Jain Concept of The Sacred

Author(s): Padmanabh S Jaini
Publisher: Z_Kailashchandra_Shastri_Abhinandan_Granth_012048.pdf
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/210614/1

Page #1
JAIN CONCEPT OF THE SACRED Prof. Padmanabh S. Jaini, California University, Berkeley, U. S. A. Eliade, in his celebrated work The Sacred and the Profane, defines the sacred as being "equivalent to a power, and, in the last analysis, to reality". "Man becomes aware of the sacred", he observes, "because it manifest itself, shows itself, as something wholly different from the profane". He maintains further that "for those who have a religious experience all nature is capable of revealing itself as cosmic sacrality". Accordingly, Eliade sees a religious man as one "who attempts to remain as long as possible in a sacred universe" and believes that "the completely profane world, the wholly desacralized cosmos, is a recent discovery in the history of the human spirit",1 Sacred for the Systems It is obvious that Eliade's concept of the sacred and his idea of religious man are appropriate only to those religions which affirm the existence of a "wholly other reality" capable of manifesting in the "profane". The idea of a reality that is wholly other is somewhat unsatisfactory to the Hindu tradition: otherwise, Eliade's scheme, if suitably modified, would appear to be adequate to comprehend the classical Vedic darsanas and Hindu theism in its multiple forms. The latter has all the major ingredients of a "sacred" tradition: belief in an Almighty Creator, his divine incarnations and power of his grace; belief in the authority of a revealed text, namely the Vedas, which are seen as the source of all knowledge, both ritual and spiritual; and belief in the divine origin of a social system which defines and regulates the activities of each and every member of society. Eliade's concepts of the sacred are, however, deficient when we consider the heterodox systems, particularly the religion of the Jains. Unlike the Carvakas, the Jains are salvationists; unlike the Buddhists, they believe in the existence of souls; hence they must have a concept of the sacred. Nevertheless, their atheism requires that this sacrality be located neither in a Deity nor in its divine ordinances and manifestations, but in man himself, both in the middle of his bondage and in the very act of his isolation (kaivalya) from that bondage. Jainism is distinguished by its man-centredness, a feature which forcefully presents itself in the Jain opposition to all forms of theism. and the alleged sacrality of the phenomena inspired by the Deity. It is the Jain Claim that he alone among salvationists can truly explain the twin doctrines of bondage and freedom, of a beginningless samsara and an endless moksa. The Vedantin, because of his doctrine of the Absolute Brahman, - 524 -

Page #2
is forced to declare phenomena as illusory; he must hope that bondage can be wished away merely by denying its reality. The Samkhya might admit the reality of both individual souls (purusa ) and Prakrti, but he renders the bondage of the soul a mere mockery by declaring that Purusa is totally incorruptible and unchangeable. The Mimamsaka is loath to admit the very idea of moksa, and does not accept the possibility of a man ever knowing anything beyond what the senses will perceive. Lest human beings should imagine that their puny intelligence is capable of properly managing their affairs, the Mimamsaka, who quietly disposes of gods as mere nominalizations with dative case-endings, stipulates that the dharma or the laws of the universe and the duties of mankind are known only through the Vedas. These are not the relations of a God whose authority must depend on a circular "validation" by the Vedas, nor are they compositions of human beings, however exalted. Rather, these are eternal words, emenating from no man (apauruseya) but manifest themselves throughout the cyclical movements of the universe. Yoga and Jain Systems Yoga is one Vedic system which probably comes close to the fundamental teachings of the heterodox schools The term Jina is primarily a description of a yogin who has attained the goal of isolation (kaivalya) and omniscience (kevalajnana); indeed, the Jains have claimed that they are the true successors of the yogin depicted in the