Soul Science Part 01

SR No.: 034407
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Parasmal Agrawal
Publisher: Kundakunda Gyanpith
Publication Year: 2014
Total Pages: 217
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 12 MB

Page 87

Soul Science : Samayasāra by Jain Ācārya Kundakunda
एदे सव्वे भावा पोग्गलदव्वपरिणामणिप्पण्णा। walifuft uforetage at sitat for gorift 114411 Ede savve bhāvā poggaladavvaparināmanippannā. Kevelijinehim bhaniyā kaha te jivo tti vuccanti. ||44|| एते सर्वे भावाः पुद्गलद्रव्यपरिणामनिष्पन्नाः। shalatortafforar: ret at tila slaid114411
It is stated by omniscients (Jinendra Deva) that the aforementioned characteristics are the effects of physical matter (Pudgala), then how can they be called as Jīva (soul)? [It means, none of these can be called as Jīva]. [44]
Annotation
In Gāthā 43, it has been stated that the description of the soul given in Gāthā 39 to 42 is not true. Why so? Here in this stanza a logic has been advanced. Here Ācārya says that all these entities listed in stanzas 39-42 are the outcomes that depend on the physical matter such as Kārmika dust, physical body, food, house, etc. Therefore, they cannot qualify to be the soul (Jiva). In this stanza, Ācārya emphasizes that this fact has been revealed by omniscients (Jinendra Deva).
In Appendix-3, six kinds of eternal substances (Dravya) have been described. Two of these six are Pudgala (matter) and Jiva (soul). According to the Jain philosophy, the cosmos is a collection of these six kinds of substances. Any other type of eternal entity does not exist. A Dravya can neither be created nor destroyed. The conversion of one type of Dravya into other type is not possible. With this background, the logic advanced in this stanza can be easily understood. If we understand that all entities described from verses 39 to 42 depend on Pudgala then we can logically infer that none of these entities is Jīva (soul).
To clarify further, let us take one macro example. Suppose a peacock is standing infront of a mirror. The image of the peacock changes according to the activities of the peacock. Thus the image is an outcome of the activities of the object peacock. We know that the image of the peacock could not be possible without