Bharatiya Chintan Me Moksha Aur Mokshmarg

Here is a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Bharatiya Chintan me Moksha aur Mokshmarg" by Devendramuni Shastri, focusing on the concepts of Moksha (liberation) and Moksha Marg (the path to liberation) in Indian thought:

Introduction: The Origin of Indian Philosophy and its Goal

The author begins by stating that the pursuit of freedom from birth, old age, death, suffering, and worldly possessions is the genesis of Indian philosophy. Unlike Greek philosophy, which starts from wonder (Aristotle, Plato), and Western philosophy, which originates from doubt (Descartes, Kant, Hegel), Indian philosophy is born from curiosity rooted in suffering. The ultimate aim of Indian philosophy is not merely acquiring knowledge but eradicating suffering and attaining supreme happiness, making it a way of life rather than just a system of thought.

Moksha: The Central Concept in Indian Philosophy

• Significance: Moksha is identified as the focal point of Indian thought, a concept that distinguishes it from Western philosophy. It holds the primary position among the four Purusharthas (goals of human life), with Dharma (duty/righteousness) being the means and Moksha the ultimate end.
• Comparative Approach: The author intends to present a comparative analysis of Moksha and the path to Moksha across different Indian philosophical traditions.

Categorization of Indian Thought

The Indian spiritual tradition is broadly divided into four streams: Vedic, Jain, Buddhist, and Ajivika. As there are no independent texts available for Ajivika philosophy, the discussion will focus on the remaining three.

Vedic Philosophy and Moksha

The Vedic tradition includes six schools: Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Sankhya, Yoga, Purva Mimamsa, and Uttara Mimamsa.

• Purva Mimamsa: Primarily concerned with rituals (karma mimamsa), its early focus was not on Moksha, although later it did engage with Upanishadic thought.
• The Other Five Schools: These schools significantly contributed to the discourse on Moksha.

Divergent Views within Vedic Traditions:

Even within the Vedic tradition, there are considerable differences regarding the nature of the soul (Atma) and Moksha, with some views being contradictory.

1. Nyaya-Vaisheshika Philosophy:

   • Nature of Soul: Propounded by Kanada (Vaisheshika) and Akshapada (Nyaya), they consider the soul to be kutashtha nitya (uncreated and eternal, unchanging). Souls are numerous, with one soul per body.
   • Consciousness: Consciousness is not an inherent quality of the soul but an agantuk (accidental/acquired) quality. It arises from the connection of the soul with the body, senses, and mind.
   • Moksha: In Moksha, the soul relinquishes all experiences and exists purely in its substance. It does not experience pure bliss or pure consciousness, as these are considered accidental qualities that are shed in liberation. Moksha is defined as the absolute cessation of suffering, a state from which future suffering is impossible. It involves the complete eradication of nine qualities: intellect, happiness, sorrow, desire, aversion, volition, merit, demerit, and past impressions.
   • Critique: This view of Moksha is criticized for being devoid of bliss and consciousness, making worldly life seem preferable by comparison. Critics liken it to an inert stone. Nyaya-Vaisheshika justifies this by stating that the true practitioner strives only to avoid the undesirable, and this avoidance itself is their happiness. There is no basis for assuming positive consciousness or bliss in the liberated state, which is merely the existence of the soul as pure substance, devoid of knowledge and happiness.

2. Sankhya and Yoga Philosophy:

   • Relationship: Considered two aspects of the same philosophical principle – Sankhya is theoretical, and Yoga is practical, focusing on the means to achieve liberation (Kaivalya).
   • Duality: Sankhya posits a dualistic worldview of Purusha (consciousness) and Prakriti (matter/nature). Purusha is passive, unchanging, and pure consciousness, while Prakriti is the source of all material existence and is composed of the three gunas (Sattva, Rajas, Tamas).
   • Bondage and Liberation: Bondage and liberation are considered states of Prakriti that are superimposed on Purusha. When Purusha mistakenly identifies with Prakriti or its modifications, it experiences bondage.
   • Nature of Soul: Both Sankhya and Yoga believe in a plurality of Purushas, arguing that if there were only one Purusha, the liberation or bondage of one would affect all. Consciousness is the essence of Purusha, not an acquired quality.
   • Moksha (Kaivalya): Liberation is achieved through discriminative knowledge (Viveka) that distinguishes Purusha from Prakriti. The soul, in its true nature, is eternally free. The realization of this inherent freedom is Moksha. Sankhya considers the soul to be nirguna (without qualities) and self-luminous consciousness.
   • Comparison with Nyaya-Vaisheshika: The key difference lies in the status of consciousness in the liberated state. Nyaya-Vaisheshika posits the absence of consciousness, while Sankhya-Yoga asserts its presence. However, from a terminological perspective, the difference is not significant, as Nyaya-Vaisheshika explains the absence of consciousness by the absence of contact with the body and senses, while Sankhya-Yoga attributes consciousness to the inherent nature of the Purusha.
   • Twenty-Four Tattva Sankhya: This branch describes liberation as the ultimate dissolution of the activities of Prakriti into Pradhana (primordial matter), where consciousness itself is not separately described. It shares similarities with Nyaya-Vaisheshika in that the "work-principle" of Prakriti is dissolved.
   • Eternal Nature: Both Sankhya-Yoga and Nyaya-Vaisheshika maintain the eternal nature of the soul, but with a difference in emphasis: Nyaya-Vaisheshika views the soul as kutashtha nitya (static eternality), while Sankhya-Yoga sees it as parinami nitya (dynamic eternality) in terms of its inherent consciousness.

