so it goes out of it. The seed of the wurm tree ( ficus Indica ) bears analogy to the- body, and consi ering the smallness of the seed and the largeness of the tree, it is evident that this can proceed only from Maia or ~delusion. The Logicians proudly suppose that they can remove these difficulttes, but their opinions are completely refuted by Hursh Misra,” sloks 142—8 and Commentary. -‘Fhe argument appeardy to rest «on two circumstances, first. that the generation of animals cannot be ace counted for by its apparent cause; second, that even this, apparent cause sometimes fails in producing the effect as inthe case of sterile feniales, Hence it is concluded that animals and the visible world are not real existences but mere illusions. The author has not stated his argument in a precise manner, but he seems to “assume that matter is itself inert and lifeless, and consequently incapable of producing life and -motion; hence it must be admitted that there is a living Being who is different from what is called matter, and that this Being is the cause of sensible objects, and of life and perception. Of what use then is the supposition of inert matter? If ali effects proceed from the unceasing energy of the Infinite Being, is it not more rational to affirm that he if the immediate cause, than that he operates circuitously and by an intermediate substance.
The Vedanta philosophy does not correspond with any system which has been published in the Western world, It does not teach that the Supreme Being is the soul of the universe; that animate beings are goparate detached portions of his essence, or that the visible extended material frame ef things is God; hut it affirms that the world is one, living, unextended, indivisible Being, who puts forth his energy, and excites in himself the phenomena of sensible things, 4s well as of sensation, passion, &c. In explaining this | system, however, the writers frequently make use of such figures as may mislead a person who has only read dutached passages of their books, or who has not closely examined the nature of their doctrines. In consequence of this the Vedantas have been supposed to teach the doctcine of emanations; and a passage occurs in the Atharvan Ved, vhich appears to countenance “this opinion. “As the sparks proceed from fire, so yerious kinds of animate and inanimate beings proceed from tke ineurruptible Being.” But the best commentators say that these expressions do not mean that there are “separate individual, beings, but only that whatever is beheld is the Divine Essence. The Vedanta opinions’cannot be accurately represented by any figure; they must be @educed from plain and simple declara. tions. The Vedanta philosophy has been supposed to agree with the system of the celebrated Bishop Berkeley, APPENDIX. Hi APPENDIX. Hi and it certainly does eo in denying a material world, and in referring sensjble things to the energy of living Being; but here the agreement ends, The Berkelian hypothesis is completely opposed to the Vedanta doctrine by maintaining the existence of separate beings, upon whom this energy operates, and excites in their minds the ideas of externa? things, After this slight sketch of the philosophy of Vedanta, the practical maxims of the sect will be easily understood, They teach that perfection consists in rest, and that motion or action is the origin of the moral distinctions of good and evil, both of which must be renounced, as they involve and imply each other, It is required in order to the attainment of this sublime state, that the active faculties be annihilated, the passions and affections subdued, and that the individual be totally indifferent to external things, animate and inanimate, to parents, wives, children, relations, goods, or to whatever causes pleasure, pain, é&c. and this furnishes us with a reason for the disrespectful language made use of in the Play towards these relations and friends. When by the practice of rigid aysterity, retirement from the world, and contemplation, this quiescent state is attained, the soul perceives that it is Being, and that Being is all thirgs, and tius it becomes the one Infinite Fssence. Action or religious performances do not conduct the soul to the state of the Eternal, but toa place called Swarg, where it gontinuss until the holiness it ‘had accumulated be nearly expended by the enjayment of happiness, after which it returns to earth, and takes a body ecrresponding to the remnant of Virtue, it brings along with it, Agreeably to this notion the Vedantas condemn the performance of action as it retaing, the soul in the prison of passion and affection; but whilst a person continues to perform the common acts of life, it is incumbent on him to attend to religious duties and rites. It also has been found expedient to modify the doctrine in such a manner, as to reconcile it with the occupations and acts on which theexistence of societf depends, Accordingly they say that renunciation of the world does not require that a person cease from the acts and duties of life, but only that he preserve his mind in a state of perfect indifference and tranquillity. “If it be alledgé& that the Paranas declare Bharata and others did not perform the acts of life; we would ask, why do you not listen to the Veds, which declare that wise men eat, act, and procreate.” 271.
