________________
6. MANDIKA — REGARDING BONDAGE AND
EMANCIPATION
Then Mandika decided to approach Lord Mahāvira who accosted him by his name and gotra as Mandika Vasiştha. Mahävīra also explained to him the doubt that disturbed him. Are there bondage and emancipation or not? There are Vedic statements which should mean that there is nothing like bondage or emancipation for the soul; e.g. Sa eșa viguņo vibhur na badlıyate samsarati vā, na mucyate mocayati vā, na vă eşa bāhyam abhyantaram vā veda—This soul is ubiquitous and free from guņas. Neither is it bound nor does it transmigrate. It is not freed (from karman) nor does it free (karman), that is to say, it is non-doer. It knows neither the external nor the internal (for knowledge is an attribute of prakrti). On the other hand we are told : Na ha vai saśarīrasya priyapriyayor apabatir asti, aśarīram vā vasantam priyāpriye na sprśataḥ - "The embodied soul is never lacking in respect of the pleasant and the unpleasant i. e. can never be free from pleasure and pain, whereas these do not have any effect whatsoever on the soul as it exists in an unembodied state'—which would suggest that the soul has the conditions of bondage and emancipation. Mandika was puzzled on account of these conflicting statementsboth of the Veda-and hence his doubt. But the truth is that he did not know the true meaning of these Vedic statements (1802-4).
Dialectical reasoning also has led Mandika to question bondage-emancipation. If bondage means the union of the jīva (soul) with karman, has this union a beginning or not? If it has, which of the two is earlier, jīva or karinan? Or were they simultaneously produced. Bondage cannot be explained in the light of any of these alternatives ;
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
