king together with his retinue is going there.  Our interpretation (according to which the Sutra represents Brahman as the direct object of knowledge) moreover agrees with Scripture, which directly represents Brahman as the object of the desire of knowledge; compare, for instance, the passage, ’That from whence these beings are born, &c., desire to know that.  That is Brahman’ (Taitt.  Up.  III, 1).  With passages of this kind the Sutra only agrees if the genitive case is taken to denote the object.  Hence we do take it in that sense.  The object of the desire is the knowledge of Brahman up to its complete comprehension, desires having reference to results[57].  Knowledge thus constitutes the means by which the complete comprehension of Brahman is desired to be obtained.  For the complete comprehension of Brahman is the highest end of man, since it destroys the root of all evil such as Nescience, the seed of the entire Sa/m/sara.  Hence the desire of knowing Brahman is to be entertained.

But, it may be asked, is Brahman known or not known (previously to the enquiry into its nature)?  If it is known we need not enter on an enquiry concerning it; if it is not known we can not enter on such an enquiry.

We reply that Brahman is known.  Brahman, which is all-knowing and endowed with all powers, whose essential nature is eternal purity, intelligence, and freedom, exists.  For if we consider the derivation of the word ‘Brahman,’ from the root b/ri/h, ‘to be great,’ we at once understand that eternal purity, and so on, belong to Brahman[58].  Moreover the existence of Brahman is known on the ground of its being the Self of every one.  For every one is conscious of the existence of (his) Self, and never thinks ‘I am not.’  If the existence of the Self were not known, every one would think ‘I am not.’  And this Self (of whose existence all are conscious) is Brahman.  But if Brahman is generally known as the Self, there is no room for an enquiry into it!  Not so, we reply; for there is a conflict of opinions as to its special nature.  Unlearned people and the Lokayatikas are of opinion that the mere body endowed with the quality of intelligence is the Self; others that the organs endowed with intelligence are the Self; others maintain that the internal organ is the Self; others, again, that the Self is a mere momentary idea; others, again, that it is the Void.  Others, again (to proceed to the opinion of such as acknowledge the authority of the Veda), maintain that there is a transmigrating being different from the body, and so on, which is both agent and enjoyer (of the fruits of action); others teach that that being is enjoying only, not acting; others believe that in addition to the individual souls, there is an all-knowing, all-powerful Lord[59].  Others, finally, (i.e. the Vedantins) maintain that the Lord is the Self of the enjoyer (i.e. of the individual soul whose individual existence is apparent only, the product of Nescience).