Sambodhi 2014 Vol 37

Author(s): J B Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 64

56
Vijay Pandya
SAMBODHI This much about the scope and nature of the work, Sankara Vedāntaman Avidyāvicāra.
Now regarding the nature of avidyā. Should we attempt to unravel the nature of avidyā ? Is it possible? The key-concept of Advaita Vedānta is avidyā or sometimes māyā though perhaps Sankarācārya does not recognise any difference between these two terms. Avidyā/māyā cannot function independent of Brahman as Sankaracārya puts it MÀRTS724 HRT (1-4-3) and also in the B.U.Sankara-bhāsya अविद्याकामकर्मविशिष्टकार्यकर णोपाधिः आत्मा संसारी जीव Boyd I (B.U.3-8-12) and it ceases to be when Brahman is realized. Avidyāmāya is the device by which the advaita vedāntin tries to explain how the One non-dual Reality (Brahman) appears as multitudinous. As noted above, avidyā cannot function without Brahman/Jiva as its locus and it ceases to exist as the realization dawns. Yet it is the central concept of the Advaita-Vedāntin. To take the help of the lucid explanation of Radhakrishnan, 'In Saṁkara, it (avidyā) becomes the logical way of thinking which constitutes the finiteness of human mind, or as in phrase of Deussen, avidyā is 'the innate obscuration of, our knowledge' (DSV p.302). Avidya is not a non-entity like the son of barren woman, since it appears and is experienced by all of us, nor is it an entity, real and absolute, since it is destroyed by institutional knowledge. If it were nonbeing it could not produce anything, if it were being, what it produce must also
d not phenomenal.' (Radhkrishan, P.537, Vol II, Indian Philosophy, Second Edition, 2008, Fourth Impression 2010)
Avidyā cannot reside in Brahman as Sai vajñātmamuni thinks; it cannot reside in the individual as Vācaspati believes. To say that modified Brahman is the seat of Avidyä is untenable as Brahman cannot be modified. For Samkara this difficulty would not arise because for Samkara avidyā is inexplicable. In Sankarācārya's scheme of things, this question is without any meaning. In his BSSB on 4-1-13, Sankarācārya says कस्य पुनरयमप्रतिबोध इति चेत् यस्त्वम् पृच्छसि तस्य त çfa agit:, Toet Tal FUI, TEO4 ufagastsfH nifi alifagyfate: (BSSB 4-113). Deussen says, In reality there is nothing else besides Brahman alone. if we imagine that we perceive a transformation (vikāra) of him into the world, a division (bheda) of him into a plurality of individuals, this depends on avidyā. But how does this happen ! How do we manage to deceive ourselves into seeing a transformation and plurality, where, in reality Brahman alone is ? On this question out authors give us information. (DSVP 302) Radhakrishnan pithily adds 'They give us no information simply because 'no information' is possible' (P.539, Indian Philosophy II) One Vedāntic writer says 3711farial