Chapter 1

Dvividhovadhih  (21) (not in SS)

Clairvoyance (Avadhi‑jnäna) is of two types. (21)

bhavapratyayo näraka-devänäm (22) (SS 21)

yathoktanimittah sadvikalpah sesänäm (23)  (SS 22)

rju-vipulamatimanahparyäyah (24) (SS 23)

visuddhy-apratipätibhyäm tadvisesah !!25!! (SS 24)

visuddhi-ksetra-svämi-visayebhyovadhimanahparyäyayoh !!26!! (SS 25)

mati-shrutayor nibandhah sarvadravyesv-asarvaparväyesu !!27!! (SS 26)

rupisv avadheh (28) (SS 27)

tadanantabhäge manahparyäyasya (29) (SS 28)

sarvadravya-paryäyesu kevalasya (30) (SS 29)

ekädini bhäjyäni yugapad ekasmin äcaturbhyah (31) (SS 30)

Dvividhovadhih  (21) (not in SS)

Clairvoyance (Avadhi‑jnäna) is of two types. (21)

bhavapratyayo näraka-devänäm (22) (SS 21)

yathoktanimittah sadvikalpah sesänäm (23)  (SS 22)


Of these two, one ‑ viz. Bhava‑pratyaya  or that owing to birth is found among the hellish beings and the heavenly beings. 22 (SS 21)


The other type which owes its origin to a particular cause ‑ that is, the type originating as a result of the suppression‑cum‑disassociation of the karma concerned (called Guna-pratyaya) ‑ is of six kinds and is found among the remaining types of beings ‑ that is, among the animals and the human beings. !!23!! (SS 22)


Pratyaya means cause.


These sutras begin the definition of the third variety of knowledge, clairvoyance (Avadhi‑jnäna) by classifying it into two types:  1) bhava‑pratyaya  or that owing to birth and 2) guna‑pratyaya  or that owing to a meritorious qualification.


The first is the in-born clairvoyance  of the hellish (infernal) and heavenly (celestial) beings.  Ultimately, the nature of all clairvoyance is due to the kind of partial disassociation and partial suppression of the clairvoyance-covering karma.  But in the case of the infernal and celestial beings, it is said to be due to birth because they are born with the requisite partial disassociation and partial suppression.  The in-born power of clairvoyance is compared to the in-born capacity of birds to fly or fish to swim.


On the other hand, the type of avadhi‑jnäna which is not present at the time of birth but which appears there after the being concerned is born and as a result of an implementation of the meritorious requirements like ethical vows, self-imposed restrictions etc. is called guna‑pratyaya. The type is originating as a result of the suppression‑cum‑disassociation of the karma concerned.


Avadhi‑jnäna to be found among the animals and human beings is of six kinds:

  1. aungämika  or that which accompanies,
  2. anänugämika  or that which does not accompany,
  3. vardhamäna  or that which increases,
  4. hiyamäna  or that which decreases,
  5. avasthita  (also called apratipäti) or that which remains constant,
  6. anavasthita  (also called pratipäti) or that which does not remain constant.


(1) Just as the colour applied to cloth when placed at a particular place remains attached to this cloth even when it is transferred to another place, similarly, avadhi‑jnäna which continues to belong to the being concerned even when he leaves the place where this jnäna was generated and transfers himself to another place is anugämika. Briefly, just as light accompanies the sun, the first kind accompanies the individual possessing it wherever he/she goes.


(2) Just as some person's knowledge of astrology is such that he/she can correctly answer a question when seated at one particular place but not when seated at another place, similarly avadhi‑jnäna which ceases to belong to the being concerned when he leaves the place where this jnäna was generated is anänugämika.


(3) The third variety develops rapidly like the fire in the forest caused by friction, which spreads rapidly by means of dried leaves and fuel. Similarly avadhi‑jnäna which covers few objects at the time of its generation but gradually comes to cover more and more of them as there is increase in the spiritual purification of the being concerned is vardhamäna.


(4) Just as the fire feeding upon a limited number of burning objects undergoes gradual decrease when it no more receives new such objects, similarly avadhi‑jnäna which covers more objects at the time of its generation but gradually comes to cover less and less of them as there is decrease in the spiritual purification of the being concerned is hiyamäna.


(5) Just as certain numbers of good or bad impressions created by past deeds accompany a soul in its next birth or stay with a soul throughout one life, similarly avadhi‑jnäna which persists in a soul even in its next birth or stays in until the generation of omniscience or throughout one life is avasthita.


(6) Like the waves of water avadhi‑jnäna which now increases, now decreases, now appears, now disappears is anavashita.


Even though a tirthankara as such and so also certain other persons happen to possess avadhi‑jnäna ever since their birth this avadhi‑jnäna should be treated as belonging to the type guna‑pratyaya, for in the absence of an appropriate meritorious qualification this avadhi‑jnäna fails to remain there throughout one life ‑ just as it does so remain in the case of the heavenly beings and the hellish beings.


In the case of wrong believers it is called vibhanga (erroneous clairvoyance), as it is vitiated by their wrong belief.


