts and dispositions will become purer, due to which the potency of material karmas will decrease and after sometime the subsidence of Darshan Moha (faith-deluding karma) will take place of its own; then the exact conviction of Tattvas will be evolved. So, his duty is only to continue the practice of ascertainment of Tattvas; by this means only, the subsidence of Darshan Moha takes place of its own; there is no role of Jiva in it.

And on subsidence of Darshan-Moha, the right belief gets manifested of its own in the Jiva.  And on evolution of right belief, such faith is evolved - "I am soul, I should not indulge in attachment (Raag), etc.".  But due to rise of Charitra Moha (conduct-deluding karma) the attachment, etc. are produced.  There, if the rise be intense, then he indulges in sensual objects and if the rise be feeble then he engrosses his Upayoga (active knowledge) effortfully in the religious acts and in the contemplation of renunciation, etc. due to its instrumentality, Charitra-Moha becomes feeble; in such state the effort (Purushartha) for accepting partial conduct (small vows) or complete conduct (great vows) gets manifested.  And by accepting charitra (self-conduct with vows) through his own Purushartha he increases the engrossment in religion; there, by purity of thoughts and dispositions, the potency of karmas becomes feeble, due to which purity increases further and the potency of karmas becomes more feeble.  In this way, he gradually destroys Moha (conduct-deluding karmas) then the thoughts and dispositions become absolutely pure (passionless); through them the knowledge obscuring, etc. destructive (Ghati) karmas are destroyed; then omniscience gets manifested.  Thereafter, effortlessly, he attains the perfectly pure liberated state (Siddhahood) by destroying the non-destructive (Aghati) karmas.

In this way, if one makes right effort in the presence of instrumental cause of sermons, then the destruction of karmas takes place.

And when the rise of karma (conduct-deluding karma) be intense then right effort (purushartha) is not possible; even one falls down from the higher Gunasthanas (spiritual stages of development); there, whatever be the destiny, the same happens.  But where the rise of karmas be feeble and right effort (Purushartha) be possible, there one should not remain reckless but should make effort attentively for achieving one's objective.

For example, a person is flowing in the current of the river; there, if the force of water be more, then Purushartha is not effective, even sermons are not fruitful.  And if the force of water be less and he makes effort for coming out, then he can come out, then he will continue flowing in slow motion and after, when the force of water increases, then he will go on flowing.  Similarly, the Jiva wanders in the world; there, if the rise of karmas be intense, then Purushartha is not effective, even sermons are not fruitful.  And if the rise of karmas be feeble, then if he makes effort to follow the path of liberation, then he can attain liberation.  He alone is sermonized to follow the liberation path.  And if he does not follow the path of liberation, then some purity of dispositions and thoughts may get evolved and later on due to intense rise of karmas he may get birth in Nigoda (most inferior state of existence of one-sensed beings) etc.

Therefore, missing the opportunity is not desirable.  Now from all angles, the opportunity is there; obtaining such an opportunity is difficult.  Therefore, the capable souls should practice the religion as is being preached by true preceptor.

	            The Nature Of Liberation Path

Now the nature of liberation path is being described:- On total destruction of delusion, etc. karmas, due to whose instrumentality, the soul became miserable by undergoing alien (impure) state, the evolution of absolutely pure state of the soul is called Moksha (liberation).  And the means or cause of the same is to be known as the path of liberation.

There, the causes (means) are of various types.  1. Some causes are such without which the act cannot be accomplished and on whose existence, the act may or may not be accomplished.  For example, without accepting monkhood, liberation can not be attained.  And 2.  some causes are such by which chiefly the act is accomplished but even without which the act may be accomplished.  For example, by observance of external penances like fasting, etc., chiefly, liberating is attained but Bharat Chakravarty, etc. attained liberation even without observing the external penances.  And 3. some causes are such by which accomplishment of the act invariably takes place and without which the act can never be accomplished.  For example, on union of right belief, knowledge and conduct, liberation can never be attained. Such are the causes; amongst them, the union of right belief, knowledge and conduct is invariably the path of liberation which alone magnanimously, and as a rule, is the means of liberation.  Amongst these right belief, knowledge and conduct even if one of them is not there, liberation path is not possible.

The same is stated in Tattvarth Sutra:-

Smygdarshangyancharitran.i mokshmarg ---  (Tatvarth sutra  1/1)

In the commentary of this Sutra (aphorism) it is stated that here the word is a singular word which means that the union of all the three is one path of liberation; there are no three separate-separate paths of liberation.

Question: The vowless true believer does not possess the conduct; has he attained liberation path or not?

Answer: It is the rule that he will definitely attain liberation path.  Therefore, conventionally he is also said to have attained liberation path but in real spiritual sense, he attains the liberation path on evolution of right conduct (Samyak-charitra).  For example, some person decided to go to that town", but in reality, only on moving in the path, the act of going will be established.  Similarly, the vowless true believer has acquired faith in the passionless liberation path, therefore, conventionally he is said to be the treader’ of liberation path, but in reality, liberation path will be attained only on evolution of passionless state. Further in Pravachanasara also, it is stated that liberation path is evolved only on the union of all the three (right belief, knowledge and conduct) therefore, it should be known that without acquiring right belief and knowledge of Tattvas, by mere lessening of attachment, etc. (passions), the liberation path is not attained and without lessening of passions-attachment, etc., even on acquiring the right belief and knowledge also, the liberation path is not attained; only on the union of all the three, the real liberation path is evolved.

Now these are being described through the process of Nirdesha (nomenclature), Lakshan Nirdesha (characteristics)- and Pariksha (analysis) hereunder:

There, "the union of right belief, right knowledge and right conduct constitutes the path to liberation"- such nomenclature is called Nirdesha.

And that which is devoid of (the fault of) Ati-uvyapti, Auyapti and Asambhava and by which these are identified is called Lakshana and its nomenclature with specification is called Lakshan-Nirdesha.

There, that which is to be identified is called Lakshya (objective); excepting it, all other things are called Alakshya (non-objective).  Stating that characteristic to be the characteristic of a thing which is found in both Lakshya (related thing) and Alakshya (unrelated thing) is called Ati- vyapti.  For example, stating "immateriality" to be the characteristic of the soul; but immateriality characteristic is found in both the related thing, i.e., soul and unrelated thing, i.e., space substance, etc., therefore, such characteristic (of soul) is called Ati-vyapti.  By identifying the soul through this characteristic, even the non-soul substances like space, etc. would also be included amongst souls; this fault will be there.

Further, stating such characteristic to be the characteristic which is found in some related things and is not found in other related things is called Auyapti.  For example, omniscience be stated to be the characteristic of the soul; but omniscience is found manifested in some souls and not found manifested in other souls; therefore, this is an Avyapti characteristic.  By identifying the soul through this characteristic, the non-omniscient souls will not be included in the category of souls.  This fault will be there.

Further, stating that characteristic to be characteristic of the objective which is not at all found in that objective is called Asambhava (impossibility).  For example, stating to be the characteristic of the soul; this is contradictory to direct comprehension, etc. because this is an Asambhava, impossible characteristic, even matter, etc. (insentient things) would be included in souls and soul would become non-soul.  This fault will be there.

Thus, if the Lakshana (characteristic) is contaminated with Ativyapti, Avayapti and Asambhava (fault), it is a perverse characteristic (Lakshanaabhasa).  And that characteristic which is found in all related objectives and not found in any unrelated objectives, is called the true Lakshana (characteristic). For example, soul's specific characteristic is Chaitanya (sentience), so this characteristic is definitely found present in all souls but is not at all found in any non-soul; therefore, this is the true characteristic. By identifying the soul through this characteristic, the correct knowledge of soul-non-soul is obtained; there lies no fault.  In this way, the nature of characteristic is explained.

Now the true characteristic of right belief, etc., is being described:

	          True Characteristic of Right belief
	                   (Samyagdarshan)

The belief in Jiva etc. Tattvarthas (substances with their true character) devoid of perverse ascertainment is the characteristic of right belief. (1) Jiva (soul), (2) Ajiva (non-soul), (3) Asrava (influx with impure thought activity), (4) bandha (bondage of karmas), (5) Samvara (stoppage of influx with emergence of pure thought activity), (6) Nirjara (partial dissociation of karmas with increase in purity of thought activity) and (7) Moksha (complete dissociation of karmas with manifestation of perfect purity -these are the seven Tattvarthas. Their belief- " It  is so only and not otherwise" - such conviction is Tattvarth-Shraddhana (belief of Tattvarthas) and such right belief which is devoid of perverse grasping and understanding is right belief (Samyag Darshan).

Her for the negation of perverse conception, the word Samyak (means right or true) is stated because the word Samyak stands for commendation.  Only after removal of perverse conviction in belief, commendation is possible.

Question:  What is the purpose of using two words here Tattva and Artha?

Answer: The word Tat (means `that') is used in context of the word Yat (means `which'), hence that which is being talked of is called Tat and its quality or nature is called Tattva; because Tasyabhavastattvam- such is the compound formation of the word Tattva.  And that which is being comprehended, such substances along with their true nature is called right belief (Samyag Darshan).  Here, if only belief of the quality (Tattva) was considered, then without the belief of that substance whose quality is being considered, mere belief of its quality is not efficacious.  And if the belief of the substances alone was considered then without the belief of it's quality, the belief of the substance is also not efficacious.

For example, someone may be having the faith of knowledge, perception, color, etc.- this is knowledge, this is whiteness- such belief be there but knowledge and perception is the nature of the soul, "I am soul; and color, etc. is the nature of the matter, the matter is a distinctly separate substance from me"- if such belief of the substance is not attained, then mere belief is acquired but if the belief of the true nature of the soul, as it really is, is not acquired then without the belief of its quality, the mere belief of the substance also is not efficacious.  Therefore, the belief of the substance along with its qualities alone is efficacious.  Or the Jiva etc. are also termed by both the words Tattva and Artha; therefore, Tattavama- varthastattvartha, i.e., the Tattva is also the Artha, their belief is Samyagdarshan (right belief).

With this meaning, at some places- Tattva-shraddhana (belief of qualities) is called right belief and at other places Padartha Shraddhana (belief of substances) is called right belief.  So, one should not understand any contradiction there.  This is the purpose of stating the two words tattva and Artha.

Why Seven Tattvarthas Only

Question: The Tattvarthas are infinite.  From the general point of view, all these are covered under Jiva-Ajiva; therefore, either two only or infinite should have been stated?  The Asrava etc. are the specific dispositions of Jiva-Ajiva only; what is the purpose of stating them separately?

Answer:  If here, the purpose would have been only of acquiring belief of substances, then the statement would have been either in the general or specific form which will produce knowledge of all substances; but that is not the purpose here; here the purpose is of (attaining) liberation only.  So, here only those general and specific substances and dispositions are given by those belief liberation is attained and without whose belief liberation cannot be attained.

Therefore, the Jiva and Ajiva (soul & non-soul), these two, are stated as general form of Tattvas from the viewpoint of one category of many substances.  By knowing these two categories Jiva can acquire the belief of self and non-self, then he can know the self as distinct from non-self as distinct from the self; then by becoming detached (dispassionate) from the non-self substance, he may follow the liberation path by giving up attachment, etc.  Hence, only on evolution of belief of these two categories, liberation is attained and without knowing these two categories, the belief of self and non-self is not evolved; then he continues making effort for worldly objects only by modificational approach.  If he indulges in the non-self substances with attachment-aversion feeling then how can he follow the liberation path?  Therefore, without the belief of these two categories, liberation cannot be attained.  In this way, these two general Tattvas are described as worth believing necessarily.

Further, the other five Tattvas like Asrava etc. are the modifications (Paryayas) of Jivas (soul) and Pudgalas (matter); therefore, these are specific Tattvas, so, by knowing these five modifications (Paryayas), the belief of making effort for liberation is evolved.  There, if he identifies Moksha (liberation) then he can make effort for attaining it by believing it to be beneficial.  Hence, one should acquire belief of Moksha.

Further, the means of Moksha is Samvara (stoppage of influx) and Nirjara (dissociation of karmas).  So, if he identifies these, then he may make effort for evolution of Samvara and Nirjara.  Therefore, one should acquire belief of Samvara and Nirjara.

Further, Samvara and Nirjara Tattvas bear negative characteristics, therefore, those dispositions which are to be renounced should be identified.  For example, forbearance is evolved by giving up anger, so if he identifies anger- passion then he may evolve forbearance by giving up anger. Similarly, Samvara is generated on mitigation of Asrava and on partial mitigation of Bandha (bondage) the dissociation of karmas, i.e., Nirjara is evolved.  Therefore, if he identifies Asrava and Bandha then by mitigating them, he can make effort for evolution of Samvara-Nirjara.  Hence, one should acquire belief of Asrava and Bandha Tattvas.

Thus, only on evolution of belief of these five Paryayas (modifications of soul and matter) the liberation path is acquired.  If one does not identify these Tattvas then, without identification of Moksha, why would he make effort for it?  Without identifying Samvara and Nirjara, how can he make effort for their evolution?  Without identification of Asrava and Bandha, how can he destroy them?  Thus without acquiring belief of these five Parayayas (Tattvas), the path of liberation cannot be attained.

In this way, although the Tattvarthas are infinite, those may be described in various ways by their general and specific forms, but here the sole purpose is of Moksha (liberation only; therefore, two are general Tattvas from category of substances point of view and by adding five specific Tattvas of modification form, the Tattvas are stated as seven.

The path of liberation depends on their right belief.  It should be known that, excepting these Tattvas, the belief of other things may be contrary; the path of liberation is not dependent of any other things.

Further, at some places, by including Punya (virtue) and Papa (vice) (in above seven Tattvas), nine Padarthas are described.  So Punya & Papa are the details of Asrava etc. only.  Therefore, they are covered under the seven Tattvas. Or, on acquiring belief of Punya & Papa, one would not accept Punya to be the path of liberation or would not indulge in sins unrestrainedly.  Therefore, by knowing the belief of these also as beneficial in the liberation path, the nine Padarthas (Tattvas) are stated by adding the two Punya & Papa Tattvas as the details.  And in Samayasara etc., these are also stated as nine Tattvas.

Question:  Belief of these Tattvas is stated to be Samyagdarshan (right belief), but Darshan means general perception only and Shraddhana means ascertainment only; how is the same meaning possible (of these two words)?

Answer:  According to the context, the meaning of the verb changes.  Here, the context is of the path to liberation. Therefore, the meaning of the word Darshana should not be understood to be mere general perception caused by occular- nonoccular perception is found similar to both true believer and false believer.  Following or not following the path of liberation is not concerned with it.  And right belief is found in a true believer only; the liberation path is concerned with this.  Therefore, here the meaning of the word Darshan also should be taken to be belief only.

Question:  What is the purpose here in stating the belief to be devoid of Viparita Abhinivesha (perverse intention)?

Answer:  Abhinivesh means inner intention.  So perverse intention consists in not having correct intention about the belief of Tattvarthas, as it should be, and instead, the intention be contrary.  The purpose of belief of Tattvarthas is not merely their affirmation; there the purpose is such that by ascertaining Jiva-Ajiva, one should believe the self and non-self as they really are; by identifying  Asrava (influx with impure thought activity), should believe it to be Heya renounceable (worth giving up); by identifying Bandha (bondage), should believe it to be harmful; by identifying Samvara (stoppage of influx with emergence of purity) should believe it to be Upadeya, worth acquiring; by identifying Nirjara (partial dissociation of bondage with rise of purity) should believe it to be beneficial and cause of benefit and by identifying Moksha (liberation with full manifestation of soul's purity & complete dissociation of bondage)  should believe it to be the highest benefit of the self- such is the purpose of Tattvartha-shraddhana.  Perverse intention is the name of belief contrary to aforesaid belief.  It comes to an end on evolution of true belief of Tattvarthas (substances with their true nature).  Hence, it is stated here that the belief in Tattvarthas is devoid of perverse intention.

Or, someone may have seemingly belief in Tattvarthas but in inner intention perversity is not ended.  Somehow, intention contrary to the aforesaid intention, is found in the inner-self.  So, right belief is not evolved in him.  For example, a Dravyalingi Muni ascertains the Tattvas through Jain scripture but due to such perverse intention as feeling of I-ness in bodily activities and sense of benefit in Punyaasrava (auspicious influx or virtuous conduct), he remains a mis-believer only.  Therefore, that belief in Tattvarthas which is devoid of perverse intention, is only Samyagdarshan (right belief).

Thus, the belief of Jiva etc. Tattvarthas, devoid of perverse intention, is the characteristic of Samyagdarshan and Samyagdarshan is the Lakshya- objective.

