SAIVA-SIDDHANTA

The
264 ADVAITA ACCORDING TO THE SAIVA SIDDHANTA.
the effect is like that of the body and of the embodied,
or like that of
the substance and its attribute. By unity of Brahman and the universe,
we mean their inseparability like that of clay and the pot as cause and
effect, or like that of the substance and its attribute. A pot, indeed, is
not seen apart from clay, nor is the blue lotus seen apart from the colour
blue. Similarly, apart from Brahman, no potentiality of the universe can
exist ;
nor is Brahman ever known apart from something else, the former
must ever be conditioned by the latter, and this latter is naturally one
with the former.
Wherefore, Brahman who is in no way separable from the universe is
said to be one with the other. And there is a natural distinction betveen
the two ;
so that the Supreme Brahman is ever higher than the universe.
As to their distinction as to the cause and the effect, it has been already
explained in II. i. 9. Wherefore this theory is quite unopposed to the
Srutis declaring distinction as well as non- distinction.
And as in the case of stone, etc., it is incongruous (II. i. 23,).
(Objection) : Under all conditions, Jiva and Isvara are one, because
of the Srutis declaring non-duality.
(Answer) No, because of an : incongruity. Jiva and Isvara cannot
be identical, because, like the insentient stone, timber, grass, etc., the Jiva
also is, on account of ignorance, etc., said to belong to quite a distinct
class from the Isvara who is possessed of such attributes as omniscience.
Therefore Isvara is a distinct entity from Jiva,
Thus even the Jiva,
senti
ent as he is, cannot be identical with Isvara owing to this difference, that
the latter is superior. Much less can the insentient existence which is
essentially different be identical with Isvara. From all standpoints of
view, by Sruti, Smriti and Reasoning, we see that the omniscient and
omnipotent Paramesvara is quite superior to the whole universe, sentient
and insentient though, as His own emanation, it is not altogether distinct
from Him.
And he brings out the non-difference more by means of the simile of
soul and body in his commentary
on I. ii. i.
11
All this is Brahman, as beginning, and breathing in Him ;
and
therefore let a man meditate on Him."
This passage may be explained as follows :
origin, existence,
and end of all this depends on Brahman. All this, both the sentient and
the insentient existence, is verily Brahman, and therefore let a man
meditate on Brahman, tranquil in mind. Just as water-bubbles which
have their origin, existence and end in the ocean, are found to be only
forms of that ocean, so, too, that which depends for its origin, etc., on
Brahman associated with Sakti must be made up of Brahman and nothing