3. Upanishadic Philosophy (Advaita, Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita):

   • Advaita (Shankara): Accepts the presence of consciousness and bliss in Moksha, aligning more closely with Sankhya-Yoga than Nyaya-Vaisheshika. Liberation is the realization of unity with Brahman.
   • Vishishtadvaita (Ramanuja): Views the soul as atomic and part of Brahman, achieving liberation by dwelling in Vaikuntha in proximity to Vishnu, retaining its individual identity as a part of the divine.
   • Dvaita (Madhva): Considers the soul and Brahman to be eternally distinct. Liberation involves residing in Vishnu's abode, being subservient to Him.
   • Shuddhadvaita (Vallabha): Also sees the soul as atomic and part of Brahman. Some liberated souls merge with Brahman, while others, through Pushti Bhakti (devotional grace), descend into the world as if liberated to engage in devotion.

4. Buddhist Philosophy:

   • Nirvana: The Buddhist equivalent of Moksha is Nirvana, defined as the cessation of suffering.
   • Nature of Reality: Buddhism teaches that all existence is impermanent (anicca), unsatisfactory (dukkha), and without a permanent self (anatta). Only Nirvana is attainable.
   • Meaning of Nirvana: The term has various interpretations: ending rebirth, freedom from the "stench" of karma, release from the "dense forest" of samsara, and freedom from the "threads of karma" that weave the cycle of birth and death. It is also understood as "extinguishing" or "blowing out."
   • Positive or Negative State: Scholars have differing views. Some see Nirvana as the cessation of personality, while others describe it as a state of moral perfection filled with bliss. Radhakrishnan suggests it's an identification with the infinite reality, though not explicitly accepted by Buddha. Buddha viewed Nirvana as the extinction of craving, desire, and ignorance.
   • Not Annihilation: Many scholars, including Rhys Davids, Thomas, and Radhakrishnan, argue that Nirvana is not annihilation but a state of moral perfection and bliss.
   • Unutterable: Buddha often described Nirvana as "avyakta" (unmanifest or inexpressible) by thought or speech.
   • Schools of Buddhism: After Buddha's passing, his followers split into Hinayana (Theravada) and Mahayana. A key difference arose on whether the goal was individual Nirvana or the Nirvana of all beings. Mahayanists emphasized universal liberation.
   • Ambiguity: Buddha himself did not provide a definitive explanation of Nirvana's nature, leading to interpretations ranging from emptiness to blissful experience.

Jain Philosophy:

• Unity of View: Unlike Vedic and Buddhist traditions, there is no significant sectarian disagreement within Jainism regarding Moksha.
• Reason for Unity: The author attributes this to Lord Mahavir's declaration of being omniscient and the emphasis on unwavering faith in his teachings. This prevented the emergence of diverse interpretations on fundamental principles.
• Nature of Soul: Jainism adheres to the principle of Parinami Nityata (dynamic eternality), asserting that both the inanimate and animate are eternally changing. This applies to the soul's qualities and states.
• Size of the Soul: The soul is not considered all-pervading like in Nyaya-Vaisheshika or atomic like in Ramanuja's philosophy. Instead, it is described as having a "medium" size, capable of expanding or contracting to fit the body it inhabits (e.g., an elephant or an ant).
• Liberated Soul: In the liberated state, the soul, having shed all karmic coverings, resides at the apex of the universe (Siddhashila). It has no further movement beyond this point. The size of the Siddhashila is equivalent to the human world's extent (45 lakh yojanas).
• Liberated Soul's Form: While liberated souls are formless, their "size" is conceptualized based on the extent of their last physical body.
• Moksha as Full Development: Jainism views Moksha as the complete manifestation of the soul's potential and the absolute cessation of suffering.
• Comparison: Jainism's concept of a dynamic, medium-sized soul distinguishes it from other Indian philosophies. The realization of the soul's state in liberation is clear due to this unique tenet. In liberation, the soul's inherent qualities of consciousness, bliss, and knowledge are fully manifested and eternally dynamic. It shares similarities with Nyaya-Vaisheshika in its substance-based eternality and with Sankhya-Yoga and Advaita in the expression of inherent qualities. There's a potential closeness to Yogachara Buddhist philosophy if their alaya vijnana is understood as a pure, continuous flow of consciousness.