Clairvoyance has been explained in this way.  Now mind-reading (telepathy) should be described.  Hence, with the intention of giving out its definition as well as its subdivisions, the author composes the next sutra.


rju-vipulamatimanahparyäyah (24) (SS 23)


visuddhy-apratipätibhyäm tadvisesah !!25!! (SS 24)


Simple (Rjumati) and complex (vipulamati) ‑ these two are the types of Mind-reading (telepathy, manahparyäya, . 24


The differences between the two are due to purity and infallibility. !!25!! (SS 24)


These two sutras explain the fourth variety of knowledge, mind-reading.  Simple (Rjumati) mind-reading reads only a few general modes of the mind.  However, complex (vipulamati) mind-reading reads many different and complex modes of a mind.  It is, therefore, considered purer than simple (Rjumati)  mind-reading.  Moreover, it (complex vipulamati) is infallible, lasting until one attains omniscience.  It is wider in extent and penetrates more deeply into the minds of others.  Simple (Rjumati) mind-reading is relatively impure, fallible, limited in scope and shallow.


The type of manahparyäya which apprehends the general form of an object is rjumati that which apprehends its particular features is vipulamati.


The simple modes relate to thoughts about an object or action and the complex to the deeper motivation and beliefs that lie behind these thoughts.


Of these two varieties, rjumati can extend from the minimum of two or three births of oneself and others up to a maximum of seven or eight births.  It can extend in space from one krosa, (two miles) up to one yojana (eight miles) but not beyond it. 


The latter (vipulainati) can extend from seven or eight births up to innumerable births. In space it can extend from one yojana up to the entire abode of human beings (i. e. up to the mountain range of Mänusottara) and not beyond that limit.


The state of the soul on the disassociation-cum-suppression of the karmic veil covering telepathy is purity.  Pratipatanam is fall (pratipäta).  No pratipäta is apratipäta.  Apratipäta is absence of fall.  An ascetic, whose karmic veil has only subsided but has not been completely removed, sometimes falls from his/her spiritual height in the presence of powerful conduct deluding karmas.  But such a fall does not occur in the case of an ascetic whose conduct-deluding karmas have been completely destroyed.  And the excellence of telepathy depends upon purity and absence of fall.  First with regard to purity. Vipulamati is purer than rjumati with regard to the object (subject matter), space, time and nature or condition. 


If these are the differences between the two kinds of telepathy, what are the differences between telepathy and clairvoyance?


visuddhi-ksetra-svämi-visayebhyovadhimanahparyäyayoh !!26!! (SS 25)


Clairvoyance (Avadhi‑jnäna) and mind-reading (telepathy, manahparyäya, differ from each other in their purity (vishuddhi), spatial range (shetra), the species of the knowing subject (swämi) and the nature of the object (vishay) identified by them. !!26!! (SS 25)


Purity means clearness.  Space is the place where the objects known are present.  Knower is the possessor. Vishaya is the object known.


The difference between mind-reading and clairvoyance is identified through four factors.


Firstly, to be able to mind-read, a soul must be in a purer state than is necessary for clairvoyance.  Mind-reading (Manahparyäya‑jnäna) knows the thinking expressed by the modes of the material clusters which constitute the mind.  Mind-reading knows the finer modes of the material clusters which are beyond the reach of clairvoyance (avadhi‑jnäna). In short, mind-reading is purer than clairvoyance because its range includes subtle matter and finer modes.


Secondly, clairvoyance (avadhi‑jnäna) can operate in space ranging from the innumerablth part of a finger to the entire cosmic space (lokäkäsh), whereas mind-reading (Manahparyäya‑jnäna) is confined to the region inhabited by human beings (adhi-dwip).


Thirdly, clairvoyance (avadhi‑jnäna)  is available to living beings of all destines (hellish beings, heavenly beings, tiryanch and human beings.  Mind-reading (Manahparyäya‑jnäna), however, is possible only in human beings with self-restraint, spiritually advanced ascetics. Mind-reading arises in the case of ascetics possessed of high conduct, that is from the seventh stage of perfection of vows to the twelfth stage of destroyed delusion. 


Fourthly, clairvoyance (avadhi‑jnäna)  can identify colored substances with several of their modes but not all their modes.  Mind-reading (Manahparyäya‑jnäna), however, can know the infinitesimal part of those clusters – only the sunstance in the form of mind. In short, clairvoyance (avadhi‑jnäna)  is extensive but shallow, whereas Mind-reading (Manahparyäya‑jnäna) is more limited but deep.


If so, let the scope of the first two types of knowledge be mentioned.


mati-shrutayor nibandhah sarvadravyesv-asarvaparväyesu !!27!! (SS 26)


The scope of sensory (Mati‑jnäna) and scriptural knowledge (shruta‑jnäna) extends to all substances, although not in all their modes (only limited modes). 27 (SS 26)


Nibandanam means connecting or uniting. With what? With objects. Dravyesu is in the plural in order to include all the six substances-the soul, the medium of motion, the medium of rest, time, space and matter.  ‘Asarvaparyäyesu'  means not all modes.


