Shri Amar Muni



Shri Mahavir Bhagavan said to the eleventh brahmin scholar named Prabhas--

Oh you Aayushman Prabhas (endowed with a long span of life)

You have found these two mutually contradictory vedic statements: Here the first statement prescribes the duty of carrying out the agnihotra throughout the life; and its fruit is only swarga (heaven) hence you feel that there can be no such thing as moksa Otherwise why should the veda shastra give such a precept of ceremonising agnihotra during the life-time? But 'Brahma' soul has been introduced to be in two forms, i.e. par and apar. The 'par' is pure, enlightened soul liberated from samsar. This expounds the existence of moksa So, you have entertained the doubt whether such a thing as moksa exists or not.

The Relationship between a Substance and its Existence:

Reasons disproving salvation:

1. First if you accept the existence of the pot, "The pot soul also is completely destroyed, then who has to acquire moksa?

2. Karma contact being in existence from times immemorial cannot be destroyed. Therefore how can there be an end to samsar and salvation?

3. What is jiva? Jivas are naraka's, birds, animals, etc. If they are destroyed, it is to be believed that jiva is destroyed. Then whose moksa--the salvation?

These are the proofs of salvation--

1. Even after a light is vanished, the minute tamas, particles of its dark soot are present in the atmosphere, and they can be experienced by the sense of smell. Therefore, there is no total destruction. In the same manner, even after the jivas samsar ends, there is not total destruction of it. If the soot is blown away by wind, or if clouds are scattered, do their pudgals thereby get totally destroyed? No. The moulds and modifications of pudgals are strange. That which is perceptible by a particular sense, after a little elapse of time becomes perceptible by another sense after a little elapse of time becomes perceptible by another sense. Salt which can be perceived by the eyes, when dissolved in water, cannot be seen by eyes, yet its changed form is perceivable by the sense of taste. In the same manner, after the attainment of salvation, the jiva changes its mould only but is not totally destroyed; and it can be only seen by means of kevaljnan.

2. Though gold and clay are bound together, they are separated by means of chemical process, and pure gold is obtained. In the same manner, by means of 'samyag darshan' (the right faith) etc. the soul becomes pure and liberated.

3. 'Narkas' the inhabitants of hell, animals and birds etc., are only the modifications of the soul, the soul remaining intact all through these modifications, because the jiva himself assumes such forms and modifications, just like a ring or the bangle is broken, gold is not destroyed, but it remains intact. In the same manner, when the modifications such as of a Narak, an animal, a bird, etc., are destroyed, the jiva is not destroyed.

Question: On account of the contact of karmas the jiva was a worldly being. After the destruction of karmas why should not the jiva be destroyed? When the cause is destroyed, the effect also must be destroyed. Just as when the lines of a picture on a paper are destroyed, the picture also is destroyed.

Answer: Jiva is not created by karmas, so that when karmas are destroyed jiva also should get destroyed. Karmas are in the form of a cover, or an attributive substance. Therefore, just as the sun is not destroyed even though the clouds covering the sun are scattered, or, just as the space occupied by a hollow pot is not destroyed, when the pot is destroyed likewise after karmas are destroyed, the jiva is not destroyed. This is essential that even after the karmas are destroyed, the modifications of the samsar born out of karma's contact such as narakatva, Tiryakatva (the forms of birds and animals etc. ) also get destroyed along with karmas, but the jiva continues to exist in its pure nature of jiva, i.e. without any worldy modification like a human being, an animal etc., and it now acquires the muktiparyaya or the modification called salvation.

The liberated soul is not destroyable because it is devoid of variations like the pure sky.

Question: At once it may not be destroyed, but in coming time why may it not be destroyed?

Answer: The soul is permanent like the sky because it is formless. Yet, like the sky it is not all pervasive because its attributes like knowledge and pleasure are observed only through the body. So the soul must be pervasive in the body. This has been proved. In the same manner, it is not always unbound, unliberated, because it gets bound by Punyakarma and Papakarma. Otherwise, what is the fruit of benevolence, charity and violence? In the same manner by the separation from karmas, the soul also is freed from bondages.

Why is it that the soul even in moksa is absolutely permanent? It is permanent in particular aspects because its knowledge-modification changes according to the subject- modification, so the soul also in accordance with change of knowledge gets changed; hence with respect to knowledge it is transient.