The Abode of Liberation (Mukti-Sthan):

• Nyaya-Vaisheshika, Sankhya, Yoga: These schools, believing the soul to be all-pervading, do not posit a separate abode for liberated souls. They remain all-pervading within the existing cosmic realm.
• Advaita Vedanta: Also considers the soul (Brahman) to be all-pervading. Liberation is the dissolution of ignorance, revealing the non-dualistic reality.
• Vishishtadvaita: Liberated souls go to Vaikuntha or Brahmaloka and exist in proximity to Vasudeva.
• Dvaita: Liberated souls reside in a specific world in the presence of Vishnu.
• Shuddhadvaita: Some liberated souls merge with Akshara Brahman, while others, devoted through Pushti Bhakti, continue to manifest in the world as if liberated.
• Buddhism: Since Buddhism denies the existence of an eternal soul or substance, there is no transmigration of a soul. Instead, one consciousness ceases, and a new one arises. Nirvana has no fixed location; it is realized through a pure mind.
• Jainism: The soul's inherent nature is to move upwards. Upon achieving complete freedom from karma, it ascends to the apex of the universe (Siddhashila), where it remains, as there is no further space for movement. This location is extensively described in Jain literature.

The Path to Moksha (Moksha Marg):

• Analogy to Medicine: Just as medicine requires knowledge of the disease, its cause, health, and the remedy, spiritual practice requires understanding of:

  1. Samsara (the cycle of birth and death – the "disease")
  2. Samsara Hetu (the cause of Samsara – the "disease-cause")
  3. Moksha (liberation – "health")
  4. Moksha Marg (the means to liberation – the "remedy")

• Vedic Tradition (Yoga Sutras, Gita):

  • Patanjali: Outlines four principles: Heya (that which is to be avoided – suffering), Heya-hetu (the cause of suffering), Hana (cessation of suffering – liberation), and Hana-upaya (the means to achieve cessation – the path).
  • Bhagavad Gita: Highlights three paths: Jnana (knowledge), Bhakti (devotion), and Karma (action).

• Buddhist Tradition (Four Noble Truths):

  1. Dukkha (suffering)
  2. Dukkha-samudaya (the origin of suffering)
  3. Dukkha-nirodha (the cessation of suffering)
  4. Dukkha-nirodha-gamini pratipad (the path leading to the cessation of suffering – the Noble Eightfold Path).

• Jain Tradition: Presents the path in terms of four categories:

  1. Bandha (bondage – suffering)
  2. Asrava (influx of karmas that cause bondage)
  3. Moksha (liberation – cessation of karma)
  4. Samvara (cessation of the influx of karmas – the path).

• Common Ground:

  • Root Cause: All Indian spiritual traditions identify ignorance (avidya, moha, ajñana) as the primary cause of suffering and bondage, leading to attachment, aversion, and other afflictions. Jainism specifically points to Darshan-moha (delusion regarding right perspective) and Charitra-moha (delusion regarding right conduct).
  • The Remedy: The solution lies in wisdom or right knowledge (vidya, tattva-jnana, samyak-jnana, prajna, Vipassana). This knowledge eradicates ignorance and leads to liberation.
  • The Path: Various paths are described, but they converge on the principles of ethical conduct, mental discipline, and wisdom.
    • Vedic: Jnana, Bhakti, Karma.
    • Buddhist: The Noble Eightfold Path (Right View, Right Resolve, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration), summarized as Śīla (virtue), Samadhi (concentration), and Prajna (wisdom).
    • Jain: Samyak-darshan (right faith), Samyak-jnana (right knowledge), and Samyak-charitra (right conduct) – collectively known as the Moksha Marg.

Conclusion:

Despite differences in terminology, the underlying essence of Indian philosophical traditions concerning Moksha and the path to Moksha is remarkably similar. They all aim to overcome suffering and achieve ultimate liberation through the eradication of ignorance and the cultivation of wisdom and ethical living. The author concludes by emphasizing that understanding this shared core principle, rather than getting lost in linguistic nuances, reveals the profound commonalities among Indian philosophical systems.