There are six substances in the cosmos: the medium of motion, the medium of rest, space, matter, souls and time.  All these, in a limited range of modes, constitute the domain of sensory and scriptural knowledge.  Only the omniscient soul fully knows the infinite modes of all six substances.

rupisv avadheh (28) (SS 27)


The scope of clairvoyance (avadhi-jnäna) extends to all matters (colored things, things that have form), though not in all its modes. 28 (SS 27)


It is laid down that the scope of clairvoyance is restricted to matter only and does not extend to non-material substances.  Even with regard to matter, the range of clairvoyance is limited to certain modes alone according to its potency and does not extend to all modes of matter.


tadanantabhäge manahparyäyasya (29) (SS 28)


The scope of mind-reading extends only to an infinitesimal part of the scope of clairvoyance. 29 (SS 28)


The scope of mind-reading is narrower than that of clairvoyance because mind-reading can only identify the modes of the material clusters that constitute the mind while clairvoyance can identify all kinds of material clusters in cosmic space.  However, clairvoyance cannot read the mind, that is, it cannot identify the modes of the mind's material clusters, because these are too subtle.


sarvadravya-paryäyesu kevalasya (30) (SS 29)  


The scope of omniscience extends to all substances in all their modes. 30 (SS 29)  


Here, the scope of the final variety of knowledge is described.  Omniscience is autonomous, perfect, whole, incomparable, independent, pure and all-encompassing.  No substance or mode lies beyond its range.


An Account of the Types of Knowledge that can be Simultaneously Present in a Soul :


ekädini bhäjyäni yugapad ekasmin äcaturbhyah (31) (SS 30)


From one up to four of the five varieties of knowledge may be possessed simultaneously in a soul. 31 (SS 30)  


Eka denotes number. Ädi means beginning.  Ekädi means beginning with one.  Bhäjyäni means can be possessed.  Simultaneously by one soul or living being.  Up to how many?  Up to four. 


The availability of the varieties of knowledge to a particular soul are now discussed.

In some soul there can possibly be present only one type of knowledge, in some other two types, in some other three, in some even four; but all the five types of knowledge cannot possibly be present in a soul.


When only one type of knowledge is present in a soul it must be kevala‑jnäna; for kevala‑jnäna being a complete type of knowledge no incomplete type of knowledge whatsoever can co‑exist with it.


When two types of knowledge are present in a soul they must be mati and shruta.


When three types of knowledge are present in a soul they must be either mati, shruta and avadhi or mati, shruta and manahparyäya. Mati and shruta must be present irrespective of whether the third coexisting type is avadhi or manahparyäya.


When four types of knowledge are present in a soul they must be mati, shruta, avadhi and manahparyäya


The reason why kevala‑jnäna does not co‑exist with any other type of knowledge is that the former is possible only in a complete state of perfection while the remaining types are possible only in an incomplete state of perfection. Certainly, a complete state of perfection and an incomplete such state being mutually contradictory coexist in a soul.


The first four varieties of knowledge, all of which are due to the partial-elimination and partial suppression of knowledge-covering karma, cannot exist with omniscience which occurs when knowledge covering karma is completely eliminated.


Again, when two, three or four types of knowledge are declared to be possibly coexistent they are so declared only in respect of potency not in respect of activity.


For example, at the time when a person possessing the two types of knowledge mati and shruta or one possessing the three types mati, shruta and avadhi is actively engaged in cognizing some object through mati‑jnäna he is certainly possessed of the potency to have shruta‑jnäna or of that to have avadhi‑jnäna, but at that same time he/she cannot put either of these potencies to use with a view to cognizing objects through the corresponding type of jnäna.


Similarly, at the time of being actively engaged with shruta‑jnäna he/she cannot put to use the potency to have mati‑jnäna or that to have avadhi‑jnäna. The same applies to the potency to have manahparyäya.


The idea is that even when there exist in a soul the maximum number of cognitive potencies ‑ that is, four of them ‑ then too an active engagement in the form of having knowledge is possible on the part of just one of them at a time; for at that time the remaining potencies lie defunct.


At the time of kevala‑jnäna there do not take place that four types of knowledge mati etc. ‑ this principle is admitted on all hands but it is interpreted in two ways. Thus some authorities are of the view that at the time of kevala‑jnäna the four cognitive potencies ‑ corresponding to mati etc. ‑ are certainly present there but being overpowered by kevala‑jnäna ‑ just as the light of planets, stars etc. is overpowered by solar light ‑ they are not in a position to undertake active engagement in the form of having knowledge. That is why at the time of kevala‑jnäna  there arise no cognitive mental states of the form of mati etc. even while the corresponding potencies are then certainly present there.


The other authorities are of the view that the four cognitive potencies mati etc. are not natural to a soul but being of the form of the kshayopashama of the karma concerned they are something accidental ‑ that is, something dependent on karma. Hence when there is a total disappearance of the jnänävaraniya‑karma as it is there at the time of kevala‑jnäna there is no possibility whatsoever of the accidental potencies in question being present. Hence it is that at the time of kevala‑jnäna no cognitive potency except that pertaining to kevala‑jnäna is possibly present – nor an active engagement in the form of having knowledge on the part of one such potency.