________________
3
Drstisṛṣṭivada-an Analysis and Critical Appraisal
the awareness came into being Thus, if the perception of awareness is not competent to become proof for establishing the differense between the awareness and its obj cts, there is no possibility of an inference to prove the difference. This position of inference may be like this "The object is different from its awareness, because the object has different qualities and characteristics" But this will not be proper, because an object can never have different qualities from its awareness. The Drsti srstivadin further argues that on the basis of Implication (Arthāpatti), It is said that awareness involves the acceptance of something which is different from the awareness of which the awareness affirmed and this is because any knowledge is impossible without a corresponding o'ject. Retuing the above arguement, Prakāśānanda says that for the inferential knowledge of an object, it is not necessary that the external object must be existent or perceived In this way, the wholesome character of Drştisṛstivada is that really, the awareness is not different from its object and the world is meie awareness! Therefore perception is the cause of making a difference between the awareness and its objects. In his view the awareness of yellow and the yellow are not different.
In this way, the existence of world reality depends upon perception. As a matter of fact, it is nothing more than the awareness This is why in Vedanta, the world has been described as the creation of Avidya and thus false. Now a question further arises that if Avidya is the creator of the world, then who is the creator of Avidya ? The answer is that 'Atman with its adjunct (Avidyopadhi) creates the posture of Avidya on account of prior impressions of Avidya and actually it is in this manner that Atman with the adjunct of Avidya is the creator of the world of name and form Some of the cholars hold that the mental creation of the jiva is not justified in anadi Avidya and it can only be admitted in the objective world. It can further be argued that Atman with the adjunct of Avidya, can imagine a perceptive thing but it can never imagine about the Akāśa, Vayu, fire etc. and their order, which has been but automatically described by the scripture ('Atmana ākāśa sambhūta akasad vayuḥ' Taitti 2-1-1)
No doubt, there can be no imagination of Akasa etc and their order and so far as the scriptural statement-"Atmana ākāśa sambhūtaḥ" is concerned, it maintains that Atman and Akasa etc. are non-dual and one. It is the superimpostion (Adhyasa) which proves the duality of Atman and
1, V.S M p 18.
2
Siddhantalesa sangraha, Pariccheda-2, Acyuta, Kasi, 2017.
