NOTES
163
is deluded is indeterminable, then is thaf indeterminable cognised as indeterminable, or, as otherwise ? If it be cognised as it is, tl.en there could be no empirical usage about delusion, because the indeterminable is cognised as indeterminable. If it be cognised as otherwise, then there is the violation of the statement that the unreal is not cognised. On this ground there is no possibility of erroneous cognition. (For Advaitins refutation of the criticism, see Ad·writa siddhi, p. 121). VII (43). The second alternative referred to (the second of the first seven alternatives stated in the beginning of the text, i.e. unreality). The Dvaitin points out that it cannot be unreality. Indetenninability according to the Advaitin is other than both the real and the unreal. The statement that indeterminability is unreality is opposed to AdYaita. VIII (44-60). The Dvaitin examines the third alternative "being different from the real". He resolves this again into four alternatives. Is it para jati (summum genus), or being not Brahman, or unreality, or being other than unsublatability. In the first case there is the defect of apasiddhanta (being opposed to the doctrines of one's own school). The advaitin does not deny the presence of generality in the universe. In the second case, i.e. "being not Brahman, there is the defect of the establishment of the established, because the Dvaitins admit that the 1aniverse is not Brahman. In the third case i.e. unreality, there is oppo· sition to their own school of thought, because the Advaitins do not admit that the universe is unreal. They hold that it is indeterminable i.e. being other than the real and the unreal. In the fourth case there is the defect of the establishment of the established. The Dvaitin admits that the universe is other than the unsublatable. The unsublatable is Brahman, and the universe is other than Him. Hence the" defect of the establishment of the established. If the term " beitlg other than the unsublatable " is interpreted as s1~b· latabilit;v, the Dvaitin proceeds resolve the sense of the term into two. (a) Is sublatability an enoneously cognised object or (b) is
to
