Fudge words in Śaṅkara’s Advaita Vedanta

Finn’s Charvaka manual for Navigating Śaṅkara’s Nondual Nonsense

Śaṅkara’s Advaita Vedānta is often hailed as the pinnacle of philosophical clarity—“the purest nondualism,” “the highest truth,” “the razor of reason.”

But Śaṅkara’s system, when examined carefully, is a cathedral built on fudge words: undefined terms, convenient metaphors, apophatic placeholders, and metaphysical smoke and mirror machines.

This manual provides a catalogue of the principal offenders and diagnostic strategies for identifying them.

1. “Brahman”

The Original Infinite Fudge Blob

Brahman is:

· nirguṇa (without quality)

· nirviśeṣa (without distinction)

· avāṅmanasagocara (beyond mind and speech)

· akartā (non-agent)

· asanga (non-relational)

· one-without-a-second

· pure consciousness

· pure being

· pure bliss

· yet somehow the ground of the world that is not real

This is the metaphysical equivalent of:

“The ultimate is something about which nothing can be said.”

The word functions by negation—it is defined by what it is not (hence apophatic).
It is the perfect fudge word: vast, undefined, invulnerable, and unfalsifiable.

Diagnostic rule:
If you cannot tell whether Brahman is something or nothing, the fudge is doing its job.

2. “Māyā”

The Mother of All Metaphysical Excuses

When Advaita is confronted with any problem—cosmological, logical, or empirical—Śaṅkara deploys māyā.

Māyā explains:

· why the world appears though not real

· why plurality seems to exist

· why ignorance manifests

· how the changeless appears to change

· how the unmanifest manifests

· how the world exists “neither real nor unreal”

· how bondage appears without affecting the self

It is the theological duct tape of Advaita.

Translation:
“Don’t ask how. Māyā.”

3. “Avidyā”

Ignorance as Ontological Filler

Why do we misperceive Brahman?
Avidyā.

Why do we experience the world?
Avidyā.

Why do we think we are individuals?
Avidyā.

Why is there duality?
Avidyā.

Does Śaṅkara define avidyā? No.
Is it individual or cosmic? Both. Neither.
Is it beginningless? Yes.
Does it have an end? Also yes.
Is it real? Not real.
Is it unreal? Not unreal.

Avidyā is a metaphysical fog that appears only to vanish when examined.

Warning sign:
Avidyā is invoked most frequently where the system fails.

4. “Adhyāsa”

Superimposition as a High-Class Handwave

Śaṅkara begins with the statement that all bondage is due to adhyāsa—superimposition of the non-self on the self.

But “superimposition” is never rigorously defined.
It oscillates between:

· perceptual error

· cognitive error

· ontological error

· experiential confusion

Śaṅkara’s own definition amounts to:

“Taking one thing to be another.”

This is a description of error, not an explanation of how error is possible in a nondual, actionless, distinction-less Brahman.

In Advaita:

“Adhyāsa happens.”
Why?
“Because it happens.”

This is philosophy by recursion.

5. “Atman = Brahman”

The Great Identity Fudge

The mahāvākya “tat tvam asi” is treated as a mathematical truth.
But identity between finite experience (tvam) and infinite metaphysical principle (tat) is achieved only through:

· abstraction

· negation

· selective interpretation

· intentional conflation

· removal of all attributes

It is ontological alchemy:

Strip the self of all qualities.
Strip Brahman of all qualities.
What remains?
“Identity.”

This is identity by erasure.

6. “Upādhi”

The Limiting Condition That Explains the Unexplainable

Upādhi is the Advaitin’s favourite escape hatch.

How does the infinite appear finite?
Upādhi.

Why does the changeless appear as changing?
Upādhi.

How does Brahman appear as jīva?
Upādhi.

What is an upādhi?
A “limiting adjunct.”

What is a limiting adjunct?
Something that limits.
How does it limit?
Māyā.
What is māyā?
Undefined.

This is metaphysical circularity at its most elegant.

7. “Anirvacanīya”

The Word That Means “We Cannot Say What This Means”

This is the king of fudge words.
Śaṅkara uses it for reality, māyā, avidyā, and the world.

It means:

· “indescribable,”

· “not real,”

· “not unreal,”

· “not both,”

· “not neither.”

In other words:

“Conceptually untouchable, but necessary for our system.”

Anirvacanīya is the Advaita version of quantum mechanics’ “wavefunction”:
The central term nobody can define.

8. “Sat-Cit-Ānanda”

The Triple-Word Gloss That Explains Everything and Nothing

Brahman is:

· sat (being)

· cit (consciousness)

· ānanda (bliss)

But:

· Being is undefined.

· Consciousness is undefined.

· Bliss is smuggled in as metaphysical well-being.

Śaṅkara treats these words as intuitive givens, but they are the most undefined terms in Indian philosophy.

Sat-cit-ānanda is a poetic incantation, not an ontology.

9. “Neti-Neti”

The Theological Fog Machine

The via negativa (“not this, not this”) conveniently removes all features that could lead to contradiction.

Anything that threatens coherence is denied.
This creates an unfalsifiable system.

Diagnostic rule:
If every objection dissolves into “not this,” the system explains nothing.

10. “Mukti” (Liberation)

Freedom Without a Mechanism

Advaita promises liberation through knowledge.
But liberation means:

· cessation of ignorance

· recognition of identity with Brahman

· dissolution of individuality

· release from karma

· end of rebirth

· “abiding as Brahman”

How does knowledge accomplish metaphysical transformation?
Śaṅkara never explains.
He only asserts.

Mukti is a doctrinal endpoint, not a mechanism.

HOW TO SPOT A FUDGE WORD IN ADVAITA

The Charvaka Druid’s Three Śaṅkara Questions:

1. Is the term defined only negatively?
→ Fudge.

2. Does it resolve contradictions or simply hide them?
→ Fudge.

3. Does invoking the term answer a question or silence it?
→ Fudge.

If the answer is #3, you are in the presence of classical Advaita metaphysics.

Final druidic verdict

Śaṅkara, the hereditary high-caste Brahmin priest, is a brilliant synthesiser, a profound logician, a master rhetorician and a throwback to the Vedas.
But his system relies heavily on:

· undefined primitives

· apophatic placeholders

· dodgy means of knowledge (pramanas) 

· semantic fog

· metaphysical tautologies

Advaita’s genius is its ability to use language to transcend language—while quietly depending on language’s most elastic terms.

As the druid notes:

“If a word explains everything, it explains nothing.
If a doctrine cannot define its key terms, it is not knowledge but enchantment.”

Śaṅkara perfected the art of metaphysical enchantment.

And that is why Advaita endures.

Fudge words used in Christianity

Fudge Words and Fuzziness

All Finn’s blogs

The Druid Finn’s homepage