The Vedas in the Light of Advaita: Nineteen

The principal objections to the nature of avidyā (ignorance) in Advaita Vedānta philosophy and Advaita's reasoned defenses are discussed in detail as follows:

1. The Impossibility of Substratum (Āśrayāṇupapattiḥ):

The Critic's Objection (Pūrvapakṣa): The fundamental objection is this: if Brahman alone is the sole reality and pure, how can dual concepts like knowledge and ignorance reside in Brahman? If avidyā is some impure or false notion, it cannot take Brahman as its substratum, for this would compromise Brahman's purity. Brahman is nirguṇa, formless, and free from all modifications; the notion of avidyā finding refuge there seems unreasonable.

Advaita's Refutational Strategy (Siddhānta): Advaitins respond to this objection by asserting that Brahman itself is the substratum of avidyā. However, avidyā is called 'anirvacanīya' (inexplicable). Anirvacanīya means that which is neither 'sat' (real) nor 'asat' (unreal), but rather a strange entity beyond both. It is also known as 'bhāvarūpa ajñāna'—that is, a positive or existing entity that does not merely exist as an absence of knowledge, but functions as an active power. Since avidyā is inexplicable, it neither touches Brahman nor brings about any change in Brahman's essential nature. Avidyā is merely Brahman's māyā-śakti. Just as a rope appears to be a snake in darkness, yet the rope's nature remains unchanged, so too when avidyā exists in Brahman, Brahman's purity remains unaffected. Avidyā is merely an illusion superimposed upon Brahman, which does not influence Brahman's true being.

2. The Impossibility of Essential Nature (Svarūpāṇupapattiḥ):

The Critic's Objection (Pūrvapakṣa): Critics raise the question: what is the essential nature of avidyā? Avidyā must be either 'sat' (real) or 'asat' (unreal). No third, intermediate position is possible. If avidyā is real, then like Brahman it becomes eternal and imperishable, which contradicts Advaita's doctrine that Brahman alone is the sole reality. And if avidyā is unreal, then it has no existence whatsoever and can exert no influence, which contradicts our experiential reality of ignorance.

Advaita's Refutational Strategy (Siddhānta): Advaitins declare that avidyā is 'false.' However, this falsity differs from the conventional notion of falsity. According to Advaita, 'false' means that which is experienced (that is, whose existence appears), but which can be destroyed by knowledge. It is a strange entity different from both real and unreal. Avidyā is called 'sadasat-vilakṣaṇa' or 'anirvacanīya.' This means it is neither completely unreal (because its existence appears, like the dream world), nor completely real (because it is destroyed by true knowledge). Avidyā assumes a delusory existence, which vanishes only when Brahman-knowledge dawns. Just as in the illusion of a mirage, water appears and creates thirst in people, but approaching closer reveals its non-existence—so too avidyā remains present only until Brahman-knowledge is attained.

3. The Impossibility of Liberation (Muktyanupapattiḥ):

The Critic's Objection (Pūrvapakṣa): The argument arises: if avidyā is beginningless (anādi—that which has no origin), then the destruction of a beginningless entity is impossible. Whatever is beginningless is generally considered eternal. If avidyā is eternal, then liberation for the individual soul becomes impossible, because ignorance will remain forever and cannot be removed by knowledge. This contradicts the concept of mokṣa or liberation.

Advaita's Refutational Strategy (Siddhānta): Advaitins respond to this objection by explaining that 'anādi' means that whose origin cannot be known, but whose destruction is not impossible. Though avidyā is beginningless, it is 'bhāvarūpa ajñāna' and does not remain spontaneously eternal. Though beginningless, avidyā's destruction is possible through knowledge. In Advaita, knowledge alone removes ignorance. Just as darkness, though beginningless, is dispelled by light. Darkness is beginningless, but when light appears, it ceases to exist. Similarly, though avidyā is beginningless, when Brahman-knowledge dawns, it is completely destroyed. This destruction brings about the complete cessation of avidyā, and the individual soul then realizes its true nature (Brahman) and attains liberation. Therefore, though the destruction of beginningless entities may not be possible, the destruction of superimposed or illusory beginningless entities like avidyā is possible through knowledge.

To explain the nature of the individual soul (jīva) and its fundamental non-difference from Brahman, Advaita philosophy employs two principal logical methods: the analysis of the three states of consciousness and eka-jīva-vāda (the doctrine of one individual soul). These methods unveil the true nature of the individual soul and prove its unity with the Supreme Self (Brahman).

1. Analysis of the Three States: Application of the Anvaya-Vyatireka Method

The anvaya-vyatireka (co-presence and co-absence) method is a powerful argument for proving the soul's independence from body and mind. This method minutely analyzes the presence and absence of consciousness (the soul) across the different states of the individual (waking, dreaming, deep sleep).

Method and Refutation:
Waking State (Jāgrat): In this state, the individual experiences through the external world and the senses. Body, mind, intellect, and senses remain active. We see, hear, touch, and feel worldly objects.
Dream State (Svapna): In the dream state, the individual's connection with the external world is severed. The mind creates its own world based on internal impressions and desires. Here too body-mind remain active, though their functioning is of a different nature.
Deep Sleep (Suṣupti): This is the state of profound sleep, where all mental and physical activities are completely at rest. Mind, intellect, senses, and even the sense of 'I' remain absent. In this state, neither waking nor dream experiences exist.

