As representative of the metaphysics of the S[=a]nkhya and Ved[=a]nta systems respectively stand in general the two great religions of India.  The former, as we have shown, is still potent in the great Song of the epic, and its principles are essentially those of early Civaism.  The latter, especially in its sectarian interpretation, with which we have now to deal, has become the great religion oL India.  But there are two sectarian interpretations of Vishnu, and two philosophical interpretations of the All-spirit in its relation to the individual soul or spirit.[62] Again the individual spirit of man either enjoys after death immortal happiness, as a being distinct from the All-spirit; or the jiva, individual spirit, is absorbed into the All-spirit (losing all individuality, but still conscious of happiness); or the individual spirit is absorbed into an All-spirit that has no happiness or affection of any kind.

Now the strict philosophy of the Ved[=a]nta adopts the last view in toto.  The individual spirit (soul, self) becomes one with the universal Spirit, losing individuality and consciousness, for the universal Spirit itself is not affected by any quality or condition.  A creative force without attributes, this is the All-spirit of Cankara and of the strict Vedantist.  To Cankara the Creator was but a phase of the All-spirit, and the former’s immortality ended with his creation; in other words, there is no immortal Creator, only an immortal creative power.

In the twelfth century arose another great leader of thought, R[=a]m[=a]nuja.  He disputed the correctness of Cankara’s interpretation of Vedantic principles.  It is maintained by some that Cankara’s interpretation is really correct, but for our purpose that is neither here nor there.[63] Cankara’s brahma is the one and only being, pure being, or pure thought.  Thought is not an attribute of brahma, it is brahma.  Opposed to this pure being (thought) stands m[=a]y[=a], illusion, the material cause of the seen world.  It is neither being nor not-being; it is the cause of the appearance of things, in that it is associated with brahma, and in so far only is brahma rightly the Lord.  The infinite part of each individual is brahma; the finite part is m[=a]y[=a]. Thus B[=a]dar[=a]yana (author of the Ved[=a]nta S[=u]tras) says that the individual is only illusion.

R[=a]m[=a]nuja[64], on the other hand, teaches a brahma that is not only universal, but is the universal personal Lord, a supreme conscious and willing God.  Far from being devoid of attributes, like Cankara’s brahma, the brahma of R[=a]m[=a]nuja has all attributes, chief of which is thought or intelligence.  The Lord contains in himself the elements of that plurality which Cankara regards as illusion.  As contrasted with the dualistic S[=a]nkhya phiiosophy both of these systems inculcate monism.  But according