ANALYTICAL OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. xiv
the knowledge derived from the scripture is no exception in this matter and cannot destroy the sensory perception, of differentiated phenomena. Moreover, meditation can- not be the means of knowing the syntactical meaning of scriptural sentences, in as much as the Brahman has to be known before He can be meditated upon ; nor can it produce the knowledge which relates to the oneness of the self with the non-phenomenal Brahman, because it has itself to pre-suppose many phenomenal entities. If it were possible to destroy the bondage of avidyd merely by the knowledge of the syntactical meaning of scriptural sentenc- es, the commandment enjoining meditation would become purposeless. The bondage of phenomenal unreality can- not, however, be so destroyed ; and it follows as a matter of course thatftvanmukti, or the soul's release from such a bondage even while it is in the embodied condition, is altogether impossible. The idea ofjivanmukti is illogical, and is opposed to scripture ; it is discarded by a great teacher like Apastamba. Accordingly, bondage comes to an end only after death and by means of that injunction which relates to meditation and which produces the direct knowledge of the Brahman. What is accomplished under this injunction relating to meditation is not final release itself, but it is the removal of the obstructions to final release ; therefore this injunction cannot give a non-eternal character to moksha. Obeying this injunction purifies the mind ; the mind so purified realises the Brahman directly; and there is nothing in the scripture to shew that He cannot be made an object of meditation. Therefore the bondage of phenomenal unreality comes to an end only by obeying the commandment which enjoins meditation and the final result of which is the direct realisation of the Brahman (pp. 302-309.).
