Kevalgyan Aur Kevaldarshan Dono Upayog Yugpat Nahi Hote - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Kevalgyan aur Kevaldarshan dono Upayog Yugpat nahi Hote" by Kanhaiyalal Lodha, based on the provided pages:

The book discusses the contentious issue of whether Kevalgyan (omniscience) and Kevaldarshan (omnividence) occur simultaneously (yugpat) in an embodied soul.

Key Points and Arguments:

Schwetambar View: The majority of Svetambar acharyas, with the exception of Acharya Shrisiddhasen Diwakar, hold that Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan do not occur simultaneously. This belief is primarily based on inferential reasoning and experience rather than explicit scriptural sutras.
Digambar View: Most Digambar acharyas believe that Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan occur simultaneously.
Author's Stance (Digambar Perspective): The author, Kanhaiyalal Lodha, presents arguments from Digambar scriptures, particularly Kashay Pahud, to support the view that Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan do not occur simultaneously. He states that while Svetambaras lack explicit sutras, Digambaras have many clear proofs in their scriptures and commentaries.

Evidence Presented from Digambar Scriptures:

Kashay Pahud (Gatha 15-20): This section discusses the varying durations (minimal and maximal) of different types of sensory knowledge and mental activities.
- The text states that the maximal duration of Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan in a soul with passions and pure leshya (aura) is equal to each other in their own space, but greater than the duration of respiration (shwasochchwas).
- Crucially, the maximal duration of Kevalgyan is described as "specialy more" than the duration of a specific type of meditation (ekatva vitarka avichar dhyan), and the maximal duration of Kevaldarshan is not directly equated in this comparative sequence in a way that suggests simultaneity.
- The author interprets these comparative durations, which are often specified as "specialy more" or "double," to imply that the two usages do not occur at the exact same moment. If they were simultaneous, their durations would be precisely aligned.
- The text also states that the maximal duration for Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan is antarmuhurta (less than a pala or a thought-moment). The author argues that if these were simultaneous, their combined maximal duration should be within the antarmuhurta period, but the text indicates that each exceeds the duration of respiration, suggesting a sequential rather than perfectly overlapping existence.
Dhavala Commentary (on Kashay Pahud):
- Gatha 137: This gatha discusses the simultaneous destruction of Darshanavarnaniya (vision-obscuring karma) and Jnanavarnaniya (knowledge-obscuring karma). The question is posed whether Kevaldarshan or Kevalgyan arises first. The answer given is that their manifestation occurs simultaneously, but the usage (upayoga) of Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan does not occur simultaneously.
- Interpretation: This is a key point for the author. While the qualities of knowledge and vision are revealed at the same time due to karma annihilation, the soul's activity or usage of these qualities cannot be simultaneous. This distinction between the presence of a quality (labdhi) and its active use (upayoga) is central to the argument.
Dhavala Commentary (on Shatkhandagama, Vol. 2, p. 411): This passage distinguishes between knowledge (gun) and knowledge-usage (knowledge-upayoga). It states that upayoga (usage) is the state of perception that grasps self and other, and it is not included within the categories of marganas (pathways) for knowledge or vision. This reinforces the idea that the activity of knowing and seeing are distinct.
Pannavna Sutra: Similar to the Dhavala commentary, this scripture also lists knowledge and vision as separate "doors" from upayoga (usage).
Shiddha Jeeva (Liberated Souls):
- Dhavala commentary (on Kashay Pahud, p. 320): The text states that liberated souls have upayoga in both vision and knowledge. However, it also states that the maximal duration of their upayoga is antarmuhurta. The author questions this, arguing that if Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan were simultaneous in a liberated soul (whose existence is infinite), their maximal duration of upayoga should also be infinite, not antarmuhurta. This implies that even for liberated souls, the usage is sequential.

Core Distinction: Gun (Quality) vs. Upayoga (Usage)

The author strongly emphasizes the difference between a soul's inherent qualities (gun) and its active usage or application of those qualities (upayoga).

Qualities: The qualities of knowledge and vision are eternal attributes of the soul. They are never absent, as their absence would mean the absence of consciousness itself. These qualities are present as labdhi (achievement) due to the destruction or partial destruction of karmas.
Usage: Upayoga is the soul's active engagement or application of one of these qualities at a particular time. Just as a person can have knowledge of many subjects but can only actively think about or teach one at a time, a soul can possess the qualities of Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan but can only be actively engaged in one at any given moment.

Analogy:

Knowledge of Subjects: A person can acquire knowledge of mathematics, geography, astronomy, etc. ( उपलब्धि - achievement/acquisition). However, when actively studying or thinking, they can focus on mathematics or geography, but not both simultaneously ( उपयोग - usage). The knowledge of the other subject is still possessed but not actively used.
Wealth: A wealthy person has the capacity to buy many items ( क्षमता - capacity). They may own a radio and a television ( उपलब्धि - achievement). At a given moment, they might be using the radio and not the television ( उपयोग - usage).

Application to Kevalis:

The author argues that the same logic applies to Kevalis (omniscient beings). Their Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan are present as labdhi due to the complete annihilation of karmas. However, their upayoga (activity) is necessarily sequential.
The author cites Visheshavashyak Bhashya (Gatha 3066) which states that even for a Kevali, upayoga is not simultaneous.
The author states that the argument used by some Digambar acharyas (like Acharya Shrisiddhasen Diwakar) for the simultaneous upayoga of Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan in Kevalis is the same as that used for the simultaneous upayoga of the same in chaddmasthas (souls with residual karmas). Since the latter is universally rejected by all Jain sects, the former should also be rejected.

Conclusion:

The author firmly concludes that based on the scriptural evidence, particularly from Kashay Pahud and its commentaries, both Kevalgyan and Kevaldarshan are never simultaneously in usage (upayoga) for any soul, including Kevalis. The distinction between the possession of a quality (labdhi) and its active application (upayoga) is crucial. While the qualities may be revealed together, their use is always sequential. He invites scholars to consider these points with an unbiased mind.