Acharya Mahaprajna
4.12 je āsavā te parissavā, je parissavā te āsavā, je aṇāsavā te aparissavā, je aparissavā te, aṇāsavā - ee pae saṃbujjhamāṇe, loyaṃ ca āṇāe abhisameccā puḍho paveiyaṃ.
What is influx is efflux, what is efflux is influx; what is non-influx is non-efflux, what is non-efflux is non-influx.—The aspirant, comprehending this paradigm, should realize the world of living beings in accordance with the discrete commandment of the Jina and should not indulge in what leads to influx.
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 12
The mode of the self that attracts karma is the cause of influx, and the mode that is responsible for the dissociation of the karma is the cause of efflux. The opposite of influx is non-influx. The cause of influx is the cause of karmic bondage and that of efflux is the cause of karmic dissociation.
The cause of influx is that which makes the karma to flow in and that which flow out is the cause of efflux. According to this etymology,[1] the cause of influx attracts karma and the cause of efflux expels the karma. Hence the following four paradigms can be deduced: 1] What is the cause of influx is the cause of efflux, what is the cause of efflux is the cause of influx. 2] What is the cause of influx is the cause of non-efflux, what is the cause of non-efflux is the cause of influx. 3] what is the cause of non-influx is the cause of efflux, what is the cause of efflux is the cause of not-influx. 4] What is the cause of non-influx is the cause of non-efflux, what is the cause of non-efflux is the cause of non-efflux.
In the Sūtra, the first and the forth paradigms are overtly mentioned, and the other two are implied.
The truth is that there is karmic bondage, and the karma that is bound lasts for a limited period. From this, the truth also follows that there is also the dissociation of karma. Where there is no karmic bondage, there is no karmic dissociation. This is but natural. In the rock-like state immediately before disembodied liberation, there is only the cause of efflux and not the cause of influx and bondage.
The programme that should be followed by a person who has enlightened himself in these principles and has penetrated into the distinct nature of the cause of influx and the cause of efflux will be described in the next Sūtra. Such person leads his life in accordance with the way prescribed in the commandment of the omniscient Jina.
The aforementioned paradigms are to be explained with reference to three factualities: (i) modification, functions and (iii) accumulation and dissipation of the karma.
(i)With reference to modification, there are as many causes of karmic dissociation for the enlightened one, as there are causes of karmic inflow for the unenlightened one.[2]
(ii)With reference to functions, the same activities that are conducive to karmic dissociation for the restrained one are for the karmic inflow for the unrestrained one.
(iii)With reference to accumulation and dissipation of karma, the paradigm namely, 'what is the cause of influx is the cause of efflux' is with reference to worldly bondage.
The paradigm 'what is the cause of influx is the cause of non-efflux' is a non-entity.
The paradigm 'what is the cause of non-influx is the cause of efflux' is with reference to the rock like state of soul.
The paradigm 'what is the cause of non-influx is the cause of non-efflux is with reference to the emancipated soul.
In the Sūtra under consideration the secrets of the principles of karmic bondage and dissociation are implicated. The central idea is that an aspirant well, posted in the secrets of the doctrine of karma abstains from violence or is established in the principle of ahimsā or attains the discriminating knowledge of self-development.
4.13 āghāi ṇāṇī iha māṇavāṇaṃ saṃsārapaḍivannāṇaṃ saṃbujjhamāṇāṇaṃ viṇṇāṇapattāṇaṃ.
The wise person explains the discipline to them who are involved in worldly life, also to them who are on the path of awakening, and also to them who have achieved the power of discrimination.
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 13
The wise person, having known the secrets of karmic bondage and dissociation, reveals the truth (religion) to the people who are involved in worldly life, that is engaged in worldly affairs; also to them who are on the path of enlightenment, are disgusted with suffering, are in search of joy and are eager to hear the discipline; and also to the disillusioned ones, that is, in whom the power of discrimination has not arisen.
4.14 aṭṭā vi saṃtā aduvā pamattā.
The afflicted and also the non-vigilant person accept the religion.
