The learned Doctor failed to take stock of the antecedent agent, in the frozening or otherwise of the ocean, namely the sun, and hence his error. The Siddhantins take the water whether it be that of the smallest rill or that of the ocean as analogous to the soul, and the universal Akas present both in the water of the stream and that of the ocean, as the Para-meSvara and Paramatman, the universal Supporter, and all-Pervader; and the Glorious Sun is also God, whose pancha-kritya is also felt on the ocean and stream water, in its making and increasing and dissolving, and under whose powerful Sakti the minor powers of Karma (wind and moon) also find play, and the whole cycle of evolution is set agoing.

And it is this learned Doctor who spoke of the misinterpret-ing variations of Sankara's advaita, known under the names of Visishtadvaita, Dvaita, etc, and it is the freqent boast of people of his ilk, that Sankara's Advaita is the most universal and ancient system, whereas all other forms of Indian philosophy are only partial and sectarian and modern; and in the present paper, we propose to deal with this claim, to a certain extent by taking up the Gita, their most beloved Upanishat, and by merely taking the various analogies used by Lord Krishna; we wil1 show, whether we find among them or not, any of the favourite and hackneyed similes of this school, and whether the similes actually have any bearing on the special tenets of this school.

The first simile in the book occurs in chapter ii., 13.

"Just as in this body, childhood and youth and old age appertain to the embodied man, so also does it acquire another body."

This is a popular enough simile, and its meaning is plain but it cannot be construed as is done by Sankara, that the soul undergoes no change or is not affected by the change of avastas or change of bodies; for it cannot be contended that the intelli-gence of Sankara is in the same embryonic stage as that of a new born babe, and the denial of this would also militate against all our ideas of evolutionary progress and the necessity for undergoing many births. In the previous verse, Sri Krishna postulated the existence of many souls, by asserting, neither did I not exist, nor thou, nor these rulers of men, and no one of us will ever hereafter cease to exist; "and he reiterates the same fact, in chapter iv, 5, where he alludes to his own former births, which fact is also mentioned by Sri Krishna himself again in the AnuSasana Parva and stated by Vyasa in the Yuddha Parva. By 'I' and 'thou', and 'these', he clearly does not refer to their bodies as Sankara interprets. The next figure occurs in verse 22 of the same chapter, "just as a man casts off worn-out clothes and puts on others which are new, so the soul casts off worn-out bodies and enters which are new." Similar instances are that of the serpent throwing off its skin, the mind passing from the conscious into the dream condition, and the Yogi into another body, which are given by Saint Meykandan. The next one occurs in verse 58, where the Sage withdrawing his senses from the objects of sense, is compared to the tortoise withdrawing its limbs, at the approach of anybody.

The same simile occurs in Tiruvarutpayan.

In chapter iii., only one illustration occurs, and this in verse

38, which we have often quoted. "As fire is covered with smoke, as a mirror with dirt, as an embryo is enclosed in a womb, so this is covered with it" Sankara explains, "as a bright fire is covered with a dark smoke co-existent with it..... ...so this is covered with desire."! The italics are ours. What 'this' and 'it' are, are seen to be, man and his wisdom-nature, Prakriti-guna - Rajas and Desire constraining one to the commission of sins. 'Constrained.' Sankara explains as a servant by the King. Man is enslaved by his passion; his wisdom is such that it is deluded by unwisdom, ignorance (verse 40). Sankara leaves these passages quietly enough but when explaining the similar passage (xiv, 5) "Sattva, Rajas, Tamas, - these three Gunas,

0 mighty armed, born of Prakriti, bind fast in the body, the embodied, the indestructible," Sankara says, "now one may ask: It has been said that the embodied is not tainted (xiii, 31). How then, on the contrary, is it said here that the (Gunas) bind him ? We have met this objection by adding 'as it were'; thus they bind him as it were'." It would have been well for his reputation, if he had not raised the objection himself and tried to meet it in the way he has done. Why did not the Omniscient Lord Krishna himself add this 'as it were,' and leave these passages alone, apparently contradicting each other. In his explanation, he has omitted the force of 'fast,1 and he has forgotten

' Dragged and constrained' and of the co-existent darkness and delusion of the former passage and explanation. There is one other passage relating to the soul and its bound condition namely verse 21 in chapter xiii itself. "Purusha, as seated in Prakriti, experiences the qualities born of Prakriti) "attachment to qualities is the cause of his birth in good and evil wombs." Lo, the Supreme Self, attaching itself to qualities born of Prakriti, constrained to commit sin, deluded by co-existent darkness, having to undergo births and deaths, and getting fettered and seeking salvation, and all this 'as it were'! What a precious excuse would it not prove, this 'as it were' to the murderer, the forger, the liar, the thief etc.? Besides, Sankara identifies the embodied of verse 5, xiv, with the 'dweller in the body' in xiii, 31. Even so far as forms of expression go, they are not altogether the same, thing. It may be noted that the expression 'embodied' is always used in describing the soul, Jiva, and never to denote God. Though God is seated in the hearts of all, He is the Soul of Souls, and Light of Lights. He can never be called the 'embodied.' The expression 'embodied' conveys itself the idea of attachment and bondage.