gard to the relation of the real वेदान्तग्रन्थेषु ब्रह्मशब्दसा and the phenomenal, no point हृचर्येण भूयः प्रयज्यमाना

appears to have occasioned more

ants of Vedántism than the em

ployment of this term nir-guna,

perplexity to the European assail- निर्गुणमिति शब्दो युरोपदेशोयान् प्रतिवादिनः सुso frequently connected in the वहु व्याकुलयति तथाVedántic writings with the name पलभ्यते कश्चिद् वेदान्तof the Supreme (Bralm). We दूषणाद्यता युरोपीयो निwriter against Vedántism declar- र्गुणशब्दस्य यः केाऽप्यर्थो ing that ‘In any sense, within the ऽस्तु सर्वथा ब्रह्म शून्यरूपमे• reach of human_understanding, वनहि गुणविनाकृतान्या

find, for example, a zealous

' he (Brahm) is nothing. For

And the same writer calls upon his readers to admire the extrav

' sciousness of his own existence !'

the mind of man can form no त्मद्रव्याण्यनात्मद्रव्याणि ‘ notion of matter or spirit apart वा प्रतीतिविषयीभवितुम' from its properties or attributes' ईन्तीत्याह तथा सएव श्रोतृन् ब्रह्मणि स्वसत्ताविषयagant notion that Brahm exists कॅमपि ज्ञानं नास्तीति मतwithout intellect, without intelli - स्यानौचित्यचमत्कारानुभ gence, without even the con- वाय प्रार्थयते । अस्यच सर्वNow, the reply to all this is, that स्येदं प्रत्याख्यानम् यन्निthe word nir-guna is a technical र्गुणशब्दस्तावत्पारिभाषिterm, and must be understood in क इति तस्य परिभाषितो devoid of whatever is meant by ऽर्थो ज्ञातव्यः । गुणशब्देन the term guya, and the term guna यद्यदभिप्रेतं तद्रहितमितिis employed (as already explained) हि तस्यार्थः गुणशब्दार्थश्च सर्वं दृश्यजातमिति प्राङ्गmenal belongs constitutively to the निरूपितमेव । तथाच सर्व

its technical acceptation. It means

to denote whatever is phenomenal. In denying that anything pheno

D.

Supreme Being, the Vedantin स्य दृश्यजातस्य ब्रह्मस्वspeaks very much like Bishop रूपान्तर्गतत्वनिषेधे वेदा

Berkeley, and like other good

Christians whom Milton's epic has न्ती बरकलीनामकवत् कnot educated into a semi-conscious विकल्पितसमूर्तिकेश्वरानंAnthropomorphism. Berkeley ex- गीकर्तृसाधुखष्टीयजनान्त

presses himself as follows :—' We,

* who are limited_and_dependent रवच्च वदति । तथाहि बर— spirits, are liable to impressions कलीनामकेने । क्तम् वयं of sense, which, being impressed तावत्परिच्छिन्नाः__ _परतन्त्राश्च जीवा ऐन्द्रियक'painful and uneasy. But God, वृत्तीनां बाह्यपदाथकृतवि

८

(

' against our wills, are sometimes

'whom no external being can

— affect, who perceives nothing by — sense as we do, whose will is

‘absolute and independent, caus‘ing all things, and liable to be

thwarted or resisted by nothing; ‘it is evident such a being as this — can suffer nothing, nor be affected ← by any painful sensation, or in

‘deed any sensation at all, We

काराणां पाचाणि भवामः ताश्च वृत्तयेो ऽस्मदिच्छाविराधिन्यो ऽस्मासु कदाचि द् दुःखरूपा भवन्ति भगवास्तु न किमपि वस्त्विन्द्रियद्वारेण पश्यति नच केनापि बाह्येन विक्रियते । तथा

‘are chained to a boly ; that is to तस्येच्छापि कार्यक्षमा स्व‘say, our perceptions are connect - तन्त्रा

सर्ववस्तूत्पादिका

— ed with corporeal motions. By केनापि कारणे नाशक्य प्र

f the law of our nature we are af

ffected upon every alteration in तीघाताचेति सपूर्ण कामो — the nervous parts of our sensible दुःखादिजनिकाभिरिन्द्रि— body ; which sensible body, यवृत्तिभिर्विरहितश्चास्ति । ← rightly considered, is nothing वयम्पुनः शरीरेण निरुद्धाः “ hut a complexion of such quali - शारीरक्रियापराधीनज्ञा

<

' ties, ' – and so on. The Vedántin,

in like manner, denying that such नशक्तिकाश्च यतोऽस्मदीय

declares, we ought not to ascribe ‘to Almighty God properties, at

‘qualities' belong to the Supreme, दृश्यशरीरस्य मस्तिष्कतन्तुमदवयवान्यथाभावेनास्मा‘tributes, or modes of being, सुज्ञानमुत्पद्यते तच्चास्मदी‘which are the peculiar charac- यं दृश्यशरीरं दृश्यगुणस'teristics of humanity, such as मुदायरूपमस्तीत्यादि । त 'the faculty of vision,' &c.* In थैव वेदान्तिनोऽपि ब्रह्मणि the Supreme cither has or requires गुणाननभ्युपगच्छन्तो जी either senses or bodily organs; वासाधारणधर्मभतान् दर्शनस्पर्शन शक्त्यादिरूपा

short the Vedántin denies that

and, holding that organs of sense or motion are made up of what

he calls guna, as we Europeans न गुणानीश्वरे प्रतिषेधामin general say they are made up इति वदन्ति । संक्षपतस्त of what we call mutter, he asserts वेदान्तिनेो ब्रह्मणीन्द्रिvery much the same sense that we याणि निषेधन्ति तानिच assert that God is immaterial. ज्ञानकर्मेन्द्रियभेदभिन्नानि

that the Supreme is nir-guna, in

We say, guardedly, ‘in very much

‘the same sense, and not simply तैर्गुणमयलेन स्वीक्रियन्ते ‘in the sense,' because the term ऽतश्च यथा युरोपीयै भति

