________________
480
MOKSHA MARG PRAKASHAK
Anantaanubandhi only the Dwiteeyopashama Samyaktva (second type of subsidential right belief) is attained. Some Acharya states this to be a rule and some others do not state it to be a rule. And in the state of Kshayopashama Samyaktva, in the case of some Jivas, Aprashasta Upashama takes place and in the case of some other Jivas Visanyojana (transformation) is caused. But Kshāyika Samyaktva is evolved only after Visanyojana of Anantaanubandhi.
Here the specific point to be noted is that in the case of Upashama and Kshayopashama types of true believers, the destruction of existence of Anantānubhandhi was caused through Visanyojana (transformation). If he again falls in Mithyatva state, then the bondage of Anantaanubandhi is caused. Then the recurrence of its existence takes place. And the Kshayika Samyagdrishti does not fall in Mithyatva state; therefore, the recurrence of the existence of Anantaanubandhi is never found in his case.
Question: Anantaanubandhi is the Prakriti of Charitra Moha (conduct-deluding karma), so, it destroys the Charitra (conduct). How is the destruction of Samyaktva(right belief) possible by this Prakriti?
Answer: In the state of rise of Anantaanubandhi, anger, etc. dispositions are produced, (but) disbelief in Tattvas is not caused. Therefore, Anantaanubandhi destroys the conduct only, does not destroy Samyaktva (right belief). So, in reality, it is like this only but the types of anger, etc. passion which is caused due to rise of Anantaanubandhi, of the same form is not caused on evolution of Samyaktva (right belief) — such instrumental cause and effect relationship is found. Forinstance, the destroyer of Trasa state(mobile name karma) is the Sthavara Prakriti (immobile name karma) only; but on attainment of Trasa state even the rise of the EkendriyajatiPrakriti (one-sensed type of name karma) is not found. Therefore, conventionally even if the one-sensed type of Prakriti is stated to be the destroyer of Trasa state, then there lies no fault. Similarly, the destroyer of Samyaktva is the Darshan Moha (faith-deluding karma) but on evolution of Samyaktva even the rise of Anantaanubandhi is not found; therefore, conventionally even if Anantaanubandhi is stated to be the destroyer of Samyaktva, then there lies no fault.
Question: Anantaanubandhi also destroys conduct (Charitra) only, then on its disappearance evolution of some conduct should be Jain Education International For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
