The form of divinity is
not that of a dancer nor, of a climber of trees the true
Godhood
is the perfection of the noblest attributes of the soul the peace,
tranquillity, renunciation, self-control, equanimity and the like, and
must be contemplated as such. The
Parma
Atma
has nothing to conceal, nor to be ashamed of; He wears neither clothes nor
ornaments, nor does He embellish His 'person' otherwise.
Shant
(full of peace), serene and self-centered, He sits, unmoving and unmoved
in the contemplation of his own effulgent glory, indifferent to the
praises of the Bhavya
and the abuses of the Abhavya.
Such is the true object of contemplation which is to be found only in the
consecrated pratibimbas
(images) of the holy
Tirthankaras
in a Jaina Temple.
It may also be pointed out
here that those who try to attain the purity of
Dhyana
by dispensing with concentration on the form of the
Tirthankara
are not likely to achieve any happy results. They are like those who try
to reach the top of the ladder without the help of its rungs. It is true
that constant meditation on the qualities of the
Parma
Atma,
accompanied with the belief that the same qualities inhere in every
Jiva,
goes a long way towards making one self- conscious, but it is no less true
that the full acceptance of the impress of the form of
Parma Atma
by the soul-substance, which is necessary to prevent its fickleness and
unsteadiness, cannot be secured till the
yogi
knows what that impress is like and the method of transferring it from his
mind to the 'liquid' essence of his soul. The knowledge of the form of the
Parma Atma
being, th8us, a pre-requisite of
Moksha,
true Bhakti
can not be said to begin unless the mind of the devotee is first filled
with the divine image. There can be no such thing as falling in love with
a being or thing whose very form one has no idea of.
In this connection we
may also explain the significance of the word
nirakara
when used in reference to Parma
Atma. Obviously everything
that exists must have some kind of form, so that the word
nirakara,
if taken in its literal sense, i.e., as devoid of form (nir
= without, and akara
= form), cannot possible apply to any existent thing. It is however,
applicable to soul or spirit, firstly, because it has no visible form
which, may be perceived with the eye, and, secondly because the
Jiva
involved in the cycle of births and deaths has no permanent form of his
own. The Parma Atma,
however, differs from the ordinary not emancipated
Jiva
in so far as the destruction of all kinds of
karmas
places Him for ever beyond the cycle of re-births fixing His form also,
incidentally, once for all and for ever in the manner described in the
tenth chapter of The Key of Knowledge. This form is the noblest form of
all, being that of perfect MANHOOD, and the stature of the soul-substance,
which on the attainment of complete liberation is freed from the liability
to expansion and contraction in the manner of an involved
Jiva,
is slightly less than that of the body from which
nirvana
is attained. Those who might find it difficult to reconcile this view of
the Jaina Siddhanta
with the prevailing notions of the Hindus and others who maintain that
nirvana
signifies an absorption into the deity-- the merging of the drop in the
sea-- would find it easier to understand the nature of the form of the
Siddha
Atma
in Moksha
if they would only take the trouble to analyze the idea underlying the
notion of absorption. It is no use trying to smother the voice of
intellect when it proclaims that two or more existing realities, or
individuals, can never be pressed into one; and neither reason nor analogy
can ever be found to support the thesis of the absolute merger in respect
of simple, indivisible entities. The very illustration of the
disappearance of the drop in the sea is a sufficient refutation of all
such notions; for the sea is an unit only in so far as the word is
concerned, not in any other respect, so that the 'individuality' of the
drops constituting its volume is neither destroyed nor impaired in the
least in the process of their supposed merger. It is, no doubt, impossible
for us to pick out any particular drop were invested with the functions of
understanding and speech it would undoubtedly respond to a call from a
friend on the shore.
The true idea
underlying the analogy, then, is only that of a collection of 'drops'
enjoying a common status, which is fully in agreement with the Jaina view,
according to which the
Siddha
Atma
in Nirvana
enjoy the status of Godhood
but retain their individualities separate and distinct from others. Thus,
the status is one though there is no limit to the number of individuals
acquiring or attaining to it.
We gain nothing by
denying the fact that we must have a clear conception of a thing before we
can ever hope to acquire it; and the necessity of being scrupulously
precise is even greater in the spiritual realm where the soul's aim and
ambition are centered round in ideal which it wishes to realize in its own
self. It follows from this that the fullest information rather than a
negative description --neti,
neti, (not this, not this) --
concerning the great ideal of perfection and joy must be insisted upon, at
the very outset, by an earnest seeker after
Moksha.
Existence, it will be noticed, is not the attribute of anything in nature
which is not possessed of a single positive content of knowledge, so that
where every conceivable attribute is negatived there remains nothing but
non-existence to stare the philosopher in the face. If those who insist
upon defining an existing being or thing in this negative manner would
only analyze the nature of speech, they would not fail to perceive that
the converse of rational beings consists in the expression of ideas
clearly conceived by the mind, and that it is impossible to have an idea
of a thing which is absolutely devoid of all elements of affirmation and
certainty. Hence, it is very clear that those who describe the Godhead in
terms of negation have really no idea of the supreme status, which the
soul is to attain on obtaining
Nirvana.
The idea of
Moksha
cannot also be clear to the minds of those who look upon the world as an
illusion with a solitary soul as the only reality and the true substratum
of life in all forms. For either this all- pervading soul does not stand
in need of Moksha
or it is to attain it at some future moment of time; but in the former
case it is impossible to explain the longing of living beings for a taste
of true happiness and in the latter the very possibility of the attainment
of perfection and bliss by different individuals is excluded by the
hypothesis itself, because where the substratum of individual life is a
solitary soul there can be no release except for all living beings at one
and the same time. Furthermore, the idea of
Moksha
for the individuals, cannot, on such a supposition possible mean anything
more or less than utter, absolute annihilation of individuality, since the
emancipation of the only true soul must be a signal for the exeunt of all
others.
It is thus evident
that no true concept of
Moksha
is possible on such a hypothesis, and since the realization of the great
ideal of the soul is not compatible with a vague or inconsistent
conception thereof in the mind of the aspiring
Jiva,
no one who pins his faith on such a doctrine is likely to reach 'the other
shore'. And, so far as practicability, the only true test of utility, is
concerned, it is evident that no one can be said to have been benefited by
the doctrine hitherto, for the one soul is still subject to illusions and
there has never been another to be redeemed.