The conclusion is original source must be senscient. Because in this, our experience, experimental knowledge, we see something matter and something living. I am seeing here is a small ant and here is a big stone. The big stone is insenscient, it cannot move. For millions of years you wait, whether the stone will move—you cannot see. No, it will not move, because it is insenscient, whereas a small ant, it is going. You just check its marching, it will struggle. It will struggle—this way, this way, this way. And ultimately you have to give way. This is senscient. Therefore senscient is superior.
There are two things within our experience: one, matter, not senscient; and another senscient. So this . . . now, I am seer. Or sometimes I control both these things. But I am not supreme controller. But I can observe that there are two things, senscient and insenscient, and I am observing. So for the time being, I am superior of both the senscient and nonsenscient. So the conclusion is the ultimate source of everything, ultimate knower, ultimate analyzer, must be a senscient. It cannot be insenscient. That is experimental knowledge.