ISJS-Transactions (July-September, 2021)

ISSN : 2457-0583 ISJS - TRANSACTIONS A Quarterly Refereed Online Research Journal on Jainism VOL. 5 No. 3 July - September, 2021 INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL FOR JAIN STUDIES International School for Jain Studies SELF STUDY IS THE ( A Division of Amar Prerana Trust) SUPREME AUSTERITY C/o Firodia Hostel, 844, B.M.C.C. Road, Shivaji Nagar, Pune - 411004 (Maharashtra), INDIA web: www.isjs.in | e-mail: [email protected]



ISSN: 2457-0583 ISJS – TRANSACTIONS A Quarterly Refereed Online Research Journal on Jainism VOL.5 No.3 July – September, 2021 CHIEF EDITOR Prof. Prakash C Jain Former Professor of Sociology School for International Studies Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi Email: [email protected] EDITOR Dr. Shrinetra Pandey Joint Director International School for Jain Studies, Pune Email: [email protected] International School for Jain Studies (A Division of Amar Prerana Trust) C/o Firodia Hostel, 844, B.M.C.C. Road, Shivaji Nagar, Pune – 411 004 (Maharashtra), INDIA e-mail: [email protected] website: www.isjs.in



ADVISORY BOARD • Dr. Shugan Chand Jain, President, International School for Jain Studies, Pune. Email: [email protected] • Prof. Kamal Chand Sogani, Director, Jain Vidya Sansthan, Jaipur. Email: [email protected] • Prof. Kusum Jain, Former Director, Center for Advance Philosophical Research, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur. Email: [email protected] • Dr. Sulekh Chand Jain, Former President, JAINA, USA. Email: [email protected] EDITORIAL BOARD • Prof. Viney Kumar Jain, Emeritus Professor, Dept. of Yoga and Science of Living, Jain Vishva Bharati Institute, Ladnun – 341 306, Dist. Nagaur, Rajasthan, India. Email: [email protected] • Prof. Christopher Key Chapple, Director, Master of Arts in Yoga Studies, University Hall, Room 3763, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, California-90045, USA. Email: [email protected] • Prof. Anne Vallely, Department of Classics and Religious Studies, University of Ottawa, 55, Laurier East, Ottawa, ON, Canada- K1N 6N5. Email: [email protected] • Prof. Jayanti Lal Jain, Dean, Faculty of Humanities, Mangalayatan University, Mathura - Aligarh Highway, 33rd Milestone, Aligarh -202 145. Email: [email protected] • Dr. Priyadarshana Jain, Assistance Professor & Head i/c, Department of Jainology, University of Madras, Chennai – 600 005. Email: [email protected] Articles can be sent in favour of International School for Jain Studies, Pune ISSN: 2457-0583 PUBLISHED BY International School for Jain StudiesC/o Firodia Hostel, 844, B.M.C.C. Road, Shivaji Nagar, Pune – 411 004. Email: [email protected] © International School for Jain Studies Note: The facts and views expressed in the Journal are those of the authors only.



From the Chief Editor’s Desk This issue of the ISJS-Transactions consists of four articles on diverse topics, two in English and two in Hindi followed by a book review. The first article “History of the Publication of Dhavalā Text” is authored by Mr. Anubhav Jain. As the title itself suggests, while presenting the chronology of the publication of the Dhavalā text – an important part of the Jain canonical literature, the article also attempts to seek the answers to several questions like – Why was this text not published for so long? Was the entire dvādaśāṅga really extinct by the time of Ācārya Dharaseṇa? Are Ṣaṭkhanḍāgama and Kaṣāyapāhuḍa interrelated with the original aphorisms of dvādaśāṅga? Who are the great heroes behind the publication of Dhavalā text? Authored by Ms. Pragya Jain, our second article is entitled “Moha and its Good Riddance” In Jain tradition moha is the cause of ignorance, misery, suffering and individual deviances, and therefore overcoming of the moha is the first step towards liberation. Besides highlighting the nature and types of moha, the article also suggests the ways and means of getting rid of it. The third article “Gwalior Kṣetra ke Jain Abhilekhoṁ meiṁ Paṇḍit-Pratiṣṭācārya” is authored by Dr. Navneet Kumar Jain and Mr. Ajit Jain Shastri. Highlighting the importance of Gwalior as a major center of Jain archaeological and epigraphical material the article focuses on the status and role of paṇḍits and pratiṣṭhācāryas who lived and worked in the city in different points of time in history. Our final article in the issue entitled “Uttarādhyayan Sūtra: Eka Pariśīlana” written by Dr. Pawan Kumar Jain is a critical study of the well-known Jain text Uttarādhyayan Sūtra in terms of its author, time-period and contents, etc. While doing so, it also takes into account the text’s various forms of interpretative literature. In this issue the book that we have taken up for review is titled \"Bhāratanāmā” and is written by Dr. Chandrakiran Jain. It is reviewed by Dr. Malay Patel. I am thankful to all the authors for contributing their scholarly papers to this issue. I am also thankful to Dr. Shugan C. Jain, President of ISJS, for his continuous support and guidance. Thanks, are also due to Dr. Shrinetra Pandey for rendering his editorial skills, Ms. Pragya Jain for her editorial support and Mr. Sushil Jana for diligently computing the journal and putting it on our website. The readers and contributors are welcome to send their valuable suggestions for improving the journal. Prakash C. Jain October 30th, 2021



CONTENT From the Chief Editor’s Desk Mr. Anubhav Jain 1 – 13 14 – 28 1 History of the Publication of Ms. Pragya Jain Dhavalā Texts 29 – 56 MkW- uouhr dqekj tSu 2 Moha and its Good Riddance Jh vftr tSu “kkL=h 3 Xokfy;j {ks= ds tSu vfHkys[kksa esa MkW- iou dqekj tSu 57 – 79 if.Mr&çfr’Bkpk;Z leqnk; Dr. Malay Patel 80 – 81 4 mŸkjk/;;u l=w % ,d ifj'khyu 5 Book Review - Bhāratanāmā



HISTORY OF THE PUBLICATION OF DHAVALĀ TEXTS Anubhav Jain1 Abstract The preaching of Mahāvīra, was compiled by their chief disciples (gaṇadharas) and monk scholars (ācāryas) in the form of twelve-limb scriptures (dvādaśāṅga) more than 2500 years ago. This paper reflects on the forgetting knowledge of aṅgas chronologically, need of publishing of the remaining knowledge, and the blood, sweat and tears it took to bring out Jain canons into publication. The paper also looks for the answers to the questions like – Was the entire dvādaśāṅga really extinct by the time of Acharya Dharasena? Are Ṣaṭkhanḍāgama and Kaṣāyapāhuḍa interrelated with the original aphorisms of dvādaśāṅga? Who are the great heroes behind the publication of Dhavalā texts? Why were these Jain canons not published for so long? Introduction There were two traditions that were in vogue in prehistoric times, one Vedic tradition and the other śramaṇa tradition2. The substructure of mythological dharma was fabricated on nigama and āgama while nigama refers to the Vedic tradition and āgama refers to non-Vedic traditions, including Jainism. The main scriptures of Jainism are referred to by the name of āgamas which were preached by tīrthaṁkaras. In today’s time, Jain, Bauddha and Ājīvakas fall under the śramaṇa tradition. Bauddha and Ājīvakas are contemporary to the era of Mahāvīra. We also find traces of Jainism in Harappan civilization. The Dharmacakra (reverential wheel related to samavaśaraṇa) was inchoate by Ādinātha in the beginning of the fourth era which continued till Mahāvīra. All the theoretical, conceptual, spiritual and other important teachings given by Mahāvīra were preserved in the form of aṅgapraviṣṭa and aṅgabāhya. A Short History of Jain Monks & Scriptures During the last 2500 years, after the nirvāṇa of Tīrthaṃkara Mahāvīra, many outstanding Digambara Jain monks flourished and publicized Jainism all over India. What happened till 683 years after the Mahāvīra’s salvation could be understood by the following description 1 Anubhav Jain is MA in Philosophy from University of Mumbai and a PhD aspirant. He offers his services as a freelance teacher to Uttar Pradesh Jain Shodh Sansthan Sanskriti Vibhag Lucknow, Arham Pathshala Jaipur, Pandit Todarmal Smarak Mukta Vidyapeeth Jaipur-Mumbai. He is also an academic speaker and a voice over artist who has published various audio books on Jainism. e-mail: [email protected] 2 Prof. Sagarmal Jain (Jaina Religion: Its Historical Journey of Evolution 4) describes two kinds of traditions by saying that the term “Jain” became popular only after 6th or 7th century AD while the Jain tradition was addressed as nirgrantha (of Parśvanātha and Mahāvīra) or ārhat tradition (of arhanta). He also claims that all the śramaṇic traditions – Jaina, Buddhist and Ajīvakas have been followers of “arhanta”. In the R̥ gvedic era both ārhat and bārhat (śramaṇa and Vedic) were in existence and arhat or vrātya was denotative of śramaṇa stream.

2 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 accepted by the Digambaras (Śrutaskaṁdha 66-83). After Mahāvīra, within the period of sixty- two years, there were three kevalīs (Gautam Swamī, Sudharma Swamī and Jambu Swamī), next hundred years was the period of five śṛuta-kevalīs (omniscient of scriptures – Nandī, Nandī-mitra, Aparājita, Govardhana and Bhadrabāhu), next one hundred and eighty-three years belonged to those eleven scholar monks (Viśākha, Proṣṭhil, Kṣatriya, Jaya, Nāga, Siddhārtha, Dhr̥ tisena, Vijaya, Buddhil, Gaṅgadeva and Sudharma) who had the knowledge of eleven aṅgas and ten pūrvas of the twelfth aṅga, the next period of two hundred and twenty years was the time of those five scholar monks (Nakṣatra, Jayapāla, Pāṇḍu, Dhruvasena and Kaṁsa) who had knowledge of eleven aṅgas, and later on, within 18 years there were four scholar monks (Samudra, Yaśobhadra, Yaśobāhu and Lohārya) who had knowledge of the 1st aṅga named Ācārāṅga. After Lohārya, there were four scholar monks (Vinaydhara, Śrīdatta, Śivadatta and Arhaddatta) who had the partial knowledge of some pūrvas. Later to this, there was a time of Arhadbalī, Guṇadhara, Dharasena, Puṣpadanta and Bhūtabalī who possessed knowledge of one aṅga or some of its parts. According to the Nandisaṅgha Paṭṭāvalī, there is a difference in this calculation which is also to ve considered (Siddhāntacintāmaṇī-ṭīkā 22). Dharasena is considered to be present within 683 years after Mahāvīra’s salvation. The description available there is as follows: 62 years of kevalī, 100 years of śṛuta-kevalīs, 183 years of those monks who had knowledge of eleven aṅgas and ten purvas, 123 years of those monks who had knowledge of eleven aṅgas, 97 years of those monks who had knowledge of ten, nine and eight aṅgas. In this way, 565 years (62+100+183+123+97=565) belong to these scholar monks. Later, 28 years of Arhadbalī, 21 years of Māghanandī, 19 years of Dharasena, 30 years of Puṣpadanta and 20 years of Bhūtabalī are considered who had the knowledge of one aṅga. Such is the calculation of 118 years. Thus, the period of those monks who had knowledge of ten, nine and eight aṅgas is not described in Brahmahemacandra’s Śrutaskaṁdha, and the period of 97 years appears to have been counted within 220 years. A similar description is also given in Indranandi’s Śrutāvatāra. Whereas, in the Nandisaṇgha’s Paṭṭāvalī, the time of 97 years is described in the context of those monks who had knowledge of ten, nine and eight aṅgas respectively. Guṇadhara, in the beginning of the first century AD, who possessed the knowledge of the third prābhr̥ t of the tenth chapter of Jñana-Pravāda-Pūrva, composed Kaṣāypāhuḍa in 180 verses (gāthās) in Prakrit. Later, it is said that Āryamaṅkṣu and Nāgahastī added 35 verses to Kaṣāypāhuḍa. Later, Yati-vr̥ ṣabha wrote 6000 curṇi-sūtras (commentary) on this original scripture by dividing it into 15 chapters. Afterwards, Vīrasena started to write a commentary named Jaya-Dhavalā on Kaṣāyapāhuḍa but it could not be completed as he died shortly, so later on his disciple Jinasena completed the same in 837AD. Dharasena, who possessed the knowledge of Mahā-Karma-Prakr̥ tis, the 4th prābhr̥ t of the fifth chapter of Agrāyaṇī Pūrva, taught it to two highly genius monks namely Puṣpadanta and Bhūtabalī. These monks, knowing the gradual reduction of the intellect and memorizing power of the people, composed the same in Prakrit with required axioms-formulae, topic wise in six chapters and hence the first ever written canon named as Ṣaṭkhanḍāgama came into being after

History of the Publication of Dhavalā Texts | 3 683 years of salvation of Mahāvīra. Later, in the 8th-9th century, Vīrasena (770-827AD) wrote a commentary on this text. The commentary on the first five chapters is named Dhavalā.3 Chronological elucidation of the extinction of Dvādaśāṅga Aṅgas were methodically compiled by the immediate disciples of Mahāvīra, known as gaṇadharas. Aṅga4, also known as dvādaśāṅga (twelve-limb scriptures), is the systemized division of the teachings discoursed by Mahāvīra and were orally memorised by śṛuta-kevalīs. The name of dvādaśāṅga is – Ācārāṅga, Sūtrakṛtāṅga, Sthānāṅga, Samavāyāṅga, Vyākhyā- prajñapti or Bhagavatī, Jñātr̥ - dharmakathāṅga, Upāsaka-daśā, Antakṛd-daśā, Anuttaropapātika-daśā, Praśna-vyākaraṇa, Vipākaśruta and Dṛiṣtivādāṅga. Aṅgabāhya5 that provide further explanation of dvādaśāṇga were not originally compiled by the gaṇadharas but by the śṛuta-kevalīs after Mahāvīra’s salvation. According to Digambara sect (Śrutaskaṁdha 61-62), aṅgabāhya are also divided into fourteen kinds – Sāmāyika, Caturviṁśatistava, Vandanā, Pratikramaṇa, Vainayika, Kṛtikarma, Daśavaikālika, Uttrādhyayana, Kalpavyavahāra, Kalpākalpa, Mahākalpa, Puṇḍrīka, Mahāpuṇḍrīka and Niṣiddhikā. Earlier, the scriptures (aṅga and aṅgabāhya) were not documented in any written form but were memorized by ascetics and passed on by oral tradition to the future generations of ascetics. A question that springs up here is – Are aṅga and aṅgabāhya available in current period? There entails a historical incident behind it which has turned Jain tradition into two main sects. About 162 years after Mahāvīra’s salvation, Bhadrabāhu was the last śṛuta-kevalī of this era and also was the head of the monk-union. During his time, a famine of twelve years occurred in north India through which the situations were untoward to follow the code of conduct for the ascetics. Bhadrabāhu, therefore, decided to lead his union towards south India where conditions were favourable for a Digambara Jain ascetic to observe their code of conduct. Only half of the monks followed Bhadrabāhu to the south while the rest of them decided to stay back in the northern part of India where famine was at its peak. After the famine of 12 years, the entire Jain canonical literature (aṅga and aṅgabāhya) became extinct. When Bhadrabāhu returned to north India, the situations were entirely different from he had left twelve years before. The group of monks who did not follow him to the south and had decided to stay in the north India during the famine were also the followers of Jainism, but they had stopped observing various 3 Mahā-Dhavalā is the name of the last (sixth) chapter or part of Ṣaṭkhanḍāgama. 4 Aṅga-āgamas or aṅga-praviṣṭa-āgamas: (Jainism in a Global Perspective 236) Lord Mahavira’s immediate disciples were known as gaṇadharas. All gaṇadharas possessed perfect knowledge kevala-jñana and attained liberation at the end of their human life. They orally compiled the direct preaching of Lord Mahavira into twelve main texts. These texts are known as aṅga-āgamas. Hence, the aṅga-āgamas are the oldest religious scriptures and the backbone of Jain literature. 5 Aṅga-bāhya-agamas (outside of aṅga-āgamas): (Jainism in a Global Perspective 237) Monks who had knowledge of minimum of ten pūrvas were known as śruta-kevlīs. They possessed the total knowledge of reality (soul, matter, their relationship etc.) through scriptures. The śruta-kevlīs wrote many texts expanding the subject matter of the aṅga-āgamas. Collectively these texts are called aṅga-bāhya-āgamas meaning outside of aṅga-āgamas.

4 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 codes of conduct, they were not naked anymore and had adopted the clothes for their survival due to the adverse situations in the north for naked ascetics. When Bhadrabāhu saw such derailment in the code of conduct of Digambara monks, he decided to keep himself away from that union of ascetics, and went back to the south. From that point of time, Jainism was divided into two sects named as Digambara and Śvetāmbara. As per the Digambara sect, the oldest canonical literature had been forgotten in those twelve years and the knowledge had become extinct. But the Śvetāmbara sect claims that out of twelve parts, eleven were preserved in three main conventions held in Pāṭalīputra, Mathurā and Vallabhi respectively. The time of 683 years after the Mahāvīra’s salvation that has been discussed earlier shows that how chronologically the knowledge of aṅgas was forgotten. The term “forgotten” or “extinct” under the context of dvādaśāṅga does not convey the end of knowledge of entire dvādaśāṅga but, that it was not available in its original form of sūtras. Gradually, the knowledge of original sūtras was forgotten but the essence of the sūtras was survived till very late. It would also not be an exaggeration to say that the knowledge is available in some form or the other in the manner of interpretations. It is the custom of the world that a less intelligent person is not much valued in front of a more intelligent person, but this does not mean that his intelligence is not valuable. Similarly, after the passing away of the scholars with great knowledge, those with the partial knowledge of original sūtras were there who painstakingly wrote them down, and because of this, the knowledge of the twelfth aṅga is found. Although the knowledge of aṅgas gradually diminished from its original form, knowledge of its essential subject matter remained with the later monks in some form or the other. Indranandi (Śrutāvatāra 85) writes that both Arhadbalī and Māghanandī had partial knowledge of aṅgas and pūrvas. Among those scholars who had partial knowledge of aṅgas and also those who had partial knowledge of pūrvas, Arhadbalī in the city of Śrīpuṇḍravardhana.6 His successor Māghanandi also had the partial knowledge of all the aṅgas and pūrvas, and has attained heaven by taking the vow of sallekhanā.7 We have established that śruta was always available in essence. Indranandi writes that Dharasena, a great monk with sharp intellect, had knowledge of some section from twelfth aṅga (Mahā-Karma-Prakr̥ ti which is the 4th prabhr̥ t of the fifth chapter of Agrāyanī Pūrva). Realising that the last time of his life was approaching and that the scriptures which he had knowledge of were going to be diminished, he decided to make efforts in getting his complete knowledge of śruta to be written down. Due to his efforts, the original knowledge never got extinct.8 6 sarvāṅga pūrvadeśaikadeśavitpūrvadeśamadhyagate / śrīpuṇḍravardhanapure munirajani tato’rhadbalyākhyaḥ // (Śrutāvatāra 85) 7 tasyānantaramanagārapuṅgavo māghanandināmā’bhūt / so’pyaṅgapūrvadeśṁ prakāśya samādhinā divaṁ yātaḥ // (Ibid 102) 8 so’pi nijāyuṣyāntaṁ vijñāyāsmābhiralamadhītamidam / śāstraṁ vyucchedamavāpsyatīti sañcintya nipuṇamatiḥ // (Śrutāvatāra 105)

History of the Publication of Dhavalā Texts | 5 The biggest concern is that even after the method of writing had come to India, why did the Jain scholars not write down the Jain texts (before Dharasena and Guṇadhara)? If they had started writing in time, all knowledge could have been preserved in its original form. A reasoning that can be given here is that the original knowledge is considered to be holy and is highly revered. Due to the fear of disrespect of the scriptures, putting them down in words took a lot of thought and consideration. Although the laymen also considered the knowledge sacred and viewed it with great respect, there has always been a fear that if the knowledge was written down, it is possible the laymen will not be able to pay enough respect to them. But Dharasena feared if they are not written down at all, the knowledge will be completely lost as memory of people had started to diminish. According to Śrutāvtāra, after completing the commentary of Ṣaṭkhanḍāgama, Samantabhadra was about to work on Kaṣāyapāhuḍa but he was denied to do so by his senior monks due to lack of dravya śuddhi.9 Samantabhadra was one of the most prominent scholars of Jainism and if he was denied to write a commentary on Kaṣāyapāhuḍa, it could be noticed that the subject of value and respect of sacred scriptures was a matter of great concern at that time. We shall discuss at a later point that even after 2000 years of Dharasena, it was not easy to publish those manuscripts. Commentaries on Ṣaṭkhanḍāgama and Kaṣāyapāhuḍa Ṣatkhanḍāgama was written by the disciples of Dharasena – Puṣpadanta and Bhūtabalī – after learning the knowledge of Mahā-Karma-Prakr̥ ti from him directly. Albeit, Puṣpadanta and Bhūtabali had acquired the knowledge from Dharasena in the original style of the sūtras but they wrote it down in question answer style. Brhmahemacandra (Śrutaskaṁdha 85) has also specified the style of Ṣatkhaṇḍāgama – puccha lehiyo gantho (Q&A style). According to Vīrasena (author of Dhaval, Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama is a summarised version of Mahā-Karma-Prakr̥ ti. The 4th chapter of Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama – Vednākhaṇḍa – has 44 sutras as maṅgalācaraṇa. According to Vīrasena, these 44 sūtras were not complied by Puṣpadanta and Bhūtabali but are the original sūtras which were compiled by Gautama Gaṇadhara (Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama, Vol-2 Preface 34). Exactly similar sūtras are also written as Gaṇadharavalaya-mantra in Dharasena’s Yoniprābhr̥ t although the text is not available. These 44 sūtras, according to Vīrasena, are called anibaddha10 maṅgalācaraṇa opposite to Nibaddha11 maṅgalācaraṇa (Mūlācāra, Vol-1 277). 9 vilikhan dvitīyasiddhāntasya vyākhyāṁ sadharmaṇā svena / dravyādiśuddhi karaṇa prayatnavirhātapratiniṣiddham // (Ibid 170) 10 The salutation to the deity (iṣṭadeva) by the author at the beginning of the text that is not written down, and if written down then that will be copied from some other text. Salutation done with mind, body, speech while writing or reading the scripture is called anibaddha maṅgalācaraṇa (Ṣatkhanḍāgama 1/1/1:42). 11 The salutation to the deity (iṣṭadeva) which is written in the beginning of the text by the author, that is composed by the author himself and not copied from some other text, is called nibaddha maṅglācaraṇa. According to Vīrasena, Ṇamokāra Mantra is nibaddha maṅglācaraṇa composed by Puṣpadanta and Bhūtabalī (ibid).

