A History of Indian Philosophy v4.c38.s2.10

v4.c38.s2.10

¹ *Brahma-sūtra*, I. 1. 5. This is quite a different interpretation of the rule and surely not less cogent. The objection raised against Śaṅkara's interpretation is that his reference to the Sāṃkhya as being foreign to the Vedas (*aśabda*) is not accepted by the adherents of the Sāṃkhya, and there are certainly passages in the Upaniṣads (e.g. *Śvet.* IV. 51) which have to be taken as distinct references to the Sāṃkhya. Moreover, if Brahman could not be grasped and described by any of the *pramāṇas*, there would be hardly any proof of its existence; it would be like the hare's horn.