NONMONOTHEISTIC CONCEPTIONS 1035 What Bimal sees does not have the nature and properties that Bimal sees
it as having.
The standard Indian examples are seeing a conch shell and mistaking it for
silver and seeing a rope and mistaking it for a snake; each of these follows
the (1) through (5) pattern. Analogously, then, the Advaita Vedantin
claims, when one reports, based on one’s sensory experience, that there is
an experience-independent physical thing, it is nonetheless true that there
exists nothing sensory. As there was no man who Bimal saw, but only a
coat hanging on a hook, so there is no tree or table (or any other object)
that anyone senses, but only qualityless Brahman. Strictly, the analogy
does not work; taking one thing for another is very different from sheer
hallucination. But the negative idea is clear – it is denied that there is a
mind-independent physical world. This by itself would yield only idealism
- the view that there are minds and experiences with sensory content, but
no mind-independent objects of sensory experiences. Shankara’s view is
much more radical. He claims that there are neither minds nor experiences;
there is only Brahman without qualities. All experience of physical objects
or of self is illusory. It is not an illusion caused by Brahman; that would
require that there be effects that were not identical to Brahman. Of course
Brahman itself cannot be subject to illusion (that would be a limitation).
One should not suppose that Shankara is unaware of the very
considerable difficulties of his view. Consider these passages by him:
1 To refute the self is impossible, for he who tries to refute it is the self.^3
2 Only a deluded man could entertain the idea that he does not exist.^4
The idea is that while it may be possible without self-refutation to deny that
there are physical objects distinct from one’s sensory experience, it is not
possible without self-refutation to deny that one exists oneself.^5 Shankara
then turns to the task of developing a perspective that he regards as fully
consistent with certain central Upanishadic texts, particularly one that says
simply “Thou art That” (the individual person is identical to Brahman).
Taking this and other texts literally, Shankara opts for the view that only
Brahman-without-qualities exists. He holds that if I exist, then – contrary to
all sorts of powerful considerations – I am Brahman.
The Vedas and Upanishads, along with traditional commentaries on these
documents, are the sacred texts of Hinduism. Vedanta means “end of the
Vedas” – the tradition that faithfully follows the Vedic teachings. Advaita
means “non-dual” and contrasts with Dvaita (“dual”) and Vsistadvaita
(“qualifiedly non-dual”), these being the three adjectives defining different
Vedantic traditions. The core religious dispute among these three versions of
Vedanta concerns the proper interpretation of the relevant authoritative texts