This page has not been fully proofread.

lxiv
 
Dr. Thibaut goes on to mention "some
other considerations to be met with here and
there in the Sutras," in order to establish his
conclusion that the Sutrakara did not hold the
doctrine of the absolute identity of Brahman and
Jiva. We shall take these seriatim. Dr. Thi-
baut first refers to what he calls "the important
Sutra ii, 1, 22, which distinctly enunciates that
the Lord is adhika, i. e., additional to, or diffe-
rent from, the individual soul, since Scripture
declares the two to be different." We have .
already overthrown Dr. Thibaut's argument to
show that the Sutras do not contain the distinc.
tion between a higher and lower knowledge
of Brahman, and demonstrated that the
distinction between a higher and lower Brah-
man is recognised in the work. So, where
the Sutras refer to the difference between the
individual soul and the supreme soul, the latter
refers to Isvara or Saguna-Brahman, and not
to the pure, undifferenced Atman. The further
remarks made by Dr. Thibaut in this connection
are, therefore, equally without point and fall to
the ground. We have also to state here that
Dr. Thibaut is entirely mistaken in supposing