Enlightened Vision of the Self

Author(s): Akalankadev, Devendra K Goyal
Publisher: Radiant Publishers New Delhi
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/001375/1

Page #1

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
Svarupa Sambodhana of Akalanka
Translated with an Introduction by
Devendra K Goyal

Page #2

The Enlightened Vision of the Self. Svarupa Sambodhana of Bhatta Akalanka Deva, an original thinker and a brilliant logician, highlights the intrinsic or essential nature (svarupa) of the self. It outlines the path to realize our "real self" by exhorting (sambodhana) man to establish himself in his natural state of peace and happiness.
Based on a wide variety of sources, the book discusses the fundamental question "Who Am I?" It examines how Buddhism and Jainism as well as various schools of thought including the materialists, Samkhya and Vedanta perceive the nature of the self. The study answers a number of basic questions: What is the nature and characteristics or aspects of consciousness or soul? Does the soul exist or not? Is it substantial or functional? Is it evolvent (ever-chan changeless? Is the soul immanent in beings or a transcendental entity?
The book also critically examines the concepts of Being and Becoming, aham brahmasmi (I am brahman), tat tvam asi (Thou art That), soham (1 am That or He), "intentional consciousness" and "pure consciousness," the self as knower (jnata), observer (drashta), etc.
The book will be useful to scholars and students of Indian philosophy, especially Jainism.
ISBN 81-7027-244-0
Rs200
$20

rozww.jainelibrary.org

Page #3

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF

Page #4

Page #5

THE ENLIGHTENED
VISION OF THE SELF SVARUPA-SAMBODHANA
of
BHATTA SHRI AKALANKA DEVA
TRANSLATED WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY
DEVENDRA K GOYAL
EDITED WITH FOREWORD BY JAGDISH PRASAD JAIN 'SADHAK'
RADIANT PUBLISHERS

Page #6

First Published 2005
Copyright 2005 by Radiant Publishers
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any
form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of
the Publishers.
ISBN 81-7027-244.0
Published by RADIANT PUBLISHERS E-155 Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019
Printed at Tarun Offset Printers, Delhi.

Page #7

Contents
PREFACE
60
73
1 Foreword
by Jagdish Prasad Jain “Sadhak” 2 Introduction 3 Main Shlokas with English Translation
APPENDIX 1: The Concept of Draga (Substance): Continuity and Change APPENDIX 2: Sanyakdarshan APPENDIX 3: The Psalm of the Soul
100
106
INDEX
113

Page #8

Page #9

To
the memory of my wife

Page #10

Page #11

Preface
Suara Sambodhana Pancharinshatih, as the name signifies is a short grantha consisting of twenty-five shlokas (excluding the last one forming the epilogue). It is the shortest composition of Bhatta Shri Akalanka Deva, who flourished in the eighth century (720-780) AD.
It was the period when Buddhism was at its zenith and enjoyed political and royal patronage. Buddhist acharyas were in great power and were zealously trying to wipe out and destroy the very fabric of the Jain Darshan. It was Acharya Akalanka Deva, who not only stood against this onslaught and saved the Jain Darshan from extinction, but also debated with and defeated renowned Buddhist acharyas such as Dharma Kirti in religious debates. Bhatta Shri Akalanka Deva was one of the greatest thinkers and exponents of Jain Darshan
This grantha, Szarupa Sambodhana Pandharinshatih, deals with the nature of Soul and gives a vision of the Self. The author has discussed the true nature of the self from the anekantic point of view. It also deals with the methods to achieve self realization.
Though in vastness, this grantha is nowhere near to the other works of Sri Akalanka Deva, yet it has its own grandeur.
This English translation of the grantha is based on the original Sanskrit shlokas and khandariya given in the book, Swarupa Sambodhana Pancharinshatih edited by Dr. Sudeep Jain, a publication of Shri Akhil Bhartiya Jain Yuva Federation, Alwar, Rajasthan.

Page #12

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
I have greatly benefited by the Hindi translation of Srarupa Sambodhana done by Brahmachari Gyananandji in his book Shanti Sopan and adopted some of the interpretations and explanations contained therein.
I am highly indebted to Dr. S.K.Vohra, former Reader in English in Meerut University, Meerut,and Dr. Jagdish Prasad Jain "Sadhal", former Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, for their suggestions and help in bringing the English text in its present form.
Deoband Distt. Saharanpur
DEVENDRA KUMAR GOYAL

Page #13

Foreword
Jagdish Prasad Jain "Sadhak”
Srarupa Sambodhana is a short treatise, comprising only twentyfive verses, by Acharya Akalanka Deva (also known as Bhatta Akalanka Deva) who lived in the eighth century A.D. An original thinker, a great scholar, a good commentator, and a brilliant logician, he refuted the philosophy of Dharmakirti - Buddhist scholar of great repute. Akalanka was an accomplished debater who defeated Buddhist scholars in philosophical disputations. His contribution to the field of Jain logic was so immense that he is considered as the “Father of Jain Logic”, and Jain Logic has come to be designated as "Akalanka Logic" (Akalanka-nyaya). Dr. Atsusi Uno, Professor Emeritus at Hiroshima University observes:
Akalanka Deva (c. 625-675 CE.), well-known for his Akalankamaya, undoubtedly occupies the highest place in the Jaina logical literature, as a logician and doughty controversialist against opponent schools. It may be said without exaggeration that he was the first to systematise the Jaina logic and philosophy, exerting the greatest influence on later Jaina literature on that line.
In addition to Swarupa Sambodhana, the original works,

Page #14

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
composed by Akalanka, are: Laghiyastraya, Nyayarinishchaya, Pramanasangraha and Siddhivinishchaya. Akalanka also wrote Tattrarthrartika (Rajuartika) commentary on Tattrartha Sutra of Umasvami or Umasvati and Ashtashati commentary on Acharya Samantabhadra's Aptamimansa.
Akalanka's works on logic were seriously studied even by nonJaina scholars in those days. In all likelihood his arguments were profitably utilised by them against the common rivals. It is said that Jayanta Bhatta (9th century A.D.), the logician of the Nyaya system of thought, had consulted Akalanka's works. Jayanta Bhatta's commentator Chakradhara (10th-11th century A.D.), while commenting on Jayanta's concerned sentences, reproduces five karikas from Akalanka's Siddhirinishchara and explains them extensively in his own words. This is very important and noteworthy. One more Kashmiri Pandit Bhattanarayanakantha (10th-11th century A.D.) refers to Akalanka and his Granthatraza by name in his writti on Mrgendratantra. His actual words are: sadasadradinam arhatam cha mateshu A kalankatritaya-prabhrtisu. This shows that Akalanka's works attracted the attention of non-Jaina scholars of even remote regions like Kashmir.?
Srarupa Sambodhana consists of two words: "szaroa”, which signifies the innate nature or character (szabhara) of the Self and "sambodhana" meaning an address to that starupa. The essential nature of the Self is consciousness and hence this treatise by Aklanka exhorts the Self to understand its true nature and exert oneself to realize it. Unless one is aware of the true nature of the Self, one remains oblivious of one's impurities and deviations in the same manner that one cannot possibly know the deterioration or the abnormality of the disease until one knows one's natural healthy condition. Accordingly, the work explains the real nature of the Self in the first ten verses. The next five verses describe the path to self-realization. In the remaining ten verses, the Self is exhorted to wake up and exert itself to realize the fullest development of the potentialities of the Self by either giving up or eradicating the impurities which constitute vibhara, i.e. deviation, distortion or modification of the intrinsic nature of the Self (suabhara or scarpa). Thus, Akalanka's aim is to remind the Self of its true nature and establish it in its natural state.
Since the Self alone is responsible for the deviations or the

Page #15

FOREWORD
distortions of its inherent qualities, it alone is capable of undertaking all corrective steps. The Self is the doer of its own karmas or actions, both physical (dravya) and mental or psychic (bhara) karmas. It is also the enjoyer of the fruits of its own karmas. It is therefore rightly said that "Mana eva manushyanam karanam bandh mokshyoh". In other words, the mind alone is responsible for both bondage and liberation. Bondage is caused by one's psychic dispositions (bhara) of attachment and aversion and enslaving desires and passions. Liberation is secured by the Self through his own efforts without any extraneous help. Other persons, including gods and goddesses, have no role or responsibility whatsoever in regard to either bondage or liberation. Thus, others can only provide inspiration and guidance.
3
Each and every substance is independent of other substances. Every soul has infinite power. It is an embodiment of knowledge and potentially divine. What the soul needs to do is to break the shackles of the cravings of the senses and passions. It needs to be reminded of its innate nature and inherent strength. It also needs to be awakened from the slumber of infatuation or delusion and urged to take the right path. Self-realization, in fact, is an exercise in independence and self-reliance. It is an art as well as a science.
The Self, which is described in the beginning verses of Swarupa Sambodhana, proceeds from the perspective of the doctrine of anekant or non-absolutism or multi-faceted reality. The nature of things, according to this doctrine, is extremely complex. One cannot affirm or deny anything in absolute terms. Since there are innumerable qualities in things and beings that exist, and ever so many sides to every question that may arise, one can discuss only one of them at a time and understand a particular point of view or the various contexts in which different statements are made. For instance, I am a father in relation to my son and a son in relation to my father. What may appear as an irreconcilable statement for some is, to a Jain, merely a difference of point of view and a necessary step in understanding a thing in all its aspects. Anekant propounds the many-sided view of a thing and emphasizes the relativity of truth.

When the nature or character of the Self is explained from the above-mentioned multi-faceted perspective, it is naturally critical of other systems of thought, which hold one-sided views about the

Page #16

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
conception or nature of the Self. This view is particularly critical of the philosophy of Buddhists, who held considerable influence in Akalanka's time and against whom he had to engage himself in philosophical debates. Thus, Verses 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 13 and 25 are critical of Buddhism. Verse 2 refutes the materialist conception of the soul as held by Charvakas. Verse 1 is critical of the Mimamsakas and the Vaisheshikas. Verses 3, 5, and 10 are critical of the SamkhyaYoga school of thought. Verses 5 and 12 are critical of the Nyaya school of thought. Verses 4 and 5 are critical of the Vaisheshik point of view. Verses 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 and 12 are directed against the Advaita Vedantins and Verses 1, 5, 9 and 12 are critical of the Samkhya and the Mimamsakas.
In the first verse (shloka), Akalanka offers obeisance to the Supreme Self (Paramatman) or the Pure Self and describes its characteristics. The Supreme Self, he says, is pure consciousness. He is an embodiment of knowledge (nanammti) and is free (mukta) from both drarya (physical) and bhain (psychic or mental) karmas (karmabhi). As such, he is free from the cycle of births and deaths, i.e. eternal (akshaga). According to Jainism, drazza karmas are very subtle, ultra-fine material particles which are associated with the soul of all living beings since beginningless time. These give rise to bhara karma (psychic dispositions of attachment, aversion, cravings and passions, etc.). The embodied souls are impure due to the association of karma particles. The impurities or distortions of the soul (passions, etc.), in turn, attract these karma particles as a result of vibrations caused by the activities of the mind, body, and speech.
Thus, the interaction between the impure soul and karma particles continues resulting in an unending cycle of births and deaths, until the soul, awakened to its real nature, exerts itself to get rid of both psychic distortions (bhara karma) and extraneous material (drarja karma) particles. In the liberated state, the Supreme Self is free from the karmas (Karma-mukta). This refutes the contention of the Mimamsakas who consider Paramatma not to be free from the karmas. The adjective “akshaya” refutes the view of those who do not regard the soul as remaining eternally in the state of moksha (salvation). The description of pure consciousness as jnana-mati (embodiment of knowledge) refutes the Samkhya conception of prorusha (soul), which

Page #17

FOREWORD
is devoid of cognitive acts. The cognitive acts are ascribed to buddhi (intelligence), which is said to be an evolute of the unconscious principle of prakrti.
When the nature of jira or the Self is defined as chetana (consciousness) or knowledge (jnana), which constitutes its very essence and is regarded as an essential and distinguishing characteristic of the Self, how can that guma (attribute) be separated from drarya (the soul substance)? The Self, therefore, is said to be amukta (not free or inseparable) from knowledge and other attributes with which it is associated. In asserting that the soul is not free (amukta) from its essential or the most prominent feature of consciousness, i.e. jnana (knowledge), Akalanka disagrees with the Mimamsakas and the Vaisheshikas, who maintain that jnana or knowing capacity is not the nature of the soul; it is an accidental or adventitious quality generated in the soul on account of its contact with body, mind, and sense organs. Jnana is, thus, considered to be a distinct entity from the soul and is said to be brought in association with the soul or jimatma by combination (samaraya); then the soul becomes the knower. In other words, the quality of consciousness (chetana) and substance of the soul (atmadrarxa) are two different entities occasionally or accidentally brought together by extraneous circumstances.
Commenting on this, Prof. Chakravarti observes:
This doctrine...is rejected by the Jaina thinkers as most contradictory, because it would reduce the Atma or the soul to a non-thinking entity before it has the good fortune to be combined with Guna or quality of knowledge or Jnana. The knowing capacity or Jnana is intrinsic manifestation of the spiritual entity Chetana drauga or Jira. To imagine that the quality of gma can exist separately from the Jira or the Atma is, according to Jaina metaphysics, quite impossible and meaningless, because according to this central doctrine of Jainism Guma and Draya cannot be separated and when so separated each becomes meaningless abstractions incapable of existence in reality. Hence the triple psychic characteristics of knowing, feeling and action are considered inalienable qualities of the Chetana entity, Atma or Jira and they should not be considered to be of independent existence brought

Page #18

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
together by combination or association. Each quality may vary in intensity or in extensity. But all the three characteristics must be present in any Jira however high or low it be in the scale of development.
The doctrine of the Mimamsakas and the Vaisheshikas that knowledge, consciousness or power to know is an independent quality which, when it comes in contact with the soul, enables it to perceive and know itself and other things, is also untenable on the ground that qualities or attributes only inhere in substances (Drazzaashrah gimah) as Tattrartha Sutra (V.41) categorically states. Commenting on it, Barrister Champat Rai Jain remarks:
That qualities inhere in substances is a self-evident truth, for they cannot be conceived to exist by themselves. If they could lead an existence independently of substance, we should have softness, hardness, manhood and the like also existing by themselves, which would be absurd. Moreover, if qualities were capable of leading an independent existence of their own, existence also would exist separately from all other qualities. But this would make existence itself a featureless function or attribute of nothing whatsoever, on the one hand, and all the other remaining qualities simply nonexistent, on the other, because existence would no longer be associated with them. It follows, therefore, that qualities cannot be conceived to exist apart from substances.*
Thus, the intrinsic attribute of consciousness (chetana) with its psychic characteristics or properties of intuition, knowing, feeling and activity persist or continue to exist and reside in the soul even in the liberated state, shining in their full effulgence as infinite vision, infinite knowledge, infinite bliss or happiness and infinite vigour (ananta chatushtaya) and is not extinguished or destroyed. The indestructible nature of the soul refutes the viewpoint of those who adhere to the philosophy of void, nothingness or no-soul.
The existence of the soul is affirmed in categorical terms in the second verse of Swarupa Sambodhana. This verse refutes the materialist Charvaka system of thought which denies the independent existence

Page #19

FOREWORD
of consciousness or the soul and maintains that jiwa or consciousness is an epiphenomenon of matter, something like the inebriating power emerging from the mixing of certain ingredients. In other words, the so-called jiva or atman (soul) is nothing but a temporary product of material elements. It did not exist before birth; it will cease to exist after death. There is no life hereafter. To the Jains, the experience of knowing, feeling, and willing undeniably proves the existence of the Self.
7
Satyashashan Pariksha of Vidyananda, the best exponent of Akalanka's philosophy, criticizes Charvaka materialism in the following words:
The materialist's denial of soul as an independent principle of consciousness goes against the law of causality. The nature of consciousness is radically different from matter and so it cannot be the product of material elements. The effect must be essentially homogeneous with the cause and reducible to the latter in turn. The law of causality demands that the cause and its effect must be mutually reducible. Consciousness is not reducible to matter and hence cannot be a material product. Moreover, the existence of soul is proved by self-intuition (sasamuedana). We feel pleasure and pain, joy and sorrow, which presuppose a conscious substance as their substratum. The materialist cannot deny self-intuition. He must accept cognition as self-cognized in order to cognize the object. It cannot be admitted that the cognition is cognized by another cognition, because the second cognition would require a third, the third a fourth, and so on ad infinitum, leaving the object uncognized for ever. Nor can the materialist regard the cognition as cognized by inference, because he does not accept the validity of inference. He is therefore compelled to admit self-intuition, and consequently the existence of the self or soul as the substratum of that intuition.

Being radically different in nature from the material products, the soul must be eternal unlike the latter.... The material elements are known as external objects while consciousness is felt as internal. This argues their absolutely different nature. Moreover, it is a common experience that a new-born babe has desire to suck the

Page #20

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
breast of his mother. This desire would be unexplainable in the absence of his recognition of the breast as milk-secreting organ. The recognition again presupposes memory and memory is based on past experience in a previous life. There are also instances of . .. gifted persons remembering their past lives.
Vidyananda, the Jaina philosopher, asks: “What is the source of the knowledge of this peculiar nature of reality?" He answers that question by stating that “The ultimate nature of things can be known by experience alone.” If someone asks: “What is the ground for our belief that consciousness is existent and is also the proof of the existence of other things?” The answer must be that it is felt to be so. Moreover,
Consciousness is its own guarantor and proof of its own reality. As regards unconscious matter, its existence is established by means of consciousness. It cannot be asked why consciousness should be self-evidenced and matter be dependent upon consciousness for the proof of its existence. The question is a question of fact, and not of reason. The nature of thing is inalienable and must be accepted to be what it is. Can anybody answer why fire should be hot and water cold, and not vice versa? No, because it is a question of fact. Similarly the nature of reality is to be deduced from the testimony of experience. The existence of things which are experienced is obvious and self-evident."
If one argues that everything has a separate real existence, one must accept the separate existence of knowledge and the various objects, that are cognised or known. This implies that both would become non-existent, for how can there be knowledge if something is not there as the thing known? There can be either an internal or external object of knowledge. But all such objects would become non-existent, if there be no knowledge. Again, if knowledge be nonexistent, the objects of knowledge would also become non-existent as the objects of knowledge depend on knowledge. $ The existence of the soul continues from the infinite past to an infimite future. It'is without any beginning or end (anachantah). It is

Page #21

FORE WORD
eternal and not created by anyone. While the soul, being incorporeal, cannot be comprehended (agrahya) by the senses, its existence is evident from self-intuition (sasamaedana) and the experience of the feelings of pleasure, pain, etc. Jainism does not accept the illusory character of the jira as defined in the monistic Vedanta.
The soul not only exists but is also imbued with upayoga (psychic attention, function, or manifestation of consciousness). The Self, when viewed as pure consciousness (chetana), is Karana sarupa (being of the nature of cause). However, when viewed in its manifestations or functions of cognitive and conative acts (jnana darshan roop) it is karya starupa (i.e. of the nature of effect). Moreover, the Self takes the form of cause and effect of its modes, i.e. a particular state or mode of the soul (consciousness or knowledge) becomes the cause of its later state which is the result of the former state (kramat hetu phalavah). Such a mode can be said to be the cause with respect to the subsequent mode and as an effect with respect to the mode preceding it.' There is, thus, a necessary concomitance between cause and effect. Thus, the negation of cause leads to the inference of the negation of effect. This refutes the Buddhist contention that our cognitions are momentary, that the effect is independent of the cause, and that the cause and effect are absolutely distinct.
According to Akalanka, an effect is nothing but a new modification occurring in a pre-existing and continuing substance and this substance is the cause of the modification. All momentary change is possible only in an entity that is somehow abiding. Change is not possible in things that are destroyed completely the moment they are born without leaving any trace behind just as it is not possible in a nonentity like sky flower. Modifications are absent in those which have not yet originated and those which after existence have disappeared.? If there is no permanence there cannot be any change, or fluctuation, for it is only the permanent that can change.
In this context, Harisatya Bhattacharya rightly points out:

9
Evolution does not mean continuous and successive new creations out of nothing; it always implies a development or amplification of what already is may be, as potentiality or implicit possibility, evolution thus signifies a constitutive permanent element and a
—

Page #22

10
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
contingent element of change as well.10
According to Jainism, the cognition, the cognizer (the cognizing agent) and the cognized content are three distinct facts inseparably rolled into one.11 Nathmal Tatia observes:
The Jaina philosopher [Vidyananda] does not find any difficulty in admitting the same self running through different modes and preserving its identity. He likens this vertical identity to the unity of a cognition which has a variety of colours and form, spread in space as its content. Even as a single cognition can cognize a number of forms and colours in one sweep and be one unitary fact, so does a substance remain one while passing through different modes in succession. Moreover, if causal efficiency is the criterion of reality, the real should be admitted as permanent and transitory both. The momentary is not capable of exercising causal efficiency either in succession or in non-succession and as such cannot be real. The same is the case with an absolutely permanent entity. The Jaina accepts causal efficiency as the criterion of reality, which, according to him, presupposes that the real should be both permanent and transitory.
The Buddhist denies a permanent self underlying the course of psychical events which happen in different times. What exists and is possible is only the present momentary unit. The past is defunct, and the present is lost after its turn. This makes the continuity of personal life impossible, and consequently the continuity of present life into the future and the necessity of the law of karman that the performer of good or bad act will have to bear the consequences become impossible of explanation.12
The Jaina holds that causal efficiency is not consistent with the principle of momentariness (Kshanikarada)— although the Buddhist himself treats causal efficiency as the very essence of his principle. Causal efficiency, according to Jaina view, cannot function successively owing to the fact that the momentary existence (kshanas) lacks an abiding nature and hence can have neither spatial nor temporal duration. Succession-spatial or temporal-involves the notions of

Page #23

FOREWORD
11
"before" and "after" which are absent from the moment. 13
If the Buddhist responds to this contention bystating that although the moments perish and have no extension in space or time they do constitute series (santana) which does not perish and therefore enables the moments to be successive, then the Jaina rejoinder to that argument would be as follows:
In the first instance, 'santand' or the continuous series is an unreal fiction (santanasyarastutrat). There is nothing else than the selfsufficient moments. In the second instance, supposing the reality of santana is conceded for the sake of argument, even then the Buddhist position will be as illogical as before for santana too would then have to share the momentary character of the units in it. This would be needless duplication of momentariness in another medium (santana) which is not only imposed falsely on the momentary units but also can never sustain any continuance in it.14
The Buddhist doctrine of “universal flux" is also criticized by the Mimansists—the advocates of Mimamska school of thought. As advocates of the doctrine of karma, which demands for its origin, potency, and fruition the abiding agency of the Self, they point out, and not unjustifiably, to the difficulties inherent in the concept of the Self as momentary conscious states or as an unconnected series of them, no one member of which has anything to do with the other. The most damaging of such difficulties, according to the Mimansists, is that of Krtanasha or obliteration of all trace of action done, which gives rise to the problem of akrtabhagama or the enjoyment of the result of an action done by one momentary agent by another such momentary agent who was never responsible for it.15
In the Buddhist theory of flux, nothing continues. There is no identity between the past and the present, which is to be known by recognition. We know that there are different qualities, form, colour, etc. in an object. But if, like the Buddhists, we accept the theory of changes following each other in succession, all these qualities become fictitious for there would remain nothing stable of which these can be properties. “If knowledge consists of passing sensations without the unity of apperception to connect them, there is no pratyavijna or

Page #24

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
recognition, e.g., this house as being the one that I visited yesterday.” 16 There will also be no knowledge of similarity on the same principle. If nothing remains stable, the persistence of human personality after death, which is accepted by the Buddhists, becomes impossible by their own doctrine.1?
According to Buddhism, everything (savam) is impermanent (anichcha), soulless or substancesless (anatta); there is nothing permanent, fixed or stable. Reality is a series of discrete moments without the thread of an inner connectedness. What is felt is always the moment, absolutely distinct and discrete from another moment. So no question of identity of one moment with another moment arises. Criticizing this Sautrantika (Buddhist) theory of flux, Nathmal Tatia points out:
In fact, a plurality of units without a binding nexus can never account for the unity felt in an entity. If an abiding unity is posited to connect and combine the different units, then recognition and also causality can be explained. This is the position of the Jaina philosopher who asserts that a reality is a permanent unity which runs through the changing moments that appear in it. The criterion of reality is thus continuity and change, that is to say, the flux and influx of states.
Causality, Tatia adds, is “as inexplicable in the theory of flux as it is in the theory of eternally unchanging cause”.18 Causal efficiency can neither be possible in the case of an absolutely momentary entity nor it can be possible in the case of an absolutely changeless (kutastha) entity. In this regard, Akalanka observes:
Reality cannot be absolutely eternal. If the reality is eternal, there can be no modification anywhere, there can be no cause or effect anywhere, and nowhere can there be valid knowledge or its result in the form of acceptance, rejection or indifference. Valid knowledge manifests reality. And reality is manifested by valid knowledge. If both valid knowledge and reality are eternal they cannot be related to each other as the manifester and the manifested.... If modification is real, reality cannot be eternal.

