Mithyatva Etle Halahal Vish - Book Summary

This document is a comprehensive summary and critique of the Jain text titled "Mithyatva Etle Halahal Vish" (Misguided Belief is Like Deadly Poison) by Sanyamkirtivijay. The book, published by Samyaggyan Pracharak Samiti, primarily addresses the concept of mithyatva (misguided belief) in Jainism, drawing parallels to deadly poison. The provided text is a detailed exposition and analysis of the book's content, particularly in relation to the ongoing tithi (date/religious observance) debate within the Jain community.

Here's a breakdown of the key themes and arguments presented in the document:

1. The Supremacy of Samyakdarshan (Right Faith):

The document begins by emphasizing the immense importance of Samyakdarshan (right faith), calling it the highest treasure, friend, relative, and gain.
It highlights a Jain scripture stating that even a momentary touch of Samyakdarshan limits an soul's worldly existence to half a pudgalparavartan (a vast period of time in Jain cosmology).

2. Defining Mithyatva as Deadly Poison:

The book's central thesis equates mithyatva to Halahal Vish (deadly poison).
It explains that mithyatva is fundamentally a deviation from the true principles propounded by Lord Jina. It's a state of wrong belief that clouds the soul's innate perception of reality.
The text elaborates on mithyatva being a result of darshan mohaniya karma (karma related to deluded faith) and that Samyakdarshan is a kshayo-psham (partial destruction and obstruction) state of this karma.

3. The Core of the Book: Critiquing "Mithyatva Etle..." and the Tithi Debate:

A significant portion of the document is dedicated to critiquing a specific book titled "Mithyatva Etle..." (authored by someone else, seemingly with a different perspective on the tithi issue).
The document asserts that the author of "Mithyatva Etle..." has stirred up the dormant tithi debate within the Jain community, presenting arguments that are considered misleading and likely to cause discord.
The central point of contention in the tithi debate, as described, is the interpretation of specific scriptural verses related to calculating the correct day for religious observances.

4. Arguments of the Critiquing Document Against "Mithyatva Etle...":

Misleading Premise: The critiquing document argues that "Mithyatva Etle..." incorrectly frames the tithi issue as solely an acharana (practice) matter, when it is fundamentally a dispute about the arthavicharan (interpretation of meaning) of scriptural verses.
Lack of Clarity: The author of "Mithyatva Etle..." is accused of not clearly stating which tithi perspective is scripturally correct, instead creating confusion by presenting both sides as flawed.
Misuse of Scriptures: The document claims that "Mithyatva Etle..." distorts scriptural truths by misinterpreting texts like Nishith Churni and Guru Tattva Vinishchay and mixing concepts of vyavahar (conventional truth) and nishchay (ultimate truth) samyakdarshan.
Unjustified Accusations: The author of "Mithyatva Etle..." is criticized for making baseless accusations against both sides of the tithi debate, claiming they call each other mithyatvi (believers in wrong faith).
Undermining Hari Bhadra Suri: The document alleges that the author of "Mithyatva Etle..." attempts to misrepresent the teachings of revered Acharya Haribhadra Suri, particularly regarding concepts of non-violence and synthesis.
The True Nature of the Tithi Debate: The document insists that the tithi debate is about the interpretation of the verses "Mi na tidhi" (Don't consider [a tithi] mithya) and "Kshaye purvatithi" (When there is decay, take the previous tithi). Misinterpreting these leads to incorrect observance days and thus incorrect practices.

5. Detailed Explanation of Mithyatva and its Types:

The document provides extensive explanations of mithyatva, its forms, and its consequences.
Definitions: Mithyatva is defined as the opposite of Jina's teachings, a wrong belief, a distorted perception of reality, seeing the undesirable as desirable and vice versa, and mistaking the wrong path for the right one.
Five Types of Mithyatva (from Panchavastuk):
- Abhigrahik (Prejudiced): Stubborn adherence to one's own beliefs without examination, even if they contradict scriptures.
- Anabhigrahik (Non-prejudiced/Indifferent): Believing all paths, gods, and gurus are equally valid due to ignorance or indifference.
- Abhiniveshik (Stubbornly Adhering): Knowing the truth but refusing to accept it due to arrogance and stubbornness.
- Sanshayik (Doubtful): Doubting the authenticity of Jina's words and scriptures.
- Anabhog (Unintentional/Ignorant): Occurs in beings without developed intellect or knowledge.
Six Types of Mithyatva (from Yashovijayji): Differentiating between laukik (worldly) and lokottar (transcendent) regarding deities, gurus, and observances.
Four Types of Mithyatva (another classification): Mentioned as mati bhed, purva grah, sansarg, and abhinivesh.
The Danger of Mithyatva: It's described as the greatest enemy, disease, poison, and darkness, leading to endless suffering across lifetimes. It corrupts intellect, charity, conduct, and ultimately leads to an unending cycle of birth and death.

