उपदेशसाहस्री (आदि शङ्कराचार्य - गद्य व पद्य भाग)

THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHANGELESS 55
90. Disciple.—“But, Sir, when this is so, Pure Con-
sciousness Itself has to be admitted ¹ to be adventitious
like waking and dream. For it is not known in deep
sleep. Or, (it may be that I have adventitious con-
sciousness or) am non-conscious by nature.”
न, पश्य, तदनुपपत्तेः। चैतन्यस्वरूपं चेत् आगन्तुकं
पश्यसि, पश्य। नैतद्वर्षशतेनापि उपपत्त्या कल्पयितुं शक्नुमो
वयम्, अन्यो वाऽचैतन्योऽपि। संहतत्वात् पारार्थ्यं अनेकत्वं
नाशित्वं च न केनचित् उपपत्त्या वारयितुं शक्यम्। अस्वार्थस्य
स्वतःसिद्धयभावादित्यवोचाम। चैतन्यस्वरूपस्य तु आत्मनः
स्वतःसिद्धेः अन्यानपेक्षत्वं न केनचित् वारयितुं शक्यम्,
अव्यभिचारात्॥ ९१ ॥
91. Teacher.—“No. (What you say is not right.)
Think over it. It is not reasonable (to say so). You
may look upon Pure Consciousness as adventitious (if
you are wise enough); but we cannot prove It to be so
by reasoning even in a hundred years, nor (can It be
proved to be so) even by a dull ² man. As the con-
sciousness (that has for its adjuncts mental modifications)
is a combination no one can disprove its existence for
the sake of another, its manyness and destructibility by
any reasoning whatever; for we have already ³ said
that whatsoever does not exist for itself is not
¹ The ideas, ‘I am a seer,’ ‘I am a hearer,’ etc. showing con-
sciousness in one in dream and waking are absent in deep sleep
together with the two states. The disciple’s idea is : ‘When the
two states are not there in deep sleep, my consciousness is also
not there.’ ² i.e., no one can be so dull as to prove It to be so.
³ See para 74 above.