Jain World
Sub-Categories of Passions
About This Book (Translator's Prelude)
Peculiarity of Jainism
Nature of Mundane Existence
  Miseries of Mundane Existence and Bliss of Liberation 
  Exposition of False Belief Knowledge and Conduct
  Analytical study of different religions
  Refutation of False Deity-Preceptor-Religion
  X-ray of Jaina-misbelievers
  Nature of Sermons
  Nature of Liberation Path
  Nature of Noble Peaceful Death
  Rahasyapoorna Chitthi (Spiritual Letter)

X-ray of Jaina-misbelievers



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.