Page #25

FOREWORD
Modification consists in the destruction of some one mode and the production of some other. But there is neither production nor destruction in what is eternal. However, modification is known by valid knowledge; so it is real. Therefore reality cannot be eternal. If there is no modification there can be no right actions or wrong actions, merit or demerit, bondage, transmigration, or liberation, or the agent, the self. Thus eternalism leads to a denial of the self (Nairatmarada). Reality cannot be eternal as the Advaita Vedanta holds.19
A true Jain does not subscribe to the absolutist approach to the unfolding of the inner nature of reality. A Jaina is convinced that absolutism in philosophy is subversive of ethical speculation, since absolutism is always based on a prioristic trend of thought very remote from experience. In this regard, Acharya Samantbhadra's observation is very significant. According to him, the conception of bondage and liberation, proza (virtue) and papa (vice) lose all their relevance, if we exclusively recognize either permanence or momentariness as constituting the nature of substance.20 Thus, in both cases of absolute momentarism and absolute eternalism, insurmountable difficulties arise. For the Jaina, however, such difficulties and problems are resolved on the basis of the non-absolutist anekarta doctrine which views things as possessing of the three-fold characteristics of the abandonment of previous form, the acceptance of a new form, and the retention of their own identity.
This leads us to the peculiar Jaina conception of sat (existing reality) or drazza (substance), which is characterised by permanency in the midst of change. The Jaina denies the unalterable nature of the jira. According to Jainism, the sat or real, whether conscious or unconscious, is never static or immobile, but is always parinami or evolvent But in spite of its constant change or parinama "it keeps up its stability or character as an identical substance in and through its changes or parinamas”, as Hari Mohan Bhattacharya remarks. He adds:
It is thus a parinama nitya as Umasvati puts it, utpada-gaya-dhraugayruktam sat [Tatuartha Sutra, V.30] The sat or real is characterized by uapada or origin and yaya or annihilation. It does not originate

Page #26

14
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
out of nothing, nor does it lose its identity of substance in this annihilation, but it always has the third characteristic of dhrauga or stability, for otherwise it will forego its character as a sat or real. 21
The word “sthiti” in Verse 2 stands for stability or continuity while "utpatti” (origination or appearance) and “yaya” (disappearance) account for change. This conception differs from Vedantic monism, which emphasizes permanency alone as the characteristic of reality and dismisses change as sheer illusion. It also differs from Buddhist ksharikavada (momentary change) which overemphasizes change to the utter neglect of the underlying stability. The one-sided emphasis either on permanency or change is rejected by Jaina thinkers who are critical of such systems as ekantavada – a system which clings to a partial aspect of the reality. Jaina thinkers call their own system as anekantavada, which maintains that Reality has multifarious aspects and that a complete comprehension of that must necessarily take into consideration all the different aspects through which reality manifests itself.22 The Jaina concept of "Drauga: Continuity and Change” is explained in detail in Appendix 1.
The third Verse discusses the relation between the soul and knowledge which is described as one of identity-in-difference. The soul is neither absolutely distinct nor absolutelyidentical to knowledge. It is both distinct and non-distinct to a certain extent, but not absolutely. Knowledge or consciousness is an essential and distinguishing characteristic of the soul.
It [knowledge] constitutes its very essence. The jira can therefore know unaided everything directly and exactly as it is; only there should be no impediment in its way. External conditions, such as the organ of sight and the presence of light, are useful only indirectly and jnana results automatically when the obstacles are removed through their aid.23
Knowledge distinguishes the soul from other substances, such as matter, space, etc. Acharya Kundakunda observes:

Page #27

FOREWORD
15
He who knows is knowledge (jo janadi so nanan); but the self does not by the help of its knowledge becomes something-that-isknowing (inayaka); knowledge evolves by itself, and all the objects reside in knowledge [in a certain way]24
Thus, Amrtachandra remarks, the forced supposition of a separation of knower and knowledge is superfluous.25 H. M. Bhattacharya also points out:
Knowledge to be of real significance must be regarded as identical with the soul, which in knowing only modifies itself into knowledge; there is no separation possible of any kind between the knower and its knowledge, the soul which is parinami cannot be regarded as something different from its parinama [evolution, change or modification). Knowledge as parinama is the soul knowing.25
The Sankhya postulates the pusha as the transcendental principle of intelligence to which the conscious modifications of the psychical centre, viz. perceptions and ideas, feelings of pleasure, pain and infatuation, volitions and strivings, never cling and are thus entirely foreign. It follows then that in the production of the knowledge or cognitive-situation, the prosa or the conscious principle has no role to play, nor is cognition by any means a conscious function seeing that the buddhi, intrinsically unconscious as an evolute of Prakriti, runs the whole show.27
This theory of the Self in relation to knowledge is rather odd and does not somehow appeal to common sense. Accordingly, the Jains find fault with the Sankhya position and argue as follows:
His [Samkhya] conception of the self as a static and unmodifying (aparinam) eternal principle which does not enter into the constitution of knowledge, but which merely looks on it from a distance as it arises, as a modification of an unconscious principle. This virtual separation between the self and knowledge (buddh) entails an actual stultification of each of them. For the Jaina points out, and rightly, that the self as a real, like every other real, realises

Page #28

16
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
its own nature in and through its modifications, its cognitions, emotions and conations; and the cognitions and the rest have their significance only as modifications of the self. The static self without its conscious modification and mere modifications apart from the conscious self, are both equally meaningless abstractions. Further it seems inconceivable, the Jaina thinks, how the buddhi of the Samkhyist in itself unconscious, can be made to do the duty of a conscious principle. Again supposing that the unconscious principle of buddhi does the duty of a conscious principle the postulation of the self as a conscious principle becomes a gratuitous assumption. And finally the self of the Samkhyist being an unevolving (aparinama) and eternal (nitya) principle cannot satisfy the requirements of an arthakriyakari, of something exerting causal efficiency, and as such cannot be regarded as a sat or real. For the Jaina has demonstrated that the reality of a real is constituted by its causal efficiency. The result will be that it would be impossible to demonstrate the reality of the self which is contrary to the very Smakhya position itself.28
According to Jainism, the Self is knowledge and knowledge is the Self. Knowledge and the knower cannot be differentiated from each other. In this context, Nathmal Tatia remarks:
Consciousness of the ji manifests itself in cognitive acts, and is not like the unchanging principle of consciousness in the SamkhyaYoga school which ascribes the cognitive acts to buddhi (intelligence) which is an evolute of the unconscious principle of prakrti. The Jaina philosopher consequently does not differentiate the metaphysical soul (jiva) from the epistemic subject (jnata) as is done in the Samkhya-Yoga and monistic Vedanta.29
The Mimamsaka is also another of those eternalists who maintain the unchangeable and immutable character of the Self, whose essence is consciousness (nityachaitanyasarupa). Though the conscious essence of the Self remains identical, yet it is allowed to undergo changes of states (avasthas) such as cognition, pleasure, pain and the rest, and becomes the agent (karta) and the enjoyer (bhokta) of the results of

Page #29

FOREWORD
its agency. The attribution of agency and enjoyment of the results of its deeds to the self indeed sounds like an anomaly because how can one attribute agency and enjoyment (kartrati and bhoktitra), which involves change and difference to the same self (immutable conscious reality), which is essentially identical with itself without admitting any change or difference.
The separation of the structural unity of the Self from its functional diversity is unwarranted from the viewpoint of a concrete Self which consists, according to the Jaina, of its dynamic reality, something stable in the midst of its changes, a unity in diversity, a being in becoming. In this regard, the following observation of Hari Mohan Bhattacharya is quite pertinent:
A conscious reality is never divorced from its own conscious modifications and qualities in which lies its very life. Both structure and function make up the totality of the self or the conscious real. Perceptions and ideas, feelings and conations are of the self and in the self and are never to be regarded as out of vital relation with the immanental unity of the self. The self is never transcendent retaining aloofness from its own modifications, but is always immanent in them or cognition is not a mere unaccountable arustha or state of the self, knowlege is the essence of the self. It is a parinama or self-differentiation of the self, it is the self knowing or cognizing. A parinama or modification, issuing from the parinami or the modifying, and yet not in essential relation with the parinami, is as false an abstraction as the aparinami or immutable real without any parinama or modification.31
At no stage or point of time, Prof. A. Chakravarti remarks, can one separate knowledge from soul and when separated each of them “becomes meaningless abstractions, incapable of existence in reality.” He observes:
The definition (of soul] in its affirmative form emphasises the intrinsic identity between the thing and its attributes, jira and jnana Self and Knowledge. A thing and its attributes are not different categories brought together by a third category called samarnya, a

Page #30

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
view maintained by other schools of thought. According to Jaina metaphysics drauja and gma are inseparable and indivisible unity no drarya without gana and no guma without draga. This leads to the fundamental proposition which states the identity of the Self with knowledge. The Self, the Knower, is identical with knowledge. Jnana and jiza are one and the same.32
Thus, we see that knowledge is considered almost identical with the soul. However, the two are distinct in the sense that while knowledge is a quality, the soul is the underlying sub-stratum in which quality inheres. Moreover, besides knowledge, soul possesses other attributes, such as intuition (darshan), vigour (rina), and bliss, etc.
The fourth Verse states that from the transcendental point of view the soul is the abode of consciousness with its associated qualities of intuition and knowledge. Hence it is a conscious (chetan, entity. However, the soul, like other substances, possesses general qualities such as pranejatra (knowability), existence (astitra), substantiveness (vastutua), extention in space (pradeshatra), etc. Consequently, it is also said to be devoid of consciousness (achetan). Moreover, from the empirical or phenomenal point of view, the embodied soul is contaminated by material karman and possesses bio-energy or ten life principles (pranas – five senses, three energies of mind, body and speech, life duration or age and respiration). Therefore, it is considered achetan (non-conscious). Thus, the soul is both chetan and achetan, depending on the context from which it is viewed.
The embodied soul is equal in extent to its body. In other words, it has the same dimensions as the body in which it resides (Verse 5). It is coextensive with the bodies that it might happen to occupy at different times in different births. Belief in the variable size of the jira in its empirical condition is, indeed, one of the unique features of the Jaina conception of soul; for example, the soul of an elephant is large, while the soul of an ant is small. The soul is capable of expansion and contraction according to the dimensions of the physical body with which it is associated for the time being. In this respect, it resembles a lamp, which though remaining the same, illumines the whole space enclosed in a small or big room in which it happens to be placed.33

Page #31

FOREWORD
This characteristic of atman (soul) being body-sized is meant to refute the view of the Naiyyayikas, the Vaisheshikas, the Samkhyas, the Mimamsakas and the like who hold that the soul is omnipresent like ether. They believe in the existence of many souls but do not admit that they are equal in extent to their own bodies. They say that all the souls are all-pervasive, i.e. present everywhere. To admit a soul to be equal in extent to its own body is a unique conception of the Jains. The doctrine which advocates the ribhitra of atman (a soul is everywhere) is a doctrine which, on the face of it, says the Jaina, is contrary to our experience.34
On the other hand, knowledge, being the innate nature or quality of the Self, has the capacity to know the various objects of knowledge in the world. In that sense, the Self may be said to be as extensive as the whole universe or omnipresent (saruagata). Acharya Kundakunda observes: “The self is declared to be the extension of knowledge; knowledge the extension of the knowable; the knowable is the universe and that which is beyond the universe (alaka); therefore knowledge is omnipresent."35 Commenting on it, Acharya Amrtachandra remarks:
According to the saying “the substance has its qualities and modifications equivalent to itself," the self is the extension of the knowt edge; for it evolves without becoming more or less than the knowledge; and knowledge is the extension of the knowable; for it abides therein, as fire in the fuel. The knowable is as much as everything; it is the totality of the six substances.... Therefore knowledge is omnipresent. 36
But while the soul may be said to be omnipresent or as extensive as the knowable (i.e. the Universe) on account of knowledge, it does not pervade the Universe absolutely. The knower, i.e. the Self, knows and sees the whole world, without entering or taking hold, with its own pradeshas, of all the things which function as knowables. The objects do not exist in knowledge and there is no soul outside the body it occupies, for its attributes are found only in that body. "A soul is not all-pervasive because its qualities are not found everywhere."37
While the various objects appearing before the mirror of

Page #32

20
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
consciousness may appear many and different and even maintain their different forms and for that matter knowledge itself may be said to be many-fold or multi-faceted. Yet there is the psychic factor of selective attention (upayoga) and the unity of experience in the consciousness, despite multiplicity of cognitions. (Verse 6)
A statement is made in a certain context. One can affirm or describe a thing, event or an object with respect to its own particular time, place and condition or state. But we cannot affirm or make the same statement in respect of another thing, present at another time, in different place or in different condition, situation or circumstance. There is no word which would bring out the implication of both the affirmation and negation of a thing at the same time. Owing to the limitation of the power of expression, the category of indescribability (araktarza) arises (when all qualities are desired to be expressed at the same time). 38 However, awaktazya should not be interpreted to be absolutely indescribable for then araktarja itself would become meaningless. It only refers to the impossibility of finding an idea which would include both the thesis and the anti-thesis at the same time.39 The view of those who accept the view of indescribableness without any limitation (e.g. Shankaracharya's view of Anirindyarada, i.e. indescribability) is also not tenable.40 (Verse 7)
Verse 8 states that the existence of every entity, including soul substance, can be affirmed with respect to its own properties (szadharma) and negated with respect to the properties of other entities. For instance, we find affirmation (uidh) of the existence of the Self on the basis of its intrinsic nature of consciousness and its psychic characteristics of knowing, feeling and willing and negation when viewed with respect to the properties of colour, taste, smell, touch which are found in matter (pudgala). On the other hand, in the material objects, we find negation of the properties of the soul and affirmation of its own characteristics of touch, taste, colour, and smell. Since these characteristics of rupinah pudgaldal are non-existent in soul, it is said to be non-material or incorporeal (ametah), but because its very nature is knowledge and soul being embodiment of knowledge, knowledge may be described as the body or form (muti) of the soul. Moreover, in the worldly existence, the soul possesses in common with the karmic matter, with which it is associated, material form.

Page #33

FOREWORD
In the embodied Self, it is through the mind that mental knowledge and mental activity arise, and as the senses and mind are material (paudgalik), the soul itself may be considered to have material form (mitatua). Incorporeal does not mean the absence of form. Soul, as already stated, is coextensive with the bodies it occupies (samedana is felt in all parts of the body). It is thus possessed of extension in space and hence is called a substance “having body" (astikaya). The activities of body, mind, and speech cause vibrations in atmapradesh (space points of soul) as a result of which the subtle karma particles are attracted to the soul; they enter and stay in the special units or space points of the soul, thereby causing union of soul with karma material, i.e. substantial or material bondage. This makes for mutatra of soul. The soul, which is composed of psychic-attention (upayoga), falls into infatuation, attachment or aversion on encountering the sense objects; its innate nature (suarupa) is affected or coloured and pernetration of karma particles into space points of soul takes place. 42
In the first eight verses, the author of Swarupa Sambodhana has established that the multi-faceted (anekantatmak) aspects of the soul have different properties (dharma) or characteristics. These pairs of thesis and anti-thesis are not contradictory, but complementary when viewed in their proper context. The synthesis, thus effected, indeed constitutes the very structure of reality or the true representation of reality. The ninth verse points out that the enumeration of different facets of the reality of soul is not without purpose. These facets establish the incontrovertible fact that the Self alone is responsible for its bondage (band)) as also for its release from that bondage. The passions or the attachment and aversion constitute the bondage and the Self can get rid of those passions, etc. The soul contracts the bondage of the material karman because of the perversions or distortions of its own innate nature and capacities. According to Jainism, the modifications of soul result in the concrete association of karmic mater with the soul. In this regard, Nathmal Tatia observes:
The soul is ever changing by its own nature and, in the state of worldly existence, this change is determined by the nature of the karmic matter that is associated with it. The nature of the associated karmic matter (karma-pudgala) is determined by the nature of the

Page #34

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
passions (kasays) of the soul and the nature of the passions is determined by the nature of karmic matter. This mutual determination has no beginning in time.... The Jainas distinguish between the material karman called drazza-karman, and its spiritual counterpart called bhara-karman. The former is also called ararana (cover) and the latter dosa (defects). The defects are the passions or privations and perversions of the capacities of the soul while the covers are constituted by karmic matter that brings about those privations and perversions. The material karman and its spiritual counterpart are mutually related as cause and effect, each of the other.43
By following the path of righteousness, the Self can get rid of its passions and distortions or perversions and consequently can free itself from the bondage of material karman and thus attain liberation. Because of attachment, the Self binds karman; when it is devoid of attachment or detached it is liberated from karman.°4 Atma or the soul is its own Lord, the architect of its own destiny. He can attain moksha (liberation) through his own efforts. He is not helpless in the hands of extrinsic karmic forces. The ninth verse emphasizes the principle of independence and self-reliance. The bondage of a particular soul is not the handiwork of any outside agency or external force, such as God. It is the Self's own making and he alone can undo it.
That the soul cannot shirk its responsibility in the matter is further affirmed in Verse 10 which states that the Self is the doer (karta) of his own karmas and the enjoyer of the fruits thereof. This refutes the contention of the Samkhya system of thought which argues that purusha (soul) is a static and inactive entity devoid of consciousness and enjoyment. According to this school, the purusha is merely a silent and passive spectator and is enjoyer in an indirect manner, i.e. through buddhi (intellect). The Jains saythat material buddhicannot enjoy anything. Activity and enjoyment, i.e. the feelings of pleasure and pain, are the functions of conscious (chetan) substance, and not of any jada (unconscious) entity.
Nathmal Tatia observes:

Page #35

FOREWORD
The Samkhya-Yoga view of purusa as only an impartial (madhyastha) onlooker (drasta), devoid of the function of an involved actor (akartrbhava), is also not accepted in Jainism. The jiva (soul), according to Jainism, is not only the bhokta (enjoyer of the fruits of karma), but also the actor, deeply entangled in the worldly affairs and responsible for his acts (karma), good or bad.45
23
"As you sow, so shall you reap" is a common saying but, as S.C Jain remarks: "It embodies a principle implying the relation between the soul and karmas." He adds:
In Jaina philosophy karmas are not mere action, but material counterparts of these actions. It is a very unique and singular contribution to the philosophy of karmas by the Jaina thinkers. Whatever actions a soul performs, they, by virtue of passions associated with them cling to it in the form of karmas which fructify at their maturity bringing some pain or pleasure to the soul. This process requires no external agency to initiate and goes on as if naturally. We cannot hold that the responsibility of doing actions lies with some member and the obligation of facing their fruits lies with some other member. It cannot be held that the soul is dependent on some other super agency like God for its actions and their fruits. Nor can we hold that the soul is immune from the responsibility for being a doer as well as an enjoyer of the karmas. This relation between the soul and karmas has been continuing from infinite past, but it can be brought to end with the help of an external discipline of vows and penances and an internal discipline of purifying the soul of the contamination of delusion, attachment and aversion. The external discipline is performed to aid the internal one." 46

The words "eu" and "h" in the phrase tesham muktatuamera hi seek to infuse self-confidence in the soul aspiring for self-realization, i.e. the fullest development of the potentialities of soul, by stating that it is the natural birth-right of every soul. Sat (existence), dhit (consciousness), and anand a (bliss) are the inherent characteristics of every living being.

Page #36

24
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
The next four verses (11 to 14) describe the means by which the soul can attain the pure, unblemished state of self-realization. The goal of salvation is presented here in positive terms, i.e. self-realization (szatma labdhye), not in negative terms of getting rid of the bondage of karmas. The way to self-realization is the well-known path of samyak darshan (enlightened vision, intuition or world-view), samyak jnana (enlightened knowledge) and samyak charitra (enlightened conduct). The important point to remember is that a combination of all three constitute the means of liberation, not any one or two of them. The word "sat" (correct, right, enlightened or samak) in the verse applies to all three, viz. drshti (darshan, vision or intuition), jnana (knowledge), and charitra (conduct). The nature and definition of samyak darshan is described in Verse 11, that of sampuk jnana in Verse 12, and of sanjak dharitra in Verses 13 and 14.
Samyak darshan is defined as correct understanding and firm conviction in things or substances ascertained as they are, particularly intuiting the true nature of the Self (atmano darshanam along with its distinguishing features and discriminative insight as regards conscious entity and non-conscious material karmas and things, such as body, mind and the senses. Since samyak darshan is considered to be the foundation of piety and well-being and as without it neither jnana can be said to be samak nor charitra becomes sangak, it is discussed in detail in Appendix 2.
Knowing the substances, such as the soul and the external objects i.e. matter, as these actually are, is right knowledge. The attribute "right" is intended to ward off uncertainty, doubt and error in knowledge. Right knowledge consists in cognizing the Self as well as other objects in all their completeness, that is in three-fold aspect, the knower, that which knows; the known, i.e. knowing; and the means of knowledge, i.e. by which it is known. It is free from obstinacy and attachment to one's pre-conceived notions. The author has compared right knowledge with lamp (pradeeprat). Just as a lamp illumines itself as well as objects like a jar, etc., so knowledge illumines itself as well as objects known.
Such knowledge of itself (sva) as well as external objects (artha) is ascertainment (vyavsaja), devoid of uncertainty, doubt or error, and is called pramana (valid knowledge) in Jaina logic. Each of the words

Page #37

FOREWORD
in this definition of pramana refutes definitions of other philosophies. Thus, the word "sa" is used to refute the views of the Nyaya, Samkhya, Mimamsa and Yoga schools of thought in which Pramana does not include the knowledge of itself as well as the objects known at the same time. The word "artha" is used to refute the views of those who deny the existence of external objects like the Vijnanadvaitavadins, the Mayavadins, and the Madhyamikas. The Vijnanadvaitavadins hold that every object consists of knowledge and there is nothing to be cognised. The Mayavadins argue that everything is Brahman, that what we see as a jar, a cloth, etc., are all unreal and only Brahman is real. The Madhyamikas are Shunyavadins who contend that the essence is void. It does neither exist, nor is nonexistent, nor existent as well as non-existent, nor distinct from existence and non-existence. The word "yavasaya" is critical of the Buddhists who do not accept yasaya or nishchaya (determination) to be essential in pramana.*7
25
In fine logic, right knowledge, as pointed out in Verse 12, is conceived in its two aspects: 1) knowing or cognizing objects in all their completeness (pramana), and 2) understanding or comprehending its import, use, value or purpose (pramiti), i.e. knowledge or pramana as a cause of bodhi or prajna (discriminative comprehension) and that comprehension or bodhi (pramiti) itself. Knowledge identified as pramana acts as an instrument or cause to bring about its effect as discriminative or purposeful comprehension (pramiti), i.e. the fulfillment of the cognitive finding or its result in the form of acceptance, rejection or indifference. In other words, the ascertainment of facts (pramana) forming part of a system, in which self-consistency or unity is the mark, would unfailingly bear the fruits expected from it for a pragmatic test of itself," i.e. leading to discriminative knowledge as to what is harmful and avoidable (beya), what is beneficial and acceptable (upadeya), and whether to inculcate the state of equanimity and unperturbedness (upeksha bhava or upeksha buddhi).49

Knowledge (pramana) as ascertainment of things as they are, is tathyatmak (matter-of-fact or factual); it is neutral or equanimous about right or wrong, beneficial or harmfulness of a thing or course of action. But the discriminative comprehension involving its utility or purpose, which follows ascertainment of the facts of the case or

Page #38

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
situation, i.e. putting that knowledge into use, is modhyatmak (value based or value oriented), as it applies the ethical, pragmatic or spiritual criterion of bezopachatra (i.e. of undesirability and desirability) and thus has ethical, practical or spiritual purpose.
This criterion of heyopachatua is very important in that it enables an individual, group, society or nation to make the right choices and to determine the goal or the objective. How can one make an endeavour in right earnest unless one knows where one is heading. This bodhi or prajna (discriminative comprehension) is the outcome of interaction or influence of sampak darshan (enlightened or comprehensive worldview or right intuition or vision) and the unity of consciousness (soul), encompassing both intuition and knowledge. It (bodhior discriminative comprehension) instills in the conscious being coherence, pragmatism, and a sense of purpose, thereby ensuring peace, happiness and wellbeing of the soul.
Pramana and discriminative comprehension are non-distinct or identical (abhima), both being part of a coherent whole, as well as distinct (bhima). Pramana is the cause (karana) of discriminative comprehension (bodhi or prajna). Discriminative comprehension is the effect (karya), which is subsequent to the former, thereby suggesting a time difference and later state of consciousness (indicating modification in the previous state). Thus, there are causal, temporal and modificational differences between the two aspects of right knowledge. For that matter, the two are said to be kathandit prathak (distinct in certain respects). This Jaina view of identity-in-difference between the two differs from that of the Buddhists who perceive no distinction whatsoever between prama and its consequence or phala (i.e. resulting comprehension) as they deny the existence of the soul itself. On the other hand, the Naiyyayikas accept absolute difference between the two because in their view pramana consists of connection (samnikarsha) of the senses with the objects.50
Even though one possesses enlightened vision and enlightened knowledge, but if they are not put into practice, they are useless. Action is said to be the proper fruit of knowledge. Therefore, enlightened knowledge, associated with enlightened vision, cannot bear fruit of self-realization, unless they are accompanied by “enlightened" conduct. Therefore, enlightened conduct also is of

Page #39

FOREWORD
utmost importance. This is discussed in verses 13 and 14. The attribute "enlightened" is added to conduct in order to exclude conduct based on delusion (wrong or perverted vision) and wrong or perverted knowledge.
The states of consciousness in respect of perceiving, knowing and feeling are constantly changing into varying modes and psychic dispositions (bhara) or mental states of attachment and aversion, giving rise to feelings of pleasure and pain. The author, however, advises the aspirant soul to remain steadfast in the true nature of the Self and maintain an attitude of equanimity and unperturbedness towards the pleasures and sufferings of the world. (Verse 13)
True Self is beyond all changing perceptions, thoughts and feelings of good and evil. One who contemplates oneself as jnata (knower) and drashta (disinterested observer), witnessing these changing and differing experiences with choiceless awareness, remains equanimous and unperturbed in the midst of pleasures and sufferings of the world (Verse 14). According to Bhagavada Gita, one should be dukkheshu anudrignamana sukheshu rigataspraha i.e. neither feel perturbed by the miseries nor feel elated during favourable circumstances, but remain non-attached (uitaraga). In the Samayika Path (Song of Equanimity), that Jains are enjoined to recite daily, the aspirant is asked, among other things, to remain equanimous in pleasure or pain, among friends or foes, in favourable or unfavourable circumstances, in a mansion or in the forest.52 Affirmation of such contemplations and reflections (bharana) with firmness and determination strengthens the resolve to remain equanimous and is considered enlightened conduct. (Verse 14)

27
The internal causes and conditions of samyak (enlightened) darshan, jnana, and charitra, explained in the preceding four verses (Verses 11 to 14) are described as moolheto (the foundation or the basic constituents) of self-realization while the external conditions like place, time, etc. and external austerities and penances are said to be subsidiary or auxiliary causes and conditions. (Verse 15)
Thoroughly understanding all these factors, the Self should give up, to the best of one's capabilities, attachment and aversion under all conditions, both favourable and unfavourable, and repeatedly and constantly contemplate on the true nature of the Self. (Verse 16)

Page #40

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
He whose psychic attention (spayoga) is sunk in passion for sense objects and is inclined to perverse ways, such as violence, etc., cannot have a vision of the pure Self. The major obstructions in the path of self-realization are the passions (anger, pride, deceit and greed). They are the main causes of bondage and are destructive of the nature (swarupa) of the soul. They do not let the soul maintain its calm and equanimity. For instance, it is difficult to put saffron colour on a dress dyed in blue. It is because of these passions that a person cannot keep one's equanimous poise in the midst of pleasures and sufferings, favourable or unfavourable circumstances. (Verse 17)
Hence, the author of Szarpa Sambodhana exhorts the aspirant soul to first eradicate the defects (dosha) of attachment, aversion, and passions. Then the Self should be absolutely free from delusion, infatuation, and indulgence in the sense objects which are the cause of attachment, etc. defects. Nirmoho bharz i.e. be without moha (infatuation), means giving up ahankara (ego, pride) and mamakara (sense of belonging or attachment to objects and persons), the “I and mine” syndrome, by which the Self identifies oneself with the material body and not pure consciousness. Thereafter, taking recourse to or relying on an attitude of being concerned but unperturbed (udaseenta) the aspirant should try to establish himself in Self by the contemplation of the true nature (swarupa) of the Self. Bhavana (contemplation) or affirmative messages play an important part in changing our thought processes. As you think, so you become. Affirmative messages repeated to the Self several times a day have a significant bearing in countering negative thoughts. (Verse 18)
Understanding well the position regarding what is to be abandoned (heya) and what is to be owned or accepted (upadeja), one should give up all that is distortion or deviation from the true nature of the Self. One should rely on oneself for the Self alone is to be relied upon. (Verse 19)
Lest the aspirant becomes too engrossed in the Self, the author warns him that so long as there is a sense of keen desire and eagerness even for liberation within him, he will not be able to attain liberation (moksha). (Verse 20) He, thus, stresses the need to completely give up desire, expectation, and attachment of all kinds to any object or person. One should become totally detached. Desires are the root cause of

Page #41

FOREWORD
our sufferings. All of our physical, mental and vital energies are expended in fulfilling the desires by all means available to us. When desires get fulfilled, more desires get piled up in the mind till the man looses the capacity to discriminate between right and wrong. Intense craving to satisfy all desires eventually turns into greed which is said to be the father of all sins (lobha papa ka baap bakhana).
Only that person, who does not entertain a desire even in regard to getting liberation, attains liberation. Hence, those engaged in their spiritual well-being, should not cherish even the slightest desire of any kind. It is stated that even the desire for moksha is a sort of attachment and therefore it is an obstruction in the attainment of liberation. The root cause of all problems and passions are the enslaving desires. There is a saying "asha je dasah, te dasah sarua lokasya; asha pasja dasi tasya dasajate laka," i.e. those who are slaves to their desires and expectations are slaves of all the people of the whole world; but those who are in control of their desires, become the masters of the people and the world. It is one's desires and expectations in regard to the objects of sense gratification that make a man slave or dependent on others.
Barrister Chanipat Rai Jain has devised a simple formula: "Man minus desire is equal to God and God plus desire is equal to man.” The desires and expectations give rise to feelings of attachment, aversion, and passions. They make man dependent on others and are the cause of suffering. (Verse 21) While attachment to sensual pleasures makes us dependent or binds us to the objects of sense gratification, the non-fulfilment of our desires makes us unhappy and miserable. According to J. Krishnamurti, desire is at the root of self-interest. It is sensation with the object of its attainment. He observes:
If I observe the whole process of desire in myself I see there is always an object towards which my mind is directed for further sensation, and that in this process there is involved resistance, temptation and discipline. There is perception, sensation, contact and desire, and the mind becomes the mechanical instrument of this process, in which symbol, words, objects are the centre round which all desire, all pursuits, all ambitions are built; that center is the 'me'. Can I dissolve that centre of desire. ... The more I am

