Life of Shrimad Rajchandra

Author(s): Manu Doshi
Publisher: Manu Doshi

Page 75

all its organs function by virtue of soul. The soul, which remains distinct in every state, which stays merely as knower, can be evidently identified by its characteristic of consciousness. You know the objects like pot, cloth etc. and believe in them, but do not believe in soul, whose existence is a prerequisite for seeing or knowing. Then think over, how is it possible to have knowledge of pot, cloth etc. in absence of soul?
Lifeless matter and consciousness have evidently different properties. They are not the substances, which can be unified or merged into one; they remain different at all the time. In spite of that if you have doubts about the existence of soul, why don't you think over, who is the doubter?' That is the immense amazement to me!
2) Presenting now his doubts about the eternity of soul, the pupil asks the questions in light of the religious beliefs of the great majority of people in the world.
Pupil: Lord, by pondering over the evidences that you gave regarding the existence of soul, it seems that there should be something like soul, but I think that it should be emerging with the formation of the body and might be destroyed at the time of death. Wouldn't that be right?
Guru: Body and soul do not have the inseparable connection, which may require that soul can stay only with the body or that it cannot exist without the body. The body has merely spatial contact with the soul. The body is lifeless, it has a form that can be known by the senses. Body itself cannot see, but it is a visible object that can be seen by virtue of the soul. In that case, who would make out that consciousness arises or that it is destroyed? Thus the emergence and the destruction of soul cannot be brought to the experiential level. That, which comes to know of the emergence of soul, must be different from the soul; similarly that, which knows of its destruction, should also be different. Since the objects other than consciousness do not know anything, those mentioning about the emergence and the destruction of consciousness do not seem to be speaking the truth.
Pupil: While examining various objects, it seems that all of them are transitory and destructible: their states evidently go on changing every moment. On the basis of that experience, soul also cannot be everlasting.
Guru: You are looking at the composed objects, which are destructible. Whatever is composed is going to be decomposed. But the conscious matter, which undergoes the experience, which is the seer of the compositions, is not a composed product. Consciousness can never arise by combination or composition of the lifeless objects. Similarly no one can experience that lifeless matter can arise out of consciousness. In that case, how is it possible that soul, which is a natural substance, which is not a composed product, can be destroyed or can merge into any other object? It is therefore clear that soul is an everlasting substance. Also look at the living beings like snakes, which have the angry temperament since the birth. Snakes and peacocks, rats and cats happen to be born enemies. That enmity and other faults are natural to them; they are not acquired in the present life. They are evidently the traits from the previous lives. It can be similarly proved that the soul does not die. Its eternity is evidenced by virtue of its remaining the same from birth to birth. The changing states of the objects that you notice are transformations of the everlasting substances. Despite undergoing transformation, the original substance thus continues to stay forever.
Similarly though childhood, young age and other states go on changing, soul as the knower of all such states remains constant. Had everything been momentary, the soul, after knowing the momentary nature of a thing, would cease to exist at the next moment. As such, it would not be able to convey its experience that the said thing is momentary. It is manifestly clear that what provides the concept of momentary nature cannot itself be momentary. As such, one, who experiences the momentary nature of a thing, is proved to be non-momentary, eternal.