6 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 Ṣatkhanḍāgama is divided into six chapters/parts. These are: 1. Jīvaṭṭhāṇa (it has 8 anuyoga-dvāra and 9 cūlikā) 2. Khuddābandha (it is further divided into 11 sub-chapters) 3. Bandhasāmitta 4. Veyaṇākhaṇḍa (further classified into 16 sub-chapters) 5. Vaggaṇākhaṇḍa 6. Mahābandha (also known as Mahādhavalā) Commentaries written on Ṣatkhaṇḍāgama and Kaṣāyapāhuḍa are (Śrutāvatāra 160-184)12 – a. Parikarma written by Kundakunda is the commentary on the first three chapters of Ṣatkhaṇḍāgama in 12,000 śloka pramāṇa13, but the text is not available. It can be said to be the first ever commentary written on Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama. Parikarma was written in vr̥ tti style that provides complete meaning of the maxims in fewer words. b. A second commentary of 12,000 śloka pramāṇa on both the canons Ṣatkhanḍāgama (except the 6th chapter) and Kaṣāyapāhuḍa was written by Śāmakuṇḍa in Prakrit, Sanskrit and Kannaḍa (also known as Kanaḍi) in Paddhati style (analytical description of vr̥ tti sūtras). c. Cūḍāmaṇi Vyākhyā, a Kannada commentary on both the canons except the 6th chapter of Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama, was written by Tumbalūra in 84,000 śloka pramāṇa. Later, he also wrote a commentary on the 6th chapter of Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama in 7000 gāthā pramāṇa (number of gāthās or verses in it) called Paṃjikā. d. Another commentary on Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama (except the 6th chapter) was written by Samantabhadra in 48,000 śloka pramāṇa in Sanskrit. Samantabhadra was about to write a commentary on Kaṣāyapāhuḍa but he was denied to do so due to lack of dravya śuddhi. e. Vyākhyā-Prajñapti, a commentary on both the canons, was written by Bappadeva. Firstly, he wrote a commentary on Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama’s five chapters. Then he wrote a 60,000 śloka pramāṇa Prakrit commentary on Kaṣāypāhuḍa. After this, he wrote an 8005 śloka pramāṇa commentary on the 6th chapter of Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama. f. On the basis of the commentaries by Bappadeva, there are three main commentaries that were written on Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama and Kaṣāypāhuḍa by Vīrasena known as Dhavalātraya. These are also called the principle or siddhānta scriptures. On Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama, Vīrasena wrote Dhavalā (72,000 śloka pramāṇa) and on Kaṣāyapāhuḍa, he could write Jayadhavalā (20,000 śloka pramāṇa) which was later completed by his disciple Jayasena (40,000 śloka pramāṇa). People confuse with the title Mahādhavalā (30,000 śloka pramāṇa) which is actually not a commentary but is the last part of Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama which is a separate text. g. Siddhantacintāmaṇī, another commentary on Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama is written by Jñanamatī recently. It has 6841 sūtras and is published in 16 volumes. 12 Other than Dhavalā, and the recently written Siddhacintāmaṇī, none of the commentaries are available anymore. 13 One śloka pramāṇa = 32 akṣara (letters)

History of the Publication of Dhavalā Texts | 7 It shows that a lot of work was done by the latter scholar monks on the valuable texts. History of Publication of Dhavalā text Dhavalā texts had never been brought to north India until about 300 years before. The first attempt to bring the Dhavalā scriptures in light was made by Pandit Todarmal, resident of Jaipur about 300 years ago. He realized that Dhavalā books were not available to the public to read and were kept safe at the temples at Mūḍabidri which were accessible by the authorities only for the sake of worshipping. So, he tried to get the Dhavalā texts from Mūḍabidri but could not succeed. Dr. Hukamchand Bharill (Paṇḍit Ṭoḍarmal Vyaktittva aura Kṛtittva 66) writes that the work-field of Ṭoḍarmal was entire India and his teachings were effective and widespread. With effect of his influence on the contemporary Jain community, he made contacts to get the Dhavalā texts from the shores of the sea in South India although there was no transport facility at that time. In this context, Dr. Bharill (Paṇḍit Ṭoḍarmal Vyaktittva aura Kṛtittva 342-343) mentions in his thesis on Paṇḍit Ṭoḍarmal that a grand veneration called Indradhvaja Mahotsava had once taken place in the supervision of Paṇḍit Ṭoḍārmal with his close friend Brahmacārī Rāimalla at Moti Dungri near Jaipur in 1764 AD. In its invitation letter14, some interesting incidents are mentioned: A group of five-seven people had gone to Karnataka at the expenditure of Rs 2000 to bring Dhavalā, Mahādhavalā and Jayadhavalā from Jainbidrī in Hassan district. They faced a lot of troubles on the way, including the death of one of the travellers named Daluram, but unfortunately, they could not succeed in retrieving the said scriptures. But, they did not stop trying. These manuscripts were not taken out from their cloth-cover for centuries and therefore, they were getting old, the pages were getting withered. Another unsuccessful attempt of preservation of Dhavalā texts was done by a businessman of Mumbai in 1883 AD. Seth Manikchand Jyoti Prasad15 visited Mūḍabidri with a travellers group. There he saw the manuscripts of Dhavalā texts and was immediately attracted towards them. After examining those copies carefully, he realised that the palm leaves of those manuscripts were decaying. He drew the attention of bhaṭṭārakas and the local authorities regarding the condition of the manuscripts and also inquired how he could get the manuscripts to read. The committee of the local authorities replied that it was of great fortune for them to get to worship the texts but no one was allowed to open and read them. A reason that they gave was no one knew the script in which the manuscripts were composed. After some research he found out that there was only a lay-scholar named Brahmasuri Shastri in Jainbidri who knew how to decipher the script. This information was a ray of hope for them. While returning from the 14 The invitation letter is published for the first time in the PhD thesis of Dr. Hukamchand Bharill as Annexure (Bharill). 15 To know more about Seth Manikchand Jyotiprasad see article ‘Danveer Seth Manikchand’ by Nathuram Premi published in Jain Jagran ke Agradūt, page 488.

8 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 journey, Seth Manikchand wrote a letter to his friend, Seth Hirachand Nemchand, a resident of Solapur and expressed his concern about the preservation of Dhavalā texts. After coming to know about these facts, Seth Hirachand himself went to visit Mūḍabidri the next year. He also took Brahmasuri Shastri along with him. Brahmasuri Shastri read out the invocation of Dhavalā book in front of people present there which elated their spirits. It also gave a boost to the idea of making copies of the Dhavalā texts and he urged Brahmasuri Shastri to take up the task of making the copies. On his return to Mumbai, Seth Hirachand met his friend Seth Manikchand and assured that their wish to get the texts copied will soon be fulfilled. But both of them got held up in their businesses, and for about 10 years, they could not work on the task of copying the texts. Meanwhile, Seth Mulchand Soni, a resident of Ajmer, went to visit Mūḍabidri with Pandit Gopaldas Baraiya, a prominent scholar of that time. He wanted to make sure that the first copy of those texts was made this time with Brahmasuri Shastri. So, they started the writing work. While returning from Mūḍabidri, Seth Mulchand Soni also went to Solapur and Mumbai to inform Seth Hirachand and Seth Manikchand about this. That work stopped shortly only after having written the matter for 300 śloka pramāṇa because Seth Mulchand wanted that copy for Ajmer, but it was not acceptable to the bhaṭṭārakas of Mūḍabidri. This was a stumbling stone for the task of copying the Dhavalā texts. In 1894, there was an exchange of letters between Seth Manikchand and Seth Hirachand to revive the task, as a result of which Seth Hirachand undertook the responsibility of collecting donations for it. The intention to collect the donations was the involvement of the whole Jain community in copying of the texts so as to involve them emotionally. He started to publish an appeal for help of Rs. 200 in his magazine Jain Bodha, as a result of which, within a year, more than Rs.14000 were received as donations. Seth Hirachand called Seth Manikchand to Solapur and revived the process of copying the texts by Brahmasuri Shastri on a monthly salary of Rs.125. Multiple Copies of Dhavalā Texts Gajpati Upadhyaya, a resident of Miraj, was appointed to assist him to accelerate the process. Both Brahmasuri Shastri and Gajpati Upadhyaya reached Mūḍabidri and the work of copying the manuscripts started on fālguna śukla saptamī, Wednesday of the same year. After one month and three days, on caitra śukla daśamī, Brahmasuri Shastri informed Seth Hirachand by writing a letter that 15 pages of Jaya-Dhavalā i.e., about 1500 ślokas have been copied. But shortly after that, Brahmasuri Shastri became unwell and passed away within few months. This was another setback for the task. After Brahmasuri Shastri, Gajpati Upadhyaya continued the work of making the copies and completed the copy of Dhavalā and Jaya-Dhavalā in Nagari script in about 16 years. During the same time, the Kannada script of the above texts was also copied by Pandit Devraj Sethi, Shantappa Upadhyaya and Brahmayya Indra of Mūḍabidri.

History of the Publication of Dhavalā Texts | 9 Seth Hirachand again reached Mūḍabidri and expressed his desire that the third book, Mahādhavalā, should also be copied and the copies of that should be kept at different places for the safety of these texts and for their good use of reading. But bhaṭṭārakas and committee members did not agree on this matter, however, arrangements were made for making a copy of Mahādhavalā’s in Kannada script by Pandit Nemiraj. The copying of this text was completed by 1918 AD. After this, with the efforts of Seth Hirachand, the Nagari copy of Mahādhavalā was made by Pandit Loknath Shastri in about 4 years. In this way, the work of copying these texts was completed in about 6 years, i.e., from 1896 to 1922 AD. The Kannada script was copied by Devraj Sethi, Shantappa Upadhyaya, Brahmayya Indra and Pandit Nemiraj while the Nagari script was made by Brahmasuri Shastri, Pandit Gajpati Upadhyaya and Pandit Loknath Shastri. The complete expenditure on this project was about Rs. 20,000. While making the Nagari copy of Dhavalā and Jaya-Dhavalā, Gajpati Upadhyaya secretly made a Kannada copy and kept it with himself. His wife Lakshmi Bai helped him in this work as they had a strong desire for the texts to come out in public. Gajpati Upadhyaya thought he would be appreciated for his efforts, and so he reached Solapur to Seth Hirachand and asked him to take the copy and pay him some remuneration. But he did not accept the offer and also wrote to Seth Manikchand not to accept the copy. The reason for doing so is known to be that Seth Hirachand had made a commitment to the committee members and bhaṭṭārakas not to take the copies out of Mūḍabidri. They found it morally inappropriate. If they had done so, it would have caused serious repercussions. So, Gajpati Upadhyaya reached Saharanpur with that copy where Shri Lala Jammuprasad Rais16 gave him an appropriate reward and placed it in his temple. Gajpati Upadhyaya promised Lala Rais that he himself would convert the Kannada copy to Nagari script. The translated copies were still preserved with the bhaṭṭārakas and he wanted a readable copy for his temple. But Gajpati Upadhyaya’s son fell ill and he had to return home soon to attend him. After some time, his wife also fell ill and passed away. Due to these crises, Gajpati Upadhyaya could not go to Saharanpur again and he also passed away in 1923 AD. Lalaji got the Kannada copy translated into Nagari copy by Pandit Vijay Chandra and Pandit Sitaram Shastri. This work was completed from 1916 to 1923 AD. In 1924, the people of Saharanpur called Pandit Loknath Shastri and asked him to match Kannada and Nagari scripts. While making the Nagari script, Pandit Sitaram Shastri had made another copy and kept it with him. When Pandit Vijay Chandra and Pandit Sitaram Shastri were making the Nagari copy of Kannada, Pandit Vijay Chandra used to read and Pandit Sitaram Shastri used to write in Nagari on rough papers for convenience and quickness. He carefully wrote a final copy of the scripture after copying it and gave it to Lalaji, but kept those rough papers with himself and on the basis of the same rough papers Pandit Sitaram Shastri gave the copies of Dhavalā, Jaya-Dhavalā at many places. Copies made on the basis of them are located in Amravati, Ara, Karanja, Delhi, Mumbai, Solapur, Sagar, Jhalrapatan, Indore, Seoni, Beawar and Ajmer. In whatever spirit Gajpati Upadhyaya and Pandit Sitaram Shastri may have done such work, the credit of doing 16 To know more about him see Pramukha Aitihāsika Jain Puruṣa Aura Mahilāye, page 387.

10 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 great favour for scholars by freeing these glorious ancient scriptures from imprisonment of hundreds of years goes to them. Dhavalā Texts in Print The first volume of Dhavalā texts was published by Jain Sanskriti Sanrakshak Sangh, Solapur in 1936 AD and the last 16th part in 1956 AD. In 1924 AD, when Pandit Hiralal Jain of Nagpur was appointed in Amravati’s King Edward College near Karanja (Lad.)17, he visited the local library at Digambar Jain temple called Balatkar Gana Mool Sangh Chandranath Digambar Jain Mandir Vachanalaya at Karanja and made a list of the texts available there. He found a lot of literature of Apabhramsha language kept there. With the efforts of Siddhant Shastri Pandit Devkinandan and the local committee members including Gopaldas Savaji, the publication work got started. Around 1922 AD, Pandit Hiralal had heard the rumours of handwritten copies of these principle texts. At that time Shriman Singhai Pannalal had got the copies of Dhavalā and Jaya-Dhavalā and made them available in the local temple. Pandit Hiralal has mentioned in the preface of Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama that he was keenly looking for the publication of those texts since long and fortunately in the month of December 1935 AD, the annual session of Akhil Bharatiya Digambar Jain Parisad was held in Itarasi under the chairmanship of Barrister Jamuna Prasad. On the first day, Pandit Hiralal and others were sitting in a room at night discussing the ideas about the development of Jain literature. Barrister Jamuna Prasad was tired and was taking rest. Meanwhile, someone reported that Seth Lakshmi Chandra, a resident of Bhelsa (Vidisha, MP), had also come to the convention, and he wanted to donate some money to run the religious chariot. Suddenly, Barrister Jamuna Prasad’s face lit up with this news. He got excited and left without a word. After coming back at 1:00 AM, he woke up Pandit Hiralal and handed him a pamphlet in which Seth Lakshmi Chandra had pledged to donate Rs10,000 for the development of literature and other missions related to this. On the account of this donation, local Jains of Itarasi honoured Seth Lakshmi Chandra with the title of śrimanta seth the next day. After this, whenever there were discussions about the publication of Dhavalā texts, there was a mixed reaction in the society. It was warmly welcomed by the new generation of scholars and there was active support of some old scholars and scribes like Pandit Devkinandan Shastri, Pandit Hiralal Shastri, Pandit Phulchandra Shastri and Pandit Balchand Shastri. However, a section of scholars strongly opposed it. Some were of the opinion that the printing of āgamas like Ṣatkhanḍāgama is the disrespect of the śruta. The issue of disrespect of scriptures has been in Jainism since ancient times. There are eight kinds of jnānāchāra18 (conduct regarding the knowledge) in Jainism which are mainly 17 The college is now known as Gyan Vigyan Research Center. 18 granthārthobhayapurṇaṃ kāle sopdhanṃ ca / bahumānena samanvitmanihnvaṃ jñānamāradhyaṃ // kalānatikrmādau tu jñānacareaṣṭadhamate / yathoktagrahaṇādiyaḥ sa jñānavinayo Mataḥ // (Harivaṃśapurāṇa 64.37-38)

History of the Publication of Dhavalā Texts | 11 concerned about the respect of scriptures and the teachers. These are – arthācāra (correct interpretation of canons), vyañjanācāra (correct pronunciation of the terms, sentences and letters of canons), ubhayācāra (aforementioned two conducts jointly), kālācāra (study of canons in prescribed time), upadhānācāra (studying with due care and respects), vinayācāra (self-studying of the sacred books), anhiṇhavacāra (mentioning the name of preceptor/teacher at proper time) and bahumānācāra (extending full devotion to the sacred literature being studied). Thus, the respect of the scriptures is considered very important in Jainism. It was also expressed that the householders/laymen do not have the right to read such principle texts and only the monks had the right to read them. Even some scholars doubted whether a profound proofreading work could be done by an English-educated person like Pandit Hiralal. In spite of several oppositions, Pandit Hiralal and his team engaged in proofreading of the texts, and within one year, for everyone’s amazement, the first part of Dhavalā was published. After the publication of the first book, there was a kind of competition for the publication of these texts. Pandit Bansidhar Shastri, resident of Solapur, started its publication from his private press. The publication of Kaṣāyapāhuḍa with Jaya-Dhavalā (its commentary) started on behalf of Mathura Shastrartha Sangha. The publication of Mahābandha (Mahādhavalā) started from Bhartiya Jnanpith. Sumatibai Shah, a resident of Śrāvikāśram, Solapur also contributed to the publication later. In this way, the principal texts of Dhavalā, Jaya-Dhavalā and Mahādhavalā, which were only worshiped, and remained the subject of mere reverence, now were accessible to all the researchers for self-study. It would not be surprising at all to call it a special achievement in Jain history. Pandit Phoolchandra Siddhant Shastri was also a main pillar in this work. He had devoted a long period of his life in the work of translation of these texts. Dr. Harindrabhushan (Siddantacharya Pandit Phoolchandra Shastri Abhinandan Granth 23) writes about him that he was a live example of siddhānta (principal text) himself. Prof. Rajaram Jain has called him ‘the ageless Puṣpadanta-Bhūtabalī of the twentieth century’ (Siddantacharya Pandit Phoolchandra Shastri Abhinandan Granth 101). When these were being published, all the scholars requested the bhaṭṭārakas of Mūḍabidri to get a chance to match them with the original copies, but they did not approve of it. However, there was a remarkable change in their thoughts and approach towards the texts when the third part was getting published, and scholars were informed that they could go through the palm leaf original manuscripts to match their copies. The palm leaf scriptures were in Hallekannada, an ancient Kannada script, which only a few scholars were able to read. Fortunately, Lokanath Shastri could read the script and was helpful in this work. There are 39 texts (16 parts of Dhavalā, 16 parts of Jaya-Dhavalā, 7 parts of Mahābandha) which are published with Hindi translation by Pandit Phoolchandra Siddhant Shastri and few other scholars. The importance of Dhavalā and Jaya-Dhavalā commentaries written by Vīrasena Svāmī can be understood by the fact that when a reference is presented in the context of any subject matter from these texts, the scholars are forced to think again on that topic. The hardships involved in its publication are incomparable. It is the result of 26 years of hard