The same is stated Tattvartha Sutra:

Smygdarshangyancharitran.i mokshmarg ---  (Tatvarth sutra  1/1)

i.e., Belief in substances with their true nature is right belief.

And in Sarvartha Siddhi named commentary in Tattvartha Sutra, the meaning or words Tattva etc. is clearly stated and the purpose as to why the Tattvas are seven only is also specified.  It is to be known that whatever description is given here is based on it.

Further, in Purushartha Siddhyupaya also, the following verse is written:-

Jeeva Jeevadeenan tatvarthanan sdaev krtavyam
Shradhanan vipreetabhinivaish viviktmatmroopan tat -------22

Meaning:  One should always have firm belief in Jiva-Ajiva etc.. Tattvarthas (essential principles) as they are, free from perverse notions & intention.  This belief is the nature of the self (soul); it gets manifested on destruction of Darshan Moha (faith-deluding karma), therefore, it is the natural disposition (characteristic) of the soul.  It gets manifested in the fourth Gunasthana etc., spiritual stages; thereafter, even in Siddha (liberated) state, it remains manifested for all times.

Refutation of Avayapti, Ativyapti & Asambhava faults in the differentia of Tattvartha-Shraddhana

Question:  It is described in the Shastras that many Tiryanchas (rational animals) etc., having feeble knowledge, do not know even the names of seven Tattvas and yet they acquire Samyagdarshan (right belief), therefore, your statement that the differntia of the right belief is Tattvartha Shraddhan has Avyapti fault?

Answer:  One may know, may not know or may know contrarily the names of Jiva-Ajiva etc.; right faith evolves on having faith in them by correctly identifying their nature.

There, someone acquires faith by identifying the nature in general form, while other acquires faith by identifying their nature in details (specific form).  Therefore, although true believer Tiryanchas (rational animals) etc. who have feeble knowledge do not even know the names of Jiva etc., yet they acquire faith by identifying their nature in general form. Therefore, attainment of right belief is found in them.

For example, some Tiryancha (rational animal) does not know his own as well as of others name etc. but believes I-ness in the self and believes others to be non-self.  Similarly, one having feeble knowledge does not know the names of Jiva-Ajiva but he believes I-ness in the self-soul which is embodiment of knowledge and what ever body, etc. are there, believes them to be non-self - such belief is found in him.  This itself is the belief of Jiva-Ajiva.  And for example, the same Tiryancha does not know the names, etc. of bliss etc., nevertheless, by recognizing the blissful state and for continuing it by recognizing the cause of forthcoming misery, desires to avoid that cause; and whatever is presently causing misery, he makes effort for ending it.  Similarly, although one, having feeble knowledge, does not know the names of Moksha etc., nevertheless, by having belief of perfect blissful Moksha state and for evolving it, desire to evolve the state of Samvara which is caused by giving up Asravas like attachment, etc. which are the cause of forthcoming bondage; and through pure thought activity, he desires to shed out that state which is the cause of transmigratory misery.  In this way, he has belief of Asrava etc.  Thus belief of seven Tattvas is found in him also.  If such belief be not there then he would not have the desire of evolving pure dispositions by giving up attachment, etc.  The same is being explained here:

If one dose not know the category of Jiva-Ajiva and does not identify self and non-self, then how would he not develop attachment, etc. feelings in other substances?  If he does not identify attachment, etc. passions, then why would he like to give up them?  Those attachment, etc. only are Asravas.  If he does not know the fruit of attachment etc. to be harmful, then why would he like to give up attachment, etc.?  The fruit of those attachment, etc. only is Bandha (bondage).  Further, if he recognizes the passionless dispositions, then he wants to evolve  them.  That passionless disposition itself is called Samvara (emergence of purity with stoppage of influx).  And because he recognize the elimination of the cause of earlier mundane existence, therefore, for materializing it, he wishes to evolve pure dispositions through penances, etc.  The cause of that earlier mundane existence is karma, so its elimination itself is Nirjara (dissociation of karmas).  And if he does not recognize the absence of mundane existence, then why for would he evolve the dispositions of samvara and Nirjara?  So, the end of that mundane existence itself is Moksha.  Hence, only on evolution of belief of seven Tattvas, the desire for evolving pure dispositions arises by giving up attachment, etc. passions. If out of this (seven Tattvas) even the belief of any one Tattva be not found, then such desire would not be produced.  And such desire is definitely found present in right-faithed Tiryanchas (rational animals) etc., having feeble knowledge; hence, one should conclude that he possesses the belief of seven Tattvas.  Owing to less Kashayopashama of Jnanavarana etc. karmas, detailed knowledge of Tattvas may not be found in him, nevertheless, due to subsidence, etc. of Darshan Moha (faith-deluding karma), the potency of right belief of Tattvas in general form is found manifested in him.  Thus in this Lakshana (differentia), the Avyapti fault is not there.

Question:  During the time when a true believer indulges in sensual pleasures etc. passional acts, he is not having thought of seven Tattvas; how then right belief is possible? Moreover, right belief does not exist, hence, in this differentia, the Avyapti fault exists.

Answer: Thought activity is dependent on the tendency of Upayoga (active knowledge); wherever the Upayoga is engaged the same becomes the object of thought.  And belief consists in other knowables and in the state of asleep, etc. activity, the thought, of the tattvas is not there. Nevertheless, their ascertainment continues existing, it does not get destroyed, therefore, he possesses right belief.

For example, some diseased person has ascertainment that "I am a human being, I am not Tiryancha (animal) etc.  This is the cause of may disease.  So, now by removing the cause and by lessening the disease, I must become free from disease". And when the same person engages himself in other thoughts, etc. then such thought is not found; but such belief only persists. Similarly, this soul (true believer) has such ascertainment that "I am soul and I am not matter, etc., bondage is caused to me through influx (impure thought activity), so now by effectuating Samvara and Nirjara I should attain Moksha state".  And when the same soul indulges in other thoughts, etc., then though he does not have such thought, yet such right belief only persists.

Question: If such right belief persists, then why does he indulge in the causes of bondage?

Answer: For example, the same person under some circumstance indulges, in the causes which increase the disease and engages himself in business, etc. and becomes angry also; nevertheless, that belief is not destroyed.  Similarly, the same soul, being subservient to the instrumentality of the rise of karmas, indulges in the causes of bondage also, indulges in the acts of sensual pleasure, etc. and anger, etc. passions, nevertheless, that right belief is not destroyed.  Detailed discussion of the same will follow later on.

In this way, even in the absence of thought of seven Tattvas, right belief persists.  Hence, there is no fault of Avyapti.

Question: In higher spiritual stages, where notionless self- realization is found, there even thinking about the seven Tattvas etc. is forbidden.  So, how is the denial of the differentia of right belief possible?  And there the denial (of rambling of Upayoga) is possible, so Avyapti fault arises there?

Answer: In lower spiritual stages, he (the true believer) engaged his Upayoga (attention) in thoughts of seven Tattvas which strengthened his ascertainment and by disengaging his Upayoga from the objects of senses, he reduced attachment, etc. And on accomplishment of objective, the instrumental causes are also denied; therefore, when the ascertainment became strong and attachment, etc. got eradicated, then why should one allow his Upayoga to ramble meaninglessly? Therefore, in that state, the rambling of Upayoga is denied. Moreover, the differntia of right belief is ascertainment only; so ascertainment is not denied.  If ascertainment is required to be given up, then it would amount to denial of this denial of this differentia but this is not so.  Even there also the ascertainment of seven Tattvas persists. Therefore, there lies no Avyapti fault.

Question: the use of the word ascertainment-non- ascertainment is possible with reference to a non- omniscient; therefore, I agree that the differentia of right belief of seven Tattvas is pertinent in his case.  But knowledge of all the knowables is found equally in all omniscients; there the differentia of ascertainment of seven tattvas is not applicable and they do possess right belief, hence, in reference to them, the aforesaid differentia seems to have Avyapti fault?

Answer: For example, the ascertainment which is found in the non-omniscient through Shrut-Jnana (scriptural knowledge), similarly, the ascertainment is found in omniscient Arhanta and Siddha through omniscience.  The same nature of seven Tattvas which was ascertained earlier due to feeble knowledge, very few details of Jiva etc. Tattvas were known, but the basic nature of seven Tattvas which was ascertained earlier is now known through omniscience.  Here, the ascertainment has become Paramaavagadha (firmly concentrated); due to this reason only, the right belief is stated to be Paramaavagadha.  If the right belief which was attained earlier (in the non-omniscient state) would have been known wrong, then non-ascertainment could be possible in the state of omniscience, but the omniscients are found possessing exactly the same right belief of seven Tattvas which was evolved in non-omniscient state.  Therefore, in spite of the states of less or more knowledge (i.e., irrespective of Shrut-Jnan or Kewal-Jnan) the existence of the quality of right belief is found in the same full measure in Tiryanchas etc. and Arhantas and Siddhas.

Further, in the earlier state it was believed that he should make effort for Moksha through Samvara and Nirjara. Afterwards on attainment of Moksha state, this belief manifested that I have attained Moksha through Samvara- Nirjara.  Further, earlier due to feeble knowledge, very few details of Jiva etc. Tattvas were known; afterwards, on dawn of omniscience, all their details are known, but the basic nature of Jiva etc. Tattvas as was ascertained and believed in the sate of no-omniscience, exactly the same is found in the sate of omniscience.  And, although the omniscient (Arhantas and Siddhas) know even other substances with ascertainment, nevertheless, those substances are not purposeful; therefore, in the quality of right belief, the belief of seven tattvas only is accepted.  The fact that the omniscients (Arhantas and Siddhas) are not having any state of attachment, etc. passions and do not desire to have the mundane existence - all this is to be known to be due to the strength and power of right belief.

Question: Samyagdarshan (right belief) was stated to be the path of liberation; how is it stated to exist in Moksha?

Answer: Some cause is of such type also that it does not get destroyed even on accomplishment of the objective.  For example, many branches developed from one branch of some tree.  On such happening, that one (original) branch is not destroyed; similarly, on the basis of the quality of right belief some soul attained the state of Moksha along with many qualities.  On such happening, the quality of right belief some soul attained the state of the basis of the quality of right belief some soul attained the state of omniscience, right belief, in the form of belief in Tatvas only, is found. Therefore, there is no Avyapti fault.

Question: In scripture it is stated that even a misbeliever can have belief in Tattvas. In Pravachanasara the belief of Tattvarthas devoid of self-knowledge is stated to be worthless; therefore, in stating Tattvartha-Shraddhana to be the differentia of right belief, there lies Auyapti fault?

Answer: The belief of Tattvas stated to be found in a misbeliever is stated from Name Nikshepa point of view which does not have the effect of Tattva-Shraddhana and conventionally that which is stated to belief of Tattvas is found in the misbeliever. Or, it is found from Agama Dravya Nikshepa point of view, i.e., he studies Shastras dealing with the belief of the Tattvarthas but he does not engross his Upayoga in ascertaining their characteristics. And here Tattvartha-Shraddhana is stated to be the differentia of right belief from Bhava Nikshepa point of view. Such effective true belief in Tattvarthas is never found in a misbeliever. And where the Tattvartha-Shraddhana devoid of self-knowledge is stated, there too, one should know it in this very sense only. How would he not possess the knowledge of the self-soul, if he has acquired true belief of Jiva- Ajiva etc.? It is invariably found. In this way, none of the misbelievers possesses the true belief of Tattvarthas form any point of view. Therefore, in this differentia, there is no fault of Ativyapti.

Further, the aforesaid differentia of belief in Tattvarthas is also not impossible because it is no the differentia of false belief which is the rival of right belief; its differntia is contrary to this.

In this way Tattvartha Shraddhana (belief in Tattvarthas or Tattvas) is such true differntia of true belief which is devoid of Avyapti, Ativyapti and Asambhava faults and which is found in all true believers and is not at all found in any misbelievers.

Synthesis Between Different Definitions of Right Belief

Again, a question arises that the rule stated by you that the belief of seven Tattvas is right belief is not maintainable. Because at some places the belief of self (soul) distinct from other non-self objects only is stated to be the right belief. In Samayasara in the verse (Ekatve Niyatasya etc.)* it is stated that perceiving this soul as distinct form other non-self substances is only assuredly the right belief. 

*(Aikatvai niyatasyshudhnyato vyapturyadasyatmnpoorn.gyanghansya darshanmih dravyantraibhya prithak. Smyagdrshanmaitdaiv niyamadatma cha tavanyam tnmuktata navtatvsntatimimamatmaymaikostu na ------16)

Therefore, ignoring the thought of nine Tattvas one should engross one's upayoga in the soul only.

Further, at some places ascertainment of the soul only is stated to be the right belief. In Purushartha Siddhyupays there is a verse stating Darshanmatma-Vinishchiti(1), its meaning is this only. 

(1) Darshanmatmvinishichatiratmparigyanmishyatai bodh. Sthitiratmani charitan kutaytaibhyo bhavti bandh    ------216

Therefore, on evolution of belief of Jiva-Ajiva only or of Jiva only right belief is evolved. How could the aforesaid statements be possible, if there had been the rule of belief of seven Tattvas.

Answer: The belief of self (soul), distinct from non-self substances, is evolved along with or without the belief of Asrava etc.? If it is evolved without their belief, then without the belief of Asrava etc.? If it is evolved without their belief, then without the belief of Moksha, for what purpose such effort is made? Without the belief of Samvara & Nirjara what for he continues making effort for engrossing his upayoga in the nature of the soul by renouncing attachment, etc.? Without belief of Asrava & Bandha, what for does he forsake his earlier state? Hence, without belief of Asrava etc., the belief of self-nonself is not possible. And if it is found along with the belief of Asrava etc., then automatically the rule of the belief of seven Tattvas is established. Where ascertainment of soul alone is emphasized, it is to be noted that without the belief of non-self as non- self, the belief of soul cannot be evolved; therefore, the belief of Jiva (soul) is evolved only along with the belief, of Ajiva. And as stated earlier, he assuredly acquires the belief of Asrava etc., also. Therefore, here too the rule of belief of seven Tattvas only is established.

Moreover, without the belief of Asrava etc., the belief of self (soul) only is not true; because the soul substance is an embodiment of pure-impure dispositions. For example, without looking at he thread, the cloth cannot be seen (identified).  Similarly, without identifying the pure and impure dispositions is possible by the identification of Asrava etc. Moreover, without the belief of Asrava etc. the belief of self & nonself or the belief of self (soul) only is not efficacious also, because whether one believes or not, self is self only and nonself is nonself only. And if belief of Asrava etc. be there, then by renouncing Asrava & Bandha and by means of Samvara-Nirjara one can attain Moksha. And wherever the evolution of belief of self & nonself is admonished, it is for this purpose only. Hence, knowing of the self-nonself or knowing of self (soul) only is efficacious only along with the belief of Asrava etc.

Question: If it be so, then why in Shastras it is stated that the belief of self nonself or the belief of self (soul) only is right belief and it alone is stated to be efficacious. Also why is it stated that by ignoring the thought of none Tattvas one should concentrate on self-soul only?

Answer: One who has true belief of self-nonself or belief of self (soul) only, he assuredly possesses the belief of seven Tattvas. Further, one who has true belief of seven Tattvas he assuredly possesses the belief of self & nonself or belief of self (soul)- thus by knowing such sort of mutual interdependence (Abinabhavipana) true belief is stated to be the belief of self-nonself or the belief of self (soul) only.

Further, based on the above discussion, if someone by knowing the self-nonself or the self soul only in general form feels contended, then he is under delusion because it is stated that "nivisath hi samanya bvatskrvifumvth aalap paddhati shlok -9  which means that knowing an object in its general form without its detail (specifications) is like knowing an ass with horns. Therefore, it is desirable to have belief of self-nonself or of self (soul) only along with the purposeful details like Asrava etc. or he who persistently contemplates on self soul only through evolution of belief of seven Tattvarthas for the sake of giving up attachment, etc., accomplishes his objective. Therefore, chiefly discriminative knowledge (Bheda-Vijnana) and knowledge or realization of the self-soul is stated to be efficacious.

Further, without the belief of Tattvarthas knowing of all other things is not fruitful, because the purpose is of rooting out attachment, etc. passions. So without the belief of Asrava etc. this purpose is not realized; then simply by acquiring knowledge, he fosters pride-passion, does not give up attachment, etc., how would his objective be fulfilled? Further, ignoring the thought of nine Tattvas is admonished. So earlier right belief was obtained by meditating on nine Tattvas, afterwards he developed the desire of giving up the thought of nine Tattvas for the sake of evolution of nirviklpa dasha- unwavering state of Upayoga. Further, for him who did not meditate earlier on nine Tattvas there lies no purpose of giving up the thought of Nine Tattvas. He should first give up innumerable worldly thoughts which arise in him.

