The System of the Vedanta according to Badarayana's Brahma-Sutras and Cankara's Commentary c7.s7.t1.2

c7.s7.t1.2

(a) The Difference in Essence between Brahman and the World.—To the objection that Brahman could not be the cause of the world, because the two are different in essence, an empirical answer is first given, by adducing examples in which the effect is different from the cause; thus, from men, who are conscious, hair and nails which are unconscious, proceed; from dung which is unconscious, the conscious dung-beetle (vṛścika = gomayakīṭa) comes forth. But as here cause and effect, in spite of every difference of form, have this in common, that they have both sprung from the earth, so Brahman and the world have both this common characteristic,—Being (sattā). Of what nature is the difference in essence (vilakṣaṇatvam) on the ground of which the opponent disputes the creation of the world by Brahman? Does it lie (1) in the fact that nature does not altogether harmonise with the being of Brahman? Without a certain reaching-forth beyond itself (atiçaya), in the cause, we nowhere find the relation of cause and effect. Or (2) is the difference between the two complete? That cannot be maintained; for the evidence teaches that the Being (sattā), which is the essence of Brahman, is also to be found in the things which make up Nature. Or (3) is it impossible for Nature to have sprung from Brahman because Nature lacks consciousness (caitanyam)? The examples we have given above are opposed to this view; and not these examples only, but also the revelation of Scripture. But it is a mere [unjustified] postulate (manoratha-mâtram) that Brahman, because it is in fact existent (parinishpannam), must also be perceptible by worldly means of knowledge: for perception cannot comprehend Brahman, because Brahman is without form; inference also fails, because Brahman has no characteristic (liṅgam); and if reflection is nevertheless recommended by the Scriptures, it is to be understood of reflection directed to the Scriptures, and not of reflection divorced from them.—Furthermore, we must not believe that because the world is an effect of Brahman, it did not exist before it was created. Even then, it already existed in the form of its causal Self (kāraṇa-ātmanā), just as now it only persists through the power of this causal Self (p. 424, 9 to 429, 13).