History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c95.67

v7.c95.67

These passages emphasize that it is impossible to describe what *brahman* is and that we can only say what it is not. Śaṅkarācārya²⁴⁵⁵ on V. S. III. 2. 17 refers to the dialogue of Bāṣkali and Bādhva where Bādhva declared the characteristic of *brahman* by his silence. Bāṣkali said 'Sir, tell me about brahma'; then Bādhva remained silent; when Bāṣkali asked a second and a third time Bādhva replied 'we have been telling you indeed, but you don't understand; this self is still (without any activity)'. J. Royce in 'The world and the individual' vol. I. p. 148 is just like this episode of Bāṣkali and Bādhva "Believe not those prattlers' says one often quoted mystical work 'who boast that they know God' Who knows Him is silent". Śaṅkarācārya puts the distinction between para-brahma and apara-brahma (personal God) as follows: Where texts reject the connection of *brahma* with names and forms that are the product of *avidyā* (nescience) and speak of *brahma* in negative expressions such as 'asthūla' (not gross or big), there it is parabrahma (that is meant), but where in such passages as 'He is mind, has prāṇa or body, the form of light, whose thoughts are true, whose nature is like ākāśa (present everywhere), who creates everything' &c. *brahma* is mentioned for worship and it is *apara*.²⁴⁵⁶