उपदेशसाहस्री (आदि शङ्कराचार्य - गद्य व पद्य भाग)

112-119] ' THOU ART THAT ' 253 115, 116. (Objection). No. There will be the fallacy of reciprocal dependence here as the knowlege of the reflection depends on that of the Self (and the knowledge of the Self depends on that of the reflec- tion) ; (but it is not so in the case of the face etc. and their reflections) as the face etc. are always known independent of their reflections. The reflection may be said to belong to the Self if the latter be known to have an independent existence. Again, the Self may have an independent existence if the reflection belongs to It.¹ नैवं स्वप्ने पृथक्सिद्धेः प्रत्ययस्य दृशेस्तथा । रथादेस्तत्र शून्यत्वात्प्रत्ययस्यात्मना ग्रहः ॥ ११७ ॥ 117. (Reply). It is not² so. For the intellect and the Self are known to exist independent of each other in dream (like the face and its reflection), as the Self then illumines the modifications (of the intellect) in the forms of objects such as, chariots ³ etc. though they are not present in that state. अवगत्या हि संव्याप्तः प्रत्ययो विषयाकृतिः । जायते, स यदाकारः स बाह्यो विषयो मतः ॥ ११८ ॥ कर्मेप्सिततमत्वात्स तद्वान्कार्ये नियुज्यते । आकारो यत्र चार्प्येत करणं तदिहोच्यते ॥ ११९ ॥ ¹ The fallacy spoken of in verse 115 is explained here. ² The intellect is an object of the Self (Pure Consciousness) in dream. The Self must, therefore, be admitted to have an existence independent of that of Its reflection. ³ See Br. U., 4. 3. 9.