2023-03-01 15:22:03 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
lxxxiii
object of upasana and the Brahman which is
the object of jnana. For example, we have the
text of Kena Upanishad, "तदेव ब्रह्म त्वं विद्धि नेदं यदि-
दमुपासते " "Know That to be Brahman, not this
which is the object of your worship or medita-
tion." Thre is not the least justification for
ascribing the distinction between Inana and upa-
sana or the consequent distinction between jne-
ya-brahman and upasya-brahman to the ingen-
uity or the system-building porpensity of "San-
kara and his school. "
Dr. Thibaut, before leaving this topic, gives his
view of 'the true philosophy of the Upanishads."
We have seen already that all his objections to
Sankara's interpretations are totally unsustain-
able and that his work as a critic is done flimsily.
The views of Sankara, therefore, remain un-
touched; and we do not see how Dr.Thibaut
can claim that he has the secret of 'the true phi-
losophy of the Upanishads.' Still, let us know
what he has to say. After this big flourish of
trampets, however, the secret he reveals to us is
that "a philosophy of the Upanishads cannot
even be spoken of," and that in the face of
-
object of upasana and the Brahman which is
the object of jnana. For example, we have the
text of Kena Upanishad, "तदेव ब्रह्म त्वं विद्धि नेदं यदि-
दमुपासते " "Know That to be Brahman, not this
which is the object of your worship or medita-
tion." Thre is not the least justification for
ascribing the distinction between Inana and upa-
sana or the consequent distinction between jne-
ya-brahman and upasya-brahman to the ingen-
uity or the system-building porpensity of "San-
kara and his school. "
Dr. Thibaut, before leaving this topic, gives his
view of 'the true philosophy of the Upanishads."
We have seen already that all his objections to
Sankara's interpretations are totally unsustain-
able and that his work as a critic is done flimsily.
The views of Sankara, therefore, remain un-
touched; and we do not see how Dr.Thibaut
can claim that he has the secret of 'the true phi-
losophy of the Upanishads.' Still, let us know
what he has to say. After this big flourish of
trampets, however, the secret he reveals to us is
that "a philosophy of the Upanishads cannot
even be spoken of," and that in the face of
-