VEDANTA-PARIJATA-SAURABHA
NIMBARKA
VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA
SRINIVASA
(COMMENTARIES ON THE BRAHMA-SOTRAS)
ROMA BOSE, M.A, D.Phil (Oxon )
Votume I
PRINTED AT THE BAPTIST MISSION PRESS
FUBLISHED BY THE ROYAL ASIATIO SOCIETY OF BENGAL
CALCUTTA
1940
PREF AOK
Numbérka's commentary on the Brahma-Stitras known as the
Vedanta Paryéta Saurabha, and that of bs 1661906 disciple
Srimvisa styled the Vedinta Kaustubha are the chief works of the
school of philosophy associated with the name of Nmmb&rka ‘The
latter 18 not, however, 8 mere commentary on the former, 88 18 80716
times wrongly supposed, but 9 full exposition of the views expressed
in the Vedanta Parte Saurabha which 1s very terse and concise and
18 not always clear Both the treatises are therefore essential for the
proper understanding of the doctrine of Nambaérka
Hitherto no translation of either of these works was available 10
the English language, and the task was undertaken by Dr Rome
Bose (Chaudhuri) at the suggestion of Prof 7 W Thomas, Boden
Professor of Sanskrit 1) the Univermty of Oxford, under whose super-
vision 1t was carried out durimg 1934-1936, as part of the theazs for
the Degree of D Phil of that University
Thus authortetzve Hnglsh Edition of the Vedinta-Pirijata-
Saurabha has been prepared after carefully comparing the manuscripts
Nos E164, 2480, 2481 and 3278 of the India Office Labrary and the-
printed Sanskrit texia of the क्ष, Brmdiban and Chowkhimbé
Series The translation of the Ved&nta Kaustubha was based on the
Sanskrit texts of the Ka and Brmd&ban editions Dyfferonces of
readings of the various manuscripts and printed texta of both the
treatises have been noted 17 the footnotes
Asis well known the doctrine of Advarta, as developed by Samkara,
was the earliest of the Vedintic systems, and 17 the great efflorescance
of philosophic thought m India durmg the 9th-16th centuries, various
80110018 of thought arose, mostly aa protests against the extreme
views held by the Advaita 80001 There 18 no doubt that by reason.
of 18 great metaphysical appeal and the mgid application of logical
canons, Samkara’s Advaita vide exercised the most profound mfluence
on Indian thought and marked him out as the greatest philosophical
genius born in this country His inmstence, however, on the sole
reality of “Abheda’ or non dzfference and the unreality of Bheda or
difference evoked strong reactions, the foremost of which was the
Viistidvaita-vida of Rim&nuja, whose mportance was only second
to that of Samkara According to him the reality 1s not an abstiact
Vi PREFAOEH
concept mn the Samkarite sense 171 which the non difference completely
loses 1ts identaty, but 1s ® synthetic unity of both—the relation between
the two being that of the substance attmbute Thai 18, the atimbute
18 difterent from the substance in the sense that 1t mheres in 1t though
the latter cannot be equated with any particular atimbute and 18 not
® mere assemblage of them all, but 1s something over and above In
other words, the substance and the attribute, or the unity and plurality
are both real and form an organic whole, and the relation between
them 18 the relation of non difference, and not of absolute identity
R&émAnvja's docirme 18 hence known aa Vidigtidvaita vada or qualrfied
moniam as agamst the absolutism of Samkara
, who followed R&mfnuja, agreed that the relation
between the Brahman and the Universe was that of non-difference, but
while the latter identufled Brahman with Vignu, according to Srikantha
7 waa Siva His theory 18 therefore called Vitigha Sivadvaita vida
The school of Bhiskara holds that both the unity and plurality are
real The relation between the two 18 one of difference-non-drfference
during the effected state of Brahman,1e durmg the cosmic existence
and creation, but one of complete identaty durmg the causal state of
Brahman,1e during salvation and dissolution In other words, the
individual Soul or Jiva, during the state of Samsira, 18 different from
Brahman due to the presence of the Upidhis (Imutmg adjuncts)
such as the body, the sense organs, eto , but when these are not present
and 1t 18 Mikts, the Jiva becomes absolutely identical with Brahman
of which 1t 1s only the effect Simularly, the world 1s both different
and non-different from Brahman during creation, but identical with
Him in Pralaya (dissolution) Hence Bhiskara’s view 18 known as
‘Aupaidhika Bhedibheda १६08, 16 the Bhed&ibheda relation between
Brahman and the Untverse 18 only Aupddivka or due to the lmiting
adjuncts only and therefore lasta as long as these adjuncts last But
when the Samaiira is over and the Up&dhis are no more, there 18 no
longer any Bheddbheda between Brahman and the Universe, the former
alone becomes the reality and no separate soul or matter oan then
exist
Baladeva's school also adxhutted the reality of both the unity
and plurality 10 ॐ sense, both the Jiva and the Jagat are different
from Brahman bot m another they are non-different as effecta of
Brahman This relation of ग sad mtb ered en
and cannot be comprehended b and must be accepted on the
authority of the Sorzptures ( taon) His dootrme goes, therefore,
PREFACE Vill
under the name of “Acmtya Bhed&ébheds-vada’, 16 the Bheddbheda
relatjon of Brahman and the Universe 18 Acsnéya or incomprehensible
by reason.
The doctrine of Nimb&rka, which developed in the atmosphere of
general reaction against Samkara’s Advaitism, shared the views of the
above schools m their insistence on the reality of the Many According
to Nimbarksa, Brahman and Jiva-Jagat are equally real as was also
held by R&émf&nuya, but the difference between them 1s not superseded
by non difference as the Jatter supposed In fact, the difference
between the two 1s just as signifloant as ther non difference While
1t 18 true, a8 R&ém&nuja thought, that the Jiva-Jagat or the entare
universe 11110688 in the unity of Brahman as an organio whole and as
such can lay no claim to separate existence, ‘yet as the effect 1s different
from the cause, 170 the same sense 18 the Many different from the One,
and their difference 18 as fundamental ag thew non difference
Numb&rka’s system has therefore been called the Suidhkdurka-Bhedd-
bheda-vdda in which the relation between Brahman and the Jiva-Jagat
18 regarded as one of eternal difference-non difference during Sams&ra
or the cosmic existence as well as Pralaya or dissolution, and not
only during the former state as Bhdiskara thought Aocording to his
view even the freed Soul (Mfikta-Jivitman) 18 both different and non
different from Brahman and even in Pralaya does the Jagat mhere mn
Brahman 88 & distinct entity
In her Enghsh rendering of the Vedinta Pairy&ta-Saurabha and
Vedanta Kaustubha, Dr Bose has not only given Nimbé&rka’s
reading and interpretation of each Siitra, but has compared them with
those of Samkara, RamAnuja, Srikanths, Bhiakara and Baladeva
belonging to the antagomistzo and alled schools of the Vedanta
Philosophy Dufferences from the religious and ethical grounds have
not exther been ignored The present work therefore 18 not to be
considered as a mere translation, but 1t gives also reviews of the main
tensta of the post-Samkara theustac schools which arose m oppoattion
to Advaita Vedintasm, though the full philosophical expoaraon of
Nimbarka’s doctrme and the comparative study of the development of
Indian thought durmg this period has been discussed by her in 8
separate wotk which will form the third and concluding volume
of this series
The work oconmsts of four chapters In Chapter I
(Samanvayidhydya), 1t 18 sought to establish that Brahman 1s the sole
subject of all Soriptures ‘The nature of Brahman, His attributes and
vii PREYAOS
the souroes of our knowledge of Him are discussed m this chapter In
Chapter Ii (Avwodhddhydya), Nimbérka first refutes the rival views
of Sémkhya Yogs, NySya एषा, Buddhem, Jemem, Sarvaiem
and स्तथा, and considers the problema of Jiva and Jagat, पिः
natures and atimibutes and the manner m which they are related to
Brahman ‘Thess two chapters are purely metaphysical and supply
the philosophical foundations of the doctrme of Nimbarka The
remamming ones are obiefly of devotional and ethical interests In
Chapter III (Sddhkanddhydyc), for example, the means of attammg
Mokea (salvation), the nature and importance of meditations a8
71610760 in the Upanishads are discussed In Chapter IV
(Phaladhspiya), Nimba&rka grves his views on Mokga, the fruxt and the
conditions of the Miikta (released) JivGéiman or soul, eto Accordmg
to hom Mokga or salvation implies two conditions, namely, the atta
ment of qualities and nature sunilar to Brahman (Brahma Svariipa
lfbha), and the full development of one’s own individuality (Atma
Svariipa-labhe) This full development means the complete mantfeata-
tion. of one’s real nature 88 consmousness (Jfiina Svariipa) and bliss
(Ananda), untamted and unimpeded by matter whioh screens 1t durmg
Samaira, and decerves 1४ mto belevmg that rt 1s self-suffinent and
mdependent of Brahman When, however, Mokga 1s attamed, 1b 18
realized that 1t 18 dependent on Brahman ag His organic part and in
thet sense non-different from Him It mmplhes the destruction of
narrow egoity, but not the anniulation of individuality as 1s the goal
of the Advazta school Nimbarka’s ideas on Mokes or salvation
therefore are the logical outcome of his theistic mind which seeks to
find & place for the devotional soul without completely merging 16 in
Brahman
The first two chapters contammg the metaphysical portion of the
work 1s now issued as Volume I conmstang of 474 pages Volume II
will compre the remaming two chapters and indexes for both the
volumes The latter 18 expected also to be published during this year
8 8 GUHA,
20h February, 1940 General Secretary,
Royal Anate Socely of Bengal
FIRST CHAPTER (Adhyays)
FIRST QUARTER (P&da)
Adhikarana | The section entitled ‘Enquiry’
(३१४२७ 1)
SUTRA 1
“THAN, THEREFORE, AN HNQUIRY INTO BRAHMAN ”
THH EXPLANATION OF THA BRAHMA SUTRAS HNTITLAD VEDANTA
PARIJATA SAURABHA, COMPOSED BY THH RHVEREND NIMBIBEA
An enquiry 1s to be instituted, at all times, mto the Highest
Person,—Ramii’s Husband, denoted by the term “ Brahman”, the
greatest of all because of His infinite, mooncervable and mnate
nature, qualities, powers and so on,—by one who has studied the
Veda with its sx parta!, who has been assailed with doubt,
anaing from texts which teach? that the fruits of works are both
transitory and eternal ®, who has, for that very reason, enquired into
the science which 1s concerned with the consideration of rebgious
duties, * and has, thereby, gained the knowledge determined therem 5
regarding works, ther kinds and ther fruta, m whom, 98 & conse
quence, there arisen a disregard (for worldly objects), that us the
result of a discrimmation between the finrtude and eternity of the
+ The srx perta are*—~-(a) Sifted or the science of proper articulation and
pronuncetion comprimng the knowledge of letters, accents quantity, the use
of the organs of pronunciation, and phonetics generally, but especially the laws
of euphony peculiar to the Veda, (8) Chandahs or treatises on metre
(c) Vydbaraga or treatises on grammar, (2) Nerukia or treatuses on the
explanation of difficult words, (6) Jyotga or treatuses on astronomy, and
{f) Kalpa or treatises on ceremonials The first and second of these Veddagas
are said to be intended to secure the correct recitainon of the Veda the third
and fourth the understandmg of 19 the fifth and वि 178 proper employment
atsactiiice MW,p 1016
8 Prakrgena baron 1h prabaranam, tad-vad vdbyam
४ 1.8 Whose mind 28 assailed with doubt owmg to the contradictory
teachings regardmg the frurta of works, some texte declaring that the frurts
of works are tranmtory, while others declaring that they are eternal Of
VE,111
Te the Pairva-mindned
6 7 © the Pirva-mindned
[88 1 1 1
VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA apy 1]
of the knowledge of works and Brahman respectively, the
being surpassable, the latter non surpassable?, who wishes
for the grace of the Lord, who 16 covetous of having & vision of
Him, to whom the spiritual preceptor 18 the only God, who has
whole hearted devotion for the holy spiritual teacher, and who 18
dearous of final release—this 18 the sense of the mtroductory text
i
The commentary entitled ‘Vedanta kaustubha’, composed by
the reverend teacher Srinivasa
Panegyric
1 JI worshrp the holy Swan?, Sanaka and others ४, the Divine Sage +
and Nimbabbiskara5 May a devotzon for Lord Krgna
arise in us through their grace
2 Ibow down to the feet of Lord Krsna, m reference to whom
8105 the mass of scmptural texts does not come
into mutual conflict, whom those who are engaged in
meditation and Yoga obtam, and who 1s to be worshipped
constantly by Varuna and Indra with mind and speech
Fimding that the people on earth were being deluded by various
sorts of false arguments, Lord Vasudeva, the Highest Person, the
Lord of all, and the one identical material and efficient cause of the
enture universe, assumed the form of the son of Parigara ° and com
posed the Ved&nta treatise, called the ‘S&riraka-mim&msi’’, with 9.
1 Te in whose mind has arwen a dusguet for all worldly pursuits and objects,
anos he hes apprebended the great distmotion between the fruits of works,
vin ordinary worldly objecta and heaven, and the fruxt of the knowledge
Brahman, vit salvation Hven heaven bas an end, but Tidt ao salvation, and
even heaven 18 not the highest end, but salvation ww 35७ VE 111
2 The Swan Incarnation of Brahmd uw supposed to be the Founder of the
sect of Nunbdrka
3 The Four Kumdras Sanaka and others the second spiritual teachera of
the seat
4 Ie Né@rada supposed to be the third spiritual teacher of the sect and
the immediate guru of Nenbdrka
® 18 Neunbdrka
© Pardéara is supposed to be the father of 7552, the reputed author of
the Bradma sitiras
7 There 15 difference of opimion as to why the Veddnia-siiras or the
Brahma-stiraa are called the ‘ Stirfraka-memdmnsd' According to the Ratna
[80 1 1 1
apo 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 3
view to augmenting in the people knowledge and devotion १५८५५१११.
ing Himeelf and estabhshmg the Highest Brahman mn muni}
beyond doubt ‘Then, the supremely meroiful reveronl Nimibvirka
the founder of the sect of the reverend Sanatkumiia, campeud a
commentary, very difficult to understand, celled the ‘Vecdant: pir
jéta saurabha’ (Bragrance of the Heavenly Flower of the \edlant 1)
as an, explanation of the texts of the Sariraka-minimst ‘Then,
again, through lus command, and with a view to benefitiue the
wise, the ‘Vedinta-kaustubha’ (Gem of the Vedinta), which is unay,
concise and explams the sense of the ‘Vedinta parijAta-naurahin , ४
being composed by me, his discrple, following the path recommuntded
by him and wishmg to obtam his favour
If 2४ be argued our purpose being served through an enquiry
into rehgious duties aumply, what 1s the wee of an enqury inte Brah
man *—we reply since religious duties yield non permanont fruity
an enquiry into Him 1s to be undertaken for the sake of obtaminy
unsurpassed and infinite bliss
Here the word “then” implies ‘succession’, and not any other
sense, there bemg no previous distnot mention It cannot hw nal
that in, confornuty with the statement, viz ‘ The word “om ” aml the
word “stha’’ formerly issued forth from the throat of Brahman, and
hence both are auspicious’, (the word “atha”’) hore indicates ate
piclousness,—because this treatise bamg auspicious by itaclf in, वतात्
as well as m meaning, does not await any other auspiiousnen,
because good luck 1s obtamed through the mere hearing of it , antl
because m the very same way, the other meanmgs of the term
“then”, vis special prerogative and the rest? are not appropriate
here Moreover, a word, pronounced with one particular enue i
view, should not be employed m any other sense Hers the mtendad
sense 18 “succession,’, stance the word “ therefore’ refers to something
prabha commentary on 8B they are so called because tron
Brakenan hood of the embodied soul (* SUrfrabo seas 1
Accordmg to Baladeva however Brahman ws ° बद्वह oor omboduil
universe is the body of the Lond
१ S@rivaha-mimdmaa , beos
deal with Brahman the éérira (the embodied) GB, 1 1 12 _
1
Yor the different meanmgs of the term ‘aiha vide AK,p 31, line 8
60 1 1 l
4. VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]
previous Hence, the word “then” has the sense of ‘succession
only, the word “ therefore” mples the reason
The reality which 18 obtamable by one who 18 devoted to the
sound Brahman,—m accordance with the followmg and other
scriptural and Smyti texta, viz ‘He who does not know the Veda
does not know Him, the Great’, ‘There are two Brahmans to be
known, the sound Brahman and what 1s Higher Those who know
the sound Brahman go to the Higher Brahman’ (Mautri 6 22),—
and which 18 possessed of the characteristics to be mentioned here
after, 18 the object denoted by the term ‘Brahman’ The word
“enquiry” denotes a desire for the knowledge of the demred Brahman
Although the supplial of the verb (m the mdicative mood, viz
‘ares `) 18 appropriate here thus ‘‘Then”,1e afterwards, “ there
1008", 16 for this reason, an “ enquiry into Brabman”’ arsses, 17 being
possible for people with mmght to have a spontaneous desre for
enquiring imto a particular object (viz Brahman) (without being
definitely told or enjomed by Scripture to do so), yet m concordance
with the text ‘O, the self verily 1s to be seen, to be heard, to be
thought, to be meditated on, 1t 18 to be enquired 1100 ` (अ 2465,
4 6 6), we must understand here a grammatical concordance with a
word mplying injunction, viz ‘should are’! In accordance with
the scriptural text ‘Desirmg for release, one should see the self
in the self alone’ (Brh 4428), the words ‘one who demres for
release’ m the mstrumental case, are mplied here—such 18 the
construction of the words (m the siitra) >
Here the term ^" then”, implymg “succesmion’, means After the
knowledge regarding the nature of religious duties, the means
thereto, the mode of performmg them and ther frorta—which form
the subject of the enqury mto religous duties > Thus, having
studied the Veda with = 108 parts,*—bemg first properly
1 That i; we can of course make the ठ complete thus Then, there
fore, en enquiry into Brahman (ensen)’, but 29 28 better to complete 10 thus
‘Then therefure an enquiry into Brahman (should anse)' and make the siira
an myunction and not a plain statement
9 Thus, the ontire siira really means: ‘(Mumukgunpd) athdio Brahma
jyhded (ताण) + or ‘(By one who demres salvation) then, therefore an
enquiry into Breiman (should be made)
2 le tho Pirva mimdmed
4 Sco footnote (2), p 1
{fst 1 1 1
ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 5
inttasted, as enjomed by the text ‘One’s own scripture should bo
studied’1, having found, in 8 general way, the texta which are mutual
ly contradictory, some depicting the non permanence and others
the permanence of the frurts of works thus ‘Undeosayiny, (तन्म,
18 the good १७७१ of one who performs the Catur mAsya* 89९ १११५८५'
(27 88 8119}, ‘We have drunk the soma juice, we have 0000110
ummortal’ (Rg V 8 4884), ‘Where there would be no heat, no cold,
no weakness, no opponents’ and so on 6, and, ‘Just as here the world,
obtamed through merit pemah’ (Chind 861), ‘That (work) of hu
has an end’ (एद 38810), “The permanent, verily, cannot ba
obtained through the non permanent (Katha 1210), ‘ What 1 not
made 18 not (obtamed) through what 18 made’ (Mund 1 2 12), ‘Frail,
indeed, are these boats of sacrifices’ (Mund 1 2 7), and so on, 9 bemg
thereby assailed with doubt, and unable to determine (the exact
nature of the fruits of works) m partioular, one, with a view to ro
moving it (viz the doubt), proceeds to make an enquiry into religious
daties, and having, through such an enquiry, determined properly
the nature of works, the mode of performimg them and their fruits,
one comes to have such a knowledge,—ajter that, this 18 the senac 7
The word “ therefore” means ‘because of the reason’ That 24,
the enquiry 1000 Brahman should be undertaken, because the fruit
of works are ascertamed to be finite and surpassable from the scriptural
passage ‘Just as here the world acquired by work pershes, so
exactly hereafter, the world acquired by mertt perishes’ (Chind 8 1 6),
and from the Smyta passage ‘ “‘ The worlds begmning with the world of
Brahm& come and go, O Arjana”’ (Git&é 816), secondly, because
1 A श्क्षा passage 29 found in Tax) Ar 215 p 158
9 Name of the three sacrificea performed at the beginning of the thne
seasons 07 four months Vide Ved In, p 259, vol 1
3 P l,vol lI
Oorrect readmg Tasnun drefe pardvare’ or when he, who 28 high and
low seen Vide Mund 228, p 31,0U p 5328
® Sravena 3 Neudidhydsana
^ That is 27 the above text (Brb ), the Lord is not anjomed to be sssn
but to be meditated on, meditatnon leadmg to seemg or direct vimon which is
the mmmediate cause of salvation
5 Thatis the Veddnia-siliras lay down what 1s contained in the Upaniwads
Hence the Veddnia-siiras are the vigoytn or what treat of the subject matter,
and the Upantsad-texts are the wigaya or the subject treated Now, the vyayin
and the vipaya must, evidently, refer to the same thmg And here, the usaya
bemg of a greater force the wseayin must be understood m accordance with
the wuigaya, or the esiiiras are to be understood in the hght of the Upanwade
Hence as the latter enjom meditation the former must also do so
© Sravana ग iManana सपर ~ Nididhydeana
RG66972,5xl, 4 < 9 {£ 24144
{ ०५)
N40
[80 L1l
10 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ang 1 1
that meanmg directly This 1s ‘hearmg’! ‘Thimking’ 18 a 100. of
reflection, by means of argumenta which are m conformity with
Scripture, with a view to making the meanmg of what has been
‘heard’ and taught, the object of one’s own realization? ‘Meditating’
means & ceaseless contemplation on the object of ‘thmkmng’, which
(contemplation) 1s the unique cause of a direct vision (of the Lord)
Accordingly, this (viz the above Brhad&ranyaka text) 1s an apurva
wmd® concernng ‘meditation’, smoe (salvation, 1s) absolutely
unobtamable (without meditation) «
The explanation of the (above quoted Chindogya) text ‘The
Plenty’, etc , may be seen under the explanation of the aphorism
‘The Plenty’, 806 (Br Sa 137)
The resulting meaning 1s that salvation can be obtamed by an
individual, eternally fettered, and desirmg for salvation, who was
by chance, looked upon (with favour) by Madhusiidana at the tame
of his birth,5 who has practised the group of means (to salvation), who
has worshipped the feet of 218 preceptor, and who has a direct vision
of Brahman, obtamed through the hearing of, thmkng upon and
meditatmg on Him, knowable through the Vedanta
> That 38, @ man first ascerbtams that the Veddnia texts demonstrate the
Lord and then approaches a teacher and jearns the meaning of those texta
from hrm
> That 18 for realmng directly for himself what he has so far accepted on
the authority of ns preceptor
ॐ An apirva-mdis' 1a > ods which enjoms something that 1 absolutely
necessary and mdispensable for the production of the demred reanit eg when
1# 18 enjomed ‘The rice grains are to be sprinkled over with water’ 16 1s meant
that without this sprinkimg the demred result viz the samekdra of these moe
grains or making them fit for bemg used m a sacrifice cannot be attamed by any
other means Hence, here the vidi with regard to the sprinkling 1s an ‘apiirva
edit In the very same manner, the above Brhadéronyaks text ‘The self
should be seen, be heard, be thought be meditated on lays down an ‘apiires
vids regarding meditation, amce without meditation, the desired result, viz
~ salvation, cannot be attiamed by any other means
For the different kmds of vidhu—viz apiirva, myoma and pari samkhyd,
see VR.M,pp 41-43
= This finwhes the explanation of the Brhaddranyaka text ‘O fmend, the
self should be seen’ eto
¢ Vide VR.M,p 188, also p 142, where rt 1s said that only one man m
& thousand 18 looked at with favour by Madhueiidana ab the tmme of lus birth,
and that not by chance, but because of the ments accumulated through thousands
of previous births
[so 1 1 ]
ADH 1 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ll
Salvation means attaming the nature of the Lord, resultmg from
the cessation of the bondage of matter mm its causal! and effected.
forms,* a8 known from the sormptural text ‘Havmg attamed the
form of supreme light, he 18 completed m his own form” (Chand
834, 812 2, 3), as well as from the aphomsms ‘Because release 18
taught of him who tekes hus stand upon, 1b’ (Br Si 117), ‘And
(Sermpture) teaches m 16 the union of this with that’ (Br Si 11 20)
and 80 on, and from the Smrti passage, viz ‘The attamment of the
Lord, characterized by a feehng of unsurpassed joy and happmess,
exclusive and absolute, 18 supposed to be an antadote (to the disease
of transmigratory exstence)’, ‘ “Many people, purified by the penance
of knowledge have come to attam my nature”’ (Git& 410) and so
on The word “nature’® has been explamed by the Lord पण्णा
m the passage ^ “ Resortang to this knowledge, they have come to have
sumilardy with me”’ (Gitk 142) ‘This we shall expound moro
clearly in the chapter dealing with, the froxt é
Then, m answer to the enquiry —Of what nature 1s the individual,
demring salvation! Of what nature 18 his bondage *—the errptural
truth 1s bemg considered now, m order that those who demre for
salvation may have an easy soceas to Scripture
Now, there are three kands of reahty, chstamguished as the sentient,
the non sentient and Brahman, because m the aphorisms aa well,
& trinity of reals has been mentioned, viz the object to be enquired
mto (ie Brahman), the enquirer (16 the sentient), and miy& (ie
the non sentient) which conmsta mn the three gunas and 1s the origmal
cause of his (viz the enquirer’s) nescence, as otherwise the very
enquiry will be impossible, and 8180 becanse of the following scriptural
and Smrii texta, viz “By knowing the enjoyer, the object enjoyed
and the Mover, everythmg has been said ‘This 1s the three fold
Brahman,’ (Svet 1.21) ‘Pershable are all bemgs, the changeless
18 called the Imperishable’* (Gité 1516), ‘But the Highest Person 18
another, declared to be the supreme self’ (Git& 16 17) and 80 on
Among these, the sentient substance 18 different from the claas
of non sentient substances, 18 of the nature of Enowledge , possessed
of the attributes of bemg a knower, bemg an agent and 80 on, of the
eee
1 Ie pradhana, the primal matter
"Ie the body, an effect of pradhdna
° Bhawa ^ Vis the fourth chapter
[80 1 1 1
12 VEDANTA KAUSTU श + ADH 11
form of an Ego, has ita very nature, existence and activity under the
control of the Lord, 1s atomic 17 size, different m every body, and
subject to bondage and release As has been said “Tho mdividual
soul 18 of the nature of knowledge, under the control of the Lord, fit
to be associated with and dissociated from a body, atomic, different
m, every body, possessed of the quality of bemg a knower and that
which they call, endless But through the grace of the Lord, veri
they know 1t, the form of which 1s associated with, beginningleas Miya +
The (ever ) free, the bound and the bound freed,® (such are the three
broad. classes of souls), and then again 1t should be known that there
18 a multitude of divisions (of these, viz the ever free, etc )* (DS
1 2) 8 There are scriptural and Smrti texts, as well as aphoiwins to
this effect, viz ‘Verily, different from this (soul) consisting of the
mind 1s another mternal soul, consisting of intelligence’ (Tait 2 4)
‘Just as a lump of salt 18 without an meide and an outaido, and 1H
entarely a mass of savour simply, so, verily, O! this self 18 without
an, inside or an outside, and 1s entarely a mass of mntelhgence simply
(Brh 4813), ‘Here thus person becomes self illummating’ (Brh
4.39 14),‘O! undeoaying, verily, 1s this self, posseasing indestructible
neas as its attribute’ (Brh 4514), ‘Now he who knows “ Let mo
amell this”, which self 18 he?’ ‘This person who among the aenses
18 made of knowledge, who 1s the hght withm the heart’ (Brh +3 7)
“This, verily, 28 the person of the essence of mtelligence who sos,
hears, tastes, smells, thmks and knows’ (Prasna 4 {)),4
‘There 18, verily, no cessation of the seemg of the soer, because it
(16 the soul) 18 indestructible , there 18, vernly, no cessation of the
hearing of the hearer, because 1t 1s indestructible, there #, verily, no
ceseation of the thinking of the thinker, because 1t 15 indostructible ,
there 1s, verily, no cessation, of the knowmg of tho knowor, because :t
18 indestructable’ (Brh 48 23), "^ By whom, 0 | should the knower
be known?” ' (Brh 2414, 4515), “Thus person simply knows’,
“The seer does not see death, nor disease, nor, again, suffering’
1 That 1s, the real nature of the soul w distorted through ite connection
with myi or matter and karma, yeb individuals can know the real nature of
their selves through the grace of the Lord See VRM,pp 20 21
४ Thats the souls which were bound once, but are freed now
7 For details see VRM
¢ Quotationmoomplete The correct quotation is‘ who seen touches
hears, smells, tastes thmks Imows and acts’ Vide Preéna 49, pp 41-42
fst 1 1 1
ADE 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 19
(01610 7 26 2) ‘Hes the best person not remembering
this appendage of the body’ (Ch&nd 8123), ‘So exactly do the
seer’s sixteen parts, gomg to the Person, on, attammg the Person,
mherge in (Him) ’ (Praéna 6 5), ‘ “Just as the one sun manifests the
entire world, so O Bharata, does the owner of the field (viz the mdivi
dual soul) manrfest the whole field (viz the body)”’ (Gité 13 34), “A
knower, for that very reason’ (Br Si 2319), “An agent, on account
of scripture havmg a sense (Br Si 2332)1 ‘I am thou, verily,
0 Deity ! he 18 I, I am Brahman, thus I bow down to the Death of
death’, ‘He shinmg alone, everythmg shines after him, through his
hght all this shines’ (Katha 2216), ‘He alone makes lim, whom
he wishes to lead upwards from these worlds, do good deeds He alone
makes bim, whom he wishes to lead downwards from these worlds,
do evil deeds’ (Kaug 8 8), ‘Whether He may make him do good or
evil, not even thereby 1s the Lord m fault’, ‘ The mdrvidual soul 1s
small in power, not mdependent and isignificant’,4 = (40716,
verily, 18 this soul ‘These two, merit and dememt, bind 1%’, ‘The
individual soul should be known as the hundredth part of the tap of
a hai, divided a hundredfold, yet 1t 1s capable of infinity (Svet
59), ‘Verily, (the soul) 18 percerved to be hke the tap of the spoke
of a wheel only, and insignificant, through 1ta quality of buddhi, and
through 108 own attrbutes (Svet 58), ‘(There 18 the mention
of departing, gomg and returnmg’ (Br Sf 2819), ‘If 28 be said
not atomic, because Scripture declares what 18 not that, (we reply )
no, becanse the topic 1s something else’ (Br Si 23 21), ‘That demgna
tion 18 on account of havmg that qualty for 108 essence, as in the
case of the Intelligent soul’ (Br Si 29 28), ठ ‘The Eternal
among the eternal, the Conscious among the conscious, the One
among the many, who bestows objecta of desire’ (Katha 518), ‘A
part, on account of the designation of ® pluralty’ (Br Si 23 42),¢
“There 18 mdeed another different soul, called the elemental soul,—
1 These texte and aphonema set forth the essenizal nature of the Individual
soul, viz that 1b 1s knowledge by nature a knower an agent and an enjoyer
9 These texts also set forth the easentzal nature of the soul, viz its
dependence on the Lord for ita activity and 119 non difference from Him in that
pense
¢ These texte and eitirae set forth the axe of the soul, vis ite atomuotty
¢ These texts and aphoriams set forth the number of the souls, viz that
there 18 a plurality of souls
[8८ lil
14 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA +र 1]
he who bemg overcome by the white or dark fruits of works, attains
9 good. or bad birth. Because of beg deluded, he does not
see the Lord, the causer of action and dwelling within the self He 18
borne along and defiled by the properties of matter’ (Maztri 3 2),
‘An, unborn, one, verily, 168 by, enjoying Another unborn one
discards her, who has been enjoyed’ (Svet 4165), ‘ Stamlesas, he
attains 9 supreme 10600 ` (Mund 318), “He does not return
agam,’ (KR 2), “Non, return, on account of scriptural texte’ (Br Sti
4 4 22) 3 and 80 on
The non sentient substance 18 of three kmds, viz what 1s derived.
from matter, what 1s not derived from matter and time 9 As 088 been.
said. —‘ What 1s derived from matter, what 1s not derived from matter
and time,—these are held to be the non sentaent (The second 18)
denotable by the term, “m&y&’, “pradhiina’ and the rest, and there are
distinctions of white and the rest m 1t, although it 1s the same’
(DS 8) Among these, the substance which 18 the substratum of the
three gunas 18 the prékrta It 18 eternal as well as subject to changes
hike transformation and 80 on, as declared by the following scmptural
texts —‘A cow she 28 white, black and red, without begmnmg and.
end,“ the progenttresas, and the source of all bemgs, milling all wishes
for the Lord’ (Cail 5), “There 1s an unborn one red, white and black,
producmg many progeny of the same nature’ (Svet 45) and so on,
by the Smrta passages, viz ‘This, consisting of the three gunas, 18
the source of the world and 1s without begmning and end’ (V P
1 2 219),5 ‘Nonsentient, for the sake of another, ever changing,
consisting of the three gunas, the fleld of works—such 1s said to be the
form of prakyi1’ and so on, 88 well as by the followmg aphonsms
"It has © sense, on account of 268 subordmation to Him’ (Br Si
143), “Asm the case of the saornficial ladle, for want of any specifi-
cation’ (Br Si 148), ‘But that which has light for its cause,
because thus, m fact, some read’ (Br Si 149) and soon The
1 Quotation moorrest Vide Matt, pp 3869, 871 Correct quotation.
translated
a These texts and aphoriums get forth the Labikty of the souls to bondage
8 Prdbria, aprdkria and, bila
“ Correct reading ‘andda-vatl’ or without sound For correot ta
vide 031 5 ¬ 230 —
¢ ए 14
and
[80 1 1 1
ave 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 16
gunas are sattva, rajas and tamas That very prakrti, bemg trans-
formed, through its own gunas, into the body, the sense-organs, the
mind and mtelhgence of the mdividual souls, and through bemg o
hindrance to salvation, 18 said to be the cause of the bondage of the
wndividual soul It 18 the cause of the universe, begimning with the
mahat and ending with the cosmic egg, and 108 products are to be
known, a8 1201 permanent
Next, the aprakyta 18 a non sentient substance, absolutely different
from prakrti consisting of three gunas and time, occupies ® region
different from the sphere of एण्ड, and 18 denoted by the terms
‘eternal manifestation’, “the region, of Visnu’, ‘the supreme void’,
‘the supreme place’, ‘the world of Brahman’ and 80 on, a8 declared by
the following scriptural texts and aphorams —‘ Of the colour of the
sun, beyond darkness’ (Svet 38, GIté 89), ‘He who 18 ita Master
in the supreme void’, “That supreme region of Visnu the wise see
always’ (Nr Pir 510, Skanda 16, Mukti 277, Vasu 4), ‘But the
man, whose charioteer 18 untelligence, and the 20100, the rems, attoms
the end of the road, the supreme place of Vignu’ (Kaths $ 9), ‘Having
obtained the soul, I become united with the uncreated world of Brah-
man’ (Chind 8131), “He does not retum agam’ (K BR 2), ‘Non
return, on account of soriptural texts’ (Br Si 4422) and so on, as
well as by the followmg verses m the MabA bbirata—vzz, ‘Whom
they oall prakytu, the eternal, because He 1s the original source of all
bemgs—the Divinity, without begimming and end, the Lord Né&ri-
yans, Hari His supreme place 1s manifested beyond the abode of
Brahm& That celestial, lammous place which the gods do not see,
more brilliant than the sun, and fire, 18 the place of Visnu the Great,
and through 1ta own rays, O king! 16 18 difficult to be seen by gods
and demons The 28069708 endowed with penance, mfused with aus
picious deeds, perfected by Yoga, great souled, and devoid of ignorance
and delusion, go there to Lord Narayana, Har, the adorable Having
gone there, they do not, O Bhirata, return to this world agam Ths
place 18; O king, eternal and undecaying, for this, O Yudhisthira, is
always the proof of the Lord. Higher than the seat of Brahmi 18
that supreme place of Vignu, which some people who are endowed
with knowledge and mtelhgence, and want to reach the supreme place,
know to be pure, eternal, lummous and the supreme Brahman That
place is immensely holy, full of holy famihes, gomg where men do not
grieve, do not return, do not feel pam But those Sattvatas attam
80 lll
16 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]
here the place of Brahman’ The same thmg 18 found m the Gita
Compare, eg the statement by the Lord, vz ‘“‘Through His grace,
you shall obtam supreme peace and an eternal placo”’ (अ 18 62)
And through the begimningleas demre of the Lord, 16 13 manifold m
forma, 88 the 0016008 of His enjoyment and of His ever free souls, and
not hable to any alternations of evolution and the rest, ance 1t 18
beyond time, m accordance with the text “That manifestation, of
which time, composed of Kalis? and minutes, 18 not the cause of
transformation Your eight fold attributes and lordship, O Lord, are
natural and supreme’ Next, time 1s a species of non sentient sub
stance, different from both the prikrta and the aprakrta, eternal and
all pervading, m, accordance with the scriptural text, ‘Now, eternal,
verily, are the soul, matter and time’, and also because 70, the text
‘“Hixstent alone, my dear, was this m the begmnmg”’ (Chand
621), the existence of time, denoted by the term ‘begmnmg’, 18
declared, as well as on account of the Smrti passage — The Lord
Time 18 beginningless, and has, 0 Brahmm, no end’ (VP 1 2 269 3)
‘There can be no apprehension, inthe world which does not mvolve time ”
It 28 the special cause of the conventional uses (of such terms) as
‘past’, ‘fature’, ‘present’, ‘mmultaneous’, ‘lasting’, ‘quick’ and #0 on,
assisting in the creation, and the rest, and the special cause of the con
ventional use (of different measures of tame), begmumg with the
paraménu and énding with the parirdha® Since it 18 well known
from the Purfinas, no detailed account 18 given, here All objecta
derived. from prakrti are dependent on time But although time 18
the regulator of everything, 16 18 1taelf regulated by the Supreme Lord,
im accordance with the text ‘Who 1s 4 knower, the Time of time,
possessor of atimbutes, omniscient’ (Svet 6 2)
The meaning of the word ‘‘ Brahman ” has already been expounded
above He 18 Lord Kyma, an abode of groups of qualitues like Creator
sbyp of the world and the reat, to be mentioned hereafter, and 1s denoted
by the words ‘Supreme Brahman’, ‘ N&r&yana’, ‘Vasudeva’ and so on
As has been said ‘Let us meditate on Krsna, on Han, with eyes lke
eee
° Correct quotation éat-prasddat’ and nob ‘mad prasdddt’
, 2०8 & एनपा drvimon of ime MW,p 261
* A paromdpu 15 the time taken by the mum to traverse past an atom of
matter and 80 07 Vide VRM p 38 for details
[80 1 1 1
ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 17
lotus, on Brahman, supreme and adorable, free by nature from all
faults, and one 20888 of infinite auspicious qualities, and having the
vyiibas 1 as His lmbe’ (DS 4)
The mutual differences among these (three) substances, viz the
sentient, the non sentient and Brahman are taught by the texts
contamed respectively m the different chapters (treatmg of theso
three) and mdicating the respective peculiarities of their qualities
and nature The non difference of the sentient and the non sentient
18 taught in the followmg texts —‘“Eixstent alone, my dear, was
this m the beginnimg, one only, without a second’”’’ (Chand 621),
‘The self, verily, was this m the begimumg, one only’ (Ait 111),
‘Thou art that’ (Chind 687, 698, 6108, 6113, 612831,
6133, 6143, 6153, 6163), ‘This soul 18 Brahman’ (Brh 445),
“All this, verily, 18 Brahman’ (Chind 3141), ‘I am you, verily,
O reverend Deity’, “Then he knows the self alone “I am Brahman”’
In this way, the two kinds of texts bemg both authontative in
thew primary and literal mmport, the sentient and the non sentient,
though of different natures (from Brabman), yet are non different
from Brahman, because they have their exmstence and activity under
His contro],—just as the sense organs, though of different natures
(from the vital breath) are yet non different from the vital breath,
because they are under its control, as 28 well known from the dialogue
between the vital breath and the sense organs im the OhSndogys
‘Verily, they are not called speech, eyes, or mind, but called the vital-
breath alone’ (Chind 5 115) Hence the view of the author of the
aphorisms 18 that Brahman, the object to be enquired into, 1s both
different and non different from the sentient and the non sentient
For that very reason, there 1s no necessity for enquirmg mto the two
realities (viz the sentient and the non sentient), and the doctrine that
through the knowledge of one, there 18 the knowledge of all? fits in
well As has been said ‘Hence, all knowledge concerning all objects
18 true, since they, as dedlared by Scripture and Smrti, have Brahman
1 The vyihas are Vdsudeva, Sambkargana, Pradyumna end Amruddha
Vide VRM, pp 47-49, for details
2 Vide Chind © 1 # The sense w that the efiiras recommend an enquiry
into Brahman alone, and not into the sentient and the non sentient not because
these two are unreal, but simply because by enquiring into Brahman the Cause
wa come to know of the sentient and the non sentient too the effects, and
hence 200 separate enquiry is necessary
2
[श ill
16 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1 |
for ther easence,—this 18 the view of those who are versed in the Vedas,
and the Trinity of Reals too 1s established by Scripture and aphonsms '
(D § 7) The following aphoriams may be referred to ‘A part, on
account of the mention of variety, and otherwise, some even read the
status of a fisherman, © knave and so on’ (Br Si 2342), But on
account of the mention of both, as im the case of a anake and ita coil’
(Br Si 3227), ‘Or, lke the substratum of lght, because of being
hght’ (Br Si 3228) andsoon Detailed explanations may be seen,
further on
Smoe 118 aphonsm (Br Si 111), ascertaming the meaning of
Scripture, 18 of the nature of an introduction, the dispensable fac tors
(in the study of a particular subject) are 8180 mentioned virtually by
1४, with a view to encouraging people with insight to (the study of)
Sempture ‘These are the person, entitled (to the study), the topic,
the relation and the purpose! Among these, one who 1s desirous of
release and possessed of the stated marks 9 1s the person entitled (to
the study of the Vedinta) The topic 1s the Lord Vasudeva, the
Highest Person, denoted by the term ‘Brahman’ and the rest, omnis
agent, the substratum of natural, mconcervable and infinite attmbutes
and powers persisting as long os He Himself does, the Contioller of
Brahm&, Rudra, Indra, matter, atoms, time, karma, and Nature, who
18 absolutely untouched by faults and who 18 the substratum of a
natural difference—non, difference from the sentient and the non
sentient The relation 18 that between a topic and what treata of the
topic ® ‘The purpose here 18 salvation, characterized by attaming tho
state of the Lord
Here ९0.08 the seotion, entitled ‘The enquiry’ (1)
Oomparison of Nembdrka’s readvag and yniierpretation with the readings
and snierpretaiions of Samkara, Ramdnwa, Bhdskara, Srikantha
and Baladeva «
Samkara
Interpretation, different Accordig to Nimbfrka, the term
“athe” (then) signifies ‘after the study of the Veda and the Piirva-
1 Adiukirwn vwaya, sambandha prayojana » See above pp 11-14
® See above, p 9 of the book and footmote ¢ there
¢ Only the pomts of differences will be noted
[श 1 1 1
ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 19
mimaims&’ But according to Samkara, this 1s not the case He
pomts out that the study of the Parva mimAmsi 1s by no means an
essential pre requisite to the study of Brahman! There 18 no essential
connection between the enquiry into religious duties and that into
Brahman On the contrary, there 18 an absolute difference between,
them as regards the result and the object of enqury?2 The result
of the former 18 the attamment of worldly and heavenly enjoyment,
which 1s something to be accomplished, while the result of the latter
18 salvation, which 18 not something to be accomplished, being eternal
and ever accomplished This bemg so, the easential pre requusite
to the enquiry into Brahman 18 not the enquiry into religious duties,
but the acquisitien of the four qualifications 8,—viz (1) discmmmation
between eternal and non eternal objects, (2) aversion to the enjoyment
of the objects of sense, here or hereafter, (3) possession of self restraint,
tranquillity and the rest +" and (4) the demre of emancipation 5
Ramanuja
Reading and interpretation same, only much more elaborate
Raéménuja pomta out that the two Mimimsis—viz the Karma-
mimaimsa and the Brahma mimfmsé constitute one connected whole,
the first naturally leadmg to the second,® and omtucizes at length, in
this connection, the Samkante view that the enquiry ito Brahman
does not necessarily presuppose the enquiry into religious duties 7
Bhiskara
Interal interpretation same, but smport different Bhiakara
develops here his pecular doctrine of jnina karma samuccaya, or
1 883 111 ‘Dharmayyfidsdydh तथा am adhita Veddniasya Brahma
jyfdsopapatish p 71
28B 111 #£Dharma brahma-jyfdeayoh phala syftdeya bheddoca (p 74)
8 Sddhana catugiaya
4 Ie dama (control of the mternal organ, viz the mind), dama (control of
the external sense-organs), uparat (indifference to worldly pursurta) tsisked
(endurance of the oppomte extremes, like heat and cold pleasure and pam
eto } draddhd (faxth in the sermpture and the spiritual teachers), and samadhana
deep concentration)
6 8 8 111 ‘Natydnsiya-vastu-vwekah, shdmuirariha phalabhoga-vwdgah
éama damddt-sidhana mumukeuteas ca
sampat,
9 §न B 111 Vakgyat oa Karma-brahma-mimameayor atkaddetryam
eto p 2, vol 1 (Madras ed)
7 Op ov, pp 5&I13, vol I
[so 1 1 1
120 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1 ]
combmation of knowledge and work Thus, accordmg to both
Nimmbirka and. Bhdskara, the enquiry mto Brahman should be under-
taken afier an, enquiry into religious duties, but for dsfferent reasons
According to Nimbirka, the prior study of the Karma mim&imsa
convinces us of the transitory nature of the fruits of karmas, and this
naturally leads us to the study of the Brabma mim&ms&, with a view
to attaming a permanent fruit therefrom, viz salvation Yor this
reason, we study first the Pirva mim&msa, and then the Uttara
mimmémss or the Vedinta
But accordmg to Bhiskara, we enquire mto Karmas before
enquirmg mto Brahman for quite different reasons, viz (1) We do
not enquire into Karmas first and then mto Brahman, because the
former are tranmtory, the latter not, but we enquire mto both Karmas
and Brahman, for the very same reason, viz because we know that
they both play an equal part 11 the attamment of salvation Salvation
can be obtamed through a proper combination of knowledge and works,
and unless we firet know the nature of the works themselves, we cannot
possibly decide which kinds of works are to be resorted. to and combined.
with knowledge, and which kinds to be avoided and not to be ao com.
bined It 18 for this reason, that we first study the Karma mimimai,
and then the Brahma-mimims&, and combme the obligatory works
with knowledge, avoiding those that are undertaken for selfish ends
(2) Further, the Vedinta deals with various kinds of meditations
on the subordinate parta of sacmilcesa—, eg the meditation on the
udgitha and so on But unless we are first acquamted with the
nature of those sacrifices themselves, such meditations are not posable
Tt 18 for this reason also that we first study the Karma mimémai,
and then the Brahma mimimaé 1
Bhiskara also cnticises here the Smkarte interpretation of the
term. “ atha `` 3
Srikantha
Interal wterpretation same, but swmport different That 18,
Nimbarka and Srikantha both agree that the Brahma mimimaé 18
to be studied, after the study of the Karma mimams&, but the reason
for this, as given by Srikantha, 1s different from that given by Nim
bitka We have already seen the reason grven by Nimbarka But
1 Bh B 111, p 2 ४ @ of pp 3-5
[80 1 1 1
ADH I] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 21
according to Srikantha, we must first study religious duties and then
Brahman, because the two stand in a relation of worship (Araédhan&)
and the worshipped (Gradhya),} cause (hetu) and effect 2 moans
(sidhana) and end (sdidhya)® The proper performance of Karmas
purifieathemind But unless we first know the nature, ete of Karmas,
we cannot perform them properly, 1 6 choose the mght ones (nitya
and naimittaka ones) and avoid othera (kimya 0788), and unless we
perform jxarmas properly, our mind 18 not pumfied, and unless our
mind 18 purified, there can, be no rise of knowledge mit It 1s for this
reason that we should first study the Karma mim&imsé and then the
Brahma mimimsé¢ Like R&mAnuja, Srikantha holds that the
Karma mimaims& and the Brahma mim&msé form one and the same
treatise 5
Baladeva
Interpretation different According to Baladeva also, the word
५ atha’’ means ‘ immediate sequence’, but he pomts out that 1t cannot
be said that the study of the Karma mimims& 18 an essential pre
requisite to the study of the Brahma mim&msé, for 1t 18 often found
that even, one who knows the Karma mimiimsaé by heart, but who 18
deprived of the company of the good, has no demre to enquire into
Brahman, while one who does not know the Karma mimaima&, but
18 purified by truthfulness, prayer, eto and assomates with the good,
has a natural melmation to enqwre ito Brabman It cannot be
said also that the term ^ atha ” means that the enquiry into Brahman.
can be undertaken only after the acquisition. of the four fold qualifica
tions, viz discrimmation between the eternal and the non eternal and.
the rest, as held by Samkara, for these cannot be acquired unless one
first associates with the good and the holy °
Henooe, what the term “ atha '* means 18 as follows —A man who
has properly studied the Veda and has understood its meaning In 4
general way, who has fasthfully performed the duties moumbent on
18KB 111, p 34, Part 1
2 Op ot pp 37, 39 Part 1
2 Op ov, pp 389, 43, Part 1
‘SEB 111 pp 88, 39, 43 50, 68 70 Parb1 Of course Sitkonjha is
not a JAdna karma-samuccaya-vadiun like Bhé&skara
6 88 111 p 98 Part 1
¢ 28 111 pp 234265, chap 1
[80 1 1 2
29 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 2]
his own stage of life, who 18 truthful and 80 on, whose mind has become
purified by the performance of duties in a disintorested spint and who
has come into contact with a knower of truth, should then commence
an enquiry ito Brahman, for then be 18 convinced that the fruits of
works undertaken with selfish ends m view are but transitory, while
Brahman alone 1s the cause of eternal happiness 1
Thus, the five pre requisites to the enquiry into Brahman are —
(1) Study of the Veda (2) Proper performance of the duties mcum
bent on one’s own stage of life (3) Purification of the mmd by such
performance of works 10, 8 disinterested spirit (4) Association with
the good and the holy (6) The consequent acquirement of the faculty
of discriminating between the permanent and the non permanent,
disgust for non permanent worldly objects and demre to know the
permanent in details
All the commentators agree 70 holdmg that the word ^ अ `
means ‘because the fruits of Karmas are transitory, while the know
ledge of Brahman alone leads to eternal bliss’
Adhikarana2 The section entitled ‘The Origin’
(8 ६८9 2)
SUTRA 2
‘‘ (BRanMAN IS THAT) FROM WHOM (ABISH) THE ORIGIN AND THE
REST OF THIS (WORLD) ”
Vedainta-parijita-saurabha
Now, with regard to the charactenstics of Brahman, the author
states the correct conclusion,
That very Lord—the substratum of infinite attmbutes lke
omniscience, eto and the ruler of Brahmd, Siva tame and the rest,——
from whom anse the ongination, subsistence and dissolution, ‘‘ of this’”’,
16 of the universe,—endowed with manifold combinations, the
abode of mnumerable peculianties of names and forms and the like,
and the form of which 1s mconcervable,—is Brahman, the object of
the above statement (viz 808 111)}—ths 18 the meaning of the
oharacterimng text
+ @ ot pp 1920, chap 1
(st 1 1 2
ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 23
Vedanta-kaustubha
Brahman, called Lord Krgna, great in qualities, powers and nature,
has been established in the previous section Now, with reference to
the enqury What are His characteristics ’—the same Being (viz
Brahman) 18 beg demonstrated, as having the qualities of ‘ bemg
the agent of the omgin and the reat of the world’, ‘bemg omniscient’,
“pemg true’ and so on
Here the words ‘of this” denote the effect, viz the world, and.
the words “from whom’’ denote the cause The word ‘Brahman’
18 to be supphed here from the previous aphoriam And, there bemg
an, universal correlation between the terms ‘yat’ and ‘tat’, the term
‘tat’ too must be supplied here +
(Next the compound “ janmfdi” 18 explamed —) ‘That of
which “orgin” 18 the beginnng’—is “ janmidi”’, 16 creation, aub
sistence, dissolution and salvation This 18 a Bahuvrihi compound
of the tad guna sam)fiina type *
That ‘from whom”,—ie the Lord, the Highest Person, the
Lord of all, ommuscient, omnipotent, the supreme cause and the ruler
of all,—arse the orgination, submstence, dissolution, and salvation
‘of this’’,16 of the world, which 18 manifested by names and forms
connected with enjoyers (viz the souls) divided variously, which 1s the
constant abode of the enjoying of place, tame and frwts, and the
composition of which 1s beyond the grasp of reasonmg—isa Brahman.
He alone 18 to be enquired into by those who desire for salvation,—
this 1s the construction of the words m the aphorism
> Thus the construction of the siira is — Janmddy asya yatah Brahmogah
tata}
> There are two kinds of Bahuertit vis iad guna sanyfdna and atad guna-
न्वी In the former case, the compounds the noun (veesya) has direct
connection with and umples the words compounded (videsanas),e हि when 10 18 said
‘Bring the man with long ears ' (Lamba barnam dnaya), the bringing of the man
mmples the bringing of his atimbute viz the ears as well and the man (videgya)
and his ears (wiéeganas) are directly connected In the latter case there is no
such direct connection between the compound and the words compounded, 8 g
when 19 18 said ‘Brng the man who haa seen the sea’ (Drea sdgaram dnaya)
the bringing of the man doss not imply the bringmg of lua attribute, viz the sea,
and there 19 no direct connection between the two
Now ‘Janmdds' 18 a Bahuertin of the first land and hence 10 includes in
108 meaning sanma’ too
[st 1 1 2
24 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]
There are scriptural texts to this effect,—beginning —'‘Bhrgu,
the son of Varuna approached his father, (with the request) “Sr,
teach me Brahman” ’ (Tait 31), and contimung —‘ “From, whom,
verily, all these bemgs arise, by whom they, so born, live and to whom
they go forth and enter,—enqwre into that, that 18 Brahman” ’
(Tart 31), ‘Brabman एह truth, nowledge and infimte’ (Tait 21)
and so ou, (The meaning of the first of the above two texta 18 —)
‘from whom’, 16 from Lord Purugottama, ‘all thase bemgs’,1e all
objects from the mahat down to a tuft of grass, ‘arise’,—hereby the
ongmaton (of the world from the Lord) 1s mdicated “By whom, they,
80 born, live’,—hereby the submstence (of the world in Brahman) 18
mdicated ‘They enter’,—hereby the dissolution, (of the world into
the Lord) 1% shown ‘To whom they go forth,’—meanmg— whom
they attam, after the destruction of all karmas’,—hereby salvation,
(of the souls) 18 mdicated Here ‘omgmation’ means the oxpansion
of the manifold consciousness of the sentient being, due to its conneo
tion with a body and the rest, and ‘dissolution’ means its ontrance
into the Cause (viz Brahman), resuliing from the contraction of ita
consciousness Thus will be made clear under the explanations of the
two aphorisms, viz ‘Dependent on the movablo and the immovable’
(Br 88 2316) and so on The distimction (betweon the xentiont
and the non sentient) 1s that the non sentient 1s more primary, having
a different form at the begmning of creation 1
The meaning of the second text, on the other hand, 18 that
Brahman possesses the attmbutes of truth, knowledge and mfintude
Here, the word ‘truth’ distinguishes the Lord from what is not true,
the word ‘knowledge’ from the group of the non rentiont, and the
word ‘infinite’ from the group of the sentient
And, thus 16 18 established that the charactemstu. mark of Brahman
18 that He, bemg the one non distmcot matenal and efficient cause of
the universe, 18 possessed of truth and the reat He 8 the matenal
cause ° in the sense of bemg the manzfestor, in & gross form, of His own
1 That 18, the non-sentient 18 more primary than the sentient mn the sense
that 20 28 prior to the sentient m pomt of time Right m tho begmning of
creation, the mdrvidual goul does not exust, in the sense that thore is nobody
with which 10 may be connected but pradhdna dosa, though not m the form
of particular non sentuent substances like stones end houren, ste and the
body comes to be evolved later on Of Sambkhya theory of ey olution
9 Upddinaiva
[st 1 1 2.
ADH 2 | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 25
natural powers, denoted by the terms ‘higher , ‘lower’ and 80 on,
and reduced to a subtle state, as well as of the effects, existent and
wherent 1 them respectively He 18 the efficent cause 1 170 the sense
of bringing about a union of the sentient beings,—whose attnbute of
knowledge 18 आ & state of absolute contraction being under tho m
fluence of the past umpressions of their own, Karmas which are begin
ningless, and 18, thereby, unfit for brmgmg about the recollection
(1 therr minda) of the retributive experiences (to be undergone in the
present birth),—with their respective karmas, and the respective
instrumenta for experiencing them, through manzfestmg (m them)
knowledge, enabling them to experience the fruits of karmaa 2
There 1s a Smyti passage too, conformable to the text dealmng
with the topic m hand, (1e the above Tartturtya text, 31) m the
Moksa dharma ® It begms ‘The Sanpture which was mentioned
by Bhrgu to Bh&radvija, who asked’ (Maha 12 67697 4), and con
tmues ‘He, verily, 1 the Lord Visnu, celebrated to be mfinite,
abiding as the वडाः Soul of all bemgs, and difficult to be known by
those who have not obtamed the self, who 1s the creator of the principle
of egoity for the production of all beings, from whom arose the universe,
about whom I have been asked by you here”’ (Mah& 12 6784b—
6786a 5)
1 Nemitiatva
> The Lord is the material cause of the universe in the sense that creation
means the manifestation of His mubtle powers of the sentient and the non
sentient into gross effecta That is durmg disolution, the entire universe of
the sentient and the non-sentient merges in the Lord and axsta in Him na
subtle state ag His natural powers Then, in the begimnmg of 9 new creation,
the Lord manifests these powers of the sentiant and the non sentient (6४
dak and aoté-dakn), developing them into grosser effects and producing thereby,
the universe of names and forms
And the Lord 8 the efficient cause of the universe in the sanse that He
unites individual souls with their respective karmas the resulta of these karmas
and the instruments for experiencing thera—that 1s, the Lord mw the efficient
cause in the sense that He regulates the ceatinies of dividual souls in
accordance with strict justice Dumng dissolution, the begmnmglesa m
pressions of past karmas get dimmed and confused and at the time of a new
creation the Lord revives these mpreesions m particular individuals, thereby
making each individual undergo the fruits of his past works VideV RM p 63
3 Mokga dharma’ 19 the name of 9 section of the twelfth book of the
Mahé bhérata from adhyaya 174 to the end
“P 604 lme7 vol 8 6 Op ov. lines 22-24
[st 1 1 2
26 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2 ]
If xt be objected —In the Svet&évatara Upanisad, a multatude of
causes 78 spoken, of in the passage ‘Time, nature, destmy, accident,
elements and the Person should be known as the Cause’ (Svet 1 2),
80 what authornty 18 there for separating specifically Vasudeva, the
Highest Person alone as the cause of the world —(then we reply )
Listen A multatude of scriptural and Smrti passages 1s our authority
for specifying the cause of the world Compare the followmg —
‘Ho, the One, who governs all these causes, connected with tmme and
soul’ (Svet 13), ‘He who 18 a knower, the Time of tame, possessed
of attributes, ommacent' (Svet 62), ‘Of whom there 1s neither
a creator, nor a lord’ (Svet 69), ‘Venly, Nar&éyana was One’
(Mahi Up 1 2), ‘Then there was Visnu, Ham alone, without parts’,
‘From Narfiyans 18 born Brahm&, from Ni&rfiyana 38 born Rudra’
(Nar 1), ‘From the forehead of this bemg, wrapt up withm himself
in meditation, was born the Person, with three eyes, trident 17. hand’
(Mahi Up 17), ‘Krsna, the One, the ruler, moving everywhere,
18 an, object of worship, He who, though one, yet appears a8 many’
‘““* Ka’ 18 the name of Brahman, I am the ‘Iéa’,106 the Lord, of all
bemgs We two have sprung up from your body, hence you have
the name ‘ Keéava’”’, ‘I, Brahmi, the primary Lord of people, am
born from Him, and you have sprung up from me’, ‘Krena alone 18
the source of the worlds, and of their dissolution, too ’, ‘ Bemg created.
by Krsna the universe consisting of the sentient and the non sentient
has origmated’ ‘In the Vedas, and m Rémdéyana, venly, m the
Bharata and 1, the Pafica ritra, Han 18 celebrated everywhere, 190
the begmning, in the end, and m the middle’ (Han V 162321)
ˆ ^ { am the ongin of the entire world, dissolution similarly”’’ (Gite
7 6), ˆ “ˆ There 1s nothimg else higher than me, O Dhanafijaya”’ (Gita
7 7), ““ I am the souroe of everything, everything origmates from me” ’
(७ 108) and so on The terms ‘ Hiranyagarbba’ and the rest,
which we find sometimes mm certain texts concerning the origin and 80
on of the world, should be known to be referrmg to Brahman Hence
it 18 established that Lord Krsna, the Soul of all, the Lord of all, the
one topic of all the Vedas, 1s the cause of the world
Here ends the section entitled ‘The Ongin’ (2)
1 P 1002 vol 4
[so 1 1 3
ADH 3 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 27
COMPARISON
Samkara
Reading and interpretation same Of course, conuistently with
his doctrme, Samkara must hold that here the term ‘ Brahman’
denotes ‘Iévara’ or the lower Brahman
Adhikarana 3 ‘The section eontitled ‘That
which has Scripture for 1068 source’ (Sitra
3 )
SUTRA 3
०८ Brosauseh (BRAHMAN HAS) SoRIeTURE FoR His 90080 ”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
With reference to the enquiry What 1s the proof of His emstence ¢
The author states the correct conclusion —
Of Whom °" Sorpture”’ alone 18 “the source’, 1 © the cause of
knowing,—that very reality, characterized as having the statod marks,
18 denoted by the term ‘Brahman’
Vedanta-kaustubha
Thus, 1t has been pomted out by the aphoniam concerning enquiry ४
that Brahman 18 the object to be enquired into, and 2४ has been
pointed out by the aphomsm concerning characteristic mark? that
the characteristio mark of Brahman 1s to be the cause of the ongin
and the rest of the world and possess truth, etc Now, with reference
to the enquiry What 1s the proof with regard to Him—the proof 1s
bemg stated.
On the doubt, viz whether Brahman, having the stated marks,
18 to be arrived at through inference, or has the Veda alone for His
proof,—the prima facre view bemg that He 1s to be arnived at through
inference, since we know from the scriptural text ‘From whom
speech turns back’ (Tait 24, 29) that Brahman cannot be known
through speech (16 texts),—
1 This explains the compound ‘édsira-yont’
2Viz Br Si 111 3 Vu Br 38 112
[st 1 ]
99 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8
(We reply ) Brahman cannot be armved at through mferen
but has the Veda for His proof Why? ° Because (Brahman 7
Scripture for His sources” That means “Scripture + 16 the Ve
18 the “gsource’”’,1¢e the cause, the informant, the proof, with rege
to whom,—that object 18 ‘“‘Sastra yon”, and ^ Sastra yonttva ”
the state of beg ‘' ra yon.”’—on account of that, 16 on accot
of having Scripture for His proof! The correct conclusion 18 tl
Brahman has the Veda alone for His proof
Tfit besaid For the sake of sumpheity, 1 18 well said that Brahm
has Sorzpture for His source, and thus to aay that Brahman ft
Scripture for His source, 1e has the Veda for its proof, serves €
purpose, (16 18 not m conflict with our view),—(we reply) }
Brahman, cannot be arrived at through inference, because the phras
० Because (He has) Sampture for (His) source” mdicates o reas
which excludes any other proof except Scripture
If1t be said How 1s 10 known that He cannot be arrived at throu,
inference *—({we reply ) There has been some room for the suspicu
that Brabman can be arrived at through inference, since the mudd
term. (or the reason), viz: “the state of bemg an, effect’ 2, stated abov
proves the world to be due to a creator? With a view to removu
it, that significant word ^ 18 used here (7. this sitra), in accordan.
with the followmg scriptural texts —Viz ‘The word which all t
Vedas declare’ (Katha 215), ‘That with regard to which all t
Vedas become one’ (Tat Ar 31115), ‘ “I ask you about Brahma
set forth in the Upanwads” ’(Brh $ 9 265), ‘He who does not knc
the Veda, does not know Him, the great’ (Tait Br 3 12947१7) ax
so on, and the followmg Smrti passages ‘ “By all the Vedas, I alo:
am to be known,” ` (Gité 1515), “ ‘In the Veda, m the Ramayan
1 Thus explams the compound disira-yomivds’
2 Karyyaiva
ठ That is 20 has been laid down m Siira 1 1 2 that the world 18 an offer
‘Thus suggests the mference -—Whatever 18 an effect has a creator
The world is an effect
the world has a creator (viz Brahman)
Thu suggestion is negatived by Sara 1 13 which explicitly sayy that tl
Brahman has Scripture alone for His proof and never mwference
Vis dédsira yon
7 P 292 vol 3
fst 1 1 38
apn 3.] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 20
verily, m the Bh&rata and m the Pafica ritra, Hari 1s celebrated
everywhere, m the begmning, in the end and in the middle’ ” (Harv
162821), ‘We bow down, to that wherem lies the eternal basis of all
speech’ and 80 on
If 1t be said On the ground of the inference ‘All objects having
parts, hke the earth and the rest, have a cause, because they are
effects, hke pots and the reat’, Brahman 1s established to be the cause
of the world, ance none else can be such 8 cause, and this bemg so,
why trouble about the Veda f—{we reply ) no, because, the very fact
that the elements ike the ether and the rest have an ongin, being not
known by anyone without the Veda, that they are effecta 18 not eatab-
lnshed, and hence the reason > 18 1teelf unestablished 3
It cannot be 88त also that the origm of the elements 18 to be known
through the Veda, and the fact that they are effecta bemg proved
through this, the reason 418 not unestablished—, for, mn, that case too,
Brahman, the cause of the world bemg known through the Veda
alone, the inference becomes futile, and you virtually come to our
ade ‘Thus, even in the case of well known effects like a house or a
shoot, Brahman, cannot be inferred from the reason, ‘produciblenesa’,
1t bemg possible to suppose the earth, the seed, wate:, men and so on.
to be their causes, and unreasonable to 1magme an unseen cause
(viz Brahman)
This should be understood here wherever something is found to
be an effect, there 1t is possible also to arrive, by means of inference, at
an individual soul, corresponding to effect, as the agent But that
the entire universe 18 an effect 18 not known without the help of the
Veda Hence, the creator of the world, too, can be known through
the Veda alone, and. never through a thousand mferences Further,
Brahman cannot be known through the evidence of perception, since
the ordinary sense organs are mcapsable of grasping Him, as declared
1P 1002
9 Vis Kdryyaiva or state of bamg an effect
3 That is, 1) has been argued ~
Whatever is an effect has a cause
The world 28 an effect
the world has a cause
Now we cannot know that the world w an effeot unless we have recourse
to Sempture and hence Sorspture is needed even here too
“Vis KGryyaive or produablenees
[80 118
30 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 3]
by the soriptural texta ‘Not the sense organs, nor mference,’ ‘ ^“ Thi
knowledge 18 not attamable through inference, dearest! It leads tc
proper knowledge only beg told by another’’* (Katha 29) That
18, ‘Dearest!’ ‘thu knowledge’ concernmg Brahman, 1s not to be
overthrown by reason, or, 1s not capable of bemg attamed thereby
‘Told’ by ‘another’,1e by an omniscient teacher who 1s versed in the
Vedas, 2४ leads to mght knowledge, as declared by the aphorism ‘On
account of reasonmg having no ground’ (Br Si 2111), by the
Manu Smrt ‘One should not apply reasonmg to those conceptions
which. are राया षट imconcervable’, and by the Mah& bhiérata ‘QOne
should not arrive at those conceptions which are verily mconcolvable
through reasonmg There can be no ascertainment of any deep
meaning through reasoning which 1s without a bass’ Moreover,
who but a mad man should say that Brahman, the cause of the world,
who 18 not known entirely and m every way even by omniscient
mantras and sages, who 18 difficult to be understood and who 28
possessed. of mfimte mconceivable quahties and powers, can be known
through inference
It 1s not to be apprehended what then, wil become of such,
texta as ‘From whom speech turns back’ (Tait 24,29) and so
on ?—for the meaning of these 18 that Brahman, 18 not limited aa
bemg so much This the author will state under the aphonsm
‘For the so muchness of the topio mentioned’ and so on (Br त
9 2 22)
(An alternative explanation of the sitra ) If the compound
“Sastra yom” be disjomed as ‘The source of Scripture’, then, too,
the very same meaning 18 arrived at! The resultmg meaning 1s that
Brahman can be known through the Vedas alone,—breathed forth
by Him, the omusoent, and (as such) standmg m an intimate and
internal relation with Him,—and not through any external inference
and the rest, magmed by others In that case, (1 6 on the second
interpretation), the topic of this aphomsm. will be the scriptural text,
viz “Breathed forth by this Great Bemg 18 the Rg veda, the Yayur-
veda and the Sima-veda’ (Brh 2410, Maitrt 682) And, on this
mterpretation, the eternity of the Vedas are not negatived, for what
we admit 18 the issumg forth only (and not new creation) of what 1s
eternally established, in accordance with the followmg scriptural
1 ¢ SB 113
[st 1 1 4
ADH 4] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 31
and Smrti passages, viz ‘By means of speech, which 18 devoid of
form and eternal’ (Rg V 87561, Tait Sam 261122), ‘Speech,
without beginning and end, eternal, consisting of the Veda and celestual,
was created by the Self born m the beginning, whence proceeded all
activities’ (Maha 1285348) Hereby, the eternal and non clerived
form of Brahman, 18 mdicated, 81706 the Veda, which 18 pnor to all
dertvative creation, was breathed forth by Him‘* ‘This we shall
explain later 00. 6 ‘Hence, it 15 established that Brahman has the
Veda as His sole proof
Here ends the section entitled ‘ That which has Sempture for 18
source’ (3)
Adhikarana 4 The section entitled ‘Concord
ance’ (Stitra 4)
SUTRA 4
“Bor THaT (viz THAT BRAHMAN HAS SCRIPTURE 4S His 801.
PROOF) FOLLOWS FROM THE CONCORDANCE (OF ALL SORIPTURAL
TEXTS WITH REGARD TO BRAHMAN) ”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
If an objection be raised, viz In os much as the entire Veda 18
concerned. with action (18 myunctions and prohibitions), the VedAnta
texta too, which are concerned with a different topo, are solely
concerned with injunctions by way of establishmg the excellence of
the agent, who 18 a part of sacrifices,—yjust as the artha vide texts 5
are indirectly unanimous with the mjunctive texta, by way of estab-
luhmg their excellence Hence, how can Brahman have Scripture
a8 His sole proof? 7—the correct conclusion 1s 88 follows
1P 162 2P 241 vol 1
3 © 688 1776 22 vol 9
¢ That 18 uf Brakman were to breathe forth the Vedas, He must have a
body (nore etc), but this body 38 not evidently composed of matter, but 14
non material, 81006 when He breathes forth the Vedas, thare 1s no matter
‘See VE 13 35-30
¢ An artha-vdda 19 the explanation of the meauing of a precept, or eulogism
7 The sense of the objectionis All Vedas set forth injunctions or prohibstione
with regerd to action But besides the texts which directly or expliorily seb
forth the above, there are in the Vedas some texts which ere merely smatcanve
[st ll 4
92 VEDANTA 27121. SAURABHA ADH 4]
‘That’, 1e Brahman alone the object of enqury and the
cause of the universe, has Scripture for His proof, and not action and
the reat, smoo the entire Veda 18 m concordance in proving Him
alone (The word) ‘‘ samanvay&t " 18 to be explained thus ‘“ Sama
nvaya”” means concordance in respect of the primary mmport,—on
account of that—‘ samanvay&t’’ Or else, because there 18 concord
ance among the Vedas 171 point of proving Him alone,—s0o much m
brief
Tt cannot be said that such a concordance exista with regard to
actions, since actions fulfil ther purpose by simply giving rise to a
desire for knowledge! To say that Brahman 18 © subsidiary factor
of sacrifices 18 > mere childish prattle, mance He 1s an mdependent
Bemg as the regulator of all works, ther agents and, 80 on, and ther
instruments, and 18 the giver of frmta On the contrary, works
themselves are in concordance (with regard to Brahman) as aasisting
madrrectly the mse of knowledge—which 18 8 means to attaimmg Him,—
by way of generating a desire for knowledge > Thus 1s ascertamed from
the text concernmg the desire for knowledge 8
If 1t be objected It bemg established im, Scrpture that Brahman
18 not an, object of the proof, viz Word, just as He 18 not an object of
the proofs, viz perception, and the rest,—Brahman has not Scripture
as His sole proof,—we reply Brahman, the object of enqmry, has
Soripture alone as Eis proof and not anything else, on account of the
concordance of all the scriptural texts, directly or mdurectly, with
regard to Him alone Among these, there 18 a direct concordance
among the texta concernmg His characteristic marks, proof and the
and nob wyunciwe And, these latter kmd of texts are to be explamad, not
literally bub as euloging the direct mjunctive texts and thereby
formmg & part of myunctions eto otherwise the mtegnty of the Vedas cannot
be maintamed Hence, the Veddnia texts too must be taken as not establahmg
Brahman but as simply extollmg the sacrifieer by identufymg him with the
Supreme Soul and so on, and as such really concerned with sacrificial 008
1 That is the proper fonction of karmas 18 उपाङ्ग to pumfy the mind and
thereby create a demre for knowledge Karma, thus, 18 8 means and not an end,
the way to truth and not truth itself Hence the Veddnia texts, dealing aa they
do with the Supreme Truth, cannot be concerned with mere karmas Vide
VPS 3436
# Te knowledge 18 not an avga of karma on the contrary karma w an
aiga of knowledge Vide VPS 848
8 Vis Brh 4422
[8८ lil 4
ADH 4 ] VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 33
rest, since they are (directly) concerned with Him, and there is an
indirect concordance among the texts concerning the Sandilya. vidyii,1
the Paficign: vidyé,® the Madhu vidy& 3 and so on, as well as among
those which are symbolic m nature‘ Or rather, there is a direct
concordance alone among all the texta whatsoever, though leading to
different procedures,5 since the topica of all these different texts being
equally Brahman m essence, they are all to be understood im their
primary and literal sense® It 18 not to be feared that m that 0886)
the texts which are concerned with the demal of the object (viz
Brabman) will be precluded,’ amoe they too, as bemg concerned with
denymg any Imit with regard to Brahman’s nature, atimbutes and the
rest, refer to the very same topic (viz Brahman) §
Moreover, we ask your Worship Do you or do you not mean that
Brahman 18 the object of the statement “Brahman 18 not an object
of knowledge’? If the first, then Brahman 18 proved to be desaribable
and hence the proposition that He 1s not desombable 1s set amde If
the second, then Brahman 18 descmbable all the more Hence, the
object of enquiry 1s Lord Vasudeva alone, omniscient, possessed of all
meooncervable poywers, the cause of the orgm and the rest of the
untverse, known through the evidence of the Veda alone, different
and non different from all and the soul of all All Semptures are n
concordance with regard to Him alone—thus 18 the settled conclumon of
the followers of the Upanisads (viz the Ved&ntaris)
1 Vide Brh 561, 08207 3 1é 1-4
2 Vide Chéind 564-10 Also VE $11
* Vide Brh 251-19 (whole section), Chfind $ 1-11
4 Vide © g Brh 57-9 ete , Chind 3 18-21, 7 1-12, ete
5 The sense 18 that the vamous kinds of texts may mmpel a man to different
procedures Some may lead a man to maditate on Brahman directly as the self,
others to meditate on Him as the sun and 20 on.