Page #42

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
frustrated, the more strength I give to the 'me'. So long as there is hope, longing, there is always the background of fear, which again strengthens that centre."
When there is no “me”, no centre of desire, the Self becomes unconditioned, free from all its fetters and distortions.
One should have a clear understanding of the true nature of the Self and other objects and know the difference between “I” and "Mine", between the Self and other objects. The body, sense organs, the mind, house, relatives and riches, etc., are thought to be mine, but the Self is not the body, sense organs, etc. The sense organs are running after external objects for happiness. The objects of the world are constantly changing, even thoughts are coming and going. If a person ties oneself or attaches himself to these external objects and runs after them, he will not get happiness or peace of mind, which reside not outside but within. Therefore, reflections on the transitoriness and fleeting nature of these things will enable a person to maintain his calm in the adverse or unfavourable situations and to adopt an attitude of self-reliance, detachment, unperturbedness (rpeksha bhara) and equanimity, leading to lasting peace and happiness (shivan. The aspirant is asked to contemplate on them repeatedly in order to attain self-realization. (Verse 22)
Since psychic dispositions (bhava) of unperturbedness, i.e. madhjastha (Verse 13), udaseenta (Verse 18) and upeksha (Verse 22), which are only different terms for equanimity, are the contemplations, reflections or affirmations of soul itself, they are said to be within easy reach of the Self. That being the case, Akalanka exhorts the aspirant soul in a polite, sympathetic and persuasive way as follows: "Oh, dear, why don't you make efforts to gain peace, calmness, happiness and equanimity which are within you?” (Verse 23) In similar vein, Manoharlal Varni has exhorted the Self to arise and awake and realize its innate nature (scarpa) by getting rid of the foreign influences, the deviations and distortions, viz. enslavin desires and passions. He observes:
Oh Soul (Atman)! Thou art an embodiment of knowledge by thine nature! Supreme! Free! Of the category of the liberated

Page #43

FOREWORD
Ones (Siddhas)! What art thou doing? Arise! Awake, and reside in your own innate nature (surpa). Thou art alone. Thou dost deeds of virtue and vice alone! Reapest their fruits alone! Alone thou contemplates the Pure Self! And alone attainest salvation!
Observe! Awake! Alien is alien. To identify with the non-self is itself misery. Recognition of the self in own self is Happiness, Salvation, and Supreme Bliss. This thou thy own Self art! Renounce the prospect of the alien. And cherish the hobby of being absorbed in Self,
If thou thinkest, then think of the true nature of the Supreme Soul. Stay absorbed in its devotion. Thinking of people, think the way that is beneficial to them.
If thou speakest, then speak to sing the virtues of the Pure Self. Go on admiring those virtues. Talking to people, utter only beneficial, select, sweet words!
If thou dost, do that by which no living being dies or suffers. Make thy daily routine virtuous.
Thou art intrinsically a Pure Conscious Being! Experience your own nature, Recite: Recite: “I am a Pure Conscious Self!"54
Only consciousness is the innate nature (swarupa) of the Self; all else is alien dust, matter or karma. The Self is exhorted to give up all foreign influences, material (karman particles) as well as psychic (passions, etc.), and to know and dwell on sva (Self), which is identified with consciousness, i.e. the innate nature (scarpa) of the Self. In Jainism, dharma is defined as vatthu saharo55 (stabhara or surropa), i.e. the intrinsic nature of an object or living being, i.e. Self. If swabhara is dharma then to lead a life in accordance with the innate nature of the Self is the real crux of dharma, a way of life ensuring peace, happiness, and well-being. In Pravachanasara, written by Acharya Kundakunda, conduct is said to be dharma (duty); dharma is defined as equanimity (sama); and equanimity is described as “a state-of-evolution (parinama) of the soul, which is free from infatuation (moha), and deviod of being perturbed (kshobha)". Commenting on it, Acharya Amrtachandra observes:
Conduct is behaving according to one's nature; activity obeying

Page #44

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
one's (innate) laws. And this being the nature of things is dharma (duty); it means the manifestation of pure intelligence. And this is equanimity; for in it we possess the qualities of the Self as they are. And equanimity is a state-of-evolution of the soul, a state which is completely exempt from blemish, because there is no longer any infatuation and disturbance.56
Know the Self and the other substances but have no attachment, delusion, or infatuation (yanoba) of any kind in regard to anything. It is only by giving up the delusion (yamoha), and the sense of mineness (mamakara) in external objects and pride in one's belongings, leading to attachment, aversion and passions, that one can be anakula (free of disturbance, tension, anguish and unhappiness, etc.) and the Self can achieve tranquility and remain established in pure Self or consciousness. (Verse 24)
In this verse, the aspirant is advised not only to give up attachment in regard to external objects but also not to have any attachment with the soul-substance either, i.e. the Self being thought of as an entity, being, substance or object distinct from consciousness or knowledge. Attachment to such an entity is also called delusion (Yamaha) of the Self (sua) and the aspirant is advised to remain established in consciousness itself. When this consciousness takes into cognizance this very nature of consciousness with the help of intelligence, it is the occasion or the state of jnananabrai (realization of consciousness) or inayak bharu (the experience of knowledge or intelligence of Self).
Often a question is asked that even though there are three aspects of consciousness (cognitive, affective and conative or activity), why is it that in describing the Self as jnayak-bhara, (Samayasara (SS) gatha 6), shuddha jayakah (pure knowing Self) (SS, 7), knowledge, par excellence, i.e. jnayako inari (SS, 403) or mana-matra (SS Kalash, 246) and jnanamiti (the embodiment of knowledge or knowledge personified) as in Verse 1 of this work, only the cognitive (knowledge) aspect is singled out to the exclusion of other aspects or that the Self is said to be the knower and considered identical with knowledge (inana and jnani are one and the same)?
In reply, it may be said that knowledge is declared by budhah (the wise) to represent the other attributes or aspects of the Self as well,

Page #45

FOREWORD
viz. enlightened vision, samyam (self restriant or self-discipline), knowledge of scriptures, renunciation or non-attachment, etc. (SS, 404); they are all located in the nature of Self. Moreover, the nature of the Supreme Self is said to be jnana-maja, vijnana-ghana, or jnanamoti (knowledge, par excellence) because it is the Light that illuminates the whole of reality and comprehends it within Itself, and when it leads to attaining the stage of Perfect Harmony and Supreme Bliss, the Self is also designated to be ananada-maya, or the nature of Supreme Bliss (SS Kalash, 245).
Furthermore, thought, which is considered to be cognitive in nauture, is closely related to thought-activity, i.e. psychic disposition (bhava), and affects not only our bharu (it is impossible to have jealous feelings without first having jealous thoughts) but also our willing and activity. What we think determines what we see, feel and doeven though it often seems the other way around. The three aspects of consciousness are inter-related and interactive. According to the latest research, articulated by neurologists like Antonio Damasio, "the dichotomy between emotions and reason was essentially false”. The understanding of the nautre of thought is, thus, the foundation to living a fully functional and happy life.
It was precisely for these reasons that spiritual scientists, such as Kundakunda and Akalanka, described the Self as jnayak or jnanamuuti without denying or ignoring in any way the importantce of vision and conduct; emphasized that development of all the three different aspects of the same Self conjointly constitute the path of spiritual salvation; and pointed out that distinctions of conduct, vision and knowledge are spoken of as different characteristics of the knower, the Self, only from the yarahara (external, other-oriented) point of view, i.e. in order that the inner core of reality is communicated to others, and understood even by ordinary people. But truly speaking, the intrinsic nature of the Pure Self (from the shuddha, i.e inner purity, or paramarthika, i.e. ultimate, standpoint) is to be considered as indivisible unity, i.e. pure consciousness, devoid of differentiations of knowledge, conduct and vision (SS, 7).
Call it self-realization or realization of consciousness, they point in the same direction. When self-realization is seen as experiencing the Self, the suul-substance is viewed as a substance having its existence

Page #46

34
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
in space, time and condition or state. Hence, if one remains occupied in thinking, knowing, and ascertaining or deciding about this atma as substance, then one cannot achieve the uncontaminated experience of consciousness (rishudha jnanarubhuti). The experience of pure consciousness (shuddha jnayak bhara) is the cause or instrument of experiencing the nature of true or pure Self. In fact, the true or pure Self is none other than pure consciousness; it has no name, no form; just the purity, just the formlessness and namelessness, in which there is no place for individuality of a substantial soul. The individuality, which is the product of karman, is submerged or extinguished and what remains is consciousness pure and simple (inayak bhara). Since we achieve self-realization only through the instrumentality of consciousness, jnanarubhai is also called szanubhava (realization of Self).57
Realization of the “Self” is always of the true or “pure” nature of the Self, which is over-shadowed, covered or distorted because of karma, which is made up of mithatin, moha (delusion, infatuation), or avidya (ignorance). In self-realization, which is a gradual process, the circumference gets smaller and smaller till it merges in the innermost core of the pure Self; it is quite different from the centre of desire, that is “me”, which is the result of the conditioned mind. In the empirical Self, having egoistic involvement in the world, it is the opposite — the circumference getting bigger and larger.
The fine distinction between the soul as substance and the soul as consciousness is indeed quite significant. From the point of view of substance (draya drishti), the soul is described as a substance with attributes and modifications. From the spatial (kshetra) point of view, it is said to be coextensive with body and from temporal (kala) point of view it is seen in human or other form and stained with passions or devoid of them. From the point of view of bhara (nature or attributes) there are two ways of looking at the Self. One is bhedarupa (division, distinction or difference), according to which the soul is imbued with several attributes, such as intuition, knowledge, activity, bliss etc. From the indivisible, identity or non-distinct point of view (abhedabharr drishti) the nature of soul (suarupa) is consciousness alone, which is the common characteristic of all living beings.
Thus, the blissful state of the “Self” is also equated with the state

Page #47

FOREWORD
35
of pure consciousness. After discussing in detail the mystical significance of Jaina ethics, K.C. Sogani has pointed out how the human self emerging from the cave of passions rests in the abode of consciousness. The Bahiratman accepts everything as his own, the Artaratman negates all attachment in regard to external objects but the Paramatman transcends these qualities of acceptance and negation. The Self rises from the state of ignorance to one of spiritual evolution to achieve Siddhatra rising above all to a state of complete liberation.58 It is not possible to give, as Radhakrishnan says, a positive description of the liberated soul.59 It is a state of freedom from action and desire, a state of utter and absolute quiescence. Zimmer shows that in that state, the individuality, the masks, the formal personal features, are distilled away like the drops of rain that descend from the clear sky, tasteless and emasculate.60
J. Krishnamurti also opines that it is not possible to give a positive description of the liberated soul. He states:
That fullness which is beyond conceptualization is best described through negation. In that, we are nothing, nobody, no one. Therefore, upon transformation, there is the realization that nobody has changed, because there was nobody there to do the changing. The entire concept of transformation is fundamentally grounded in an escape from what-is to the what-should-be. It is a false self that thinks itself conditioned, and a false self that imagines a transformed state. When free from these illusions about the present conditioned self and the imagined transformed self, these false selves vanish, leaving behind no one.61
Liberation does not mean negation of the Self because in that case the questions as to liberation of whom and liberation from what will remain unanswered. The liberated soul is liberated of its impure psychic dispositions of the empirical Self or transcends the consciousness of the conditioned mind or intentional consciousness, which is tinged with desires, intentions, egoism, selfishness and having likes and dislikes, attachment and aversion, thereby regaining its pure consciousness which is the innate nature (starupa) and distinguishing characteristic of the Self.

Page #48

36
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
Since the word "Self" is apparently indistinguishable from 'T'ness (aham), 'mine' (mamatu), 'ego,' 'attachment' (asakti); it appears that Buddha, realizing that the doctrine of the eternity of soul was being misinterpreted and misunderstood in the sense of the delusion of individuality or self-individuality (ahamkara), which he considered the main cause of suffering, established his theory of "no soul" (anatmarada), as J. C. Jaina pointed out. "Undoubtedly Buddha never meant thereby self-denial, i.e. denial of self," J. C. Jaina added.62 M. G. Dhadphale also states that although Buddhism, as a radical means to remove selfishness, tried to get rid of 'Self', Buddhist Tripitaka at times (on very few occasions of course) turns to the discussion of 'the self being dear to the individual' as also ‘of seeking the self.' He quotes the following gatha from udana (p. 47. PTS. ED): "Having gone (mentally) to all the directions I did not find anywhere, anyone, dearer than myself. Thus, the self (or soul) must be dear to every other individual (and), therefore, one who loves his own self, should not harm (kill) other(s).""
Nicholas F. Gier, one of the most outspoken supporter of Buddhism, says that Buddha was opposed to "a permanent self underlying the phenomenal self," because he thought the problem of selfishness was due to, or at least aggravated by the belief in soul as substance. According to him, Gautama Buddha, like the Hebrews, "always affirmed the self as a somatic soul—a psycho-physical personality." Gier, thus, agrees with the views of J. C. Jaina and M. G. Dhadphale. Buddha's doctrine of non-self (anatman), Gier observes, has been misinterpreted as "nihilism". Gier asserts that Buddha believed that substantial Self constitutes a point of attachment that is just as addictive in asceticism as it is in eroticism. In other words, one can become just as attached to the idea of a substantial Self (either in meditation or speculative thought) as one can become enslaved by the objects of sense. Gautama Buddha believed that the temptations here are so subtle and deep-seated that the craving for a permanent Self is the greatest obstacle to overcome."4
Buddha, according to Harvey, never rejected the existence of a life-principle (ji), which "is not a separate part of a person, but is a process which occurs when certain conditions are present"." Buddha, Gier points out, was against the substantial Self but believed in a

Page #49

FOREWORD
37
"functional” Self, just the same way as William James did. While denying a soul substance, James maintained that consciousness is a function.
In speaking of Buddhist rejection of the “soul-as-spiritualsubstance view of the Upanishads, Jainism, and Samkhya-Yoga" and finding fault with “the substance metaphysics common to all Indian philosophical schools,” Gier mistakenly equates the Jaina conception of jira with the absolutely changeless Samkhya purusha and the Upanishadic atman Gier is probably unaware of the distinction between kutasthanitya (absolutely changeless eternal being or permanent entity, undergoing no change whatsoever) and parinami-minya (remaining permanent, persisting or continuing even while undergoing change). According to Jainism, permanence is not to be understood as absolute changelessness. Similarly, change is not be taken as absolute difference. Permanence means indestructibility of the essential nature (quality) of a substance, while change means origination and destruction of different modes. Substance has two compatible notions: 1) Substance as the core of change or flux, and 2) substance as the substratum of attributes or modes. Kundakunda in Pravachansara, II. 3-4, combines these two notions:
They call it a substance, which is characterized byorigin, persistence, decay, without changing its “own nature”, and which is endowed with qualities and accompanied by modifications. For the ‘ownnature of the substance is its existence (sadbhara), which is always accompanied by qualities, and variegated modes, and at the same time, by origin, decay and continuity.
It should be noted that the notion of continuity involved in the triple character of the substance is not identical with the notion of permanence of the substance. The former notion means persistence or continuance (of prarahanityata), while the latter notion means immutability, the two notions should not, therefore, be confused. The Jaina notion of continutiy is the notion in the background of which the triple character of origination, destruction and continuity becomes understandable. The notion of continuity is, thus, essentially dependent upon origin and decay. The Jains were well aware of the

Page #50

38
Madhyamika (Buddhist) critique of the 'own-nature' concept as well as the problem involved in the doctrine of the permanent substance. It is true that the immutability of own-nature invites a host of problems. But the notion of flux, the Jains point out, is not sacrosanct. Thus, just as the Buddhists argue that there is only fluctuation, there being no permanent being, the Jainas take the bull by the horns and answer it by stating that if there is no permanence there cannot be any change or fluctuation, for, it is only the permanent that can change. It is only the persisting soul that can transmigrate.66
Gier also ignores the fact that the nature of ji is defined in Jainism as chetana (consciousness), which constitutes its very essence and the distinguishing characteristic. Consciousness manifests itself into cognition, (knowing) affective (feeling) and willing or internationality (activity). The nature of reality being dynamic in Janism, one cannot separate or suggest cleavage between the evolutes, i.e. functions, and the evolving reality, i.e. consciousness or jiu (see Appendix 1). Moreover, as already discussed in the beginning of this essay, the cognition, the cognizer (the cognizing agent) and the cognized content are three distinct facts inseparably rolled into one. Furthermore, the description of the Self as jo janadi so nanam, i.e. he who knows is knowledge makes it quite evident that the Self as parinami cannot be considered as different from its parinama, i.e. function of consciousness. In other words, consciousness is the function of a conscious entity and conscious entity is not something else or different from consciousness. Thus, Gier is not at all justified in asserting that Jains do not believe in a "functional" Self.
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
L
The Jaina conception of the Self, thus, avoids all the disadvantages and ills associated with ahamkara (I'-ness, ego, pride), mamatu or mamakara (attachment to objects and persons for selfish gain), egoistic involvement (asakti), selfishness, greed, possessiveness, etc. At the same time, it preserves all the advantages of a postive outlook and functional aspects of self, which the supporters of Buddhism and psychologists like William James are trying to affirm.
As opposed to strict deconstruction of the Self, Gier points out, Buddhists hold that selves, though neither the same nor different throughout their lives, are nevertheless responsible for their actions. These selves are also real in the sense that they are constituted by

Page #51

FOREWORD
relations with their bodies, other selves, and all other entities. This is why, Gier says, “I refer to the Buddhist self in relational or process terms rather than the negative phraseology of ‘no-self." While Buddhism's relational ontology certainly implies social relationality, Gier adds, "the Buddhist self is definitely more individualistic than either the Hebrew or Confucian view”.
Buddha, Gier observes, offers us as reconstructed self, which can be put in the form of the triad as self >no self > “self”, which, he says, can be translated as substantial self >no substantial self >relational process self. Using this technique for the first triad, he adds, we get: being > no being > “being", exparded to substantial being > no substantial being > “being” as becoming. Gier concludes by saying that concepts can describe the way to liberation, but not the state of the liberated one, and, finally, advising us to be aware of the pitfalls of "absolutism in all its forms”. 67
In identifying the notion of it is' or‘it exists' with that of substance and then explaining that ‘it is' means that it is endowed with the triple character of origin, decay and stability, the Jains explicated the notion of substance in such a way as to avoid falling between two stools of being and becoming. “It was a grand compromise of flux and permanence," as B. K. Matilal points out. Viewed from the perspective of the doctrine of “many-natured” reality (arekanta-rada), which is an important doctrine of Jainism, the substance is being (from the standpoint of own-nature', i.e. sat, unchanging), it is also becoming (from the standpoint of its triple character, origin, decay and continuity, i.e. fluctuations or modification). According to Siddhasen Divakara, reality can be viewed from two important standpoints, being and becoming, permanence and change.
If x is an element of reality, then, according to Siddhasen, x can be viewed as a SUBSTANCE from the standpoint of being, and as a PROPERTY from the standpoint of becoming. The standpoint of becoming' (modification) reveals that everything originates, stays and perishes; the standpoint of being' ('it is") reveals everything as existent, eternally without birth or decay. And, Siddhasen asserts, there cannot be being without becoming, or becoming without being; therefore, a substance (reality) is defined as the combination of being (the existent) with becoming (origin, stability and decay).68 Nathmal Tatia observes:

Page #52

40
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
The Jaina conception of staticity (substance] is ‘persistent flow'. The substance persists through modes. It is as well as becomes. Being and becoming are not mutually incompatible. One implies the other. Dead staticity is incompatible with change. Absolute being is inconsistent with becoming. If becoming were conceived as a super-addition to being, there would be self-contradiction. Becoming is not related to being in the same way as a pen is related to a table. But becoming means the state of being at a certain instant. Becoming involves and presupposes persistence. Becoming is not a derivative of being but its necessary concomitant. The question 'Why should a thing become and change?' is as absurd as the question 'Why should a thing exist?' Being and becoming are ontologically inseparable though they can be distinguished by logical thought. The thinkers who presume being as absolutely static and conceive becoming as a derivative of being are landed in selfcontradiction. They eventually reject either being or becoming or both as illusory:69
Thus, the reality of being is not opposed to the reality of becoming; becoming is, in fact, the fulfillment of being in its dynamic aspect. Sri Aurobindo observes:
The Being is the fundamental reality, the Becoming is an effectual reality: it is a dynamic power and result, a creative energy and working out of the Being, a constantly persistent yet mutable form, process, outcome of its immutable formless essence. All theories that make the Becoming sufficient to itself are therefore half-truths, valid for some knowledge of the manifestation acquired by an exclusive concentration upon what they affirm and envisage, but otherwise valid only because the Being is not separate from the Becoming but present in it, constituted of it, inherent in its every infinitesimal atom and in its boundless expansion and extension. Becoining can only know itself wholly when it knows itself as Being."
The Jaina conception of Reality seeks to avoid the two extremes

Page #53

FOREWORD
41
of Buddhist skepticism and the Vedantic doctrine of absolutely changeless eternal soul substance. It is true that while one can describe the path of liberation, the state of the liberated soul is only a matter of experience. “Meditation,” Ma Usha Prem observes, “is not something that you do. It is, only when your doer has gone and you are totally relaxed, not doing anything, in a deep let-go, rest... there is meditation. Then meditation flowers. It is the flowering of your being. It has nothing to do with becoming. It is not an achievement, it is not an improvement; it is just being that which you already are, says Osho, the Zen master.”71
In the self-effacement and elimination of the ego sense, which is the basic premise and essential feature of self-surrender to the Supreme Being, as a principal way to achieve union with Him among the Hindus also, there is no denial of the Self, only surrender of ego.
The Jaina doctrine of anekant synthesizes the seeming differences between being and becoming, and between immanence and transcendence. In becoming, the Self gets rid of the impurities and deviations of the empirical or mundane Self, i.e. the passions, desires, likes and dislikes, attachment and aversion, etc. which are the result of the erroneous identification of the Self with the body, the senses and the conditioned mind, and regains the purity of its own being, the innate nature of its true Self.
The Self liberates itself from all the distortions and fetters and transcends all the weaknesses, limitations and deviations, thereby realizing the fullest development of its potentialities, which are inherent or immanent in it. As a result, the innate characteristics and qualities of the pure Self, the divinity or the spiritual magnificence and glory of the essentially self-luminous reality is, thus, actualized. In other words, in self-realization the self regains its own inherent properties or powers, attains perfection or Godhood and is established in its suarupa (the innate nature of its true Self).
Transcendence in Jainism signifies that the pure consciousness relinquishes or transcends the impure psychic dispositions associated with the empirical Self, i.e. the conditioned mind or the intentional consciousness, thereby realizing its own inherent purity and happiness, which is supersensuous, incomparable, infinite and indestructible. It is transcendence in immanence or inner transcendence. Dr. A. N.

Page #54

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
Upadhye observes:
The Jaina conception of divinity... inclines towards realist pluralism. Every soul, when it is completely free from karmas, becomes itself (Sranbmi), and it is the divinity. Divinity as a type, a level of spiritual evolution and a culmination of spiritual attainments, is one but every soul, even when it attains divinity, retains its individuality. It is the free soul, the higher Self, as distinguished from souls in mundane existence. The Jaina God as a type is an ideal to all the aspirants on the religious path. The conception of God holds a great vista of optimistic vision before the religious devotee. It is often said that the aim of religion is the realization of the potentially divine in man; this means that the Self not only knows itself but becomes itself (suyambhrata), now immune from all matter, by becoming itself it becomes the God which nature was already inherent in the spirit but, upto this time, crippled by karmas; and this then is the state of perfection.72
According to Prof. R.D. Ranade, the Hindu conception of mysticism denotes an attitude of mind which involves a direct, immediate, first hand, intuitive apprehension of God”. This definition is in conformity with the Jaina exposition of mysticism, provided that the word “God” is understood in the sense of the transcendental Self, i.e. Paramatman, as recognized by Jainism. The idea of God (Godhood or Paramatman] is a useful hypothesis which gives a focus, a pulley ring as it were, on which the weight (psychic attention or upayoga] of consciousness can be lifted.? For the Jaina, God-realisation is self-realization, because the Jains sought the divine in man and established the essential divinity of man. The Self to be realized in moksha (liberation) is self-realization or attaining the state of pure consciousness or the transcendental Self. The Jaina description of pure consciousness or the transcendental Self avoids the two extreme metaphysical positions of both Buddhism and Advaita. This transcendental Self transcends the empirical or conditioned Self; it is transcendence in immanence or inner transcendence, not a purely transcendental Being or God, which is external and separate from the empirical selves.

Page #55

FOREWORD
Mysticism in theistic conceptions of God has been used to mean direct contact with God, union with the Absolute or communion of the soul with God i.e. yoga (to join) sadhana (practice). But mysticism need not be defined only with reference to communion with God. Otto and Stace, for instance, have shown that it is not necessary to postulate the existence of God for a theory of mysticism. “Mysticism can also exist where there is no conception of God at all or where for the final experience itself His existence is a matter of indifference."74 Stace shows that an atheistic form of mysticism may exist, because the conception of a God need not be the central point of experience.75 In this sense, the Buddha may be considered a mystic. The Buddha denied the existence of any Supreme Being, although he had the direct experience of Reality. He got Enlightenment. The Jain Tirthankaras and Arhats had the vision of truth (keval darshan and jnana). Their experiences are not to be interpreted as communion with any higher Deity or God. Jain sadhana is, in fact, ayoga sadhana, i.e. one of dissociation (severance of the bond) of the soul from the karmic entanglements in order to regain the inherent purity and realize the innate nature (szarupa) of the Self. If mysticism is to be understood as an immediate non-discursive intuitive relation of the soul to God, there would be no mysticism in atheistic religions, like Buddhism and Jainism. But if mysticism is to include the whole range of suprarational experiences presenting the truth in all its aspects as one concrete experience, we can discover the meaning of mystical experiences.
The keynotes of mysticism are growth, autonomy, self-realisation, and self-actualisation of self-transcendence.76 Man cannot complete himself without relating the values of the individualized ego to the wholeness of being and the universe. This is possible only when all the ego-centric desires and goals are transcended into the ultimatevalues and meaning of life. The mystic dwells in a different world of his own. The transcendental consciousness dominates the normal consciousness. Time and place, nationality and creed have no relevance for a mystic.
In other words, from one perspective the empirical self (jira or atma) may be said to have attained the blissful state of transcendental Self (Paramatman) by shedding all its karmic limitations, shortcomings and weaknesses; from another perspective the objective or conditioned

Page #56

A4
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
“Self” may be considered to have been obliterated, or superceded and what remained was pure consciousness. In Jainism, consciousness constitutes the very essence of jira and is regarded as the essential or distinguishing characteristic as well as innate nature” of soul and as such equated with it. And since this quality of consciousness” is inherent in all living beings, it may be said to be universal. But this has nothing to do with the Universal Consciousness (Brahman) of the Vedantin, which has its monistic and pantheistic grandeur, and insists on one and only one "Absolute” unchanging reality and as a cosmic principle.
Refuting Uparishadi notion of postulating a Supreme Essence, Brahman or Atman, J. Krishnamurti observes: “Any 'we' is still the result of a thought generated self. Even identification with the idea of an all-encompassing Self, such as the Vedantic Atman is just another thought construction, and another manifestation of illusion."78
The characteristic of pure consciouness, G. Srinivasan says, is regarded as “transcendence in immanence," and as such it is necessarily “related” to the modes of intentional consciousness. It does not mean transcendence from one reality to another or from unreality to reality but only from one poise of consciousness to another within a single realm of consciousness. The eternal reality of metaphysical soulsubstance or Brahman of the Vedantin, on the other hand, exists independently of any relation to temporal empirical existence and as such necessarily falling outside the scope of phenomenological analysis. Srinivasan adds:
For the metaphysical soul-substance (or atman in the Vedantic sense) is regarded as really unrelated' and 'unrelatable’ in its nature (szarpa) to the changing modes of intentional consciousness or at best only extrinsically related; consequently, the soul-substance is believed to be really ‘unaffected by the empirical life of bondage and is conceived to be eternally free' and 'pure' in its intrinsic nature.79
The Jaina conception of consciousness is also different from the description of the Buddhists or David Hume's analysis of consciousness, which are confined to the poise of intentional consciousness or conditioned Self. Unwilling as they are to admit the

