10 Mr. Colesrooke on the Philosophy of the Hindus. 



commentaries; and, among the rest, the Vidivan-man6-ranjini, by Rama- 

 tirt'ha, who has been ah-eady twice noticed for other works ; and the 

 Subddhini, by Nrisinha sabaswati, disciple of Crishnananda. 



A few other treatises may be here briefly noticed. 



The S'dstra-siddhdnta-lesa-sangraha, by Apyaya or (Apyai) dicshita, son of 

 Ranganat'ha or Rangaraja dicshita, and author of the Parimala on the 

 Siddhdnta Calpataru, before-mentioned, as well as of other works, has the 

 benefit of a commentary, entitled Crishndlancdra, by Achyuta Crishna- 

 nanda tirt'ha, disciple of Swayam-pracas'ananda saraswati. The Veddnta- 

 siddhdnta-vindu, by Madhusudana, disciple of Vis' wis' war an and a saraswati, 

 and author of the Veddiita-calpa-laticd and of other works, is in like manner 

 commented on by Brahmananda, disciple of Narayana tIrt'ha. 



Analysis.* 



The utlara mimdnsd opens precisely as the purva, announcing the purport 

 in the same terms, except a single, but most important word, hrahme instead 

 oi dharma. ' Next, therefore, the inquiry is concerning Goo.'t It proceeds 

 thus : ' [He is that] whence are the birth and [continuance, and dissolu- 

 tion] of this [world] : [He is] the source of [revelation or] holy ordi- 

 nance.'t That is, as the commentators infer from these aphorisms so 

 expounded, ' He is the omnipotent creator of the world and the omni- 

 scient author of revelation.' It goes on to say, ' This appears from the 

 import and right construction of holy writ.'ll 



The author of the sutras next§ enters upon a confutation of the Sdiic'hyas, 

 who insist that nature, termed prad'hdna, which is the material cause of the 

 universe, as they affirm, is the same with the omniscient and omnipotent 

 cause of the world recognised by the vedas. It is not so ; for * wish ' 

 (consequently volition) is attributed to that cause, which moreover is termed 

 {dtman') soul : ' He wished to be many and prolific, and became manifold.' 

 And again, ' He desired to be many, &c '^ Therefore he is a sen- 

 tient rational being ; not insensible, as the pracriti (nature) or pi'adhdna 

 (matter) of Capila is affirmed to be. 



* In this analysis of the sulras, a portion of the scholia or explanations of commentators is 

 blended with the text, for a brief abstract and intelligible summary of the doctrine, 

 t Br. Sutr. 1. 1. § I. | lb. § 2 and 3. || lb. § 4. 



§ lb. § 5. (sutr. 5. 11.) f CKhdnd6gya, 6. 