® That 18, even the texts concerning the various meditations and symbola,
are to be understood aa directly referrmg to Brahman, 1 8 to be interpreted
literally, and not as referrmg to Brahman indirectly 18 to be mterpreted
figuratively, a8 suggested before This modnfies the statement made unmediately
before thab some texte are direct and primary, some indirect and secondary, and
takes all to be equally direct and pmmary
7 Vis ‘Net, nei” (Beh 28 6) and so on
6 That 18, the view that afl texts are concerned with Brahman directly mn
no way precludes the negairve texte, mnce these negative texte also are concemed
with Brahman equally
[श 1 } 4
24 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]
Vedinta-kaustubha
Thus, 1b has been said that Lord Krsna, the substratum of great
qualities and powers and the non distinct material and efficent cause
of the world, has the Veda alone for His proof Now, with a view to
confirming 29, the author, by showing the concordance of the entire
Veda with regard to that very Brahman, refutes the followmg objection,
viz , The entire Veda has been 888001916त with action by Jaimm: who
holds ‘Smce Scripture 1s concerned with action, there 18 purport-
lessness of what does not refer to ut (viz action)’ (Pi Mi Sa 1817)
Hence, what 18 not concerned with action being laid down as purport-
less, the Ved&nta texts, too, all refer to action (otherwise they will all
become purportless) Consequently, how can Brahman have the Veda
as His sole proof ¢
The term “but” disposes of the (above) prima facie view “That”,
16 Brahman alone, the object of enquiry and the cause of the world,
has Sorupture for His sola proof Why? “On account of conoord-
ance”, 1 © because there '1s concordance among all the Vedas with
regard to Him alone (The word “samanvayét”’ 1s to be explained
as follows ) “Samanvaya”’ means ‘Concordance m pomt of entirety
of. statement’,—on account of that,—‘“samanvayit”,1¢e the entire
Veda 18 m concordance with regard to denoting Brahman entirely or
Lord Kysns, the object to be enquired 11100 by one who desires salvation,
the one identical maternal and efficient cause of the world, havmg
Sarrpture as His source (16 proof), the controller of matter, soul, tume
and works, having His footstool honoured by the crowns (16 the bowed.
heads) of Brahm&, Rudra, Indra and the rest, having His greatness
untouched by any odour of fault, the abode of infinrte qualities hke
ommniscience and the rest and to be approached by the freed The
followmg groups of texts are m concordance with regard to Him
alone — From whom. verily all these bemgs arise’ (Tait 31), ‘From
bles alone, verily, do these beings amse’ (Tait 36), ‘From Him
arise the vital breath, the mmd, and all the sense organs’ (Mund
213), ˆ 06 exstent alone, my child, was this m the begmning
One only, without a second” (Chand 621) “He thought May I
be many, may I procreate”’ (Chind 628), ‘Brom N&rtyana arwes.
the vital breath from Né&riyana anses Brahmi, from
1P 36, vol |
(so 1 1 4
ADE 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 96
Narayana arises Rudra’ (पिदा 1), “There was vorily, Nirdyana
alone, neither Brahm& nor Iéina (Mahi Up 1 2), ‘Brahman, verily,
was this m the begimnmg, one only’ (Brh 141011) ‘Brahman,
verily, was this m the beginning, he knew that self alone thus “I am
Brahman”’’, “From Him arose all this’, “Tho self, verily, was this
m the beginning, one only’ (Ait 111), “From thus self, very, the
ether origmated’ (श 21), ‘The word which all the Vedas record’
(Katha 2 15), “That, mn regard to which all the Vedas are unanmous’
(Tat Ar 31114), ‘Entered withm, the ruler of man’ (Tait Ar
98 11 1 2 9}, “To whom all the gods bow down’, ‘Brahman 1s truth,
knowledge and infinite’ (Tait 21), ‘Knowing the 01188 of Brahman’
(Tart 29), “Brahman 8 knowledge and bliss’ (Brh 39 28), ‘All
this, verily, 18 Brahman’ (Chind 3141), ‘Tho self that 18 free from
ams, without decdy, without death, without gmef, without hunger,
without thirst’ (Ohind 8713), ‘Who 1 omnuscient, all knowmg’
(Mund 119, 227), “The knower of Brahman attams the highest’
(Taxt 21), “Brahman, verily, 1 all this’ (Brh 251-14, 14 tues)
and 60 on
(Prima fac view )
An objection may be raised here —The entire Veda 1s but 9 collec
tion of flve kids of texta, called, myunction, prohibition, explanation
or eulogy, sacred formule and name? Of these, “One, who desires
heaven should perform the Jyotusjoma* sacrifice’ and so on, are
myunctive texta ‘A Br&éhmana should not be nlled’ and so an, are
probibiizve texta ‘The wind, verily, 1 the quickest deity’ (Tait
Sami 2115), and go on are explanations or eulogisms ‘Qblation to
you’ (Tart Sam 1115), ‘O, heavens, havimg the fire as your head’
(Rg V 8 44 169, ? Sat Br 284 118 8), and so on are sacred formule
‘Tyotastoma’,® ‘Aéva medha’10 and the rest are names,—thus we
distmguish them ‘Thus, m the begimnmg, m the aphorism “Then,
1P 19 Readmg ‘Yairastan’
2P 181
» Vedhi, mgedha, ariha-cdda, manira, ndmadheya
4 Name of a Soma-sacriice, consisting divimons, Agnigjoma and the reat
MW,p 437
5 > 126, lmes 1 2, vol 7 € P 1, lnel, vol 1
१ ए 182, lme 7 8 P 168, lme 16
® See footnote 4, above 10 The horse-sacrifies
(so 1 1 ¢
36 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]
therefore, an enquiry into religious dutsea’ (Pa Mi Sai 1117), 1४ 18
said that the Veda has meanmg as possessing the frurt to be attamed
through the myunctions regarding conceptions which are instrumental
to the Vedic studies In the second aphoriam which w concerned
with mark, vw ‘A rehgious duty has mjunction for its mark’ (Pi
Mi Sa 1122), 1 18 establshed, on the ground of the vyiptz “What-
ever has the Veda for rts proof, refers to action’, that m the sphere
of religious duties, myunction 18 the authority® Here a doubt arses
as to whether the artha vida texts hke "The wind 18 the swiftest
deity’ (Tart Sam 2114) are authoritatave m the sphere of religious
duties, or not With regard to it, the prima facie view 1s as followsa
We have a text ‘Smee Scripture 18 concerned with action, there 1s
of what does not refer to 7 (viz action)’ (Pi Mi Si
1215) (+ means }—Scrpiture,1e the Veda, 1s ‘knyirtha’, 16
has ‘action’ alone as 298 ‘purport’, or subject-matter or topic,—for
this reason, the artha vida texts are not authontatave What then
are they ?—anticrpatang this question, the text goes on to say that
“there 18 purportleamess of what does not refer to 1t’,1¢6 let there be
वाग “purportiesmess’ or ‘meanmglessness’ of that which has not
‘action’ for ite ‘purport’, viz of artha-vida and the rest, and m the
very same manner, of the Vedinia texts as well Even those (Ve
dinta ) texts which comprise injunctions regarding study viz ‘One's
own text should be studied’, cannot be reasonably said to be autho-
ritative, ance they are (really) concerned with Brahman, leading to
no frut® (Here ends the prima facie view within the omginal prima
face view) With regard to this, we state the correct conclusion
‘Because of thar unanimity with the myunctions, let (them be
authoritative) through having the glorification of injunctions as their
iP 1, vol 1
2P 3 vol 1
3 That 1s, the mference is as follows —
Whatever has the Vede for rts proof refers to actuon
A religious duty has the Veda for rts proof
& religious doty refers to action, 2 8 18 concemed wrth imyunctions and
prohibrtaons
4 P 126 lnes 12 vol J 9 P 39, vol 1
¢ That 1s, there are some Veddnia texts, which do refer to action, 3 © to
injunction, yet they are not to be taken as authoritatrve, mnoe they really refer
to Brahman who 1s outmde the sphere of actions and frurta
[80 1 1 4
ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 37
purport’ (Pi Mi Si 127+) That 18, since the artha vidas are
unanimous with the injunctive texts, let them be authoritative
‘through having glorification as ther purport’,1e by way of glonfymng
the matters to be enjomed Similarly, im order to prevent the absolute
purportlessnees of the Vedanta texts which are wanting in mjunction
and prohibrtion and teach an accomplished object (viz Brahman), 1t
18 reasonable to take them too as mdirectly connected with action,—
which 18 something to be accomplished,—as moluded under the
very mantras and artha viidas, since they (viz the Ved&nta texts)
admit myjunctions regarding the study of the Veda But rf they be
taken, to be independent (of action) they would lead to no frmt, and
hence they must be understood to have fulfilled their purpose through
establishing the agent, who 1s a part of a sacrifice (and not to be
mdependent of action) Among these, the texts concernmg the
‘that’ (viz Brahman) and ‘thou’ (vi the mdrvidual soul)? glorify
the deity and the agent of the sacrificial act, and the knowledge
concerning 7 (viz the ‘that’) called the ‘higher knowledge’,? glonfy
thefruit (Thus, weconclude ) The Vedanta texts are not concerned.
with Brahman, but are like the artha vids texts, ance they are con,
cerned. with, proclaimmg the excellence of the agent, who 1s a subord
nate factor in a sacrifice (Here ends the orginal prima facse view *)
(Author’s conclusion }
To this we reply ० No, because this 18 8 mere imagination, m
vented by you, and because (on the contrary), works, being generative
of knowledge which, 1s a means to salvation, indirectly refer to Brahman
alone, as declared by the soriptural text —‘The Brihmanas desire
to know this self through the study of the Veda, through sacrifice,
through penance, through fastmg’ (अ 4422) Here, if im the
statement “They desire to know through sacrifice’, there be a direct
connection, of the Instrument, viz ‘sacrifice’, with the meanmg of the
root," as m the sentence ‘He deamres to go by the horse’, then the
sacrificial act should be known to be serving the purpose of knowledge
© helping the rise of knowledge), and thereby referrmg to Brahman
1P 42 vol 1
® Of the famous text 'Thou art that’ (Chand 687 eto )
> Videeg Mund 1145
4 It beganonp 35
4 The correct conclusion begs here 6 Vis ‘eid’ =to know
{st 1 1 4
38 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]
If, on the other hand, owing to the primacy of the demderative suffix,
there be 9 connection with the meanmg of the suffix, 1t should be known
to be serving the purpose of desire, {16 helpmg the mse of a desire
for knowledge), to be a subordinate factor of knowledge through
that desire and to be referrmg to Brahman thereby And, the fact
that action 18 a part of knowledge will be stated under the aphornsm
‘ And, there 18 dependence on all, on account of the text concerning
sacrifice, a8 m the case of a horse’ (Br Sa 3 ¢ 26)
Tt cannot be said, also, that the reality to be known from the
Vedanta (viz Brahman) 1s a subordmate factor of sacrifices,—simce
Ho 18 self dependent as the controller of all works, their agenta and
ther mstruments Nor can it be said that the Vediinta texts are
subsidiary parts of myunctions like the artha vidas, smce the former
have been referred to in & different context and are not m, proximity to
injunctions Nor can 1४ be said that the Vedinta texta lead to no fruit,
teaching, as they do, somethmg which 1s neither an injunction nor &
probibrtion,—smece the knowledge of Brahman, who 18 to be known
from the Vedinta, leads to a supremely excellent fruit, viz salvation
If 1t be said As we read in texts hke ‘ Undecaymg, verily, 18 the
geod deed of one who performs the Odtur misya? 8907066 ° (Ap
8 8111 9) that works too have the same fruit hike xt (viz knowledge),
so there 1s nothing objectaonable (m takmg the scriptural texta) to be
referrmg to works,—
(We reply ) No, because the scriptural text ‘ Just as here, the
world gamed through work perishes, so exactly does hereafter tho
world gamed through merit perish’ (Chind 8164) 1s of a greater
force, 18 m conformity with the inference, vi ‘The world gamed
through mere work 18 non permanent, because it 18 gamed through
work along, as mn the cage of पाण and the rest’, and 1s confirmed by
another scriptural text ag well, vm ‘ Hrail, 17056, are these boats
of sacrifices’ (Mund 127), because the text ‘Undecaymg, verily ’
(Ap SS 8 1 1) and so on 1s a weaker one, and because 1t 1s mmproper
to (take the scriptural texts) to be referrmg to works, which form
the object of such texts wantmg m force On the other hand, the
1 Viz ‘san, implymg demre’
9 See footnote 2 p 5 9 2 1, र] 1
* Correct quotation Kerma-ova’ and not ‘kerma-+ua’, which 1s translated
here Vide Chind 816,p 415
[st 1 1 4
ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 89
texta ‘Those who know thus, become mmortal’ (Brh 4414, Katha
629, Svet 8311018, 417 20), ‘The knower of Brahman attams the
highest * (Tait 21), are not contradicted by any scrptural text, and
cannot be set amide by a thousand mferences Further, the text
‘Undecaymg, mdeed’ and so on (Ap SS 811) ws not really set
aside, since it refers to the relatave (permanence of works)1, and ance
the holy Bhigavate-smrti (16 the Bhigavad द), which 1s & version
of the Veda, 18 the authority 17 both the cases (viz regardmg the non
permanence of karma, and the permanence of Brahman) thus —
‘The worlds, begmmumg from the world of Brahman, come and go,
O Arjuna | But, on attammg me, 0 Son of Kuntt! there is no re-birth”’’
(Gta 8 16)
If1t be objected It may be that the Upanigadio portion 18 somehow
or other concerned with Brahman, since we see 1 to be 80 अण the
prior portion (viz the Karma ka&nds) 18 known from the texta ‘He
performs the Agnihotra? as long as he lives’, ‘One who desires
heaven, should perform the Jyotustoma sacmfice’ (Ap 688 1021)
and so on, to fulfil 1t8 purpose by enjommg obligatory and optional
works and the rest, and hence how can they be concerned with
Brahman 1-
(We reply ) Not so ‘The entare Veda 1s concerned only with
Brahman, and although some part of 1t 1s found to refer to action
somehow, 18 complete concordance 1s found m Brahman alone
Among these the Upanisadic portion refers directly to Brahman,
directly concerned, as 10 18, with demonstratmg His nature, atimbutes
and the rest Among these, agam, the statements of difference refer
to Brahman by way of bemg concerned with the nature of the sentient,
the non sentient and Brahman, the statements of non difference, by
being concerned with proving that everythmg has Brahman for re
essence, the statements of creation, and the rest, by bemg concerned
with proving attributes hke ¢qreatorship and the rest, the statements
that Brahman 28 non-qualified, by bemg concerned with the denial
of the qualities due to miy3, the statements that Brahman 1s quahfied,
by bemg concerned with provmg the natural qualities of the Lord,
1 Thad 1s, this text amnply shows that the deeds of one who performs the
sacrifice are relatrvely more permanent than the deeds of one who
does not, and not that they are a permanent
४ Sacriflomg to Agns Of Athar V 6971,p 1380
[Ist Ll 1 4
40 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]
and the statements hke ‘That which 1s not manifested through
speech’ (Kena 1 4), by bemg concerned with proving that Brahman
1s not limited by so muchness
The texts, concerned with the daily and occasional duties,! too,
refer to Brahman alone, by way of effecting the purification of the
nature of the person, entitled (to the study of Brahman) and bemg
thereby 00 operative towards the rise of knowledge and so on concern
ing Brahman, while (the texts) concerned with the optional duties,®
by way of bemg an, atomic bit of the bliss of Brahman, 8106 the text
‘Other bemgs subast on a portion only of His bles alone’ (Brh
4 8 32) declares even, worldly pleasure to be an atomic portion, of the
एड of Brahman Moreover, the optional duties are in concordance
(with regard to Brahman), smoe they are concerned with the knowledge
of Brahman by way of giving mse to & pure body, like that of a god
and. the rest, entatled to salvation Moreover, just as in accordance
with the maxim of ‘connection and disconnection’,? curd, used in
connection with daly duties (nitya),—as laid down m, the passage
‘He performs © sacrifice with curd’,—brngs about the attainment
of objects of sense,—as laid down m the passage “One who dearres
for objects of sense should perform a sacrifice with curd’ (Taxt Br
215 6*),—so the sacrifimal acts, though bringimg about heaven and
the reset, should yet be known to be serving the purpose {19 helpmg
the mise) of knowledge5 And (finally) texta hke ‘Golden mght from.
the tap of His nails’ (Chind 166°) refer to Brahman as bemg
concerned with His divine body
॥ Or else, शआ008 the entire mass of 0016008 bas Brahman for ite
essence, the mass of texts, denoting them, directly refer to Him 7
1 The daily or siya karmas are ablution, prayer and so on, to be performed
every day while the oocasional or nawnitiaka harmas are the ceremony in honour
of the dead and so on, to be performed on spemaloccamsions Both of these knnds
are obhgatory
2 The optional or bdmya karmas are sacrifices and the reat undertaken with
special objecta in view, viz heaven and the reat
3 A term epplied to expreas the.disconnechon of what 1s optional from what
in @ necemary constituent of anythmg Vide Pi Mi Si 435, and Shbara's
commentary pp 493 and ff vol 7
« P 180 Ime ॐ, vol 2 6 Vide VK 3 426
¢ Correct quotation Apranakhdi sarva eva suvarnah Vide Chand
166,p 43
? That is instead of the laborious explanation given above, 16 1s aumpler to
accept this alternaizve explanation
[0 1 1 6
ApH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA dl
Hence it 18 estabhshed that the entire Veda 18 im concordance
with regard to Brabman alone or Lord Krsna the Highest Person,
omnisment, possessing infinite natural and imoonceivable powers,
the cause of the world, and different and non different from the sentient
and the non sentient, as declared by the Lord Himself m the passage
‘“By all the Vedas, I alone am to be known,”’’ (Gita 15 16)
The four aphorisms constituting the basis of Scmpture are hereby
explained This treatise (vi the Vedinta) 18 but an expounding of
these
Here ends the section entitled ‘Concordance’ (4)
Here ends the explanation of the four aphorisms m the first
quarter of the first chapter m the commentary Vedinta-kaustubha,
composed by the reverend teacher Srinivasa, the moarnation, of the
Paficajanya and dwelling under the lotus feet of the reverend Lord
Numb&ditya, the founder of the sect of the reverend Sanstkuméra
Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘He sees’
(8 ६४८४8 56-12)
SOTRA 5
“BHOCAUSH (कात OREATOR OF THH WORLD) 8058, (PRADHANA IS)
NOT (THR CAUSH OF THE WORLD) (SINCE) 77 18 NON SORIPTURAL ””
Vedinta-parijaita-saurabha
But pradhina, admitted by the Samkhyas, 18 “non somptural”’,
16 18 devoid of scriptural evidence 09006 it 18 “not” the cause of
the world, as m Scripture seemg, which. 1s a characteristic of a sentient
hemg, 18 predicated of the cause of the world
Veddnta-kaustubha
Thus, 1t has been pomted out that Brabman, great m attributes,
powers and nature, omniscient, and the one object of all the Vedas,
18 the cause of the origin and the rest of the world Now, the Sém-
khyas,— who hold that Brahman 18 not the cause of the world, since
He 1s of a dissimilar form, while the non, sentient pradhina, consisting
of the three gunas, 18 the cause of the world, since 1t 18 of a form
[ऽ 11 8
42 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 5]
mmular to the effect—also relate the Vedinta texts like ‘“The
existent, alone, my dear, was this im the beginning”’ (Chind 621)
and so on, to 1t alone (viz pradhina) The reverend author of the
aphorisms 1s now refuting this view
Pradh&na, which 1s derived through inference,! 1s not fit to be
the cause of the origm and the rest of the world Why? Becaune
1# 18 “non scriptural”, 16 that with regard to which there w no
“word”’,106 Scripture, asauthonty This adjective denotes the reagon
If 1t be objected that in the Oh&ndogya, pradhiina 1s meant by
the term ‘existent’ in the passage =^ ८ The existent alone, my dear,
was ths 10 the begmumg”’ (Chind 621) Heroe, how can 26 be
said that pradhina 1s non soriptural?—we reply “‘ Because (ithe
creator) sees”, 1 © because from the text, begmnmg =" ^ Huustent
alone, my dear, was this im the begmmmg”* (Chand 6 21), and con
tmumg ‘He thought, ‘May I be many, may I procreate*’’ (Chand
6 23), we find that the creator of the world percerves The same
thing 18 mentioned m the Aitareya as well m the passage ‘The self,
verily, was this m the beginning, one only Nothing else was apparent
He thought “Let me create worlds*’ He created these worlds’
(Axi 1 1 1) Here the word "8668 °", denotative of the root, must be
understood, by indirect apphoation, to be referrmg to ‘seemg’, which.
1s the meaning of the root ‘Seemg’ means deliberating, 168 deter
mination, and that, bemg the attmbute of a conscious bemg, 18 not
appropriate on the part of the pradhina Hence, pradhina, devoid
of perception, 1s not mentioned by Scripture Acoordingly, 1t has
been rightly said by 018 Holmeas that 1t 1s “non soriptural’’ There
fore, 10 18 neither the cause of the world, nor knowable through the
Veda
It cannot be said also that pradhfna possesses the power of
knowledge through ita attribute of sativa, and as such, percatving 18
appropriate on 108 part,—smee rt 18 ummpossible that a non sentient
substance and & nov, sentient attribute can possess knowledge, and
be knowledge (respectively) Nor should 1% be said that thus 1s appro-
priate through the connection, of pradhina with puruga,—because
there bemg (at hand) Brahman, mentioned before and possessed of
1 That 18 we cannot directly percexve the pnmary matter, bub we argue
that every effect must have a cause, that cause too another cause and 80 on, and
thus finally we must admit a primary cause which has no cause This is the
pradhdna
[so 115
apH 5] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 43
ever present knowledge, as a simple (explanation of the fact m band),—
it volves unnecessary comphcations to drag in something which 18
the substratum of knowledge, only through its conjunction with
another, (and not by itself), because such a view 18 utterly neghgible,
and, finally because during ite state of equilibrium, 1t does not possess
that atimbute1 30 stop labourmg the pomt Henos, the cause
corresponding to the effect, viz the cause of the omgm and the rest
of the world, 1s none but Brahman, who 1s denoted by the term
‘existent’ and 18 capable of perceiving, possessed as He 1s of natural,
mooncervable and infinite powers, as declared by the scmptural text
‘ Supreme 18 His powers, declared to be of various kmds, and natural
18 the action of His knowledge and power’ (Svet 68) and so on
COMPARISON
Samkara
Reading and interpretation same, but Samkara develops, mm this
connection, his doctrme of upidhi, or lmtimg adjunct, viz —that
there 1s really nothmg besides Brahman, the individual soul and the
rest being due to the limiting adjuncts of body, and the rest, hke the
all pervading ether, lmnited by 0008 and the rest Hence difference 18
mithyi through and. through *
Ramdnuja
Reading and interpretation same, but RiméAnuyja also develops
bis own. view, viz that the universe of the sentient and the non
sentient constitutes the body of the Lord > 1
Baladeva
Reading same, mnterpretation different,—viz ‘ Because (Brahman
18) seen (16 designated by Scripture), (Hoe 18) not mexpresatble ` 4
1 That 18, 1f knowledge arises through the pre dommance of the satiwa-guna,
then prior to creation, all the gupas bemg m a state of equilibrium, no knowledge
CAD). Gree 10
9 82116, 208
8 उत् ए 116, 160 एष्लः]1
“ ए 116, pp 46 47, Chap 1
Ist 116
44. VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ANH 5]
SUTRA 6
“Tr IT BH 847 THAT (THE WORD ˆ SERING' IN THE ABOVE CHAN
DOGYA TEXT) IS SHOONDARY, (THEN WH REPLY) No, BROAUSE OF
THE THERM ‘SEL’ (BEING APPLIED TO THE CAUSH OF THE WORLD) ”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
Tt 18 not reasonable to say that the ‘seemg’ 18 (only) “secondary”
Why? “On account of the term ‘self’ *”
Vedinta-kaustubha
Anticipating the objection, viz —
As we often find the metaphorical transference of the qualitiss
of a sentient bemg to non sentuent objects lke a bank or tllmg,
eg when referrmg to a bank about to fall, 1 18 said ‘The bank 18
about to शा "+" or when referrimg to the tillmg of dry soll, 1४ 18 said
‘Tillng 1s awaiting rain’, and as we read in Scripture about perception
on the part of non sentuent objects hke water and light, in the passages
‘That hght percerved’ (Chand. 623), ‘Those waters peroelved’
(Chand 6 2 4),—there may very well be a metaphorical perception
on the part of pradh&ina in the very same manner,—the author disposes
of 1t here
If 1t be said. that the attribute of perception, belonging to pradhina
18 “secondary”, (we reply) “No” Why? “On account of the
term “self’’’, 1e on account of the scriptural mention of the term ‘self’
which, estabhshes the absence of perception on the part of pradhana
Thus, if by takmg the term ‘existence’ to mean the non sentient
pradhina, a metaphorical perception, be admitted on ita part, then m
the texts ‘All this has that for ita self, that 1s true, that 28 the self’
(Chind 678, 694, 6103, 6113, 61238, 6183, 6143, 6158,
0 16 3), the term ‘self’ must refer to the non sentient substance, which
18 the meaning of the terms ‘existent’ and ‘perceiver’, mentioned
before in the texts ‘‘‘The existent, alone, my dear!’’’ (Chand 6 21),
“He percerved’ (Chind 623) That 18, on the view, viz ‘He alone
18 the existent and the perce:ver, the self which 1s pradhAna’,—the
identaty between the terms ‘exstent’ and the rest denoting the non
sentient and bearmg a different sense and the term ‘self’ denotang the
1 Here the demderative suffix does not umply ‘wish but ‘mmmment danger’
(déamkd), in accordance with E V8 1707 quoted in SD K 2622, pp 336, vol 2
[8 1 1 7
ADE &] VHDINTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 45
Supreme Self and bearmg a different sense, will mvolve a contradiction,
it bemg xmposaible for the term ‘self’ denotative of the Supreme Lord,
to refer to pradhina Hence, to say that the perception 18 even meta
phorical is unreasonable And owimg to the entering of the Deity
(mto them), (the perception) on the part of water and light 1 not
metapborical —this 18 the sum and substance
COMPARISON
Baladeva
Reading same, interpretation different, viz —‘If 1b be said (that
the creator of the world 1s) the gauna (or the Saguna Brahman,
connected with the gunas of prakrii, possessing the sativa guna 88 his
veature), (then we reply,) No, on account of the term “self”’ Thats,
the term ‘self’ has been used m Scripture m connection with the
creator of the world, and this term can be apphed only to the infinite
Nirguna Brahman, unconnected with the gunas of prakyii 9
SOTRA 7
“(PRADHANA CANNOT BE MBANT BY THE THRM “SHLF’,) BECAUSE
SALVATION 28 TAUGHT OF OND WHO RELIBS UPON THAT”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
As salvation, characterized by the attamment of His (ie Brah-
man’s) nature, 1s taught of a knower, who relies on the cause, the
meanmg of the terms ‘extent’, ‘percerver’, ‘self’ and the rest,—
80 pradhina cannot be denoted by the terms ‘exstent’ and ‘self’
Vedainta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz 1m that case, let the term ‘self’ atand equally
for the sentient and the non sentient, hke the term ‘light’® which
1 That is, 30 is nob water or fire that really percerves, but tha Lord who has
entered into them, as mentioned in the pessage ‘That Divinity thought—
“Come, let me enter these three divmities ’ (io, fire, water and food)" and so
on (Chand 632)
> 25 11600 48 Ohap 1)
= ४४०६
[80 117
46 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]
denotes equally a sacrifice’ and fire, hence, no imconsistency 28 m,
volved here,—the reverend Badaréyana replies here
The non sentient pradhane 1s not the object denoted by the term
‘self’ Why? “Because salvation 1s taught of one who relies on
Him” 168 of one who has reliance (or devotion), otherwise called
‘meditation’, with regard to Him, 1e with regard to one who 18
denoted by the terms ‘existent’ and the rest, who 18 & perceiver and
who 1s the creator of fire, water and food? Thus, after having
taught an investigation, by one who 18 desirous of salvation, into the
effect as consisting of the Cause (viz Brahman) m, essence, in the text
“Thou art that’ (Chind 68 7,69 8,6103,611 3,6 123,618 38,6143,
6158, 61638), Seripture goes on to teach salvation, charactermed
by the attamment of the nature of Brahman, m the text ‘For hm
there 1s delay, so long as I am not freed, then I shall attam (Brahman)’
(Chind 6142) (The meanmg of this text 1s ) So long as & person,
who desires for salvation, 18 not freed from his body and 18 mmpedaed,
bamg compelled to undergo the fruits of works which, have already
begun, to produce results, there 1s delay for him, but when the fruis
of works will be fully enjoyed, he will attam the nature of Brahman
at 0008; owing to the absence of impediments The use of the first
person m both the cases, viz ‘I shall be free’, and ‘I shall attam’
should be known to be implymg the third person m accordance with
Vedic use
If in the text “He 1s the Self’ (Chind 6 8 7, eto), the term ‘self’
18 to refer to pradhina, then in the text ‘Thou art that’ (Chind
6 8:7,eto ), the very same thing must be referred to by the term ‘that’
Henoé the text “Thou art that’ would mean ‘Thou hast pradhina
for th soul’, whereby 9 great mishap would take place, smce through,
the mediation ‘I have the non sentient as my soul’, one would be
obstructed from salvation for ever In the present case, on the other
hand, Brahman, having the stated charaéterstaca, 18 denoted by the
tetim ‘that’, arid the meanmg of the term ‘thou’ 1s the individual soul,
Hi6 part, otherwise called Hig power, and possessed of the stated,
marks Here, between the part and the whole, there 18 a relation of
difference and non diffarence,—well-known everywhere m ordmary
if amd m the Vedi “hs between the attmbute and ate substratum.
1 ‘Vix Jyoteioma
9 This explams the compound fan-nigfhasya'
[80 1 1 8
ADH 5] VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA 47
Although the mdividual soul 1s different from Brahman m nature,
it 18 also non different from Hm, having no existence and activity
apart from Him On account of bemg enveloped by the beginingless
miyé, the mdrvidual soul has no knowledge of such a non difference
Hence rt 18 said ‘Thou art that’, 1e you are non different from the
object dencted by the term ‘that’ Even durmg the state of salvation,
one who has attamed the nature of Brahman 1s of a different nature
(from Brahman), but should yet be known to be non different from
Him, because of having no existence and activity separately from Him,
because from the text ‘He attams the bighest identity’ (Mund
318) we learn that Brahman alone 1s one that 1s to be approached,
while the individual soul only one that approaches, and, finally, because
we find the words ‘together with’ 10 the text ‘He enjoys all objects
of destre together with Brahman, the all knowmg’ (Tait 21) Hence,
Brahman alone 18 denoted by the terms ‘existent’, ‘self’ and the rest
COMPARISON
Baladeva
Readmg same, mterpretation different—viz —'(The creator of
the world 1s not the Saguna Brahman, but the Nirguna Brahman 2),
for salvation, 1a taught of him who relies on Him (viz the Nirgune
Brahman)’ 2
SUTRA 8
“AnD (PRADHANA GANNOT BE DENOTED BY THE TRRMS
‘HXISTENT’, “SEL” AND THE REST), BROAUSH THERE IS NO
(SORIPTURAL) STATEMENT OF ITS HAVING TO BE ABANDONED ”
Vedainta-parijaita-saurabha
That the non sentient substance, tanght by the terms ‘existent’
and the rest and to be abandoned in salvation, 18 to be abandoned, as
well aa the purpose of the teachmg > ought to have been pomted out
1 For the explanation of the terms Sagunea end Nirguna, see © B
22GB 117, pp 4950 Ohap |
8 That is, if pradhdna be denoted by the terms ‘extent’, ‘self’ and the
rest, then evidently such a self, eto cannot serve the purpose of salvation
Hence there must be some other purpose for the teachmg of pradigna, ance.
Sorrptare does not teach anythmg which does not fulfllan end But there is no
indipation. 17 Serspture what this other purpose 18 न
[Ist 1 1 8
48 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 5]
by Seripture, omniscient and the well wisher of men Because of the
absence of these two kinds of texta, pradh&na 1s not denoted by the
terms ‘existent’ and the hke
Veddnta-kaustubha
If the non sentient pradhina alone were taught as that which 18
denoted by the terms ‘existent’, ‘percerver’ and the lke, then, m
order to prevent reliance upon that, Sormpture, omnuisaent, well
wishing, and mtending to instruct Brahman, should have told that
it 18 to be rejected, just as a mother says to her son, about to take
something not good, ‘Son, this is not good’ But there 18 no statement
that 10 18 to be rejected, on the contrary, an identity with 16 18 taught
m the passage “Thou art that’ (Chind 687, 698, 6103, 6118,
6 12 8, 6183, 6143, 6158, 6168) The term “and” 1s meant for
भाता (another reason, viz ) the absence of statement mdicatmg
the purpose of such a teaching
COMPARISON
Samkara
Readmg same, intérpretation same on the whole Only, while
Nimbarka interprets the term “Ca” to mean ‘the purpose of such a
teachmg’, Samkara takes 1t to mean ‘the contradiction of the intial
proposition’, viz the cause bemg known, the effecta are also known 1
Evidently, through the knowledge of the non sentient pradh&na, there
can be no knowledge of the sentient souls Hence pradh&na cannot
be the cause of the universe #
RamdAnuja
Readmg and interpretation same He gives no special meanmg
of the term “oa”, but takes 1t to mean simply ‘also’, and not 9 second
reason 3
Bhaskara
Readmg and interpretation same on the whole Bhfskara inter
prets this stitra exactly after Samkara, taking the term “ca” to mean
“contradiction of the गण्ड propoattion’ ४
nnn ---- ~~~
1 Vide 0080 6 1 9 87 11 209
9 इत B118,p 168 vol 1 ब २1.
[इ 1 1 9
ADH 0 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 49
Baladeva
Reading same, interpretation different, viz And because there
18 70 statement of the rejectability (of the Saguna Brahman)’ That
18, Scrrpture declares the inferionty and worthlesaness of all saguna
0016018; or objecta connected with the gunas of prakrii, viz, all worldly
objecta Hence, if the Saguna Brahman were the creator of the world,
then Scripture would have demgnated him as mferior and fit to be
rejected 2
SOTRA 9
“(PRADHANA OANNOT BE THE CAUSE OF THH WORLD), ON ACCOUNT
OF THE CONTRADICTION OF THE INITIAL PROPOSITION ”
Vedanta-padrijata-saurabha
Moreover, “on account of the contradiction of the mitzal propos
1100 "` as well, viz through, the knowledge of one, there 1s the know
ledge of all *,—the doctrine of the causality of the non sentient 18 not
right
Vedinta-kaustubha
Pradhina is not the cause of the world Why? “On account
of the contradiction of the mutial proposttion”, viz that through the
knowledge of one, there 18 the knowledge of all Thus, the sorptural
text ‘Did you ask for that struction whereby the unheard becomes
heard, the unthought becomes thought, the unkmown becomes
known?”? “What is that instruction, my reverend Sir?’’’ (Chand
619 2), mtroduces the doctrine that through the knowledge of one,
there 18 the knowledge of all, and this will be contradicted Although,
through the knowledge of pradh&na, there may be knowledge of ita
effects, yet the proposition that there 18 knowledge of all the effecta,
consisting of the sentient and the non sentient, 13 not established,
emoe the sentient not bemg the effect of pradh&na, 1ts knowledge 18
not possible (through the knowledge of pradhina)
1GB 118, pp 60 51, Chap 1
> ‘Vide Ohind 61
4.
(st 1 1 10
50 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 5]
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhaskara
This siltra 18 not found m ther commentaries The argument
contamed herem 18 included by them, as we have seen, m the previous
sutra
Baladeva
This siitra 8 not found m his commentary as well
SUTRA 10
“(BRAHMAN ALONE GAN BH THE GAUSH OF THE WORLD), OF
ACCOUNT OF (THH INDIVIDUAL SOUL'S) BNTRANOE INTO ITSELF
(DURING DEEP SLEEP)”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
As rt 18 mmposaible that the object,—mentioned m the passage
referrmg to the cause of the world which 1s denoted by the term
‘existent’, viz ‘ Understand from me, my dear, the state of deep sleep
When, 9 person sleeps here, 98 we say, my dear, then he has become
united with the Hmstent’ (Chind 6811), can be understood as a
non sentient cause,? 1t 18 reasonable to hold that Brahman alone 1s the
cause of the world
Vedanta-kaustubha
On account of the (roul’s) “entrance”, 16 dissolution, into
“rtaelf’’,2 1 8 mto 108 own cause, viz Brahman, introduced m the text
‘“The existent alone, my ०९७८ 1 "` ` (Chind 621), Brahman alone
28 denoted by the terms ‘existent’ and the rest, and not pradhéns
Hf tt be the cause, then the text concerning dissolution would be
contradicted Thus, there 18 a somptural text to this effect, vis
1§R Bh &k \
SA shghtly different readmg 18 gmven m the 088 ed—which, when
tranalated, is as follows —As the ‘entermg' which relates to a sentuent bemg
and 18 mentioned in the passage referring to the cause of the world denoted by
the term existent’—vis Understand from me my dear, "5 possible
in the cage of Brahman alone eto. (P 8 )
® This explains the word svdpyaydi
[st 11 11
ADH 6] VEDANTA PABLJATA SAUBABHA 51
*** When this person sleeps here, as we say, my dear, then he has
become united with, the ixistent, he has entered mto hisown Hence
they say of him “ He sleeps’, for he has entered into his own ”’’ (Chind
681) Theres also another scriptural text, vz ‘ Just as a man, when
embraced by his dear wife, knows nothmg external or mternal, so
this person, when embraced by the mtelligent soul, knows nothing
external or mternal’ (Brh 4 3 21)
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 18 sitra 9 m bis commentary JKeading different—viz
‘Svipyat' Interpretation too different, viz ‘(The creator of the
world 18 not the Saguna Brahman), because the Creator merges 1000
himself, (not so the Saguna Brahman, who merges 1000 something
other than himself) ’ 1
SUTRA 11
“ (BRAHMAN ALONE IS THE ©^ एषा OF THE WORLD), ON ACOOUNT
OF THE UNIVERSALITY OF KNOWING (HIM 4S THI CAUSE) ”
Vedanta-pdrijata-saurabha
As ao sentient cause 18 known from all the Vedi&ntas, the doctrine
of 9 non-sentient cause 1s untenable
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this reason, too, pradhfina 18 not denoted by the term ‘existent’,
vig on account of the universalty of ‘knowmg’,ie apprehending
One sentzent cause of the world beg known from all the Upangads,
the sentient Brahman alone 1s the cause of the origin and the rest of
the world Nor, agam, even, the slightest moonsistency 1s found m
the Vedintas, such, as, 17; some places a sentient cause 18 taught, mm
others 8 non sentient The sense 18 that 11 here 4 non sentient object
be understood by the term ‘existent’, the multatude of texts, speaking
of a sentient cause, will come to be contradicted.
1 & 8 119,pp 5152 Chsp 1
[st 1 1 12
52 VEDANTA PABRIJATA SAURABHA ADH 6]
COMPARISON
Raméanuja
Readmg same Interpretation too 18 same, since although
according to Riminuyjs, the word ‘ gat: * means ‘ pravptta’ or primary
meaning and not ‘avagati’ or apprehension as held by Numbarka, yet
the ultzmate meaning 1s the same, viz the meanmg or mport of all
the scriptural texts 18 uniform, 18 from all of them Brahman alone
78 known and nothmg else, and hence Brahman alone 18 the cause 1
Srikantha
Reading same, interpretation different He connects this siitra
more particularly with the precedmg one, thus ‘On account of the
universality of knowmg (the term ^ emstent”’ as denotmg the Supreme
Lord)’ That 18, just as im ths Upanisad, viz the Oh&ndogya, the
term ‘existent’ 2mphes the Lord, and none else, so mn all other Upam
8808 as well Hence it can never stand for pradhina According to
bm also, thus, the word ‘ gat’ means ° avagati’ 9
Baladeva
This 18 stitra 10 17, this commentary Reading same, mterpre
tation different, viz —‘On account of the universahty of knowmg
{the Nirguna Brahman from all Semptures)’ That 1s, Sormptore
uniformly teaches the Nirguja Brahman, and never the Saguna
Hence the Nirguna Brahman alone 1s the cause of the world Accord
mg to him also, the term ‘ gati’ means ‘ avagati * 3
SUTRA 12
“(BRAHMAN ALONE 78 THE CAUSE OF THE WORLD), ALSO BECAUSE
THIS 18 DHFINITELY STATED In SogteruReE ”’
Vedinta -parijdta-saurabha
Hence, the causality of the Universal Lord,—a sentient Bemg,
denoted by the terms ‘emstent’ and the rest, omniscient, and. the
हल B 1111 p 165 vol 1
> अर B1111,p 202 Part 3
3 1110,p 58, Chap 1
[80 1 1 12
ADH ©] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 53
controller of all,—being definitely stated in Scripture, pradhfina can
by no means be accepted as such @ cause
Vedanta-kaustubha
(Brahman alone 1s the cause of the world), because ए this Upanisad
(viz Chindogya) that which is denoted by the term ‘extent’ “us
defintely stated ˆ` to be the cause of all as the self of all, 1 the passage
‘ All this, verily, 1s from the self’ (Chind 7 261), and also because,—
ag denoted by the term “and”,—the same thing 18 mentaoned m
other Upanigads too Thus, there 18 a passage 17, the mantra upanigad
of the Svet&4vataras ‘Who 1s a knower, the tame of time and omnis
cent’ (Svet 6 2 16), ˆ He 18 the cause, the Lord of the lord of sense
organs Of him there 1s no progenitor, nor lord’ (Svet 69)
The Kaugtakins declare ‘ From this self all the vital breaths depart
to their respective places, from the vital breaths the gods, from the
gods the worlds’ (Kaus 33,420) = भ्वर्, m other places too
We stop here for fear of increasing the bulk of the book Hence, the
non sentient pradhins, which 18 an object of mference,* 1s not the
cause of the world, simoe xt 18 unfit to be the cause of collocation
without an mtelligent ruler, and because if pradh&ina be admitted to
have the power of bemg such a ruler, you come over to our side 8
00 the contrary, 10 1s established that Lord Krsna, denoted by the
words “ Brahman’ and the rest, the one topic of all the Vedas, omnis
aent, omnrpotent, the non distinct maternal and efficient cause of the
world, and denoted by the term. ‘existent’, 18 the cause of the world
Here ends the section entitled “ He sees’ (5)
1 Correct quotahon ‘Kdrond-diipddhipaf which 1s tranalated here Vide
89७ 69
9 Bee footmotel,p 42
8 That is, then pradhdna will become Brahman, and cease to be non santient,
as held by the Sdimkiyas
4 Note the difference between the interpretations of Namnbdrhe and StTintwdaa
According to Nimbdrke, the word ‘ éruéaiedi'’ means ° because this 18 mentioned
17 Serprpture and he attaches no special and separate meanmg to the word
Oa But accordmg to Srinivasa, the word ‘drufatedé means ‘becanse this
18 Mentioned m fue Upanigad (viz OChdndogya) and the word Ca” means
because this is mentioned in other Upanisades (viz SteHisvatara, Kaumiaki and
the reat) ’
[st 1 1 18
64 VEDINTA PABIJATA SAURABHA ADH 6]
COMPARISON
Ramanuja
Reading and inteipretation same Réminuja poimts out m
conclusion that this adhikarana 1s also a refutation of the theory of
the Nirguna Brahman, since it asserts ˆ perceiving ` or ` willing’ on
the part of the creator of the world, and ‘willing’ means bemg
possessed of the quality of intelligence +
Baladeva
This 18 siitra 11 in hiscommentary Reading same, interprotation
different, viz ‘And because (the Nirguna Brahman) 1s mentioned m
Serrpture’ ‘That 18, Scripture proves the Nirguna Brahman to be
the creator, and not the Saguna Brahman >
The difference 28 that while according to Nimbirka (and others
too), this section 18 concerned with the question as to whether Brahman,
or pradhfna 18 the creator of the world, according to Baladeva, the
question 1s as to whether the Nirguna Brahman or the Saguna Brahman
18 the creator of the world
Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘That which
consists 07 bliss’ (Sfitras 18-20)
SUTRA 13
“ (BRAHMAN IS) THAT WHIOH CONSISTS OF BLISS, ON ACCOUNT OF
REPETITION ”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
“ That which consista of blias ” 18 the Supreme Soul alone, but not
the mdividual soul Why? On account of the repetition (m Somp
ture) of the word “bliss’ with reference to the Highest Self
Vedanta~kaustubha
Thus, by way of refutung the doctrme of pradhina, it has been
shown that scriptural texts like ‘‘‘ The extent alone, my dear!” ।
1 &t B 1112,p 166 vol 1
2GB 1111 pp 5455, Chap 1
[श 1 1 18
ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 55
(Chind 621) and the rest, all refer to Brahman Now, the author
18 Showing that the texts about that which consists of bliss and the
rest 8180 refer to Brahman who, as possessed of unsurpassed bliss,
18 different m nature from the class of sentient beings also
In the Ta:ttinya, four sheaths, viz that which consists of food,
that which consists of the vital breath, that which consists of mind,
and that which consists of understanding, are spoken of 70 a succesalve
order, and after that 1t 18 said ‘ Verily, other than and withm that
which consists of understanding 1s the self which consista of bliss By
that this 18 filled’ (Tart 25) Here a doubt ansos, viz whether by
the words ‘consisting of bliss’, the mdividual soul 8 denoted or the
Supreme Soul What 18 reasonable here? If 17 be suggested As
m the passage ‘ Of him 1s this very embodied soul which belongs to
the previous one’ (Tait 2 5), an embodied soul 1s mentioned, as m
another scriptural text ‘May my (sheaths) conmsting of food, con
asting of the vital breath, consisting of the mind, consisting of unde
standing and consisting of bliss, be purified’ (Mah&nar 20 21) 16 18
said that what consists of 0188 18 something to be purified, and as it
18 umpossible for the ever pure Supreme Soul to be somethmg to be
purified, so that which consists of bliss 18 the dividual soul,—
We reply “that which consists of bliss” 1s the Highest self alone,
possessed of unsurpassed 0188 Why? ‘On account of repetition’,
16 because the word ‘bliss’ has been repeated many tzmes (17 Sorip
ture) m reference to the Highest Self alone, the Highest Person, m
texts hke ‘If there were not bliss in the ether, for this alone causes
blias*® (Tart 2'7),1 ‘He knows that Brahman is bliss’ (Tart 3 6)
and 80 on, and because, bogmning thus ‘This 18 an mvestigation into
0088 ’ (Tait 2 8), the concluding text ‘ Knowing the 0188 of Brahman,
he does not fear from anythmg’ (Tait 28), mw found to end by
estabhshing that the bhss of Brahman alone 1s unsurpassable and
1090186
If 1 be said that here there 18 the repetition of the word “ 01188 ` 3
only, and not of the words ‘consisting of bliss’ ®—(we reply) no, be
cause just as in the passage ‘In sprmg, he performs the jyot: sacrifice’
1 QComplete quotatzuon ‘For who indeed would breathe, who would livo
if there were not this bliss in the ether’ andsoon Vide Tat 27, p 70
> Ananda
3 Ananda-maya
(st 1 1 14
56 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADE 6]
the word ‘yyots’ stands for the word ‘jyotistoma’, so here the word
‘bliss’ stands for the words ‘consisting of bliss’
To your allegation that as an embodied soul is mentioned m
Soripture, the Highest Self 1s not that which consists of bliss,—{we
reply ) the designation of the embodiedness of the Supreme Self fits
m, smoe He abides within all, viz that which consista of food and the
rest, as ther controller On the other hand, the text about that
which consists of bhas, viz ‘Of him 28 this very embodied soul which
belongs to the previous one’ (Tait 2 6), shows that it (viz that
which, consists of bliss) has no other (पालाः) soul? The expresaon
‘Let them be pumfied’ (m the above Mah&narayana passage) moans
‘Let them be embellished. ’
SUTRA 14
“If IT BE SAID THAT ON ACOOUNT OF THE WORD (‘ANANDA MAYA’)
DENOTING MODIFICATION, (THH Hignast अक्रा 1s) Not (DENOTED
BY THIS WORD), (WH REPLY ) NO, ON ACOOUNT OF ABUNDANOB ”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
If xt be said that on account of the mention, of (the suffix) ‘mayat’
1 the sense of ‘modification’, the Highest Self 1s not that which
consists of blsas,—({we reply )no Why* On account of the mention
m Smrti of (the suffix) ‘mayat’ as having the sense of ‘abundance’
88 well
Vedanta-kaustubha
Tf rt be objected That which consists of bliss cannot be the
Highest Self Why! “On account of the word denoting 70001009
ticn "¬, 16 on account of the mention of the suffix ‘mayat’ as having
the sense of ‘modification’,—begmnmng ‘Mayat 18 used optionally
7 the olassical language after any base (to mdicate “product” and
1 That w the soul conmstyng of food has the soul conmsting of the vital
breath as 106 mner soul this latter again haa the soul consisting of mind as its
inner soul this latter again, has the soul consisting of understanding aa ite mner
soul and this latter agam hea the soul consisting of bls as ita mner soul But
the last one viz the soul conmsting of bliss has nothing else an ita soul, but 18
the nmost soul of all
[80 1 1 Id
ADH 6} VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 57
“part”’) when, food and dress are meant’ (Pin 43143, 8D K 1523 1),
Smrti goes on, to designate (the suffix) ‘mayat’ m the sense of modifica
tion thus — (The suffix “mayat” 1s used) mvanably after words 10.
which the vowel has been lengthened and after “daia’ and the rest’
(Pin 43144, SDK 16242),—and also because the suffix ‘mayat’
18 found used in, the sense of ‘modification’ m ordinary life m expres
sions like ‘An earthen 9 pot* and 80 on, 98 well as im the Veda, m
passages like ‘A large branch of the parna * wood 5 1s the sacrificial
ladle’, and so on,—
(We reply) “No” Why? “On account of abundance’’, 16
because Smrti depicts (the suffix) ‘mayat’ m the sense of ‘ abundance’
as well, in the passage ‘Mayat’ 18 added in the sense of ‘made
thereof’ 6 and in the sense of ‘having a great portion of’ 7 (Pin 5 421,
SDK 2089 8), and because the suffix ‘mayat’ is found used 10 the
sense of ‘abundance’, too, mm ordinary expressions hke ‘A sacmiice
abounding 79 food.’ 9 and so on
It cannot be said also that mnce Brahman 18 admitted to be
consisting of bliss, there may be some want of bliss m Him,}°—because
here ‘abundance’ 18 but a synonym for ‘very muchneas’ Thus,
among (all the effecta of prakrti) beginning with mahat and ending
with the body, the body bemg a transformation of food,!! 18 said to
be the person, ‘consisting of food’ Other than and the supporter of
1 18 ‘that which conssts of the vital breath’ Othe: than and the
supporter of these two 18 ‘that which consists of mid’ Other than
and the controller of these three is the madividual soul, called ‘the
person consisting of understandmg’ That which 1s of the nature
of knowledge and has understanding as 108 atimbute (viz the individual
soul) 18 the controller of the three non sentient persons ‘That this
1P 786, vol 1 2P 786 vol 1 2 Mrn maye
4 Porna is @ large leaved sacred tree whose wood 1n used for making sacred.
vessele, later generally called palida MW,p 606
® Parna mayt 0 Tad vacana
१ क, - °," क ~, . 1 1. // 1.6.111 (ह. 11१... 1/1... 6
SD K 2089, 921, vol 1
8 Op ow 9 Anna maya
19 That 28, when 1t 18 8810 ‘Anna maya yaya’, 1t 14 moant that the sacrifice
conmsta शष्ठ of food but notenmrely Similarly it might be thought that the
expression ‘Ananda maya Brahman’ means that Brahman wi postly blixa but
not entirely bliss 1 8 there is eome non, bling in Brahman
11 That 1s, tt 18 food which being asaumulated produces and keeps the body
[80 1 1 16
58 VEDANTA PARIJATA IAUBABHA ADE 6]
possessor of the attribute of understanding 1s of the natme of know
ledge, will be made clear m the second chapter? But why, then,
has the attmbute alone been indicated in the text `
performs @ sacrifice ° ` (Tait 26) Listen The very nature, too
of the knowoer 18 self manifesting, and the use of the term ‘understand
ing’ or the nommative case ending should bo understood to be referrmg
0 1६ The use of the neuter gender? 1s meant for denoting a thing 3
For this very reason, 71 the Kanva recension, viz “Who abiding m
understanding’ (Brh 37 22), and m the M&dhyandma recenmon,
viz ‘Who abiding in the self’ (Sat Br 1467 30 *), im spite of the
difference of words, the meanmg, viz the mdividual soul, 1s the very
same And for this very reason, the statement ‘“Understandmg
performs a sacrifice, and deeds too’ (Tart 25) 18 perfectly justrfable,
it bemg umposaible for the mere attnbute of understanding to be an
agent And, it, the mdividual soul, the knower, should be known
to be possessed of bliss, m accordance with the text “That 1s one
human 0188 ` (Tat 28), as well as another scriptural text ‘For
verily, on gettmg this essence, one becomes blissful’ (Tait 27)
The Supreme Person, an ocean of ummense bliss in contrast to tts
(viz the mdividual soul’s) little bliss, 18 the controller of all, referred.
to in, the text ‘Verily, other than and within that which consists of
understandimg, 18 the self which consists of bliss’ (Tait 25) More
over, the Supreme Person, the One, 38 indeed establshed in all the
Vedaintas as free from all faults by nature, so there is not even an
odour of shghtest non bliss in Hmm,—so much m bnef
SOTRA 15
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THR DESIGNATION OF THE CAUSE OF THAT”
Vedainta-parijaita-saurabha
On account of bemg the cause of the bliss of the individual soul
too, the Highest Self alone 1s that which conmsta of bliss
1 Vide VK 2318 2 Vis ‘viflanam 1n the text
8 That 19 the word ‘understandmg does not stand for a mere abstract
attribute here but for a concrete thmg, viz the mdividual soul possessed of the
attribute
= P 861 Ime 19
{४ 1 1 16
apn 6] VEDANTA PARIJETA SAURABHA 59
Vedanta-kaustubha
Scripture designates that He (viz Brahman) alone 18 the “cause”
of the 01188 “of that’, viz the individual soul,—which, according
to the prima facie view, was suspected to be that which consists of
bhes.—thus —‘For, verly, this alone causes bliss’ (Tait 27)
Here the term “finandayati’’ means ‘inandayati’ The senseus that
as he who gives riches and knowledge to others 18 himself
of ynmense riches and ummense knowledge, so the statement that the
Highest Self, too, causes bliss to mdividual souls means that He 18
of mmmense 0188 Just as the term ‘conmsting of lght’
18 apphed to Lord Sun, whose very nature 18 to remove all dark
7888, 80 exactly the application of the term ‘consisting of bliss’ to
the Lord, the topic of the present discussion, the cause of all, without
an equal or & superior, and devoid of even a tinge of non 0188 of any
sort, 18 perfectly reasonable
SUTRA 16
“AND THH MANTRA DESORIBED (भय BRAHMAN) IS CELEBRATED
(10 BE CONSISTING OF BLISS) '"
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
That which 1s stated in the mantra text viz ‘ Brahman 38 truth,
knowledge and infimte’ (Tart 21),1 8 “mantra deaornbed” 3 That
alone 18 celebrated. by the term “ consisting of bliss”
Vedinta-kaustubha
That which 28 stated in the mantra text which bemmnmeg thus
‘The knower of Brahman attains the highest’ (Tat 21), contmues
‘He who knows Brahman as trath, knowledge and mfinite, mtuated
m the cave’ (Tait 21) w the ‘ mantra described’’, 1 9 Brahman
alone, the cause of the ongin and the rest of the wold He 1s cele
brated wn the followmg Br&ihmana text as well—viz ‘Verily, other
than and within, that which conasta of understanding 18 the self which
consists of bliss’ (‘Tart 25), smce the mantra and the Brahmana,
1 §, R, Bh, AK, B 3 Manira varaskam,
[80 1117
60 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 6]
the object to be explained and the explanation, refer to the same
topic Hence that which consists of bliss 18 the Highest Self alone
SOTRA 17
“NoT THE OTHER, ON ACOOUNT OF INAPPROPERIATENESS ”’
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
The qualties peculiar to the Lord, which are mentioned m
Sempture as relating to that which 1s signified by the term ‘conastmg
of 71088 °, bemg “mappropriate’ on the part of anything else, “the
other”,1¢ the mdividual soul, 1s not signified by the term ‘consisting
of bliss’
Vedinta-kaustubha
“The other’, 1e the individual, soul 18 not to be understood
here by the term ‘consisting of 01188 Whyt “On account of
mappropriateness”’, 16 the creatorslup of the entire world and the
hke, mentioned as relatmg to that which conmasta of bliss m the
serrptural text ‘““He wished ‘May I be many, may I procreate’
He created all this” (Tait 26), are not appropriate on the part of
the individual soul Hence that which consists of 01188 18 Brahman.
alone
Or else, the following construction (of the siitra) may be under
stood —The individual soul, “other than’’ Brahman, 18 not “mantra-
described”’, because the qualities which are peculiar to the “mantra
described”’, viz bemg the object to be attamed by the wise and so on,
are ^ mappropriate”’ on, the part of anything else
COMPARISON
Ramaénuja
Readmg same, mterpretation different—‘ The other (viz the
individual) (1s) not (the object of the text ‘Truth, knowledge and
infintte’, Tart 21), on account of imappropmateness’ That 16,
Réménuje takes this sitra as contmung more particularly the theme
of the preceding siitra where it has been shown that Brahman 1s
designated by the text ‘Truth, knowledge and mfinmte’ (Tait 21)
Here 1# 1s shown, he pomts out, that none else than the Lord, not
[80 1 1 18
aDE 6] VEDANTA PABRIJATA SAURABHA 6]
ever. the freed soul, can be the object of the above text, for even the
freed. soul 18 not absolute 1 knowledge in the sense the Lord 18, as even
the freed soul cannot wish to be many and soon 30 1t 18 not appro
pnate that the individual soul can ever be the object of the abovo
text and be identical with Brahman >
Srikantha
Reading same, interpretation different, viz The other (viz
Hiranyagarbha) (1s) not (the cause of the world), on account of in
appropriateness’ According to Srikantha a new adhikarana begins
with this siitra (sitras 17-20), concerned with the question whether
the Lord is the cause of the world, or someone else, viz Hiranya-
gatbha °
SUTRA 18
‘AND ON ACCOUNT OF THH DESIGNATION UF DIBFERENGOS >
Vedanta-pirijata-saurabha
“On account of the designation of a difference” between the
obtamer and the object obtained in the text ‘Hor, verily, on obtammng
ths essence, he becomes कणि (Lait 2'7)4 the mdividual soul
1s not that which consists of bliss
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this reason, too, that which consists of bliss or the ‘mantra-
described’ one 18 not the individual soul Why? Because the
mdividual soul and the Supreme Bemg are demgnated as different
Thus, the text ‘He 1s, verily, the essence एणाः, verly, on sttammeg
the exgence, he becomes blissful’ (Tait 2'7), designates a difference
between, the Highest Self, conmsting of bliss and mantra described,
aa the object to be obtaimed, and the individual soul, as the obtamer,
ames the obtainer cannot be the object obtamed There 1s & difference
of nature between the individual soul and Brahman, otherwise an
+ Nirupddhtka
9 इल B 1117, pp 198 194 Part 1
3 SK B 1117 pp 230-237 Part 3
+ 8, Bh
[st 1 1 19
62 VEDANTA PARIWJATA SAUBRABHA ADH 6)
intermuxture of qualities will rosult,—-this 1s the meaning of the two
aphorisms
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 18 sitra 17 mn 118 commentary Reading and literal inter
pretation same, quotes the same passage, but m conclusion adds his
own View, viz that really and transcendentally, there 1s no difference
between the soul, the obtainer, and Brahman, the obtamed 1
Ramanuja
Reading and interpretation same, but refers to a different passage,
viz. Taittimya upanisad, 2 6 >
Srikantha
Reading same, nteipretation different, viz ‘(If 1t be said that
Hiranyagarbhs 18 identical with the Supreme Lord, then we reply,
no), on account of the designation of difference’ 3
SUTRA 19
‘‘AND ON ACOOUNT OF DESIRE (THROUGH WHICH SIMPLY THR
LORD IS ABLE TO BBALIZE His PURPOSES), THERE IS NO DHPEN
DEROE (07 THE LORD) ON (WHAT IS AN OBJEOT OF) INFERENCE
(vIZ PRADHAWA) ”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
Lf the mdividual soul be admitted to be the cause, 16 must depend
on a material cause, viz on pradh&ina which 18 an (object of) “m
ference’’, just a8 © potter has to depend on clay and the rest 111 creating
pots and the hke But the Highest Person, non materal, consisting
of bliss and omnipotent, has to depend on nothmg Why? “On
acoount of demre”’,16 on account of intention, as declared by the
scriptural text - 06 demred ‘‘May I be many”’ (Tait 26)*
1 88 1117, pp 221 22
2 Of also Chind 623 ‘Sa astkeata balu सकाः ete
8 & B 1119 pp 287 8 Part 1 48 R, Bh,B
[st 1 1 19
ADH 6 | VEDSNTA KAUSTUBHA 63
Hence that which conmsts of bliss 18 different from that (viz the
mdrvidual soul)
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz 0८500878 may very well be denoted by
the term ‘consisting of bliss’, as it contams the quality of sativa
which 18 the cause of bliss, and as 1t corresponds to the effect 1,—we
reply —
The term ‘consistimg of bhses’ contams no “reference” to “in
ference”,1e to that which 18 ferred, viz pradhina Why? “On
account of destre’’, 1e because the text, which refers to that which
consists of bliss, viz “He demred ‘May I be many”’ (Tait 2 6),
mentions one who desires The sense 1s that desire means volition,
and that 1s not possible on the part of the non sentient pradhdna,
but 18 possible on the part of the omniscient Lord of all Although
pradhina has already been set aside by the aphorism ‘Because~{the
creator) 9668, not, non acriptural’ (Br Si 1 1 5), 1४ 28 once more set
aside here with a view to confirming the ‘universality of knowing’ >
and hence there 18 no fault of repetition
Or else, (an alternative explanation of the sfitra )—zf the md:vi-
dual soul be denoted by the term ‘conmsting of bles’, the topic of the
present discussion, 16 must be the cause of the world as well, and in
that case, just as potters have to depend on clay and the rest for
creating pots, etc so the mdividual soul too must depend on pradhbina,
which 18 8 synonym for ‘inference’? But 1f the ommpotent Brahman
be the cause of the world, no such fault arises,—this 18 the sense
COMPARISON
Samkara and 20881852
This 1s siitre 18 in ther commentames Reading same, mnterpre-
tation different, viz ‘And on account of desiring, there 1s no reference
2 Thats pradhdna the non-sentnent couse 18 mmular to the effect, the non
pentient world Vide VK 116
2 Vide Br 83 1111 where 1b has been said that Bratman uw universally
known from all texta to be the cause of the world
8 That uw, pradhdna hes been called ‘inference’ (anwmndna) in the siira,
because 1b 18 an object of inference
[st 1 1 20
64. VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 6]
to (what 16 an object of) mference (viz pradhiina) (17) the term “ Ananda
maya”) ‘That 18, Scmpture predicates willing on the part of the
Snanda maya, and willing 1s posatble on the part of a conscious bemg
alone 7
Srikantha
Reading same, mterpretation different—viz And, (even) on
account of desire, (16 10 spite of the fact that Hiranyagarbha 18 said
to have desired to create the world,) (his bemg the creator) 1 not
dependent on reasoning © 6 does not stand to reason,) (because
it 18 the Lord Himself who created the world in the character of
Hiranyagarbha) ` 3
SUTRA 20
“AnD (SCRIPTURE) THACHES THE UNION WITH THAT (VIZ 81.788)
OF THIS (VIZ THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL) IN THIS (Viz THE LogD) ”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
Sorrpture “teaches’’ the “union with that”,16 the union with
bliss, in the passage —‘ Verily, he 1s an essence, for verily, on attammg
the essence, he becomes blissful’ (Tait 27) Hence it 1s establahed
that He, on attammg whom the individual soul comes to be united
with 01188, 18 different from 1t
Vedanta-kaustuobha
For tlus reason also that which 00081808 of 01188 18 nexther the
individual soul, nor pradh&na, but Brahman alone, mnce Soripture
“teaches” the “union with that’’,1e6 the “union” or ‘connection’,
with “that”, or the Highest Self—ie salvation, charactemzed by
the attammg of His nature,2—‘of this’, 16 of the individual soul,
relymg on Him, “m this”, 16 m the Highest Person, the Highest
188 1118 p 292 BhB 1118, p 26 Note that this in adopted as an
alternative explanation of the siira by StHinwdea but not by Nimbdrka See
above
9 8K B 1119 (pp 240 241 Part 8)
9 Note that while according to Nimbdrka the word iad yogam means
union with bliss’ accordmg to Sriniwdsa, 1b means ‘union with the Highest
Self’, or salvation though ultumately these two mterpretations come to the
fame thing
(st 1 1 20
apH 61 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 65
Self, consisting cf bles and mantra desciilbed And the senptural
text to this effect 28 as follows —‘For, ध पाड, when he finds fear
lessness a8 & foundation in that which 1 invisible, mcorporeal, un
defined, and unsupported, then he 1s gone to fearlessness When,
however, he makes the smallest distmotion therem, then ho comes to
have fear’ (cat 2'7) ‘The meaning of this 18 as follows ‘When
16 when at the tame of birth which took place at a tume when there
was a causeless laondly glance by the Lord, as mentioned m sacred.
texts, thus ‘But should Madhusiidana glance at a person, when he
18 born, he should be known to be pure and given to the thought
of salvation’ ““Through my grace, he attaims an eternal and un
changeable place” ’ (Git& 18 56) and so on, (116 २, 16 & knower, devoid
of any desire for enjoymenta here or hereafter, restormg to the feet
of the Lord alone and possessed of the charactemstios as stated im
Scripture thus ‘“I am easily attainable by one, 0 Partha, by the ever
free 8809110, who constantly remembers moe, not thmkmg ever of
another” (Git® 1814), ‘He who departs, discarding the body,
uttering the one syllable “om” and remombermg ma, goes to a supreme
goal’, ‘“‘Knowmg me, he goes to peace” ` (कीक 5 29), “The knower
of Brahman sattams the highost’ (Iuit 21), and so on, becomes
fearless, he ‘finds’, 16 attams, ‘a foundation’, 168 unfailing,
devotion (or reliance) through His grace alone ‘Then’, 1e mm
mediately after, ‘he 18 gono to fearlessness’, on account of the
absence of any devotion {on lis part) to anyone else, which (alone)
w ithe cause of fear In whom? ‘In the invimble’, 16 m that
which 18 different from the group of the non sentiont which 1s visible
Agan, 12 whom? ‘in the iicorporeal’, 1e m the supremely
conscious Being, who 1s different from the group of souls or conscious
baings,—that He 1s the supremely consaious Bomg 1s stated mm the
Kathavalli, thus ‘Consaioux among the conacious’ (Katha 518,
980 Svet 6 13),—‘m the undefined'’,10 in that which 18 not estab
bshed as having so muchnow and the nature and qualhties of which
aro to be known from the Vedanta alone, ‘in the unsupported’,
1.8 10. that which has no baw, which 18 possessed of infinite, incon
cavable powers,—this mw the sense And ‘vhen’, io when during
the period of nescience, ‘he’, 16 « non-knower, ‘makes’ even the
amallest ‘distinction’, 1 8 relies on something else, viz one or othe:
of the ends, connected with meann (other than a complete resort
to the Lord alone), ‘then he comes to bave fear’ Hence, it 1
5
[st 1 1 90
66 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 6]
estabhshed that that which consists of bliss 1s Brahman, different
from all the sentient and the non sentient 7
Here ends the section entitled “That which conmste of bliss’ (6)
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 18 stitra 19 un his commentary Reading and mterpretation
game, quotes the passage quoted by Srinivasa But here Samkara
changes his pomt of view all of a sudden, and after having given, at
length the very same interpretation as given by Nimbérka, viz that
the ‘ananda-maya’ referred to m the Tarttirlya upanigad (Tait 25)
18 the Highest Self,? and not the mdividual soul or pradhana, he
finally 2816008 1t, at the end of this शात, m favour of another, viz
that the word ‘Brahman’ im the immediately followmg phrase
‘Brahma puccham, pratasthi’ (Tait 26), refers to Brahman pr
cipally, and not as a member of the ‘Ananda maya’, for the ‘inanda
maya’ would refer to the quahfied Brahman, and never to the non
qualified Brahman, which 18 called ‘dnanda’, and not ‘ dnandamaya’®
Bhaiskara
This 18 siitra 19 m bis commentary too Readimg same, mier
pretation, of the word ‘tad yogam’ slightly different—viz ‘union
with Him (the Lord)’, 16 salvation’ (Cf Srinivasa ) Quotes a
different portion of the same passage (viz the portion quoted by
Srinivas)
Srikantha
Reading same, interpretation different—vi ‘Herem (viz m
the Mahi-nairiyans upanisad) (Scnpture) teaches his (16 Huranya-
* Note that here Nuwnbarka and अन्व understand the word ‘dda’ as
referring to iwo different portions of the same passage, viz Tait 37, Nembirka
to the first part, Srumedisa to the lest
9 Vide 8B 1112 p 217 ‘Para evdimd dnanda-mayo bhavium arhah
In thw very नमै also, 1) 13 8526 --- Tasmdd dnanda-mayah paramdimé tw
shian' 8B 1119 p 228
8 Vide SB 1119, pp 225 26
4 Bh B 11189, ४ 26
(st 1 1 2!
ADE 7 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 67
garbha’s) connection with that (viz the Supreme Lord)’1 While
according to Nimbarka, siitras 13-20 form one section, concerned with
the question of the ‘dnanda maya’, according to artkantha, Sitras
13-16 form one section, while sitras 17-20 form another different
section, concerned with, the question, a8 noted above, whether Hiranya
garbha is the creator of the world, or the Supreme Lord (viz Siva)
Baladeva
This is stitra 191m his commentary Readmg same, nterpretation
of the word ‘tad yogam’ different, viz ‘union with fearlessness’
Quotes the passage quoted by Sriniviisa 2
Adhikarana 7 The section entitled ‘That whioh
18 within’ (SG&tras 21 22)
SUTRA 21
“ [8 + 7 WHICH IS WITHIN (THH SUN AND THE BYE) (8 NONE BUT
Tom Hichast रणा); ON ACCOUNT OF THE TRACHING OF HIS
QUALITIES ˆ
Vedanta-pirijata-saurabha
He who sbides “ withm °" the sun and the eye and 18 to be wor
shipped by one demring salvation, 1s, truly, the Highest Self alone,
and not ® particular individual soul Why? “On account of the
teaching of the qualities belongmg to Him” alone, viz qualtties lke
‘freedom from. sins’, “bemg the soul of all’ and so on
Veddnta-kaustubha
In this manner, 1t has been shown mm a general manner m the
two sections that the stated texts all refer to Brahman, who 18
(hfferent from pradhina as well as from the imdividnal soul and
18 the cause of the ongm and the rest of the world Now, after
having mentioned the peculiar quahties of the Lord, such as, possess
ng an, eternally present, non celestial body and 80 on, and then by
showmg the concordance of those texts (with regard to the Lord),
tha author denotes, up to the end of the section, the dzfference
18K B 1120 pp 240 241, Pars 3
2GB 1119 pp 76-77, Chap 1
[st 1 1 2]
68 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]
of Brahman from particular individual souls who have attamed
eminence by virtue of supreme merit, as well as from particular non
sentient objects, hke tume and the hke
In the Chindogya, we read ‘Now, this golden Person, who 18
seen withm the sun, has a golden beard and golden hair, and 1s golden
through and through, nght to the finger nal tips His eyes are hke
the full blown lotus His name 1s High, (because) he has risen above
alles Verly, he who knows thus rises above allmns His singers
are the Ro and the S&iman 1 §So much with reference to
the gods’ (Chind 166-168), ‘Now, with reference to the self’
(Chind 1171), ‘Now, this person, who 18 seen withm the eye’
(Chind 1 7 5) and 80 on
Here, a doubt amses, viz whether this Person, mentioned mn
Sorpture as abiding within the sun and the eye, 18 & particular indivi
dual soul, or the Supreme Lord? What 18 reasonable here? If 1
be suggested An mdividual soul who has attained emmence Why
Because the person within the sun and the person withm the eye
are declared by Scripture to be possessed of a form in the passages
(respectively) ‘Having a golden beard, golden hair’ (Chand 1 66),
‘The form of this one 1s the very same as the form of that onp’
(Chind 1175), because a limit to the lordship of both 1s declared
respectively by the texta —‘He rules these worlds which are beyond
that, as well as the demres of gods’ (Ohand 16 8), “He rules these
worlds which are under that, as well as the demres of men’ (Chand
1 7 6), because the dependence of both on something 6188 18 declared
(respectively) by the texts =" भाण the sun’ (Chand 1 6 6), ‘Wrthin
the eye’ (Chand 1 7 6), and because the Supreme Self 18 declared to
be just the opposite by the texta ‘Without sound, without touch,
without form’ (Katha 3 15), ‘““On what, my reverend 917, 18 1t based ?”
