touching this manta in the adhikaraa beginning with * The eater because of the mention of the mobile and the i!ihnobile' ($r Basya 1. ii. 3). He writes' " It is evident that his question is prompted by the desire to acquire knowledge of the true nature of the highest Self - which knowledge has the form of meditation on the highest Self- and by means thereof knowledge of the true nature of final Release which consists in obtaing the highest Brahnlan. The passage, therefore, 1S not merely concerned with the problem as to the separation of the son from the bodybut rather with the problem of the Self freeing itself from all bondage whatever, the same problemin fact, with which anothe! scriptural passage also is concerned, viz " when he has departed thee is nc more knowledge " (Bra. Up. II. 4. 12). The full purport of Naci . ketass question, tierefore, is as follows: When a man qualified for Releafe has died and thus freed himself from ail bondage there arises a doubt as to his exstence of Holexistence---a doubt dtue to the disagreement of philosoplders as to the true aatre of Release ; in order to clear up this doubt I wish to learn from thee the turne nature of the state of Release. Philosophers, indeed, bold many videy differing opi ions as to what constitutes Ret ase, Some hold that the Self is constituted by consciousnes only, and that Release consists in the otal destruction of this essential nature of the Self. Otherswhile holding the same opinion as to the nature of the Self, define Release as the passing a way of Nescience (ovidya). Others hold that the Self is in itself non-sentient, like a stonebut pUssesses, in the state of bondage, certain distinctive qualities, such as knowledge and so on. Release then consists in the total renoval of all these qualities, the Self remaiuing in a state of pure isolation {&aidya). Others, again, who acknowiedge a highest Self free fron ail inperfection,
4. CLe entire passage is quoted from Sri Bhasa 1. H. 12, It is here extracted from Thinaut's translation of the ar Bhasa (pp. 270 121 ४. Tibut has wrongy translated the B¢h. Up quotation, for it abould be translated viji&xdvaitically as "There is no more of the indi confusion all the bady
