Shri Amar Muni
ARE THERE BONDAGE AND DELIVERANCE?
The (sixth) brahmin by name Mandit came. The Bhagavan
said to him, "You have the doubt whether the soul undergoes bondage and
moksa or not? You have found two kinds of vedic statements"
(indian writing pg 109 angie)
The first statement means, "This all pervasive soul 'viguno'
devoid of the three attributes- 'Satva' 'Rajas' 'Tamas' never comes into
bondage; does not undergo transformation in the samsar; does not attain
moksa; nor does cause deliverance of others" Whereas the second statement
means, "There is no voidness of joys and sorrows in the soul possessing
body. The soul becomes bound in the body. It also experiences the changes
in joys and sorrows, and when it gets permanent deliverance from the body,
then this botheration ends this series of entanglement ends". From this,
you have entertained the doubt whether the soul should have bondages and
moksa or not.
'Poorva Paksha' :-Opponent's view: His proposition
'Bondage and Moksa (deliverance) do not exist.
The soul has no bondage. In support of this theory, the
idea arises, "Bondage means the binding of the soul with karmas" But the
question is, "do the soul and karmas coexist or do they come
1) If the soul is first and karma next, then this
cannot happen i.e., it is not logically possible because in that state
either the soul might have taken birth without cause or the soul might
have been in existence from times immemorial. But in the first alternative
it is impossible, because without a cause an effect cannot be created.
That which is created is preceded by a cause, and if it is created without
a cause, then it may just perish without a cause, and perished after being
created, how could it be visible at all?
1) If the soul is first and karma next, then this
cannot existence without cause and how did they stick (cling) to the
soul? If they cling thus, namely without the cause, then to the
delivered souls they may cling!
2) If karmas are first and jiva next, even this
cannot be possible because without a doer how can karmas be created at
all? If they are created thus, then they might perish without any cause!
3) If you say that karmas and soul are created
together then there are defects on both the sides. Moreover between
these two there will not be possible even the logical link of doer and
deed, just as between the left and right horn created at the same time,
this relationship of a doer and a deed does not exist.
In this manner, the bondage of the soul and karma is
not logically possible. If the soul is not at all in bondage consequently
how can there be deliverance? If there is the union between karmas and the
soul from times immemorial, then that union without a beginning would be
ever-lasting which means the union cannot be destroyed. Hence deliverance
(moksa) cannot be logically possible. Will the union between the soul and
the sky, which is without beginning get ever destroyed? The implication is
that the soul has neither bondage nor deliverance ( moksa ).
The Refuting View: Bondage and Deliverance (Moksa)
1) The series of the body and the karmas is without a
beginning like the series of the seed and the fruit. Without a cause,
there can be no effect. Therefore this is to be accepted that karmas have
been created by the causative soul in some previous body. That body has
been formed by the causative karmas done previously... In this manner, the
chain between karmas and body is infinite. But it should be remembered
that karmas and the body are both causes and means, whereas the doer of
karmas and body is the soul. For the soul to do karmas the body is the
means: and to create the body karmas are the means. In this manner, karmas
in series remain clung to the soul. Therefore the bondage on the soul is
Question: If karmas exist, should they not be visible?
If not visible how can their existence be believed in?
Answer Let the karmas be invisible and imperceptible by
the senses, but their existence is inferred on the basis of their effect.
Otherwise if we think in this manner, just because your intelligence is
not visible, does it mean that it does not exist? Are you devoid of
intelligence? There is no rule that a thing that is not visible does not
2) There cannot be an end to an ever-existing
phenomena. But this is not an absolute truth. That 'which is without a
beginning cannot perish'. This kind of one-sided view is not sound (not
established by an evidence). The series of karma- samyog (karma-binding)
which is without a beginning, can come to an end. As for instance, if the
seed is dried or if the fruit is burnt, its series of seed and fruit which
has been running from the times immemorial and which is without a
beginning comes to an end. If a son remains bachelor and observes celibacy
throughout his life, his series of father and son, father and son, father
and son running from the times immemorial, will come now to an end. If the
hen dies before hatching eggs, or if the egg is destroyed, then its series
ends, because it does not further continue. Therefore, though the series
of the union between gold and clay has been in existence from the time of
their existence, but by means of its burning in fire etc., the series of
their union ends. In the same manner, by means of non-violence,
self-restraint and austerities the union of soul with karma also ends, and
deliverance (salvation, moksa) is attained. This-is a fact
that--deliverance is possible only of the "bhauya jivas', but not of the 'abhauya
jivas. 'Bhavyas' i.e. those souls that are worthy of salvation (eligible
for attaining salvation).
What is Bhayatva? How?
Question: Why is it that some are bhavya souls and some
are abhavya souls? If you say that this difference is like the difference
between the inhabitants of hell and animals, then it becomes evident that
the difference is caused by karmas.
Answer: No. There is a difference on account of nature.
