For the other Hindu systems of thought, the sutras (Jaimini sutra, Nyaya sutra, etc.) are the only original treatises, and no foundation other than these is available.  In the case of the Vedanta however the original source is the Upani@sads, and the sutras are but an extremely condensed summary in a systematic form.  S’a@nkara did not claim to be the inventor or expounder of an original system, but interpreted the sutras and the Upani@sads in order to show that there existed a connected and systematic philosophy in the Upani@sads which was also enunciated in the sutras of Badaraya@na.  The Upani@sads were a part of the Vedas and were thus regarded as infallible by the Hindus.  If S’a@nkara could only show that his exposition of them was the right one, then his philosophy being founded upon the highest authority would be accepted by all Hindus.  The most formidable opponents in the way of accomplishing his task were the Mima@msists, who held that the Vedas did not preach any philosophy, for whatever there was in the Vedas was to be interpreted as issuing commands to us for performing this or that action.  They held that if the Upani@sads spoke of Brahman and demonstrated the nature of its pure essence, these were mere exaggerations intended to put the commandment of performing some kind of worship of Brahman into a more attractive form.  S’a@nkara could not deny that the purport of the Vedas as found in the Brahma@nas was explicitly of a mandatory nature as declared by the Mima@msa, but he sought to prove that such could not be the purport of the Upani@sads, which spoke of the truest and the highest knowledge of the Absolute by which the wise could attain salvation.  He said that in the karmak@n@da—­the (sacrificial injunctions) Brahma@nas of the Vedas—­the purport of the Vedas was certainly of a mandatory nature, as it was intended for ordinary people who were anxious for this or that pleasure,

431

and were never actuated by any desire of knowing the absolute truth, but the Upani@sads, which were intended for the wise who had controlled their senses and become disinclined to all earthly joys, demonstrated the one Absolute, Unchangeable, Brahman as the only Truth of the universe.  The two parts of the Vedas were intended for two classes of persons.  S’a@nkara thus did not begin by formulating a philosophy of his own by logical and psychological analysis, induction, and deduction.  He tried to show by textual comparison of the different Upani@sads, and by reference to the content of passages in the Upani@sads, that they were concerned in demonstrating the nature of Brahman (as he understood it) as their ultimate end.  He had thus to show that the uncontradicted testimony of all the Upani@sads was in favour of the view which he held.  He had to explain all doubtful and apparently conflicting texts, and also to show that none of the texts referred to the doctrines of mahat, prak@rti, etc. of the Sa@mkhya.  He had also to interpret