|
Page1
31. But on account of resemblance.
The 'but' sets aside the pûrvapaksha. There is no truth in the assertion that from the designation of the Highest as a biidge (or bank) it follows that there is something beyond the Highest. For Brahman in that text is not called a bank with regard to something to be reached thereby; since the additional clause 'for the non-confounding of these worlds' declares that it is compared to a bridge or bank in so far as it binds to itself (setu being derived from si, to bind) the whole aggregate of sentient and non-sentient things without any confusion. And in the clause 'having passed beyond that bridge' the passing beyond means reaching; as we say, 'he passes beyond the VedAnta,' meaning 'he has fully mastered it.'
|