12 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 penance that today the original texts and their commentaries are available for self-study and for our welfare. Concluding Remarks In essence, it could be said that dvādaśāṇga are not available anymore in the original form, but are accessible in the form of interpretations. Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama and Kaṣāyapāhuḍa are very close to the original sūtras of mahā-karma-prakr̥ ti. The available commentaries on these canons are such tools through which we can decode the sūtras of Dharasena and Guṇadhara. Undoubtedly, the commentaries written by Vīrasena are an asset for Jain literature. Jain monks were great thinkers who practiced and preached Jain religion and philosophy showing the eternal way to real happiness to the miserable mundane beings. Pandit Todarmal, Seth Manikchand, Seth Hirachand, Seth Mulchand Soni, Brahmasuri Shastri, Gajpati Upadhyaya, Pandit Hiralal, Seth Lakshmi Chandra, Pandit Phoolchandra Siddhantshastri and others are the pylons behind retrieving the holy texts and scriptures that we have in our hands today. We must have the highest regards towards Jain monks for their unforgettable contribution in composing the Jain scriptures; and the laymen for bringing them out for us. In order to pay the best regards towards them, we must put our best efforts in learning Jain philosophy and set out on the glorious path of salvation. References Amr̥ tcandra. Puruśārtha Siddhyupāya. (V. K. Jain, Ed.) Dehradun: Vikalp, 2012. Bharill, H. Paṇḍit Ṭoḍarmal Vyaktittva aura Kṛtittva. Jaipur: Pandit Todarmal Smarak Trust, 1973. Brhmahemacandra. Śrutaskaṁdha. (P. Vaklivala, Ed.) Raipur: Gangval Dharmik Trust, 2002. Siddantacharya Pandit Phoolchandra Shastri Abhinandan Granth. Fagull, B. J. (Ed.). Varanasi: Siddantacharya Pandit Phoolchandra Shastri Abhinandan Granth Prakashan Samiti, 1985. Ganī, Kalyanvijay. Śrī Paṭṭāvalī Parāga Saṁgraha. Jalaun: Sri K.V. Sastra Sangraha Samiti, 1966. Goyaliya, Ayodhyaprasad. Jain Jāgaraṇa Ke Agradūta. Banaras: Bharatiya Jnanpith, 1952. Guṇadhara. Kasāyapāhuḍam with Cūrṇisūtra by Yativr̥ aṣabha. Phoolchand Siddhantshastri, Ed.) Chaurasi- Mathura: Bharatiya Digambar Jain Sangh, 1956. Gyanmati. Siddhāntacintāmaṇī-ṭīkā. Ravindrakirti (Ed.) Hastinapur: Digamber Jain Trilok Shodh Sansthan, 2014. Indranandi. Śrutāvatāra. D. S. Patani (Ed.) Jalaun: Bharatavarsiya Anekant Vidvat Parisad, 1989. Jain, Jayantilal. Kundakunda Acharya and Jain Philosophy. Chennai: Research Foundation for Jainology, 1997. Jain, Jyoti Prasad. Pramukh Etihasik Jain Purush aur Mahilayen. Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanpith, 1975. Jain, Nathulal. Prāgaitihāsika Prāgvaidika Jain Dharma Evam Uske Siddhānta. Indore: Shri Digambar Jain Yuvak Sangh, 2001. Jain D and P. C. Jain. Gems of Jaina Wisdom (Vol-9). Delhi: Jain Granthagar, 2012. Ācārya Vidyānanda Nibandhāvalī. Jain, Veersagar. (Ed.). Delhi: Kundkund Bharti Nyas, 2019. Jinasena. Harivaṃśapurāṇa. Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanpith, 2003. Nishith Sutra. Kanhaiyalal, T. D. (Ed.). Beawar: Agam Prakashan Samiti, 1991. Kapadia H R, Shah N J. History of Canonical Literature of Jainas. Ahmedabad: Prakrit Text Society, 2010. Kumudendu. Śrī-Bhūvalaya. Delhi: Shri Bhuvalay Prakashan Samiti, 1956. Kundakunda. Pañcāstikāya Saṃgraha along with Jayasena’s Tātparyavr̥ tti Commentary. Aligarh: Tirthdham Mangalaytan, 2010. Kundakunda. Samayasāra. Kota: Paras Moolchand Chatar Chatitable Trust, 2010.

History of the Publication of Dhavalā Texts | 13 Mahapragya. Jain Parampara Ka Itihas. Ladnun: Shraman Sanskriti Sankay, Jain Vishva Bharti, 1988. Jain, Sagarmal and Shriprakash Pandey. Jaina Religion: Its Historical Journey of Evolution. Varanasi: Parshwanath Vidyapith, 2007. Puṣpadanta, Bhūtabalī. Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama, (Vol-2). Phoolchand Siddhantshastri and Hiralal Jain (Eds.). Amravati: Jain Sahityoddharak Fund Karyalaya, 1940. Puśpadanta, Bhūtabalī. Ṣatkhanḍāgama (along with Vīrasena’s Dhavalā commentary, Jīvasthāna, Satprarupaṇā) (Vol. 1). Phoolchand Siddhantshastri and Hiralal Jain (Eds.). Solapur: Jain Sanskrti Samraksaka Sangha, 2000. Puṣpadanta, B. Ṣatkhanḍāgama (along with Vīrasena’s Dhavalā commentary, Jīvasthāna, Satprarupaṇā), Vol. 9. Phoolchand Siddhantshastri ans Hiralal Jain (Eds.). Solapur: Jain Sanskrti Samraksaka Sangha, 2005. Sagarmal Jain, S. P. Jainism in a Global Perspective. Varanasi: Parshwanath Vidyapith, 1998. Shastri, N. Bhāratīya Sanskr̥ ti Ke Vikās Me Jaina Vaṅgamaya Kā Avadāna. Delhi: Krishna Nagar Jain Samaj, 2003. Shuddhatmaprabha. Ācārya Kundakunda Aur Unke Ṭīkākāra: Ek Samālocanātmaka Adhyayana. Jaipur: Pandit Todarmal Smarak Trust, 1987. Śivārya. Bhagavatī Ārādhanā. K. Siddhantshastri (Ed.). Phaltan: Hiralal Khushalchand Doshi, 1990. Vaṭṭakera. Mūlācāra, Vol-1. Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanpith, 1999. Yativṛṣabha. Tiloyapaṇṇattī. C. Patni (Ed.), Kisangadha: Shri Bharatavarsiya Digambara Jain Mahasabha, 1984.

MOHA AND ITS GOOD RIDDANCE Pragya Jain1 Abstract Ignorance is not bliss. It causes misery and suffering. Illusion, delusion, avidyā, ajñāna, aviveka are all synonymous to ignorance. It is called moha in Jain tradition. Moha is infamous as the root cause of all miseries and individual idiosyncrasies. It is identified as the derivation of suffering getting rid of which is the first step to liberation. As Jains believe the world to be eternal, created by no God and governed by no Higher Being, moha is blamed as the one that determines the wandering of a living being since eternity. This paper elucidates magnificence of moha that acts as magic dust causing oblivion. The paper further argues that although the world around us is a creation of karmic matter, the mental attitude (intention) of a soul is the root cause of it. Therefore, karma is just the reflection or product of moha. The paper accentuates on finding out the role of moha in misery and suffering, and the technique to its good riddance. Prelude The popular American sitcom television series “Young Sheldon” introduces Sheldon (an 11- year-old boy) to philosophy by asking him to imagine he is a butterfly, and he is dreaming to be a young boy named Sheldon.2 It shakes his little world not because he was a butterfly but the thought of being under the influence of illusion is difficult to grasp. The Butterfly Dream Parable3 makes one imagine one’s identity and question it at the same time. Sheldon’s philosophy teacher directs his attention to his ignorance saying, “You don’t even know what you think you know.” Well, is that so? Are we ignorant of our own knowledge? Do we not know what is real or permanent, but we see only what is surreal and temporary? Is our knowledge ignorance? During 1950s, medical science had developed a drug called Phencyclidine or PCP that induced hallucinations and produced a feeling of detachment from oneself and one’s surroundings.4 Interestingly it was called ‘angel dust’ and was discontinued shortly due to its repercussions. The patients had to suffer with acute anxiety caused by the drug. It deduces that the ‘angel dust’ made its users ‘ignore’ their presence, feel ‘lost’ causing irritation and a feel a sense of ‘madness.’ Paṇḍit Ṭoḍarmal, an 18th century Digambara Jain scholar, also mentions a ‘deluding dust’ (mohana dhūla) which if thrown on a person’s head, makes him behave crazily (Mokṣamārga Prakāśaka 25). There the deluding dust, being an inanimate thing, cannot intentionally or forcefully make the person go crazy, but the person himself behaves 1 Research Associate at International School for Jain Studies (ISJS), India. e-mail: [email protected] 2 “Young Sheldon” is a spin-off prequel to the hit comedy show “The Big Bang Theory” created by Chuck Lorre and Steven Molero. This particular incident is taken from Season 4, Episode 7. 3 The Butterfly Dream Parable is a famous Taoist allegory of spiritual transition used by the Chinese philosopher Zhangzi (Chuang-Tzu) (369 BCE to 286 BCE) to deal with reality vs. illusion. (Reninger) 4 Phencyclidine or PCP was a psychedelic drug which was used as a surgical anesthetic. It was soon discontinued after it was found to cause agitation, mania, hallucinations, and irrational thinking in the patients.

Moha and its Good Riddance | 15 unnaturally under the influence of the dust. Hence, it appears to be a metaphor for a person’s ignorance. Excerpt from the poem “White Ignorance” by Charles W. Mills discusses ignorance contrasting it with enlightenment – Ignorance is usually thought of as the passive obverse to knowledge, the darkness retreating before the spread of Enlightenment. But… Imagine an ignorance that resists. Imagine an ignorance that fights back. Imagine an ignorance militant, aggressive, not to be intimidated, an ignorance that is active, dynamic, that refuses to go quietly–– not at all confined to the illiterate and uneducated but propagated at the highest levels of the land, indeed presenting itself unblushingly as knowledge. The poem suggests that knowledge we have today is ignorance. Ignorance that resists, fights back shamelessly inside every sentient being. It is dynamic, refuses to budge as is deep-rooted in our psyche. If, miraculously, we become aware of ignorance, it shall open the doors of Enlightenment. It somehow gives the impression of an awakening or realization as in a 1998 Canadian drama-comedy ‘The Truman Show’ where the protagonist discovers his whole life is actually a reality TV show; his complete life is scripted and being recorded since his childhood to make a hit show which he realizes one day and fights hard to lead a free life. Jain tradition recognizes the possibility of eradication of ignorance. It is the only way that would allow a soul to see through multiple realities and, in turn, attain its summum bonum – the eternal bliss. The Jain deities have set examples since time beginningless stating that this theory is practically possible and every living being has the potential to attain liberation from ignorance. The Jain theory of soteriological relevance stands on three virtues – right belief, right knowledge, and right conduct.5 Opposite to these are wrong belief, wrong knowledge, and wrong conduct. This ‘wrong’ is the source of never-ending birth cycles (bhava cakra) of which the root cause is moha. Moha never leaves the side of a sentient being until he embarks on the soteriological journey. The process is quite simple. As soon as the button is switched on, elimination of darkness and illumination of light take place simultaneously. Similarly, the moment a soul turns its focus towards itself, removal of moha and emergence of the true self take place at the same time. But as the knowledge of the ‘other’ is necessary to identify and distinguish it from the self, identification of moha and its quintessential characteristics is also vital for its removal. 5 “samyagdarśana-jñāna-cāritrāṇi mokṣamārgaḥ” Tattvārtha-sūtra, 1.1

16 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 Moha and the Schools of Thought Most of the philosophies point out at some kind of tragic flaw in a sentient being that causes his wandering in the world. Indian philosophies blatantly identify that flaw and figure out how to rise above to find eternal bliss: a) Upaniṣad (Sinha 64-65) Reason of bondage: According to Upanishads, the flaw that is pulling a sentient being down is called avidyā (ignorance). Avidyā leads to ahaṃkāra (ego) which makes one imagine his oneness with senses, mind, intellect and body. He, due to which, is unable to see his soul (or his self), the Brahma or the real world. This bondage due to avidyā is called granthi. Idea of liberation: On the contrary, vidyā (knowledge) is salvation as it is the only way to eradicate ego. Salvation is oneness with Brahma. Way to attain liberation: A moral discipline is required to get rid of the bondage and acquire knowledge. It includes virtues like truth, non-violence, non-stealing, celibacy, and non-possession. The method to attain these virtues is through listening, contemplation, and practice. b) Nyāya (Sinha 200-202) Reason of bondage: The soul is different from mind, body, and senses but the bondage is due to ajñāna (ignorance). It causes all the suffering and transmigration. Idea of liberation: Salvation is called apavarga which is liberation from the bondage of body and senses. Salvation is devoid of suffering as well as bliss as both are derived due to interaction with body. Since there is no body in that ultimate state, it is without merriment. There is no feeling in the soul as there is no sensation of the body. Therefore, it is a complete unconscious state. Way to attain liberation: Only knowledge of the reality (tattva-jñāna) can help eradicate the ignorance. Like knowledge of rope eradicates the illusion of snake, knowledge of soul without senses can eradicate the illusion of sensory body. But, in the ultimate state of salvation, knowledge is also lost and a state of complete annihilation is attained. Listening, contemplation and practice can be helpful in attaining this goal. c) Sāṃkhya (Sinha 257-260) Reason of bondage: The reason of bondage is aviveka (indiscretion or non-discrimination). The world is full of pain and sufferings as wherever there are characteristics, there are sufferings and this world is full of characteristics. There are three types of sufferings: spiritual (influenced by mind and body like fear, hunger, headache, hatred etc.), physical (influenced by external material causes like hurt by a thorn, crops getting destroyed by animals etc.) and supernatural (influenced by external and unworldly causes like heat, cold

Moha and its Good Riddance | 17 etc.) that every living being goes through. Science can temporarily help but the ultimate solution is salvation. Idea of liberation: Removal of all three types of sufferings is salvation. A sentient being (puruṣa) is eternal and indestructible, and is ideally free from bondage, but is only deluded to be in bondage. Like a crystal looks red due to the red cloth behind it, a sentient being looks in bondage due to indiscretion caused by shadows of intellect, suffering etc. Way to attain liberation: With the help of contemplation and practice through the eight limbs of Yoga, this free state of a sentient being can be realized. The sentient being needs to realize his liberal state by discrimination. Knowledge is the only way to attain this state, and not karma. Discretion (viveka or bhed-jñāna) can help in discriminating between nature and the sentient being (prakṛti and puruṣa). d) Advait Vedānta (Sinha 313-315) Reason of bondage: The feeling of oneness with body and mind is the reason of bondage. Like a father feels successful when his son achieves success, a deluded being identifies himself with mind and body when he is just a free soul. Therefore, ignorance (avidyā) causes bondage which is actually fondness or intimate connection of the sentient being with the body. Idea of liberation: Every living being is blissful by nature which is the ultimate state of salvation. Like rain drops become one with the sea when falling in it, a living being also becomes one with Brahma when attains salvation. Way to attain liberation: Knowledge is the key to happiness and liberation. Diligent study of Vedānta philosophy and listening, contemplation and practice can rule out ignorance from a sentient being. Karma and devotion can assist in knowledge but not in salvation as karma and knowledge are opposite to each other. The sentient being can himself work hard (puruṣārtha) to attain liberation. e) Jain Reason of bondage: Passions (kaṣāya) and activities of mind, speech and body (yoga) cause influx and bondage with karma particles (That Which Is-Tattvārtha Sūtra 8.2). These karma particles reach to the stage of fruition causing suffering. A deluded being identifies himself one with mind, speech and body, and realizes that suffering is only due to demeritorious karma, while, actually, meritorious karma also cause transmigration. Idea of liberation: Eradication of eight matter karmas6 is material liberation (dravya mokṣa) and eradication of attachment and aversion is psychic liberation (bhāva mokṣa). The soul moves upwards and gets situated at the summit of the universe for eternity. It 6 The eight matter karmas are: jnānāvaraṇa, darśanāvaraṇa, vedaniya, mohaniya, āyu, nāma, gotra, antarāya. They are matter particles and bind with the soul. (Tattvārtha Sūtra, 8.4)

18 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 enjoys all its attributes in full. The soul is without body, which means there is no activity of mind and speech as well. There is no passion in the soul, therefore it is free from influx. A liberated soul bears the body of its knowledge (jñāna) only. Way to attain liberation: The discriminatory insight (bhed-jñāna) that discriminates between the self and the other only can lead to salvation which can be attained through knowledge and penance. Moha and its Interpretations Moha is interpreted as the archenemy of the soul for causing the sufferings without which other karma are unable to participate in bondage. Once moha is destroyed, the rest of the eight karmas lose their capability of causing transmigration.7 The relation between moha and the soul is not new. Moha has been with cognition of the soul since eternity in the form of wrong belief, ignorance (wrong knowledge) and wrong conduct.8 The soul has been wandering around in the world with the impurity of ignorance; and that the causal blame of this impurity goes to moha which is one of the eight matter karmas; and the source of moha is the soul itself as it occurs due to the soul’s own impure thoughts (feelings towards other substances).9 Moha is also identified as gullibility of a soul in relation with six substances or multiple realities.10 Ācārya Amṛtacandra explains in Tattva-pradīpikā, commentary on Pravacansāra, this situation of a soul with wrong belief as if someone has eaten a thornapple (dhatūrā, a powerful narcotic plant) and then mistakes the realities, substances, their attributes and manifestations.11 Dhavalā defines moha as an assortment of all 13 types of passions along with wrong belief.12 Other than Jain ascetics, Jain learned laymen have also composed literature where they have stated the concepts in the local modern languages. Banārasīdāsa detailed about effects of moha in Nāṭaka Samayasāra (3.28) as a deluded person believes himself to be in several forms but himself; similar to an impersonator who takes many disguises to entertain people on crossroads and then forgets which one is his real form. Daulatrāma in Chahḍhālā calls moha a sort of cogent alcohol under the influence of which the soul has ignored itself since eternity.13 Bhūdharadās (Bāraha Bhāvanā 209) mentions that an empirical soul wanders in the world 7 aśeṣaduḥkha-prāptinimittvadarirmohaḥ, Dhavalā, 1/1,1/43/1 8 uvaogassaaṇāīpariṇāmātiṇṇimohajuttassa / micchattamaṇṇāṇamaviradibhāvoyaṇādavvo// Samayasāra, 89 9 parapariṇati-hetormohanāmno'nubhāvā- / daviratamanubhāvya-vyaptikalmāṣitāyāḥ/ mama paramaviśuddhiḥśuddha-cinmātramūrte- / rbhavatusamayasāra-vyākhyayaivānubūteḥ// Samayasāra Kalaśa, 3 10 “davvādiesumūḍhobhāvojīvassahavadimohotti” Pravacansāra, 83 11 “yo hi dravyaguṇaparyāyeṣu pūrvamupavarṇiteṣu pītonmattaksyeva jīvasya tattvāpratipattilakṣaṇo mūḍho bhavaḥ sa khalu mohaḥ” (Śrī Pravacanasāra (with Tattvapradīpikā and Tatparyavṛtti) 83) 12 “krodha-māna-māyā-lobha-hāsya-rati-arati-śoka-bhaya-jugupsā-strī-puṅ-napuṃsakaveda-mithyātvānām samūhomohaḥ”, Dhavalā 12/4,2,8 13 “moha-mahāmada piyau anādi, bhūla āpko bharamat vādï”, Chahaḍhālā, 1.2

