or effects are names only, exist through or originate from speech only, while in reality there exists no such thing as a modification.  In so far as they are names (individual effects distinguished by names) they are untrue; in so far as they are clay they are true.—­This parallel instance is given with reference to Brahman; applying the phrase ‘having its origin in speech’ to the case illustrated by the instance quoted we understand that the entire body of effects has no existence apart from Brahman.—­Later on again the text, after having declared that fire, water, and earth are the effects of Brahman, maintains that the effects of these three elements have no existence apart from them, ’Thus has vanished the specific nature of burning fire, the modification being a mere name which has its origin in speech, while only the three colours are what is true’ (Ch.  Up.  VI, 4, 1).—­Other sacred texts also whose purport it is to intimate the unity of the Self are to be quoted here, in accordance with the ‘and others’ of the Sutra.  Such texts are, ’In that all this has its Self; it is the True, it is the Self, thou art that’ (Ch.  Up.  VI, 8, 7); ’This everything, all is that Self’ (Bri.  Up.  II, 4, 6); ’Brahman alone is all this’ (Mu.  Up.  II, 2, 11); ‘The Self is all this’ (Ch.  Up.  VII, 25, 2); ‘There is in it no diversity’ (Bri.  Up.  IV, 4, 25).—­On any other assumption it would not be possible to maintain that by the knowledge of one thing everything becomes known (as the text quoted above declares).  We therefore must adopt the following view.  In the same way as those parts of ethereal space which are limited by jars and waterpots are not really different from the universal ethereal space, and as the water of a mirage is not really different from the surface of the salty steppe—­for the nature of that water is that it is seen in one moment and has vanished in the next, and moreover, it is not to be perceived by its own nature (i.e. apart from the surface of the desert[280])—­; so this manifold world with its objects of enjoyment, enjoyers and so on has no existence apart from Brahman.—­But—­it might be objected—­Brahman has in itself elements of manifoldness.  As the tree has many branches, so Brahman possesses many powers and energies dependent on those powers.  Unity and manifoldness are therefore both true.  Thus, a tree considered in itself is one, but it is manifold if viewed as having branches; so the sea in itself is one, but manifold as having waves and foam; so the clay in itself is one, but manifold if viewed with regard to the jars and dishes made of it.  On this assumption the process of final release resulting from right knowledge may be established in connexion with the element of unity (in Brahman), while the two processes of common worldly activity and of activity according to the Veda—­which depend on the karmaka/nd/a—­may be established in connexion with the element of manifoldness.  And with this view the parallel instances of clay &c. agree very well.