sribhashya-mahapurvapaksha-continued

[Guest guest]

How could this avidhya be eradicated? 'asyAscha avidhyAyAh

nirviseshachinmAthrabrahmAthmaikathva vijAnEna nivrtthim

vadhanthi,'says Ramanuja. The nivrtthi, removal of avidhya has been

postulated by the advaithin to be caused by the knowledge of the

identity of the Atman with the Brahman, the undifferentiated

consciousness.Sruthi texts like 'na punarmrthyavE thadhEkam

pasyathi,'(Chan.7-26-2),he who sees the One is not subject to death ,

meaning that he attains immortality, 'brahma vedha brahmaiva

bhavathi,'(Mund.3-2-9 one who knows Brahman becomes

Brahman, 'thameEva vidhithvA athimrthyum Ethi,' Knowing Brahman thus

one transcends death. Here the word mrthyu means refers to avidhyA.

The knowledge that Brahman is nirvisEsha chinmAthra is attained by

the texts like' sathyam jnAnam anantham brahma,'(tait.Ana.1-1)

Brahman is existence, knowledge and infinity,'vijnAnam Anandham

brahma,' Brahman is consciousness and bliss. The identity of Atman

with Brahman is declared by the texts like 'thathvamasi.' The

suthrakAra also says 'AtmEthithoopagacchanthigrAhayanthicha,' the

texts acknowledge Brahman as the self and teach others also to

realise it as such.

 

After citing the testimony of the vedas the advaitin can establish

the destruction of avidhya by the knowledge of the identity of the

individual self with Brahman through yukthi, argument

It may be argued that the direct perception of the diversity of the

world cannot be sublated by the scriptural texts. In the illusion of

the rope as a snake mere knowledge that it is only a snake is enough

to destroy the illusion. But it is a case of one perception being

sublated by another whereas here perception is said to be sublated by

sasthra which is a different pramANa, means of knowledge, altogether.

 

One pramANa can be sublated by another if the latter is stronger. For

instance when you hear that there is a fire this knowledge through

inference may be sublated by perception that there is no fire which

becmes the stronger means of knowledge. But here it could be objected

that sruthi is weaker than perception because it needs to be

validitated by perception.

 

Advaitin in answer to this argument says that the flame of the lamp

appears to be one through perception but by inference it is

understood to be not so.The flame is continously produced and hence

gives the appearence of one single flame.So here the prathyaksha

which is stronger is sublated by the weaker pramANa. The criterion is

not whether the pramANa is weak or strong but only whether it is

contaminated by defect. In the case of the flame perception is

affected by the defect of the eye in being unable to see the

different flames.Similarly when there is a conflicting evidence

thriough different means of knowledge the one which can be explained

otherwise, anyathA siddham , that it is due to some defect, is

sublated by the one which cannot be explained away like that,

ananyathA siddham. Hence the perception of diversity of the universe

which is due to dosha of avidhya is sublated by the knowledge arising

out of sasthra, of the undifferentiated Brahman.

 

An objection may be raised against this stand of the advaitin that if

the sasthras were free of defects how can the injunctions on karma

like 'jyothishtomEna svargakAmo yajEtha,' one who wishes to attain

svarga should perform jyothishtoma sacrifice, can be dismissed by

those prescribing the spiritual practices for Moksha? Advaitin says

that the texts about karma are sublated by those about Brahman not

because they are defective but because they are anyathAsiddha, that

is, they can be shown to have results that are transitory while the

latter are not so,ananyathAsiddha. Even among the vedantavakyas,

those about SaguNabrahman are sublated by those about

Nirgunabrahman.The saguNa texts serve the purpose of attributing

qualities to Brahman so that it could be sublated by the nirguNa

texts, which are stronger. The argument given for proving that the

NirguNa texts are stronger is that, if they are not, then after

attributing qualities to Brahman there will not be any meaning for

the NirguNa texts. Therfore Brahman is in reality undifferentiated

consciousness.

 

..

 

 

..