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 14
Having cultivated acquaintance with violence as the cause of karmic bondage and non-violence as the cause of karmic dissociation, under the guidance of an enlightened person, even the person afflicted with anguish or non-vigilance undertake the practice of non-violence;[3] what to speak of the people who have developed detachment from sensual objects?
The afflicted ones fall in two categories: physically afflicted and spiritually afflicted. The person afflicted with anguish may be a person in need of fortune or striken with ailments or miseries. Such people are physically afflicted. Some persons may also be stricken with violent emotions. The person afflicted with non-vigilance is one who is overpowered by sensual objects and intoxicating drinks, or excited with worldly pleasures. They are spiritually afflicted persons.
4.15 ahāsaccamiṇaṃ te bemi.
This is the ultimate truth - thus do I say:
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 15
The truth is that the people are miserable and non-vigilant. It is also true that some people, though miserable exert themselves to get rid of their misery. Some people again, though non-vigilant, attain to the state of self-awareness on getting an occasion for such awakening.
The central idea of the Sūtra is that this change of the state of the soul is indeed an unimpeachable truth.
4.16 nāṇāgamo maccumuhassa atthi, icchāpaṇīyyā vaṃkāṇikeyā. kālaggahīā ṇicae ṇiviṭṭhā, puḍho-puḍho jāiṃ pakappayaṃti.
Nothing is inaccessible to death. Some people are led by their desires, being the abode of crookedness. Intending to practise the discipline at a particular period of life, they remain engaged in accumulating fortune. Such people incessantly transmigrate from one form of life to another.
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 16
Now the two supports to enlightenment are explained. One cannot run away from the expanded jaws of death, that can swallow the creature, or, death may come from many a direction.[4] All creatures are mortal, none is immortal. Comprehension of this truth is the first support or step to enlightenment.
'Desire' means activity in accordance with the sensual and mental objects. People are driven by such desire. 'Abode of crookedness' means shelter of deceitfulness. 'Intending to practise at a particular period'[5] means with the intention of adopting spiritual life at later periods of life—middle or the last part of life. 'Accumulating fortune' means engaged in hoarding money. Such people produce different forms of life, that is, they are born as, different classes of beings such as the one-sensed and the like. Comprehension of this truth is the second support or step to enlightenment.
4.17 ihamegasiṃ tattha-tattha saṃthavo bhavati. ahovavaie phase paḍisaṃve-dayamiti.
Various people are familiar with various doctrines (on account of their deluded views). They suffer from various pains in the lower realms of transmigration.
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 17
'Familiarity' means acquaintance, inclination or conjunction.[6] Some people have acquaintance with views that are contaminated by perversity, passions and sensual objects. On that account, they freely indulge in sinful conduct. And as a result they are born in various forms of life. During their transmigration, they suffer from miseries of lower-realms of existence,[7] such as hells.
4.18 ciṭṭhaṃ kūrehiṃ kammehiṃ, ciṭṭhaṃ pariciṭṭhati. aciṭṭhaṃ kūrehiṃ kammehiṃ, ṇo ciṭṭhaṃ pariciṭṭhati.
Indulgence in intensely cruel acts leads one to the realm of intensely painful suffering. On the contrary, one who desists from intensely cruel acts does not transmigrate to realms of intensely painful suffering.
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 18
The disciple asks: 'O Lord! are the souls, suffering from the miseries of the lower worlds, of the same kind of feelings?' (Reply) 'No, this is not so' 'Why?' (Reply) 'Because the person who indulges in cruel acts is born in inauspicious places like hell and is striken with immeasurable pain.[8] But the person who is not so deeply involved in cruel acts is inflicted with only light pain though bom in the inauspicious place like hell'.
Here the fruition of intense involvement and mild one are differentiated. The same holds true of the auspicious karma.
4.19 ege vayaṃti aduvā vi ṇāṇī?
ṇāṇī vayaṃti aduvā vi ege?
Is this (doctrine) averred by other (heretic) philosophers or by those who have attained knowledge? (Or) Is this averred by those who have attained knowledge or by other philosophers?