Thus, in the belief of the self-nonself or in the belief of self-soul, the coexistence of the belief of seven Tattvas is found. Therefore, Tattvartha Shraddhana (belief of Tattvarthas) is the differentia of right belief (Samyaktva or Samyagdarshan).

Question: At some places in Shastras the belief of Arhanta Deva (true omniscient God), Nirgrantha Guru (true possessionless naked monk-preceptor) and Dharma (religion devoid of violence) is stated to be the right belief (Samyakva). How is it so?

Answer: By acquiring belief of Arhanta Deva, the belief of false deities, etc. is eradicated, due to which newly adopted false belief (Graheeta-Mithyatva) comes to an end; from that point of view, this has been stated to be the right belief. This is not the differentia of right belief in true sense, because such belief is found even in misbelievers following conventional practices like Dravyalingi Muni (Jain monk without right belief).

Or for example, partial conduct or complete conduct may or may not be found on accepting partial vows (Anuvratas) or complete vows, (Mahavratas) but without accepting partial vows or complete conduct is never evolved.  Therefore, knowing these vows (Vratas). to be coexisting causes and treating these causes conventionally to be the act itself, these vows, etc. are these causes conventionally to be the act itself.  Similarly on, acquiring belief in Arhant Deva etc., the right belief may of may not be evolved but without having belief in Arhanta Deva etc., the right belief of Tattvartha Shraddhana form is never evolved.  Therefore, knowing the belief in Arhanta Deva etc. to be the coexisting cause and treating this cause conventionally to be the act itself, this belief is stated to be the right belief.  Due to this reason only, this is called Vyavahara Samyaktva (conventional right belief).

Or one who has belief in Tattvarthas invariably possesses belief in true nature of Arhantas etc.  Without having belief in Tattvarthas one may have belief in Arhanta Deva etc. from partisan angle but belief with true identification of the true nature of Arhanta etc. is not evolved.  And one who has belief in true nature of Arhantas etc. invariably has right belief of Tattvas because by identifying the true nature of Arhantas etc., the identification of Jiva-Ajiva-Asrava etc. Tattvas is attained.

Thus knowing them to be mutually coexisting, at some places, belief in Arhanta Deva etc. is stated to be the right belief.

Question:  The convention of belief in true or false deities is not found in the hellish state of existence, etc. but right belief (Samyaktva) is found there; therefore, such a rule is not possible that on evolution of right belief, the belief in Arhanta Deva etc. is invariably found?

Answer:  In the belief of seven Tattvas the belief of Arhanta Deva (true omniscient God) is inherently included because in belief of Tattvas, Moksha Tattvas is believed to be supreme, that Moksha Tattva is the differentia of Arhanta & Siddha; one who believes the differentia to be supreme, invariably believes the object possessing that differentia to be supreme.  Therefore, those Arhantas & Siddhas are also believed to be supreme and others are not believed to be such.  This itself amounts to be the belief of true omniscient God.  Further, the causes of Moksha are Samvar- Nirjara; therefore, he (the true believer) believes these also to be supreme and the possessors  of Samvar-Nirjara are chiefly the monks; therefore, he believes the monks to be supreme and not the others.  This itself amounts to be the belief in Guru (true preceptor).  Further, the name of the disposition, devoid of attachment, etc. passions, is Ahinsa (non-violence), he believes the same disposition to be worth evolving and not any other disposition.  This itself amounts to be belief in Dharma (true religion).  In this way, the belief in Arhanta Deva etc. is inherently included in the belief of seven Tattvas.  Or through the instrumentality by which he acquires belief in Tattvarthas, by the same instrumentality he acquires belief in Tattvarthas, by the same instrumentality he acquires belief in Arhanta Deva etc. also.  Therefore, in evolution of right belief, there lies the rule of having belief in true Deva etc.

Question:  Many Jivas have belief in Arhanta Deva etc., know their attributes, yet right belief of the form of Tattvartha Shraddhana is not evolved in them, therefore, one who possesses true believe in Arhanta Deva etc. invariably possesses Tattva Shraddhana (belief in Tattvas)- such a rule is not possible?

Answer:  Without belief in Tattvas he knows forty-six qualities of Arhanta Deva; these qualities which he knows are concerned with the embodied state of Arhanta.  But he does not identify clearly the respective qualities of Jiva (soul) and Pudgala (matter) as are found differently in them. Therefore, true belief also is not attained by him.  Because without identifying the different categories of Jiva-Ajiva he does not know Arhanta Deva's spiritual qualities and the bodily modifications of the embodied state of Arhanta.  If he knows them correctly, why would he then not know his self (soul) different form other non-soul substances?  Therefore, it is stated in Pravachansara thus:

Jo jan.di arhantan, davvtagun.tpajjyataihin
So jan.adi appan.an  moho khalu jadi tsyalyan      ----480

Meaning: He who knows the Arhanta with respect to substantiality, quality and modifications, knows himself and his delusion, in fact, gets destroyed.

Therefore, one who does not have belief of Jive etc. Tattvas does not have true belief of Arhanta Deva etc. also. And without belief of Moksha etc. Tattvas he does not know correctly the supremacy of Arhanta Deva etc. He knows the supremacy of Arhanta by worldly glories etc., of Guru (preceptor by penance etc. and of Dharma (religion) by non- violence, i.e., by quality of protecting other Jivas; so all these specialties are dependent on other things. And only on having belief of Tattvas etc., the nature of Arhanta Deva etc. is known by their spiritual qualities. Therefore, one who has true belief of Arhanta Deva etc., invariably possesses true belief of Tattvas. This is the rule.

In this way, the differentia of right belief is determined.

Question: The differentia of right belief is stated to be the belief of Tattvarthas or belief of self-nonself, or belief of self-soul or belief of Deva-guru-dharma (true omniscient god, true preceptor and true Ahinsa religion). And the mutual oneness of all these differntia, as shown by you, is also understood, but what is the purpose of stating these different differentias?

Answer: Out of these four differentias, if one differntia is accepted form true angle, it covers all the four differentias , nevertheless, keeping in view different chief purposes, different differentias have been stated differently.

Where the belief of Tattvarthas is stated to be the differentia, there the purpose is that by identifying these Tattvas one acquire belief of the real nature of the substances and of his own benefit and harm and then he follows the path of liberation.

And where the belief of self-nonself is stated to be the differentia, there such belief is stated to be the chief differentia, by which the purpose of Tattvartha Shraddhana is accomplished. The purpose of belief of Jiva-Ajiva is to acquire distinct belief of self-nonself. And the purpose of belief of Asrava etc. is to renounce attachment, etc. passions; therefore, on evolution of distinct belief of self- nonself, the belief of non-attachment, etc. in other substances is generated. In this way knowing that the purpose of Tattvartha Shraddhana is accomplished by acquiring distinct belief of self & nonself, this differentia (belief in seven Tattvas) is stated.

And where belief of the self-soul is stated to be the differentia, there the only purpose of distinct belief of self-nonself is this much that one should know the self-soul to be himself. On knowing the self soul to be himself, even the thought of other substances is not useful. By knowing the primeness of such fundamental purpose, the differentia of belief of self-soul has been emphasized.

And where belief of Deva-Guru-Dharma (true god, preceptor & religion) is stated to be the differentia, there the external means are emphasized; because belief of Arhanta Deva etc. is the cause of true belief in Tattvarthas and belief of false deities, etc. is the cause of belief of imaginary Tattvas. so, from the viewpoint of primeness of external cause, by effectuating abandonment of belief in false deities of effectuating belief in true Deva etc., the differentia of the belief in true Deva -Guru-Dharma is stated to be chief differentia.

In this way, from the viewpoint of primeness of different purposes, different differentias are stated.

Question: Out of these four differentias, which one differentia should this Jiva adopt?

Answer: On subsidence, etc. of Mithyatva karma (faith- deluding karma) the destruction of perverse determination or belief takes place. There, all the four differentias are simultaneously found. And from the viewpoint of thinking process, he chiefly meditates on Tattvarthas or develops discriminative knowledge between self and nonself or concentrates on the nature of true Deva etc. Thus in his knowledge different kinds of thoughts arise but in belief everywhere mutual correlation is found. When he mediates on Tattvas, it is for the purpose of discriminative knowledge (Bheda-Vijnana). When he engages his upayoga in discriminative knowledge, he does so with the purpose of meditation on Tattvas. Similarly, at other places also, mutual correlation exists. Therefore, in the belief of a true believer, acceptance of all the four differentias is found.

Further, one who has rise of Mithyatva (faith-deluding karma) possesses perverse belief of Tattvas. These differentias are found in him apparently only; these are not true. He believes Jiva etc. Tattvas as described in Jina's faith, does not believe in others, learns their names, kinds, etc. Such sort of Tattva Shraddhana is found in him; but belief of their true nature is not found in him. further, he may talk about the difference between self & nonself objects, may meditate on this, but as he possesses I-ness feeling in the embodied form and nonself feeling in cloths, etc. like that he does not possess I-ness feeling in the self-soul according to Jina's preachings but he does not have belief of self to be the self with real ascertainment. Further, excepting Arhanta Deva etc., he does not believe in other false deities, etc. but he does not believe them by correctly identifying their nature (distinctive characteristics) thus these apparent differentias are found in a misbeleiver. Out of these differentia, some is found and some is not found. There, these may be found in different forms also.

Further, amongst these apparent differentias, the point to be noted is that first of all one should acquire the belief of true Deva etc., then he should contemplate on Tattvas, then he should ponder over the self-nonself and ultimately should meditate on self-soul only-if he follows these means sequentially, then successively by attaining the true path of liberation, some Jive may attain the Siddhahood (liberated state of soul) also. And by violating this sequence, he whose belief about Deva etc. s not authentic or correct, owing to the sharpness of intellect, remains engaged in contemplation of Tattvas; and by this believes himself to be an enlightened self, or does not engross his upayoga in contemplation of Tattvas also but considers himself possessor of the discriminative knowledge of self & nonself; or even does not know correctly the self-nonself objects but believes that he has realized the self; so all these facets are mere show of cleverness and are the means of fostering pride passion, etc. These are in no way useful to the self. Therefore, the Jiva who desires self realization, should follow the steps stated here under in the given sequence till he does not attain true right belief.

The sequential steps are these:- First of all either by the commandment, etc. or by some examination, one should give up belief in false deities, etc. and should evolve belief in Arhanta Deva etc. because by such belief the newly acquired false belief (Graheeta Mithyatva) is quitted and the instrumentality of the false deities etc., which act as impediments in the liberation path, is removed and the instrumentality of Arhanta Deva etc., who are the agreeable case in the liberation path, is obtained. Therefore, first of all one should acquire faith in true Deva etc. then he should ponder over Jiva etc. Tattvas as described in Jina's faith, should learn their names, differentias, etc. because by such practice, belief in Tattvas is acquired. Afterwards, he should continue meditation in such a way which might generate distinction between self and nonself because by such practice discriminative knowledge is evolved. Thereafter, for the sake of believing I-ness in self-soul, he should continue mediation on the nature of self-soul because by such practice, self-realization is attained.

In this way, by following these steps sequentially, he should sometimes engage his upayoga in the thoughts of true Deva etc., sometimes in Tattvas, sometimes in self-nonself and sometimes in self soul only. By such practice Darshan Moha (faith deluding karma) may gradually become feeble, then he may attain true right belief (Samyagdarshan). But there is no such rule. If some Jiva meets with some strong perverse cause in the course of this process, then he may not attain right belief; but chiefly many Jivas do accomplish their objective by following this process. Therefore, one should adopt these in the aforesaid manner. For example, one who desires to have a son, should get married. Afterwards, most of the persons are assuredly blessed by the birth of a son; but some may not get a son. His duty is to make effort. Similarly, one who is desirous of evolving right faith, should adopt willfully these causes. Afterwards, most of the Jivas do attain right faith, someone may not attain also. But one should willfully adopt these means as persons capacity.

Thus, the differentia of right belief is determined.

Question: The differentias of right faith have been stated in many ways; why have you given prominence to the differentia of Tattvartha Shraddhana amongst them?

Answer: In other differentials, the Jivas having feeble knowledge, do not grasp the purpose explicitly and instead they get confused, whereas in this Tattvartha Shraddhana differentia, the purpose is grasped explicitly, no confusion arises. Therefore, prominence is given to this differentia. The same is being explained here:-

In the differentia of belief in true Deva-Guru-Dharma the Jivas having feeble knowledge, understand that right belief consists only in believing in Arhanta Deva etc. and not believing others. Therein, the nature of Jiva-Ajiva and of the cause and effect relationship about bondage and liberation is not grasped correctly; then the purpose of liberation path is not accomplished and without evolution of belief in Jiva etc. Tattvas one becomes satisfied by such belief only and thinks himself to be true believer. He develops jealousy towards false deities, etc. but does not make effort for giving up other feelings of attachment, etc.- such state of confusion arises.

Further, in the differentia of belief of self-nonself, the persons, having feeble knowledge, understand that only knowledge of self and nonself is efficacious, this alone produces right belief. Therein, the nature of Asrava etc. Tattvas is not correctly grasped, then the purpose of liberation path is not fulfilled. Or without belief of Asrava etc., he becomes satisfied by this much knowledge only and believes himself to be true believer; by remaining unrestrained, he does not make effort for giving up attachment, etc. Such fallacy is produced.

And in the differentia of belief in self-soul only, he person having feeble knowledge, thinks that the thought of self-soul only is efficacious. This alone produces right belief. Therein the detailed nature of Jiva-Ajiva etc. and nature of Asrava etc. is not correctly grasped, then the purpose of attaining liberation path is not fulfilled or he may believe himself to have acquired right belief by such thought only without acquiring the belief of the details of Jiva etc. and the nature of Asrava etc. By remaining unrestrained, he does not make effort for giving up attachment, etc. -such fallacy is caused to this person also.

Knowing this, these differentias are not given prominence.

And in the differentia of belief in Tattvarthas the belief of Jiva-Ajiva etc. is evolved. Therein, the true nature of all Tattvas is clearly grasped, then the purpose of liberation path is fulfilled. Further, on evolution of such belief one becomes true believer but he does not remain satisfied here. Because of belief of true nature of Asrava etc., he continues making effort for liberation by giving up attachment, etc. He does not fall in the trap of fallacy. Therefore, the differentia of belief in Tattvarthas is given prominence.

Further, in the differentia of Tattvartha-Shraddhana, belief of true deva etc., belief of self-nonself and belief of self soul are included. This grasped by Jivas having feeble knowledge also. But in other differentias, the inclusion of differentia of Tattvartha-shraddhana is grasped by intelligent persons only. Person, having feeble knowledge, are not able to grasp this. Therefore, the differentia of Tattvartha is given prominence.

Or all these differentias may be found a misbeleiver in an apparent form only; therein, the thought of Tattvarthas quickly becomes the cause of elimination of perverse determination; whereas the other differentias may not become quick cause and even may become the cause of perverse determination.

Therefore by ascertaining the prominence from all angles, "the belief of Jiva etc. Tattvarthas, devoid of perverse determination, is the only differentia of right faith (Samyaktava)"- such conclusion is arrived at. So ends the discussion of determination of differentia of right belief.

That soul, who possesses this differentia, is alone to be known as true believer.

Kinds of Samyaktva & Their Characteristics

Now the kinds of Samyaktva (right faith) are being discussed :- 
First of all, the difference between Nischaya (real) and Vyavahara (conventional) is being considered. That disposition of the belief attribute of the soul, which is devoid of perverse determination, is real right belief (Nischaya Samyaktva), because this is the trait of true form of right faith; the name of true form of state only is Nishchaya. And the belief which is the instrumental cause of belief devoid of perverse determination, is conventional right faith (Vyavahara Samyaktva); because calling the cause to be the effect or act s attribution (upachara). So, the upachara (attribution) only is called Vyavahara.

The true believer has true belief in Deva-Guru-Dharma, because of which only, his belief is devoid of perverse determination.  Here the belief, devoid of perverse determination, is Nischaya Samyaktva and belief of Deva-Guru- Dharma is Vyavahara Samyaktva.

In this way, both the types of Samyaktva are found at one and the same time only.

