________________
56
Besides o Sudharman | you believe that above-mentioned tinterpretation of the words of the Vedas seems to be correct logically also, because the result resembles the cause just as, the seeds of Paddy give rise to the offshoots of Paddy but the offshoots of wheat never come out of the seeds of Paddy; in the same way, a man after death, must be born as a man for how can he be an animal like a cow etc ? In this way, because of the Vedic statements, and because of logic, you know that a living being will be born of the same class during his next birth, as he is in this life.
But it is, at the same time, said in the Vedas that,
शगालो वै एष जायते यः सपुरीषो दह्यते ॥
Śrigālo vai éşa jāyaté yah sapuriso dahyaté
That is to say, 'A person is born as a jackal, if he is burnt with his body besmeared with his stools. It means that if the body of a man is unclean because of his stools, and if he is cremated with such an unclean body, that man is born as a jackal in his next birth.
These Vedic statements go to prove that a man is born in the next birth as a jackal also, and hence, the principle"The living being 'assumes the same form in the next birth as he has in this life"-does not stand to be correct now. Because of such contradictory statements, a doubt has been created in your mind but O Sudharman ? this doubt of yours is improper; because the Vedic statement-galu garaga qua: TiraqPuruso vai purusațvamaśnuté pašavah paśutvam-is not properly followed by you This Védic statement should not be interpreted as you do.
The Vedic statement means as follows:-Listen —
A man inspite of death, can be a human being in the next birth, and animals, in spite of death, can be animals in the next
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