Moha and its Good Riddance | 19 under the deluding drowse of moha while the karma-thieves rob it off all its belongings.14 Jaicanda (Bāraha Bhāvanā 208) maintains that the gist of all scriptures is that one has to wander in the world as a result of attachment with other substances.15 Shrimad Rajchandra specifies in Ātmasiddhi that an illuminated soul is the one whose moha is either destroyed or is tranquilized for a while, otherwise he is an errant soul.16 Siddhasena Divākara views moha as one of the “non-essential modificatory changes” of the soul.17. In this way, moha is condemned for deluding a soul as drugged and put into the world to wander for willingly giving in to ignorance. Moha and its Kinds Karma can be classified into two types: material (dravya) and psychic (bhāva) karma. The actual influx of deluding karma’s material particles and its due fruition are the functions of material deluding karma; whereas the thoughts and emotions due to which the influx of karma particle is caused is psychic deluding karma. Furthermore, moha is classified as auspicious (śubha/praśasta) moha dealing with compassion towards religious associations while the otherwise compassion is inauspicious (aśubha/apraśasta) moha.18 The imprudence of soul in comprehending the six substances that causes distress is also moha and is classified as delusion, attachment, and aversion.19 Moha, also termed as wrong belief (mithyātva) is categorized as the wrong belief pertaining to the soul (jīva mithyātva) and wrong belief pertaining to the non-living beings (ajīva mithyātva).20 Ācārya Śivārya classifies wrong belief as one which is adverse in the understanding of reality, existence of soul and other substances etc. by formal instructions of others (abhigṛhīta mithyātva); and one which is adverse without help of any formal instructions of others and is only by the rise of one’s own deluding karma (anabhigṛhīta mithyātva) . Ācārya Pūjyapāda discusses five types of wrong beliefs (deluded beliefs): absolutist (ekānta), perverse (viparīta), sceptical (saṁśaya), egalitarian (vinaya) and agnostic (ajnāna) (That Which Is- Tattvārtha Sūtra 189). Moreover, while looking through the glasses of karma, moha falls under the category of psychic karma while out of eight material karma, there is one deluding karma (mohanīya) dedicated to moha. It is one of the four obstructing (ghātiyā) karma – karma that obstruct the 14 moha nīṅda ke jora, jaga vāsī ghūme sadā / karma cora cahuṁora, sarvasa lūteṁ sudha nahi // Bāraha Bhāvanā of Bhūdharadās 15 para-dravyana teṁ prīti jo, hai saṃsāra abodha / tāko phala gati cāra meṁ, bhramaṇakahyośrutśodh // Bāraha Bhāvanā of Jaicanda 16 moha-bhāvakṣaya hoya jyān, athvā hoya praśānt / tekahiyejñānīdaśā, bākīkahiyebhrānt // Ātmasiddhi Śāstra, 139 17 taha rāgadosamohā aṇṇe vi ya jīva pajjāyā // Sanmati Tarka, 2.43 18 cāturvarṇya-śramaṇa-saṅgha-vātsalyagatomohaḥpraśastaitaro'praśastaiti, Niyamsāra, Tātparya-vṛtti, 6 19 davvādiesu mūḍho bhāvo jīvassa havadi moho tti / khubbhadi teṇucchaṇṇo pappā ragaṁ va dosaṁ vā //, Śrī Pravacanasāra (Tattvapradīpikā evaṁ Tatparyavṛtti sahita), 83. 20 “micchattaṁ puṇa duvihaṃ jīvamajīvaṃ taheva aṇṇāṇaṃ”, Samayasāra, 87

20 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 nature of soul to be clear and in full potential – and are further divided into two as delusion of faith21 (darśana mohanīya) and delusion of conduct (cāritra mohanīya). These two are further classified into twenty-eight types of karma.22 The three kinds of delusion of faith are: the near- perfect enlightened world-view, deluded world-view and a mixture of the two; the twenty-five kinds of delusion of conduct are: sixteen passions and nine quasi-passions (That Which Is- Tattvārtha Sūtra 8.10). Paṇḍit Ṭoḍarmal calls delusion itself the wrong belief and explains the behavior of these two types of karma condemning them for being influential in the wheel of lives (Mokṣamārga Prakāśaka 41, 38-40, 73): Moha is instrumental in the rise of wrong belief and passions. The faith-deluding karma owes to the rise of delusion of faith due to which the soul comprehends the contrary nature of the seven realities, the soul does not comprehend them as they are but otherwise. Ideally, the soul is a score of intangible space- points, bearer of prominent attributes like knowledge, eternal object is itself; and a mound of tangible space-points, short of prominent attributes like knowledge (bearer of attributes like touch etc.), which newly coincides with the soul, such matter like the body is the other. The soul identifies itself as one with various modifications that take place due to the concomitance of the two, cannot differentiate between the two and considers itself as the acquired modification. Now, in that modification, the knowledge is the soul’s own while the attachment is a formal coincidence – such cautionary disposition is absent due to delusion of faith. Delusion of conduct, on the other hand, causes passions in the soul due to which even while knowing the distinguished features of the soul and the matter, considers them favourable or unfavourable and indulges in anger, pride, deceitfulness and greed in their varieties and degrees. Here, in the wake of the most intense degree of passions– pursuers from the limitless past (anantānubandhī kaṣāya) – the soul doesn’t attain the right belief and its subsequent right conduct; in the wake of lesser intense degree of passions – obstructor of partial renunciation (apratyākhyānavaraṇī kaṣāya)–observance of right conduct associated with lay vows is hindered; in the wake of less intense degree of passions – obstructor of complete renunciation (pratyākhyānavaraṇī kaṣāya) – observance of right conduct associated with mendicant vows is hindered; in the wake of the weakest degree of passions – smouldering (saṃjvalana kaṣāya)–carelessness or lapse in the observance of mendicant vows is caused and the comprehensive right conduct is not attained.23 All of these can be collectively called as moha in general. Moha causes bondage and in devoid of delusion, wrong belief and passions, liberation/salvation24 is achieved. Looking at the strength and role of moha, there are several other classifications in various scriptures, but mostly all of them coincide with the above broad categorization. 21 In That Which Is, Nathmal Tatia translates darśana moha as delusion of view. Here, it is kept as delusion of faith which is more popular among translations. Although, darśana is translated as ‘belief’ in this paper as in mithyā-darśana means wrong belief. 22 “mohaṇīyasya kammassa aṭhāvīspayaḍīo”, Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama, 6/1.9-1/19 23 The translations of four degrees of passions are taken from The A to Z of Jainism by Kristi Wiley, other than the term ‘mendicant vows’ which is replaced with ‘ascetic vows’ to avoid sectarian terminology. 24 The term liberation is from a negative point of view where the soul attains a state devoid of wrong belief, passions, delusion, and karma. Salvation, whereas, is a term from positive point of view where the soul attains a state of complete enlightenment with all its attributes functioning in full potential. Both are the two sides of a coin which is attained beyond the last stage of spirituality when the non-obstructing karma are also destructed.

Moha and its Good Riddance | 21 Moha and its Implications Ācārya Raviṣeṇa gives a graphic representation of Balbhadra Rāma wandering in madness after the death of his beloved brother Lakṣamaṇa. When all the local medical experts had found themselves unable to bring Lakṣamaṇa to life, Rāma passed out and fell down on the floor like an uprooted tree.25 Death of Lakṣamaṇa was also caused by the fake news of Rāma’s death which he could not handle and passed away. The affection between the two brothers has always been exemplified and celebrated by most of their followers. While Rāma kept trying to convince his dead brother to wake up for six months,26 his sons Lavaṇa and Aṅkuśa took inspiration from the scenario and adopted Jain ordination.27 Despite the fact that Rāma was also supposed to attain salvation from the same birth, he found it difficult to accept the death of his beloved brother. From one of the sixty-three illustrious men, who was supposed to attain salvation from the same birth, was born with the right belief, moha makes Rāma behave in an estranged manner.28 In another instance, Mandodarī, King Rāvaṇa’s chief queen with his 18,000 other queens, went to Sītā and begged her to pay heed to Rāvaṇa’s request and become his another queen. Mandodarī told Sītā that Rāvaṇa was one of the most attractive and powerful men on the earth. If she didn’t agree to his pleads, it would be her great loss.29 Sītā snapped at her saying how could a virtuous wife ask another faithful wife to woo her husband. Sītā stayed firm in her decision and Mandodarī had to resign herself to the fact that her intention of pleasing Rāvaṇa with his new-found love was a far-fetched idea. Instead of explaining it to Rāvaṇa that eyeing someone else’s wife is a bad idea, Mandodarī was coaxing Sītā as she felt that it should have been Sītā to come to Rāvaṇa and not the other way round. This is just another way how moha makes Mandodarī forget her virtue towards another woman. There are numerous such examples from legendary tales where a person loses his or her prudence due to moha. Moha and its Magnificence The etymology of the word ‘moha’ by Jain ascetics presents a fierce literal translation. Ācārya Pūjyapāda recognizes something that fascinates / lures / entices / bewitches as moha.30 Brahmadeva Sūri investigates the nature of moha and answers himself comparing with ‘extreme confusion’ after consuming alcohol, a soul enticed with moha loses the understanding 25 hāraiśchandananīraiśca tālavṛntānilairbhaiḥ / kṛccheṇa tyājito mohaṃ vilalāpa suvivhalaḥ // Padmapurāṇa 115.47 26 adyāsti dvādaśaḥ pakṣo rāghavasyeyuṣaḥ śucaṃ / Ibid, 118.30 27 avadhāryeti sambodhaṃ vaidehījāvupeyatuḥ / Ibid, 115.57 28 Although Rāma was a born right believer (kṣāyika samyagdr̥ ṣṭi), his variations of moha are categorized and justified as conduct-deluding moha (cāritra moha). 29 mayeti gaditaṃ vākyaṃ yadi na pratipadyate / tato yadbhavitā tatte śatrubhiḥ pratipadyatāṃ // Padmapurāṇa, 46.78 30 “mohayati mohyate aneti vā mohanīyam”, Sarvārthasiddhi, 8.4.

22 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 of what is petty and what is acceptable in life.31 Paṇḍit Ṭoḍarmal has written a section in Mokṣamārga Prakaśaka (93-94) discussing the magnificence of moha. Despite having all the causes available for the soul to identify the reality, its delusion puts a veil on his wisdom making it comprehend adversely. For example: a) Body and soul clearly seem to be different at death – the soul leaves the body and reincarnates in another body to dwell in, the peripatetic heavenly beings disclose their relations with their relatives of previous births; but the soul does not differentiate itself with the body. b) Wife, sons, and other relatives seem to be the companions of their selfish motto as they turn their backs on a person if their self-interest is not served; but the soul likes to own them and indulges in several demeritorious deeds taking him to the hell. c) Money is nobody’s companion. Bodily prowess and external facilities are gained and lost on their own; but the soul takes pride in the favorable acts and shows helplessness in the unfavorable acts, without becoming a ‘doer’ or ‘non-doer’ of all acts. d) Death is inevitable. There are various ways of looking at death, like – I will die and the body will be cremated, I will be cremated, I can be immortal in my fame, I will survive in my sons; but the soul is not mindful in the jibber-jabber. e) Every soul has to transmigrate but no one cares for the next life. It never happens that any material from this life would help in the next life; but the soul devices innumerous methods to make sustain the current relations, materials, fame, etc. f) Due to passions, the soul performs such acts that harm others in many ways, suffers itself, feels distressed, gives in to animosity, is condemned in this life and spoils its next life too; but it still indulges in the same. Lo and behold the magnificence of moha! The soul is, therefore, under the modifications of wrong belief-knowledge-conduct. It, in turn, attracts karma causing various innumerous sufferings in the world. These thoughts or psychic notions are the seeds of sufferings, and thus destroying such notions and wrong belief is the only correct thing to do. This is the dance of delusion, ignorance, indiscretion. It causes the soul to believe it is one with the body or with the fruits of its good or bad deeds as similar to: the elephant who eats grains with grass but only takes the taste of eating without identifying the two; or, the drunken man who tells the taste of yogurt (śrīkhaṇḍa) as plain cow milk instead of the two different tastes of curd and sugar (Nātāk Samayasāra, 3.13). It also causes the soul to consider itself the doer/influencer of the acts related with the body and other non-living things forgetting its true nature, like: the deer who runs towards the mirage to drink water under the scorching sun; the man who takes the rope as a snake in the darkness and runs away; the ocean that is calm deep inside naturally but keeps waves itself due to the wind (ibid, 3.14). 31 “mohanīyasya kā prakṛtiḥ? madyapānvad-dheyopādeya-vicāra-vikaltā”, Bṛhaddravya-saṃgraha, 2.33

Moha and its Good Riddance | 23 Ācārāṅga-sūtra (2.1) describes the same as āsakti when the soul determines itself one with the body and then oneness with its relatives as: my mother, my father, my brother, my sister, my wife, my son, my daughter, my family, my apparatus, my food, my clothes, etc. The soul, thus, gets under the influence of two ghosts of affection and indolence. Moha and the Spiritual Stages Moha induces material karma to bind with the soul causing interactions and modifications. The fourteen stages of the soul’s spiritual journey to liberation (guṇasthāna) are all based on two types of moha – delusion of faith (darśanamohanīya karma) and delusion of conduct (cāritramohanīya karma). Both of these interact on the basis of subversion or destruction of the respective karma, articulating respective change in the state of the soul (Sarvārtha-siddhi Vacanicā 1.8) (Gommatsar Jeevkand in Charts and Tables 9-14) (Tattvārthavārtika, Ch 9): Sr. no. The Spiritual State of the Soul State of the The Stage Karma Correspon ding Karma 1. Mithyātva Wrong belief about seven Rise32 verities Sāsādana Contempt of right belief Without rise, Darśana 2. subversion, Mohanīya subversion cum Samyaktva destruction or Karma destruction, it is 3. Miśra (Samyak- Mixture of right and rather a mithyātva) wrong belief neutral33 state Subversion cum 4. Avirata Samyaktva Right belief destruction Subversion, 5. Deśa-virata Partial conduct subversion cum destruction, 6. Pramatta-virata Conduct with negligence destruction 7. Apramatta-virata Subversion cum Conduct without destruction negligence Subversion cum destruction Subversion cum destruction 32 Rise = udaya; subversion = upaśama; subversion cum destruction = kṣayopaśama; destruction = kṣaya 33 Neutral = pāriṇāmika. In this context, it is a state when delusion of faith is not attained while falling from the above stages. The soul is yet to attain the wrong belief which it had previously subverted. The delusion of conduct is subverted in this stage.

24 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 8. Apūrva-karaṇa With unprecedented Subversion or Cāritra 9. Anivṛtti-karaṇa psychic activities destruction34 Mohanīya Psychic activities at par Subversion or with fellow practitioners destruction Karma Subversion or 10. Sūkṣma-sāmparāya With minute passion destruction Subversion 11. Upśānta-moha With subversion of Destruction 12. Kṣīṇa-moha35 delusion 13. Sayoga-kevalī With destruction of Destruction delusion 14. Ayoga-kevalī With activities of mind, Destruction speech and body (yoga); with destruction of four obstructing karma; with complete knowledge Without activities of mind, speech and body (yoga); with complete knowledge The above implication is mainly a broad categorization corresponding to delusion of faith and delusion of conduct. The role of delusion of conduct in the first four stages is also determined: it rises in the first and second stages and performs subversion cum destruction in the third and fourth stages. Moha and its Insignificance From the above discussion, it is clear that moha is involved in all the suffering and misfortune of the soul; and that it hinders the performance of the soul’s attributes to full potential restraining it from attaining an iota of bliss. This bliss can be attained with the awareness that the soul is a distinguished substance and that it is different from matter and their interactive modifications. Therefore, it is also clear that soul is a standalone object with its own set of attributes, ideally indifferent from other objects. Moha, being a psychic entity, is just an influencer that encourages material karma to bind with the soul. It means that moha is just an influencer, and not a binding agent. It is passions that summon material karma towards the soul. 34 If the deluding karma is subverted, the soul climbs through the 8th to 11th stages, and then certainly falls down to the previous stages; on the other hand, if the deluding karma is destructed, it climbs through the 8th to 12th stages, skipping the 11th stage and certainly climbing the final 13th and 14th stages. 35 Here it is to notice that delusion is completely destructed in the 12th stage before the attainment of complete knowledge in the 13th stage. The time between the two is so less that the soul does not recognise the difference.

