teach that liberation is attained .by a knowledge of the true nature of Spirit, and by discriminating Spirit from matter. If, as the result of this knowledge, the whole universe of matter and material objects has altogether vanished away from the vision of Spirit, how can it be said to exist at all, inasmuch as nothing can be said to exist, of which we are not conscious? Thus it follows that the universe has ceased to exist in virtue of the knowledge of the true nature of Spirit. Now, it is only an illusion that can be removed by mere knowledge. For example, it is the illusory notion of serpent which is removed when the rope that is mistaken for a serpent is recognised. It must, therefore, be admitted that the universe which is removed by knowledge is also an illusion. In the Yoga-Sutras, Patanjali says: ''Though removed from the vision of the liberated Spirit, it has not vanished altogether, as it is still perceived by others" (ii. 22). This can only hold good if the Universe is a mere illusion. To one whose eye has some organic defect, the mother-of-pearl appears to be silver, while to another it appears not as silver, but as the mother-of-pearl. That which appears the same to all is alone true. Wherefore the universe also, which presents itself to consciousness so long only as Atman's real nature is not known, and no longer, must be an illusion. Though conscious of this truth, the

philosopher does not expressly state it in order simply that the student's mind may not get perplexed. If at the very outset the system should start with a declaration of the unreality of the universe, the mind would be with the question, how can it be? It is only with a view to prevent this perplexity that the universe is spoken of as real. Again, according to the Sankhyas and the Tarkikas, neither the existence of manifold Atmans nor a distinction between Jiva and Isvara is ever perceived by the liberated soul; and they are, therefore, as unreal as the universe. They admit plurality of Atman at the outset with the hope of being better able to explain the varied distribution of pleasure and pain, which in fact is due to variety in the upadhis with which the one Atman is associated. Like the Vedantins, the Sankhyas and others maintain that in liberation Atman alone shines. He is, therefore, in reality one without a second. [**]

36. This short review of the methods and the fundamental tenets of the various systems of Aryan philosophy and religion is a necessary prelude to the short treatise which, while expounding the main principles of the Vedanta doctrine, also enters into a discussion and refutation of some of