________________
BRAHMANISM
-together with its world-somehow both is and is not, or perhaps, rather, neither is nor is not. In any case, it is more of an enigma even than Brahman.
Ignorance (avidyā), because of which the seeming reality of our empirical experience remains superimposed upon the ultimate reality of Brahman, is thus absolutely inexplicable, through its very nature. It cannot be demonstrated by reasoning, since reasoning itself can never stand apart from ignorance. Analyzing ignorance by reasoning is like searching darkness with the help of darkness. But neither can it be demonstrated by knowledge; for with the awakening of knowledge no trace of ignorance remains. Analyzing ignorance by knowledge is like studying darkness with a blazing light. "The very characteristic of ignorance," declares the Vedāntic philosopher Sureśvara, "is its sheer unintelligibility. It cannot bear any proof; if it could it would be a real thing." 161 It is, on the contrary, a false impression (bhrānti). “This false impression is without real support and is contradictory to all reasoning," the same authority states in another text. “It cannot stand against reasoning any more than darkness against the sun." 162
The existence of ignorance, then, has to be accepted, even though it is inexplicable in itself; otherwise we should deny the undeniable fact that the phenomenal world is experienced. Brahman is experienced, and that experience is the sage's proof of Brahman; but if experience counts in the one context it must be allowed to count also in the other. Hence, ignorance is described as "something" which may be said to have "the form or appearance of a floating or transient reality” (bhāvarī pa).158 In common with the beings and experiences rooted in it, this "something" has the “form of becoming" (also bhāvarūpa): it is transient, perishable, conquerable. Having come into exist
161 Brhadaranyaka-vártikā 181. Surcsvara was a direct disciple of Sankara. 182 Naişkarmyasiddhi g. 66. 188 Vedantasära 84.
422
