Accordingly the Amritabindhu Upanishad Reads As Follows: "Beyond All Thought

 - and infinite, beyond argument and illustration." As Brahman is devoid of attributes, ther can be no argument, no attribute forming a sign or mark

- by which to infer the existence of Brahman. And as Brahman is secondless, there can be no illustration, nothing else which belongs to the same class

- (Objection): Sankaracharya, the great commentator (bhashyakara) on the Brahmasutras, commentating on I.i.2 admits aniumana as an evidence regarding Brahman, in the following words:

- "Though there are Vedantic passages revealing the Cause of the birth etc., of the universe, still anumana, as serving to impress the more firmly the revealed truth, is not unwelcome,

- being authoritative when not contardicting the vedantic texts; tarka or reasoning being admitted as asn eveidence by the Veda itself, in the words 

- "He should be heard and reflected upon" - (Answer) - This does not detract from the validity of our contention. The commentator means simply this 

- The vedantic texts alone form evidence regarding Brahman; and anumana may be admitted only in so far as it serves to reconcile human intellect to the revealed truth

- In this case the anumana or inference is based on fictitious premises. Indeed, the existence of Brahman is not primarily provable by inference alone; for it can never lead us to knowledge of Brahman's essential nature