Indus valley seal. They point to the very significant fact that Hindu divinities are never represented in the posture of meditation (with the possible exception of Siva as Daksinamarti) and that the early Buddha images depict him either in the bhamisparia or the abhaya-mudra of preaching. By contrast, images of the Jain Tirthankaras, from the immemorable past to the present day, are invariably shown either seated in a lotus posture or standing erect, rapt in meditation. The discipline of the Patanjala yoga, comprising of yama, niyama etc., agrees in many respects with the rules and regulations and holy practices prescribed for a Jain aspirant. It is conceivable that the Jains and the Buddhists on the one hand and the compilers of the Upanisads and the Gita, represented by the Patanjala school, on the other, all draw upon an earlier source of yoga which is common to both the Sramana and the Brahmanical traditions. What mainly distinguishes the Vedic yoga from that of the heterodox systems is Patanjali's adoption of Isvara-pranidhana ( devotion to the Deity) as a means of attaining yoga, however inconsistent this may be with the doctrines of the atheistic Samkhya and the monistic Vedanta, Patanjali describes this Deity (Iivara) as one who has never been in bondage, a being who is eternally free from afflictions, actions and their results. an eternally omniscient being, "the guru of all gurus", unrestricted by time. Although called a "purusa-visesa", Patanjali's 'guru' is not a human being like Mahavira or Gautama, both of whom also claimed to have acquired freedom from bondage and an irreversible state of omniscience. The belief in an eternally free - 525

Page #3
person capable of dispensing salvation by grace is a feature conspicuously absent in the heterodox systems. The Jains as well as the early Buddhists rejected this special category of an eternally free soul as purely arbitrary and observed the activities of a teacher were inconsistent with one deprived of the means of communication, namely mind, body and speech. They also maintained that the belief in such an omnipotent power makes the salvation of the human being dependent on the sweet will of an agency outside the control of the aspirant. They affirmed, and sought to drive. home by the examples of Mahavira and the Buddha, the message that human beings formerly in bondage, are able to break the begining less bond of samsara, that they have within them the innate powers to realize, here and now, perfection and omniscience, independent of a Deity. Theistic Systems The Yoga school probably saw Ivara playing only the limited role of the spiritual teacher, the Guru. But the theistic darsanas like Nyaya-Vaisesika and the sectarian cults of Visnu and Siva, supported by their respective Upanisads. Agamas and Puranas, saw this Iivara not merely as a benign Guru but as the "Sacred Power", the very source and sustenance of all creation. He, the omniscient and omnipotent Lord, created the world of matter and souls and presided over the destinies of His creations. He dispensed divine justice, weighing the actions of men, punishing the wicked and rewarding the righteous. He held in balance the forces. of good and evil (dharma and adharma) by the mighty acts of His divine interventions, the avataras. Through the Vedas this Lord instructed man in his duties to gods and manes, to the society, and to himself, and stipulated that he be guided not by a free chioce of conscience but by the dictates of varna and airama, that is, by the caste and stage of life in which he found himself. While stating in the Gita that all actions (karma) must be followed by their results, the Lord also predicted dire consequences for breach of the caste duties, duties which must be maintained for the upkeep of the Universe. But it was further promised, rather benignly, that these duties, however unpleasant, could become "sacrifice", or sacred acts, if performed as an act of devotion, and thus comprise the very means of man's salvation from the bonds of action. This kind of theism soon became the most favoured means of salvation, asking nothing more than conformity to the varnairama-dharma and an emotional. adoration for the Deity in any chosen (ista) form. It inspired mighty waves of bhakti movements which swept across the nation, absorbing countless numbers of diverse people, and assimilating a multitude of gods and cults within its fold. Caves were scooped and temples were erected to enshrine the images of the Lord, who was shown either in the terrible acts of destroying a demon, or, bedecked in royal splendour, enjoying conjugal happiness in the endearing company of His consorts. Poets and scholars alike, joined hands in glorifying the name of the Lord, whom -526

