Darshan Vishe Vicharna - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text, "Darshan Vishe Vicharna" by Munishri Trailokyamandanvijay:

The article "Darshan Vishe Vicharna" (Discussion on Darshan) by Muni Trailokyamandanvijay delves into the multifaceted meanings of the term 'Darshan' within Jain tradition and critically examines the prevailing understanding of 'Darshan' and 'Gyan' (knowledge) among scholars, highlighting discrepancies with ancient Jain scriptures (Agamas).

Key Meanings of 'Darshan':

The author begins by outlining the three broad meanings of the word 'Darshan' in common parlance:

Seeing/Looking: The literal act of visual perception.
Realization of the Unseen/Supernatural: Experiencing something beyond the ordinary senses.
A Specific School of Thought/Philosophy: As in Sankhya Darshan.

Within the Jain tradition, 'Darshan' is further used in two specific contexts:

Faith in Principles (Samyaktva): Right faith and belief in Jain tenets.
Formless Perception (Nirakar Upayog): A general, unspecific apprehension of an object.

The article primarily focuses on exploring the second meaning: Nirakar Upayog (Formless Perception).

Discrepancy with Current Understanding:

The author notes that the current understanding of the 'Gyan-Darshan' system among Jain scholars often deviates significantly from the scriptural (Agamic) explanations. This divergence can lead to numerous conceptual problems, which the article aims to address by returning to the original scriptural interpretations.

The Prevailing (Current) System:

The prevailing system posits that the soul has the inherent power of 'Kevalgyan' (omniscience). This power is obscured by karma. However, the portion of this power that remains un-obscured allows the soul to perceive. This perceptible portion, based on its object, means, and scope, is divided into four types of 'Gyan' (knowledge):

Mati Gynan: Perception through the five senses and mind.
Shrut Gynan: Perception through listening or reading.
Avadhi Gynan: Perception of subtle, material objects within a limited scope, independent of senses and mind.
Manahparyav Gynan: Knowing the thoughts of others' minds.

The fifth is 'Keval Gynan', possessed by liberated souls.

The text also describes objects as having two aspects:

Common Aspect (Samanya Ansh): The general characteristics that connect an object with others.
Specific Aspect (Vishesh Ansh): The unique characteristics that differentiate an object.

The author emphasizes the 'Mahasamanaya' (the ultimate commonality) which is free from all specific attributes and represents the essence of existence (production, existence, destruction). This Mahasamanaya is considered the object of 'Darshan'. Other relative commonalities are seen as specific aspects for the purpose of 'Gyan-Darshan' discussions.

Defining Darshan vs. Gyan:

Based on the above, the article proposes that:

When the soul's Gyan Shakti (knowledge power) is used to grasp the common aspect of an object, this application of Upayog is called Darshan.
When the soul's Gyan Shakti is used to grasp the specific aspect of an object, this application is called Gyan.

Nirakar (Formless) vs. Sakar (Formed):

The text clarifies why Darshan is identified as 'Nirakar Upayog' (formless perception):

While all perception has some form, Darshan is considered 'Nirakar' because all instances of Darshan are uniform in their form (they all perceive the Mahasamanaya).
'Gyan', on the other hand, is 'Sakar' (formed) because it grasps the specific aspects of objects, leading to a distinct form for each type of Gyan.
'Akar' (form) here signifies 'distinctiveness' or 'specificity'. Darshan lacks this distinctiveness, as it apprehends the Mahasamanaya, which is common to all.
Gyan is 'Sakar' because it apprehends an object in its specific form, leading to an assimilation with the object's form.

Darshan and Pramana/Apramana (Valid/Invalid):

Darshan is considered beyond the categories of 'Pramana' and 'Apramana'. Since Darshan grasps only the Mahasamanaya, which is always the same, the question of its truthfulness or falsehood doesn't arise. Gyan, however, deals with specific aspects that can be true or false, thus making Gyan 'Pramana' or 'Apramana'.

