________________
426
VEDÂNTA-SÚTRAS.
the objections raised against the theory are refuted.—But, we reply, this also is of no avail. A theory which rests exclusively on arguments derived from human reason may, at some other time or place, be disestablished by arguments devised by people more skilful than you in reasoning; and thus there is no getting over the objection founded on the invalidity of all mere argumentation. The conclusion from all this is that, with regard to supersensuous matters, Scripture alone is authoritative, and that reasoning is to be applied only to the support of Scripture. In agreement herewith Manu says, 'He who supports the teaching of the Rishis and the doctrine as to sacred duty with arguments not conflicting with the Veda, he alone truly knows sacred duty' (Manu XII, 106). The teaching of the Sankhyas which conflicts with the Veda cannot therefore be used for the purpose of confirming and elucidating the meaning of the Veda.—Here finishes the section treating of difference of nature.'
13. Thereby also the remaining (theories) which are not comprised (within the Veda) are explained.
Not comprised means those theories which are not known to be comprised within (countenanced by the Veda. The Satra means to say that by the demolition given above of the Sankhya doctrine which is not comprised within the Veda the remaining theories which are in the same position, viz. the theories of Kanada, Akshapada, Gina, and Buddha, must likewise be considered as demolished.
Here, however, a new objection may be raised, on the ground namely that, since all these theories agree in the view of atoms constituting the general cause, it cannot be said that their reasoning as to the causal substance is ill-founded.—They indeed, we reply, are agreed to that extent, but they are all of them equally founded on Reasoning only, and they are seen to disagree in many ways as to the nature of the atoms which by different schools are held to be either fundamentally void or non
Digitized by
Digitized by Google