Question: The attachments and hatred which are the causes for samsar have been in existence from times immemorial, how can they be destroyed totally? Just as you yourself say that the knowledge-consciousness has been in existence from times immemorial and it cannot be destroyed.

Answer: In this world dharma is of two kinds

1. 'Sahabhu' (natural) and

2. 'upadhi-prayojya (directed by a Nimitta, created by a cause.

(a) The light in the sun is natural, and so it never perishes. If clouds spread, the sun is only covered that's all; but even if very dense and dark clouds appear and spread over the whole sky, a slight lustre remains, from which we find some peculiarity, in respect of day or night; and so we can know that it is a day, since it is different from night. In the soul knowledge-consciousness is natural dharma like that. (b)Sometimes, in the sphatik (a transparent stone ) such colours as red and yellow are observed, but they are directed attributes by others i.e. they are upadhi-prayojya (acquired). It is due to 'upadhi' i.e. red-yellow thing which is placed behind the sphatik. As soon as that thing is removed, there will not remain even a trace of redness or yellowness. In the same manner, in the soul attachment and hatred are not natural attributes, but are dharmas of this sort, viz. upadhi-impelled i.e. manifested by other causes. They burst out on account of the producer namely 'karma'. Therefore, soon after karmas slip away, they will not remain in the least; this is logically acceptable. If it is so when 'Virag' the feeling of indifference towards world and sensual objects, and 'upasham.' the control over 'kashayas' like anger, pride etc. When these two increase and attachments and hatred decrease, and thus when the highest level of 'Virag' and 'upasham' (pacification of kashayas and ignoble sentiments is reached. Why should there not be total absence of attachment and hatred?

Question: After once the attachments etc. are completely destroyed, what proof is there to say that they will not be created again?

Answer: The deterioration i.e. variations in a substance are of two kinds--'Nivartya'- irremovable (those variations that cannot be wiped out or removed). Gold by the heat of fire melts. This melting is to change gold into a liquid form and this liquid form is a 'nivartya- vikar' a removable variation, because as soon as heat disappears, this liquid- form disappears, and gold again comes into the solid form.

Wood burnt by fire becomes ash. This is called 'anivartya vikar' (unchangeable distortion), because this ash cannot again become wood. In the soul, attachments and hatred are nivartya vikaras (removeable changes). They are caused by karma-samyog (karma-contact) and as long as the karma-samyog exists, they too exist, and as soon as karma-contact is removed, they too are removed. Now in the salvation-state karma-contact, because of the absence there-of its causes like mithyatva etc., will never be created, and so attachments and hatred also will never be created.

(indian writing pg142 angie): I This Vedic statement says that 'there is such an individual who is bodyless, who is not touched by sorrows and joys viz. who is not congruent with pleasure and displeasure. This kind of individual is a bodyless liberated soul. This also proves the existence of 'moksa'. It should be remembered here that this Vedic statement should not be taken to mean that "when the body is totally destroyed, the soul also is totally destroyed, and then therefore the liked one and unliked one do not touch it. The statement should not be understood thus, because the word 'ashariri' is not merely expressive of absence; but just as the word 'abrahman' refers to a man other than a brahman the word 'agras' refers to a food of vegetable grains etc. different from cow's milk, the word 'ashariri', in the same manner, does not denote total absence, but it denotes an existence of a real substance. Otherwise, the statement should have contained such a word like (indian writing pg 143 angie): 'Sharir-Nash, the destruction of the body. If even the word like 'Abrahmans'--a 'Nay Tatpurusha Samas'--word also does not denote only the absence, the non-existence of a brahman, but denotes kshatriya etc., then what to talk of the word like 'Ashariri', a Bahuvrihi-Samas! The word 'Vasantum' clearly denotes the dwelling of some body. Thus the word 'asharir' clearly denotes an existent subject. If only absence had to be taken, the word 'Sant' would have been enough. But because word 'Vasant' is said, the word 'a- sharir' denotes the soul that is steady on the top of Lokant' (on top of Lokakash).

