I say “the jug is,” the “isness,” or “being,” does not shine in its purity, but only as a characteristic of the jug-form, and this is the root of the illusion.  In all our experiences only the aspect of Brahman as real shines forth in association with the manifold objects, and therefore the Brahman in its true nature being unknown the illusion is made possible.  It is again objected that since the world-appearance can serve all practical purposes, it must be considered as real and not illusory.  But the Vedanta points out that even by illusory perceptions practical effects are seen to take place; the illusory perception of a snake in a rope causes all the fear that a real snake could do; even in dreams we feel happy and sad, and dreams may be so bad as to affect or incapacitate the actual physical functions and organs of a man.  So it is that the past impressions imbedded in us continuing from beginningless time are sufficient to account for our illusory notions, just as the impressions produced in actual waking life account for the dream creations.  According to the good or bad deeds that a man has done in previous lives and according to the impressions or potencies (sa@mskara) of his past lives each man has a particular kind of world-experience for himself and the impressions of one cannot affect the formation of the illusory experience of the other.  But

452

the experience of the world-appearance is not wholly a subjective creation for each individual, for even before his cognition the phenomena of world-appearance were running in some unknowable state of existence (svena adhyastasya sa@mskarasya viyadadyadhyasajanakatvopapatte@h tatpratityabhavepi tadadhyasasya purvam sattvat k@rtsnasyapi vyavaharikapadarthasya ajnatasattvabhyupagamat).  It is again sometimes objected that illusion is produced by malobserved similarity between the ground (adhi@s@thana) and the illusory notion as silver in “this is silver,” but no such similarity is found between the Brahman and the world-appearance.  To this Vedanta says that similarity is not an indispensable factor in the production of an illusion (e.g. when a white conch is perceived as yellow owing to the defect of the eye through the influence of bile or pitta).  Similarity helps the production of illusion by rousing up the potencies of past impressions or memories; but this rousing of past memories may as well be done by ad@r@s@ta—­the unseen power of our past good or bad deeds.  In ordinary illusion some defect is necessary but the illusion of this world-appearance is beginningless, and hence it awaits no other do@sa (defect) than the avidya (nescience) which constitutes the appearance.  Here avidya is the only do@sa and Brahman is the only adhi@s@thana or ground.  Had there not been the Brahman, the self-luminous as the adhi@s@thana, the illusory creations could not have been manifested at all The cause of the direct perception of illusion is the direct but indefinite perception of the adhi@s@thana.