The Problem of Discrepancies:

The article then highlights several significant discrepancies and raises critical questions regarding the prevailing understanding:

Contradiction in Mati Gynan: How can Arthavagraha (a stage of Mati Gynan) be described as formless and grasping the common aspect, yet simultaneously be categorized as a specific aspect-grasping, formed (Sakar) stage of Mati Gynan?
Darshan Preceding Gyan: If Darshan is essential before Gyan, where is Darshan located in the process of Mati Gynan's origin?
Interpretation of Avagraha-Iha: When some interpret Vyavagraha, Arthavagraha, and Iha as stages of Darshan's formless perception, and that their presence enables subsequent formed knowledge (Mati Gynan), a question arises: Why are these stages not directly listed as forms of Darshan, but rather as stages of Mati Gynan?
Categorization of Gyan Shakti: If the 28 stages of Mati Gynan are considered, and these include both formed (Gyan) and formless (Darshan) uses of Mati Gynan Shakti, why isn't this principle consistently applied to Avadhi Gynan and Keval Gynan, where Avadhi Darshan and Keval Darshan are sometimes excluded from their respective knowledge stages?
Nandi Sutra Interpretation: The Nandi Sutra states that the Abhinibodhika Gynani (Mati Gynani) knows and sees all substances. If 'sees' (pasati) refers to Darshan, and Darshan grasps only the common aspect, how can one 'see' all substances? This implies 'pasati' might not solely mean grasping the common aspect.
Shrut Gynan and Manahparyav Gynan: Even in Shruta Gynan and Manahparyav Gynan, where common aspect apprehension is not expected, the word 'pasati' is used. If 'pasati' is interpreted as 'seeing', it challenges the notion that Darshan is solely about common aspect apprehension.
All-Encompassing Nature: If Darshan grasps only the common aspect and Gyan only the specific, then neither Keval Darshan nor Keval Gyan could be all-encompassing. While it's argued that Darshan also has subtle specific apprehension and Gyan subtle common apprehension, the primary focus on the commonality in Darshan and specificity in Gyan leads to the question of how both can be all-encompassing.
Categorization of Chakshu Darshan and Achakshu Darshan: If Darshan is merely general apprehension, why the specific categorization of Chakshu Darshan and Achakshu Darshan based on sensory organs? What makes the general apprehension through the eye distinct from that of other senses?
Absence of Vyavagraha in Chakshu and Manas: The absence of Vyavagraha in visual and mental perception raises questions about how the process begins. If an entire cognitive process is at least an 'antarmuhurta', how can a direct Arthavagraha occur?
Agamic Scope of Darshan: Agamic texts like Anuyogadvara present a much broader scope for Darshan, including the apprehension of specific permutations (paryayas) of substances for Avadhi Darshan and all permutations for Keval Darshan. This contradicts the prevailing view of Darshan grasping only the common aspect.

Alternative Interpretations and Classical Views:

The author then explores various other interpretations of 'Darshan' from classical Jain texts:

Darshan as apprehension without signs, Gyan as apprehension with signs: This is refuted as it would make all non-inferential knowledge as Darshan.
Darshan as apprehension of the present, Gyan as apprehension of the tri-kal (past, present, future): This is also refuted as it would classify tri-kal Avadhi Darshan and Keval Darshan as Gyan.
Darshan as self-observation, Gyan as external object illumination: This is considered an spiritual rather than philosophical view.
Darshan as apprehending subtle permutations (Vyanjana Paryaya), Gyan as apprehending gross permutations (Artha Paryaya): This is critiqued for misinterpreting scriptural terms.
Darshan as grasping general-specific aspects, Gyan as grasping their specifics: This is seen as based on a popular understanding of 'samanya' rather than the scriptural 'mahasamanya'.
Shri Vadidev Suri and Shri Hemchandracharya's View: This new perspective proposes that Darshan is distinct from Avagraha and Iha, with Darshan preceding them. In this view, Darshan is the initial formless perception upon contact, which later evolves into Avagraha. However, this interpretation is challenged for not fitting the 28 stages of Mati Gynan and the scriptural sequence of Vyavagraha.

