Sambodhi 1983 Vol 12

SR No.: 520762
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Dalsukh Malvania, H C Bhayani, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1983
Total Pages: 326
Language: English, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Magazine, India_Sambodhi, & India
File Size: 11 MB

Page 24

The Advailic Sat
21
Therefore Madhusûdana, is his Advaita siddhi, says that the falsehood of falschood is very much necessary to negate the reality of the world. No doubt, one side of Madhusudana's argument seems to be improper on the ground that if the falsehood of falsehood is admitted, it will, on the other hand, justify the reality of the world & thus the tenet of Advaita can not be proved. In this manner, it seenis to be convincing and proper, if the falsehood of world according to Sankara, is admitted. Regarding the logic of falsehood of falsehood, it may further be emphasized that after the realisation of Brahman, the falsehood of world, is automatically proved for the jñānin and then there remains no scope for arguing the falsehood of falsehood. Therefore the logic put forth by Madhusudana Saraswati can not be said valid.
So for, mainly two types of sat have been taken in view, 1. e. the Paramārthika and the Vyāvahărika. In relative terms, the Vedānta has also referred to the third type of sat the Pratibhāsika. The erroreous appearence of silver superimposed on the conch shell, is the example of Prātibhāsika sat. It is called sat, because it appears as real, but as a matter of fact it is not real at all. It is noteworthy that even the Pratibhasika sat, illusory reality, can not be experienced without its substratum, which is conch shell in the example of conch-shell-silver. The substratum is sat and Brahman in the case of the experience of world. Thus the coucept of sat is the main thesis of the Vedantin. The sat Brahman has cit and Ananda, as its main characteristics. It is surprising that over-looking the above chai acteristics of Brahman S.N. Das Gupta, a noted scholar of Indian philosopliy, has found the Brahman parallel to the Sünya of Nagarjuna. He says "His Brahman is very much like the Sünya of Nāgārjuna",1 As the Yogavāśistha has also mentioned the Brahman of the Vedanta, which is sat etc. can not be described as Sünya or the Vijñāna
Sankara, the propounder and advocate of sat, Brahman has refuted the idea of unreality regarding Brahman, saying fauna mica हि परमार्थ सदस्यं ब्रह्म मन्दबुद्धीनामसदिव प्रतिभाति"2
In this way, the Paramartha sat of the Vedantian, is consciousness, supreme bliss, absolute, without the distinction of knower and known, beyond the approach of senses, eternal and one. Neither there is luality and nor the approach of the Sastras. It is only known by these vho intute it. 1 History of Indian Philosophy, vol. 1. P 493. 2 Prästävika, S. B Ch. Upa. viii. 1. 1.