Page #4
they trusted to take care of not only their ultimate salvation but even of their immediate yoga-ksema, the daily bread and butter. The sectarian Puranas vied with each other in creating a world of fantasy for the benefit of the devotees, who silently accepted as "the Lord's will" untold injustices of an oppressive caste system from within and humiliating defeats and devastations at the hands of unbelievers from without. Jaina Concept of the Sacred As far as we know, no complaint was uttered either by the oppressed masses below or the enlightened brahmins above. The only recorded protest that survives is to be found in the vast literature of the heterodox systems, especially of the Jains, a literature created mostly for the guidance of the Jain laity, which had to be protected from the overwhelming waves of bhakti that engulfed the rest of India. A careful study of this literature, particularly during the medieval period, shows the Jains as pioneers among those who challenged the authority of the Vedas, disputed the efficacy of their sacrifices, repudiated the doctrine of the Creator, rediculed the sacrality of the avataras, and rejected the brahmanical rituals. In this way they sought to establish a "desacralized cosmos", if we can use such an expression, in which to pursue kaivalya or "isolation", their vision of salvation. The Jain critique of the "sacred" in the Vedic tradition centers around the examination of the nature of an apta, a technical term meaning 'reliable authority' in matters pertaining to salvation of the soul from the bonds of samsara. clearly falls in the realm of dharma, and the Mimamsaka declares that only the Vedas, by virtue of their being apauruseya (uncreated by a human or divine agency) are to be considered apta. The problem of eternal words engaged the attention of such scholastic philosophers as Jaimini, Kumarila and Bhartrhari; but Jains saw no difficulty in dismissing the whole controversy with the simple observation that the Vedas consist of words, and like any other composition, must have a human The Theist intervenes here, attempting to save the situation by declaring that the Veda are neither Uncreated nor man-made, but emenate as revealation from the Creator, the eternally free and omniscient being who alone deserves to be called apta. The Jain arguments against this theory are basically two-fold: 1) Creation is not possible without a desire to create and this implies imperfection on the part of the alleged Creator. 2) If karma is relevant in the destinies of human beings, then God is irrelevant; if he rules regardless of karma of beings, then he is cruel and capricious. In brief, the Creator is not free from raga and dvesa and hence is neither free nor omniscient; therefore, he cannot be an apta. The Jain needed no better proof for his thesis than the Hindu Puranas, which narrated the most shocking deeds of their God, perpetrated as He assumed the forms of Brahma, Visnu and Siva. They extolled what appeared to the Jain the most hideous and immoral exploits of Narasimha or Krsna, the Lord's alleged avataras or manifestations on earth. Akalanka, a celebrated ninth century logician -527

Page #5
expresses the Jain indignation over worship of the Hindu Trinity in his famous stotra to a Jina. The Jain could allow that the Puranic tales of the avataras were probably figurative and therefore their teaching should be tested against more difinitive texts like the Vedas, the Brahmanas or the Dharma-sostras, which claimed the prerogative to instruct on dharma and adharma. Even here the Jain was disappointed, for these texts bristled with self-contradictions and seemed to lack any universal ethic which could be applied at all times for all human beings. Having, for instance, enjoined that "Thou shall not injure any being" (na himsyat sarvabhutani), the scriptures had no scruples whatsoever against openly prescribing