Re-evaluation of the Agamic Understanding:

The author emphasizes that the term 'Darshan' in the Agamic era was primarily associated with 'realization' or 'apprehension' rather than just 'seeing' or 'grasping the common aspect'.

The Act of Seeing: The act of seeing involves the simultaneous, indistinct apprehension of multiple objects presented before us. This indistinct apprehension, described as 'something exists' ('kenke chhe'), is formless. This initial formless perception through the eyes is called 'Chakshu Darshan'.
Briefness of Formlessness: This formless state is transient, leading the soul to prioritize and focus on specific aspects for clearer apprehension, thus giving rise to Gyan.
The Process: The author illustrates this with the example of a watch, where initial indistinct perception leads to a more focused understanding of the time. This focused perception with clear form is Gyan. The indistinct apprehension is Darshan.
Importance of Attention: 'Seeing' (Darshan) is without focused attention, while 'knowing' (Gyan) involves focused attention.

Darshan and Specific Gyns:

Mati Gynan: The formless apprehension through eyes and mind is Chakshu Darshan and Achakshu Darshan, respectively. The formed apprehension is Chakshu Mati Gynan and Manas Mati Gynan.
Shrut Gynan: This arises from listening or reading and is always formed, not a form of Darshan.
Avadhi Gynan: This can be both formed (Avadhi Gynan) and formless (Avadhi Darshan).
Manahparyav Gynan: This is always formed (Manahparyav Gynan), not Darshan.
Keval Gynan: This encompasses both Keval Gynan (knowledge) and Keval Darshan (realization).

Darshan and the Concept of "Pashyatta":

The author strongly asserts that 'Darshan' is intrinsically linked to 'Pashyatta' (the act of seeing or perceiving), not just to grasping the common aspect. Evidence from scriptures like Bhagavati Sutra, Nandi Sutra, and Anuyogadvara is presented to support this. The use of 'pasati' (sees) in contexts of Shruta Gynan and Manahparyav Gynan is explained as a broader interpretation of 'seeing' as having a mental visualization or apprehending something with focused attention, rather than mere visual perception.

Reconciling Darshan and the 28 Stages of Mati Gynan:

The author addresses the perceived contradiction by suggesting that Chakshu Darshan and Achakshu Darshan occupy the place of Vyavagraha in visual and mental perception respectively. This also resolves the issue of the absence of Vyavagraha in these cases.

The Role of Arthavagraha and Iha:

The article further explores Arthavagraha and Iha. While earlier Agamic interpretations considered them as stages of Darshan, later logical interpretations viewed them as stages of Mati Gynan. The author argues that the latter view is more consistent, as Arthavagraha involves grasping specific aspects like 'it is sound' or 'it is form', thus being formed.

Conclusion:

The central conclusions of the article are:

Darshan's Meaning: 'Darshan' fundamentally means 'realization' or 'apprehension' (Pashyatta), not merely grasping the common aspect. The confusion arises from misinterpreting the term 'common aspect apprehension'.
Classification of Darshan: Chakshu Darshan and Achakshu Darshan are the formless stages preceding visual and mental perception respectively. Avadhi Darshan is the formless state preceding Avadhi Gynan. Keval Darshan is the realization of all substances and their permutations by Keval Gynanis.
Darshan Before Gyan: The rule that Darshan precedes Gyan can be understood by considering Vyavagraha (the initial formless apprehension in hearing and touch) as a form of 'formal' Darshan.

The author acknowledges that this interpretation is based on extensive analysis of scriptures and may contain flaws. They express humility and willingness to accept corrections if their interpretations deviate from the intended meaning of the ancient sages. The article concludes by touching upon specific aspects like the object-scope of Achakshu Darshan and the 'pasati' used in the context of Shruta Gynan and Manahparyav Gynan, further reinforcing the idea that 'Darshan' is deeply connected to the act of 'seeing' or 'realizing' in a broader sense.