Moha and its Good Riddance | 25 To elaborate on the same point, the actual bondage takes place between two such particles that consist of the qualities of viscosity and dryness.36 These tactile qualities are possessed by matter (pudgala), and hence the bondage takes place in two atoms. The soul modifies itself as attachment and aversion which act as viscosity and dryness to bind with matter karma particles.37 Consequently, moha is excluded from the process of bondage. Passions are equally instrumental in the process of bondage as they admit karma particles according to their degree exactly like the digestive fire admits food in the stomach as per its blaze.38 Meanwhile, the (awakened) soul, from the absolute viewpoint, only knows the modifications of the matter without engaging with them, admitting them or becoming like them.39 Hence, moha is neither in the soul nor of the soul. It is insignificant and thus defamed as the root cause of suffering while it might be an influencer but not the binding agent for karma and the soul. It is actually the cognition (upayoga) of the soul that needs to consider moha as the ‘other’ and identify itself as the ‘self.’ Moha and its Good Riddance Eradication of moha, by identifying it as the ‘other’ and the soul as ‘oneself’, is mandatory to identify the soul as indifferent from the material world. Those who have walked on the path of liberation can only tell how to get rid of the delusion. A person who is engrossed with delusion cannot be trusted to show the right path. As he lacks the acquaintance with the self, he cannot be followed to pursue the path of liberation. Therefore, first and foremost, moha needs to be eradicated which will help in attaining the self, causing destruction of the rest of the obstructing karma to attain complete knowledge.40 Those who have eradicated moha and the other three obstructing karma are called arhant. To attain a state like his, one should know him thoroughly with his attributes and modifications, eventually to know one’s own attributes and modifications. This is the ideal way to eradicate moha.41 Knowledge is the key to eradicate moha from the soul’s system. Once the soul learns the differentiation between the soul and the matter, it inevitably discards the deluding thoughts. The idea that identifies anything and everything other than the self as ‘other’ brings the awareness to the soul which automatically renounces the ‘other’ from the subconscious mind 36 ‘snigdha-rūkṣatvādbandhaḥ’, Tattvārtha-sūtra, 5.33 37 yathāyamātmāśuddha-buddhaikasvabhāvenbandharahito'pipaścād-śuddhanayenasnigdha-sthānīya- rāgabhāvenrūkṣa-sthānīya-dveṣabhāvenyadāpariṇamatitadāparamāgam-kathit- prakāreṇabandhamanubhavati / Tātparya-vṛtti on Pravacanasāra 163. 38 sakaṣāyatvājjīvaḥ karmaṇo yogyānpudgalānādatte sa bandhaḥ, Tattvārthasūtra 8.2 39 ṇa vi pariṇamadi ṇa giṇhadi uppajjadi ṇa paradavvapajjāe / ṇāṇī jāṇanto vi hu poggala-kammaṁ aṇeyavihaṁ // Samayasāra, 76 40 mohā''krāntānnabhavatiguror-mokṣamārga-praṇītir / nartetasyā sakalkaluṣad-dhvansajā svātmalabdhi / tassyai vandyaḥ paragururiha kṣīṇamohastvamarhan / sākṣāt-kurvannamalakamivā-śeṣa-tattvānināthaḥ // Āpta-Parīksā, 121 41 jo jāṇadi arahantaṁ davvatta-guṇatta-pajjayattehiṁ / so jāṇadi appāṇaṁ moho khalu jādi tassa layaṁ // Pravacanasāra, 80

26 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 of the soul.42 It is not really difficult to figure out the difference. For example, person A gets his cloth from the laundry and goes to sleep in it, but then another person B comes and pulls the cloth saying it belongs to him and that he should give it back. Person A looks for the signs (maybe the initials) of person B and immediately identifies that the cloth he is sleeping in is not his. Similarly, as soon as the soul identifies the signs (attributes) of its own and of the ‘other,’ it renounces the psychic notions and attains its own attributes like knowledge etc.43 Ācārya Amṛtacandra devises a sharp tool – chisel of intellect (prajñā-chainī) – to bifurcate ‘self’ and the ‘other’. It is actually the attribute of knowledge in the soul that quickly separates the soul and material karma with complete alertness. It establishes the soul in the inner glow of consciousness, and simultaneously establishes karma in ignorance.44 Once this separation is established, the awakened soul is free of ignorance or delusion or moha, and has attained the right belief (samyaktva). It will eventually get rid of material karma and launch itself in the state of eternal bliss. The ideal experience of the self is achieved when the soul drowns the veiling sheet of ignorance completely in its ocean of knowledge and appears ‘as it is.’ Hence, the whole world should now drown in the pacific tides of knowledge.45 A simple technique to attain such a state is meditation: do not make any effort, do not speak, do not contemplate. With this the soul will establish itself in the ‘self.’46 The soul meditates that from absolute viewpoint it is the true modification of belief-knowledge-conduct, it is one, pure, non-morphous identity and the slightest of the other identities are not in the soul.47 Moha in a Nutshell Gold is found in goldmines with impurities which are removed by the process of smelting in fire to obtain pure gold. Similarly, the impurity of moha can be removed from the pure cognition of soul by the process of meditation. All kinds of souls in the world can be classified under three categories: the ignorant one (bahirātmā), the awakened one (antarātmā) and the attained one (parmātmā). Among these, ignorance is to be renounced to awaken and attain oneself.48 It is not such that there is no soul in this world that has not attained such a pure state. 42 savve bhāve jamhā paccakkhāī parettiṇādūṇam / tamhā paccakkhāṇam ṇāṇam ṇiyamā muṇedavvam // Samayasāra, 34 43 jaha ṇāma ko vi puriso paradavvamiṇaṁ ti jāṇiduṁ muyadi / taha save parabhāve ṇāūṇa vimuḥdi ṇāṇī // ibid, 35 44 prajñā-chetrī śiteyam kathamapi nipuṇaiḥ pātitā sāvadhānaiḥ / sūkṣme'ntaḥsandhibandhe nipatati rabhasād-ātmakarmobhayasya // ātmānam magnamantaḥsthiraviśadalasaddhāmni caitanyapūre / bandham cā-jñānabhāve niyamitamabhitaḥ kurvatī bhinna-bhinnau // Samayasāra Kalaśa, 181 45 majjantu nirbharamamī samamevalokā / āloka mucchalati śāntarase samastāḥ / āplāvya vibhramati-raskariṇīm bhareṇa / pronmagna eṣa bhagavānavabodhasindhuḥ // ibid, 32 46 mā ciṭṭhaha mā jampaha mā cintaha kiṁ vi jeṇa hoi thiro / appā appammi rao iṇameva paraṁ have jjhāṇaṁ // Dravyasaṃgraha, 56 47 ahamekko khalu suddho daṁsaṇa-ṇāṇa-maiyo sadārūvī / ṇa vi atthi majjha kiṁci vi aṇṇaṁ parmāṇumettaṁ pi // Samayasāra, 38 48 ti-payāroappāmuṇahi, paruantarubahirappu / para jhāyahiantara-sahiu, bāhirucayahiṇibhantu // Jogasāru, 6

Moha and its Good Riddance | 27 Increase or decrease in moha, attachment and aversion is also seen in people. Therefore, total eradication of moha and other impurities of karma is also possible. Eradication of moha overcomes passions (vītrāgtā) and yields omniscience. These two qualities make the soul worthy of worship.49 Establishing the fact that moha is the root cause of sufferings, and its eradication is crucial to attain the blissful state, the soul must use its chisel of intellect to distinct itself from moha. The chisel of intellect works with the hammer of knowledge that moha is not the soul. Those who have realized the differentiation between the soul and the matter, and have read it in the scriptures, they testify that moha does not belong to the soul and the soul is nothing but cognition. Those who understand this fact are far away from moha.50 It means that the desire for liberation is also moha which destroys the chances of attaining liberation at all.51 Therefore, acceptance (sahajtā) of the eternal difference between the two is the key which will help the chisel of intellect to strike right between them and separate the ‘self’ from the ‘other’, exactly like the fountain where water appears to be colorful due to lights but as soon as the lights are turned off, the colorless, natural, eternally pure water can be seen. References Akalaṅka Deva. Tattvārthavārtika,. Trans. Mahendra Kumar Jain. Vol. II. Banaras: Bharatiya Jnanpith Kashi, 1957. Amṛtcandra. Samayasāra Kalaśa. Indore: Shri Digambar Jain Dharm Shikshan Sanyojan Samiti, 2000. Banārasīdāsa. Nāṭaka Samayasāra. Jaipur: Pandit Todarmal Smarak Trust, 1997. \"Bāraha Bhāvanā.\" Bṛhad Ādhyātmika Pāṭha Saṁgraha. Ed. Hukamchand Bharill. Jaipur: Akhil Bharatiya Jain Yuva Federation, 1987. Bharill, Hukamchand. Pravacansāra Anuśīlan. Vol. 2. Jaipur: Pandit Todarmal Smarak Trust, 2007. —. Vītrāga Vijñāna Praśikṣaṇa Nirdeśikā. Jaipur: Pandit Todarmal Smarak Trust, 2008. Chhabra, Jaicand. Sarvārtha-siddhi Vacanicā. Kolhapur City: Kallappa Bharmappa Nitave, Shak 1833. Chhabra, Prakash. Gommatsar Jeevkand in Charts and Tables. Solapur: Jain Sanskriti Sanrakshak Sangh, 2014. Daulatarāma. Chahadhālā. Ed. Balabhadra Jain. New Delhi: Kundakunda Bharati, 1994. Davis, Kathleen. \"What is phencyclidine (PCP), or angel dust?\" 12 October 2017. Medical News Today. Ed. Elaine K Luo. English. 29 September 2021. <https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/305328>. Deva, Akalaṅka. Tattvārthavārtika,. Trans. Mahendra Kumar Jain. Vol. II. Banaras: Bharatiya Jnanpith Kashi, 1957. Divākara, S. Sanmati-Tarka Prakaraṇa. Ed. D. Malavania. Bombay: Shri Jain Shwetambar Education Board, 1939. Divākara, Siddhasena. Dvātrinśad-dvātrinśikā. Botad: Shri Vijaylavanya-Surishwar Gyanmandir, V. Sam. 2009. —. Sanmati Tarka. Bombay: Shri Jain Shwetambar Education Board, 1939. Gorisse, Marie-Hélène. \"The Legitimation of an Authoritative Discourse in Jainism.\" Framing Intellectual and Lived Spaces in Early South Asia. De Gruyter, 2020. <https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110557176-007>. Hemcandra. The Jain Saga, 1 (Triṣaṣṭhiśalākāpuruṣa Carita). Ed. Samvegayashvijay. Ahmedabad: Acharyadeva Shrimad Vijay Ramchandra Surishwarji Jain Pathshala, n.d. 49 doṣāvaraṇayorhāniḥ, niḥśeṣāstyatiśāyanāt / kvacidyathāsvahetubhyo, bahirantarmalakṣayaḥ// Āptamīmāṃsā, 1.4 50 ṇatthi mama ko vi moho, bujjhadiuvaogaevaahamekko/ tam moha-ṇimmamattam, samayassaviyāṇāyābenti// Samayasāra, 36 51 jāyetodgat-mohato'bhilaṣitā, mokṣe'pisāsiddhihṛt, Padmanandi Pañcavṃśatikā, 912.

28 | ISJS-Transaction, Vol.5, No.3, July-September, 2021 Inan, Ilhan. \"Awareness of Ignorance.\" Inan, Ilhan. “Awareness of Ignorance.” De Gruyter: SATS – Northern European Journal of Philosophy, Vol.20, Issue 2. ISSN: 1869-7577 (2020). <https://doi.org/10.1515/sats-2020-2004>. Kundakunda. Indore: Shri Digambar Jain Dharm Shikshan Sanyojan Samiti, 1994. —. Niyamasāra (Tātparyavṛtti aura Ātmaprabodhinī sahita). Jaipur: Pandit Todarmal Smarak Trust, 2018. —. Samayasāra. Jaipur: Pandit Todarmal Smarak Trust, 2006. —. Śrī Pravacanasāra (with Tattvapradīpikā and Tatparyavṛtti). Trans. Himmatlal Jethalal Shah (Gujarati) and Parameshthidasji Nyayateerth (Hindi). Bhavnagar: Shri Vitaraga Sat Sahitya Prasarak Trust, 1975 (VS 2032). Long, Jeffery. Jainism: An Introduction. London: I.B. Tauris, 2009. Muni, Madhukar, ed. Ācārāṅga Sūtra. Beawar: Shri Agam Prakashan Samiti, 1989. Nemicandra, Ācārya. Dravyasaṃgraha. Trans. Nalini Balbir. Mumbai: Hindi Granth Karyalay, 2010. Padmanandi. Padmanandi Pañcaviṃśatikā. Nagpur: Shri Kundkund Digmbar Jain Swadhyay Mandal Trust, 2013. Pūjyapāda. Sarvārthasiddhi. Ed. Pt. Phoolchandra Shastri. New Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanapith, 1998. Rajchandra, Shrimad. Ātmasiddhi Śāstra. Agas: Shrimad Rajchandra Ashram, 1995. Raviṣeṇa. Padmapurāṇa. Ed. Pannalal Jain. Vols. I, II, III. New Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanpith, 2006. Reninger, Elizabeth. \"Zhangzi's (Chuang-Tzu's) Butterfly Dream Parable-A Taoist Allegory of Spiritual Transformation.\" 22 May 2019. Learn Religions. 5 September 2021. <https://www.learnreligions.com/butterflies-great-sages-and-valid-cognition-3182587>. Samantabhadra. Āptamīmāṃsā. Delhi: Veer Seva Mandir Trust, 1967. —. Ratnakaraṇḍa Śrāvakācāra. Jabalpur: Saral Jain-Granthmala, 1939. Siddhāntadeva, Nemicandra. Bṛhaddravya Saṃgraha (with Sanskrit vṛtti of Brahmadeva). Ed. Manoharlal Shastri. Agas: Shri Paramashrut Prabhavak Mandal, 1999. Sinha, Harendra Prasad. Bhāratīya Darśana Kī Rūpaekhā. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas, 2016. Śivārya. Bhagavatī Ārādhanā. Ed. Kailashchandra Siddhantshastri. Phaltan: Baal Br. Shri Hiralal Khushalchand Doshi, 1990. Soni, Jayandra. \"A Note on the Jaina tattva/padārtha.\" Vasantagauravam: Essays in Jainism . Mumbai: Arun K. Mehta, 2001. 135-140. Svāmī, Kārtikeya. Kārtikeya Anuprekṣā. Indore: Shri Digambar Jain Kundkund Parmagam Trust, n.d. Svāmi, Vidyānand. Āptaparīkṣā. Saharanpur: Veer Seva Mandir, 1949. The Truman Show. Dir. Peter Weir. Perf. Ed Harris, Laura Linney Jim Carrey. Prod. Andrew Niccol and others Edward S. Feldman. 1998. Ṭoḍarmal. Mokṣamārga Prakāśaka. Aligarh: Teerthdham Mangalayatan, 2020. —. Mokṣamārga Prakāśaka. Aligarh: Teerthdham Mangalayatan, 2020. Tuana, Sullivan Shannon and Nancy, ed. Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2007. Umāsvāti/Umāsvāmī. That Which Is-Tattvārtha Sūtra. Trans. Nathmal Tatia. San Francisco: Harper Collins Publishers, 1994. Vīrasena. Dhavalā, Ṣaṭkhaṇḍāgama. Vol. 1. Roorkee: Pandit Phool Chandra Shastri Foundation and Varanasi: Shri Ganesh Varni Digamber Jain Sansthan, 2004. Wiley, Kristi. The A to Z of Jainism. New Delhi: Vision Books Pvt. Ltd, 2006. Yogindu. Jogasārū (Yogasāra). Ed. Veersagar Jain. Trans. Hukamchand Bharill. Jaipur: Pandit Todarmal Smarak Trust, 2005. Young Sheldon. Dir. Jaffar Mahmood and others. Perf. Zoe Perry, Jim Parsons, Annie Potts and others Iain Armitage. Prod. Steven Molero, Chuck Lorre and others Timothy Marx. 2017.

Xokfy;j {k=s ds tSu vfHkys[kksa esa if.Mr&çfr’Bkpk;Z leqnk; uouhr dqekj tSu1 vftr tSu “kkL=h2 lkjka'k mÙkj&e/; Hkkjr ds izeq[kre~ ,sfrgkfld ,oa iqjkrkfÙod dsUnzksa eas ifjxf.kr rFkk orZeku e/;izns”k ds mÙkjh Nksj ij vofLFkr ^Xokfy;j {ks=* u dsoy ^Xokfy;j nqxZ* ds fy, izfl) gS oju~ tSu/keZ ,oa dyk dh n`f’V ls Hkh fo”ks’k:is.k mYy[s kuh; gSA Xokfy;j {ks= ds lgL=ksa fnxEcjkEuk;h tSu vfHkys[k rRdkyhu bfrgkl fo’k;d fofo/k ,oa izpqj tkudkfj;ksa ls le`) gSaA buesa vkpk;Z Hkêkjdksa ,oa muds varxZr eqfu;k]sa vkf;Zdkvk]sa {kqfYydkvk]sa cãz pkfj;ks]a czãpkfjf.k;ksa ds vykok ^if.Mr&izfr’Bkpk;Z leqnk;* dh mYy[s kuh; lwpuk,¡ fo|eku gaSA buls bl leqnk; dh ,sfrgkfld fLFkfr] ijEijk] dk;Z ,oa egÙo dk izHkkoh cks/k gksrk gS vkSj izLrqr vkys[k blh ij dsfUnzr gSA {ks= ,oa dky dh n`f’V ls bl vkys[k eas Xokfy;j {ks= ds izkphudky ls yds j vk/kqfuddky rd ds fnxEcj tSu vfHkys[kkas ij ppkZ dh xbZ gSA çLrkouk% Hkkjr x.kjkT; ds e/;çns”k izkUr ds lqnwj mÙkjh lhekUr ij vofLFkr ^Xokfy;j {k=s * vFkok ^Xokfy;j&pEcy lEHkkx* ;k ^mÙkjh e/;inz s”k* dk foLr`r HkkSxksfyd {k=s ekuoh; laLÑfr ds izkxSfrgkfld dky ls ysdj vk/kqfud dky rd ds fofHké dky[k.Mksa eas vuojr~ iqjkik’kk.kh; midj.k laLd`fr;ksa ds mijkUr fofHké jktuSfrd “kfDr;ksa ,oa muds izHkqRo ds lkFk gh muds laj{k.k eas fodflr lkefjd] vkfFkdZ ] /kkfeZd] lkaLÑfrd] lkekftd bR;kfn ifjos”kkas ds lkFk&lkFk cgqfo/k dykvkas ds mé;u ,oa foLrkj dk lrr~ lk{kh jgk gAS Hkkjrh; bfrgkl eas fo”k’s kdj {k=s h; dyk”kSyh ds fodkl] ifjiDork ,oa fof”k’Vrk dh n`f’V ls bl {ks= dk viuk viwoZ egÙo jgk gSA ^Xokfy;j {k=s * ls vk”k; oLrqr% e/;dkyhu ^xkis kpy* ¼izkphu xkis ] xkis kfnz½ ls gSA xkis kpy dh {k=s h; “kfDr rkes j jktoa”kdkyhu vusd vfHkys[kkas esa Xokfy;j nqxZ dks fof”k’V:i.s k ^xkis kpy* uke ls vfHkfgr fd;k x;k gS vkSj bu vfHkys[kkas ls Lor% gh xkis kpy ds rn~;qxhu vHkrw iwoZ jktuSfrd ,oa lkaLd`frd egÙo dk vkadyu fd;k tk ldrk gSA xkis kpy ds jktuSfrd izHkkokUrxrZ HkkSxksfyd foLrkj ls gh Xokfy;j {ks= dh ifjf/k lqfuf”pr gksrh gSA orZeku HkkSxksfyd ifjlheu esa Xokfy;j {k=s ds vUrxZr pEcy lEHkkx ds rhu ftyksa&fHk.M] eqjSuk o “;ksiqj rFkk Xokfy;j lEHkkx ds Hkh rhu ftykas&Xokfy;j] nfr;k ,oa f”koiqjh dks lfEefyr :i ls ns[kk tkrk gSA izkphudky ls ysdj vk/kqfuddky rd ^Xokfy;j nqx*Z ¼vk/kqfud XokYgsj] Xokfy;j½ loZnk gh bl {k=s dk jktuSfrd ,oa lkaLÑfrd dsUnz jgk gSA tSu leqnk; eas vkt Hkh Xokfy;j nqxZ dk ^xkis kpy* uke gh vf/kd izpfyr gSA 1 ijkLukrd ¼izkphu Hkkjrh; bfrgkl] laLd`fr ,oa iqjkrÙo½] ih&,p-Mh- ¼laxzgky; foKku½] Lor=a “kks/kdÙkkZ] Xokfy;j ¼e-iz-½ bZ&eys % [email protected] 2 izfr’Bkpk;Z] fo/kkukpk;Z] ijkLukrd ¼ikz phu Hkkjrh; bfrgkl] laLd`fr ,oa iqjkrÙo½] Xokfy;j ¼e-iz-½ bZ&eys % [email protected]

