vii by an intense love of his subject and a profound regard for the honour of Shri Shankaracharya. When we hear writers of repute confounding pantheism, idealism, realism, nonism, nihilism and other isms with Shri Shankaracharya's Vedanta, it is certainly in cumbent on those who value the truth to comme forward and put these purblind babblers in the right . १) Many European and a few Indian critics of the Vedanta philosophy express themselves as fully convinced that it is pai• theistic. And yet, in reality, such is by no means the truth. For Pantheism is defined as the doctrine that the Universe taken or conceived of as a whole is God, or the doctrine that there is no God but the combined forces and laws which are manifested in the existing Universe. It is plain that the Vedanta never denies the existence of God. It holds that while the idea of a God separate from man, regarded as an object of veneration and love, is not a contradiction of the real truth yet it represents want of ability to perceive that truth in its reality, and says that the highest truth is reached when we are able to see one only, not Gad and nature, but God, and God alone. It does not say that the combined forces and laws which are manifested in the existing Universe go to make up the conception God. 'Then what does the Vedanta mean, when it says that we should see God in everything? The whole difference lies in one word. Where the Pantheist sees nature as God, the Vedantist sees God in nature. So long as we look upon tree as tree, it is nothing more than a tree; but when we dive deep, leaving the 21se and for behind, and try to realise the inner essence of the tree, we see nothing but God. All the differences in the world are differences of time, space, and causality (देश-कालनिमित्तानि) or of names and forms' (नामरूपे); and that these names and formes ,' or 'tinge , space, and causality ' are, deeply con: sidered, but forms of the mind, ४. e. , appearances or pictures projected by the mind; and when the mind is purified, subdued,