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 19
In the preceding Sūtra (4.18), the fruition of indulging in violence was explained. The present sūtra gives expression to the curiosity regarding the issue whether this (doctrine expressed in 4.18) is agreed to by all philosophers or not. (The question arises whether) others (heretic philosophers) declare the aforesaid fruition of indulging in violence or the teachers endowed with knowledge. The answer to this query is obtained in the sūtras (20-26) that follow.
'Others' means some of the other philosophers or heretics.
Those endowed with knowledge' means the teachers who have attained the right world-view.
The aphorism is constructed in the circular style, so that the question is put also vice versa.
4.20 āvaṃtī keāvaṃtī loyaṃsi samaṇāya māhaṇāya puḍho vivādaṃ vadaṃti - se diṭṭhaṃ ca ṇe, suyaṃ ca ṇe, mayaṃ ca ṇe, viṇṇāyaṃ ca ṇe, uḍḍhaṃ ahaṃ tiriyaṃ disāsu savvato supaḍilehiyaṃ ca ṇe - savve pāṇā savve bhūyā savve jῑvā sawe sattā haṃtawā, ajjāveyawā parighetawā, pariyāveyavvā, uddave-yawā. ettha vi jāṇaha ṇatthittha doso.
Some Śramaṇas and Brāhmaṇas put forth mutually contradictory doctrines in the field (of philosophy). Some of them contend: "The following doctrine has been perceived, heard, reflected upon, thoroughly comprehended and scrutinized in all directions - upwards, downwards and lateral: 'AH animals, living beings, organisms and sentient creatures may be injured, governed, enslaved, tortured and killed'. Know that there is no sin in committing violence."
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 20
Some Śramaṇas and Brāhmaṇas mutually contend—"We have perceived, heard, reflected upon, thoroughly comprehended, scrutinised in all directions that there is no sin in committing violence of the living beings.
One wonders whether there are Śramaṇas and Brāhmaṇas who approve of such kind of violence. One should not forget that in the age of Lord Mahāvīra, the principle of non-violence was not held in that great respect which it commands today. In those days, sacrificial violence was considered a religious act. Violence was approved for acquiring non-vegetarian food. In the present Sūtra, the opinion of the learned people who supported such violence in those days has found record.
4.21 aṇāriyavayaṇameyaṃ.
This is the view of the ignoble.
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 21
To the aforesaid opinion of the opponent, the Sūtra says that this is the doctrine of the ignoble person, as it professes violence to living beings.
In earlier ancient times, the word ārya (noble) and anārya (ignoble) were used for ethnically different groups of people. In the time of Lord Mahāvīra, these words acquired technical meaning. Ārya stood for the ethically superior people and anārya for the ethically inferior ones. In the Sutrakṛtāṅga, there is a mention of āryamārga (the path followed by the ārya (1.3.66). The word ārya-satya (noble truth) in Buddhism is well known. In the present context anārya appears to stand for one who does not believe in the discipline of ahimsā, the antidote of this is ārya who believes in such discipline.
4.22 tattha je te āriyā, te evaṃ vayāsī—se duddiṭṭhaṃ ca bhe, dussuyaṃ ca bhe, dummayaṃ ca bhe, duvviṇṇāyaṃ ca bhe, uḍḍhaṃ ahaṃ tiriyaṃ disāsu savvato duppadilohiyaṃ ca bhe, jaṇṇaṃ tubbhe evamāikkhaha, evaṃbhāsaha, evaṃ parūveha, evaṃ paṇṇaveha - "savve pāṇā savve bhūyā savve jīvā savve sattā haṃtavvā, ajjāveyawā, parighetavvā, pariyāveyavvā, uddaveyawā. ettha vi jāṇaha ṇatthittha doso.
Those who were āryas proclaimed thus: "you have wrongly realized, wrongly heard of, wrongly thought about, wrongly known and wrongly considered in all respects and all directions, above, below and in front, when you say, speak, explain and propound that 'all animates, living beings, souls and living entities should be injured, commanded, enslaved, tortured and killed; you should know that there is no blemish in such actions of violence'."
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 22
On this subject, the noble ones declare: 'what you say has been wrongly realized by you'.
