Sutrakritang Sutra

SR No.: 032440
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Sudarshanlal Acharya, Priyadarshan Muni, Chhaganlal Shastri
Publisher: Shwetambar Sthanakvasi Jain Swadhyayi Sangh
Publication Year: 1999
Total Pages: 658
Language: Hindi
Classification: Book_Devnagari & agam_sutrakritang
File Size: 21 MB

Page 559

श्री समवसरणाध्ययनं महदादिविकारे जन्ये प्रकृतिवैषम्योत्पादने कश्चिद्धेतुः, तद्वयातिरिक्तवस्त्वन्तरानभ्युपगमाद, आत्मनश्चाकर्तृत्वेनाकिञ्चित्करत्वाद् स्वभाववैषम्याभ्युपगमे तु निर्हेतुकत्वापत्तेर्नित्यं सत्त्वमसत्त्वं वा स्यादिति, उक्तं च - .
"नित्यं सत्त्वमसत्त्वं वाऽहेतोरन्यानपेक्षणात् । अपेक्षातो हि भावानां, कादाचित्कत्वसंभव ॥१॥" __ अपिच-महदहङ्कारौ संवेदनादभिन्नौ पश्यामः, तथाहि-बुद्धिरध्यवसायोऽहङ्कारश्चाहं सुख्यहं दुःखीत्येवमात्मकः प्रत्ययः तयोश्चिद्रूपतयाऽऽत्मगुणत्वं, न जड़रूपायाः। प्रकृतेर्विकारावेताविति । अपिच-येयं तन्मात्रेभ्यो भूतोत्पत्तिरिष्यते, तद्यथा-गंधतन्मात्रात्पृथिवी रसतन्मात्रादापः रूपतन्मात्रात्तेजः स्पर्शतन्मात्राद्वायुः शब्दतन्मात्रादाकाशमिति, साऽपि न युक्तिक्षमा, यतो यदि बाह्यभूताश्रयेणैतदभिधीयते, तदयुक्तं, तेषां सर्वदा भावात्, न कदाचिदनीदृशं जगदितिकृत्वा, अथ प्रतिशरीराश्रयणादेतदुच्यते, तत्र किल त्वगस्थिकठिनलक्षणा पृथ्वी श्लेष्मासृग् द्रवलक्षणा आपः पक्तिलक्षणं तेजःप्राणापानलक्षणो वायुःशुषिरलक्षणमाकाशमिति,तदपि न युज्यते, यतोऽत्रापि केषाञ्चिच्छरीराणांशुक्रासृक्प्रभवोत्पत्तिः न तत्र तन्मात्राणां गंधोऽपि ।समुपलक्ष्यते अदृष्टस्यापि। कारणत्वकल्पनेऽतिप्रसङ्ग स्यात्, अण्डजोद्भिज्जाङ्करादीनामप्यन्यत एवोत्पत्तिर्भवन्ती समुपलक्ष्यते, तदेव व्यवस्थिते प्रधानमहदहङ्कारादिकोत्पत्तिर्या सांख्यैः स्वप्रक्रिययाऽऽभ्युपगम्यते तत्तैर्नियुक्तिकमेवसवदर्शनानुरागेणाभ्युपगम्यत इति। आत्मनश्चाकर्तृत्वाभ्युपगमेकृतनाशोऽकृतागमश्चस्यात् बन्धमोक्षाभावश्च, निर्गुणत्वे च ज्ञानशून्यतापत्तिरित्यतो बालप्रलापमात्रं, प्रकृतेश्चाचेतनाया आत्मार्थं प्रवृत्तियुक्ति विकलेति । अथ बौद्धमतं निरूप्यते-तत्र हि पदार्था द्वादशायतनानि, तद्यथा-चक्षुरादीनि पञ्च रूपादयश्च विषयाः पञ्च शब्दायतनं धर्मायतनं च, धर्माः-सुखादयो द्वादशायतनपरिच्छेदके प्रत्यक्षानुमाने द्वे एव प्रमाणे, तत्र चक्षुरादी (दिद्रव्ये) न्द्रियाण्यजीवग्रहणे नैवोपात्तानि, भावेन्द्रियाणि तु जीवग्रहणेनेति, रूपादयश्च विषया अजीवोपादाने नोपात्ता न पृथगुपादातव्याः,शब्दायतनं तु पौद्गलिककत्वाच्छाब्दस्याजीवग्रहणेन गृहीतं,न च प्रतिव्यक्ति पृथक्पदार्थता युक्तिसंगतेति, धर्मात्मकं सुखं दुःखं च यद्यसा (तासा) तोदयरूपं ततो जीवगुणत्वाज्जीवेऽन्तर्भावः, अथ तत्कारणं कर्म ततः पौद्गलिकत्वादजीव इति । प्रत्यक्षं च तैर्निर्विकल्पकमिष्यते, तच्चानिश्चयात्मकतया प्रवृत्तिनिवृत्योर नङ्गमित्यप्रमाणमेव तदप्रामाण्ये तत्पूर्वकत्वादनुमानमपीति, शेषस्त्वाक्षेपपरिहारोऽन्यत्र सुविचारित इति नेह प्रतन्यत इत्यनया दिशा मीमांसकलोकायतमताभिहिततत्वनिराकरणं स्वबुद्धया विधेयं, तयोरत्यन्तलोकविरुद्धपदार्थानां श्रयणान्न साक्षादुपन्यासः कृत इति । तस्मात्पारिशेष्यसिद्धा अर्हदुक्ता नव सप्त वा पदार्थाः सत्याः तत्परिज्ञानं च क्रियावादेहेतुः नापरपदार्थपरिज्ञानमिति ॥२१॥
टीकार्थ - जो पुरुष यह जानता है कि आत्मा परलोकयायि-परलोकगामी है, शरीर से व्यतिरिक्तभिन्न है, वह सुख एवं दुःख का आधार है तथा जो आत्महित में प्रवृत्त होता है, वही आत्मज्ञ-आत्मवेत्ता है। जो मैं हूँ इस प्रत्यय से-अनुभव से ग्राह्य आत्मा को उसके यथार्थ रूप में जानता है वही प्रवृत्ति रूप एवं निवृत्ति रूप समस्त लोक को जानता है । वही आत्मज्ञानी परुष अस्ति-जीवादि पदार्थ है, इस क्रियावाद का भाषणविवेचन करने में समर्थ है । यहां दूसरे वृत्त-छंद या गाथा के अंत में क्रिया है अर्थात् दोनों पद युग्मक है। नाट्यशाला में कमर पर दोनों हाथ रखकर खड़े हुए पुरुष के सदृश आकर युक्त लोक को तथा च शब्द द्वारा संकेतित अनंत आकाशास्तिकाय परिमित अलोक को जानता है एवं जो जीवों की आगति-आगमन को जानता है अर्थात नारक. तिर्यञ्च मनष्य एवं देव कहां से आये हैं ? किन कर्मों द्वारा नारक आदि के रूप में उत्पन्न होते हैं ? यह जानता है एवं कहां जाने पर फिर पुनः आगमन नहीं होता, यह जानता है । चकार शब्द से सूचित सम्यक्दर्शन, ज्ञान, चारित्र रूप उसके उपाय को जानता है ।
-531

