removing the second variety of nescience and for converting the
first indirect knowledge of Brahman (Parökṣajñana) into the
direct Brahman-realisation (Aparökşa-brahma-sākṣätkara). By the
way, it may be noted here that Vacaspati also speaks of two
kinds of Avidya in the opening verse of his Bhamati. Sureśvara
scents danger in the recognition of two kinds of nescience, specifically refers to Mandana's view regarding avidyadvaividhya, and argues against it by urging certain reasons.
4. Mandana definitely argues in favour of the view that Jiva (the individual soul) should be regarded as the seat or the locus (Aśraya) of nescience (Avidya), which obscures the true nature of Brahman and thus has Brahman as its object (visaya). Sureśvara sets his face wholly against any kind of differentiation between the aśraya and vişaya of avidya and maintains that Brahman itself is both the aśraya and vişaya. The disagreement between Mandana and Sureśvara on this matter served as the basis of the two different views regarding the locus and object of nescience, which are associated in later Advaitic tradition with what came to be known as Vacaspati's school and Vivaraṇakāra's (Prakaśātman's) school. By the way, it may be observed here that most of the distinctive features of the Vacaspati-school have their roots in Mandana's views as set forth in the Brahmasiddhi and most of the distinctive features of the Vivarana-school are derived from Sureśvara's views as set forth in the Vārtikas and the Naişkarmyasiddhi.
5. The Upanişadic texts like "Tattvamasi " reveal the identity of Brahman with Atman and give rise to the true knowledge of the One Absolute Real. The knowledge which arises from such texts, however, according to Mandana, is indirect and mediate (parokşa) and necessarily involves relation in some manner (samsrsta-visaya), like any other cognition arising from a valid verbal testimony (sabda-prama). Mandana maintains that such in direct knowledge of Brahman should pass through the furnace of meditation (Upasana) before the detractive and recessive elements of relation and mediacy could be removed from it, and before it could be
"Bra. Sid., p. 35, Part I. se Bhimati, verse i. 64 अनिर्वाच्याविद्याद्वितयसचिवस्य प्रभवतो विवर्ता यस्यैते वियदनिलतेजोऽभवनयः 1 Brhad. Vär., Part II, p. 1065, verse 199. as Bra. Sid., pp. 10 and 11, Part I. Nai, S., pp. 105-106, Brhad. vär, Part I, pp. 55 to 58, verses 175 to 182; Part II, .p. 675 to 677, verses 1215 to 1227. a Bra. Sid., p. 35, lines 1 to 8, 25; p. 134, p. 159, lines 10 to 13, Part I.