Having given this short sketch of the Vedanta principles, I shall now notice in a very cursory manner, the other four Brahminical systems which are mentioned in the translations.
The Nyayat is a system of Ingic and metaphysics. It contains two sects which were founded by the two celebrated teachers Gautam and Kanad. The sect of Gautam is the most ancient, and those who adhere to it are by way of eminence named Nyayaiks, and their philosophy is called Nyayai; the followers of Kanad are frequently named Veisheshiks, and their systeme'Tarkeek-Gautam is a celebrated character, not only in India, but in the countries to the eastward of the Ganges, where he has been raised to the rank of a divinity, and iseworshipped under a variety of names, which, however, are all easily traced to the primitive word. There is little distinction, if indeed any, between the systems of Gautam and Kanad, except in the number ¢f orglers into Which they have divided the different classes of Being. Ggutgm divided them into twenty-three classes, which Kanad has reduced to seven; but to understard the opinions alluded to in the Play, it is not fequisite to name the different classes of Being,#o enumerate the accidents and logical divisions of the system, or to notice the arrangement of syllogisms, which perhaps is not less perfect than that of the Greek Logician.
The Nyayaiks ( under which term I include the followers* both of Gautam and Kanad ) believe that zhere are two eternal substances, spirit and matter; the one distinguished by life and thought, the other by being inert and lifeless, and moving only as it is impelled by Spirit. They do not however suppose that the world in its present from has existed from eternity, but only the primary mgtter from which it springs when operated on by the Almighty hand of,God. Matter in its primary state is an invisible figureless substance. It is very common to express this primary condition of matter, by the word beej, which signifies seed; from this seed or germ the world is called forth by the Intelligent Living being; and at its final dissolution all things return to a seminal state, in which they remain until again spread out by creative energy.
Tn the process of “creation, the first form of material substance is called anoo, two anods make a dwenook, three a trenook, and so forth; and on arriving at the bulk of a trenook, matter assumes figure and becomes visible, In the first or invisible atomical condition, matter is eternal; in the second or figured state it is perishable. Hence inthe Nyayai system the elements, water, earth, fire, &c. are always divided info what _ is temporary, and what is eternal; the visible state,of water, for example, is temporary, its primary,state or essence is eternal,. a The combinations or Aggregations which compose the material universe are produced by the energy of an Almighty and Intelligegt cause, who is considered the Supreme Being. Matter is inctpalie of action,, whence it is cvident tha’the motions of material objects are caused by being diferent from these Sbjects, and in this manner they prove th® egistence of God. Thus the author of the Miktawali in delivering the opinions of the Nyayaiks, says, “ Though we@have in ourselves the consciousness that I am, [ feel pleasure, &c. yet we have no evident knowledge that spirit and matter are different; but this is proved by the following ’ 120 AFPENDIX.
argument:—An instrument requires an ‘operator; thus without an operator no effect could result from cutting instruments, as an axe® &c. in like manner, without an operator no effect would result from the eyes, &c. which are the instruments of vision, dc. hence we infer the existence of an operative Being. Should it be said that oneration belongs to matter, we reply that matter does not possess life, as is evident in the case of an inanimate body. It may however be urged that life, as consisting in perception, sensation, &c. does not belong to a dead body, just as it cannot be ascribed to the individual, who, according to your opinion, is united to the Supreme Being. We reply, if life or sensation be a property of matter, how can the events of youth be remembered in old age, since the body is subject to growth aid decay.” Atma Prakarn.
