Isn’t belief in an invisible soul on the same level as belief in any absurd claim like payment with invisible money?

From Tushar Vora:

Just because the soul, which is atomic in size, has not been perceived yet by senses or instruments, we should not conclude that it is not there.” – someone can say, “OK, so you are saying somethig is there even though I cannot perceive it – so how about you give me all your books now – the donation is there though you cannot perceive it, when you meditate upon it and purify your consciousness sufficiently you will see that I have given you a very valuable donation”.

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Now, sometimes some devotees get the idea that pratyaksha, which means empirical sense perception, and anuman, which means logical inference, they are wrong.
They are not wrong, they are inadequate. They are incomplete. But within their jurisdiction, they are important.
When Srila Prabhupada went to America, he took a ship to go to America. And the ship went according to a particular pathway and it reached America. So, now, Srila Prabhupada certainly believed in Shabda.
But if he did not use the knowledge of, say, navigational science and use a ship, and if that knowledge did not work, he would not have landed in America. So, Srila Prabhupada would say often that, yes, the scientists can take credit where it is due. But they should not go beyond their jurisdiction and make claims about that which is unknowable by science.
So, science in and of itself can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God. So, pratyaksha and anuman have their jurisdiction in the empirical realm, in the material realm at least. And Jiva Goswami, in his Sarvasamadhi, when he talks about how to acquire knowledge, as well as in his Sattva Sandarbha, he talks about, expands these three ways of acquiring knowledge into ten.
He talks about upapatti and arthapatti and upama and ceshta and several other ways of acquiring knowledge, which are expansions of these three. But the important point is that pratyaksha and anuman have their validity in the material realm. It is only when their jurisdiction is expanded beyond where they are valid that they can become invalid and incorrect.
So, when we are talking about having faith in the existence of soul and purifying oneself, so that one can realize the soul, then one has to understand the implications of this. What it essentially means is that, from the philosophical, theoretical, conceptual point of view, spirit is essentially pure matter, and that is why spirit cannot be perceived material. And that is why we need to purify ourselves so that our spiritual senses become awakened and we can see.
So, the soul, by definition and constitution, is non-material. And that is why a non-material sensory apparatus has to be aroused and trained. The soul has non-material faculties, but they have to be stimulated from their present dormant stage, and then we can perceive the soul.
So, this does not at all apply to money, because money is something which can be perceived with a normal sensory apparatus. And if somebody claims that there is this invisible money, money is an absurd claim, because money is an object that is not deserving or requiring or demanding any special process of purification for perception. Because it is a material object, it is in the realm of pratyaksha and anumant to perceive it.
And therefore, such a claim is absurd. The same way with somebody claiming that there is this kind of ghost and that kind of ghost, and that is God, and you purify yourself and then you will see it. That is invalid, because there is no theoretical or philosophical basis for it.
So, in the case of the soul, first of all the theoretical basis is established by the philosophy given in the scriptures. And then the procedural basis is established by the sadhana given in the scriptures. So, if there is no theoretical basis at all for a particular claim, then to demand adherence to a procedure to follow it is a demand for blind faith.
Whereas, if there is a systematic theoretical basis, then even if something seemingly implausible is being demanded, it is not actually implausible or unreasonable, because there is a theoretical basis. What I mean by a theoretical basis is, now according to quantum physics, say, the table in front of which I am sitting is neither solid nor stationary. Although that is what it seems to be.
Actually, it is made up of atoms and molecules, atoms ultimately at one level, which are mostly vacuum. At another level it is made of electrons and other subatomic particles, all of which are whizzing around at high speed. So, to me it appears to be stationary and solid, whereas actually it is mostly vacuum and it is moving at high speed.
So, now if a scientist demands that, I say, I don’t see like this, why should I believe it? The scientist says, no, you have to educate yourself in quantum physics. And after you are educated, then you will be able to perceive it in due course of time by using the methodology and the technology of quantum physics. The same principle, as we are talking about spirituality, applies for this high energy physics, because it is having some sort of theoretical basis.
So, there are some quantum physics equations, there are some quantum physics mathematics, there is some quantum physics theory, which give tenability to the stipulation of procedural adherence for demanding confirmatory experience. So, to put it simply, when quantum physics uses a theory that is in its own way coherent and then proposes that things are not the way they appear to be, and then asks for a procedure by which we can actually come to know how the perception, the actual reality claimed by quantum physics is the way it is, then that is a reasonable, credible claim, that is used by science, standard. So, same way scripture uses that, it gives a philosophical theoretical basis, saying that how the soul is a non-material spiritual entity, and then it says that the soul can be perceived using spiritual sense perception, which can be aroused when we are purified.
So, it is as scientific as quantum physics, and it is far removed from my absurd claim that of invisible money, because that has absolutely no theoretical basis. It is just a claim, it is just a call for blind faith.