* r. w R. o. " , ! তত্ত্ববোধি We shall neither conceal nor deny that the epithet fool”. signifying destitute of qualities, not unfrequentlv occurs in otu sacred writings, connectedly with the name of Brahm : hut this apparent negation is not to be understood in the limited and narrow acceptation of those words, which striefly tupsv, that we ought not to ascribe to Alinichty God properties, attributos, or modes of honor, which are the peculiar Characteristies of lunyanity, such as the faculty of vision, wisdom, on passion, anger, or our own feeling a 'l passions, because these are as title ort” in and , angrofoil, as the innumerable casti'di' * hicident to our fleeting existence ;—t'ev i:e “voi ritant o disappear, at times.—revive, alternately exalted or dep: , , -oil, to , , , , , or as our several physical or to: ۹.۹۱ ،۰ ۰ و - } \ affected by the unpressions » (t ه ، 1 , ده : , ! չյ } t) - -հ, --'l','! ti ?" ?
- I &
to , 't' f < . If is in conformity to these p \,, .5', fruij,.. that our discriminating piet . , is is to ascribe to the etertial and 1:11" " '}}, i ; or our own brief, transito v, tin-1": . . . and ex . e umscribed fae'ılties on atti tb'11 -, ai, i statnįrs with the stigma of moritevi i ' rro!» It w 1, . | " i \' audacious htteinpt fo lik ei the *it):n of ;, :i , , to the Everlasting ' – Yes' a 'n si e ratton', and less ambitions philosophy woitid i... " Laught our adversaries the exa, t overse of ti, stoctrine upheld by the Roveretal gentle”, i. and impressed their mind, with the co, , , ti, n. that | f | the eyes of en!irhter" W" : {i vn i ti!? Supreime Ruler of this tini, ei se is reall, , esset, - tially, and absolutely, without it to that's, th it is, without those peculiar attributos, aud vai seus modes and org’ons of existence, which “oil-troute humanitv
- *:: *
lu cort oboration of tite above ti tiths, wo the oli w ıııı evr, t+ fı on the B ılı munical Magazine, No. 1 V. . “'The Waldanta does not ascribe to God “ any power or atti ibute, according to the hn“ inan notion of properties, or modes of being, “attached or suboidiuate to their substance. “such as the faculty of vision, or of wisdom, coin“passion, anger, &c. in rational animals. Because “ these properties are sometimes sound among the human race in full operation, and again ceasing to operate, as if they were quite extinct.— because the powe one of these attributes, is often impeded by "le operation of another,and because the objects or wach thev exist, depend upon special members of the body, stich as the eyes, brain, heart &c., for the exercise of vision, wisdom, compassion &c. In consideration of the incompatibility of stich 4& &
&& 敏结 Ֆճ {{ { £ $6 & & “the Vaidanta declares the very identity of God “ to be the substitute of the perfection of all the “attributes necessary for the creation and sup “ port of the universe, and for introducing revela “tion among men ; without representing these “attributes as separate properties depended upon “by the deity, in creating and ruling the world.” The Reverend gentleman admits that “if
desects with the perfection of the divine nature,
- १ پودمهم په مه \ W
পত্রিকা । கம் : Þ ÞXᏗ “indeed the Supreme (Being) were represented “ as , invested with qualities and attributes, “ and devoid of these at one and the same instant of time, such lepresentation would be sell-contradictory. But these different, or ratiuer opposite, and mutually destricti ve states, or modifications of being, are not contemporaneous but successive, each of them being assurned altei nately, after nniuense “ intervals of time.” Had the Reverend gentleman fully understood that passage, in which Brahm is represented as devoid of attributes, as was explained in the preceding section, he would probably ilave abstained footn urging the appa ent contradiction on which he now dwei's, with reference to the asstint d yao ita!,!iitv : f Brahııı, nao e r.specially as the \ udanta t, st positively declares his inchangewhile nature, and the Reveronti gettlesnan himself has favonra d us alreatv with a quotation ti , fi , vt efi>et. { Vide p;uro In further c rrobot at von of our doet, is om f tus patticular h”, l, we refer to the following passage from the Vaidanta. கே ᎲᏋ են. ேெ ն ն $ i. ? (} ) BBBBBBBBBBBBJSJDSBBS BB BBBBBSJBBS শু • দিম ? পর৯ ,স- fੇ ਯੋਸ) ੪ ` মৃত্যুমুখত A. t. প্রম সমে । 公、亨了烹一高光 N. & 1 to o, ø. "o. 50 “To Supreme Being is not of ganised “ w;til the to illries of inearing, feeling, vision. He is ete mal. without “ i.ruins: 2 or eioti, anti is beyond matti: “. “ He is inchangeable meાં با ن» ، ف: t - f ۰۰ \Iau, knowing liun illus, " - rene ved from the g: asp of I)-ati, !” | \, . I just furth, r observes that He is then de tot d emthat cally TI I l , { } N E. – without “ a seco, i. Not merely one, gone cally, as being flow truly poss --sed “t a divine natine,—not inerviy "on", hy in statieally, as bring stimple, uncoln“ pound, d, and, therefore, without ports : --not •* iuei ely oiie, muneri ally, as bei of, in point of “ fact, the otly a tually existing deit v. No. He “ (Brahm) is simply, absolutely, and by necessity of nature, one , –and I, ot oruly so, bat he is one m the sense of veluding the vety possibility of the evistence of any other God This far a Christion inorht accord in the defini 辐 கி. % à & 疊 l, J. اینتین w , “ tion of the divine unity.” We ar lo a tiiy rejoiced at Dr. Daff's admission of this notable conforinitv , foi, ot, titts 1, 11t 1 ex}s the chief doctrine of the Voidant 13ut are we, therefore, to consister the Rove' -nd gentleman a s am :I ،'؟ ، ، ، f ، of the sortal to n creed denomi:iated I utt,” losin, and is uninted! to the l’resbyterian dogun , of a holy Ti la:! ' But we are, in decency, bound to s, ip,1 ·· ·s all doubts or surmises on this lead and respectfully abstain fi oııı fut ther allusion to so delicate a subject, leaving everv eligious creed to rest between inan and his Maker. He alledges that Brahn is one, “ not merely “ in the sense of excluding other gods, but in “ the sense of excluding the possibility of “ the existence of any other being whatever.” Granting that the Reverend gentleman la
