[Advaita-l] Advaita Siddhi: request for a clarification.

[Durga Prasad Janaswamy]

Hari Om,
Pranams.

Advaita Siddhi

A.  paricCheda 1 - paricChinnatva hetUpapattih

नच - रूपादिहीनतया चाक्षुषत्वाद्यनुपपत्ति: बाधिकेति - वाच्यम् ; Do not argue
thus - Brahman, being without form, cannot be seen with eyes and thus there
is a contradiction.

प्रतिनियतेन्द्रियग्राह्येष्वेव रूपाद्यपेक्षानियमात्, सर्वेन्द्रियग्राह्यम्
तु सद्रूपं ब्रह्म, नातो रुपादिहीनत्वेऽपि चाक्षुषत्वाद्यनुपपत्ति: Every
sense organ is capable of revealing only that which it is designed for (for
example, eyes can only reveal form, not sound). Whereas Brahman is capable
of being known by all sense organs. Thus even though Brahman has no form it
is capable of being known.


B. paricCheda 1 - pratyaksha bAdhoddhAre sattva nirvachanam
ननु 'सन् घट' इत्याद्यध्यक्षबाधितविषया दृश्यत्वादय - इति चेत्  If this is
the argument (of the opponent) - The world's unreality established by
reasons such as knowability, etc. is contradicted by direct perception of
the kind "The pot exists".

न ; चक्षुराद्यध्यक्षयोग्यमिथ्यात्वविरोधिसत्त्वानिरुक्ते: |
No. The existence that is capable of being known through direct perception
is not contradictory to mithyAtva. (The corollary - The existence that is
contradictory to mithyAtva, is not perceptible.)

I think I am missing something here, to me (A) and (B) look contradictory.
Please clear my confusion.

Thanks and regards
-- durga prasad janaswamy