World of Philosophy

Author(s): Christopher Key Chapple, Intaj Malek, Dilip Charan, Sunanda Shastri, Prashant Dave
Publisher: Shanti Prakashan

Page 850

If non-duality of Brahman is proved with the help of valid inference which involves the proban (hetu) and the probandum (sādhya), then there is clear admission of duality between the proban and probandum.54 The fact is that both cannot be identical because, inference will be invalid unless both are admitted as two distinct facts. Again it will not be possible to construct a syllogism which demands different members. In inference, one proves the probandum by means of proban, preceding from the known to the unknown which means inevitable dualism of the 'known and the un-known'. It is also illogical to argue that so far as the opponent's refutation is concerned the conditions of Inference, such as the proban, the probandum and the example, are accepted as true by the opponents and hence they are valid, because it will again lead to dualism of one's own acceptance and the acceptance of the opponent.35 If the condition of inference (the proban, the probandum and the example) are false and thus cognition of difference be considered as false, then that inference will be declared to be invalid, because no valid, conclusion can be drawn from false premises, If Advaitins prove their theory of non-duality on the basis ot false premises, then we may obtain real fire from to dream smoke. 35
In addition to all these difficulties, the word 'duality' which occures in the word Advaita itself indicates acceptance of duality. 'Advaita' means rejection of dvaita. Without acceptance of dvaita, its denial is also not possible. Nothing is contradicted unless it exists and thus, non-duality, which contradicts duality, from this very fact accepts the existence of duality. 37 Again, it is not plausible to argue that Brahman is supporting ground of all and is that principle of existence which runs through all things and unites them in one Reality, because it clearly involves the dualism of a principle that runs through the things (anvetr) and the things through which it runs (anviyamāna).38 If the doctrine of Advaita is based on Scriptural testimony and not on pure logic, then, dualism or pluralism may also be said to be based on Scriptures on the same ground.
Even acceptance of Scriptural testimony implies dualism of Agama (revelation) and Brahman i,e, dualism of vācya-vācakabhāva, without which these Scriptures declare nothing. Ontologically, Scriptures cannot be identical with Brahman because the means of proof (Agama) and the object of proof must be different. Otherwise they can establish nothing. In fact, Scriptural statements such as "All that
801