Soul Science Part 01

Author(s): Parasmal Agrawal
Publisher: Kundakunda Gyanpith

Page 80

44
Pre-view (Purva Ranga)
Acārya Amṛtacandra in Atmakhyāti has explained the difference between the Upayoga and the Moha by an example of the taste of sweet-yogurt/curd. He explains that by practice and experience one can learn to distinguish between the taste of the plain yogurt (curd) and the sweet taste of the added sugar while eating the sweet-yogurt (sweet-curd). In the same way, a knower of the truth (Jñāni) realizes the difference between the Moha and the Upayoga (perception and knowledge). On such realization one would agree that the thoughts and feelings of Moha are not of the soul, because they are different from the Upayoga.
Similarly, in stanza 37 we find that the soul is not the owner of the Dharma Dravya (substance) and other substances associated with the soul. In Jain metaphysics six kinds of substances (Dravya) have been described. These are: Jīva, Pudgala, Dharma, Adharma, Ākāśa and Kāla. A brief description of these is given in Appendix-3. Each Dravya is different from all other Dravya.
Question: A dead body does not become angry. It means the presence of the soul is essential for the existence of the anger. Does it not mean that the anger is an attribute of the soul? Answer: Let us first be clear that according to the relative point of view the soul owns anger, emotions and the physical body. Many arguments such as one raised here regarding the ownership of the anger by the soul are accepted by the relative point of view.
But by such arguments alone one cannot get a true picture of the soul. How? Let us consider one example. Imagine that a red lamp is placed near a crystal in box-1 and the crystal appears red. Imagine another similar crystal in another box (box-2) where a green lamp is placed and the crystal appears green. We clearly note the difference in the two crystals. By camera as well as by our own eyes we can check that the crystal of box-1 is red and the crystal of box-2 is green. We cannot deny this observation but assume that the crystal of box-1 is red and the crystal of box-2 is green. The relative point of view accepts this.