32. It is nothing what is seen before us, nor aught that is visible, is ever reliable as real; neither also is there ever a viewer for want of visible, nor the vision of a thing without its view. 33. Ráma rejoined:--If it is such, then please to explain moreover, O most eloquent sir, the nature of the visibles, their view, and viewer; and what are these that thus appear to our view? 34. Vasishtha replied:--There being no assignable cause, for the appearance of the unreal visibles; their vision is but a deception, and yet it <is> maintained as true by the dogmatism of opponents. 35. Whatever there appears as visible to the vision of the viewer, is all fallacy and offspring of the great delusion of Máyá only. But the world in its recondite sense, is but a reflexion of the Divine mind. 36. The intellect is awake in our sleeping state, and shows us the shapes in our dream, as the sky exhibits the various in its ample garden; thus the intellect manifests itself in the form of the world in itself. 37. Hence there is no formal cause or self evolving element, since the first creation of the world; and that <which> sparkles any where before us, is only the great Brahma Himself (not in his person or formless form, but in his spirit or intellectuality). 38. It is the sunshine of the Intellect within its own hollow sphere, that manifests this world as a reflexion of his own person. 39. The world is an exhibition of the quality, of the unqualified vacuity of the Intellect; as existence is the quality of existent beings, and as vacuity is the property of vacuum, and as form is the attribute of a material substance. 40. Know the world as the concrete counterpart, of the discrete attribute of the transcendent glory of God; and as the very reflexion of it, thus visibly exposed to the view of its beholders. 41. But there being in reality no duality whatever, in the unity of the Divinity; He is neither the reflector nor the reflexion himself; say who can ascertain what he is, or tell whether he is a being or not being, or a something or nothing. 42. Ráma rejoined:--If so it be as you say, that the Lord is neither the reflector nor reflexion, and neither the viewer nor the view (_i.e._ if he is neither the prototype nor its likeness, and neither the subjective nor objective); then say what is the difference between the cause and effect, what is the source of all these, and if they are unreal why do they appear as realities? 43. Vasishtha replied:--Whenever the Lord thinks on the manifestation of his intellect, He beholds the same at the very moment, and then becomes the subjective beholder of the objects of his own thought. 44. The intellectual vacuum itself assumes the form of the world, as the earth becomes a hill &c. by itself; but it never forgets itself for that form, as men do in their dream. Moreover there is no other cause to move it to action, except its own free will.