(indian writing pg 143 angie) In this word 'va vasantam' the word 'Va'(indian writing pg 143 angie) denotes (indian writing pg 143 angie) or it suggests that even the Vitarag jiva in the worldly state i.e., who is still in the body, is not touched by priya or apriya. Here if we take in (indian writing pg 143 gada) `Va-avsantam' having 'A' after 'Va' (with (indian writing pg 143 angie) after (indian writing pg 143 angie)" e.g. "Va-A-Vasantam" meaning one who does not exist anywhere" in other words "absolutely destroyed" that would be wrong. Because this absolute destruction will not be congruent with what is said above that the ~ 'A-sharir' is solely a Bhava Padarth (a real substance) quite opposite to the sheer absence- state) .

The existence of Knowledge in moksa:

Question: Moksa may be existent; but since in Moksa there are no such means as the senses to produce knowledge, there knowledge is not produced, not created. Therefore such a soul will be like an inanimate object, a non-living thing.

Answer: Knowlegde is not an attribute being newly created in the soul by any means, but it is its natural inherent quality, which is covered by avarana' i.e., veils and the instruments like senses or the penances remove those veils partially or totally and the inner inherent knowledge is revealed to that extent, i.e., partially or wholly. When all 'avaranas' (veils) are destroyed absolutely by ~ penances and austerities of non violence and ~ self-restraint, the infinite knowledge is manifested which is called omniscience, which manifests itself fully and forever. Therefore in moksa, knowledge as the nature of the soul flashes always in its full fledged form.

Why is Knowledge a quality of the soul?

If knowlegde may not be the soul's own natural quality then what is the consciousness of the soul? Nothing. Even from the beginning the soul should be lifeless and inanimate like wood. If it is so, why is it that:

1. Knowledge is manifested only in the soul and not in the lifeless body, or the senses etc.?

2. Even when sometimes senses etc., are not functioning, how can knowledge in the form of remembrance happen?

3. During discourses etc., how in the mind unseen and unheard meanings are flashing out and to whom do they flash i.e. who is the container or the possessor of these flashes?

4. Though the eyes are the same, but if good practice say of studying the peculiarities of a diamond increases, then they are quickly observed with sharp sightedness and fine introspection. How is it so?.

Therefore it is proved that the knowledge is not the quality of the senses, but is an original inherent natural quality of the soul. Soon after all the veils completely being removed like the sun brightening full in the clear sky, the knowledge manifests itself fully in moksa After moksa is attained if all the qualities like knowledge may necessarily be destroyed totally, realness and substancehood ( i.e. 'Dravyatva' etc. ) also must be destroyed. But that doesn't happen and if they remain intact, why should knowledge, happiness etc., also not be existing intact?

How does the Knowledge comprehend all the objects?

Question: Let knowledge he there, but how can that be omniscience i.e. the knowledge of infinite objects of past, present and future infinite time?

How can there exst the knowledge of infinie objects?

Answer: This perfect natural knowledge knows all the substances (objects) accompanied with their all the moulds and modifications, existing in the 'lok' and the 'alok' in the three phases of time. Even if previous modifications are destroyed, then also this perfect infinite knowledge sees them in the form of past modifications. and it sees the future events in the form of the future modifications. The nature of knowledge is to know the knowable things. Only it knows to that extent to which the veil has been removed. When all the veils are removed, then what is the obstacle there to obstruct knowing i.e. having the knowledge of all the knowable things? Even the past is also knowable as the past. Otherwise there would be no remembrance of past events. How can it know all? Thus, just as even if the mirror is small, it can reflect all objects existing before it. Similarly for the Jnan' for the knowledge, whatever are knowable, it can know all of them in their totality, i.e., with all their modifications. Otherwise if a limit is prescribed that it can know only this much. not more, here 'only this much', means how much? What is the deciding factor to fix the limit that only a certain number of knowable things should be known and not more? There is no one who can decide upon the limit. So it is proved that all the knowable things are known. Thus, the liberated soul is omniscient. This omniscience by its nature goes on changing as the knowable things change from time to time, because it is the direct perception of the modifications as existing in every second and every moment and as they are changing every moment, the direct true perceptions of them also must be changing. Otherwise if the perception knowledge is steady it will be false (untrue).

How can there be infinite felicity in Moksa?

Question: Well, since there are no /papas (misfortunes) which are the means of sorrow in moksa, there is no sorrow there, but the question arises. similarly! How can there be happiness since punya (good fortune) which are the means of happiness, and the body, the senses and their objects which are the basis of happiness, are not present there at all, then the happiness also can not exist there, is it not so?

