This page has not been fully proofread.

lxxviiii
 
vidya." Sankara explains the slokas so as to
make them accord with the context, and we
have to be thankful that he renders us the help
we need, and that he is able to render it. There
is nothing, however, in all this to show either
that there is no consistent doctrine in the
Upanishads or that those who attempt to unfold
that doctrine are making a mistake. Dr.
Thibaut is clearly also mistaken in supposing-
without offering the least justification for it-that
there is in the Upanishads anything like a dis-
tinction between what he calls an "older notion
of a wise man going by the path of the gods to
the world of Brahman and a later and, if we
like, more philosophic conception of Brahman
as a man's self for the attainment of which no
motion of any kind is needed on man's part.
In making this supposition, he virtually admits
all that he fought for against Sankara, -i. e., he
admits that the Upanishads teach the distinction
of a lower and higher Brahman and, therefore,
all that follows from it as a consequence.
 
Dr. Thibaut next discusses the second
Brahmana of the Third Adhyaya of the Brihad-