killing of animals for the sacrifice to gods and also as offerings to the manes ! Even more obnoxious to the Jain was the fact that such sacrificial hisa was not only declared to be without evil, but was even labelled as "dharma", a virtuous act ! Hemacandra (1088-1172) indignantly asks : If hurt, how cause of merit ? If cause of merit, how hurt?" The Dharmasastras, having said "Let him not speak what is untrue" (nanptam bruyat), proceed to make an exception : "For the sake of a Brahmin he may speak what is not true" (Apastamba); they even list five occasions upon which speaking an untruth is not a lie : when spoken in jest, when told in dealing with women, at the time of marriage, when in the peril of life, or in the complete loss of goods. (Vasista XVI 36). Having forbidden stealing and having repudiated taking what is not given, Manu has no hesitation in saying: "Even if a brahmin by violence appropriates another's goods, or by ruse, nevertheless there is on his part no taking of what is not given; for all this (world) was given to the Brahmins, but through the weakness of the Brahmins the outcasts enjoy it. And therefore a Brahmin, taking it away, appropriates his own, a Brahmin simply enjoys his own, he dresses himself in his own, he gives away his own" (Cf. Manusmrti I, 101). Further, in examining the domestic rituals enjoined by the Law books the Jain found that a great many of these were acts of gross superstition, exploited by the brahmins to earn an easy livelihood. They scrutinized, for example, the ceremony of sraddha to the ancestors by feeding the brahmins, a practice of great antiquity which forms the very foundation of the Hindu family system even to this day. This ritual is of crucial importance to the Hindu because it is considered a fulfilment of a major obligation under the varnasrama-dharma. A man must enter the stage of a householder (glhasthasrama) by marrying according to the caste rules. Begetting a son is obligatory because only a son can guarantee the ghost (preta ) of the dead ( father) a new body and a safe passage to the world of ancestors (pitrs ); he does this by periodically offering nourishment in the form of sraddha. Brahmins are fed sumptous meals on these occasions and it is believed that they are able to transfer the merit directly to the deceased fathers. The son is rewarded for his service with the right to inheritance of the paternal property, and a prosperous lineage is expected to result from the blessings of the ancestors. - 528

Page #6
The Jain acaryas forbade this ritual to their laity not only because it defied common-sense but also because it was in direct violation of the law of karmas. They argued rather sarcastically that there was no invariable causal relationship between the performance of the sraddha and prosperity of the lineage. It was clear that most people who performed it saw no increase in their lineage; on the other hand, such creatures as donkeys, pigs and goats increased their lineage even without performing the sraddha. And as for the claim that "What is enjoined by the Brahmins accrues to the ancestors", the Jain critic Mallisena ( 1292 A. D. ) retorts : "Whoever is to agree to that ? For only in the Brahmin do we see the fattened bellies; and transference of these into their ( the ancestors' bellies) just cannot be believed; since at the time of feeding no single sign of such transferrence is perceived; and because only on the part of the Brahmins is satisfaction witnessed".4 The claim that the departed soul depended on his son's offerings in order to acquire a new body was a rather serious one. The Jain believed that a departed soul automatically assumes a new body-human or animal, hellish or heavenlyforged by his past karmas, and also that the new incarnation occurs no more than three instants ( samaya ) after discarding the old body. The Jains had no place for the world of Fathers ( Pitp-loka ) in their cosmology and could not cherish the idea of preserving a "point of meeting between the living and the dead", which they saw as a constant source of fear and attachment. Nor could they accept the dicates of the varnasrama, pertaining to marriage and the begetting of a son; rather than being obligatory, these acts were considered optional and preferrably to be avoided. A man owes nothing to either gods