Answer No, there in the Moksa, happiness is infinite, unobstructed, and incessant. Happiness is of two kinds; I) inherent-natural, and 2) creative, which is dependent upon external objects. Let the moksa being the voidness of objects, be the absence of creative happiness, yet the inherent-natural infinite happiness, natural infinite bliss can flash in its full fledged form. Even in samsar the basis, the support of happiness is not the body or the senses or their objects, because happiness is experienced by the soul, not by the body or the senses. Therefore, the basis, the support for happiness is only the soul. Happiness is a quality of the soul. The body etc., are only the means of happiness. They are the means of happiness resting upon 'samyog' (contact). There is no need for any means for inherent natural happiness. The felicity perpetual happiness does not depend upon contact. In moksa if a soul devoid of all karmas can exist, why cannot as its inherent quality the bliss, the felicity also exist like knowledge? Actually, felicity is that which does not depend upon any transitory objects, but which is cognate, inherent. The soul is happiness incarnate. In samsar the happiness that is expecting transitory objects, changes into sorrow as soon as those objects are lost, or circumstances are changed. Therefore, the happiness of 'shata' (physical ease, pleasurable sensation) depending upon punya (good fortune) is actually sorrow; because since it is born out of auspicious karmas, when the karmoday stops, shata disappears, and then this causes sorrow.

Question: In the same manner we can ask why is there not the converse of it? The sorrow born out of papodaya is felicity, because it depends on karmodya, is not it?

Answer: No, it is not so, because no person devoid of illusion experiences sorrow as happiness.

Question: In that case, then in the contact of desired objects the experience of happiness also is not devoid of illusion?

Answer: No, such happiness is in fact sorrow, but it appears to be happiness because of false perception caused by illusion (moha) and false previous impressions. This sensual pleasure is virtually sorrow because when in the disease of exema or ringworm, on arising itching sensation we scratch our body, we experience illusory pleasure in scratching, but that pleasure is not real happiness. It is merely a remedy for agony. Similarly, we experience joy in the excessive hankering for sensual enjoyments, which is really a sheer remedy of pain arisen out of hankering for sensual pleasures. When the hanker disappears, the contact of the same sensual objects does not give pleasure but pain. If we eat too much sweetmeats, then afterwards on the very sight of the sweetmeat, we develop disgust for it. It means that on the stomach being satisfied, the agony of the desire for sweets disappeared, and there happened the temporary relief of the agony. The agony is for the time being subsided; consequently the imaginary illusory joy disappeared.

Question: Whatever may happen later, but previously so long 'as there remains some samyoga (contact) or condition, upto that extent, the experience of happiness is real. Isn't it?

Answer: Those who adore such happiness will have to pray for the mouth of a pig, or an uncivilised person; or pray for the birth in the hell. Because the mouth of a pig has a certain taste, and it takes extreme delight in eating excrement. In the same manner, the uncivilised people experience excessive delight in eating meat and drinking liquor. Whereas the inhabitanes of hell experience extreme delight in the state of leaving hell. If you choose it, you should enter that state and come out of it. If you say "the feeling of delight there is the mental illusion of a pig, or for the inhhabitants of hell on leaving it there is merely a deliverance from extreme suffering, but no real happiness"-- if that is so, here also the case is the same. In the happiness experienced in 'vishay-samyoga' (i.e. the contact of sensual objects) what is there excepting 'arati nivaran' the temporary removal of the thirst of sensual pleasure? Say, that sensual delight is a sheer remedy for time-being of excessive sensual quenching. When a man sits down to eat delicious food, and suppose, he at that juncture hears the news of a great calamity, there his excited eagerness for delicious food disappears. There he does not feel even delicious food as an item of happiness.

Even the remedy of the agony of sensual desire is for the time being. So after some time again a new desire arises, and to remove it one has to exercise new forced labour. Thus new quenches and new forced labours continue.

The happiness of samsar i.e. the worldly happiness depends on other's contacts (samyoga). It depends on the body, senses and their objects etc. It is not happiness. If the contacts exist, then only there is the experience of happiness; and all the samyogas or contacts are transitory. It means happiness is lost on the loss of samyoga Therefore, the anxiety for keeping samyogas remains continuing, incessant. So such happiness mixed with anxiety is really sorrow.