,

guna denotes strictly, not the imperceptible quiddity 'matter,' but what Berkeley calls the sensi

ble, or the sum of the oljects of sense. Theologically, the Vedán

tin, asserting that the Deity is nir'-guna, and the Christian, as

serting that God is immaterial, are

* The Tattwa-bodhini Patrika—the Cal

व

कद्रव्यानात्मक ईश्वर इष्यते तथैव वेदान्तिभिरपि निगुण ईश्वरः । तथैवेत्येव क्तव्यं नतु तादृशार्थतात्पयेणेत्यपि यतो गुणशब्दस्य न स दृश्यगणाधारो ऽदृश्यो वस्तु विशेषो ऽर्थः किन्तु बरक

cutta organ of the modem Vedanting- लौनामकेन यो दृश्यशब्दfrom which we quote, is in English. न व्यवह्रियते स एव । अत

p. 113. N. B. The Patrika's article,

as two chemists might make each

asserting the very same fact in श्वोभयोरपि वक्त्रोस्तात्पर्य terms of separate theories,—just विषयाभूतार्थस्यैक्येऽपि मूthe same assertion in regard to लभूतपरिभाषाभेदाद् वsome individual specimen, while चनभेद्ः । यथाहि युरोपीthe one spoke of it as destitute of यानां भौतिकद्रव्यानात्मक

Chlorine, and the other spoke of it

as destitute of Oxymuriatic Acid

"To say that the mind of man

can form no notion of matter or

ईश्वर इति वचनं तत्स्वीकृ तागमीय परिभाषा भेदाद् भिन्नप्रकारकं तथैव वेदान्तिनां निर्गुणं ब्रह्मेति वचनं तत्खीकृतागमीयपारिभाषाभेदाद् भिन्नप्रका कं । तात्पर्यंतूभयोरेक मेव |

तथाच गुणशब्दपरिभा षितः कोऽप्यर्थो ब्रह्मस्वरू‘ spirit apert from its properties or पान्तर्गतो न भवतीत्येता‘attributes' is therefore no reductio दृशेवेदान्तमते आत्मानाma that nothing of what is techni- त्मद्रव्याणां गुणैर्विना ज्ञानं cally called guna enters into the न सम्भवतीत्युक्तिर दूषणessence of God. Take away every- म् । तथाहि सवषामिन्द्रियthing of what is comprised under ग्राह्याणां सर्वेषामिन्द्रिया

ad absurdum of the Vedántic dog

the name of guna,-that is to

say, take away everything that is णां सर्वासां भयविस्मयस्मृperceived through the organs of त्यनुमित्यादिजीवचित्तsense, and take away every sense- तीनां दूरीकरणे वेदान्तिorgan, and take away all human feelings or mental processes, such मते न तावत शून्य आधाas alarm, delighted surprise, re- रोऽवशिष्यते किन्तु अहि

tion, take away all this, and

-

there remains to the Vedántin,

joy-thought. This, whatever else

।

collection, computation, deduc- तीयवस्तु परस्पराव्यतिरिक्तसत्ताज्ञानानन्दरूपं काnot a mere empty substratum, but लचयावध्यानन्दानुभवात्मthe One Reality, consisting of कमवशिष्यते । तत्तु यexistence, thought, and joy, in त्किमप्यस्तु सर्वथा शून्याtheir identity as an ever-existing त्मकं न भवति । युरोपीwe may think of it, is something याहि अनादिसत्ताज्ञानvery different from a substratum सुखानि परमेश्वरस्य गुevacuated to nonentity. We are णाइतिवासनावन्तः वेदाexistence, wisdom, and blessed न्तिनस्तु अनाद्यभेदविशिness, as attributes of God. The ष्टानां तेषां परमेश्वरगुणVedántins, on the other hand, in- त्वंमकल्पयित्वाब्रह्मस्वरूप

accustomed to regard eternal

stead of regarding these as attri

butes of God, regard them, in त्वमेवस्वीकुर्वन्ति अतश्चtheir eternal identity, as God him- युरोपीयाभिप्रेतगुणशब्दाself. Instead of holding, as they र्थानुसारेण गुणशून्यत्वमीश्वरस्य वेदान्तिनो ना sense of the term, they hold, in भ्युपगच्छन्ति यथैते प्रायेणfact, that he is all attribute, sheer

are so often accused of holding,

that God has no attributes in our

दोषारोपविषयी क्रियन्ते ।

existence, sheer thought, sheer joy, — as a lump of salt is wholly of परन्तु लवणघनवदन्त — uniform taste within and with- हिश्चैकरसं केवलसच्चिदान‘ out. So far is the conception of न्दात्मकमीश्वरमभ्युपगच्छ that of a non-entity by the ve - न्ति । कोलब्रुककृत ग्रंथे च । Ve

Brahm from being reduced to

* Compare St. John's expression " God

व्यासवचानुसारेण निर्गु

is love.” “ I do not suggest a parallelism, णेपि ब्रह्मणि जगत्कारण

for the Vedántic enunciation is meant

literally.

तानिर्वाहकाः सर्वज्ञत्व सर्व