18 3Ir. Colebrooke on (lie Philosophy of the Hindus. 



text of the Veda, and inconsistent with its undoubted doctrine, so, by the 

 like reasoning, the notion of atoms {arixi or paramdn'u) and that of an uni- 

 versal void (/unya), and other as unfounded systems, are set aside in 

 favour of the only consistent position just now affirmed. {Br. Sulr. 1.1. § 5 

 and 1.4. §?.) 



Not to interrupt the connexion of the subjects, I have purposely passed 

 by a digression, or rather several, comprised in two sections of this chap- 

 ter,* wherein it is inquired whether any besides a regenerate man (or 

 Hindu of the three first tribes) is qualified for theological studies and 

 theognostic attainments j and the solution of the doubt is, that a s'lidra, or 

 man of an inferior tribe, is incompetent ;t' and that beings superior to man 

 (the gods of mythology) are qualified. 



In the course of this disquisition the noted question of the eternity of 

 sound, of articulate sound in particular, is mooted and examined. It is a 

 favourite topic in both mimdnsas, being intimately connected with that of 

 the eternity of tlie veda, or revelation acknowledged by them. 



I shall not, however, enter into the matter further, in this place, though 

 much remain to be added to the little which was said on it in a former 

 essay.t 



In the fourth chapter of the first lecture, the author returns to the task 

 of confuting the Sdnc'hya doctrine ; and some passages of the vedas, appa- 

 rently favouring that doctrine, are differently interpreted by him : ' the 

 indistinct one (avyacta) is superior to the great one (niahat), and embodied 

 soul (purusha) is superior to the indistinct.'§ Here the very same terms, 

 which the Sd^ic'hyas employ for ' intelligence, nature and soul,' are con- 

 trasted, with allusion seemingly to the technical acceptations of them. 

 This passage is, however, explained away ; and the terms are taken by the 

 Veddntins in a different sense. 



The next instance is less striking and may be briefly dismissed, as may 

 that following it : one relative to qjd, alleged to signify in the passage in 

 questionll the unborn sempiternal nature (pracrtii), but explained to intend 

 a luminous nature {pracriti) noticed in the OChdndo'^ya \ (there is in the 

 text itself an evident allusion to the ordinary acceptation of the word, a 



* Br. Sutr. 1. 3. § 8, 9. (S. 26-38.) f Br, Siitr. 1. 3. (S. 28-29.) 



X Vol. 1. p. 446. § Ci'i'ha 3. Br. Sutr. 1. 4. § 1. (S. 1-7.) 



II Swetas'watara. B.S. 1. 4. § 2. (S. 8-10.) 



