________________
SELF
111
determined and spontaneous. Were it to be made of matter, its activities would have been determined from outside and it would not have been capable of immaterial thought-activity. Hence it is held that the 'self? or the 'soul is both substantial and nonmaterial in nature. It is interesting to note here that the American philosopher, William James, implies that a non-material conception of a 'soul is not unacceptable. He writes :"... to posit a soul influenced in some mysterious way by the brain-states and responding to them by conscious affections of its own, seems to me the line of least logical resistances so far as yet we have attained.”9
In one of the Jaina classics, Višeșāvaśyaka-bhāsya we find the problem of existence or otherwise of the soul being discussed at length. Mahāvīra is portrayed as giving suitable answers to the objections raised by Indrabhūti representing the opposite school of thought which does not accept the existence of soul. As is found in most of the Indian philosophical classics, we find, in the Jaina classic also, the opponents' view-point stated first, and then a systematic refutation of the various arguments put forward in its favour. Lord Mahāvīra himself states the opposite point of view : “The existence of soul is doubtful since it is not directly perceived by any of the sense organs. The case of the soul is not similar to that of the atoms, for, though the latter also are imperceptible, as collectivities they are perceptible. Inference is also of no use in asserting the soul's existence since no inference is possible without some element of perception. On scriptural authority also the existence of the soul cannot be proved since scriptural knowledge is not distinct from inferential knowledge. Even granting that scripture aids our understanding of the existence of the soul, scripture itself does not contain the experiences of anyone who has directly perceived the soul. Added to all these difficulties in regard to scripture is the fact that there are mutual contradictions between scriptural passages. The analogical argument cannot even be attempted to establish the soul's existence, for, there is not a single entity in the universe which bears even remote resemblance to the soul. In the absence of proof through any of the means of valid knowledge considered, the only valid conclusion is that the soul does not exist."'10
9 op. cit., Vol. I, p. 181 10 Višeșāvaśyaka-bhāsya, 1550-53
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
