365bet娱乐

The attributes of the Lord are never affected and never get changed. When the nature of Brahman does not get affected, $ how can the attributes get affected? ju asks Vadiraja. So the attributes are real and eternal. And the Sruti also substantiates the view that knowledge, strength and action 295 of the Lord are natural to Him for ever. The attributes of the Lord are neither of the nature of destruction nor of the nature of change as is the case 296 in Pilupaka and Pitharapaka of the Vaisesikas. In the Pilupaka atoms get changed. It means when wet pot is heated then all its atoms are destroyed and they produce a new pot. So in the Pilupaka, Dharmin or the object gets completely affected. In the Pitharapaka, the object does not get 1

destroyed or changed, but only its attributes like colour, form and the like get changed. The object remains the same; so in one case, the object is changed and in another attributes are changed. 297 83 1 The attributes of Brahman are not of the nature of getting in either of the manners said above. The Lord does not undergo any type of Paka i.e., He does not get affected by the fire. So the Form, Beauty, Valour, Adventure, Supreme independence and Omnipotence and other attributes of the Lord, 298 are all real and eternally present in Him. And these characteristics of the Lord are not conditional and are not procured by others' favour. So when the Lord is not subjected to destruction, the intrinsic attributes are also not subjected to destruction. The attributes of the Lord such as knowledge and the like, are not created like the knowledge of an ordinary being. They are uncreated and Aprakrta. When the object is present, absence of its intrinsic attributes, is nowhere found. The attributes of the Lord are Srutisiddha and are not sublated. Everywhere in general, it is known that, existence of the attributes is regulated by the existence of the object. E.g., as long as there exists the pot (object) so long potness (Ghatatva-attribute) also exists: So undoubtedly, all the attributes of Brahman are eternally real, The natural attributes may 300 1

84 come to an end only when the concerned created entity perishes. As Brahman is eternally Undestroyable, Imperishable, His attributes will never come to an end or never be destroyed. The attributes of the Lord are described in the srutis and the Smrtis as natural, real and eternal and hence are not -302 the nature of Maya as understood by the Advaitins. 303 -304 The Vidya and the Avidya are mutually opposite and produce different effects. By the Avidya one cannot gain the Vidya, strength, lusture etc. Because all these are not the products of the Maya. In the same way, like Brahman, His attributes are also not the products of and not related to the Maya. Corroborating with this, one can state logically that all the Dharmas of Brahman are Amayika because they are 305 real, natural and eternal like Brahman. The Maya cannot be said to be an Upadhi (extraneous limiting factor) to Brahman. Because, the Maya is Jada and it cannot have the Lord's qualities like Wapyatva, Nityasuddhatva, Muktatva etc. So the Maya cannot superimpose all these on Brahman. Therefore, the attributes of Brahman cannot be considered as Mayika or 306 products of Maya. Moreover, as this Maya of the Advaita cannot trace and exert its influence on the Jiva directly, how can then it superimpose the extra-ordinary features such as Omniscience, Omnipresence on Brahman who is the Lord and 307 is Omnipotent. In the Bhagavata, fifth canto, it is clearly

f stated that the knowledge of Brahman never gets related with Maya. So as Brahman is Real, Natural and Eternal likewise His attributes are also real, natural and eternal. The absence of them (non-existence) cannot be thought of. 4 > J 308 85 E So far it is proved that Maya as Upadhi or limiting> adjunct cannot be related with the Lord and His attributes. Further it is said that in Bimba and Pratibimba, Bimba or reflection is Upadhi or Pratibimba or reflected. ties of the Bimba are seen in the Pratibimba. The qualiAs the redness of the flower is seen in the nearby crystal. Here, the flower is Upadhi or Bimba and crystal is Pratibimba. Hence, the quality of redness is seen in the Pratibimba crystal. But the relation of Bimba and Pratibimba cannot be referred to Maya since the Lord is Amayika. The Mava cannot be an Upadhi in case of Brahman as is the flower in case of crystal but, it is only an apparent cause or a pretext, a secondary cause, 1 Now Brahman is the Bimba and the Jiva is the Pratibimba Brahman is Upadhi and hence on account of that, the attributes such as knowledge and the like of Brahman are seen in the Pratimba Jiva. To all these attributes, the Lord Brahman, who is Bimba and of the Upadhi state, is the primary cause. So all the attributes, seen the Jiva, are under the control of the Upadhi, i.e. Brahman, whereas the attributes of Brahman

