Acharya Tulsi
Question
Is self-experience necessary for comprehensive knowledge? Is self-experience possible merely by having devotion for any dispassionate respective individual, guru or scriptures as part of one's sanskaras? If not, then what is the process of acquiring that state?
Answer
Comprehensive knowledge may be related to practical life or it may be determinative. Comprehensive knowledge relating to practical life characterised by devotion to a respected individual, guru and mental attitude to see in dharma the qualities attributed to a respectable individual, guru and the basic implications of dharma. In the world of practical reality, after establishing contact, a respected individual, guru and all-knowing dharma, the state of self-experience in the practical world is reached. From the point of view of naya, respected individual, guru and dharma all are the Soul. Apart from the Soul, there is nothing else that could provide the motivation for attaining comprehensive knowledge. From this point of view, knowing and realising the Soul is itself thorough knowledge which is related to self-experience.
Preksha-dhyan is the simplest way of having self- experience or realising the Soul. The aphorism, 'see the Soul through the Soul' emphasises self-knowledge or self- experience.
Question
By accepting knowledge of an ominiscient person as an evidence, it also proves in a different way that every matter gets transformed in its own determined stages. If we accept this, we cannot escape the conclusion that everything would get transformed in the determined manner at its own time. In that case, where is the need to pursue the path of moksha or to make effort for anything?
Answer
The transformation of matter is not by way of moksha or dharma, but due to its natural properties. The transformation of matter is pre-determined. But one cannot follow sanvar dharma or nirjara dharma by any predetermined rule. Dharma is the result of endeavour. Quite often, man changes his nature, karma, destiny, etc. through his endeavour. From that point of view the need for endeavour cannot be disregarded. We regard knowledge of the omniscient person as evidence. But the authenticity of that knowledge has no impact on one's endeavour, because just because someone has attained Ultimate Knowledge, we ourselves cannot know that state. When we do not know anything definite about ourselves how can we sit back smugly.
In a different sense, we may even accept that according to naya principle that fate may be playing the main role. But from practical point of view, endeavour has its own importance. No person with a practical sense gives up endeavour and depends solely on fate.
Question
Can matter in one form influence matter in another form? If not, how far are the external physical actions of being are justified?
Answer
This is not the right question. You should have asked if matter in one form can by its endeavour influence matter in another form. Endeavour is never directed to someone else. It is only meant for one's own self. Another matter may be related to it. The Soul and the Body are mutually related. In that case, how can the body not be influenced by the spiritual endeavour? So long as the Soul and the Body are linked together, the spiritual activity would affect the body and the physical activity would affect the soul. The soul freed from the body cannot affect the body nor can it do any physical activity. But so long as the two are synthesised, they cannot be free from their mutual impact.