Though all the substances are equal being sat (real), yet by nature some
substances are animate (conscious) and some are inanimate. This difference
is from the times immemorial; and due to such varied nature of those
substances, naturally some of them are animate and some are inanimate. In
the same manner, though all souls are equal as regards conscience
naturally some are bhavyas (worthy of salvation) and the others are
abhavyas (unworthy of the salvation). This difference has been in
existence from times immemorial. The series has no beginning. But when a
bhavya soul achieves salvation, its bhavyatva is ended.
Question: If the eligibility (worthiness) of salvation
bhavyatva like the soulhood is natural, then that is ever- existing. Why
should it end or perish! Just as jivatva does not end, why should
Bhavyatva end (be destroyed)?
Answer Though 'ghat-pragabhav' (i.e. true previous
absent state of the pot before its birth) is without a beginning as soon
as its effect the pot takes birth i.e. comes into existence, the 'ghat-pragabhav'
i.e. the absent state is destroyed. In the same manner, as soon as the
salvation as the effect of bhavyatva is attained, bhavyatva perishes. This
is quite logical. Do not say that pragabhav is of an absence state and
bhavyatva is of a non-absent state, hence how can the bhavyatva be
compared to pragabhav?"
Because even pragabhav, when the pot is in the state of
being created (namely, is in the process of creation) is in the form of a
special combination of clay-pudgals (specially shaped clay-bulk) and pot
is to some extent existent in that form. Though pragabhav in the
form of previous absence is without a beginning, it can perish in the form
of clay bulk. Bhavyatva being the eligibility of attaining salvation comes
to an end immediately after salvation is attained, because a soul after
attaining salvation is not eligible for salvation. The clay transformed
into pot is not now called eligible for pot. Hence now the intended very
effect is there, but not its eligibility.
As per anekdntvad, a pragabhava is not absolutely in
the form of absent state only of a substance but it is also in the form of
previous state of the effect. As for example, the pragabhava of a pot is
not merely its previous absent state, but it is also in the form of a
clay-bulk. So just when the form of the pot comes into existence their
does not remain now the form of the clay-bulk i.e., bulk-form is
destroyed, and pot-form has come into existence. Similarly when a bbavya
jiva acquires salvation form, he loses the form of worthiness for
Why does not the Samsar become empty of Bhavya
Question: If the bhavya jivas go on attaining moksa,
why should that day not come when the samsar should be totally empty of
bhavyas just as when even one grain after the other is taken out from a
store-house of grain a day comes when the store-house becomes totally
empty of grains.
Answer No, the amount of bhavya jivas is infinite like
time. Even though, time is exhausting second by second it does not come to
an end. In the same manner, bhavya jiva cannot be exhausted even though at
least one bhavya jiva attains moksa within every period of six months.
Question: Time is not limited whereas the bhavya jivas
are limited. There is only a definite amount of bhavya jivas in this
world. New bhavya jivas does not increase. So on the passing of infinite
time all the bhavya jivas should attain moksa, and the world should be
void of bhavya jivas.
Answer No, if you count from today, upto some future
infinite point of time, then that time is limited only, owing to two
extremes of time being fixed whereas the past time has no beginning and so
it is limitless. Now you think over this, what work of 'being completely
exhausted of bhavyas, has not happened in that limitless past time, how
can it happen in the future limited time? Whenever this question is asked
in the future, 'how many jivas have attained moksa till now the answer
will be one and the same that "jivas, only in an infinitesimal part of the
infinite number of one Nigod jivas, have attained moksa". Like the other
statements of the omniscient, even this statement also has to be believed
to be true, by having faith in him and on his words.
Question: Why are all the jivas not attaining moksa not
styled as 'abhavya?
Answer The term 'bhavya' does not mean a jiva that will
necessarily attain moksa, but it means a jiva who is worthy of (eligible
for) attaining moksa. In other words, those jivas only are bhavyas who can
attain moksa, if they obtain the means of moksa such as non-violence,
austerities and self-restraint etc. They should not be called (termed) as
'Abhauyas' simply because they did not get these means. If the wood
eligible to become an idol did not receive all other means required for
the creation of an idol, then the idol will not be created. But simply
because of such creation not happening in the absence of other means, wood
will not be considered ineligible and unworthly for idol.
Question: If moksa is a created thing, then why should
it not perish inasmuch as that which is created is destroyed?
Answer Just as 'Dhwamsa' (absence in the form of
destruction) after being created does not get destroyed similarly moksa
also does not get destroyed. Really speaking for moksa what is that thing
to be created? Moksa salvation is simply nothing but the manifestation of
the pure form of the soul. When a pot is broken, the 'ghataksa' (sky-part
occupied by the pot) is destroyed, but on account of it, there is no
additional increase in the sky. In this manner by the complete destruction
of all the *karmas, the embodied soul does not continue to exist in that
state; but the pure soul does exist and now there will never be new
entrance of karmas in the pure soul which might be subject to destruction
After moksa is attained, even though the soul and
karma- particles continue to exist in the universe yet in the delivered
soul there being the absence of activities of the mind, body and voice,
karma-particles are not ever captured in that case which can bind the
delivered soul. So there never arises any bondage of karmas. In the same
manner, when there is no seed of karmas, how can there be any sprout of
rebirth? The soul is permanent in the form of dravya, but transient in the
form of samsarik modification; and when just the samsarik modification
ends, then and there the salvation, modification starts, viz. the soul
gets created in the form of an imperishable salvation-modification (avinashi
i.e. everlasting moksa paryay).
