Shraman Bhagvana Mahavira Part 3

SR No.: 008004
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Ratnaprabhvijay, D P Thaker
Publisher: Parimal Publication
Publication Year: 1989
Total Pages: 586
Language: English, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_English, Biography, History, & Religion
File Size: 14 MB

Page 21

Really speaking, the flanie of a lamp does not vanish entirely but it only changes its form, Just as inilk changes its fo‘m into curds, the flame of a lamp changes iuto darkness. The minute particles of the flam of a lamp transform themselves into still more minute particles of darkness which are not perceptible. But that does not mean that they have ceased to exist entirely. As a matter of fact, the light-particles of the flame which were perceptible to the eye, would become perceptible to nose when turned into darkness. So, the lamp does not entirely dic away, but it only changes from light into darkness which is perceptible Like lamp, jiva is also said to have attained N:rvāņa or Final Emancipation, when that jiva passes into a new form which is a-mūrta, free from Karma-bandhas and which is unobstructible. This, therefore, shows that the pure, enternal, positive condition of jiva at the removal of obstructions like sukha-dulkha is called the state of Nirvāņa or Final Emancipation to the jiva
Like a sage, engrossed in the highest bliss of Absolute Knowledge, a Muklātmā liberated from the bondages of all sorts of worldly miseris, like birth, death, and old age etc enjoys a blissful state of Perfect Knowledge,
Finally, explaining the real interpretation of the sentences of Védos such as “ Na ha vai sas'arirasys priya'prij ayorapahutirasti ” as well as “ Asariram vā vasantam priya'priye na sprasataḥ” etc., śramana Bhagavān Mahāvîra Swami convinces the Ganadhara of the validity of the theory of Nirvana, and removes all his doubts. (For further explanation see discusssion with the last Ganadhara ).
Ganadharavāda and Nihnuvavāda,
Although both the Vădas ultimately point to the coinion goal of the realistion of truth, there is a great contrast between Ganadhara-vāda and Nihnavavada. In so far as their subjects, method of discussion, debators, and the consequences of debate are concerned. These points of contrast could be explained briefly as follows: