of sketches and pictures, there is at the basis of the cogni- tion a real similarity between the things and their represen- tations. The apprehension of the real and absolute Brahman by means of the unreal and phenomenal teachings of the scripture cannot also be proved on the analogy of the apprehension of the absolute un- differentiated sound known as Sphota with the help of its numerous phonetic differentiations or nadas. Although the unreality of the scripture is not such as may be due to its absolute non-existence, it is difficult to arrive at the knowledge of the noumenal reality by means of the phenomenal teachings of the scripture. Nothing that is un- real can ever give rise to the knowledge of that which is real (pp. 107-110.).
After this the proper meaning of various passages in the Upanishads is taken into consideration, and it is shewn that their Adwaitic interpretation is not accurate and allow- able. The passages first taken into consideration are "Existence alone, my dear child, this was in the beginning", from the Qihdndogya- Upanishad ^ " And that is the higher knowledge by which that Indestructible Being is known", from the Mimdaka-L r panis/md,-and "The Brah- man is Existence, Knowledge, Infinity", from the Taitti- riy a- Upanishad ; and it is proved that these do not relate to the absolute and unqualified Brahman, and that the grammatical equation to be found in the last passage is intended to establish that one and the same thing, namely, the Brahman is characterised by more than one attribute (pp. 1 10- 1 1 2.). Does the statement that the Brahman is one only without a second mean that the Brahman is not associated with a second thing even in the form of a quality ? It is shewn that it does not mean such a thing, and that the scriptural passages which speak of the Brah-
