________________
170
Harmless Souls
it is the latter which is really instrumental in terms of binding and liberating the jiva.
This is part of the same pattern of theory as Pravacanasara 2:24, which remarks that 'there is no action without fruit, although the highest dharma is without fruit'.95 The Tattvadīpikā reads this in terms of 'mental' action, the action of one who thinks (cetana), and such action is defined as a modification (pariņāma) of consciousness (caitanya). However, this modification is only (karmically) fruitful (i.e. binding) for the atman connected with 'delusion' (mohasamvalita; sval(I) + sam). When the connection of the soul with moha disappears, the action is without fruit, so there is no further rebirth. And it is this fruitless (i.e. moha-less) mental action which Amṛtacandra defines as the parama-dharma, 'the highest dharma'. This may be compared with Pravacanasāra 2:58, where it is the idea of 'mine' (mamattam) with regard to external objects, especially the body, which is the cause of rebirth. (According to the Tattvadīpikā, this idea is the 'interior cause' of rebirth, a manifestation of attachment [uparaktatva].) Taking these two together, it is clear that it is the 'delusion of possession' - the idea that the jiva can have a real connection with anything ajīva - that is the real cause of rebirth. In other words, himsā, the binding instrument, has effectively been internalised to moha, which, in turn, is a manifestation of, or equivalent to, 'false consciousness' or aśuddhopayoga.
Pravacanasara 3:19 and commentary assemble a further set of equivalences around the concept of himsā which point to aśuddhopayoga as the significant cause of bondage. Gāthā 3:19 reads:
There is or there is not bondage, when a being dies in the course of physical activities; bondage is certain from attachment to
95 kiriyā hi natthi aphala dhammo jadi nipphalo paramo - Pravac.
2:24.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
