Aptamimansa

SR No.: 001170
Original Sutra Author: Samantbhadracharya
Author: Jugalkishor Mukhtar
Publisher: Veer Seva Mandir Trust
Publication Year: 1978
Total Pages: 190
Language: Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Philosophy
File Size: 9 MB

Page 114

कारिका ५२]
देवागम अबद्ध-चित्तकी होती है; क्योंकि हिंसाका अभिप्राय करनेवाला चित्त वैसा अभिप्राय करनेके क्षणमें ही नष्ट हो जाता है और उत्तरक्षणमें दूसरा चित्त, जिसने हिंसाका कोई इरादा, विचार अथवा संकल्प नहीं किया, उस हिंसा-कार्यको करता है, उस हिंसक चित्तके तत्क्षण नष्ट हो जानेपर तीसरे क्षणमें तीसरा ही चित्त, जिसने न तो हिंसाका कोई संकल्प किया और न हिंसाकार्य ही किया, उस द्वितीय चित्तके हिंसाकर्मसे बन्धनको प्राप्त होता है और बन्धको प्राप्त हुए उस तृतीय चित्तके भी तत्क्षण नष्ट हो जानेपर उसे उस पापकर्मके बन्धनसे मुक्तिकी प्राप्ति नहीं होती-तब मुक्ति किसकी होती है ? क्या अबद्ध-चित्तकी भी मुक्ति बनती है ? नहीं बनती। मुक्तिके बन्धपूर्वक होनेसे जब बन्धन ही नहीं तब बन्धनसे छुटकारा पानेरूप मुक्ति कैसी ? इस तरह बौद्धोंके यहाँ कृतकर्मके फलका नाश और अकृतकर्मके फल-भोगका प्रसंग उपस्थित होता है-अर्थात् जिसने कर्म किया वह उसके फलका भोक्ता नहीं होता और जिसने कर्म नहीं किया उसे उस कर्मका फल भोगना होता है, जो कि एक उपहासका विषय है। इसके सिवाय जब बद्ध-चित्तकी मुक्ति नहीं होती तब मुक्तिके लिये यम-नियमादिका अनुष्ठान व्यर्थ ठहरता है।'
___ नाशको निर्हेतुक माननेपर दोषापत्ति अहेतुकत्वान्नाशस्य हिंसाहेतुर्न हिंसकः ।
चित्त-सन्तति-नाशश्च मोक्षो नाष्टाङ्ग हेतुकः ॥५२॥ ___(क्षणिक एकान्तवादी बौद्धमतके अनुसार नाश स्वयं होता है, उसका कोई कारण नहीं होता, जब नाशका कोई कारण नहीं होता तब हिंसक हिंसाका हेतु नहीं ठहरता—किसीको हिंसक कहना नहीं बनता। इसी तरह चित्त-सन्ततिके नाशरूप जो मोक्ष माना गया है वह भी अष्टाङ्गहेतुक नहीं बनता । बौद्धोंके यहाँ मोक्ष (निर्वाण ) को जो सम्यक्त्व, संज्ञा, संज्ञी, वाक्काय

Translation AI Generated

[Verse 52]

The liberation of the unattached mind is not possible; because the mind that intends to commit violence is destroyed at the moment of intending, and in the next moment, a different mind, which has no intention, thought, or resolution of violence, performs the act of violence. Upon the immediate destruction of that violent mind, in the third moment, a third mind, which neither intended nor performed the act of violence, receives the bondage from the act of violence of the second mind. And upon the immediate destruction of that third mind, which received the bondage, it does not attain liberation from the bondage of that sinful act. Then, whose liberation is it? Does the liberation of the unattached mind become possible? It does not. Since liberation is dependent on bondage, when there is no bondage, how can there be liberation, which is the release from bondage? In this way, the destruction of the fruit of action and the enjoyment of the fruit of inaction arise in the context of the Buddhists - that is, the one who performed the action does not enjoy its fruit, and the one who did not perform the action enjoys the fruit of that action, which is a subject of ridicule. Besides this, when the liberation of the bound mind does not occur, then the practice of Yama-Niyama, etc., for liberation becomes futile.

_The destruction is considered without a cause, because the destruction is without a cause, the violence is not the cause of the violent.
The destruction of the lineage of the mind, which is considered liberation, is not based on the eightfold path._ (According to the momentary, isolated Buddhist doctrine, destruction happens on its own, it has no cause. When there is no cause for destruction, then the violent is not the cause of violence - it is not possible to call anyone violent. Similarly, the liberation that is considered to be the destruction of the lineage of the mind is not based on the eightfold path. In the Buddhist doctrine, liberation (Nirvana) is considered to be the right view, perception, perceiver, speech, body, action, effort, and mindfulness.)