“Qn rts own greatness”’ (Chind 7 24 1), ‘This 18 the Lord of
beings’ (Brh 4 4 22), eto —
We reply The Person, mentioned m Scripture as “ withm” the
sun and the eye 18 the Highest Selfalone Why? ^ On account of
the teaching of his qualities,” 16 because of the “teachmg”’, m, this
text, of the qualities “of him”, viz of the Highest Soul alone, such as,
being free from sms in every way, being the remover of all the sins
1 Quotation moomplete—vis — His mngers are the Rc and the Sdman
Therefore (they are called) the udgitha’ and ao on 886 footnote 1 p 69
श 1 1 21
ADH 7] VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 69
of His own devotees, and so on, as well as, bemg the soul of all and
the rest, thus “He, venly, 18 the Ro, the Siman, the Uktha, the
Yajus, He 1s Brahman’1 (Chind 1 7 6), because m accordance with
the scriptural texts “When the seer sees the golden coloured person’
(Mund 318), ‘Of the colour of the sun, beyond darkness’ (Svet
9 8, Git& 89), “That on which all these powers are based, O king,
18 another great form of Har, different from the form of the world’,
and so on, like His natural qualities of possessing true desires and the
rest, His possessing a form too, involves no contradiction, and because
the text ‘Without sound, without touch, without colour’ (Katha
315) 28 concerned with denying sound and the like belonging to the
material world Nor 18 Brahman depicted here as possessed of @
Imuted lordship, smoe the text setiang forth such a limit 1s concerned
with an arrangement of presiding deities Nor can Brahman be said.
to be dependent on something else, 81006 He 18 the support of all,
m accordance with the following scmptural and Smrt: texts, viz
‘Entered with, the ruler of men’ (Tat Ar 3111, 23), ‘The
Inner Soul of all begs’ (Katha 69, 10, 11, 512, Svat 611, Mund
214), “Who, abidmg within the earth’ (Brh 373), ` “And, I am
situated within the hearta of all’’’ (Gita 15 16), ‘“I abide, supporting
the entire universe with a part of mme”’ (Git& 10 42), and 80 on
Here, by the Vedic text,—which is omniscient, mdependent of all
proofs and authoritative by iteelf with regard to its own matter,—
viz “This golden person who 18 seen within the sun, having a golden,
beard’ (Chind 166) and so on, the body also of Brahman, the
topic of discussion, suitable to Him, 18 mentioned, on the bass of
direct perception alone, as evident from the statement ‘is seen’
From this 1t 18 Known, that the Highest Self 18 to be meditated on by
one who desires salvation as possessed of a body And, meditation
too, to be mentioned, hereafter,3 1s possible only if the Highest Self
be possessed of a body The multitude of scriptural and Smrt
texts, referrmg to the body of the Lord, 1s not quoted here for fear
of proluuty
1 Row © sacred verse, which 1s recited in praise of a deity Sdman 18 a verse
which 13 sung, Yajue is a sacred formula which 18 mudered Ukiha w ao nnd of
recitation in sacrifices Brahman 19 © sacred text or mantra, distinct from Be,
Sdman and Yaue MW,pp 172 225 787
> ¬ 181
ठ Vide ए 88
(at 1 1 22
70 VIDINTA PABLIATA SAUR ABH ५ AD 7 |
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 18 सि 20 in 1४ commentary Roadmy and interpret shiun
same, quotes the name [त्तव = 1 conclumon, 1४ adds that aul ductal
the Supreme Lord is really arfipa or tormleas, yot He may wexxunic
various mAy inaya rips to: [४९ काह His dovotees2 That m ull
theso passes, tuahimg the workhip of the Person with the xu
und 80 on, refer to the qualified! Brahman only, and nat to the hugh +t
Brahman, which of course Nimbiirh s cloow not admut
— ie
SOTRA 22
“AND ON ACCOUST GF THR DAMIUNATION OF DIFEPRENCH (TH!
पात्र AFLA 1५) OTHER THAN (THR INDIVIDUAL SOULS OF THI
SUN AND) THE REST) “
Vedainte-pirijita-saurabha
Tho Highest Self ५ “oth: * than the goup of miividual Haus
of the sun and the rost® Why? “On account of the demgnution at
difference” m the text ‘Abuling m the sun' (Brh $794) antl ~
On,
Vedinta-kaustubha
For this rewon ton, the Highest Self, त “othor” than, ie विकलता
by nature from, the nul प्राप saulk of the san and the rest within
which He abules Why? “Qn aceount of the demgnation of difler-
ence” between the individual soul aucl Brahman, m the teat ‘Whe
abiding within the sun ix othor than the sun, whom the aun does tut
know, of whom the anni the body, who rules the min from within
he 18 your soul, the mne: controller, immortal’ (Brh 370) Thus
Lg | ee म
818 112) p 282) ‘Sale panunedraramplptechd vadin mdydimunman
ripam atddhakinugriedhdirthean *
> (१9 od xwhghtly differnt vie ‘Iie Highent Self im other than tly
group of tho Individual souls of the aun भातं the rest within which He alade-
(p 5)
$S,R Bh B
[st 1 1 23
ADH 8] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHS |
the difference of Brahman, from the individual soul, within which He
abides, 1s established.
Here ends the section entitled “That which 1s within’ (7)
Adhikarana 8 The section entitled ‘The ether
(87६7० 28)
SUTRA 23
“(BRAHMAN IS DENOTED BY THH WORD) ETHER, ON ACCOUNT OF
HIS OHARAOTHRISTIO MARKS ”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
In the text ‘“ What 1s the final refuge of this world?” ‘“ The
ether”, said he’ (Ohind 1 9 1 +), that which 18 denoted by the tam
“ether” 18 the Highest Self Why? “On account of hus characterstec
marks,” such as, bemg the creator of all, and the lke, mentioned in the
text ‘All these things, verily, arse from the ether alone’ (Chind
1919)
Vedanta-kaustubha
In this manner, 1+ has been shown, on the ground of the peouhar
quairties of Brahman, the topic of discussion, that the text ‘Now,
this golden person who 18 seen withm the sun’ (Chind 18 8) and
80 on, refers to Brahman, the topic of discussion Now, 16 28 bemy
shown that the text ‘“‘ What 18 the final refuge of this world?" ° and
80 on too (OhAnd 1 9 1) refers to Him, on the ground of the character
1806 marks of Brahman
In the Ohindogya, we read the following under the dialogue
between Salavatya and Jarvah ‘What 16 the final refuge of thw
world ?”’ ‘The ether,” said he, “All these bemgs, verily, arise from
the ether alone, disappear into the ether, for the ether alone 15 greater
than these, the ether 1s the supreme refuge”’ (Chand 191) Bere
® doubt arwes, viz whether tho elemental ether 1s meant by the term
‘ether’, or the Highest Self What 18 reasonable here ? If 1t be sug
gested As 16 18 80 well known im the world and as 16 18 declared also
by Scripture to be the cause of the elements beginnmg with the aur,
वि > atenlemnsc delice cibsatencets aden’. ¢ aa anes cntectiasinon
1 8 R BL, SK B
18 R Bh, SK, B
[80 1 1 23
19 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8 |
and 80 on, m the passage ‘rom the “ether”, the “ar”? (Tart 2 1),
the elemental ether (1s meant here)—
We reply In this text “the ether”, 16 the object meant by the
term ‘ether’, 18 the Highest Self alone Why* “On account of his
characteristic marks,” 16 “his”, or the Highest Self’s, “charactenstic
marks”, viz bemg the creator of all bemgs, bemg superior, bemng
the supreme refuge, and 80 on,—on account of that.) 16 on account
of the र्गाः qualities of the Highest Self It cannot be said, also,
that m accordance with the rule ‘When, there 1s @ collocation, of
scriptural statement, mark, text, topic, place and name, each following
one 18 weaker (than each preceding one), on account of 108 remote
ness from the meanmg’ (Pi Mi Si 331434), the scnptural state
ment 18 of © greater force than the mark,—for m accordance with the
Tule ‘The strength and weakness of those which are spoilt by meanmg-
leasness are in the opposite proportion’, the scriptural statement
‘the ether’, 18 set aside by the mark mentioned m the text ‘All
0688 bemgs, verily, arse from the ether alone’ (Chind 191)
If the word “ether” were to refer to the elemental ether, then no sense
would follow, for such 8 mark (viz bemeg the creator of all) 18 not
possible on the part of the elemental ether, on the contrary, the
elemental ether 18 declared by Sormpture to be created by the Highest
Self, m the passage ‘From this soul, verily, the ether arose’ (Tait 21)
Further, on the ground of the etymologecal interpretation too
(of the word ‘ether’ or व), viz ‘The ether 1s that which shines
everywhere’, 9 as well as on the ground of its conventional meanmg,
given m the passages ‘If there were not this 0788 m the ether’
(Tart 2'7), “The ether, verily, 18 the revealer of names and forma’
(यत 8 14 1) and 80 on, 2) 1s established that by the term “ether’’,
the Supreme Self alone 1s denoted
Here ends the section entitled ‘The ether’ (8)
1 This explams the compound ial inigté'
9 P 284 vol 1 Vide Shbara bhdaya
$ A samanidtt bifaia ws 00८४
[80 1 1 24
ADH 9] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 73
Adhikaransa 9 The section entitled ‘The vital
breath’ (Stitra 24)
SUTRA 24
“FoR THIS VERY RHASON (BRAMAN IS DENOTED BY THH WORD)
VITAL BREATH °
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
In the text also ‘All these bemgs, verily, enter mto the vital
breath alone, amse from the vital breath (Chind 11152), the
vital breath is none but the Highest Self, on account of the character
istic marks of Brahman, viz entermg into and coming out of Him
Vedanta-kaustubha
In this manner, 10 has been pomted out that the text referring
to the ether denotes Brahman, and not the elemental ether Now,
by declarmg that the text about the udgitha,? viz ‘O Prastrot;!’§
(Chind 1109, 1 11 4) and so on, also refers to Brahman, the author
extends here the same principle regarding the ether
In the Chandogys we find the followmg concernmg the udgttha 4
under the dialogue between Cakriyana and the Prastrotr 0 Pras-
troty | 1f you shall sing the prastiva® without knowing the Deity
who 1s connected with the piastiva, then your head will fll
off * * (Chind 1109, 1 11 4), ‘“‘ Which 1s that Deity?” “The vital
breath,” said he, “‘All these bemgs, verly, enter mto the vital breath
alone, arise from the vital breath This 18 the Dexty connected with
the prastiva’’’ (Chind 1114-5) Here a doubt amses, viz As
the entare world is found to exst as dependent on the vital breath,
and as 1# 18 80 well known 17) the world, so by the term ‘vital breath’
a modification of the ar too may be meant, and as m the text ‘““For
the mmd, my dear, has the vital breath aa its fastening”’ (Chand
6 8 2) and go on, the term ‘vital breath’ 1s apphed to Brabman, 80
Brahman may 8180 be meant What 18 reasonable here? If it be
suggested Since everythmg 18 found to be dependent on the vital
15 R Bb, 87, 23
> The word ‘udgtthe' 18 not included under the quotation
> A Prastroir um an asmatant of the Udpdir, and mnga the praaffva or tho
introductory eulogy or the prelude of a sdman MW,p 609
¢ The word ‘udgitha’ 1s not included under the quotation
® The prastGva 18 the introductory eulogy or the prelude of & siman See
footnote 9 above
fst 1 1 26
74. VEDANTA PABIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 10]
breath, since popularly the term ‘vital breath’ 1s well known to be a
modification of the air, and since in the text “When, verily, a person
sleeps, his speech goes to the vital breath, bis eye to the vital breath,
his ear to the vital breath When he wakes up, from the vital breath
alone they arise again’ (Sat Br 103361), the entrance mto a
modification of the air and 80 on are Mentioned, the chief vital breath
alone, which 18 a modification, of the air and has five modes, 18 under
stood here by the term ‘vital breath ’,—
We reply “For this very reason”, 16 on account of the very
characteristic marks of the Supreme Lord, viz the entering mto and
coming out (of Him) of all the great elementa, 16 18 reasonable to hold
that the object denoted by the term “vital breath” 18 the Supreme Lord,
the Highest Person alone The characteristic marks of the Supreme
Lord, viz the entering into and the mang from Him of all the meat
elements, as mentioned in the text ‘All the elements enter mto, 1e
merge into, and arise from, 1e come out towards, Him’, are not
possible in the case of a modification of the ar In the text ‘When,
verily, ® person, sleeps’ (Sat Br 103 3 6), there 18 no mention of the
entermg and so on of the great elements, but sumply of the entermg
and the rest of the sense organs Henoe, on account of the marks
of the Supreme Lord, as well as on the ground of the etymological
interpretation (of the term ‘vital breath’ or prina), viz ‘In whom the
entare world breathes excellently, ie finds a basis’, 1t 18 establshed
that the Highest Self alone 28 denoted by the term ‘vital breath’
Here ends the section entitled “The vital breath,”’ (9)
Adhikarana 10 The section entitled ‘The light’
(SSitras 25-28)
SUTRA 25
“(BRAMAN IS DENOTHD BY THE WORD) LIGHT, ON ACCOUNT OF
THR MENTION OF Fue ”’
Vedinta-parijdta-saurabha
“The lght”, mentioned in the passage ‘The hght (higher) than
the heaven,’ (Chand 31374) 1s Brahman alone, “on account of the
1 P 778, limes 8-11 © > simular passage m Chand 433
9 8 R Bh SK,B
[श 1 1 26
apa 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 76
mention of feet”, m the passage ‘One foot of him are all the ele
menta” ` (Chind 31261)
Vedanta-kaustubha
In this manner, 1t has been pointed out that the term ‘ether ,
as well as the term ‘vital breath’ refer to Brahman, all pervading,
untouched by any fanlt and the canse of all life Now, the author 18
showing that the term ‘light’ also refers to Brahman
In the Chindogya, 1t 1s recorded ‘Now, the light which shines
higher than this heaven, on the backs of all, on the backs of everything,
in the highest worlds than which there are no higher,—that, verly,
18 the same light which 18 within this person’ (Chind 3137)
Here, a doubt arises, viz whether the term ‘light’ denotes the well
- known hght of the sun and so on, or the Highest Self What 18 reason
able 268 ४ The prema facte view 18 98 followa It denotes the hght of
the sun and the rest Why? Because that 18 well known to be a
remover of darkness, because Scripture mentions a limit in the passage
‘The hght which shimes higher than this heaven’ (Chind 3137),
because no Init 1s possible on the part of Brahman, because Scripture
speaks of a mmor fruit m the passage “He who knows this becomes
agreeable to the eyes, and renowned’ (Chind 318 8), and, finally,
because from the passage “That, venly, 18 the same lght, which 1s
within, this person’ (Chind 3137), 108 identaty with the fire withm
the belly 1s known
On this suggestion, we reply Here the object denoted by the
term “hght”’ 1s the Supreme Brahman alone, possessed of unsurpassed
splendour Why? “On account of the mention of feet” Thus,
m the text, which precedes the text about the ‘hght’, viz ‘So much
18 His greatness, and the Person 1s higher than this One foot of hm
are all hemes, three feet of him, the 1mmortal in the heaven’ (Rg V
10103, Chand 3126), Brahman 18 mentioned as having four feet
Thus, all bemgs consiatute His one foot Having all bemgs as one
foot 1s possible on the part of the Supreme Brahman alone, and never
on, the part of any one else Nor 1s any contradiction mvolved in, the
declaration of His havmg the heaven as Has limit, because, as the word
‘higher’ m the passage ‘What 1s higher than this’ (Chand 3 137)
denotes superiority, 16 18 not meant to denote non comprehensiveness,
1§ R,SE,B
[80 1 1 26
76 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 10]
and because from the passage ‘That the gods worship as the
laght of lights, as Life’ (Brh 4416) the term ‘light’ 18 known
to be referring to Brahman Nor 18 any contradiction involved m the
declaration of a mimor fruit, because Brahman 1s the giver of fruits
m accordance with the fitmess of persons As it 18 declared in the
‘Mystery of Fire’! of the Vajasaneymsa ‘As one worships him, so
he becomes’ (Sat Br 105210%), and by the Lord Himself, m
the passage —‘““Whosoever, 70 whatever way, resorta to me, him, m
that same way, do I favour” ’ (Gité 411) And, the purpose of the
meditation on the identity (of the Lord) with the fire within, the belly
18 to be known from the text ‘“I, having become the Vaisvinara 3,
abide within the bodies of hving bemgs, and united with, the
and the apéina,* I digest the four kinds of food” * (Git& 16 14)
SUTRA 26
“IF IT BB OBJROTRD THAT ON ACCOUNT OF THH MENTION OF THE
METRE, (BRAHMAN IS) NOT (DENOTED), (THEN, WE REPLY ) NO,
ON ACCOUNT OF THE DECLARATION OF THE APPLICATION OF THR
MIND (TO BRAHMAN) THUS, FOR THUS IT 78 SHEN (IN OTHER PAS
8.4.88 TOO) ”
Vedinta-padrijata-saurabha
If 1t be objected that “on account of the mention,” of the metre
called ‘Gayatm’ m the preceding text, the text referrmg to the feet
may refer to that and not to Brahman,—(we reply ) “No, on
account of the declaration of the application of the mimd”’ to the Lord,
who 18 denoted by the term ‘Gayatri’ owimg to the connection of the
latter with certam qualties5 Compare the word ‘virdj’ which
illustrates a parallel case 9
1 Agni-rahasya 18 the title of the tenth book of the Sutapatha brakmdna
2 P "126, 1108 18 Of avery mmular passage in Mudg 3,p 384, linea 8 9
® That is, the fire of digestion
# The préga 18 one of the five modes of the chief vital breath and apdna
wenother The first goes upwards the nose, the second goes downwards through
theanuzs Vide VRM
9 That 18 the Gdyairl 1s said to posseas cerbam qualities, which can belong
to the Lord alone Hence the Lord 18 really demoted by the term ‘ Gdyatri
See V EK below
6 We find that in other passages, too a word, prrmanly denoting a metre
may atand for something elae,eg the word virdy' pmmanily denotes a kind of
fst 1 1 26
aspx 10} VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 77
Vedanta-kaustubha
If xt bo objoctod As the Gayntri metre is reforred to m the preced
ing passago viz ‘Tho (ityati1, verily, 38 all thin’ (Chand 3 121)
the designation of beings as the foot, viz ‘One foot of lim are all
bemgs’ (Chand 3126), may कणि to this very metre It 18 not
reasonable to hold that this text establishos Brahman,-—
(We reply ) “No” Why? “On account of the declaration ot
the application, of tho mind thus,” 10 on account of the mention of
the faimg of the mma “thus” to Brahman who 18 denoted by the term
‘Gayatri’ smnco the lattor 18 prodicted to be the soul of all, m the
passage ‘Tho Giyairl, vouly, 1s oll th (Chand 3121) Hers,
the term ‘GiiyatrI donotes Biahman who inheres m the metre, it
bemg impossible fo. « metro, which 14 a mere collection of letters, to
be the soul of all = कठा thus 1t 1s geen,” 18 m very same manner, a
parallel case 18 mentioned i, the A:tarzya upangod, m the passage —
‘The Bahvreas consider Him in the great hymn, the Adhvaryus in
the sacrificial firo, the Chandogas m the Mahi vrata ceremony’ 1
(Ait Ar 223,12) Tho senso is that those who are conversant with
the Rg vods, thoxe who are convorsent with the Siima veda, and those
metre, yot 1b denutus the dria or the group of tan substances m Chind 43 8
Similarly though the word ‘ Gftyutrs’ donotis © kind of metro, yot 16 may denote
Brahman too 800 VK षाक
088 od rends ‘Apte pura -—mvaning comos to the samo, viz the word
wird? stands for thy Apis
2 A Bahorca 1 one com ersant with tho By veda, a preat of 16, or the Hotr
pricut who representa xb in the sa mficial coromonus MW,p 726
An Adhrurjyu 14 & pricat of « particular class, as dustingmahed from the
Hotp, the Udydaiy and the BrdAmana clawe: He has # measure the ground
build the altar and so on, and while cnyaged in theo duties, be haa to repeat
the hymns of the lapyurvedu Viluop of p 24
A Qhandoga wa chanter of the Sdma-vedn, an Udytir pmost Videop oi,
ए 405
The Makai ubtha (great hymn) or the Brhai-ukifia formx © series of verse,
in three sections, coach contamng cighty Z'yoas or triple vorses, recited at the
end of the Agni cayuna An Uktha wa verse which 1s reoied, as distinguizhed
from the Sdman verso which fs sung, apd the Yayua or sacred formula which is
muterod It forms @ subchyision of tho Sastras Vide op ov, p 178 See
footnote 1, pn 78
Mahd-vraia wm the name of = great roligwus observance It 28 also the name
of a Sdman or Stoira, appornted tu be sung on the last day but one of the Gavdm
ayana Video MW,p 800
[8 1 1 26
78 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 10]
who are conversant with the Yajur veda consider, respectively m
the chief Sastra 1, sacrificial fire, and the Mah& vrata, Brahman who
mheres in them severally, hke tus, Brahman mheres m the (Gayatri)
metre
Or, (an alternative explanation of the sitra,) Just as the Gayatri
18 9 Claas of metre which conssta of four feet, each consisting of ax
syllables 2, so Brahman, too, has four feet 71 accordance with the
text ‘One foot of him are all bemgs, three feet, the mmortal m the
heaven” (Chind 3126) Accordingly, on account of the mention
of the fixng of the mind to Brahman who 18 metaphorically denoted.
by the word ‘Géayatri’ in virtue of the fact that both possess the
quality of having four feet, the G&yatri 18 not recognized here, but
Brahman alone “Yor thus xt 18 seen,” 1 © 10 the very same manne,
a term denoting a meire 1s found apphed,—m a literal (as opposed
to a metaphorical) sense,2—even, to a different object im virtue of the
fact that both possess a common quality Thus, begmnmg ‘These
098 and the other five make ten, and that 18 the krta’4 (Ohand
4 9 8), the text goes on tosay ‘That 18 the Virij, the cater of food’
(Chind 488) Here under the samvargavidyd 5, the term ‘Vird)’,
1 A Sustra 18 9 verse recifed by the Hofr and his agsistanta Vide MW
p 1044
9 Vide the verse ‘Indrad कष्ठ paiu/ Balena piduah | duscyavano ured /samiisu
गव०० ५ | §न B 1126 p 216 Part 1
3 See end of footnote & below
# Kria 18 the name of the die marked with four points
6 The Samvarga iidyd or the knowledge concernmg the snatcher unto
iteelf taught by fashbva to Jdnadruds Vide Chind 48 The wind 18 the
ematcher unto rteelf among the gods, the vital breath mu the snatchor unto
iteelf among the sense organs The wind absorbs fire, the sun, the moon and
water The vital breath absorbs speech, the eye, the ear and the mind And,
the wind, together with ite four lunds of food, viz fire, the sun, the moon and
water—theae five and the vital breath together with its four londs of food
viz 8066009» the cye the ear and the mmd—these five, make ten or the ‘Aria
which 18 called the *Verdy Here, the Kria has actually ben constituent parts,
just aa the Verdy metre has actually ten syllables Hence these two are said
to resemble each other i © (षन sense, and not in © figurative one as opposed
to the caze of Brahman and Gdyairi, since when 1b 1s said that Brahman has
four feet, 10 15 not meant that He has actually four feet, but only mefaphorically
while Gdyatrt has actually four feet or parta Hence, here the term ‘gaura
haa been used mm connection with the latter 08.86, and the term dakya m con
nection with the former Vide VK above
[sa 1 1 27
apa 10] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 79
which 18 a class of metre of ten syllables, 18 found applied to a collection
of ten objects or the krta
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 1s शी 9 25 m his commentary Reading same He gives
two alternative explanations of the sitra Under the first, he pomta
out that the passage ‘The Gayatri, venly, 18 all this’ (Chand 3121)
intunates that by means of the metre Gayatri, the mind 18 to be directed.
to Brahman who 1s connected with the Giyaitr! as ite cause, just as
devout meditation on Brahman under the form of certam, effecta of
Brahman, 1s mentioned in other passages, wiz Aitereya Eranyaka
(See Srinivisa above) Under the second, he pomts out that accordimg
to some, the term Géyatri directly denotes Brahman, smce both
possess four feet, and quotes a Chandogya passage as an example
(Seo Srinivasa above )!
Ramégnuja
Reading slightly different—viz ‘nigmit’ m place of ‘nigadit’
Interpretation, same *
Baladeva
This 18 8098 25 m his commentary too Keadmg and interpre
tation same, only the mterpretation of the phrase “Tath& bi darfanam’
different He does not take it as referrmg to one specific parallel
instance as Nimb&rka does but understands ‘darfanam’ in the
sense of ‘consistency’, and the phrase means, according to hm, ‘for
by such an explanation alone the above passage gives a consistent
meaning ’ 4
SUTRA 27
‘“AND BEOAUSH THE DESIGNATION OF THE BHINGS AND 80 ON AS
THE FEET IS APPROPRIATE (ONLY 17 BRAHMAN BE DENOTED BY THE
एका “GAYATRT’’), THIS 75 80”
Vedainta-piarijata-saurabha
We hold that the Gayatri 1s Brahman not only ‘on account of
the declaration, of the apphoation of the mmd thus’ (last part of Br
18B 1136 aft B 1126, 216 vol 1
2 GB 1125, pp 91 92 Chap 1
[so 1 1 27
apH 10] VEDANTA PARIJETA SAURABHA 79
which 18 © 01888 of metre of ten syllables, 1s found appled to a collection
of ten objects or the Erta
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 1s sitra 25 m bis commentary Reading same He gives
two alternative explanations of the siitra Under the first, he pomts
out that the passage ‘The Gayatri, verily, 18 all this’ (Chind 3121)
intimates that by means of the metre Gayatri, the mind 1s to be directed
to Brahman who 1s connected with the G&yatri as 108 cause, just as
devout meditation on Brahman under the form of certain offecta of
Brahman 18 mentioned m other passages, viz Aitereys dranyake
(See Srintvisa above) Under the second, he points out that according
to some, the term Gayatri directly denotes Brahman, ance both
possess four feet, and quotes a Chaindogya passage as an example
(See Srinrviisa above )1
Ramanuja
Reading shghtly different—viz ‘nigm&t’ m place of ‘nigadat’
Interpretation, same ४
Baladeva
This 18 809 25 m bis commentary too Readme and interpre
tation same, only the mterpretatzon of the phrase ‘Tath& hi daréanam’
different He does not take 1t as referrmg to one specific parallel
mstance a8 Nimb&rka does but understands ‘darfanam’ in the
sense of ‘consistency’, and the phrase means, according to hm, ‘for
by such an explanation alone the above passage gives a consstent
meaning * 9
SOTRA 27
“AND BEOAUSH THE DESIGNATION OF THE BHINGS AND 80 ON AS
THE FRET IS APPROPRIATH (ONLY If BRAHMAN BH DENOTHD BY THE
THRM ““GivatTRt’’), THIS 15 sO ”
Vedinta-pirijata-saurabha
We hold that the G&yatri 1s Brahman not only ‘on account of
the declaration of the application of the mind thus’ (last part of Br
1 8 8 11305 2S B 1126,p 216 vol 1
¢ 028 1125, pp 91 92, Chap 1
[80 1 1 28
80 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 4DH 10]
8 11 26), but “this 15 so also because” (the four feet, viz) एश
earth, body and heart,! are “appropriate” on the part of Brahman,
the Lord (alone)
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this reason “also”, m the text “The Gayatri, verily, 18 all
this’? (Chand 3 19 1), the object denoted by the term ‘Gayatri’ 18
Brahman ‘For what 7688070 £ “Because the designation of bemgs
and so on as the feet 18 appropriate”’,1e also because the designation,
viz that the Giyatn has four feet,—called bemgs, earth, body and
heart,—is appropriate on the part of Brahman alone, and not on the
part of the G&yatri metre which 18 but a collection of letters
SUTRA 28
‘Tr rr BE OBJECTED THAT ON ACOOUNT OF THE DIFFERENOH OF
TRAOHING, (BRAHMAN IS) NOT (REOOGNIZHD), (WE REPLY ) NO,
ON ACCOUNT OF THERE BEING NO CONTRADICTION EVEN IN BOTH
OASES ”
Vedanta -pirijata-saurabha
If 1t be objected that first the heaven. 18 referred to as 9 ‘locus’, and
then agai, as ७ ‘limit’, and there being such “a difference of teaching”’,
Brahman 28 “not” recognized,—
(We reply ) “no” Why! “Because there 1s no contradiction,”
in both the cases, with regard to the oneness of Brahman (ie m
point of proving the very same Brahman)
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected —The heaven 1s referred to as a ‘locus’, by the
locative case ending, m the previous case, viz ‘The three feet of him
are the ummortal m the heaven (div1)’ (Chind 3126), but as a
“lhmit’, by the ablative case endmg, im the text ‘Now, the hght that
shines higher than the heaven ({divah)’ (Chind 3187) ‘Thus,
“on account of the difference of teachmg’”’, resultang from the difference
of the case endings, Brahman 18 not recognized in the text concermmg
the hght (viz Chand 3 13 '7)—
1 Vide Chind 3 12 1-4
[so 1 1 29
ADH ll | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 81
(We reply ) Such an objection cannot be rased Why? “In
both the cases’’, 1 68 mm the case of the locative as well as m the case
of the ablative, the oneness of the root meaning, which 18 the main
thing, 18 not set aside by the meaning of the case endings, which 1s
submdiary only, just as the expressions ‘A hawk on the top of the
tree’, ‘A hawk above the tree’ (mean the same thmg) Hence, it 18
established that the object denoted by the term “hght”’ 18 the Supreme
Brahman alone, possessed of unsurpassed splendour
Here ends the section entitled “The hght’ (10)
Adhikarana ll The section ontitled ‘Indra and
the 1४91 breath’ (Sitras 29-82)
SUTRA 29
“(BRAHMAN JS DENOTED BY THA WORD) VITAL BREATH, ON
ACOOUNT OF INTELLIGIBILITY IN THAT Way ”’
Veddnta-parijata-saurabha
In the text ‘I am the vital breath’ (Kaus 821) and so on,
the object denoted by the term ‘vital breath’ and the rest, the
Highest Self, because the qualities of highest auspicioumness, endless
प and so on are intelligible only य the Highest Self be understood
Vedanta-kaustubha
Now, by showing, in the followmg four aphorsams, that the
Kausitak: texts all refer to Brahman, the author refutes the view that
words hike ‘vital breath’, “Indra’ and so on mean the mdividual soul.
In the Kaugttak: brihmana upanisad, the Pratardana-vidyai 38
recorded, beginning ‘Pratardana, verily, the son of Divodisa, arnved
by fighting and valour at the beloved abode of Indra’ (Kaug 8 1)
1४ 28 said here Beimg told by Indra ‘I will give you a boon”’’ (Kaus
81), Pratardana said ‘‘‘Do you yourself choose (a boon) for me, #
what you consider to be the most beneficial for mankmnd’’’ (Kaus
18 R, Bh SK, 5
3 The word ‘varam 18 not cluded in the ongimal text
[so 1 1 29
82 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 11]
8 1), 16 havmg considered the boon ‘yourself’, ‘choose’,1e give that
‘to me’ Thus told by Pratardana, Indra said ‘“I am the vital
breath, the mtellgent Self Worship me, as hfe, a8 immortality” ’
(Kaus 32), and agam, later on ‘“‘ The vital breath, verily, 1s the in
telhgent self that takmg hold of this body, makes it stand up”’
(Kaus 3 3), ‘“‘Let none desire to enquire after speech, but let him
know the speaker”’ (Kaus 3.8), and mm conclusion also ‘ “Now,
this vital breath itself, forsooth, 18 the mtellgent self, 01188, ageless
and ummortal”’ (Kaug 38) Here, the doubt 18, viz whether a
certain, mdividual soul 18 denoted by the words ‘Indra’ and ‘vital
breath’, or the Highest Self? What 18 reasonable here 1
The prima facse view 18 As the word ‘Indra’ 1s well known to
be denotimg an individual soul entrusted with a certam, office, and as
there 28 a text regarding the object denotable by the term ‘Indra’, viz
८८० am the vital breath”’ (Kaus $ 2),—the word ‘vital breath’ also
denotes ‘Indra’ From the text ‘““Worship me as 1108, as 1717107
tality ` (Kaus 32), he alone 18 known here as the object to he
worshipped.
With regard to thus, the correct conclumon 16 as follows “The
vital breath’, 16 the meanmg of the word ‘vital breath’ and what
18 denoted by the words ‘Indra’ and the rest accompanying 10, are the
Highest Self alone Why? ‘“On account of mtelligibility m that
way, 1e because qualities lke “highest auspiciousness’, ‘bemg the
mtelhgent self’, “bhss’, ‘agelesaness’ and the rest are intelligible ‘im,
that way’’,1e only if the Highest Self be understood Thus, first,
it 18 said in the begimnmg “The son of Divodisa went to the beloved
abode of Indra’ 1 (Kaus 31), where Indra, conceiving the dependence
of hus own, self 07, Brahman for its existence and activity, did not
thmk ‘I am Indra’, but, bemg merged m the 01185 of Brahman and
concelving that the sentient and the non sentient objects have Brahman
as ther self, reflected ‘Brahman, alone, 1s all this, I am Brahman’,
and looked upon even those who had commutted sins as his own self
And, the object to be attamed by the Self (viz Indra) and by those
who were equal to the Self (viz all other bemgs whom Indra looked
upon as his self) was Brahman alone, the means thereto bemg amply
the worship of His feet Indra told to Pratardana, who had arrived
there, 16 at his so beloved place ‘Choose a boon’ And, thus
1 The word ‘idvaé’ 1s not included m the quotation
(st 11 30
apa 11 ] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 83
requested, Pratardana too, wishing for the highest goal of men, said.
to bim, who was very modest, free from puide, and desirous of mta
matmg the means to the highest goal of men, ‘Do you yourself
choose a boon for me”’’ and 80 on Thereupon, the vital breath was
taught to Pratardana as the object to be worshipped, im the passage
***T am the vital breath’’’ (Kaus 32) and so on How aan the
vital breath, taught thus as the highest goal of men, be an individual
goul* How can the text ‘“‘Worship me”’ (Kaug 3 2) be mtelhgible
except as designating the worship of the Supreme Brahman? The
individual soul, the witness of the three states 1, bemg a part and not
fit to be attamed by another individual soul, 12 not attamable through
the mtuition of a knower And (the adjective) ‘most beneficial’ (आ
the text ‘What you consider to be the most beneficial for mankmd’’’)
does not apply to anything else except to the attamment of Brahman
(The qualities ke) ‘bemg the intelligent self’, ‘bliss’, ‘agelessness’,
and ‘immortality’, mentioned m the passages ‘“‘Worship me as life,
as immortality” ’? (Kaus 23), This alone, verily, 28 the intelligent
self, bliss, ageless, ummortal’ (Kaug 38), fit m only if Brahman
be understood, and not otherwise Henoe, the words ‘Indra’, ‘vital
breath’ and so on were used by the celebrated Indra with a view to
designating Brabman, and not his own self
SUTRA 30
“Tr It BH OBJEOTED THAT (BRAHMAN 28) NOT (DENOTED), ON
ACCOUNT OF THE SHLF OF THE SPEAKER BRING TAUGHT, (WH BHPLY )
BEOAUSE THHRE IS + MULITTUDE OF REFERHNOHS TO THR SHLF IN
rr”?
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
If 1t be objected The object denoted by the words ‘vital-breath’
and the rest cannot be Brahman Whyf Because in the text
‘Know me 91076 '" ' (Kaug 314), the very self of the speaker 18
taught,—
1 Viz waking dream, deep aleep
9 Correct quotation translated ‘tam mdm
’§ R Bh SK,B
[80 1 1 30
84. VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 11]
(We reply ) ‘ “In this”’ chapter, there 18 a multitude of references
to the Highest Self Hence, the object denoted by the words ‘vital
breath’, ‘Indra’ and the rest 18 the Highest Self alone
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1b ba objected In the aphorism ‘The vital breath, on account
of mtelligibihty in that way’ (Br Si 11 29), 1t has been said that
the object denoted by the words ‘vital breath’, ‘Indra’ and 80 on, 18
Brabman That 18 not the caso Why? ‘“On account of the self
of the speaker being taught,’’’1e because the very self of the speaker,
viz Indra, who says at first ‘“Know me alone”’ (Kaug 3 1), and
later on ‘“T am the vital breath, the intelligent self’’’ (Kaug 3 2),—
his very individual character, well known from the passage ‘“I killed
the three headed son of Tvastr, I delivered the Arunmukhas, the
88081708, to the wolves’’’ (Kaus 3 1),—as taught as the object to be
worshipped ‘Thus, the introductory text here refers to the individual
soul This bemg so, the concludmg text too, viz ‘Bliss, ageless,
immortal’ (Kaus 3 8), should refer to 1t,—
We reply ‘“ Because there 18 a multitude of references to the self
mit”’,1e “because”,1e certamly, “m 1t”’, viz 1 this chapter, there
18 “a multitude of references to the self”, 1 © numerous references to
that which 1s above the (mdividual) self, viz the Highest Self, that
means, 17. this chapter there are (mentioned) © great many attributes
of the Highest Self Henoe there cannot be any reference to any
individual soul like Indra here,—this 18 the resultmg meanmg ‘Thus,
the worship of what 18 the most beneficial, mentioned in the introduo
tory text ‘““What you consider to be the most benefiaal for mankmd”’
(Kaug 31), 18 nothmg but the worship of the Highest Self, because
He alone 18 the most auspicious Bemg, as declared by another scriptural
text “By knowmg Him alone, one surpasses death, there 18 no other
way to salvation’ (Svet 615) Sumilarly, making one do good or
evil deeds as declared by the text ‘He alone makes one, whom he
wishes to lead up from these worlds, perform good action He 91076
makes one, whom he wishes to lead downwards from these worlds,
perform evil action’! (Kaug 38), 18 & quality of the Highest Seif
alone Likewise, bemg the support of all sentient and non sentient
1 Correct quotation translated ‘Hga ht eva enam 694 & eva
enam क karma kdraya tam yam adho कमं Vide Kaug 3 8,p 130
[80 1 1 31
ApH 11 ] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA 86
objecta,—depicted by the term ‘elements of mtelhgence’ m the text
which, begmning thus ‘The vital breath alone uw the mtelligent self
that, taking hold of the body, makes 10 stand up’ (Kaus 3 3), goes
on ‘As of 9 chanot the mm of the wheel 18 fixed on the spokes, and
the spokes are fixed on the nave, even so these elements of being are
fixed on the elements of intelligence, and the elements of intelligence
are fixed on the yital breath’ (Kaug 3 8) —as well as bliss and the
rest, Mentioned m the text ‘Now, this vital breath, forsooth, 15 the
intelligent self, 71188, ageless, xmmortal’ (Kaug 3 8), are qualities of
the Highest Self alone ‘Bemg the Self’ and ‘bemg the object to
be known’, mentioned in conclusion in the text ‘“‘Let one know
“He 18 my self”’ (Kaus 3 8), are also qualities of the Highest Self
Hence, a great many attmbutes of the Highest Self bemg mentioned
here, the Bighest Self alone 18 denoted by the terms ‘Indra’, ‘vital
breath,’ and the rest
SUTRA 31
“BUT THH INSTRUCTION (GIvHN BY INDEA ABOUT HIMSELF)
(IS JUSTIFIABLE) THROUGH SORIPTURAL INSIGHT, AS IN THA 04.82
OF VAMADEVA ”’
Vedanta-pdrijata-saurabha
Reahzmg that everything had Brahman for its soul, Indra
properly said “through scriptural msight” ‘Know me alone”’
(Kaus 3114)—the sormptural text to this effect 1s ‘What sorrow,
what delusion 1s there of him who perceives the unsty’ (18 72)—,
just as Vamadeva said ^" was Manu and the sun”’ (Brh 1410,
Rg V 426 123)
Vedinta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz Why then, did Indra bemg one, (vm an
individual soul) taught himself as another (viz Brahman) m the
passage ‘““Worship me”’ (Kaug 3 2) ?—it 1s replied here —
No such objection can be raised Just ase highly favoured royal
servant says to the subjecta, even lke the kmg himself, ‘I am your
1§ R Bh, SK,B 9 §, R, Bh, SK, B
9 P 285, 116 8 Not quoted by others
[80 11 31
86 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 477 11]
ruler to be worshipped by you’, so 18 the case here ‘But through
soriptural insight” That 18, m the passages, ‘Know me alone”
(Kaus 31), ‘“Worship 706" * (Kaus 32), and so on, Indra, who 18
only an, individual soul, taught the Highest Self as his own self, conse
quent of knowmg, “through scriptural insght”, 16 from soriptural
texts, that the Supreme Brabman, 18 the mner controller and the soul
of all The scmptural texts are the followmg —‘ All this has that for
108 self, that 18 true, that 18 the self, Brahman’, (Chand 67 8,
694, 6108, 6113, 6128, 6133 6148, 6163, 6163),
‘All this, verily, 18 Brahman, emanating from him, disappeamng into
bum, breathing m bum’ (द्यत 314), (एणा havo, truly, attamed
freedom from fear, 0 Janaka ` [` (Brh 424), ‘Who knows himself
‘Tam Brabman”’? (Brh 1 410), ‘Entered within, the ruler of men,
the soul of all’ (Tart Ar 31124), ‘This 18 your soul, the mner con
troller, ummortal’ (Brh 873, eto) and 80 on Compare the case
of Vamadeve, who intuitang the Highest Self, the Inner Controller of
all, through scriptural maght, spoke of Him alone, when he said
‘Seemng this, the sage Vimadeva understood ‘I was Manu and the
sun”’’ (Brh 1410), ‘I am the wise Kaksgiviin sage’ (Rg V 4 26 1*)
Hence the teachmg ‘Know me alone”’ (Kaus $1), eto 18, indeed,
proper
COMPARISON
Srikantha
He gives two alternative explanations, the last of which tallies
with the explanation, given by Nimbé&rka 5
+ The word ‘Brahman 18 not included m the ongmal texts
9 Correct quotation ya evam veddham Brahmderm Vide Erh 1410
p ५0
४ 181
¢ The fall quotation in Rg V ia ‘I was Manu and the sun I am the
wise Kakgwin sage'—said by Indra
6 SK 1181 (p 388 Part 3)
(st 11 32
ADH 11] VEDANTA-PABIJATA SAUBABHA 87
SUTRA 32
“Ty IT BE OBJHOTHD THAT ON ACCOUNT OF THD CHARACTERISTIO
MARKS OF THH INDIVIDUAL SOUL AND THH तपा VITAL-BREATH,
(BRAHMAN 18) NOT (MEANT), (WH REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF
THE THREEFOLDNESS OF MEDITATION, ON ACCOUNT OF BEING
REFERRED TO (ELSEWHERE), ON ACCOUNT OF (ITS) SUITABILITY
HERE ”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
If 16 be objected On account of the characteristic marks of the
individual soul, mentioned in the passages —Let none desire to
enquire into speech, but 160 him demre to know the speaker’ (Kaus
3 8 2), ‘I slew the three headed son of Tvastr’ (Kaus 312), as well
as on account of the characterstico marks of the chief vital breath,
mentioned 10 the passage—‘The vital breath alone 1s the mtelligent
self that taking hold of the body makes it stand up’ (Kaug 3 3 §),
Brahman, 1s not referred to here,—
(We reply ) No, “because of the threefoldneas of the meditation ’”’
on, Brahman, m accordance with the different grades of meditating
devotees, viz (meditation on Brahman) as the Inner Controller of the
group of individual souls, as the Inner Controller of the non sentient
objects, and as different from them both, “because 29 1s referred to”
(elsewhere), “because 1t 1s suitable here” also
Here ends the first quarter of the first chapter m the Vedfnta
panjita saurabha, an interpretation of the S&riraka mim&melii texts,
and composed by the reverend Nimb&rka
Vedainta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected Brahman cannot be denoted here by the words
“vital breath’ and the rest Why* “On account of the character
istic marks of the mdividual soul and the chief vital-breath ' First,
the characteristio marks of the individual soul are stated m the
passages “Let none desire to enquire after speech, but let him desire to
know the speaker’ (Kaug 38), "न delivered the Arunmukhas, the
॥ 8, 5 BhB 9 7 SK, Bh B a8,R Bh B
[80 11 32
88 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 4DH 11]
88061108, to the wolves’’’ (Kaus 31) and so on, and the charactenstic
marks of the chief vital breath are stated m the passage ‘Now, verily,
the vital breath alone 1s the yntelhgent soul that takmg hold of this
body makes 16 stand up’ (Kaug 31) Hence 16 18 not possible that
Brahman 1s referred to here,— =
(We, reply) “No” Why?! “On sccount of the threefoldness
of meditation, on, account of bemg referred (elsewhere), on account
of (1ts) suitability here’ That 18, the demgnation of Brahman by
such and such terms (viz Indra and the vital breath) 1s for the sake
of teaching the threefoldness of meditation, just as elsewhere three
kinds of meditation on Brahman are referred to There (viz in the
Taittarfya upanisad) Brahman 1s recommended to be meditated on.
in His own, nature m the passages “Brahman 1s truth, knowledge and
mfinite’ (Tait 21), ‘Brahman is bliss’ (Taxt 36), and to be med1-
tated on, as the mner soul of the sentient and the non sentient, as well
as the soul of all m the passages “Having created that, he entered mto
that very thmg Havmg entered 1t, He became real and that, defined.
and undefined, based and non based, knowledge and non knowledge’
(Tart 26) In the same manner “on account of ite suitability’,
168 on sccount of the suttabihty of such a threefoldness, “here’’,
16 m the Pratardanavidy& as well, there 18 no divergence among the
texta, the whole group of texts referring to one and the same Brahman
This should be understood here If a text be ascertamed from the
introduction and the rest to be referrmg to Brahman, then, if there
be marks of anything else therem, those, too, affould be referred to
Brahman, who 1s the mner controller of that thing, who possesses 1t
as His power, and who 18 the object to be meditated on = 57068, it 1s
established that the object mdicated by the words ‘Indra’, ‘vital-
breath’ and the rest 1s the Highest Self
Here ends the section entitled ‘Indra and the vital breath’ (11)
Here ends the first section of the first chapter in the Vedanta
kaustubha, @ commentary on the Sartraka mimimsé, and composed.
by the reverend teacher Srinrvisa, dwelling under the lotus feet of
the reverend Nimbérks, the founder and teacher of the sect of the
reverend. Sanatkumfra
[80 1 1 82
apy 11] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 89
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 18 siitra 31 m bis commentary Readmg same He gives
two alternative explanations of the second part of the siitra viz the
reply to the objection, thus —
(1) ‘If 16 be objected , (then, we reply )—On
account of the threefoldness of meditation, (1e your mterpretation
would imvolve the assumption of devout meditation of three kinds,
viz on the mdzvidual soul, on the chief vital breath and on Brahman,
but one and the same section cannot teach three different kinds of
things) (Moreover, the word ^" vital breath’’ must denote Brahman
here,) on account of (that meanmg) being accepted (elsewhere), on
account of connection here (16 im the passage itself characteristic
marks of Brahman are mentioned) (Hence the conclusion 1s that
Brahman 1s the topic of the whole chapter)” This mterpretation 18
different from Nimb&rka’s interpretation
Or, ‘If rt be objected. , (then, we reply ) (the charac
teristic marks of the individual soul and the chief vital breath, are not
out of place m ® chapter which deals with Brahman) on account of
the threefoldness of meditation (16 because this chapter aims sumply
at advocating thereby the three ways of meditatimg on, Brahman, viz
under the aspect of the prana, under the aspect of prajfid, and m
itaelf, accordmg as Brahman 18 viewed either with reference to the
two limiting adjuncts, or m itself), because (m other passages also we
find that meditation on Brahman 1s) made dependant (on Brahman
bemg qualified by णाह adjuncta—cf Chind $142), because
(the hypothems that Brahman 1s meditated on under three aspects)
18 perfectly conmstent here (168 m the prina chapter!) This mter
pretation too does not tally with Nimb&rka’s mmterpretation, for
Nunb&rka does not hold that the sentuent and the non sentient—
under the aspects of which Brahman is meditated on—are lLmitmeg
adjuncts of Brahman
Raminuja
Reading and interpretation same According to RimdAnuja, the
three kinds of meditation are — (1) Meditation on Brahman m His
own nature as the cause of the world, (2) meditation on Brahman as
18B 1181, pp 255 ff
[80 1 1 32
90 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 111
having the totality of the enjoying souls as His body (16 as the inner
soul of the sentient), and (8) meditation on Brahman as having the
objects and means of enjoyment 0 His body (16 as the mner soul
of the non sentient) 7
Bhaskara
This 1s sitra 31 m his commentary Readmg different—vuz
omits the portion ‘Aémtatvid iba tad yogét’ Two alternative
interpretations given, the first (the author's own view) exactly like
ras first explanation, the second (the view of 0098 ‘apare
tu’, ete ) hike Nimb&rka’s explanation >
Srikantha
Reading and interpietation same He pointy out, exactly after
RémAnujs, that the three kinds of meditations on the Lord are—
svarupens, bhokty sarirena and bhogya riipena २
Baladeva
This 18 siitra 31 7 Baladeva His intorpretation 1s hke Samkara’s
first interpretation 4
Résumé
The first quarter of the first chapter contains —
(1) 32 siitras and 11 adhikaranas, according to Nimbirka,
(2) 31 siitras and 11 adhiknranas, according to Samkara,
(8) 32 stitras and 11 adhkaranas, according to Rimanuyja,
(4) 31 stitras and 11 adhikaranas, according to Bhiskara,
(5) 32 aiitras and 12 adhikaranas, according to Srikantha,
(6) 31 siitras and 11 adhikaranas, according to Baladeva
Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva omut afitra 9 m Nimb&rka’s
commentary
181 8 1182 p 324 vol 1 —Nskhtla kdranatlhitiasya Brahmanah
evarupeninusandhdnam, bhokir-varga-dantakatvdnuseandhdnam, bhogya bhogopa
karana-danrakaivinusandhdnaA ost irwnidham anusandhanam upadesum १४
artha),’
£ Bh B 1181 pp 865 36
8 SK B 1182 pp 20192 Pert3
“ 028 1131
FIRST CHAPTER (Adhyéya)
SECOND QUARTER (P&da)
Adhikarana 1 The section entitled ‘Celebrity
everywhere’ (30788 1 8)
SOTRA 1
“(THAT WHICH CONSISTS OF MIND 18 BRAHMAN), BHOAUSE OF THE
THAOHING OF WHAT 18 OBLEBRATED EVERYWHEER ”’
Vedinta-pfrijaita-saurabha
Beginning ‘All this, verily, 28 Brahman, emanatmg from hm
disappearing into him and breathing in him ,—tranqull, let one medi
tate on him thus’ (Chind 3 14 1 1), Serpture contmucss ‘Conmsting
of mind, having the vital breath for his body’ (Ohand 314 29)
Here, the object which 18 to be meditated on as consisting of mind 18
to be understood as the Highest self, the cause of all, and not as the
individual soul Why! Because the highest self alone, celebrated
im all the Ved&ntas, 18 taught mm the above passages, viz ‘All this
veruy, 18 Brahman,’ (Chand 3 141)
Vedanta-kaustubha
Thus, एप the first section, the concordance of the scriptural texts
with regard to the holy Lord Vasudeva has been shown,—He who 1s
the object of enquiry, the greatest Being, the cause of the ong and.
the rest of the world, havmg Senpture for His sole proof, omniscient,
without an equal or & superior and the one mass of infinite auspicious
quahitzes Now, in the following two seotions, the reverend teacher
of the Veda 18 showing that those texts,—some of which indistinctly
indicate the mdividual soul and the rest, and some of which distanctly
do 80,—all refer to Him alone
The Chandogas record the followmg ‘All this, verily, 1s Brahman,
emanating from him, disappearing into him, and breathing m him ,—
tranquul, 166 one meditate (on him) thus Now, a person consists of
1§ RB, BhB ४ 8 R, BhSK B
[80 1 2 1
92 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH | |
determmation Accordmg to what 118 determmation, 1s in this world,
80 0068 he become on departing hence Let him form a determination
He who consists of mind, has the vital breath for his body, 1s of the
form of hght’ (Chand 314121) and so on Hore, a doubt arises,
viz whether the mdividual soul? should be understood as the object
to be meditated on, possessed of the attmbutes of consisting of mind
and the rest, or the Highest self What 1s reasonable here ¶
(Pruma face view )
If 1t be suggested The individual soul Why? Because the
individual soul 1s well known to have the mmd and the vital breath as
ita instruments, because Scripture declares that Lord Brahman, the
Supreme Bemg, has no connection with mind and the vital breath, m
the passage ‘Without the vital breath, without 00100, pure* (Mund
212), and, finally, because having the heart for 1ta abode as well as
bemg atomic, stated m the passage ‘This is the soul® withm the
heart, smaller than a gram of rice, or & barley corn’ (Chind 3 14 3),
are possible in the case of the limited dividual soul alone [If 1t be
objected of the mx proofs, viz scriptural statement, mark text,
topic, place and name, each succeeding one 18 weaker than the preceding
one Of these, sormptural statement means an mdependent statement,
and mark means the power cf words (to indicate some meaning)
Now, here, the scriptural statement, viz ‘All this, verily, 13 Brahman’
(Chand 3141), 18 of a greater force than the mark of the mdividual
soul, viz consisting of पात and the rest, 1t bemg mentioned first,
(the rule bemg that of these mx, each preceding one 18 of & greater
{10706 than each succeeding one) Hence, Brahman, alone, mentioned.
above, 18 to be construed here as the object to be meditated on,—({we
reply } no, because as that text fulfils 708 purpose simply by teachmg,
a8 # means to the attamment of tranquillity, that everything has
Brahman, for 1ts soul, thus ‘Tranquil, let one meditate’, so 1t 18 not
concerned with laying down any injunction, regarding the meditation
on, Brahman (here ends the ongmal Prima facte view)
1 This passage occurs 2150 in Sat Br 10 6 3 It forms > part of the famous
SGadsizya-vsdyd, or tha Doctrme of SUaddya For a further account see footnote
(5), p 1078 f
i * Kesirajfia, means Knower of the field’, or the body 16 the soul, the
conscious prmerple in the corporeal frame
8 Oorrect quotation ‘Rea ma dind > Vide Chind 3143, p 158
{jst 1 2 1
ADH 1] VEDANTA hAUSTUBHA 93
(Correct conclusion )
We reply —The highest soul alone, possessed of the attmbutes
of consisting of mind and the rest, 18 the object to be meditated on
Why? “Because” the cause of the ong and the rest of the would,
“celebrated everywhere’’,1e 1m, all the Vedintas, “1s taught” as the
cause of all, as the soul of all, here in the text ‘All this, very, 18
Brahman (Chand 8141) Or, else, “because” the attributes of
‘sonsisting of mind’ and the rest, “celebrated” 1n all the Vediintas as
belonging to the Supreme Brahman, thus ‘Conmsting of mind, leader
of the vital breath and the body (Mund 227), ‘Thus ether that 28
within the heart,—therein 18 the person, consisting of mind (Tait 1 6),
and so on, “are taught” Of these, ‘conmstmg of mimd’ means
‘capable of bemg apprehended by a pumfied mind’, ‘havmg
the vital breath for the body’ means “beimg the support and the लाभ
of even the vital breath’, ‘without the vital breath’ means ‘abiding प्रा
dependently of the vital breath’, and “without mind’ means ‘havmg
knowledge not dependent on the mind’
Or, else, the text ‘All this, venly, 18 Brahman, omanatmg from
hm, disappearing into him, and breathing mm him ,—tranguul, let one
meditate (on him) thus’ (Chand 3141) enjoms meditation, thus
‘Let one meditate on Brahman, the soul of all, 12, a tranquil spit’
The text ‘Let him form a determmation’ (Chand 3 14 1) 18 © repeta
tion. (of the same injunction), with 8 view to proving that the atimbutes
of ‘consisting of mind’ and the rest belong to the very same Being,
mentioned above, (viz Brahman) Let one meditate on Brahman, the
soul of all and possessed of the attributes of consistmg of mind and the
Test,—this 18 the sense of the text Here, 9 doubt arises, viz whether
Brahman, mdicated as the soul of all, 1s the mndividual soul, or the
Highest self What 218 reasonable here? If 1t be suggested The
individual soul Why?! Because, 1t alone can possibly assume the
forms of all kinds of bemgs, Brahms and so on, dus to karmaa, based
on, beginningless nescience, while 1t 1s never 0088016 for the Supreme
Brahman, to assume identity with all sorta of low or vile forms, mince
He 18 endowed with (the attmbutes of) omniscience, omnipotence,
freedom from suns, freed on by nature from all faults andsoon The
word ‘Biahman’ too, apples to the mndividual soul alone, 1+ being
endowed with great qualrties (1116 knowledge and the hke) And
the origin and the rest of the world bemg due to karmas, 1t 18 reasonable
to indicate the individual soul as thew cause,—
[श 1 2 1
94 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 1]
We reply “Because of the teachmg of what 1s celebrated every
where”,1e the meaning of the word ‘Brahman,’ who 18 designated as
the soul of all and as the cause of the ongin and the rest of all, 1s the
Highest Self alone for this very reason, “everywhere”, 1 © m, the
Vedintas, he 18 “taught”’ to be “celebrated” as the cause of the origin
and the rest of the world—because of this, and also because it 15
impossible that the origin and. the rest of the world can, be due to the
individual soul, since 170. the passages—‘‘Hoe desired ‘May I be many,
may I procreate’ He created all this” (Tait 26) and
so on, the Supreme Lord alone 1s celebrated to be the cause of the
world This 1s stated m the ‘Law of salvation’! Beginning
‘ “Whence has arisen this entare world, consisting of the ummovable
and the movable, and to whom does 1t go during universal dissolution 1
Tell me that, O grandfather! By whom has thi world, together
with the oceans, the aky, mountaims, cloud, lands, flre and ar,
been made?”’ (Mahi 126765 66%), havmg stated “The scripture
which was related by Bhrgu to Bha&radvija, who asked’ (Mah& 12
6769C 3), having stated the omgin of all bemgs thus ‘Of him who
18 called Naér&iyana, who 18 unchangeable, the mmpermshable soul, who
18 Unmanifest, unknowable, higher than prakrti,’“ and baving
stated ‘Then, a lustrous, celestial lotus was created by the self born
From that lotus arose Brahm&, the Lord, consisting of the Veda’
(Mahé 126779 C-89A 5),—the text designates Lord Krena, Narayana,
Brahman, 98 the cause of all sentient bemgs and non sentient objects,
thus “For 06 1s difficult to be Known, undoubtedly meonceivable m
nature even by the perfected souls He, verily, 1s Lord Vignu, cele
brated to be infinite, abidmg as the mter controller of all bemgs,
difficult to be known, by those who have not obtamed the self,—who
1s the creator of this prmncple of egosm for the production of
all bemgs, from whom arose the universe, about whom I have been
asked by you here’ (Mah& 12 6784-86A°) Hence, the Highest Self
1 Mokga dharma 18 the name of © section of the 12th book of the Mahd
bhdraia, from Adhydya 174 to the end
® P 604, 17.698 8 4, vol 8 9 Op ov, line 7
« This 1s not traceable 1n any of the three editions, Amatnc Society Variga
vist and Bombay
5 P 604 1०28 17 18 (vol 3) Thu verse is not found m the Bombay
9 © 604 Imes 22-24
[80 1 ~ £
ADH 1 | VEDANTA KALSTUnHA 06
alone 19 denoted by the word ‘Brahman here and not the mdzvidual
soul `
COMPARISON
Raimiénya
Reading samo Hb paves two alternative mtorpretations, which
tally with the last two explunetions of Sina २86 2
SOTRA 2
“AND BL(AUSH (9 LHP APEROLRIATRNPSS QF THE ATTRIBUTES
INTENDED TO RP STATI
Vedinta-pirijitu-saurabha
And becavae the attubutes viz commsting of mind,’ ‘haymg
true revolves’ and the rest, “intended to bu stuted’’ m the text
‘Consisting of पतो) having the vital breath fo: the body, of the
form of lycht, having true mewlyes (Chind 31428) and so on, are
‘approprindo on the put of Broluman alone
Vedinta-kaustubha
As the attuibutes of hasan truc resolves and the rest, ‘untended
to be stated’ as the pocuhar attmbutes of Brahman m the passage
‘Conmsting of mind, having the broath for the body, of the form of
hght, huwsings trae resolves, having the ethor as the soul, having all
derired, having all कान 4 having all tustes, pervading all
thin, unspeskuys, indifferent (Chiind $ 142) and #o on, are “appro
priate” on the part of Brahman alone, so Brabman alone 18 under
stood in the wbave teat Phe adjective ‘pervadmy all this’ means
that He has necopte d ‘all चाण ~न 6 the sontient and the non sentient
objects, ending with tate’, ~ an His own, ‘ungspeaking’ moans that
He abides in silent a bees of Hus unsurpassed gravenoss , ‘indifferent ’
moans that ‘He hus ne concern,’
॥ 11 rae त 1 D oe | 1
1 कोद्य maven altogether three explanations of this इताः tho first ai
which tallion with the oxplanation of Nanbdrka
984 13 121 Pp 291 श् Part)
7K, 13
4 The कल्यत] text racks कदल Aarma’ aftcr this
[80 1 2 8
96 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 1]
SUTRA 3
“But on ACCOUNT OF INAPPROPRIATENESS, NOT THE EMBODIED
(SOUL) "°
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
He who 18 possessed of the atinbutes of consisting of mind and
the reat 18 the Supreme Being alone, and not the individual soul,
because (the attributes hke) ‘ consisting of mind’, ‘having true re
solves and 80 on, are “imappropriate”’ on 15 part
Vedinta-kaustubha
Brahman alone 1s to be understood as consisting of mind, for
the purpose of meditation, and not “the embodied”, 1 6 the indivi
dual soul, possessing a body Why? Because the attmbutes of
‘having true resolves’ and the 116 are “imappropmate”™ on the part
of the individual soul Moreover, the attributes of ‘consisting of
mind’ and the reat too, are inappropriate on the part of the एता
dual soul ‘Thus, the text says ‘Let him form a determimation’
(Chind 3141) Of what kindishe? ‘ Consisting of mind’, again,
‘having the vital breath for his body’ These adjectives are not
appropriate on the part of the mdividual soul, because no such
implication 18 involved here, nor any purpose But all these are
appropriate on the part of the Highest self Thus, when 10 18 said
Let the worshipper, whether be desires for salvation, or for any
particular froit, ‘form a determination’, 1 6 perform meditation or
action, in & ‘calm’ spirit, the question arises In reference to whom
18 he to perform meditation or action? and in reply, the Highest
Person, the soul of all, and indicated above in the passage ‘All
this, verily, 1s Brahman’ (Ohind 3141), 1s pomted out as the
object to be meditated on And, this text ‘Consisting of mind,
having the vital breath for the body’ (Chind 3,142) and so on
refers to Brahman Hence the attributes of ‘ consisting of mind’
and the rest are not appropriate on the part of the individual soul
COMPARISON
Srikanthe
Reading same, interpretation different According to Srikantha,
a new adhikarana begins with this siitra (sitras 3-8), concerned with
fet 1 24
apH 1] VIDANTA LARTIATA SAURABRHA 97
the question whothcr a pussage in the Maha nfriyana upaniged
113) refers tao Nariyana or to Siva Thus —‘ (The
refors to Siva, and not (to) the embodied (ie N&rfiyana),
becatwe (the attmbutes of buimg the Lord of the universe and the
rest) are not approprixte (on the part of NixByana) ’ 1
SUTRA 4
“ AND BECAUYF OF TH DESIGNATIQN OF OBJECT AND AGENT ”
Vediinta-padrijita-saurabha
For this roaton too, the abject qualified by the adjectives ‘con,
asting of nund* andl the rest im not the embodied soul, “ because of the
deagnation of object and agent" in the teat ‘On departing 1167108,
Tahall reach him (Child 4 144 ®)
Vedintu-kaustubha
Fao: this roaxon, too, that which consists of mmd and has breath
for its body us not to he understoul as the embodied soul Why!
“Because of thus designation “ ef the embodied soul as the “agent २०,
16 asthe worshipper, and’ bec ate of the designation ” of the Highest
Self an tho ‘ehjoct', ia usa the object to he meditated on and obtamed,
m the passage ‘On departing hones, 7 shall reach bum’ (Chind
8144) That m, ‘1°’, or one cdenring jor salvation, ‘shall reach’, 16
shall obtain, hun’,:0 Brahman, mentioned before as possessed of the
attributes of (भप of mind and ihe rest, ‘hence’, 1e after the
fall of the holy, aiter the cuatruction of the works which have begun.
to bear fruits ५ worshipper who m endowed with such 9» nght
insight attains Brahman
COMPARISON
Srikantha
Reading xame interpretation different, viz ‘(The supreme soul,
vis Siva, the object to be moditatad on, 18 othor than N&rfiyana),
because of the deaymetion of the object and the agont, (16 because
18K 1 11५ pp क्त्यन Part
ॐ 8, R, Bh, {१
भुं
(st 128
98 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBRABHA ADH 1}
Siva 18 designated to be the object to be worshipped, Narayana, the
worshipper) ’ 1
SUTRA 5
“ON ACCOUNT OF THH DIFFERENCE OF WORDS ”’
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
That which possesses the attributes of ‘conmsting of mind’ and
the lke 18 the Highest Self, different from the embodied soul, because
in the text “This soul of mme within the heart’ (Chind 3 14 38, 49)
the mdividual soul and the Highest Self are denoted by different
words, viz the genitive and the nominative respectively
Vedinta-kaustubha
For this reason, too, that which, possesses the attributes of con-
sisting of mind and so on, 18 the highest self, different from the embodied
soul Why? ‘On account of the difference of words”’,1e because
of another scriptural passage of kondred subject matter, viz “Like a
grain of rice, or a barley corn, or a gram of mullet, or the kernel of a
gram, of millet, such 18 the Golden Person, within, the self’ (Sat Br
10 6 9 2), there 18 ^ difference of words”, viz the locative ‘ within the
self’ denotes the embodied self, while the nomimative ‘the Golden
Person,’ denotes the Highest self 3
COMPARISON
Srikantha
Reading same, imterpretation different, wiz (‘Brahman, viz
Siva, 1s other than and superior to Nar&yana) on account of a particular
word (or sonptural passage) (to that effect’) *
18K B 124, pp 322-324 Part 4
2R 28
¢ Note that Nembdarka and Stinwdaea refer to two different passages here
48K 8 1985 (Pp 324-25 Part4)
[80 1 2 6
ADH 1 ] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 99
SUTRA 6
‘“AND ON ACOOUNT oF रित् ”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
“And on sccount of the Smrta” text —‘The Lord abides, 0
Arjuna! in the heart-region of all bemgs’ (018 186114), there 18 a
difference between, the individual soul and the Supreme Soul
Vedanta-kaustubha
‘ He who 8668 me everywhere, and sees everything m me, of him
I will never lose hold, and he shall never lose hold of 716 " ` (Gité 6 30),
‘He who, established im unity, worships me as abiding within all
bemgs, that ascetic abides m me, under whatever arcumstances he
may 1156 ` ` (105 631), ‘“‘There 18 nothing higher than me, 0 Dha-
nafijaya! All this 1s strung on me, lke gems on a इन्त (अहि
77), ‘“And I abide within, the heart of all, and from me memory,
knowledge and their absence”’’ (Git& 1615), ‘“‘The Lord abides, 0
Arjuna! in the heart region of all, causmg all bemgs to revolve by
His mysterious power, as if mounted on a machine””’ (Gita 18 61),
‘Because I excel the perishable and am. superior even to the mperish
able, I am calebrated m the world, and m the Veda as the Highest
Person”’ (1४8 16 18) The following scrptural texts too are referred
to by the term “‘and ’’ (mn the sitra) 2 “The two unborn ones, the
knower and the non knower, the Lord and the non Lord’ ag 1 9),
‘The Lord of matter and souls, the ruler of the attmbutes’ (Svet 6 18),
‘The eternal among thp eternal, the conscious among the conscious’
(Svet 613, Katha 513) and so on From such Smpti and scrip
tural texts, 1t 18 to be known that there 18 a difference between the
wdividual soul and Brahman ‘Thus, wm this section, the difference
between, the mdividual soul and the Supreme Soul 18 indicated by the
reverend author of the aphorams 1 four aphoriame, ® and this view
18 most reasonable, smce 1t 18 established by both Smyti and Scripture
The Highest Self 1s ever-free, omniscient, mdependent, all pervading
+ 8 R Bh,B
9 Note the different interpretations of the word Ca’ m the silira 88 grven
by Nunbdrka and Stinwdsa According to thea former 1b mmply means algo +
while according to the latter, ‘on account of sorsptural texte
$ Vis Br 80 123-6
[तं 1 2 7
100 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 1]
without an equal or a superior, the soul of all and the controller of all
The individual soul, on the other hand, though of the nature of eternal
knowledge, has, as 18 well known, 108 attribute of knowledge enveloped
by the beginnmgless miy&, 18 subject to bondage and release, possessed.
of little knowledge, a part of Brahman, but through its aversion to
the Lord, revolves through many births owmg to the works done
by staelf Non difference also, established by the scmptural texta
ke ‘He 18 the self, thou art that’ (Chind 694, 6103, eto),
‘All this, verily, 18 Brahman’ (Chind 3 141), “This soul 1s Brahman’
(Brh 445) and 80 on, 18 most reasonable Thus, the reverend author
of the aphorisms will speak about the nature of difference and non-
difference, az held by himself, under the aphomsm ‘A part, on
account of the demgnation of vanety’ (Br Si 2342) and so on
We shall speak of 1+ m, detail in the same place }
COMPARISON
Samkara
Reading and interpretation same But m conclusion, he adds
his own view, viz that this difference between the mdividual soul
and Brahman 1s not real, but due to limiting adjuncts only 3
Srikantha
Reading same, interpretation different, viz ‘On account of
शण (viz 0768 119) N&riyana 28 the worshtpper—ie different
from Siva 8
SUTRA 7
" [क Iv BE OBJEOTHD THAT ON ACOOUNT OF ITS OOCOUPYING A
SMALT, ABODE, AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF THAT,
(BRAHMAN 18) NOT (THE OBJECT OF MEDITATION), (WH REPLY )}
NO, 27204087 (BRAHMAN) IS TO BH OONCHIVHD THUS, 4S IN THE
O4SH OF THE ETHER ”
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
If 1t be objected that on account of its havmg a small abode, as
mentioned mm, the text “This soul of mmp with the heart’ (Chand
२ Vide VK 2342 28B 127, p 266
88K B 127 pp 325 26, Part 4
[9 1 2:7
ADH 1 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 101
8 14 3), also on account of the designation of 108 smallness im the text
‘Smaller than & grain of rice, or’ (Chind 3148, Sat Br 106323),
(the object of meditation) here 1s not Brahman,—
(We reply ) “ Not so’, because Brahman 1s to be meditated on
in that way Minuteness on the part of a great thmg, however, fits
10, 98 1 the case of a window and the ether
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected —Brahman cannot be understood here as the
object of meditation Why? ‘On account ofits oocupymg a small
abode and on account of the designation of that ’’ That 1s, that which
has a small abode, 1e 01908, viz the mdividual soul which 18 like
the tap of the spoke of a wheel, 18 ‘arbhakaukas’, the state of that 18
‘arbhakaukastvam’, on account of that,2—the resulting meanmg
bemg ‘on, account of the characterisino mark of the individual soul’
That 1s to say, occupymg & muted place, viz the heart, 1s the attribute
of the mdividual soul only, and not the attmbute of Brahman More
over, “on account of the designation ° of smallness by that very term.
