________________
would also follow that it is non-soul. (The Objector -) says, Well, it may be such.
61
(1994) (Reply) On account of its natural genus (jivatva), like 'substance' and non-corporeality, it is not proper that it should attain another genus that is quite the opposite of it, as sky cannot attain the genus 'soul' (soulness).
(1995) Being corporeal, etc., sense-organs are not the possessors of cognition (cognisers) like a jar. They are the doorways to cognition (i. e. means of cognition) and it is the soul that is the coguiser.
*(1996) The soul is different from the sense organs because there is remembrance (memory) even when they stop functioning and no cognition even when they are operating, as the cogniser is different from the five windows.
(1997) Soul cannot be devoid of knowledge, because that is its very nature, as an atom cannot be devoid of the state of corporeality. It is contradictory that it exist and be devoid of knowledge.
(1998) How can it be said that knowledge is its nature? (Reply) Why, from the direct experience in one's own body! It is to be accepted as such even in another's body, by virtue of the signs of action and inaction.
(1999) When all the obstructions are removed it attains its purest state, like the sun. As the senses are not of the form of knowledge, it is not proper that it (soul) should be non-knower in their absence.
(2000) Thus the soul is of the nature of knowledge (illumination). It shines forth only to a small extent because it shines (only) through the peep-holes (the sense-organs) like a lamp covered with an utensil having holes.
*See Gathas 1657-1660.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
