ich require intelligence,
the scriptural passages denote not the mere material elements and
organs, but rather the intelligent divinities which preside over earth,
&c., on the one hand, and Speech, &c., on the other hand. And why so?
'On account of the difference and the connexion.' The difference is the
one previously referred to between the enjoying souls, on the one hand,
and the material elements and organs, on the other hand, which is
founded on the distinction between intelligent and non-intelligent
beings; that difference would not be possible if all beings were
intelligent. Moreover, the Kaushitakins in their account of the dispute
of the pra/n/as make express use of the word 'divinities' in order to
preclude the idea of the mere material organs being meant, and in order
to include the superintending intelligent beings. They say, 'The deities
contending with each for who was the best;' and, again, 'All these
deities having recognised the pre-eminence in pra/n/a' (Kau. Up. II,
14).--And, secondly, Mantras, Arthavadas, Itihasas, Pura/n/as, &c. all
declare that intelligent presiding divinities are connected with
everything. Moreover, such scriptural passages as 'Agni having become
Speech entered into the mouth' (Ait. Ar. II, 4, 2, 4) show that each
bodily organ is connected with its own favouring divinity. And in the
passages supplementary to the quarrel of the pra/n/as we read in one
place how, for the purpose of settling their relative excellence, they
went to Prajapati, and how they settled their quarrel on the ground of
presence and absence, each of them, as Prajapati had advised, departing
from the body for some time ('They went to their father Prajapati and
said,' &c,; Ch. Up. V, 1, 7); and in another place it is said that they
made an offering to pra/n/a (B/ri/. Up. VI, 1, 13), &c.; all of them
proceedings which are analogous to those of men, &c., and therefore
strengthen the hypothesis that the text refers to the superintending
deities. In the case of such passages as, 'Fire thought,' we must assume
that the thought spoken of is that of the highest deity which is
connected with its effects as a superintending principle.--From all this
it follows that this world is different in nature from Brahman, and
hence cannot have it for its material cause.

To this objection raised by the purvapakshin the next Sutra replies.

6. But it is seen.

The word 'but' discards the purvapaksha.

Your assertion that this wo