(viz ‘small’), wn the passage ‘Smaller than @ gram of roe, or &
barley corn’ (Chand 3148, Sat Br 10632), the mdividual soul
alone 18 to be understood here, and not Brahman,—
(We reply) “No” Why? It 1s “because (Brahman) 18 to
be concarved thus”,—ie “ Because (Brahman) 18 to be conceived ”’,
or to be medxtated on, “thus ०, 16 as abidmg within the heart, small
17, s1ze,-——that the Highest Self 1 demgnated m that way And,
hereby His omnipresence 18 not contradicted or, He 28 demgnated
to be minute with the object of designatmg a particular kmd of medita
tion on Him as very subtle Nor, agam, does He become small m
mize (16 small like the heart) hereby, since the text ‘Greater than
the earth, greater than the sky’ (Ohind 3143) speaks of the great
neas of the Lord An analogous case 18 the followmg Just as the
ether, though all-pervasive, 18 spoken of as occupymg a small place
and as small im reference to the eye of a needle, so 1s Brahman, the
topic of discussion,—this 18 the sense
1 P 806 lme 18
3 Thus explams the compound ‘arbhakaubastvdt'
[st 12 8
102 VEDANTA PARIJATA-SAURABHA ADH 1]
COMPARISON
Samkara
Reading and mterpretation same He poimts out that just as
the Lord of the entire universe may be appropriately said to be the
Lord. of Ayodhya, so the Supreme Soul, abidmg everywhere, may very
well be denoted as abiding within, the heart 1
Ramanuja
Reading same, interpretation of the word ‘vyomavac ca’
different, viz — (The Lord 1s described to be) lke the ether as well
(© all pervading as well, nm that very passage, viz. Chind 3 148%)’
Hence the Lord 18 not really mmute by nature, but 1s simply designated
to be so for the purpose of meditation,
Srikantha
Reading and literal mterpretataon same, though this topic 18
different, as noted above 8
Baladeva
Reading same, interpretation of the word “vyomavac oa’ different,
viz ‘(The Lord though atomic as abiding withm the heart of men,
18 yet all pervading) hke the ether (as declared by the same passage,
vz Chind $1434)’ And this 1s possible because the Lord 1s
possessed. of inconceivable powers
SUTRA 8
^" {# IT BE OBJECTED THAT (IF BRAHMAN WEBE TO DWELL WITHIN
THH HART, THEN) THERE FOLLOWS EXPERINNOS (OF PLEASURES
AND PAINS), (WH REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENOE `°
Vedanta-périjita-saurabha
If 16 be objected that owing to His connection with all hearts,
“there will follow experience” of pleasure and pam, on the part of
1 8 127 966 9 इल B 127 p 287, vol 1
28K B 127 p 327 Part 1
^ 028 187 ¢ 114 Chap 1 Note the difference from Rdmdnuja
{fst 1 2 8
ADH 1] VEDSNTA KAUSTUBHA 103
Brahman, 88 on the part of the individual soul —(we reply ) no such
objection, can be raised, because there 1s an, absolute difference between,
the mdividual soul and Brahman, as the soul 18 an enjoyer of the
fruits of the works done by itself, while Brahman 18 ever free from
ANS
Vedainta-kaustabha
If it be objected Owing to 1ta connection with a amgie heart,
there results experience of pleasures and pams on the part of the
mdividuel soul Owing to His connection with all hearts amul
taneously, there certamly resulta experience of all pleasures and.
pains everywhere on the part of the all pervading Highest Self If this
be ao, then, the Highest Self, as the enjoyer of pleasures and pais,
will mevitably become subject to all sorts of faults, as the mdrvidual
soul itaelf 13 Hence even the Supreme Being will be subject to
karmas,——~
(Wereply ) “No” “On account of difference (vaiéesyit)” The
word “vaisesyat’’ 1s formed by adding the suffix ‘syafi’ to the
word ‘videsa” in an identical sense, (viz difference) or to mducate
excessive difference That the mdividual soul 1s an enjoyer of the
froita of works performed by itself and the Supreme Soul 1s just the
opposite 18 eatablished m, Scripture, m accordance with the Smrta
passage ‘Of these, He who 1s the Supreme Self 18 said to be eternal
and free from the properties of matter 1 He is not
affected even by the fruit, as a lotus leaf 18 not touched by water
The active self, on the other hand, 1s another, who 18 lable to release
and bondage’ (Mah& 18 13764 18766 >}, and the declaration of
the Lord Himself ‘Works do not affect me, I have no desire for
fruits of works’ (Gité 414) Thus, on account of an absolute
difference between these two, 1४ follows that the mdividual soul
alone experiences pleasures and pams, and not the Supreme Soul
Hence 1b 18 estabhshed that that which conasta of mimd and has the
breath for xta body, 28 none but the Highest Self
Here ends the section, entatled ‘Celebrity everywhere’ (1)
1 One 16 omrtted, wiz ‘San Ndrdyana sfeyah sarvdéimd purugo hs sats
2 P 852 119059४ 9 10 vol 8
[80 12 8
104 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1 ]
COMPARISON
Samkara
Reading and literal mterpretation same Here, too, he 18 forced
to add his usual explanation that the difference between the dividual
soul and Brahman 18 not real, but only phenomenal 1
Ramanuja
Interpretation of the word “vaidesy&t’ different Accordmg to
Nimbarka, ‘vaiéesyit ’ means ‘on account of the difference of nature
between, the mdividual soul and Brahman’, while according to
Raémfnuya, 1+ means ‘on account of the difference of the cause of
enjoyment’*, 16 it 18 not abidmg withm the body which 18 the
09086 of undergomg pleasure and pam, but bemg subject to karmas,
which 18 never possible in the case of the Lord 8
Bhiskara
Reading and interpretation same The example cited 1s appro-
priate—Sumply because the Lord abides withm the heart, 16 does not
follow that He shares ita experiences, for there 18 no rule that oo-
existence and the consequent miter relation umply the shammg of the
same attributes The ether,eg though m connection with a burnmg
place, does not burn itself 4
Srikantha
Reading and literal mterpretation same, though the topo 18
different, as noted. above 9
1§B 128 p 968
9 ‘Hetu-varcdenyit *
8 {ति B 128 p 288, vol 1
«Bh B 128, p 40
8 8K B 128, pp 327 e seg, Part 4
[st 12 9
ADE 2] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 105
Adhikarana 2 The section ontitled ‘The eater’
(Sitras 9 10)
SUTRA 9
“THR HATER (18 BRAHMAN), ON ACCOUNT OF THE COMPREHENSION
(08 TAKING, IB DREVOURING) OF THH MOVABLE AND THE IM
MOVABLE ”’
Vedanta-périjata-saurabha
In the text ‘He to whom both the Br&ihmana and the Kgatriya
are the food and death the condiment, who thus knows where He 16?’
(Katha 2 251), the eater 1s the Lord, the Highest Person, “on account
of the comprebension, (or taking, 16 devouring)” ४ of the food which
has death for ita condiment, 1e of the Universe, conmstmg of the
movable and the 1mmovable, mplied by the terms ‘Brahmans’ and
‘Keatriya’
Vedanta-kaustubha
In the precedmg section, after having shown that the text
“All this, venly, 18 Brahman’ (Chind 3141) and so on refera to
Brahman, the author has shown also the absence of any experience
of pleasure and pam due to karma on the part of Brahman Now,
by showing that the text ‘He, of whom the Brahmana’ (Katha
225) and so on refers to Him, he removes the suspicion that, as
before, He cannot be an eater of the movable and the mmmovable 8
In the Katha valli 1b 1s recorded ‘He, to whom both the Br&h
mana and the Ksatriya are the food and death the condiment, who
thus knows where He 18 १ ` (Katha 225) Here by the word ‘food’
edible objects are understood, and by the words ‘of whom’, indicatmg
connection, an eater 18 understood A doubt arwes, viz whether the
eater here 18 fire, or the dividual soul, or the Supreme Soul, since
here all the three have been referred to before What 1s reasonable
15K B 128 pp 397 ® seq, Part 4
9 It 18 not clear what Nenbdrka means exactly by the term ‘grahana
here It may mean appropriately both understandimg and taking or devour
ing वह) Brahman 18 the eater because the movabie and the mmmovable are
understood as the food hare or because the movable and the ummovable are
devoured 88 the food here
The same remarks apply to Srinwdsa’s mterpretation
9 Ie it may be thought thet amce Brahman not an enjoyer, as shown
above He cannot be an eater too
[7 1 2 10
106 VEDANTA PABRIJATA SAURABHA ADH 2]
here? If1t be suggested First, let fire be the eater here, because 1४
18 well known to have the power of burning the Brihmana and the
Ksatnya and because the scnptural text —‘Fire 18 the eater of food’
(Brh, 146) declares so Or, let the mdividual soul be the eater,
because 1t 18 well known to be an enjoyer, because the scmptural text
‘Of the two, the one tastes sweet berry’ (Svet 46, Mund 311)
declares so, and finally, because 17, the preceding section, (viz Br St
1 2 8) 1t alone has been established to be an enjoyer In accordance
with, the negative text ‘Without eatmg’ (Svet 46, Mund 31 1),
as well as on the ground of the negation of experience in the preceding
section (viz Br Sa 1 2 8), the Highest Self cannot be understood as
the eater here,—
We reply Here the eater can posmbly be the Highest Self alone
Whence 18 thisknown? ‘“ On account of the comprehension (or taking,
16 devouring +) of the movable and the mmmovable,” 16 because
here the movable and the rmmovable are understood to be the food
If 1t be objected that the words ‘movable’ and ‘immovable’ are not
found here,—{we reply ) It may be 80, (yet that does not falafy our
view), because by the terms ‘Brihmana’ and ‘Ksatriya’, the movable
and the ummovable are understood metaphorically, and because there
bemg & natural connection between death and the movable and the
mmovable, that food which has death for 108 condiment, viz the
movable and the ummovable, 1s understood here Hence the eater
18 the Highest Self, the destroyer of the Universe,—this 18 the resulting
meaning, for neither fire, nor the individual soul, can possibly be the
eater of the entire world The text ‘Without eating’ (Svet 46,
Mund 311) denies any experience of the fruits of works on the part
of the Lord
SOTRA 10
“AWD ON ACCOUNT OF THE TOPIO”’
Vedanta-piarijata-saurabha
The eater 18 the Lord, the Highest Person, because He alone 18
mentioned as the topic of discussion in the text ‘The great, the all
pervading ` (Katha 2 22 3)
2 See footnote (2), previous page 2R SE.
fst 1 2 11
ADE 3] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 107
Vedinta-kaustubha
As the Highest Self 18 mentioned as the topio of discussion m the
texts “Knowmg the great, all pervasive self’ (Katha 2 22), ‘By
him 18 (He) attamable, whom alone he chooses’ (Katha 228 Mund
8 223), and as a peculiar mark of the Lord, viz unmtelhgibleness, 18
mentioned in, the passage ‘Who thus knows where He 18?’ (Katha
2 25), 10 18 established that the eater 1s the Highest Self alone
Here ends the section entitled “The eater’ (2)
Adhikarana 3 The section entitled ‘The cave’
(Sitras 11-12)
SUTRA 11
^ THR SOULS ENTERED INTO THE CAVE (ARH THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL
4ND THE SuPeREME Soul), BECAUSE THAT IS SEEN”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
In the text “There are two, drmking of mghteousnesa in the
world of good deeds, entered mto the cave’ (Katha 311), the two
souls, entered into the cave, should be known to be two sentient
bemgs, viz the individual soul and the Supreme Soul Why! “ Be
cause that 18 seen’’, 16 because 1t 18 found that this section desig
nates the entermg of these two alone,—of the Supreme Soul in, the
passage ‘Him, who 18 difficult to see, who has entered into the hidden,
who 18 hidden in the cave’ (Katha 2122) and of the mdividual soul
in the passage ‘She, who arises with the vital breath, who 1s Adit,
who 18 made of the dertzes, who, entering into the cave, abides theremn,
who was manifested through the elements ` (Katha 4 7 3)
Vedanta-kaustubha
It has been pointed ont above that the Supreme Soul, the topic
of discussion and the object to be meditated on, 1s the eater of the
movable and the mmmovable, and that He 1s difficult to be known, as
declared by the text ‘Who thus knows’ (Katha 226) Now, by
18 R Bh AK B #8 R, Bh, SK, 3 $ ए 2
[st 1 2 11
108 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 4775 3]
teaching the following attributes of the Lord—viz ‘bemg easily
attamable’, ‘bemg easly knowable’ and the rest—which result from
His close assomation (with the individual soul1),—to one who desires
for salvation, who desires to attam, His nature, who desires to know
Hm, and who 18 submerged mm the pit of mundane existence consisting
of the movable and the mmmovable, the author 1s showing that the
text ‘Righteousness’ (Katha 3 1) and so on refers to the Lord
Immediately after the above quoted text, we find the following
7 the Katha valli ‘There are two, drinking of righteousness in the
world of good deeds, entered 17000 the cave, m the highest upper
region Those who know Brahman, speak of them as “lght” and
“‘ahade’’, as well as those who maintam the five sacred. fires,? and.
those too who thrice kmdle the Naciketas fire’® (Katha 31) Here
a doubt arses as to whether here buddhi and the individual soul
are designated as entered mto the cave, or the individual soul and
the Supreme Soul? What 1s reasonable here? If 1t be suggested.
Buddhi and the mdividual soul,—because m accordance with the
statement ‘“Hntered mto the cave’ (Katha 31), entermg into a
cave 18 mpossible on the part of the Supreme Soul who 18 all pervasive,
because 10 18 umposaible for the Supreme Bemg who has all His desires
fulfilled to be the enjoyer of the fruits of works, as stated m the
passage ‘Drinking of mghteousness’ (Katha 31), because any
connection with the “world of good deeds’,—1e with the world where
one enjoys the fruits of the works done by one’s self, viz the body
generated by works,—is impoasible on His part, and, finally, because a
question 18 found, seeking to know the individual soul as different
from एतत, viz ‘“There 1s this doubt when a man 18 dead some
saying, ‘He 1s’, others, “He 18 not’ This I should know, as taught
by you”’ (Katha 120) Henose, these two alone (viz buddh
and mdrvidual soul) are established by this text,—
1 Ie the Lord abides with the mdrvidual soul in the same place wiz the
heart, and as such 18 easily knowable and atbamable by 1b
2 "एक Anvdidrya-pacana or Dakgya Gérhapatya, Ahavantya Sabhya, and
Avasthya MW p 577, Col 8
2 VideMW,p 458, 001 2
^ The sense 18 Nacwkeid wanta to know here what happens to the soul after
death, 1 8 he wants to know the self as 0187158 from the body buddhi and so
on Hence, m reply Yama must speak of the mdrvidual sovl and buddh:, and
aa such the passage 70. question must deal with these two alone
fat 1 2 11
ang 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 109
We reply ‘The souls entered mto the cave, viz the heart, are two
sentient bemgsalone IJf1t be objected The entarmg of the individual
soul stands to reason, since 16 1s atomio, but entermg mto a cave 18
not appropriate on the part of the Supreme Soul who 18 all pervaave,
and hence the above objection remams m force,—(we reply ) No
Because that is seen” That 18, because m this very Upanisad, the
text ‘The Person, of the swe of merely a thumb, abides withm the
soul, the Lord of the past and the future’ (Katha 412) enjoins the
Supreme Soul to be looked upon as abiding withm the caves (1e
hearta) of His sincere devotees m accordance with, their wishes, though
He Himself 18 all pervading, because this 1s found m the texts
“Hidden m the cave, dwellmg im the abyss’ (Katha 212), ‘He who
knows him, hidden in the cave’ (Tait 211), and, lastly, because
7) the text ‘She, who arses with the vital breath, who 18 Adit, who
18 made of the deitues, who, entermg into the cave abides therem,
who was manifested through the elaments’ (Katha 4 7), the mdividual
soul 18 designated as entermg into the cave Moreover, 1m, the text
‘Dunking of mghteousness’ (Katha 31), one bemg ascertamed to
be a sentzent bemg as the enjoyer of the fruzts of works, the other too
must be understood to be a sentient bemg alone, because we find that
in, ordinary life whenever s number 18 mentioned, bemgs of the same
class are meant When, og it 1s said ‘Look out for a second for this
cow’, people look out for a cow only, and not for a horse or an ass
This 1s established in, the Mah’ bhasya
To the objection, viz that > question 18 found which seeks to
know the imdividual soul ag driferent from buddhi,—({we reply ) the
reply to this question, 1s something else, and not this text It cannot
be said also that there 28 anythmg mcoonmstent m the ‘drinking of
righteousness’ (Katha 3 1); since the statement ‘Drninng of
nghteousness’ (Katha 31) 18 justifiable, just like the statement
‘Moen, with umbrellas are gomg’, + since 1t 18 possible to say that while
the mdividual soul drmks, the other (viz the Lord) causes 10 to drink,
1 That is referrmg to a crowd of hurrying people we often say Men with
umbrellaa are going’, though really only some of them are carrying umbrellas
and not all Sznularly, here too, when 20 28 8610 ‘Thetwodmnkng ete what
18 really meant 18 that only one (viz the individual soul) 28 drinkmg, and not the
other (viz Brahman)
[std 1 2 12
110 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 3]
and 18 as such, the causative agent, + and since 1t 18 well known every
where that the Supreme Lord first experiences the fruits of the works
which are performed by one who 18 whole heartedly devoted to Him,
and are entrusted to Him Hereby, 1t 28 explaimed also how the
Supreme Being can, abide m 9 body generated by works The sense
18 that just as ‘shade can be removed by ‘light’ and not ‘hght’ by
‘shade’, 80 the ‘light’ and the ‘shade’ (im the above text) are none but
Brahman and the individual soul, the independent and the dependent
Samkara and Bhaskara
Interpretation of the phrase ‘tad darsanit’ different, viz
‘ Because 17 18 seen (that numerals denote beings of the same nature) 2
SUTRA 12
< AND ON ACCOUNT OF SPECIFICATION ”’
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
The individual soul and the Supreme Bemg alone are understood
here as entered into the cave, because 11 this section those two alone
are specified as the object to be worshipped and the worshipper, as
the object to be known and the knower, and so on, in the texts ‘By
knowing the knower of what 18 born from Brahman,? the deity to be
worshipped, by revering (bim), he goes to everlasting peace (Katha
1 17 *), ‘The bridge for sacrificers’ (Katha 3 25) and 80 on
Vedanta-kaustubha
The individual soul and the Supreme Soul are to be understood.
as entered within the cave “also because of the specification ”’ of
those two alone The sense 18 that m this treatise (viz the Katha
upanisad), the individual soul and the Supreme Soul alone are specrfied
as that which approaches and the goal approached, as the thinker
1 Thatis Brahman 18 not really an agent or drinker here, but only instigates
the other to drink, He 1 saad to be drmking m this sense alone
988 1212,p 272 BhB 13919, 41
8 Correct quotation Brahmajajyfa Vide 088 ed, p 8 ‘Brahkmaja
ठ" may be interpreted also as Brahmajyad cdsau jfasceis
éR 5 On ot
(st 1 2 19
ADH. 4 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA Ill
and the object thought, mm the passages ‘Know the soul to be the
charioteer, and the body the chariot’ (Katha 33), ‘He reaches the
end of the road, that supreme place of Vienu’ (Katha 8 9), ‘Him, who
18 difficult to be seen, who has entered into the hidden, who 1s hidden
in a cave, who dwells m the abyss, ancient,—by thmking him God,
through the study of the Yoga of what relates to the self, the wise
man discards joy aud sorrow’ (Katha 212) and so on Hence, 1#
18 established that the individual soul and the Supreme Soul alone are
to be understood here as entered into the cave, and not buddhi and
the individual soul
Here ends the section entitled ‘ The cave’ (3)
Adhikarana 4 The section entitled ‘What 18
within’ (Satras 13-18)
SUTRA 13
“THAT WHICH IS WITHIN (THE BYE 78 BRAHMAN), ON ACCOUNT
OF HITTING In”
Vedainta-parijita-saurabha
In the passage ‘That person who 18 seen withm the sye’
(Chand 41514), the Person “‘ withm’”’ the eye 1s the Highest Person
alone, and not any one else Why? Because the attmbutes of
“being the self’, ‘bemg fearless’, “being the uniter of all lovely things’,
and 80 on,—mentioned in the passages = "ˆ He 18 the self”, said he,
“५ This 1s the mmortal, the fearless, this 1s Brahman ” ’ (Chind 4 15 1%),
‘They call 1t the “ uniter of lovely things ` ` ` (Chand 415 2),—“ fit m”
m the case of the Highest Person, alone
Vedanta-kaustubha
Now, by showing that the text “That Person who 1s seon within.
the eye’ (Chind 4151) and so on refers to Brahman, the author
removes the doubt, viz —In the previous passage (viz Katha 31),
the individual soul and the Supreme Soul may be understood, since
the dual number 1s found used But here, smoe the amgular number
18 R Bh, SK B 9 6, R Bh
[87 1 2 13
112 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]
18 used, who (viz the individual soul or the Supreme Soul) 18 to be
understood ?
We read under the Upakodala vidy& 117, the Chindogya —* ‘That
Person who 18 seen within, the eye, he 18 the soul’’, said he, “* This 1s the
immortal, the fearless, that 18 Brahman 6608, even if they pour
clamfied butter or water on 1t, 1b goes away to both sides’ (Chand
4151) and so on Here, a doubt arises as to whether the person,
taught as abiding within the eye, 1s the reflected self (16 the image
of a person reflected on the eye of another), or the dividual soul,
or the presidmg deity of the sense organ (viz the eye), or the Supreme
Soul ‘The prima face view 18 88 follows In accordance with the
statement ‘1s seen’, he may be the reflected self, because the reflected
self alone 1s well known to be percervable, while the individual soul
and the rest are not percelvable If 1t be said that here ‘seemg’
means scriptural insight (and not actual, physical perceiving),—then
the mdividual soul may be that which 1s ‘within’ the eye, snce it,
as the perceiver of colour and the reat, 18 in proximity to the eye 4
Or, the presiding deity of the eye 18 denoted by the word ‘person’
In accordance with the scriptural passage ‘Through his rays he 18
stationed herem’ (Brh 6 6 2), and because the all pervasive Bemg
cannot possibly abide withm, the eye
With regard to it, we reply “That which 18 withnm”,1e the
bemg who 1s withm the eye, 18 the Supreme Soul alone Why?
“On, account of fittimg m”,1e because the attmbutes of “bemg the
self’, ‘fearlessness’, and 80 on, “fit m,’’ m the case of the Supreme Soul
alone Although ‘bemg the Self’ and the rest are not mcompatible
with the real nature of the dividual soul, yet when the term ‘Brah
man,’ (in the text) can be understood in 18 primary 86786; 1४ 18 not
proper to take 10 as implymg some other sense Moreover, ‘fearless
ness ’, too, 18 not appropriate in the case of any one, other than Brahman,
as known also from the text ‘Through fear of Him the wind blows,
through fear of Him the sun mses, through fear of Him fire and
Indra, and death as fifth, speed along’ (Tart 281), and further
because the attributes of “bemg the uniter of all lovely things’ and the
1 Te 1t 18 the soul which really perceives colour eta and not the eye rtaelf
but the soul percerves them. through the eye and 18 as such im close proxmuity
to the eye Hence as the soul 1s mtuated very near to the eye 16 18 called the
person within the eye
fst 1 2 14
ADH 4] VEDANTA PABLIJATA SAURABHA 118
rest, mentioned m the sacred text ‘They call this “the uniter of all
lovely thmgs’’+, because all lovely things come together to hun’
(Ohind 4 16 2), “He 1s also “the leader to all blesmng’’? because he
leads to all blessings’ (Chind 4153), ‘He also 18 “the leader to
hight ’’8, because he shines 1n all the worlds’ (Chand 4 16 4), “fit m’’ m
the case of the Supreme Soul alone ‘Samyadvaima’ implies one from
whom the ‘vimas’, 1e the fruits of karmas ‘come together’, 1 6
one who 1s the cause of the mse of all frmta of karmas This very
thing 18 stated mm the above text thus —‘Because’, 16 since, ‘the
lovely things’ ‘oome together’, 1 6 arise from ‘this’,1e the Person
witbin the eye, the cause In the text ‘He 18 also the ‘vAamant’, the
‘viman!’ imples one who ‘leads’, 1 6 causes people, to attam the
‘vimas’ or auspicious objects This very thing 1s stated in the passage
‘Because he 16868 to all blessmgs’ In the text “He also is the
bh&mani’, the ‘ bhimani’ mmphes one who leads to the ‘bhiimas’,1e
one who manifesta all objecta ‘This very thing 18 stated in the text
‘Because he shines m all the worlds’,—this 1s the meanmg of the
text
SUTRA 14
“‘AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF PLACE ’”’
Vedainta-paérijata-saurabha
“And on account of the demgnation of the place”’ of the Supreme
Soul, m the text “He who abiding within the sun’ (Brh 37 184),
the Person within the sun 18 none but He
Vedanta -kaustubha
To the objection, viz How can an all pervadmg bemg be
deagnated as ocoupying a small locality, the reverend author of the
aphorisms rephes here
The Person within the eye oan be the Supreme Soulalone Why?
“On, account of the designation of place”,1e because of the designa
taon of the abode of the Lord, the Highest Person alone, the cause of
all causes, the inner soul of all, and the object to be meditated by all,
because one who occupies one part cannot properly dwell m another
~ Samyadvdma = Vdmant
— 4 8, R, Bh, SK, B
[80 1 2 16
114 VEDINTA PABIJETA SAURABHA ADH 4]
If 1t be objected How can an all pervadmg bemg abide
m ॐ small localty,—({we reply ) No moonmstency whatsoever 18
involved here Just as fire, though all pervading, becomes viable
in clouds and the rest m the form of hghtnmg and so on through 108
own, greatness, so the Lord, though all pervadmg, becomes visible m
the eye and the rest through His own spemal powers, for the sake of
falfillmg the desire of His devotees The words “and so on” mean —
On, account of the designation of the form of the Supreme Soul, suitable
to Him, and fit for alidmg im place,! celebrated m, the followmg
passages — ‘Now, this Golden Person who 18 seen, within, the sun, has
& golden beard, golden hair’ (Chind 1 6 6), ‘He sees the Person,
lymg im, the crty, who 1s higher than the highest aggregate of souls’
(Prana 55) “The Person, of the mze of merely & thumb, smokeless
ke hght’ (Katha 413) and so ०६, 16 on account of the designation
of the form of the Lord by the expreasion ‘The Person who 18 seen’ 2
(Chind 4151) By the term “and” His power of manifestang Himself
in forms, a8 desired, 171, the eye, m the heart and the like, 18 mdicated
SUTRA 15
“ON ACCOUNT ALSO OF THE MENTION ONLY OF WHAT 78 OHARAG
THRIEHD BY PLEASURE ”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
That which 1s within the eye 1s the Supreme Being alone, “on
account also of the mention of what 1s characterized by pleasure”
in the passage “Pleasure 1s Brahman, the ether 1s Brahman’ (Chand
41043)
Vedinta-kaustubha
The Person withm the eye is the Highest Person alone, the cause
of the world, and not any one 6196 Why! “Qn account also of
the mention of what 1s characterized by pleasure’ That 1s, m the
+ Te unless the Lord has © form, He cannot abide anywhere Hence the
body of the Lord enahlea Him. to abide in the eye and so on
> le that Person within the mum has a form 1s evident from the word ‘seen
for a bodileas bemg cannot be seen
8 8 R Bh, 4k B
[st 1 2 16
ADH 4] VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAUBABHA 116
introductory text ‘The vital breath, 18 Brahman, pleasure 18 Brahman,
the ether 18 Brahman’ (Chind 4104), pleasure that 1 Brahman,
1e Brahman charactemzed by pleasure, 28 mentioned, and that alone
18 referred to here
SUTRA 16
“ALSO FOR THAT VERY REASON, THAT 18 BRAHMAN ””
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
“That”,1¢6 pleasure, 18 “Brabman”’,16 Brahman, alone 18 charac-
terized by pleasure Why? On account also of the text, establshmg
their mutual specification 1, viz “What, verily, 1s pleasure, that 18 the
ether , what 18 the ether, that 1s pleasure’ (Chind 4 10 69)
Ved&inta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz: The word ‘pleasure’ conventionally denotes
wordly pleasure, 80 how can 1t be said that Brahman 18 characterzed
by pleasure {—the reverend teacher of the Veda replies here
“That 1s Brahman `` This means that in that mtroductory text,
Brahman alone, charactenzed by pleasure, 18 mentioned and not
worldly pleasure Why? “Also for that very reason,” 16 on account
also of the text mtmmatmg thex mutual specafication, viz ‘What,
verily, 18 pleasure that 1s the ether, what 1s the other, that 18 pleasure’
(Chand 4105), for worldly pleasure cannot consstently refer to an
all pervading substance—denoted by the term ‘etber’—as non different
from itself
COMPARISON
Samkara, etc
This Siitra 1s omitted by Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva
Ramfinuja
Reading different, viz ‘Ata ova ca 89 Brahma’ Interpretation
too different, viz ‘Hor that very reason (1e because the ether 18
characterized. by pleasure), that (viz the ether) 1s Brahman,’ ®
1 1 8 ha (pleagure) qualifies kha (ether) and vice versa
9 R, SK
8 St B 126 pp 252 258, Part ]
[8८ 1 2 17
1168 VEDANTA PABLIATA SAURABHA ADH 4]
Srikantha
Reading different, viz ‘Ata eva sa Brahma’ Interpretation too
different, viz exactly hke R&mé&nuja’s 7
SUTRA 17
“ALSO ON ACCOUNT OF THE MENTION OF THE PATH OF ONE WHO
HAS HEARD THE UPANISAD ``
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
“The path’, called ‘the path of gods’, “‘of one who has heard the
Upanigad.”’ 16 celebrated 1n another scriptural text, viz “Now those
who seek the soul by austerity, chastaty, faith and knowledge, win the
sun by the northern path ‘That, verily, 1s the abode of the vital
breaths, that 18 1mmortal, that 18 fearless, that 1s the highest goal
From that they do not return’ (Prasna 110%) “On account also
of the mention” of that very “path” here m the text ‘They pasa
over to light’ (Chand 415 6 8), the Person within the eye 18 none but
the Highest Person +
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this reason, too, the person within the eye 1s the Supreme
Soul,—so says the reverend author of the aphorisms
That through which bondage 1s broken 18 Upammad, the know
ledge of the Supreme Soul, or that which leads one to attam the
Supreme Soul 28 Upanisad, the knowledge of the Supreme Soul The
treatase relating to that 18 also Upamisad “Srutopanwatka” 1s one
by whom the Upanwad has been directly heard from a teacher, he 18
a knower of Brahman, the Mysterious “The path’”’ which, as cele
brated mm another Scripture and im the अपप, belongs to him, 16
18 his way to attaming Brahman who 1s establshed in thé Upanigads,—
that very path 1s mentioned here too as belongmg to one who knows
the person withm the eye Jor this reason too,1e “on account
18K 2 1216 p 360, Part 4
» 8, R, Bh 9 8 R 21, 2
That 18, the worshipper of the person within the eye follows the same
path followed by the worshzpper of Brahman This proves thet the person
withm the eye 18 Brahman
[इत 1 2 17
ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 117
of the mention of the path of one who has heard the Upanjsad”, the
person, within the sun 18 the Supreme Self,—this 16 the sense
Thus, the path, which 1 said to be followed by a knower,—so
that he may attam Brahman,—in another scriptural text, viz ‘Now,
those who seek the soul by austerity, chastity, faith and knowledge,
win, the sun by the northern path That, verily, 18 the abode of the
vital breaths, that 18 immortal, that 15 fearless, that 18 the highest
goal From that they do not return’ (तक 110), 88 well as
m the Smrta passage, viz “Wire, ight, day, the bnght fortmght, the
six months of the sun’s northern progress,—through these do the
knowers of Brahman go to Brahman on departing’ (Gita 8 24),—
that very path 18 said to belong to one who knows the person within
the eye, in the followmg passage ‘Now, whether they perform
obsequies in the case of such 9 person, or not, (the dead) pass over to
hight, from hght to the day, from the day to the waxmg fortnight,
from the waxing fortnight to the mx months during which the sun
moves northwards, from the months to the year, from the year to the
sun, from the sun, to the moon, from the moon to lghtnmg Then
there 18 © non human Person, He leads them to Brahman This 1s
the path of the gods, the path to Brahman Those who go by it
do not return to this human, whirlpool,—they return not’ (Chand
41556) Hence, the person withm the sun 18 none but the Supreme
Soul
The meaning of the text (viz Praéna 1 10) 18 as follows — ' Now’,
16 after the fall of the body, they ‘wm’, 168 attam the sun, “by the
northern path’, 1e through the path beginning with hght and 80 on
Then, through the moon and the rest, m the order to be demgnated
hereafter, they attam the nature of Brahman By domg what?
Through the three kinds of ‘austemty’, mentioned by the Lord,* or
else through the ‘austerity’ which 1s the special duty of a Vana
prastha 8 and a Samny&sin,‘ both bemg primarily given to austerity,
1 See below, p 119 Videalso VE 435
2 Vide Gité 17 14-16, where three kinds of austerity (fapas) are spoken of
viz Sirira, Vdn-maya and Mdnasa These, agai may be of three kmds, viz
sdiimka rdjasa and ईन 5176 17 16-22
3 A Brahmm m the third stage of life who has passed through the stages
of © student and. house holder and has abandoned. his hfe and family for an ascetic
1178 m the forest
« A Brahmm mm the fourth stage of hfe a religious mendicant, who has given
up all earthly concerns
[st 1 2 17
118 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]
‘through faith’,1e through vidyé, which 1s a mental disposition given
to the worship of the feet of the teacher, 16 through meditation,
aniaing from the hearmg and the thmking of the Ved&nta, and men
tioned m the text ‘The self should be meditated on’ (Brh 245,
456),—one should, seeking the self, meditate on 1t,—this 1s the
grammatical construction By the phrase ‘through chastity’, the
text shows the particular stage of life which 1s congenial to the hearing,
the thinkmg and the rest of the Vedinta By chastity and the
hke, not only the duties, incumbent on, special stages of life, are to be
understood That those who are destatute of any devotion for Brah
man, but merely belong to one or other of the stages of life and are
devoted to the duties, mcumbent thereon, return once more and
attam the world, 18 declared by the reverend Par&idara in & passage,
which begins ‘The Pr&jipatya 18 for the Brabmanas’ and ends
“The Brihma 18 declared m अत to be for the Samnyaemns’ That
those who, among these, are devoted to the Supreme Brahman,
attam His world, 18 mentioned im the passage “Those ascetics who
are devoted to Brahman alone, who ever meditate on Brahman, to
them belong that supreme place, which, verily, the wise see’ 6008,
the V&na-prastha and the rest should be understood as mmplymg
devotion to the Supreme Brahman, (and not as mere dutses incum
bent on different stages of life) By ‘chastity’ 18 meant here the
religious duties pursued by the Naisthikas 7 who lead a life of chasinty
and are absolutely free from all demres for enjoyment, here or here
after The sense 18 that the search for Brahman should properly be
made through such 9 permanent vow 9 of ‘chastity’
The sacred duty called ‘chastity’ 18 stated by the all knowmg
‘Law of Salvation’ 2 under the section called ‘Vargneya-adhy&tma’,
thus “This unbroken chastity which 1s the form of Brahman 18
higher than all reigious practices By 1t, (people) reach the highest
goal’ (Mab& 1277704) Under the section treatmg of mstruction,
1 A Noasgiiska 16 ॐ perpetual religious student, who observes the vow of
ohashty MW,p 570, 00 1
Sle ° Brahme-odrya’ (= chastity) in the ordinary sense of the term means
temporary chasitty which 9 student has to observe ao long as he has not entered
the stege of a house holder But here the term means permanent chastity which
© Naswtka, e g practines
ठ Mokea-dharma
# P 640 line 40, vol ॐ, Amiatic Somety ed
fst 1 ॐ 17
apH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 119
it 18 sald ‘Lasten, O Father Yudhisthira, to the ments of chastity
He who leads a life of chastaty from birth to death, and practises the
“Great Vow”, there 1s nothing, know, O King, that 1s unattamable by
him Many milhons of Vrgs dwell m the world of Brahman, those
who are truthful, ever self controlled, leading © life of chastaty Chas
tity 18 a supreme duty, honoured in all stages of 118, and 1f resorted to,
chastity burns, 0 King, allems’,andsoon In accordance with the
scriptural text, viz ‘Desirmg which people practice chastity, that
word I tell you m bmef’ (Katha 215), as well as m accordance with
the statement by the Lord, vz ‘“ Demrmg which people practise
chastaty, that word I will tell youm bref” ’ (08 8 11), chastity alone
18 the chief means to the supreme region ‘The repetition of the
means, to be mentioned hereafter m the aphorsm ‘Repetition,
more than, once, because of teaching’ (Br Si 411), may also be
resorted to by a Naisthike
The text ‘This verly’ (last portaon of Prana 110) and so on
indicates Brahman, who 18 to be attaimed through the path which
begms with light, and to be enquired mto
(The meanmg of the text—Ohbind 4155 6—18 as follows )
‘Now’, 16 when he 18 dead, whether people perform proper funeral
ceremonies or do not perform them, m either case, the wise, un
obstructed m, their progress, and wishing to attam the nature of the
Lord, attain the premdmmg deity of light, through that the day, after
that, they successively attam, the presidmg derties of fortnight, the
six months of the northern progress of the sun, the year, the wind
or the world of gods, the sun, the moon, bghtumg the worlds of the
king of water (16 Varuna) and Indra, then the world of Prajipati
After that, breaking through the sphere of prakrti, they atiam, the
Viraj&, the best of rivers and formmg the boundary of the supreme
place After having crossed that river and having entered the world
of Vigmn,—oalled ‘supreme void’, ‘supreme place’, ‘world of Brah
man” asd so on, havmg the stated marks,’ and unapproachable by
those who are averse to the Lord,—they roam about, attammg the
nature of Brahman,—this 18 the resulting meanmg This we shall
expound in details m the fourth chapter? ‘This 1s the path of Gods’,
because 1t 18 characterized by having Gods as the conductors It 18
the ‘path to Brahman’, because 16 18 the way to Brahman, the object
i Vide VE 111 8vVideVE 435
[80 1 2 18
120 VEDANTA PLRIJATA SAURABHA ADH 4]
to be enquired into and the object to be attained ‘Those who go
by rt’‘do not return’,1e do not enter any more, through the mfluence
of Kkarmas, mto ‘this human whirlpool’, 1e the material world,
figuratively implied by the creation, of mankind, and subject to re
currence (which 18 indicated by the term ‘whirlpool’), —as declared
by the Lord Himself m the passage ‘“The worlds, beginnmeg from tho
world of Brahma, come and go, 0 Arjuna But, on attammg mo, O
son, of Kuni, there 18 no rebirth”’’ (Gita 816) The difference of
the world of Brahman from the sphere of matter 1s stated m the
Moksa dharma under the dialogue between Jaigiga and Vy&sita in, the
passage which begms ‘A man of what nature, of what conduct, of
what Jearning, of what valour does attam the place of Brahman
which 18 higher than prakri, and eternal’’?’, and ends “He attams
the place of Brahman which 1s higher than prakrti, and eternal’’’
(1818 12 9968 9969 ?)
SUTRA 18
“ON ACCOUNT OF NON ABIDING, AS WELL 4S ON ACOOUNT OF
IMPOSSIBILITY, NOT THA OTHER ”’
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
That which 1s withm, the eye cannot be any one “other’’ than the
Highest Self Why? Because any one other than Him does not
regularly abide therem, and because mmmortality and the rest are
not possible on rts part
Vedinta-kauatubha
“The other’’,16 the reflected self, or the mdrvidual soul, or the
presiding de1ty of the eye, m short, any one other than the Supreme
Soul,—ais not the Person withm the eye Why? “On account of
non-ebiding 7, 1e because any one other than the Supreme Soul,
does not regularly abide m, the eye, since the presence of the reflected.
soul in the eye depends on, the nearness of another person, to the oye,
(and hence when, the person, moves away, there 1s no reflection any
longer), smce the individual soul 1s connected with all the sense organs
(and cannot, therefore, abide withm the eye only), and since the
1 © 716, lmes 23 23, vol 8 For full quotation see under VK 1318
[st 1 2 19
ADH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 121
presiding deity 18 declared to abide m the eye through the rays, (and
hence does not hrmself abide withm the eyes1), and finally, because
ummortality, fearlessness, “bemg the uniter of lovely things’ and the reat
are not possible on the part of any one other than Him Hence, it
18 established that the Highest Soul alone 18 to be worshipped as the
person withm the eye
Here ends the section entitled ‘That which 1s within’ (4)
COMPARISON
Srikantha
Interpretation, different, viz he takes this sitra as formmg an.
adhikarana by itaelf, concerned with the question, whether the Person,
of the mze of a thumb merely, (Mah&n&r 16 3) 18 the Lord or someone
elso Thus ‘(The person, of the size of a thumb, 1s the Lord),
because of the instability (16 unsuitableness), as well as because of
the impossibilty (of the attributes of “having the entire world as the
body’’, “bemg the devourer of the entire world”’, and so on, on, the part
of any one else)’ 9
Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘The inner
controller’ (Stitras 19-21)
SUTRA 19
‘Ta INNER CONTROLLER IN THH PRESIDING DEITIES AND THE
REST, AND IN THE WORLDS AND THE REST (18 THE Higuast SHELF),
ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF His QuaLriiss ** 8
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
The inner controller,—mentioned repeatedly m all the versions
in reference to the presidimg deities of the earth and the rest, m the
passage which begms ‘He who, abiding withm the earth’, and
1 Vide अल B 1118, p 854, Part 1
SK 2 1118, ए 364-66, Part 4
8 Of the different readings—EK SS ed and Bmndaban ed read ‘adhs
devids O8S ed reads ‘adhsdawddhs’
[80 1 2 19
122 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 5]
continues ‘He 1s your soul, the mner controller’ (Brh 37 3*),—
18 the Highest Self alone Why? “On account of the designation
of His qualtties”’ here, viz “bemg the controller of all’ and so on
Vedanta-kaustubha
Now, the author pomta out that just as the text about the Person
within the eye refers to Brahman, so the text about the mner controller,
too, refers to Brahman, and to none else
The inner controller, 1e the controller who abides within, who
18 repeatedly mentioned m the Brhadiranyaka, under the section
treating of the mner controller, पा all the versions 1) reference to the
presiding deities of the earth, the sky, the ether and the rest, ण the
passage which beginning ‘Who controls from within this world and
the other world and all bemgs’ (Brh 371), contamues ‘He who,
dwellmg within the earth, 18 other than the earth, whom the earth
does not know, of whom the earth 16 the body, who controls the earth
withm—He 18 your soul, the inner controller, mmmortal 2’ (Brh 3 7 3),
and so on, aud who 18 taught, after that,—m the text which begms
‘He who abiding 1n all the worlds’ (Sat Br 1467178) and onds
‘He who abiding withm the soul’ (Sat Br 1467 804),—by a section,
which enjoms him with m reference to the worlds, the Vedas, the
sacrifices and. the soul 5.—15 such an, muer controller, a deity, or an
individual soul, or the Highest Self, the one topic of all the Vedas?
What 18 reasonable here? He may be 9 presiding deity, or an indtv1
dual soul, because these two abide everywhere
With regard to this, we reply The mnef controller mentaoned im
all the versions 171 reference to the presidimg deities of the earth, fire,
sky, ether, air, sun and the rest, can be the Highest Self alone
18 R Bh, SK,B
9 This 28 repeated at the end of each verse from Brh 8 7 3-8 7 23
3 P 107 lme & 4 Op ot, line 18
५ The Kdnve branch demgnates a bemg abiding within the earth and the reat
(vide Beh 873-28) The Mddhyandina branch, after designating a bemg abiding
withm the earth and eo on (vide Sat Br 1467716) reads three additonal
texts, viz "He who dwells m all the worlds , ‘He who dwells m all the Vedas’
and He who dwells in all the sacrfices, and m place of He who dwells m
mtelligence (Brh $722) > text He who dwells m the soul’ (Vide Sat Br
146717-80) Note that Nembdrka makes no reference to this Mdadhyandsa
addition. in lug commentary, although 16 8 alearly indicated im the eilira by the
word lokddsgu’
[at 1 2 19
ADH 5] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 123
Wherefore? “On account of the demgnation, of His quahties”’,1e on
account of the designation here of the peculiar qualities of the Highest
Self, viz “bemg the governor of all worlds, Vedas, sacrifices, bemgs,
vital breaths, soul and the rest’, “bemg the mmer controller of all’,
‘bemg immortal’ and soon Hence a deity cannot be understood,
because a deity, too, 18 but an mdividual soul and the stated qualities
are not appropriate on his part, and because 111 that case, the statement
that the mner controller 13 unknowable by the earth god, yz “Whom
the earth does not know’ (Brh 373), becomes mconsustent The
individual soul, too, 18 not the mner controller, for the stated qualities
are not appropriate on 108 part as well, and because m the passage
‘He 18 your soul, the mner controller’ (Brh 377 3, etc ), rt 18 declared
to be different from the mner controller by the use of the genetive
case ( = “your’), designating difference
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 18 siitra 18 m Samkara bhisya ‘Reading different, viz
‘ Antaryamyadhidaiviidigu * 1, 16 omits ‘lok&disn’
Ramanuja
Reading lke the Chowkhamba edition? Interpretation different,
viz exactly hke Srintvisa’s Nimbirka reads ‘lokidign’ m the
siitra, hke Ram&nuja, but gives no meaning of the word “lokAdigu’
Bhaskara and Srikantha
This 18 sutra 18 m bs commentary Reading lke the Chow
khamba edition, 9
Baladeva
Ths 18 sfitra 18 10 his commentary Readmg different, viz
hke Samkara’s ¢
1§B 1218, p 282
2 उत B 1219, p 257, vol 1
‡ Bh B1218,p 48 SK B 1310 p 868 Part 4
«GB 1218(p 128 Chap 1)
[st 12 20
124. VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 5]
SUTRA 20
“AND (THE INNER CONTROLLER 78) NOT THAT WHICH IS DESIGNATED
IN THH SMRTI, ON ACCOUNT OF THE MHNTION OF QUALITIES NOT
BELONGING TO IT”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
And, pradhina 18 not denoted by the term “imner controller”,
“on account of the mention,” of the qualties of a sentient bemg, viz
‘beg the controller of all’, ‘bemg the seer of all’ and so on
Vedanta -kaustubha
Although pradhina has already been, set aaide unde: the apho-
riam ‘Because (he) sees, not, it 18 non somptural’ (Br Si 1158),
yet it 1s bemg set aside once more appiehending the posabibty of the
attributes of invisibility the rest (belonging to the mner controller
alone) on 108 part 1
“That which 1s designated m the Smrta”,1e pradhinsa established.
by the Samkhya Smrti, 18 not denoted by the term “immer controller”
Why? “On account of the mention of qualities not belonging to
it”’,—"“the qualities not belonging to 10" mean the qualities which
belong to a sentient bemg,—‘‘on account of the mention”,16 declara-
aon, of such qualities, mm the concluding text ‘He is the unseen seer,
the unheard hearer, the unknown knower’ (Brh 3723) On
account of the designation of the quahties of a sentaent bemg, vz
‘bemg the soul of all’, “bemg the governor of all’ and so on, pradhina
cannot be accepted here
COMPARISON
Ram&nuja and Srikantha
Reading different, viz add ‘Siriraica’, and extends the same
argument to the case of the individual soul as well 2
1 That 1s pradidna 18 mvimble and the mner controller too w said to be
invinble, eto (Brh 38728) Hence 1b might be thought that pradidna 1s the
inner controller This w beme refuted hare
9 St B 1220,p 250, एष्ट] SE B 1220, p 372, Part 4
[80 1 2 21
ADE 5] VEDANTA PARIJITA SAUBABHA 125
SUTRA 21
“AND THRE BMBODIED ONE (IS NOT THE INNER OONTROLLER),
BEOAUSH BOTH ALSO DEPICT IT AS DIFFERENT”
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
“And”? the mdtvidual soul 1s not the mner controller, because
“both” the Kanvas, ‘as well as’ the Madhyandmas depict “it”
“as different’ from the mner controller, respectively mm the passages
“He who abiding in intelligence’ (Brh 37 221), ‘He who abiding in
the soul’ (Sat Br 1467 802)
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the objection Let then the mdividual soul, and not pradhina,
be denoted by the term “imner controller’’, smce the qualities of bemg
@ seer and the rest are appropriate on, the soul’s part—the author
replies here
The word ‘not’ 1s to be supplied here from the preceding aphorism
And the “embodied one”’,1e the soul which has entered ito a body,
its abode for enjoying the fruits of 1ts own actions, 18 not denoted by
the term. “imner controller’’, on account of the mention of qualities not
belonging to 1t, viz ‘bemg the soul of all’, “bemg the governor of all’,
‘bemg the seer of all’ and so on, ‘for both’ the Kanvas, ‘as well as’
the Madhyandmas “depict” ‘this’, 16 the embodied one, “as
different ’’ from the inner controller, mnce the embodied self 1s an abode
lke the earth and the rest, and 18 an object to be governed® The
Kanvas read ‘He who abidimg within intelligence’ (Brh 37 22),
the Maédhyandmas read “Whom the soul does not know, of whom
the soul 1s the body, who controls the soul from withiwn—He 18 your
soul, the mner controller, immortal’ (Sat Br 1457380) There
bemg the denial of any other seer m the passage “There 18 no seer
other than Him’ (Brh 87 23), the seer of everythmg 18 the Highost
Férson alone, the sense bemg that none other than, the Lord 18 the seer
of everything The imdividual soul, known from the text ‘'The
person alone 18 a seer, ॐ hearer’, 18 the seer of only a few thmgs m
18 R Bh दह. 28 9 2 1016, 1175 18 8, R, Bh,SK B
ॐ Ie the individual soul 1s the abode, while the mner controller 28 one who
abides therem, just as He abides withm the earth and the rest Agaim, the
individual soul 1s the object governed, the mner controller the governor Hence
the two are different
[st 1 2 21
126 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]
contrast to Brahman, (the seer of everythmg),—such 1s the distanction
(between, Brahman, and the soul, though both are seers) Here too,
the difference of nature between, the individual soul and Brahman is
esteabliahed by Scripture and aphorism This difference should not
be understood m the sense the logimans understand 1t to exist between
the mdrvidual soul and the Lord, (16 as absolute difference), but
(1 omphes that the mdividual soul) 1s a part of Brahman who 18 One
alone, a8 Mentioned m the text ‘Brahman,! one, without a second’
(Chand 621), without an equal or © superior, the governor, possessed.
of mfinite powers and an ocean of auspicious qualities Although
here in, the mtroduotory chapter, the individual soul, possessed of the
stated marks, 18 said to be different from the Lord, because of 108 own
peculiar qualities, mentioned in the Veda, viz “bemg an object to be
controlled’ and so on,—yet just as an attribute 18 different from its
substratum (yet non different from 10), so 1t 15 non different from ite
own. controller, aa 1t 18 incapable of having an independent exstence
or activity, and as 1t does not contradict the attributes, such as, ‘bemg
one’, ‘being without a second’ and so on, belonging to the Whole
of which 10 18 a part? Thus, the qualities of ‘bemg subject to bondage
and release’, ‘havmg litle knowledge’ and the rest, pertam to the
part, (viz the dividual soul), while the qualities of ‘bemg ever free’,
“being omniscient’, “bemg unenveloped (by nescence)’, “bemg the
object to be approached by the freed’ and the reat, are peculiar to
Brahman, Hence, no fault of an mtermixture of qualities arises here
Similarly, ‘materiality’, ‘mutability’ and the lke are the peculiar
qualities of the non sentzent, a power of Brahman, while‘ omnipotence’,
‘omniscience’ and the reat, are peculiar to Brahman, the possessor of the
power Although prakrti 1s different from Brahman as 9 power, yet 17
18 non. different from Brahman, as a power has no separate activity,
etc Thus, a relation of difference non differance between the three
realities 18 the view of the followers of the Upanisads (16 VedAntins)
Here ends the section entitled ‘The mner controller’ (5)
1 The word Brahman’ not meluded in the onginal text
ॐ Ie if the mdvidual soul were different from Brahman then 1) would
have been a second principle besides Brahman and would have thereby contra
0160650 Eis Oneness But as it does not do ao, 7 musth be non different from Him
[st 1 2 22
ADH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA 127
COMPARISON
Ramf@nuja and Srikantha
Readmg different, viz omits ‘s&riraéca” m the begmnmg,
interpretation same +
Thus, accordmg to Nimb&rka, Samkara, Bhiskara and Bala
deva —
‘Na 09 smirtam atad dharm&ibhiuipit’ (One siitra )
‘Sartrascobhsye’p1 hi bhedenamam adhfyate ° (One sutra )
According to Raéménuja and. Srikantha —
‘Na ca smirtam atad dharmf&bhiliip&t इल त 09 ' (One sttra )
“Ubhaye’p1 hi bhedenamam adhiyate’ (One siitra )
Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘Invisibi
lity’ (७१४८०७8 22-24)
SUTRA 22
“ToaT WHICH POSSHSSES THE QUALITIES OF INVISIBILITY AND
80 ON (78 उ+ ध +ल); ON ACCOUNT OF THE MENTION oF (His)
QUALITIRG ”
Vedanta -padrijata-saurabha
That which 13 mentioned by the Atharvanikas in the text
‘Invisible’ (Mund 116%) and 80 on, 48 ‘possessed of the qualziies
of mvisibility and the rest’, 18 the Highest Self alone Why? “On
account of the mention’’ of His “qualrties’’ m the passage ‘He who 18
omniscient’ (Mund 11 9 3), eto
Vedanta-kaustubha
1
like “hemg a seer’ and the like which belong to a sentient
being only Now, by showmg that the text ‘Now, the higher 18
that whereby that Imperuhable’ (Mund 115), and so on refers to
Brahman, the author 18 dusposmg of the objection, viz Let pradhina
1 Si B 1222, p 260 PartI
SK 2 1222 p $74, Part 1
9 8 R, Bh, SK, B 9 Op ov
[0 1 2 22
128 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]
be understood here (in, the above text), owing to the absence of that
(18 owing to the fact that the above text contains no reference to the
quahties of 8 sentient bemg)
In the Atharvana, 1t 18 821 ‘There are two knowledges to be
known’ (Mund 114) Among these, the knowledge of works,
viz the Rg veda and the rest, 18 the lower4 With a view to teaching
the higher, viz the knowledge of Brahman, in contrast to 10, 1t 15
said ‘Now, the higher 1s that whereby the Imperihable 1s appre
hended, that which 18 invisible, mcapable of bemg grasped, without
family, without caste, without eye, without ear, 1t 28 without hands
and feet, eternal, all pervasive, omnipresent, excessively subtle, 16 18
unchangeable, which the wise percerve as the source of beings’ (Mund
115 6), “Without the vital breath, without mind, pure, higher than the
ligh Impernshable* (Mund 2112) and soon Here a doubt arises as
to whether here the Impemshable, the source of begs and possessed of
the qualities of invimbilty and the rest, 18 pradh&na, or the mdividual
soul, or the Highest Self The prima facie view 18 98 follows —As
mnvisibilty and such, other qualities are possible on the part of pradbina
and. the individual soul, as pradh&na is established to be the source
of beings, and as the individual soul too, the cause of the body and
the rest through 1ts own works, can be so,—let one of these two be
the Imperishable
With regard to this, we reply The Impermshable, the source of
beings and possessed of the qualities of invisibility and the rest, 18 the
Hughest Selfalone Why! “On account of the mention of quahties”’,
1e because in the passage “He who 18 all knowing, ommacient, whose
penance consists of knowledge, from Him alone Brahman, name and
form, and food arse’ (Mund 11 9), the permanent attributes of the
Self, viz omniscience, etc are stated, with a view to laying
down the attributes of the imperishable, the source of beings
If 16 be objected This wew is not reasonable Having referred
to the Impershable m the passage “The imperishable 1s apprehended ’
(Mund 115), then agam havymg designated the Imperishable as a
पा in the passage ‘Higher than the high Impermhable’ (Mund
212), the text next goes on to designate the meaning of the word.
‘higher’ as the Highest Self, m, the passage ‘He who 18 all knowing’
(Mund 119) If here the Highest Self be understood by the word
2 Vide Mimd 115
[80 1 2 22
ADH 6] VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 129
“Im perishable’ mm the first passage, then how can the text ‘Higher
than the Impernshable, the Light’ (Mund 212) be possible, 1t bemg
impossible for one to be higher than one’s own, self, and there bemng
no reality higher than Brahman, the Impemshable, the cause of the
world and the topic of discussion, 98 evident from the declaration by
the Lord Himeelf, viz ‘“There 18 nothmg else, higher than me, 0
Dhanafijaya”’!’ (१४ ¶ 7), as well as from the scriptural text ‘There
18 nothing higher than the Person’ (Katha 311)% Hence, let either
pradhina or the mdividual soul be the meanmg of the word “Impernsh
able’, mentioned first, (Mund 115), and let the Highest Self, higher
than that high Impenshable, be omniscient,—
(We reply ) Not so, because the word ‘Impenshable’, mentioned.
for the second tre, (Mund 21 5) does not refer to the Highest Self
Thus, from the knowledge, called ‘higher’,—mentaoned 1n the passage
‘The higher 1s that whereby that Impenshable 1s apprehended’
(Mund 1 1 5),—uit 18 gathered that the Impemshable 18 the Highest
Brahman alone, since no other knowledge, except that of Brahman,
can be high ‘Thus, having begun, with the Highest Self, denoted by
the word ‘Impenshable’ and celebrated in the texts ‘He teaches in
trath that knowledge of Brahman whereby one knows the Imperish
able, the Person, the True’ (Mund 1213), ‘As the hams and the
body hairs anwe from ® living person, so from the Imperishable arses
this Universe’ (Mund 1177), ‘As from a well lit fire thousands of
sparks of a mmular form emit forth, 80 do, my dear, manifold existences
from the Impenshable’ (Mund 211) and so on, and with the Imper
whable, possessed of the attributes of invisibility and the rest, 17 the
passage ‘Now, the higher 18 that whereby that Imperishable 18 known’
(Mond 1 1 6), Serrpture, with a view to demonstratang His qualities
and nature, designates Him once more as ‘higher’ than the ‘Imperish,
able’,1e@ than the mdrvidual soul which 1s His own part, as well as
than the ‘high’,1e pradhfina which His own power,—ie designates
Hin ag their source and controller Or, else, the ‘Impermshable’ 18
that which pervades the mass of its own modifications, ‘higher’ than
that mperishable 1s pradhina which 1s superior to 108 own, 7007909
tions, and ‘higher’ than this pradh&na 18 the Highest Self Or, else,
the Supremes Person 1s ‘higher’ than the Person, withm the aggregate
(or Hhranyagarbha) who 1s higher than the Impenshable, viz pradh&na,
—this 18 the sense
[80 1 2 28
130 VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA ADE 6]
SUTRA 23
«° ATSO ON ACOOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF ATTRIBUTES AND
DIFFERHNCH, NOT THH TWO OTHERS `
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
Pradhina and the individual soul are not denoted by the words
‘Impershable, the source of bemgs’, “on account of the designation.
of attmbutes and difference’ The demgnation of atimbutes 18
"All pervading’ (Mund 1 1 6 4), and the designation of difference 18
‘Higher than the high Impermhable’ (Mund 21 23)
Vedanta-kaustubha
«The two others ”’,1e pradhina and the soul, are not mdicated
as the Impershable, the source of bemgs, but the Highest Self alone
Why? “ Also on account of the demgnation of attributes and differ
ence” That is, the attribute ‘All pervadmg’ (Mund 116) m
the text concerned excludes pradhina and the mdzvidual soul from
bemg the Impershable, the source of bemgs,—on, sccount of that,
m, the text ‘Higher than the high Impernshable’ (Mund 21 2),
the difference of the Imperuhable, the source of bemgs, from these
two 18 designated,—on account of that as well
COMPARISON
Raminuja and Srikantha
They interpret this siitra m, the same way ‘The word ‘videsana’
interpreted differently, viz “Because this section distinguishes the
Imperishable from pradhdna and the individual soul, ance 1t ams at
proving that through the knowledge of one there 18 the knowledge of
all’ 3
1 Not quoted by others
9 &, 7, Bh, SK
3 St 2 1223 p 364 एषः] &K B 1228 p 383, Part 4
[ग 1 2 24
ADH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 191
SOTRA 24
‘ALSO ON ACOOUNT OF THE MENTION OF (His) FoRM ”’
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
* Also on account of the mention of the form” of the Highest
Self in the passage ‘Fire 18 his head’ (Mund 2141) and 80 on,
not the other two
Vedainta-kaustubha
The very same Bemg who 1s this Impemshable, the source of
bemgs, the Cause of all causes and has the sentient and the non
sentient as His powers, abides also as the mner controller of the
sentient and the non sentient, the powers, and as His effects, and
should be meditated on by one who desires salvation and 18 free from
the faults of envy and malice,—with a view to showing this, the
author here states that the universe 1s the form of the Lord
The Impershable, the source of bemgs, 18 the Highest Self alone,
and not the other two Why?! =“ Onaccount of the mention of (His)
form ' In the passage ‘Fire 18 his head, his eyes, the sun and the
moon, the regions his ears, his utterances the Vedas, wind his breath,
his heart the Universe, from his feet the earth (amnses), truly, he 18
the Inner Soul of all bemgs’ (Mund 21 4), the entire expanse of the
universe, consisting of the sentient and the non sentient, 1s demgnated.
as the form of the Highest Self alone, the mner Controller of all If
pradhfng snd, the individual soul be understood here, the designation
of such 9 form 18 not posaible for this reason also, 1) 1s established
that the Impenshable, who 1s the source of beings, 1s the Highest
Person
Here ends the section entatled ‘Invisibility’ (6)
COMPARISON
Baladeva
After thia इतिप he reads a siitra ‘prakaranét’, not found m
other commentarios
1 §, BR, Bh, SE.
[st 1 2 25
132 VEDANTA PARIJITA SAURABHA ADH 7]
Adhikarana 7 The section ontitled ‘Vaiiva-
nara’ (9377788 25-83)
SUTRA 25
५८ VaIsSVENARA (18 THE LORD), ON ACCOUNT OF THE DISTINCTIVE
ATTRIBUTES OF THH COMMON TERM”
Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha
‘Vaiivanara’ 18 the Highest Self alone, because that the word
‘Vaiévinare’, though a common term, denotmg (both) fire and
Brahman, 18 to be understood as implying Brahman here, follows from
the fact that we know ita ‘distinctive attributes”’ through the designa-
tion, of 1ts parts, auch as the heaven as tis head and so on
Vedinta-kaustubha
Thus, 1t has been pomted out that the Lord 18 to be meditated on,
as the Soul of the movable and the mmmovable Now, by poimting
out that the Lord 1s to be meditated on, m the very same manner, as
Vaiévanare also, the author shows that the text ‘““Who 18 our soul }
What is Brahman” ?’ (Chand 6 11 1) refers to the Lord
In the Chandogya, the followmg passage 18 found, begmning
‘*“Who 18 our soul? What 1s Brahman” ?’ (Chind 6 111), “"You
know now that Vaiéviinara Self, tell us about Him alone” ’ (Chand
5116), and continumg ‘But he who meditates on the Vassévinara
Self as of the measure of a span, only, and as of an, unlimited dimension,
—he eats food m all the worlds, in all beings, in all nelves Verily,
of this Vaiévinara Self, the head, mdeed, 18 the brightly
(heaven), the eye the multsform (sun), the breath that which
m various paths (16 the wind), the body the extended (space), the
bladder, indeed, wealth (16 water), the feet the earth mdeed, the
breast, indeed, the sacrificial altar, the hairs the sacrificial grass, the
heart the G&rhapatya fire, the mind the AnvahSryapacans, fire, the
mouth, the Ahavantya fire’ (Chand 61812) A doubt arses as
to whether here VaiSvinara 18 the gastric fire, or the elemental fire,
or the presidmg deity of fire, or the Highest Self The prema facie
view 18 @ follows The word ‘Vaiévinara’ 18 9 commonterm Why?
Because 7४ 1s apphed to the gastric fire, as m the passage ‘This 18
the Vaisvinara fire which 18 within this person, by means of which
0 1 2 26
ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUNTUBHA 133
this food that 1s eaten 1s digested Ite nome w that which one he we
on, covering the ears When one 18 on the point of departing ono doe»
not hear this sound’ (अ 591), bocause it is applic also to the
elemental fire, as m the passage ‘For the whole world, tho gods
made Agni Vaiévanara 9 sign of the day’ (Rg ४ 10 98 121)
bocauso 1# 18 apphed to the fire god {00 as 10 the pustage Mav we
be in the favour of Vauivinara, for verily, he 18 the king: of the worlds,
bliss, lustrous’ (Rg V 19813), and because it 18 applied to the
Highest Self, as 11 the passages “Hoe threw 1६ in tho olf, mdeed, in
the hoart m Agni Vasévinara’ (Tat 3 31875) ‘Ths Vanvi
nara amses as having all forms, naa the vital bienth, a4 fire
(Pratna 1 7)
With regard to it, we reply Vaisvanara 1s the Hyrhest Person
alone Why’? “On account of the distinctive attributes of the
common word ”’,1e because thore are distinctive attiibutes for taking
the common term ‘Vaisvinara’,—applied, oquaily, to the gastric fite,
the elemental fire, the fire god and tho Highest Self,—as denoting
specifically the Haghest Self alone The sense 1s that the distinctive
attmbutes by reason of which the Highost Person slone may be taken
as the primary meanmg of the word ‘Varvinaia , aro present hers,
as we know them from the text ‘Of this \Vaimvauara Nolt, the head
indeed 18 the bnghtly shmimg (heaven)’ (Chind 518 2) and 0 on
Henoe, the word ‘Vaisvadnara’, though commonly applicable to all
(the tour), here denotes the Highest Self (alone), on account of such.
distinctive attributes The gastric fire and the rest cannot possibly
have limbs, like the heaven, and the rest down to the earth,—nmnco
they are not the soul of all, and snes m, this section, the common, term
16 qualified by the special attributes of the Lord such as, ‘bemg the
soul of all’ and the rest, mentioned m the mtroductory text =“ Who 18
our soul? What 18 Brahman” ?’ (Chand 5 11'1)
1 P 8347 lnes 78
9 P 81, lines 3 4
3 P 265, lmes 34, (vol 3) Correct quotation T'ad hrdaye
ajnau vatéednare prdeyat’
[9 1 2 26
134. VEDINTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7]
SUTRA 26
“THAsT WHIOH IS STATED BY SMRTI MUST BR AN INDICATION,
THUS ”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
The form, stated m Smrti as well, im the passage ‘Of whom,
fire 1s the mouth, the heaven the head’ (Mahé 12 1656 61), “must”
be a decustve factor m proving that Vaiévinara 1s the Highest Self
Vedanta-kaustubha
The word “thus” mmples the reason For this reason, too,
Vaisvinara 78 the Highest Self alone,—because “ that which 1s stated
by Smrta must be an mdication.” of the fact that the word ‘Vaiévinara’
denotes the Highest Self The phrase “That which 1s stated by
Smrti”’ means that the form, characterized by having the heaven for
the head and the rest, denoted by the scriptural text ‘The head,
indeed, 18 the brightly shimmg (heaven)* (Chind 6 18 2) and so on,
18 mentioned also by a Smrt: which follows Senpture That very
thing must be “‘an indication”, 1e a& decisive factor here,—this 18
the sense The अतप passages are the following ‘Of whom fire 1s
the mouth, the heaven the head, the sky the navel, the earth the feet,
the sun the eye, the regions the ear,—obeisance to Him, the Soul of
the world’ (Mab& 12 16560-1657a%), ‘Of whom the heaven 18 the
head, the wise declare, the sky, venly, the navel, the sun and the
moon the eyes, the regions the ear, the earth the feet,—He 28 the
inconcervable Soul, the maker of all bemgs’ Wor this very reason, 10
has been said ‘Sarpture and Smyti are celebrated to be the two
eyes of the wise Deprived of one, one 18 said to be “one syed”’,
deprived of both “bhyd” ’
Or, (an alternative explanation of the siitra ) the phrase “That
which 218 stated by Smytz”” means as follows (The form) which 18
recognized, m the followmg manner thus What is celebrated in
another scriptural text, viz “Bure 18 his head, the eyes the sun and the
moon’ (Mund 21 4), and so on, as well as m the stated Smyti passages
as the form of the Highest Self, that alone, 1s stated here (m (क्षणत्
6 18 2),—that form must be an mdication,ie 9 sign, that Vaisvinara
18 the Highest Self
1 8 ए 2 P 424 1168 2 3, vol 3
"सिचि I TE
[श 1 2 27
ADH 7 ] VEDANTA-PABIJEATA SAUBABHA 135
SOTRA 27
[ऋ IT BB OBJHOTED THAT (VAISVENARA 78 THE GASTRIO FIRB) ON
ACCOUNT OF WORD AND THH REST, ON ACCOUNT OF ABIDING
WITHIN, XOT (THE Higuest Sur), (WH REPLY ) No, on account
OF THACHING THE VISION (OF THE LORD) THUS, ON ACOOUNT oF
IMPOSSIBILITY, AND (BECAUSE) THEY READ HIM ALSO AS A
PERSON *’1
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
If 06 objected that smce the word ‘Vaisvinara’ conventionally
denotes the gastric fire, mnce there 1s the designation of a tmad of
fires, since 1t 18 mentioned as the abode of the offermg to the vital
breaths, and since 1t 18 declared by Sarpture to be abiding withm,
Vaiévinara 18 not the Highest Self, byt the gastric fire,—
(We reply ) “No”, ‘‘as”’ the Supreme Lord 18 “taught to be
viewed.” *thus”’,1e m the gastric fire, “for” if the Supreme Lord
be not understood here, then having the heaven as the head and the
rest “1g not possible’, and 1t 1 declared by Scempture to be a
person,—so Valsvanara is none but the Highest Self
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected The Highest Self cannot be denoted by the
word ‘Vaisvinara’ here, but the gastmc fire Why? ‘On account
of words and the rest,” 10 the reasons which begin with ‘word’
are ‘reasons bemmning with word’,i—‘on account of those’?
Those reasons are aa follows Jurst, the ‘word’ here 1s ‘Vaisvainara’,
and that conventionally denotes the gastric fire, and when a literal
meaning 18 possible, it 18 umproper to suppose any other meaning
Secondly, there 18 the word ‘fire’,16 there 18 8 co ordiation between
Vaisvinara and the word ‘fire’ 17 the Vijasansyaka text, viz ‘This 1s
the Vausvinara fire’ (Sat Br 1061114) ‘Thirdly, a tmad of fires
18 designated in the text, ‘The heart 1s the G&rhapatyea fire, the mind
the Anvaihirya’ (Chand 5182) and so on Fourthly, Vaiévanara
४8 declared by Scripture to be the support of the offermg to the
> The © 8 8 ed omits +» 0929 702 , 2 11
2 Shbdddayah
ठ This explams the compound ‘dabdddsbhyah
The co otdimation of the words ‘Agni’ and ‘Vaisvinare’, too,
18 appropnate ‘Agni’ 18 ‘one who goes, 1 © goes to or manifests
himself in the heart lotus’,—the ‘na’ (m, the root “ang’) 18 elided m
accordance with the rule ‘And, the “na” of “anga”’ 18 elided’ >
(हता siitra 490) “—, or ‘one who causes one to go, 1 © causes the
first birth of the Universe
SOTRA 30
‘ON ACCOUNT OF MANIFESTATION, ASMARATHYA (THINKS 80) ”
Vedinta -pirijata-saurabha
With a view to favourmg His worshippers who are devoted to
Him alone and to none else, the Highest Self though infinite, manifests
Himself in accordance with the respective capacities of His devotees
As such, He oan fittmgly be regarded as of the size of merely 9 span,
—this 18 80 “‘on account of manifestation’’, so the sage "" Afmarathye”’
thinks
Vedinta-kaustubha
(The author) explains, in accordance with the approbation of
Aémarathya, the text about that which 1s of the size of merely a
span
In the text ‘But who meditates on the Vaisvinara Self as of
the measure of @ span only and as of an unlimited dimension’ (Chand.
1 P 654 vol 1
9 Vide Pin 41104 SD EK 1106, p 682 vol 1, and Pin 54388, 8D ए
2106 p 936 vol 1
3 And m 15 added, aa mentioned m the siira 488 Thos, adg = ag-+-ns =
#8D K p 684 vol 2
jst 1 2 31
ADH 7 ] VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA 199
5 18 1), 161s perfectly justifiable to hold that even, one whose ‘measure’
or mrt, has disappeared ‘on all mdes’ or enturely1,1e even the
Highest Pergon, who 1s unlimited, can be of the measure of a span
merely, 18 of the extent measured. by the thumb and the forefinger
How? ‘On account of manifestation’ That 18, with © view to
favouring those who are devoted to none else except to Him, the Lord
manifests Himself 70 the heart lotus m a form, which 1s eternal, bhsasful
and non, material, which 1s of the size of a span and 18 the fulfiller of
the desire of His own devotees, just as He manifested 07708911 m
the lmited space of a pillar as a man lion® This 1s the view of the
teacher Asmarathya
Or, (an alternative explanation of the siitra), with a view to
favouring the dull witted devotees (16 who can grasp gross objects
only), the Lord squeezes Himself, as 1t were, into gross regions only,
though all pervading, He limita Himself m accordance with their
respective intelligence and manifests Himself m those respective
places Thus, “on, account of mamfestation”, He can, very well, be
of the measure of merely a span,—so thmks “ Asmarathya’”’,—this
18 the sense
COMPARISON
Ramfnuja and Srikantha
Interpretation of the word ‘sbhivyakteh’ different, vz ‘on
account of definiteness’,1e the texta speaks of the Lord of a definite
extent with a view to rendering the thought of the meditating devotee
more definite 8
SUTRA 31
° (षष ACOOUNT OF REMEMBRANCE, BADARI (THINKS SO) ”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
The imagination, of a body from head to foot 1s “on account of
remembrance”, 1e for the purpose of recollection (or meditation),—
#0 thinks the teacher ‘‘Badam”’
1 Abhitah ngaiah minah = abhuwevwndnah
# The reference 1s to the Inllmg of Hiranyakassypu by the Lord m the form
0 च 709 1100 Vide Mahi 9 15835, eto
8 St 5 1880, 274 Partl SK B 1830, 2 802 Part]
fst 1 2 32
140 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7 |
Vedanta-kaustubha
On the enquiry What purpose 18 served by such a manifestation
of a Bemg,—who 18 of the mze of merely a span,—im the heart lotus
of the sharp witted (1e those who are capable of graspmg subtle
things)? On the enquiry What purpose is served by such worship
of a Bemg,—who 18 lmited as having limbs lke head and the rest
in, the heaven, and 80 on,—on, the part of the dull witted (16 those
who are capable of grasping gross things) *—1t 18 8810 here
The manifestation, m the heart lotus, of the Highest Self as of
the size of merely a span , similarly the magination of His body, from
head to foot, mm the regions of the heaven and. the rest, are “on account
of remembrance”, 168 serve the purpose of recollection, or meditation
in that way, for attaming the Supreme Lord This 1s the view of
the teacher ‘‘ Badan”
SUTRA 32
“ ON ACCOUNT OF IDENTIFICATION, 80 JAIMINI THINKS, FOR THUS
(SORIPTURE) SHOWS `
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
The imagination of their] breast and the rest as the sacrificial
altar and so on 1s for the purpose of effecting “an identification”
of Agni hotra with the offermg to the vital breaths, which 1s a sub
aidiary element of the Vaiévinara vidyf, practised by a worshipper
of Vaisvinara,— so”’ the teacher “Jamum1’ thinks That very thing
the scriptural text ‘Now, he who offers the Agni hotra, knowing this
thus’ (Chind 5 24 28), ‘shows’
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 17 be asked If the Highest Self, having thus the three worlds
as His body, be denoted by the term ‘Vai4évinara’, then, what 18 the
purpose of magming the breast and the rest of the worshipper as the
sacrificial altar and so on thus ‘The breast 18 the sacrificial altar,
the hairs the sacrificial grasa, the heart the Girhapatya fire, the mind
the Anvihiryapacana fire’ (Chind 5182)%—the author replies
here
1 Te of those who meditate on Vawudnara
8 8 R SK
[st 1 2 33
ADH 7] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 14}
The umaginmg of the worshippers as the sacrificial altar and the
rest 18 for the purpose of effectang an “identification” of Agni hotra
with the offermg to the vital breath, which 18 © subsidiary element
of the Vaisvinara-vidy&, practised by the worshippers of Vaisvanara,
--८८ a”? the teacher “Jazmim1” thmks “Hor thus”, 1९ this very
identafication of the offermg to the vital breath and the Agni hotra,
“Sorpture shows” m the followmg passage ‘Now, he who offers
the 4 णा hotra knowmg this thus, his offermg 1s made to all the worlds,
to all beings, to all selves’ (Chand 6 24 2)
COMPARISON
Baladeva
The interpretation of the word ‘sampatteh’ different, viz ‘on
account of mysterious power or lordlimess’ Hence the sitra
‘(The Lord 1s said to be of the measure of a span) on account of (His)
mysterious power, 80 Jaimini (thinks), for thus Scripture shows (viz
that the Lord 1s possessed of such powers) ` 1
SUTRA 33
५ AWD THEY RECORD THIS IN THAT”
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
“And they record” “‘ths”,ie Vaisvinara havmg the heaven as
his head and so on, a8 a Person in the body of the worshipper
Here ends the second quarter of the first chapter mm the Vedinta
p&rijéita saurabha, an interpretation of the Sériraka-mimémsad
texta and. composed by the Reverend Nimb&rka
Vedanta-kaustubha
And moreover, the Vays “‘record’’ ० thu’’,i1e the Lord Vazivit
nara, “im that’’,1e m the body of the worshipper, m the passage
‘He who knows this Vaiévinara fire as a man, abidmg withm man’
(Sat Br 106111) That to say, these too, viz his bemg a person,
1GB 1282, p 142, Chap 1
[so 1 2 33
142 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7 ]
as well as his abiding within, are indicative of the fact that Vaisvanara.
