________________
E. A. Solomon
2. Avidya in Sankarācārya's Philosophy
Sarkarācārya, in his writings, mostly commentaries on the Upanişads, Brahma-sūtra and the Bhagavad Gita, had a more difficult task before him. Commenting on works none of which seem to clearly establish the unreality of the world he put forth his confirmed view that the eternally unchanging undifferentiated Brahman of the nature of Pure Being-Consciousness-Bliss is the only Reality, all else being false and the individual soul being nothing else but Brahman. He had in support of his view Vedic statements like 'ekam evädvitiyam', 'neha nänä'sti kimcana', 'neti neti', 'tat tvam asi', 'ahan brahma'smi', etc. He had at the same time to evolve a philosophical terminology of the Vedic brand which would not directly smack of Buddhist impact, and also to show the difference of Vedāntic thought from the Buddhist Idealistic Philosophy and to emphasise the distinctive characteristics of Advaita Vedānta.
Sankara's line of argument is that if Brahman is taken as really evolving in the form of the world it must necessarily be accepted as being modified. And in that case either it should be accep'ed as wholly modi. fied as the world with no Brahman left in its own nature or Brahman would have to be accepted as having parts so that one quarter becomes the world and the other three quarters are left intact .('tripad asyämytan divi'). It is very well to say that Brahman is both immanent in the world and also transcendent, and to say that Brahman is both the upädäna and nimitta kärana of the world. But does our reason allow us to accept this when we are told that Brahman is eternally unchanging, undifferentiated and devoid of parts ? If Brahman evolves into the world it either ceases to be Brahman in its own nature, or it undergoes modification. Better still, Brahman perishes every moment and a new one is born so that all variations could be accounted for. But how could it be possible that Brahman evolves in the form of the world and the individual souls emerge from it as sparks from fire and yet it retains its pristine purity and remains eternally unchanging ? If the realisation or direct vision of the Ultimate Reality of the Upanişadic scers has any value for us, Brahman should be regarded as one without a second, eternally unchanging and pure and devoid of differentiation, the world as an unreal superimposition, and the jivas should be regarded as Brahman itself, conditioned or limited by different adjuncts (upādhi), these latter being unreal or projections brought about by Avidya, which itself is false.
It may be noted that the other Acāryas while commenting on the Brahma-sútra and other texts admitted some form of Dualism or Pluralism
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