30 | vkbZ.,l.ts.,l&VªkatSDlUl] o’kZ&5] vad&3] tqykÃ&flracj] 2021 jktfufrd :i ls Xokfy;j {ks= egktuinh; ;qxkis jkUr Øe”k% ekS;Z] “kaqx] ukx] dq’kk.k] xqIr] xqtjZ &izfrgkj] dPNi?kkr ¼flgkfs u;k&Xokfy;j] nwcdq.M o ujoj “kk[kk½] dNokgk] ijorh&Z izfrgkj] ;Toiky] rksej] tkV] ejkBk&flaf/k;k vkfn jktoa”kkas ds v/khu jgk Fkk vkSj bu lHkh jktoa”kksa ds laj{k.k eas “kSo] oS’.ko] “kkDr vkfn /keks± ds lkFk gh tuS /keZ ,oa dyk dk vHkwriwoZ mRFkku ,oa izlkj gqvkA tSu/keZ ,oa dyk dh oSHkoiw.kZ n`f’V ls dPNi?kkr] ijorhZ&izfrgkj ,oa rkes j;qx fo”k’s k gaSA {k=s h; tSu/keZ ,oa dyk ds izHkko ds vkykds eas lokZf/kd mYys[kuh; rF; ;g gS fd e/;dky rd Xokfy;j nqxZ ;k xksikpy ^^tSu rhFkZ** ;k ^^nsoiÙku** ds :i eas viuh fof”k’Vre~ mifLFkfr LFkkfir djrs gq, loZizfl) gks pqdk FkkA xkis kpy dk tSu efw rZf”kYi ,oa LFkkiR;dyk fuf”pr gh Hkkjrh; dyk eas vU;re~ vonku gAS tSu dyk dh xkis kfnz “kyS h Hkh blds vfrfo”k’s k izHkko dks bafxr djrh gSA izpjq ijq krkfÙod ,oa lkfgfR;d lk{;kas ls Li’V gksrk gS fd yxHkx NBha “krh bZ- ls gh tSu/keZ Xokfy;j dk loZizeq[k /keZ jgk gS vkSj tSu/keZ lEcU/kh efw rZf”kYi] LFkkiR;] vfHkys[k vkfn ds HkXuko”k’s k foiqy ek=k esa vkt Hkh lexz {ks= esa ns tk ldrs gSaA tSu vfHkys[kksa dh n`f’V ls Hkh ;g {k=s vR;Ur egÙoiw.kZ jgk gSA bl {k=s ds lexz vfHkys[kksa esa lokZf/kd la[;k fnxEcj tSu vfHkys[kksa dh gh gSA tuS /keZ ds nwljs izeq[k iaFk “ors kca j tSu/keZ dk Hkh Xokfy;j esa mYys[kuh; iHz kko n`f’Vxkps j gksrk gS vkSj rRlEcU/kh yxHkx 11oh&a 12oha “krh bZ- ls ysdj vk/kqfuddky rd dh ik’kk.k o /kkrqefw rZ;k¡ ,oa vfHkys[k vPNh la[;k esa ;gk¡ ds “ors kca j ,oa fnxacj nkus ksa iaFkkas ds tSu efa njkas eas fojkftr ,oa iwtuh; gSa ¼tSu] uouhr dqekj 2020% 121&144½A tuS vfHkys[k izeq[k:is.k ik’kk.k ,oa /kkrq dh ewfrZ;ksa o /kkrqfufeZr ;a=iêksa ,oa okLrq[k.Mksa ij mRdh.kZ gSaA tSu ik.Mqfyfi;ksa dh iqf’idkvksa ls Hkh bl {k=s eas tSu/keZ ds fo’k; eas egÙoiw.kZ tkudkfj;k¡ feyrh gSaA u dsoy tSu/keZ ,oa dyk ds bfrgkl eas cfYd Xokfy;j ds {k=s h; jktuSfrd rFkk lkaLd`frd dky[k.Mksa ds fuekZ.k eas Hkh bu tSu vfHkys[kkas dh vrho egÙoiw.kZ Hkfw edk gSA vusd fo”k’s krkvkas ls ;qDr ;s tSu vfHkys[k bfrgkl&fuekZ.k eas cgqfo/k :i ls lg;kxs h gSaA tSu/keZ fo’k;d jktuSfrd] lkekftd] lkaLÑfrd] O;ogkfjd] vkfFkZd ,oa dyklac/a kh xfrfof/k;kas dh bu vfHkys[kkas ls rn~;qxhu mYys[kuh; tkudkjh izkIr gksrh gSA lkekU; :i ls bu tSu vfHkys[kkas esa frfFk ds mijkUr mins”kd vkpk;Z@Hkêkjd ds uke o ijEijk( izfr’Bk&dk;Z eas jr lk/kq o lk/oh leqnk; ds vUrxZr eqfu] vkf;Zdk] czãpkjh] cãz pkfj.kh ds lkFk gh if.Mr] izfr’Bkpk;Z dk mYys[k] nkunkrk O;fDr ;k ifjokj ds uke] oa”k] tkfr] xk=s ] fuoklLFky vkfn dh le`) tkudkjh fufgr gAS vusd vfHkys[kkas esa “kklujr jktk ds Hkh ukekYs ys[k gq, gSa vkSj lkFk gh vusd vfHkys[kkas eas lw=/kkj] ys[kd] dfo] mRdh.kZd vkfn dk Hkh ifjp; feyrk gSA lexrz % bu vfHkys[kkas ls Xokfy;j {k=s esa yxHkx 8oha “krh bZ- ls ysdj vk/kqfuddky rd tuS /keZ] lekt] lk/kq&lk/oh la?kVuk ,oa dyk ds fodkl ,oa mé;u dh lVhd ,oa cgqfo/k fLFkfr dk irk pyrk gSA bu vfHkys[kkas esa fnxEcj tSu iaFk ds if.Mr ,oa izfr’Bkpk;Z leqnk; ds fo’k; eas Hkh izpqj lwpuk,¡ lféfgr gSa vkSj izLrqr vkys[k dk y{; blh leqnk; dh ,sfrgkfld fLFkfr] dk;Z ,oa egÙo ij ppkZ gSA Xokfy;j {k=s ds vf/kdk”a k% fnxEcjkEuk;h tSu vfHkys[kksa esa if.Mr ,oa izfr’Bkpk;ks± ds cgqr ukekYs ys[k feyrs gSaA ;g ,d rjg ls tSu lekt dk fo}r~ o cqf)thoh vuq’Bkfud oxZ jgk gSA vfHkys[kh; izek.kksa ds lUnHkZ eas ns[kas rks bl leqnk; dk izeq[k dk;Z tSu efw rZ;kas ,oa ;a=ksa dh izfr’Bk&fof/k dks tSukxe ,oa “kkL=h; jhfr ls lEié djuk@djokuk gksrk FkkA lkfgfR;d lk{;kas ls Kkr gksrk gS fd tSukxe ,oa “kkL=ksa dh O;k[;k] fpUru] ys[ku] Vhdk&fVIi.kh] vuqokn] ik.Mqfyfidj.k vkfn Hkh buds izeq[k dk;Z jgs gSaA

Xokfy;j {ks= ds tSu vfHkys[kksa eas if.Mr&çfr’Bkpk;Z leqnk; | 31 if.Mr&çfr’Bkpk;Z lenq k; cgqizpfyr lkekU; ifjHkk’kk eas ^if.Mr* dk lkekU; rkRi;Z ^“kkL=K fo}ku* ls gksrk gS vFkkZr~ tks vius /keZ”kkL=ksa dk Kkrk gksA gj /keZ esa viuk if.Mr leqnk; gksrk gS] tks ml /kekZuqlkj “kkL=h; fof/k;kas ls izfr’Bk ,oa vuq’Bkfud dk;ks± dks lEié djkrk gSA ^^if.Mr** oLrrq % ,d “kSf{kd&mikf/k gS] tks gj /keZ eas muds “kkL=ksa ds vkf/kdkfjd tkudkj ,oa fo}ku dks iznku dh tkrh gSA blh izdkj tSu /keZ eas Hkh izkphudky ls gh ^if.Mr ijEijk ,oa leqnk;* ds n”kuZ gkrs s gSaA ;s tSu vkxe ,oa “kkL=kas ds Kkrk ,oa fo}ku gksrs gSaA vkt Hkh fnxEcj tSu iaFk eas if.Mr lenq k; fo|eku gSA Xokfy;j ds tSu vfHkys[kkas ls Kkr gksrk gS fd tSu /keZ eas if.Mr x`gLFk ;k czãpkjh nkus kas gh gksrs FksA if.Mrkas }kjk izfr’Bk&dk;Z djokus ds lkFk gh muds ,oa ifjokjtukas }kjk ftufcEcksa ,oa ;a=iêksa ds nku djus nkus kas rjg ds mnkgj.k vfHkys[kksa esa feyrs gSaA dbZ mnkgj.kkas esa bu if.Mrtukas dh oa”k] tkfr;k¡ ,oa xk=s Hkh mfYyf[kr gSa vkSj lkFk gh bueas oa”k ijEijkxr ,oa xq#&f”k’; ifjikVh nkus kas izFkkvkas ds n”kZu gksrs gSaA vfHkys[kkas eas mfYyf[kr if.Mrtuksa dh tkfr;kas ;Fkk] xkys kjkM] ikSjikV] ukx}g] tSloky] [k.Msyoky] iùkorh&iqjokj] vxzksrd ¼vxzoky½] cjfg;k] [kjkSok vkfn ls dgk tk ldrk gS fd ;s eyw r% tSukuq;k;h gh jgs FksA djjS k ds ,dek= l-a 1585 QkYxq.k lqfn 5 “kqØokj ¼1528 bZ-½ ds fl)pØ ;=a ys[k esa ewyla?k dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd ftupUnz ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr Hkkuq “kEeZ.k ds izfr’Bkpk;ZRo esa izfr’Bk gksus dk mYys[k feyrk gSA ^“kEeZ.k* vFkkZr~ ^“kekZ* pafw d lkekU;r% czkã.k /keZ esa ,d izeq[k tkfr gSA vr% blls bafxr gksrk gS fd tSuksa ds izfr’Bk&dk;Z esa czkã.kiaFk ds if.Mrksa dk Hkh ;kxs nku jgrk FkkA tSu vfHkys[kkas eas O;fDrfo”k’s k ukeksa ds lkFk if.Mr fo#n izk;% ^ia-* rFkk izfr’Bkpk;Z ^izfr-* “kCn&la{kis ds :i eas vafdr gqvk gSA yxHkx 17oha&18oha “krh bZ- ds dqNsd vfHkys[kkas esa ukekas ds lkFk iwjk ^if.Mr* Hkh fy[kk feyrk gSA buds foijhr ^if.Mrkpk;Z* fcuk “kCn&la{kis ds iw.kZ :i eas vafdr gSA dbZ vfHkys[kkas esa if.Mrkas dks efw rZ ;k ;a=ys[k ds ys[kd ds :i eas Hkh of.kZr fd;k x;k gS vFkkZr~ ;s vfHkys[k dk ikB ;k fooj.k Hkh rS;kj djrs FksA ,ls s if.Mrkas eas if.Mr fnãkotz ¼la- 1496½] if.Mr vkuank ¼la- 1498½] if.Mr lSukejbZik ¼la- 1523½] if.Mr ?kkVe ¼la- 1525 o 1531½] if.Mr oy ¼la- 1533½] if.Mr lrkes ]w if.Mr ;q/kij o if.Mr elhdkS ¼yxHkx- 15oha “krh bZ½] if.Mr _’kHknkl ¼la- 1604 o 1672½] if.Mr fl’kkjh ¼la- 1722 o 1723½] if.Mr xjhonkl ¼la- 1724½] if.Mr fxfj/kj ¼la- 1741½] if.Mr okypUnz ¼la- 1755½] if.Mr oHkrq ¼la- 1884½ vkfn mYys[kuh; gSaA bl rjg ls if.Mrtu cgqeq[kh izfrHkk dh /kuh gksrs Fks vkSj os u dsoy ftufcEckas dk nku gh djrs Fks] oju~ mudh izfr’Bk&dk;Z] ewfrZys[ku ds lkFk gh xaFz k&y[s ku] lkfgR;&iz.k;u vkfn fofo/k /kkfeZd dk;ks± esa Hkh jr jgrs FksA if.Mr leqnk; ,d rjg ls tSu Jkod lekt dk gh iq#’k&iz/kku fgLlk gksrk gS vkSj budh fLFkfr lcls Js’B miknku ij vknj.kh; gksrh gSA Xokfy;j {k=s ds dbZ fnxEcj tSu vfHkys[kkas eas ^if.Mrkpk;Z* dk Hkh ck/s k gksrk gSA if.Mrkas eas Js’B ,oa izdk.M fo}ku dks gh ^if.Mrkpk;*Z dgk tkrk gSA if.Mrkpk;Z vFkkZr~ ^if.Mrksa esa vkpk;Z*] ;g Hkh ,d mikf/kcks/kd fo”ks’k.k gSA {k=s h; tSu vfHkys[kkas ds vkykds eas ns[ks rks tSu/keZ eas if.Mrkpk;Z ,d “kSf{kd&laLFkkxr la?kVuk dh vkjs ladsr djrs gq, fn[kkbZ nsrs gSa] tgk¡ xq#&f”k’; ijEijk dk vuqxeu gksrk FkkA foosP; {k=s ds dbZ tSu vfHkys[kkas eas vkpk;ks± ,oa Hkêkjdkas dks Hkh dbZ LFkyksa ij if.Mrkpk;Z dgk x;k gS] tks fuf”pr :i ls laLFkkxr vuqikyuk dks n”kkZrk gSA if.Mr ,oa if.Mrkpk;Z ds vkjfEHkd mnkgj.k yxHkx 12oha “krh bZ- ds pSr ,oa ipjkbZ ds tSu vfHkys[kkas esa

32 | vkbZ.,l.ts.,l&VªkatSDlUl] o’kZ&5] vad&3] tqykÃ&flracj] 2021 fo”k’s kr% feyrs gSaA pSr ds HkXu tuS eafnj lewg esa fo|eku l-a 1182 dkfÙkdZ lqfn 14 lkseokj ¼1125 bZ-½ rFkk la- 1236 QkYxq.k ofn 12 “kqØokj ¼1179 bZ-½ ds nks [kf.Mr LrEHkys[kkas eas ewyla?k ds vUrxrZ iznhilsu ds f”k’; ia- dudlsu] muds f”k’; fl)kfa rd fot;lsu] muds f”k’; fl)kfa rd yfyrlsu] muds f”k’; i-a iùlsu o muds f”k’; o`’kHklsu dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 34 o 40½A pSr ds gh la- 1250 T;s’B lqfn 10 cq/kokj ¼1193 bZ-½ ds ,d ik’kk.k efw rZys[k esa ia- fjr??kls.k ds f”k’; t;lsu o muds f”k’; okypna z }kjk iz.kke&fuons u dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 41½A bu vfHkys[kkas esa of.kZr ;g ijEijk fuf”pr :i ls eyw la?k ds varxZr ,d xq#&f”k’; ijEijk jgh Fkh vkSj bl ijEijk ds mYys[k dsoy pSr ls gh feyrs gSaA bu vfHkys[kkas ls ^if.Mr* ,oa ^fl)kfUrd* nkus kas fo#nkas ¼mikf/k;ks½a dk Kku gksrk gSA ^fl)kfUrd* ls lkekU; vfHkizk; ^tSu fl)kUrksa ds Kkrk* ls ekuk tk ldrk gSA pSr ds vfrfjDr ipjkbZ ds la- 1210 ¼1153 bZ-½ ds ,d fHkfÙkLrEHkys[k eas ns”khx.k dh vkpk;Z&ijEijk dk mYys[k gqvk gS vkSj bl ifjikVh eas ^if.Mrkpk;Z* mn~cks/ku gqvk gSA ys[k ls fofnr gksrk gS fd if.Mrkpk;Z Lda/kdhfÙkZ ds f”k’; if.Mrkpk;Z ohjpUnz] muds f”k’; vkpk;Z “kqHkuafn ds f”k’; yhypna z lwfj ds vkEuk; eas lk/kq /kke ds iq= foØe }kjk fogkj dk fuekZ.k djok;k x;k Fkk ¼tSu] uouhr dqekj 2020 v% 10&13½A dbZ mnkgj.kkas eas ,d gh vfHkys[k esa ,dkf/kd if.Mr ,oa if.Mr ds lkFk&lkFk izfr’Bkpk;ks± ds Hkh mYys[k feyrs gSaA dqN vfHkys[kkas esa if.Mr}; dk feyuk Hkh jkps d gSA yxHkx 18oha&19oha “krh bZ- ds fnxEcj tuS if.Mr leqnk; esa if.Mr ijel[q k ,oa if.Mr HkkxhjFk dh tkMs +h vR;Ur egÙoiw.kZ jgh FkhA izk;% mnkgj.kkas esa bu nkus kas if.Mrtuksa dk lkFk&lkFk gh mYys[k gqvk gSA l-a 1836 oS”kk[k lqfn 5 c/q kokj ¼1779 bZ-½ ds nks ;a=ys[kksa esa ewyla?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN ds izfr’Bkpk;Z Jh uSul’q k o Jh puS lq’k }kjk flejk;k esa izfr’Bk gksus dk mYys[k gqvk gSA yxHkx 15oha “krh b-Z ds rkes jdkyhu tuS vfHkys[kkas eas egkdfo jS/kw dks if.Mr] if.Mrkpk;Z ,oa izfr’Bkpk;Z rhuksa gh foHk’w k.kksa ls vyad`r dgk x;k gS ¼tuS ] uouhr dqekj 2016% 33&42½A bu vfHkys[kksa ls egkdfo jS/kw ds vUrxrZ O;kid f”k’; ijEijk ds Hkh n”kZu gksrs gSa vkSj muds f”k’;kas eas vkf;Zdk] {kqfYydk] eqfu] czãpkjh] ckbZ vkfn Hkh ifjxf.kr gSaA yxHkx 16oha “krh bZ- ,oa ijorhZdkyhu tSu vfHkys[kkas eas if.Mrksa ds fy, ^ikMs* ;k ^ikMa s* fo#n dk Hkh mi;kxs gksrk gqvk fn[kkbZ nsrk gSA loZizFke Jh fnxEcj tSu efa nj] vVsj ds la- 1573 ¼1516 bZ-½ ,oa rnuarj la- 1577 ¼1520 bZ-½ ds nks ;a=ys[kkas esa eyw la?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas ikaMs jklw?k ds mins”k ij izfr’Bk gksus dk mYys[k gqvk gSA Jh vkfnukFk fnxEcj tuS efUnj vfr”k; {k=s ] ikgs jh ds la- 1667 dkfÙkZd lqfn 5 lkseokj ¼1610 b-Z ½ ds ‘kksM~”kdkj.k ;a=ys[k esa ewyla?k ljLorhxPN cykRdkjx.k ds e.Mykpk;Z ujsUndz hfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas ikMs lgley }kjk lnSo iz.kke&fuons u dk mYys[k gvq k gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 276&277½A dksykjl ds Jh pna zizHk fnxEcj tSu iapk;rh eafnj ds yxHkx 17oha “krh bZ- ds vusd tuS efw rZys[kkas eas dkejkt o vt;jkt nksukas ds fy, if.Mr ,oa ikMs dk mi;ksx gqvk gSA vkt Hkh fnxEcj tuS leqnk; dh [kjkSok ¼’kjkSok½ tkfr eas ^ikMs* ,d xk=s uke feyrk gS vkSj fHk.M ftyk bl tkfr dk ckgqY;{ks= jgk gSA if.Mr o if.Mrkpk;Z ds vykok foosP; {k=s ds tSu vfHkys[kkas esa izfr’Bkpk;k±s ds Hkh Hkjiwj lUnHkZ feyrs gSaA izfr’Bkpk;Z vFkkrZ ~ ^izfr’Bk djkus okys vkpk;Z* ls lkekU; vk”k; ftufcEc vFkok ;a=kas dh izfr’Bk&fof/k&lEcU/kh e=a ksa ,oa vuq’Bkfud jhfr;ksa ds Kkrk ,oa dÙkkZ ls gSA izfr’Bkpk;Z Lo;eos

