पृष्ठम्:विशिष्टाद्वैतसिद्धिः.djvu/२३

[ 6 ] from writing any work criticising others philosophy . To refer to one more incident that took place in the same Pudukkottai aidcat scblic, but in another year , the Devan desired that three scholars repre senting the three schools of Vedanta might say some thing about their respective philosophy. The Advaita gentierman said Take the sruti text ut leam cs१. Dont twist it. Accept what its natural and clear mean ing is. Does it not tell us unequivocallly that jua is identical with Brahman ? What is it but Advaita ? No doubt part of the word 'td' as well as won' is to be abandoned in order to warrant the identity; but it is inevitable. When we ask our servant to bring the resting plank he will first get it vacated and then only bring it to us. The gentleman did not at all refer to such Srytes as biolate bhogyam breritarof» cc nota, whose meaning is clear enough to be understood even by an ordinary man and which insist on our knowing jiva, matter, and Brahman as entities quite distinct and different from each other, as if they do not exist at all. Be sides his meaning of the text bot too csj is not a natural one. Jiva is an individual soul undergoing all sorts of sufferings but Brahman is the Supreme Soul, the universal soul absolutely free from all pains and sorrows. How could there be any identity between the two ? To get over this difficulty he had to give a fcrced and unnatural meaning to both the terms tot and team. Regarding the example it may be pointed