Syadvada Manjari

Author(s): Mallishenacharya, F W Thomas
Publisher: Motilal Banarasidas

Page 51

50
F. W. Thomas, Mallişeņa's Syādvādamañjari self should in that state be unthinking, not different from a stone, then enough of release (a pavarga); rather let us have mundane life, where at any rate some pleasure is experienced, though at intervals and rendered turbid by pain; - just think! Is experience of a little pleasure worth while, or simply annihilation of all pleasure ?
Or, 'There is in such a Mokşa superior gain for people capable of taking a right view; for they distinguish thus: In mundane existence, first of all, pleasure untouched by pain is not possible; but pain is certainly to be avoided, and discriminatory avoidance of those two, as of poison and honey placed in a single vessel, is hardly possible; for this reason both of them are abandoned; and therefore Moksa is more blessed than mundane existence, seeing that pain at any rate would not there be; better abandon such a measure of occasional pleasure, and not support its so great load of pain.'
Here this is the truth: Seeing that mundane pleasure has actually the form of pain, like swallowing a jagged scimitar with its edge smeared with honey, it is reasonable for those who seek Moksa to desire to abandon it; but only if desiring to get an absolute kind of happiness. For even here in this world) pleasure springing from cessation of objects (vişa ya-nivrtti) is actually guaranteed by experience (57); and, if that is not pre-eminent (vişişļa) in Mokşa, then Moksa turns out to be actually of the form of pain, - that is the meaning. As for the poison and honey, mixed in one, which are abandoned, they also (are abandoned) simply through a desire to obtain distinct pleasure. Moreover, just as by living beings in the mundane state pleasure is desired, and pain undesired, so for the state of Mokşa cessation of pain is desired, but cessation of pleasure is really undesired. So, if there should be Mokşa according to your view, then discerning persons would not take steps towards it; but this is done. Hence it is proved that Moksa is by own-nature consciousness of pleasure, because the action (pravrtti) of the discerning is not otherwise accountable.
Or, 'If Moksa should have the sole nature of consciousness of pleasure, then, proceeding (pravartamana) through passion for it, the Mokşa-seeker would never get Moksa. For to the impassioned there is no Mokşa, passion being essentially bondage', - Not so! Only passion for mundane pleasure is essentially bondage, because cause of action (pravștti) in regard to objects, etc.; but passion for the happiness of Mokşa, because cause of cessation (nivetti) of that, is not essentially bondage; and in one who has mounted to the highest peak, it ceases even in the form of mere aspiration. For it is stated:
"For Moksa and for life (bhava) altogether the best of Munis is without aspiration" 6).
Otherwise, on your alternative also, with acceptance of a Moksa consisting of cessation of pain, what is to prevent a turbidity through infection (anxiety) in regard to pain? Thus it is established that Moksa consists in consciousness of supreme pleasure through extinction of all karma, and is not in the form of annihilation of the special qualities, awareness, etc.
Moreover, O Ascetic!61) Do not distort your mind by thinking that annihilation of these some way or other is approved by us also. For as follows: By the word 'awareness' cognition is stated: and that is fivefold according to the distinction of the five, thought (mati)-cognition, scriptural, cognition of distant things, state-cognition, perfect cognition 62). And of these the first tetrad of cognitions (58), because they belong to extinction and alleviation (of karma), disappear at the very moment of the manifestation of perfect cognition; because of the Scripture: "When the tiro knowledge is ended"63). But perfect (cognition), which covers all
.) The verse, quoted also in Sammati-tarka, p. 163, is not otherwise traced.
61) Ascetic': According to Gunaratna's Comm. on Haribhadra's Saddarśana-samuccaya (Dhruva, p. 117) the Naiyāyikas and Vaišeşikas were both devotees of Siva and were known as 'ascetics' (tapasvin).
a) On those Jain terms see Outlines of Jainism, pp. 59-60, 109-10. 63) Arasyaka, I 539 (M. L.). The chadmastha, 'tiro', is detined in Țhananga-sútra, 309 a.