पृष्ठम्:विशिष्टाद्वैतसिद्धिः.djvu/७४

[ 55 ] which are responsible for Sat becoming and being many . it had no forms then that would make it many.There. fore It was only one. Just as plurality pertains to Sat through the forms evolved from matter, oneness also pertains to it through matter in its original, formless state. It was a subtle state. There was not yet such change in it as to make it fit for evolving different | forms. So it was only one and with it Sat was only One. Because there are many forms evolved from matter and Sat indwells each and every one of them Sat is many during the time of creation.But during the time of destruction, matter remaining only one undi ferentiated and subtle e:tity, Sat, indwelling it, also remains only one.Thus it may be seen that fonly one' In the sentence is not only not opposed to the presump tion of the existence of matter but require it for its explanation and justifies it. Fe say that alone after “Sat in the sentence ex• cludes the non-existent. while ‘ndrtigo'•without a second-excludes an agent separate from Sat. So these two also do not contradict the existence of matter before creation. Just as, due to stralcurkhapatti, we are compelled to take Sat in the sense Sat with matter in its origi. nalchangeless anc undifferentiated state, so we have to take ‘this also in the sentence in a sense wider than it woula ordinarily carry. This in the sen- tence means 'the world that we see 1.e. each and every one of things which constitute vbat we collectively call the world or universe. All those things