4.23 vayaṃ puṇa evamāikkhāmo, evaṃ bhāsāmo, evaṃ parūvemo, evaṃ paṇṇavemo - "savve pāṇā sawe bhūyā savve jῑvā savve sattā ṇa haṃtavvā, ṇa ajjāveyavvā, ṇa parighetavvā, ṇa pariyāveyavvā, ṇa uddaveyawā ettha vi jāṇaha ṇatthittha doso.
"We do however say, speak, explain and propound that 'no animates, living beings, souls and living entities should be injured, commanded, enslaved, tortured and killed; you should know that there is no blemish in such actions (of non-violence)'."
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 23
The āryas say: "We however declare that no creature should be killed or tortured."
4.24 āriyavayaṇameyaṃ.
This is the view of the noble.
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtra 24
The Sūtra says that this is the noble ones' doctrine that enjoins the principle of non-violence.[9]
4.25 puvvaṃ nikāya samayaṃ patteyaṃ pucchissāmo—haṃbho pāvāduyā! kiṃ bhe sāyaṃ dukkhaṃ udāhu asāyaṃ?
The heretical teachers sticking to their own repsective doctrines we should address, 'O teachers! is pain pleasant or unpleasant to you?’
4.26 samiyā paḍivanne yāvi evaṃ būyā - savvesiṃ pāṇāṇaṃ savvesiṃ bhūyāṇaṃ savvesiṃ jῑvāṇaṃ savvesiṃ sattāṇaṃ asāyaṃ apariṇivvāṇaṃ mahabbhayaṃ dukkhaṃ.—tti bemi.
To those who are rightly disposed towards the truth, one should say - 'to all animates, living beings, souls and living entities pain is unpleasant, disagreeable and most dreadful9.
Bhāṣyaṃ Sūtras 25,26
If the unwise persons do not properly understand the principle of non-violence even though adequately explained, one should feel indifferent. One should engage in debate with the council of knowledgeable people in the following order. First of all the opponents should be asked to make the solemn vow to speak the truth or they should be asked to acknowledge their own doctrines. And thereafter the question should be raised: 'O heretics! is pain pleasant[10] to you or not?'[11] Being thus asked, if they reply that pain was pleasant to them then such doctrine should be repudiated by the evidence of perceptual experience, verdict of the scripture and popular feeling against it. But if they confess that pain was not pleasant to them then the monk should address such people who have been brought to the right way of thinking in the above manner, as follows: 'the pain is not only not liked by you, but it is not liked by all animates, living beings, souls and living entities; the pain is unpleasant, disagreeable and most dreadful..
'Disagreeable' means repugnant to peace.
The doctrine thus follows that no living being should be injured.
akkhātaṃ dhammaṃ apaḍivajjamāṇā aṭṭā rāgadosehiṃ pamattā visaehi aṇṇautthiyagihatthā pāsatthādao vā saṃsārameva visaṃti.
Or it may be translated as: Neither the miserable nor the infatuated one abide by
religion. (b) See - Gītā 7.
caturvidhā bhajante māṃ, janāḥ sukṛtino'rjuna.
ārto jijñāsurarthārthī jñānī ca bharatarṣabha!..
'nāṇāgamo' padaṃ 'nānāgamo', na anāgamo - iti dvābhyāṃ prakārabhyāṃ vyākhyātuṃ śakyaḥ. Cūrṇau (p. 140) 'nāṇāgamo' mṛtyumukhasya, Vṛttau (patra 166) na hi anāgamo mṛtyormukhasya iti.
Ācārāṅga Cūrṇi, p. 141: iha saṃsāre saṃthuti saṃthavo, appasattho neraio neraiyatteṇa saṃthuvati ṇāma niddisijjati evamādi, pasatthaṃ tu devo devatteṇa, ahavā samāgamo saṃthavo.
(a) Ibid, p. 141: adha iti aṇaṃtare, aha te sakammaniddiṭṭhaṃ aṇṇataraṃ gatiṃ gayā, uvavāte jātā uvavāiyā phusaṃti.
(b) Ācārāṅga Vṛtti, patra 167: adhaaupapātikān narakādibhavān 'sparśān' duḥkhānubhavān prati-saṃvedayanti.