18 Brahman ‘The sense 1s that rf the gastric fire be understood here,
then the circumstance of abiding within 2 person will, of course, be
possible, but not that of beng hke a person Hence, 1t 1s established
that Vaiévanara 1s the Highest Self
Here ends the section entitled ‘Vaisvinara’ (7)
Here ends the second quarter of the first chapter m the commentary,
the holy Vedanta kaustubha
COMPARISON
Baladeva
Interpretation different, viz ‘And they (viz the Atharvan1
kas) record this (viz the exstence of such mysterious powers) 1n that
(viz m the Lord)’ 1
Résumé
The second quarter of the first chapter contaims —
(1) 33 siitras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Nimbéarka ,
(2) 32 sitras and 7 adbikaranas, according to Samkare. ,
(3) 33 stitras and 6 adhikaranas, according to Ramanujs ,
(4) 32 sutras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Bhaskara ,
(5) 33 sitras and 9 adhikaranas, according to Srikantha ,
(6) 33 siittras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Baladeva
Samkara and Bhiaiskara and Baladeva omit the siitra 16 im
Nimbarka’s commentary Nimbarka omits the sttra 24 im Bhis
kara’s commentary
[SEE
1 QB 1288 p 148 Chap 1
FIRST CHAPTER (Adhydya)
THIRD QUARTER (Pada)
Adhikarana 1 The section ontitled ‘The
heaven, the earth,and 80 on’ (Sitras 1 7)
SUTRA 1
‘Trg SUPPOBT OF THH HEAVEN, THH HARTH AND THE REST (19
BranMmaw ALONE), ON ACCOUNT OF THE THEM ‘OWN’ ”’
Vedanta-parijita saurabha
“The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest’, stated in
the passage ‘In whom the heaven’ (Mund 2 2 6 2) and ao on, 18
Brahman, “on account of the term ‘own’”,1e on account of the
word ‘soul’ and the reat which are denotative of Brahman.
Vedanta-kaustubha
Now the reverend author of the aphomsms 18 showing that to
be the support of the three worlds, too, 18 possible on, the part of the
Lord alone who has the heaven for His head and so on and 18 the soul
af the three worlds
In the Mundaka, we read ‘He m whom the heaven, the earth
and the sky are woven, and the mind together with all the vital-
breaths,—Eim alone know as the one soul, give up other worlds
He 18 the bmdge to immortality’ (Mund 225) Here a doubt
arises—viz whether that which 18 mdicated as the support of the
heaven and the rest by the locative ‘m whom’ 18 pradbana or the
mdividual soul, or the Supreme Soul, the cause of the birth and the
rest of the world What 1s suggested here to begm with! The
prima face view 18 88 follows Let pradhina be the support As it
18 found that an effect arses from and dissolves into ita own, cause,
70 18 reasonable to hold that 1t has 108 own cause asita support (‘This
18 80), also on account of the scriptural mention of ‘bridge’ To be
a bridge means to be limited, but Brahman 18 not lmuted as declared
1 8, ए, Bh, SK, B
[80 1 3 1
144 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH | |
by the text Infinite, boundless’ (Brh 2412) The term self’
too may be applied to pradhaina thus —
Pradhéna 18 the self, because of bemg the benefactor of the soul
Whoever 18 the benefactor of some one else 18 his self, yust as (when
it 18 said, ) ‘Very, Bhadrasena 18 my self’ Or, else, let the mdrvidual
soul be the support, as there 18 the mention of the word ‘soul’ im the
text,—the word ‘soul’ denotes the mdzvidual soul primarily, since 26
18 a sentient bemg.—as the soul 1s mentioned 17 Scrmpture as the
support of sense organs like mind and the rest, as the soul 18 said to
be connected with the vem, as well as to be born, mm the passage
“Where the vems have congregated together like the spokes in the
nave of a wheel, he moves about withm, becoming manifold’ (Mund
226), and, finally, to be the support of the entire universe, the
object to be enjoyed, fits m on the soul’s part, 1t bemg an enjoyer
We reply ‘‘The support of the heaven, and the earth and the
rest”’ 18 none but the Supreme Brahman That 18, ‘dyau’ and
‘bhu’ (make) ‘dyubhuvau’, that which begms with ‘dyu bhuvanu’
18 ‘dyu bhuviu &di’, 16 all the things beginning with the heaven,
and ending with, the vital breath,—their support 1s the Highest Self
Why? “On sccount of the term ‘own’”,1e on account of the term
‘soul’, denotative of rtself, viz of the Supreme Soul, the topic of dis
cussion, and charactemzed by an adjectave as stated m the passage
“Him alone know ss the one soul, give up other worlds’ (Mund
2 2 5),—here, from the adjective ‘one’ which denotes the Lord, the
soul of all, 1॥ 18 Known that the ‘soul’ 18 the Supreme Soul ,—also
on account of the word ‘bridge’, mentioned m the passage ‘The
bridge to immortahty’ (Mund 225), 16 the ‘bridge’ or the support
meaning the cause of attammg ‘immortality’ or salvation In
another scriptural text, viz ‘By knowimg him thus, one becomes
mmortal on earth’ (Tart. Ar 3121), He alone 18 celebrated to be the
cause of the attamment of immortality Oonnection with the artery,
too, 18 possible on the part of the Supreme Soul, 17 accordance with
the scriptural text ‘But surrounded by the vems he hangs lke a
sheath” (Mah&hfr 119) In accordance with the followmg scrp
tural and अपि texta, viz “Not born, he 18 born m many ways’
(Vj 8 811694, Tat Ar 31818), ‘Though unborn, the unchange
able soul’ (Gité 46), 1t 28 also possible for Him to be born m many
1P 199 2 P 857 Ime 17 2P 201
[80 1 3 2
+” 1] VEDANTA PARLJITA SAUBABHA 145
ways Jinally, to be the support of the struments of the mdividual
soul, too, 18 possible on the part of the Supreme Soul who 18 the support
of all The followmg aphomsms1, secondary m nature, are but
amplifications of this primary aphorism
SUTRA 2
“ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION (OF BEAHMAN) THE OBJECT
TO BE APPROACHED BY THE FREED ”’
Vedainta-parijita-saurabha
The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest 18 Brahman
alone Why? “On socount of the designation,” of such a support
alone as “the object to be approached by the freed ”’, in, the passage
“When the seer sees the golden coloured Creator, the Lord, the
Person, the source of Brahm&, then the knower, having discarded
ment and demerit, stamless, attams the highest identity’ (Mund
ॐ 1 13 >) and 80 on,
Vedinta-kaustubha
The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest 18 none but
Brabman Why? ‘“‘On account of the designation (of Brahman)
as the object to be approached by the freed’’ That which 18 to
be approached, 1 © obtaimmed, by those who are freed from the fetter
of mundane existence 18 “ the object to be approached by the freed”,
on account of the “‘demgnation’’, 1e indication, of that? The
sense 18 The reality that 1s admitted to be the support of the heaven,
the earth and the rest, to be one, to be the bridge to ummortality,
and 18 celebrated elsewhere also as the object to be approached by
the freed,—that very same reality, the one topic of all the Vedas
and without an, equal or > superior, 1s designated as the object to be
obtamed by the freed, m the passages ‘The knot of the heart 18
undone, sll doubts are out off, and bis works perish, when he, who 18
high and low, 28 seen’ (Mund 228), ‘Just as the flowmg mvers
disappear into the ocean discarding name and form, so the knower,
freed. from name and form, goes to the Person, who 1s Higher than,
1 Vis Br Si 138 2-7 2 8, 87, 2
* This explains the compound ‘mubkiopasrpya-vyapadedat"
10
[80 18 8
146 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 11
the high’ (Mund 328) ‘The ‘ugh and low’ means One
to whom the high,1e Brahmi, le ation cae The
phrase ‘higher than the hgh’ means the Person who 18 higher than
the high, 16 the individual soul or prakrin 1
COMPARISON
Ra&minuja and Srikantha
Readmmg shghtly different, viz adds a ‘ca’ 17 the end 2
SUTRA 3
° Nov THE INFEBENOE, ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABSENOB OF THETS
TO THAT 0 १
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
Pradhina, which 1s armved at through mference, 18 not that
support, on account of the absence of texte denotang 16
Vedainta-kaustubha
The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest cannot be
^^ the inference” The non sentient cause which 1s without any
connection with Brahman, viz pradhina, mferred by the S&mkhyas
on, the ground of non, sentuent effects, like the elamenta and the rest 8,
18 881d. to be “ the inference ^", and that 1s not the support of the heaven,
the earth and the rest Why? = ^" On account of the absence of texts
to that effect” That is, the “text to that effect” 18 ‘tac chabda’,
“absence of text to that effect’ 1s ‘atao chabda’, on account of
that *, or on account of the absence, here, of texts denotmg the
1 Note that Nunbdrka and Srinwdea understand the word ' Vyapadadsdi?
as referring to different passages
9 Sri B1238,p 288, Part] SK B182,p 401 Part4
8 Hirst, we infer that every effect must have 9 cause that cause another
cause and ao on, and finally there must be an uncaused first cause Secondly,
we infer that this uncaused first cause must be non sentient mnce the affects
which we perceive are non senizent, and the effect and 19 onuse must be smular
mnature ib 28 im this way that the Sdmkhyas arnmve ab non sentient first
cause OF pradhdna
¢ This explams the compound aiuc-chabdds’
[80 1 3 4
ADE 1] VEDINTA PARIJiTA SAUBABHA 147
infermble pradhana On the contrary, there are texte denoting ॐ
sentient bemg, such as, ‘He who 1s omniscient’ (Mund 119,227)
and 80 on
COMPARISON
RaémAnuja and Srikangtha
Readmg different, viz take this stitra and the next as one sutra 7
SUTRA 4
‘ AyD THR BEARER OF THE VITAL BREATH ”’
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
“The bearer of the vital breath” also 18 not the support of the
heaven, the earth and the rest Why? On account of the very same
absence of texts to that effect
Vedinta-kaustubha
The words ‘not, on account of the absence of texts to that
effect’ are to be supplied from the precedmg aphomam ‘The bearer
of the vital breath =, 16 the mdividual soul, too, 13 not the support
of the heaven, the earth and the rest, on account of the absence of
texts to that effect,—that means although the term ‘soul’ 1s equally
applicable to the individual soul and the Supreme Soul, yet just as
in this section there are texts hke ‘Him alone know aa one —He 18
the bridge to immortality’ (Mund 2 2 5), ‘He whois omniscient’ (Mund
119, 22 7) and so on, establishing the peculiar qualities of the Supreme
Soul, so there are no texta here, establishing the pecuhar व्याप
of the individual soul,—also because ह 18 impossible for the mdividual
soul, which 18 atomic by nature, to be the support of the heaven,
the earth and the rest This aphorism 1s taken, separately, because
of ita association with the followmg aphonsms 9
1 ल B 133, p 283, Part 1
SK B 138,p 408 Part 4
4 That 18 16 would not have been mecessary to wwtroduce @ special silira
for the individual soul,—which hke pradhdina is precluded in the preceding silira,
—af rb wére not for the reagong given in the followmg three sitras which apply
only to the mdividual soul, and not to pradhdna
[st 1 3 5-6
148 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH | ]
COMPARISON
All others ताह the ‘ca’ m the end 1
SUTRA 5
“AND ON AQCOUNT OF THH DESIGNATION OF DIFFERENCE ””
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
Moreover, “on account of the demgnation of difference”? also
between the knower and the object to be known, the support of the
heaven, the earth and the rest 15 not the bearer of the vital breath,
(or the individual soul)
Vedainta-kaustubha
The bearer of the vital breath 18 not to be understood 98 the
support of the heaven, the earth and the rest Why? ‘On account
of the demgnation of difference’, 16 0608186 the difference between
the two, vis between the mdividual soul—which 1s possessed of
Itttle knowledge and 1s subject to bondage and release through the
Lord’s mBy& oonsistmg of the three gunas—and the Ommnsuent
Lord, as the knower and the object to be known, 18 designated by the
holy Scripture itself in the passage ‘Him alone know as one’ (Mund
425) The purpose of this repeated declarations of difference 18 to
point out that with a view to attammg His nature, one should practise
meditaizon on Him, based on a true knowledge about Him
SUTRA 6
“ON ACCOUNT OF THH TOPIO”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
The Supreme Self bemg the tome, the mdrvidual soul 18 not to
be understood as the support of the heaven, the earth and the reat
18B 186, 810 St B 134 p 283, Part
Bh B 185 p 52 SK B184 p 404, Parté
BB 186
[80 137
ave 1] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 149
Vedinta-kaustubha
It 18 not that the mdividual soul constitutes the topic so that
10 may be understood here None but the Supreme Soul 18 the topic
here, as evident from the mtroductory passage ‘“““What, my
reverend Sir, bemg known, all this comes to be mown” t’ (Mund
113),—all thimgs do not become known when the mdividual soul
18 known, 81008 all things have not the mdividusl soul as ther soul—
and as established by the fact that m the passage ‘Now, the higher
18 that whereby that Impemshable 18 apprehended’ (Mund 1 1 5)
and so on, the Supreme Soul alone 1s referred to
SUTRA 7
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF ABIDING AND EATING ”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
“On account of the abiding ` of the Highest Self as a non easter,
98 woll as ‘on, account of the eating’ of the mdividual soul, as laid
down, mm the text ‘Two birds’ (Mund 311, of also Svet 462),
the mdividual soul 1s not the support of the heaven and the earth
Vedanta-kaustubha
The author 1s once more explammg statements regarding the
difference between the individual soul and Brabman
The mdividual soul 1s not the support of the heaven, the earth
and the rest Why?! ‘On account of abiding and eatmg”’, “ ति
and ^“ 00879 ˆ“ (make) “sthityodane ’—on account of that? “On
account of the abiding” of one bird m the tree, ie the body, without
eating the fruit of work and shinmg, and “‘ on account of the eating”
of the frat of work by the other as subject to karmas,—as laid down
m the text which refers to the support of the heaven, the earth and
the rest, viz ‘Of these two, one tastes the sweet berry, the other
100४8 on without eatmg’ (Mund 11 8),—the difference between, the
mdividual 8001. and Supreme Souls known Hence, 10 1s established
1 8 ©, Bh, SK, B
= This explams the compound ‘sthtiyodandbhydrm’
fst 13 8
150 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADE 2 |
that the independent and omniscient Supreme Soul alone 18 the bridge
to immortality, and as the soul of all, He 1s also the support of the
heaven, the earth and the rest
Here ends the section entitled “The heaven, the earth and the
reat’ (1)
COMPARISON
Samkara
Readmg and interpretation same, but pomts out at the end m
his usual manner that the distmction between the mdividual soul
and Brahman 18 no more real than that between the ether within a
pot and the universal ether and so on 1
Adhikarans 2 The section 6291४196 ‘The plenty’
(8788 8 9)
SUTRA 8
“Tos Pranty (78 THE LORD), BECAUSE OF THE THACHING (OF IT)
48 ABOVE SHEENITY (VIZ THE VITAL BREATH) ”’
Vedinta-pirijaita-saurabha
The Plenty, taught by the highest teacher, the venerable Sanat
kuméra, to our preceptor, the reverend Narada, m the passage
“But the Plenty alone should be enquired after’ (Chand 7 22 1 >),
18 not the vital breath, but the Highest Person Why? “ Because
of the teaching ’’ of the Plenty as “above” the vital breath
Vedainta-kaustubha
Now, the reverend author of the aphorisms 1s showing that the
text “But the Plenty alone should be enquired after’ (Chand 7 22 1)
and so on, refers to Brahman
t§B1387,p 31 2S R, Bh, Sk, B
{so 1 3 8
ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 151
The followimg 1s recorded by the Chandogas ‘“‘It has been heard
by me from men like you that one who knows the soul crosses over
sorrow J am such a sorrowing one, reverend sir! Cause me, arr,
to cross over the sorrow’ (Chind 71983), thus asked by Narada,
his preceptor, the reverend Sanatkumiara, the teacher of the doctmne
of salvation, taught “The name is Brahman’ (Chind 715) Agam,
asked thus ‘““Is there, ar, more than name” ?’ (Chand 71 5),
he taught ‘“Speech, verily, 18 more than name’’’ (Chand 721)
In this way, fifteen objects, begimnmg with name and endmg with
the vital breath, were taught1 After havig taught the vital breath,
he, without bemg asked any further question, taught the following
*“But he, verily, speaks superiorly who speaks superiorly through
truth’’’ (Chind 7161), ‘“‘But the Plenty alone should be enquired
after” “1 enquire, sir, after the Plenty " ‘ Where one does not see
another, does not hear another, does not know another, that 18 the
Plenty But where one sees another, hears another, knows another,
that 18 the small”’ (Chind 7231-241) Here the term ‘plenty’
(bhiiman) denotes ‘muchness’ It 18 der1ved m the following manner
The suffix (78710 " 18 added to the word ‘bahu’ (much) m the sense of
‘the nature thereof’2, m accordance with the mle ‘The (suffix)
“Imanic”’ 18 optionally added to the words “ prthu ” and the reat’ (Pan
61122, SD K 17848) (m order to 10010806 the sense ‘the nature
thereof’ —Pin 51119, SD K 1781) Then the root (viz bahu)
and the suffix (viz manic) undergo a change in accordance with the
rule ‘After “babu”, the first letters of “iman” and “1yas" affixes
are elided, and ^“ bahu ”’ 1s replaced by the word ^ bhii”’ (Pan 6 4 164,
168, SD K 2017*) Here ‘muchness’ means ‘immensity’ (1 6
quantitative greatness), and not numeroarty (1 © numencal greainess),
because just as the term ‘bahu’ denotes number, 98 mm ths examples
‘In expressmg numeromty the plural case affix 18 used’ (Pan 1421,
SD K 1875), ‘Many, purified by the penance of knowledge’ (01४६
410), ‘After many births’ (Git& 719) and so on, so 1# 18 seen to be
applied m the sense of ‘immensity’ also, m contrast to smaliness, ag
im the example ‘He who renders service, be it great or small, to cone
who has heard Scrpture’ Hore, too, the term ‘plenty’ being used
eee ~ >
1 Vide Ohind 7 1 ef seg 9 Tasya bhdvah
9 P 894 vol 1 Correct quotation translated ‘Prtheddubhya wmane vd'
«P 908 vol 1 Thatw, bahu-+-imanio = bhi-+-man = bAdsnan
¢ © 114 vol 1
[st 1 3 8
152 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]
im contrast to smaliness 77) the passage “There 1s no pleasure mm the
small’ (Chand 17231), its meanmg 18 nothing but “zmmensity”
Thus, there 1s no pleasure m the small, but the Plenty alone 1s pleasure
Hence ‘The Plenty alone 18 to be enquired mto’ (Chand 7 23 1)
That 1s, the Plenty, or the Supreme Soul alone, who 18 of the form of
pleasure characterized by unsurpassed greatness, should be enquired
after by one desiring salvation and wishmg to attam pleasure charac
terized by unsurpassed greatness When the reverend Sanatkumire
said this, the reverend Narada said ‘I enquire, sir, after the Plenty”’”
(Chand 7231) ‘That 28, ‘Sir’, meanmg, O reverend teacher! I
deare to know the Plenty alone m particular Thorefore, Sanat
kumara told hmm the characteristic marks of the Plenty by means of
& positive (mdicating what 1t 18) and a negative (indicating what rt 1s
not) proposition, thus “where’ (Chind 7241) and so on,—4this 1s
the sense of the text
Here, a doubt arses, viz whether the Plenty 1s the vital breath
or the Supreme Soul The vital breath, holds the prema facie view,
because in the previous passage ‘The vital breath 1s more than hope’
(Chind 71651), the vital breath alone 1s mdicated, and because after
the teaching about the vital breath, there are no further question
and answer (as there were mm the previous cases), viz ‘“‘Is there, ar,
more than name”’?’ (Chand 715), ^ 8106600, verly, 18 more than
mame”’ (Chind 721) By the term ‘vital breath’, the mdzvidual
soul, endowed with the vital breath, 18 to be understood, and not
merely a kind of air,—because, from the passage “The vital breath 18
the father, the vital breath the mother’ (Chind 7151), the vital
breath 1s known, to be a sentient bemg, and because in the mtroductory
text, viz ‘One who knows the soul crosses over sorrow’ (Chand
7 1 3), a8 well 98 m the concluding text “To the soul alone belongs
all this’ 1 (Chand 7 25 2), the term ‘soul’ 18 found employed The
passage ‘Where one does not see another’ (Chind 7241) and 80
on, too, fittmgly apples to the individual soul, because all rts activities
hke seeing and the rest cease during 108 state of deep sleep, and further,
because all 168 practical activities hke external perceptions and the
rest cease when its own real nature, different from the body, the sense
organs, buddhi and the rest, 18 known Hereby, 1t should be known,
that texts hke ‘Venly, the Plenty w pleasure’ (Chind 7 23 1),
1 Correct quotataon ‘“Aimawedam sarvam Vide Chind 7252 p 402
[80 1 9 8
ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 153
“Verily, the vital breath 18 1mmortal’ (Brh 163) and 80 on, aro all
to be explamed as referrmg to the individual soul, possesamg the |
vital breath
With regard to 1t, we reply The Plenty 1s the Supreme Soul alone
and not the imdividual soul, posseasmg the vital breath Why?
"Because of the teachmg (of it) as above serenity” ^ Seremty ”
means one m whom there 18 complete serenity, 1e the md.vidual
soul, celebrated in, the Somptural text ‘This serenity, havmg amsen,
from. this body, having attamed the form of highest hghi, 1s completed
in its own form’ (Chind 834) and so on (The above phrase
means because of the teaching of 1t as) “ above ° that which 1s denoted.
by the term “vital breath’ In the text ‘But he speaks superiorly
who speaks through truth’ (Chind 7261) from the term ‘but’,
the difference between the subsequent teachmg about the Plenty
and the prior one about the vital breath 18 known The sense 1s that
08 the teaching about the Plenty 18 different from the teaching
about the vital breath, the meanmg of the word “ plenty ” 13 different
from the meanmg of the term “ vital breath ”
(An alternative explanation of the siitra) Or, else, (the phrase
means ) because of the teaching of the worshipper of truth as higher
than the worshipper of the vital breath, m the passage ‘But he,
verily, speaks superiorly’ (Ohind 7161), 16 owmg to a difference
between the worshippers, there 1s a difference between the objects
to be worshipped aa well ‘The sense 18 this If xt be objected In
accordance with your statement, viz that the Plenty 1s that alone,
which 18 denoted by the term truth, demarcated as higher than the
individual soul,—yust as each of the fifteen objects, begmnmg with
name and ending with speech, 1s taught as successively higher by the
reverend Sanatkumira, asked by the reverend N&rada,-how do you.
know that truth 18 taught as something higher,—(we reply ) Having
stated that a knower of the vital breath 18 9 superior speaker 7) the
passage ‘Verily, by seemg thu, by thimkmg this, by knowing thu,
ons becomes a superor speaker’ (Chind 7154), and having dustan
guished the worshipper of truth from the worshzpper of the vital
breath by the term ‘but’ m the passage “But he, verily, speaks
superiorly, who speaks superiorly through truth’ (Ohind 716 1),
Scripture teaches truth, the cause of bemg a superior speaker m, this
case (Chind 7161), as higher than the vital breath, the cause of
bemg @ superior speaker im the previous case (Chind १ 16 4)
[so 1 9 8
154: VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]
The mstrumental case ‘through truth’ (satyena) follows the rule
"The third case ending 18 added to s word denoting a mark or an
attribute which indicates the existence of a particular state or condi-
tion,’ (Pin 2821, SD K 65661) ‘The olause ‘who speaks’, eto
means who speaks superiorly through trath which figuratively
imphes the Supreme Brahman, the object to be worshipped. The word
‘truth’ 28 well known to be denotmg Brahman, as in the
“Verily, the name of this Brahman 1s truth’ (Chand 8 3 4), “Brahman
18 truth, knowledge and imfinite’ (Tait 21) and so on ‘Bemg a
superior speaker’ means being the speaker of the supremacy of one’s
own, object of worship, and this amounts to declaring the unsurpassed
ness of the Deity to be worshipped The suffix ‘éatr’ in ‘by seemg
this’ and the rest follows the rule ‘The present partiaple 1s used to
denote the manner or the cause of an action’ (Pin 3 2 126, 87 K
31032) That 18, the direct vision of the Dety to be worshipped 1s
the cause of being © superior speaker The sense 18 that 1t becomes
possible for one to be such a superior speaker only through the grace
of the Deity worshipped by him, and apprehended through direct
vision, Moreover, the very permission to speak the truth, givmg
up bemg # superior speaker through merely the vital breath, asked
for mm the passage ‘“‘May J, mr, speak supemorly through truth”’’
(Ohind 7 16 1), ndicates the termmation of the section, of the vital-
breath Here, the term ‘soul’, too, can have a consistent meaning
only if the Supreme Soul be understood, since to be the cause of all,
mentioned in the passage ‘To the self alone all this belongs’ (ChAind
7 261), 18 impossible on the part of any one else His 0117688
will speak of this in subsequent aphonsms +
COMPARISON
Baladeva
He gives two alternative explanations of the sitra the last of
which agrees with the explanation given by Nimbarka The first
explanation 18 ‘The Plenty (08 Brahman), because 1t 18 immense joy,
and because 17 18 taught as the highest’ 5
1 P 423 vol 2 2 P 558 vol 2
9 For correct quotation see 0017006 1 p 152
¢ Vide Br Su 214-35 6GB 138
[80 1 89
ADH 2] VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA 155
SUTRA 9
‘© AWD ON ACCOUNT OF THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE ATTRIBUTES >”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
"५ And” because attributes hke “bemg of the form of unsurpassed.
pleasure’, ‘bemg mmmortal’, “bemg estabhshed on one’s own great
7988 ' and the rest are ‘‘ appropriate ” on the part of the Highest Self
alone, the Plenty 1s none but the Highest Self
Vedanta-kaustubha
The attributes, mentioned im the section of the Plenty, which
are not possible on the part of any one else, bemg “ appropra
m, reference to the Highest Self alone, 1t 18 known that the Plenty
18 the Highest Self Thus, the passage “Where one does not see
another’ (Chind 7241), means ‘where’ one, unmersed m, pleasure
characterzed by unsurpassed greatness, ‘does not see’, 16 notice
another’, 16 petty worldly pleasure, the contrary of the pleasure
which 18 characterized by greatness,—just as one who has drank the
nectar, does not notice any other drmk Moreover, ‘where’ one,
plunged 1 pleasure, ‘does not see’ any sorrow, the contrary of pleasure,
16 comes to be endowed with every pleasure and delivered from
every sorrow The term ‘where’ moans ‘by being attached to whom’
Such atimbutes of “bemg the giver of unsurpassed pleasure’, ‘bemg
the remover of all sorrow’ and the rest are appropriate on the part
of the Highest Self alone, and not on that of the individual soul,
denoted by the term ‘vital breath’ Further, as the atimbutes of
“being unmortal by nature’, “bemg established on one’s own great
ness’, ˆ 06106 the creator of all’ and the rest,—mentioned im the pas
sages ‘*‘ That which 18 the Plenty 18, vernly, the mmortal’—‘ Sir, On
what 18 1t established?’ ‘On 108 own greatness’” (Chiind 7 241),
“He alone 18 below”’ (Chand 7251), ‘From the soul the vital
breath,” (Chind 7261) and so on,—are appropmate on the part of
the Highest Self alone, 80 16 18 estabhshed that the Plenty is none but
the Highest Self
Here ends the section entitled ‘The Plenty’ (2)
[80 1 3 10
156 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 8]
Adhikaransa 8 The section entitled ‘The 1m
perishable’ (Sfitras 10-12)
SUTRA 10
“Ton ImPERISHABLE (78 BRAHMAN), BECAUSE OF SUPPORTING
THH END OF THE ETHER ”’
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
The Imperishable 1s Brahman Why? ^ Because of 108 support-
mg’ the ether, dicated. as the support of the effects m. past, present
and future
Vedinta-kaustubha
Now, the reverend author of the aphorisms 1s showing that the
Brhadiranyaka passage “Hesaid “That, verily, 1s the Impershable’’’
(Brh 3 8 8) and so on, refers to Brahman
In the Brhadiranyaka we read ‘“‘In whom 1s the ether woven,
warp and woof?” He said “That, verily, 0 Gargl, the Brihmanas
call the Impenshable, non gross, non-atomic, non short, non long,
non-red, non lubricous, without shadow”’’ (आ) 3888) and so on
A doubt arises, viz whether here pradhfins 1s understood by the term
“Imperishable’, or the individual soul, or the Supreme Brahman
What 1s suggested, to begin with? The pruna face view 1s as follows
Let pradhiinsa be denoted by the term ‘Impershable’ because, to be
the supporter of 108 own effecta fita m on ita part, and because non
grossness and the rest, too, fit m on 108 part, फ bemg admutted to be
without form Or, let the mdividual soul be mplied by the term
“Imperishable’, smce 1t 18 possible for 1t to be the supporter of all
non sentient 07016008, the objecta of 108 own enjoyment
With regard to it, we reply The Impershable is the Supreme
Brahman Why? “On account of supporting (all thmgs) ending
with the ether ”’,1e on account of supporting that which, ends with the
ether, viz the group of effects begmnmng with the earth, or the group
of effects, bogmnmg with the earth and endmg with the ether To the
query ‘“ That, 0 Yajfiavalkya, which 1s above the heaven, that which
18 beneath the earth, that which 18 between these heaven and the earth,
that which 1s past, present and future 1, m whom 18 all that woven,
1 Omuts doakgaia’, vide Brh 386, p 168
[80 1 3 10
ADH 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 157
warp and woof!”’ (Brh 886), the answer bemg given ‘“In the
ether alone all that 1s inter woven, warp and woof”’ (Brh 387),
G&rgi asked again ‘“‘In whom, verily, 18 the ether mterwoven, warp
and woof’’?’ (Brh 387) Then, the answer given was that the
support of (all things), begmmnimng with the earth and endmg with the
ether, 18 the Impershable, in the passage “He said “That, venly, 18
the Impermhable”’ (Brh 888) and so on Thus, on account of
supporting the group of effecta, begmning with the earth and endmg
with the ether, known from the above question and answer, the
Imperishable 18 none but Brahman
Or else, (an alternative explanation of the sfitra,) ““The end”
16 the mit or the cause, of the “ ether”, meanmg the atmospheric
ether 1, 18 the non manifest pradhina,—" on account of supporting
1” That 18, the Imperishable,—mentioned as the support of that
which 18 dicated as the support of all objects im past, present and
fature, in the passage beginnmg ‘That which 18 above’ (Brh 377),
which 18 denoted by the term ‘ether’, and which has the names ‘non
manifest’, ‘subtle’, ‘pradhins’ and the rest,—18 not pradh&na, but
Brahman. alone >
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiskara
Interpretation of the term ‘ambarfinta’ different, viz ‘(all
thmgs) ending with the ether’® Samkara uses the term ‘Brahman
here *, although evidently from 018 pont of view Brahman cannot
be such a support, but Iévara
1 Ie the ether, in the ordmary sense, aa distmguished from the ether which
denotes pradhdina
2 Note that the first explanation given by Stinwdec talles with the expla
nations of Samkara and Bhdskdra, the second with those of Rdmdnwa and
Nunbérka and others
3 828 1310, % 318 Bh B1310,p 66 See SHnwdiec above
“ © 319 Na ca ayam ambardnia dhrhh Brahmano'nyaira sambhavait’ eto
[st 1 3 1112
168 VEDANTA PARLJATA SAUBABHA ADH 3]
SUTRA 11
“AND THIS (SUPPORTING) (BELONGS TO THE LORD), ON ACCOUNT
OF COMMAND ”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
“And this” supporting belongs to the Highest Person alone
Why? Because (the Impermshable, the supporter) 1 mentioned by
Scripture to be a commander, in the passage “Verily, at the command
of this Imperishable, Gargi, the sun and the moon stand held apart’
(Brh 38 9 4)
Vedanta -kaustubha
To the objection, viz Very well, let pradhbfina be not denoted by
the term ‘Impenshable’ Bnt, as, to be such 9 support fita m on the
part of the individual soul, the enjoyer of material objects, as, possess
ing the attributes of non grossneas and the rest too fita m on 118 part,
and, as, finally, uf the mdividual soul be understood, then an etymo
logical meaning (of the term ‘Imperushable’) 18 possible, viz “The
Impershable 1s that which does not pemsh,1e the mdividual soul,—
let the individual soul alone be umplied by the term ‘Impenshable’,—
the author reples here —
The supporting of the body and the rest alone,—the abode where
the imdividual soul expemences the fruits of 18 own works,—is
possible by the individual soul ^" And this” supporting 1s the work
of the Highest Self alone, and not of any one elas Why? “On
account of command”, 16 because of the mention of command
m the passage ‘Verily, at the command of this Impenshable, Garg
the sun and the moon stand held apart’ (Brh 389) and so on
Prakrste’, 16 unrestricted, “Sigana’ 18 ‘prasisana’,1e unrestricted
commanding *
SUTRA 12
‘‘ AND ON ACOOUNT OF THE EXOLUSION OF ANOTHER NATURE ”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
Here, by the term “Impershable’ netther pradhiina or the mdrv1
dual soul can be understood The Supreme Bemg alone 1s the meaning
+ 6 R Bh, 87, 3
2 This explama the word prasasandi im the siltra
[st 1 3 18
ADH 4] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 159
of the term ‘Impermhable’ Why? ‘On account of the exclusion
of another nature’, 1 the passage ‘Verily, that Imperishable, Gargi,
13 the unseen seer, the unheard hearer, the unthought thinker, the
unknown knower’ (Brh 38 11 4)
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this reason, too, the Highest Self alone 18 denoted by the
term ‘Impershable’ Why* “On account of the exclumon of other
nature”, 16 the “nature” “of another”, viz of pradhina or the
individual soul, or the “‘ nature ’’ ^ of another two ` (make) “‘ another
nature ’’,2 ‘“‘on account of the exclusion” of that ® The concluding
passage, viz ‘Verily, that Imperishable, Gargi, 1s the unseen seer,
the unheard hearer, the unthougbht thinker, the unknown knower
None but 1t 18 @ seer, 4, none but 10 18 a thmker, none but
1 18 8 knower Verly mm this Impenshable, Girgi, the ether 18 mter
woven, warp and woof’’’ (Brh 3 8 11), excludes 4 nature other than
Brahman ‘Thus, pradhina 1s excluded on the ground of the atimbutes
of a sentient bemg, viz bemg a seer and the rest, and the individual
80] 18 excluded on the ground of the teachmg that the Bemg who
18 unseen by all 18 the seer of all, and so on 76108, 1t 18 established
that by the term ‘Impershable’ the Highest Self alone 1s understood.
Here ends the section, entitled ‘The mpershable’ (3)
Adhikarana 4 The seotion ontitled ‘One sees’
(8 7५२८४ 13)
SUTRA 13
“On ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION (oF His Qua Lrrrms), He
18 THH OBJEOT WHICH ONE SEES”
Vedadnta-pirijaita-saurabha
The object which one sees, mentioned in the passage “He 8668
the Person, lymg m the aty’ (Pradna & 55), 1s not Brahma, residmg
1 8 B Bh SK,B 2 Anya bhava
3 This explams the compound anya bAdva-vydertieh"
4 Omitted portion None else other than 29४ 18 a hearer" Vide Brh 3 8 11,
p 171
6 8 R Bh, SK, B
[80 1 3 18
160 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]
in the Brahma world and moluded withm the Brahmfindal But
the Highest Self alone, the topic of discussion, the Lord of His own,
special and non material Brahma world, 18 “the object which one
8668 ` Why! “On account of the demgnation”’ of His qualities, im
the passage ‘That which 15 tranquil, ageless, fearless’ (Praéna 5 7 2)
and so on
Vedanta-kaustubha
Thus, 1t has been said that prakrt: and the individual soul are
not understood by the word ‘Impershable’ which denotes Brahman
Now it 18 beg pomted out,—by means of this aphorism, as well as
by the text dealmg with that topic.—that prakrti (or the matemal
sphere) 18 rejectible, while the world of the Highest Self 1s acceptable,
and that the mdividual soul 18 the worshipper, one who 1s approaching
(a goal), while the Highest Self 1s the object to be worshipped and the
goal to be resorted to
We find the following text in the Praéna upanisad of the Athar-
vanas, introducmg the topic of discussion thus ‘Verly, that, O
Satyakima, which 18 the syllable “om”, 18 the higher and the lower
Brahman, Hence a knower, through this very support, reaches one
of these two’ (Praansa 6 2), and contmumng ‘“ Agam, he who meditates
on the Highest Person with this very syllable ‘om’ of three elements
comes to the hght m the sun As 8 snake 1s freed from 108 skin, so,
verily, he 18 freed from sms He 1s led by the Siman verse to the
world of Brahman He sees the Person, lying in the city, and higher
than the highest mass of souls” (Praina 55) Here a doubt arises,
viz whether “‘the object which one sees”.—ie the Realty which
one sees, 10 accordance with the declaration, viz that through the
meditation on Him, the worshipper of the three elements, freed. from
all sins, having come to the sun, and having been led by the S&man
verses to the world of Brabman, 8668 that very Person, lymng im the
Oity,—s the four faced Brahm&, the premding derty of all souls, and
indicated before as the ‘lower Brahman’, or whether the object which.
one sees 18 the Highest Person, denoted by the term ‘Supreme Brah-
man’, the cause of the whole world and the topic of Scripture The
orma {0006 view 8 a8 follows Let the four faced Brahma be the
1 — ee pp 82 e¢ seg
aR B
[st 1 3 1d
ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 161
object which one sees As! 1t has been, stated before that the wor
shipper of the prapava (= om) of one element and the worshipper
of the pranava of two elements respectively attam the world of man
and the world of the ether as frutta, so the world of Hiranyagarbha,—
who represents the individual souls m their collective aspect,—higher
than the ether, should be understood as designated as the fruit belong
ing to the worshipper (of the pranava) of three elements The object
of the perception of a person, who has come to that world, 18 he (the
four faced) alone, the ruler of that world It 1s quite appropriate to
hold that the person, residing m that world and representing the
mdividual souls mm thew collective aspect, 1s superior to those discrete
souls which are embodied bemgs, yet are superior to the body, the
sense organs, etc Hence the object which one sees 18 the four faced
Brahma
On this suggestion, we reply The Highest Self alone, the topic
of discussion and the cause of the world, 1s the object which one sees
Why? ^ Onaccount of designation”,1e on account of the designation
of the qualities of the Highest Self, such as, ‘bemg the object to be
attained by the wise’, ‘bemg tranquil’, ‘bemg ageless’, ‘bemg mmor
tal’, ‘bemg fearless’ and the rest, mentioned in tho passage Through
this very syllable “om” as the support, a knower reachos that which
18 tranquil, ageless, immortal, fearless, the supreme, the supreme
goal’? (Prasna 67) “A mass of souls’ implies one who has connec
tion with the body and the rest, generated by karmas, and that (viz
connection with the body, etc ) 1s declared by Scripture to be pertaining
to the four faced Brahma too, m the passage ‘He who first creates
Brahms’ (Svet 618) Nor 28 the world of the four faced Brahma
higher than the ether, 1t being mcluded among the heaven and the
rest The world, mentioned in the passago He sees the Person,
lymg within the city’ (Praéna 5 5), 18 not the world of Brabm&,—
otherwise called the ‘world of truth’ and an abode for the enjoyment
of the fruits of works, but 1s the world of Brahman,—who 18 the 0006
of digcussion and the object which one sees,—to be approached by
the freed, 1t bemg mdicated. as the sleeping place of the Person, higher
than even the ‘masa of souls’ which itself 18 higher than all worlds
1 Here the dair sugiz rmplies reason in accordance with Pin 8 2 126,
SD K 3108
4‘ Pardyanam' not mcluded under the original text
11
[80 1 8 18
162 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]
This very world of the Supreme Brahman 1s declared as the object
to be attamed by the wise by another Upanigad of the same Athar
vanas, beginning ‘““The place which, all the Vedas record, that which
all the austerrties declare, wishing what people practise chastity, that
place I tell you in brief’’’ (Katha 215), and contimumg ‘That 18 the
best support, that 1s the supreme support By knowing that support
one rejoices i the world of Brahman’ (Katha 217) That very
Upanisad declares the unattamableness of this (world of Brahman)
by the non knower, and ita attamableness by the knower, as well as
its difference from mundane existence m the passages “But he who
has not understanding, who 1s inattentive, and ever impure, does not
reach that place, and goea to transmigratory existence But he who
has understanding, who 18 attentive and ever pure, reaches that
place, whence he 18 not born agam Aman, however, who has unde
standing as his charioteer, the mind as the rem, reaches the end of the
journey, that highest place of Visnu’ (Katha 37-8) In the Santi
parva, It 18 said in the beginning of the Harita mt& ‘Yudhisthira said
“A man of what nature, of what conduct, of what knowledge,
of what resort, attams the place of Brahman, that 1s higher than
prakria and eternal?” Bhigma said ^ He who 1s engaged in the
religious duties m connection with salvation, who 18 abstemious, who
has conquered the senses, attains the supreme place that 18 higher
than prakrti and eternal”’ (Meh& 129968 9969) 7 From such
question and answer by the wisest men, the superiority of thea world
of Brahman—the object of enquiry—to prakrti, 108 attamableness
only through the religious duties in connection, with salvation, and 108
eternity, are established Hence, 1t 1s established that the object
which, one sees 18 Brahman, lyimg in the वकि, and higher than prakrti,
in ita effected and in, 1t8 causal conditions
Here ends the section entitled ‘One sees’ (4)
COMPARISON
Samkara
Interpretation different, viz according to him, the question 28
whether the higher or the lower Brahman 1s meant here, and not
1 P 716 1168 22 28 vol 8
[so 1 3 14
ADH 6] VEDANTA PARLIATA SAUBABHA 163
whether Brahman or Brahmé, the four faced The conclusion, of
course, 18 that the higher Brahman 18 meant 1
Adhikarana 6 The section entitled ‘The small’
(8१४८०४७ 14-28)
SUTRA 14
“THE SMALL (ETHER) 18 BRAHMAN, ON AGOOUNT OF WHAT
FOLLOWS °
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
The ‘small’ ether, mentioned in the passage ‘In this city of
Brahman 18 9 small lotus, a chamber, small 18 the ether within it’
(Chind 8113), can be the Highest Self alone Why? ‘On account
of what followa’’, 1e on account of the peculiar qualities of the
Highest Self, which are designated subsequently im the passage ‘As
large 1s this ether, so large 18 that ether within the space In 1t both
the heaven, and the earth are contamed ‘This soul 18 free from sins,
ageless’ (Chand 8 1 83) and 80 on
Vedanta-kaustubha
Thus, on, the giound of the text “He sees the Person lymg m the
aty’ (Praéne 5 6), ‘lymg withm, the aty’, as well as ‘bemg the object
which one sees’, fit m on the part of the Highest Self as possessmg
a manifest auspicious form In the very same manner, smallness, too,
fits in on His part as residing in the abode, viz the heart lotus With
this in his mind, the reverend author of the aphorisms says now
We find the followmg text m the Chindogya mmedistely after
the doctiine of the Plenty * ‘Now what 1s within this city of Brahman
18 a small lotus, ® chamber, small 1s the ether within 1t What 18
withm that should be searched for, that, verily, should be enqured
mto’ (Chand 811) The meanmg of the text, according to us,
18 a8 follows ‘what 1s’ within ‘this aty of Brahman’,—ie withm, the
body which 1s the abode where the individual soul, a part of Brahman,
enjoys the fruit of 1te karmas and which 1s the place where 1t realizes
188 1313 p 331 ‘Kun aamin vdkye param Brahma abladhydtavyam
upadigyaia ahasvit aparam th
28 R, Bh, SK, B 9 Op ov «VE 1388
fso 1 3 lt
164. VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ApH 6 |
Brahman,—is a “small °, 1 © a tiny ‘lotus’, viz the heart, well known
from Scripture, that very thing 18 a chamber asit were In that same
chamber, there 15 a “‘small’’,1e a tiny, or one who has manifested
himself in a subtle form in accordance with the wish of his own devotees
who are devoted to none else, ‘ether’, 1e one who 1s pervasive by
nature In that heart lotus, the small Brahman who 1s denoted by
the term ‘ether’ ‘should be searched for’,1e should be disarmunated.
as different from the enquirer, a8 well as from the body, and ‘should
be enquired into’, 16 should be meditated on repeatedly through
the ‘hearmg’ of the Vedanta
Here a doubt amses, viz whether by the term ‘small ether’ the
elemental ether 18 to be understood, or the Highest Self If it be
suggested The elemental ether, because the term ‘ether’ 18 well
known to denote the elemental ether, and because the term ‘small’
too, a8 mmplymg a subtle object, may be applied to 1b It cannot be
gaid thatin the text ‘As large 18 this ether, so large 18 the ether with,
the heart’ (Chand 813), one and the same thing (viz the ether)
cannot reasonably be both the object compared and the object (upa-
meya and upamfna) with which, 1t 1s,—because it can appropriately
be so on the ground of the distmction, of the external and the internal +
Or, let the embodied soul, like the pomt of a spoke only, be the small
ether, because 1t, too, 18 known from the passage ‘Now this serenity
(ie serene bemg) having arsen from this body’ (Ohind 8 8 4)
Being 9007010 by nature, it can, be fittingly termed ‘small’, and, bemg
undefiled by the body, the sense organs and the rest, 1t can be fittingly
eompared to the ether *—
We reply “The small”, 16 the amall other, 18 none but the
Highest Self Why? ‘On account of what follows ”,1e on account
of the reasons contamed m, the concludimg text,1e on account of the
peculiar qualities of the Highest Self, viz “bemg comparable to the
ether’, ‘bemg the support of all worlds, beginnmg with the earth’,
“pemg the soul’, “bemg free from ams’—and the rest Thus, m the
passage ‘As large 18 this ether, so large 1s that ether withm the
1 That 1s, es the external ether 10 1s the upamdna, aa the mnternal ether the
upameya Hence no contradichon 18 mvolved.
2 That 18 as the ether remams aloof from the mmpumtses of the world,
though connected with 1t, so the soul remams aloof from the mpunties of the
body and the rest, though connected with them Hence the latter may be
compared with the former
[st 1 3 10
ADH 6 | VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 165
heart’ (Chind 8 1 3) the small ether, 1e the Supreme Bemg alone,
18 compared to the well known ether, smce when two different things
can be reasonably held to be the object with which the thing 1s com
pared and the object compared, 1t 18 unreasonable to suppose one and
the same thing to be both (viz upamfns and upameya) ‘Bemg the
supporter of all effecta’ too, mentioned m the pasaage ‘In it both
the heaven and the earth are contamed’ (Chind 813), fits m on
the part of the Highest Self alone The attributes lke “bemg the
soul’, “bemg free from sms’ and the rest, mentioned 1s the passage
‘This soul 18 free from sins, ageless, deathleas, sorrowless, without
hunger, without thirst, possessed of true desires, possessed of true
resolves’ (Chind 8 1 6), fit 17 only uf the Highest Self be understood
Moreover, after having designated the non permanency of the fruita of
woiks and ther incapacity of knowmg Him m the passage ‘As here
the world won by work perishes, so hereafter the world won by merit
perishes’ (Chind 816), Scripture concludes ‘Now, those who
depart, having known the soul here and those true desires, come to
have free movement in all the worlds’ (Chind 816) That 38, those
worshippers who ‘depart’ to the other world, ‘havmg Imown’, 16
having realized ‘the soul’,1e the Supreme Lord called ‘the small’,
and "10088 , 1 6 His qualities, come to have free movement in all the
worlds Accordingly, the small ether 18 the Highest Self, mnce then
alone free movement 18 explicable on, the part of those who know the
nature and qualities of the ‘small one’
SUTRA 15
“Qn ACCOUNT OF GOING AND OF WOED, FOR THUS IT IS SEEN,
THERE 78 A MARK AS WELL ”’
Vedanta-parijdita-saurabha
The “gong” 18 mentioned m the text ‘All bemgs are gomg day
by day’ (Chand 8 321), and the “ word” 18 ‘The world of Brahman’
(Chind 8 3 2%),—on account of these two, the ‘small one’ 18 ascer-
tained to be the Supreme Bemg The daily going 1s “seen thus’’
m another scriptural text too, viz ‘Then, my dear, he comes to be
‡ 8 R, Bh, SK, ए ० Op cit
fsc 1 3 15
166 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]
united with the Exmstent”’ (Chand 6812) If the karmadhiaraya
compound be understood,? then Brahman alone ए ‘the mark’, 1 ©
the primary meaning of the word ("Brahma loka’) “ as well "ˆ
Vedinta-kaustubha
For this reason too, says the author, the small ether 18 the Highest
Self
The subsequent reasons are bemg amplified now In the text
about the small ether, viz ‘Just as those who do not know the place
move again and agam over a hidden treasure of gold, but do not find
1t, 80 these bemgs are gomg day by day to that world of Brahman
but do not find 1४, for they are carmed away by untruth’ (Chand
8 3 2), the phrase ‘are going day by day’ states the “‘gomg’’, and the
“word” 18 ‘this world of Brahman’, (Brahma loka)}—on account of
these two, 10 15 known that the small ether 1s the Highest Self The
sense 18 that because of the gomg of the mdividual souls, mdicated
by the term ‘bemgs’, to Brahman daily during deep sleep when all
the sense organs are dissolved, and because of the word ‘world of
Brahman’, the small ether 18 ascertained to be none but the Highest
Self, 98 the individual soul 1s one who approaches (and hence cannot be
the goal approached), and as going 1s not appropriate on the part of the
elemental ether “For thus 16 18 seen ”’,16 the gomg of all bemgs to
the Highest Self alone day by day during the state of deep sleep, as
well as their return therefrom, are found, m the very same manner, 1n
other passages too, viz ‘“So exactly, my dear, all these bemgs, bemg
united with the Existent, do not know, we have become united with
the Existent”’’ (Chand 692), ‘““Hayimg come back from the Exs
tent, they do not know We have come back from the Exstent”’
(Chand 6101) Im the very same manner, the term ‘world of Brah
man’, too, 18 found apphed to the Highest Self, as m the passage
‘This 18 the world of Brahman, 0 king,” said he’ (Brh 48 39)
The phrase ‘that’ (Chind 832) mdicates the going of all bemgs
there (viz to Brahman) That 15, the term ‘world of Brahma’
(Brahma loka),—stated to be m apposition with the word ‘that’
which denotes the ‘small one’, and explained as a karmadhiraya
compound thus “the world which 1s Brahman’,—is “a mark”’,106
a convincing proof, that the small ether 1s the Highest Brahman
1 Op ott § Bee below V K
fat 1 3 16
+त 6 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 167
SOTRA 16
‘‘AND ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPORTING (THE LoRD 18 THR SMALL
ETHER), BHCAUSH THIS GREATNESS IS OBSERVED iy Him (पषति
ANOTHER SORIPTURAL PASSAGR) ”’
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
The holding apart, mentioned m the passage ‘He 18 the bndge,
a lhmatary support of these worlds’ (Chind 8 4 1 1), fits m 1६ the small
ether be the Highest Self, because “this greatness 18 observed” “in
him १, 18 m the Highest Self alone who 1s called ‘a support’? on the
authority of another seruptural passage, viz "67 the command of this
Imperishable, Girgi, the sun and the moon stand, held apart’ (Brh
893)
Vedanta-kaustubha
On account of the following reason, viz = On account of snpport-
ng’, by the word ‘small ether’, the Highest Self alone 1s to be under
atood here Compare “Now, he who 28 the soul is the bridge, a
imitary sopport for keepimg these worlds apart’ (Chand 841)
The sense 18 (The soul 1s) ‘a bmdge’,—or, the cause of the non miter
muxture,—and a ‘limstary support’,—or that which separates,—‘for
keeping apart’—1e for preventing the intermixture or splittmg
asunder ‘of these worlda’, or of the worlds separated from one another
as relating to the soul (1e internal), and as relatmg to the gods
(16 external) The senge 1s that as ‘‘ this greatness”, viz supporting,
4418 observed’’ in, the Highest Self m another scriptural passage, 80
here, too, the small ether, the hmitary support of all the worlds, 18
known, to be the Highest Self The other scriptural passage is to the
effect ‘At the command of this Impenshable, तह, the sun and the
moon atand held apart’ (Brh 389) Simularly, there 1s ® passage
“Hoe w the Lord of all, he uw the Lord of the worlds, he 1s the bndge,
the lmitary support for keeping these worlds apart’ (Brh 4 4 22 4)
1§ R, Bh, SK, B
$088 ed ahghtly different, p 14 viz ‘Aaya ca mahimno dhrtyd
khyasya
? 8, 8 Bh
4 Correct quotation Kea sarvedvara esa bhitddhapanr esa क्थ pdiah ea
eatul + Vide Brh 4422, p 246
(80 1 3 17
168 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 5]
COMPARISON
Ramfnuja, Srikantha and Baladeva
This 18 stitra 16 17 the commentanes of RAmaénuja and Srikantha
Resulting meaning same, although the meaning of words different,
viz ‘asya’ means ‘of the Lord’ and ‘asmm’ means in the small
ether Hence the sitra ‘Because supporting, which 18 a greatness
of him (viz the Lord), 18 observed 179 1t (viz 17), the small ether)’ 1
SUTRA 17
‘ AND BHOAUSE IT IS WHLL ENOWN ”’
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
And because the word ‘ether’ 1s well known to be denoting the
Highest Self as well,—as m, the passages “The ether, verily, 1s the
revealer of name and form’ (Chind 81413), ‘All these begs,
forsooth, arise from the ether alone’ (Chind 1 9 1 8),—the small ether
18 none but the Highest Self
Vedanta-kaustubha
Again, the small ether should be understood to be none but the
Highest Self Why? Because the word ‘ether’ 1s well-known to be
denoting the Highest Self as well Where? In the passages ‘The
ether, verily, 18 the revealer of name and form’ (Chand 8 141),
‘All these beings, forsooth, arise from the ether alone’ (Chand 19 1)
COMPARISON
Srikantha
Interpretation different, viz ‘Because (the Lord) 18 celebrated
(in, other Upanwads, viz Mahopanisad, Kaivalya upanigad and the
rest), to be an object to be worshipped as abiding m the small lotus,
(the small ether 1s the Lord)’ 4
1 इल B 1315, pp 3089 Part 1
अ+ 1815 pp 4878 PartS BB 1316
a
$ 68 R Bh
“SK 1316 p 488 Part 6
[श 1 3 1819
ADH 5] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 169
SUTRA 18
“Ty rt BE OBJROTHD THAT ON AOQOOUNT OF A REFHRENOE TO THE
OTHER, (VIZ THH INDIVIDUAL SOUL), HH (IS THE SMALL ETHER),
(WH REPLY ) NO, BROAUSE OF IMPOssIBILiry "°
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
If 1t be objected that ^< on account of a reference’ to the individual
soul as well m the middle of the text about the ‘amall one’, viz m the
passage “This serene bemg having arisen from this body, having
attamed the form of highest hght, 18 completed nits own form ‘This
18 the soul, said he’ (Chfind 8 8 & 1), let the mdividual soul be the
‘amall one ’,—
(We reply ) ‘no’, “because of the mposaibility ” of the qualities
of freedom from sins and the rest,? on the part of the individual soul
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected that ^ on account of a reference * to the mndividual
soul by the term ‘serene bemg m the middle of the text about the
amall ether, viz in the passage “This serene bemg, having arisen
from this body, having attamed the form of highest light, 18 completed.
mitsownform ‘Thiswthesoul,sadhe Ths 18 mmortal, fearless’
(Chand 8 3 4), let “him ”’ alone be the small ether,—
(Wereply )‘No’ Why? ‘Because of mmpossibility”’,1e because
the above mentioned qualities of freedom from sms and the rest are
impossible on the part of the individual soul
SUTRA 19
“Ty It BH OBJECTED THAT FROM WHAT IS SUBSEQUENT, (THE
INDIVIDUAL SOUL MAY BE MHANT HERE), (WE REELY ) BUT (THAT
SUBSEQUENT P4SSaGH REFERS TO THH SOUL SO FAB ONLY) IT HAS
ITS REAL NATURH MANIFEST ^
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
If # be objected that “from what 1s subsequent 7, 196 from
Prajapati's statement referrmg to the mdividual soul, the eight fold
18 R Bh, SE, B 2 Vide Ohind §15
[so 1 ॐ 19
170 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA apg 65]
qualtiea of freedom from ams and the rest are known to belong to
the mdrvidual soul as well, hence let 1t alone be the small ether,—
We reply The Highest Self, endowed with the above mentioned
qualities and having His real nature ever mantfest, 18 the ‘small ons’ ,
but not the mdividual soul, havmg ita real nature mantfest, (not
always, but only durmg release)
Vedainta-kaustubha
Here the word ‘small’ 18 to be supplied from the mam, aphor1sm,*
and the words ‘he, no’ from the precedimg one® If it be objected
This 18 impossible ‘From what 1s subsequent’ to the doctrme of
the ‘small’,1e from the statement of PrajApati, the mdividual soul
should be known as endowed with the attributes of freedom from ams
and the rest 06008, here too let 1t alone be the ‘small one’, endowed.
with the qualities of freedom from sms and the rest,—
(We reply )‘“‘No” There, viz m the passage ‘Having attained
the form of Highest hght, 1+ 18 completed im xta own form’ (Chand
834), the mdividual soul which has 18 real nature manifest, 18
mtended to be designated The word “but” (m the sitra) dearly
indicates the great difference between that which has tts real nature
manifest and the ‘small one’ the real nature of which 18 ever unveiled
and which 1s ever beyond the conventional distmctions of bondage
and release Thus the statement of Prajipaii (Chind 871) teaches
the individual soul as possesamg the attributes of freedom from 87708
and the rest,—the soul which has 188 real attributes concealed by the
states of walang and the rest, rooted on karmas, meritorious or non.
meritorious, and existent from all eternity, and which has 108 real
nature manifest through the attamment of the Highest Self, caused
by meditation on Him But the text about the ‘small one’ (Chand
8 1 5) teaches the Highest Self as possessing the attributes of freedom
from sins and the rest,—the Self who has His nature and attmbutes
ever manifest, and who 1s denoted by the term ‘amall ether’ 8
i The contrast 15 between, the nifyduwbhilia evaripa Paramdiman and the
aurbhiita svaripa jivdiman See VK below
४ Viz Br Sa 1814 ॐ Viz Br अ 1318
® Thats the Highest Self 1s always possessed of the attributes of freedom
from sins and the rest while the ndividual soul 18 not always possessed of them,
but only when ite real nature comes to be manifested Hence the amall one’
which 18 altaya posseased of these atinbutes cannot be the madrvidual soul
[50 1 3 19
ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 171
The meaning of the scriptural text (Chand 8 3 4) 18 as follows
Just as the eye,—enveloped im deep darkness and hence unable to
perform 178 own special function of making known objects like clothes,
ornaments and the‘rest,—havmg attamed the ever unenveloped sun,
18 completed mm its own form and able to perform ita own special
fonction, of manifestang 168 own objects,—so the mdividual soul,
‘having attamed’, 16 having completely attamed, near rteclf, the
‘highest’, 16 the Bemg different from the sentient mdrvidual soul
and the non sentient, ‘hght’, 16 the real nature of the Whole the
revealer of all, 18 ‘completed’ im its real nature as knowledge, different
from the body, the sense organs and the rest and endowed with ita
own blise,—as such 1t 18 said to have 108 real nature manifest (हषः
bhiita svaripa) The word ‘&virbhita svariipa’ 18 to be explained.
as ‘one whose real nature has become manifest’ Moreover, as ‘hems
a bridge’, ‘bemg the hmitary support of all worlds’, and ‘bemg the
controller of the sentaent and the non sentient’ are not possible even,
on, the part of the dividual soul which bas 178 real nature manifest,
so the small ether can never be supposed to be the mdzvidual soul
In the doctrine of the ‘small’ (Chind 8 1 6), the attmbutes of freedom
from sins and the rest, which are special to one who has this real
nature ever manifest, are mentioned, while in the doctrine taught by
Prajapati (Chind 871), only those that are special to that which
has its nature manifest (and not ever manifest) Henoe, the reason
“because of impossibility’ (mentioned m Br Si 1318) remams m
force
COMPARISON
Samkara
Interpretataon different, viz ‘If 1t be said + (then
we reply) No, but (the passage im question refers to the soul only so
far) as ita real nature haa become manifest (1e so far 10 has become
Brahman)1 Thus, accordmg to Samkara, the statement of Praj&pati
(Chind 8 ¶ 1) does not really refer to the mdividual soul, but to
Brahman, Accordmg to Nimbi&rka, however, as we have seen, 10
refers to the freed soul, which too 18 different from Brahman
1 8 8 1319 pp 338 ef seg
[8 1 9 20
172 VEDANTA PABLJATA SAUBABHA ADH 6 |
Bhaskara
He, too, points out that the statement of Prajipati does not refer
to the individual soul as such, but to the soul which has become the
Supreme Soul in nature !
SUTRA 20
‘‘ AND THE REFERENOH HAS A DIFFERENT PURPOSE °
Vedanta -parijita-saurabha
“The reference” to the mdividual soul 18 for showing that the
Supreme Soul 18 the cause of the manjfestation of the real nature of
the individual soul
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz If the small ether be the Supreme Soul
having His real nature ever manifest, then the reference to the 1060 चा
dual soul 77, the text about the ‘small one’, viz in the passage ‘Now,
this serene being, haying amsen from this body’ (Chand 8 8 4),
must have a purport,—the author replies here
The word “and `` (in the sttra) umples possibility Just as on.
attaming the sun, the eye, overpowered so long by darkness, 18 com
pleted m ita real form, so on, attammg the highest light,1e the small
ether, the wndividual soul, havimg 80 long 108 real nature and qualities
like freedom from. sins and the rest hidden by the beginningless miyi, 18
completed n1ts own specialform Thus, the reference to the individual
soul m the statement of Prajipati 1s simply for showmg that the small
ether 18 the cause of the manzfestation of the real form of the individual
soul, and not for proving that the small ether 1s the mdividual soul
itself
COMPARISON
Samkara and 21128128.
Interpretation different, viz: ‘And the reference (to the individual
soul) has s different purpose (viz the determmming of the nature of
Brabman)’2 According to Nimb&rka, however, as we have seen,
1 Bh B 1319 p 58
» 88 1320 p 339 Bh B 1820 p 58
[so 1 3 21 22
ADH 6 | VEDANTA PARIJITA SAURABHA 173
the purpose is to show that Brahman 1s the cause of the manifestation
of the real nature of the soul
SUTRA 21
“Ilr IT BE OBJHCTED THAT ON AOCOOUNT OF THE SORIPTURAL
DECLARATION OF WHAT IS SMALL (THH LORD IS NOT THY SMALL
ETHER), (WH REPLY ) THAT HAS BREEN SAID”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
“Tf 1 be objected, that on account of the scriptural declaration
of what 18 small’, the all pervamve Bemg cannot be understood here,—
(we reply ) the answer to this has already been given 1
Vedanta-kaustubha
«Tf it be objected that on account of the scmptural declaration
of whatis small *’ im the passage ‘Small 18 the ether within 1t’ (Chand
8 1 1), let the mdividual soul alone, which 1s atomic m, 8126, be the
‘small one ’,—
(We reply ) The answer to this has been given under the aphorism
‘Because (Brahman) 18 to be concerved thus, as m the case of the
ether’ (Br Si 1 27)
SUTRA 22
‘AND BHOAUSE OF THH IMITATION OF THAT °
Vedinta-pairijaita-saurabha
“And because of the imitation”’ “of that’, 16 of that which
has its real nature ever manifest, m accordance with the passage
“He alone shiwmg, everything shines’ (Katha 515, Mund 2210,
Svet 6 149), the mduvidual soul, the पणाः, cannot be the ‘small
one’, having 108 real nature ever manzfeat
Vedinta-kaustubha
The author says that for this reason, too, the mdividual soul 18
not the small ether
1 Vide Br Si 127 2 8, Bh
[80 1 3 23
174. VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 5]
Because of the umitation “‘of that”’,1e of the small ether having
the eight fold attributes ever manifest, by that which has 108 attributes
of freedom from mns and the rest manifest (and not ever manifest)
the ‘small one’ 18 none but the Highest Self Just as in the Mundaka,
declaring the imitation of the Lord by all m the passage ‘He alone
shining, everythmg shines’ (Mund 2210), and declaring further
thai everything 18 to be manifested by the Lord m the passage
‘Through his ght all this shines’ (Mund 2210), all thmgs which
are imitators and objects to be manifested cannot be the object which
18 imitated and the object which manifests,—so the dividual soul,
mentioned by Praj&pati, and an umitator, cannot be Brahman, denoted
by the term ‘small’, and object to be imitated.
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhdskara
Interpretation different, viz according to them, the siitras 22 23
form. a new adhikarana, designating that the passage Mundaks 2 2 10
refers not to a lummous substance, but to the Supreme Soul! But
according to Nimb&rka, they form parts of the preceding adhikarana,
setting forth additional arguments as to why the ‘small ether’ 18 none
but the Supreme Soul
Raménuja, Srikantha and Baladeva
According to all, the word ‘anukrteh’ means “because of simi
lanty’ Thats, the mdividual soul 18 not the ‘amall one’ or Brahman,
because it 18 only simular to Him ॐ
SOTRA 23
°" MoREOVES (THIS I8) DECLARED BY Smprr”’®
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
Also Smrti declares ‘They have come to attam equality of
attributes with me’ (Git& 14 2 4)
18B 1323, pp 3407 Bh B 18 22 pp 58 ef seg
9 (57 B 1321 p $13, Part 1, Tad anubdras tat aimyam’
SK B 182] pp 4445 2970 6, © 28 18 22
$ 088 ed,p 16 reads Aps amaryyais 4R,B
[७0 1 3 24
ADH 6] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 175
Vedanta-kaustubha
Smyti declares the equality of the mdividual soul, freed from all
bondage, with the Supreme Soul, in the passage ‘They have come
to attam, equality of attmbutes with moe’ (Gité 142) Hence, 1 18
estabhshed that the amall ether 1s none but the Supreme Soul
Here ends the section, entitled “The small’ (6)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiaskara
Reading different, viz ‘Api oa smaryyate’ Interpretation
different, viz —* Further, Smrta (viz Git&é 1612, etc) declares (the
Soul to be the cause of the manifestation of all)’ 1
Ramanuja and Baladeva
Reading ‘Api smaiyyate’ 2
Srikantha
‘Api ca smaryyate’, 1e ‘Moreover Smrti declares
(that the Lord 18 to be meditated on as abiding in the heart lotus 8) °
Adhikaransa 6 The seation entitled ‘What 18
measured (Sititrags 24 25)
SUTRA 24
Qm ACOOUNT OF THE TEXT ONLY, WHAT IS MHASURED (18 THE
LOED) 99
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
‘What 16 measured”’,1e what 1s of the size of a thumb, 18 none
but the Highest Person, ‘on, account of the text” ‘The Lord of past
and future’ (Katha 4 13 +)
1§ B 1338 p 948 Bh B 1323 p 59
28:1 B 19 98, p 318, 29201, 628 13 23
28K B 1328 p 445 Parts
५ 8 R Bh, SK B
[80 1 $ 24
176 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6}
Vedanta-kaustubha
Thus, 1t has been established that Brahman 18 to be meditated
on as the ‘small one’ Now, the author pomts out that Brahman
18 to be meditated on, as of the size of merely a thumb
In the Katha valli, we read ‘The Person, of the aize of merely
a thumb, dwells in the midst of the soul’ (Katha 412), agam ‘The
Person, of the size of merely a thumb, smokeless like hght’ (Katha
413) again ‘The Person, of the mze of merely a thumb, the mner
soul, 18 ever seated m the heart of bemgs’ (Katha 617) Here, a
doubt arises as to whether the Person of the mize of merely a thumb
18 the mdividual soul or the Highest Person The prima face view
18 a8 follows The Person of the size of merely a thumb 18 the mdividual
soul m accordance with the Svet&évatara text, viz ‘The lord of the
vital breaths, who 18 of the size of merely a thumb and of a form hke the
sun, moves about through his own works’ (Svet 6 7d-8a), as well as
m accordance with the Smrti passage, viz ‘Then Yama drew forth,
by force, from the body of Satyav&na, the person, of the size of merely
a thumb, taed to the noose and brought under his control’ (Maha
3 16763 1)
With regard to this, we reply “What 18 measured”,10e the
Person of the size of merely a thumb, mentioned in the Katha valh,
18 none but the Supreme Soul Why? ‘On account of the text”,
16 on account of the text “The lord of past and future’ (Katha
413) The sense 18 this Although ‘bemg of the mze of merely ©
thumb’, mentioned m the above Scnpture and Smrt: texts, 18 here
perceived to be a characteristic mark of the mdividual soul, yet that
mark 18 set aside,*—this 1s the sense
If 1b be objected It bemg umposmble for the mdividual soul,
which 1s by nature atomic in mze, to be of the mze of a thumb, and
there being the mark ‘tied to the noose’, the individual soul can, be of
the mze of merely a thumb only xf 208 subtle body be meant® But 1t
1 © 806 lme 5, vol 1
> That 1s, although in the above scriptural and Smrtr texta the mdividual
soul has been designated as of the mze of a thumb yet in other numerous passages
1b 19 demgnated as of the mize of an aiom meraly Hence the above desemptzon
18 seb acide
2 Thetis mnce the mdividual soul cannot be of the mze of a thumb being
declared to be afomtiain. mze the designation of 10 as of the size of a thumb merely
means that ita subtle body 1s 80 and not that 1t rtaelf 15 so
[भ 1 8 26
+ 6] VEDANTA 22274 SAUBRABHA Li7
18 umpossible for Brahman, the topic of discussion, to be of the size of
merely a thumb, even though repeatedly taught by Saripture,—
(We reply ) No, 1b bemg possible for Brahman to be so, 17, accord
ance with, the wish of His devotees, and on account of His connection,
with place (viz the heart) With regard to this pomt, a preceding
aphorism (viz Br Si 127) may be consulted Moreover, on account
also of a text referrmg to the Person, of the size of merely a thumb,
viz ‘Let one draw him forth from his own body with firmness, as a
pith from a reed Let one know him’ (Katha 617), the Supreme
Soul alone 18 of the mze of merely a thumb Thus, the meanmg of
the text 1s as follows The mdividual soul, entitled to know Brahman,
the agent, endowed with a mght discrimimation between the soul and
the non, soul,—amplied by the phrase ‘from his own body’,— should
draw forth’, 1e should hft up or put outade,—through mtense
prayer agam,— him’, 1e the Person, of the mze of a thumb, the
object and known, first through meditation to be within the heart,
‘from his own body’, 1e from the body known as his own, ‘as the
pith from ® reed’, then “he should know him with firmness’ If this
be so, the Person of the size of merely a thumb, the object to be
worshipped, must be other than the worshipper himself
SUTRA 25
«‹ Bor (ree Logp 28 8772 TO BE OF THR SIZE OF MERELY 4 THUMB)
IN REFERENCE TO THE HEART (OF MEN), BECAUSE MEN (4LONB)
ARE ENTITLED (TO SORIPTURE) ”
Vedanta-parijdta-saurabha
The Lord can very well be of the size of merely a thumb, ^
reference to the heart” of the worshippers To the objection, viz
The size of the heart m animals being not fixed, how can Brahman
be of the mze of a thumb m reference to the heart ?—the author
7601168 ‘‘ Because men (alone) are entitled (to Soripture) ”
Vedanta-kaustubha
The author 18 justifymg the contention that Brahman can be
of the size of merely a thumb
12
[st 1 3 26
178 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]
Even an all pervasive Bemg can, be of the size of merely a thumb,
‘‘unth reference to the heart’’, 16 with reference to the heart, or
the heart lotus which 1s of the size of merely a thumb, of His own
devotees, devoted to Him alone and to none else The sense 18 that
this designation 18 mdeed proper like the demgnation of the Lord as
‘one who makes three strides’ (Trvikrama), in reference to the three
worlds 1
Or else, (an alternative explanation of the word ‘‘ hrdyapeksa-
ya”)
As from the word “heart ” (‘‘ hrd ”’) alone the mze of that which
18 within it (viz the Lord) 1s known, the words “in reference to”
(“apekgayé*’) are to be understood as ‘im reference to the
worshippers’, 16 m, accordance with, ther wish >
To the objection, viz As the 6128 of the beart differs m accordance
with, the difference of hymg creatures, the text about (the Person of
the size of merely) a thumb cannot be explamed in reference to the
heart,—we reply ‘‘ Because men (alone) are entatled’’ to Scripture
This 18 the meanmg ठ ‘That to which men are entitled’ (make
‘ manusySidhikara ’), ‘the state of that’ (make ‘manugyidhikiratva’),
on, account of that (make ‘manusyidbikaratvit’) The meaning of the
sariptural text concerning (ihe Person of the mze of merely) a thumb
18 explicable m reference to the heart of men Although Scripture
18 Of & universal application,“ yet as men alone can, be worshippers
and seekers, they alone are entitled to it Hence, no contradiction
arises here even, if the hearts of elephants and lice be not of the mze
of merely a thumb, as they are not entitled to works enjoined in, Sorip
ture and Smrti, as established m the mxth chapter, determming the
conditions of bemg entitled to sacrifices and so on5 Thus, it 18
1 Trunkrama i an epithet of Vesnu, who paced the three worlds in three
steps in His Vdmana or Dwarf incarnation The sense 18 that just as the all-
pervading Lord 1s said to have three strides only so He may be said to be of the
mze of a thumb only
2 Ile the Lord manifesta Humself as of the mze of a thumb to please his
devotees
8 The compound manugyddhsktdraied? 18 to be explamed ag follows
¢ That 28 sorptural mandates are to be followed by all
6 Vide Pi Mi 8G 6145 pp 504-7 Part 1
fst 1 3 26
ADH 7 ] VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 179
established that the Supreme Soul alone 18 the Person of the mze of
merely a thumb
Here ends the section entitled ‘What 1s measured’ ! (8)
Adhikarana’7 The seotion entitled ‘The deity’
(Statras 26-30)
SUTRA 26
“ KVEN THOSH WHO RH ABOVE THEM (7 7 MEN) (ARB ENTITLED
TO THE WORSHIP OF 384 पा ^ त), (80) BADARIYANA (HOLDS),
BHOAUSH OF POSSIBILITY ”’
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
The gods and the rest also, who are above men, are entitled to
such 8 worship of Brahman,—so thinks the reverend “ Badariyana ””
Vedanta-kaustubha
It has been said im the last section that the text about the Person
of the size of merely a thumb 18 explicable im reference to the heart
of men, a8 men are entitled to Senpture Now, modentally, the
question as to whether or not gods too are entitled to the worship of
Brahman, 1s being considered
In the BrhadBranyaka, we read. “Whoever among the gods was
awakened, to this, he alone became that, hkewise among the sages’
(अ 1410) (The sense ) Whoever among the gods, and smularly
among the sages ‘was awakened’, 1e directly percerved Brahman,
‘he alone’ attained the nature of Brahman Here, on the doubt,
viz whether or not the gods are entitled to the worship of Brahman,
which 18 & means to attammg His nature, if the suggestion be As
men are entitled to Scripture, and as Indra and the rest are incapable
of practsamg meditation,—seemg that they, whose bodies consist of
sacred texts, are not posseased of physical bodies,2—the worship of
Brahman 18 not possible on the part of the gods,—we reply Such 4
worship of Brahman 18 posable on the part of gods as well, who are
‘above’ men,—so the reverend “ Bidariyana”’ thmks Why?