86 tions. 309 310 are natural. We cannot ascribe the Aupadhikatva to the attributes of the Lord since they are like red colour of a flower. So the qualities of Brahman are seen in the Jiva as reflecTherefore, the attributes of Brahman are all natural and eternal, This proves that the attributes of Pratibimba that are knowledge and bliss (Jivasvarupa) are natural, Brahman is Bimba to all starting from Goddess Laksmi to minute beings such as ants and others. Hence, Brahman is real, eternal and is never Nirguna as the Advaitins contend. The relation of Bimba-Pratibimbabhava between the Lord and the Jiva, is not taken in respect of nature and content but with regard to the control and regulation of the Lord over the Jiva in all respects. The Sruti referred to above, describes the natural qualities of Brahman as Jnana, Bala, Kriya and the like. Kriya and the like. Vadiraja says that Lord Visnu, Saguna, Brahman is none other than the Suddha Brahman. We cannot classify Brahman as Suddha and Sabala. Sruti does not permit for this classification. So one has to give up the Overy concept of Nirgunatva (attributelessness) and should accept Gunapurnatva (perfection). Now even if Maya is taken for granted as Upadhi, Vadiraja says that Mayikatva cannot be attributed to the qualities of Brahman. In general, a Mayin (magician) creates wonderful things out of Maya. But the very next moment, everything

87 stands disappeared from our sight. So the created wonderful things may be treated as non-permanent (non-natural) and Maya-generated. But the existence of the magician, his power, efforts, desire and the like do not disappear and hence they are permanent (natural) and real. In the same way, Brahman, His Knowledge, Desire, Action and the like are real and natural. But the world, created by Him though real unlike the created things of a magician, may change now and 311 then. Thus, the Knowledge, Richness etc. of the Lord are r natural and they are ever imperishable also, since Brahman is Imperishable. As the attributes of Brahman such as Omniscience and Omnipresence are eternal and natural it cannot be imagined that they would disappear, since the Lord never disappears. Thus, the attributes of the Lord do not get sublated by any means whereas the concept of identity of Brahman and the Jiva stands sublated. Because, so as to have the identity of that kind, according to the Advaita, Brahman should be proved as attributeless (Nirdharmika), which is impossible. Therefore, identity cannot be proved. Hence Brahman cannot be described as Nirguna or attributeless. There are innumerable Sruti passages that extol the majestic glory of Lord Brahman. + 312 The glory of the Lord is real. He is the sole supporter of the whole universe. He is the supreme Brahman. And there is no Brahman as 313 Nirguna. The Nirguna Brahman fabricated by the Advaitins

is of no use. Because. It cannot bestow the liberation. And moreover, Vadiraja says that both the srutis and the Smrtis do not claim the Moksadatrtva to the Nirguna Brahman. It is only Lord Visnu, who bestows liberation (Moksa). Thus, in all respects the Nirguna Brahman should be rejected. Even if two Brahmans are imagined and accepted, identity cannot be proved. And this imagination is contrary to the Sruti passage Ekamevadvitiyah. 314 So Brahman is alone and I 315 He is all-pervasive and is called Visnu. Due to the reasons cited above, it is highly impossible to ascribe the Nirgunatva to Brahman. If, with strong attachment, or persistence, Nirguna Brahman is accepted then there will be two Brahmans which would go against the Advaita, Thus, the 316 acceptance of Nirguna. Brahman, serves no purpose. It cannot 1 be proved by any valid evidence. Further, it leads to rejection of the concept of Advaita. So there is no supreme Brahman other than Visnu-declares Vadiraja.