पृष्ठम्:विशिष्टाद्वैतसिद्धिः.djvu/२१

[ 4 ] the world. Fory could the world come into existence? Just the same is the case with Advaita Brahman and aoidya. Brahman is absolutely indifferent. It can neither influence nor be influenced by any thing else. Avidya, like matter, cannot act by i:self. So neither JBrahman nor aridya could be the cause of the world. There is however a difference between pregriti matter, accepted in Sankhya and avidya accepted in Adobj¢d : whereas the former has its own reality, its own existence, independent of "pushd the latter oves itself to Brahman. There could be no aidya unless Brahman errs. Can Brahman ever err? That which errs can not be Brahman, and that which is Brahman can not err. This fact renders the Advaita philsophy more irrational and more difficult to understand than Sankhya. Andya is beginningless just like Brahman may be an answer to the question -->When did avidya catch hold of Brahman ? ! and not to the question-= 'how could any ocidya happen in Brahman ?” Avidya in Brahman would be just like darkness in the midday sunshine. One is as impossible as another Such considerations as these forced upon me the conclusion that Ramanuja vas justified in criticising Advaita and it is impossible to defend it. In the old princely state of Pudukikottai which con ducted a Vadasabad during nearatri festival every year, the Devans used to invite all the pandits to their residence just in the evening preceding the cmb}46 ound day and listen to the speeches delivered by some of the chinent sideps. one year the Dewan