Text 58] Instructions for Civilized Human Beings 267

abadhito ’pi hy abhaso
yatha vastutayd smrtah

durghatatvad aindriyakarn
tadvad artha-vikalpitam

abadhitah—rejected; api—although; hi—certainly; dabhdsah—a
reflection; yatha—as; vastutayad—a form of reality; smrtah—accepted;
durghatatvat—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 mir-
ror 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, vivarta-
vada, 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 Vaisnavas 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 Vaikuntha
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 Mayavadi philosopher cannot understand this, but a real phi-
losopher must be convinced that light is not possible at all without a
background of sunlight. Thus the jugglery of words used by the
