ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×“ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Æ»ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¸ï¿½Ö´ï¿½ï¿½Æ»ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¤ l
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Öµï¿½×¸ï¿½Ö¯Ö¸Ó¯Ö¸ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ ï¿½×¸ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ll 362 ll
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½:Ã¡Öµï¿½×³Ö»ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ Ã¡ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö´ï¿½×³Ö»ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö“ï¿½Öµï¿½Ô¯Ö¸Ó¯Ö¸ï¿½ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½: ll 362 ll
ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¾ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ß¾ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Î¾ï¿½Å®Öµï¿½Ö¸ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Æ»ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¤ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Öµï¿½ï¿½ ll 363 ll
ï¿½ï¿½Ã´ï¿½Ö®ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½s×¯ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ß¾ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½sï¿½ï¿½ï¿½É“ï¿½Ö¸ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Â´ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½Ö´ï¿½ï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½Ã´ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ô¾ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×³Ö»ï¿½ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½ ï¿½Ö¤Ë³ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ÖŸÖ´ï¿½ï¿½ ll 363 ll
362-363. If the ancient scriptural
teachings of the Acharyas be that male Karma desires woman, and the
woman-Karma desires man, then no soul whatsoever will become unchaste,
according to they teaching, because as has been said (above) material
karma by itself desires material Karma.
If the soul be taken as quite inactive an
substance without nature of change ability, then no soul will ever be
guilty of unchastely. Only matter will be responsible. This is quite
absurd. Under this view, there is no place for Ethics.
ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½×¤ ï¿½Ö¸ï¿½ ï¿½Ö¸ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¤ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½×¤ ï¿½ï¿½Ö¯ÖµÖ›ï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¤ ï¿½Ö¸ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ï¿½Ö´ï¿½ï¿½×¢ï¿½ ll 364 ll
ï¿½Ö¸ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ Æ®ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½: l
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö£ï¿½ï¿½Ô®ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ÞµÖŸï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½Ö¸ï¿½ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½Ö´ï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½ ll 364 ll
364. The Prakriti of Karma destroys
another, and is destroyed by another. It is in this sense that Parghata
Nama (Karma) is described.
ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¾ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ß¾ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½Ö‘ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Å®ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½×¤ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Öµï¿½ï¿½ ll 365 ll
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö´ï¿½Ö®ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½s×¯Ö•ï¿½ß¾ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½Ö‘ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Â´ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½Ã´ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ô¾ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ Æ®ÖŸï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ÖŸÖ´ï¿½ï¿½ ll 365 ll
365. Then no soul whatsoever is the
killer, according to they teaching, because the material karma itself as
said above destroys the material karma.
If the one-sided view that only Karmic matter
destroys other Karmic matter, be propounded, then no soul will be
responsible of the sin of causing injury to any other being. All souls
will be non-killers and non-killed. The doctrines of non-injury will
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½Ö¹ï¿½×¾ï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½ ï¿½×¸ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½Ö´ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ÖµÖ›ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¤ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Î¯ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¸ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½Ö¾Ö¾ï¿½ï¿½ ll 366 ll
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Üµï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½Î¹ï¿½ï¿½ÖµÖ®ï¿½ï¿½ß¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½Ö´ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½: l
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½: ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½Ö®Ö¿ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¸ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½: ï¿½Ö¾ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ll 366 ll
366. Thus if any jain ascetics
propounded, like this the Sankhya teaching, (then) according to them, the
material karma only is active, and ll the souls are non-active.
In the Jaina scriptures all propositions are
stated from two standpoints, real and practical. If only one of them is
followed, the truth wills not one out. Real point of view in Jainism says
that all souls are pure, an do not use any impurity, or any in, or bondage
or Liberation: but at the same time from a practical point of view all
mundane souls are bound up with Karmic dirt and modified into their impure
thought activities by the operation of Karmas. This view makes the soul
responsible for its deed of injury, unchastely, etc.
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Æ¾ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½Ö•ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Î¯ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Î¯ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Î¯ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½Ö¯ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¤ l
×´Ö“ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¾ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ÓŸï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ll 367 ll
ï¿½Ö®ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½Ö´ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½Ö®Ö´ï¿½ÖŸï¿½Ö®ï¿½: ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½ l
×´Ö£ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ã¾Ö³ï¿½Ö¾ï¿½ÃŸÖ¾ï¿½ï¿½Ö®ï¿½Ö®ï¿½Ö´ï¿½Ö®ï¿½Ãµï¿½ ll 367 ll
367. Or if thou holdest my soul
causes itself by itselfï¿½ thy saying this also is perverse thinking.
ï¿½ï¿½Ö“ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö•ï¿½Ö¯Ö¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½Ö´Öµï¿½×´ï¿½ï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¤ ï¿½Ö¢ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Æµï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ l 368 ll
×®ÖŸï¿½ï¿½sï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Üµï¿½ï¿½Ö¯ï¿½Î¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½×¿ï¿½ÔŸï¿½ÃŸï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½Ö´Öµï¿½ï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ÖŒï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ß®ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½s×¾Ö¬ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½ ll 368 ll
368. Know the soulï¿½s won nature,
from (the point of view of) expansion, to b co-extensive with the
universe. How does thou say that this substance is more or less than that?
ï¿½ï¿½Ö¾ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ö¾ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½×¤ ï¿½Ö¤ï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½×¾ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Î¯ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Î¯ï¿½Öµï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ÖµÖ´Ö¯ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×¤ ll 370 ll
ï¿½ï¿½Öµï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ÃŸï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½Ö¾ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½Ö®ï¿½Ã¾Ö³ï¿½Ö¾ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ÖŸÖ´ï¿½ï¿½ l
ï¿½ï¿½Ã´ï¿½Ö®ï¿½ï¿½Ö¯ï¿½ï¿½ÖŸï¿½ï¿½Ö¢Ö´ï¿½Ö®ï¿½ï¿½ Ã¾ÖµÖ´ï¿½ÖŸï¿½Ö®ï¿½: ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½×Ÿï¿½ ll 370 ll
370. The knowing substance exists
with its knowing nature. In this view, the soul never causes (creates) the
soul from itself.
The soul has ever been existing with its
knowing nature. It is useless to say. That soul causes soul. When there is
no right discrimination, the soul believes itself to be the doer of impure
though-activities, but when right discrimination is attained, then the
wrong belief that it is in reality the doer of impure thought-activity
disappears and there arises the right belief that soul is really the doer
of its own pure conscious thought-activity. An incentive soul can never be
purified. The one-sided view of the Sankhya system is not correct. The
soul is the doer of impure thought from the practical point of view, but
it is doer of pure thought only, from the real point of view. Both views
should be taken into consideration.