6. Discussion on Samyakdarshan (Right Faith):

Irreplaceability: Samyakdarshan is essential, as knowledge and conduct without it are ineffective for liberation.
Types of Samyakdarshan:
- Nishchay (Ultimate Truth): The pure state of the soul as darshan-gyan-charitra (faith-knowledge-conduct), primarily realized in higher spiritual stages (from 7th gunasthan onwards).
- Vyavahar (Conventional Truth): The faith and preliminary practices that lead to nishchay samyakdarshan. It's often associated with the 4th gunasthan.
Characteristics of a Samyakdrishti: They do not hold prejudiced views, do not blindly follow traditions if they contradict scriptures, do not accept all faiths equally, firmly believe in Jina's teachings, and avoid attachment to worldly pleasures. They are discerning and prioritize truth.

7. Analysis of Scriptural Passages (Guru Tattva Vinishchay, etc.):

The document delves into specific scriptural passages cited in "Mithyatva Etle..." and provides counter-arguments or clarification.
It scrutinizes interpretations of verses related to the tithi debate and Samiti-Gupti (rules of conduct for monks).
The critiquing document emphasizes that mithyatva is primarily linked to wrong belief (maryada or manyata) rather than mere practice (acharana) if the belief itself is correct. However, if the belief is wrong, the practice also becomes flawed.

8. The Tithi Debate Re-examined:

The document reiterates that the tithi debate is about interpreting scriptures and not just differing practices.
It highlights that when scriptural interpretations are available and correct, adherence to them is paramount, not blind adherence to tradition or personal convenience.
The document criticizes the author of "Mithyatva Etle..." for conflating the error in understanding tithis with issues like the non-use of a muhupatti (mouth cloth), arguing that the former involves a fundamental deviation in belief, while the latter might be a lapse in practice that can be corrected with proper understanding and repentance.

9. Addressing Misconrepresentations of Haribhadra Suri:

The document refutes the alleged misinterpretations of Acharya Haribhadra Suri's teachings, particularly regarding "advaita" (non-duality) and the concept of "samirash" (harmony) with other faiths.
It clarifies that Haribhadra Suri's emphasis on non-aggression and understanding other perspectives was within the framework of maintaining Jain principles and was not an endorsement of syncretism or compromise on core doctrines.
The document explains that while Haribhadra Suri may have used respectful terms for sages of other faiths, he also critically analyzed and refuted their doctrines when they contradicted Jain principles.

10. The Importance of Truth and Righteous Opposition:

The document stresses that "truth is on one side only."
It distinguishes between righteous opposition (prashasta virodh) for the sake of upholding truth and unrighteous opposition (apra shasta virodh) driven by ego, personal gain, or malice.
It defends the historical instances of opposition by great Jain acharyas as being necessary for the protection of principles and the welfare of the community.

11. The Dangers of Abhinivesh (Stubborn Attachment/Prejudice):

The concept of Abhinivesh, akin to stubborn prejudice or attachment to one's own views, is extensively detailed.
It's shown to be a root cause of mithyatva, hindering spiritual progress, corrupting even righteous acts, and ultimately leading to a lost path and increased suffering.
The document presents the story of Rohgupta Muni to illustrate the dire consequences of abhinivesh.

12. The Significance of Usutra Parupna (Spreading False Doctrines):

The danger of Usutra Parupna (spreading false doctrines or deviating from the true path) is highlighted, equating it to poison that leads to unending transmigration.
It warns that both religious leaders and householders must be vigilant against speaking or propagating anything contrary to the scriptures.

13. The Nature of Good and Bad Attachments:

The text differentiates between sadagrah (righteous attachment to truth) and mithya agrah (misguided attachment to falsehood).
Sadagrah strengthens Samyakdarshan, while mithya agrah destroys it.

14. The Critical Role of Scriptures and Guided Conduct:

The document emphasizes that scriptures (shrut) are the primary guide for discerning truth.
Blind adherence to traditions (jeet) without scriptural backing is discouraged, and the importance of following the scriptures (shrut) is reiterated, especially in matters like determining religious dates.

15. Final Critique and Recommendation:

The document concludes by reiterating its criticism of the book "Mithyatva Etle..." for its lack of clarity, misrepresentation of scriptures, and contribution to discord within the community.
It urges readers to seek truth diligently, understand the scriptural basis of tithis, and rely on the teachings of revered acharyas rather than falling prey to misleading interpretations.

In essence, the document acts as a defense of the traditional Jain understanding of mithyatva and samyakdarshan, using the tithi debate as a case study to critique a contemporary work that is perceived as undermining established scriptural interpretations and potentially causing spiritual harm.