Further, the misbeliever possesses merely apparent belief of Deva-Guru-Dharma etc. and such belief is not devoid of perverse determination; therefore, the Nischaya Samyaktva is not found here and the Vyavahara Samyaktva too is merely of apparent form; because his belief of Deva-Guru-Dharma etc. has not become the direct cause of ending perverse determination.  Without production of the desired result, even upachara (attribution) is not possible.  Therefore, from the viewpoint of direct cause, even the Vyavahara Samyaktva is not possible in him.

Or as a rule, the belief of Deva-Guru-Dharma etc. is found in him which acts to be the traditional cause of belief, devoid of perverse determination.  Although, as a rule, it is not a cause, nevertheless, it acts to be the prime cause.  And attribution (upachara) of effect of act is possible in the cause, therefore, from the viewpoint of chief traditional cause, Vyavahara Samyaktva is stated to be found even in a misbeliever.

Question:  In many Shastras the belief of Deva-Guru-Dharma etc. and the belief of Tattvas is described as Vyavahara Samyaktva and the belief of the self-nonself of belief of self-soul only is stated to be Nischaya Samyaktva; how is it so?

Answer:  In belief of Deva-Guru-Dharma the prominence is of putting into practice.  In practice, one who adores and believes Arhanta Deva only to be true Deva and not other deities, etc. is stated to the believer of Deva etc.  And in the belief of Tattvarthas thought is prominent.  One who contemplates on Jiva etc. Tattvas in Upayoga is called believer of Tattvas.  In this way, prominence is found.  So, both of these do become the cause of right faith in the case of some Jiva; but their existence is possible even in a misbeliever; therefore, these are described to be Vyavahara Samyaktva.

And in the belief of self-nonself or in the belief of self- soul only the prominence is of absence of perverse determination.  One who has discriminative knowledge of self- nonself or realizes self-soul, is chiefly devoid of perverse determination.  Therefore, the possessor of discriminative knowledge or realizer of self-soul; is stated to be true believer (Samyagdrishti).  Thus chiefly the belief of self- non-self or belief of self-soul is found in a true believer only.  Therefore, these are stated to be Nischaya Samyaktva.

This description is from the prominence point of view. Minutely speaking, all these four differentias are apparently found in a misbeliever and truly found in a true believer. If these (four differentias) are found merely in an apparent form, then, without being the rule, these are attributed to be traditional cause and if these are found in their true form, then they are, as a rule, direct causes.  Therefore, these are termed as of Vyavahara (conventional) forms.  It should be known that the belief, devoid of perverse determination, which is evolved due to their instrumentality, is Nishchaya Samyaktva (real right faith).

Question:  In many Shastras it is stated that the soul itself is the real right belief (Nishchaya Samyaktva) and rest all is Vyavahara (convention); how is it so?

Answer: The belief evolved, devoid of perverse determination, is the nature of the soul itself; there, from the indivisibility point of view, there is no difference between soul and right belief.  Therefore, from real point of view, the soul itself is stated to be the right belief.  Rest all are mere instrumental cause of right belief or by imagining distinction, the soul and right faith are stated to be different.  In this way, rest all are stated to be Vyavahara.

Thus, Nishchaya Samyaktva and Vyavahara Samyaktva are the two kinds of Samyaktva.

Further, from the viewpoint of other instrumental causes, etc. the right faith (Samyagdarshan) is stated to be of ten kinds like Ajnaa Samyaktva etc.  Same is stated in Atmaanushasana:

Agyamarg samudbhavmupdaishantu sootrbeech sankshaipat
Vistararthabhyan  bhavbhavparmavadigathaich      -----11

Meaning: (Ajna, Marga, Upadesha, Sutra, Bija, Sankshepa, Vistara, Artha, Avagaadha and Paramaavagaadha- these are the ten kinds of Samyaktva- (right belief).  Out of these ten kinds of right belief, the first eight are based in the immediate cause preceding the evolution of right belief and the last two are based on the excellence of coexisting knowledge).

The belief of Tattvas evolved by following Jina's commandment (omniscient's preachings) is called Ajnaa Samyaktva.  Here one should note that "I believe in Jina's commandment"- such belief only is not the right belief.  Belief in commandment is a mere cause.  Due to this only, the Samyaktva is stated to have evolved by Ajnaa (commandment).  Therefore, that right belief in Tattvas which is evolved by earlier obeying Jina's commandment is Ajnaa Samyaktva.  Similarly, the belief, which is evolved by viewing the possessionless path of liberation, is Marga Samyaktva(1)....

The right belief of Tattvas which is possessed by a Shruta- Kewali (preceptor who has knowledge of all scriptures) is called Avagaadha Samyaktva and the belief of Tattvas possessed by the omniscient Jina is called Paramaavagaadha Samyaktva.

Thus, these two kinds are stated from the viewpoint of coexisting right knowledge.

In all these ten kinds (of right belief) the differentia) of Samyaktva should be known to be belief in Tattvarthas.

Further, Samyaktva is described to be of three kinds:-

1. Aupashamika: (That which is caused by subsidence of Darshan Mohaniya prakriti)

2. Kshayopashamika: (Caused by destruction-cum-subsidence of Darshan Mohaniya)

3. Kshayika; (Caused by destruction of Darshan Mohaniya).

So, these three kinds are specified from the viewpoint of Darshan-Moha (faith-deluding karma) only.

Further, the Aupashamika Samyaktva is of two kinds:

1. Prathamopashama Samyaktva: (First type of subsidential right belief)

2. Dwiteeyopashama Samyaktva: (Second type of subsidential right belief).

There, the Samyaktva (right faith) which arises by effecting subsidence of Darshan Moha (faith-deluding karma) through karana (attainment of karana-labdhi) at the end of the state of first- misbeliever's Gunasthana is called Prathamopashama_Samyaktva (first type of subsidential right belief).

There, the Samyaktva (right faith) which arises by effecting subsidence of Darshan Moha (faith-deluding karma) through karana (attainment of karana-labdhi) at the end of the state of first- misbeliever’s Gunasthana is called Prathamopashama- Samyaktva (first type of subsidential right belief).

Here the point to be noted is that in the case of the eternal misbeliever (Anadi Mithyadrishti who never acquired right belief ever before) the subsidence of Mithyatva-prakriti only takes place; because in this state, the existence of Mishra Mohaniya and Samyaktva Mohaniya is not found.  When a Jiva acquires the Upashama Samyaktva (first type of subsidential right faith); if, in the period of that Samyaktva, he converts the atoms of Mithyatva into the form of Mishra- Mohaniya and Samyaktva-Mohaniya, then the existence of three types of Prakritis is caused.  Therefore, in the case of eternal misbeliever, the existence (Satta) of only one Mithyatva Prakriti is found; the subsidence of the same takes place.  Further, in the case of a non-eternal misbeliever (Saadi-Mithyadrishti) some have existence (Satta) of all the three Prakritis and some have the existence (Satta) of one Prakriti only.  During the process of evolution of Samyaktva, in whose case, the existence of three Prakritis was caused and such state persists, in his case, the existence of all the three Prakritis is found.  And where (in whose case) Mishra)_Mohaniya and Samyaktva Mohaniya have disappeared, i.e., their atoms are converted into Mithyatva form, in the case of such non-eternal misbeliever (Saadi-Mithyatva), the existence of only one Mithyatva Prakriti is found. Therefore, in the case of a Saadi Mithyadrishti either the subsidence of three Prakritis or of one Prakriti only takes place.

What is Upashama (subsidence)?  The same is being explained here:

By the Antarkarana Vidhana effected in the state of Anivrattikarana, the Nishekas (atoms of Darshan Mohaniya) which were capable of coming into rise (udaya) during the period of Samyaktva, were made ineffective in that period. The same atoms were turned into the Nishekas capable of coming into rise in future.  And by the Upashama Vidhana effected in the same period of Anivratti karana, the Nishekas, which were capable of coming into rise after that period, were caused to remain in such state that they might not come into rise in this period in the form of Udirana (premature operation).

Thus that state where the existence (Satta) of Darshan Mohaniya is found but its rise is not found, is termed as Upashama (subsidence).

This is the Prathamopashama Samyaktva evolved at the end of the state of Mithyatva (first Gunasthana).  This is found existing from the fourth, etc. up to seventh Gunasthana.

And Upashama Samyaktva, which is evolved from Kshayopashama Samyaktva in the state of readiness for Upashama-Shreni in seventh Gunasthana, is termed Dwiteeyopashma Samyaktva.  Here the subsidence of all the three Prakritis of Darshan Mohaniya is caused by Karana (attainment of Karana-labdhi), because in his case, the existence (Satta) of all the three Prakritis is found.  Here too their rise (udaya) is made ineffective in that period by Antar Karana Vidhana and Upashama.  This is called Upashama (subsidence).  So, this Dwiteeyo-pashama Samyaktva is found existing from the seventh etc. up to the eleventh Gunasthana.  It should be known that when one falls from the eleventh Gunasthana, this in some cases is found existing in sixth, fifth, and fourth Gunasthana also.

Thus Upashama Samyaktva is of two kinds.  So in the present state, this Samyaktva is as pure as Kshayika.  Since the existence (Satta) of its opponent karma is found, therefore, this Samyaktva remains persisting merely for an Antar-Muhurta period.  Later on, the rise (udaya) of Darshan-Mohaniya (right belief deluding karma) takes place.

Thus, the nature (differntia) of Upashama Samyaktva has been described.

Further, there out of the three Prakritis of Darshan-Mohaniya the rise of Samyaktva Mohaniya only is found and the rise of other two is not found, there the Kshayopashama Samyaktva is found.  This Samyaktva is evolved on completion of the period of Upashama-Samyaktva and in case of a non-eternal misbeliever (Saadi-Mithyadrishti) it is attained from the (at the end of) first Mithyatva Gunasthana or the third Mishra Gunasthana also.

What is Kshayopashama?  The same is being explained here:-

Out of the three Prakritis of Darshan Mohaniya, whatever is the fruition (potency) of Mithyatva-Prakriti, its infinitesimal part is of Mohaniya.  In these, the Samyaktva Mohaniya Prakriti is Desha Ghati (causing partial destruction); even on its rise, the right belief (Samyaktva) is not destroyed.  That (Prakriti) which causes some foulness but can not destroy totally, is called Desha Ghati.

And where the Nishekas (atoms) of Mithyatva and Mishra Mithyatva, capable of coming into rise in the present moment, are shedded out even without their coming into rise state, is to be known as Kshaya (destruction); and the same Nishekas capable of coming into rise in future moments, if found existing (in Satta) is termed as Upashama (subsidence) and the rise of Samyaktva Mohaniya is found- the existence of such a state is called the Kshayopashama (destruction cum subsidence of Darshan Mohaniya).  Therefore, the belief of Tattvarthas which has foulness, is Kshayopashama Samyaktva.

The nature of such minute state of foulness, which is found here, is known by the omniscient Jina only.  For the sake of illustration, the nature of foulness is explained through waveredness, impurity and lack of firmness.  There, although conventionally he has ascertainment of true Deva etc. but the existence of such type of waveredness that "this Arhanta Deva etc. is mine and that Arhanta Deva is of others", rise of doubt, etc., is impurity.  This Lord Shantinath bestows peace, etc. feeling is called lack of firmness.  Such examples are given merely conventionally; but there is no such rule.  Whatever, foulness is found assuredly in Kshayopashama Samyaktva is known by the omniscients only. One should know this much that some sort of foulness is found in his belief of Tattvarthas.  Therefore, this Samyaktva is of one kind only.  There is no subdivision in it.

The specialty is this that at the time of readiness for evolution of Kshayika Samyaktva, where during the period of one Antar Muhurta only he destroys the prakriti of Mithyatva, there remains the existence (Satta) of two Prakritis only; later on, he destroys Mishra Mohaniya also, there remains the existence (Satta) of one Samyaktva Mohaniya only.  Then, afterwards he does not perform the Kandakaghata(1) etc. operation of Samyaktva Mohaniya; there he gets the name of Krit-kritya Vedaka Samyagdrishti (the true believer whose objective is fulfilled).

Further, the name of this Kshayopashama Samyaktva itself is Vedaka Samyaktva.  Where it is described from the prominence of Mithyatva and Mishra-Mohaniya point of view, there it is termed Kshayopashama Samyaktva.  And where it is described from the prominence of Samyaktva-Mohaniya, there it is termed as Vedaka Samyaktva.  These two names are simply for the sake of description.  There is no difference in their nature. Further, this Kshayopashama-Samyaktva is found existing from the fourth up to the seventh Gunasthana.  Thus, the nature of Kshayopashama Samyaktva has been explained.

Further, the totally pure belief of Tattvarthas, which is evolved on the complete destruction of all the Nishekas of all the three Prakritis, is called Kshayika Samyaktva.  So, this is attained by Kshayopashama Samyaktva) in any of the four Gunasthanas, i.e., from fourth to seventh Gunasthana.

How is it attained?  The same is explained.  There, first by means of three Karanas he conversts the atoms of Mithyatva into Mishra Mohaniya and Samyaktva-Mohaniya form and then sheds them out.  By this way, he destroys the existence (Satta) of Mithyatva and then he converts the atoms of Mishra Mohaniya into Samyaktva Mohaniya and then sheds them out; in this way, Mishra-Mohaniya is destroyed.  And then Nishekas of Samyaktva Mohaniya shed out by coming into rise state; if its Sthiti duration, etc. be very long, then he reduces it by Sthitikandaka process, etc.  Where the sthiti (duration) remains only of one Antar Muhurta then he becomes a Krit- kritya Vedaka Samyagdrishti.  Further, successively by destroying these Nishekas, he becomes a Kshayika Samyag drishti (true believer possessing destruction- form of pure belief)

So, this (Kshayika Samyaktva) is pure owing to the destruction of the opponent karma (Darshan Mohaniya) and is passionless owing to destruction of intensest passion with false belief.  This is never destroyed.  From the moment it is evolved, it remains existing for ever even in the liberated state of Siddhas.  Thus the nature (differntia) of Kshayika Samyaktva (destruction form of right belief) has been explained.  Such are the three kinds of Samyaktvas.

Further, on evolution of Samyaktva the intensest type of passion (Anantaaanubandhi Kashaya) gets changed into two forms.  Either it takes the form of Aprashasta Upashama (inauspicious subsidence) or Visanyojana (conversation into Aprathyakhyan etc. forms of intenser passions).

There, the subsidence which is caused by subsidential process (Upashama-Vidhana) through Karanas (attainment of Karana- labdhi) is called Prashasta Upashama (auspicious subsidence). The absence of Udaya (rise) is called Aprashasta Upashama (inauspicious subsidence).  So, in the case of Anantaanubandhi (intensest passion), the Prashasta Upashama is not at all possible, but it is possible in the case of other Prakritis of Mohaniya.  Its Aprashasta Upashama only takes place.

Further, through the process of three Karanas, the transformation of the atoms of Anantanubandhi (intensest passion) in the form of other Prakritis of Charita Moha and thus destruction of its existence, is called Visanyojana (transformation).

In Prathamopashama Samyaktva, only the inauspicious subsidence of Anantanubandhi takes place.  And after Visanyojana of Anantaanubandhi only the Dwiteeyopashama Samyaktva (second type of subsidential right belief) is attained.  Some Acharya state this to be a rule and some others do no state it to be a rule.  And in the state of Kshayopashama Samyaktva, in the case of some Jivas, Aprashasta Upashama takes place and in the case if some other Jivas Visanyojana (transformation) is caused.  but Kshayika Samyaktva is evolved only after Visanyojana of Anantaanubandhi.

Here the specific point to be noted is that in the cases of Upashama and Kshayopasham types of true believers, the destruction of existence of Anantanubhandhi was caused through Visanyojana (transformation).  If he again falls in Mithyatva state, then the bondage of Anantaanubandhi is caused.  Then the recurrence of its existence takes place. And the Kshayika Samyagdrishti does not fall in Mithyatva state; therefore, the recurrence of the existence of Anataanubandhi is never found in his case.

Question:  Anantaanubandhi is the Prakriti of Charitra Moha (conduct-deluding karma), so, it destroys the Charitra (conduct).  How is the destruction of Samyaktva (right belief) possible by this Prakriti?

Answer:  In the state of rise of Anantaanubandhi, anger, etc. dispositions are produced, (but) disbelief in Tattvas is not caused.  Therefore, Anantaanubandhi destroys the conduct only, does not destroy Samyaktva (right belief).  So, in reality, it is like this only but the types of anger, etc. passion which is caused due to the rise of Anantaanubandhi, of the same form is not caused on evolution of Samyaktva (right belief)- such instrumental cause and effect relationship is found.  For instance, the destroyer of Trasa state (mobile name karma) is the Sthavara Prakriti (immobile name karma) only; but on attainment of Trasa state even the rise of the Ekendriyajati-Prakriti (one-sensed type of name karma) is not found.  Therefore, conventionally even if the one-sensed type of Prakriti is stated to be the destroyer of Trasa state, then there lies no fault.  Similarly, the destroyer of Samyaktva is the Darshan Moha (faith-deluding karma) but on evolution of Samyaktva even the rise of Anantaanubandhi is not found; therefore, conventionally even if Anantaanubandhi is stated to be the destroyer of Samyaktva, then there lies no fault.