Xokfy;j {ks= ds tSu vfHkys[kksa eas if.Mr&çfr’Bkpk;Z leqnk; | 33 if.Mr gksrs gS]a D;kafs d “kkL=K KkuksijkUr gh os izfr’Bk&fof/k;kas eas fuiq.k gks ikrs gSaA gj if.Mr izfr’Bkpk;Z gks] ,ls k vko”;d ugha gSA if.Mr gh Kku ds vxzre~ miknku ij izfr’Bk&fof/k;kas dk KkuktZu dj ^izfr’Bkpk;Z* gksrs FksA izfr’Bkpk;Z x`gLFk ,oa czãpkjh nkus kas gh gks ldrs gSa] tSlk orZeku esa fn[kkbZ nsrk gSA Xokfy;j ds tSu vfHkys[kkas eas if.Mrkas ds rks oa”k o tkfr dk mYys[k gqvk gS] ijUrq ,d Hkh mnkgj.k eas izfr’Bkpk;k±s ds oa”k ,oa tkfr dk mYys[k ugha feyrk gSA ;g ,d fopkj.kh; igyw gS] dgha ;g vfHkfyf[kr izfr’Bkpk;k±s ds czãp;Zozrh gksus dk ladsr gSA Jh fnxEcj tuS vfr”k; {k=s ] cjklks ds la- 1580 ds fl)pØ ;a=ys[k esa eyw la?k oykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN ds Hkêkjd flga dhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr neks dks czãpkjh dgk x;k gSA Xokfy;j ds vf/kdka”k tSu vfHkys[kksa esa Hkh czãpkfj;ksa ds oa”k&tkfr dk fooj.k vuqfYyf[kr gSA Xokfy;j ds tSu vfHkys[kkas esa izfr’Bkpk;Z ds :i eas Li’V:i.s k izfr’Bkpk;Z irz kipna z ¼la- 1413½] izfr’Bkpk;Z if.Mr ekyw ,oa if.Mr xksifr ¼l-a 1475½] izfr’Bkpk;Z if.Mr rkjs o fl;k ¼la- 1491½] izfr’Bkpk;Z ufepna z ¼la- 1497½] izfr’Bkpk;Z ft.knkl ¼l-a 1511½ vkfn ds uke feyrs gSaA ns[kk tk, rks vkpk;Z o Hkêkjd rks vius vki eas gh if.Mr ,oa izfr’Bkpk;Z gksrs Fks] ijUrq Xokfy;j {k=s ds dbZ vfHkys[kkas esa mUgas fo”ks’k:i ls if.Mr] if.Mrkpk;Z ,oa izfr’Bkpk;Z tlS s fo#nkas ls vyad`r fd;k x;k gSA dbZ tSu vfHkys[k ,ls s Hkh gS] ftuesa if.Mr ;k izfr’Bkpk;Z dk Li’Vr% Hksn dj ikuk vklku ugha gSaA if.Mr fy[kk gksus ij Hkh muds izfr’Bkpk;Z ds :i eas izHkkoh gksus dh iqf’V gksrh gSA mijkDs r yxHkx 12oha “krh bZ- ds tSu vfHkys[kkas ds mijkUr ijorhZdkyhu tSu vfHkys[kkas esa vuojr~ if.Mr ,oa izfr’Bkpk;k±s ds le`) mYys[k feyus yxrs gSaA ,ls s tSu vfHkys[k Xokfy;j ftyk esa Xokfy;j] y”dj] ejq kj] Xokfy;j nqxZ ¼mjokgh ?kkVh] ,d iRFkj dh ckoM+h lewg ,oa <k<s k}kj lewg½] vkeh] flejh;k Vkda k] djfg;k] ikjlsu] prS ( f”koiqjh ftyk eas f”koiqjh] ujoj] Hkheiqj] mjokgk] exjkSuh] iksgjh] djSjk] ipjkbZ] dksykjl( nfr;k ftyk eas flukoy] lksukfxj] cj/kqok¡] u;k[ksM+k( eqjuS k ftyk eas eqjSuk] tkjS k] ikjs lk] vackg( fHk.M ftyk esa fHk.M] cjklkS] vVsj] vek;u] lksuh] Åejh] cjgh] xkgs n( “;kis qj ftyk esa “;ksiqj] nwcdq.M vkfn LFkykas ls cgqrk;r esa feyrs gSaA ;s vfHkys[k izeq[k:i ls efw rZ ,oa ;a=iêys[kksa ds :i eas gSa vkSj mijkDs r LFkykas ij fo|eku fnxEcj tuS efUnjkas esa fojkteku ,oa iwtuh; gaAS Xokfy;j {ks= ds fnxEcj tSu vfHkys[kkas esa mfYyf[kr fnxEcj tSukEuk;h if.Mr ,oa izfr’Bkpk;Z leqnk; dk fooj.k v/kkfs yf[kr gS & • if.Mr oko.k & ipjkbZ ds la- 1213 ¼1156 bZ-½ ds vkfnukFk ik’kk.k efw rZys[k eas xksykjkM vUo; ds if.Mr oko.k o muds iq= lgtw rFkk ikSjikV vUo; ds ft.ks ds iq= dwYgs vkSj vkls ds iq= ukjk;.k }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 55½A • if.Mr ly’k.k & Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tSu eafnj] vek;u ds la- 1318 vk’kk<+ lqfn 8 lkseokj ¼1261 bZ-½ ds ik”oZukFk /kkrq ewfrZys[k eas ikSjikV oa”k ds if.Mr ly’k.k dh iRuh ly’k.kh ,oa muds iq=kas vtg]s oYgk ,oa ohYg dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 29½A • if.Mr “kEHkq & Jh fnxEcj tuS ik”oZukFk efUnj ¼Ø- 45½] lksukfxj ds la- 1340 oS”kk[k lqfn 7 lkseokj ¼1283 b½Z ds usfeukFk ik’kk.k efw rZys[k esa ewyla?k ds vUrxZr xzgiYyh; vUo; ds Jsf’B

34 | vkbZ.,l.ts.,l&VªkatSDlUl] o’kZ&5] vad&3] tqykÃ&flracj] 2021 lk<s }kjk ifjokjtukas lfgr if.Mr “kEHkq ds funsZ”ku eas izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018 v% 26½A • if.Mr jru] if.Mr ’ksrk o if.Mr nk;k & Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tSu eafnj] irk”kk cktkj] fHk.M ds la- 1402 oS”kk[k lqfn 8 jfookj ¼1345 bZ-½ ds f=rhFkhZ /kkrq ewfrZys[k eas eyw la?k ds Jh iùuafn ds vkEuk; eas ukx}g tkfr ds if.Mr jru dh iRuh yk’kw] muds iq=kas if.Mr ‘ksrk o if.Mr nk;k }kjk izfr’Bk gksus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 44&45½A bl efw rZys[k eas oa”k&ijEijk ds n”kZu gksrs gSaA • izfr’Bkpk;Z çrkipUnz & Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tSu efa nj] Åejh ds la- 1413 oS”kk[k lqfn 13 cq/kokj ¼1356 bZ-½ ds ik”oZukFk /kkrq efw rZys[k eas ewyla?k ds vUrxrZ izfr’Bkpk;Z irz kipUnz ds funsZ”ku eas lk/kq fuaonso dh iRuh eqns o muds iq= oyohj }kjk izfr’Bk gksus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 46½A • if.Mr gyk & Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tSu cj;S k iapk;rh efUnj] ekek dk cktkj] y”dj ds la- 1458 T;s’B lqfn 3 pUnzokj ¼1401 bZ-½ ds ik”oZukFk /kkrq ewfrZys[k eas ewyla?k ds Hkêkjd iùuafn ds vkEuk; eas b{okdq oa”k o xksykjkM vUo; ds lk/kq lknnso dh iRuh yksgo] muds nks iq=ksa frXok o if.Mr gyk ,oa ifjokjtuksa }kjk iz.kke&fuons u dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 56½A • if.Mr ukynso o if.Mrkpk;Z xkslfo & xtq jhegy laxzgky;] Xokfy;j ds la- 1473 QkYxq.k lqfn 8 jfookj ¼1416 bZ-½ ds [kf.Mr ik’kk.k ik”oZukFk ihfBdkys[k eas jktk ohjenso ds jkT;dky eas dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; i’q djx.k ds Hkêkjd xq.kdhfÙkZ ds f”k’; ;”k%dhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; esa vxzksrd vUo; o xxZ xks= ds lk/kq MkYo ,oa ifjokjtukas lfgr if.Mr ukynso] muds iq= if.Mrkpk;Z xkslfo }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gSA if.Mrkpk;Z xkls fo dh iRuh jtflfj] muds iq= fo”odekZ o Nhre] Nhre ds iq= vej o gjflag] gjflag ds iq= nsÅ dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 63&64½A • çfr’Bkpk;Z if.Mr ekyw ,oa if.Mr xksifr & Jh “kkfa rukFk fnxEcj tSu efUnj] tuS xyh] vackg ds la- 1475 ek?k lqfn 13 ¼1418 bZ-½ ds pna zizHk /kkrq ewfrZys[k eas dk’Bkla?k ds Hkêkjd xq.kdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas izfr’Bkpk;Z if.Mr ekyw ds iq= if.Mr xkis fr ,oa muds iq=kas /kkek o Å/kk dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2019% 56&57½A • if.Mr okVw & Jh vkfnukFk fnxEcj tSu vfr”k; {ks= efUnj] ikgs jh ds la- 1477 T;s’B lqfn 3 cq/kokj ¼1420 b½Z rFkk y”dj ds Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tSu efUnj] bUnjxat ds la- 1478 QkYxq.k lqfn 5 xq#okj ¼1421 bZ-½ ds nks /kkrq ;a=ys[kkas esa leku:is.k dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; ds Hkêkjd {ksedhfÙkZ ds iêf”k’; Hkêkjd gsedhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas Jh jRudhfÙkZ] Jh iùdhfÙkZ] Jh foeydhfÙkZ] Jh olardhfÙkZ] Jh nsodhfÙkZ ds f”k’; Jh dqekjlsu ds vkEuk; eas czãpkjh iwuk o czãpkjh ukfux ,oa if.Mr okVw }kjk lnSo iz.kke&fuons u djus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tuS 2018c% 172&173] 2018% 67&68½ A • çfr’Bkpk;Z if.Mr rkjs o fl;k ,oa if.Mr l#ejk & Jh vftrukFk fnxEcj tSu efUnj] cjgh ds la- 1491 oS”kk[k lqfn 15 “kkfuokj ¼1434 bZ-½ ds [kf.Mr ftu ik’kk.k ihfBdkys[k eas jktk Hkqounso ds jkT;dky eas dMgy uxj ds Hkkstetw dh iêjkuh ukbdknsoh o muds iq= dqekj jktk lalkjpUnz ds le; eas ewyla?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd lglzdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr l#ejk ,oa izfr’Bkpk;Z if.Mr rkjs o fl;k ds funsZ”ku esa

Xokfy;j {ks= ds tSu vfHkys[kksa eas if.Mr&çfr’Bkpk;Z leqnk; | 35 yaodapqd vUo; ds lk/kq okgs ,oa ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tuS 2017% 61&62½A • if.Mr ,ds nso o fnãkozt & y”dj ds Jh fnxEcj tSu chliaFkh efUnj] nkukvkys h ds la- 1496 d`’.k ¼1439 bZ½ ds ;a=ys[k eas dk’Bkla?k ds Jh nsolsu ds mins”k ij fcEc izfr’Bkdkjd if.Mr ,ds nso ,oa ys[kd ds :i eas if.Mr fnãkozt dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 76&77½A • if.Mr xqjnkl & Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tuS cM+k efUnj] ujoj ds la- 1497 T;s’B lqfn 5 “kqØokj ¼1440 bZ-½ ds vftrukFk ik’kk.k efw rZys[k eas f=HkqoudhfÙkZnqxZ ds egkjkt i`Fohjkt ds jkT;dky eas dk’Bkla?k ds vkpk;Z dqekjlsu ds vkEuk; eas vxzksrd vUo; o xxZ xk=s ds lk/kq tkYgk dh iRuh ikYgkgh] muds iq= if.Mr xqjnkl dh ifRu;ksa lrks o uYgks }kjk lnSo iz.kke&fuosnu dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 176½A • çfr’Bkpk;Z ufepUnz & Jh fnxEcj tSu chliaFk Hkêkjdth efUnj] lksM+k dk daqvk] Xokfy;j ds l-a 1497 T;s’B lqfn 2 HkkSeokj ¼1440 bZ-½ ds vkfnukFk&prqfo±”kfr /kkrq efw rZys[k esa dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; i’q djx.k ds Hkêkjd xq.kdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas vxzksrd vUo; o xxZ xk=s ds lk/kq v;Zu ,oa muds ifjokjtukas }kjk fuekZ.k djokus rFkk lglzdhfÙkZ ds iêf”k’; ufepUnz }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 85&86½A • if.Mr vkuUnk & Jh fnxEcj tSu efUnj] vVsj ds la- 1498 vk’kk<+ lqfn 5 “kØq okj ¼1441 bZ-½ ds fl)pØ ;a=ys[k eas ewyla?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN ds Hkêkjd ftupUnz ds vkEuk; eas xkys kjkM vUo; ds la?kkf/kifr dkys ,oa muds iq= X;kupUnz }kjk izfr’Bk djokus rFkk ys[kd ds :i eas if.Mr vkuUnk dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 64½A • if.Mr] if.Mrkpk;Z ,oa çfr’Bkpk;Z jS/kw & yxHkx 15oha “krh bZ- ds rksejdkyhu viHkaz”k Hkk’kk”kSyh ds egkdfo vkSj lkFk gh if.Mr] if.Mrkpk;Z ,oa izfr’Bkpk;Z ds :i eas [;kfryC/k jS/kw ¼la- 1448&1530½ tuS bfrgkl ds ,d egkure~ O;fDrRo Fks ¼tSu] uouhr dqekj 2016% 33&42½A Xokfy;j nqxZ ij mjokgh ?kkVh ,oa ,d iRFkj dh ckoM+h lewg ds dbZ tSu vfHkys[kkas esa muds }kjk ewfrZ&izfr’Bk gksus dk mYys[k gqvk gSA mjokgh ?kkVh ds la- 1497 oS”kk[k lqfn 7 “kØq okj ¼1440 bZ-½ ds vkfnukFk “kSyd`r efw rZys[k ,oa blh frfFk ds vU; efw rZys[kkas eas Hkh xkis kpynqxZ ds egkjktkf/kjkt Mqxa jsUnzflag ds jkT;dky esa dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; iq’djx.k ds Hkêkjd ;”k%dhfÙkZ dh izsj.kk ,oa if.Mr jS/kw ds izfr’Bkpk;ZRo eas vxzksrd vUo; o xkbs y xk=s ds la?kkf/kifr dkSyk }kjk lifjokj fuekZ.k djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 80&81] 84&85½A Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tSu efUnj] djfg;k ds la- 1509 pS= lqfn 11 “kqØokj ¼1452 bZ-½ ds vkfnukFk&prqfo±”kfr /kkrq efw rZys[k eas xkis fxfj ds jktkf/kjkt MqaxjsUnzflag ds jkT;dky esa dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; ds Hkêkjd deydhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr jS/kw ds funsZ”ku eas vxzksrd vUo; ds lk/kq dkyw ,oa muds ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tuS 2018% 96&97½A mjokgh ?kkVh ds la- 1510 ek?k lqfn 8 lkseokj ¼1453 bZ-½ ds egkohj efw rZys[k eas xkis fxfj ds egkjktkf/kjkt Mqxa jsUnzflag ds jkT;dky esa dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; ds Hkêkjd deydhfÙkZ dh iszj.kk ,oa if.Mrkpk;Z if.Mr jS/kw ds funsZ”ku eas vxzksr oa”k o xXxZ xk=s ds lk/kq vkYgk ,oa muds ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 98&99½A mjokgh ?kkVh ds la- 1510 ek?k lqfn 8 lkes okj ¼1453 bZ-½ ds pUnzizHk efw rZys[k esa xkis fxfj ds egkjktkf/kjkt Mqxa jsUnzflag ds jkT;dky esa dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; ds Hkêkjd xq.kHknz dh izsj.kk ,oa if.Mrkpk;Z if.Mr jS/kw ds funsZ”ku esa vxzksr o”a k o okfly xk=s ds la?kkf/kifr nsÅ ds iq= la?kkf/kifr djeflag }kjk lifjokj Jh pna zizHk dh egkdk; izfrek dh izfr’Bk djokus dk

36 | vkbZ.,l.ts.,l&VªkatSDlUl] o’kZ&5] vad&3] tqykÃ&flracj] 2021 mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tuS 2018% 99½A ,d iRFkj dh ckoM+h lewg ds la- 1525 pS= lqfn 7 cq/kokj ¼1468 bZ-½ ds xqgkefUnj Ø- 12 ds vkfnukFk efw rZys[k eas xksikpynqxZ ds dhfÙkZflag ds jkT;dky esa dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; iq’djx.k ds Hkêkjd “kqHkpUnz dh izsj.kk ,oa mudh lsok eas jr izfr’Bkpk; if.Mr jS/kw ds funsZ”ku eas vxzksrd vUo; o xxZ xk=s ds la?kkf/kifr ges jkt }kjk vius dqVqEclfgr Jh ;qxkfnukFk dh izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 136&137½A blh lewg ds la- 1525 pS= lqfn 15 ¼1468 bZ-½ ds xqgkefUnj Ø- 13 ds fHkfÙkys[k eas xkis kpynqxZ ds egkjktkf/kjkt dhfÙkZflag ds jkT;dky esa dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; iq’djx.k ds Hkêkjd “kqHkpUnz dh izsj.kk ,oa if.Mr jS/kw ds vkEuk; eas vxzksrd vUo; ds lk/kq vljkt ,oa muds ifjokjtuksa }kjk lnSo iz.kke&fuons u dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 139&140½A blh lewg ds la- 1525 pS= lqfn 7 c/q kokj ¼1468 bZ-½ ds xqgkefUnj Ø- 14 ds jRu=; efw rZys[k esa xksikpyegknqxZ ds egkjktkf/kjkt dhfÙkZflag ds jkT;dky eas dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; iq’djx.k ds Hkêkjd ;”k%lsu dh izsj.kk ,oa if.Mr jS/kw ds vkEuk; eas vxzksrd vUo; o xkbs y xk=s ds l?a kifr ifrjkt }kjk dqVqEclfgr Jh “kkfa r] dqFa kq o vjukFk dh jRu=; egkdk; izfrekvkas dh izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 140&141½A blh lewg ds la- 1525 pS= lqfn 7 cq/kokj ¼1468 bZ-½ ds xqgkeafnj Ø- 15 ds iq’inUr efw rZys[k eas xksikpyegknqxZ ds egkjktkf/kjkt dhfÙkZflag ds jkT;dky esa dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; iq’djx.k ds Hkêkjd “kqHkpUnz dh izsj.kk ,oa if.Mr jS/kw ds funsZ”ku esa vxzksrd vUo; o ehr.k xk=s lk/kq dkyw ,oa muds ifjokjtukas }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gSA blh lewg ds xqgkefUnj Ø- 20 ds la- 1530 ek?k lqfn 11 “kqØokj ¼1473 bZ-½ ds fHkfÙky[s k eas rkes joa”k ds jktk Jh dhfÙkZflag ds jkT;dky esa dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; ds Hkêkjd ges dhfÙkZ ds varxZr e.Mykpk;Z /keZpUnz ds f”k’; izHkkpUnz ds f”k’; dhfÙkZpUnz ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr jS/kw ds funsZ”ku eas lk/kq nsu/kh ,oa muds ifjokjtukas }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 165&166½A Jh fnxEcj tuS efUnj] vVsj ds ,d frfFkfoghu ¼la- 1529&30½ ckgqcyh /kkrq ewfrZys[k eas dk’Bkla?k ds Hkêkjd “kqHkpUnz vkEuk; esa if.Mr jS/kw }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 52½A • çfr’Bkpk;Z ft.knkl & Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tuS iapk;rh cM+k efUnj] ejq Suk ds la- 1511 ¼1454 bZ-½ ds ik”oZukFk /kkrq efw rZys[k eas eyw la?k ds izfr’Bkpk;Z ft.knkl ds mins”k ij lk/kq ekgns o mudh iRuh okcM }kjk Jh ik”oZukFk dks iz.kke&fuosnu dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tuS 2019% 67½A • if.Mr x.kifr & mjokgh ?kkVh ds l-a 1514 oS”kk[k lqfn 10 cq/kokj ¼1457 bZ-½ ds “kSyd`r dqfydkys[k eas xksikpy egknqxZ ds egkjktkf/kjkt MqaxjUs nzflag ds jkT;dky eas eyw la?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN ds Hkêkjd ftupUnz ds vkEuk; eas [k.Msyoky vUo; ds if.Mr x.kifr ,oa muds ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 108½A • if.Mr Å/kj.k ¼Å/kk½ & mjokgh ?kkVh ds la- 1514 oS”kk[k lqfn 10 cq/kokj ¼1457 bZ-½ ds iùizHk efw rZys[k esa jktk Mksxa jlh ds jkT;dky esa eyw la?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN ds Hkêkjd ftupUnz ds vkEuk; eas tSloky vUo; ds if.Mr Å/kj.k }kjk lifjokj izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 109&110½A • if.Mr y’kk o if.Mr ouk & Jh fnxEcj tSu chliaFkh efUnj] nkukvksyh] y”dj ds la- 1514 T;s’B lqfn 8 lkseokj ¼1457 bZ-½ ds prqfo±”kfr /kkrq efw rZys[k eas eyw la?k ds Hkêkjd ftupUnz ds vkEuk; eas e.Mykpk;Z f=HkqoudhfÙkZ ds vUo; eas ikSjikV vUo; ds if.Mr y’kk ds iq= if.Mr

