falsehood and truth are not contrary entities such that the negation or the falsehood of falsehood will mean truth.  The world-appearance is a whole and in referring to it the negation refers also to itself as a part of the world-appearance and hence not only is the positive world-appearance false, but the falsehood itself is also false; when the world-appearance is contradicted at the dawn of right knowledge, the falsehood itself is also contradicted.

Brahman differs from all other things in this that it is self-luminous (svaprakas’a) and has no form; it cannot therefore be the object of any other consciousness that grasps it.  All other things, ideas, emotions, etc., in contrast to it are called d@rs’ya (objects of consciousness), while it is the dra@s@ta (the pure consciousness comprehending all objects).  As soon as anything is comprehended as an expression of a mental state (v@rtti), it is said to have a form and it becomes d@rs’ya, and this is the characteristic of all objects of consciousness that they cannot reveal themselves apart from being manifested as objects of consciousness through a mental state.

_______________________________________________________

_____________

[Footnote 1:  See Advaitasiddhi, Mithyatvanirukti.]

445

Brahman also, so long as it is understood as a meaning of the Upani@sad text, is not in its true nature; it is only when it shines forth as apart from the associations of any form that it is svaprakas’a and dra@s@ta.  The knowledge of the pure Brahman is devoid of any form or mode.  The notion of d@rs’yatva (objectivity) carries with it also the notion of ja@datva (materiality) or its nature as non-consciousness (ajnanatva) and non-selfness (anatmatva) which consists in the want of self-luminosity of objects of consciousness.  The relation of consciousness (jnana) to its objects cannot be regarded as real but as mere illusory impositions, for as we shall see later, it is not possible to determine the relation between knowledge and its forms.  Just as the silver-appearance of the conch-shell is not its own natural appearance, so the forms in which consciousness shows itself are not its own natural essence.  In the state of emancipation when supreme bliss (ananda) shines forth, the ananda is not an object or form of the illuminating consciousness, but it is the illumination itself.  Whenever there is a form associated with consciousness, it is an extraneous illusory imposition on the pure consciousness.  These forms are different from the essence of consciousness, not only in this that they depend on consciousness for their expression and are themselves but objects of consciousness, but also in this that they are all finite determinations (paricchinna), whereas consciousness, the abiding essence, is everywhere present without any limit whatsoever.  The forms of the object such as cow, jug, etc.