age, death, &c.) that were predicated in VIII, 1, of the small ether within the heart.—­But the reply to this is, that the second passage refers not to the (ordinary) individual soul but to the soul in that state where its true nature has become manifest, i.e. in which it is Brahman; so that the subject of the passage is in reality not the so-called individual soul but Brahman.  And in the former of the two passages the soul is mentioned not on its own account, but merely for the purpose of intimating that the highest Self is the cause through which the individual soul manifests itself in its true nature.—­What Ramanuja understands by the avirbhava of the soul will appear from the remarks on IV, 4.

The two next Sutras (22, 23) constitute, according to Sa@nkara, a new adhikara/n/a (VII), proving that he ’after whom everything shines, by whose light all this is lighted’ (Ka/th/a Up.  II, 5, 15) is not some material luminous body, but Brahman itself.—­According to Ramanuja the two Sutras do not start a new topic, but merely furnish some further arguments strengthening the conclusion arrived at in the preceding Sutras.[9]

Adhik.  VIII (24, 25) decides that the person of the size of a thumb mentioned in Ka/th/a Up.  II, 4, 12 is not the individual soul but Brahman.

The two next adhikara/n/as are of the nature of a digression.  The passage about the a@ngush/th/amatra was explained on the ground that the human heart is of the size of a span; the question may then be asked whether also such individuals as belong to other classes than mankind, more particularly the Gods, are capable of the knowledge of Brahman:  a question finally answered in the affirmative.—­This discussion leads in its turn to several other digressions, among which the most important one refers to the problem in what relation the different species of beings stand to the words denoting them (Sutra 28).  In connexion herewith Sa@nkara treats of the nature of words (sabda), opposing the opinion of the Mima/m/saka Upavarsha, according to whom the word is nothing but the aggregate of its constitutive letters, to the view of the grammarians who teach that over and above the aggregate of the letters there exists a super-sensuous entity called ‘spho/t/a,’ which is the direct cause of the apprehension of the sense of a word (Adhik.  IX; Sutras 26-33).

Adhik.  X (34-38) explains that Sudras are altogether disqualified for Brahmavidya.

Sutra 39 constitutes, according to Sa@nkara, a new adhikara/n/a (XI), proving that the pra/n/a in which everything trembles, according to Ka/th/a Up.  II, 6, 2, is Brahman.—­According to Ramanuja the Sutra does not introduce a new topic but merely furnishes an additional reason for the decision arrived at under Sutras 24, 25, viz. that the a@ngus/th/amatra is Brahman.  On this supposition, Sutras 24-39 form one adhikara/n/a in which 26-38 constitute a mere digression led up to