[ 57 ] tended meaning, and it can be frhaL which exists in the form of this world. We do not and could not know through our worldly exprience that there is some be ing indwelling the worldly things and there are merely the visible forms of it. But this very passage of the . panishat teaches us this truth by implication. What is here thus implied is expressly taught in the very opening line of the Isavasyopanishat : f\Whatever is there in this world all that is an abol of God. Take for instance a pot . Our idca about it is that it is simply a thing made of clay. But Sastra s tell us that it is a composite thing, the constituent parts being the visible clayisi substance and the invisible Being. The former of these two is the form of the latter 1 he cily substance and the invisible inner Bcing both together make what is called pot, though our worldly experience is limited to the clay-subst nce aloneNow bearing this in mind we will be in a position to appre. ciate the philsophers when they say that though the names used in ordinary specch are intended to indi cate only things evolved from matter the full signi ficance of them covers their inner Being also Pot cule neen that which exists with the form called°pot . Applying this principle we are able to understand that the Upanishadic statement under consideration means: “‘that being which exists now with this world as its form was previously only Sat, the formless and name. less ExistentWe have already seen that in the state 1nent *That fire say I shall become many, I shall be born 'ire' means Sat with the form of fire. The same
