पृष्ठम्:विशिष्टाद्वैतसिद्धिः.djvu/१०२

( 83 ) passage anew, because our practical experience firmly establishes the reality of re in every sense of the term. It is not at all nere idon and na.ne like the emerald which the cryistal in contact with a red flower caused to appear. Fire serves our practical purposes. Can that falsc emerald be put to any use? What is and where is the comparison between the two? Advaitins always ignore easily and conveniently but most uujustly and even insincerely this well estab- lished difference between the real things and false ideas. Sat combining the thrce first-created clements in a particular manner evolves something which gets the name 'fire' and which serves very many purposes in the world. This something is nothing but a parti- cular state of the three elements from which it is evolved. When that state is disturbed it goes together with the name 'fire and there remain the three elements. The state as fire comes and goes. The substance remains and it is the same. It is permanant. This is said by the passage quoted above. Why should you bring in the question of unreality here? Sankara is quite right when he says under (ć-2-3): “रज्जुविवेकदर्शिनां तु सर्वाभिवानबुद्धी निवर्तेते । But for those who found the rope distinctly the wrong idea of it as a serpent and calling it as such ceases." But he is not so when he says immediately after: 'यथा च मृद्विवेकदर्शिनां घटादि शब्दबुद्धी |