Whose Ignorance?
If Brahman is all there is, the error that shows us a world of many things must belong to someone. Vācaspati asks who that is, and how ignorance can exist at all without making Brahman ignorant.
Ignorance, Vācaspati answers, belongs to the individual self, the jīva, and has Brahman only as its object: Brahman is never ignorant and rules ignorance as the Lord. The obvious objection is a circle, since the individual self is itself produced by ignorance. He answers that the two are beginningless, like seed and sprout, each preceding the other without either being first. Ignorance can be called neither real nor unreal, and the self that persists from childhood to old age is what it veils.
- ignorance
- individual self
- self
- brahman
- nonduality
- appearance and reality
- consciousness
- identity
- memory
- embodiment
- agency
- causation
- creation
- cosmology
- metaphysics
- momentariness
Enter a dialogue
- If Brahman, the one reality, is all there is, someone must be ignorant for a world to appear. Why is that someone each individual self, not Brahman?
- The individual self exists through ignorance, and ignorance needs a self to belong to. Why is that, for you, no vicious circle but a seed and its sprout?
- Ignorance, in your account, can be called neither real nor unreal. How can something that defies description still hide the truth from us?
- Your opening verse calls the Vedas God's breathing, the five elements his glance and the world's dissolution his sleep. What kind of God does that picture?
- Brahman is never ignorant, you insist, yet it is the very thing ignorance is about. How can the truth be hidden from someone without being hidden in Brahman?