Page #57

FOREWORD
45
reality of any eternal soul substance, they interpreted consciousness as consisting of only discrete impressions, ideas or experiences which would be "fleeting' without any abiding substratum. Such an approach naturally gives rise to the problem of self-identity since there is nothing in common between the discrete sensations or experiences. In fact, both Buddhism and Hume attempted to account for self-identity on the basis of the rapidity of the succeeding impressions or sensations. For instance, David Hume says: “The self is an ensemble of feelings, perceptions, dispositions and awareness that serves as the vehicle for Karma.”80 He further states: “The self is nothing but a bundle or collection of different perceptions, succeeding each other with an inconceivable rapidity and are in a perpetual flux and movement." Buddha's attempt to improve upon Hume by stating that these different perceptions, dispositions, etc. are “internally related phenomena” and “interdependent" also did not solve the problem of self-identity. These attempts to account for self-identity are not satisfactory, since the impressions being basically disconnected and lacking any abiding agency of the Self as substratum cannot account for ‘real self-identity, whatever be the rapidity of their succession. Accordingly, any feeling of self-identity on the basis of such explanations becomes “fictitious, »81 as Hume was frank enough to admit. In this regard, G. Srinivasan points out that this problem of self-identity however comes to be solved with the introduction of the notion of pure consciousness. For, it is shown that pure consciousness is not only immanent to each discrete experience but is also transcendent and common to all such experiences. Being 'common’to all the multiple discrete experiences, it makes possible memory and also accounts for the sense of self-identity.82
Describing the relation between the conception of pure consciousness and the notion of Being, G. Srinivasan observes:
It is only through the mental nullification of the modes of intentional consciousness which are the subjective correlates of the objective particulars of what-is, that the Being as such comes to be revealed in the poise of pure consciousness more clearly and directly without undergoing concealment or dissimulation as the particulars of what-is. A relation thus comes to exist between

Page #58

46
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
pure consciousness and Being which is one of revealing and the revealed. There can be no consciousness which is not of the nature of revealing and there can be no revealing without a content to be revealed. The revealing and the revealed (pure consciousness and Being) are thus integrally related in the revealment of Being in pure consciousness. In this relation, pure consciousness is the locus of experiencing, and the plentitude of Being forms the content of experiencing, however transitorily it may be. Without either of them, the experiencing or revealment of Being which occurs in pure consciousness will be inexplicable and therefore both may be said to exist in integral unity. In this relation of integral unity, pure consciousness experiences Being as the ground of its own being, and this relation is not dualistic since pure consciousness does not experience Being as divided from it.83... there is complete absence of duality of any kind in this highest state of pure 'objectless transcendent subjectivity. Duality however sets in with the descent of pure consciousness to the state of observing the mental states without involvement. Since this duality is free from any egoistic attachment or conflict, the 'transcendent subjectivity of pure consciousness, however, remains unaffected in this state in spite of duality and not being objectless'.84
In the worldly existence full of treachery, deceit, hatred, violence, imperfection, ignorance, frustration, suffering, ungratefulriess and the transitoriness of name, fame, possessions, riches and relations, etc., there comes a time when the nothingness, meaninglessness or worthlessness of all of them is disclosed in a dread or anxiety. The consciousness, then, undergoes serious devaluation and ceases to evoke any feeling, interest or desire in consciousness; in the absence of all its reaction, ideas, desires or emotions, consciousness experiences a void or ‘emptiness' in itself. But "if consciousness faces dread and lives with the presence of nothingness in its own being, there comes about the possibility of revealment of Being in the ‘overtness' of its own being;"85 for consciousness is imbued with the characteristic of saparpazasam (scaparaprakasham in Sanskrit), i.e. illuminating not only other objects but also illumining or revealing itself to itself (i.e. soul) 86 and therefore retains that characteristic in both its poises, intentional

Page #59

FOREWORD
consciousness as well as pure consciousness. Because of its selfilluminating characteristic, the Self, after the dissolution or annihilation of the mental modes of intentional consciousness, retains its pure consciousness and remains established in its own innate nature (surupa), which is described as sat (pure Truth or existence), chit (Intelligence) and ananda (bliss or joy), which are supersensuous, infinite and indestructible. It is self-sufficient (scayantini), 97 and does not need any prop or support of any kind, and it is krta-knya, i.e. nothing remains for it to accomplish any more. It is free from “becoming" or the temporal continuity of intentional consciousness and empirical existence. Reality is nothing but our own pure and infinite Self.
Even in the so-called “being-one's own-nothingness," one encounters a metaphysical Being as such in the poise of “pure consciousness” – however impermanently it may be. In this regard, G. Srinivasan points out that “pure consciousness”, which is empirically contentless, reveals Being as its integral content. “Nothingness” is, thus, the medium through which Being comes to be revealed and “nothingness annihilates itself in Being” in this sense. Pure consciousness, which remains as the "experiential residuum" after the nullification of mental modes as objectless subjectivity, may be described as choiceless awareness in the sense that there is nothing for it to choose and there is nothing against which it is chosen. For, with the cessation of the temporal process of intentional consciousness, there will be no mental content left and pure consciousness alone remains.88 Pure consciousness and intentional consciousness are not two consciousnesses but two poises or aspects of the same consciousness. Consciousness in its “inward” extension beyond the limits of the modes of intentional consciousness is pure consciousness, which cannot be regarded as egoistic “I”.
"The true value of a human being”, Albert Einstein stated, “is determined primarily by the measure and the sense in which he has attained liberation from the self.”89 Thus, the Self has to be liberated from the egoistic Self by the Self. The egoistic Self is the greatest obstacle in the liberation of the Self. But while the Self itself is the greatest enemy of the Self, it is also the greatest friend of the Self. This distinction between the empirical Self (jira) and the transcendental Self (atman or soul) also emphasizes the role of self-reliance in moral

Page #60

48
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
and spiritual discipline. Since the Self itself has been responsible for its own conditioning, it can alone undo that conditioning. If the Self will not liberate itself, who else will? Of course, a mere desire to be free will not liberate us from the bondage or conditioning of the karmas. It is not an easy task. It is the true knowledge or understanding of the innate nature of the Self, discriminative insight (bheda-rijnana), which distinguishes the conditioned Self or mind from the pure Self, and the sustained efforts for the purification of the soul through moral and spiritual discipline are needed to get rid of the conditioned mind. The “Self” has to be transcended of its egoistic and selfish nature in order to attain liberation in the true sense of the word.
The advocates of Advaita Vedanta proclaim the concept of “Grand Selfishness" (Brahman) as the way out from the egoistic Self. They argue that if, as some modern psychologists believe, that man is "by nature” selfish it is because he has (is) Self. It is, therefore, iinpossible to remove selfishness. Hence, the Vedantin philosophers speculated on replacing “petty selfishness" (ahamkara, egoism) with 'Grand Selfishness' (which in other words signifies the sublimation of egoistic feeling"). A ham Brahmasmi' (I am Brahman) is identification with the 'Grand Selfishness'. Again, since everyone loves one's Self, the Br. Up. (4.5.6) clearly says: “Lo verily not for the love of all, all is dear (to man,); for the love of Self alone, is all dear (to him).” na i, are, saruasja kamaya sarram prijam bhainti, atmanastu kamaya saruam prijam bharati. The import of this is that the love one bears to anything is to be regarded as an aspect of the love one bears to one's own self. We like other persons and things because S(s)elf is mirrored in them. Again, as everyone likes his soul (existence) to continue, and the Vedantin assures the immortality of the Self. Instead of calling men as “Ye Oh, mortals” he addresses them as the “sons of the Immortal”, a no srmudham antasya parah.90
A similar argument is also advanced by another champion of Advaita Vedanta, George Kotturan, who claims: “It is not for the love of the neighbour that the neighbour is important, but for the love of the self that [the] neighbour is important. It is not a question of doing good or wrong to one's neighbour, it is the question of doing good or wrong to one's own self."91 It is hard to believe, Nicholas F. Gier observes, that Kotturan does not see how

Page #61

FOREWORD
problematic it is to define the value of the neighbour in terms of self-love. Ahimsa and compassion must be based on a relational, otherregarding philosophy, rather than a self-centred mysticism. Kotturan might respond by arguing that the distinction between the inner and the outer is an illusion, but this appears to contradict our ordinary experiences of the world. Kotturan would also counter that it is for the sake of an all-pervading Atman that we love our neighbour. But if Atman is the same for all the people- neither plural nor individualthen it cannot be an agent in the world as either a subject or object of love.92
49
George Kotturan further contends that the concept of Absolute Brahman or "non-dualism makes love easy, because there is nothing easier than loving one's own self". Commenting on this assertion, Nicholas F. Gier observes:
The problem, however, is that, according to Shankar, we actually do not have a true self of our own. In his view love must amount to Brahman loving himself, but even this cannot be correct because, again, ultimate Brahman, nirguna Brahman, is totally devoid of qualities. The great moral exhortations of the Upanishads make no sense if non-dualism in this sense is true. To be self-controlled, to give to others, and to be compassionate (see Brihadaranyaka 5.2.3) are intelligible imperatives only if there are individual selves who have reciprocal relations with other beings. Upanishadic monism is shallow and empty of meaning if it is not interpreted to include the rich diversity of individual lives and situations. Upanishadic monism is better conceived as a panentheism that resacralizes the world rather than a transcendental monism that desacralizes it.93

Jainism does not believe in the theistic concepts of son (putrah) or father (pitah); the Self being the creation or part of some "Grand Self" (e.g. Brahman in the Advaita system) in which it merges or is assigned proximity or a special status on attaining liberation. Jainism believes in the plurality and separateness of souls which are all equal and wholes, not portions or parts of any unitary principle. In Jainism, atman is Parametman (appa so paramappa).94 After atman, which is the

Page #62

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
preliminary state of Paramatman becomes Paramatman, the highest stage of development of atman,95 the self realizes itself, i.e. its own highest, or pure self and there remains no difference or distinction whatsoever of any kind between the two. Therefore, in Jainism alone there can be true self of our own or real self-realization.
In other religions, the self-realized soul or liberated being is not treated on a footing of complete equality with Brahman Vishnu, Krishna, God, Father or Allah, with the result that the individual Self is assigned a dependent, junior or some similar status, even after attaining moksha. In other words, man can get "close to God” by subduing his own negative inclinations, but cannot become God himself. For instance, in Christianityone can attain the highest position of ‘son of God' but can not become God; in Islam one can rise to the maximum status of a prophet, but cannot be Allah; and in Hinduism, the Self is considered an ansha (part), which merges in the arshi (whole, i.e. Brahman), or remains bhakta (devotee) even after liberation but can not become Bhagian (God) himself. In Jainism, however the bhakta is potentially Bhagran and becomes God (Bhagan) on self-realization.
The life principles of body, senses, mind, etc. are the characteristic features of the soul only from the phenomenal or empirical point of view. They are non-existent in the pure, natural state of the Self (siddhutua),% but consciousness remains in all the stages of the soul's journey. The mundane soul is taught the lesson of tat tuamasi (Thou are That) in Hinduism or asked to contemplate scham, in both Jainismo and Hinduism, i.e. “I” or the Self is sought to be equated or identified with “He”, the perfect or pure Self, so that the empirical Self compares its existing condition of being stained with passions, sufferings, sorrow, etc. with the ideal of perfect soul and endeavours to attain that state of perfection. The latter is imbued with all the good things, such as equanimity, compassion, free from attachment, aversion, passions and desires, etc. In both tat tuamasi and scham, the I/Thou duality or difference remains until soul attains perfection.
The Self is also advised to contemplate itself as jnata (knower) and drashta (disinterested observer or spectator). (Verse 14) A fine distinction is often made between drashta bhara (passive observation of outer or external phenomenon) and sakshi bhara (dispassionate or

Page #63

FOREWORD
dininterested observation of inner thoughts, mental modes or thought processes without the filter of conditioning, i.e. without the egoistic attachment or involvement in them, the attitude of detached witness or choiceless awareness). When the Self is not disturbed or affected by the outer observed phenomenon, i.e. the events and happenings in the external world, but simply observes them as a passive spectator, he is said to practise drashta bhara.
But when he also remains uninfluenced by his internal thoughts such as likes and dislikes, attachment or aversion and sense of mineness or pride in material possessions and persons, it is known as “sakshi bharu” or tatasthabhara, i.e. an attitude of detached witness or a disposition of equanimity. “Freedom to choose" at the poise of intentional consciousness or desire does not give us “real” or “true" freedom; rather it accounts for attachment and binds us to objects and persons; it is indeed the cause of conditioning of the mind and leads to the influx of karmas. In fact, it is a state of “not-having-tochoose” which gives us inner psychological freedom from the temporality of intentional consciousness or a state of complete silence.98 In that awareness, there is no choice, no condemnation or acceptance, no likes or dislikes, no reaction, no negative thinking, no mamatra (attachment to possessions), no ahankara (ego or pride) in name, fame etc., including kartratur (doing some thing commendable or noteworthy).
In the jnata drashta state or syndrome, the Self (i.e. the soul as spiritual substance) continues to remain, even though it is free from any egoistic attachment to material things and worldly attainments. It may, however, be said that so long as the concept of substantial Self remains, there may still remain a distant possibility of it having some eagerness or desire for its own perfect spiritual well-being and liberation (moksha), and consequently complete non-attachment or equanimity in the true sense of the word may not be possible.
Jyoti Prasad Jain was an eyewitness to "a most painful scene in a train" when a Jain refused to give a little water from his lota (small round.pot, usually of brass or copper) to a woman for her baby, who was crying for it. Instead of giving water, he threw it away through the window. When enquired about the reason, he replied that “he is such and such Jain and that after the teachings of his Gurgi

Page #64

52
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
reasons,
he considered any action out of daya as a sin."" He was probably taught that daya (mercy, pity) was a manifestation of raag (attachment) which is generally regarded as the cause of bondage. For similar it is said that a Jain monk, who carries a kamandalu (earthen or wooden water pot) or a mumukshu (one who is desirous of moksha) having some pot containing water, may not offer water to a person who is dying of thirst. In this connection, it may be pointed out that attachment, which is tinged with egoism, selfishness or passions, is bad, not compassion or kindness. In fact, anukampa (compassion) is one of the main pre-requisites of samyak darshan (enlightened vision), which, in turn, is the foundation of dharma and without which one cannot attain liberation. In describing daya to be sin, one seems to be guided by egoistic considerations of the so-called higher order, i.e. personal moksha (liberation or self-realization) than by considerations of morality or spiritualism in its true sense.
Phyllis Granoff refers to a story cited in the Hindu Vallabhadigujaya, written in Sanskrit by the grandson of Vallabh (d. 1530 A.D.) about Vallabh's encounter with a dove, who was a Jain monk in the previous birth but was born as a dove because of the wrong he had done. As a Jain monk, he had once come to a village and spent the night just outside the village limits. A devastating fire had broken out and the villagers had begged the monk to open the village gates from the outside, for they were locked in the village, which had become an inferno in which men and animals were being consumed by the flames. The monk had refused to comply with their request, for he feared that he might take the life of some living being if he walked in the dark, unable to see the insects and tiny creatures in his path.100 Again, this is an instance of mistaken notion about ahimsa and of laying emphasis on personal and selfish considerations of his own well-being, i.e. moksha (liberation).
These examples clearly show how an individual, who is obsessed, infatuated or deluded by the selfish desire of his personal salvation (moksha), can be so inhuman and unconcerned about the well-being of other living beings. These examples also highlight the emphasis laid by Bhatta Akalanka on not entertaining any desire or expectation and having no attachment of any sort even in regard to one's own moksha (salvation) in shloka (verse) 20. He emphatically warned that

Page #65

FOREWORD
any such expectation or attachment will debar him from attaining liberation.
53
person.
These instances are glaring examples of yamoha of swa. At the same time, they highlight the distorted view held by some in regard to the true meaning of ahimsa, completely ignoring and indeed violating the positive dimensions of ahimsa, viz. compassion. Ahimsa means compassion, sacrifice, and self-restraint. It means that the value or worth of others is equal to one's own. It is sometimes said that the person whose life is being saved may be asamyami (wicked or bad person). But as was the case in the first example, the person to be saved was a child about which it is not possible to say whether that child will turn out to be a good or bad Even if a person is not a child, one should not condemn a person as he may become a transformed and righteous being later on; one should condemn the sin, not the sinner. Thus, the actions of the persons in the above instances cannot be justified under any pretext whatsoever. To describe or label daya (pity, mercy, kindness, compassion or consideration for others) as sin is a gross travesty of truth. Indulging in kindness and service of others is considered in many religious works as the foundation or the basis of righteousness, piety or religion (dharmasya moolam daya or daya dharma ka mool hai). In Suryambhu Stotra, Acharya Samantabhadra speaks of Shri Shanti Jina as dayamurti (the embodiment of compassion and kindness).101
In his other work, Yuktyanushashan, Samantabhadra describes dayadama-tyaga-samadhi (kindness or compassion, self-restraint, renunciation and meditation) as the four pillars of moral and spiritual discipline that lead to self-realization (moksha). 102 In his commentary on these virtues, Vidyananda points out that compassion or ahimsa is the instrumental cause of self-restraint, self-restraint is the cause of renunciation (giving up of attachment of all kinds, including one's ego or selfishness), and renunciation, in turn, leads to meditation (dhyana or samadhi).103 It is for this reason that compassion (daya) or ahimsa is said to be the basis of dharma (piety or righteousness) and described not only as param dharma (supreme piety or morality) but also param Brahma, 104 the supreme divine quality, or spiritual principle.

Moreover, indulgence in kindness or practice of compassion is not a manifestation of attachment. On the contrary, the egoistic and

Page #66

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
selfish consideration of getting a berth in heaven or entertaining a as heya (not to be) desired or aspired for) because they are all concerved in relation to karma-upadhi (association of karman, material and psychic), and, thus, represent, in a way, desire for personal salvation (moksha) by non-observance of daya for fear of harming a few insects and tiny creatures, even if it would have meant saving the lives of thousands of living beings, is attachment which results in bondage. Furthermore, the inaction on the part of such misguided people, evident in the above examples, make them guilty of sin on account of pramad (negligence, lack of carefulness and being infected with attachment or passion for their own selfish ends).
It is clearly stated in Jain scriptures that one, who is careful and vigilant (apramatta) and whose activities of mind, body, and speech are not contaminated by passion, does not commit any himsa (violence) or incurs any sin, irrespective of whether living beings are injured or not.105 The practice of absolute ahimsa for the sake of personal liberation and selfish reasons cannot be justified. In fact, this seems to contradict or violate the Jaina doctrine of anekant (balancing of various viewpoints) or the principle of sapeksharad (the theory of relativity), which views things from an overall, comprehensive and detached perspective.
Lest there be any doubt in this regard, the author of Svarupa Sambodhana, emphasizes the need to shun even the vyamoha (illusionment or attachment) of sua (ego or self), i.e. to inculcate wetragata (absence of attachment of any kind to anything, including self) in order to remain completely devoid of any trait of “I”-ness, so as to be completely non-attached, non-selfish or desireless. In fact, “I”-ness, with which is associated ahankara (ego, pride) and mamakara (attachment to objects and persons for selfish gain) is bondage. Obviously, this “I”ness or illusionment with the ego has to be either renounced or transcended if one wants or seeks liberation (moksha) or establishment in swarupa (i.e. pure consciousness).
Moksha is not sitting or resting in Vaikuntha, Siddha-shila, heaven or merger in Brahmar, it lies in attaining the state of perfect equanimity and complete non-attachment (wetragata), i.e. being free from all sorts of kuntha or granthi (the enslaving desires, cravings, expectations, etc.). In this context, it is worth noting that Acharya Kundakunda has

Page #67

FOREWORD
55
considered the embodied, empricial Self (jira), conditioned and contaminated as it is by material karman, and all other external tattias, such as influx and bondage of karmas, stoppage of influx, destruction of karmas already accumulated and even moksha as heja106 (not to be desired or aspired for) because they are conceived in relation to karmawadhi (association of Karnan, both material and psychic) and also because one may be infatuated and deluded by the desire and expectation of the so-called higher order, i.e. the selfish considerations of “spiritual greed” or “pious ego” of personal moksha (salvation) in the next world, which may be deterimental to non-attachment, equanimity and equalness of all living beings, morality and spirituality in the true sense, as we have already seen in the two examples cited above. Akalanka, therefore, lays stress on experiencing the pure consciousness (shuddha inayak bhava), thereby remaining established in its natural state (srarupa), i.e. consciousness. The very nature of the Self in Jainism is perfect enlightenment and infinite intelligence and any condition of partial or indistinct knowledge marks a lapse from
How is this suarupa (nature of self), in which Akalanka asks the aspirant to remain established (tishtha) is to be realized and by what means or with whose help? This is not like keeping the body stationed at one place. Here scarpe tishtha signifies keeping the upazoga (psychic attention or exertion) established in consciousness which is the essential nature of sza (Self).
How is this to be achieved? When we focus our psychic attention towards external objects, we remain engaged or preoccupied in them with a sense of longing or desire for them; the soul accepts the character of its state of evolution. That is how the objects of sense gratification give rise to mental states or psychic dispositions (bharas) of attachment and aversion which result in the self becoming tainted with passions. Samantabhadra illustrates this point in the following words:
If a golden pot is destroyed and a golden crown is made out of it, destruction, orgination and continuity – all three – happen simultaneously and give rise to sorrow, joy and equanimous or unperturbed attitude in the minds of three different kinds of

Page #68

56
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
people, those in favour of the pot, those in favour of the crown, and those in favour of the gold stuff.107
Similarly, if we engage our psychic exertion (upayoga) in our suaripa (innate nature of self or pure consciousness), it will be termed as remaining established in swarupa, which is said to be anakula (free of infatuation and mental or emotional agitation, i.e. moha and ksholha). As this scarpa is inherent in the Self and it is suasanmeca (amenable to self intuition), it is within easy reach of the Self. Pure consciousness is to be achieved by one's own efforts and experienced by oneself. It can never be achieved by proxy. No outside agency can do anything for the soul except to point out that the power which can bring about its emancipation is latent within itself. No one else - a deity, scripture or teacher (guaru), etc. - can make the other person experience pure consciousness. The realization of the Self, regaining the consciousness of its true nature, establishment in pure consciousness or natural state of the Self is the function and the sole prerogative only of the Self.
Pure awareness dawns through an understanding of one's own nature. Hence, one has to have full understanding of the nature of the Self and the other objects because only then one can get rid of
gancha (infatuation) of all kinds. Only the Self, devoid of infatuation, knowing the true nature of soul and giving up attachment and aversion, can experience the natural state of the Self (svarupa). (Verse 24) When a person becomes aware of the unnatural Self (i.e. the distortions and deviations of the natural Self), and gives them up, regains the natural Self, which is its innate nature. When the unnatural disappears, the natural is found. The natural has, in fact, always been there, hidden under the rubbish. Unnatural gone, you are natural.108 The conditioned mind is the unnatural Self.
In realizing the indestructible nature of the Self (i.e. pure consciousness), the Self is all by itself and fully self-sufficient in all respects. One has to lift oneself by one's own efforts. The conditioned mind or intentional consciousness has always a sense of insufficiency in it and strives towards greater sufficiency, and is thereby always in a process of striving or “becoming" until one eventually attains selfrealization or the state of pure consciousness. The Self itself realizes

Page #69

FOREWORD
itself by itself, i.e. through its own instrumentality and for itself. The self-sufficiency of the soul in all respects is best described in the form of six components of action called six cases (karakas). Thus, commenting on gatha 16 of Pravachanasara dealing with self-being (suyambhu), Acharya Amrtachandra observes:
This self in its innate nature is intelligence provided with pure, unlimited efficacy, for all its destructive karman disappears through the dignity of the internal-state (bhavana) of pure psychic-exertion; it claims kartrtu (agency, or the function of the grammatical nominative), because of its independence; for it is in its innate nature a knower, possessing pure, unlimited efficacy,
it bears karmata (the relation of the accusative towards the verb), because of its being arrived at; for it is in its innate nature an evolution-state of knowledge, possessing pure, unlimited efficacy,
57
it shows karanata (the nature of an instrumental), because of its great effectiveness; for it is in its innate nature an evolutionstate of knowledge, possessing pure, unlimited efficacy,
it manifests sampradanatur (the nature of dative), because of its being the goal of an action; for it is in its innate nature an evolution-state of knowledge, possessing pure, unlimited efficacy, accepts apadanatra (the character of an ablative), because of its being based on immobility, for in its innate nature it is original (sahaja) knowledge, even when at the moment of an evolution-state of knowledge, possessing pure, unlimited efficacy imperfect knowledge in its innate nature, existing previously, withdraws;

www.dam
it appropriates adhikaranata (the character of a locative), because of its being the abode of the innate nature of an evolution-state of knowledge, possessing pure, unlimited efficacy, thus by itself (suyam) arising in the form of the six karakas (the six cases of a noun which bear on a verb), it is called suyambhu (self-arising). Or it is called thus because it comes itself (suyam) forth, throwing off in proportion to its rise the destructive karmans, divided into kinds according to their material nature (dravya-bhava). Thus, on strict examination (nishdhaya) there is no relation of

Page #70

58
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
causality (condition of being a factor, karakatta) between the Self and anything else; for such beings as are intent on the search for means to the realization of the innate nature of their own pure selves are independent.109
The Self is exhorted to contemplate with unswerving conviction upon the eternal divine nature of the Self (i.e. pure consciousness) and achieve the everlasting blissful self-realization. (Verse 25) The writer of An Insight into Jainism observes:
According to Jaina principles, from one point of view, God is one, but from another, he is not only many, but infinite. With reference to his Sabhara or Starupa (omniscient and Perfect status), He is one, but as regards the Atmans to which that perfect status has been manifested, He is infinite. In reality, Jainism does not worship any particular individuality, but that Perfect, Pure and Good status in which Atman exists as All-knowing, All-seeing, All-powerful, All-happy and Vitraga (non-attached). In Jainism prominence is given not to individuality, but to the status in which Atman becomes Paramatman, and that status, whatever may be the number of souis individually, is identically the one and the same.'
110
Call it "perfect, pure and Good status", "god-consciousness", Godhood, godliness, God, truth, pure consciousness or one's own essential and innate nature (surupa) - they are one and same thing. Jainism proclaims that every living being is essentially pure and divine and has the capacity of fully developing its own nature and becoming Paramatman. When perfected and fully developed, this potentiality is realized, as the true God, Godhood or Supreme Soul with the fourfold attributes of Infinite Power, Infinite Knowledge, Infinite Vision or Intuition, and Infinite Bliss. These features are called "anant chatushtaya" by the Jains, and are considered as the fundamental characteristics of God in all religions, as Harisatya Bhattacharya remarks.111
This godliness is a quality like the fragrance surrounding a flower, but not something objective you can hold, or cling to. God is not known as a person or as an object; it is the infinite joy, bliss, etc., the

Page #71

FOREWORD
innermost core, the innate nature (szaruppa) of every living being. God is nothing but our own pure and infinite Self. There is no separate, super, absolute, purely transcendental entity, God, or divine agency existing independently of any relation to temporal empirical existence, apart from this godliness, our own pure and infinite Self or pure consciousness of one's own essential nature (starupa). In this connection, J. Krishnamurti remarks:
Knowing that we are conditioned we invent a divine agency which we piously hope will get us out of this mechanical state. We either postulate its existence outside or inside ourselves, -as the atman, the soul, the Kingdom of Heaven which is within, and who knows what else! To these beliefs we cling desperately, not seeing that they themselves are part of the conditioning factor, which they are supposed to destroy or redeem. So not being able to uncondition ourselves in this world, and not even seeing that conditioning is the problem, we think that freedom is in Heaven, in Moksha, in Nirvana.112
The realization of the natural state or status of the Self (szaruppa) is free from all traits of egoism, selfishness or individuality, not only those based on possessions and prosperity, social standing, political prowess or intellectual superiority, but also those based on spiritual upliftment of an individual which is self-centered, egoistic and selfish. The greed for money, wealth, popularity and fame is specific to human race alone and arises primarily as an ingredient to feel the ego. The subtle infatuation of the Self (zamoba of sza) is so deep-seated and insidious that even saints or the ascetics, who give up home and possessions and claim to be completely non-attached to external things, are found to be attached to their position, prestige, popularity, name and fame (khyati-prga-labha) and are seen taking pride in their excellence in jnana (knowledge), tapa (austerities or penances), dhana (meditation) or other spiritual practices, including possession of so-called supernatural miraculous powers tartra, martra, etc. There is a saying in Hindi: “kanchan tajna sahaj hai, sahaj trja ka neh, maan, badai, irshja, durlabh tajna jeh." (The ladies can read pija, i.e. husband, in peace of tija, i.e. wife or woman). In other words, it is easy to give up gold, i.e.

