usefulness is a good deal impaired by the wearisome uniformity of type in the lengthy articles, and by the absence of subdivisions and other aids to the eye invariably to be found in large European Lexicons. There are a great many quotations but very frequently no clue is given to their source; and, even when it is indicated, the absence of a key to the obscure abbreviations employed sometimes deprives it of all value. Its numerous lists, of maxims(s. v. न्याय), of festivals, religious rites &c. (s. v. व्रत ), and of other series of things, are extremely valuable and constitute a distinct feature of the work.
II
The Vedantasara is a summary statement of the doctrines of the advaitavadins as set forth by Sankara in his Brahmasutrabhasya. In a few particulars, duly indicated in the Notes, it departs from his teaching and exhibits an apparent admixture of Sankhya doctrine. The chief peculiarity of this school is its tenet of the unreality of all phenomena, technically termed mayavada; but scholars have long been divided on the question as to whether this formed part of the original Vedanta or not. A very valuable contribution to the literature of this subject has been made by Dr.Thibaut in the Introduction to the first volume of his translation of the Vedanta Sutras and bhasya. It seems to me impossible to resist the conclusion at which he arrives, namely that the old Upanisads and the Sutras do not propound it,--that is to say, “they do not set forth the distinction of a higher and lower knowledge of Brahman; they do not acknowledge the distinction of Brahman and Isvara in Sankara's sense; they do not hold the doctrine of the unreality of the world; and they do not, with Sankara, proclaim the absolute identity of the individual and the highest Self” (p. 100 ). There are, however, a few passages of which the mayavada may be a development; and it may also be admitted that if
