Moksha Marg Prakashak

SR No.: 006760
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Todarmal Pandit
Publisher: Kundkund Kahan Digambar Jain Trust
Publication Year: 1992
Total Pages: 556
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 15 MB

Page 197

162
MOKSHA MARG PRAKASHAK
importance; but those are the acts of pride. Indulgence in the acts of duplicity is also associated with God's name but those are the acts of deceit. He is said to have made efforts for gaining the objects of senses. But these are the acts of greed. He is said to have indulged in sportive acts, but those are the acts of laughter, etc. Hence, such kinds of acts are possible only under the influence of anger, etc.
In this way, by attributing the acts of sex, anger, etc. to God, they say that they are praying, but which acts would then be called censurable if acts of sex, anger, etc. are stated to be adorable? Adoring of God by ascribing to him such acts which are censured in world as well as in scripture is an act like that of a sycophant. Now our question is- 'Will you regard him gentle or wicked who without naming the person starts describing the acts that someone has done such and such acts? If you will regard him gentle then the wicked people are proved gentle; who else would then remain wicked? And if you will regard him wicked then whosover does such acts, he is wicked. Justice should be done without prejudice.
If you will say prejudicedly that describing the Thakur with such traits is also an invocation, then we ask you "Why did Thakur indulge in such acts? What did he accomplish by indulging in such censurable acts? If you say that for establishing the tradition he did so, then our question is-'What benefit did he and others get in establishing such a tradition of contemptible acts of enjoying other's wife, etc.? Therefore, indulgement of Thakur God in such acts is not possible. And if Thakur did not indulge in such acts and you yourself attributed such traits to him, then you have blameda person without blemish. Therefore, such a description is not adoration but censure.
Moreover, while invocating, one gets the same type of ideas and harbours affection in the same qualities which are being described. So, while describing the acts of sex, anger, etc. one would also develop the feelings of sex, anger etc., or will become interested in such passions. But such thoughts and feelings are not praise-worthy. If you will say-" The devotees do not get involved in such feelings, then we will ask you as to how one would describe without being affected by such ideas? How could one adore without the feelings of affection? If these thoughts and feelings are supposed to be good then why