1 The section entitled What is measured’ 1s resumed m stitra 1 8 40
2 That us, mm order that one might carry op medrtatnen, one must have a
phymeal body which 4 godlacks Hence a god cannot practise meditation
[st 1 ॐ 26
180 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]
‘Qn acoount of possibibty,”1e because the worship and the like of
Brahman, leading to salyatzon which 18 characterized. by the attamment
of Brahman and 1s preceded by the cessation of all retmbutive
experience due to their own works, 1s possible on their part as well
Thus, although they have supermundane and celestial enjoyment, yet
since such an enjoyment is subject to the faults of non permanency,
surpassa bility and the rest, 1ts cessation, one day or other, 18 possible,
hence, a desire for salvation, too, 18 possible on their part, by reason
of their learning the unsurpaassability, supreme blisafulness and perma-
nency of the attamment of the nature of Brahman, and finally through
this desire for salvation, a worship of Brahman, too, 1s possible on
their part 1 there bemg proofs establishing their nght to the worship
of Brahman, viz the texts ‘For one hundred and one years, forsooth
Indra dwelt with Prajipati, practusing chastaty’ (Chind 8 113),
“Verily, Bhrgu, the son of Varuna, approached his father Varuna,
(with the request) “Sir, teach me Brahman” ˆ (Tart 311) and so
on Simularly, corporality, too, 1s possible on their part mn accordance
with text about the evolution of name and form,* as well as 1n accord-
ance with, sacred formulg, explanatory and glorificatory passages and.
tradition 3 Thus it 1s declared by Scmpture “When about to say
^ एड °, he should meditate on that deity for whom the offermg 18
taken’ (Ait Br 1184) Here, no meanmg of the text being posable
unless the god referred to, be possessed of s body,5 the god must be
understood to have a body In tradition too, the sun, the moon,
Vasu and the rest are well known to have bodies The sons of Kuntl
were born from gods like Dharma and the rest, possessed of bodies 6
1 That 18, jusb es m the case of a man, the non permanency of the earthly
enjoyment leada him to seek for salvation, which yields a permanent fruit and
that agam, leads him to worship the Lord as a means thereto so exactly the
non permanency of the heavenly enjoyment leads a god to seek for salvation,
which leads him to worship the Lord
4 Vide Oh&nd 68 9 2-4 9 Moniras artha-vdda and tithkdsa
4 Ananddérama ed p 805
These are manira and ariha vada
5 Because we cannot meditate on the deity unless he possesses a body
To meditate 18 to meditate on a certain definite form Of उल B 1825 Na
ht mireesa-devata dhyam adiurohat '
9 Kuni, the wife of Pandu, had with his approval, three sons, Yudhtgura,
Bhima and Arjuna, by the three derties, Dharma, Vayu and Indra respectively
Vide Mah&. 1 4760 ef seg (chap 128), pp 174 @ seg, vol 1
[श 1 3 27
ADH 7 ] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 181
In the Puri&nas, too, there 18 a multitude of legends of vanous kinds
about them, possessing bodies The verses from those chapters are
not quoted here for fear of increasing the bulk of the book
SUTRA 27
५ [7 rr 37 OBJHOTED THAT (IF THE GODS BE POSSESSED OF BODIES)
¢ GONTRADIOTION WITH REGARD TO WORKS (WILL 2BESUIL4),
(WH REPLY ) NO, BEOAUSE OF THH OBSERVATION OF THE
ASSUMPTION OF MANY (BODIES BY THH GODS, Eto ) ”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
If 1t be objected Since the worship of Brahman 18 not possibile
without a body, their corporality must surely be admitted But if
that be so, 1t will grve mise to a “‘ contradiction with regard to works *’,—
(We reply ) ‘‘no” such objection can arse Why’ ‘“ Because
of the observation of the assumption ° amultaneously of many bodies
even by one and the same deity
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected Although, the corporality of the gods, as of us,
18 an mevitable conclusion, as the activitaes in connection with the
repeated practice of ‘hearing’, ‘thmking’ and ‘meditating’ are possible
only on the part of one who 1s endowed with & body, sense organs and
mind, and as in that way alone it 18 possible for them to be the bene-
factors of sacrifices, through ther actual presence, hke sacrificmg
priests and the rest,.—yet 17 they be possessed of bodies, there will
be “a contradiction with regard to works”, viz sacrifices and the
reat, since the simultaneous presence of one body (16 of one god)
In many sacrifices 18 mpossible,z7—
(Wereply )‘‘No” Why? ^ Because of the observation of many
worships "8 ‘ Many”,1e of various forms, ^" worship ”’, ^ on account
1 That 1s, if gods be possessed of bodies, then they may themselves be
present ab sacrifices like the pmesta and conduce to their proper performance,
ete
9 That 18, one and the same god 1s aaultaneously mvyoked in many sacrifices
but evidently he cannot be armultaneously present m many places
8 The compound ‘anska-pratpaiter dardandt’ 1s explained as follows
[87 1 3 27
182 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]
of the observation of that” Thus, just as one and the same
teacher 18 found to be saluted sunultaneously by many saluting dis
ciples, just as one and the same sun 18 found to be worshipped simul
tansously by many worshippmg men, 80 there 18 no inconsistency 1n
supposing that different sacrificers offer their own 0016618 to one and
the same corporal deity who abides m his own place Hence no
harm 1s done to sacrifices
Or else, there may be another construction of the phrase “ aneka.
pratipatter daréanSt*’ If 1t be objected that there will be ^ & con
tradiction with regard to works” m the stated way,—(we reply )
‘*No” Why! “On account of the assumption of many”,1e6 on
account of the assumption of many forms, or on account of the
attamment of many bodies, by one and the same person who 18
perfected by Yoga Why? ^" Because of the observation” of 10
m Scripture Thus, in the Moksa dharma,! a question bemg put
forth concerning the Simkhya and the Yoga thus =" ^ Reverend father,
it behoves you to tell me in particular about the SAmkhya and the
Yoga Everything, O knower of sacred duties, 18 known to you,
O best among the Kurus”’!’ (Mah& 19 11087 8), the text, having
set forth an eulogy of the Samkhya and the Yoga, goes on =“ ^" Those
who &re endowed with the power of the Yoga and are self controlled
and majestic, enter, © Partha, through Yoga mto Prajipatis, sages,
gods and the great elements Neither Yama, nor the angry Antaka,®
nor the supremely mighty Mrtyu lords 1t, O king, over the Yoga of
unmeasured might A yogm, O mghtiest of the Bh&ratas, can, by
reason of attaming strength,“ create many bodies for himself, and
move about the world by them all By some he may attam (16
enjoy) objecta, by others, he may practise a severe penance, and he
may again contract them, as the sun does the multitude of 108 rays’
(Maha 12 11060-64 5)
1 Name of a section of the twelfth book of the Mahdbhdraia, from chap 174
to the end
2 P 764, ine 27 vol 3
ठ Name af Yama, the god of Death
« Here the éatr-suifiz implies reason
5 © 755, lines 20-28, vol 8
[so 1 8 28
ADH 7 | VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA 183
SUTRA 28
““T¥ IT BH OBJECTED THAT (4 CONTRADICTION WILL BESULT) WITH
BHGAED TO WORD, (WE REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THE ORIGIN
(OF HVERYTHING) IROM IT, ON ACCOUNT OF PRROEPTION (1 ग
SORIPTURE) AND INFERENCE (IB Smet) ”
Veddnta-parijaita-saurabha
If 1t be objected thai if the corporality of the gods be admutted,
a contradiction will result with regard to the Vedia words denoting
them, aa these words will become meaningless prior to the origin of
the 0016008 (viz the gods) denoted by them and subsequent to ther
destruction,—
(We reply ) No such contradiction resulta, “‘on account of the
origin”? of the objects (viz the gods and the reat) “from it”, 16
from the words alone, denoting eternal prototypes or forms, and
serving ॐ reminders to the thonght of Praj&pati, wm, accordance with
the followmg scriptural and Smyta texts ‘He evolved name and form
by means of the Veda’ (Tait Br 2623 ),‘A celestial word, without
beginmng and end, eternal, and composed of the Vedas was omutted
by the self born m the beginning, whence proceeded all activities’
(Mah 12 8534 4)
Vedanta-kaustubha
Here, the word ‘contradiction’ 1s to be supplied from the preced-
ing aphorism If it be objected Very well, there may not be any
contradiction, with regard to works 11 the gods be possessed of bodies,
still there may be contradiction ^ with regard to the words” denoting
gods and the rest, 16 with regard to the Vedio forma That 18, on
account of the non eternity of the bodies of the gods,—they being
due to karmas—as well as on account of the eternity of the Vedic
texte, the eternal relation between a word and its meanmg will be
1P 275 08 9 vol ॐ Reading ripe
R, 8K
2 FP 666, ima 22, 501 $
8, R, Bh
Reading That 18, the Vedic manérae are said to be composed by different sages like
Vesedentira and go on and hence 210 may be thought that these sages bemg
non eternal, the mantras composed by them must also be so, 18 the Veda
must be non eternal But the fact ७ that the sages are not really the composers
of the manirae, which are really eternal, but when they are aaid to be the composers
of those maniras, 1b is amply meant that they ubter 1e reveal the eternally
existent manira in different ages Thus,eg एण्य m one partacular age
utters © manira which is then said to be Vawudenwra Then m course of time,
किध perishes, but the manira remams intact and in the next age a new
एक 28 deputed to utter and reveal the very same maniraandsoon Thus,
the manira itaelf remaims unchanged from all eternity, only rte revealers change
from age to age Hence the Vedio maniras are really sternal and so 19 the Veda
2Pp 1494
8 Bh SK, 2
8 P 50
8 Bh Of @ very amular pamege m Mahi 12 8660, ए 667 lines 9 10
vol 3, which 1s the same as the above pagsage only reads ‘Tathd Brahma
horadsqu' m place of Tathd bhdud yugddsgu '
[st 1 3 30
188 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the objection, vz The view that Prajipatz, having known
the particular forms of object by means of the Vedsa,—in accordance
with the maxim of a person arsen from sleep,—! creates them as he
did before, fits in the case of the periodical dissolution® But since
in the case of the total dissolution ठ there 1s destruction of everything,
how can the priority of the Veda to creation be possible? How can
also 108 eternity be possible? How can again the world be preceded by
16% The author replies here
The word “and” (in the siitra) 1s meant for removing the doubt
The word “even” imphes possibility That 18 to say, there 18 no
contradiction whatsoever “even with regard to the recurrence”
consisting In a contimuous stream. of creation and dissolution of the
material world, 1e with regard to the first creation at the end a
great dissolution Why? ^ On account of having the same name and
form’’ ‘Thus, during the total dissolution, the Lord Vasudeva, the
one 71888 of a multitude of attributes which are special to Hin, eternal,
infinite and natural, and possessing the sentient and the non sentient
His powers, having drawn im all the effects, consisting m His own
powers (Sakti) of the sentient and the non sentient, as a tortoise draws
in ita 17008 , and having placed them m Himself im a successive order,
opposed. to that of creation, abides m silence, lkea boy who has
gathered. up his toys At that time, the Vedas, the objecta denoted by
them, as well as the forms of the latter, exist in Him, all blended
together with Him Thus, the entare Universe always exists m
108 cause, viz VWAsudeva or Brahman, possessing the sentient and the
non sentient as His powers There 78 no such thing as absolute
destruction, in accordance with the scriptural text ‘“‘The exsatent
alone, my dear, was this in the beginning, one only, without a second ”’ ’”
(Chind 621) That 18, ‘My child!’ ‘this’,1e the Universe, ‘was
existent alone’,1e was non different from 108 cause, “im the beginning’,
1 See footnote 2, p 184
9 Nawnitiba pralaya
8 Prdkrta-pralaya
Nawmthke pralaya means the dissolution. of the three worlds when one day
of the Kdryya brahman or Heranyagarbha comes to anend while prdkria pralaya
means the dissolution of all objects together with the Kdryya brahman himeelf
Vide Ved Pan, 7th chap for the four knnds of pralayas miiya natwntitska,
prékria and diyaniska
{80 1 3 JO
ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 189
16 prior to creation, and that, viz the cause, denoted by the term.
‘existent’, 18 ‘one only, without a second’ He 1s without an equal
or & superior, indicated respectively by the words ‘only’ and ‘without
a second’, and He 1s to be known also as manifold by nature indeed,
emcoe He 16 the substratum of the sentient and the non sentient which.
are His powers Dissolution means the exstence of the effect m the
cause in a subtle form, while creation means amply the manrfestation
of such an effect At the end of dissolution, the omniscient and all
knowing Lord, having wished first ° "८ May I be many”’’ (Chind
628, Tart 261), having then separated the mass of enjoying souls
and the ०016608 of enjoyment, so long merged m Him aa His subiile
powers, having created all objecta from the mahat down to the four
faced Brabma& as He did before, having manrfested the eternally
existent Vedas, having taught them mentally to Brahm&, and having
deputed him to the creation of the Universe, consisting of gods, men
and the rest, as 1t was before, Himeelf exists as his (Brahmé’s) mner
aoul, as declared by the text ‘Having created 1४, he entered into that
very thing’ (Tat 261) Brahma too, who has attamed lordship
through His grace, having apprehended thex forma from the Vedic
words, creates gods and the rest As such, there 1s no contradiction
even with regard to the recurrence,—this 18 the sense Just m this
consists the non human omgin of the Veda, 1t having an eternally
exstént form like the Supreme Brahman And ita eternity means that
one, having remembered a particular order of succession, through the
mpreasions generated in his mind by his prior recitations of the Veda
in & fixed order, should recite the Veda m that very order +
If 1t be asked Whence 1s this known Wereply “ Brom percep
tion and from Smrtz”’ ‘' Perception” means that which destroys the
darkness of the hoart,1e Serpture, viz ‘He who first creates Brahma
and he who, forsooth, delivera the Vedas to him, to that Deity, who
18 the light of self knowledge, I, demrous of release, take shelter’,
(Svet 618), smularly ‘The creator fashioned, as he did before, the
sun and the moon, the heaven, the earth and the ether, and then the
sky’ (Rg V 1019038) There 18 a Smrti passage as well, viz ‘Then
1 That 28 tho Veda iu said to be apaturuseya or of non human ongin and
miye or sternal Now, the Grset means that the Veda w eternally ematent and
18 amply reveaied and not created, ab the tume of each new creation The
second means that 1# 18 reoited m exactly the same order of succession m different
ages all throughout
[0 13 3
190 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 8]
8 lotus sprang forth from the navel of the sleeping Deity In that lotus,
0 holy one, BrahmS was born, fully versed m the Vedas and their
parts He was told by Him “Create bemgs, O highly learned one’’!’
‘Just aa the various signs of the seasons are seen to be the very same
m their regular recurrence, 80 are the beings 17 the successtve stages’
(VP 1564), ‘Whatever were the names of the sages and (ther)
knowledge of the Vedas, the same the Unborn One gives to them when
they are born at the end of the mght Simularly, the past mdrvidual
gods are equal to the present gods in names and forms’, and so on
Hence, शा006 the gods too may be seekers, there 18 nothing contradic
tory 170. their bemg entitled to the knowledge of Brahman Therefore
1t 18 established that the gods are entitled to the knowledge of Brahman
Here ends the section entitled “The deity’ (7)
Adhikarana 8 The section ontitled ‘The honey
and the rest’ (Sitras 31-33)
OPPONENT'S VIEW (Stitras 31-32)
SUTRA 31
© Om ACCOUNT OF DMPOSSIBILITY, (THE SUN AND THS BEST HAVE)
NO RIGHT TO THE (MEDITATIONS ON) THE HONEY 4ND THE RBST,
(80) JADMINI (THINKS) ”
Vedinta-parijfta-saurabha
It being umposaible that the object worshipped can be the wor
shipper himself, the sun and the rest are not entitled to the medtta-
tions on the honey, etc —so ^ Jamin” thinks
Vedainta-kaustubha
Thus, 1t has been said that the gods are entitled to the knowledge
of Brahman Now, the question 18 bemg considered whether or not
they are entitled to meditations on the honey and the rest
The meditation on the honey 1s mentioned in the Chindogya
“This sun, verily, 18 the honey of the gods’ (Chand 311) and so on
By the phrase “‘and so on” (m the sfltra) other meditations m which
the gods are the objects worshipped are to be understood Here a
[80 1 8 32
ADH 8] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 197
doubt arises, viz Whether or not the gods are entitled to the med
tations on the honey and the rest What 1s reasonable here’ Gods
like the sun, Vasu and others have “no nght” to the meditation on
the *‘ honey and the reat *’,—a0 the teacher “‘ Jaumm1” thnks Why?
५ (07 account of impossibility,” 1e because 1t 18 umposaible that the
sun and the rest which are accepted as the objecta to be worshipped
in those meditations, can be themselves worshippers
OPPONENT'S VIEW (concluded)
SUTRA 32
०८ AND BEOAUSH OF (THEIR) BEING (WORSHIPPERS) WITH RHGARD-
TO THE LIGHT (IE Braman)’
Vedanta -parijita-saurabha
* And because of (ther) bemg’’ worshippers “‘ with regard to’”
Brahman, they are not entitled to the honey meditation and the reat,—
this 1s the prima facie view
Vedinta-kaustubha
But २६ 18 not to be thought that this bemg the case the gods are
without a Lord, because then they, bemg all of a mutually equal
status, will come to be annihilated through vying with one another,
and also because the text ‘Through fear the sun arses’ (Tait 28 1)
will come to be contradicted The fact 1s that they are the worshippers
of the Highest Self and are themselves worshipped by others 30,
the opponent pomta out here The gods and the rest, who are the
objecta to be worshipped in the honey meditation and the hike, bemg
worshippers ‘‘ with regard to the hght”’,1e of the Supreme Brahman,
are not to be taken as the worsluppers in the honey meditation, eto —
this 1s the sense, as declared by the passage ‘That the gods worship
as the Light of lights, as life, as immortal’ (Brh 44 16)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiaskara
Interpretation of the word ‘jyotim’ different The stitra means,
according to them And because (the words ‘sun’, ‘moon’, and the
[so 1 ॐ 38
192 VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 8 |
rest) refer to the Laght That 18, the sun and the rest are not sentient
detties, possessed of bodies, but are mere non sentient spheres of
hight, and what 18 non sentient cannot be, evidently, entatled to any
meditation +
CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sitra 38)
SUTRA 33
“Bor BIDABRAYANA (MAINTAINS) THE EXISTHNOE (OF RIGHT ON
THE PART OF THE GODS), FOR THEEH IS (POSSIBLE LONGING FOR
BRABMAN ON THEIR PART) ”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
With regard to it, the author states the correct conclusion
“( Bidariivana ° mamtains “ the existence ” of mght on the part of the
sun, Vasu and the rest, to the honey meditation and the like as well,
० because ” & longing for Brahman ^ 18 ”’ posable on them parts, conse
quent on the attainment by them of their respective offices in © future
age aa well, through the worship of Brahman, their Inner Controller
Ved&anta-kaustubha
Having thus set forth the view of Jamin, his Holimess, wishing to
refute 1b, 18 statmg his own view
The word ^ but” precludes the prema face view The reverend
५ BEdarfiyans *’ maintains “ the existence”,1¢6 the existence of right
on the part of the sun, Vasu and others, to the honey meditation and.
the like as well, ‘ because” a longing for Brahman 1s possible on the
part of even the sun and Vasu and the rest m the present age,
consequent on their attamment of sun hood, Vasu hood and the rest
in a future age as well, through the worship of Brahman, their Inner
Controller Thus, here the worship of Brahman being enjomed both
m His effected and causal states, the words ‘sun’ and the rest, mply
Brabman, their Inner Controller, and hence it 18 possible for the very
same Vasu and others to be the objects to be worshipped and attamed,
since the concluding text ‘He who knows this Brahma Upanigad’
(Chand 3113) proves that the words ‘sun’ and the rest, imply
1 8B 18382, pp 336 67, Bh B 1382, p 66
{80 1 8 33
4DH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 198
Brahman Thus, Brahman alone bemg the object to be worshipped
even in the honey meditation and the hke, the text ‘That the gods
worship as the hght of hghts, as life, as mmmortahty’ (Brh 446) 18
perfectly consistent It cannot be said 9180 that as the frost of the
honey meditation 1s the attamment of Vasu hood and the rest, and
as Vasu and the rest have already aitamed that, they cannot be
seekers, or wish, for these again,—because in ordimary experience, 9
desire for wealth, 17. & future hfe 18 found on the part of those who are
rich in the present hfe Hence, it 18 established that the gods are
entitled to the honey meditation and the hke 1
Here ends the section entitled ‘The honey and the rest’ (8)
1 The Madhu-edyd, or the representation of the gun as the honey extracted
from all the Vedas as taught first to Prayapah by Brakmd then to Manu by
Prajapats and then to his descendants by Manu, and to Uddalaka Arum: by his
father (Vide Ohand 811] 4) 1s grven im Chand 31811 It begs Venly the
sun. is the honey of the gods Ita cross beam 1s the heaven ‘The ether w the
honey comb ‘The rays are the sons (1 © the sons of Dees) (Chand 811) and
goes on to represent the eastern rays of the mun, ita red form, as extracted from
the Rg-veda the southern rays of the sun ite white form, from the Yayur-veda
the western rays of the gun, ita dark form from the Sdma-veda the northern
raya of the sun, ita exceedingly dark form, from the Aiharva-veda and the up
wards rays of the gun, 1ts centre from the Upaniwads (Ohind $1-85) After
that the drfferent forms of the sun are demgnated as the objects of enjoyment
for Vasus, Rudras, Adtiyae, Morus and Saddhyas who respectively enter mto and
arise from those forms (Chind 36-310) Finally in the concludmg sectnon
the sun 18 represented aa standmg in the middle without rising or setting, and
ae neither rismg nor settimg for one knows this Bra/fma-upanwad ( = secret of
Brahman) (Chand 8 11)
(1) Here the opponent's view 18 that Yasus and the rest are enjomed here
as the objects of worship (Chand 3 6-8 10) and hence they themselves cannot
be the worshippers
The answer to this objection 18 that the Madhu-wdyd bas two sections
The first sectaon (viz (0820 86-310) demgnates Brahman m Fis effected
state 1 6 as appearing m the forms of Vasus and the rest ‘The second section
(wax 00825. $11) designates Brahman m His causal state, 1e aa abidmg m
the san as xts Inner Self And the concludmg demgnaton of the Madhu-vdyd
ase Brahma-upanyad proves that the meditations on the Vaeus and the rest
too are really meditations on Brahman as abiding withm them Hence Brahman.
18 really the object to be meditated throughout m the Madhu-mdyd, and as such
Vasus and the rest can be worshippers here, 1 © oan practise the Madhu-eidyd
18
[st 1 8 84
194. VEDANTA-PIRIJATA SA URABHA ADH 9]
Samkara
Interpretation different, viz “Badaréyane (mamtams) the exis-
tence (of mght on the part of the gods), for (although the gods have
no nght to the Madhu vidy& and the reat, mm which they themselves
are mmpleated, yet there 28 (ther mght to the pure knowledge of
Brahman’)1 Thos, Samkara does not admit that the gods are
entatled to the Madhu vidy&é as Nimb&rka does The view of the
latter as we have seen, 18 that the gods are entitled not only to the
knowledge of Brahman in general, but also to those vidy&és in which
they themselves are umplicated.
Bhaskara
Interpretation of ‘asta hi’ different, viz for there 28
(serrptural evidence that the gods are enitiled to the Madhu vidyé
and the rest) ` 9
Adhikarana 9 The sectionentitied ‘The exolu-
sion of the Siidras’ (8०१८०8३ 84-41)
SUTRA 34
His GRIM (AROSE) ON ACCOUNT OF HEARING ITS DISEESPECT, ON
ACCOUNT OF HASTHENING aT THAT TOME, FOR THIS IS WHAT 78
INDICATED (BY THR THEM ‘“‘StpRs’’) ”
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
Tt 28 not to be supposed, on the ground 8 that m the Chindogya
the term ‘Siidra’ 1s applied by a preceptor to one desirous of salvation,
(2) The opponent resumes Iiven if Brahman and none else, be the object
of medrtefion here, yet Vasus cannot be held to be practimng the Madhu-mdyil
since the frurt of Madhu-mdyd is the attammentof Vasu hood, ete and why should
those who are already Vaeus etc strive to beso again
The answer 15 that they may be Vasus ancl go on im the present age but
at the same time be desirous of holdmg the same position m a foture age also,
88 1333 p 367
१ Bh B 1888 p 66 3° Here the éair suffix implies reason
[st 1 38 34
4DH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 195
that a Sidra + 18 entitled to the knowledge of Brahman Because
of “his’’21e of Jénaéruti’s, demre for salvation, on hearing the dis-
respectful words used by the swan, and because of his hastenmng
towards, for that reason, to the preceptor at that very moment,—
"“ 1# 18 indicated `° that his grief had arsen and that was what was
meant by the address ‘Stidra’
Vedinta-kaustubha
Now the followimg question 18 bemg considered Just as 1 has
been. said that the gods are entitled to the knowledge of Brahman, as
the term ‘God’ 1s mentioned in the text ‘Then, whosoever among
the gods 18 awakened’ (Brh 1410), so whether or not ® Sidra too
18 entitled to the knowledge of Brahman, seemg that in the Chin
dogya, the word "6678 * 18 mentioned m reference to Janaéruta who
demred for salvation
If 1t be suggested The word ‘éiidra’ bemg mentioned m the
Chindogys under the Samvarga-vidyf m the passages ‘“‘ Oh! the
necklace and the carnage be yours, 0 Sidra, together with the cows” ’
(5०१ 42), ‘““You have brought these, 0 Sidra” | ' (Chand 428),
a Siidra too must be entitled to the knowledge of Brahman, 16 being
posmble for him also to be a seeker® And, he may gam the know
ledge of the nature, eto of Brahman through the hearmg of tradition
and the rest, 1 accordance with the statement of the ancient onea
‘He should make the four castes hear, ‘begining with the Brihmana’
Mahf 12 1289600 4}, and, the statement of Ham Vaméa ‘One who 18
fidra by birth should attam a good end through hearing’, which
lays down an myunction with regard to the hearmg of Brahman by
him also The prohibition contamed m the passage ‘Hence, 6
Sidra 18 not to be mnitaated to ® sacrifice’ (Tar Sam 7115), 15
concerned emply with his dusqualfication with regard to acts lke
sacrifices to be performed by means of fire, but 1s not ® cause of bis
1 The fourth and the lowest caste
9 Here the gentirve cage implies an agent (hari) m accordance with Pax
28 65,8D K 628
> That 18 just es 1b has been shown that gods are entitled to the knowledge
of Brahman, smce they demre (arthms) for salvation, ao the Siidras too destre for
satveinion and are as such entitled to the same knowledge
4 © 8] lme # vol 3 8 P 24), Ime 91, vol 2
[st 1 3 34
196 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 9]
disqualification for knowledge, as knowledge 1s mental, and as Vidura 1
and the rest, as well as women 1178 Sulabh& > and so on are found to
possess the knowledge of Brahman,—
We reply A Sidra 1s not entatled to the knowledge of Brahman
for the followimg reasons (first, he lacks the requisite fitmess, not
having the knowledge of the nature of Brahman and the method of
worshipping Him Secondly, although the worship of Brahman may
be accomplished mentally, yet the knowledge of the nature, eto of
Brahman 18 generated by the study of the Veda, preceded by the
investiture with the holy thread Jimally, 9, Sidra bemg excluded
from investiture, 18 not fit for knowing Brahman and as such, his seeking
18 of no great value As the mjunctions regarding work hold good
in the case of the first three classes, the prohibition holds good equally
with, regard to knowledge as with regard to work Also, as in accord
anos with the statement ‘The Veda 1s to be confirmed by tradition
and Purfina’ (Mahé 1 260 8), tradztion and Purina, too, confirm the
knowledge established by the Veda, a 60078 cannot attam knowledge
from that too The injunction about the ‘hearing’, on the other
hand, smply means that auch a ‘hearmg’ has the effect of destroying
a Sidra’s sms and securmg prosperity for him, here or hereafter ,
and not that he 1s entitled to meditation or knowledge The possession
of knowledge by Vidura and the rest should be known to be due to the
non destruction of the knowledge which they attamed im another
birth, and their such low births should be known to be due to their
works which had begun to bear fruits Hence a Sidra 1s not entitled
to the knowledge of Brahman
On the other hand, the term ‘Sidra’, mentioned m Scrpture,
18 to be explained thus This the reverend author of the aphorisms
states in the words “gmef”, and so on “For” mplies the reason,
and “his”, means J&nadrut: Pautriyanas That 18, on hearing the
disrespectful words used by the swan for his want of knowledge of
Brahman, thus ‘“O, who 18 that man of whom you speak, as if he
were Raikva, with the cart”?’ (Chand 413), J&naéruti at once
1 Vedura was the younger brother of Dhrtardsfra and Pdndu He waa the
son of Vydea and @ slave girl who was dressed 88 one of the widows of Viotire
viryya, and mistaken by Vyasa assach ‘Vide Mahé 1 4301, etc
9 Sulabhd waa female mendicant who entered into a highly learned discourse
with Janaka Vide Maha 12 11854 & seq (Chap 321)
9 P 10 175 11 vol I
[st 1 3 34
ADH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 197
hastened to Raikva, the man with the cart and a knower of Brahman
From, this, 1t is “ indicated” that his “gmef’’ had ansen Hence, the
address ‘Stidra’ was apphed by the sage to a non Sidra, with a view
to intimating his own ommiacience, thinking ‘This Jinoéruti has come
to Jearn the knowledge of Brahman from me, tempting me with the
offermg of riches He docs not know me, that I have performed all
my duties and am omniscient’ Thus, (the whole story goes ),
Jinaéruti Pautriiyana wax a royal samt, versed in religious duties
Certain divine sages pleased with bis multitude of qualities, and
intending that having heaid their conversation, and having thereupon
approached Raikv.i, the knower of Brahman, Jinasruti, too, would
become & knower of Biahman, assumed the forms of swans and began
to fly mm a circle over the king who was lying on the roof of his palace
in summo. ‘Then, the swan which waa followmg said with surprise
to the one which was leading ‘O Bhuallfikea, ग्नि, do you not
see the light of the king Jiinusrut: which has pervaded the remon
of the heaven? That hght will buin you, so do not cross it On
hearing these woids of the one following 1t, the leading swan rephed.
*“Q, who 1s that man of him you speak as if he were Raikva, with the
cart’ १ ` (Chind 413) 16 you apoak of this Jénwruti as 1f he were
Raikva with the cart, meanmg, the reverend Raikva who has a
‘yugve’ or 0 cart and 13 a knower of Biahman By the adjective
‘with a cart’, Raikva’s mark was indicated, mn order that he might
be easly found out and approached Then, on hearmg the disres
pectful words used by the swan, Jinaéruti too, ascertained, in the
morning, the whereabout of Ratkva through his man, and repaired
to the sage Raikva, taking with him mx hundred cows, a necklace and
a chariot yoked with horses, and having approached him, said ‘O
Raikva! Take all these cows and the rest, and teach me, O reverend
याः ` Raikva replied ‘ “QO, the necklaco”’’ (Chind 423) and 80 on,
16 ‘O Sidra, the heap of wealth, hke the chariot and the rest, together
with the cows be yours’ And he addressed hm as ‘O Sidra’ more
than once (viz again in Chind 4 2 5) A ‘Stidra’ 18 one who gneves
(&008&0), and the word 18 formed m accordance with the rule
‘When the root “ duc” 18 followed. by the suffix ८८ कष, ११, the “oa”
15 replaced by “‘da”’ (SD K Un&di siitra 176+), and the vowel ‘u’ 1s
lengthened (in accordance with the unfidi siitra 1752) Hence “hus”’,
1 P 699, vol 2 2 Thus, fic-+ra = did-++ra = Hidra
[st 1 3 26
198 VEDINTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADE 9]
१९ J&naéruta’s grief alone “‘ was indicated’ by Raikva, with a view
to pointimg out J&nadruta’s fitness for recerving instruction, and not
his eonnection with any caste,—this 1s the sense 1
SUTRA 35
“(JaxasRUTI WAS NOT A STDRA) ALSO BECAUSE WH KNOW OF
(His) KgaTRIYAHOOD FROM THE INDICATION, (VIZ THA FACT OF
HIS BEING MENTIONED) LATHR ON Wits CarTRanaTHa ”
Vedinta-parijdta-saurabha
““ Because we know of the Kgatriyahood >` of J&nadruta "from the
indication” viz that ‘later on’ he was mentioned together with
Caitraratha Abhipratarm, Kegatriya, in the passage ‘Now, when
Saunaka Kapeya and Abhipratirm Kfikgasen. were bemg served
food, a 0 ee (Chind £365 2), Jinaérut
was not a Sidra
Vedainta-kaustubha
From this reason also, the author, pomts out, the Ksatrryahood
of J&nasrut 18 known
His grief alone has arisen, hence he was called & ‘Sidra’ by the
sage, this being 80, the Siidrahood of Janaéruta was not due to this
caste Why? “ Because we know of (bis) Ksatrryahood”,1¢ also
because we know of his Ksatriyahood from the fact that m the mtro
ductory passage, viz A plentiful giver, one preparing many food’
(Chand 411), he 18 known to be & Jord of gifts and a giver of much
well cooked food, from the fact of his sendmg the door keeper, known
from the passage ‘He said to the door keeper’ (Chand 415) and
from the fact of his giving golden ornaments, chariot and daughter to
Raikva Having, thus, stated the marks contamed in the introduc
tory text and proving the Kgatriyahood of Jénaéruti, the author goes
on to show the mark, contamed in thy concluding text of the samvarga
vidy#, according to the mamm of the ‘crow’s eyo ’,2—the term ^ and ”
eee
1 ‘Vide Chind 41-42
9 8, R, Bh, Sk, B
9 The maxm of the crow’s eye’ means as follows Crows are supposed to
have only one eye, which & ocoaaon requires moves from the cavity on one ade
into that of another The maxun 1s used of a word which appears only once
{st 1 3 35
ADE 9 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 199
(mm the stitra) referrmg to both—,1n the words “ And from the mdica-
taon, (viz the fact of his bemg mentioned) later on with Ca:traratha ११,
16 “from the indication’, viz that Janaéruta was mentioned together
with Caitraratha who 18 ascertained to be a Ksatriya from the fact
of his association with a well known priest of Kgatriyas Thus, m
the concluding text, viz ‘Now, when Saunaka Kapeya and Abhi
pratarin Kiikgaseni were being served food by a cook,! a religious
student begged of them’ (Chind 435), Caztraratha, named Abhi
एकह). 18 mentioned This 18 the sense On the engmry ‘who were
the two that were being served’ ‘by the cook’,1e by one who superin
tends over the oven *'—the text says Sunaka’s descendant, the prest
of the Kapi alan, and Kaksasena’s descendant, named Abhipratinn,
the kng When these two sat down to eat, they were asked for alms
If 1+ be asked Whence do you know that Abhipratimn was o
Caitraratha ? (a descendant of Citraiatha),—we reply He was ao,
because of his connection with Kipeya, (10 descendant of Kap),
the priest of Citraratha From the text ‘The Kapeyas made Citra
ratha perform sacrifice by this’ (Tand Br 20 12 6 *), 1t 18 well known
that the Kipeyas were the prieata of Citrarnatha The term ‘by this’
means ‘by the Dvi riitra `
If 1t be objected Very well, let Abhipratinn be Caitraratha
because of his connection with a priest of Citra, but what proof 1s
there of lus Keatriyahood *‘—(we reply) The text ‘From him was
born a king of Kaatriyas, named Caitraratha’,1s the proof The words
‘from him’ mean. ‘from Oitraratha’
A Kegatriya being referred to in the end, Jinaéruti, mentioned in
the begmning, too, must be a Kastriya, 81106 in one and the same
vidy& there 18 the mention, as a rule, of parsons of the same class,—
this 18 the meanimg of the aphonsam Moreover, the Kgatrryahood
af Abbipratirm bemg ascertamed in the end on the ground of his
in. @ sentence, but which applies to two portions of 1b or to two persons or things
fulfillmg a double purpose The maxon may be said to approxmate to the
Enghsh one of ` पणां two birds with one stone’ Vide LN Partl, pp 13 13
Lakewise, here the phrase ‘ Kaairyyaivdvagaish falfils a double purpose, meanmg
both ‘on account of knowmg the Kegairwyahood of Oastroratha Abhupraténn’,
and ‘on account of knowing the Keatryyahood of Janafruts’ Seep 200 = 1
1 The word eildena not found im the origmal text Vide Chind 435
p 189
2 P 687 vol 2
[80 1 3 36
200 VEDANTA PARLIATA SAUBABHA ADH 9]
association with K&peya, a Brihmana, the Kgatriyahood of Jénaérut1,
too, 18 ascertained m the begining on the ground of his association
with Raikva,—this 18 the sense 4
COMPARISON
RAmanoja and Srikantha
Reading different, vz They break xt into two different sitras
‘Keatmyatvil gated ca’ (8009 $4), and ‘uttaratre ling&t ’ (afitra 3b >)
Bhaskara
different, viz ‘“Kesatriyatvii gates ca 3
instead. of ‘Ksatriyatva avagates oa
SOTRA 36
“ON ACCOUNT OF THH BHFERENGE TO FURIFICATORY BITES, AND
ON ACCOUNT OF THE DROLABATION OF THEIR ABSENCE (IN TH
CASH OF A SUDRa), (+ SUDRA 18 NOT ENTITLED TO THE KNOWLEDGE
or BEanMAN) °"
Vedainta-pirijita-saurabha
“On account of the reference to the purrficatory mtes "’ of mvesti-
ture with the holy thread in the section concerned with knowledge,
i Thus, altogether three reasons are advanced—why J dnaéruis 23 to be taken
es 8 Beals —
(a) In the beginning, Jdnadérits 18 said to be practimng charity, feedmg people
on 4, large scale, which proves him to be a Keairya
(४) In the end, AbMpratdiren 19 mentioned, and Abhupraidrin bemg a Keairwe,
Jdnasrats must be so amce persons of the class are entitled to the same Vidyd
(9) AbAspratirm, mentioned im the end, 19 said to be a Kaatruya, because of
hus connection with a Briimana (vis Kdpeya), and hence Jdnaérué, mentioned
ब because of his connection with a Brdhmana (vis
a B 183485 pp 837888 Part 1 Madras ed Some edrions read
* Keairiyaiva-qvagateioa’® + Vide Bombay ed,p 826
The Benares of VD reads ‘ Keairsyaiva-gaied ca (p 60), but the Brm
davan ed of VS, reads Kaairwaiva avagaied ca (p 46)
Sk 183485 pp 488 480, Part 5
> Bh B 1834 p 67
[807 1 3 86
ADH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 201
thus ‘He mvested him, forsooth, with the holy thread’ (Sat Br
11581814) and so on “and on account of the declaration of ther
absence” thus ‘A Sfidra, belongs to the fourth caste and 1s once-
born (© 78 10502), ‘And be 28 not fit for a puniicatory mite’
(Manu 10 126 8),—a Sidra 18 not entitled to knowledge
Vedinta-kaustubha
In the previous aphorism, the disqualrfication of a Sidra for the
knowledge of Brahman has been established on the ground of reason.
Now, his disqualification 28 being proved on the ground of Scripture,
eto as well
A Sidra 18 not entitled to knowledge Why? “On account of
the reference to purificatory 768," 16 on account of the reference to
the purificatory mites of mvestiture with the holy thread m sections
concerned with knowledge, thus “He mvested him, forsooth, with the
holy thread’ (Sat Br 115818) But, then, 1s 1b to be supposed
that a Siidra, too, 18 entitled to nvestature® To this it 18 replied
“On. account of the declaration of their absence”, 16 on account of
the depiction of the absence, in the case of a Sidra, of purifloatory
rites like investiture with the holy thread and the rest, m the passages
‘In a Sidra there 1s no sm and he 18 not fit for a purflcatery mte’
(Mann 10126) ‘A Siidra belongs to the fourth caste and 1s once-
born’ (GDS 1050) and so on ‘The imvestature with the holy
thread 28 designated m the case of others m the passage ‘Let one
invest a Brahmans with the holy thread at the age of eight, a Ksatriya
at eleven, and a Vaisya at twelve’ (Ad GS 17138 44)
Hence, the reference to investiture with the holy thread fits in
11. the sections concerned with knowledge
(4a 1 4 37
202 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH ¢ ]
SUTRA 37
“AND 2204 एण OF (GAUTAMA’S) PROOREDING (TO INITIATES JABALA}
ON THE ASOHRTAINMENT OF THR ABSENOR OF THAT (VIZ पापि
Stppanoon), (+ 60784 78 NOT ENTITLED 70 THE KNOWLEDUE 01
BrabMAn) ”
Vediinta-parijadta-saurabha
Moreover, “because of” Gautama’s “proceoding ' tu mest
J&bBla with the holy thread and to teach him, only “on thi weer
tamment of the absence” of his Sfidrahood,—heon 16) 1 Sudri 1
not indeed enittled to the knowledge of Br dunan
Vedanta-kaustubha
For thus reason too, says the author, a अपिता as not ontith प te the
knowledge of Brahman
Fatherless पद्या, dewrous of suly ition, and about to xpprich
& preceptor, asked his mother with a view {fo earning dua fine aye
‘Of what hneage am J?’ Sho too, waaware of hia lincage ॥ 10५ 4
“I do not know’ पद्मक too, having approached (iuutama, said
* Reverend Sir । I wish to stay 1 your place as a etudent कि तत् know
ledge’ ‘Then, being asked by lum ‘O! what lmenge an you’
यढ said ‘Sir, I do not know of what linea [ am,' aul se on
Thus, when J&bila had spoken tho truth, and whon, thereby, the
absence of J&éb&la’s Siidrahood had been axertamed thus “A not
Brihmana cannot speak thus”’ (‘hind 44614), then only (ताक
proceeded to invest J&b&la with the holy thread and teach him with
the words ‘“Hetch the fuel, my child. I shall invest you with
the holy thread You have not deviated from truth'*’ (Chand
445%) Henoe, 9 Sidra 1s not ontatled to knowledge
Fa
oe न [मि | Lae]
1 Correct quotation ‘ ध्न) erhak' Side (hind $44
4 Vide Ohind 4 4 for the whok stury
{s0.1 9 38
ADH 9] VEDANTA PARIJATA-SAURABHA 203
SUTRA 38
“ON ACCOUNT OF THH PROHIBITION OF HEARING, STUDYING, AND
(LRARNING) THE meANING (07 THE Vana), (+ 67774 78 NOT
ENTITLED TO THH KNOWLEDGE 07 Branman) ^"
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
A Stidra 1s not entztled to the knowledge of Brahman, “on account
of the prohibition of the hearmg ” and 80 on of the Veda on his part,
in the text ‘One should not study (the Veda) m the viamity of 4
Sidra’ (V Sm 18 9 1) and 80 on
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this reason, too, 8 Sidra 1s not entitled to the knowledge of
Brahman For what reason?! ‘On account of the prohibition of
hearmg”’ and the rest on the part of a Sidra, m the passage ‘A
cemetery, endowed with, feet, 18, verily, 9 Sidra 2 Hence one should
not study (the Veda) in the vicinity of a Siidra’ (V Sm 18 9), ‘Hence
a Sidra 18 a beast,® not fit for sacrifices’ and on 80 The sense (of
the first passage) 1s 8, & Kh &k, i
[80९ 1 ॐ 42
ADE. 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 207
Highest Person Why? “On sccount of the designation” of ¢
Supreme Soul “as something different’ from even. the freed once
He bemg the producer of all objecta possessmg names and form~
mphed by the term ‘name and form’,—aa well as on account of th
designation of Brahmanhood, immortality and the rest on 11 part
Vedanta-kaustubha
Thus, by means of the aphorism ‘On account of the text only
what 18 measured (8 the Lord)’ (Br Si 13 24), the text regardiny
the Person of the size of merely & thumb has been shown to be referriny
to Brahman, and this has been confirmed once more mmmedintely
after the end of the motdental sections Now, with a view to dea
nating the non attachment and the omnipresence of the Supreme
Self, 16 15 bemg shown that the text about the etlier, too, refera to
Him.
In the Chandogya, we read ‘The ether, verlly, 28 the producer
of name and form That withim which they are 1s Brahman, that 1-
mmortal, that 1s the soul’ (Ghind 8141) Here a donbt arises
viz whether by the term ‘ether’ the elemental ether 1s to be under
stood. here, or the soul freed from the bondage of mundane exatence
or the Supreme Soul If 1t be said that the elemental ether 10 to be
understood, since the term ‘ether’ 18 well known to denote that
alone,—(we reply ) no, on account of the term ‘soul’ What then
should be understood? If zt be suggested the freed soul, Why !
For the followmg reasons Yurst, the freed soul alone has been men
tioned previously as the tomo of discussion, m the passage ‘Shaking
off (evila) as a horse shakes off 1118 hairs’ (Chind 8 15 1),—the phrase
‘That within which they are’ means That soul, freed from mundant
exstence, from which ‘they’, 1e name and form ‘are different
(antara),1e outede Further, the discarding of the well known nam
and form 18 posable on the part of the soul in ita state of release, ax
declared by the passage ‘Just as the fowmg rivers, discarding name
and form’ (Mund 828) And, finally, the term ‘other’, too, &
appropnste with regard to the freed soul, 1t bemg possessed of folly
manrfeat knowledge ‘The phrase ‘Thats Brahman, thet 1s immortal
denotes the state of salvation.
(Author’s conclusion ) गा
भ The meanmg of the term ‘ether’ here can tting)s
॥ ete makes Why 7 “On account of the designation
[न 1 3 45
208 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA भा 10]
{of 1t) aa something different”, 16 on account of the derygnntion of
the object denoted by the term ‘ethe:’,—whith >? untow ind by mime
and form, as evident from the phrase ‘That within whih they ane’
and 18 the producer of name and form, on evident from the pli ine
‘The producer of name and form’,—uos different from thie objet which
18 devoid of the power of bemg a producor, sme during its xtate of
bondage, the soul, partaking of name and form as subject to harm
13 not itself capable of producmg, 16 revealing, nemo and form,-
to do so being all the more mmposaible on its part पप्य its भ्ण of
telease That tho activities in connection with (the ¢rewtion and (1
rest) of the Universe, are mpossible on ite part, will be expressly stated
later on On the other hand, that the Supreme Soul, an adept in
the creation of the enture Universe, 28 such ९ producor, 4 we lla nt ih
ished by Seripture iteelf, thus ‘“‘ Having entered with the living
soul, let me evolve name and form”’ (Chind 6 4 2), ‘Irom hum
arose—* this name, form and food’ (Mund 119) "The Wine One
who abides concerving all forms, mvig names, and declaring (them)
(Text Ar 3 12178) The ‘ether’ 18 Brahman also on account of the
designation, in the text, of the exclusive qualities of the Lord, such
as, bemg eternally manifest, greatness, mmortality and dhe rent
mphed by the term “and so on” (in the atitra) Nor low the fred
soul been mentioned before os the topic of discumion, the Supreme
Soul alone bemg the topic, as evident from the pnasngeu ‘1 atta
the world of Brahman’ (Chind 8131), and the term ‘ether’, tou
being well known to denote the Supreme Soul alone, 2t bang all
‘pervasive and non attached
SUTRA 43
“(AND ON ACCOUNT OF THH DESIGNATION 07 BRAHMAN) aS
DIFFARENT (FROM THH INDIVIDUAL SOUL) IN DEEP ALERP AND
DHPARTUBR ”
Vedinta-pirijata-saurabha
And on account of the designation of the omnixciont “ as different
from the non knower “in deep sleep and departing *’
1 Vide Br 3 4417
2 Correct quotation ‘Tasndd stat Brahma Vide Mui 134
{st 1 3 43
478 10] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA. च
Vedanta-kaustubha
If ४ be objected Since 1t 18 found from & conaideratio
meaning of the text “Thou art that’ (Chind 6 87, etc 1) म
cannot possibly be anything different from Brahman, how can it kk
said ‘On account of the demgnation (of Brahman) as somethmer
different and 80 on”? (Br Si 13 42)—
(Wereply) True In apuite of there bemg non difference between
the individual soul, which 1s a part of Brahman, and Brahman, owing
to the fact that the mdividual soul has no existence, activity and the
reat apart from Brahman,—ate difference from Thm, too, 18 inevitable
PORKCABING 48 10 does ita own peculiar qualtties,—#0 says the reverent
author of the aphorisms
The words ‘on account of the demgnation” are to be supphud
{The mdzvidual soul and Brahman are different from each other }
on account of the designation of the Supreme Soul, the omniscient
५8 “different” from the mdividual soul, the non knower, “1m deep
siaep”, 0. the passage ‘Bmbraved by the Intelhgent Soul, he does
not know anything external, nor anythmg mternal’ (Brh 43 23)
and ‘in departure”, m the passage ‘Mounted by the Intelligent
0४, 1+ goea groanmg’ (Brh 453 36) ‘Mounted’ means superin
tended, ‘groaning’ means making fmghtful sounds, or gounds of
hiccough It 1s not posable that the non-knowing soul, sleeping or
departing, can st the same time, becoming intelhgent, embrace oF
mount itself, or that another wdividual soul can do #0, OMAIUSCIENCE
beung imposaible on the latter’s part aa well
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiskara
Interpretation. different, Viz according to them, this adhikarans
१ eonosrned with the question whether the Brhadiranyake text
4.37 refers to the Supreme S00" -------- as refera to the Supreme Soul, or not 9
1 Aly coun in कणत 694, 61038, 61138 6 198, 81858 6148, 6 15.3,
8 16.3
268 1343, pp 389 Bh & 1342,p 70
छ ७ रिं
1#
[४९ 1 9 44
210 VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA avH 10}
SOTRA 44
“Ow ACCOUNT OF WORDS LIKE ‘LORD’ AND 1H REST
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
On account of the demgnation ot the Supreme Soul as different
from the indrvidual soul by the texts ‘The Lord of all’ (Brh 44 22,
8611), ‘The ruler of all’ (Beh 44224), 1¢ ४ vxtablishod that He
alone 1s the ether
Here ends the third section of the first nee lin Ve diinta
pinjSte-saurabha, an unterpretation of the lea, पा
texts composed by the reverend Nimbirka
Vedanta -kauatubha
The author dwells on the differenco between the medividual soul
and Brahman
There 18 indeed a difference botweon the individual soul and the
Supreme Soul Why? “On account of words lke ‘lord’ and the
तछा“, 16 on account of texts like ‘Tho Lord of all’ (Brh 44 ॐ,
661), ‘The oontroller of all’ (अ 4422), ‘The ruler of all’
(Brh 4423), ‘He rulea all this’ (Brh 561), ‘Ho w the Lard at
all’ (Brh 4 4 22) and so on
Though already shown above, we shall sm 1k of thin diflerence
non difference m detail later on 5 6008, 1b w entabluhid that on
account of the designation of the Lord as something different und wo
on, the meaning of the term ‘ether’ ए vone but the Supreme Lord
Here ends the section entitled ‘Something different” (10)
Here ends the third section of the first chapter in tho Vedanta
kaustubha, & commentary on the Sariraka mimimasi,, and
composed by the reverend teacher Srinivizea
18 R Bh, SK, 2
9 Op ov
> Videeg VK 149,1420 1421,21 13,31 31, oto
[sd 1 3 44
ADH 10 |
VHD ANTA-EKAUSTUBHA Sit
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhaskara
Interpretation different, mz the same topic continued 1
Résumé
The third section of the first chapter contams
(1) 44 stitras and 10 adhikaranas, accordmg to Nimbiarka
(2) 43 siitras and 13 adhikaranas, according to Samkara
(3) 44 sittras and 10 adhikaranas, according to Rimfnuja
(4) 43 stitras and 13 adhikaranas, according to Bhiskara
(6) 44 siitras and 11 adhikaranas, accordmg to Srikantha
(6) 43 sitras and 10 adhikaranas, according to Baladeva
Samkara, Bhaskara and Baladeva read the sitras 38 and 39 317
Nimbiairka’s commentary as one sitra
R&aménuja and Srikanthe read the siitras 2 and 3 1m Nimb&rka’
commentary 88 one siitra, while breakmg the siitra 35 in the same
as two different sutras
1 85 1343 p 385, Bh B 18 48, p 70
FIRST CHAPTER (Adhyéya)
FOURTH QUARTFR (Pada)
Adhikarana 1 The scotion cutitlod ‘What is
derived from inforoncy [४8६५८५१ 1-7)
SUTRA 1
“Ty TT BH OBJHOTED THAT WHAT If DERIVED FRUM INFERENOX
(प्ट PRADBANA), TOO, (18 MENTIUNND IN THE TRXTS) OF BOMX
(BRANOHES), (WH REPLY) NO, BROCAUSE OF UNDERSTANDING
WHAT 18 PUT DOWN IN THH SIMILE OF THE BODY, AND (THE TEXT)
SHOWS (THIS) ”
Veddnta-parijata-saurabha
If 1t be objected that in a text of tho Katha branch, viz ‘Higher
than the great (mahat) 8 the unmanzfest (avyakta), higher than the
unmantfest 1a the Person (puruga)’ (Katha 3 1) 1), “ What m derived
from inference’ 9, 16 pradhana, “too”, 1s found moentioned,*—
(We reply ) “No”, because 171 accordance with the taxt ‘Know
the soul to be the lord of the chamot and the body to be the chant’
(Kathe 3 $ ५), the body, which 1 put down in tho mmile of the chariot,
18 understood by the term ‘unmamfest’ ^ And” having demon
strated the mode of subdwng the sense organs, the text “shows”,
in the concluding portion 5, that what had been previously contrived
through the mmile® (viz the body), w understood here, thus ‘A
wise man should reatraim speech in the mind, that he should restrain
in the intelhgent soul, the utelhgent soul m the great (mahat), that
he should restrain m the tranquil soul’ (Katha 3 137)
1 8 R, Bh 87, 2
9 For, why pradh&ns w called ‘anumanika’, see footnota 1
p a
$ Of Br 8i 116, which contends that pradhina is ‘afabda’ or not
mentioned in Sarpture
५ 6, BR, Bh, SK, B
° O88 od reads vikys-degah’ (p 19)
Riapaka-parskalpvam ig
एकु grahanam is evidently @ musprint All other
+ ial de i lita
[80 1 ¢ 1
ADH 1]
VEDAN'TA-KAUSTUBHA 213
Vedinta-kaustubha
In this manner, 1t has been shown above, under three sections,
that the scmptural texte all refer to Brahman, possessing the sent nt
and the non sentient as His powers, an ocean of natural, finite ane
inconcalvable auspicious qualities, untouched by any material quality +
and the cause of the world Now agai, m the fourth section bs
showing + that those texts too which apparently seem to extablixh
pradhina—which 18 demonstrated by the doctrme of Kapila and 1
14 the Person (purusa)’ (Kathe 9 11) Here, a doubt arses viz
with the Person
der, beginning with the great (mahat) and ending be
7 नी which, 18 well-known. m the Kapila शप्र If it be objected
The concordance of the entare Veda with regard to Brahman, the ng
(640 world, bea been estabbshed duly, hence i: ००६ posse
radhine, ‘* derived from inference”; (mentioned 10 the
नु pm: schools, be the cause of the world 80 here पा the
म of tbe Kajhakes pradbAne 1 understood by the term ‘un
navifost’ (Here ends the orginal prema facre vie"
| ro conclusion. ) ^ No” Wherefore! Because of under
‘Know
certain sumularity Thus, compare the म
oh ho lord of the chant, he DY shanot, the body to be the chatio¥, know inte
1.7 1 4 I
214 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ann | |
to be the cbarioteer, and tho mind to be the rummy ‘The se nae ofp
they aay, are the horses, the 01५८ ol tho senses their roudis, the self
connected with the sense orgins wid the mind, is the enjayar, Ko the
wise say He who 15 dovoid of understanding and over mattentive
his sense organs are uncontrollable, hke the wicked horas of a chu
rioteer But he who 18 possessed of intelligence and ever nfte ntive,
his sense oigans are controllable, like the good horses of a chariot oor
He, however, who 18 devoid of undcrstancding, ४ mettentive and ove:
impure, does not attain that place, and uttainag mundany evant ne
But he who 18 possessed. of undoistanding, ws attentive aml over pure,
attains that place whence he 1s not bornagam A mun, however, who
has understanding as hua chaziotoe: and the mind as jus reins, attains
the end of the road, that supreme placo of Vianu’ (Kotha 33, 3 9)
In these passages, a map—who 18 demrous of the place of Vieni, thi
end of the road of transmigiutory existence, and who heang the ¢njoye t
18 the principal agent—1s firat metaphorically repronented as the lord
of a chariot , his body,—which 1s subordimate to lnm as the able of
118 enjoyment,—as the chanot, and the senso organs, inte Tle ४ ane
the reat, as the charioteer and the rewt, as fur aa pomnble, = which
shows that just &8 17 18 possible for ५ potter to be the creator of pots, et
only when he is connected with the wheel, the stick wad the rust, so
the attributes of the soul, wz ‘being an agont’, ‘buing an enjoyer
and the rest, are found to belong to 1t, only when 16 24 connec ted with
the body, the sense organs, eto and not when 16 18 devoul of attributes
since 1t 18 impossible for 19 then to be the realzing ayent —one who
18 approaching a goal After that, the qualitaes of a sentiont ४" ing,
lke ‘“bemg an agent’, ‘bemg o realiing agent who is appron hing
towards a goal’ and 80 on, umphed by 168 quality of ‘being an cujoyer’
are stated Immediately after, tho hability of » non knower, wher
sense organs are unrestrained, to transmigratory exutenco, and the
fitmess of a knower, whose sense-organs are reatramedd, for tho place
of Vignu are designated, and then the place of Vusnu 1s pointed ont
a8 the object to be reached Immediately after thu, Scripture goon
on to declare those objects which have superorty to others in ae
far as these latter are to be controlled, in the passage ‘Highi than
the sense organs are the objects of senses, higher than the objecta is the
mmd, higher than the mind 18 intellect, higher than mtollect in the
greatsoul Higher than the great (mahat) 1a the unmanifest (avvakta),
higher than the unmanifest 18 the Person (puruga), nothing 1s higher
(80 1 4 1
than the Person, He 18 the goal, the highest +
$11) Here, the objecta, incall before as the lord aan. Protech
and the reat, arc mentioned irrespective of the smile for the sak:
of making the intended meanmg olear 9 And the soul and the rest
metaphorically represented as the lord of the chamot and so on, ars
here referred to by those very terms (‘soul’ and so on) pitied
and the body, metaphorically represented as the chariot, bemg left
over, 18 denotud by the term ‘unmanifest’® Thus, the objects of
senses, metaphorically represented as the roads, are ‘higher than’
16 superior to, the sense-organs, metaphorically represented aa the
horses, 7) #0 far na these latter are to be controlled, smce when m
proxmuty to 0016018 of senses, the sense-organs of even a self-controlled
man uro found to incline to them once more Higher than those even
18 the rand, metaphorically represented 88 the reins, amce the proximity
to 0४010018 of भश too 18 of little avail if the mind be not inchned to
thom Higher than that even 18 mtellect, metephorocally represented.
as the charlotec:, since the mind, too, 18 of little avail im the absence
of apprehemuon Hagher than that even uw the soul, metaphorically
reprewontad ५१ the lord of the chariot, because of 108 superiority as
an धा Since all these depend upon ite will, 2 alone 18 specified
4 tho ‘great’ Figher than that even 18 the body, metaphorically
representa aa the chariot, sce all the actrvities of the individual
youl in connection with all the means to salvation depend on the
hody Higher than that even 18 the Person, the soul of all and the
end of the road of transmuigratory existence, since everything else,
mentioned previously, are under His control When He 1s won by
= = षणे ee a ne a ० ि
४ A krame wi & kuad of smile in which the comparisons exhibited correspond
to sank uther m rezular succession MW ,p 319, Col 2
४ That iy, in ordur thab the intended meanmg may be clearly conveyed to
216
lanly भवते
५ Tho angumant 28 98 follows In Kaths 8 8-8 0 the soul, the body and the
ria aro uuocemuvely corapared to the lord of 9 chanot, & chariot and #0 on
vhivoun Katha 3 10-8 11 the same objects, vis the soul and so on, are mentioned
once more, nub metaphorically, bab directly and plamly ee
vareew, the कणा, etc are demoted by those very words, Only १०० ot only
mention of thea hody Hence, when everything else fits m, the body ए
remaining ons on this side must be denoted by the term unmenzfeat
remaining une un thet ade
[st 1 4 1
216 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]
means of meditation,as directed, all the ends of a man are accomplished,
as declared by the passage ‘Whatever verily, be the means resorted
to for the sake of the four ends of a man, a man, who haa taken refuge
m N&r&iyans, attams them without 1t’ Hence, here the mabat, an
effact of pradh&na, 18 not understood by the term ‘great’, nor pradh&na,
108 cause, by the term ‘unmanzfest’, nor puruga, admitted by the
Samkhyas, the twenty fifth prmople m contrast to the twenty four
material ones, by the term ‘Person’ The entare Veda is im oon-
cordance with regard to this very Person, the object which one should
deare to enquire into, and an ocean of infinite, auspicious attributes,
there being nothing higher than Him, m accordance with the sarip
tural text ‘There 1s nothmg higher than the Person’ (Katha 3 11);
the Smyti passage ‘There 18 nothing else higher than me, O Dhanafi
jaya” (Gité 7'7) The Person 81016 18 the object to be attaimed, in
accordance with the sormptural text ‘That 1s the goal, that 1s the
highest course’ (Katha 311), as well as with the declaration by the
interpreter of the texts (viz Nimb&rka) ‘There 1s no other goal except
the lotus feet of Krsna’ (D8 80)
Having shown that the Supreme Person 1s difficult to be attamed
by one who 18 not self controlled, while easy to be attamed by one
who 18 self controlled, and havimg shown the mode of subduing the
sense organs, the text “ shows”, in the concluding portion, that what
had appeared previously in the amule 18 understood here, (and not the
Simkhya pradhina), thus ‘This soul, hidden im all bemgs, 18 not
manifest, but 18 percetved by subtle seers through highest, subtle
intellect A wise man should restrain speech m the mimd, that he
should restrain m the intelhgent soul, the mtelligent soul in the great,
that he should restram m the tranquil soul’ (Katha 312318)
(The text meana )‘'This’,1e Vasudeva,—omniscient, to be approsohed.
by the freed souls, and without an. equal or a superior, as stated in the
text “There 1s nothmg higher than the Person, that 18 the goal, that
18 the highest course’ (Katha 8 11),—though present im all beingr,
1s not manifest’, 1 6 1s not peroerved. by all, since they are not entitled
to perceive Him for this very reason, He 1s ‘hidden’,—the com-
pound (viz ‘girdho’ tm&’) 18 mm accordance with Vedic use,—ns
declared by the Lord Himself ^ ^“ am not manifest to भा” ` (Gita
7 26) If one is entatled to perceive the Lord, then alone He comes
to be perceived, hence 1t 18 said "18 perceived’ and so on All the
sense organs, inphed by the term ‘speech’, should be restraimed in the
ist 1 4 2
ADE 1 |
mind,—the long vowel (व m ‘manaat’) 1s in accordance with Vedic ux
the ne in the intelligent soul, 16 m intellect, 87008 ‘bemg intelli: nt
and ‘bemng the soul’ are posable on the part of intellect, owing to itn
connection with the mduividual soul, intelligence in the great soul
ie m the mdividual soul, and that m the tranquil,re m Brahman
the Universal Cause ‘The sense 18 that if 1 the previoun cane (vu
Katha 811), because of understandmg! the prncple ‘mahat’ bs
the term ‘great’, we understand 118 cause,—viz pradhine whauh 1s
demved. from inference,—~by the term ‘unmanzfest’ on the ground ot
ita immediate proximity to it, then, hare, too, that may be understood
by the term ‘great’, and hence (the mjunction ) ‘One should restram
the great m the tranquil’ should lead to undesired. conclusions >
Hence the concluding text, too, shows that what bad pre viously
appeared 7. the smule of the body 1s understood here
SOTRA 2
Roy ए SUBTLE (BODY 78 DENOTED BY THE THEN “UNMANIFEST }
BHOAUSH OF TTS FITNESS (TO BE DENOTED 80)
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
If it be said that the word ० nmanifest'’? denotes somethmg
xubtle,—(we reply 1t may denote the body too,) since the body too,
the meaning (of the term,“ unmanifest’’), 18 & grosser state of something
aubtle indeed.
understood by the term “wamanti#) "= by the term ^ unmanifest”’, फ bemg something maniteut शै
suffix 100701168 reason
; ange Be case the mahat would. be dependent on Brahman a gorichi
trary to the Sdmkhys view ग्ण
रि oe मो of the subtle body are the five tan-matras the ten acme
Vide VRMP 30
organs, the mind, and the vitel breath Vv
[भौ 1 4 9
218 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA. ADH 1]
We reply The word “ but” पाठा emphasis The borly ४ tha
gross effect, pradhAns 18 the subtle cause, and that nione w to be
understood, so the term ‘‘unmanifest” may very wellrefertoit Why?
‘Because of ita fitness”, 16 because of the fitnexa of the subtle
pradhina to assume the form of the effect, or bocause of the fltnews of
the effect to assume the form of the cause Just asin the toxt ‘All
this verily, 18 Brahman, emanating from Him, disappearing into Him
and breathing in Him’ (Ohfind 3141), the umverse, though driterent
from Brahman as His effect, having been omanated from Him, ४५ yet
declared to be non-different from. Him, so 18 this body, which ४ तक्रा
different from. pradh&na.
Or 6186; (an alternative explanation ,) because of the fitness of that
word “unmanifest”, denotang the cause, to denote the efit too |
&8 17) the example ‘Mix the soma with cows’ (Rg ४ 940 45)
COMPARISON
Réimfnuja
Interpretation of ‘tad arhatvit’ diftcrunt, viv भान the
tnmanifest matter alone, when 1t has assumed the form of the effet
(viz body), 18 fit to undertake activities, promoting the cml of men
like a chariot 3
SUTRA 3
“ (PBADHENA) HAS A MBANING ON AQGOOUNT OF (LEH) DEPANDENGE
on Him ”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
Pradhana, taught m the Upanisads, “hrs a mowing ot wt count
of ita dependence” on the Supreme Cause, while that adnutted by
others 18 meaningless, such 18 the distinction (betwean our [वपी
and that of others, viz of the Simkhyas)
1 The argument m that the cause sod the effect being non-diffiun nt, a terres
denotang the one, can very wull denote the other Hane thn term ‘dumanitent
the cause, can denote the body, its affuct au wull
® P 208, 106 16 That is, the Some ts to be mixed, uot with the ouw, the
cause, but with the milk, ita effect Here a word, donntuy the osu, really
stands for the offect
‘Sr B 142, p 357 Chap 1
{80 1 4 8
ADH 1 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 219
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz In that case, be happy by falling m with
the Simkhyas, since you admit the doctrine of the causality of pra
dhina,—the author replies here
In ordinary experience, a non sentient object, having no connec
tion with a sentient principle, can have no meaning, incapable aa 16 18
of giving rise to an effect Never does a lump of clay assume the form
of & pot by iteelf Similarly, pradhina, admitted by the Samkhyas,
having no connection with a sentient prnaple and itself non sentient,
is not able to give rise to effects, hence, 1t 1s simply meaningless
Pradhéns, taught m the Upanisgads, on the other hand, “has a mean
mg” ‘That has a meaning which serves the ‘meanmg’, or the purpose,
of giving mse to all effects, beginning with the mahat and ending with
a tuft of grass Why? “On account of (1ta) dependence on Him”? 1
‘That which 1s dependent on Him,16 on Brahman or Lord Vasudeva,
sentient and the Supreme Cause, 1s ‘tad adhina’, viz pradhina, the
atate of bemg that (tad adhinatva), on account of that (tad श्त
natvat)
But the dependence of pradhina on Brahman 18 not like the
dependence of atoms on Iévara, as held by the logicans, but 1s due
to the relation between 9 power and the possessor of the power,?
as established by the scnptural text like' ‘The own power of the
Derty, hidden by bis own qualities’ (Svet 1 8) and 80 on ‘The
scriptural texts, establishing pradhina as taught im the Upanisads,
have been quoted above 2
COMPARISON
Bhaskara
He gives two alternatave explanations of the afitra, the first of
which, tales with the explanation gven by Nimb&rka The second
1s as follows ‘But (the subtle causal body 1s demgnated as) subtle
(m reference to the gross body), because of the fitness (of the word
““onmanrfest ” to denote 1t)’ (Siitra 2) (‘ Bondage and release) have
meaning a8 dependent on it (viz the subtle body)” (Stitra 3) ¢
1 The compound tad-adhinaivdt' 1s to be explamed as follows
# That 18, not an external and accidental relation, but an mternal and
emential one
2Videog VE 111 4 Bh B 148,p 73
[ऋ 1 । 45
220 VEDANTA PARIJSTA SAURABHA ADH 1 ]
Srikanthe
Interpretation different, vis ‘(Tho soul, the body and tho ist)
have a meaning as dependent on Him (viz the Lord)’ ॥
SUTRA 4
“ALSO BHOAUSE OF THE ABSBNOE OF AN STATEMENS (1 (TT)
BRING AK OBJHOT TO BH KNOWN "`
Vedainta-piarijita-saurabha
The word ‘unmanifest’ doea not denote pradhina of the Tin
trikas (1e the SAimikhyas), “also because of the absence of any ntute
ment of 165 bemg an object to be known ’
Vedinta-kaustubha
Hor this reason aleo pradhina w not denotid by the term `प्र
manifest’ here Why? ‘Because of the absence of any xtatemer १
of its bemg an object to be known” The Simkhyns, weolu rently
prattlng that salvation arses from a nght disemmination 14 twern
prakyti ( = matter) and purusa ( = soul), say that with a yew te
the attamment of salvation, prakyii, too, should be known by one
desiring for salvatzon But pradhina 15 not montiond by the Kathas
४8 an object to be known, thero bemg the mention of the word ‘un-
manifest’ smmply
SOTRA 5
“If IT 87 OBJECTED THAT (SORIPTURE) SPFAKS (OF PRADHANA
45 4N OBJEOT TO BE KNOWN), (WH REPLY ) NO, FOR THE INTELL!
GHNT SOUL (I8 THE OBJECT TO BE KNOWN), ON ACLOUNT OF FEE
TOPIO °
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
Ifit be objected that the text ‘By duscernmyg him, who in without
beginning, without end, higher than the great (mahnt) eternal, one i
delivered from the jaws of death’ (Katha 3 169), ^" भभम ` of
pradhina as an object to be known,—
18K B 118 p S14 Parté
28 ए Bh 8, छ
[श 1 4 6
ADH 1] VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA 291
(We reply ) ‘No’ “The intelligent soul’, 18 the Supreme Soul,
18 here indicated as the object to be known, He being the ५५ topio”
Vedanta-kaustubha
It may be objected The following text “speaks” of pradhina
88 an object to be known, vz ‘What 1s without sound, without
touch, without form, unchangeable, hkewise without taste, constant,
and without odour, without begining, without end, higher than the
great (mahat), eternal, by discerning that, one 1s delivered from the
jaws of death’ (Katha 315) It means that ‘by diwocarnmg’, 1 6
by knowing, pradhina,—the cause of and higher than ‘the great’,
168 than the prmople mahat, the second prmcaple called buddhi,
and an effect of pradhina,—one 1s delivered from the jaws of death,
18 from the jaws of mundane existence
(We reply ) “No”, “for the intelligent soul” alone 1s mdicated.
here as the object to be discerned Why? ‘On account of the
topic”, 16 because the Supreme Soul 18 the topic here, as evident
from the texts ‘That supreme place of Visnu’ (Katha 39), “ Nothmg
18 lughe: than the Person’ (Katha 311), ‘The soul, hidden m ail
bemgs, 18 not manifest’ (Katha 312) andsoon And by the phrase
‘Higher than the great (mahat)’, the superiority of the Supreme Soul
to the indzvidual soul,—mentioned. previously in the passage ‘Higher
than buddha 1s the great soul’ (Katha 3 10),—3s denoted.