Question:  Anantaanubandhi also destroys conduct (Charitra) only, then on its disappearance evolution of some conduct should be stated. Why is incontinence stated to be existing in Asanyat Gunasthana (state of vowless right belief)?

Answer: The Anataanubandhi etc. kinds are not from the intense or feeble passions point of view, because whether indulgence is found in intense passion or feeble passion, the rise of Anataanubandhi, etc., all the four types of passions, is found simultaneously. There are the highest Sparddhakas of all the four types of passions are stated to be uniform.

Here the specific point is that, that type of intense rise of Apratyakhyana, etc., which is found in the absence of Anantaanubandhi, the same type is not found on its disappearance. Likewise, that type of intense rise of Pratyakhyana and Sanjwalana type of passion which is found on its disappearance. And the intense rise of Sanjwalana which is found in the presence of Pratyakhyana, the same degree of intense rise is not found when t (Sanjwalana) alone is found existing.  Therefore, on disappearance of Anantaanubandhi, although passions become somewhat feeble, yet that degree of feebleness is not evolved owing to which the corresponding state of soul may be given the name of Charitra (conduct). Because the degrees of intensity & feebleness in passions are of innumerable types. In them, the posterior states of passions are less intense as compared to the anterior states, but conventionally all these states of passions are categorized in three limits. Most of the earlier states are stated to be of incontinent form. Many of the states found thereafter are stated to be of partial continence (Desha Sanyama) form and the states found thereafter are stated to be of Sakal Sanyama-complete continence form. In all the aforesaid states of passions, those which are found from the first Gunasthana up to the fourth Gunasthana, all are of incontinence (Asanyama) form only. Therefore, in spite of feeble states of passions, the corresponding states of the soul cannot be named as states of Charitra (conduct or continence).

Although from realistic point of view, the reduction in passion amounts to part evolution of conduct (Charitra), nevertheless, from conventional point of view, where such reduction of passions is found whereby one accepts Shravaka Sharma (partial c & vows found in the householder's state) or Muni Dharma (complete continence & vows found in the monk's state)-such state only is regarded as Charitra (conduct). Such degrees of reduction in passions is not found in an incontinent person. Therefore, here (from first to fourth Gunasthana) incontinence exists. In spite of the states of intensity and feebleness in passions, as form the Pramatta Gunasthana onwards everywhere the state of the soul is called the state of soul is called the state of Asanyama (incontinence only. It is to be noted that in all these states, the degree of incontinence is not uniform.

Question: Anantaanubandhi does not destroy Samyaktva (right belief), then on its rise, how one attains the state of Sasadana Gunasthana after falling form the state of Samyaktva (right belief)?

Answer:  The Anataanubandhi etc. kinds are not from the intense or feeble passions point of view, because whether indulgence is found in intense passion or feeble passion, the rise of Anantaanubandhi, etc., all the four types of passions, is found simultaneously.  There the highest Sparddhakas of all the four types of passions are stated to be uniform.

Here the specific point is that, that type of intense rise of Apratyakhyana, etc., which is found in the absence of Anantaanubandhi, the same type is not found on its disappearance.  Likewise, that type of intense rise of Pratyakhyana and Sanjwalana type of passion which is found in the presence of Pratyakhyana, the same degree of intense rise is not found when if (Sanjwalana) alone is found existing.  Therefore, on disappearance of Anantaanubandhi, although passions became somewhat feeble, yet that degree of feebleness is not evolved owing to which the corresponding state of soul may be given the name of Charitra (conduct).  Because the degrees of intensity & feebleness in passions are of innumerable types.  In them, the posterior states of passions are less intense as compared to the anterior states, but conventionally all these states of passions are categorized in three limits.  Most of the earlier states are stated to be of incontinent form.  Many of the states found thereafter are stated to be of partial continence (Desha Sanyama) from and the states found thereafter are stated to be of Sakal Sanyama- complete continence form.  In all the aforesaid states of passions, those which are found from the first Gunasthana up to the fourth Gunasthana, all are of incontinence (Asanyama) form only.  Therefore, in spite of feeble states of passions, the corresponding states of the soul cannot be named as states of Charitra (conduct or continence).

Although from realistic point of view, the reduction in passion amounts to part evolution of conduct (Charitra) nevertheless, from conventional point of view, where such reduction of passions is found whereby one accepts Shravaka Dharma (partial continence & vows found in householder’s state) or Muni Dharma (complete continence & vows found in true monk’s state)-such state only is regarded as Charitra (conduct).  Such degrees of reduction in passions is not found in an incontinent person.  Therefore, here (from first to fourth Gunasthana) incontinence exists.  In spite of the states of intensity and feebleness in passions, as from the Pramatta Gunasthana onwards everywhere the state of the soul is called the state of Sakal Sanyama (complete continence), similarly, from the Mithyatva (first etc.) up to Asanyama (fourth) Gunasthanas everywhere the state of solid is called the state of Asanyama (incontinence) only.  It is to be noted that in all these states, the degree of incontinence is not uniform.

Question:  Anantaanubandhi does to destroy Samyaktva (right belief), then on its rise, how one attains the state of /Sasadana Gunasthana after falling from the state of Samyaktva (right belief)?

Answer: For example, a person is suffering from such intense disease that it may cause end of human life. And after end of human life, if gets birth in celestial life, then this latter state of existence is not evolved during the diseased state. Here the rise of age karma of human life is continuing. Similarly, in the case of a true believer the rise of Anantaanubandhi took place which became the cause of end of right belief, (Samyaktva); therefore, such rise (of Anantaanubandhi) is stated to be the opponent (Sasadana) of Samyaktva. And on destruction of right belief, the perverse belief (Mithyatva) is evolve; this did not happen in Sasadana Gunasthana. Therefore, it should be noted that here (in Sasadana) the duration of period is of Upashama Samyaktva (subsidential type of true belief) only.

Such happens the state of Anantaanubandhi anger, etc., four passions, on evolution of right belief. Therefore, the attainment of Samyaktva (right-belief) is also stated to have been evolved on subsidence, etc. of seven Prakritis.

Question: How is Samyaktva Margana classified in six categories?

Answer: The Samyaktva is of three types only. And the absence of right belief is Mithyatva (perverse belief). And the mixed disposition of the both (Samyaktva & Mithyatva) is the Mishra (state of mixed disposition). The disposition which is destroyer of Samyaktva s Sasadana (state of downfall). Thus on pondering over the Jiva from the viewpoint of Samyaktva- Margana (soul-quest by right-belief) the six kinds (of Samyaktva Margana are stated.

Here someone may say that one who has come in Mithyatva state after falling from Samyaktva should be called to be in the state of Mithyatva-Samyaktva. But this is wrong, because its existence is found in an Abhavya (incapable soul) also. Moreover, the use of the word Mithyatva Samyaktva itself is incorrect. As in Sanyama Margana (soul quest by continence) the Asamyama (state of incontinence) is also included; in Bhavya Margana (capable soul quest) the Abhavya (incapable souls) is enumerated. Similarly, in Samyaktva-Margana the Mithyatva is enumerated. But one should not understand Mithyatva to be a kind of Samyaktva. On deliberation from Samyaktva point of view, many Jivas may be found without right belief (Samyaktva), there Mithyatva is found; for explaining this state, Mithyatva is enumerated in Samyaktva Margana.  Similarly, the states of Sasadana (downfall and Mishra (mixed) are also not the kinds of Samyaktva. It should be known that Samyaktva is only of three kinds.

Here it is stated that by subsidence, etc. of karmas the subsidential, etc. types of Samyaktva are evolved, but subsidence, etc. of the karmas are not caused by Jiva. He should make effort for ascertaining the Tattvas; owing to its instrumentality, the subsidence, etc. of karmas take place on their own; then he attains belief in Tattvas.

Thus one should know the kinds and nature of Samyaktva

Eight Angas (virtues) of Right Belief

Further Samyagdarshan (right belief) is described to be having the following eight Angas (virtues).

1. Nihshankitatva:   (Doubtlessness in Tattvas)
2. Nihshankitatva:   (Desirelessness for worldly pleasures).
3. Nihshankitatva:   (Non-repugnance at the afflicted ones)
4. Amudhadrishtitva: (Non-stupidity in Deva-Guru-Dharma)
5. Upabrinhana:      (Developing spiritual qualities)
6. Sthitikarana:     (Stabilization in religion)
7. Prabhavana:       (Glorification of religion)
8. Vatsalya:         (Fraternity towards coreligionists)

There, the absence of fear, or absence of doubt, in Tattvas is Nihshankitatva (doubtlessness). And absence of attachment in and craving for nonself objects, etc. is Nihkankshitatva (desirelessness). And the absence of malice-form of disgust in other nonself objects is Nirvichikitsatva (non- repugnance). And the absence of delusion in the form of false ascertainment about Tattvas and Deva etc. is Amudhadrishtitva (non-stupidity); acquiring excellence n spiritual qualities and observance of religious practices is called Upabrinhana. This Anga (virtue) is also termed as Upagoohana which means veiling of shortcomings & demerits of coreligionist. And reinstalling the self as well as other coreligionists in one’s own intrinsic nature and of Jina's religion is the Sthitikarana Anga. Spreading and promoting the glory of one's own nature as well as of in a religion is Prabhavana-Anga.  And cultivation of deep affection in one's own nature as well as in Jina's religion and coreligionists is Vatsalya Anga. Thus, one should know these eight Angas.

As the hands, legs, etc. are the limbs of human body, similarly, these are the Angas (limbs) of Samyagdarshan (right belief).

Question: Even, many true believers are found having fear, desire, disgust, etc. passions and even many misbelievers are not found having these passions; therefore, how do you say the Nihsankita etc. Angas to be the organs of Samyaktva?

Answer: For example- hands, legs, etc. are stated to be the limbs of human body; there may be some such person who may not be having any one of the limbs like leg, etc. Although he is said to be possessing human body, yet without those missing limbs he does not look handsome and is not able to function efficiently in all respects. Similarly, the Nihshankita etc. are stated to be the Angas (limbs or virtues) of Samyaktva (right belief); there may be some true believer who may not be having any of these Nihshankitatva etc. Angas. There he is said to be having Samyaktva but without those missing Angas (virtues) such right belief is neither pure nor efficacious in all respects. Further for example, a monkey also possesses hands, legs etc. limbs, but these limbs are not similar to those possessed by a person. Similarly, the misbelievers are also found having conventional form of Nihshankita, etc. Angas; but are not of the same form as are found in a true believer form real point of view.

25 Blemishes of Samyag Darshan

Further, in the discussion of Samyaktva (right belief) twenty-five blemishes are described:-

8- Doubts, desire etc. faults,
8- Arrogance etc. prides,
3- Stupidities (follinesses),
6- Worthless places (not worth worshipping or visiting).

These blemishes are not found in a true believer. Rarely some fault may be found in a true believer but the right belief is not destroyed totally. There, one should now that in such a state Samyaktva gets defiled only. And further.....

(The great Pandit Shri Todarmalji could not conclude this 9th chapter and could not complete this book due to untimely end of his life).

Appendix I

Nature of Noble Peaceful Death
(Samadhimarana Ka Swaroopa)
-(by Pt. Gumani Ramji S/o Great Pt. Todarmalji)

Oh! Capable (potential) soul! Listen! Now the nature of Samadhimarana (peaceful noble death) is being described:-Samadhi is the name of the state of passionlessness and serenity.  Samadhimarana consists in dying with discriminative knowledge and passionless serenity thoughts.  In belief this much only is the description of Samadhimarana.  Detailed description is given ahead.  

The natural characteristics of a right-knowledged person is such that he yearns for Samadhimarana only. He always harbors this feeling only.  In the end, when death is nearer, he becomes alert in the same way as a sleeping lion becomes alert, whom some person challenges: “O! Lion! enemies’ army is attacking you, make effort and come out of the cave.  So long as the enemies’ army is away, you should get ready and conquer the army of enemies.  It is customary for great personages that they get ready before the enemy becomes alert”.

Listening to such words of that person, the lion immediately got up and made such a great roar (howling) as if in the month of Aashaadha (July) the Lord Indra (celestial chief God) himself might have roared.

Knowing the end of the life nearer the right-knowledged person (enlightened self) becomes alert like a lion and gives up cowardness at once.

How is a true believer?

In his heart, that nature of soul appears resplendently manifested.  Possessing the light of knowledge, he is full with sapid of bliss.  He clearly knows himself only the Chaitanya Deva (sentient God) full of infinite imperishable attributes.  By virtue of such glory only, he does not have even the slightest attachment in non-self substances.

Why is a true Believer Unattached?

Why does a true believer not indulge in attachment? He knows himself as knower, seer (perceiver), distinctly separate from non-self substances, eternal and imperishable and knows other substances as well as attachment, etc. (passions) as to be transient/short-lived, non-eternal and distinctly different from one’s own nature.  Why should a true believer have any fear? xxx

Appendix II
RAHASYA-POORNA CHITTHEE
(A spiritual letter)
-(Written by Acharyakalpa Pt. Todarmalji, Jaipur)

Situated in the great auspicious town Multan Nagar of all accomplishments, honorable coreligionists deserving various (commendable titles and possessing deep spiritual interest Shri Khan Chandji, Gangadharji, Shripalji, Siddharthadasji and all other coreligionists!

Please accept words of high reverence and prosperity from Todarmal.

I am enjoying possible degree of happiness.  I pray that you may also evolve natural bliss through self-realization of Chaitanya- the embodiment of knowledge and bliss.

Further, you had written a letter to brother Shri Ram Singhji Bhuwanidasji.  Other co-religionists conveyed to me the contents of the same from Jahanabad.

Dear brother! person like you alone could raise such questions.  In the present time, very few people are found having deep interest in spiritual discussions.  Blessed are those who even talk of self-realization.  The same is stated here:

Tatprati preetichitain yain vatarpi hi shruta
Nishchitan sa bhvaidbhvyo bhavinirvan.bhajnam
                                                 -----Padyanandi panchvinshtika, Aikatvasheeti  23

Meaning:  The Jiva who had even listened to the talk of this sentient-natured soul with joyful mind, he assuredly, is a Bhavya (capable potential soul).  In a short period of time, he will definitely attain liberation.

According to my knowledge, I am writing answers to the questions raised by you.  You should ponder over them and you should continue writing letters containing discussions about soul and scriptures.  Meeting face to face may materialize sometimes in future.  I urge you to make constant effort for self-realization.

Now, answers to the questions relating to direct & indirect states of self-realization are being written as per my understanding.  There, first of all I am writing about knowing the nature of self-realization.

The soul substance (mundane being) is a misbeliever (Mithyadrishti) since eternity.  There, the false belief is the name of the belief contrary to the nature of self and nonself.  And whenever Tattvartha-Shraddhana form of right belief of self-nonself is evolved to any Jiva by subsidence, destruction or destruction cum subsidence, destruction or destruction cum subsidence of Darshan Moha karma, then that Jiva becomes a true believer.  Therefore, in the belief of self and nonself, the real right belief of the form of belief of pure soul is included.  

Further, although a Jiva does not possess the belief of self-nonself but possesses belief in seven Tattvas and does not believe in Deva etc. and Tattvas etc. stated in other (non-Jaina) faiths, yet by such conventional right belief (Vyavahara Samyaktva) only he can not be called a true believer.  Therefore, the Tattvartha-Shraddhana which is found along with the discriminative knowledge of the self and nonself alone, is to be known Samyaktva (right belief).

Further, on evolution of such right belief, the Kshayopashama form of knowledge which, in the state of wrong belief, was functioning through five senses and mind in the form of perverse sensory & scriptural knowledge, the same knowledge has now become true knowledge of the form of right sensory & scriptural knowledge.  Whatsoever the true believer knows, all that, is of right knowledge form.

If sometimes he (the true believer) knows the jar-cloths, etc.  objects even contrarily, then it is the veiled state of knowledge caused by the rise of knowledge-obscuring karma.  But whatever Kshayopashama (destruction cum subsidence) form of manifested knowledge exists, all that is right knowledge only.  Because in such knowing (the objects) he does not grasp the substances in perverse form.  So this right knowledge is the part of omniscience.  For example, on somewhat disappearance of layer of  clouds whatever partial light appears, all that is the part of light.