Translation AI Generated

The study of the Samvara (universal principle) is a great cause for the production of the differences in nature, which are born from the great and other transformations. Since there is no acceptance of any other object besides this, and since the soul is inactive and incapable of doing anything, the acceptance of differences in nature would lead to the conclusion that there would always be existence or non-existence. It is said: "Existence and non-existence are always without a cause, because they do not depend on anything else. For things that depend on something else, there is the possibility of being sometimes and sometimes not." Furthermore, we see that the Great and the Ego are not different from sensation. For example, the intellect, determination, and ego are all perceptions of the form "I am happy," "I am unhappy," etc. These are qualities of the soul because of their nature as consciousness, not because of their nature as matter. These two are transformations of nature. Furthermore, the origin of the elements from the subtle elements is not logical. For example, earth from the subtle element of smell, water from the subtle element of taste, fire from the subtle element of form, air from the subtle element of touch, and space from the subtle element of sound. This is not logical because if it is said that this happens because of an external object, then it is not logical because they always exist, and they do not create a world like this. Or if it is said that this happens because of the dependence on each body, then it is not logical because in that case, earth would be characterized by skin, bones, and hardness, water would be characterized by phlegm and blood, fire would be characterized by heat, air would be characterized by breath and exhalation, and space would be characterized by dryness. This is also not logical because even in the case of some bodies, the origin is from semen and blood, and there is no smell of the subtle elements there. The existence of the unseen is also inferred. If we accept the cause, then there would be too much inference. The origin of eggs, plants, and animals is also inferred to be from something else. Therefore, the origin of the primary, the Great, the Ego, etc., which is accepted by the Samkhya school in their own way, is accepted by them only because of their attachment to their own view, and it is not logical. If we accept that the soul is inactive, then it would be destroyed and never created, and there would be no bondage or liberation. And if it is without qualities, then it would be devoid of knowledge. Therefore, this is just childish talk. And since nature is inanimate, it is illogical for it to act for the sake of the soul. Now, the Buddhist view is examined. According to them, there are twelve sense spheres, namely: the five senses, the five objects of the senses, the sphere of sound, and the sphere of dharma. The dharmas are the twelve sense spheres, which are happiness, etc. There are only two means of knowledge: perception and inference. The five senses (the physical senses) are not involved in the perception of the soul, but the mental senses are involved in the perception of the soul. The five objects of the senses are not involved in the perception of the non-soul, and they should not be perceived separately. The sphere of sound is perceived by the soul because of its material nature, and it is not logical for it to be a separate object for each individual. The sphere of dharma, which is happiness and suffering, is either a form of pleasure or pain, and therefore, because of its nature as a quality of the soul, it is included in the soul. And if its cause is karma, then because of its material nature, it is a non-soul. The Buddhists consider perception to be non-conceptual, and because of its uncertain nature, it does not lead to action or inaction. Therefore, it is not a valid means of knowledge. And because of its invalidity, inference, which is based on it, is also invalid. The rest is the refutation of objections, which is discussed elsewhere, and it is not discussed here. In this way, the refutation of the views of the Mimamsa school, which are stated in their own texts, should be done with one's own intelligence. Since their objects are completely contrary to the world, they are not directly discussed here. Therefore, the nine or seven objects, which are established by the remaining evidence, are true, and the knowledge of them is the cause of action, not the knowledge of other objects.
Commentary: The person who knows that the soul is transmigratory, different from the body, and the basis of happiness and suffering, and who acts for the benefit of the soul, is the knower of the soul. The person who knows the soul in its true form through the perception of "I am," is the knower of the entire world in its form of action and inaction. That knower of the soul is the person who is able to speak and discuss this theory of action, which is the soul, etc. Here, at the end of the second verse or stanza, there is action, meaning that the two words are a pair. Like a man standing in a theater with both hands on his waist, he knows the world that is united with the body and the infinite space that is indicated by the word "cha," which is limited and not a world. And he knows the coming and going of beings, i.e., he knows where the hellish beings, animals, humans, and gods have come from. He knows how they are born as hellish beings, etc., because of their karma. He knows where they go so that they do not return again. The word "cha" indicates the right faith, knowledge, and conduct, which are the means to it.