Page #72

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
wealth or riches, it is also easy to give up the love of the beloved; but it is very difficult to give up one's ego, pride, and jealousy. In other words, it is easier to give up external attachments than to renounce internal attachment, i.e. gandha of sea (infatuation or attachment to the Self).
It is, therefore, not without reason that the scriptures constantly remind persons, however high, mighty, powerful or advanced they may be in worldly prosperity, intellectual attainments or moral and spiritual excellence, to guard against various kinds of pride, such as pride of physical strength, material prowess, beauty, caste, family, learning, wealth, riches or opulence, holding a high place of honour in society, penances or even virtues. It is emphasized that there is not the slightest virtue in all these sources of pride; rather the filth of pride only gives rise to one's own mental agitation, maculate the Self and prolong the worldly suffering. To be free from all such kinds of pride is a prerequisite or a significant characteristic, among others, that a person endowed with sangak darshan (enlightened vision) must possess. And sampuk darshan is considered the prime cause of salvation or moksha, as without it neither knowledge can be samyak (enlightened) nor conduct is regarded as samyak; these three together constitute the path to liberation. Thus, without renouncing attachment to one's ego or pride, i.e. infatuation (gamoha) to self (sza) and consequently becoming endowed with samyak darshan, self-realization or liberation (moksha) cannot even be thought of.
In the state of natural Self, there is neither I nor He, and in which all distinctions between substances and attributes (i.e. Knower and Knowledge) disappear. Only sat (existence), dhit (consciousness) and ananda (bliss) remains. While sat and drit are the inherent characteristics of every soul, ananda (bliss) is denied or eluding because of man's egoism, acquisitiveness, and passions. Since the natural state of the Self is the pure state of consciousness, free from all kinds of blemishes, such as attachment, infatuation (moha) and passions, it can in no way be inimical or harmful to the interests or well-being of others. As the natural state of the Self (suurupa) is not self-centred, egoistic, acquisitive, competitive, possessive or selfish, it is indeed conducive to the development and well-being of all living beings, i.e. Sarvodaya, to use Acharya Samantabhadra's words. 113

Page #73

FOREWORD
The blissful nature of the soul (Atman), which is realized by attaining perfect status of Godhood or Supreme Soul (Paramatman), is upadeya (desirable) from every aspect or point of view because it is radically different from pleasures derived from attachment to sensual or worldly objects. 114 The sensual pleasure is dependent on something else. It is short-lived. It is connected with detriment since it is attended by different longings, such as hunger, thirst, etc. It is interrupted by painful or discomforting emotions. It is the cause of bondage, the enslaving desires and passions; and it is unequal and utterly unsteady, since it evolves through increase and decrease.115 Thus, the happiness acquired by means of the senses is not at all comparable to the infinite and indestructible bliss of the natural state of the Self (surupa). In that state, the soul is relieved of all its burdens, limitations, and shortcomings; it is the soul in its pure essence and as such in the fullest possession of intuition, knowledge, strength, and joy.
The final condition of self-realization is one of equanimity and is characterized by the absence of desire, complete knowledge, and everlasting peace, and the recovery of the true nature of the soul. In other words, the Self regains the consciousness of its innate nature. It is the natural state of the Self or pure consciousness (sarupa), which is the common nature of all living beings, that is addressed in Surupa Sambodhana. Thus, the consciousness experiences itself, by itself, through itself, for itself, and in itself.
The concluding verse (Verse 26) states that whosoever contemplates on the true nature of the Self in the aforesaid way, repeats or listens with respect this exposition containing address (sambodhana) to the intrinsic nature or enlightened vision of the Self, attains the splendour and bliss of Paramatman, the unpolluted and the purest state of atman (soul), which is supersensuous, incomparable, infinite and indestructible.116

61
Manoharlal (Sahajanand) Varni, a spiritual ascetic (adhyatma yogi), has composed a beautiful song, called "The Psalm of the Soul," highlighting the true nature of the Self, which is reproduced in original, i.e. in Hindi, in romanization, as well as in English rendering by Shri Mahesh Chand in both poetry and prose along with explanation in Appendix 3.
Starupa Sambodhana deals with who am I?, what is self?, what is

Page #74

62
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
its inmate nature (starupa)?, what is meant by self-realization?, and how to realize the state of self-realization? The soul has the inherent capacity for self-realization. But self-realization is a long process. It is not possible by performance of certain rituals (kriya-kanda), external asceticism and physical discomforts, dependence on certain mantras, tantras, etc., God's grace, or by simply having knowledge about atman (the so-called Jnana-kanda or Brahma-jnana) and being mumukshu (having desire for moksha); self-realization is possible only by radical transformation of the inner Self, the mental nullification of the modes of intentional consciousness or the empirical Self, the enlightened vision of the Self, devoid of infatuation and delusion. This transformation or inner transcendence is an art, while purification of the self through moral and spiritual discipline or practice, including various kinds of internal and external austerities, is a well-thought out and carefully planned scientific technique, or mechanism to achieve self-realization. Thus, self-realization is both an art as well as science.
It is indeed very significant that Jainism upholds and emphasizes the positive nature of the Self. When one realizes that the negativities, impurities and defects of passions, etc. are extraneous to the innate nature (starupa) of the soul, the self-confidence in a person is fostered and it becomes possible for him to get rid of them. It is hoped that this small treatise will provide some inspiration to the readers to exert themselves to realize the true nature of the Self (szarupa), which is the birthright of every human being.
NOTES
1 Atsusi Uno, "A Study of Syadvada," Jinmanjari, October 1998, p. 17. 2 Samantbhadra, Apta-Mimansa; Critique of an Authority, along with Akalanka's Sanskrit commentary Astasati, translated by Nagin J. Shah (Ahmedabad, 1999), Introduction, p. 34.
3 A Chakravarti, Samayasara of Kundakunda (Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanapith, 1971), Introduction, p. 97.
4 Champat Rai Jain, Fundamentals of Jainism (1.leerut: Veer Nirvan Bharati, 1974), p. 115 footnote.
5 Nathmal Tatia in Gokul Chandra Jain, ed., Satyasasan Pariksa of Acharya Vidyanandi (Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanapith, 1964), pp. 35-36 and 29.

Page #75

FOREWORD
6 Apta-Mimamsa of Acharya Samantabhadra, ed. with introduction and translation by Saratchandra Ghoshal (New Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanapith, 2002), Chapter II, verse 30, p. 93.
7 S.C. Jain, "Sarupa Sambodhana," comments on Verse 2, unpublished, p. 5. 8 Ashtashati, p. 186, Quoted in Nagin J. Shah, Akalanka's Criticism of Dharmakirti's Philosophy A Study (Ahmedabad: L.D. Institute of Indology, 1967), PP. 61 and 66-67.
9 Acharya Kundakunda, Pravachanasara: The Spectrum of Consciousness, ed. by Jagdish Prasad Jain 'Sadhak', translation by B. Faddegon (New Delhi: Radiant Publishers, 2004), gatha 38, forthcoming.
10 Harisatya Bhattacharya, "The Basic Idea of God," Jain Journal, January 1999, p. 88.
11 Tatia, n. 5, p. 39.
12 Ibid., pp.
39-40.
13 See H. M. Joshi, "Reflections on Jain Metaphysics and Ethics," Journal of the Oriental Institute, M.S. University of Baroda, vol. 60, Nos. 1-2, September-December 1990, p. 17.
17 Apta-Mimamsa, n. 6, p. 92.
18 Tatia, n. 5, p.
42.
14 Ibid., p. 18.
15 Mimama Slokaurtika-Atmarada, Quoted in Hari Mohan Bhattacharya, “Jain Critique of the Samkhya and the Mimamsa Theories of the Self in relation to Knowledge," The Jaina Antiquary (Arrah), June 1939, p. 24.
16 A. B. Latthe, An Introduction to Jainism, p. 118. Quoted in Apta-mimamsa, n. 6, p. 92.
63
19 Ashtashati, pp. 179-181, Quoted in Shah, n. 8, p. 69.
20 See Samantabhadra, Apta-mimansa, verse 25, as translated in K. C. Sogani, Ethical Doctrines in Jainism (Sholapur, 1967), Preface, pp. xi-xii.
21 Hari Mohan Bhattacharya, "Essentials of Jaina Metaphysics and Epistemology," Jain Journal, January 1999, p. 93.
22 Chakravarti, n. 3, p. 91.
23 M. Hiriyanna, quoted in Arvind Sharma, "Some Special Aspects of Jain Philosophy as a School of Indian Philosophy," Sambodhi, April 1980January 1981, p. 92.

24 Pravachanasara, n. 9, gatha 35.
25 Ibid., commentary by Amrtachandra on gatha 35.
26 Bhattacharya, n. 21, p. 95.
27 Bhattacharya, n. 15, pp. 21-22.
28 Prameya Kamala Martanda, pp. 25-26 and Pramana-mimansa, p. 49, as translated and quoted in Bhattacharya, n. 15, pp. 22-23.

Page #76

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
29 Nathmal Tatia, “Jain Philosophy,” in Gurbachan Singh Talib, ed., Jainism
(Patiala: Punjabi University, 1975), p. 16. 30 Bhattacharya, n. 15, p. 23. 31 Ibid., pp. 24-25. 32 Chakravarti, n. 3, Introduction p. 97 and p. 231. 33 Sarıadarsharsangraha, IV, Verse 20-31. Tattuarthasutra, Verse 6, quoted in
Hajme Nakamura, A Comparative History of Ideas (New York: Routledge &
Kegan Paul, 1986), p. 148. 34 Mohan Lal Mehta, Jaina Philosophy An Introduction (Bangalore: Bharatiya
Vidya Bhawan, 1998), p. 101. 35 Pravachanasara, n. 9, gatha 23. 36 Ibid. 37 Mehta, n. 34, p. 101. 38 A ptamimamsa, n. 6, Chapter I, Verse 16, pp. 74-75. 39 Panchastikayasara: The Building of the Cosmos of Acharya Kundakunda,
English translation, etc. by A. Chakravarti Nayanar and A. N. Upadhye
(New Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanapith, 1975), commentary on gatha 14, p. 10. 40 Apta Mimansa, n. 6, Chapter 1, Verse 13, p. 66. 41 Tattuarthasutra, V. 5. 42 Pravachanasara, n. 9, gatha 175-178 (II.83-86) 43 Nathmal Tatia, Studies in Jaina Philosophy (Varanasi: P. V. Research Institute,
1951), pp. 226-227. 44 Prancis hanasara, n. 9, gatha 179 (II. 87) 45 Tatia, n. 29, p. 15 46 Jain, n. 7, p. 18. 47 The Sacred Books of the Jainas, Vd XI, Parikshamukhamof Manikyanandi,
translated with introduction by S.C Ghoshal (Calcutta, 1940), commentary
on sutra 4, pp. 28-30. 48 Jain, n. 7, p. 21. 49 Mahendra Kumar Jain, Jain Darshan (Varanasi: Shri Ganesh Prasad Varni
Jain Granthmala, 1974), pp. 291-294. 50 Ghoshal, n. 47, p. 28. 51 Bhagrada Gita, 2.56. 52 Bharana Dratrinshatika by Acharya Amitgati, Verse 3. 53 Quoted by Sudhanshu Ranjan in “Meditations," Hindustan Times, 11
November 2002. 54 Manoharlal (Sahajananda) Varni, Address to Sef, translation by Mahesh
Chand, edited by Jagdish Prasad Jain ‘Sadhak. 55 A. N. Upadhye, ed., Svami-Kumar's Kanttikeyan preksha (Agas, 1990),
gatha 478, p.364.

Page #77

FOREWORD
56 Prarachanasara, n. 9, gatha 7. 57 Manoharlal Varni, Sunpa Sambodhana Pravachan (Meerut: Shri Sahajananda
Shastramala, 2000), pp. 107-111. 58 K.C. Sogani, Ethical Doctrines in Jainism (Sholapur, 1967), Chapter. VI,
quoted in T. K. Tukol Compendison of Jainism (Dharwad: Karnataka
University, 1980), p. 298. 59 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, vol. 1, p. 233. 60 H Zimmer, Philosophies of India, p. 260. 61 Hillary Rodrigues, Krishamotis Insights (Varanasi, 2001), p. 172. 62 J. C Jain, Presidential Address at the Jainism Section of the First
Convention of Religions, held under the auspices of the Indian Research
Institute, Calcutta, 1937. The Jaina Antiquary, vol. 6, no. 1, June 1940, p. 18. 63 M.G. Dhadphale, "Some Offshoots of the Ahimsa as Implied in Jain
Philosophy,” in RC Dwivedi, ed., Contribution of Jainism in Indian Culture
(Delhi, 1975), p. 130. 64 Nicholas F. Gier, "Ahinsa, the Self and Postmodernism: Jain, Vedantist,
and Buddhist Perspectives," International Philosophical Quarterly, vol. 35,
no. 1, Issue No. 137, March 1995, pp. 73-74. 65 Peter Harvey, "The Mind-Body Relationship in Pali Buddhism: A
Philosophical Investigation," Asian Philosophy, vol. 3, 1993, p. 31. 66 See B. K. Matilal, Logic Language and Reality An Introduction to Indian
Philosophical Studies (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas), p. 296. 67 Gier, n. 64, pp. 85-86 68 Siddhasena Divakara, Sarmati-turka, Chapter I, Verses 11-12, as quoted in
Matilal, n. 66, p. 283. 69 Tatia, n. 43, p. 24. 70 Sri Aurobindo, The Life Drine (Pondicherry: Sri Aurbindo Ashram, 1996),
p. 659. 71 The Hindustan Times, HT City, 1 December 2002. 72 Kundakunda, Pravachanasara, edited by A. N. Upadhye (Agas, 1984),
Introduction, p. 88. 73 Geraldine, Stocker, Yoga and Western Psychology, p. 82, quoted in T. G.
Kalghatgi, Jaina Viewof Life (Sholapur, 1984), pp. 137 and 156. 74 Rudolf Otto, MysticismEast and West (Meridian Book, 1957), p. 141, cited
in ibid., p. 155. 75 W.T. Stace, Teadsing of the Mystics (The New Am Library, 1960), p. 24, cited
in ibid. 76 Radhakamal Mukherjee, The Theory and Art of Mysticism (Bombay. Asia
Publishing House, 1961), p. 14. 77 Kalghatgi, n. 73, p. 156.

Page #78

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
78 Krishnamurtis Insights, n. 61, p. 73. 79 G. Srinivasan, Insights into Inceard Consciasness (New Delhi, 1994), p. 99. 80 Gier, n. 64, p. 73. 81 David Hume, A Treatise on Human Nature, ed., L. A. Selby-Bigge (Oxford,
1967), 1.4.6. 82 Srinivasan, n. 79, p. 99. 83 Ibid., pp. 100-101. 84 Ibid., pp. 113-114. 85 Ibid., p. 96. 86 Kundakunda, Nijansara, ch. XII, gatha 170, see Jagdish Prasad Jain Sadhak”,
ed., Salvation through Sdf-discipline. Niyansara of Kundakunda (New Delhi;
Radiant Publishers, 2004). 87 For a detailed exposition of the concept and meaning of Suryanbhs see
Devendra Kumar Goyal, The Path to Enlightenment: Srambhu Stotra of Samantabhadra (New Delhi: Radiant Publishers, 2000), Foreword by
Jagdish Prasad Jain ‘Sadhak. 88 Srinivasan, n. 79, pp. 90-91. 89 Quoted in L.S Kothari, Science, Non-ridence and Education (Ahmedabad,
1993), p. 15. 90 Dhadphale, n. 63, p. 129 footnote. 91 George Kotturan, Ahinsai Gautamto Gandhi (New Delhi: Sterling Publishers,
1973), p. 73. 92 Gier, n. 64, p. 82. 93 Ibid. 94 Jagdish Prasad Jain Sadhak’, ed., Spiritual Enlightenment; Paramatma Prakash
of Sri Yogindu Dera (New Delhi: Radiant Publishers, 2000), Book II, Verse
174, p. 144. 95 For comparison between Jaina conception of Paramatmanand Uparishadic
Brahman, see The Path to Enlightenment: Smanbhu Stotra, n. 87, Foreword
by Jagdish Prasad Jain ‘Sadhak', pp. xi-xiv. 96 Siddhas (liberated souls) are not jira in the sense that they do not possess
the ten life principles (fives senses, three energies of body, speech and mind, age and respiration). They are said to possess jëratra (life) only from upadhara i.e. from the point of view of traditional and formal usage. See Kailashchandra Shastri, Jain Siddhanta (New Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanapith,
1983), p. 67. 97 Acharya Kundakunda, Samasara, gatha 297-299 and Nijamasara, gatha 96
98. The concept of scham( I am that Real Self), prevalent in Hinduism, equates “I” with Brahman

Page #79

FOREWORD
67
98 Srinivasan, n. 79, p. 90. 99 Jyoti Prasad Jain, Maharira and Jairusm(Agra: Ahimsa Mission, 1958), pp.
124-125. 100 Phyllis Granoff, “The Violence of Non-Violence: A Study of Some Jain
Responses to Non-Jain Religious Practices," The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies (Northfield, MN), vol. 15, no. 1, 1992, pp.
38-39. 101 The Path to Enlightenment, n. 87, Verse 76. 102 Samantabhadra, Yukryanushashan, Verse 6, quoted in ibid., Foreword, p.
xxxiv. 103 See ibid. 104 Ibid. 105 Taltuarthasutra, VII. 13 and Pravachanasara, n. 9, gatha 217/1 (Book III.
17). 106 Nijansara, gatha 38. 107 Apta-Mimarsa, n. 6 chapter 3, verse 59, as translated in B.K. Matilal, Logis
Language and Reality: An Introduction to Indian Philosophical Studies (Delhi,
n.d.) 108 Shree Rajneesh, Beyond the Frontiers of the Mind (Poona: The Rebel
Publishing House, n. d.), p. 54. 109 Pravachanasara, n.9, gatha 16. For a detailed consideration of S ambhus
see The Path to Enlightenment, n. 87, Foreword. 110 Quoted in Champat Rai Jain, The Key of Knowledge (Delhi, 1975), p. 490. 111 Bhattacharya, n.10, p. 87. 112 Krishnamurti's Insights, n. 61, p. 93. 113 Yuktanshashan, n. 102, Verse 61. 114 Pravachanasara, n. 9, gatha 5, Tatparvaritti commentary by Acharya Jayasena. 115 Pravachanasara, n. 9, gatha 76. Tattuadipika commentary by Acharya
Amrtachandra. 116 The Path to Enlightenment, n. 87, Foreword, p. xv.

Page #80

Introduction
This grantha Szaruda Sambodhana Pandharinshatih containing only twenty-five shlokas, is the smallest composition of Bhatta Shri Akalanka Deva.
The writings of Acharya Bhatta Akalanka Deva, can be categorized under two heads- independent or original works and commentaries on other author's works.
His original or independent granathas (books) are:
1. Laghijastraya Satritti. It is a collection of three short essays on pramana pravesha - initiation or introduction to the logic of testimony (pramana), naja pravesha - initiation or introduction to the logic of reason or strategy (naza), and nikshepa pravesha - initiation or introduction to the logic of deposition (rikshepa). It contains seventyeight theorems and propositions.
2. Njaya Virishchara Savrittih. It contains four hundred and eighty propositions and deals with three prastaras (interpretations) – pratyaksha (evident) prastara, arumana (inference) prastara and pravachana (elucidation) prastaru
3. Pramana Sangrah. It contains nine prastaras (interpretations) theologized through eighty-seven and a-half propositions with explanatory notes and commentaries.
4. Siddhi Vinishchaya Savrittih. It contains twelve prastaras (interpretations) complete with comments and explanatory notes on pramana (testimony), prameya (universal statements), naza (reason) and räkshepa (deposition).

Page #81

INTRODUCTION
5.Starupa Sambodhana Pandharinshatih. It contains twenty-five shlokas
only.
His commentatorial works are: 1. Sabhashya Tattrartha Vartika is a commentary in prose on Tattrartha Sutra by Umasvami and contains two thousand and seventy
annotations.
2. Ashtashati is a commentary on Aptamimansa alias Deragama Stotra of Acharya Samantabhadra and contains eight hundred shlokas (verses).
-
Bhatta Shri Akalanka Deva flourished in the eighth century (720780 A.D.). There is disagreement amongst Jain historians about the parentage of Shri Akalanka Deva. Kathakosha of Prabhachandra describes him as son of Purushottam, who was a minister to King Shubhatunga of Manyakheta. The same view finds support in Aradhana Kathakosha of Nemidutta. Tattuartheraja Vartika describes him as the eldest son of King Laghuhavvah. But all historians agree that Akalanka and Nishkalanka were brothers. Nishkalanka was the younger brother; he was executed by the Buddhist army-men.
Traditionally in India, there had been a practice to name a grantha according to the number of shlokas it contains. For example,Amritashiti contains ashiti, i.e. eighty shlokas; Sambodhana-saptatih has saptati, i.e. seventy, Mahavirashtaka has ashta, i.e. eight; Gatha Saptashati contains saptashati, i.e. seven hundred shlokas and Padmanandipandharinshatih has pandha-rinshati, i.e. twenty-five verses. It is in the same tradition, that this grantha of Bhatta Shri Akalanka Deva containing twenty-five shlokas, carries the name of Swarupa Sambodhana Pandharinshatih.

69
Surupa Sambodhana Pandharinshatib contains only twenty-five shlokas excluding the one forming the epilogue. Language used in the grantha like other granthas composed by Shri Akalanka Deva is classic Sanskrit, concise and full of deep thoughts and meanings.
-
The grantha basically deals with spiritual contemplation connected with the Soul and not the logical deductions that can be deduced therefrom. The subject matter is better understood by dividing it into two parts the first half deals with the scientific basics and special attributes of the Self, while the second half deals with the ways and means to realize the ture nature of soul, i.e. liberation of

Page #82

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
the Self.
In the first eight shlokas, the author Bhatta Shri Akalanka Deva has described the nine special attributes of the Soul. All the nine attributes are dualistic and contextual. By this approach, he discards the ekartic misbeliefs of his opponents without naming them, and establishes the anekantic nature of the Soul. This shows his deep and comparative study of the philosophies of various religions. These special attributes of the Soul are:
The Soul is muktamukta (free and not free). It is free of the effects of all the eight types of karmas and so it is mukta (free). It is identified with knowledge, hence it is amukta (not free). The Soul is embodiment of knowledge (inaromoti) and indestructible (akshasan. (1)
The Soul is grahagrahya, an independent object, which can only be conceived through knowledge and not through senses. It is permanent, having neither a beginning nor an end, but at the same time it is characterized by the triad of origination, destruction and permanence. (2)
The Soul is bhimmabhima (different and also not different), different from knowledge and at the same time not different from knowledge. Knowledge keeps on changing all the time and hence the Soul can not be identified with the knowledge of a particular moment. But since the soul is the embodiment of knowledge and therefore it is identical, i.e. not different from it. (3)
It is cetanacetan (with consciousness and also without consciousness). Basing it on its attributes of knowledge and perception, it is detan having consciousness. But when material properties of the embodied Self are taken into account it is acetan.(4)
It is vyapakaryapaka (extensive and also not extensive). The Soul has a shape and is limited to the audarik sharir ( gross body having senses) the body it takes. But in the sense that the Self has the capacity to know the various objects of knowledge in the world, it is extensive and all pervading. (5)
It is ekanekanekanta, multifaceted as well as singlefaceted. (6)
It is wktavaraktarja, describable as well as indescribable. In its own svacatushtaya state (draza, substances, kshetra – area or location, kalam time or period and bhara - internal state) it is describable, but when viewed from a different perspective, it becomes indescribable.

Page #83

INTRODUCTION
71
With respect to its own attributes, it shows positiveness (ridh), while with respect to others it reflects negativeness (rishedha). When viewed from the point of sensory knowledge, it has form (meta), but when considered as embodiment of knowledge or consciousness, it is without form (amnt). (8)
In addition to the above-mentioned attributes, the Soul has various other qualities also. (9)
Due to delusion or infatuation the Self gets enmeshed in the net of karmas and gets bonded, but it is fully capable of being liberated. (10)
As stated in sutra I of Tattvartha Sutra, Samag darshan jnana Charitrari moksha margah - by adopting all the three samyak darshan, (enlightened vision) samyak jnana (enlightened knowledge) and samyak charitra (enlightened conduct) collectively, the soul can be liberated. (11 to 15)
Thus, Akalanka, in the first half, has described the scientific basics of the Soul. The next half prescribes the way and means to attain self-realization or liberation. By giving up all attachments - love and hatred, passions and meditating on the true nature of the Self, exercising control on the senses, and giving up all the desires, one can realize the pure Self. In the last two pachas (verses), the author has stated that even the desire to attain moksha (liberation), hinders its attainment. So one has to be completely free of all types of desires to enable the Soul to fully liberate itself.
Two exhaustive and discursive commentaries, have been written on this grantha - one Karnataka Vritti in Kannada by Mahasena Pandit Deva and the other Svarupa Sambodhana Vritti in Sanskrit by Keshava Varyya.
Keshava Varyya, in his Sanskrit commentary, has described the purpose of the grantha as suasja bhara samshuddher nimittam - to help understand and specially cleanse one's Soul or disposition. The result of the composition has been described as sakala bhara janopakarinam - beneficial in every way for all noble beings. As regards the size and significance of the grantha, he has described it as granthenalpam analpartham - small and concise in size but fathomless with regard to the depth of its meanings.

Page #84

72
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
All the twenty-five shlokas forming the main grantha (book) are composed in upendra vajra chanda, while the last one, the twenty-sixth, forming the epilogue is in anushtupa Chanda.

Page #85

SVARUPA SAMBODHANA
Om Shri Naminathaya Namah
SVARUPA SAMBODHANA - PANCHAVINSHATIH
Composed by Shri Bhatta Akalanka Deva
मुक्तामुक्तैकरूपो यः कर्मभिः संविदादिभिः । अक्षयं परमात्मानं ज्ञानमूर्ति नमामि तम् ॥ 1 ॥
खण्डान्वयः यः = जो, कर्मभिः = कर्मों की अपेक्षा से मुक्त - मुक्तरूप है, (तथा) संविदादिभिः=ज्ञानादि (स्वकीय) गुणों से, अमुक्त- अमुक्त अभिन्नरूप है, एकरूप :- (ऐसा ) मुक्तामुक्त / भिन्नाभिन्न एकरूपवाला है । तम् =उस, ज्ञानमूर्तिम् ज्ञानमूर्ति, अक्षयम्-अक्षय/ अविनाशी, परमात्मानम् = परमात्मा को, नमामि नमस्कार करता हूँ ।
muk tamuk taikarupo yah karmabhih samuidadibbih. akshayam parmatmanam, jnanamurti namami tam (1)
73
I bow and pay obeisance to that divinely blissful (parmanandamaya) Paramatama (supreme pure Soul) who is mukta: free or liberated in reference to karmas and amukta (not free) when referred to knowledge and its own natural attributes, ekarupa - having different forms but always the same, akshayam (indestructible) and jnanammti (knowledge personified).

EXPLANATION
The above is the first padya forming the mangalacaran of the grantha in which the composer Shri Bhatta Akalanka Deva has paid homage to the supreme atman (self).
It is mukta (liberated) being completely free of the effect of all the eight types of karmas. At the same time it is amukta (not free) being in possession of all the qualities that enable it to know and fully understand the Self. The apparent dual facet of mukta and amukta merge and become one, a single-faceted paramatma, the pure Soul. The supreme Soul is an embodiment of knowledge itself. Being the holder of ananta dhatushtaya (ie. ananta jnana (infinite knowledge), ananta darshan (infinite vision), ananta sukha (infinite bliss), and ananta virya ( infinite power or vigour), it is indestructible.

