________________
would do if at the outset they admit that the puruşa (soul) is non-doer, eternal, of the nature of sentiency, and then proceed to look upon it as doer, non-eternal and non-sentient. If one denies the soul that means contradicting our empirical experience, because the soul is well known to all-even the simple cowherds and women and all. It is equivalent to saying "Sašī (luna) is acandra (non-moon)". The statement, 'Do I exist or not ?' is self-contradictory like 'My mother is a barren woman'. If the thesis of the inference - "The soul does not exist' - is a sham one, the reason, 'Because the five means of proof cognising existent objects do not operate with respect to it also cannot be its attribute and thus it becomes unreal (asiddha) with reference to it and hence fallacious. Moreover we can never know the size of the Himalaya by any means of proof; the five sources of positive knowledge do not operate with respect to it, nor with respect to ghosts, etc., but this does not mean that they are non-existent. Similarly the means of proof may not be able to operate with regard to the soul and yet the soul may be existent. Thus the reason given above is anaikāntika, inconclusive. In fact, the soul will be established even by inference later on, in which case the mark (linga) given above can be shown to be existent in heterologous cases only, and so is viruddha, contradictory also. Therefore a doubt should not be entertained with regard to the existence of the soul; but the soul should be determined by perception. (1557)
The qualities of the soul viz. memory, desire to know, desire to do, desire to go, doubt—which are all particular forms of consciousness are established through self-apprehension. Therefore the substratum of these qualities must also be directly known, just as the jar is known by perception because its qualities, colour, etc. are known by perception. One may feel like arguing that this is not conclusive, because sound, the attribute of ether is perceptible, but not so ether. But this is not correct. Sound is not an attribute of ether, it is a modification of matter, because it like colour, etc., is amenable to the senses (1558) 10
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