Thus the soul is both permanent and transient. Now you
cannot say that because the soul is permanent and formless like sky so it
should be pervasive (pervaded) everywhere. Because first, the soul is not
absolutely permanent; and second, the soul is a doer, enjoyer and seer
etc. By this its all- pervasiveness is negated. Therefore, after all the
karmas are destroyed, just as the soul attains a new modification of
perfection, so it attains now the modification of naturally rising upwards
in the sky. Hence it can go upto the lokanta (the top of the Universe). If
it might be all-pervasive, where is the question of going? After it
reaches up the lokanta, then there will not be such causes of downfall as
karmas, endeavour, attraction, repulsions, heavyness etc. Therefore, it
can never fall in Samsar.
Question: Why is not the formless soul, like sky,
devoid of total movement?
Answer As opposed to the sky, just as the soul
possesses consciousness and the capacity for endeavouring as special
dharmas or natures, in the same manner, the capacity to act and move is a
special feature of the soul. Though in the physical actions, the soul
possessing karmas is the cause, and along with the bodily activities, the
soul is active. After all the karmas are destroyed, the soul on account of
its previous endeavour, soon after the burden of its karmas is removed,
attains an upward motion upto the Siddhashila But not beyond it. It is
like the scoped gourd covered outwardly with clay lying at the bottom of
water and coming up as soon as the clay-covering being washed down by
water is removed, it acquires naturally an upward motion but only upto
Siddhsihila Further, since in the AlokakaSa there is no Dharmastikaya
which is a helping medium for motion, there will not be further movement.
In the lokanta where the soul now stays for ever, during that stay karmik
body and bodily actions do not exist. Therefore the soul does not possess
at that level, actions like movement.
Question: What is the proof of the existence of aloka,
dharma, adharma, etc.? (Aloka means the sky beyond the universe 'dharma' 'dharmastikaya'
means a substance helping motion and 'adharma' means a substance helping
rest, standing still.
Answer The word loka is a pure word with a clear
etymological derivation. Its opposite is the 'aloka' just as inanimate is
the opposite of animate.
Question: Can we believe that a pot, a cloth etc., also
Answer: No the opposite point of view should be in
consonance with it. Just as when we say this is not a scholar; this
statement of absence of a scholar is only with respect to a conscious
nimate individual, not with respect to an inanimate pot. In this manner,
the 'aloka' existing as a separate akas is proved by the existence of the
'lok' which is akas, and which is congruent with it. The dharmastikayaand
the adharmastikaya are proved to be existent on the ground of
differentiating lokakasa and alokakasa The dharmastikaya is a formless
substance pervading only that much portion of akas (sky) which is called 'Lok'
akas; and it helps souls and matter in the movement of going etc.,
Consequently souls and matter can move can go up to the edge of
dharmastikaya and lok-akas. Now if there did not exist this substance like
Dharmastikaya the jivas and the pudgals would have got scattered in the
boundless akas. Consequently, how can bondage, moksa, joy, sorrow, roaming
in samsar, be possible in the jivas? Like the water helping fish in the
movement in the water, dharmastikaya remaining only in lokakas helps jivas
and pudgals in the movement only in the lokakas. Just as the movement of
fish is favoured by water, the movement of jiva and pudgals is favoured by
dharmastikaya. From this, dharmastikaya is proved to exist. Similarly the
standing or staying is favoured by 'adharmastikaya' just as an old or a
sick man stands on a road supported by a stick, by this adharmastikaya is
proved to exist.
The Existence of Moksa has no beginning
(It is existent from the Times Immemorial)
In moksa, infinite souls co-exist.
Question: From when did the possession of body start?
From when did the existence of time start?
Answer: They have no beginning. They have been going on
from times immemorial-infinite time.
Question: When did the process of attaining siddhatva
Answer It has no beginning. So uptil now infinite souls
attaining siddhatva have reached to and stayed on siddhashila.
Question: How did they co-exist there in a limited
Answer: Even in the limited area, the radiance of
thousands of lights get mingled and co-exist. When it is so, in that realm
of perfection, infinite number of formless siddha-souls can co-exist. What
wonder is there in this?
That soul which is devoid of three
gunas--sattva-rajas-tamas, and Karma particles, and is pervasive through
knowledge is not bound. This statement is made with reference to siddhas.
After being thus convinced of the truth by the
Bhagavan's explanation, Mandit also became a disciple of the Bhagavan
along with his three hundred and fifty pupils.