The Nyayaiks conceive that Spirit is a figured substance, which means that it possesses magnitude, but this magnitude is indivisible. According to Hindd Metaphysics, whatever is the subject of active and moral qualities must have magnitude, for these qualitits imply action and change; but what is absolutely without magnitude and figure must be impossible and unchangeable; hence as the Nyayaiks maintain that the Supremé Being is the immediate and active agent in the creation of theworld, and that perception, desire, and action, are in him permanent qualities, they ascribe to him a prineiple of invisible magnitude. - This magnitude i§ so small, that it moves in the smallest nerves which are the one thoucandth part the diameter of a hair; and this opinion is stpported by the Veds, “Spirit is more minuté than the minutest atom, and more subtle than the subtlest thing.” But it must not be inferred fron this that they are materialists; for they maintain an essential distinction between the phenomena of matter and Spirit.
They believe that the soul is a portion of the © APPRXDIX. 121 Supreme Being, and has a separate individual existence. Itcis distinguished from the Creator by not possessing essentially and permanently the qualities of perception, desire, and action, and it is also subject to ignorance and sorrow; but the Supreme Spirit is perfect and eternally blessed —“ Truth and intelligence are the attributes of God, and are gnot to be ascribed to the soul, which is the subject both of knowledge and ignorance, pleasure and pain, by which it is distinguished from the Supreme Spirit; therefore God and the soul are entirely distinct beings; if you deny this, how can you account for the soul being confined to material habitations, and again released from them?”
While embodied in matter, the soul is in a state of imprisonment, apd is under the influence of evil passions; but having by intense study arrived at the knowledge of the natural elements and principles, it attains the place of the Eternal. In this state of Supreme bliss, however, its individuality does not cease; but on this point they express themselves very obscurely. They admit that the soul is united to the Supreme Being, but conceive that it still retains the akgtract. nature of difinite or visible existence.
The dissolution of the world proceeds from the destruction of the visible forms and qualities of things, but their material essence gemains, and from it new worlds are formed by the creative energy of God; and thus the universe is dissolved and renewed in endless succession. ed a ae The Sanxnya Seqt was founded by a philosopher named Kapila. It has béen noticed by sone English writers as advancing thé doctgine of materialism: but “the Sankhyas believe in the efistence of two eternal substances or Beings, the one named Rjirish or Male, the other Prakrati or Nature. They conceive. that Parish, or the male, exists in an eternal state of’ rest, - impassible, and a mere spectator of ths motions of the universe, This state of the Supreme they illustrate by saying that he resembles the water-lily, Which after the water passes over it, is left in its original condition. The motions of the material world, and also sentient beings, proceed from Prakrati or Nature. The argument by which this opinion is supported is not very clear, or perhaps I have not been able to comprehend it. “ Spirit is life; effect an¢ cause are inseparably united, consequently, when the effect ceases, the cause must also cease; therefore agency cannot be attributed to the Supreme Being, and the idea that he acts arises from the union of Life and Understanding.” Miktawalli, Atma Prakarn. This passage, however, will receive some elucidation by remarking that Lite here denotes its simple abstract nature, divested of the qualities of thought, feeling, actiop, dc. This simple abstract Life is the Supreme Being: Understanding (which denotes the active and sensitive principles of being ) arises from the operation of nature; and the union of understanding or the active faculties with Life, which is the Supreme Being, produces the idea that he is the Agent in the motions of the universe, -The Vedanta sect affirm that understanding is the termination or completion of the One Being; the ankhyas on the contrary, assert that it is the completion of nature, Nature is eternal, but it is upheld by Life, the Supreme Being. When the universe disappears, nature "remains in an invisible seminal state; but at the desire ot the Supgeme, it assumés a visible form and becomes the creator of the world. x The roul, or sensitive part of living beings, arises from the organization of, Nature, but is formed of its more refined parts. “It is probably this opinion con,* cerning the soul, which has led to the supposition that the Sankhyas are Materialists. By the efficacy of virtuous action. however, men are delivered from passion, and united to the Supreme Spiritual Essence.
The Mimanasa was originally taught by Jaimini.