or ancestors; while kindness to parents is a virtue, it is nevertheless perfectly proper to renounce the world whenever one is ready to follow the higher call. The Jain law-givers extended this same critical attitude towards variety of "holy" and "meritorious" practices which orthodox Hindus cultivated with the aim of coming closer to the divine manifest in nature. Somadevasuri (959 A. D.) gives a long list of such practices, which he labels as mudhatas (follies): 1. Offering libations to the sun, 2. bathing during eclipse, 3. spending wealth at samkranti ( winter solstice), 4. performing sandhya ritual ( ablutions at dusk ), 5. worshipping fire, 6. worshipping a house, 7. worshipping one's own body ( by smearing it with ashes, etc.), 8. ritual bathing in rivers and oceans, 9 saluting trees, 10. jumping from holy mountains, 11. saluting the end of a cow's tail, 12. drinking cow's urine, etc. "These and many others", he warns, "are follies prevalent in the world. A Jain performing these, whether in order to obtain a favour or to maintain one's position in society, will surely lose samyag-darsana, the true insight into the nature of reality'.5 The Jain idea of the "sacred" is clearly shown in one of their most ancient litanies, which lists four saranas or refuges, also called mangalas, the auspicious 529 - 67

Page #7
ones. These are arihanta (Skt. arhat ), siddha, sadhu and the dharma taught by the Kevalin or omniscient one. The first of these, the arhat, means the Worthy, the Holy One; he is also called Jina ( The spiritual victor ), after whom the Jains take their name. Both arthat and jina were originally Jain terms, which were adopted by many other sramanas including the Buddhists; the terms are conspicuously absent in the Brahmanical tradition. The arhat is an ascetic, like Mahavira, who by contemplation and exertion, has attained to omniscience and has acquired an irreversible state of freedom from the bonds of samsara. While the current state of embodiment continues, he preaches the law ( dharma ) as he has perceived it through his omniscience. At the end of his normal life, his pure soul discards the last of the physical and karmic bonds; becomes totally isolated from all associations, and resides forever at the peak of the universe (loka-akasa), endowed with infinite knowledge and bliss. He is then called siddha, the Perfected One. Theoretically the siddha is higher than the arhat. but the latter is given precedence in the Jain litany, for only the arhat is able to preach the law and be a guide to the disciples. The third refuge, the sadhu, is an aspirant, an ascetic who follows the path of purification and adheres to the doctrines preached by the arhat. These doctrines and practices will constitute what is called dharma, the fourth refuge, the mangala by which the Jain abides. It is the contention of the Jain that a person becomes an arhat not by the grace of any Higher Being, but by dint of his own insights (darsan) and exertions (caritra). He is no doubt helped by the example and preachings of previous Teacherarhats, called Tirthankaras ('Ford-makers'), similarly, he will help others who follow in his wake. The line of Teachers had no beginning and will have no end; any one can at any time join the line, be counted a Teacher and become a siddha. The Jain thus replaces the Yoga doctrine of a single and enternally free Isvara with an interminable succession of 'human' Teachers rising in the course of time. These Teachers do not respond to the aspirant's devotion (pranidhana), nor can they influence his career; they remain totally indifferent to whether their teachings are received or rejected. The relationship between a Jain and his Jina is strictly impersonal. There is no concept of ista; although Mahavira is recognised as a historical person and his nirvana is commemorated by an era (the Vira-nirvana-samvat, 527 B. C., probably the oldest historical era in India), he receives the same worship as any other Jina, since they all preached the same perfection and taught the same doctrine. The Jain layperson worships the image of the Jina totally independent of any priest; he does this in a rather lavishly furnished shrine-an imitation of the holy assembly (samavasarana) where the Jina preached his sermon-and is fully aware of the absence of any Deity, considering the whole act as purely a reminder of his true goal. Nor is there any expectation of gaining absolution from the confessions (pratikramana) he makes in the presence of the Jina image or of the sadhu, for the laws of karma are irrevocable and no power, however mighty, can enable one to escape the consequences of his own acts. -530 -

