Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: May 6, 2025
Now, as difference and non-difference are contradictory, and as the view of difference may be accounted for as resting on beginningless Nescience, we conclude that universal non-difference is what is real. The tenet that difference and non-difference are not contradictory because both are proved by our consciousness, cannot be upheld.
Against this view the Sutra now declares itself as follows. The non- difference of the world from Brahman, the highest cause, follows from 'what begins with the word arambhana' which proves such non-difference; 'what begins with the word arambhana' means those clauses at the head of which that word is met with, viz. Up.
Under II, 1, 7 and other Sutras the non-difference of the effect, i.e. the world from the cause, i.e. Brahman was assumed, and it was on this basis that the proof of Brahman being the cause of the world proceeded. The present Sutra now raises a prima facie objection against that very non-difference, and then proceeds to refute it. On the point in question the school of Kanada argues as follows.
To this bhedabheda view the Purvapakshin now objects on the following grounds: The whole aggregate of Vedanta-texts aims at enjoining meditation on a non-dual Brahman whose essence is reality, intelligence, and bliss, and thus sets forth the view of non-difference; while on the other hand the karma-section of the Veda, and likewise perception and the other means of knowledge, intimate the view of the difference of things.
Do you mean to say that the difference lies in one aspect of the thing and the non-difference in the other? or that difference and non-difference belong to the thing possessing two aspects? On the former alternative the difference belongs to the individual and the non-difference to the genus; and this implies that there is no one thing with a double aspect.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking