A Critique of Advaita Vedanta-1

 A critique of Advaita Vedanta

This is an attempt on my part to deconstruct Advaita Vedanta as available in Kaivalya Navaneetam and many other Tamil texts on the basis of my metaphysical insights I have gained in writing the massive Azivil UNmai with two different types of commentaries.

Dr K.Loganathan 1-11-12

A critique of Advaita Vedanta - Part 1

Dr K.Loganathan 1-11-12

A Critique of Advaita Vedanta-1

Vedanta in Tamil

By Vedanta is meant essentially the study of the Upanishads particularly the so-called Maha Vakkyas and the metaphysical elucidations they inspire. These Maha Vakkyas are “akam Brahmam Asmi” ‘Ta Twam Asi’ and so forth. While certainly Vedantic thinking as such can be as ancient as the early Upanishds dated around 800 BC or so, it is not clear to me how old are these Vedantic treatises. The most famous is of course the Vedanta Sutras of BadarayaNa where the different schools of Vedanta, the Advaita Vishtatvaita Dwaita and so forth emerge as commentaries to this Vedanta Sutras. Among these it is the commentary of Ati Sankara (dated around 800 AD) that is called Advaita Vedanta and which is the subject matter of this critique.

However long before Ati Sankara we hear of Vedanta and the Maha Vakkyas in Tirumular;s Tirumantiram dated around 600 AD or so. There we find extensive discussions of the meaning of the Maha Vakkyas where Tirumular offers his own interpretations that he calls Siddhanta Vedantam i.e the meaning of Vedantic Maha Vakkyas according to Saiva Siddhanta. It is interesting in all these extensive studies of Vedanta as such, there is no mention of Advaita Vedanta of Ati Sankara in Tirumantiram that suggests that Ati Sankara came into the world much later and where the date 800 AD seems to be reasonable.

Vedanta in Meykanda Sastras

While Tirumular announced the Fundamental Ontology of Pati Pasu Pasam as a great and wellfounded metaphysical inspiration, it was Meykandar (13th Cent AD) who established it as a TRUTH by transforming metaphysics itself as the most inclusive Hermeneutic Science with a Hermeneutic Logic , the Virutti KaNdikai as the method. The very fact of the triadic Fundamental Ontology is already a deconstruction of the monistic Advaita Vedanta. But nevertheless Meykandar actually mentions the word ‘advaita’ and claims that the very meaning of the word implicates a substantial difference between the soul and BEING(Brahman) though at the point of Moksa the soul is in essence the same as BEING remaining however different as a substance.

Now such deconstructions are \carried out in greater detail by AruNandi in his massive and magnificent Siddhyar and Umapathy in his very erudite SaGkaRpa NirakaraNam. Many other Saiva Siddhanta philosophers have done something similar and continued to do so until the 16th Cent AD and after which the situation changes dramatically.

Original Vedanta Literature in Tamil

For a variety of reasons -- one being the loss of political power of the native Tamils with the collapse of the Cholas and Pandiyas, we have sanskritization of Tamil culture and replacing the native philosophic culture with that of the Sanskrit. It is at this time that great books on Advaita Vedanta begin to appear in chaste Tamil authored both by Tamil scholars as well as Brahmins. This begins with the Kaivalya Navaneethan of TaNdava Murthy Swamigal followed by many treatises by the prolific Tattuvarayar who composed Tatvamirtam Casivanna Botham Amirthsaram and so forth. There are many others but the most widely studied remains Kalvalya Naneetham(KN) which has also seen many commentaries some very erudite in indeed. For the purpose of this critique I shall take up this KN with many commentaries and show that this advaitic interpretation of the Upanishadic Maha Vakkyas is untenable and that there are other interpretations possible that do not imply the Monism of Ati Sankara that comes along with the claim that the world as we know is a Mythya a delusion.

A Critique of Advaita Vedanta-2

Before we begin to outline the essences of this Kalvalya Navaneethana(KN) we give some background information about the book which has attracted the attention of many great scholars and who have written erudite commentaries on it. As we have said the book is not a translation of some Vedantic treatises in Sk but rather an original composition written around the 15 th Cent AD and which has three different commentaries to it. The first is that of AruNasala SwamikaL of the 19th cent AD and which was followed by the Virutti , a massive and very erudite commentary by Ramalingka Yogikal also of the 19th Cent AD. More recently i.e. in 1993 there was another elegant and simple commentary by Vidvan NarayaNa VeluppiLLai published by Mullai Nilayam.

I have in my possession all these three commentaries and this critique is written on the basis of my understanding of KN with the help of these commentaries.

KN and The Earlier Texts

As the author himself describes, this KN is not simply a translation into chaste Tamil of some original text in Sk and which is the case with many treatises in philosophy at about that time. Tandava Murtti SwamikaL(TMS) claims to have composed the text after reading extensively many original texts in Sk on Vedanta including of course the Upanishads, Vedanta Sutras of BadarayaNa the various commentaries to it and many other ancillary treatises composed by Ati Sankara and many others. He recalls this by way of explaining why he named this book as the Ghee (Navaneetam) that would grant Moksa (kaivalyam) to any one who would study it carefully and with utmost respect.

6.

படர்ந்த வேதாந்தம் எனும் பாற்கடல் மொண்டு முன்னூல்

குடங்களில் நிறைத்து வைத்தார் குரவர்கள் எல்லாங் காய்ச்சிக்

கடைந்து எடுத்து அளித்தேன் இந்தக் கைவல்ய நவனீதத்தை

அடைந்தவர் விடய மண் தின்று அலைவரோ பசியிலாரே!

Padarnta veetaantam enum paaRkadal moNdu munnuul

kudangkaLil niRaittu vaiittaar kuravarkaL elaang kaaycci

kadaintu eduttu aLitteen intak kaivalya navaniitattai

adaintavar vidaya maN tinRu alaivaroo paciyilaaree!

Meaning:

The great ancient rishies explored the vast Ocean of Milk that is the Upanishads and scooping out this milk had filled many pots as treatises on Vedanta. What I have done is to heat up this milk and extracted the ghee of the most profound knowledge in this book of mine. Those who access this treatise understand what it purports to disclose will be cured of their hunger for metaphysical wisdom. Eating the food of wisdom that provides Moksa, will they still hunger after such a knowledge? Certainly will not.

Consistent with this claim the author begins to address the earthly individuals with many kinds of existential miseries and in that differs fundamentally with BadarayaNa who begins Vedanta Sutras with the aphorism ‘And so now inquiry into Brahman”. Such a beginning presupposes a vast knowledge of Vedas and Upanishads and with that make metaphysical inquiries as something only for Brahmins as only they are privileged with the study of the Vedas.

TMS, who is not a Brahmin, avoids this restriction by opening upon metaphysical inquiries as something that any one in existential miseries can undertake and become free of such miseries by the Vedantic wisdom that informs the person that the self is actually Brahman and that he remains unaware of this TRUTH only because he remains deluded into thinking that only the material world is real and only the ordinary existence of many earthly desires is the only possibility he has.

A Critique of Advaita Vedanta- 3

A common ground for leaving aside the normal existence and pursue metaphysics is the various distresses in worldly existence. There comes a point in the life of many where a deep disenchantment comes to prevail making them seek out some deeper meaning for continuing existence as such. It is such a burst of distress that makes also many become quite religious. The author of KN sees this as the primordial existential condition for inquiring into the truths of Vedanta that is sure to provide the illuminations that would free the person from such existential miseries,

13.

ஆம் இம்மனைவி மக்கள் ஆர்த்த ஈடணைகள் மூன்றில்

கானவர் வலையிற் பட்டுக் கைதப்பி ஓடு மான் போல்

போனவன் வெறுங்கையோடே போகாத வண்ணம் சென்று

ஞானசற்குருவைக் கண்டு நன்றாக வணங்கினானே

Aam immanaivi makkaL aarttta iidaNaikaL munRil

Kaanavar valaiyiR padduk kaitappi oodu maan pool

Poonavan veRuGkaiyoodee pookaata vaNNam cenRu

Njaana caRkuruvaik kaNdu nanRaaka vaNaGkinaanee

Meaning

A man came seeking the metaphysical wisdom from a True Guru non empty-handed like a deer that managed to escape the net of the hunters in the forest, escaping from family of wife and children all because of the basic three instinctual pressures. He stood awaiting the grace of the Guru praying fervently in all humility.

Thus is established the primordial existential condition for metaphysical inquiries viz the distress in family life and economic and political existence that are founded by the innate instinctual pulls that trap a person into such an existence. What was considered normal, all of a sudden and for unknown reasons becomes so distressing that a way out of it is sought and with a hope that a seer, a genuine Guru would help for sure,

But what is the help such a guru can provide?

The help is actually the knowledge of Advaita Vedanta proposed here as the remedy for all existential miseries.

19,

வாராய் என் மகனே தன்னை மறந்தவன் பிறந்து இறந்து

தீராத சுழற்காற்று உற்ற செத்தைப் போல் சுற்றிச் சுற்றிப்

பேராத கால நேமிப் பிரமையில் திரிவன் போதம்

ஆராயும் தன்னைத்தான் என்று அறியும் அவ்வவளவுந் தானே

Vaaraay en makanee tannai maRantavan piRantu iRantu

Tiraata cuzaRkaaRRu uRRu cettaip pool cuRRic cuRRip

Peeraata kaala neemip piramaiyil tirivan pootam

Aaraayum tannaittaan enRu aRiyum avvaLavun taanee

Meaning

Come my dear son and let me explain the reasons for your miseries. The one who reamains forgetful of his own essence, .will remain caught in the whirlwind like a straw and will be tossed into suffering births and deaths endlessly. He will be relieved of this predicament of being caught in the wheel of time only when he realizes his self is actually Brahman.

This is further elaborated in the next verse.

20.

தன்னையுங் தனக்கு ஆதாரத் தலைவனையுங் கண்டானேல்

பின்னை அத் தலைவன் தானாய்ப் பிரமமாய்ப் பிறப்புத் தீர்வன்

உன்னை நீ அறிவாயாகில் உனக்கொரு கேடும் இல்லை

என்னை நீ கேட்கையாலே ஈது உபதேசித்தேனே

TannaiyuG tanakku aataarat talaivanaiyuG kaNdaaneel

Pinnai at talaivan taanaayp piramamaayp piRapput tiirvan

Unnai nii aRivaayaakil unakkoru keedum illai

Ennai nii keedkaiyaalee iitu upateesitteenee

Meaning

If a person sees his own self and the Lord who remains the foundation for one’s own self, he will seek earnestly to become that Lord who is actually Brahman. With this becoming Brahman the self will enjoy Moksa and will not be thrown back into embodied existence. If you understand your own essence as such then there will be no miseries of whatever kind. Only because you implored me I divulge this secret to you.

Thus is set the stage for not just for metaphysical inquiries in general but rather very specifically search into the foundations of self which is actually Brahman where subsequent to that vision self will seek to become Brahman and so forth.

A Critique of Advaita Vedanta- 4

The stage is set for expounding Advaita Vedanta with the observation that all existential miseries will disappear with the self identifying itself as the Brahman and thus frees itself from the delusion that self is the physical body and so forth. The primordial delusion is that self identifies itself as the physical body and which delusion must be shown to be what is viz, a delusion. Normally a person does not see himself as different from the physical body and the reality of the physical world. The essence of the self and the world remains covered up or concealed and which must be first destroyed.

23.

தேகம் அல்லாமல் வேறே தேகி யார் காணேன் என்றாய்

மோகமாம் கனவில் வந்து முளைத்திடும் அவன் ஆர் சொல்லாய்

சோகாமாங் கனவு தோன்றாச் சுழுத்திக் கண்டு அவனார் சொல்லாய்

ஆக நீ கனவில் எண்ணும் அறிவுதான் ஏது சொல்லாய்

Teekam allaamal veeRee teeki yaar kaaNeen enRaay

Mookamaam kanavil vantu muLaittidum avan aar collaay

cookamaaG kanavu toonRaac cuzutti kaNdu avanaar collaay

aaka nii kanavil ennum aRivu eetu collaay

Meaning:

You say that for an average person like me, the body is the self and there is nothing beyond it. Now if this is so then tell me who appears as the dreamer during those moments a person dreams. Also who is that who recalls the moments of dreamless deep sleep called Cuzutti? Reflecting on these you should realize that your self is actually that which enjoys dreams and dreamless sleep and that it is due to a delusion that you remain identifying yourself with the physical body.

Thus begins an exposition of Advaita Vedanta by way of dispelling this self’s delusion into thinking that it is non other than the physical body wherelse as a matter of fact it is not at all so.

Thus it is indicated that a Delusion Creating Mechanism (DCM) which in fact deludes the person into thinking that he is the physical body and that he is destined only to live the materialist existence and that also involves being thrown into embodied existence endlessly.

The essence of Advaita Vedanta emerges in the following two verses.

26.

அத்தியாரோபம் என்றும் அபவாதம் என்றும் சொல்லும்

உத்தியால் பந்தம் வீடென்று உரைக்கும் வேதாந்தம் எல்லாம்

மித்தையால் ஆரோபத்தால் பந்தமாம் அபவாதத்தான்

முத்தியாம் இவ்விரண்டின் முந்தி ஆரோபிதம் கேளாய்

27.

ஆரோபம் அத்தியாசம் கற்பனை ஆவ எல்லாம்

ஓர்ரொர் வஸ்த்துவினை வேறே ஓரோர் வஸ்துவென ஓர்தல்

நாரூடு பணியாத் தோன்றல் நரனாகத் தறியில் தோன்றல்

நீரூடு கானல் தோன்றல் நிரந்தரம் வெளியில் தோன்றல்

26

Attiyaaroopam enRum abavaatam enRum collum

Uttiyaal pantam viidenRum uraikkum veetaantam ellaam

Mittaiyaal aaroopattaal pantamaam abavaattaan

Muttiyaam ivviraNdin munti aaroobitam keeLaay

27.

Aaroobam attiyaasam kaRpanai aava ellaam

Oorror vasttuvinai veeRee ooroor vasttuvena oortal

Naaruudu paNiyaat toonRal naranaakat taRiyil toonRal

Niiruudu kaanal toonRal nirantaram veLiyil toonRal

Meaning (conbing both verses)

The Vedanta texts outline two strategies in existence viz the delusion creating mechanisms of attiyaasam and Aroobitam and the delusion freeing mechanism of Abavatam. The self identification with the physical body and suffering worldly existence is due to Delusions such as Aroobitam Attiyasam and so forth. Moksa comes with Abavatam, the destruction of this delusion.

Of these let me first explain what is DCM. When an object is seen other than what it is in fact then we have a delusion illusion and so forth. This happens for example when a rope is seen as a snake, a wooden stump appears as a person, the seeing of mirages where pools of water are seen in the heat and non discontinuous space is seen in an ordinary spatial expanse.

Here we have the standard examples of delusions and optical illusions that are extensively cited with very detailed analysis in almost all Vedanta texts.

Thus there is a DCM and because of which a person wrongly and as a delusion identifies himself as a physical body where as a matter of fact he is actually Brahman itself. As a follow up on this comes the famous and specifically Vedantic assertion of the World is Mythiya i.e. irreal and only because of the workings of DCM that is it thought to be real and so forth.

29.

இப்படிப் போல நாம ரூபங்கள் இரண்டும் இன்றி

ஒப்பமாய் இரண்டில் தோன்றா உணர்வொளி நிறைவாய் நிற்கும்

அப் பிரமத்தில் தோன்றும் ஐம்பூத விகாரம் எல்லாம்

செப்பிய கற்பிதத்தால் செனித்த என்று அறிந்துகொள்ளே

Ippadip poola naama ruupaGkaL iraNdum inRi

Oppamaay iraNdil toonRaa uNarvoLi niRaivaay niRkum

Ap piramattil toonRum aimpuuta vikaaram ellaam

Ceppiya kaRpitattaal cenitta enRu aRintu koLLee

Meaning:

The Brahmam stands as the only reality of absolute brilliance that fills the consciousness and understanding. The world of ordinary understanding of the five basic elements of Wind and so forth and the whole range individual particulars of varied names and forms are actually the products of the above mentioned DCM- there is nothing real as such except for the Brahman.

Thus we have the assertion that the phenomenal world is not real but only a delusion, an illusion a mere appearance created by the adhyasa Aroobitam and so forth, a kind uncanny illusory world created by the uncanny and indescribable (anirvasanam) DCM

Now to convince the scholars the Vedanties indulge in a very detailed analysis of such delusions optical illusions and so forth and try to JUSTIFY the Monism of the Upanishads by such strategies.

A Critique of Advaita Vedanta- 5

Before we take up a critique of Advaita Vedanta as such, it is necessary to delineate more precisely the exact claims of Advaita Vedanta as expounded in the text under study viz KN by TMS and which is based upon a vast array of texts in Sk as well the Upanishads.

First we take up the assertion that a person in existential miseries is deluded into thinking that his self is actually the physical body and nothing besides that. Now this is not very clear for normally almost all identify themselves with the body but at the same time also feel that one is different in being a psychic entity and so forth. In saying “I am tall” the person identifies himself with the body but in saying “I am scared” he is saying that he is a psychic entity quite different from body. There is no delusion at all and if it is a delusion then the distinction between normalcy and abnormality is not maintained.

Now let us represent symbolically this normal claim as (s =l D) where ‘s’ stands for self and ‘D” for body and the symbol “=l” denotes the identification. In Advaita as described above this is denied as it is quite normal and there is no delusion at all. Thus it appears that what Vedanta claims is ( s = D) where ‘=’ means not self identification as above but rather saying the self itself is a physical entity, nothing but the body. Here obviously we have something quite unnatural and Vedanta locates the existential miseries of all kinds in this physicalism, Here perhaps there is a delusion to correct which the Guru points out that self as the dreamer and the one who also enjoys the dreamless sleep cannot be this body for obviously the physical body does not dream at all.

Now the truth according to Vedanta is (s : D) i.e. the self is deluded into thinking that it is in fact the body”D” where as a matter of fact it is not. Here the symbol “ : “ denotes the workings of the DCM, the delusion creating mechanism.

The Self is Brahman

But the notion of ‘self’ in Vedanta does not end here. The fundamental claim of Advaita Vedanta is that the self is actually Brahman and that it is only because of the workings of DCM that there is a feeling of individual selves quite distinct from Brahman and so forth. What is really being denied and attributed to delusion here?

Let us use the symbol “W” for the world of selves i.e. W( s1, s2, s3, . .. . .) and which is the normal view. Now according to Vedanta this is a delusion for there are NO individual selves--- all are Brahman (B) and it is only because of delusion that a person thinks he is different from B. Thus we have B : W(s1. s2, s3 . . . .) i.e. it only because of the workings of the mysterious and uncanny DCM that Brahman B is seen as a collectivity of individual and independent selves. But this is false for the selves are actually like the different reflections of the one and same Sun in different pots full of water. The physical body becomes the substrate where Brahman gets reflected and which reflection is misunderstood as independent and autonomous selves, the jivas. The truth is (B : s1) (B : s2) (B : s3) and so forth. The individuals are actually Brahman B but are led to think that they are autonomous selves due to the workings of DCM i.e. they are deluded into thinking so.

The Wolrd is a Mythiya

The bulk of the text is devoted to describing how the world of names and forms are constituted as such by the DCM into the details of which it is not necessary to go. Let us symbolize all the possible different worlds such as that of concrete particulars, properties and attributes, feelings and emotions, the aesthetic sensitivities and what not as W1 W2 W3 and so forth. These are not real but mere appearances but made to present themselves as real by the workings of DCM. Let us for example take the world of concrete particulars (U) --- those which are named as tree hill dog cat and so forth. According to Vedanta this is a delusion, a Mythiya i.e. (B : U) ---- there are no concrete individual particulars as such, they are simply appearances (tooRRam). They are only seemingly so and all because of the workings of the uncanny DCM. Thus we have the TRUTH ---- B : (W1 W2 W3 . . . ) i.e. the so-called different worlds are simply Mythiya, an appearance only and we are led to think they are real only because of the workings of DCM

All these assertions of Vedanta are based upon the REALITY and TRUTH of the presence DCM and its workings. But how does the Vedanti justify the TRUTH and REALITY of DCM?

We shall take up this issue next in some details.

A Critique of Advaita Vedanta- 6

By way of elucidating in greater details the essences of Advaita Vedanta we have introduced some symbolic representations such as (s =l D) the self identifying itself with the physical body, (s = D ) the self equating itself as the physical body and the Vedantic ( s : D) the self being deluded into thinking it is nothing but the physical body. Along these come the claim that world is Mithya i.e the world as a collection of names and forms is an illusion, just an appearance created by the DCM, a superimposition on the single absolute Radiance Brahman B.

All these claims are founded on a single assumption --- that there is a Delusion Creation Mechanism because of which all these misperceptions take place and require the self freeing itself from it and at which it will realize it is in fact Brahman i.e. ( s = B) and which is the goal of Vedantic studies. So we shall take up a detailed consideration of this DCM called variously as Adhyasa Arobita KaRpanai etc . Several typical examples are also given to illustrate and validate the reality of DCM such the rope appearing as a snake the conch shell mistaken for silver, the mirage under the hot sun, a stump appearing like a person under dim light the Pure Space appearing as divided and so forth.

