Indian Philosophy

Author(s): Sukhlal Sanghavi
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 89

The U panişadic Thought-Current Regarding the Nature of Soul
81
nescience. Thus the doctrine of reflection has been defended in so many different ways. [Vedāntasükeimanjarı, chapter 1, v. 28-40)
(2) The Doctrine of Delimitation; Certain other masters employ the concept of delimitation in place of that of reflection and submit that not Brahman reflected in antahkarana (=interaal-organ) etc. but the same delimited by antahkarana etc. is what constitutes a soul. libid. v.41]
(3) The Doctrine that Brahman Itself is a Soul: On this view a soul is neither a reflection of Brahman nor a delimitation thereof, but the unchanged Brahman itself acts as a soul on account of ignorance and as Brahman on account of knowledge. [ibid. v. 42.]
Thus as to the nature of a soul there are chiefly curcent three alternative views-viz, that which treats it as of the form of a reflection, that which treats it as being of the form of a delimitation, that which treats it as being non-different from Brahman,
The question whether there exists just one soul or a number of souls has also been discussed among the advocate of Kevaladvaita. Thus one submitted that some one single body is alone possessed of a soul while the rest are devoid of a soul, another one that even while there exists just one soul all the bodies are possessed of a soul, a third one that there actually exist a number of souls. Thus the discussion has received good deal of ramification, fibid-yv. 43-44] This wide ramification has been altogether summarized by Madhusūdana Sarasvati in his Siddhāntabindu and by Sadananda in his Vedāntasära.
Bhāskara is of the view that Brahaman on account of its various capacities is transformed in the form of a soul just as it is transformed in the form of the world. The souls are of the form of a transformation of Brahman and are real because they are born of an active and hence real adjunct possessed by Brahman. Even if Brahman is a single entity it is possible for its transformations to be many in number. Thus on Bhāskara', view there is no contradiction between unity and multiplicity. Just as the same ocean appears to be many on account of its waves, similarly the souls constitute so many transformations of the same Brahman, and they really remain in existence only so long as ignorance has its sway. For when ignorance disappears those atomic-sized souls come to realize their own non-difference from Brahman.
Rāmānuja, while propounding the doctrine called Visiştādvaitavāda (=doctrine of modified nondulism), submits that at root a soul is as much of the form of a non-manifest body of Brahman as is the world while the same non-manifest body in due course assumes the form of a manifest
11