1845.~\ Vedanta-Sara, or Essence of the Veddnta. 103 



scurity, which prevails in some passages, is rather owing to the concen- 

 tration than to the indistinctness of the ideas. The principles of the 

 system are clearly laid down, and though in a few passages there is a 

 deviation from them, they are never lost sight of. Other philosophical 

 systems are only touched upon, when it is the object to prove their 

 principles to be entirely inconsistent with themselves and with each 

 other. The demonstrations, though short, are perspicuous, and some- 

 times even elegant. The illustrations are generally well selected and 

 striking ; and, if we consider the work to be rather of a descriptive than 

 of a argumentative character, we must acknowledge, that it is a most 

 excellent introduction to the study of that philosophy. 



The following exposition is intended to place before the reader the 

 chief metaphysical topics of this work and to compare the doctrines, 

 explained in it, with those philosophical systems, Hindoo as well as 

 European, with which it has an affinity in its principles. There exists 

 according to it only one eternal and unchangeable being, who has the 

 attributes of existence and consciousness. The manifold distinctions 

 in what may be called, the material and intellectual worlds, are toge- 

 ther with those worlds, mere aowAa, produced by unconsciousness,* 

 (which objective is something analogous with matter, and subjective 

 a want of clear perception of the unreality of all material objects.) 

 For example, if you reflect on the reality of the world, you find it has 

 none, because it is changeable throughout ; all reality is centred in 

 one being, who is beyond change, and concerning whom there is not 

 even change or plurality of ideas, as it includes no distinctions in it- 

 self. Thus of the supposed reality of the world, nothing remains ; 

 naught exists but mere aowXa, which, in contradistinction with the 

 knowledge of Brahma (or of the infinite being without plurality,) may be 

 called ignorance or unconsciousness. It is the principal work of philoso- 

 phy to destroy this ignorance, or to unite our finite being with the infinite 

 Brahma, or in the words of the Vedanta, to know ourselves as Brahma. It 



* The words consciousness and unconsciousness do not express the full meaning 

 of the corresponding Sanscrit words. Consciousness means the knowledge of what 

 passes in the mind, that is, a reflected knowledge, while the Sanscrit term refers to 

 knowledge in general. As Colebrooke, however, has used in his essay those words, 

 I thought it better not to introduce another terminology, and have only to remind 

 the reader, that consciousness and unconsciousness are here always to be understood 

 in the more comprehensive sense. 