Kumaril Bhat and Prabhakar, who are mentioned in the Play, were two pf his most eminent disciples. There are two divisions of this sect; one named Parva or former, the other named Utter or latter Mimangsa. The Parva Mimangsa say that motion is the only Being, and that it has existed from eternity, and will exist for ever, producing and @naintaining all the phenomena which compose the universe. There is neither creation nor dissolution, the world had existed always in the same visible form which it now exhibits. Jaimini seemed to deny the existence of Paramatma or Supreme Soul, and to admit only that of Jiv Atma or Vital Soul; for which reason he was charged with Atheism, and in the Play we find one of his pupils asking if there be agy other Being begides those visible beings whom we behold. This tenet, however, was rejected by others of the Sect, and accordingly, Kumaril in reply to the above question, says, that there isa Being distinct from the universe, who is the judge of actions, and the dispenser of rewards and punishment, In asserting that motion is the only Being, the Mimangsa is directly opposed to the Vedanta system; and the Play exhibits a controversial conversation be® tween Religion and Mimangsa respectjng the fature of the Supreme Lord, and the means of obtaining deliverance from this state of mortality, in which Mimangsa maintains the necessity of action, or religious performances in order to obtain beatituge, because tHe Supreme Lord is himself an active Being.
he doctrine of Var&nsen agrees with ¢the Shan- -khya philosophy in the Belief gf an infinite Being or Man, who is impassible and uftaffected by nature. But from the following passage it appears that the Patanjelists conceive the soul to be of the same nature with Purush or the Infinite Being, and not an éffect - of the organization of matter: The Lord is a Great Being ( Man ) whois free from pain or the influence - 124 APPBNDIX.
of action, is impassible like soul.” Chitra Dipa slok. - 105, ® The three remaining sects’ are those which deny’ the authority of the Veds.
The Jarwas are found in considerable numbers in different parts of India, especially in the Mysore, Canara, and Guzerat. Ip their philosophical opinions they have been supposed to resemble the Sankhyas, but their tenets exhibit rather a mixture of the, Sankhya and Mimangsa doctrines than an exclusive adoption of either. Like the Mimangsa they believe that the Supreme Being is motion, and that he is without figure, impassible, and all-pervading; and like the Sankhyas they believe in the eternity of the world, and conceive that the soul is only a refined species of matter, which possesses thought and understanding, and which pervading the whole body, illuminates it as. lamp does the apartment in which it is kept. Where~ ver there is blood, say they, there is soul.’ As the infinite Being is indescribable and incomprehensible, they direct their worship to Tirthakars or deified men, The Great Being is omniscient, but the soul possesses only finite knowledge. Man is elevated to sthe state of the Infinite Being by renouncing secular. concerns and devoting himself to contemplation and ivine Worship; but likethe Mimangsa they conceiv that holy actions are required to secure eternal beatitude.
“The Bavupp'ua reliyion is now almost exéinct in India. Ihave never seen any who professed it, though Mr. Moor in the Hindu Inffnticide says that some may be met with in Guzerpt. I’ do not know whether ar account has yet beer given of their philosophical opi nions drawn from original authentic sources; but from the declarations of Mendicant in the Play, I should conceive that they profess a system of idealism excluding the existence both of matter and Spirit, and admitting ouly that of sensations.
APPENDIX.: 125 It is generally alledged by the Brahmans, that the .‘iarvakas are Atheists, but perhaps they are only “{aterialists, and maintain an hypothesis similar to the one advanced in Europe by Spinoza. This conjecture corresponds with the account given of them by passion, in which it is said, that they believe only what is proved by the evidence of the internal or external senses, The argument they 2mploy is stated in more precise terms in a Logical book called Dinkari + * There is no evidence that a Being ( different from the universe ) exists, for,as he is without figure and ~quality, he cannot be discerned by the external senses, and there cannot be the evidence of mental perception, for the mental perception of one person cannot discover the existence of another Spirit.”
In perusing thesketch which I have thus given of the philosophical opinions noticed in the translations, it has perhaps occurred to the reader, that a more de- - tailed account of them would throw much light on the ~.ncient systems taught in Europe, and would be a aluable addition to the History of Philosophy and _ 4 the Human Mind.
THE END.