Page #8
Through acts of worship a Jain may hope to secure such results as karmaksaya (destruction of karma), bodhi-labha (attaing enlightenment) or samadhimarana (holy death in meditation), but as far as worldly gains are concerned, the Jina is past granting any boons; it is unbecoming to even entertain such thoughts in his presence. It is true that this situation makes it possible for the Hindu divinities and Jain demi-gods (yaksas) to creep into the Jain temples in the guise of doorkeepers (dvara-palas) or guardian deities (4asana-devatas), catering to the emotional needs of the weaker sections of the Jain laity. But the informed Jain pays no more attention to them than he would to a distinguished guest visiting the temple; for he firmly believes that one reaps the fruits of one's own karma, whether good or evil; no one can add to or take away from another's karma, not even the mightiest of the gods, for they too are subject to the same law. Karma is a psycho-physical complex; although neither holy nor sacred, it is nevertheless a power to be reckoned with, a power which is not to be propitiated but rather to be challenged by the aspirant and overcome by his insight and pure conduct. The Jain acaryas who struggled against the bhakti movements contended that Ievara and karma are not compatible; the God will always be invested with powers labeled as "sacred", to intervene in the automatic operation of karma, to nullify its effects and finally to set it aside as mere illusion. They argued that such a belief destroys the roots of Universal ethics and justice; instead of making a man self-reliant and motivated to develop his innate powers, it makes him a fatalist resigned to the mercy and favour of a higher power. Therefore they attempted to depict the Hindu trinity of Brahma, Visnu and Siva as a collection of sham gods (kudevas), not to be depended upon for salvation. Further, they exerted great effort in dealing with the two human avataras, Rama aud Krsna, for these could not be dismissed as mere myth, and their cults had become a real threat to the integrity of the Jain laity. The Jain acaryas had no difficulty in accepting the hero of the Ramayana, whose life had been nearly ideal, except for the deplorable act of killing the demon king Ravana, an act which was the main purpose of the Ramavatara. They could not let him kill Ravana and yet not take the consequences of going to hell! Therefore they very ingeniously drafted a Jain Ramayana and saw to it that Ravana was killed not by Rama but by his younger brother Laksmana, and the latter was cosigned to hell. They made Rama renounce the world in the time-honoured fashion of Jain ascetics, and accepted him as an arhat and a siddha, a true model for the Jain laity. The controversial Krsna, however, did not fare so well. The Mahabharata is filled with accounts of his trickeries as a statesman; he had killed countless humans and demons. The Jain acaryas tried as best as they could to paint a more flattering picture of Krsna in their Puranas (e. g. the Harivartapurana of Jinasena), making him at contemporary of one of their Tirthankaras named Neminatha, but finally had no alternative but to send him to purgatory to suffer the consequences of his actions. They did predict however, that when he emerges from purgatory in the near future, Krsna will be a Tirthankara and will be worshipped by both gods and men. - 531

Page #9
