Till the acceptation of these words are therefore settled, we should not make confusion worse confounded, by rendering Nirguna and Saguna, as Impersonal and Personal.

So far, there can be no doubt on the nature of the God-head described in our Upanishat.

"When there was no darkness, nor day nor night, nor Sat, nor Asat, then Siva alone existed (Siva eva Kevalah). That is the absolute, that the adorable (condition) of the Lord. From that too had come forth the wisdom of old - (jnanasakti). (iv, 18).

* A Christian missionary writing to the Christian College Magazine wonders how Vemana, the famous Telugu poet, could speak of Siva as other than the Hindu triad, Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra. Cf., Bartrihari's Satakas for the popular conception of Siva.

† By Nirguna, we mean 'without Prakritic qualities' and by Saguna clothed in Prakritic qualities, And God could therefore be both Nirguna and Personal in Emerson's sense.

"He is the eternal and infinite, Unborn Being, partless, action-less, tranquil, without taint, without fault, the Highest Bridge to Immortality (vi. 19). He is the causeless first cause, the all-knower, the all-pervader, the creator, sustainer and liberator of the world, the end and aim of all Religion and of all philosophy, He is the lsvara of ISvaras, Mahesvara, the God supreme of Gods, the King of kings, the Supreme of the supreme, the lsa of the Universe" (vi. 7).

There is one other matter to be considered in the nature of the Divine Personality. God is spoken of both in masculine and in neuter, and that in the same verse, a peculiarity which is noticeable in modern Saivaism. And God is addressed in all forms as 'He' 'She' and 'It.' Sivah, Siva and Sivam.* And the reason is not as stated by Prof. Max Muller, in his note under Ver. 16, Chapter iii, that the gender changes frequently, according as the auther thinks either of the Brahman ,or its impersonation as "Isa, Lord." To the Indian whether he addresses his God as Siva or Sivam, he is addressing the same Supreme Personality who is neither male nor female nor neuter, and there is no jar to him in the sense, as there will be to the Christian, who could only think of and address God in the masculine gender.

The Upanishat does not recognize any difference between the use of 'It' and 'He,' and it does not contemplate that by using 'It' instead of ' He,' a Higher Being is reached.

Coming now to the nature of the soul, as set forth in this Upanishat, the first thing to be noticed is that the Jiva is very often spoken of as Atma simply and distinguished from God. The other appellation it receives are Purusha, Anisa, Ajna, the Hamsa, Vidya, and these are to distinguish it from the other, the Paramatma, the Parama Purusha, Isa and Jna.

This soul is bound, because he is not God (i. 8) because he is ignorant of himself, and of the self within him, (the

* Sivam in Sanskrit, they say, is not the neuter of Siva. But somewhow this neuter form is quite prevalent in Tamil.

Antaratma). This soul is not selfdependent (i. 2). This soul is confined in the Pura (city-body) of nine gates, i. e., is limited and 'flutters about' is changeable, and he enjoys the fruits, pleasures and pains (even pains are a pleasure to him, the ignorant soul) and fondly clings to the body, and performs karma (iii, 18. iv. 5 and 6).

"But he who is endowed with qualities, and performs Karma that are to bear fruit and enjoys the reward of whatever he has done, migrates through his own works, the lord of life, assuming all forms, led by the three gunas and the three paths" (vi. 7).

And yet this soul is of the image of God, is infinite and brilliant like the Sun, endowed with Ichcha and Jnana, and is sinless.

The Supreme One who witnesses all his doings, dwelling within him, without Himself being tainted by the contact, helps to secure the ripening of his mala, and waits till the soul attains to that condition of perfect balancing in good and evil, (v. 5) by the performance of Chariya, Kriya and Yoga (good works, Penance and meditation) with love and knowledge and the syllable Pranava, he is blessed by the Lord (i. 6,) and God's grace descends on him (vi. 21 and iii, 20) and he knows and sees, with Manas (the supreme grace of God - the spiritual eye) (v. 14)'The Purusham Mahantam Aditya Varnam, tamasah parastat,' and his fetters (Pasa) fall of, and sufferings cease and he enters the Bliss of the Supreme Brahman, and Eternal Peace.

That Isvara Prasadam (iii. 20) or Anugraham or grace is necessary is a common belief of the people, and this doctrine is not peculiar to this Upanishat alone. The Kafka Upanishat puts the same doctrine in much stronger language, "That Atma (God) cannot be gained by the Veda, nor by understanding, nor by much learning. He whom Atma (God) chooses, by him the Atma (God) can be gained." (1. 2. 23); but even the supreme Almighty (God) cannot help him, if he had not turned away from wickedness, and is not tranquil, subdued and at rest, dedicating (Arpanam), all his words, deeds and thoughts to God, (i. 24).

That the doctrine of Bhakti is found well set forth in the oldest Upanishats and the Vedas will be apparent by reading the texts collated by Dr. Muir in bis learned "Metrical translations from Sanskrit" under the heading of 'Sraddha

V* and Bhakti.' By the way, this Sraddha and Bhakti is not to be understood as a manifestation of feeling only, at one stage of man's spiritual evolution and unnecessary at another stage, but this love is essential to the aspirant whether he is a Dasamargi, Satputramargi, Yogamargi or Jnanamargi. That these four paths grow one, out of the other, and are not independent, and each one of these is hardly possible to reach without going through the lower rungs of the ladder, we have already pointed out above.

The Upanishats, all of them, discuss the particular Upasana or Upasanas which are required for the salvation of the bound soul, and these Upasanas are called also Vidyas.