The knowledge, which is functioning in the form of right sensory knowledge and right scriptural knowledge, by the process of gradual increase, assumes the form of omniscience; from the viewpoint of right knowledge, both are of the same category.

Further, the functioning of the dispositions of this true believer is of two types-Savikalpa (rambling) & Nirvikalpa (non-rambling, fixed).  There, that disposition which is engaged in passional acts or in the activities of worship, charity, study of Shastras etc. is to be known as Savikalpa (rambling, not fixed).

Question:  How is right belief (Samyaktva) found existing when the dispositions indulge (ramble) in auspicious-inauspicious forms?

Answer:  An accountant of a firm acts on behalf of its owner.  He also states such acts to be his own and in this process becomes happy-unhappy also.  While performing such activities, he does not think of the separateness of his own identity from that of the owner, but in his inner heart, he maintains the belief that  this is not my work.  Doing such activities (with such feelings & belief) that accountant is honest.  If by stealing the wealth of the owner, he considers such wealth to be his own, then the accountant is a thief.  Similarly, the true believer while indulging in auspicious -inauspicious activities & dispositions in the state of the rise of karmas might get absorbed in those dispositions, nevertheless, in his inner heart, he entertains such belief that this is not my work.  If he believes the bodily activities of observance of vows, continence, etc. also to be his own, then he is a misbeliever.  So, such are the Savikalpa-Parinama (rambling dispositions).

Now the process of attaining Nirvikalpa-Parinama (non-rambling state of thoughts and dispositions) through Savikalpa (rambling state of thoughts and dispositions) is being described.

The same true believer sometimes strives for meditating on the nature of the self-soul; there firstly he discriminates between the self and nonself, determines the nature of his soul only as the lighthouse of sentience devoid of Nokarma (body etc.), Dravya-karma (Karmic matter) and Bhava-karma (psychic dispositions); afterwards the thought of nonself objects also disappears; only the thought of the self-soul continues.  In such state of thought, he establishes the feeling of I-ness in the self-nature in various ways.  On evolution of such thoughts as- “I am Chidaananda (full of sentience & bliss), I am Shuddha (pure), I am Siddha (liberated) etc., a wave of bliss arises in natural course, horripilation takes place; thereafter, such thought also disappears and the Upayoga gets fully engrossed in the pure conscious nature of the self-soul (Chinmatra-Swaroopa).  There, all dispositions firmly get concentrated in conscious nature, even the thought of perception, knowledge, etc. and of Naya-Pramana etc. disappears.

The sentient nature of the self (Chaitanya-Swaroopa) was determined through thought activity (Savikalpa state); he engrosses his Upayoga in the same with such concentration that the difference between the meditator and the object meditated on disappears.  Such a state is called the state of Nirvikalpa Anubhava (self-realization in unwavering state of Upayoga).  The same is stated in the great book Naya-Chakra:

Tachchan.san. kalai smyam bujjhaihi jutimaggain.
Nrai arayen.samyai pachchkkhoan.uhavee jmha      266

Meaning: First of all one should ascertain the nature of pure soul through Naya & Pramana (partial and comprehensive view-points) during reflection on Tattvas.  Thereafter, during the state of self-realization, there is no place for Naya & Pramana, i.e., there arise no thoughts of Naya and Pramana; because it is the time for direct self-realization.

For example, at the time of purchasing the jewels, several thoughts prevail but when we put it on the body then the thought activity stops and only the joy of wearing it is experienced.  In this way, the state of Nirvikalpa-Anubhava (self-realization devoid of rambling state of thoughts) is evolved through the thinking process (Savikalpa state).

And the knowledge, which was functioning through five senses and mind, the same knowledge, by getting disengaged from all directions, got engrossed in the nature of self-soul only in this Nirvikalpa-Anubhava (rambleless state of self-realization).  Because that knowledge is of Kshayopashama form (i.e. knowledge evolved by the destruction cum subsidence state of knowledge-obscuring karma).  Therefore, in one unit of time, it knows only one knowable object. When that knowledge got engaged in the nature of the self-soul, then the knowing of other (non-self) objects automatically stopped.  There such a state is evolved that although externally there may be various types of disturbances like noise, etc., yet the meditatior of the nature of self-soul.  And by disappearance of the thoughts of Nayas (viewpoints) etc., the Shruta-Jnana (scriptural knowledge) also got engrossed in the nature of self-soul.

Such description is found in Atma-Khyati named commentary of Samyasara (Verse Gatha No. 144) and in the book Atmaavalokana etc.  Therefore, Nirvikalpa-Anubhava (rambleless state of self-realization) is called supersensory.  Because the role of senses is to be instrumental in knowing touch, taste, smell, color, words (sound); the same is not found here (in the state of self-realization); and the role of mind is to be instrumental in various types of thoughts; that also is not here.  Therefore, although the same knowledge which was functioning through senses and mind, is functioning now in the state of self-realization also, nevertheless, this knowledge is called supersensory.

And this Swaanubhava (self-realization) is also termed to have evolved through mind, because in this realization only Mati-Jnana (sensory knowledge) and Shruta-Jnana (scriptural knowledge) are functioning; no other knowledge is found here.

The Mati & Shruta Jnana do not function without the instrumentality of senses and mind.  So here (in the state of self-realization) the senses have no role because the object of senses is material substance only.  Here (in self-realization) the knowledge is functioning through the mind because the object of mind is immaterial substances also.  Here, the knowledge functioning through the mind and getting engrossed in the nature of self-soul, is absolved from other thoughts.  Therefore, this (self-realization) is stated to be functioning through the mind. Aikagrchintanirodho dhyanam Concentration of thought on one particular object, by turning it away from several objects, is meditation from several objects, is meditation; such differntia of meditation also is possible in this state of self-realization.

Further, it is stated in the following verse of Samyasara Natak:

Vastu vicharat dhyavataen man pavae vishram
Ras svadat sukh oopjae , anubhav yako nam

Meaning: On meditating upon the nature of the substance the mind gets rest (i.e., Upayoga gets relaxed after ascertainment of the self-substance) and by engrossment of Upayoga in the self-soul, spiritual bliss is experienced.  Such a state is called the state of self-realization.

In this way, the engrossment of Upayoga in the nature of self-soul is not without the instrumentality of mind.  Hence, Swaanubhava (self-realization) is also said to have generated though mind.  Thus, there is no contradiction in stating self-realization to be Ateendriya, supersensory, or to be generated through mind.  The difference lies in the viewpoints.

Further, you wrote that “The soul is Ateendriya (supersensory), therefore, it can be realized by supersensory means only”.  But he mind is instrumental in knowing the immaterial substances also, because the object of Mati-Shrut Jnana is stated to be all (material & immaterial) substances also, because the object of Mati-Shrut Jnana is stated in Tattvarthasutra also:

Matishruteenirbando dravyaishvasrvpyishu  

i.e., the range of sensory knowledge and scriptural knowledge extends to all the six substances but not to all their modes.

Further you have raised the question of  Pratyaksha (direct) and Paroksha (indirect) in context with right belief.  But direct and indirect are not the kinds of Samyaktva (right belief).  In fourth Gunasthana, Kshayika Samyaktva (destruction type of right belief) similar to that of Siddha (liberated soul) can be evolved, therefore, Samyaktva is only of right belief form.  That Jiva can be found even indulging in auspicious-inauspicious acts.  Hence your statement that the Nishchaya Samyaktva (real right belief) is Pratyaksha (direct) and Vyavahara Samyaktva (conventional right belief) is Paroksha (indirect), is not correct.  Samyaktva is of three kinds:  there Upashama Samyaktva (subsidential type of right belief) and Kshayika Samyaktva (destruction type of right belief) both re pure (free from any impurity) because they are devoid of the rise of Mithyatva (faith-deluding karma) and the Kshayopashama Samyaktva is having some blemish because it is found with the rise of  Samyaktva-Mohaniya.  But there are no Pratyaksha (direct) & Paroksha (indirect) kinds of Samyaktva.

Whether a true believer having Kshayika Samyaktva is found indulging in auspicious-inauspicious acts or is engrossed in self-realization, the quality of right belief in both the states is the same.  Therefore, it should be known that the direct-indirect are not the kinds of Samyagdarshan (right belief).

Further, the direct-indirect (Pratyaksha-Paroksha) are the kinds of Pramana (comprehensive knowledge) and Pramana is right knowledge.  Hence Mati-Jnana & Shruta-Jnana are Paroksha Pramana (indirect comprehensive knowledge’s; Avadhi (clairvoyance), Manah Paryaya (telepathy) and Kewal-Jnan (omniscience) are Pratyaksha-Pramana (direct comprehensive knowledge’s) .  Adhaiproksham, prtyakshmnyat. Tatvarth sutra 1/11-12 This is the statement in Tattvarthasutra.  And in books of logic Spashtpratibhasatmkan pratyakshamspasht proksham, such differentia of direct (Pratyaksha) and indirect (Paroksha) is described.

That knowledge which knows its object (knowable) clearly well in its true form, is direct (Pratyaksha) and that which does not know its object clearly well, is indirect (Paroksha).  There the range of objects (knowables) of sensory knowledge and scriptural knowledge are many but they cannot know even one knowable fully.  Therefore, these are called indirect knowledge’s and the objects (knowables) of  Avadhi Jnana (clairvoyance) and Manah Paryaya Jnan (telepathy) are less, nevertheless, each one knows its object clearly well; hence, both are Desha_Pratyaksha (partially direct) and Kewal-Jnana (omniscience) knows all knowables independently and clearly; therefore, it is Sarva-Pratyaksha (fully direct).

The direct (Pratyaksha) knowledge is of two kinds: (I) Paramartha Pratyaksha (Independent direct knowledge) and (ii) Samvyavaharika Pratyaksha (Dependent direct knowledge).

There Avadhi (clairvoyance), Manah Paryaya (telepathy) and Kewal Jnana (omniscience) know their objects independently clearly.  Therefore, those are Parmarthika Pratyaksha (independent direct knowledge).  And colors, etc. are known through eyes, etc.; there, it is stated conventionally that “He knew colors, etc. directly”.  Here partial clarity is also found.  Therefore, these are called Samvyavaharika-Pratyksha; but if an object has different mixed colors, then those are not known clearly by the eyes; that is why, such knowledge is not called Parmartha-Pratyaksha (independent direct knowledge).  

Further, the Paroksha Pramana (indirect comprehensive knowledge is of five kinds:-

1.  Smriti (Remembrance)
2.  Pratyabhijnana (Recognition)
3.  Tarka (Logic)
4.  Anumana (Inference) and 
5.  Agama (Knowledge of scriptures).

There, knowing that object through remembrance which was known earlier , is Smriti (Remembrance) 

Recognizing an object by illustration is Pratyabhi-jnana (Recognition).

The knowledge of an object deduced from its cause is Anumana (inference).

The knowledge derived through scriptures (Agama) is Agama.  

Such are the kinds of Pratyksha-Paroksha Pramana (direct-indirect knowledge of a substance).

In this state of self-realization, the soul is known through Shruta-Jnana (scriptural knowledge).   The evolution of  Shruta-Jnana is preceded by Mati-Jnana and Shruta-Jnana are Paroksha (indirect knowledges).  Hence, here the knowledge of soul is not Pratyaksha (direct).  Further, the object of Avadhi (clairvoyance) and Manah-Paryaya-Jnana (telepathy) is material substance only and the Kewala-Jnana (omniscience) is not possessed of by the Chhadmastha (non-omniscients).  Therefore, in the state of self-realization, the soul is not known by Avadhi, Manah-Paryaya and Kewal-Jnana.  And here the soul is not known clearly well.  Therefore, fully independent  direct knowledge (Parmarthika-Pratyakshapana) is in no way possible here.

Further, as we know the colors, etc. thorough eyes., similarly, the soul’s innumerable Pradeshas (spatial units) etc. are not known even with partial clarity; hence conventional independent direct knowledge (Samvyavaharika-Partyakshapana) is also not possible here.

Here the soul is realized through scripture-inference, etc. types of indirect knowledge.  By knowing the true nature of soul as described in Jaina scripture, he engrosses his Upayoga in it; therefore, Agama (knowledge derived from scriptures) is called Paroksha )ramana.  Or “I am soul only because I am embodiment of knowledge.  Wherever there is knowledge, there is soul (Atma) as are Siddhas (liberated souls) etc. and where there is no soul, knowledge is also not  there, as in the case of dead body (carcass) etc.” In this way, by ascertaining the soul-substance through inference (Anumana) he engrosses his Upayoga in it.  Therefore, inference (Anumana) is called Paroksha Pramana.  Or the soul-substance which is known through scripture-inference, etc., by remembering the same, he engrosses his Upayoga in it.  So it is called Smriti.  Thus in various ways in the state of self-realization, the soul is known through Paroksha-Pramana (indirect knowledge) only.  There, first the soul is known (as it is), thereafter, the Upayoga gets engrossed in the same nature of  the self-soul.  Nothing social is known in the state of engrossment of Upayoga in the self-soul.

Question:  If there is nothing special in the process of knowing in Nirvikalpa state as compared to Savikalpa state then how is more happiness generated?

Answer:  One specialty is this that in Savikalpa state (rambling state of Upayoga) the knowledge was engaged in knowing several knowables, whereas in Nirvikalpa state (rainblemless state of Upayoga or concentration of thoughts) the knowledge (Upayoga) remains engrossed in knowing the soul only.  The second specialty is that the Upayoga which used to ramble in different thoughts, the same Upayoga is now engrossed in the nature of self-soul by merging its identity in it.

On evolution of such specialties, some such inexpressible unique bliss is experienced of which even a minutest part is not experienced in enjoying carnal pleasures; therefore, that bliss is called supersensory (Atteendriya).

Question:  Even if in the state of self-realization, the soul remains Paroksha (indirectly known) only, then how is self-realization described in the books to be Pratyaksha (directly known)? In the earlier quoted verse also, it is stated that Pachchkho an.uhavo jmha  how is it so?

Answer:  In the state of self-realization, the soul is Paroksha (known indirectly) only, the soul’s Pradeshas (spatial units) and shape are not visible, but by engrossment of Upayoga in the nature of the self-soul, the self-realization, which is evolved, is called direct self-realization (Swaanubhava Pratyaksha).  The true believer does not know the taste of self-realization by Agama-Anumana etc. Proksha Pramana (scripture-inference etc. form of indirect knowledge), rather he himself experiences the taste of sugarcane; there, the shape, etc. of sugar candy are Paroksha (indirect or not visible) but the taste experienced through the tongue is Pratyaksha (direct); similarly, in the state of self-realization the soul is Paroksha (indirect or not visible) but the taste experienced through pure dispositions ifs Pratyaksha (direct).

Or that which is like Pratyaksha (direct) only, is also called Pratyaksha (direct).  For example, people say- “We saw directly a particular person in dream or meditation”.  There, in fact, nothing is seen directly, but identical to direct, we really saw like Pratyaksha (directly seen); therefore; it is said to Pratyaksha.  Similarly, in the state of self-realization, the soul is really known like Pratyaksha; therefore, by this logic if we say that soul also is known directly, then there is no fault.  The statements are made in different ways; however, the statements should be understood in such a way that the point of view of Agama (aetiology scripture) and Adhyatma (metaphysics) is not contradicted.

Question:  Such realization (Anubhava) is evolved in which Gunasthana (stage of spiritual development)?

Answer:  It evolves even in fourth Gunasthana itself, but in the fourth Gunasthana it occurs again after long interval of time and in higher Gunasthanas it occurs with lesser interval of time.

Question: The self-realization is Nirvikalpa (rambleless concentration of thoughts-Upayoga), what difference lies in self-realization with respect to higher and lower Gunasthana?

Answer:  The difference lies in the degrees of engrossment of Upayoga.  For example, two persons are chanting the name (of Arhanta God, etc., say) and the thoughts of both are engaged in chanting the name, but greater concentration may be found in the case of one and lesser in the case of other.  Similarly, one should know here also.

Question:  It is stated that there is no Vikalpa (rambling of thoughts) in the state of Nirvikalpa-Anubhava (rambleless self-realization), but first type of Shukla Dhyana the state of pure concentration found in true monks prior to attainment of omniscience) is stated to be (Prathaktva-Vitarka-Vichara (different scriptural knowledge-shifting of Upayoga) and Prathaktva-Vitarka means shifting of  knowledge from one object to another or shifting of thoughts with regard to objects, words and activities.  How is it so?

