2023-03-01 15:21:48 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
xlv
closely analogous. For in these cases as well as
in the emanation of Maya from Brahman, that
which is non-intelligent springs from that
which is intelligent, and thus the reply to the
Sankhyan objection is an appropriate one. Dr.
Thibaut entirely misses the point by his failure
to understand or remember the explanation given
in i, 4. 23.-Dr. Thibaut next takes up Sutra 9
following of the same first pada of the same
Adhyaya II, and holds that the illustrative
instances adduced in this Sutra are "singularly
inappropriate if viewed in connection with the
doctrine of Maya." And why? In the cases
adduced, viz., things made of clay, golden
ornaments, and the fourfold, complex of organic
beings, they do not, when re-absorbed into their
original material causes impart to the latter
their individual qualities. According to Dr.
Thibaut, these instances do not apply here, for
he thinks that, "according to Sankara the
world is not merged in Brahman, but the
special forms into which the upâdâna of the
world, i. e., Maya, had modified itself are
merged in non-distinct Maya, whose relation to
Brahman is not changed thereby". But, as
closely analogous. For in these cases as well as
in the emanation of Maya from Brahman, that
which is non-intelligent springs from that
which is intelligent, and thus the reply to the
Sankhyan objection is an appropriate one. Dr.
Thibaut entirely misses the point by his failure
to understand or remember the explanation given
in i, 4. 23.-Dr. Thibaut next takes up Sutra 9
following of the same first pada of the same
Adhyaya II, and holds that the illustrative
instances adduced in this Sutra are "singularly
inappropriate if viewed in connection with the
doctrine of Maya." And why? In the cases
adduced, viz., things made of clay, golden
ornaments, and the fourfold, complex of organic
beings, they do not, when re-absorbed into their
original material causes impart to the latter
their individual qualities. According to Dr.
Thibaut, these instances do not apply here, for
he thinks that, "according to Sankara the
world is not merged in Brahman, but the
special forms into which the upâdâna of the
world, i. e., Maya, had modified itself are
merged in non-distinct Maya, whose relation to
Brahman is not changed thereby". But, as