75. The wicked cannot understand the difference between the embodied and the Supreme Souls; the great reason for this is a mind possessed by an evil obstinacy in favour of the doctrine of Illusion; just as the tongue of those who suffer from excess of bile cannot taste the sweetness of molasses, nor the eyes of those afflicted with gutta serena or jaundice see the whiteness of a shell.
76. He by a particle of whose intellect thou, O Soul, hast been produced the foremost of intelligent beings—say not, O knave, that thou art __He__; for who but the ingrate desires to seize the seat of his Master?
77. A particle of intelligence has been deposited in thee by the supreme Lord in His mercy,—it becomes thee not, O knave, to say that therefore thou art God; just as if some evil-minded man had received elephants, horses, and infantry from the king and then set his heart on seizing his kingdom.
78. He under whose control is that mighty illusion which deceives the three worlds, He is to be recognized as the Supreme Lord, the adorable, essentially thought, existence and joy; but he who is himself always under her control like a camel drawn by a string through his nostrils, is to be recognized as the individual soul,— vast indeed is the difference between the two!
79. Having studied the doctrines of the Sâ"nkhya, Ka.nâda, and Gautama, and the doctrine of Patañjali, the doctrines of the Mîmâ.msâ and Bha.t.tabhâskara [Footnote: Colebrooke's Essays, vol i. p. 359.], —amidst all the six current systems,—let the wise tell the final conclusion if they can as to the real nature of the supreme and the individual soul,—is it duality, or is it oneness, or is it again a oneness in duality?
80. In five of the systems I have only heard peremptorily asserted in many places the difference between the supreme and the individual souls; what is this that I hear asserted in the Vedânta system? "Plurality, unity, both,"—this is a threefold marvel! [Footnote: This is an attack on Râmânuja's system, as opposed to that of Pûr.naprajña or Madhva, cf. Sarva-daršana S. p. 52, l. 20, "What is the real truth? The real truth is plurality, unity, and both. Thus unity is admitted in saying that Brahman alone subsists in all forms as all is its body; both unity and plurality are admitted in saying that one only Brahman subsists under a plurality of forms, diverse as soul and non-soul; and plurality is admitted in saying that the essential natures of soul, non-soul, and the Lord are different and not to be confounded." This doctrine is opposed by the followers of Madhva, see __ibid.__, Pûr.naprajña-darš. p. 61, l. 11.]
81. He who is the maker of all and the Lord of the world is independent by reason of his essential independence; the individual soul is notoriously dependent; how can they say then that these two are identical?
82. There are various flavours in honey [existing distinct] through the difference of the trees [from whose flowers it is produced]; how else could it remove the three-fold disorders? [Footnote: __I.e.__ those affecting the three "humours" of the body, __i.e. vâyu__ 'wind,' __pitta__ 'bile,' and __kapha__ 'phlegm.' Certain flavours of the honey counteract one disorder and others another. The Sušruta thus describes honey (vol. i. p. 185): "When cooked it removes the three-fold disorders, but when raw or sour it causes them; when used in various applications it cures many disorders; and since it is composed of many different things it is an excellent medium for mixing. But as it consists of the juices of flowers which are mutually contrary in the action, potency, and qualities of their various ingredients, and it may happen that poisonous insects may be included, it is only good as a remedy for cold diseases.">[ So the individual souls at the world's dissolution are absorbed in the Lord; but they do not become identified with Him, for they are again separated at the next creation.
83. There is a difference between rivers and the sea, with their respective sweet and salt water; so too God and the soul are different and possessed of distinct attributes [Footnote: In allusion to Mu.n.d. Upan. iii. 2. 8.].
84. Rivers, when joined to the sea from all sides, are not identified with it nor yet do they appear to be separate; but from the difference between salt water and sweet water [Footnote: Most of the MSS. and the Benares Pa.n.dit read __kshî roda__; but the Calcutta ed. and one of the two MSS. in the Library of the Calcutta Sanskrit College read __kshâroda__, which seems preferable. If we read __kshîroda__, the line would require to be rendered, "but from the difference between milk mixed with water and pure water," or perhaps "from the difference between the milk-ocean and the water- ocean.">[ there must be a real difference between them.