________________
from the five windows, as well as, the palace, so also person recollecting an object apprehended by the five senses of a body, is different from the body and its five senses.
When Dévadalta recalls an objects seen through a number of windows, even the windows are closed, it is almin of soul that recollects the objects perceived through senseorgans even when toe sense-organs have Ctased working as in case of benumbed state of blindness, deafness etc. This shows evidently that alman is different from indriyas. Or, súy, for example, a soul who observes a person eating tamarind by means of eyes, and exhibits vikūras or perversion by distilling saliva etc. by means of tongue, is decidedly different from eyes as well as tongue. Or, ülman is different from mdı ijas, because having seen an object by means of eyes, ātman holds j! by means of hands.
In reply to the Buddhistic theory that like all objects, jiva is destructible, it is argued that one who remembers the incidents that happened in former time and place, is existing like Dêvadatta who is able to recollect his experierce of childhood. So, the soul also can never vanish on account of its being able to recollect the past life,
Bauddhas advocate the destructibility of jñāna (knowledge) by means of statenients such as “Yat sat tat sai vam kşanikan" and "Ekavijñānasautatayaḥ sattrah" etc. But if the destrutibility of knowledge were accepted, there would be absolute negation of smarana. Inana of the pramālā or the perceiver) should, therefore, be taken as indestructible. Jrāna being å quality, could never exist without a substance. This shows distinctly that soul is distinguished from body.
Futher, according to Bauddhas, kşaqihatā or impermanence i recognized neither by maans of self-perception for by the help of perception through sense-organs, but hy means of Tapanāna or inference only. They further believe that the
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