Vyatireka (Co-absence): In the state of deep sleep, the functions of mind, intellect, senses, and both gross and subtle bodies remain completely absent. This is the state where no form of thought, feeling, or external perception exists. All upādhis (limiting adjuncts) are temporarily dissolved.

Anvaya (Co-presence): Despite the absence of mind and body in deep sleep, the existence of consciousness remains unimpaired. Upon awakening, we can remember, "I slept well" or "I knew nothing." This pratyabhijñā (recognition) proves that a witness (Sākṣi) or seer was always present, who observed the experience of deep sleep. The constant presence of this consciousness despite the absence of body-mind during deep sleep proves that the soul is different from, independent of, and unaffected by changes in body-mind. This establishes the soul's eternality and immutability.

This analysis makes it crystal clear that the soul or witness-consciousness is independent of the upādhis (limiting adjuncts) of body and mind and is eternal. The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.3.23) provides scriptural support for this position: "In deep sleep, when no second object remains separate for perception, the seer's seeing does not cease, because the seer (the soul) is imperishable and indestructible." This proof clarifies the 'tvam' (thou) word in the great statement tat tvam asi, which declares the individual soul's true nature to be non-different from Brahman. When the individual is freed from the upādhis of body-mind-intellect, it realizes its non-difference from Brahman.

2. Eka-Jīva-Vāda (The Doctrine of One Soul—EJV) and the Objection to Multiple Souls

Eka-jīva-vāda is a significant doctrine of Advaita philosophy, which claims that this world is imagined by only one individual soul (like a single dreamer), and all other souls are part of that dream. This is closely connected with dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi-vāda (the world exists only as far as it is perceived) and ajāti-vāda (nothing has ever been created). According to eka-jīva-vāda, Brahman alone is the sole individual soul (Īśvara), and the countless souls we see are all part of that single soul's (God's) imagination. This gives utmost importance to the power of māyā, where the one Brahman appears in manifold forms under māyā's influence.

Objection (Pūrvapakṣa): In the text 'Iṣṭasiddhi,' a principal objection is raised against eka-jīva-vāda: "Brahman alone is involved with avidyā and is liberated through knowledge. When one is liberated, the entire world is liberated (eka muktau jagan mukteh)." That is, if there is only one individual soul, then its liberation means the liberation of all souls and the dissolution of the world. But this does not happen in practical experience. We see that different individuals attain liberation at different times, and one person's liberation does not ensure others' liberation. The world continues as before, and other souls continue experiencing their karmic results.

Refutation (Siddhānta): Advaita refutes this objection by relying on the reflection-original analogy.
Illustration: The individual soul is conceived as a reflection of Brahman, limited by upādhis. Just as the sun is one, yet countless reflections appear in different water bodies (pots, ponds, rivers). These reflections appear different depending on the shape of their water containers.
Explanation: When one individual soul (one reflection) attains liberation, it merely removes that single soul's own upādhis or desires. Just as when a pot breaks (upādhis are removed), the reflection of space within it merges with the vast sky, but other pots (other souls) remain intact and their experiences continue. That is, one reflection's liberation (freedom from upādhis) does not affect other reflections.

Liberation merely removes an individual's own delusion (māyā), not another's experience or other souls' existence. Each soul is limited by its own upādhis (avidyā, karma, desires). One soul's liberation does not affect another soul's upādhis, because each soul, under the influence of its own avidyā, creates a distinct world of experience. Though Brahman is one, under māyā's influence He appears as countless souls, and each soul attains liberation according to its own karma and avidyā. This explanation supports the concept of individual liberation for multiple souls while keeping Advaita's fundamental principle intact.

Objection and Refutation Concerning the Teacher-Student Relationship: The teacher-student relationship in Advaita Vedānta philosophy is a complex and profound subject. Critics often raise the question: if according to ultimate truth both teacher and student are part of māyā—that is, dream-characters—then what is the necessity or utility of the teacher's instruction? If the teacher himself is part of the individual soul's dream, then how can his teaching remove the soul's ignorance and show the path to mokṣa? The fundamental basis of these objections is: if everything is false or unreal, then how can one false entity (teacher) guide another false entity (student) toward truth?

Advaita Vedānta provides an extremely coherent and practical answer to this objection. Advaita maintains that though at the ultimate level (paramārthika) everything is Brahman and duality is an illusion, yet at the practical level (vyāvahārika) the teacher's instruction remains indispensable. The reason is that instruction is necessary to remove illusion. For instance, if someone sees a terrifying situation in a dream and becomes frightened, then to awaken from that dream, external stimulation may be needed, or someone within the dream might tell him that it is merely a dream. Similarly, in worldly life, due to ignorance we consider ourselves identical with body, mind, and world—which is a fundamental illusion. To remove this illusion, guidance from an experienced teacher is absolutely essential.