Text 58]
Instructions for Civilized Human Beings
267
ābādhito 'pi hy ābhāso yathā vastutayā smṛtaḥ durghaṭatvād aindriyakam tadvad artha-vikalpitam
ābādhitaḥ —rejected;  api —although;  hi —certainly;  ābhāsaḥ —a reflection;  yathā —as;  vastutayā —a form of reality;  smṛtaḥ —accepted;  durghaṭatvāt —because of being very difficult to prove the reality;  aindriyakam —knowledge derived from the senses;  tadvat —similarly;  artha —reality;  vikalpitam —speculated or doubtful.
TRANSLATION
Although one may consider the reflection of the sun from a mirror to be false, it has its factual existence. Accordingly, to prove by speculative knowledge that there is no reality would be extremely difficult.
PURPORT
The impersonalists try to prove that the varieties in the vision of the empiric philosopher are false. The impersonalist philosophy,  vivartavāda , generally cites the acceptance of a rope to be a snake as an example of this fact. According to this example, the varieties within our vision are false, just as a rope seen to be a snake is false. The Vaiṣṇavas say, however, that although the idea that the rope is a snake is false, the snake is not false; one has experience of a snake in reality, and therefore he knows that although the representation of the rope as a snake is false or illusory, there is a snake in reality. Similarly, this world, which is full of varieties, is not false; it is a reflection of the reality in the Vaikuṇṭha world, the spiritual world.
The reflection of the sun from a mirror is nothing but light within darkness. Thus although it is not exactly sunlight, without the sunlight the reflection would be impossible. Similarly, the varieties of this world would be impossible unless there were a real prototype in the spiritual world. The Māyāvādī philosopher cannot understand this, but a real philosopher must be convinced that light is not possible at all without a background of sunlight. Thus the jugglery of words used by the