उपदेशसाहस्री (आदि शङ्कराचार्य - गद्य व पद्य भाग)

THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHANGELESS 55 90. Disciple.—“But, Sir, when this is so, Pure Con- sciousness Itself has to be admitted ¹ to be adventitious like waking and dream. For it is not known in deep sleep. Or, (it may be that I have adventitious con- sciousness or) am non-conscious by nature.” न, पश्य, तदनुपपत्तेः। चैतन्यस्वरूपं चेत् आगन्तुकं पश्यसि, पश्य। नैतद्वर्षशतेनापि उपपत्त्या कल्पयितुं शक्नुमो वयम्, अन्यो वाऽचैतन्योऽपि। संहतत्वात् पारार्थ्यं अनेकत्वं नाशित्वं च न केनचित् उपपत्त्या वारयितुं शक्यम्। अस्वार्थस्य स्वतःसिद्धयभावादित्यवोचाम। चैतन्यस्वरूपस्य तु आत्मनः स्वतःसिद्धेः अन्यानपेक्षत्वं न केनचित् वारयितुं शक्यम्, अव्यभिचारात्॥ ९१ ॥ 91. Teacher.—“No. (What you say is not right.) Think over it. It is not reasonable (to say so). You may look upon Pure Consciousness as adventitious (if you are wise enough); but we cannot prove It to be so by reasoning even in a hundred years, nor (can It be proved to be so) even by a dull ² man. As the con- sciousness (that has for its adjuncts mental modifications) is a combination no one can disprove its existence for the sake of another, its manyness and destructibility by any reasoning whatever; for we have already ³ said that whatsoever does not exist for itself is not ¹ The ideas, ‘I am a seer,’ ‘I am a hearer,’ etc. showing con- sciousness in one in dream and waking are absent in deep sleep together with the two states. The disciple’s idea is : ‘When the two states are not there in deep sleep, my consciousness is also not there.’ ² i.e., no one can be so dull as to prove It to be so. ³ See para 74 above.