By their rather bold but not altogether unexpected treatment of Rama and Krsna, the Jains were proclaiming their firm belief that violence (hirmsa) is not compatible with the sacred"; that the scriptures which approved violence as a means of dharma were not holy; and also that no person, however exalted, is to be emulated if his conduct brings harm to other beings. Non-violence or ahimsa is the basis of all dharma; and this ahimsa itself rests upon the knowledge that all beings, even the most insignficant ones, possess an iminortal soul, capable of attaining perfection. This seed of perfection called sa myaktva is the single most "sacred" thing for the Jain. Upon this foundation he has built a very elaborate network of holy practices for the realization of his true nature.' References 1. M. Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane, New York, 1959, pp. 11-13. 2. Akalanka-stotra, Nitya-naimittika-pathavali, Karanja, 1956. 3. Mallisenna's Syadvadamalijari, Agas, 1970. 4. Syadradamarijari, karika 11. 5. See U pasakadhyayana, karika 136-140. 6. Hemacandra's Trisastisalahapurusacarita, VII, 10, 231. 7. For a full description of this path, see P. S. Jaini, The Jaina Path of Purifi cation, California, 1979. lekhasAra pavitra jo jaina dhAraNA pro0 padmanAma esa. jainI kailiphorniyA vizvavidyAlaya, varkale, amerikA IliyeDa ne apanI pustaka 'dI sekreDa eNDa dI prophena' meM pavitra aura apavitra ko spaSTataH vibhedita kiyA hai aura batAyA hai ki manuSya dhArmika anubhava se pavitratA ke prati unmukha hotA hai / unakA kathana hai hai ki vizva meM apavitratA kA guNa pahale nahIM thA, abhI hI AyA hai / yaha mAnyatA sarvazaktimAn IzvaravAdI, vedavizvAsI, karmakANDI evaM adhyAtmavAdI hindU paramparA para bhI kucha parivartita rUpa meM lAgU ho sakatI hai, lekina anIzvaravAdI jainoM ke liye yaha paryApta apUrNa hai / jaina mAnyatA ke anusAra, pavitratA kA kendra bindu koI atimAnava yA Izvara nahIM, apitu mAnava svayaM ko mAnanA cAhiye / mAnava ko sampUrNa vikAsa kI kSamatA kA kendra bindu mAnanA AdhyAtmika vikAsa kA mUla hai| anAdi saMsAra aura ananta mokSa kI dhAraNA kI sahI vyAkhyA jaina mAnyatA se hI ho sakatI hai vedAnta, sAMkhya aura mImAMsaka loga Izvara yA veda-vAdI - 532 -

Page #10
hone ke kAraNa vizva aura usakI pavitratA ke sambandha meM yathArtha nahIM kahate / hAM, yoga aura jaina mAnyatAoM ke bIca kucha saha-sambandha socA jA sakatA hai kyoMki jaina bhI yoga kA abhyAsa kara pavitratA kI ora bar3hate haiM / lekina pataMjala kI 'puruSa vizeSa' kI mAnyatA jaina aura bauddhoM se mela nahIM khaatii| aise vizeSa deva yA puruSa kI mAnyatA mAnava ko apane vikAsa ke lie parAvalambI banAtI hai| mAnava apane zrama aura sAdhanA se svayaM hI pUrNa vikAsa kara sakatA hai, yaha mahAvIra aura buddha kI mUlabhUta zikSA hai| - IzvaravAdI darzanoM meM karmakANDa aura bhaktivAda kA vividha rUpa meM vikAsa huaa| devatA ke mandira banane lage, pUjAoM ko vividha vidhiyAM Arambha huI Izvara loka kI kalpanAyeM kI jAne lagI aura IzvarIya icchA ke Age sabhI natamastaka ho gye| ina mAnyatAoM ke viruddha zikAyata karane vAloM meM jaina sarvaprathama rahe / madhyakAlIna dhArmika sAhitya ke avalokana se patA calatA hai ki jainoM ne veda, baliprathA, Izvara, karmakANDa Adi kA virodha kiyA aura sambhavataH AtmavikAsa ke liye 'apavitra' saMsAra kI bAta khii| jainoM ne Izvara ke vipayasi meM Apta puruSa kI bAta kahI aura tarka tathA paurANika kathAoM aura AkhyAnoM ke bala para Izvara kA khaNDana kiyA / zAstroM meM varNita virodhI AdezoM kA ullekha kiyaa| unhoMne karmavAda aura sAmAnya anubhUti ke AdhAra para zrAddha ke samAna aneka rUr3ha saMskAroM kA virodha kiyA / somadeva sUri ne bAraha mUr3hatAoM kA varNana karate hue batAyA hai ki rUr3hiyAM samyak darzana meM bAdhaka hotI haiN| jaina dhAraNAoM ke anusAra, vizva meM cAra maMgala aura zaraNa hote haiM-arihanta, siddha, sAdha aura dharma / koI bhI vyakti apane darzana, jJAna aura cAritra kI vizeSatA se hI arihanta ho sakatA hai, kisI kI kRpA se nhiiN| aneka avatAra yA tIrthakara usake liye mArgadarzaka kA kAma karate haiM / isa prakAra jaina yogamata ke anurUpa kisI puruSa vizeSa ko na mAnakara samaya-samaya para hone vAle puruSa vizeSoM yA guruoM kA mAnatA hai / aise puruSavizeSoM kI pUjA-bhakti se karmakSaya, bodhilAbha, samAdhimaraNa saMbhAvita hai lekina isase sAMsArika lAbha kucha bhI nahIM hotA jaisA anya mata mAnate haiM / karmavAdI jaina karma ko eka mano-bhautika jaTila tantra mAnate haiM jisa para vijaya pAnA ati duSkara hai / jainAcAryoM ne batAyA hai ki IzvaravAda aura karmavAda sAtha-sAtha nahIM raha sakate / IzvarecchA kI pavitratA mAnava kA uddhAra nahIM kara sktii| hiMsA aura pavitratA sAtha-sAtha nahIM raha sakate / ahiMsA hI paramadharma hai| isI ko jaina zAstroM meM samyaktva kahA gayA hai| jainoM ke liye ratnatraya rUpa samyaktva (zraddhA, jJAna, cAritra) hI pavitra hai| isakI prApti ke liye zAstroM meM aneka upAya sujhAye gaye haiN| samyaktva ke anugamana se mAnava pavitra hotA hai| -533