________________
Vāda ]
Ganadharavada
: 91:
is due to something wanting in materials-a defect arising from want of real knowledge.
We may add that we are glad to admit that the act 8.8 that of charity, if done without the serenity of mind, is fruitless; for, it is an iṣṭāpatti (a desirable acquisition) to us.
Some one may here argue as under :
The act, like tilling the ground, is seen to yield a visible fruit, viz., acquisition of crop. So, the act, like charity, must yield a visible fruit like the serenity of mind. Such being the case, why should we think of a fruit like Karman which is invisible? Hence, this hètu is viruddha (inconsistent); for, it establishes inst the contrary to what is desired.
This argument may be refuted as below :—
Even the serenity of mind is certainly a kriyā. So, just as acts like charity yield a fruit, so this serenity of mind, too, must yield a fruit. And that fruit is Karman, and nothing else. So, there is no vyabhicāra (irrelevancy).
It may be here noted that, that Karman whence living beings experience happiness and misery which are its parinati (consequences), is certainly the fruit of the act, viz., serenity
of mind.
It may be argued that in the preceding verse (v. 1615) while saying that dānādikriyāphalam Karma" only the act like charity was mentioned as the cause of Karman and here the act like serenity of mind is stated as the cause of Karman. So, are not these statements contradictory? Yes, they are. But, it should be borne in mind that since the act like the serenity of mind is the intermediate cause of Karman and that the act like charity is the cause of the act like the serenity of mind, there arises no flaw, because, here, we have an upacara (compliment) of Karaṇa in Karaŋa....
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
""
www.jainelibrary.org