Page #86

14
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
It is this supreme, pure Atman or the Self to whom homage has been paid by Shri Akalanka Deva in this shloka forming the mangalacaran of the grantha.
सोऽस्त्यात्मा सोपयोगो यः क्रमाद्धेतुफलावहः । यो ग्राह्योऽग्राह्यानाद्यन्तः स्थित्युत्पत्ति-व्ययात्मकः ।। 2 ।।
खण्डान्वयः सः=वह, आत्मा आत्मतत्त्व, सोपयोग:-उपयोगसहित, अस्ति विद्यमान है; यः जो कि, क्रमाद्=क्रमशः हेतुफलावह: कारण और कार्यरूप है। य:जो, ग्राह्यः ग्रहण करने योग्य है, अग्राह्य-ग्रहण नहीं किया जा सके-ऐसा है; अनाद्यन्त-आदि अन्त से रहित है (तथा) स्थित्युत्पत्ति-व्ययात्मक:=स्थिति-ध्रुवता, उत्पत्ति एवं विनाशरूप है।
sostjatma sopayogo yah, kramaddhetuphalarahah. Yo grahyograhyanachartah, sthityrdpatti-ryuyatmakah. (2)
The real Self, being in the form of a Soul, has a form and on account of it having knowledge and perception, the form is also a creative form and reflects both cause and effect. Similarly being comprehendible through knowledge it is an acceptable form, and being imperceptible through senses it is also a non-acceptable form.
EXPLANATION This shloka, in short, describes the true nature of the real Self - its permanency, its characteristics, causative, objective and subjective nature, its comprehensibility and variance in form and susceptibility to the triad of origination, destruction and permanence.
When viewed from draryarthic naya ( substantial point of view), it has permanence or stability, but when viewed from paryayarthic naja (the modification point of view) it has varying forms and is susceptible to origination and destruction. This, in a way, goes to prove the multifaceted (anekantid quality of the Soul.
ज्ञानाद् भिन्नो न नाभिन्नो, भिन्नाभिन्नः कथंचन । ज्ञानं पूर्वापरीभूतं, सोऽयमात्मेति कीर्तितः ।। 3 ।।
खण्डान्वयः ज्ञानात्-ज्ञान से, (आत्मा) भिन्नो न=सर्वथा भिन्न नही है, (और) अभिन्नो न=सर्वथा अभिन्न भी नहीं है। कथंचन भिन्नाभिन्न:-कचित् भिन्न और अभिन्न-उभयस्वरूप

Page #87

SVARUPA SAMBODHANA
है । पूर्वापरीभूतं = पूर्वापरीभूत (जो ) ज्ञानम् - ज्ञान ( है ), सो= वही, अयम् = यह, आत्मा आत्मा ( है ), इति = ऐसा, कीर्तित: कहा गया है।
jnanad bhimno na nabhinno, bhinnabhinnah kathanacana. jnanam puruparibhutam, soyamatmeti kirtitah. (3)
That supreme Soul or Paramatma is different from knowledge, and at the same time it is also not different from knowledge. In a certain context, it is different from knowledge and under most circumstances it is not different from knowledge. Similarly, the Soul is identified with knowledge and it is also not identified with knowledge. In a certain context, it is identical with knowledge but otherwise it is also not identical with it.
75
EXPLANATION
Soul is a substance, though permanent, but it is subject to variation. It has infinite attributes; out of which knowledge is one quality which we experience and by which we differentiate our Soul from other substances. That is the reason why the Soul is identified with this quality of knowledge. Moreover, this quality of knowledge or consciousness though always associated with the Soul, keeps on changing all the times. So the Soul cannot be identified by the knowledge of a particular moment. This makes knowledge different from the Soul. This explains the contextual reason why the Soul is not always considered to be different or identical with knowledge. It is only in a certain context that it is accepted as such.
प्रमेयत्वादिभिर्धर्मैरचिदात्मा चिदात्मकः ।
ज्ञान- दर्शनतस्तस्माच्चेतनाचेतनात्मकः ॥ 4 ॥

खण्डान्वयः प्रमेयत्वादिभिः धर्मैः प्रमेयत्वादि ( सामान्यगुणों ) धर्मों के कारण से, आत्मा=आत्मतत्त्व, अचित् = अचेतन ( कहा गया है) (और) ज्ञानदर्शनत:- ज्ञानदर्शन आदि (विशेष गुणों) के कारण से, चिदात्मक : = चेतनस्वरूप ( कहा गया है ), तस्मात् = इसलिए, चेतनाचेतनात्मक :- (पूर्वोक्त दोनों अपेक्षाओं से युगगत्) आत्मा चेतनाचेतनात्मक है।

Page #88

76
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
prameyatuadibhir dharmairacidatma cidatmakah. jnana-darshana-tastas macetanacetamakah. (4)
When Soul is viewed in reference to sensual perceivability, it attributed with non-consciousness. And when viewed with reference to comprehensibility based on knowledge and perception, the Soul is attributed with consciousness. Thus, the two different standpoints, in a way, give the Soul attributes of both non-consciousness and
consciousness.
EXPLANATION
Consciousness is a distinctive attribute of the Soul. It has two forms - knowledge and perception. Based on this attribute of consciousness and its two forms - knowledge and perception, the Soul is known to be chetan or with consciousness. Beside this property of consciousness, the Soul possesses other numerous perceivable material properties, which are also found in non-living achetan substances. If only these properties are considered, the Soul can also be said to be achetan or devoid of consciousness.
स्वदेहप्रमितश्चायं ज्ञानमात्रोऽपि सम्मतः ।
तत्सर्वगतः सोऽपि, विश्वव्यापी न सर्वथा ।। 5 ।।
खण्डान्वयः अयम्- यह आत्मा, स्वदेहप्रमितः = स्वदेहप्रमाण है, च =और (इसे ही ) ज्ञानमात्रोऽपि = ज्ञानमात्र ( परिमाणवाला) भी, सम्मत: = माना गया है। तत्-उस ज्ञान के, सर्वगततः = सर्वगतत्व होने से, सोऽपि = वह आत्मा भी, विश्वव्यापी = विश्वव्यापी है, ( किन्तु यह बात ), न सर्वथा = सर्वथा ( एकान्ततः ) नहीं है ।
suadeba pramitashcayam, jnanamatropi sammatah. tatsaragatatah sopi, vishyapi na sarutha. (5)
The Soul is equal to the audaric sharir (living body, having all the senses) and takes the shape of the body it occupies. Soul is also perceived as knowledge. Since knowledge knows all the objects of knowledge as in the omniscient stage, the soul is said to be all pervading. But it is not so absolutely.

Page #89

SVARUPA SAMBODHANA
EXPLANATION When the soul is viewed with reference to keval jnana, all knowing omniscience, then it can be treated as all pervading, because all the substances of the universe are reflected in it. But the embodied soul is confined within living body it occupies and hence it is not all pervading.
नानाज्ञानस्वभावत्वादेकानेकोऽपि नैव सः ।। alathala gran cantorcha da 116 11
खण्डान्वयः सः=वह आत्मा, एक: एक है, नानाज्ञानस्वभावत्वाद् अनेकविध ज्ञानस्वभावी eta gu, 37f9= 47, 3474: #q=3170 (19) ET (3176) Hot atach 4rallca चैतन्यस्वरूपी होने से, (वह) एकानेकात्मक-एकानेकात्मक, भवेत् होता है।
nana jnana swabharatradekanekopi naira sah. ætanaika szarupatwadekarekatmako bhavet. (6)
The Soul is attributed with various types of knowledge, such as mati-jnana (which helps to know about the things through sensual and mental faculties), shruta-jnana (which enhances and confirms the knowledge gained through mati-jnana about a substance) and so on. It is also attributed with samyaktra, i.e. right vision, right conduct, etc. on account of which the Soul even though it adopts various shapes and sizes in conformity with the body encasing it, it does not part with its basic attribute of consciousness, remains one and the same. In this way, in a certain context, the Soul is also multifaceted.
EXPLANATION As an individual who is basicallya man, but in context with varying relationships - he is a father in reference to his son, or a son in reference to his father, a nephew or an uncle, etc. In the same way, the Soul having consciousness as its very basic attribute, is one, but is visualized differently in different forms and in different circumstances.
A
स वक्तव्यः स्वरूपाद्यैर्निर्वाच्यः परभावतः ।
nalitat arest Tf9 ENTER: 11 7 11

Page #90

78
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
खणडान्वयः स:-वह आत्मा, स्वरूपाद्यै:- स्वरूपादि (चतुष्टय) की अपेक्षा से, वक्तव्यः-वक्तव्य (कहने योग्य) है (तथा) परभावतः = परभाव की अपेक्षा से, निर्वाच्य :- निर्वाच्य है। तस्मात् इस कारण से, एकान्ततः = एकान्तरूप से, वाच्यो न= वाच्यो भी नहीं है, (और) वाचामगोचरः = वचनों के द्वारा ( सर्वथा) अगोचर ( अवाच्य), अपि भी, न नहीं है।
sa raktaryah sarupadyair niruacyah parabhavatah. tasmanmaikartato vacyo napi uncamagocarah. (7)
The Soul in reference to its own natural suachatushtaya state (dravya -substance, kshetra area or location, kala time or period and bharat - internal state), is describable, but when referred to in a different relation or parchatushtaya it becomes indescribable. Thus the Soul is not such a thing, which can be said to be absolutely describable or indescribable. Contextually it is describable and indescribable both.
-
EXPLANATION
Every substance is known or described as per its own attributes or nature, and cannot be described differently. For example, a mango fruit is always described as a mango. It cannot be described by the name of banana or a guava. Therefore just as the descriptiveness of a substance depends on its nature, the same applies to the Soul, which makes it describable or indescribable.
स स्याद् विधि - निषेधात्मा, स्वधर्म-परधर्मयोः । समूर्तिबोधमूर्तित्वादमूर्तिश्च विपर्ययात् ॥ 8 ॥
-
खण्डान्वयः सः- वह आत्मा, स्वधर्म-परधर्मयो :- स्वधर्म और परधर्म में (क्रमश:), विधिनिषेधात्मा = विधि और निषेधरूप, स्यात् = होता है। सः = वह, बोधमूर्तित्वात् -- ज्ञानमूर्ति होने से, मूर्ति:- मूर्तिरूप (साकार) है, च =और विपर्ययात् = (मूर्तित्व के विषय अर्थात् रूपादि से रहित) विपरीतरूपवाला होने से, अमूर्ति :- अमूर्तिक है।

sa syad ridhi-nishedhatma, sudharma- pard"armayoh. samurtibodha murtitradamurtishca riparyayat. (8)
With reference to its own attributes the Soul displays positiveness (ridhr), while the same Soul, in a different reference exhibits negative

Page #91

SVARUPA SAMBODHANA
79
ness (nishedha). Being an embodiment of knowledge it has a form and being different from the corporeal body it is without a form.
EXPLANATION As the Soul with reference to its own attributes possesses positive properties, in the same way, with reference to those of the others it establishes negative properties. For example, entity of the Soul is established by knowledge, such as its atmicor spiritual properties, but the same is lost when it is based on form or senses like other corporeal bodies. Besides this, the Soul being an embodiment of knowledge such as can be treated as having a form; constituted as it is of corporeal elements, it is also said to be without a form or having no form at all.
इत्याद्यनेकधर्मत्वं, बन्धमोक्षौ तयोः फलम् । आत्मा स्वीकुरुते तत्तत्कारणैः स्वयमेव तु ।। 9 ।।
खण्डान्वयः इत्यादि-पूर्वोक्त (प्रकार से आत्मा की) अनेक धर्मत्वं अनेक-धर्मात्मकता को (तथा) बन्धमोक्षौ-बन्ध और मोक्ष को, (एवम्) तयोः-उन दोनों के, फलम् फल को, तत्तत्कारणैः-उन-उन कारणों से, आत्मा यह जीव, स्वयमेव स्वयं ही, स्वीकुरुते स्वीकार CAT
inadyankadharmatram, bandhamokshau taych phalam atma sukuride tattatkaranaih suzamera tu (9)
In this way as mentioned aforesaid and in the earlier shlokas, the Soul acquires various properties and qualities and subsequently this jira as a consequence of the same, undergoes bondage or salvation.
EXPLANATION This Soul on account of acts of love and hatred gets enmeshed in karmas and on its own becomes dependent and unhappy. By acquiring knowledge and by performing worship, meditation and penance etc. it undoes the bondage and all by itself becomes free and liberated.

Page #92

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
कर्ता यः कर्मणां भोक्ता, तत्फलानां स एव तु । बहिरन्तरुपायाभ्यां तेषां मुक्तत्वमेव हि ।। 10 ।।
खण्डान्वयः यः जो कोई, कर्मणां कर्मों का, कर्ता कर्ता है, तु और, स एव=वही, तत्फलानां उनके फलों का, भोक्ता भोगने वाला है। हिक्योंकि, बहिरन्तरुपायाभ्यां बहिरंग और अन्तरंग उपायों से, तेषां-उन कर्मों का, मुक्तत्वमेव-मुक्तपना ही है।
karta yah karmanam bhokta, tatphalanam sa era tu bahirantarupayabbsam tesham muktattamera hi (10)
The Soul, conditioned by the extrinsic karmas and internal defects of attachment and aversion, passions, etc., becomes the doer (karta) of jnanavarnadic karmas (karmas which obscure knowledge, etc.) and enjoyer (bhokta) of the resulting happiness or unhappiness therefrom. The same Soul by practising external austerities and by meditative efforts becomes free of the process of the doer (karta) and enjoyer (bhakta). In other words, one who is a doer (karta) and enjoyer (bhakta) of the karmas in samsaric or the worldly state, is not a doer (karta) and enjoyer (bhakta) in the mukta or liberated state.
The following four shlokas, viz. 11 to 14, show the way, how to realize the true form of the Self.
सदृष्टिज्ञानचारित्रमुपाया स्वात्मलब्धये । तत्त्वे याथात्म्य-सौस्थित्यमात्मनो दर्शनं स्मृतम् ।। 11 ।।
खण्डान्वयः सदृष्टि सम्यग्दर्शन, ज्ञान-सम्यग्ज्ञान, चारित्रं सम्यक्चारित्र, स्वात्मलब्ध ये अपनी आत्मा की उपलब्धि के लिये, उपाया: उपाय हैं। तत्त्वे आत्मतत्त्वों में, याथात्म्य-सौस्थित्यं वस्तस्वरूप के अनसार अविचल-श्रद्धान करना, आत्मनो आत्मा का, दर्शनं दर्शन अर्थात् सम्यग्दर्शन, स्मृतम्=माना गया है।
Saddrishtijnanacaritramupayasratmalabdhave tattue jathatnyasausthityamatmano darshanam smritam (11)
Samak darshan (enlightened vision), samak jmana (enlightened knowledge) and samak charitra (enlightened conduct), all the three taken together, lead to the path of self-realization, which in other words is the same as seeking salvation, moksha or liberation from the

Page #93

SVARUPA SAMBODHANA
world. Out of the three, the way that helps perceive the real Self and maintain firm faith in the true state, i.e. Jatha-artha (as it is) of the seven reals (tattras) is known as samyak darshan (enlightened vision).
यथावद्वस्तुनिर्नीतिः सम्यग्ज्ञानं प्रदीपवत् । तत्स्वार्थव्यवसायात्मा कथञ्चित्प्रमितेः पृथक् ॥ 12 ॥
खण्डान्वयः यथावद् वस्तुनिर्नीति:=ज्यों का त्यों वस्तु का निर्णयात्मक ज्ञान, सम्यग्ज्ञानं= सम्यग्ज्ञान ( कहलाता) है। तत् = वह सम्यग्ज्ञान, प्रदीपवत् - दीपक के समान, स्वार्थव्यवसायात्मा=अपने एवं ज्ञेयभूतपदार्थ के निश्चयात्मक ज्ञानरूप (होता है) (और) प्रमिते :- प्रमिति से, कथञ्चित् पृथक् = कथंचित् भिन्न (होता है ) ।
yatharadvastunirnitih samaginanam pradiparat. tatsurtharoyarasayatma kathanipramith prithak. (12)
Acquiring true knowledge of a substance as it is, is known as samyak jnana (enlightened knowledge). Nature of that omniscient knowledge is like that of a lamp - suparaprakasham or selfenlightening which lightens self as well as other. Samyak jnana imparts correct knowledge of both internal and external aspects of the objects. It differs from the one-sided knowledge and is gained when ignorance is done away with. Samyak jnana is identified with the cognitive nature of the Soul and is distinct from the act of comprehension in some
ways.
दर्शन - ज्ञान- पर्यायेषूत्तरोत्तरभाविषु ।
स्थिरमालम्बनं यद्वा माध्यस्थं सुख-दुःखयोः ।। 13 ।।
81
खण्डान्वयः उत्तरोत्तरभाविषु = आगे-आगे होने वाली, दर्शनज्ञानपर्यायेषु-दर्शन और ज्ञान की पर्यायों में, स्थिरम् दृढ़, आलम्बनं आलम्बन करना, वा अथवा, यद् = जो, सुखदुःखयो- सुख और दुःख में, माध्यस्थं - माध्यस्थ भाव का होना ( ही चारित्र है ) ।
darshan jnana-paryayeshuttarottarabharishu sthiramalambanam yada madhyastham sukha-dhkhayoh. (13)

Casting aside the lure of attachment to external objects such as wife or son, based on enlightened knowledge and vision, participating

Page #94

82
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
unflinchingly in the activities of the Soul and uplifting them to a climax, and maintaning equanimity under all the adve.se circumstances is samgak charitra
ज्ञाताः दृष्टाहमेकोऽहं सुख-दु:खे न चापरः । इतीदं भावनादायं चारित्रमथवा मतम् ।। 14 ।।
खण्डान्वयः अथवा अथवा, सुख-सुख में, च-और, दुःखे-दुःख में, अहं-मैं, एक:-एकमात्र, ज्ञाता-दृष्टा=जानने-देखने वाला हूँ, अपर: न-अन्य कोई (किसी रूप) नहीं हूँ, इति इस प्रकार की, इदं-इस, भावनादायंभावना की दृढ़ता को, चारित्रं मतम्=चारित्र माना गया
inatah drishtahamekcham sukhe dubkhe na caparah. I tidam bharanadardham caritramathara matam (14)
In situations of sukha or dukha, pleasure or pain, I consider myself nothing else but a knower and an observer. I remain only knower and observer of pleasant or unpleasant circumstances, having no attachment whatsoever, with external objects like wife or son - such thoughts along with repeated and earnest contemplations to remain absorbed in the Self, are also termed samyak charitra (enlightened conduct).
यदेतन्मूलहेतोः स्यात् कारणं सहकारकम् । तदबाह्यं देश-कालादिस्तपश्च बहिरङ्गकम् ।। 15 ।।
खण्डान्वयः यदेतत्=जो यह, मूलहेतो:=(रत्नत्रयरूपी) मूलकारण का, सहकारक कारणं सहकारी कारण, स्यात्-होता है, तबाह्य-उसके अतिरिक्त, (यत्-जो) देशकालादि:-क्षेत्र-काल आदि (रूप कारणचतुष्टय), च और, तप:-(अनशनादिरूप बाह्य) तप भी, बहिरंगकम्-बहिरंग (कारण) हैं।
Jadetarmulahetch syat karanam sahakarakam tadabahyandesha-kaladistapashca bahirangakam (15)
Aforesaid shlokas state that sampak darshan (enlightened vision), samyak jnana (enlightened knowledge), and sanyak charitra (enlightened conduct), are the basic internal means for achieving moksha. In addition

Page #95

SVARUPA SAMBODHANA
to the right kshetra or location, devout austerities, meditation, asceticism and penance are the supporting external means for the same. Without the right coordination of both the internal and external means, moksha cannot be achieved.
इतीदं सर्वमालोच्य सौस्थ्ये-दौस्थ्ये च शक्तितः । आत्मनो भावयेत् तत्त्वं राग-द्वेष-विवर्जितम् ।। 16 ।।
खण्डान्वयः इति इस प्रकार से, इदं सर्वं-यह सब, आलोच्य विचार करके, सौस्थ्ये-सुस्थिति में, दौस्थ्ये दु:स्थिति में, शक्तित:-शक्तिपूर्वक, आत्मन: अपने, राग-द्वेष-विवर्जितं राग और द्वेष से रहित, तत्त्वं-निजात्मतत्त्व की, भावयेत् भावना करनी चाहिए।
itidam sariamalocza sausthe dausthe ca shaktitah. atmano bharzyet tattuam raga-dresha-ritarjitam (16)
Thus, taking into account all the pros and cons and understanding the Self clearly and fully well, irrespective of happy or unhappy circumstances, one should meditate daily on the Self in a detached way. In other words, one should neither become elated on gaining prosperity and comforts, nor he should get depressed in adverse circumstances. None of these desirable or undesirable things affect the Soul in the least; they are only connected with the body.
कषायै रंजितं चितस्तत्त्वं नैवावगाहते । नीली-रक्तेऽम्बरे रागो दुराधेयो हि कौंकुमः ।। 17 ॥
खण्डान्वयः कषायैः कषायों से, रञ्जितम्-रंगा हुआ, चेत:=मन या उपयोग, तत्त्वं आत्मतत्त्व को, नैवावगाहते-ग्रहण नहीं कर (सकता) है। हि-क्योंकि, (जैसे कि) नीलीरक्ते-नीले रंग से रंगे हुए, अम्बरे वस्त्र में, कौंकुमो राग:-कौंकुमी रंग, दुराधेय-दुराधेय है। (चढ़ना अत्यन्त कठिन है)।
kashayai ranjitam cittastattvam nairaragahate. mali-raktembare rago durradheyo hi kaumkunah. (17)
The mind of a deluded person under influence of anger or passion is unable to recognize the true shape of the atmatattua , just in the same way as saffron is unable to provide its hue onto a blue cloth.

Page #96

84
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
EXPLANATION Prior to attempting to know the true nature of the Self, it is necessary to drive out passions, attachment, avarice, anger, etc. from the mind; then only one can gain the true knowledge of the atmatattua. As no seed can germinate in a ground that is scorched by fire, in the same way, righteousness does not take root or germinate in a mind affected by passion or anger. Every man should earnestly strive to drive out all the passions fully and completely so that he is able to salvage his Soul, which is drowned deep in the worldly ocean. Passion is not the nature or quality of a jirn, it is merely a perversion.
ततस्त्वं दोषनिर्मुक्त्यै निर्मोहो भव सर्वतः । उदासीनत्वमाश्रित्य तत्त्वचिन्तापरो भव ।। 18 ।।
खण्डान्वयः ततः इस कारण से, त्वं-तुम, दोषनिर्मुक्त्यै-दोषों के निवारण के लिए, सर्वत: सब ओर से, निर्मोहो-मोहरहित, भव-हो जाओ (तथा) उदासीनत्वं उदासीनता का, आश्रित्य आश्रय लेकर, तत्त्वचिन्तापरः-तत्त्वचिंतन में तत्पर, भव-हो जाओ।
tatastram dosharirmuktyai rirmoho bhara sarratah. udasinatramashritya tattiacintaparo bhaun (18)
In this shloka, the acharya advises a samsaric jira as follows:
It is not possible to uplift the Self without giving up attachment and the feeling of love and hatred resulting therefrom. Therefore, one should give up attachment for the body and for other external objects and adopt a detached and unperturbed attitude towards the world, body and pleasures and delve deep into the realm of the tatras.
हेयोपादेयतत्त्वस्य स्थितिं विज्ञाय हेयतः । निरालम्बोऽन्यतः स्वस्मिन्नुपेये सावलम्बनः ॥ 19 ।।
खण्डान्वयः हेयोपादेयतत्त्वस्य हेय और उपादेय तत्त्व की, स्थिति स्थिति को-स्वरूप को, विज्ञाय जानकर, अन्यतः हेयत: अपने से भिन्न हेयतत्त्वों से, निरालम्ब:=आलम्बन रहित होकर (उनका आश्रय छोड़कर), उपेये उपादेयभूत अथवा ग्रहण करने योग्य, स्वस्मिन्-अपने स्वरूप में, सावलम्बन-आलम्बन सहित हो जाओ, (उसका आश्रय ग्रहण

Page #97

SVARUPA SAMBODHANA
85
et)
heyopadezatattrasya sthitim vijnaza heyatah. miralamborjatah stas mimpeye savalambanah. (19)
Only after ascertaining the true state and nature of things worth discarding or accepting and disassociating from all external objects, one should accept the things worth accepting for the upliftment of the Self.
EXPLANATION One should disassociate oneself from all external objects like wife, son, wealth and riches, friends and foes, etc. which cause attraction and attachment and impede development of the Self. A mortal should seek refuge in the pandra parmeshthies and remain absorbed in meditation gaining knowledge of the Self.
तदाप्यतितृष्णावान् हन्त ! मा भूस्त्वात्मनि । raporgrafent, arantieri 7 qef 11 20 11
ausra: 6 ! = 3154#! 71111=TAI (3T4f1a) Ha , 4=T9, आत्मनि=अपने विषय में (भी), अतितृष्णावान् अत्यन्त तृष्णा से युक्त, मा भू:-मत ET3Tt, (alfa) qeja 7, arger (377 #), qol yufa:=qot भावना उत्पन्न होती है, तावत्-तब तक (तुम), मोक्षमोक्ष को, न यास्यसि-नहीं जा Hatto
tadapati trishmaran hantal ma bhustratman. parattrishmaprabhutiste, tavanmoksham na yasyasi (20)
The teacher further advises:
Even after disassociating oneself from external objects and becoming absorbed in the Self, one should not get very ambitious about himself attaining moksha, because so long as there is a feeling of desire within you, you would not be able to achieve selfrealization.

Page #98

86
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
मोक्षेऽपि यस्य नाकांक्षा स मोक्षमधिगच्छति । इत्युक्तत्वाद्वितान्वेषी कांक्षां ने क्वापि योजयेत् ॥ 21 ॥
खण्डान्वयः यस्य- जिस व्यक्ति की, मोक्षेऽपि = मोक्षविषयक भी, आकांक्षा-इच्छा, न=नहीं है, स= वही, मोक्षम् = मोक्ष को, अधिगच्छति समझता या प्राप्त करता है, इति ऐसा, उक्तत्वात्=कहा गया होने से, हितान्वेषी - हित की खोज में लगे हुए व्यक्ति को, क्वापि = किसी भी विषय में, कांक्षां= आकांक्षा, न योजयेत् =नहीं करनी चाहिए ।
makshepi yasya nakanksha sa mokshamadhigachati. ityuk tatuaduitareshi kanksham na kupi yjayet. (21)
When the desire to attain moksha fades away or disappears from the heart of a sage or a mahatma, then only he can achieve salvation. Keeping in view the aforesaid principle, people who are desirous to uplift their own Self, should give up their desire for all things.
स्वं परञ्चेति वस्त्वित्थं वस्तुरूपेण चिन्तय । उपेक्षाभावनोत्कर्ष- पर्यंते शिवमाप्नुहि ।। 22 ।।
खण्डान्वयः स्वं परञ्चेति = अपनी और परायी ऐसी (समस्त), वस्तु वस्तुओं को, वस्तुरूपेण=(जो वस्तु जैसी है, उसी) वस्तुरूप से, चिन्तय- विचार करो ( और फिर ) इत्थम् = इस प्रकार ( विचार होने पर), उपेक्षाभावनोत्कर्षपर्यन्ते = उपेक्षा रूप माध्यस्थ भावना का चरम उत्कर्ष प्राप्त होने पर, शिवं मोक्ष को प्राप्नुहि = प्राप्त करो ( प्राप्त कर सकोगे - ऐसा भाव है ) ।
suam paranceti vastuttham vasturupena cintaya. upekshabhaumotkarsha-paryate shivmapmubi. (22)
Think and try to evaluate the actual state of things which are yours (connected with the Soul) and which belong to others (external objects). This should be done in a detached and unperturbed way. This process is termed as param madhyastha bhaana state of equanimity or upeksha bhara - equanimous attitude. When this attitude of equanimity reaches its zenith then only one can hope to attain moksha.

—

Page #99

SVARUPA SAMBODHANA
साऽपि च स्वात्मनिष्ठत्वात् सुलभा यदि चिन्त्यते । आत्माधीने फले तात ! यत्नं किन्न करिष्यसि ।। 23 ।।
खण्डान्वयः साऽपि वह (मध्यस्थ भावना) भी, स्वात्मनिष्ठत्वात् अपनी आत्मा में विद्यमान होने से, यदि अगर, सुलभा सुलभ है-ऐसी, चिन्त्यते-विचारी जाती है, (तो), तात ! -हे भाई! आत्माधीने फले-स्वाधीन फल में, यलं-पुरुषार्थ-प्रयत्न, किन्न करिष्यसि क्यों नहीं करते हो?
sapi ca svatmarishthatunt sulabha jadi cirtrate atmadhine phale tata! vatramkima karishasi. (23)
If someone says – to wish is easy, as wishing is under one's control, but achieving the result is difficult because it is beyond him. Hence, one can desire for anything one may wish. In reply to this, the acharya out of compassion tells - as desire is within one's control, so also to achieve everlasting bliss is within the control of one's own-self. So why do you not strive for that everlasting bliss which will end all the miseries and will make you free of distress forever.
स्वं परं विद्धि तत्रापि व्यामोहं छिन्दि किन्त्विमम् । ... अनाकुलं स्वसंवेद्य-स्वरूपे तिष्ठ केवले ।। 24 ।।
खण्डान्वयः स्वं-अपने को, परं-पर को (यथावत्), विद्धि-जानो, किन्तु-परन्तु, तत्रापि उनमें (स्व-पर में) भी, इमं व्यामोहम्-(ये मेरा है-ये पराया है) इस व्यामोह को, छिन्दि-नष्ट कर दो (तथा) अनाकुल: (सन्) =अनाकुल होकर, स्वसंवेद्यस्वरूपे-अपने से ही अनुभव में अपने योग्य स्वरूप में, केवले परिपूर्ण (स्वरूप) में, तिष्ठ स्थिर रहो।
svamparam viddhi tatrapi yamcham chindi kintuimam anakulam suasanaecha-scarpe tishtha kerale. (24)
The acharya further says: “ Accepting that attaining moksha also lies within one's control, one should know to differentiate between the objects that are his - connected with the Soul, and which are external - belong to others, and thereafter realising the difference do away with attachment to all the external objects and remain fully established in the self-realized Self."

