z:\ ambedkar\vol 011\vol11 04.indd MK SJ+YS 5 10 2013/YS 18 11 2013 257
WHAT IS NOT—DHAMMA
257
But for argument’s sake let it be granted that a thing exists although it is invisible.
The best illustration of it is electricity. It exists although it is invisible.
This argument is not enough.
An invisible thing must show itself in some other form that is visible. Then alone it can be called real.
But if an invisible thing does not show itself in any visible form then it is not a reality.’
We accept reality of electricity although it is invisible because of the results it produces.
Electricity produces light. From light we accept the reality of electricity although it is invisible.
What does this invisible Brahma produce? Does it produce any visible results ?
The answer is in the negative.
Another illustration may be given. In law too it is common to adopt as a basic concept a fiction— a proposition, the existence of which is not proved but which is assumed to be true.
And we all accept such a legal fiction.
But why is such a legal fiction accepted?
The reason is that a legal fiction is accepted because it gives a fruitful and just result.
“Brahma is a fiction. What fruitful result does it give ? ”
Vasettha and Bharadvaj were silent.
To drive the argument home he turned to Yasettha and asked “Have you seen Brahma ? ”
“Is there a single one of the Brahmanas versed in three Vedas who has ever seen Brahma face to face ? ”
“No, indeed, Gautama.”
“Is there a single one of the teachers of the Brahmanas versed in the three Vedas who have seen Brahma face to face ? ”
“No, indeed, Gautama.”
“Is there, Vasettha, a single one of the Brahmanas upto the seventh generation who has seen Brahma face to face ? ”
III