________________
OCTOBER, 1971
50
not delineate the identity of Brahman and the experienced 'this', because Brahman and the 'this' being in the form of no-diversity are either purely negative entities, or both being, in their own substances, are positive ones. If they are purely negative, the guarantee of their identity is beyond reason ; and if they are purely positive, then logically one substance-unit is not convertible into some other substance-unit. Laying special stress on the absolute stand-point if it is said that both the substance-units are fundamentally one and the same, we find it difficult to prove logically. In this way, when logically the being of Brahman can not be proved in the experienced 'this', the worldliness can also not be disproved logically in the way we disprove the snake along with the positive proof of the analogized rope. Hence with as much of validity do we accept Brahman absolutely, with so much of it will we have to accept the world relatively. Both the arguments are valid in their own contexts. To contradict one conclusion from some different context is not logically proper. It can, of course, be negatived, only when it happens to be inconsistent with its own context. Just as the conclusion of snake was inconsistent with its own premises. Hence its negation was caused by its self-inconsistency, not by the rise of rope-knowledge. The rise of rope-knowledge is quite independent of the process of the negation of snake. Therefore it can definitely be asserted, that the analogy of rope-snake-illusion is not only useless as a proof of Non-dual Ultimate (Advaita Brahman), but also is a misleading one.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