SUTRA 6
८ AwD THUS THREE ARE STATHMBNT AS WELL 4.8 QUESTION ABOUT
THREE ALONE *”
Vedinta-parijaita-saurabha
That in tha Upanwad, “there are statement aa well as question
about three”,—viz the means, the end, and the realming agent,—is
Known from 9 consideration of the meanmg of the pmor and later
texts Here, there 1s no room for determmmg & prinaiple which 1
derrved from inference (viz pradhina)
9 1 ¢ 6
222 VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 1 |
Vedanta -kaustubha
Here pradhina cannot be understood by the term ‘unmanifest’,
smoe here m the Katha रध्या, ^" there is statement about three ulone"’,—
viz the Supreme Soul, the worslup of Hm, and the worshipit,-—
88 the objects to be demgnated, “as well as questaun” about them as
the objects to be known, but not about pradhiie and the rest, estab
hahed by the Samkhya tanira Thus, when three boons were promied
to Naciketas by Death with the words ‘‘‘Since you have pasted thre
days in my house without eating, O Brihmana, o guest to be nalutel,
salute to you, © Bribmana, may 10 be well with me, thereture तपत
three boons for each (mght)”’’ (Katha 1 9), the former axked fin the
propitiatzon of his father as the first boon thus ‘“May Gautama be
tranquil minded, well disposed, with anger appeased towards in,
0 Death! May he cheerfully greet me, when disminied by you,
this I choose as the first boon among the three”’ (Katha 110) ‘Then,
bemg granted the propitiation of his father with the words’ ‘ “Aud
d&laka Arum, dismissed by me, will be cheerful as before, he will
sleep happily at mghta, with lus anger appeased”? (Katha 1 11) ane
80 on, he asked for the knowledge of fire, called Naviketis und a
means to salvation, thus ‘You know, O Death, the heavenly fire,
tell 1t to me, who has faith Those who hve wm the honven-work!
partake of immortalty—this I ask as the second boon”? (Kathu I IJ)
The construction of the above text 18 as tollows ‘O Donth!’ ‘Yon
know’, 1e remember and know, the ‘heavenly fire’, 1e the fre
which Jeads to salvation So ‘tell that to mo’, dewrous ax | am of
salvation I choose aa the second boon that knowledge of the fin
whereby “those who hve m the heaven world’, 10 thos: tu whom
belong the heaven world, viz the world to ba approached by the trod
souls through the path begmnmg with light as stated in the tourth
chapter 2, or the Vedintins, ‘partake of’, 16 attain, “immortahts
or salvation Here the word ‘heaven’ applies to aalvation equally ,
this bemg well known from other texta us wall, such as, ‘The world
of heaven 18 > golden sheath, covered with hght’, ‘The knowers «at
Brahman go to Brahman, to the world of heaven’ (Brh 4483)
° ‘That 28, commended by me Vide 8B on Katha ' Matprasystab sac
san *
9 Vide Br Si 43 1 of seg
४ Correct quotation ‘Zena dhirah apwyant: brake गदे
Vide Bph 448, p 397 a haat
[st 1 4 6
aDH 1 } VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 293
and soon Then, having obtaimed the knowledge of the fire, taught
thus ˆ ^ tell 1t to you, learn 16 from me, knowing the heavenly fire,
ONaciketas! The atiamment of the mfinite world, and the support” *
(Katha 114) and 80 on, he,—by means of 8 question regardmg the
real nature of salvation, charactermed by the attamment of the
Supreme Soul, the highest end of men,—asked, as the third boon,
about the real nature of the object to be attamed, the real nature of
the attamer and the real nature of meditation, the means, thus
‘“When a man 1s dead there 1s this doubt, some saying that he 8,
others that he 18 not This may I know, taught by you, this 18 the
third among the boons”’’ (Katha 120) (णऽ, when the real nature
of salvation was asked thus, the reply given by Yama, preceded by an
examination of Nacikete’s fitness for that teachmg, was aa follows
‹ ‘Hun, who w difficult to be seen, who 18 hidden, who has entered
within, who 18 hidden in the cave and who dwells m the abyss, by
knowing Him as God through the knowledge of the Yoga relaiang to
the soul, a wise man discards joy and sorrow”’’ (Katha 2 12)
Having been thus taught, in a general manner, Nacketas with a
view to understanding clearly the real nature of the object to be
attamed, udicated by the word ‘God’, the real nature of the means,
viz knowledge, demonstrated by the phrase ‘by knowing’, and the
real nature of the attamer, demonstrated by the words ‘wise man’,
once more asked about meditation, different from means like ment
and demerit, thus ‘“Drfferent from the mght, different from the
non right”? (Katha 214), about the object to be approached, not
lmuted by time, thus ‘“Dufferent from what has been done and what
has not been done, different from what has been and what will be’’’
(Katha 214), and aluo about the attaimer, 88 this latter question 28
a question about the altainor, the sentient being as well, the latter,
too, bemg eternal and mcluded. among the objects to be attamed +
Or else, this text 18 concerned with a queation about the object
to beapproached Luke the oo-ordination of the two words ‘different’,
mentioned m the text ‘** Drfferent from the right, different from non
right” (Katha 214), there 1s also a co ordination between the two
words ‘different’, mentioned subsequently, and so m this question
1 Theat 18, the last portion of Kathe 2 1415 © quastion about both Brahman
the object to be atteamed, and the individual soul, the attamer since the latter
boo, ia eternal and an objeot to be abtamed like the former
[st 1 4 6
224 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA apa 1}
about the object to be approached, the approaching agent and of the
means too have been meluded, and henoe really no less than three
questions were asked +
Then, having praised the pranava by way of demonatrating
Brahman, having depicted the real nature of the attamer, denoted by
the pranava, and the real nature of the means, denoting the pranave
end haying taught the pranava once more, Yama taught the real
nature of the attamer, im the passage ‘“‘A wise man is neither born,
nor dies He has not arwen from anythmg, has not become anything
Unborn, eternal, constant 18 this anment one, who 18 not Inlled when.
the body 18 killed”? (Katha 225), the real nature of the object to be
attamed, im the passage beginning ‘“‘ Smaller than the amaill, greater
than the great 18 the soul placed in the cave (1e heart) of this creature
Him one who 18 free from. active will sees, fread from sorrow, through
the grace of the Creator, (and) the glory of the soul"’ (Katha 2 20),
and ending ^ ^ Who knows thus?’ (Katha 2 25), and meditation
that 1s of the form of devotion, mn the middle m the passage ‘” This
soul 18 not attainable by the study of the Veda”’ (Katha 2.23) anc!
soon Then, having stated that the Supreme Soul 28 eamly attamable
7 The entire passage २8
Aanyaira dharmdd anyatra adharmdd anyatra asmdi bridkrtds
Anyaira bhiidd bhavydo ca yat tai pasyas tad vada’ (Kathe 9 14)
The author 28 here trying to show that thu क not a question about a single
thing, but about three different thmgs, vis Brafvnan, the mdrvidual soul, and
the means to salvation
He offers two explanations
(a) The portion Dufferent from the right and different from the non
mght refers to the msans, vis knowledge, different from ordmary mem and
demerit And, the portion ‘Different from what has been done and what has
not been done, differant from what hag been and what will be refers equally
to Brahman and the mdryidual soul, to both of wham, who are eternal the above...
description fittingly applies Hence the above question means Tell ma about
{1) ponies (2) the individual soul and (3) Brahman
whole text 1s really > questzon about Brahman, bub soludes questaons
about the other iwo as well Thus the portion ‘different from the right
Hence the above quesiion means Tell me about (1) Brahman, who is differant
from, (2) the means and (3) the madrridua!}
नुन मुन Boul As such it 18 really > question
(श 1 4 7
ADH } | VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 226
by the dividual soul,—since the Person worshipped and the wor-
shipper have entered 17100 the same cave (Katha 311),—and the
mode of worship, 08 well as the attamment of the place of Visnu by
the worshipper, in the passage which begins ‘“‘ Know the soul to be
a Jord of chanot’’’ (Katha 3 3), and ends ‹ “his the wise declare’” ’
(Katha 314), he concluded with the words ‘"‘Invimble”’ (Katha
815) and so on Hence, this Upanigad contains a statement about
the three alone as the objects to be known, as well as a question about
them, there 18 no reference to pradh&na, established by the Tantra,
(viz the S&amkhyas)
SUTRA 7
‘AWD 48 IN THER 0/8 OF THE GREAT +»
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
Just as, although the word ‘great’ (mahat) has been applied by
the Samkhyas to the second principle called ‘buddhi’, yet xt 18 found.
apphod elsewhere ax well in Vedic texta like, ‘I know this great Person’
(भ्र) 8 18122, Svet 3),—so the word “unmanifest’ (avyakta) may
refer to the body
Vedinta-kaustubha
Just as the word ‘great’, mentioned in the Veda, 1s applied to the
individual soul and to Brahman,—as in the passages “Higher than
intellect 14 the great soul’ (Katha 3 10), “The soul which 1s great and
all pervading’ (Katha 2 22, 44) and so on,—and not to the second
principle, called buddlu, admitted by the Samkhyas, and cannot be
applied eluewhere even by a hundred S&imkhyas, so it 18 established
that the word ‘unmanifcst as well, beng mentioned mm the Veda,
does not apply to pradhina, but denotes the body
Here ends the section entitled ‘What 18 derived from
inference * (1)
aa eee!
1 Vide Br Sd 1221 12
2 P 357, me 10
6 Bh
15
[श 148
226 VEDANTA PABWIATA SAUBABHA ADH 2]
Adhikesrane 2 The seotion entitled ‘The cup’
(8८४२८४8 8-10)
SUTRA 8
५५ (Tm WORD ‘ UNBORN’ DOES NOT DENOTE THH SiMKHYA PRAKBTT)
ON ACCOUNT OF NON SPHOLFIOATION, AS IN THER 0487 OF THE CUP "”
Vedinta-parijaita-saurabha
On the prema face view, viz Let prakrti, mentioned in the sacred.
text ‘One unborn female (aj&)’ (Svet 461), be the one estabhshed.
in (the S&mkhya) Smrti, the author mdicates the nght conclusion
The unborn one, mentioned in the sacred text, must have Brahman
for 1ta soul?, because there 18 no specification guaranteemg the prema
face view 8, as in the case of the cup, mentioned in the sacred text
There 18 & cup with 1ta mouth below’ (Brh 228 *)
Vedanta-kaustubha
Thus, xt has been shown that 10) the Katha valli pradhina, whick
18 not mentioned in the Veda, 18 not denoted by the term ‘unmanifest’,
as it, through denotimg the cause, viz pradhfina which 1s mentioned
1 the Veda, denotes ita effect, viz the body It bas also been shown
that as pradhAna has Brahman for ita soul, the text, thereby, refers
to Brahman Ina hke manner, it 18 beg shown now that the text
about the unborn one, too, refers to Brahman alone
In the Mantropanwad of the Svet&évataras, we find the following
‘By an unborn female (aj&),5 red, black and white, bringing forth
manifold offspring tf a like nature, there hes an unborn male (aja)®,
enjoying Another unborn male (aja) leaves her who has been en
joyed’ (Svet 46) metaphor), there 1s no contradiction’ That 28,
the word ‘aj&’ here does not stand for one who 18 literally unborn,
but sunply metaphorically represents prakri, the source of all things,
as a she goat, just as the sun, though not really honey, 1s metapho-
rically represented as such in the Chindogys *
Adhikarana 9 The section entitled ‘The
collection of number’ (Stitras Ll1-13)
SOTRA 11
“Not ON ACOOUNT OF THE COLLECTION OF NUMBER EVEN, OW
AOOOUNT OF DIVHRSITY, AND ON ACCOUNT OF BxoRss”’
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
“Even on account of the collection of number” in the text ‘In
whom the five people and the ether ary based’ (Brh 4417, Sat Br
147 2 194), 16 18 not to be said that the twenty flve pnnorples, begin-
ning with pradhfina, are based on Senpture, 80 what dispute can there
be regardmg the knowability of one pradhfna from Sompture ? ॐ
Why? “On account of diversity,” 16 because the objects which
are based on Brahman, established in Sampture and denoted by the
18B1110,pp 4045 Bh B1110,p 76 Of Rdménwa's ontiasm
‘of this interpretaizon
me 1090 Ime 8 RB, Bh, SK, B
ॐ 2, all the twenty five prmoiples of the म्र can be known from
Sertpture, not to speak of pradhdna alone
(st 1 4 11
ADH 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 233
term, ‘mm whom’, are different from the objects established in the Tantra.
(16 the Samkhya-smrt1), since the former are found to have Brahman
for ther soul, ^ and on account of the excess "’ of Brahman, the support,
and hkewise of the ether
Vedinta-kaustubha
In the previous aphorism, 1t has been shown that the text about
the unborn one, not referable to pradh&na, as admitted by the Saim-
khyas on the ground of texts like "The self power of the Deity’
(Gvet 1 8), refers to Brahman on the ground that it refers to His
power, viz pradh&na, as admitted by the Vedntins In the very
same manner, by showing that} the text about the ‘five five people’
refers to the vital breath and the rest, based on Brahman, on the
ground of the pronoun. (‘1m whom’) and 80 on, leadig to the null
fication of the number admitted by the Simkhyas, (viz twenty five),
the reverend author of the aphorisms 18 confirming his contention
that pradhina bas never been mentioned in Seripture
In the sixth chapter? of the Brhadiranyaka, mmediately after
the mtroduction ‘That the gods worship as the hght of lights, 88
hfe, as womortahty’ (Brh 4416, Sat Br 1479 20 8), we read
the followmg ‘In whom tbe five five people and the ether are based,
him alone I, the knower, the immortal, know as the soul, the ummortal
Brahman’ (दृ 4417, Sat Br 147219) Here 9 doubt arises,
viz whether by the phrase, ‘five five people’, meaning five groups of
five, the twenty five prmoples, admitted by the S&mkhyas, are
denoted, or the vital breath and the rest, five 1 number and called
‘five people’ (pafica jana) The grima fane view 18 88 follows We get
here the twenty five principles, mentioned in Sorzpture and, determmed
more specially in the Samkhya amrta In the Sasi! sambité *, we read
the followimg,—beginning ‘Bemg struck 5 by the three kinds of sorrow,
(one undertakes) an enquiry into the cause of their removal’ (Sim
Ka 1), and contmunmg ‘The primal cause एप 18 not an effect,
the seven objects begimnmg with the mahat are causes as well as
OO
1 Here the éaiy-suffix mmplies reason.
9 Ought to be fourth chapter ॐ © 1000, line 5
५ "That 15 & Sémkhyo treatise or & sarphité or treatuse dealing wrth the mxty
10688 peculiar to the Sdmkhyas
[50 1 4 11
224 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 478 9 |
effects, sixteen objects are effecta (only), puruga 8 neither a cause
nor an effect’ (Sim Es 3 7)
With regard to1t, wereply =“ Not even on account of the colle tion
of number”, The word “even” 17001168 possibility 8 In spite of the
fact that the number twenty five 18 found in this text, prakrti and the
rest have not Scripture as their authomty Why? “On account of
diversity ’’,1e because the twenty five principles, mentioned 1m Smrta,
cannot be arranged in five groups of five each, they being of various
kinds There can be numeration or groupmg of objects only with
reference to & class, a common quality and so on, eg when we Hay
‘A group of five cows’, ‘a group of five learned men’ But here we
find no common cause for grouping five objecta under cach pontad
In such cases as ‘seven are causes as well as effects’, ‘axteen are
effecta (only)’ and so on, on the other hand, there do emst causcs
for such, groupings 8
Or, else (an alternative explanation of the word ‘nfin&ibhavit ),
‘on account of the absence of plurality’ That 18, all the objocta
mentioned in the Vedanta having Brabman for their soul, there 14 no
absolute pluralty, m accordance with the statement ‘All thin has
that for 18 soul’ (Chind 687, 694, 6103-6168), and also m
gccordance with the teaching contained here, vz ‘In whom the five
five people and the ether are based’ (Brh 4417) The sense w that
if the twenty five prnciples, admitted by the SAmihyas, bo accepted
here then, they not having Brahman for their soul, plurality will
result, contradicting Scripture
Or, rather, the principles, admitted by our opponenta and indo
pandent of Brahman, bemg distinct from those that are band on
Brahman, 7 accordance with the text ‘In whom the five five people ’
(Brh 4417), ^“ and on account of excess °, there 18 not even the numbor
twenty five here On the contrary, “on account of the excess”,
1.6 surplus, viz the Supreme Soul, the support of all, mdicated
५24 ae
‡ 7 6 oven 4 1) be posmble to understand bere the number mtended by the
Sdmbhyas sl then the Sdenkhya view cannot be said to be referred to here It
will be shown later that rb 1s not really even posmble to understand here the
number twenty five intended by the SamkAyar
¢ Le A group consists of a certam number of sundar chjecta But here
य is impossible to drvide the twenty five Sdmkhya prmoiplea into five groups, each
containing five ewmlarprmomples Henoext cannot be saad that ‘five five people
means 5X5 = 25 principles of the Sdmkhyas
fs0 1 4 12
ADH $] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 235
by the pronoun ‘in whom’, and the ether, twenty five principles are
not denoted
The meanmg of the text 1s as follows ‘The gods worship that’,
viz Brahman What 1s that? ‘That which 18 the hght of lights’,
16 of sun and the rest, ‘life’, 1e the cause of the longevity of its
own devotees, ‘“immortal’,1e the object to be attamed durmg the
state of release, this 28 the sense of the introductory text (Brh
4416, etc) ‘In whom’,1e m Brahman, ‘the five five people are
based” The compound ‘five people’ (pafica jana) 1s to be explamed
in accordance with the rule “Words indicating a quarter or a number
are compounded (with words in the same case 1) to designate a name
(and the compound 28 a tat puruga)’ (Pin 2 1 60, SD K 7272)
‘The word ‘five people’ 18 here understood as a name, smoe the meanmg
of the component parta (1e the number five) 18 not mtended to be
designated Just 88 by the expression ‘seven sages’ each of the
seven sages 1s denoted, 80 by the word ‘five people’ as well On the
enqury How many five people are there? the adjective ‘five’
18 added® As Y&jfiavalkya says ‘In whom the ether 18 based that
alone 18 Brahman, the support of all and mmortal He who knows
the Highest Self, to be approached by the freed, the soul, the cause
of all existence and activity, becomes immortal, so I thnk He who
does not know Him does not become free’
SUTRA 12
०“ (Tos ‘¥IVE PHOPLE’ ARE) THE VITAL BREATH AND THE RAST,
ON ACCOUNT OF THE COMPLEMENTARY PASSAGE ”
Vedainta-parijita-saurabha
‘On account of the complementary passage”’, viz “Those who
know the breath of breath, the eye of eye, the ear of ear, the food of
1 In accordance with the previous Pan -sutra 2 1 40
ॐ P 609 vol l
8 Ie the expreasion five people’ denotes the name of @ certain class of
beings and the expression ‘five five people’ denotes that there are jive claases
of such bemgs just ag the expression seven sages’ denotes a certam clasa of
Sages, (1 © stars) and the expression seven seven-sagea’ denotes that there are
seven classes of such begs What these classes of bemgs called five people are
is indicated m the next siitra.
fat 1 4 13
236 VHDANTA KAUSTURHA ADH 3]
food, the mmmd of mind’ (Sat Br 1472211), ११८५० “hve people”
(pafica jana) are to be known aa the vital breath and the rast
Vedainta-kaustubha
To the question Who, then, are the five people, the anthor
replies here
*On account of the complementary passe", vir “Those who
know the breath of breath, the oye of 0१८, the aar of ear, the mind of
mind’ (Sat Br 147 2 21), the vital-breath and the rest, five m num
ber, having Brahman as their soul, and denoted by the term ` five
people’, are meant by tho sacred text
SUTRA 13
“ (गष NUMBUES FIVE IS TO BH OOMPLFTED) BY LIGHT, FOOD BEING
WOM PEMSENT (IB NOT MENTLONMD) (IN THR TEXT) OF SOMP "
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
“Food bemg non present (16 non montioned)", on the other
hand, in the complementary passage of tho Kiinvan®, the numixer
five 18 to be completed “by hight”, montioned in the beginning
Vedanta-kaustubha
Apprehending the objection, vir Lot the vital breath and tho
rest, five in number, be the “five people * on the ground of the comple-
mentary passage, subsequent to the sacred text nbout the ‘five peaplo’
mm the MAdhyandina branch In the KAnva branch, too, there mt «
text about the ‘five people’ There the word ‘food’ ५ not found in
the complementary passage Hence, how ¢an the number five be
completed here ‘the author replies here
Tt has been said that the MSdhyandinas complete the numbor
five by means of food But “there bemg the absence or non mention
of food ^” m the reading “of some”, 1 6 of the Kanvas, the number
five 1s completed “by hght’, mentioned in the introductory passage
“That the gods worship as the hght of hghts’ (Brh 4 4 16),—ths
ae Bie lle [~ 1
1 2 1090, 1068 6 6 8 > Bh SK, 2
4 Viz ॐ 4418, which omits ‘annasys annan'
[st 1 ¢ 14
ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 237
18 the sense Hence, it 18 established that pradhAns, devoid of any
connoction with Brahman, 18 not an object to be known from Scripture
Here ends the section entitled ‘The collection of number’ (8)
Adhikarana £ The section entitled ‘Being the
cause’ (Siitras 14 15)
SUTRA 14
“AND (प्ण LORD 4LONE IS TO BH UNDERSTOOD) AS THR CAUSE
WITH REGARD TO THR ETHER AND THH BEST, ON ACCOUNT OF THE
DEOLARATION OF (BRAHMAN) 48 DESIGNATED ”
Vedinta-parijata-saqurabha
Omniscient and omnipotent Brahman alone 1s to be understood
evarywhere in the texts abont the creation of the ether and the rest,
because the very same Brahman, “as designated” in the charactensz
ing aphorism? and the followmg, 1s demonstrated “as the cause”
of the ether and the rest
Vedanta-kaustubha
An objection may be raised here That view, too, which rejectmg
prudhiina, estabhshed by Smrta, as the cause of the world, takes the
universe to have Brahman 8.8 ita sole cause, 18, indeed, a doubtful one,
mnce in the Vedinta texts, demonstratimg the cause, creation 18 stated.
to be due to mamfold causes Thus, 1n 8 certam text ‘“The exstent
alono, my dear, was this in the beginning” ` (Chand 6 2 1), creation
18 sul to be due to the exsatent, mm a certain other text ‘From this
soul the ether has arisen’ (Tait 21), to be due to the soul alone,
again in another text, on the other hand ‘The non existent, vemly,
was this in the beginning, from that, forsooth, the extent arose’
(Tart 2'7), likewise in the text ‘The non exstent alone was this m
the beginning, 1b was extent’ (Chénd 319 1), to be dus to the non-
existent, mm another text ‘‘' What 15 108 final goal?” “The ether”
said he’ (Ghand 191), to be due to the ether, m q certain other
text again ‘“‘ All these bemgs, verily, enter unto the vital breath” ’
1 Viz Br 9 1 1 2, ete
[80 1 4 14
238 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4 |
(Chind 111 5), to be due to the vital breath, and in some paasages
in the Brhadfranyaka ‘The soul alone was this in the begining’
(णा). 1417), ‘Brahman, vernly, was this in the beginning’ (Brh
14 10), to be due to the soul and to Brahman Such being our know
ledge of the cause of the universe, 1t 18 not possible to asceitam
definitely that Brahman alone 1s the cause of the universe But 1
18 possible to sacertain definitely that pradhfina, mdependont of
Brahman, 1s the canse of the universe Thus, in the text ‘Vorily, at
that time this was unmanifest (avyéikrta), 10 became manifest amply
by name and form’ (Brh 147), by the word ‘unmanifest’ pradhina,
mdependent of a sentzent principle, 18 declared to bo the cause of the
universe The meaning of the text 18 that ‘this’, 16 the manifest
world, was ‘at that time’,1e pmor to creation, ‘unmantifest’ and ‘it’,
viz pradhina, ‘became manifest by name and fom’ ‘The mass of
texts demonstrating the cause of the universe should be taken to be
referring to pradhina alone
With a view to disposing of the above view, his Holiness 18 showing
that the mass of texta deaignating the cause of the universe all refer
to Brahman
The word “and” 18 for disposing of tho objection The word
“fas” smples the kind It 18 posmble to ascertain defimtely that
the Highest Person alone, omnipotent, endowed with the attibutes
of omnigcience and the rest and the Lord of all, 1 the Cause of the
Unmverse How? “On account of the declaration” of the very
same Brahman, “demgnaied” in the characterumng aphorism and.
the reat, “as the cause ” of effects like the ether and the rest Thus,
Brahman alone, mentioned previously mm the passage Biahman 1s
truth, knowledge and infinrte’ (Tart 21), 1s designated as the cause
in the passage ‘From him, verily’ (Tart 21) and s0 on = Lakewise,
Brahman alone, indicated by the passages, ‘“‘The existent alone,
my dear”’’ (Chand 621), “He thought “May I be many”’ (Chand
623), 18 degignated in the passage ‘He created leht’ (Chand
623) The same 18 to be understood with regard to other Upanisad
texts too
COMPARISON
Samkara
General umport same, hteral mterpretation duferent, viz ‘(Al
though there may be a conflict among the Vedinta texts) with regard
[st 1 4 16
ADH 4 ] VEDANTA PABLIATA SAUBABHA 239
to (the order of the things created, hke) the ether and the rest, (there
18 no conflict among them with regard to the creator,) because as-
(Brahman) 15 designated as the cause (in one Vedanta) so (He) 16.
mentioned (in other VedAntas 7007
Srikantha
Interpretation different He does not begin a new adhikarana
here, but continues the same topic Hence the siitra ‘And just as
on account of the declaration (16 understanding) (of Brahman) as
the vause (in all the Ved&nta texts) with regard to (all the effects lke)
the ether and the rest, (as well as m all other general texts), (pradhina.
of the Simkhyas 18 not understood, so the Samkhya prinaples are not
understood here)” ‘That is, just as we interpret the vague and general
text ‘verily at that time, 1t was unmanrfest ' (Brh 1 477) in the hght
of the specific text “The soul alone waa this m the begmnmg’ (Brh.
141), and understand thereby the first text as denoting Brahman
and not the Simkhya unmanifest or pradh&na, so exactly, here we
should interpret the vague and general text about the ‘five five people’
(Brh 4417, etc) m the lght of the specific passage about the vital-
breath and the rest (Brh 4418, eto), and understand, thereby, the
‘five five people’ as the vital breath and the rest, and not as the
Samkhya principles >
SUTRA 15
“On aCCOUNT OF THER DRAWING In”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurdbha
“Qn account of the drawing n”’of Brahman That 18, the very
same Brahman, mentioned previously in the passage “He wished’
(Tait 265%), 18 referred to in the passage ‘The non exstent, verily’
(Tart 274) too Simularly the very same Brahman, mentioned pre
viously in the passage “The sun 18 Brahman’ (Chand 3 19 1 5), 18 also.
referred to un the passage ‘The non existent alone was this * (Chind
ॐ 19 19} Hence, Brahman alone, who 18 ever existent, 18 denoted
18B 1414 p 414 SK B1114,p 580 Part 6.
3 §,R, Bh, SK B ¢ Op on
5 Not quoted by others 68 ए Bh 2
[ग 1 4 16
240 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ApH 4]
by the word ‘non existent’, since there being no distamction of names
and forms prior to creation, He has then no existence in so far as
connected. with these names and forms In the same manner, what
18 denoted. by the term ‘unmantfest’ m the passage ‘Verily, at that
tame, this was unmanifest, 10 became manifest smmply by name and
form’ (भ 1471), 18 referred to mm the subsequent passage as well
“He 18 entered here as far as the finger nail tips’ (Brh 1 47%) and
so on It 18 also impossible for the non sentient pradhina to be a
controller by entermg with Hence, the unmanifest, 188 controller,
28 said to be Brahman ‘The sense 18 that im the texts, demonstrating
the cause of the universe, Brahman alone, established by the defining
aphoriam and the rest, 1s to be understood,—there 18 not even the
shghtest possibility of pradhins being so understood
Vedanta-kaustubha
“Qn account of the drawing in” of Brahman That 1, the
very same Brahman, omniscient, and creating the universe subsequent
to His resolution to be many, as mentioned previously in the paxaage
“He wished’ (Tait 26), 18 also referred to m the passage ‘The non
existent, verily, was this in the begmming, from that the existent
arose’ (Tait 27) Here, Brahman as possessed of subtle powers
mm His causal state 18 denoted by the term ‘non existent ’,—which
18 but & synonym for the word ‘subtle’,—in contrast to Brahman aa
possessed of manifested powers 10 His effected state, fit to be denoted
by the term ‘existent’,—which 1s but a synonym for the word ‘gross’
In the very same manner indeed, 1t should be known that Brahman,
mentioned previously in the passage ‘The sun is Brahman’ (Chand
5 19 1), 18 referred to m the passage too ‘The non oxstent alone was
this in the beginning, 1t was extent’ (Chand 3 19 1) in the valy
same manner, in the text about the unmanzfest as well, 1t 7४ the mner
controller of the unmanifest that 1s denoted by the word ‘unmanii at ॥
as here the pronoun ‘he’ refers to Brahman, denoted by the term
*unmanifest’, m the passage ‘He 1s entered here as far as the finger
nail taps When seeing, the eye, when hearing, the ear, when think
ing, the mnd Let one worship (Him) 88 the soul’ (Brh 147)
In spite of there bemg a separate agent of manifestation, tho expreaxion
"It became manifest (vyiknyata)’ should be understood as denoting
ee eesesessssssseSSsi“‘“(<;#;SSC NS
1 §,R Bh, 8 ४ 8, 7; §K, 2
fst 1 4 16
ADH 4] VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 241
an ‘object agent” (16 the reflexive pasmve form) Or else, the present
indicative should be understood mmply in the passive! Hence,
everywhere the cause 18 one and the same mdeed The objections
with regard, to the cause are refuted in this section We shall dispose
of the objections with regard to the effects, on the other hand, in the
third quarter of the second chapter, under the aphomams ‘Not the
ether, because of being non scriptural’ (Br SG 231) and the follow
ing Hence, it 25 established everywhere that the cause of the universe
8 Brahman alone, a sentient Bemg and possessed of omnisaience and
the Test
Here ends the section entitled ‘Being the cause’ (4)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhaskara
The general purport (of the sfitras 14-15) same, but while Nm
barka connecta this adbikarana more directly with the topio of the
preceding part of the pada, viz with the refutation of the Simkhya
view 9, Samkara and Bhiskara do not do 80, but take 1t to be concerned
with the general question of the concordance of all texts with regard
to Brahman 9
Srikantha
Interpretation different The same topic contmued ‘On
account of the drawing in’ ‘That 1s, Just as the very same Brahman
mentioned in the prior passage ‘He wished’ (Tait 2 6) 1s understood
m the subsequent passage too ‘The non existent alone was this mm
the beginnmg’ (Tait 2717), because the two passages involve each
other, s0 exactly, the ‘five five people’, mentioned in the prior passage
{प £417, eto) are understood as the vital breath and the reat,
> Ie as having reference to a necessarily unplied agent, aa 770. the expregsion
‘The village is bemg approached’ VideS B 1415 p 417
4 This 28 evident from the concluding sentence of his explanstaon of the
sutra 15 ‘““Na pradhdna-fankd gandko' pin bhdeah' VPS 14165, p 181
ह 8 8
8 This us evident from the beginnmg of the adiikerana ‘Taira च्व, aparam
dfiakkaie Na janmd di-karanaivam Brahmono, preg ae | ow gat
siminyam veddnia-vakydndm prahpatium dakyam’, etc Vide SB 1114,
pp 41212 Bh B 1114, pp 76 77
16
(80 1 4 16
242 VEDANTA PAEIJATA SAURABHA, ADH 5]
mentioned m the subsequent passage (Brh 4418, eto), because the
two passages involve each other *
Adhikarana 6 The section 6 71४1४194 “Denoting
the world’ (8४788 16-18)
SUTRA 16
‘BecauUsSh OF DENOTING THH WORLD ”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
It 18 not to be supposed that in the text ‘“He verily, O Balan,
who 18 the maker of these persons, of whom this 1s the work”’ (Kaus
39%), the object to be known 18 the person, mentioned m the Tantra
(viz m the Simkhya dootrme) and the enjoyer of the र पाड of merit.
and dement None but the Supreme Soul 1s here indicated as the
object to bo known Why? Because Brahman 18 the topic, as known
from the text ‘“Let me deolare Brahman to you”’’ (Kaus 41 8),
because the word ‘work’, meaning ‘something thai 18 done’, denots
the world which 1s an effect, because by the pronoun ‘thus’ the workd,
estabhshed. by the evidence of perception and tha rost, 18 suggested ,
and, lastly, because the person, mentioned 2n the Tantra, is not the
topic here
Vedinta-kaustubha
The S&amikhyas hold that prakrti 18 the agent and puruga the
enjoyer The mpossibility of prakria to be the cause has beon ahown.
in various ways Now, although 1b has been shown in the section
regarding Pratardana + that the Kaugitaki brihmana texts refer to
Brahman, yet by showing that the text ‘“‘Of whom. this 1s the work.’
(Kang 419), too, refers to Brahman, the author 1s now dispoamg of
the objection, viz the person (puruga), admitted by the Sdmkhyas,
is accepted by the Vedinta, on the ground of 28 bemg an enjoyer,
and prakrta, supermtended by 1t, 28 the cause of the world
We read of a dialogue between B&laki and Aj&teéatru m the
Kaugtaki brahmans There, 9 sage, called Balak Gargya havmg
न cand cae cate ae
1 8४ B 1114, pp 682 88, Part 6
° 6, R, Bh SK, 2 9 8, २२, Bh B
* Vide ‘Indra-prigddhkaraga , siliras 1 1 29-32
fst 1 4 16
ADH 5} VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 243
promised the king Ajatagatru ‘Let me declare Brahman to you
(Kaus 41), baving then designated various persons as
thus ‘He who 18 the person within the sun’’ (Kaug 4 3), cre
person within the moon”’ (Kaug 44) and so on!, became mlent
Then, Ajétafatru, who knew Brahman®, havimg condemned hm
with the words ‘“In vain, did you tell me”’3 (Kaug 419), said
‘“He who, verily, © B&lik, 1s the maker of these persons, and 4 of
whom this 1s the work, he, verily, 1s to be known””’ (Kaus 419)
Here a doubt arises, viz whether puruga, established in the Simkhya
tantra, the superintendent of prakrti and the enjoyer, 28 taught here
as the object to be known, or the Supreme Soul The prima facte
view 18 a8 follows It was purusa, unconnected with prakru, as estab-
hshed mn the Tantra, that was mdicated, by the royal sage, as the
object to be known, because of the mention of a connecizon with
works mm the phrase ‘“and of whom this 18 the work”’ (Kaug 419),
because works, consisting in mert and demerit, are possible on the
part of the mndividual soul alone, entitled to works, because a connec
tion with work 18 not admitted on the part of the Supreme Soul,
and, because the origin of the world 1s due to the works of the respectzve
enjoyers Moreover, here Im accordance with the text ‘They two
went to a sleeping person’ (Kaug 419), 0 was the enjoying soul
alone which was demonstrated by Ajitadatru to BalAk Jakewnse,
m the passage ‘Just as 8 merchant enjoys with his own people, and
as his own people enjoy hun, so exactly this mtelhgent self enjoys
with these selves, 80 exactly these selves enjoy 1t’ (Kaug 4 20), the
characterstio mark of the enjoying soul alone 1s found The meaning
of the text 28 as follows ‘Just as a merchant’,1e a lord who 18 the
chief, enjoys “with his own people’, 16 with umplements hke servanta
and the rest, and “his own people’, 16 the servants and the rest,
‘enjoy’ the merchant, 1e depend on him for food and clothmg, ‘so
1 The sage wanted to teach the king about the person withm the sun,
that withm the moon, that withm the bghtmmg that wrthm the cloud and so on,
altogether about acxteen persona but m each case, the king begged to be spared
of the teaching as he was already acquainted with the person m question
Fmally, the kug himself taught the sage about Brahman Vide Haug 4
# The word BrajenayAa' 28 not really cluded m the text
$ Correct quotation ‘Myed var hhalu md saqwddaygfhd' m winch case 10
would mean m vam, vamly did you make metelk’ Vide Kang 419 p 138
4 Correct quotation od" and not ‘os’
[80 1 4 16
apH 5] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 248
promised the king Ajatadatru ‘“Let me declare Brahman to you”’
(Kaug 41), having then designated Various persons as Brahman,
11178 नि ~ who 18 the person within the sun?’ (Kaug 4 3), («The
person within the moon”’ (Kaus 44) and ao on!, became शान
Then, Ajatasatru, who knew Brahman®, havmg condemned him
with the words ‘ ‘In vam, did you tell me’”’’® (Kaus 419), sad
° "म् who, verily, O Balik, 1s theo maker of these persons, and * of
whom this 18 the work, he, verily, 18 to be Imown”’ (Kaug 419)
Here a doubt arises, viz whetber purusa, established in the Samkhya-
tantra, the superintendent of prakrti and the enjoyer, 18 taught here
as the object to be known, or the Supreme Soul The prima facte
view 18 88 follows It was puruga, unconnected with praky, as estab-
iahed in the Tantra, that was indicated, by the royal sage, as the
object to be known, because of the mention of a connection with
works in the phrase ‘ “and of whom this 1s the work”’’ (Kaus 419),
because works, consisting in mert and demerit, are possible on the
part of the individual soul alone, ontitled to works, because a connec-
tion with work 18 not admitted on the part of the Supreme Soul,
and, because the origin of the world 1s duc to the works of the respective
enjoyers Moreover, here in accordance with the text ‘They two
went to a sleeping person’ (Kaun 410), 16 was the enjoymg soul
alone which was demonstrated by Ajitagatru to Balin Likewise,
m the passage ‘Just as a merchant enjoys with his own people, and
as 118 own people enjoy him, so exactly this intelligent self enjoys
with these selves, so exactly these selves enjoy 1t’ (Kang 4 20), the
oharacteristio mark of the enjoying soul alone 18 found The meaning
of the text 18 88 follows ‘Just as a merchant’,1e a lord who 18 the
chief, enjoys “with his own people’, 10 with mplementa hke servants
and the rest, and ‘his own people’, je the servanta and the reat,
‘anjoy’ the merchant, 16 depend on hum for food and clothing, ‘so
i The sage wanted to teach the ling about the person within the sun,
that within the moon, that withm the lightning, that withm the cloud and so on,
altogether about sixteen persons, but in each case, the king begged to be spared.
of the teaching, as he was already acquainted with the person in question.
Fimally the kmg himaelf taught the sage about Brahman Vide Kaug 4
» The word * Braimayfa’ is not really inaluded in the text
* Correct quotation ‘ Afrgd vas khalu ma samyddayswghd’ in which case it
would mean in vam venly did you make metelkk’ ‘Vide Kaug 419, p 138
€ Correct quotatzon ‘ud’ and not ‘ag’
(st 1 4 16
244 VEDINTA KAUSTUSHA ADH 5]
exactly this intelligent self ‘enjoys with these’,1e6 with the persons
within the sunand the rest And 17 cannot be said that amce the word
‘work’, mentioned in the concluding text ‘“ Of whom this 18 the work"’
(Kaug 419) denotes action, the vital breath, possessing the activity
of motion as his substratum, mentzoned in the concluding text ‘In
this vital breath alone, he becomes one’ (Kaus 4 20), 18 to be under
stood, but puruge, established m the Tantra and tho enjoyer of the
frarts of works, 18 not to be accepted here as the object to be known,—
for the term ‘vital breath’ refers to the bearer of the vital breath
or the तारत पन्न soul, such a construction, viz ‘m this vital breath’,
meaning ‘mm puruasa, the bearer of the vital breath’, bemg possible
Tf, m accordance with the explanation ‘In the vital-breath which 18
present in this,1e m the soul’, the two locatives (viz ‘in this’ and
‘m the vital breath’) are to refer to different objecta 4, then although
the word ‘vital breath’ will refer to the chief vital breath, yet as 10
18 naturally an mplement of the individual soul, none but the individual
soul 18 the object to be established here And hence the meaning 18
‘He who 1s the maker’, 16 the cause, ‘of these persons’,1e of the
persons dwelling m the orb of the sun and tho rest, and ummplements
of the enjoyment of the individual soul, ‘and of whom tlus 1s the
work’, 16 ment and demerit, the cause of ita boing the cause 3,
18 to be known as unconnected with prakrt1 And henco Brahman,
mtroduced as the object to be depicted in the text ‘ ‘Let me declare
Brahman to you”’ (Kaus 41), 18 none but puruga, there bemg no
proof of any God other thanit As the qualities of perceiving and the
rest, belonging to the cause, afe posable on ita part, possessing as It
does the quality of consciousness, prakyta alone, suporintended by
the puruga, the enjoyer, 18 the cause of the world (Here ends the
proma face view )
(Author’s conclusion )
With regard to 1t, we reply Here, the Highest Person alone, the
maker of the persons, 1s the object to be known Why? For the
following reasons Furst, the term ‘work’ denotes the world, and the
1 ‡ 8 standing m a vysdiskarana relation and not m a samdnddinkaraga
relation, or in. a relation of noun and an adjective referring to the same locus,
as the first explanation takes them to be
० Te the works (barmas) of the soul lead to the creation of the world the sun
and the rest
{so 1 4 16
ape 5] VEDANTA KAUSTU BHA 246
creatorship of the world 1s not possible on the part of any one other
than the Supreme Soul A ‘work’ 18 what 1s done, 16 the world,
conmsting of the sentient and the non sentient Secondly, the creator-
ghip of the world 18 not posable on the part of the sentient individual
soul which has entered into the world as an onjoyer, and wluch 38.
never admitted to be ४ creator Thirdly, the creatorsliup of the world
18 umposaible also on the part of prakrti, supermtended by the indivi
dual soul of little knowledge and little power In ordmary hfe, what
Irttle 1s done by non sentient objocta, like chariots and the rest superin-
tended. by sentient beings, 1s due to the sentient beingx alone And,
there bemg no purpose in rejecting the primary agent, the promary
agent 18 none but the Supreme Bemg, celebrated in a masa of scriptural
texts The world, known through perception and the rest, in referrod
to by the pronoun ‘thw’ Work conswtng in merit and demerit
simply 18 not denoted by the term ‘work’ here Nince the mxteen
persons, indicated as Brahman by Balik who had promised ‘“ Let
me declare Brahman to you”’ (Kaus 41), were not really Brahman,
Ajétegatru, baving condemned hun who could not tell him about
Brahman, thus ‘“In vain, verily, did you tell me! ”’ (Kawi 4 14),
taught the Supreme Soul,—not known by the sage, and the maker
of the persons indicated by hun,—ts the objact to be known, with
the words ‘“ Ho who, venly, O Balaiki'’ (Kans 419) Otherwise,
the persons connected with wmks, 16 momt or demerit, beng
already known to Balilhn, the tenclung of them as the objects to
be known would be meaningless Hence, the word ‘work’ simply
denotes that the univerne consisting of the « ntient and the non sentient
18 an 62800, and doex not deanate mero merit and demerit, or more
action This being no, the word ‘thin’ too, haw a purpos aince,
referring as 10 does to the entire workl, consmting of the sentient and
the non sentient and known through the evidence of perception and
the rest, 1t serves to preclude the supposition of ita heng due to a
mere person Thus, the meaning of the text ‘He who, venly, ©
Baléin, 1s the maker of theae persona”’ (Kaug 119) is ax follows
0 Balan, he who 1s the maker of the persons within the aun and the
rest, designated, by you au Brahman, and who w not tho maker of the
persons only, but of whom. thus entire universe, consisting of the sentient
and the non sentient, w an effect,—that Supreme houl, the soul of
A न्नादण्ण्या Set गणी [रि | eT Al
1 For correct quotation ace footnote 8, p 245
[st 1 4 17
246 VEDINTA-PARLJATA SAURABHA ADH 5]
all, the Lord of all, 1s the object to be known Here, although the
persons, being included within the world, are proved to have the
Supreme Soul as their cause, their separate mention 1s to be known
for the purpose of rejecting ther Brahman hood, claimed by Balan 1
SUTRA 17
“Ty mr BR OBJECTED THAT ON ACOOUNT OF THR CHARACTERISTIC
MARK OF THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL AND THE OHIEI VITAL BREATH,
(वप LORD 18 NOT DENOTED HERE), (WE BEPLY ) THAT HAS BREN
EXPLAINED *’
Vedinta-padrijata-saurabha
If 1+ be objected that on account of the charactenstic mark of
the individual soul, contamed in the passage ‘This intelligent self
enjova with, these selves’ (Kaus 4 20 9), ax well as on account of the
characteristic mark of the chief vital breath, contained in the passage
‘Now, 1m ths vital breath alone he becomes one’ (Kaun 338, 4 20 8),
one of these two 18 to be understood, and not Brabman,—
(We reply ) “that has been explained” in the section treating of
Pratardana * ‘The sense 18 that the charactemsatic marks of the
mdividusl soul and the rest have been explained there as referring
to Brahman, and should be known to be so here as well
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected On account of the charactenstic mark of an
wdividual soul, contamed in the passage ‘Just aa a merchant enjoya
with, his own people, and as his own people enjoy him, so exactly this
untelhgent self enjoys with these selves, so exactly do these selves
enjoy it’ (Kaus 420), as well as on account of the charactenstic
mark of the chief vital breath, contamed im the passages ‘Then m
1 Ie in the text He who ia the creator of these persons, of whom this
us the work’, the phrase of whom this uw the work’ implies that the entire
universe—imoludimg the sun and the rest—1 the effect of Brahman In spite
of this the persons withm the sun and the rest are mentioned separately once
more as the effects of Brahman, because the lang wanta to point out partculariy
9 6, R, Bh, SK 4 Vide Br Sil 1 1 20-32
[st 1 4 18
ADH 5 ] VEDINTA PABIJATA SAUBABHA 247
this vital breath alone he becomes one’ (Kaus 33, 420), one of
these two 18 to be understood, and not the Supreme Soul, —
(We reply ) “that has been explained” in the sub section, begin
ning with the aphorism ‘The vital breath, on account of mmtelhgr
tility 10. that way’ (Br Si 1129) There, the text bemg ascer
tained to have Brahman for its object on the ground of the begmnmng
and the end, the marks of the mdrvidual soul and the rest, too, have
been described as referrmg to Him alone In the very same manner,
here, too, m the beginning, in the passage =" ^“ Let me declare Brahman
to you”’ (Kaus 41), Brahman 18 mentioned as the object In the
middle, too, 1n the text ‘“‘Of whom this 18 the work”’ (Kaus 4 19),
Brahman 18 mentioned. as the agent of the “work’ or the entire universe
The end as well refers to none but Brahman, smoe the text ‘He who
knows thus, having Overcome all evils, attains supremacy, independent
role and lordship among all bemgs’ (Kaug 420), declares that
excellent resulta pertam to His worshippers Thus, this text bemg
ascertained to be refermmg to Brahman, the charactemstic marks of
the individual soul and the rest, too, are 70 be taken as referring to
Him And, 1t 18 not to be said that there 1s any repetztion here (ol
what has already been said under Br 8i 1 1.29-32), since that section
about Pratardana d.ces not determme the meaning of the text ‘Of
whom. this 18 the work’ (Kaug 419), which the present section does
COMPARISON
Bhiskara
Reading different, viz he reads this siitra and the next one as one
stiitra >
SUTRA 18
“Bot प ^ प्प (THINKS THAT THE MANTION OF THE INDIVIDUAL
SOUL) HAS A DIFFERENT PURPOSB, ON ACCOUNT OF QUESTION AND
HXPLANATION, AIND THUS SOME (BHAD) ”
Vedinta -parijata-saurabha
Jaimini thmks that the mention of the mdividual soul m this
section has the purpose of suggestung Brahman, other than the
1 Bh B 1114, 2 78
[st 1 4 18
248 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 5]
individual soul, on account of the question ‘“ Where, O Balak, did
this person lie? What did he become? Whence did he come back?”
(Kaug 4191), and on account of the reply ‘When the sleepmg
person sees no dreams whatsoever, then in this vital breath alone he
becomes one”’’ (Kaug 419%) The Vajasaneyins, too, thus record
the Supreme Soul as other than the mdividual soul There too, there
are question and answer The question 18 ‘“*What did he then be-
come? Whence did he retwmn’?’ (Brh 2 1 16 2), and the answer
ए ‘“That which 1s this ether within the heart, m that he lea’’’
(Brh 2117 4)
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz since m the text ‘In this vital breath
alone he becomes one’ (Kaug 419), entering by the md:vidual
soul 18 mentioned, and since the term ‘vital breath’ 3s apphed to
Brahman, who alone 1s fit to be the substratum: of the mdvidual
soul's entermg, let the charactenstic marks of the vital breath refer
to Brahman ए) ए seams very difficult to take the charactenstio
marks of the mdividual soul as referring to Brahman, since here m. the
passage ‘They two went to a sleeping person’ (Kaus 419), the
exclusive mark of an imdividual soul 18 found,—the author rephes
here
The teacher Jaumm thinks that the mention of the individual
soul in this section “has a different purpose”, vi the purpose of
demonstrating that the Supreme Soul,—posseased of the qualities
of being a support and the rest,—is different from the individual soul,
possessed of the qualities of “bemg the object to be supported ’, etc
Why? “On account of question and explanntion” Thus, Ajita-
Satro, a knower of Brahman, approached a sleeping person with
Balain, demrous of enquiring mto Brahman, and called that person
thus ‘“O Soma, the kng”’ (Kaus 419) But when the sleeper
did not hear him, Ajitadaira thereby demonstrated the fact that
enjoyer 18 different from the vital breath and the rest which are not
enjoyers After that, when the sentient soul, different from those non
sentient, was awakened by the push of the stick, AjStagatru himself
asked the followmg questions with a view to demonstrating Brahman
once more as different from the sentaent and the non-sentient
1§ R Bh, 8, 2 9
४ 8, छ, Bh, SK, ए 4 Op on
180 1 4 18
948 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 61
individual soul, on account of the question ‘“‘Where, O Balila, did
this person 16 ¶ What didhe become? Whence did he come back? *”
(Kaus 4191), and on account of the reply ‘‘*When the sleeping
person sees no dreams whateocever, then in tlus vital breath alone he
becomes one™’ (Kaus 419%) The Vajasansying, too, thus record
the Supreme Soul as other than the individual soul There too, there
are question and answer The question is ‘°“ What dul he then be-
come? Whence did he return”?’ (Brh 21165), and the answer
18 ‘“That which 1s this ether withm the heart, in that he les”’
(Brh 21174)
Vedinta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz since in the text ‘In this vital breath
alone he becomes one’ (Kaug 419), entering by the imdividual
soul 18 mentioned, and since the term ‘vital breath’ + apphed to
Brahman, who alone 1s fit to be the substratum of the individual
soul's entering, let the characteristic murky of the vital broath refer
to Brahman Bot it seems very difficult to take tho charnoatenutic
marks of the individual soul as referrmg to Brahman, aince here in the
passage ‘They two went to a aloeapmg person’ (Kaw 419), the
exclusive mark of an mdividual soul 18 found,—the author rephes
here
The teacher Jammin thinks that the mention of tha md:vidual
soul in this section “has © different purpose”, viz the purpose of
demonstrating that the Supreme Soul,—possossed of the qualities
of being a support and the rest,—1s different from the individual soul,
possessed of the qualitues of ‘bemg the object to be aupported ’, ete
Why? “On account of question and explanation” Thus, Ajita-
Satru, a knower af Brahman, approached ५ sleepmg person with
Balin, desirous of enquring into Brahman, and called that porson
thus ˆ ^" 0 Soma, the kng”’ (Kaug 419) But when the sleeper
did not hear him, Ajitadatru thereby demonstrated the fact that
enjoyer 18 different from the vital breath and the rest which are not
enjoyers After that, when the sentient soul, different from those non-
sentient, was awakened by the push of the stuck, Aj&tadatru himself
asked the followmg questions with a view to demonstratung Brahman
once more as different from the sentient and the non sentient
18,R Bh 8 B 9 Op of
४ 6, फ Bb, 8K, B 4 Op ow
[so 1 4 18
ADH 5] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 249
‘Where, O Balin, did this person lice? What, verily, did he become ?
Whence did he return” ¶ ` (Kaus 419) As Balaln was unable to
answer the question, Ajaétasatru himself rephed ‘‘'When the sleeping
person sees no dream whatsoever, then 10 this vital breath alone he
becomes one , when he wakes up, then from
this soul all the vital breaths proceed, each towards 118 place, from the
vital breaths the gods, from the gods the worlds”’ (Kaus 4 20)
On account of such question and answer the Supreme Soul, different
from the mdividual soul, 18 to be understood here The sense 18
this During the period of deep sleep, the soul, having drawn forth
the whole group sense organs, and having entered into the Supreme
Soul,—denoted by the term ‘vital breath’ which stands 17 apposition
with the pronoun ‘this’ m the text ‘In this vital breath’ (Kaus
4.19),—becomes self abiding and tranquil Then, when time comes,
16 goes out from that very vital breath for undergoing retmbutive
experiences This Supreme Soul, celebrated to be the substratum
of deep sleep! and the rest, and different from the mmdrvidual soul,
18 the object to be known,—such 18 the view of Jaimimi as well The
mention of Jaimini 1s for the purpose of clearly mdicatang that the
meaning stated above by us 1s highly commendable
“And thus some”, 16 the Vajasanoyms designate the Supreme
Soul as different from the individual soul, conmsting of mtelhgence
There, too, a dialogue between BAlikn and Aj&tadatru has been miro
duced, contaming a question and an answer The question ‘“He
who consists of intelligence, what did he become then? Whence did
he come*”’ (Brh 2116), and the answer 18 ‘“‘That which 18 the
ether withm the heart, in that he hes”’ (Brh 2117%) That the
ether 1s the Supreme Soul has been established under the section,
concerned with the text ‘Small 1 the ether within that’ (Chand
8118} This difference between the individual soul and the Lord
has been demonstrated before by the author of the aphorisms In many
aphorisms like ‘And on account of the designation of difference’
(Br ॐ 11184), etc Incidentally ४ 8 confirmed here too as beng
1 Vide Br अ 327
9 The Bdéldki Ajdtasairu-samvdda in Brh 2 1 1s exactly mmilar to that in
Kaug 4 only the lather makes no mention of the ether
8 Vide DoAera adhibarana, Br SO 13 14-24
4 Vide also Br Si 1133, 124, 1231 18393, 186, eto (The num
bering 1 Nunbérke « )
[७0 1 4 18
260) VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA apni 61
held by Jamu as well, with the words “But Jamun (thinks पणं
the mention of the mndividnal soul hae a different purpose” With o
view to showing that 1t 1s confirmed all tho more strongly an being
based on the Veda, 1# 28 sald “On account of question and ¢ Readme different, viz
‘ VWskGrasananim miydm asa-ripdm dhruvim
purd
Gaur anddavah a4 tu jantirt bhita-thdewmt" Vide Cail 8-5 p 230
[80 1 4 28
ADH 7 } VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 259
the initial propomtion and the illustration The muitial proposition,
to begin with, 18 asfollows ‘‘ Did you ask for that instruction whereby
the unheard becomes heard, the unthought thought, the unknown
known ¶ '' ` (Chind 613) The meanmg of this text 18 as follows
0 son Svetaketu! Did you ask for that ‘mstruction’, 16 that
mmstructor, vis the Supreme Soul, ‘whereby’, 16 through hearmg
of whom from the preceptor, even what 18 unheard becomes heard,
what 1s unthought becomes thought, what 1s unknown becomes
known? It 1s known from this mitial propomtion that the Supreme
Soul 18 the material cause, since the hearing and the rest of the effects
18 yustzfiable only through the hearing and the rest of the matenal
cause Tho illustration givenisasfollows ‘“ Just as, my dear, through
a lump of clay, all objects made of clay may be known”’ (Ohf&ind
614) and soon It1s known from thus lustration that the Supreme
Soul 18 the maternal cause of the object illustrated as well (viz clay)
A potter has not been cited in the illustration, and through a potter
being known, 9 pot cannot beknown Butalump of olay being known,
all objects made of clay, ike pota and the rest, may, 10560, be known
To the contention, viz that in the world of ordimary experience
sentient bemgs lke pottera and the rest are found to be efficient
causes merely,—we reply We do not arrive at the cause of the world
by means of inference and the rest, and so, for us, there 1s no need for
the illustration of a potter But discarding all evidences contrary
to the Veda, we follow what 18 mentioned by Sompture and the pre
ceptor! Moreover, in the world of ordinary experience, too, we see
that a sentient person 18 the maternal cause of the effects hke hairs,
body-hairs and the rest, that a spider 18 the material cause of the
web,and soon We read in Scrpture, too ‘Just aa hairs and
hairs (arise) from a person, just as 8 spider creates and takes’ (Mund
1173) If xt be objected that m the above cases, the material
causes contammg elements, surtable for giving mse to the effecta,—(we
reply ) in the subject of our discussion, 000, there 18 God’s self power,
called prakrti
1 Vide VK 118
9 Correct quotation
‘ Yaihd irna-ndbMh भु grhpate oa
Yathd priiwwydm opgadhayah
sambhavanitt
Yathd saiah purupit keda lomine’, eto 55 Mund 1 4 7, p 9
[st 1 4 24 36
260 VEDINTA PARWATA SAURABHA ADE 7]
SUTRA 24
“ON ACCOUNT OF THE TRACHING OF BREFLEOTION "’
Vedanta -pfirijaita-saurabha
“Qn account of the teaching of reflection” m the text ‘He
perceived (16 thought) ‘“ May I be many”’ (Chind 6 2 3), the fact
that Brahman 18 the orpator (18 the effiaent cause) and the matenal
cause 18 established
Vedinta-kaustubha
‘Qn account of the teaching of reflection,’’ 16 on account of
the teaching of resolution, m the passage ‘He wished’ (Tait 26),
a8 well as on account of the teachmg of resolution in tho passage
‘“May I be many”’ (Tat 26, Chand 623), the Supreme Soul
alone can appropriately be the creator (or the efficient cause) and the
material cause respectively)
COMPARISON
All others read ‘ca’ in the end 2
SUTRA 25
“AND ON AQOCOUNT OF THE DIREOT MENTION OF BOTH IN THE
SAORED Text ”’
Vedinta-pairijata-saurabha
On account of the direct mention of Brahman aa tho effiuent
and maternal cause in the sacred text ‘Brahman was the wood,
Brahman the tree from which they carved out the heaven and th:
earth O wise men, ask through the mind whereon 1b stood. supporting
the worlda’* (Tat Br 289678), Brahman alone 28 of the two fold
forms
eee
1 The readmg m the 088 ed of VPS, however adds ‘ca’ at tho ond
P 29 But the Brndaban ed (vol I)omitathe oa p 354
= Last line of the quotation correct or the correct quotation sev below
VK 1106088 ed gives the correct quotation p 28 whichis translate! bore
¢ P 360 1088 5-7 vol 2
R, Bh, B
[st 1 4 26
ADH 7] VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 261
Vedinta-kaustubha
The particle ‘‘and” implies affirmation Brahman 18, mmdeed,
both the matemal and the efficient cause Why? ‘On account of
the direct mention of both m the sacred text’ Thus, to the question,
viz ‘What was the wood, what was the tree from which they carved
out the heaven and the earth? O wise men, ask through the mind
whereon 1t stood supporting the worlds’ (Tat Br 28961, Re V
10 81 42), the answer ‘ Brahman was the wood, Brahman the tree
from which they carved out the heaven and the earth O wise men,
I tell you through the mind, 1t stood on Brahman supporting the
worlds’ (Tait Br 2896 7), directly records ‘both’, 16 the fact
that Brahman 18 both the efficent and the matemal cause
COMPARISON
Bhaskara
This 18 Sittra 24 m his commentary Interpretation different,
viz ‘ On account of the direct mention of both (viz omgin and dissolu
tion) by the sacred text’ That 18, 10 ChAndogya 1 9 1 16 18 said that
all beings arise from and disappear into the ether Now, here the term
‘ether’ stands for Brabman (as shown in Br Si 1122) Hence the
above passage means that all things are from and disappear into
Brahman JBut things disappear 1100 their material cause from which
they have arsen Hence the above passage proves that Brahman 18
the material cause of everything 8
SUTRA 26
‘Qw ACCOUNT OF ORHATING HIMSELF, ON ACOOUNT OF TRANS
FORMATION °
Vedinta -parijata-saurabha
Brahman alone 18 the efficient and the material cause of the world
Why! ‘On account of creatzng Himself,” as known from the passage
` That rtaelf created itself’ (Tait 2174) If it be objected Now can
the Creator be Himself the object of creation ’—(We reply ) ‘ On
1 P $60, lmes 2-5 vol 2 £ P 336, nes 8-10
3 ठ) B 1424p 85 8 R, Bh, SK,B
[st 1 4 26
262 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]
account of transformation’ ‘The ommscient and omnipotent Brah
man, having transformed Himself mto the form of the would by the
projection of His power, becomes transformed, indeed, through His
own nature, undeveloped, and possessing powers like creatorship, cto
Vedanta-kaustubha
Brahman alone 1s the effiaent aud the material cause Why?
On account of creating himself” That 18, in the text ‘That 1teelf
created rtaelf’ (Tart 2'7), He Himself 18 indicated as the creator of
Himself, the object of creation,—the word ‘ krt1’ means droation,—
on account of this If 1t be objected How can the fact that the
Creator Himself is the object of His own creation be reconeilable ~
the author replies “On account of transformation” The omnucient
and omnipotent Supreme Soul, non deviating: in nature, transforms
Himself into the form of the world through, the projection of His own
powers, conmstang m His own self and supermtended by Him, on
acoount of such 9 transformation everything 18 faultless पअ powers
are infinite and natural, as established by tho following sorptural
and भपप texts, viz ‘ His supreme power 18 declared to be of various
kmds indeed, and natural 1s the operation of his knowledge and power’
(Svet 68) ‘The ancient Person 1s possessed. of a vanity of powers,
and. the powers of others cannot be hke them’, ‘ Hundreds of positive
powers, like creation and the rest, which are inconceivable to tho oom
prehension of all bemgs, may belong to Brahman, O best among the
8806108, as heat to fire’ (VP 1821) Heo projeots them in the
beginning of creatzon The best among the sacred texts of the Sveté
évataras proves His non dependence on another at the beginning of
creation, as well as His beg without an equal or a superior, thus
“Hus action and organ do not exist, His equal or superior 18 not seen’
(Svet 6 8) And the following soriptural and Snort: texts are evidences
with regard to His transformation or the projection of powers ‘Just
a8 & spider creates and takes’ (Mund 1177), ‘Havmg entered into
pradhina (1e matter) and puruga (1e soul) through, 628 own wish,
Han stirred up the mutable (viz matter) and the zmmutable (viz
soul) when the tame of creation armved’ (VP 1 2 29 9), ‘Just ase
tortowe, having stretched forth ite hmbe, draws them im agem, so the
ee ee EEE
a 2P 16
(st 1 4 27
ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 263
eoul of bemgs swallows up agam the created bemgs’ (Mahé 12
7072b—7078a1)
COMPARISON
Raménouja and Srikantha
They break the atitra into two different stitras, viz ‘Atmakrteh’
and, ‘Parinimét’ 9
SUTRA 27
“AND BECAUSE (BRAHMAN) IS CELEBRATED TO BE THE SOURCE ”’
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
And im the texts ‘The source of bemgs which the wise see’
(Mund 1 1 68 9), ‘The creator, the Lord, the person, the source of
Brahmé’ (Mund 3134), Brahman “1s celebrated” by the word
" 8017068 Hence, Brahman alone 28 the maternal cause
Vedainta-kaustubha
^ Because” in the texts ‘The source of bemgs which the wise
seo’ (Mund 11 6), ‘The areator, the Lord, the person, the source
of Brahmi* (Mund 3143), ‘This 18 the source of all’ (Mind 6),
Brahman “1s celebrated.” by the word ^° source”’, denoting the material
cause,—the material cause 18 none but Brahman,—this 1s the sense
Hence, the doctrme of the Simkhyas 18 nob to be accepted, bemg
opposed asit isto the Veda It1s established that Lord Krams alone,
the sole topic of all the Vedas, different and non different from the
universe, the Highest Person, the Lord, and the Lord of all, 18 to be
meditated on by one demrous of salvation aa the non different material
and efficient cause of the un1verse
Here enda the section entitled ‘The material cause’ (प)
1 2 615, limes 2425, vol 3 Reading ‘Hoarais' instead of ‘grasata’
प्रभ्वी दभर ed too reads ‘harais', p 1571
9 ईत् Bp 404 Partb1,Ak B,pp 564 65, Part 6
38, R, Bh, 2
£0Onp ow
fst 1 4 28
264 VEDINTA PIRIJATA SAURABHA ApH 8]
COMPARISON
Samkara and Srikantha
As before they do not take ths adhikarana to be directly connected
with the refutation of the Simkhya view, as Nimbirka does *
Adhikerana 8 The seotion entitled ‘The expla-
nation ofall’ (8६४८४ 28)
SUTRA 28
¢" HanEsy 471, 18 BXPLAINED, RXPLATNED ”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
Hereby”, 16 by the totality of the sections, ‘all’ the Vedintas
‘are explained’ as referrmg to Brahman, “ explamed”’
Here ends the fourth quarter of the first chapter of the Vedanta
périjata saurabha, an interpretation of the SSriraka mimAmsa
texts, and composed by the reverend Numbarka
Vedfinta-kaustubha
Now, the reverend author of the aphomsms 18 showimg the con-
cordance of all the Vedintas with regard to Brahman by means of
extended and analogical apphcation* ‘‘Hereby”, 16 through the
abave mode of concordance, “all” Vedintas, mentioned or non-
mentioned, should be known to be “explained” as referring to Brahman
It should be known that the Vedas also are m concordance with
regard to Brahman alone, m accordance with the soriptural text
“The word which all the Vedas record’ (Katha 2 15), and m accordance
with the Smrfa text ‘I slone am to be known through all the
Vedas”’ (Gité 1515) ‘The repetition shows the end of the chapter
Hence it 1s estabhshed that Lord Krena, the cause of the Origin.
and the rest of the universe, the 8016 topic of all the Vedas, aud
~~~
i Vide ए ए 1438 2 149 920 1427 p 145 88 od
® Adela For the explanation of 10560 ' see VK 218
[so 1 ¢ 28
ADH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 265
denoted by the terms ‘Brahman’, ‘N&riiyana’ and the rest, 16 to be
worshipped by one, demrous of salvation, through hearing, thinking,
meditating and 80 on
Here ends the section entitled “The explanation of all’ (8)
Here ends the fourth quarter of the first chapter of the Vedinta
kaustubha, a commentary on the S&riraka mimimss, and composed.
by the reverend teacher Srinivasa, dwelling under the holy lotus feet
of Nimbarka, the founder and teacher of the sect of the venerable
Sanatkuméra
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiskara
Interpretation different, viz thoy connect this adhikarana more
directly with the refutation of the Simkhya doctrine, which Nimb&rka
does not Thus, the meanmg of the अपि according to Sumkara and
Bhiskara w ‘Hereby’ (6 by the mode of refutung the Saimkhyna
view), all (6 other doctrine hke Atom1im, and the rest) are explamed
as negated), explained * 1
| म Baladeva
Interpretation different, viz “Hereby (viz by the method mdi
cated above) all (the words like pradhina, Stva and the rest) are
explamed. (as denoting Brahman alone), explained’ +
Thus, we find that Nimb&rka, Ramanuja and Baladeva direct
the entire pidas, except the last adhikarana, to the refutation. of the
Simikhya view, but surprisingly enough make no reference to the
Simkhya view mn the last adbukarana, bringing in different topice
Nimb&rka and R&manuja speak of the general concordance of the
Vedinta texts in the last section, while Baladeva speaku of the signi-
ficance of all names
No less surprising 1s the procedure of Samkara and Bh&skara
finishes with the refutation of the Simkhya doctrine m
adhikarana 3, and takes the intervening four adhikarana as concerned,
not with the refutation of the S&mkhya doctrine, but with the general
concordance of the Vedanta texts, etc ‘Then, all of a sudden, he
refers to the S&mkhya doctrine in the last adhikarana
18B 1428 p 436 Bh B 1437 p 86
ॐ @ 5 1438
isu A & ZB
266 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8]
Bhiaskara closely follows Samkara He too finishes with the
refutation of the Samkhya doctrine in adhikarana 3, takes the inter
vening three adhikaranas as concerned with the general concordance
of texts, but takes the last two adhikaranas as referring to the
Samkhya doctrine
Srikantha, 1s the most consistent of all He finishes with tho
refutation of the Samkhys doctrine m adhikarana 3, once for all,
and directs the remaimmg adhikaranas to other topzos
Résumé
The fourth section of the first chapter consists of —
28 sutras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Nimbirka
28 sitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Samara
29 sutras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Raménuja
27 sutras and 8 adhikaranas, acoording to Bhiskara
29 siitras and 8 adhbikaranas, according to Srikantho.
28 sitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Baladeva
RamsSnuja and Srikantha split stitra 26 in Nimbirka bhisya mto
two separate siitras, while Bhaskara takes the sutras 17 and 18 m
Nimbarka bhisya as one siitra
Oa # 6 ¢ =
SECOND CHAPTER (Adhyéya)
FIRST QUARTER (Pada)
Adhikarana I The section entitled ‘Smrti’
(87४००३1 2)
SUTRA 1
“Ty 7 32 OBJHOTED THAT THERE WILL RESULT THH FAULT OF
NOT LBAVING A BOOM FOB SMBTI, (WH REPLY ) NO, FOR THERE WILL
RESULT THE FAULT FOR LEAVING NO BOOM FoR (oTHHE) Smeqtis ”
The interpretation of the Brahma-siitras entitled ‘ Ved&inta-pin
1808 saurabha ', composed by the reverend Nimbirka
Now, 1४ 18 being demonstrated in details how the stated concord
ance 18 free from all contradictions If 1t be objected There does
exist a need for Smrtis for confirming Scripture Among these, the
Simkhya Smyti 18 to be accepted It 18 not to be said that it,
designating as 17 does 9 non sentient cause, 1s not to be accepted for
that reason—for, then, “‘ there will result the fault of leaving no room
for Smrti1"—{we reply ) ‘no’, for, then, there will result the contra
diction of other Smrtis which deal with a sentient cause mentioned
in the Veda-—such, 1s the meanmg of the text
The commentary entitled ‘ Vedinte-kaustubhs’, composed by
the reverend teacher Srinivasa
With a view to induomg one desing salvation to the repeated
practice of the hearing, thinking and. the like of the Vedanta, revealing
the qualities, nature and so on of Brabman,—which, practice 18 con
duave to the meditation on Brahman, the exclusrve cause of a direct
vision of Him,—the concordance of the somptural texts with regard
to Brahman,—the Highest Person, different and non different from
all, free by nature from all faulta, the one abode of a maas of auspicious
qualraes and the cause of the world,—has been shown in the previous
chapter Now, in this second chapter, contradictions are bemg
removed Thus, in the first quarter, the faults found by the opponents
with, our own view are refuted In the second quarter, faults are
found with the views of the opponents, hased on 9 semblance of reason,
(and not on real reason), with a view to ducing people to our own
view In the third quarter, it 28 shown 1n details how the scriptural
[80 2 1 1
268 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1 ]
texts, regarding the origm of the great elements hike the ether and the
rest, are all free from contradictions, and, further, the order of creation
and destruction, and the nature of the individual soul, are determined.
In the fourth quarter, again, the contradictions among the texts,
demonstrating the organs of the dividual soul, are removed Now,
first, 10 18 bemg demonstrated that our view 18 consistent with the
Smrtis as well
It has been stated in the section treating of proof + that Brahman,
the cause of the world, has the Veda as His sole proof, since He cannot
be known through any other source And in the section, treating of
concordance 9, 1t has been estabhshed that there 1s concordance of all
the Vedas with regard to Brahman alone And, likewise, the meaning
of the Veda being very difficult to be grasped without the help of Smrtis,
composed by those who are versed in the Veda, there 1s a need for
Smrtis as well It has been declared by Smrti iteelf that one, who 18
without the Smrti, to be a one eyed man, thus ‘Serpture and Smt.
are celebrated to be the two eyes of the wise Deprived of one, one
18 8910. to be “one eyed’, deprived of both, ^ 0706 ˆ` * Hence, on
the doubt, vm whether the Samkhya Smyta and the rest are to ba
accepted as true for the sake of making the Veda clear, or the Manu
Smyia and the bke,—if 1t be argued The Samkhya Smrti is to be
accepted for the sake of makmg the Veda clear, the aim of the Veda
bemg to unpart self knowledge to all If unable to give mse to self-
knowledge, the collected Vedio texts must all be amply frurtless like
® cow yielding no milk 30 why should a Smrti, which 1s concerned
with, teaching self knowledge, be disregarded by amy seeker after
knowledge* The Manu Smrta and the rest, on the other hand, aim
वणा at demonstrating the works which lead to resulta, here or
hereafter The Svetdévataraa record the omniscience of Kapila in
the passage “Who, in the begmning, bears m his thoughts the sage
Kapila, the born, and sees him while bemg born’ (Svet 52) Hence
the Smyta which 1s composed by an omniscient person must be accepted
for knowing the prinorple of the soul That part of Veda which teaches
the principle of the soul should be understood 1n accordance with
the Samkhya Smrti alone Thus, as the Samkhya Smrti teaches a
non sentient cause, the doctrine of a sentient cause cannot be accepted.