Now let us introduce some symbolic representations to delineate the details of the analysis and which has been very extensively discussed in various Indian darsanas.

Let us use the symbol ‘U’ for the universe of individual particulars (a,b,c . . ) i.e. U(a,b.c. . . .) and ‘V” for the universe of concepts x,y,z, . . . i.e. V(x,y,z, . .), Now if ‘x’ is the concept rope and ‘y’ is snake then we have the sentences ‘That is rope’ and ‘That is snake’ as (Ua)(Vx)(a =l x ) and (Ub)Vy)( b =l y). What it means is that a particular object ‘a’ is selected from the universe of concrete particulars U and identified as ‘rope’ where the concept ROPE or ‘x’ is aso selected from the universe of concepts “V”. Similarly for the identification of snake and so forth.

So far these representations are quite normal or at least the representations of the normal veridical perceptions.

Now how can we represent the delusions as above?

When the rope is seen as the snake we can represent it as: (Ua)(Vx.y)(a =l x):y) i.e. the object which is really rope is seen as a snake under certain psychological and optical conditions. When the delusion is destroyed we have simply the perception as above (Ua)(Vx)(a =l x). Such a destruction of illusions and delusions is called Abavatam and for securing which the Sadhana Sadushtaya, the Four Fold Vedantic Sadhanas SravaNam Mananam and so forth are proposed.

Now in the various Indian darsanas there are many theories (kiyaati) about such illusory perceptions called Satkiyat Asatkiyati Anirvasakiyati and so forth and in which Anirvasanak Kiyati is that of Advaita Vedanta. But what exactly is it?

The Satkiyati denies that the illusion of ‘snake’ upon the non-illusionary perception of ‘rope’ by saying even the ‘snake’ perception is actually a part of the rope attributes. It is already inherent in that object named ‘rope’ but which emerges into perception only under certain physical and mental abnormal conditions. But this view is easily deconstructed by the Advaiti by showing that the delusion perception of ‘snake’ does not last with the object at all times and under all conditions as does the ‘rope’ perception. There is this perception only because of Avidya, a kind of ignorance on the part of the perceiver and the mechanism producing this delusion is impossible to locate and describe I,e anivasanam.

Now the Advaiti having shown in this way the reality of the delusion and the reality of DCM, goes on to say the same thing about the ‘rope’ perception also i.e. (Ua)(Vx((a : x ). The perception of an object as a rope (upon which is superimposed the ‘snake’ under certain conditions), is also a delusion a mere appearance as the concept of ‘rope’ is after all a construction of a sort, a kaRpitam and hence nothing real about it. It is purely mental and there is nothing real in the world corresponding to it.

Now the Vedanties do not stop at this level of their extension of the workings of DCM ---- they extend it also to the universe of concrete particulars ‘U’ and that of concepts ‘v’ and so forth. All these are also delusions or mere appearances the products of the workings of DCM, a superimposition upon the Pure Brilliance of Brahman B the only reality and which understanding can be represented as B : (U, V)

Now what is the justification for such a claim?

Simply the authority of the Upanishadic Maka Vakkiyas Akam Brahman Asmi , Tat Twam Asi and so forth and the fact that these universes are mental constructions of a sort. While the Vedas as a whole may not be absolutely authoritative but these Maka Vakkiyas cannot be wrong at all and speak the Satyam, the Absolute Truth that stands there indestructible.

If the universe of individual particulars and conceptual entities are taken as REAL and not simply appearances then it would follow that the Vedantic claim that only Brahman is Real will turn out to be false and which is impossible.

Thus we meet here the central and fundamental assumption of Vedanta: the Maka Vakkyas of the Upanishads cannot be wrong at all and hence any metaphysical claim contrary to the Vedantic must be thrown out as unacceptable.

Now with these, I think, we have covered enough of the Vedanta doctrines to enter into a critique where in the course of these critiques we shall take up other issues discussed in KN and other Vedantic texts. Here we must also a peculiar sense in which the word ‘Avidya” that normally means ignorance is used. To the question as to whcy the Brahman,a Pure Brillinace should appears as the world of individuals and so forth, it is said it is all because of Avidya where only a true understanding of the Maka Vakkyas will destroy it and let the self realize that it is actually Brahman.