2023-03-01 15:21:40 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
xxiii
all kinds, there is not the least justification for
his assumption of an attitude of self-satisfied dis-
trust of Sankara's discussion of the second set of
Sutras. Such a distrust would be to some extent
justifiable if Dr. Thibaut's criticism of Sankara's
interpretation of the first set had been a success,
instead of the total faiture we have shown it to
be. In the light of our demonstration of his
failure, it cannot fail to appear premature. We
shall now proceed to review his discussion of
Sankara's interpretation of this second set of
Sutras. As before, his first criticism is that
"their wording gives no indication whatever of
their having to be separated from what precedes
as well as what follows." In replying to Dr.
Thibaut's criticism of Sankara's interpretation of
the first set of sutras, we have, already dealt
with this vague and unmeaning generality as it
deserves, and we content ourselves with referr-
ing the reader to the remarks already made.
His second criticism is that "the last sutra of
the set (7) obliges Sankara to ascribe to his truly
released souls qualities which clearly cannot
belong to them. In the same breath Dr. Thibaut
makes the extraordinary admission that Sankara
all kinds, there is not the least justification for
his assumption of an attitude of self-satisfied dis-
trust of Sankara's discussion of the second set of
Sutras. Such a distrust would be to some extent
justifiable if Dr. Thibaut's criticism of Sankara's
interpretation of the first set had been a success,
instead of the total faiture we have shown it to
be. In the light of our demonstration of his
failure, it cannot fail to appear premature. We
shall now proceed to review his discussion of
Sankara's interpretation of this second set of
Sutras. As before, his first criticism is that
"their wording gives no indication whatever of
their having to be separated from what precedes
as well as what follows." In replying to Dr.
Thibaut's criticism of Sankara's interpretation of
the first set of sutras, we have, already dealt
with this vague and unmeaning generality as it
deserves, and we content ourselves with referr-
ing the reader to the remarks already made.
His second criticism is that "the last sutra of
the set (7) obliges Sankara to ascribe to his truly
released souls qualities which clearly cannot
belong to them. In the same breath Dr. Thibaut
makes the extraordinary admission that Sankara