Xokfy;j {ks= ds tSu vfHkys[kksa eas if.Mr&çfr’Bkpk;Z leqnk; | 37 ouk }kjk izfr’Bk&dk;Z djokus rFkk xkys kjkM vUo; ds la?koh eglkS ,oa muds ifjokjtuksa }kjk fuekZ.k&dk;Z djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 113½A • if.Mr djepUnz & dsna zh; iqjkrÙo laxzgky;] f”koiqjh eas lajf{kr ujoj ls izkIr la- 1517 ek?k ofn 9 pUnzokj ¼1460 bZ-½ ds loZrkHs knz ik’kk.k LrEHkys[k eas dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; iq’djx.k ds vkpk;Z [kes dhfÙkZ ds iêk/kh”k vkpk;Z izrkipUnz dh f”k’;k.kh fuJfs gdk ysfy[k dh f”k’;k o?kfs ydk la?keJh ,oa if.Mr djepUnz ds vkEuk; eas tSloky tkfr ds lk/kq Nkm ,oa muds ifjokjtuksa }kjk laHkor% Jh izrkipUnz dh fuflf/kdk ds fuekZ.k gksus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 185&186½A • if.Mr oh?kw & Jh fnxEcj tuS vkfnukFk ftuky;] exjkSuh ds la- 1519 ekxZ”kh’kZ lqfn 3 cq/kokj ¼1462 bZ-½ ds x.k/kjoy; ;a=ys[k eas dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; iq’djx.k ds Hkêkjd deydhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas tS”koa”k o Hksyk&vykiqj ds oklh lk/kq Hkko|kS dh iRuh lqgxk] muds iq= lk/kq gfjpUnz dh iRuh ugqJh] muds iq=kas if.Mr oh?kw dh iRuh eYgks o lqjtu dh iRuh dEeZJh ,oa muds iq= gfjnkl }kjk x.k/kjoy; ;a= dh izfr’Bk djokus ,oa lnSo iz.kke&fuons u dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 186&187½A • if.Mr lSukejbZik & ,d iRFkj dh ckoM+h lewg ds la- 1523 QkYxq.k ofn 6 lkes okj ¼1466 bZ-½ ds xqgkefUnj Ø- 12 ds ys[k eas ys[kd ds :i eas if.Mr lSukejbZik dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 129½A • if.Mr gfjiky & Jh vkfnukFk fnxEcj tSu efUnj] ikjlsu ds l-a 1524 dkfÙkZd lqfn 15 cq/kokj ¼1467 bZ-½ ds n”kyk{kf.kd ;a=ys[k eas ewyla?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr gfjiky ds funsZ”ku eas tSloky vUo; ds pkS/kjh <gbZ dh iRuh lrks ,oa ifjokjtukas }kjk iz.kke&fuons u dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 129½A ,d iRFkj dh ckoM+h ds la- 1525 pS= lqfn 7 c/q kokj ¼1468 bZ-½ ds xqgkefUnj Ø- 1 ds ik”oZukFk efw rZys[k eas ewyla?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds mins”k ,oa if.Mr gfjiky ds funsZ”ku eas xkys kjkM vUo; ds fdlh Jkod ¼uke vLi’V½ dh iRuh eqgkjkJh] muds iq=kas la?kifr ekf.kd] v”oifr] dqljkt o tkfs t rFkk vU; ifjokjtukas lfgr Jh ik”oZrhFkZs”oj dh izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 131&132½A • if.Mr ukx.k & Jh fnxEcj tSu vkfnukFk ftuky;] exjkSuh ds la- 1525 ek?k lqfn 10 lkseokj ¼1468 bZ-½ ds ik”oZukFk&iaprhFkhZ /kkrq ewfrZys[k eas ewyla?k ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; esa if.Mr ukx.k dh iRuh ogksrd o muds iq= ozã }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 194½A • if.Mr irs o irs)eZ & ,d iRFkj dh ckoM+h lewg ds la- 1525 pS= lqfn 7 cq/kokj ¼1468 bZ-½ ds xqgkefUnj Ø- 13 ds fHkfÙky[s k eas dk’Bkla?k ds Hkêkjd “kqHkpUnz ds vkEuk; eas iùkorh&iqjokj tkfr ds lk/kq /kktr dh iRuh yktS] muds iq= yBk dh iRuh lkSfefr] muds iq= if.Mr irs dh iRuh gla kSfr ,oa muds iq= if.Mr irs)eZ }kjk Jh ik”oZukFk dh lnSo iwtk ,oa ueu djus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tuS 2018% 138&139½A • if.Mr ?kkVe & ,d iRFkj dh ckoM+h lewg ds la- 1525 pS= lqfn 7 cq/kokj ¼1468 bZ-½ ds xqgkefUnj Ø- 15 ds iq’inar ewfrZys[k eas xkis kpyegknqxZ ds egkjktkf/kjkt dhfÙkZflag ds jkT;dky eas dk’Bkla?k ekFkqjkUo; iq’djx.k ds Hkêkjd “kqHkpUnz dh izsj.kk ,oa if.Mr jS/kw ds funsZ”ku eas vxzksrd vUo; o ehr.k xk=s lk/kq dkyw ,oa muds ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus

38 | vkbZ.,l.t.s ,l&VªkatSDlUl] o’kZ&5] vad&3] tqykÃ&flracj] 2021 dk mYys[k gqvk gSA bl ys[k dks if.Mr ?kkVe ds iq= fpnzwi us fy[kk Fkk ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 141&142½A blh lewg ds xqgk efUnj Ø- 13 ds la- 1525 pS= lqfn 15 xq#okj ¼1468 bZ-½ ds fHkfÙky[s k eas ?kkVe dks lw=/kkfj ey; dk iq= dgk x;k gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 137&138½A Jh “kkfUrukFk fnxEcj tSu efUnj] tSu xyh] vackg ds la- 1531 QkYxq.k lqfn 5 “kØq okj ¼1474 bZ-½ ds fl)pØ ;a=ys[k esa dk’Bkla?k ds Hkêkjd xq.kHknz ds vkEuk; esa dqekjJh] okbZ ohjk ,oa ikSjikV vUo; ds if.Mr ?kkVe }kjk izfr’Bk gksus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2019% 81&81½A bu ys[kkas ls if.Mr ?kkVe ds ys[kd ,oa ifz r’Bkpk;Z nksukas dk;ks± eas jr jgus ds ladsr feyrs gSaA bu vfHkys[kkas esa if.Mr ?kkVe dh oa”k ijEijk dks v/kkfs yf[kr izdkj ls le>k tk ldrk gS & ey; ¼lw=/kkj½ A if.Mr ?kkVe ¼ys[kd½ la- 1525&1531 A fpnwzi ¼y[s kd½ 1525 • if.Mr fFk# & <ks<k}kj tSu efUnj lewg ds la- 1527 ek?k lqfn 5 ¼1470 bZ-½ ds xqgkefUnj Ø- 2 ds iùizHk efw rZys[k eas xkis kpynqxZ ds egkjktkf/kjkt dhfÙkZflag ds jkT;dky eas eyw la?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas tSloky vUo; ds if.Mr fFk# }kjk ifjokjlfgr Jh iùizHk dh izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 148&149½A • if.Mr fotSlhy ¼fotSlh½ & Jh lqik”ouZ kFk fnxEcj tSu efUnj] xkgs n ds la- 1527 Hkknz lqfn 13 jfookj ¼1470 bZ-½ ds prqfo±”kfr /kkrq ewfrZys[k eas ewyla?k ljLorhxPN ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr fotSlhy ds funsZ”ku eas ikSjikV v’Vlk/k vUo; ds lk/kq egjktq ,oa ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 82½A Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tSu cM+k efUnj ¼chliaFk½] “;kis qj ds la- 1532 oS”kk[k lqfn 14 xq#okj ¼1475 bZ-½ ds f=rhFkhZ /kkrq efw rZys[k rFkk ik”oZukFk /kkrq efw rZys[k esa eyw la?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN uafnla?k ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vUrxrZ pUnziqjh ds e.Mykpk;Z f=HkqoudhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas ikSjikV vUo; ds la?kifr efgik: ,oa ifjokjtukas }kjk if.Mr fotSlh o if.Mr ujifr ds funsZ”ku esa izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2019% 81&84½A Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tSu NksVk efUnj] “;kis qj ds la- 1539 oS”kk[k lqfn 14 xq#okj ¼1482 bZ-½ ds vkfnukFk&prqfo±”kfr /kkrq efw rZys[k eas ewyla?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vUrxrZ e.Mykpk;Z f=HkqoudhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr fotSlh ,oa muds ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2019% 86½A Jh oklqiwT; fnxEcj tSu efUnj] fdykxsV] Xokfy;j ds la- 1549 QkYxq.k lqfn 11 lkseokj ¼1492 bZ-½ ds pna zizHk /kkrq ewfrZys[k eas eyw la?k ds e.Mykpk;Z f=HkqoudhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr fotSlh ds funsZ”ku eas jRukxj vUo; ds lk/kq ek/kkS ,oa muds ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 208½A mijkDs r pkj fofHké vfHkys[kkas esa mfYyf[kr if.Mr fotSlhy rkes jdkyhu ,d egÙoiw.kZ if.Mr tku iM+rs gSa vkSj ;s ewyla?k oykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ¼vVsj “kk[kk½ ,oa

Xokfy;j {ks= ds tSu vfHkys[kksa eas if.Mr&çfr’Bkpk;Z leqnk; | 39 muds vUrxZr e.Mykpk;Z f=HkqoudhfÙkZ ¼pUnsjh e.My½ ds vkEuk;h jgs FksA budk dk;Zdky la- 1527&1549 ekuk tk ldrk gSA • if.Mr ujifr & Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tSu cM+k efUnj ¼chliaFk½] “;kis qj ds la- 1532 oS”kk[k lqfn 14 xq#okj ¼1475 bZ-½ ds f=rhFkhZ /kkrq efw rZys[k rFkk ik”oZukFk /kkrq ewfryZ s[k eas ewyla?k oykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN ufUnla?k ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vUrxZr pUnzijq h ds e.Mykpk;Z f=HkqoudhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas ikSjikV vUo; ds la?kifr efgik: ,oa ifjokjtuksa }kjk if.Mr fotSlh o if.Mr ujifr ds funsZ”ku eas izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2019% 81&84½A • if.Mr eflZ; & ykyk xkds qypanz tSloky fnxEcj tuS efUnj] ykgs ke.Mh] Xokfy;j ds la- 1529 oS”kk[k lqfn 7 ¼1472 bZ-½ ds lE;Xn”kZu ;a=ys[k esa ewyla?k ds vkpk;Z fo|kuafn ,oa if.Mr eflZ; }kjk izfr’Bk gksus dk mYys[k feyrk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 162½A • if.Mr oy & Jh vkfnukFk fnxEcj tSu efUnj vfr”k; {k=s ] ikgs jh ds la- 1533 QkYxq.k lqfn 15 xq#okj ¼1476 bZ-½ ds fl)pØ ;a=ys[k eas eyw la?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas tSloky oa”k ds lk/kq lUrks’kq ,oa muds ifjokjtukas }kjk izfr’Bk djokus ,oa if.Mr oy }kjk ys[k dks fy[kus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 205&206½A • if.Mr yk’kk & Jh fnxEcj tuS vkfnukFk ftuky;] eaxjkSuh ds la- 1534 ¼1477 bZ-½ ds lE;d~pkfj= ;a=ys[k esa ewyla?k ds Hkêkjd HkqoudhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas vkpk;Z /keZdhfÙkZ ds mins”k ij if.Mr yk’kk dh ifRu;kas ekgh o ekabZ o muds iq= ft.knkl dh iRuh tlekns }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 206½A • if.Mr g;k & Jh fnxEcj tSu efa nj] vVsj ds la- 1535 Hkknz lqfn 15 ¼1478 bZ-½ ds lE;d~n”kZu ;a=ys[k esa ewyla?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas xkys kjkjs vUo; ds lk/kq y’ks ,oa ifjokjtukas }kjk ifz r’Bk djokus rFkk vUr eas if.Mr g;k dk ukekYs ys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 95&96½A • if.Mr fHk;k & Jh ik”ouZ kFk fnxEcj tuS cM+k efUnj] ujoj ds l-a 1538 oS”kk[k lqfn 15 “kqØokj ¼1481 bZ-½ ds vkfnukFk&prqfo±”kfr /kkrq efw rZys[k eas ewyla?k ds e.Mykpk;Z f=HkqoudhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas ikSjikV vUo; ds if.Mr fHk;k ,oa ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 211&212½A • if.Mr nheu & Jh “kkfUrfxfj fnxEcj tSu vfr”k; {ks=] vkeh ds la- 1554 oS”kk[k lqfn 3 cq/kokj ¼1497 bZ-½ ds “kSyd`r ftu ewfrZys[k eas egkjktk ekuflag ds dky eas eyw la?k ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; ,oa if.Mr nheu ds funsZ”ku eas okjgJs.kh oa”k ds la?kifr ‘ksey }kjk lifjokj izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k feyrk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 214½A • if.Mr fyi.kq & mjokgh ?kkVh ds xqgkefUnj Ø- 8 ds fudV “kSyd`r frfFkfoghu dqfydkys[k ¼yxHkx 15oha “krh bZ-½ eas Jh “kkafrukFk dh oUnuk] lk/kq y’ke.k }kjk iz.kke&fuons u ,oa Hkêkjd fyi.kq o igqy ds ukekYs ys[k gq, gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 389½A • if.Mr lrkes q] if.Mr ;q/kij if.Mr elhdkS & ,d iRFkj dh ckoM+h lewg ds xgq kefUnj Ø- 12 ds vusd frfFkfoghu y?kq fHkfÙky[s kkas eas if.Mr lrkes ]w if.Mr ;q/kij o if.Mr elhdkS dk mYys[k feyrk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 397½A • if.Mr JhpUnz & <k<s k}kj tSu efUnj lewg ds ,d frfFkfoghu y?kq fHkfÙky[s k eas if.Mr JhpUnz dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 403½A

40 | vkbZ.,l.ts.,l&VªkatSDlUl] o’kZ&5] vad&3] tqykÃ&flracj] 2021 • ikaMs jklw?k & Jh fnxEcj tSu efUnj] vVsj ds la- 1573 ¼1516 bZ-½ ds ;a=ys[k eas if.Mr flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas ikMa s jklw?k ds mins”k ij tSloky vUo; ds lk/kq efgtsrw }kjk lifjokj izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 148&149½A blh eafnj ds l-a 1577 ¼1520 bZ-½ ds ;a=ys[k eas eyw la?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas ikMa s jklw?k ds mins”k ij tSloky vUo; ds lk/kq efgtsrw }kjk lifjokj izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 151&152½A • if.Mr m’knso & Jh fnxEcj tuS eafnj] vVsj ds la- 1574 dkfÙkZd lqfn 5 lkes okj ¼1517 bZ-½ ds fl)pØ ;a=ys[k eas if.Mr flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas czãpkjh n;k ,oa if.Mr m’knso ds funsZ”ku eas yEcdapqd vUo; ds lk/kq lklow ,oa muds ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 151½A • if.Mrkpk;Z lk/kkj.k & Jh ik”oZukFk fnxEcj tSu cM+k efUnj ¼chliaFk½] “;ksiqj ds la- 1575 QkYxq.k ofn 5 xq#okj ¼1518 bZ-½ ds ik”oZukFk /kkrq ewfrZys[k eas dk’Bkla?k ds Hkêkjd fot;lsu ds f”k’; vkpk;Z flaglsu ds izfr’Bkpk;ZRo eas if.Mrkpk;Z lk/kkj.k }kjk Jh ik”oZukFk dks lnSo iz.kke&fuosnu dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2019% 118&119½A • if.Mr neks & Jh fnxEcj tSu vfr”k; {ks=] cjklks ds la- 1580 QkYxq.k lqfn 14 xq#okj ¼1523 bZ-½ ds fl)pØ ;a=ys[k eas ewyla?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas czãpkjh if.Mr neks ds mins”k ij oyw }kjk lifjokj izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 153½A • if.Mr Hkkuq “kEeZ.k & Jh fnx tSu fla?kbZth dk efUnj] djjS k ds la- 1585 QkYxq.k lqfn 5 “kqØokj ¼1528 bZ-½ ds fl)pØ ;a=ys[k eas ewyla?k dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd ftupUnz ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr Hkkuq “kEeZ.k ds izfr’Bkpk;ZRo eas tnqoa”k o yaodapqd vUo; ds pkS/kjh vk<w o ifjokjtuksa }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 251½A • if.Mr mns & Jh vkfnukFk fnxEcj tSu cM+k efUnj] ikjs lk ds la- 1592 Hkknz lqfn 10 jfookj ¼1535 bZ½ ds lE;d~n”kuZ ;a=ys[k esa ewyla?k oykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds f”k’; czãpkjh inkjFkq ds mins”k rFkk if.Mr mns ds funs”Z ku eas lk/kq /kh# ,oa muds ifjokjtukas }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2019% 121&122½A • if.Mr fnoku & Jh vkfnukFk fnxEcj tSu efUnj vfr”k; {ks=] iksgjh ds l-a 1600 dkfÙkZd lqfn 5 xq#okj ¼1543 bZ-½ ds fl)pØ ;a=ys[k eas eyw la?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd lglzdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr fnoku ds mins”k ij tSloky oa”k ds lk/kq lÅ ,oa ifjokjtukas }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018c% 255&256½A Jh fnxEcj tSu chliaFkh efa nj] nkukvksyh] y”dj ds la- 1677 dkfÙkZd lqfn 5 xq#okj ¼1620 bZ-½ ds ;a=ys[k eas eyw la?k cykRdkjx.k ljLorhxPN dqUndqUnkpk;kZUo; ds Hkêkjd flagdhfÙkZ ds vUrxZr e.Mykpk;Z flagufUn ds f”k’; vkpk;Z lglzdhfÙkZ ds vkEuk; eas if.Mr fnoku ds mins”k ij tlS oky tkfr ds /kEeZnkl }kjk lifjokj Jh fpUrkef.k ik”oZukFk ;a= dh izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2018% 264½A • if.Mr n;kjke & Jh fnxEcj tSu efUnj] cM+k cktkj] xkgs n ds la- 1603 ¼1546 bZ-½ ds ;{kh iùkorh /kkrq efw rZys[k eas if.Mr n;kjke }kjk izfr’Bk djokus dk mYys[k gqvk gS ¼flag ,oa tSu 2017% 162½A