Answer:  The statement is of two types- one is in the general (gross) form and the other is in specific (minute) form.  For example, from general point of view, the vow of complete celibacy is stated to be evolved even in the sixth Gunasthana and from specific (minute) point of view, the Maithuna Sanjnaa (feeling or desire of coition) is stated to be present upto the ninth Gunasthana; similarly, here in the state of self-realization rambleless state of thoughts, Nirvikalpta, is described from the general point of view.  And from the specific (minute) point of view Prathaktva-Vitarka-Vichara etc. (shifting of Upayoga etc.) and passions or emotional feelings, etc. are stated to be present upto the tenth Gunasthana.  There, the statement of such dispositions, which is known by self and others, should be known from general (gross) point of view and the statement of such dispositions, which even himself does not know and only the omniscient knows, should be known from minute (specific) point of view.  In Charannuyoga (ethics) etc. the prominence is that of general (gross form of) statement and in Karananuyoga (aetiology) the prominence is that of specific (minute) statement.  One should know such difference elsewhere also.

Thus, one should know the differentia of Nirvikalpa Anubhava (rambless self-realization).

Further, you have written three examples and a question based on them.  But the example is not applicable in all respects.  The example specifics one particular purpose, so here the second-day moon, water drop and a particle of fire (an ember)-these are parts only, and the full moon of plenilunar day, the ocean and fire-pit-these are complete forms.  Similarly, in the fourth Gunasthana, the attributes of soul like knowledge, etc. have manifested partially; in the thirteenth Gunasthana (in Arhanta state) the attributes of soul like knowledge, etc. are fully manifested.  And from quality point of view, the class of examples is one and the same.  Similarly, from the quality point of view, the category of attributes manifested in the state of vowless right believer and those manifested in the thirteenth Gunasthana is one and the same.

Further, your question was that- “If the class is one, then even the true believer of fourth Gunasthana might be knowing the soul directly as the omniscient (Kewali) knows directly all the knowables?

Answer:  One category is not from the point of view of directness, but is from the point of view of Samyag-jnana-right knowledge.  The true believer of fourth Gunasthana possesses right knowledge of the form of Mati & Shruta-jnana whereas in the thirteenth Gunasthana the right knowledge is of thing form of omniscience.  Further, the difference between “Partial” and “Full” is only this much that the possessor of Mati-Shruta jnana (true sensory & scriptural knowledge) knows somewhat successively, one after the other, the immaterial substance indirectly and even the material substance directly as well as indirectly; and the possessor of omniscience knows all substances wholly and simultaneously; the possessor of Mati-Shrutajnana knows; indirectly (Paroksha) whereas the omniscient knows directly (Pratyaksha), only this much difference is there.  And if the category be described to be the same in all respects, then it should be stated that as the omniscient (Kewali) knows indirectly (Paroksha) whereas the omniscient knows directly ramblelessly and simultaneously the purposeless knowables, similarly, he (the true believer of fourth Gunasthana) too would know; but this is not so.  Therefore, one should know the difference between direct and indirect (Pratyaksha and Paroksha).
In Ashta Sahasree also it is stated thus:-

Syadvad kaivlkshanai srvtatv prkashanai
Bhaid sakshadsakshach, havastvanyatman bhvant  
                                      ----105  Asht Sehsree Dashma Parichhod
            
Meaning:  Syadwad, i.e., Shrutajnana (scriptural knowledge) and Kewal Jnana (omniscience)-both are the illuminators of all kinds of Tattvas(substances with their attributes and modifications).  The specialty is only this much that Kewal Jnana (omniscience) is Pratyaksha (direct) and Shruta Jnana (scriptural knowledge) is Paroksha (indirect); but he substance remains the same, does not convert into the other.

Further, whatever you have written to be the differentia of Nischaya-Samyaktva (real right belief) and Vyavahara Samyaktva (conventional right belief) is true but this much should be known that in the case of a true believer, the internal real right belief is always existent in conventional right belief and at other times too; it is always in active form.

Further, your question is that- “Some coreligionist has raised a query that if the true believer knows the soul directly (Pratyaksha) then why would he not know the Karma-Vargana (karmic matter) directly?

The answer is that the soul is known directly by the Kewali (omniscient) only, whereas the Karma-Vargana is known by a clairvoyant also.

Further, you have state that the soul’s Pradeshas (spatial units) should be stated to be partially open similar to the moon of second-day?

Answer: This example is not from the point of view of Pradeshas (spatial units); this example is from the point of view of attributes.

Whatever questions you have raised about Pratyaksha-Apratyaksha (direct-indirect knowing process) etc. with respect to right belief (Samyaktva) and self-realization, I have tried to answer the same as per my knowledge; you should also check the same from Jinavani (omniscients’ preachings) and from your own understanding and knowledge.

How much to write! That which is known cannot be fully written; on meeting face to face, further discussion is possible; but meeting depends on destiny; hence, benefit lies in continuously making effort for realization of the sentient nature of the (self) soul.

In the present times Adhyatma-Tattva (spiritual reality or truth) is in the Atma-Khyati, the Sanskrit commentary written by Amrit Chandra Acharya on Samyasara book and the discussion of Agama (aetiology) is in Gommatasara and also in other books.

All that is known cannot be put into words; therefore, you too should keep yourself engaged in the study of Adhyatma (metaphysics) and Agama (aetiology) books and keep engrossed in the bliss of self-soul.

And if you have come across some other special books, please write to me about the same.  The coreligionists need to have mutual discussions.   And I do not possess great intelligence but it is a great thing that I have an occasion for mutual exchange of ideas with brethren like you.

So  long as meeting does not materialize till then please continue writing the letters.  Dated Fagun Badi 5, Vikram year 1811. (March.......,1755 A.D.).

* THE END *

============================================================
1* Here after describing Margana Samyaktva a space of 3 lines is left in the manuscript written by Pt. Todarmalji (author of this book) for describing the rest six Samyaktvas, but the same could not be written.

MOKSHA MARG PRAKASHAK
GLOSSARY

Abhavya (Incapable to attain liberation, an incapable soul)
Abhisheka (Anointing ceremony)
Abhrahma (Incontinence, coiton, unchasity)
Adharma (Sinful act, vice, irreligion)
Adharma-dravya (The medium of rest, anti-ethr substance)
Adhah-karana (Beginning of the process of self-meditation through which the soul attains to some degree of purity leading to self-realization- samyagdarshan)
Adho-loka (The lower world, the hells where infernal beings live)
Advaita (Non-dual, the monistic school of Vedanta)
Aghatia/Aghati (Non-obscuring karmas which are the cause of embodiment and surrounding conditions)
Ahimsa/Ahinsa (Non-harming, non-injury, non-violence)
Ajiva (Insentient, non-soul substances)
Ajnana (Ignorance, false knowledg, lack of knowledge)
Akama-nirjara (Involuntary dissocciation of karmas)
Akashaya (Free from passion or desire)
Amudha-drshti (Free from superstitions & delusory notions)
Amurta (Immaterial substances, non-matter)
Ananta-darshan (Infinite perception)
Ananta-jnana (Infinite knowledge)
Ananta-sukha (Infinite bliss)
Ananta-virya (Infinite spritual power)
Anantanubandhi Kashaya (Intensest type of passion causing infintie bondage)
Anashana (Fasting)
Anga (Limb, a group oF 12 Jaina canonical texts)
Anivratti-karana (The process of self-meditation through which the soul attains right belief or self-realization by suppressing certain Mohaniya Karmas)
Antaraya-karma (Obstrutin karma which restricts the energy-quality of the soul)

Antar-muhurta (A period of upto or within 48 minutes) 
Anu (Atom) 
Anubhaga, Anubhava (Fruition or intensity of karma)
Anubhaga-kandaka (Reduction in fruition of previously bonded
karmas by one-one Antarmuhurta) 

Anukampa (Compassion) 
Anumana (Inference, deduced) 
Anumodana (Approving some act being done by others) 
Anupreksha (Reflection, contemplation’s of 12 kinds) 
Anuvratas (Minor or small vows pertaining to householders) 
Anuyoga (Exposition, a group of four canonical texts) 
Aparigraha (Non-possession) 
Apoorva-karana (The process of self-meditation through which the soul attains to
an unprecedented degree of purity) 
Apramatta-virata (7th Gunasthana - meditation state of a monk in which his
continence is not fouled by carelessness) 
Apratyakhyanavarana (Passions which hinder partial conduct) 
Arhanta, Arhat (Worthy of worship, omniscient Lord) 
Arati (Disliking or displeasure in regard to sense activities) 
Ardha-Pudgal- Paravartan-kala (Half of the time of the cycle of wanderings
with reference to karmic matter taken in and cast off infinite times) 
Arupi (Immaterial substances) 
Asamjni (Without mind, irrational beings not endowed with faculty of reasoning)
Asamyama (Non-restraint, incontinence) 
Asata, Asata vedniya (Unpleasant feeling producing karma) 
Ashubha (Inauspicious, evil)
Ashubhopayoga (Inauspicious thought activity, 'upayoga' engaged in impious acts) 
Ashuchi (Impurity) 
Ashuddhopayoga (Impure thought activity causing inflow of karmas) 
Atichara (Infraction committed by accident) 
Atman, Atma (Soul, self)
Atmanubhava (State of self-realization, 'upayoga' engrossed in self-soul or abiding in one's own nature) 
Audayika Bhavas (Dispositions arising from fruition of Karmas)
Aupadhika (Imposed dispositions, unnatural functioning due to rise of karmas) 
Aupashamika Bhava (Subsidential right belief and disposition) 
Avadhi-darshan (Clairvoyance perception, indistinct awareness preceding Avadhi jnana) Avadhi-jnana (Clairvoyance) 
Avagaha (Providing accommodation) 
Avagraha (Mere awareness of an object) 
Avasarpini Kala (Descending cycle of time) 
Avtara (Incarnation, rebirth) 
Avaya (Perceptual judgment) 
Avirati (Non-abstinence) 
Avrata (Non-vow, vowless state) 
Acharana (Conduct, behaviour) 
Acharya (Chief preceptor, Head of monks' group) 
Agama (Scripture, canonical literature, omniscient's preachings) 
Akasha (Space substance) 
Akinchanya (Non-attachment, possessionlessness)
Asrava (Influx of karmic matter) 
Arambha (Commencement)
Arjava (Straightforwardness) 
Artadhyana (Sorrowful concentration) 
Aryika (Nuns of Digambara sect) 
Avarana (Covering or veil) 
Avali (Twinkling of an eye) 
Ayu (Life karma that determines the span of a given life-time)

     "B" 

Bandha (Karmic bondage, 4 types of bondage) 
Bhagwana (Venerable, omniscient God) 
Bhakti (Devotion, devotionalism)
Bhava (Dispositional, internal thoughts, psychic) 
Bhavanavasi Devas (Residential gods) 
Bhava parivartana (Cycle of incarnation, i.e, wandering repeatedly in all states of
embodied existence)
Bhavya (A self with capacity for liberation, capable soul)
Bhavalingi (A true possessionless naked Digamber Jain monk with right belief-knowledge and conduct) 
Bhavamana (Psychical mind) 
Bhavana (Observance or contemplation’s) 
Bhava Nikshepa (Installation by actual state)
Bhava Parivartana (Cycle of thought, i.e., wandering repeatedly indifferent pious-impious thought activities from their minimum to maximum degrees of intensity) 
Bhavasamvara (Psychic stoppage)
Bhoga (Enjoyment, experience) 
Bhogabhumi (Land or realm of enjoyment) 
Brahmachari (celibate, one who observes the vow of celibacy) 
Brahma (Creator of universe as per Vaidik culture)
Brahmana (Priest, priestly caste)

   'CC"

Chaitanya (Consciousness, sentience) 
Chaitya (Jina's idol, Pratima) 
Chaityalaya (Temple where Jina's idol is installed for worship & adoration) 
Chakravarti (y) (Universal monarch, king of kings) 
Chakshu (Sense of sight) 
Chakshudarshan (Visual perception) 
Charananuyoga (Ethics, scriptures dealing with the conventional conduct of householders and monks)
Chaturindriya (Four-sensed being having sense of touch, taste, smell, vision, i.e. touch, tongue, nose, eyes)
Chandala (Untouchable person) 
Charitra (Conduct) 
Charitra-mohaniya (Conduct deluding karmas) 
Chhadmastha (Non-omniscient beings)
   
"D"
 
Dana (Charity, alms-giving) 
Dana-antaraya (A type of obstructing karma which hinders charity) 
Darshan (Perception, insight, philosophy, belief of faith)
Darshan-moha/Darshan-mohaniya (Faith or insight deluding karma) 
Darshan-Pratima (First Pratima or vow related with right belief) 
Darshanavarana/Darshanavarni (Perception-obscuring karmas) 
Darshan-Vishuddhi (Purity of right faith)
Dasa Dharma (Ten characteristics of religion) 
Desha-Charitra (Partial conduct related with small vows) 
Desha-Ghati (Obscuring partially) 
Desha-Ghati Spardhaka (Karmic matter which obscures only partially) 
Deshana Labdhi(Attainment of omniscient's preachings) 
Desha Virata (The 5th Gunasthana where partial continence with partial renunciation is found)
Deva (Celestial being, god) 
Deva-Mudhata (Delusion pertaining to gods) 
Dharma Religion, duty, pious & pure thought activities, virtue, no violence, righteousness) Dharma Dhyana (Virtuous concentration, pious meditation) 
Dharma Tirtha (Holy path, liberation path) 
Dhyana (Meditation) 
Digambara (Sky-clad, possessionless naked Jain monk) 
Diksha (Initiation, vow of renunciation) 
Divya-dhwani (Miraculous divine sound forming omniscient's preaching)
Dravya (Substance) 
Dravya-mana (Material, mind, an internal sense which acts as instrumental cause in thinking) 
Dravya-Nikshepa (Installation by substance) 
Dravyendriya (Physical sense) 
Dveendriya (Two-sensed being having, sense of touch & taste) 
Dvesha (Aversion, hatred-feeling, disliking) 
Dvipa (Island) 
Dvipa-Samudra (Island-continent surrounded by sea)
   "E"
Eka (One, unitary)
Eka-kshetravagaha (Occupying the same space points or locus)
Ekanta (One-sided)
Ekantavada(Absolutist doctrine)
Ekatva (Unity)
Ekendriya (One-sensed being having sense of touch only, a synonym for sthavara - immobile beings)
Eshana-samiti (Carefulness in taking food)
Evambhuta-naya (The actual standpoint)

   "G"

Gana (Congregation of monks)
Ganadhara (Chief acharya monk who possesses four types of knowledge’s And composes scriptures from the preachings of omniscient, Tirthankara; first monk disciple of Tirthankara)
Garbha (Uterine birth; conception)
Gati(Birth, condition of existence, transit from one body to another, destiny)
Ghati, Ghatia karma (Obscuring karmas)
Ghrana (Sense of smell)
Gotra (High or low family status determining karma)
Grantha (Book, scriptures, possessions, attachment)
Guna (Quality)
Gunahani (Decreasing series)
Gunasthana (Stage of spiritual development)
Gunashreni (In multiplying order)
Gunavraddhi (Increasing series)
Gupti (Control, restraint)
Guru (Preceptor monk)

"H"

Hasya (Laughter)
Himsa (Injury, violence, harming)
Hundavasarpini (A period of 'avasarpini' i.e., period of downfall in which  extraordinary events may take place)

"I"

Indra - Lord of Devas (Celestial beings)
Indriya (Sense organ)
Indriya paryapti (Completion of senses)
Iha (Speculation)
Irya-patha (Influx of karmas caused by vibrations without passions).
Irya-samiti (Carefulness in walking so that no insect or being is harmed)
Ishat-kashayas (Quasi -passions, 9 types - laughter, liking, disliking, sorrow, fear, disgust and 3 types of sex inclinations)
Ishwara (God)

"J"

Jainabhasa (False Jainas, so-called Jainas)
Jain, Jaina (Follower of Jina, one who has 'samyak-darshan')
Jati (Genus of beings, caste)
Jati-karma (The variety of Namakarma that determines one's genus)
Jina (The victor, conqueror; a synonym for Tirthankara)
Jina-dharma (Jina's religion, i.e., religion preached by Jina)
Jina-agam (Jaina scripture)
Jina-bimb (Image of a Jina)
Jiva (Soul, sentient, being)
Jivatva (Consciousness, principle of life)
Jnana (Knowledge)
Jnana chetana (Consciousness, realizing consciousness only to be the self)
Jnanavarana karma (Knowledge obscuring karma)
Jugupsa (Disgust, a type of quasi-passion)
Jyotishi devas (Stellar celestial beings)

