Chicago Prashnottar

Author(s): Vijayanandsuri
Publisher: Atmanand Jain Pustak Pracharak Mandal

Page 57

( 41
)
your own meaning to these terms, the matter does not affect us because when the term and the object denoted by it appear in the artificial sense you have imposed on them the usual sense of the word and the object denoted by it would never be absent. How would you then prove the phenomena to be indescribably unreal ? If the indescribable unreality is not proved, how can phenomena be proved unreal.
Nor can only one Brahma be proved. 27. Q.--I call that to be indescribable which is
not visible. A.-Your position is highly self-contradic. tory. If the phenomena are not visible, why did you accept them as visible and having attributes in your former statement. If you ask what contradiction there is in accepting them as visible and having attributes, then your statement that what is not visible is indescribable would fall through. When the phenomena are not indescribable, then either they would be existing in form or non-existing in form. In accepting either of these two positions