Page #100

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
स्वः स्वं स्वेन स्थिरं स्वस्मै स्वस्मात्स्वस्याविनश्वरे । स्वस्मिन् ध्यात्त्वा लभस्वेत्थमानन्दमृमतं पदम् ।। 25 ।।
खण्डान्वयः स्वः स्वयं ही, स्वं अपने को, स्वेन-अपने से (स्वयं के द्वारा), स्वस्मात्-अपने से, स्वस्याविनश्वरे स्वस्मिन् अपने अविनाशी स्वरूप में, स्थिर:-स्थिरतापूर्वक, ध्यात्वा ध्यान करके, एनं-इस, आनंद आनन्दमय, अमृतं पदं अविनाशी पद को, लभस्व प्राप्त करो।
suah suamscena sthiram suas mai suasmats tasyarinashare. Svasmin dhyatra lbhasretthamanandamrimatam padam (25)
In this shloka, the acharya establishes that all factors – subject, object, cause, action and effect, etc. are functions of the Soul only. He advises that all mortals in this world, for the benefit for their own-self, should concentrate on their own Soul, and try to achieve the everlasting blissful moksha pada that is achievable or realizable through the Self only.
इतिस्वतत्त्वं परिभाव्य वाङ्मयं, य एतदाख्याति श्रुणोति चादरात् । करोति तस्मै परमात्मसंपदं, स्वरूपसस्बोधनपंचविंशतिः ।। 26 ।।
खण्डान्वयः इति-इस पूर्वोक्त रीति से, स्वतत्त्वं-निजात्मतत्त्व को, परिभाव्य-भली भाँति भावना करके, य:-जो, एतद्वाचां-इन वचनों को, आख्याति कहता है, च-और, आदरात् =आदरपूर्वक, श्रुणोति-सुनता है, तस्मै = उसके लिए (यह ग्रन्थ), परमात्मसंपदं परमात्मारूपी सिद्धि-सम्पत्ति को, करोति प्राप्त करता है - (ऐसा यह) स्वरूप सम्बोधनपंचविंशति:-स्वरूप-सम्बोधन-पंचविंशति नामक ग्रंथ है।
itisuntattram paribharja vannayam, Ja etadakhyati shrmoti cadarat. karoti tasmai paramatmasampadanı svarupa sambodhana pancarinshatih. (26)
In the epilogue, Shri Bhatta Akalanka Deva describes the great benefits of reading and listening to this grantha and says:
“Whosoever reads or listens with devotion to this Svarupa Sambodhana Panchauinshatih grartha made up of twenty-five shlokas and repeatedly contemplates on the atma-tattun described therein, will achieve the grandeur or magnificence of infinite vision, infinite

Page #101

SVARUPA SAMBODHANA
89
knowledge, infinite vigour and infinite bliss of Godhood (Paramatman."

Page #102

Appendix 1
The Concept of Dravya (Substance):
Continuity and Change
Jagdish Prasad Jain "Sadhak”
The English translation of the word "drazza” is “substance”. Substance is suggestive of something unchanging behind the changes and yet it is characterized by both continuity and change. The substance is endowed with attributes or qualities, which are permanent or unchanging and always reside in the substance, and accompanied by change or modifications. A quality is (actually) the distinguishing character of one substance from another, while the modifications of such qualities are called modes (paryaya). The modes too reside, though not always, in a substance; they are subject to origination and destruction and are temporary. “The object [of knowledge) indeed, consists of substance, the substances are said to have their essence in qualities. And through these are the modifications."1 The very term “drarza" signifies drazatua, i.e. “that which by nature, flows towards its modes”.
Substance is defined as follows: “That which, whilst it does not forsake its innate nature, is connected with [characterized by] origination, annihilation and stability [continuity or permanence) and which possesses qualities and modifications.”? In other words, apart from preserving its innate nature (sunbhara or suarupa), which is

Page #103

APPENDIX 1
91
unchanging or indestructible, the existent or substance is said to possess qualities or attributes (guma) and modes or modifications (paryaya) (gumapraymarad drogam) and which is endowed with the triple character: origination, destruction, and stability (persistence) (upada gaya, dhraugas yuktam sat).
The three (origination, destruction and stability or continuity) are inextricably linked so much so that there is no coming-into-existence (origination or creation) without destruction; no destruction devoid of origination; neither origination nor destruction without permanence, stability or what continues to be; and no permanence or continuance without creation and destruction. Thus, Acharya Kundakunda confirms the necessary concomitance (arinabbarz) of origination, annihilation, and stability. The inseparability of these three terms is further clarified as follows: “There is without substance no quality whatever, no modification.”6 In other words, in the absence of substance, there can be neither quality nor modification. There is also no substance without the mode and no mode without the substance. This point is put forward more forcefully by Siddhasen Divakara in the following words:
There is no substance that is devoid of modification, nor is there any modification without an abiding something, a substance. For, origin, decay and continuance are the three constituents of a substance.
Though inseparable (aprathaktra), the substance and the quality are nonetheless distinct (anyatun). This is clearly asserted in these words: "The substance is not the quality, and the quality is not the substance, indeed; for ... this a-tad-bhara (non-identity or notion-of-otherness, i.e. anatua) is not non-existence as such." Thus, in anyatia (otherness) there is no differentiation of place or location while in prathakatin (separateness) there is differentiation of place or location. The use of these terms helps to avoid the confusion between bhedabheda (differentiation and non-differentiation).
Although paryaya is not mentioned in this discussion of substance and quality specifically, it may be assumed that it is also a distinct aspect. However, the distinctness of these terms does not imply that

Page #104

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
they are exclusive of one another. Substance or reality is a multifaceted complexity. It is endowed with many qualities or attributes which, in turn, undergo modifications, i.e. origination and destruction, with the sub-stratum remaining intact. Such a complex reality, viewed in itself and with reference to time and place, can be understood properly and thoroughly from different standpoints (nazes). That everything that exists is permanent or continuing is true from the standpoint of substance (draryarthika naja); that it is ever changing is true from the point of view of modification (paryayarthika naja). In fact, it is the substance which undergoes modifications.
The above explains the genesis of the theory of multifaceted nature of reality, i.e. anekartwaida. According to this doctrine, the same object can have a plularity of attributes, viz. non-eternal and eternal, etc. In other words, the same object can apparently have contradictory properties depending upon the perspective from which it is viewed. This is because reality is perceived to be manifold, “and each entity has a manifold nature”, consisting of diverse forms and modes, of innumerable aspects."
There are, according to B.K. Matilal, two compatible notions of substance, viz. substance as the core of change or flux, and substance as the substratum of attributes. 10 Acharya Kundakunda combines these two notions in the following words:
That which whilst it does not forsake its innate nature, is connected with origination, annihilation, and stability and which possesses qualities and modifications they call a substance. ...
Existence is the innate nature of a substance, (connected as this is) with qualities and various modifications of its own, with origination, annihilation and stability at all times. 11
According to Jainism, the nature of reality is dynamic and therefore the substance must evolve into qualities (greas) and modifications (paryayas) and must constantly undergo the three stages of origination, annihilation, and permanence or stability. In fact, the entire dynamic process of development is due to mutual action and reaction between the soul (the self or jira) and the non-soul, (ajira or unconscious matter), because of their evolutionary (Parinam) nature. This parinami or

Page #105

APPENDIX 1
93
evolutionary nature endows them with the characteristics of both bharu parinama and parispanda or krija parinama, i.e. evolutions into being and evolutions into action. Space and Time, however, are endowed only with bharr parinamas. 12 It follows then that full completeness of existence is not realized either in a substance or a quality or a modification taken singly or separately but only in these taken together. Such separateness would suggest a cleavage between the evolutes and the evolving reality reducing each of them in their separation to non-existence.
Jainism makes its position clear by citing the example of gold. Just as gold realizes its own nature as an existence through its qualities like yellowness, malleability, etc. and through its modifications or changes of form like ear ring, bangle, etc., which all proceed from gold as a substance. Even then any substance realizes its complete existence only in and through its qualities and modifications varying under variable circumstances. Existence is, thus, in the complete sense of the term, to be equated with a substance with all its qualities and changes of form which are themselves real. And this holds good of the conscious substance as well as of the unconscious.
In order to obviate the difficulties inherent in Nyaya Vaisheshika doctrine of aramihavada or the theory of emergence (arambha) or something new, so that the quality or modification which is arabhate (emerges) must be something new and different from the consequent causes, Jainism postulates the principle of parinama according to which the qualities and modifications are the self-evolutions of the substance having an identity of essence with it. Moreover, Jainism points out that in spite of this metaphysical or real identity between the drarga and guas and paryayas, there is a logical and conceptual distinction between them. “The qualities and modifications," Kalipada Mitra states, “are both bhima or distinct as well as abhima or not distinct from the draga. Metaphysically, they are non-distinct from or identical with the draga but logically they are distinct from it for without this logical distinction there is no other way of apprehending the draga as drazza, gma as such and paryaya per se." 13
Jainism conceives of substance as being not only existent, but evolutionary as well. Its very existence consists in a dynamic process resulting in the evolution of qualities and modifications coupled with

Page #106

94
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
the three stages of origination, annihilation, and stability. The whole world with its principal contents of the soul and the non-soul has to obey this law of change, process, or movement. The important point to note here, observes Kalipada Mitra, is that “the stages of origination and annihilation are like the thesis and anti-thesis of Hegel having a tendency towards stability which means nothing other than synthesis at a particular stage of the continuous developmental process ready to make room for a fresh origination or a new stage."14
This, however, has again to pass over into the stage of annihilation which along with the previous stage jointly acquires a momentum urging the reality attain a fresh synthesis and so on. The qualities which originate at a certain stage, Mitra adds, “carry with them their death signal and the influx of fresh qualities ensures synthesis and stability of the substance. Like other hypotheses, the Jaina hypothesis of evolution, is an attempt to conceive of substance as it presents itself to common observation. It seems at once both emergent and creative. "It is emergent," Kalipada Mitra explains, “in so far as it supplies us with the detailed links of connection between one stage and another which is the main character of the hypothesis of Emergence as pointed out by Lloyd Morgan. It is creative in so far as we do not miss in it the creation of a new feature as indicated by the new synthesis which is attained at every third stage." 15
As a conscious substance, the soul itself evolves into its qualities and modifications into its thinking, feelings and conations and into the various forms of conscious beings. If realizes its complete existence through them. This account of reality and existence, Kalipada Mitra points out, “at once mark the Jaina position out from that of the Buddhist who disintegrates reality into shreds of qualities and modifications and from that of the adinitist whose reality swallows up all qualities and modifications." 16
The significance of the Jaina view of reality will be obvious when we examine the extreme views of Advaitins and the Buddhism. At the one extreme, there is the Vedanta school, especially the Advaitins, who as Matilal observes, hold that “if something exists, it should exist always. And since only Brahman is the existent, it is eternal, ever lasting and unchanging. Hence, change has to be ruled out as only appearance."1? At the other extreme are the Buddhists (especially

Page #107

APPENDIX 1
95
perhaps the Sautrantikas) who completely deny that there is a substantial (.e. permanent) aspect of reality, existence is pure process or becoming. Thus, both the Vedantin and the Buddhist concepts of reality, as Sri Aurobindo remarks, are incomplete and partial aspects of reality or "half-truths”18
The Jaina doctrine of anekant synthesises in a unique way the seeming differences between the viewpoints of both being (substantial) and becoming (modificational). According to the dragarthika naya, the “substance exists" standpoint, i.e. in terms of being or continuity or permanence, the soul (jira) is eternal (unchanging). But according to the paraarthika naya, the “modification exists” standpoint, i.e. in terms of becoming and change, it (jira) is noneternal (everchanging). “The permanence of the jira makes liberation and omniscience possible, its mutability or capacity for modification accounts for the reality of Karmic bondage."19
If as is claimed by the Vedantin, reality is an unchanging permanency there is no scope for life, no scope for samsara, no necessity for moksha, or moksha-manga either. The whole religious framework will thus appear to be superfluous and useless, as it is based upon unreality. Change must be accepted as real, if life is to be real and if samsara is accepted to be as real. It is only then that we can appreciate the utility of pietyor dharma, and religious doctrines contributing to the salvation of the soul.
Similarly, the Buddhistic emphasis of change alone being real is also one-sided. The Buddhist doctrines of kshanik-rada (momentariness of reality, which denies the permanent underlying reality of the Self or non-Self) and anatmarada (denial of the existence of a substantial Self or atman), are also lacking in a complete comprehension of reality. Since there is no permanent Self, there is no responsible person who can be taken to be author of his conduct. “Moral conduct and its evolution would become meaningless. The person who did the act passes away and a different person comes to enjoy the fruits thereof. There is no justification why a different personality should enjoy the fruits of the karma by another distinct personality. Ethical responsibility loses its meaning and value in this anatmarada.”20
Jaina philosophy combines both aspects of continuity and change

Page #108

THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
in its system when it describes reality as ever changing while retaining its sub-stratum or permanence which forms the foundation, the basis or the core of change or flux. The Self, according to Jainism, is thus a reality which maintains its stability through a continuous process of change.
The Jaina view of Reality is intimately connected to the Jaina way of life. A substance does develop derivative characters (ribharas). However, amidst derivative characters of a substance we do not miss the innate nature of its existence, which is its swabhara or scanpa. Tadbhavaryuyam niyant", i.e. a drazza never leaves or gives up its srabhara (nature) and gets transformed into something else. Thus, while some of the destructive (ebatia) karmas can create hindrance to the power of knowledge and intuition, cause limitation and distortion of the factulties and capacities of the soul, and may even be completely obscuring (sarunghatin), they are not able to destroy the basic capacity or essential characteristics of the Self completely or totally. Hence the conscious being cannot be reduced to an unconscious entity. The analogy of the sun and cloud is useful here. As there is always some light, though the sun is covered with the dense veil of clouds so the Self retains some fragment of its intrinsic purity and enlightened knowledge, though it is covered with the dirt of karma.22
The intrinsic nature of substance or jira is its dharma (dhammo ratthu saharo, i.e. sublara); it is permanently fixed and is an inalienable part of drarja. Any ribhain paryaya is deviation, distortion, limitation, or modification of the innate nature (szabhara) of the Self and as such it is adventitious, transitory or impermanent. Such deviation can be understood as jira not being established in its nature and signifies distortion of its gumas (qualities), viz. darshan (indeterminate intuition or närakara upayoga) and jnana (determinate knowledge or sakara upayoga). Upayoga may be said to be attentiveness, manifestation, function or operation of consciousness or consciousness in action.
The passions, attachments, aversions, etc. are modifications, distortions, or impurities of scabbar. This signifies that the innate nature and qualities of the conscious Self, or the spiritual magnificence and glory of the essentially self-luminous reality, i.e. the soul, is not actualised or present in the person having impure dispositions. In other words, the Self is not established in its own intrinsic nature, i.e.

Page #109

APPENDIX 1
97
subhana.
A person who is ignorant of the true nature of the Self, because of his erroneous identification with an alien substance, i.e. body and the senses, develops impure dispositions. He is always prone to mental tensions, which are the result of his passions, desires, likes and dislikes, attachments and aversions. Such a person lacks discriminative insight or an enlightened view (samyak darshan) and, as Acharya Samantabhadra states, is never at peace with himself and always miserable due to "bhaya-kama-rashio".23 In other words, he is enmeshed in two contradictory thought processes, fear and the desire or lust – fear of death and desire of seeking his well-being in gratification of the senses. He is unnecessarily afraid of death, when there is no escaping from it, while he endlessly and mistakenly strives to seek his wellbeing in enslaving desires, sensual pleasures and passions, etc.24 Awareness of the transitory character of passions and attachments, etc. enables one not to cling to objects of transitory nature and impels him to practice equanimity, self-control, etc., and thereby to realize the goal of peace, happiness, freedom and self-realization.
How paryaya (change or modifications) in the material objects affects the bhara (psychic dispositions) or the attitudes of persons because of their intense attachment to them is aptly described by Acharya Samantabhadra in these words: “Persons desirous of a pot, a crown and gold become sad, happy and indifferent at the destruction (of the pot) origination (of the crown) and persistence (of gold) on account of their causes.”25 The psychological states of sadness and happiness and indifference though generated in the Self have their causes in the material object existing in the external world. Thus, the process of origination, destruction, and continuity in material objects causes changes in the psychic states or dispositions as well.
Paryaya or the transitoriness of things is an important concept in Jaina philosophy. Aritya (transitoriness) is considered to be the foremost amongst the twelve contemplations (bhavana) which are prescribed for Jains as a desirable religious practice. A rinya means transient, ever changing, transitory, and impermanent. Change is one of the few constants in life; or rather the only constant in life is change. Everything is in the process of change and evolution. To stop change is to cease living. Without change, there is no growth. Change adds to

Page #110

98
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
newness and freshness in life. Without change, life will be dull and monotonous. In fact, one can neither know nor realize the value of health unless one falls sick and one does not really experience happiness unless one has gone through hardships and misery.
Contemplation of ariya bhavana instills in us a sense of detachment, equanimity, self-reliance (prorsharth), self-restraint (saman, and control of passions (kashaya), and emotions. Contemplation on the impermanence of things makes us reflect on our inner Self, to search for the changeless reality behind the ever-changing, the quest for seeing and experiencing the real “I”, which is different from the “I” of body and senses.
The concept of paryaya is extremely important. Firstly, it helps in understanding the real nature of existence, Secondly, it forms the basis of the dynamic process of development and evolution, Thirdly, it makes possible growth and adds newness to life, Fourthly, it forms the genesis of the Jaina doctrine of anekant which reconciles the apparent contradictions between continuity and change, one and many, unity and diversity, etc. Fifthly, it signifies that the conscious substance (jira) may and does develop ribhara paryayas while retaining its innate nature (szarpa) of intrinsic purity, thereby providing the basis for self-realization, i.e. re-gaining the stabhara or the state of pure consciousness. Finally, it instills a sense of non-attachment, calmness in adverse circumstances, equanimity, self-restraint and control of desires, acquisitions and passions.
NOTES
1 Kundakunda, Acharya Praradhansara: The Spectrum of Consciousness, ed.,
by Jagdish Prasad Jain, 'Sadhak', translation by B. Faddegon (New Delhi:
Radiant Publishers, 2004), gatha 93-2 (Book II.1) (forthcoming). 2 Ibid., 95 Book II.3). 3 Umasvami (Umasavati), Tattuartha-Sutra, V.38. 4 Ibid., V.30. 5 Pravachansara, n. 1, 100 (Book II.8); see also Amrtachandra's commentary. 6 Ibid., 110 (Book II.18). 7 Siddhasen, Sarmati Ch. 1, Verse 12. 8 Pravachanasara, n. 1, 108 (Book II.16) and 106 (Book II.14).

Page #111

APPENDIX 1
9 B.K. Marilal, The Central Philosophy of Jairusm(Anekanta Vada) (Ahmedabad:
L.D. Series 79, 1981), p. 25. 10 Ibid., p. 36. 11 Pravachansara, n. 1, 95-96 (Book II.3-4). 12 Ibid., 128-129 and 133-135 (Book II.36-37 and 41-43). 13 Kalipada Mitra, “The Jaina Theoryof Existence and Reality," Indian Cudture
(Calcutta), January 1939, pp. 322-323. 14 Ibid., p. 323. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid., pp. 321-322. 17 Matilal, n. 9, p. 28. 18 Sri Aurobindo, The Life Divine (Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1996),
p. 659.
19 W.J. Johnson, “The Religious Function of Jaina Philosophy. Anekantrad
Reconsidered,” Religion (London), vol. 25, no. 1, January 1995, p. 44. 20 Jagdish Prasad Jain “Sadhak”, “Jainism in the 21st Century,” Jain Mission
Neues, April-June 1999. 21 Tattrartha Sutra, n. 3, V. 31. 22 Shiv Kumar, Muni, The Dodrine of Liberation in Indian Religion with Special
Reference to Jainism (New Delhi, Munshiram Manoharlal, 2000), p. 65. 23 Samantabhadra, The Path to Enlightenment: Suambhi Stora, tr. by D.K.
Goyal (New Delhi: Radiant Publishers, 2000), Verse 34. 24 Foreword by Jagdish Prasad Jain “Sadhak” in ibid., p. xvi. 25 Samantabhada, Aptamsa, Verse 59.

Page #112

Appendix 2
Samyakdarshan* Jagdish Prasad Jain "Sadhak"
A person endowed with an enlightened vision possesses a comprehensive view of reality, practices self-restraint, contentment, detachment, compassion, and fellow-feeling. As stated in the sacred books of the Jains, dansan mudo dhamm, i.e. samak darshan (enlightened vision or intuition) is the root or foundation of piety (dharma). Peace and happiness can be achieved only through subsidence of passions, self-restraint, contentment, and fellow-feeling, which are the attributes of a Samyakdrashti. A person imbued with Samyak darshan is a determined and dedicated person devoted to follow the path of righteousness, non-injury, limitation of one's desires and possessions and other virtues.
The Prerequisites of Samyakdarshan
The prerequisites of samyk darshan are: prasham (control or subsidence of passions), sarruega (enthusiasm for righteousness), nirreda
* Revised version of lecture at 10th Biennial Convention, of the Federation of Jain Associations in North America (JAINA), Philadelphia, USA, 4 July 1999.

Page #113

APPENDIX 2
101
(renunciation and disinterest in sensual pleasures and worldly possessions), arikampa (compassion), and astikya (shraddha or conviction). They form the world-view of a Jain householder as also of an ascetic. The quality of prasham endows a man with a certain degree of equanimity, calmness, and balance which enables him to feel happy, contented, and "at peace with himself”.
In Prashamratiprakarana, authored by Acharya Umasvami or Umasvati, who also wrote Tattwartha Sutra— the so-called bible of the Jainas,- it is stated:
Szargasukhari parokshanyatyant Parokshamera Mokshasukham Pratyaksham prashansukham Na parasham na cha Vaya praptam (237)
The happiness of heaven is indirect; it is beyond our experience. Thus, we may be disinterested in it. The happiness of salvation (moksha) is still more indirect. On the other hand, the peace and calm brought about by the subsidence or quelling down the excitement of passions (anger, pride, deceit and greed) and the happiness resulting therefrom can be directly experienced immediately and in this life. This happiness is neither dependent on other objects, things or beings nor is it perishable.
The so-called pleasures of worldly life, viz. sensual pleasures, are always accompanied with pain, difficulties, and suffering. They are never full and unadulterated. They are preceded and/or followed by suffering. They are transient, passing, and short-lived. What people in general consider happiness is mostly sensual pleasure which by its very nature is dependent on external objects pleasing to our senses. Prashansukha, i.e. happiness derived from or resulting from calmness and equanimity, is free from all these shortcomings.
This calmness or equanimity and the consequent peace and happiness in our lives results from subsidence of gross forms of anger, pride, deceitfulness, and greed (anantarıbandhi kashaya or passions) and by having a proper attitude towards life and by understanding and accepting the real nature of things. Accept the reality of things as they are and accept what you cannot change is a sure prescription for avoidance of stress and depression which are

Page #114

102
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
so common and prevalent in modern day life.
Samnega results in a man having great enthusiasm for righteousness and avoidance of evil deeds. The obverse of samaega is rireda or a spirit of renunciation. Some consider it a separate characteristic. It leads to disinterest in sensual pleasures, disenchantment with worldly things and possessions and detachment or renunciation in life. Detachment is not indifference to world; it means that one is not subjectively attached to something. Renunciation is not going to the forest but absence of attachment to worldly objects and persons.
Yet another characteristic of samyak darshan is arukampa (compassion), which is both negative and positive. In its negative sense, it is ahimsa (non-violence). In its positive sense, it is compassion, goodwill, and fellow-feeling. The four-fold bhavana (feelings/ reflections or mental dispositions) of maitri (amity or fellow feeling towards all living beings), pramoda (appreciation of the merits of others), karuma (unstinted sympathy and compassion for those in distress), and madhastha (equanimity towards the perversely inclined) are considered part of anikampa and are the golden principles for social intercourse and a happy, peaceful life in the world.
A stikya is firm conviction in regard to the principles of Truth. It may be said to correspond to six fundamental truths of Shrimad Rajchandra, viz. the soul exists; it is eternal; it is the author of its activities; that therefore it is responsible for the consequences of its activities; it aspires for liberation; and that there are means to achieve liberation. Sansakdarshan (enlightened vision), samjakmana (enlightened knowledge), and samakcharitra (enlightened conduct) combined are the means to achieve liberation (moksha).
The affirmation, faith or conviction (astikya or shraddha) about the existence of soul, distinct from the non-Self, is a necessary prerequisite for samakdarshan It forms the basis of understanding the reality of things or the fundamentals of life (tattras) and leads to spiritual awakening and advancement. In the absence of sangukdarshan neither can knowledge be considered sarjak (enlightened) nor conduct be called samyak. It was probably keeping this in mind that Shrimad Rajchandra observed:

Page #115

APPENDIX 2
koi kriyajad thai rahya shushkagyan ma koi mane marg mokshno karuna upje joi
Some are entangled in barren rituals, others stuck in knowledge dry, And in these they view a path to liberation. I have pity for them.
103
If a person is not convinced of the existence and reality of sentient or conscious being (ji) and its special characteristics (such as consciousness, performer of actions and liable for the results thereof, etc.), he would remain deeply engrossed and attached to his body and sensual pleasures. When a particular desire of sense gratification is satisfied, it will lead to attachment to those things and give rise to further desires. If there is any obstruction in the fulfillment of the desires, aversion and anger will be the natural outcome. This enslavement to desires is the root cause of passions and these, in turn, result in the adoption of an attitude of aggressiveness and possessiveness, which are not only harmful to the physical, moral and spiritual well-being of the individual but also militate against social harmony, peace and well-being of mankind. Peace of mind and harmony in society can be achieved only through contentment and fellow feeling.

