________________
Interpretation of Brahma-sūtra 1. 1. I
109
kāṇḍārthasyātmanaḥ paraprakasyatvābhāvāt)1. Though such a Brahman is always self-revealed in our experience, yet, since by the realization of such a Brahman we are not in any way nearer to liberation (mokṣa), no benefit can be gained by this Brahmaenquiry. So the explanations of this sūtra, as given by Sankara, are quite out of place. By Brahman is meant here the fullness of qualities (guna-purtti), which is therefore different from jīva, which is felt as imperfect and deficient in qualities (apūrṇa)a.
Madhva also disapproves of the view of Sankara that Brahmaenquiry must be preceded by the distinction of eternal and noneternal substances, disinclination from enjoyments of this life or of the other life, the sixfold means of salvation, such as self-control, etc., and desire for liberation. For, if we follow the Bhāmatī, and the eternal (nitya) and not-eternal (anitya) be understood as truth and falsehood, and their distinction, the right comprehension of Brahman, as the truth, and everything else as false (brahmaiva satyam anyad anṛtam iti vivekaḥ), then it may very well be objected that this requirement is almost the ultimate thing that can be attained and, if this is already realized, what is the use of Brahmaenquiry? Or, if the self is understood as nitya and the non-self as anitya, then again, if this distinction is once realized, the non-self vanishes for good and there is no need to employ ourselves in discussions on the nature of Self. The explanation of the Pañcapādikā-vivarana is that the word nityanitya-viveka means the comprehension that the result of Brahma-knowledge is indestructible, whereas the result of karma, etc. is destructible (dhvamsapratiyogi). But this is not justifiable either; for the appearance of silver in the conch-shell being always non-existent (atyantābhāva), the word "destructible" is hardly applicable to it. If it is said that in reality the conch-shell-silver is non-existent (pāramārthikatvākāreņa atyantābhāvaḥ), but in its manifested form it may be said to be destroyed (svarūpeṇa tu dhvamsaḥ), this is not possible either; for no definite meaning can be attached to the word "in reality" (pāramārthika), which is explained as being "non-contradiction (abadhyatva); "non-contradiction" means "in reality"; and thus we have an argument in a circle (anyonyaśraya). Brahma, being
XXVI]
1 Tatparya-candrikā, p. 36.
2
jijñāsya-brahma-sabdena guṇa-pūrty-abhidhāyinā
apūrṇatvenānubhūtāj jīvād bhinnam pratiyate. Ibid. p. 46.
""