Even from other point of view, the happiness of samsar arising from the contact of objects is really sorrow, because its result is the bondage of karmas, spiritual ruin, and wandering in mean births and experiencing severe agonies and distresses. As the jivas in the illusion of happiness, go on developing contacts with sensual objects, their hunger for happiness also goes on increasing, and following this hunger they also indulge in this great lust and great sinful activities. I Hence they invite for future a series of inauspicious births full of sins and sorrows. To call this kind of happiness a 'happiness' is like treating poisoned sweets as sweets.

Since this happiness of worldly objects is artificial, unreal, illusory happiness, there must be somewhere the existence of real, true happiness. Since worldly happiness is untrue and dependent on contact, the real and independent happiness also must exist somewhere. Without the original, there can be no duplicate. Without the primary thing, there can be no secondary thing. Because a real lion exists we call some human being a lion.

Question: If there are no sensual objects in moksa, how can there be happiness?

Answer: By this question, you mean that happiness lies in sensual objects, and that the happiness increases on the increase of those objects. In other words you conceive a ratio between the sensual objects and the happiness. But it is a wrong concept, because as an example, if you have a hunger to eat only two sweet breads but the host insisted and you ate up four breads, then there even though the happiness- container sweet breads have increased, happiness does not increase. On the contrary agony is experienced there, only sorrow is experienced. Therefore, where did lie the ratio between the sensual objects and the influence of their pleasure? On the contrary, the munis (Jain ascetics) who are freed from such contacts, experience great felicity. Hence after all karma-samyogas are destroyed, why cannot there be experienced infinite happiness?

Felicity like knowledge is a quality of the soul. Therefore, just as after the veils over knowledge are destroyed, infinite knowledge is manifested. In the same manner, after the destruction of 'vedaniya'--karma infinite felicity is disclosed. It is not newly created like shata a physical ease, but it is the nature, a natural quality of the soul revealing itself. Therefore, it is eternal.

indian writing pg 149 angie)

This Vedic statement says that the impact of priya and apriya is prohibited in the pure soul (brahma). This priya-apriya are in connection with the sorrows and joys dependent on punya and papa. In other words such joys and sorrows do not exist in moksa They are only prohibited there by these vedic words, but this prohibition is not in connection with the eternal and natural felicity. In the phrase (indian writing pg149 angie) the word indicates that only those who desire heaven may do so. But those who desire moksa should not do so. If it were a direction for all, the word would not have been used there.

The summary is 'moksa' exists, and it abounds in infinite knowledge and infinite felicity. The liberated soul eternally stays at the top, at the 'lokanta' i.e. at the top of the universe, and becomes steady there for ever.

This explanation of Shri Mahavir Bhagavan cleared all the doubts of Prabhas and he with his three hundred pupils received diksa at the feet of the Bhagavan.

All the eleven brahmins after becoming munis salute the Bhagavan and politely ask, three times, "Bhagavan! What is tatvam (the extract of existance)?" and the supreme guru of the world, worshipped by all the kings of deities, Sri Mahavir Pratnatma answered the three questions respectively saying (indian writing pg 149 angie) "everything is created". "It is destroyed." "It remains steady." Pondering over these three answers through three factors i.e.

i) The answer uttered by the omniscient Mahavir Bhagavan himself.

ii) The ripening of the punya namely the 'Ganadharnam karma' earned in their previous birth, and

iii) The intellectual -- potentiality called autpatiki (spontaneous flash of) talent etc. on account of being equipped with these three means, the jnanavaran karmas achieved excessive khshayopsham (partial destruction) and then and there all 11 Ganadharas composed the Dwadashangi Agam, main l2 scriptures abiding in all tattvas (essentials) and the 14 Poorvas (Shastras) contained therein. The Bhagavan bestowed his blessings throwing on their heads scented powder of sandal wood etc. testifying to their truth and directing them to teach others. Thus the eleven brahmin munis became Ganadhar Maharsis.

This book has been written so that people may read it and understand the meaning of the tattvas relating to the soul, the karmas, the five elements, next birth, bondage, deliverance etc. and so that they may realise the true phenomenon of this Universe, may cultivate the trust (indian writing pg 150 angie) and may make endeavours to attain the liberations from samsar. No doubt with this auspicious desire, this book has been written, yet on account of intellectual inadequacy if something is said in this book contrary to the jinajna (the words of the omniscient) the author seeks pardon -michchhami dukkadam".