Characteristics of Samyakdarshan
In addition to the above-mentioned prerequisites of a Samyak drishti, there are certain component parts of samyakdarshan. These are:
1. Nibshankita (freedom from scepticism), i.e. the unshakeable faith or conviction in the existence and reality of the Self and the non-Self and in the doctrine of anekant (non-absolutism). This faith is not blind faith since it is in reality a decision arrived at after mature consideration and understanding of things. A Samyakdrasthi is aware of the limitations of thinking and the harmful effects of frustration. Therefore, after deliberating on different aspects and viewpoints, he wants to arrive at rational decisions and be free from skepticism or doubt (nihshankita). He knows that doubt kills decision and without taking a decision an individual is unable to muster enough courage to

Page #116

104
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
go forward.
2. Nihkankshita (freedom from desires or attachment to worldly things) The faith in Self or (atman) enables a Samyakdrashti to attain a sort of mental equilibrium and consequently he does not fear death and is not disturbed by pain, censure, insecurity, etc. He endeavours to inculcate the virtues of modesty, forsaking all pride of learning, honour, family, affluence, etc. and limitation of wants and desire. Eventually, he wants to be nihkankshita (free from all desires and attachment for worldly things).
3. Amudhatas (freedom from delusive notions and follies). A Samak drashti, having an open mind, is ever eager to learn from history and experience and is grounded in anekant, scientific outlook and rational thinking. He is not slave to customary beliefs, traditions, or conventions or vested interests. He is, thus, free from delusive notions and follies (amudhatas).
4. Niridhikitsa (freedom from disgust). As a Samyakdrashti has acquired a discriminatory insight about the reality of things, the Self and the non-Self, he is free from disgust (Nirudhikitsa), and feels no revulsion at the sight of human sickness, insanity or ugliness. He does not hate or condemn others on grounds of religion, race, colour, creed or nationality.
5. Vatsalya (disinterested affection or selfless love). Not only does a Samyakdrashti avoid hating others, he is also enjoined to practice atsalya (disinterested affection or selfless love) for fellow beings, dedicating his life to the service and support of all human beings without any distinction of race, religion, sex or nationality.
6. Upguhana (to hide shortcomings of others) or Uparrahana (cultivation of virtuous dispositions). Another characteristic of a Samyak drasthi is upguhana (tendency to cover up or hide from public view the shortcomings of persons) or uparhana, that is cultivation of virtuous dispositions of honesty, gratitude, ahimsa (non-violence), forgiveness, modesty, straightforwardness, etc.
7. Sthitikarana (re-establishing oneself and others on the path of righteousness). When people deviate from the path of righteousness under the influence of greed, possessiveness, conceit and pride and indulge in aggressiveness and exploitation of the weak, a Samyak drasthi endeavours to re-establish them on the path of righteousness

Page #117

APPENDIX 2
105
(sthitikarana).
8. Prabhavana (propagation of the values of life). A Sanjak drashti tries to propagate the values of life (prabhavana) by making righteous way of living, in thinking and doing things, widely known and easily accessible to people at large the world over through publications, radio, television, internet, etc.
Conclusion
As a result of samyak darshan, one becomes an entirely transformed being. His attitude towards life, his outlook of the world and worldly things, the basis of his relations with others, his conception and assessment of values all are changed. This miraculous transformation is evidenced in the person's attitude and behaviour by the five tendencies (calmness, enthusiasm, detachment, compassion, and acceptance of reality, which become automatically manifest in a person gifted with samyak darshan and are, as it were, its differentiate.
This transformation of individual consciousness rarely occurs overnight. It is a matter of growth and adherence to a plan with a fixed mental intent. That is why a life of moral and spiritual discipline consisting of self-restraint, the five abstentions or vows (non-injury, truthfulness, non-stealing, sex-fidelity and setting a limit to the maximum wealth or worldy objects one would possess) together with their augmenting and supporting vows, five Samitis (carefulness) (in moving, speaking, eating, keeping and receiving things and in excretion), three kinds of self-control of mind, speech and body, twelve reflections (bhavana) and ten virtues (forgiveness, humility, straightforwardness, truth, purity of body and mind, self-restraint, austerities, renunciation, non-acquisitiveness, and chastity) is considered essential. Thus, sanjak darshan not only enables an individual to obtain peace of mind and happiness, but also facilitates social well-being, communal harmony and peace in the world.

Page #118

Appendix 3
आत्म कीर्तन
The Psalm of the Soul
By Manoharlal (Sahjanand) Varri (Translation and Commentary by Mahesh Chand)
In this hymn, Manoharlal Varniji addresses his own soul rather than an External Infinite Power or God. He sings the former's praises, and establishes the similarity of the Self's natural characteristics with the Supreme Being. Not recognising any outside Force as the maker of the world, the Bestower of pleasure and pain, etc., he invokes neither His mercy or generosity nor entertains a hope or wish. But on the contrary, taking the very existence of all emotions, passions, prejudices, and cravings to be the cause of misery and sufferings and eradicating them from his Soul, he wants to meditate and repose himself in the true nature of his Self.
हूँ स्वतंत्र निश्चल निष्काम। ज्ञाता द्रष्टा आत्म राम ।।टेक।।
hoon suntantra rushchal mishkam jnata drashta A tam Ram!
.

Page #119

Constant, eternal, wishless, free, Knower, seer, such soul is me!
APPENDIX 3
I am a Soul, free, immutable, without a craving - All Knowledge and All Perception.
COMMENTARY
-
I, the Soul, without colour, taste, smell or touch; existing from eternity and everlasting; distinct from even the body, not perceptible to the senses, but capable of being experienced by own innate knowledge when inclination to passions and emotions is curbed --- such a Soul, I am 'free'. That is, on none do my activities, happiness, or misery depend. I do my own deed and bear its consequences, and I shall attain Salvation by reposing myself in my own intrinsic nature. From eternity to the present day, I have wandered through innumerable births, and been over-whelmed by various emotions and passions. Yet my essential nature of consciousness has never wavered. I have not become non-living and shall be ever steadfast or constant in my nature. Devoid of all lust, wish, and desire, I am a pure conscious Self. Such a Soul, I am a knower and a Seer — of a Knowing and Perceiving nature.
-

मैं वह हूँ जो हैं भगवान । जो मैं हूँ वह हैं भगवान ।। अन्तर यही ऊपरी जान । वे विराग यहँ राग वितान ।। ( 1 )
mein waha hoon jo hain Bhagwan, jo mein hoon waha hain Bhagwan; antar yahi oopari jaan, e virag yanha raag vitan (1)
I am what Supreme Being is, What myself is, that God is;
107

Page #120

108
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
With this sole apparent difference, Here "passions," there "Equanimity." (1)
1. I am that which the Supreme Being is and the Supreme Being is what I am. The only apparent difference is that while He is absolutely without delusions and passions, my empirical Self has them in ábundance.
COMMENTARY
That which is my intrinsic nature is the obvious expressed nature of the Supreme Being, or what the expressed nature of the Pure, Supreme Soul is, is my innate nature (starupa). But there is only this apparent difference between me and the Supreme Soul. He is free of all attachment and aversion, etc. while I am having a wide range of passions and delusions.
This difference is only superficial, because intrinsically both are exactly similar. If passions had been a part of my intrinsic nature, they will be irremoveable; then religion, austerity, penances, and vows (self-denials) will all be futile, and there will be no way for the advancement of the Soul.
मम स्वरूप है सिद्ध समान ।
अमित शक्ति सुख ज्ञान निधान ।। किन्तु आश वश खोया ज्ञान । बना भिखारी निपट अजान 11 (2)
mam starupa hai Siddha saman, amit shakti guna jnana nidhan; kintu aash rash khoya jnana, bana bhikhari nipat ajan. (2)

My real Self like Siddhas is, Infinite power, knowledge, bliss; Losing knowledge being aspirant,

Page #121

APPENDIX 3
I am left a beggar,
ignorant. (2)
2. My real nature is like that of the Liberated Soul (Siddha): Infinite Power, Infinite Bliss, Infinite Intuition and Infinite Knowledge. But under the influence of expectations (aash) and desires, I have lost the enlightened vision and become a beggar, entirely ignorant.
-
COMMENTARY
My nature is like that of the absolutely pious and pure Emancipated Soul (Siddha), who is the embodiment of Infinite Power, Infinite Bliss, Infinite Knowledge, and Infinite Intuition (Darshan). These attributes have been inherent in me since eternity, but under the influence of quite distinct foreign entities I have lost the attributes of knowledge, etc. and in their bankruptcy have become a beggar, wanting alien things.
सुख दुख दाता कोई न आन । मोह राग रुष दुख की खान ।। निजको निज पर को पर जान ।
फिर दुख का नहिं लेश निदान ।। ( 3 )
sukh dukh data koi na aan, moha raag rush dukh ki khan; nij ko nij par ko par jaan, phir nahi lesh dukh nidan. (3)

None else bestows pain and pleasure, 'Love' and 'anger' are grief's treasure; "Self" from "non-self," I distinguish, And then there is no anguish. (3)
109
3. None else bestows Happiness or Misery. My own delusion, attachment, and aversion are the source of anguish. Know the Self as the Self and the Non-Self as Non-Self. And then there is no cause for even the least distress.

Page #122

110
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
COMMENTARY
Actually this misapprehension that "some foreign object is the cause of my happiness or misery, and I am the bestower of pleasure and pain on others", aggravates the grief. As this feeling is full of indigence and pride, which causes un-easiness, Oh Self! end this feeling and understand thine own and the world's real nature. Then there will be no occasion for anguish.
जिन शिव ईश्वर ब्रह्मा राम । विष्णु बुद्ध हरि जिसके नाम ।। राग त्यागि पहुँचूँ निज धाम | आकुलता का फिर क्या काम 11 (4)
Jin Shiv Ishuar Brahma Ram, Vishnu Buddha Hari jiske naam raag tyag pabundhun nij dham, akulta ka phir kya kaam (4)
Whose name Buddha, Rama, Ishuar, Jin, Brahma, Vishnu, Hari or Shira; Leaving passions, I reach that goal, No distress then will be for soul. (4)
4. Once I eradicate the passions and reach my goal by attaining the Godly nature of Supreme Beings such as Jina, Shiv, Ishwar, Brahma, Rama, Vishnu, Buddha, or Hari - there remains then no ground for
uneasiness.

COMMENTARY
If renouncing all attachments to other, alien objects and persons, I realize Godhood described by such names as Jina, who have conquered gross emotions, passions, and prejudices, Shiva, who is himself the embodiment of Bliss; Ishuar, who is the master architect of his destiny or conditions; Rama, the vision to which Yogis dedicate themselves in contemplation; Vishnu, who is omnipresent by virtues of his omniscience; Buddha, who is all Knowing; Hari, who

Page #123

APPENDIX 3
111
has washed away the filth of vice – then there remains no uneasiness or distress.
होता स्वयं जगत परिणाम । मैं जग का करता क्या काम ।। दूर हटा परकृत परिणाम ।। HETIPİS Š 3Rr 11 (5)
hota suzam jagat parinam, mein jag ka karta kya kaang, door hata parakrit parinam, Sahjanand rahoon abhiram (5)
World does function by itself; What work of it does myself? Alien influence! Do get away! In bliss, for ever, may I stay. (5)
5. All the changes and transformations in the objects of the world occur by themselves. What am I doing to them? Nothing. Oh alien manifestations and influences! Get away! Let me remain established for ever in my real blissful nature.
COMMENTARY The modifications of all entities of the Universe are taking place by their own causation. I neither could do, nor can do, nor shall be able to do anything to any living being or non-living thing except self. That is to say I am not functioning by becoming one with any entity. Of course in any modification which an entity has at the time, another entity – whether it be myself or any other — may be acting as an auxiliary agent.
Other things apart, even the psychic dispositions of attachment and aversion in the empirical self, are the result of external/ auxiliary causes. I am therefore not identical with even these passions as they are not my innate nature (Starpa). I am simply passing through

Page #124

112
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
impure mental states only in vain. These manifestations are due to alien influences and should be gotten rid of so that I may remain for ever established in my eternally blissful, true and perfect nature.

Page #125

Index
Ananta chatushtaja, 73 ananta darshan (infinite vision), 73 ananta jnana (infinite knowledge), 73 ananta ura (infinite power or vigour),
73
abhedabhara drishti, 34 abhima (identical), 26 achetan (devoid of consciousness), 18,
76 adhikaranatra (the character of a loca
tive), 57 adhyatma yogi (spiritual ascetic), 61 Advaita Vedanta, 4, 48-49, 93 ‘A ham Brahmasmi? 48 ahamkara (ego, pride), 28, 38, 48, 54 ahimsa (non-violence), 48, 52-54, 101 ajira (non-soul), 91 Akalanka, Deva (Bhatta), 1-2, 4-5, 9,
12, 33, 52, 55, 69-70, 72-74 Akalanka-nyaya, 1 akrtabhagama, 11 akshayam (indestructible), 71, 73 Allah, 49 Amartachandra, Acharya, 15, 19, 31, 57,
anatman (non-self), 36 anatmarada (denial of the existence of a
substantial Self or atman), 94 anekant (balancing of various view
points), 3, 13, 40, 54, 97, 102 anekantatmak, 21 anekantarnda, 14, 91 ankartic (multifaceted), 71, 74 anichcha (impermanent), 12 anirundharada, 20 arinya (transitoriness), 96 amma bharana, 97 antaratman, 35 arukampa (compassion), 52, 99, 101 anatra (otherness), 90 apadanatra (the character of an ablative),
57 Aptamimansa, alias Deragama Stotra, 2,
70 Aradhana Kathakosha, 70 Arhats, 43 armbhavada, 92 antha, 25
70
Amudhatas (freedom from delusive no
tions and follies), 103 amikta (not free), 5 amuntah, 20 An Insight into Jainism 58 anakula (free of infatuation), 56 ananda (bliss or joy), 23, 47, 60 ananda-maya, 33

Page #126

114
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
asamyami (wicked person), 53
asceticism, 82
Ashtashati, 2, 70
astikaya, 21
astikya (shraddha or conviction), 99, 101 astita (existence), 18
a-tad-bhara (non-identity or notion-ofotherness), 90
atman (soul), 19, 30, 33, 43-44, 49, 58, 60-61,74
atmapradesh, 21
atmatattra, 83-84
audarik sharir (gross body having senses), 71, 76
Aurobindo, Sri, 40, 94 araktarya, 20
arinabhara (concomitance), 90 ayoga sadhana, 43
Bahiratman, 35
bandh (bondage), 21 Bhagavada Gita, 27 bhakta (devotee), 49 Bhatt, Jayanta, 2 Bhattacharya, Hari Mohan, 13, 15, 17 Bhattacharya, Harisatya, 9 Bhattanarayanakantha, Kashmiri Pandit,
2
bhara (psychic dispositions), 3, 27, 33, 55, 78, 96
bhara-karman, 22
bhara parinamas, 91-92 bhavana (contemplations), 27-28, 57, 96,
101
bhedabheda (differentiation and non
differentiation), 90
bhedarupa (division), 34 bheda-vijnana, 48 bhinna (distinct), 26
bhinnabbinna (different and not different), 71
bhokta (enjoyer of the fruits), 23, 80 bodhi (pramiti), 25-26 Brahman (Universal Consciousness), 25, 44, 49, 54

Brihadaranyaka, 49 Buddha, 36, 39, 43
buddhi (intellect), 22
Buddhism, 12, 26, 38-39, 43, 45, 93-94 and Jainism, 36-37
Chakradhara, 2 Chakravarti, A., 5, 17 Chand, Shri Mahesh, 61 dharitra (conduct), 24, 27 Charvaka system, 4, 6-7 detana (consciousness), 5, 9 dhit (consciousness), 23, 47, 60 Christianity, 49
compassion, 48 Confucius, 39
conscious (dhetan), 18, 22 consciousness (dhetana), 5-6, 47, 75 Jaina conception of, 44-45 control, 97
Damasio, Antonio, 33
Dansan Mulo Dhammo, i.e. samyak darshan (enlightened vision or intuition), 99 darshan (indeterminate intuition or nirakara upayoga), 24, 95
daya, 52 Daya-dama-tyaga-samadhi, 53 desirable, 60-61
detachment, 101
Dhadphale, G., 36
dharma (dhammoutthu sahari.e. srabhara),
95
dharma (piety or righteousness), 21, 31,
53, 94
Dharmakirti, 1
dhyana (meditation), 59
Divakara, Siddhasen, 39, 90 divinity, 42
dosa (defects), 22
drashta bhara (passive observation of outer or external phenomenon), 22, 27, 50
dravja (substance), 3, 5, 13-14, 17-18, 89, 92

Page #127

dranya drishti, 34
dravya-bhara (material nature), 57 dragya-karman, 22
dravyarthic naya (substantial point of jnana-matra, 32
view), 74, 91, 94 drshti, 24
Einstein, Albert, 47
ekanekanekanta (multifaceted as well as
singlefaceted), 71
ekantarada, 14
ek antic, 71 ekarupa, 73
Gatha Saptashati, 70 ghatia (destructive karmas), 95 Gier, Nicholas F., 36-39, 48-49 grahyagrahya (an independent object), 71 Granoff, Phyllis, 52
greed (anantanubandhi kashaya or passion), 100
gua (attribute), 5, 17-18, 89, 91-92, 95
Hebrews, 36, 39 beyopadyatra, 26 himsa (violence), 54 Hinduism, 49
Hiroshima University, 1 Hume, David, 44-45
identity-in-difference, 26 impartial (madhyastha), 22 Islam, 49
jada (unconscious), 22 Jain, Champat Rai, 6, 29 Jain, Jyoti Prasad, 51 Jain, S. C., 23
INDEX
Jaina, J. C, 36
Jainism, 43, 49
hypothesis of evolution, 93
James, William, 36, 38
Jina, Shri Shanti, 53
jiu (the Self), 5, 9, 13, 23, 37-38, 43,
79, 84, 94-95

jnana (knowledge), 18, 24, 27, 43, 59,
95
Jnana-kanda or Brahmajnana, 62
jnanamurti (knowledge personified or embodiment of knowledge), 4, 32, 71, 73 jnananubhuti (realization of consciousness), 32
jnanammadic karmas (karmas which obscure knowledge, etc.), 80
jnata, 27
jnata drashta, 51
jnayak bhara (the experience of knowledge), 32
115
kala (time or period), 78
karana sarupa (being of the nature of cause), 9
karma, 3, 11, 21, 40, 45, 71, 95 Karman, 22, 55, 57 karma-pudgala, 21 karmatra, 57 karma-upadhi, 54-55 Karnataka Vritti, 72
karta (doer), 80 kartitia (agency), 57
karuna (unstinted sympathy and compassion for those in distress), 101
kashaya (passions), 21, 97 Kathakosha, 70
Keral Darshan, 43
keral
jnana, 77
khyati-puja-labha (name and fame), 59 knowledge (pramana), 25
Kotturan, George, 48-49 Krishnamurti, J., 29, 35, 44, 59 krta-krtya, 47
kshanas (momentary existence), 10 kshanik-vada (momentariness of reality), 10, 14, 94
kshetra (area or location), 78
kshobha (perturbed), 31, 56 Kundakunda, Acharya, 14, 19, 31, 33, 37, 54, 91

Page #128

116
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
kuntha or granthi (the enslaving desires),
54 Kutasthanitya, 37
Laghijastraja Sarritti, 2, 69 Laghuhavvah, 70
attachment to worldly things), 103 Nihshankita (freedom from skepticism),
102 Nirmoho bhay 28 rruana, 59 rrieda (renunciation and disinterest in
sensual pleasures and worldly pos
sessions), 99 Nirridhikitsa (freedom from disgust), 103 rishchaya (determination), 25, 57 rashedha (negativeness,) 79 Nishkalanka, 70 nityachaitamaswarupa (consciousness), 16 non-conscious (achetan), 18 Nyaya system of thought, 2, 4, 24 Nyaya Vaisheshika, 92 Nyaya Virishdhaya Sarrittih, 2, 69
Osho, 40
Madhyamika (Buddhist), 25, 37 madhjastha (equanimity towards the per-
versely inclined), 30, 101 madhjastha bharana (state of equanim
ity), 86 Mahasena, Pandit, 72 Mahavirashtaka, 70 mamakara (mineness), 28, 32, 38, 54 mamatra, 38 Manyakheta, 70 mati-jnana (which helps to know about
the things through sensual and men-
tal faculties), 77 Matilal, B. K., 39, 91, 93 Mayavadins, 25 meditation, 40, 82 Mimamsakas, 4-6, 11, 16, 19, 25 Mitra, Kalipada, 92-93 modifications, 91 moha (infatuation), 31, 56, 60 moksha (liberation), 4, 22, 28, 51-52, 54-
55, 59, 80, 83, 86-88, 100-101 modyatmak (value based or value ori-
ented), 25 Morgan, Lloyd, 93 Mrgendratantra, 2 mukta (free), 71 muktamukta (free and not free), 71 mumukshu (having desire for moksha), 62 matatra, 21 mrti (form), 20 mysticim, 42-43
Padmanandi pandarinshatih, 70 pancha parmeshthies, 85 papa (vice), 13 param Brahma, 53 param dharma (supreme piety or moral
ity), 53 paramarthika (ultimate, standpoint), 33 Paramatama (supreme pure Soul), 35, 42
43, 49, 58, 60, 73, 75, 88 parinama, 38 parinami (evolutionary nature), 91 parinami-mita, 37 parispanda or krija parinama, 91 Parmatman, 61 paryaya (change or modifications), 89,
91-92, 96-97 para jarthicraya (modification point of
view), 74, 91, 94 path of righteousness, 103 paudgalik, 21 penance, 83 Prabhachandra, 70 Prabhavana (propagation of the values
of life), 103 pradeshatra (extention in space), 18
Nairatmarada, 13 Naiyyayikas, 18, 26 Nemidutta, 70 “nihilism," 36 Nihkankshita (freedom from desires or

Page #129

prajna (discriminative comprehension),
25-26
pramad (negligence), 54 Pramana (valid knowledge), 24-26 Pramana Sangrah, 3, 69 prameyatra (knowability), 18 pramiti (comprehension), 25 pramoda (appreciation of the merits of others), 101
INDEX
pranas, 18
pas
prasham (control or subsidence of sions), 99-100 Prashamratiprakarana, 100 Prashamsukha, (happiness derived from or resulting form calmness and equanimity), 100
prathakata (separateness), 90 pratyaujna (recognition), 11 Pravachanasara, 31, 37, 57 pravahanityata (persistence), 37 Prem, Ma Usha, 40 pudgala, 20
punya (virtue), 13 purusha (soul), 4, 15, 22 purusharth (self-reliance), 97 Purushottam, 70
Radhakrishnan, S., 35
Rajchandra, Shrimad, 101
Ranade, R. D., 42 reality, 40-41

Samitis (carefulness), 104 Samkhya, 4, 15, 18, 25 Samkhya-Yoga school of thought, 4, 16, 22, 37
sampradanata (the nature of dative), 57 samsara, 94
samsaric jira, 84
samega (enthusiasm for righteousness),
99-101
samak, 24
samak dharitra (enlightened conduct), 24, 72, 80, 82, 101
samyak darshan (enlightened vision), 24, 26-27, 52, 60, 72, 80, 82, 96, 101102, 104
Samyakdrashti, 99, 102-103 samak jnana (enlightened knowledge), 24, 72, 80-82, 101 samakta (right vision), 77 samyam (self-restraint), 32, 97 saparpayasam (saparaprakasham), 46 sapeksharad (theory of relativity), 54 saraghatin (completely obscuring), 95 sat (existence), 13, 23, 47, 60 Satyashashan Pariksha, 7 Sautrantika (Buddhist) theory of flux,
12, 93
Self (szarupa), 24, 49, 56, 59, 86 according to Jainism, 95
self-arising, 57 self-realization, 61-62
Shankaracharya, 20
Jaina view, 95 reflections (bhavana), 104 renunciation, 101 rupinah pudgala, 20
Sabhashya Tattartha Vartika, 70 sadhana (practice), 43 sahaja (original), 57
or
sakshi bhava (dispassionate dininterested observation of inner thoughts), 50-51 Samantabhadra, Acharya, 2, 13, 53, 55, Sogani, K.C., 34
60, 70, 96 Samayika Path, 27 Sambodhana-saptatih, 70
117
shruta-jnana (which enhances and confirms the knowledge), 77 Shubhatunga, 70
shuddha jnayak bhara (pure consciousness), 34 Shunyaradins, 25
Siddha-shila, 54 Siddhatra, 35
Siddhi Vinishdhaya Savrittih, 2, 69
Soul, 5, 34, 71, 75, 78-80, 91 spatial (kshetra), 34 Srinivasan, G., 44-45, 47

Page #130

118
staticity (substance), 39-40 Sthitikarana (re-establishing oneself and others on the path of righteousness),
103
THE ENLIGHTENED VISION OF THE SELF
substantiveness, 18 sukha or dukha (pleasure or pain), 82 Supreme Being, 105 sza (Self), 55
sabhara or scanpa (innate nature), 58, 89, 95
stadhatushtaya state (dravya-substance), 78 sra-dharma, 20 svaparaprakasham (self-enlightening which lightens self as well as other), 81
sarupa (innate nature of self or pure consciousness), 31, 34, 43, 55-56, 58-59, 60-62, 107
Starupa Sambodhana, 1, 3, 6, 21, 28, 54,
61
Surupa Sambodhana Pandharinshatih, 6970, 88
Surupa Sambodhana Vritti, 72 starupe tishtha, 55
statma labdhye (self-realization), 24 suyam (itself), 57
swayambhu, 57
Swayambhu Stotra, 53 suryambhuta (itself), 40
Tadbharayayamnityam, 95
tathyatmaka (matter-of-fact or factual);
25
Tatia, Nathmal, 10, 12, 16, 22 Tattiartha Sutra, 2, 6, 13, 70, 72, 100 Tattvarthartika (Rajartika), 2, 70 Tirthankaras, 43
udaseenta, 30
Umasvami, Acharya, 2, 13, 70, 100
Uno, Atsusi, 1 upadeya, 25, 60 Upadhye, A. N., 40

Upanishads, 37, 44, 49 Uparrahana (cultivation or virtuous dispositions), 103
upayoga (psychic attention or exertion), 9, 21, 55-56
upeksha bhava (equanimous attitude), 25, 30, 86
Upguhana (to hide shortcomings of others), 103
Vaikuntha, 54 Vaisheshikas, 4-6, 18 raktaryaraktarya, 71 Vallabh, 52 Vallabhadigujaya, 52
Varni, Manoharlal (Sahajanand), 61, 105 Varyya, Keshava, 72
atsalya (disinterested affection or selfless love), 18, 103 ratthu saharo (svarupa), 31 Vedanta school, 9, 16, 93
Vedantin, 44, 94
Vedantin philosophers, 48
vetragata (complete non-attachment), 54 ribhara paryaya, 95
ribharas (derivative characters,) 95 ridhi (positiveness), 78
Vidyananda, 7, 10, 53 Vijnanadvaitavadins, 25
rishudha jnananubhuti (uncontaminated experience of consciousness), 33 Vitraga (non-attached), 27, 58 yamaha (illusionment or attachment), 32, 54, 60 yapakayyapaka (extensive and also not extensive), 71
yarahara (external, other-oriented), 33 yarasaya, 25 yatha-artha (as it is), 81 Yuktyanushashan, 53
Zimmer, H, 35

Page #131

DEVENDRA KUMAR GOYAL is a Civil Engineer by profession. He is an Honours graduate in Civil Engineering from the Thomason College of Civil Engineering, Roorkee and a Fellow of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Institution of Engineers (India). He has widely travelled and has work experience in many countries. He has published Jin Stotra Nikunj (1997), a translation of nine Sanskrit stotras, and The Path to Enlightenment: Svayambhu Stotra by Samantabhadra (2000).
JAGDISH PRASAD JAIN 'Sadhak' is Founder of Jain Mission and Editor of Jain Agam. He was formerly Diplomat/Adviser, Indian Mission to the United Nations, New York; Deputy Director, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India; and Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University. He has published nearly a dozen books, including Fundamentals of Jainism, Salvation through Self-Discipline: Niyamsara of Kundakunda, Spiritual Insights: Ishtopadesh and Samadhi Shatak by Pujyapada (editor), Spiritual Enlightenment: Paramatma Prakash by Yogindu Deva (editor). He has published a number of articles in national and international journals, including Jinmanjari (Mississauga, Canada) and Jain Journal (Kolkata).
Cover Design: Sparsh Communications

Page #132
OF RELATED INTEREST FUNDAMENTALS OF JAINISM JAGDISH PRASAD JAIN 'SADHAK SPIRITUAL INSIGHTS Ishtopadesh and Samadhi Shatak by Pujyapada TRANSLATED WITH COMMENTARY BY CR JAIN AND RAOJI N SHAH SPIRITUAL ENLIGHTENMENT Paramatma Prakash by Yogindu Deva TRANSLATED BY RD JAIN AND COMMENTARY BY AN UPADHYE THE PATH TO ENLIGHTENMENT Svayambhu Stotra by Samantabhadra TRANSLATED BY DEVENDRA K GOYAL SALVATION THROUGH SELF-DISCIPLINE Niyamsara of Kundakunda TRANSLATED WITH INTRODUCTION BY JAGDISH PRASAD JAIN 'SADHAK' THE RELIGION OF MAN Ratnakaranda Shravakachara of Samantabhadra TRANSLATED WITH INTRODUCTION BY JAGDISH PRASAD JAIN 'SADHAK' THE SPECTRUM OF CONSCIOUSNESS Pravachanasara of Kundakunda TRANSLATED BY BAREND FADDEGON AND EDITED BY JAGDISH PRASAD JAIN 'SADAK' ISBN 81-7027-244-0 Radiant Publishers E-155 Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 Tel: 5563 4084, Fax: 2622 2819 Email: radiantbks@yahoo.co.in 9117881701272441||