   "K"

Kala (Time, katanu-the time substance) 
Kala-parivartana (The cycle of time, i.e. wandering repeatedly in all moments of all aeons by taking birth and dying infinite times)
Kalpa (Cycle of 2 aeons, celestial abodes below the graiveyakas heavens) 
Kalpatita (Heavenly beings born beyond the kalpas) 
Kalyanaka (Auspicious moments or occasions) 
Karma (Fine particles of matter called a karman-vargana" that bind the soul; action, act) 
Karma-bhumi (Land or realm of action)
Karma-chetana (Knowing oneself to be the doer of actions)
Karman sharira (The transmigrating body of karmic matter bonded with mundane beings)
Karma-phala-chetana (Knowing oneself to be the enjoyer of karmic fruits)
Karma-prakriti (The particular type of karmic matter)
Karta (Doer, agent, instrumental)
Kasaya (Passions - anger, pride, deceit, greed)

Kavala-ahara(Food in morsels, human food)

Kaya-klesha (Mortification of the body)

Kapota-leshya (Grey, dove colored thought complexions)

Karan (Thoughts, degrees of purity of thoughts, means mathematical exposition, case)
Karana (Cause, instrumental or substantial)

Karita (Getting a thing done by others )

Karman-sharira (Karmic matter body bonded with soul)

Karman-Vargana (Molecules of karmic matter which fill the universe)

Karya (Effect)

Kaya (Body)

Kaya-klesha (Mortification of body)

Kayotsarga (Abandonment of attachment with body, standing or sitting posture of meditation)

Kesha-locha (Pulling out one's hair of head & beard)

Kevala-darshana (Omni-perception associated with Kewalagnana-omniscience)

Kevalajnana (Omniscience)

Kevali (Omniscient 'Jina')

Kriyas (Actions, sacred rites)

Krodha (Anger)

Krashna-Leshya (Black thought complexion)

Krata (Performed by oneself)

Kshapak (The destroyer of delusion)

Kshapak-shreni (Ladder of destruction of karmas)

Kshaya (Destruction of karmas)

Kshayika-Bhava (Pure dispositions evolved on destruction of karmas)

Kshayopashamik-Bhava (Dispositions evolved on destruction cum-subsidence of karmas)

Kshetra (Region, space, area)

Kshetra-Parivartana (The cycle of space i.e. wandering infinite times by taking birth and dying on all space points of this universe sequentially)

Kshayopashama Labdhi (Attainment of knowledge or puity in destruction cum subsidence of certain karmas)

Kshina Moha (The monk of 12th Gunasthana whose all charitra mohaniya karmas and passions are destroyed permanently for ever)

Kula (Family, lineage)

   "L"

Labdhi (Attainment, psychic sense)

Lakshana (Differentia)

Laukantika Devas (Celestial saints, gods of 5th heaven)

Labhantaraya (Obstructive karma of gain, i.e., hindrance to the attainment of something)

Leshya (Thought complexion, degrees of passions & purity)

Linga (Sex, sign)

Lobha (Greed)

Loka (Universe)

Loka-akash (The universe-space)

Loka-mudhata (False beliefs regarding religious practices)

"M"

Madhu (Honey) 
Madhyaloka (Middle of terrestrial world) 
Madya (Alcohol) 
Madhyastha (Indifference) 
Mahavrata (The five great vows of a monk) 
Manahparyaya jnana (Telepathy, direct knowledge of thought  forms of others without the aid of mind or senses) 
Mantra (Incantation, holy litany) 
Manushya (Human being) 
Manushya-Gati (Human state of existence) 
Mati jnana (Sensory knowledge) 
Marga (Path) 
Maya (Deceitfulness) 
Meru (Mount, sudarshan meru) 
Mishra-bhava (Mixed state or disposition) 
Mishra-Gunasthana (Mixed spiritual stage of right and wrong belief, 3rd Gunasthana)
Mithyadarshana (Wrong belief, misbelief, wrongfaith, synonym for Mithyatva)
Mithya-charitra (Wrong conduct)
**Brahama**
Mithyajnana (Wrong knowledge)
Mithyatva (Misbelief)
Mithyatva Gunasthana (The 1st spiritual stage of misbelief)
Moha (Delusion, infatuation)
Mohaniya karma (Deluding karma)
Moksha (Liberation, emancipation, salvation)
Moksha Marga (The path of liberation)
Muhurta (48 minutes' period)
Mukta (Liberated soul)
Mulguna (The eight basic restraints of a Jaina layman)
Muni (A monk)
Murta (Material, of matter form)

   "N"

Naraka (Infernal abode, hell)

Naya (Standpoint)

Nama-karma (Physique-making karma)

Namaskar-mantra [ Salutation to(five) holy beings (souls) ]

Nama Nikshepa (Installation by name)

Narakas (Infernal beings)

Nidana (Diagnosis, seeking temporal gain from austerities, etc. good deeds)

Nidana-salya (The sting of desire for enjoyment)

Nigoda (The lowest form of life i.e, undeveloped one-sensed beings, e.g.  moss, fungus,roots, etc.)

Nihkankshita (Freedom from anticipation)

Nihshankita (Freedom from doubt about 7 tattuas, true God, preceptor, scriptures, etc.)

Nimitta-karana (Instrumental cause, external agent)

Nimitta-naimittika (Cause and effect relationship)

Nikshepa (Installation)

Nirdesha (Description)

Nirgrantha (A monk without material possessions, unattached)

Nirjara (Dissociation of karmas)
Nirvana (Salvation, complete release from bondage)
Nirvichikitsa (Freedom from disgust)
Nishchaya Naya (The real point of view, realistic standpoint)
Nitya (Eternal)
Nokashayas (Quasi-passions)

"O"

'Om' (A synonym for five holy souls, sacred sound formed by combining the first syllable of each word in the namaskar- mantra)

"P"

Padartha (Substances, category, elements)

Palya, Palyopama (Many many years period, innumerable years, a measure of max. Iifetime)

Papa (Vice, sin, inauspicious act, demerit)

Papa-bhava (Inauspicious dispositions)

Paramanu (An indivisible particle of matter, matter substance)

Para-dravya-kshetra-kala-bhava~ (The being or substance-location or space-time or state, quality of disposition respectively of other objects or substances)

Paramatma (The omniscient, the liberated soul)

Parameshthi (The five supreme souls--Arhant, Siddha, Acharya, Upad hyaya &Sad hu)

Parigraha (Possession)

Pariksha (Examination)

Parinama (Thought activity, disposition, change or modification)

Parivartana (Cycle of wanderings)

Parishaha (A~lictions)

Parishahajaya (Victory over the afflictions)

Paroksha (Indirect or dependent knowledge accomplished through senses, inference, etc.)

Parva (Holy days meant for specific religious observances)

Paryapta (Attained completion)

Paryapti (Completion or development)

Paryaya (mode, state, modification,,condition, state of existence)

Paryayarthika (Relating to modifications)

Paryayarthika-Naya (Standpoint of mode)

Parinamika-bhava (Inherent nature)

Pichchhi (A peacock feather whiskbroom)

Prabhavana (Propagation of the teachinga of Jina)

Pradesha (Space point)

Pradesha-bandha(Space bondage relating to quantity of karmas bonded)

Prakriti-bandha (Type-bondage relating to quality of karmas bonded)

Pramada (Negligence or carelessness)

Pramana (Valid or comprehensive knowledge)

Pramatta-Samyata (The ascetic of the sixth spiritual stage)

Pranayama (Yogic control of respiration)

Prathamopashama Samyaktva (First type of subsidential right-belief)

Prashama (Serene, tranquil)

Pratikramana (Repentance with confession)

Pratima (Householder's stages of renunciation)

Pratyabhijnana (Recogrution)

Pratyaksha (Direct knowledge)

Pratyakhyana (Renunciation of certain foods, indulgences or activities for a specified period)

Pratyakhyanavarana/niya (The passions which hinder and disturb complete restraint)

Pravachana (The scriptures, discourses on omniscient's preachings)

Prana (Vitality or life principle)

Prayaschitta (Expiation, repentance of transgressions)

Prathivi (Earth)

Prathivi-kayika (Earth bodies i.e. jiuas having earth as their body)

Pudgala (Matter substance, atoms)

Puja (Worship)

Punya (Merit, pious act, virtue, auspicious act or karma)

Punya-bhava (Auspicious disposition)

Puranas (Sacred texts dealing with the lives of Tirthankaras etc.)

Purush-veda, Pumveda (The masculine sex inclination)

Purusha (Soul, man)

Purushartha (Effort-making, right effort)
Purva (A group of fourteen Jaina canonical texts)

   "R"

Raga (Attachment, passion, desire)

Rajas (Endowed with pride passion, etc.)

Rajoharana (A whisk broom)

Rasa (Taste)

Rasana (Tongue)

Rasa-parityaga (Abandonment of stimulating or delicious food)

Rati (Pleasure in sensual indulgence)

Ratnatraya (The three jewels - right faith, right knowledge and right conduct)

Ratri-bhojana (Eating at night)

Raudra-dhyana (Cruel concentration, feeling pleasure in indulgence in sinful acts of injury, etc.)

Rijusutra-naya (The straight view point)

Ruksha (Dry, rough)

Rupi (Material object having touch, taste, odour, colour)

   "S"

Sabda-naya (The verbal viewpoint)

Salya (Sting)

Sharira (Body)

Shauch (Freedom from greed)

Shraddha; Shraddhana (Belief, conviction)

Shravaka (Householder)

Shreni (Spiritual ladder)

Shruta (Scripture, scriptural knowledge)

Shurta-kevali (Omniscient in the scriptures)

Shubha (Good, auspicious)

Shukla-dhyana (Pure concentration or meditation free from attachment-aversion)

Shvetambara (White clad, a Jaina sect whose mendicants wear white garments)

Sachitta (With livin~ matter. ve~etables. etc.)

Sakashaya (With passion)

Sallekhana (Passionless end, ritual death by fasting, dieing with pure thought activity, a synonym of 'samadhi-marana'

Samabhirudha-naya (Specific prevalent point of view)

Samanaska Samjni (Rational beings endowed with mind or thinking power)

Samavasarana (Holy assembly of the Jina)

Samaya (Unit of time, instant, moment, pure soui substance)

Samiti (Carefulness)

Samjvalana-Kshaya (Gleaming passion, perfect right conduct-preventing passion)

Samkhyata (Numerable)

Sammurchchhana (Spontaneous generation)

Samsara (Cycle of existence, mundane existence)

Samsari (Transmigrating beings)

Samsthana (Configuration)

Samudghata (Expansion or emanation of the spatial units of the soul)

Samvara (Stoppage of influx "asrava")

Samvega (Fear of transmigration)

Samyagdarshan, Samyaktva (Right belief, insight)

Samyagdrishti (True believer, enlightened self)

Samyak-charitra (Right conduct)

Samyakjnana (Right knowledge)

Samyama (Continence, non-injury, restraint)

Samsaya (Doubt)

Saraga-charitra, Saraga-samyama (Self-control with attachment)

Sarvaghati karma (Karma which obscures totally the manifestation of soul's essential attributes)

Sarvaghati-Sparddhaka (Karmic matter which obscures wholly)

Sarvajna (The all knowing, the omniscient)

Sarvavadhi (The perfect clairvoyance)

Sat (Existence)

Satta (Inoperative state of existence of karmas)

Satya (truthfulness)

Sayoga Kevali (The omniscient with vibrating state of spatial units of soul)

Sadhu (A possessionless naked Jain monk of long-standing)

Samayika (Attaining equanimity through self-contemplation)

Samayika charitra (Conduct of equanimity)

Sasadana gunasthana (The second spiritual stage of downfall)

Sata, Sada Vedaniya Karma (Karmas producing feelings of pleasure) 

Satvika (Endowed with mild-passion & good notions)

Siddha (Liberated soul)

Skandha (Molecule)

Smriti (Recollection, remembrance)

Snigdha (Smooth or sticky quality)

Sparsha (Touch)

Sparshana (Sense of touch)

Sthapana Nikshepa (Representation of one thing by another)

Sthavara jiva (Immobile one-sensed being)

Sthitiban&apasarana (Duration of fresh bondage of karmas goes on reducin~z bv one-oneAntarmuhurta)

Sthitibandha (Duration of karmas)

Sthitikandak (Reduction in duration of previously bonded karmas by one-one Antarmuhurta)

Striveda (Feminine inclination)

Swadhyaya (Study of scriptures)

Sukha (Bliss)

Sukla-Leshya (White thought-complexion)

Sutra (Aphorism, aphoristic mode of presentation)

Svabhava (Own nature, intrinsic nature, pure manifestation of an attribute)

Svabhava-sthita (Established in one's own nature)

Sva-dravya-kshetra-kala-bhava (One's own substance, space (location), time (state) and quality (disposition)

Syadvada (The doctrine of relative prediction; narrating something with respect to some particular viewpoint, law of relativity)

Syat (In some respect; angle or viewpoint)

   "T"

Taijas-sharira (the luminous or electric body) 

Tamas (Endowed with anger passion, etc)

Tattva (Element, principle, reality)

Tattvartha (The 9 real elements wih their qualities, regarded as objects of faith for a Jaina)

Tirtha (Ford, the path of Jaina-practice)

Tirtha-kshetra (A place where monks 'arhatas' have attained 'moksha' -liberation)

Tirthankara (Ford-makers, the Lord of the three worlds, the omniscient spiritual teachers of Jainas)

Tirthankara-prakriti (Karmas that determine the body of a Tirthankara)

Tiryancha (Animals & plants,( floras & faunas) or sub-human beings)

Trasa Jiva (Mobile being, 2 to 5 sensed beings)

   "U"

Uchcha Gotra (High family status determining karma)

Udaya (Rise or operation - state of karma

Udirana (Premature fruition of karmas)

Udumbara (Fig category fruits)

Udvelana (Regaining back status of karmas)

Utkarshana (Increase in duration & fruition of karmas)

Upabhoga (Enjoying some object repeatedly)

Upabhoga-antaraya (Hindrance to repeated enjoyments)

Upadana karana (Substantial cause)

Upadhyaya (A true preceptor - monk)

Upagoohana (Protecting a fellow Jaina by ignoring his mistakes & weaknesses)

Upasaka (A Jain layman, a synonym for shravaka)

Upashama (Subsidence of karmas)

Upashama samyaktva (Subsidential right belief)

Upashanta moha (The 11th Gunasthana in which all charitra mohaniya karmas are rendered inoperative)

Upasarga (Calamity)

Upavasa (Fasting)

Upayoga (Active or attentive consciousness; applied or active knowledge)

Utpada (Origination)

Utsarpini (Ascenoing cycle of time, progressive half-cycle)

"V"
Vaikriyika sharira (Transformable body)  
Vaimanikas (Heavenly gods) 
Vairagya (Detachment, renunciation) 
Vajra (Diamonds, adamantine) 
Vaiyavritti (Respectful service to the saints)
Vanaspatikayika (Plant beings, vegetables) 
Veda (Sex, sign)
Vedaka Samyaktva (A synonym for kshayopashama samyaktva)
Vibhangajnana (Wrong clairvoyance) 
Vibhava (Defiled, impure, disposition) 
Vichara (Shifting attention or upayoga from one object or mode to another) 
Vigrahagati (Transit from one body to another) 
Vinaya Mithyatva (False belief of the type of paying respect or reverence indiscriminately to all true-untrue gods, preceptors & scriptures, etc.) 
Virodhi Himsa (Injury caused in facing an enemy) 
Virya (Energy, soul's power to know & see ) 
Virya-antaraya karma (Energy obstructing karma) 
Vishuddhi (Purity) 
Vitaraga (Free from passion & attachment, etc., an epithet of an Arhanta) 

Vrata (Restraint, vow, oath) 
Vrata-Pratima (The second stage where a layman assumes the Anuvratas - small vows) 
Vratti parisamkhyana (Limiting the extent of one's begging rounds)
Vyantara/vyantari (The peripatetic gods/goddesses) 
Vyavahara (Convention) 
Vyavahara-naya (Conventional standpoint)
Vyutsarga (Renunciation of egoistic thoughts)

"Y"

Yaksha (Demigod)

Yathakhyata charitra (Perfect conduct or conduct conforming to perfect purity)

Yoga (Activity)

Yojana (A measure of distance equal to 4 kosas of 2 miles each = 8 miles distance)

Yoni (Nucleus)

(Note:  This book is corrected up to part of chapter 5 which ends at " Thus the contrariness is obvious. Hence your arguments are not correct.")