________________
82
Illuminator' of Jaina Tenets
[ Lustre IV
as a matter of fact the colour-index of the soul, represented by the aura that manifests itself at the physical level.
Three alternative theories have been proposed by commentators to explain the nature of leśyā. In the first theory, it is regarded as a product of passions (kaşayanisyanda), and consequently as arising on account of the rise of the kaşāya-mohaniya karman. In the second, it is considered as the transformation due to activity (yogaparināma), and as such originating from the rise of karmans which produce three kinds of activity (physical, vocal and mental), In the third alternative, the leśya is conceived as a product of the eight categories of karman (jñānāvaraniya etc.), and as such accounted as arising on account of the rise of the eight categories of karman. In all these theories, the leśya is accepted as a state of the soul, accompanying the realization (audayika-bhāva) of the effect of karman.1
of these theories, the second theory appears plausible. The leśyā, in this theory, is a transformation (parinati) of the sarira-nåmakarman (body-making karman), 2 effected by the activity of the soul through its various gross and subtle bodies--the physical organism (kāya), speech-organ (vāk), or the mind-organ (manas) functioning as the instrument of such activity. The material aggregates involved in the activity constitute the leśyā. The material particles attracted and transformed into various karmic categories (jflandvaraniya etc.) do not make up the leśyā. There is presence of leśvå even in the absence of the categories of ghati-karman in the sayogi-kevalin stage of spiritual development, which proves that such categories do not constitute lesya. Similarly, the categories of aghati-karman also do not form the leśvä as there is absence of leśyā even in the presence of such categories in the ayogi-kevalin stage of spiritual development. The leśyā-matter involved in the activity aggravates the kasävas if they are there. It is also responsible for the anubhāga (intensity) of karmic
1 For the refutation of the theory propounding leśyā as karma-nisyanda, vide
Malayagiri's Commentary on Pannavaņā, pada XXVII. 2 Ibid : iyam (leśyā) ca śarisanāmakarmapariņatirūpā yogapariņatirūpatvāt............ 3 Ibid : yogapariņāmo leśyā, katham punar yogapariņāmo leśyā, yasmāt sayogikevali
suklaleśyāpariņāmena vihștyäntaramuhūrte sese yoganirodham karoti tato’yogitvamaleśyātvam ca prāpnoti, ato'vagamyate yogapariņāmo leśye'ti. sa punar yogah sariranāma karma-pariņativiśeşah, yasmād uktam-karma hi kārmaṇasya kāranam anyeşām ca śarīrāņām iti' tasmādaudārikādiśarirayuktasyātmano vīryaparinativisesah kāyayogaḥ(1), tathaudārika-vaikriyāhāraka-sarira-vyāpārāhstavāgdravyasamühasācivyāt jiva-vyāpāro yah sa vāgyogaḥ(2), tathaudārikādi-sariravyāpārābrtamanodravya-samuhasācivyāt jivavyāpāro yaḥ sa manoyoga iti(3), tato yathaiva kāyādikarana-yuktasyätmano vīryapariņatir yoga ucyate tathaiva leśyäpīti. Ibid : kim yogāntargata dravyarūpā yoganimittakarma-dravyarūpā vā ? tatra na tāvad yoganimittakarmadravyarūpā vikalpadvayānatikramāt, tathāhi-yoganimittakarmadravyarūpā sati ghātikarmadravyarūpā aghātikarmadravyarūpå vā? na tāvad ghātikasmadravyarūpā, teşām abhāve'pi sayogikevalini leśyāyāḥ sadbhāvāt, nāpi aghātikarmarūpā, tatsadbhāve'pi ayogikevalini leśyāyā abhāvāt,
tataḥ päriseşyāt yogāntargatadravyarūpā pratyeyā. 5 Ibid : tāni ca yogāntargatāni dravyāņi yāvat kaşāyās tāvat teşām apyudayopa
brmhakāņi bhavanti,
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
