________________
386
388
birth the highest grader of the triplet, for instance, attains liberation. This text belongs to the final canonical stage when the threefold pathway to mokṣa became the favourite topic of the canonical authors.
153
-4
XVII.2.593 reads that those from samyata up to renunciant (cf. VII.2.270 in this D-2a-2; third stage) abide (sthita) in religion (dharma), those from asamyata up to non-renunciant in non-religion (adharma), and those who are in-between in both religion and non-religion, and that H.A G abide in non-religion, A' in non-religion and religion-non-religion, and M in all three forms. The categorical characterization of living beings as such, which is based on the criterion of virati-avirati, goes in parallel with that of the renunciants discussed in VI.4. 239 (fifth stage) which will be taken up very soon. This text also mentions that abiding (sthita) in religion means to follow religion, but it does not mean that one can physically sit and lie down, etc., on it. This is a play of words. The canonical authors are amusing themselves by posing a question whether one can stand, sit and lie down, etc., on a certain item, which also occurs in X.10.304 (astikayas), XW.3.621 (nirjara pudgala) and II.2.663 (astikayas). XVII.2.593 is to be placed in the fifth canonical stage.
387 Then, I.9.79 maintains that an unresolved person (asthira) cannot stand firm and breaks but a resolved person does not break, that the foolish are eternal but foolishness is temporary, and that the wise are eternal but wisdom is temporary. The Jainas are accustomed to discussing whether beings are eternal or otherwise from various standpoints, for instance, from the standpoints of dravya and bhava (e.g., VII.2.273 in B-1 and C-1b). It appears that the aphorist here applied the same logic to these problems, i.e., bhava aspect to wisdom and foolishness, and dravya aspect to the wise and foolish. The discussion of wisdom and foolishness involves no problem, but that of the wise and foolish needs exposition.
The standpoint of dravya is applicable to the classes of beings in the way that H, for instance, are eternal, for the Jainas believe in the permanent existence of living beings in this and that gati. The criterion of the wise and foolish must have been again based on virati and avirati. For in XVI.2.594 heretics insist that monks are wise, laymen are half wise, but those who do not renounce himsa even to a single living being are totally foolish. MV expresses his view against the last point that those who spare even one life are not totally foolish. On this basis it explains that H.A G are foolish, A' are foolish or half wise, and M are wise, foolish or half wise. In the light of this text, H, for instance, are the foolish, and the categorical foolish as such based on gati can be also said to exist permanently from the standpoint of dravya. This is likewise applicable to the wise. I.9.78 (cf. E-3a-3) and 79 are referred to in VII.8.297 for its total content. We assign all these texts to the final canonical stage.
(2) Five vows.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
