उपदेशसाहस्री (आदि शङ्कराचार्य - गद्य व पद्य भाग)

181-186] ‘ THOU ART THAT ’ 273 and give up what ¹ is in them. For this explanation of the sentence ² is thus possible. प्रत्यक्षादीनि बाधेरन्कृष्णलादिषु पाकवत् । अक्षजादिनिभैरेतैः कथं स्याद्वाक्यबाधनम् ॥ १८५ ॥ 185. (Objection). The knowledge ‘ I am Brahman ’³ is contradicted by sense-perception ⁴ etc. like the cooking of gold ⁵ particles. (Reply). How can that knowledge be contradicted ⁶ by these which are evidences only apparently ? दुःख्यस्मीति सति ज्ञाने निर्दुःखीति न जायते । प्रत्यक्षादिनिभत्वेऽपि वाक्यान्न व्यभिचारतः ॥ १८६ ॥ 186. (Objection). The knowledge that one is devoid of unhappiness does not arise from the sentence as long ⁷ as one feels that one is unhappy, though the feeling of unhappiness may be due to sense-percep- tion etc. which are all fallacious. (Reply). we say ‘ No.’ For there are exceptions.⁸ ¹ Right knowledge of Self-Brahman arising from the sentences like ‘Thou art That’ and negating Ignorance. ² ‘Thou art That.’ ³ On the part of those who hold that the idea, ‘ I am Brahman ’ is enjoined to be repeated for self-purification. ⁴ For sense-perception, according to the objector, proves agency etc. to be in the Self. ⁵ Gold particles are boiled in order to sanctify them for use in certain sacrifices. ⁶ Evidently they (gold particles) do not become soft. So the word ‘ cooking ’ implies a contradiction. ⁷ One feels unhappy and so on from one’s birth. The know- ledge, ‘ I am free from unhappiness ’ (i.e., ‘ I am Brahman ’) which comes later cannot, therefore, negate the previous one. ⁸ E g., One feels that the sky is blue from one’s birth, but one acquires the knowledge later that it is free from blueness when one is told so. See verse 3, chap 2, Metrical Part. 18