Otherwie, “there will result the fault of leaving no room for the Smrti”’,
i Vide Br 84 113 4 Vide Br Si 114
fat 211
4DB 1} VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 260
16 there must result the fault of leaving no room for a Smrti which
designates & non sentient cause and is composed by an omniscient
sage, celebrated in the Veda,—
(We reply } ‘no’, such a prima facie view 18 not reasonable
Why? ‘“ Because there will result the fault of not leavmg room for
other Smrtis"’, 1e because there will result the fault of leaving no
room for the Smrtsa other than it, viz the Manu Smrti and the rest
which establish Brahman to be the sole canse and are based on
Serrpture The opponent who 18 shouting on the ground of Smri
can be silenced by that very Smrti itaelf Thus, the reverend
Manu says ‘He appeared as possessing effective powers, lke the
great elements and the rest, dispelling darkness’ (Manu 161), ‘He
having intended (to be many), and demrous of creating various
knnds of beings, created water in the beginning and left his power
in it’ (Manu 18%) Apastamba too says ‘Laying bemgs are the
abode of him who dwells in all caves (viz hearts), who 18 not killed
and who 18 stainless’ (Ap DS 1 2248), ‘From him anise all bodies
He alone 18 the source, constant, he 18 eternal’ (Ap DS 12824)
It 1s said ए the Bharata (16 Mahé bh&rata) m the Raja dharma
‘You are its ong and the dissolution, O Krena! You alone create
this unmverse mn the begmnimng And this universe 18 under your
control, 0 Source of the Universe! Obeisance to you, O (Lord)
with the bow, disc and sword in hands!”’ (Mah&B 1216145) In
the Moksa-dharma 6, 16 18 said ‘Hor he 18 the imner soul of bemgas,
and called the knower of the field? He 18 Nar&yana, having the
universe as his form, infinite, constant 8 From him arose the un
manifest, having three gunas, 0 best among the twice born!”’’
(Mah& 1212680%) In that very section, to the question ‘“‘O
reverend Father! O supremely wise one! I wish to hear, m truth,
1P 6 2P & ॐ P 80 lmes 8 4
4P 40, line 2 6 P 419, le 5, vol 3
€ The nama of a section of the 12th book of the Mahé bhdrata, from
Chap 174 to the end
7 Le the knower of the body
6 Thi line 18 not found eather in the Amatic Society ed , or in the Vatgivaal
ed Both read instead the ime ‘Triguna-vyatwikio vas purugad cet kalpiiah’
Vide Amatic Society ed, p 819, 106 ¢ vol 8 Vatgavésled,p 1800 limes
14-15
9 P 812 lines 6 6, +0] 3, Amatic Soosty ed
fat 211]
VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]
with eyes ke lotus, unchangeable, the creato: who x
ननू न the pe and dissolution of bemgs, about Niiriiyana,
Hirukeéa, Govinda, the unoonquered, about Kedava, O host among
the Bharates!”’ (Mah& 12 7618 19 1), (the answer g1vol was}
‘The Highest Person, the great-souled one, the soul of bemgs, fualuon
ed the great elementa, the air, the hght and hkewise the wilor, and
the ether and the sky”’ (Mahi 1278252) In the Dana-dharma,
Siva says ‘"‘ Higher than even the reverend Father (10 Brahmi)
1a Han, the eternal Person, Kyens, of a golden appearance and aren
like the sun m the cloudless sky, demgnated 88 Srivatsa, Hretkeds
worshipped by sll the dertaea Brahmé& bas sprung up from his belly,—
hkewise 7 from his forehead, the hghta from the hairs on his head, the
gods and the demons from his body hairs, the sages have arisen from
his body, likewise, the eternal worlds He 1s the veritable abode of
the reverend Father (16 Brahmi), as well as the abode of all the
gods Hoe 18 the creator of this entare world, the Lord of all the threo
worlds, the destroyer of all bemgs, of the immobile as well ns of the
mobile He 1s directly perceived ait all trmes indeed by ono who has
conquered his passions He 18 the Lord of the gods and higher
than the high, ommuscent, connected with all, moving overywher
and, turned towards all He 1s the Supreme Soul, Hrstkeun, all
pervading, the Supreme Lord”’ (MahA 18 6507-6512%) In that
very section, the omnuaent Devavrata, too, says, bosmning =° "^ For
1 know Kygpa m trath”’ (Mah& 18 71669 +) and continumg ‘Know
everything, the movable, as well as the :mmovable, all souls and the
universe as Krapa5 Whatever is honoured m the worlds os a
270
the middle, the begmumg and the end of the unrverse Which existed,
knowable by all, the omgm as well as the dissolution of beungs”’
631, Imes 18 19 vol ॐ > Op
ov, Line 26
287 238, vol 4 Readmg different m some places, viz “Sa hi deva
enam " FP 968, lne 7
[80 211
ADE I] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 271
(Mahé 1317391, 7399-74007) And the statements by Him whose
feet are worshipped. by all the composers of Smpiis are as follows
‘“T am the source of all, from me everythmg amses”’ (Git& 10 8),
‘“T am the source, likewise, the dissolution of the entare untverse’”’”
(Gita 7 6) Parfdara, too, declares ‘The universe has अतथा from
Visnu, and 7) Him alone 17 18 grounded He 1s the cause of the sub-
gistence and control of the universe and He 18 the universe”’ (V.P
11352) ‘The sense 18 that if the view of Kapila be accepted as
conducive to the Vedanta, then all those above and other texta muat
be contradicted But the Manu Smrti and others are acceptable, amoe
they establish religious duties, which are meant to the knowledge of
Brahman, designated m the Veda, smoce they establish the qualities,
nature and the rest of Brabman, and since they are composed by those
who know the Veda And m the Veda the cause of the world 1
designated to be ® sentient prmoiple, 17 fact, none but Brahman
Because of their opposition to this, the Simkhya अपति and the rest
are not acceptable As the reverend Manu says ‘Whatever Smrtas.
are outaide the pale of the Veda, whatever heterodox doctrmes there
are,—all of tham are fruitless after death, these Smrtas are given to
ignorance’ (Manu 12 95%) urther, the composer, too, of the Smrt
which 16 opposed to the Veda (viz the Samkhya Smrti) 78 & certam
sage, Called Kapila, lke 6811608 and the rest, but 1s not the lord Kapila,
called Vasudeva Asis declared by the Padma purina ‘Kanula, called
Vasudeva, told the principle of the Simkhya, supported by the meanmg
of all the Vedas, to the gods 6 Brahma and the rest, and hkewise
to Bhrgu and others, likewise to Asuri Another Kapila told the
Simkhysa, opposed to all the Vedas and supported by false arguments,
to another Asuri’ ‘Kapila, mentioned in the scriptural text, should
be known to be Hiranyagarbha
1P 258 1068 7, 1819 Readmg ‘Widdrdah, Kedavo tad ca bhilyo Ndrd-
ण्ड sambabhilsatin १ ‘Vatgavasal ed exactly suniler
only ‘dubAdgaiden’ m place of ‘sambabhiigatdm 2 2017
9 2 8
8 ‰ 483
[श 21 2
279 VEDINTA PARIJETA SAURABHA apy 1]
SUTRA 2
८५ ॥ व ON ACCOUNT OF THH NON PERCEPTION ON THE PART OF
oTHERS °°
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
‘‘ And on account of the non perception on the part of others”,
16 on the part of Manu and the rest, that the Veda 1s concerned with,
pradhins, Smrti which 1s opposed to the Veda 1s unauthentic
Vedainta-kaustubha
‘And on account of the non perception on the part of others’’,—
16 on the part of men like Manu and the rest, other than Kapila and
beat among those versed mm the Vedas,1—that the Veda 18 concerned
with pradbfna, the SSmkhya Smrti 18 to be disregarded Hence,
it 18 established that the rejection of the Smrta which 18 opposed to
the Veda 18 not 17 conflict with the stated concordance
Here ends the section entitled ‘Smyta’ (1)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhaskara
Interpretation different, viz ‘On account of the non-perception
{in त्वपर and ordimary experience) of others (viz of the principles
of mahat and the rest, other than pradhina), (the S&mihya-Smrti
18 not to be accepted) * 2
Baladeva
His interpretation too 18 very similar to the above one,
viz “On account of the non perception (in Sompture) of others (viz
of many other doctrnes found m the Samkhya system, such as, the
doctrine that the souls are pure consciousness and all pervasive, and
80 on)* >
* Ie as men hke Mann and others reject pradhina, pradhina cannot be
the cause of the world
"SB 212 p 448, Bh B 212 p 88
*G@B 212 p 11 Chap 1
[808 21 8
ADE 2] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 278
Adhikarana 2 The section entitled ‘The re
futation of the Yoga’ (37०५7८8 8)
SUTRA 3
“Hersey THe YoGA I8 BEFUTED 2
Vedainta-parljita-saurabha
By the refutation of the Samkhya Smyti, the Yoga षु, too
18 refuted.
Vedanta-kaustubha
Now, the author pomts out the unauthenticaty of the Yoga-
Smt
This aphorism 18 of the form of a formal extension (atadedga)
A formal extension means the intimation of similamty when such
a smilanty 18 not known Thus, at first, the Yoga Smrt: 18 taken
to be concerned with making the Veda clear, acceptang aa 1t docs
the word ‘Yoga’, which 18 accepted by Scmpture, too, m the text
“This they thmk to be the Yoga, the firm holding back of the senses’
(Katha 611), and hence tte sunilarity to the Samkhya-Smrta 18 not
known ‘Therefore, this aphorism intumates the simulamty of the
Yoga Smrti to the Simkhya Smyta “Hereby”, 168 by thus very
refutation of the Saimkhya Smrti which establishes a non sentient
cause, the Yoga-Smrti, too, should bo known to be refuted In the
statement “The Yogs 18 refuted”, by the term “ yoga”"’, the Smriz
which establishes 10 18 underatood The purpose of the mention of the
term “Yoga” m the statement “The Yoga Smrti 1s refuted’ 18 this
Although the Lord 1s admitted m the Yoga doctrme, yet He 18 not
establshed primarily, as He 18 in the aphorism and texts hke ‘Then,
therefore, an enquiry into Brahman’ (Br Si 111), 0, the soul,
verily, should be seen”’ (Byh 245, 456) The prmacy of the
Yoga alone 18 found in the begmning ‘Now, an instruction with regard
to the Yoga’ (Y 8 11), andin the aphorism, laying down 108 definition,
viz ‘The Yoga 1s the suppression of the functzons of the mind’
(¥8 121) And, this mere suppression of the functions of the mind,
devoid of any connection with the Lord, 1s, mdeed, of no avail in
crossing the world, any more than a dog's tal 1s n crossing the ocean
> 2 4
18
[st 214
274. VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 3]
So, 1t 18 to be rejected, opposed. as 1t 18 to Scriptural and Smrta texts
like ° “0, the soul, verily, should be seen”’ (Brh 245, 45 6), ‘The
knower of Brahman attams the highest’ (Tait 21), ‘“ By knowmg
me, one atiams peace”’’ (Gité 529), ‘The bmder with the noose
of the world, and the lberator from the noose of the world’, ‘This
one thing 18 well established that the object to be worshipped 18
NirSyana, Han’ and so on Salvation bemg impossible through
® mere suppression of the functions of the mind, the Yoga doctrme
which, deals with the primacy of that only 18, mdeed, non acceptable
Ita view 18 that pradhne, devoid of any connection with Brahman,
18 the material cause of the world, and the Lord 1s merely the efficient
cause of the world, and this, too, bemg opposed to the Veda, 18 certamly
unreasonable There are many other faults m the Yoga doctrine,
but they are not quoted here needlessly And the term ‘Yoga’
found m Seripture and Smrti, refers to the meditation and the reat
on the Lord The eulogizmg statement m the Moksa dharma, ९00 ,
on the contrary, 1s intended only for referring to that portion of Yoga,
ete which 1s not opposed to Scripture Hence, it 1s established that
the stated concordance, mndicatmg the causality of Brahman, 18 not
contradicted, by the Yoga Smrtz
Here ends the section entitled “The refutation of the Yoga’ (2)
Adhikarana’ Thesection entitled ‘Difference’
(80788 4-11) Prima facie view (87५८884 5)
SUTRA 4
“ (THERE 78) NO (HAVING BRAHMAN 4S THE CAUSE) ON ITS PART,
ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENOR, (ITS) BEING SO (IS KNOWN) FEOM
res Tex +
Vedinta-pirijaita-saurabha
We object! to your view on the ground of reason The world
has not Brahman as 108 maternal cause “on account of difference ”
+ Correct readmg ‘pratyavaingjhats which is translated here Vide 08 8
ed p 24 and Brmdabaned p 378
[9 21 4
ap 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA. 6
And the difference 18 to be known also “from the text”, viz ‘He
became knowledge and non knowledge’ (Tait 2 61)
Vedanta -kaustubha
Thus, the objection based on Smytis has bean disposed of by the
preceding two sections Now, the objection based on reasoning 1s
bemg disposed of
It has been stated under the aphorsam ‘From whom (arse) 108
orign and the rest’ (Br Sti 112) that 1b (viz the world) has
Brahman for rie material cause The prima facie objector objects to
10 on the ground of reason thus ‘no’ This world has not Brahman
for ita matemal cause Why? “On account of difference” That
18, Brahman possesses the attributes of sentience, non grossnens,
infimty, purity, and the rest, while the world possesses just the
opposite attributes of non sentience, grossness and so on,—on. account
of such a dissimilarity between the two Whatever 1s different from
something has not that for 108 material cause, just as the pot, which 1s
different from the ether, has not the ether as its matenal cause, just
as the pot, the dish and the rest, which are different from the potte:,
have not the potter as their material cause
If + be objected It 1s found that the attmbutes of a maternal
cause recur 100 218 effectsas well Sumularly, im the 0988 under discussion,
too, Brahman 28 the matemal onuse, and the universe, His effect,
consisting of sentaent bemgs like men, animals and the rest, must
bestmilarto Him Hence the reason (viz ‘“ On account of diffarence °}
does not hold good,—
(We reply) No, because that there do exist the atimbutes of
non sentience, grossness and. the rest 1n the effect, viz 17 stones, wood
and the rest, 18 known from the evidence of direct perception
If 1t be objected It 1s possible to umagme that there 1s sentience
in them, too, though unmantfest , 06706 there 1s no difference
(We reply ) No, because 1t 18 unreasonable to take what 18 known
through direct perception to be otherwise on the ground of mere
imagination.
The difference 18 known “from the text” as well,—this 1s stated.
by the phrase “‘1ts bemg so”, 1e ‘“‘ita bemg so”, or 108 difference,
18 known “from the text’’ as well, 16 from the following texta ‘He
1 8 R, Bh 8K
fst 2 1 6
2716 VEDANTA PARIJITA SAURABHA ADH 3]
became Knowledge and non knowledge’ (Tait 26), ‘On the same
tree, & person, immersed, greves for bis impotence, bewildered’
(Mund 312, Svet 47), ‘And the soul, which 1s without the Lord,
18 bound, because of bemg an enjoyer’ (Svet 1 8) and so on
COMPARISON
Baladeva
Interpretation. absolutely different He takes this sutra as
forming one adhikarana by itself, concerned with demonstrating the
eternity and iunfalhbihty of the Veda He thus does not take this
श as representing a prima fane view Thus, this sutra moans,—
according to him,—'‘(The Veda 1s) not (unauthomtative like the
Samkhya and the rest), on account of (1४8) difference (from them),
(18 because 16 18 a non human onmgin unlike the SAmkhysa and the
rest), (08) bemg so (1e 108 eternity) (1s known) from the text `
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (concluded)
SUTRA $
“Bur (THERE 78) THH DESIGNATION OF THR PRESIDING (DEITIES)
ON ACCOUNT OF SPROIALITY AND FOLLOWING -
Vedinta -parijata -saurabha
^" But’ in the texts ‘The earth spoke’ (Tait Sam 6552, 3%),
“These sense organs, disputing about self supremacy, went to Brahma’
{Brh 6 1 73) and so on, there 1s ‘the demgnation of their premding’ +
deriiea, ‘on account of the specification’, mentioned in the passage
‘Very well, let me enter mto these three divmities”’’ (Chand
63.25), and ‘on account of the following’, or entermg, mentioned
in the passage ‘Hire, becommg speech, entered the mouth’ (Ait
246
Vedainta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz From the sonptural texts ‘The earth
spoke to him’ (Tait Sam 5652, 3), ‘The earth spoke’ (Sat Br
1 08 214,p 18, ए 2
> 2 76, hne 9 vol, 2 968. 7 B
#088 ed reads ia iat’, meanmg ther respective तथा” p 24
५ ए, SK, B 18, B, Bb, 8K
[jst 215
+ प्त 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA O77
6 1 3, 41), ‘The waters spoke’ (Sat Br 613, 23), ‘ These sense
organs, disputang about self supremacy, went to Brahm&’ (Brh
6177), ‘They said to speech “Do you mng for us”’ (Brh 132)
and go on, it 18 known that of the effects too are sentient, and hence
they have no difference from the maternal cause—
We reply The word “but” disposes of the stated objection
There 1s no demgnation of sentience on the part of the effects, and
80 they cannot have Brahman for their matemal cause, but there
15 the designation of only the premdimg deities of earth and the
rest m the passages, ‘The earth spoke to him’ (Tait Sam 55 2, 8)
and soon Why* “On account of spemalty and followmg”, 1९
on, account of the specification of the earth and the rest by the word.
‘derty’ in the passage ‘““Very well, let me enter mto these three
deiizes”’ (Chind 6 3 2), and on account of the specifications of the
sense organs by the word ‘deity’ m the passages ‘These 6111688,
verily, disputing about self supremacy’ (Kaug 214), ‘These 06798,
verily, having known superiority m the vital breath’ (Kaug 2 14),
as well as ‘on account of the followmg’ of fire and the rest aa the
presiding deities of speech, and the rest, 1 8 on account of the scrip
tural mention of following, or entering, 1n the passage ‘Fire, becommg
speech, entered the mouth,—the sun, becoming mght, the eyes
(Axt 24) Henoe the world being different from Brahman, Brahman
18 not its material cause
COMPARISON
Baladeva
Literal interpretation same, but mmport different, since he takes
this Sitra as an adhikarana by itself, not laymg down a prima face
view, but the correct conclusion ‘Thus, the Sitra means accordmg
to him “(If 1t be objected How to reconale the absurd sayings of
the Vedas, such as‘ Wire willed to be many’ and soon?) Wereply (In
those passages) there 1s the demgnation of the presiding (derties) (of
fire and the rest), on account of speciality and followmg (1e entering
into) "° ॐ
[8 2 1 6.7
278 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 3]
CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sutras 6 7)
SUTRA 6
‘“‘ Bor (rr) 18 SHEN ”
Vedanta-paryata-saurabha
With, regard to 1t, we reply “It 28 seen” that there w the ongin
of hairs on the head and so on from a person from whom they are
different, nnd of dung beetles from the cow dung from which, they are
different Hence it 18 not to be said that the universe, because of
beang different from Brahman, has not Him aa 1ts material cause
Vedinta-kaustubha
The author pomta out that such a prima facie view 18 basod on 9
fallacious reason (viz ‘on account of difference’)
The word “but” 18 for disposmg of the prima facie view The
statement that this universe has not Brahman as its maton! cause
on. account of being different from Him, 18 not tennble, since 1b “ms
seen” that there 18 the omgin of nails, body hairs and tho rost from a
person from whom they are different, and that of the dung boeotles
from the cow dung, from which they are differcnt,—on account ot
this,—this 18 the sense
COMPARISON
Baladeva
Interpretation same, but he takes this श्र as forming an
adhikarana by itself
CORRECT CONCLUSION (end)
SUTRA 7
“Te 17 BH OBJHOTED THAT (IN THAT CASH THE BFFEOT MUST BH)
NON BXISTENT (WE REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THERE BRING A
NEGATION MERELY ”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
If it be objected If the effect be different from its material cause,
rt must be “non existent” prior to 1ta origination,—(we reply ) No
suoh objection can be raised, “on account of there bemg a negation
fst 2 1 7
apH 31 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 279
merely ”, m the previous aphorism, of the rule that there 1s a similarity
between the materia) cause and ite effect m every respect
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected Having admitted an absolute mmularity between
the material cause and its effect in the aphoriam ‘(There 1s) no
(havmg Brahman for 108 cause) on 108 part, on account of difference ’
(Br 87 214), 1t has been objected by the opponent that the world
being different from Brahman, He 18 not its maternal cause with ®
view to disposing of that objection, it haa been estabhshed in the
aphoram ‘But (10) 18 seen’ (Br Si 216) that there can be a cause
effect relation even between two different objects With regard to
10, the question 18 whether prior to creation the universe was non
different from its cause, or different Whatis your opmon? If you
say Non different,—then, just as the origin of a different world 18
admrtted, hike the omgin of haira on the head and body hairs from a
person from whom they are different, 80 why there may not be the
origin of a sunilar world, like the origin of a gold bracelet and the rest
from gold?
If you say Dhfferent,—then, the world must have a material
cause different from Brahman, and hence pradhina must be the
cause of the world If 1t be said that this cannot be admitted, as
pradhina has been already refuted,—{we poimt out) m the texts
‘Brahman! 18 one only, without second’ (Ohind 621), ‘There
was, verily, Narfiyana, the one’ (Mab& Up 1 2), “Then there was
Vignu, Hari alone, without parta’,—there 1s the mention of a smngle
realty, and hence, 1t follows that there was the absence of anythmg
else prior to creation Therefore, the world must be non extent
prior to creation
(Here ends the onginal prima facie view )
(Author’s conclusion )
(We reply) ‘No’ Why? ‘On account of there bemg a
negation merely’ The aphomsm ‘But (st) 18 seen’ (Br Sai 216)
negates merely,—by way of mentioning the difference between the
material cause and 18 effect,—the rule, admitted. by the opponent, viz
that there 1s ammulanity between a material cause and ite effect m every
1 The word ‘Brahman’ w not moladed in the onugma) text
[st 218
280 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 3]
respect, but 10 never establishes any difference between the two in
every respect Hence, because of having Brahman as ita soul, the
universe 18 existent even during ita causal atate
Or an alternative explanation of the phrase “On account of
there beng a negation merely” The atatement, viz “The universe
18 non-existent’ 18 a negation merely, 1e without any meaning, in
accordance with the scriptural text ‘“‘ The existent alone, my dear,
was this in the beginnmg’”’’ (Chind 62 1)
COMPARISON
Samkara
Interpretation different, viz ‘If 1b be said that (the effect) इ
non existent (prior to ita actual creation), (we reply) No, since (rt)
18 & mere negation (without an object to be negatived)’ That 1,
the negation by the opponent, vz ‘The world 18 non existent’ has
no object, for 1t certainly cannot have for 1ta object the exrstence of
the effect prior to 108 actual creation, as the effect always oxistes in rts
cause, whether before or after ita actual creation 1
PRIMA FAOLE VIEW (Sitra 8)
SUTRA 8
“ON ACOOUNT OF THEBH BEING THE CONSEQUENCE OF (BECOMING)
LIKE THAT DUBING DISSOLUTION, (THE DOCTRINE OF THE CAUSALITY
OF BRAMAN) IS INCONSISTENT ”’
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
An, objection 18 raised As at the tame of dissolution, the cause,
hike the effect, will become non sentient, the view that Brabman 1s
the material cause of the universe 18 ^ nconatstent ”
Vedinta-kaustubha
An objection 18 raised 0008 more
It 18 objected “Inoonmstent’’, indeed, 18 the view which admuts
Brahman to be the materml cause of the world—Brahman who
॥ 217 ‘Pratwedham hidam ndsya praipedhasya pratigedhyam ०, ,
p
[st 21 9
ADH 3 | VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 281
possesses the attributes of sentience, infinity, freedom from sins and
the rest, and 28 established by the sorptural texts “Brahman 18
प्रप, intelligence, infimte” (Tait 21), “Free from ans, ageless,
deathleas”’ (Chand 816, 871, 3, Maztrt 7'7), “ Who 18 ommacent,
all knowmg” (Mund 119,227) and soon Why? “On account
of there bemg the consequence of (becoming) lke that durmg dissolu-
tion” That 18, because “ during dissolution”, or during reabsorption,
non sentience, limitedness, impurity and the rest will ocour on the
part of the material cause as well, “hke that”’,1e as on the part of
the effect The sense 18 that during dissolution, the world, possessing
non-sentience and the rest, and merged into its matemal cause m an
order reverse to that of creation,1¢ merged mto Brahman, possessing
the attribute of sentience and the rest, 1s sure to defile Him with ita
own attributes, as does butter milk dropped in milk
CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sitras 9-10)
SUTRA 9
“Bor NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THEBH BEING PARALLEL IN-
STANCES ”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
The reply 18 as follows There 18 mdeed no “ consequence of (be-
coming) hke that” Just as the evolutes of the earth do not defile
tt when dissolved mto 1t, so the universe, the evolute of Brahman,
also does not
Vedinta-kaustubha
The author refutes the objection
“But no”, 16 no such consequence follows, and hence our
view does not mvolve any moonsmstency Why? An effect does
not defile 1s material cause with 1ts own attmbutes when dissolved
into 1b, there being parallel instances to this effect Just as the evolutes
like bracelets, ear rmgs and. the rest, when dissolved, do not defile
the Inmp of gold with ther own attributes, and just as the evolutes
of the earth, when dissolved mto the earth, do not defile the earth
with ther own attributes, so this universe, consisting of the sentient.
and the non sentient, when dissolved mto Brahman, does not, mdeed,
[st 2 1 10
282 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA aDH 3]
defile Brahman, possessing the sentient and the non sentient as His
powers
CORRECT CONCLUSION (end)
SUTRA 10
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF OBJECTION TO HIS OWN VIEW”
Vedainta-parijita-saurabha
The Saéspkhya, maitamung a doctrme opposed to the Veda,
cannot raise any objection, 806 the stated objections apply to his
OWN View 88 well
Vedanta-kaustubha
The author pomta out that the Simkhya cannot even object that
there 18 any inconsistency 1n our view which 18 based on the Veda
There 18 no moonsistency in our view based aa 10 18 on Scripture
1 has been alleged by the SAmkhya, unacquamted as he 18 with the
settled conclusion of the Vedfnta, firstly, that a cause effect relation
between Brahman and the world 1s mappropriate, as there 18 &
difference between the cause and the effect im this case, secondly,
that, n our view, the effect becomes non existent prior to areation,
and thirdly, that Brahman becomes like the word during the tame of
dissolution All these objections are of equal force agamst the
Sémkhya doctrine as well The sense 18 The omgin of the effect,—
which possesses colour and the rest and possesses parte,—from pra
dbéna, which 18 colourless and devoid of parts, 1s admitted Henoo,
a cause effect relation between pradhina and its effects 18 Imappro
priate, there bemg here a difference between the cause and the effect
There beg nothimg groas pmor to creation, the effect itself becomes
non existent, and during dissolution, prakyia, hke the world, becomes
gross
COMPARISON
All others, except Baladeva, read “sapakga-dogfic ca”? +
1 828 2110, p 887 &ल B 2110 p 13 29 Bh B 2110, p 91,
SK B 2110, p 14 Parta 7and 8
{ऽ 2 1 11
ADE 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 283
SUTRA 11
“Ty It BE SAID THAT ON ACOOUNT ALSO OF BEASONING HAVING
NO SOLID GROUND, IT 78 TO BE INPHREED OTHER WISR, (WH RHPLY )
“Tt, THAT WAY, TOO, THERE WILL BE THR CONSEQUENCH OF NON
RELHASE ”’
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
On account also of the stability of reasonmg, there 1s no
inconsistency in the stated conclusion, smnoce, if pradhina and the reat
be inferred. to be the cause of the world by means of a strong reasoning,
then a counter argument is possible by means of another equally
strong reasoning As there will be the “consequence of non release
thus also”, owing to disagreement among the logicians, 80, that alone
which 1s mentioned 10 the Veda 18 acceptable—this 1s established.
Vedanta-kaustubha
The word “api” means ‘and’ There 18 no inconsistency in the
stated conalumon, which 18 based on Scripture There 18 mconsstency
an the Samkhya conclusion iteelf which 1s based on reasoning, amoe the
atated objections apply thereto, ‘on account also of reasonmg having
no solid ground”’,1e on account of the instability of reasonmg The
sense 18 that the thing inferred by one expert logician 18 seb aside by
another, proved to be otherwise by another,—on account of the
instability of reasoning 10 this way But the thmg menizoned m the
Vedinta m the begimnmg and the end cannot be refuted even by
hundreds of reasonings
If 1t be objected Even though reasonings like ‘on account of
difference’ 1 be refutable, having no sold ground, yet m order that
there may not be any infinite regress, 10 18 perfectly proper to infer,
m that way, a non sentient matemal cause of the non sentient effecta,
hke the ether and the rest—
(We reply ) “in that way too”, the primacy of reasoning 18
upheld, and hence the conclusion atated in the Veda 1s regarded as bat
of a secondary importance As & consequence, non release will result
owing to the mutual opposition among Kapila, Kandda and the
rest It cannot be said that if victory be won by one of them at
some time or other, there will be no non release 88 @ consequence,—
1 Vide Br Su 214
[st 2 1 12
284 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 4]
1t bemg mmpossible for one among many persons to be ever victorious
If 1t be said. that the Supreme Soul 1s such, you fall m with our view,
so be happy by giving up reasoning which 1s opposed to the Veda
Thus the Lord Vésudeva, the sole topic of all the Vedas, bemg
established to be the material cause of the world, no opposition, based.
on reasoning which 1s opposed to the Veda 18 of any avail—this 18
established.
Here ends the section entitled “Difference” (3)
COMPARISON
Samkara
He reads “Vimoksa prasanga” mstead of “Anirmokga pra-
8979 ' *
Ramnuja and Srikantha
They break 16 into two different sitras—viz ‘“Tark&pratasthinad
ap.” and “Anyathaé prasangah ` ` +
Adhikarana 4 The 8680४100 entitled “The Non-
acceptance oftherest” (Sittra 12)
SUTRA 12
“HaRESY THH REMAINING (PHESONS) TOO WHO DO NOT ACOEFT
(man VEDA) ARE EXPLAINED (IE BHEUTED) ”
Vedanta-padrijata-aaurabha
“Hereby”, 1e by the refutaizon of the S&mkhya view, the
remaining ones, 1 6 others who maintam 6 cause which 1s opposed to
the Veda, “too’’, are refuted.
Vedinta-kaustubha
Now, the author 1s extending the above refutation to the remaming
views
“Hereby”, 1e by the above refutation of the doctrme of pra-
dhins aa the cause of the world, “the remamimg (persons) who do not
1 88 9111, 458
9 उलि 2, 18 Part? SK B p 1४ Parts 7and 8
[0 2 1 13
aDH 5} VEDANTA PARLIATA SAURABHA 285
accept (the Veda)”, too, should be known to be refuted The word
“Mstih” means “the remaining ones’,1e persons other than Kapila 1
and Patafijali? The word “pamgrab&h” means all who do not accept
the Veda ®
It 18 thus established that the doctrine of the causality of Brahman
१8 not contradicted by their views as well
Here ends the section entitled “The Non acceptance of
the rest ” (4)
OOMPARISON
Samkara, Bhaskare and Srikantha
According to them the word “st&pargrahBh” means (the doc
trines hike Atomism and the rest) which are not accepted by the wise ५
Adhikarana 5 The 8690100 entitled “Becoming
theenjoyer’ (8०८०9 18)
SUTRA 13
“It 17 BE OBJEOTED THAT ON ACCOUNT OF (BRAHMAN) BECOMING
4N ENJOYER, (THERE WILL BE) NON DISTINCTION, (BRETWHEN
BRAHMAN AND THH INDIVIDUAL SOUL), WH BEPLY IT MAY BH
48 IN ORDINABY LIFE ”’
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
If 1t be objected that uf Brahman be the material cause, then
Himself will become an enjoyer of pleasures and pais in
the form of the mdividual soul, so that there will be no distinction
1 The founder of the Sémsbhya doctrme
9 The founder of the Yoga doctrme
‡ Thus explams the compound “#égfdparigrahdh’
“ Hence they explain the compound as “Stamh aporwrahah” and nob as
digihdd ea apangrahdé ca" as done by Nenbdrha Svinwisa, Rdmdmya and
Baladwo Vide SB 2111, p 461 Bh B 3112, 2 93, 87 23 9118,p 18
Parts 7 and 8
[so 2 1 19
286 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 5]
between the enjoyer (viz the individual soul) and the controller (vz
Brahman) es well known from the Veda,—
(We reply ) In spite of there being « non distinction, there 18
a distanction as well between the two, as between the soa and the
wave, and between the sun and 108 ray
Vedanta-kaustubha
Now, havmg apprehended an objection once more, the author
18 disposing of that here
If it be objected If Brahman who 14 without an equal or a superior
be the material cause of the world, thon there must be no distinction
between the enjoyer and the object enjoyed Why? “On account
of becoming the enjoyer * That 1, all effects whatsoever bemg non
different from their causes, the enjoyer, 16 the individual soul, will
become the object enjoyed, and the object enjoyed, 1e the body,
the sense organs and the 80780 objects, will become the enjoyer, and
6008, the distinction between tho enjoyo: and the object enjoyed,
well known 1n ordinary life and in the Voda, will not be posuble on
this doctmne of the causahty of Brahman Morcovor, there will not
be any distaunction between tho enjoyer and the controller, because
the group of enjoyers bemg non differont from the controller, the
enjoyer will become the controller, and the controller, the Supreme
Soul, will become the enjoye: In ordimary life, to begin with, the
distanction between the enjoyer and, the objcot enjoyed 28 well known,
thus “The mndividual soul 1s the enjoyer, the body and the rost are the
objects enjoyed’, and in the Veda too, thus ‘Hats the sweet berry”
(Mund 311, Svet 46) Similarly, the distmction between the
enjoyer and the controller, too, 1s well known im ordinary hfe, as 18
evident from, the conduct of the good who always regard thour pleasures
and pains as dependent on the Lord, and im the Veda too, thus “He
alone makes one do good deeds” (Kaus 38), “The soul which ४
without the Lord 1s bound, because of being an enjoyer” (Svet 1 8)
and soon ‘Thus, “on account of becoming an enjoyer, there 15 non
distinction”, and hence the doctrine of the causality of Brahman
cannot be accepted,—
The author states the correct conclusion mn the words ‘‘It may be,
as in ordimary hfe* That is, on our view, too, there may, indeed,
be a distinction between the enjoyer and the object enjoyed, as well as
between the enjoyer and the controller, “as m ordmary hfe” In
[st 2 1 13
aDH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 287
ordmary hfe, although pots, dishes and the rest, having the lump of
olay as ther material cause, bracelets, ear rings and. the rest, having
gold aa ther material cause, foams, waves and the rest, havmg the
sea as their material cause, and leaves, fruits and the rest, having the
tree as their material cause, are all non different from their respective
causes, there 28 stall a mutual distinction amongst the particular
effects themselves In exactly the same manner, there may be
a mutual distanctton between the enjoyer and the object enjoyed,
although they are non different from Brahman, havmg Brahman
४8 their material cause Similarly, m spite of ther non distmetion,
there may still be a distinction between the enjoyer and the controller ,
just as pots, dishes and the reat, though by nature non different from
the clay, as having no existence and actavity apart from the clay,
are yet by nature different, too, from the clay possessing as they do
their own peculiar attributes which the olay lacks The same should
be known. to be the case with, the gold and bracelets and the rest too
Likewise, there 18 a natural relation of difference—non difference
between Brahman and the individual soul There 18, indeed, no
moonsistency here Hence 1 28 established that the doctmne of the
causality of Brahman 18 not open to the above objections 1
Here ends the section entitled “Becoming the enjoyer”’ (5)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhaskara
Interpretation different, viz they interpret the siltra like Srini-
visa, although while Srinivasa understands the word “ bhoktri-
patteh”’ to mean ‘because the enjoyer will become the object enjoyed.
and ₹106 versa, as well because the enjoyer will become the controller
and vice versa’, they understand 1t to mean only “because the enjoyer
will become the object enjoyed and vice versa” Hach develops his
own pecuhar theory in connection $
1 Note the different mterpretations given by Nembdrka and Srimvdsa
9 828 2118, pp 4619० , 5 B 2113 p 92
80 2 1 14
288 VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA ADE 6]
Adhikarana 6 The sectioneantitied “The begin
ang” (Stitras 14-19)
SUTRA 14
“(Taaen 18) NON DIFFERENCE (OF THH EFYEOT) FROM THar
(viz, THE CAUSA), ON ACCOUNT OF (THH TEXTS) BKGINNING WItH
THH WORD ‘BEGINNING’ AND THE REST”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
There 18 “non difference” between the effect and the caune, and
not absolute difference Why? On account of the toxta ‘“*The
effect having 108 beginning in speech, 1s a name, the reality 18 just the
clay”?’ (Chand 6141), ‘“‘All this bas that for its soul That m
+ना Thou art 00 (हतत 687, 694, 9109
6 16 8 9), “ All this, verily, 18 Brahman” (Chind 314 1 3)
Vedainta-kaustubha
In the first chapter, Brahman has been decribed many times as
different from the sentient and the non sentient, 70 orde. that there
toay be & proper discrimmation between the peculiar: natures of these
three realities respectively* Here, on the other hand, the non
difference of the world, the effect, from Brahman, tho cause, resulting
from the absence of separate existence, actuavity and the rest (on the
part of the former), has been established under the aphorum “If
it be objected that (in that case the effect must be) non existent,
(we reply ) no, on account of there being 0 negation merely” (Br
आ 217) and &0 on § Now, with a view to confirming the stated
conclusion, the author 18 refuting the view of the Vaiféerukax who hold
that the effect 1s not non different from the cause, but 1s something
which originates (16 1s an absolutely new creation) 5
The compound (“tad ananyatvam’”’) 18 to be explamed as follows
‘There 18 non difference between the two, viz the cause and, the effect,
or, there 1s non difference of that, viz the world, the effect, from
1 8, R, Bh SK, B 286 R Bh SK,B 2
4 Videeg VE 111, ४ 11 1118, p 32,1123 p 36,123 &0, ste
क 8 8
® This 18 the doctrme of Asat-kéryya vada
fat 2 1 14
ApH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 239
Brahman, the cause, or, there 1s non difference of the effect from that,
viz thecause That 18, the effect, which 1s of the form of the sentient
and the non sentient, which 18 limited, has many names and. forms,
and 18 dependent, 1s non different from Brahman, the Supreme
Cause, possessing the sentient and the non sentient as His powers,
unhmited, denoted by words like ‘one’, ‘withont a second’ and so
on, capable of abiding voluntarily in the causal state and in the effected
state, and prior to the entire universe The author states the proof
with regard to 16 m the words “on account of (the texts) begmnumg
with the word ‘beginning’ and the rest” (The compound “dram
bhana dabdBdibhyah” 18 to be explamed thus ) The texta of which
the begmning 1s the word “beginning’, on account of them That 28,
on account of the texts ‘““The effect, having its beginning in speech,
18 © name, the reality 18 just the clay”’’ (Chind 61 4), ‘“ The ems
tent alone, my dear, was this in the begmning, one, without a second.”’
{Chand 621), ““He thought, ‘May I be many’, may I procreate”’
He created the hght’ (Ohind 6 2 3), ° "411 that has this for rts soul
That true That 18 the soul Thou art that”’ (Chind 687,
eto ), “All this, verily, 13 Brahman, emanating from Him, disappearmng
into Him and breathmg m Him” (OhSnd 3141), “That was
unmanifest then It becams manifest by name and form” (Brh
147) andsoon ‘There are many texta of such kinds which establish
the non difference of the world, the effect, from Brahman, the cause,
buat which are not quoted here for avoidmg prolixity
Among these, the meaning of the text beginnmg with the word
‘beginning’ (frambhana) 18 as follows
The Chandogaa, having made an initial statement to the effect
thet through the knowledge of the material cause there arises the
Enowledge of all the effecta, m the passage ‘“Whereby the unheard
becomes heard, the unthought thought, the mnknown known”’
(Chind 6 1 3), state a parallel instance to establish 1t, m the passage
““Just as, my dear, through one lump of clay, everythmg made of
alay may be known,—the effect, having 18 begmnmg 17. speech 18 8
name, the realty 18 just the olay”’ (Chind 6141) That 18, jusb
as ‘through one lump of clay’ bemg known as clay, ‘everything made
of clay’,1e the group of the evolutes of clay, may be known, since
1 The pamage 18 ` Yathd saumya/ ekena mri-puidena sarvam
vightiam sydi, vdodrambhanam wibdro nimadheyam mrlivkity eva satyam"
19
[fst 2 1 14
290 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]
they are all made of clay,—for such a group of evolutern ‘has its
beginning m speech’, 16 18 designated by 810906४ Speech 1s of two
Innds ‘effect’, 18 meaning, and (19708 ', 16 word The functon
of speech, rests on these two, viz Meaning antl word, eg we say
‘Fetch water by the pot’ Hence, ‘the tiuth’ 1s that the evolute,
characterized. by having a broad bottom and resembling the shape of
a belly, having the name ‘pot’, and conducive to the function of
fetching water and so on, 1s ‘just clay’ Thut 1s, the view that the
effect 1s different from the cause, on account of the difference of
individuality and conception, 1s incorrect, for 1t 2 not posusble to
attribute the individuality or the conception of a pot to the wind
and the rest which are difforent from clay 1 If the offect 38 to originate
from the non existent simply, then that would lead to the गाद्वा. of
everything everywhere, as well as to the futility of the activity of
the agent So demat from further arguments
COMPARISON
Samkara
Each commentator develops his peculiar thoory 1m this connection
Samkara understands the word “Ananyatva” aa obsolute identity,
interpreta the word ‘viciirambhana’ to mean ‘that whuch begins
from speech only, but does not exist in reality’, and thereby develops
his theory of Vivarta at great length >
Ramanuja
He understands the word “ananyutva” as non diffcrence, like
Nimbfarka, but connects 1t with his peculiar doctrine of the soul-body
relaizson between Brahman and the universe? He mtoerprets the
phrase “vioSrambbansa” as follows ‘vic’ means on account of
speech, 1e on account of activity preceded by speech , ‘rambhana’
means what 18 touched Hence the text means On account of
speech, (© for the sake of certain activities, like the tetching of
1 If the effect were abeolutely different from its causc then any and every
thing, © g wimd, might very well have bean conceived to bea pot But thu yw
never the case, since clay alone and nothme alge 18 conceived to be £0
2 “ Vioatea khevalam ast natu vastu-vriiena mkdrah Laserd asit
ec SB 2114,p 404
3 St B 8116, pp 39, 42 Part 3
[80 2 1 16
ADE 61 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 291
water and the rest,) there 18 touched (by the olay) an effect and 8
name,1¢ clay 1s transformed into @ particular effect having 8 special
name, 7). order that a certain activity may be acoomplhshed 1
Bhaskara
He, too, understands the word “ananyatva’”’ as non difference
He criticizes the Samkarite view at length and masts on the reahty
of difference,? and interprets the phrase “vicSirambhana’ ike
Srinrviise
Srikantha
He, too, understands the word “ananyatva” as non difference 8
He explains the phrase “vacirambhans” m the next sitra, and gives
two alternative explanations, viz “That which 18 the beginning, 1 6
the cause, of speech, 16 of speech and practical activity” “ Hence,
the text means that an effect (vikira) 1s © name (nima dheya) which
18 the cause of speech and practical activity, 1e of such expressions
‘Fetch water in a pot’ andsoon ‘The second explanationis “That
which, has speech, for 1ts begining’ 5 Hence the text means that an
effect (vik4ra) 18 simply the object of such expressions ‘This 18 a pot’,
16 & special condition the alay has assumed for practical purposes,
but 18 not a separate substance from the clay
SOTRA 15
“AND BECAUSE OF THH PHROEPTION (OF THH HFFROT) ON THE
HXISTHNGH (OF THE OAUSH) ` `
Vedinta-parijaita-saurabha
There 18 non difference between. the cause and the effect, because
the effeot 18 percerved, only when the cause 1s existent
1 * Trabhyate Mlabhyaie epréaie,” obo अल B 2115,p 40, Part 3
2 Bh B 2114 pp 93 & seg
४ 4K B 2115,p 22, Parts 7 and 8
4 ' एन्व् ablildpirtha-knyd-ripa-vyavahdrsya wppddakam bhavah
0 of 3 1 16, क 28 Parts 7 and 8
5 Vdgdrambha-tgaya-mdiram @ od
[st 2 1 16
292 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]
Vedainta-kaustubha
For this reason also, says tho anthor, there ॥ non difference
between the effect and the cause
Whence 18 1t known that there 18 non difference between the effect
and the cause? Becauso the offect 1s perce:ved, only when the cause
18 existent, m accordance with the scmpturv text ˆ “These beimgs,
my dear, have the existent as their root’ (Chiind 6 8 4)
COMPARISON
Ramanuja, Srikantha and Baladeva
They interpret the इत्र in just the opposito way, viz ‘And
because of the perception (of the cause) on the cawtenes (of the effect)”
That 18, the gold, which 18 the cause, 18 percerverl when the ear mng
is present That 18, the gold alono 1s perceived 11 the car mng, and
not the clay 4
SOTRA 16
“AND ON ACOOUNT OF THH BXISTDONON OF THE POSTERIOR `
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
“On account of the exstence ” of the effect,—belonging to a pos-
terior tame,—an the cause, owing to the demgnatiion of their co mherence
in the text “Brahman, verily, was this in the beginning” (Brh
1 4 10 >), there 1s non difference between the 60006 and. the cause
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this reason too, there 1s non difference between the effect
and the cause
“On account of the existence” of the effect,—whuich 1s “postenor”
and denoted by the term ‘this’,—im the cause, owing to the designation
of their co mherense, in the texts ‘The existent alone, my dear, was
this in the begmning”’ (Chand 621), “Brahman, verily, was ths
18 B2116,p 46, Part 9, 8६ B 2116 p 22, Parte 7 and 8, GB
2115, p 45, Chap 2
9 Not quoted by others
[80 2 1 17
ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 293
in the beginning” (Brh 1410), the non difference between the ररि
and the cause 18 definitely ascertamed.
COMPARISON
Raimanuja and Srikantha
This 18 हतप 17 m both They read “aparasya”’ in place of
“avarasya”” and take 1b to mean ‘an effect’ 1
SUTRA 17
“Iv It BH OBJECTED THAT ON ACOOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF
WHAT 18 NON HXISTENT, (THE BFFEOT 18) NOT (EXISTHNT PRIOR
TO ORHATION) (WH REPLY ) NO, (SUCH 4 DESIGNATION 18) ON
AOOOUNT OF A DIFFERENT ATTRIBUTH, THIS 78 KNOWN FROM THE
COMPLEMENTARY THXT, FROM BHASOMING AND FROM ANOTHER
THXT *’
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
“If 1t be objected that on account of the demgnation of what 1s
non, existent’’ m the passage “The non existent, venly, was this in
the begmnmng” (Chind $ 19 1 9), the effect does not exist pmor to
crea 111८911
(We reply ) “no” There 18 such a demgnation because of the
subtieneas (of the world prior to creation) Whence 1s this known?
“From the complementary passage,” viz “That was existent’
(Chind $1915), “from the reasoning”, viz if 9 previously non
existent effect does indeed arise, why 18 there no origin of a barley
sprout from fire? “and from another text”, viz “The existent alone,
my dear, was this in the begining’ (0500. 6 2 1 4)
Vedinta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected The doctrme of pre existent effect 1s not 9
more reasonable one Why! On account of the demgnation of its
=
2 &t B 2117, p47, Parts 2,8K B 81117, p 28, Parta 7 and 8
28, R, Bh Correct quotahon “Asad eva" Vide Chind 3191,p 175
9 68, Bh
a
8, R, Bh, B
[87 21 17
204. VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA apn 6 1
non existence prior to creation, in the text “The non existent,
verily, was 11118 in the begmning”’ (Chand 319 1),—
(We reply ) “no”, why? Because there 18 “such a designation”
* on account of a different attmbute” Thats, the attribute of having
name and form unmanifest 1s different from the atimbute of having
name and form manrfest, and 1t 18 because of this different attmbute
that the world 1: demgnated thus in the text “The non existent,
verily, was this in the begmning” (Chand 3191), but 18 neve
denoted to be non existent by nature
If 1t be asked Whence 18 this known? We reply ‘From the
complementary passage’ For the complementary passage “That
was existent’’ (Chand 3191), refers to the topic of our discussion,
viz the world, by the term ‘that’ and from this 1t 1s known that the
term ‘non existent’ m the beginnmg denotes the subile reality with
name and form unmanrfest
The author states another reason for the pre existence of the
effect, viz “From reasonmg” ‘That 18, the existence of the effect
18 ascertained from reason as well ‘To the question Whait 18 that
reason whereby the existence of the effect 18 ascertained? We reply
On our view, names and forms, knowable by means of the evidence
of direct perception and the rest, are all real, on account of bemg
perceived An agent, viz a potter, makes a pot out of a lump of
clay that 18 existent Here, like the lump of alay, the existence of the
pot, too, 18 kmown from direct perception Hence, the activity of
the agent, too, 1s not useless If1t be objected that as the pot already
exigta, like the lump of clay, the activity of the agent has no meaning,—
(we reply ) not so, since 108 purpose 1s amply manifestation The pot
which was unmanifest before 1s made manifest, hence the activity
of the agent 18 not useless The names and forms, mentioned 17 the
Veda, are used just as they were before! Jt should be known thai,
on our view, the conventional usage of names and forms 18 not on
precedented ‘The origin of a non extent effect, on the other hand,
does not fit in, smoe the origi of a barley sprout from fire 18 never seen
It cannot be said that although fire has no power of producng such.
an effect, 1t has, nonetheless, the power of produang sparks,—
for, 1n an effect, produced from gold and the rest of a known weight,
1 Vide V E 18 2880
[et 21 17
ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 295
e different weight 18 never found: Likewise, the sparks of fire,
which are 108 evolutes and known through the evidence of direct
perception, are perceived by all,—there bemg no evidence for the
mnaginary doctrme of a power producing unprecedented 07016608
Hence the doctrme of a non existent effect 2 18 unreasonable The
activity of the agent, too, 18 meaningless on this view, amoe the
activities of an agent mn connection with the making of a pot,—viz
digging earth, pounding it, placing 16 and so on,—all relate to the
matenal cause In the absence of the matenmal cause, with regard.
to what should the agent act, seeing that the effect, viz the pot and
the rest, are not produced then, and that, 10 that case, the conse
quence will be the origin of the pot through more activity, even in the
absence of the lump of clay? All this should be considered by tho
Wise
The manifold controversies with regard to this pomt are not
mentioned, here fo. fear of unduly tirmg those who deaire for release
In the case under discussion, on the other hand, amce Brahman
89०8868 infinite powers, everything 18 unobjectionable
The author states once moro another reason for the exstence
of the effect, thus “And from another text” The other text 1s the
text aptly teaching the pro existenco of the effect, wz ‘ “The existent
alone, my dear, was this in the beginning”’’ (Chind 621), which 1s
other than the above quoted text, vz “The non existent, very,
was the beginning” (Chind 3191) Because of thw too, it is the
(pre ) existent effect alone that omginates,—thus 18 the sense
COMPARISON
Samkara, Bhaskara and Baladeva
They break this stitra into two different sitras, viz “Asad-
vyapadedsat पए, 86680 °" and “Yukteh dabdantar&c ca’’ >
Interpretation same
1 Ie the weght of the gold ear ring us the name as thad of the gold from
wich 1s made ‘This shows that the cause and the effect are non different
2 Asai kirya-vdda
36828 3117 end 18, p 475, Bh B 2117 and 18 100, 101,G@B 2117
and 18
[80 2 1 1819
206 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 6 |
SUTRA 18
“AND LIK a रात OF OLOTH”
Vedanta -parijata -saurabha
Just as 9 piece of cloth 18 at first rolled up, and afterwards spread.
out, 80 18 the universe
Vedanta -kaustubha
The sense 18 Just as a piece of rolled up cloth, although not known
to be a piece of cloth, does not, for that reason, become non existent,
but 18 indeed existent, existing m a different form, and when spread
out once more, 18 known to be a piece of cloth,—so, mdeed, prior to
creation, the universe remains existent 1705896, though not known
to be a universe, having its name and form unmeantfeat, and 18 clearly
known as the universe at the tame of creation, having its name and
form manifest Just as the drawn forth lmbs of a tortoise are not
percerved, even. though extent, but do not become non exustent
thereby and are known when atretobed out again, and just as the
banyan. tree, existent in the seed. at all trmes indeed in 8 subtle form,
18 Mantfegted mm, a gross form, 80 1t 1s the pre existent universe alone
which originates, m accordance with the Mah& bh&rata passage
“Just as a tortowe, havmg stretabed out 108 lambs, draws them m
again, 80 the soul of bemgs, having created bemgs, destroys them
भक्त (Mah& 12 70728 707821) and the Visnu-purina passage
“Just as & gigantio banyan tree 1s contamed in a small seed, so 18
the entire universe in you, the seed, during (the state of) contraction
(viz dissolution)” (VP 1 12 666-67c2 )
SUTRA 19
“‘AND JUST LIKE THR VITAL-BEEATH AND THE BRST”
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
Just as the vital breath, having the prina, apGna and the rest,
controlled by breath exercises, eto remains im its real form, and
1 P 615 Imes 24-25 vol ॐ Reading ‘ ereiim harate” Vavgaviasl ed
also p 1571
2 P 108
[0 2 1 20
ADE 7 | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 297
when the control removed, 1s instantly known im those respective
forms,—so here too
Vedanta -kaustubha
The sense 18 Just as the vital breath, havmg modes hke the
praéna, apna and the rest, controlled by breath exercises, 28 existent
mdeed, though not known in the special forms of the prana, ap&na
and the rest, and when freed from the control 1s known clearly m
those respective forms,—so the effect, with 118 name and form un
manifest prior to creation, 1s not known through those respective
names and. forma Hence 1t 18 established that the world 1s true hke
Brahman, having Him for 1ts matemal cause, and 18 non different
from Brahman, though different from Hm
Here ends the section entitled “‘ The beginning” (6)
Adhikarana7 The section entitled “The desig
netzon of another” (87०८०४8 20-22)
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Siitra 20)
SUTRA 20
“ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF ANOTHER, THERE IS THE
OONSEQUBNOE OF FAULTS LIKE NOT DOING WHAT IS BENEFICIAL
AND THE EEST ”’
Vedanta-parijata -saurabha
An objection 1s raised Since on the doctrme of the causality of
Brahman the individual soul 1s established to be Brahman m the pass
age “This soul 1s Brahman” (Brh 2691), there result “faulta
hke not doing what 18 beneficial and the rest” by reason of Brahman’s
creating the world, which, 1s an abode of all miseries
Vedanta-kaustubha
The view that there 1s an absolute difference between the cause
and the effect has been disposed of above Now, smoe there oan be no
1R SK
[st 2 1 %
298 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7]
suspicion of an absolute non-differance between the Sontiont Bemg
and the non sentient, the autho: is here refuting only the view of those
who suppose that there 18 an absolute identity botween Brahman
and the mdividual soul 7
It may be objected If Brahman be the cteator ot the world
which 18 the aite of the three kinds of miserics, thor. must be the
“consequence of the fault of not domg what 1s beneheml" By the
term “and the rest”’ (in the siitra) tho fault of domg what 1 not bene-
968 18 understood Why! “On account of the designation of
another,” 1e on account of the demgnation of the individual soul as
Brahman m the passage ‘“Thou art that”’ (Chind 687, 094
ete ), “ This soul 1s Brahman” (Brh 259) and so on The senses
that the transmigratory soul, performimg good and bad deeds ond
undergoing threefold pais, 28 not other than Biahmin Henos
the stated faults must result on the part of Brahman, not subject to
tranamigratory existence
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 18 siitia 21 in bis commentary Like Nimbirka, Baladeva
too bemns a new adhikarana here, but unlike Nimbfirkn ¢ontinnes
1४ up to siitra 33 (82 1 Nimbiirka) He takes thin adhikarana as
concerned with showing that the Brahman, and not the mdtividual
soul, 1s the cause of the world Thus, firat, ho takes thw afitra as
settang forth the correct conclnaion and not + prima facse view (98
according to Nimbarka), thus “There will be the consequences of
faults like not domg what 18 beneficial and tho rest from the denignation
of another (1e if the mdividnal soul be demgnated as the creator
of the world)” 2 That 3a, 1f the mdividual soul were the creator of
the world, 16 would not have created a world so full of misorica = Hence,
Brahman, not the individual soul, must be the creator
‡ Ie the author 18 not trying to remove tho suspicion of an absolute non
driference between Brahman and the material world,—amco none w so foolish
a8 to suppose thad s Sentient Bemg and non-sentaent object may be absolutely
identical—but he 18 dispomng only of the not unnatural bolief of an absolute
adentity between Brahman and the ind:vidual soul
2 GB 2121, pp 652 58, Ghap 2
{sé 2 1 2]
ADE 7 ] VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 299
CORRECT CONCLUSION (8४७ 21 22)
SUTRA 21
“Bor (BRAHMAN 78) SOMETHING MORE, ON ACOOUNT OF THR
INDIOATION OF DIFFERENOH ”
Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha
The refutation of this 18 as follows
We hold that the creator of the world 1s Brabman, who 1s “some
thing more” than, 16 superior to, the embodied soul, the enjoyer
of pleasure and pam कलम faon of difference ”
mn the passage “Who rules the soul within” (Sat Br 1467, 30 +),
there 18 no absolute non-difference between the two 86008 there
cannot resulé the fault of not domg what 18 benefiaal
Vedanta-kaustubha
With regard to this prima face view, the author states the correct
oonalusion
The word “but” disposes of the prima facie view Since we hold
that Brahman,—omniscent, omnipotent, the Lord of all, without
an equal or © superior, and the one identical matemal and efficent
cause of the worlds “something more”, 1e superior to the
embodied soul, the question of not domg what 18 beneficial does not
arise The reason of His bemg something more 1s stated in the phrase
“On account of the mdication of difference”,1e on account of the
indication of a difference between Brahman and the imdrvidual soul
in the passages ˆ ^“ 0, the self, verily, ahould be seen” * (Byh 245,
456), “The knower of Brahman attains the bighest” (Tart 21),
‘Who rules the soul withm’ (Sat Br 1467, 30) ‘The sense 18
this Just as im the passage ‘All this, verily 1s Brahman’ (Chand
3141), 1b bemg impossible for the group of the non sentient to be
non different from Brahman, ita difference from Brahman 1s admitted
by the phrase ‘emanating from Him’? so 7 bemg impossible for the
1 FP 1074, 158 18 छ
४ The passage 15 ‘ All this verily 1s Brahman, emansimg from Him,
disappearing into Him and breathmg m Him ' (Chand 3 14 1)
[st 2 1 22
300 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 7 ]
individual soul, too, to be by nature non different from Brahman
on the authority of the stated sorptural text demgnating difference,
1४ 18 declared to be non different from Brahman, by such texta like
‘“Thou art that’’’ (Chind 687, etc), only as having no existence
and activity mdependently of Brahman, but not by nature Thus,
on, account of the designation of difference, m spite of there bemg
& non difference between the two, faults hke domg what 1s not bene-
ficial do not ame
COMPARISON
Samkara
Interpretation same, but in conclusion he adds, as usual, the
explanation that 16 78 only from the empirical point of view that we
can speak of crealion of a difference between the individual soul and
Brahman, but from the transcendental pomt of view no question of
creation arises at ali 1
CORRECT CONOLUSION (end)
SUTRA 22
“AND (THE INDIVIDUAL SOULS ARH) LIKE STONES AND THE BEAT,
THERE IS IMPOSSIBILITY OF THAT”
Vedanta -parijate-saurabha
Like the diamond, the lapis Jazuh, the ruby and the rest which
are the modifications of the earth, the mndrvidual soul, though non
different from Brahman, 18 also different from Him, possesang, as it
does, some peculiar qualities of 1४8 own Henoe, the allegation by
the opponent 1s an “impossible” one
Vedénta-kaustubha
Moreover, just as in ordimary 1188, the stones like the diamond,
the lapis laguh, the ruby and the rest which are modifications of the
earth, though non different from the earth as consstang m earth,
are yet different from the earth, possessing, as they do, their pecuhar
natures,—so 18 the 0988 [1678 By the term “and the rest’ the
deg nt m0 TaN, Ieuto! wt heta karanddayo dopth?’ 88 21 22,
p
[so 2 1 22
ADH 7} VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA S01
modifications of the tree, such as the leaf and so on, are to be
understood That 1s, Just as the leaf, though non different from the
tree, 18 yet not the tree, 80 18 the case here Or else, by the term “and
the rest’, the ray of the diamond and the rest 1s understood, for the
ray, though non different from the diamond, etc, 28 yet found to
be different Hence, just as the ray, though non different from tis
substratum, 1s yet different from 10, so 10 18 appropriate to hold that the
embodied soul 18 by nature different from Brahman, though rt 1s at the
game time non different from Him as having Him 07 118 soul Hence,
the respective difference between what 1s subject to transmigratory
existence (viz the individual soul) and what 18 not, (viz Brahman)
bemg thus established, there 1s no inconmstency here Hence “there
78 imposaibilty of that”, 16 there 18 no possibilty of faults like
not domg what 1s beneficial and the rest, as alleged by the opponent
Thus, 1t 18 established that there no contradiction 18 involved mm our
view
Hence ends the section entitled “The deagnation of another ” (7)
COMPARISON
RamaAnuja
This 1s sutra 28 in Ram&nuja’s commentary fom.
different, viz “Just (as 16 18 umpossible for non sentient objecta) hke
stones and the rest (to be identical with Brahman, so) there 18 the
mmpossibility of that (viz of an identity between the indrvidual soul
end Brahman)” 1
Srikantha
This 18 80078 23 m Srikantha’s commentary too ‘(Since the
individual soul, possessed of httle knowledge, 1s declared to be belonging
to an absolutely different category from Brahman, the omnuscient),
just as (non-sentient 0016608) 1118 stones and the rest, there 18 the
mmposslbilrty of that (viz of an absolute identity between the mdividual
soul and Brahman) ” >
1 St B 2128, p 68, Part 2
"SK B 2123, p 32 Parts 7 and 8
[87 2 1 28
302 VEDAINTA-PARITATA SAUBABHA ADH 8]
Baladeva
This 18 sittra 23m his commentary ‘(Since the individual soul,
though sentient, 18 dependent) lke (non sentient objects like) stones
and. the rest, there 18 the impossibility of that (viz of the mdividual
souls being the creator of the world) "1
Adhikarana8 The sectionentitled “The Obser
vationof Qollection” (80४८०98 28-24)
SUTRA 23
“Tr IT BH OBJHOTSD THAT ON ACOOUNT OF THE OBSERVATION OF
COLLECTION, (BRAHMAN IS) NOT (THE OBBATOR OF प्प WORLD),
(WH REPLY ) NO, FOR (HE TRANSFORMS HiwsHLr) LIKE MILK”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
If it be objected that “on account of the observation of the col
lection” of many implementa by potters and others, Brahman, who
18 without any external implement, 18 not the cause of the world—
(we reply ) “no”, smce Brahman transforms Himeelf “like milk”,
possessing, a8 He dues, powers peculiar to Him alone
Vedanta -kaustubha
The objection, viz if the universal Lord, possessing the sentient
and the non sentient as His powers, the soul of all, and without an
equal or a superior, be the creator of the world, there 8868 the fau!ta
hike not doing what 1s beneficial and the rest, has been refuted above
on the ground that the individual soul, though non different from
Brahman as havmg Him, as 18 soul, 18 yet subject to transmigratory
existence as subject to beginningless karmas, and thus different from
Him by nature Now, the author 18 disposing of the followimg objec
tion, viz that Brahman 18 not the oreator of the world on account
of the absence of the collection of external umplements
The words “and. the rest” are to be suppled from the last
aphoram The word “for” denotes the reason
1 GB 2128, p 56, Ghap 2
[80 2 1 23
+त 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 303
If 1t be objected. In ordmary 1108, 16 18 always found that external
implements hke stzok and so on are employed for the production of
effects like 008, etc Henoe, Brahman who has no helpers, 28 not
the creator of the world To the question Whence 28 this known?
We reply That Brahman 1s without any helpers 1s defimtely ascer
tamed from the following texts, designating the impossibility of the
existence of any kind of agent in the beginning ‘“‘ The existent alone,
my dear, was this mn the beginning, one only, without a second” ’
(Ohind 621), ‘There waa, verily, Narfiyana, the one’ (Mahi Up
1 2), “Then there was Vimu, Hari alone, the absolute ”,—
(We reply ) “no” Why? “Because” Brahman 8 “hke milk”
Just as m ordinary hfe milk, water and the rest are transformed. into
the form of effects hke sour milk, 1ce and so on,—there 18 no external
implement here,—#o0 Brahman, possessed of the sentient and the non
sentient as His powers, 18 capable of being the one identical material
and effiment cause of the world through His very nature Hoe has
not to depend on the collection of accessories for creatang the world,
as declared by the text “Supreme is His power, declared to be mani
fold, natural 18 the operation of His knowledge and power” (Svet
6 8)
Whey, on the other hand, 1s sometimes mixed with milk, sumply
for giving a certain flavour to it, and not for making 16 tum sour,!
because we find that milk turns sour even when whey 1s absent from
it, and that water and the rest do not turn mto sour milk even when.
whey 18 present in them
Tt 18 because the potters and others are mere effiment causes that
they have to depend on olay, etc for making pots, eto , and 1t 1s because
they lack the requaite power that they have to depend on the stick,
the wheel and s0 on.
Although the facts mentioned in the Veda are ever established,
yet objections are bemg raised against them agai and agam for
removing the doubts of those who are entatled to the study of 1%, for
mlencing the opponent and for malang one understand the meaning
of the Veda without # vestige of doubt
1 This rephes to the objectyon, vis that the above example of milk 39 not
to the goint, amoe mlx is not transformed into sour milk by riself, but has to
depend on whey
[st 2 1 24
304 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURALHA ADH 8]
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 18 78 24 711 108 commentary Intorpret won diferent, vz
“Tf 1# be objected that on account of the observation of the completion.
(of a piece of work by the individual soul,) (11 cannot be hkened to
mert stones and the rest, but 1s a free agent), (we reply) no, for (the
soul’s power of action 18) lke (the cow's pow. of producing) milk” 1
That 1s, although the soul 18 an agent and can as such bring works to
completion, yet 1b 18 not an independent agent, but has to depend on
the Lord for 18 activities, just as the cow cannot by herself produce
mulk, but has to dependson the hfe energy
SUTRA 24
“AS IN THH O4SH OF THE GODS AND THE REST TOO IN (THEE
WORLD ””
Vedinta-pirijita-saurabha
Just as the gods and the rest create what thoy want through a
mere wish, 80 does the Lord too
Vedanta -kaustubha
Lo the objection, viz Milk and the rest are non rentacnt, while
Brahman 1s sentient, as such, the examples cited are not to the point,—
the author rephes here ;
The word “too” suggests the posmbility of an analogy with the
sentuent The case in hand 18 analogous not meraly to that of non
sentient objects, hke milk, eto aa shown above, but 1s aleo analogous
to that of the sentient, known from Sampiture to be the power of the
Lord Justas “inthe world”,:e6 1 the world ofthe gods and the rest,
or m. Scripture,—the cause of the beholdimg of all objects,—the gods,
the fathers, the sages, the Nagas and the rest, celebrated to be possessed
of great powers, are found to create the objects which they want, as
befitting time and need, through a mere wish, just as a spider acts
by xtself alone independently of any external mplement, so the Highest
Person, celebrated i all the worlds and Vedas as possessed of great
ia Be
" 8 214, pp 66 57, Chap 1
{80 2 1 26
aDEz 9 | VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURARHA 305
powers, ommacient, omnrpotent and having true resolves, creates the
whole group of effects through a mere wish Hence, it 18 establuhed
that no contradiction 1s involved in our view amply because certam
well known mmplements are found employed m ordinary creations
Here ends the section entitled “The observation of collection” (8)
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 18 siitra 26 in his commentary Interpretation different, viz
(The Lord though mvimble, 28 the creator of the world,) just as
the gods too (though mmvimble, are seen to work) m the world, (16
to produce rain and 80 on) +
Adhikarans 9 The section entitied “The oon
sequence of the entire” (Sitras 25-30)
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (86४० 25)
SUTRA 25
“(iy BeanMAy BE THE MATHRIAL 0408 OF THE WORLD, THERE
WILL BA) THH CONSHQUENOCE OF THR ENTIRE (BRAHMAN BEXNG
TRANSFORMED INTO THE WORLD), OB THE VIOLATION OF THE TEXT
ABOUT (BRAHMAN’S) HAVING NO PABTS "
Vedanta-pdrijaita-saurabha
An objection 18 raised —
Tf Brahman be the maternal cause of the world, then if He be
admitted to be without parts, there will be the “consequence of the
entire” (Brahman bemg transformed mto the world), xf possessed of
parta, then the scriptural texts about His having no parts will be
contradicted.
+" 8 21%
[st 2 1 26
206 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 9]
Vedinta-kaustubha
Antampating the objection,—viz_ If Brahman be transformed into
the form of the world absolutely mdependently of any external mm-
plement, then let Him not depend on His own powers as well But
ance the view that Brahman 1s the maternal cause through His mere
nature leads to the horns of a dilamma, He cannot reasonably be the
materal cause, and hence pradhana alone must be the material
cause,—the author 18 replymg to 26 by pomting out that in the case
of Brahman, external implementa cannot be admutted, as they are
not mentioned in Scriptures, and as they will make Brahman a
dependent creator, and that His own powers, which are non different
from Him, may very well be admitted, as they have Soripture for
their authority
The prema facie view 18 a8 follows Is Brahman,—knowable from
the scriptural texts hke =" "^ 1106 existent alone, my dear, was this m
the beginning, one only, without a second” ` (त 621), ˆ The
soul, verily, was this in the begmnmg, one only’ (Brh 147) and 80
on, and transformed into the form of the effect,—without parts, or
possessed of parta* 11 7 besaid without parts, (we reply ) then the
consequence will be that the entire Brahman will become the effect,
as in the case of milk, there will not remaim a transcendent Brahman,
beyond tranemigratory existence and to be approached by the freed,
the scriptural texte designating Brahman as unintelligible will be con-
tradicted, universal release will result, and Brahman will come to
possess the attributes of grossness and the rest If on the other
hand, He be admitted to have parta, then there will not arise faults
hike the entire Brahman being transformed into the world, but the
scriptural texta demgnating that Brahman, the cause of the world,
has no parts will come to be contradicted, viz the texts ‘Without
parta, without action, tranquil, faultless, stainless” (Svet 6 19), ‘For
He 1s the celestial, moorporal Person, the outeide and the msde,
unborn” (Mund 212) and 80 0 So none but pradh&na can be the
the cause of the world
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 18 sfitra 26 m his commentary He reads “vyakopa”’
68 9 ॐ y व
instead of “Kopa Interpretation, too, 18 different, viz he takes
this siltre as setting forth the correct conclumon and not a prima
[श 2 1 26
ADH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 307
fac view, thus ‘(If the individual soul be the creator of the world),
then there will be the consequence of entire (absorption), or the
contradiction of the texts (designating its) bemg without parts’
That 18, uf the mdzvidual soul be the creator, we must conclude that,
in as much as it 18 without paris, ita entire self 28 present m every
act But this 18 not really the case,eg while lifting a blade of grass,
the mdividual soul does not employ rts entire force to the act Or,
else we must conclude that the individual soul must be possessed of
parta, which also goes against scriptural authority Hence, we must
conclude that the md1vidual soul cannot be the creator 1
CORRECT CONCLUSION (8४०३ 26-30)
SUTRA 26
“Bur (THB ABOVE OBJECTION HAéS NO FOROR) ON ACCOUNT OF
ScrretuRn, SINCE (THH FACT THAT BRAHMAN IS THH OAUSH OF THR
WORLD 78) BASED ON SaRIPTURE ”
Vedanta-padrijaita-saurabha
The stated objection does not hold good As the truth mentioned
1 the texts ‘He wished “May I be many” ` (Tait 263), ‘He
Himself created Himself’ (Tart 27%), “He became exstent and
that’ (Tat 264), ‘So much 18 His greatness, higher than that 18
the Person’ (Chind 31265), ‘Just as a spider creates, so from
the Person ® the Universe omginates’ (Mund 1 1 ¶ 7) and so on,
18 based. on Sompture rteelf—anything 8188 bas no basis to stand upon
Vedanta-kaustubha
The author states the correct conclusion
The word “but”’ 1s for dispomng of the pruma fame view The
entire Brahman 1s not transformed, nor 1s there any Violation of texts
Why? “Qn account of Scmpture * That 18, on account of the mass
1GB 2126 pp 58 58 (ण्णः 2 & Not quoted by others
2 Op ow 4 Op ow 88
9 Correct quotation ‘Tathd akgardd bhava tha स्ह" Vide Mund
117 p 9
7 Not quoted by others
[न 2 1 34
308 VEDANTA KAUNTURIA ADT ५1
of texta which declare that Brilimin w the non diflere nt पदिन
and effiaent cause of the world, difftrent from the world, posse कत्
of powers which are transformed and so on = such weuplurel texts
are ‘Ho wished “Muy I be many”? (Tait 26), “He तपो It created
Himself’ (Tait 27), ‘Ho एताः extent and that’ (Tut 2 4),
‘Having created 1t, he entered mto that very thing’ (Tart 26),
‘That diyvimity thought ‘Very well, kt me enter into thes threo
divinities””’ (Chind 632), ‘Having entered by thus living xoul’
(Chind 682), ‘Who abiding within tho earth, fiom tho
earth does not know’ (Brh 373), Entered within the rulkr of
men’ (Tat Ar 3111, 24), ‘So much iw His prentnens, loghor
than that 18 the Person’ (Chind $126) andro on There ix प जपि
text as well, viz ‘Having voluntarily entered mto prakyt: (matter)
and purusa (goul), Ham shook the mutable and the immutable at the
tame of dissolution and creation’ (VP 1499) ike + spider,
Brahman 18 transformed into the form of the world, without warting
for external helpers Hence there 18 no violation of the texts dong
nating Him to be without parta The scriptural text to this effect
18 98 010३ ‘Just as a spider creates and taker, yust as hairs on tho
head and body hairs amse from a person, and medicinal herbs from
the earth, so this universe aries from the Impermhabl.’ (Mund
117) There wa Smt text as well, viz ‘Just aw a 601 0140, having
stretched. out 1ta hmbs, agam draws them im, so the Soul of bemyn,
having created beings destroys them ayam’ (Mahi. 12 10725 -7073a*)
Brahman, possessing the sentaent and the non sentiont as Has powers,
18 declared to be without parta and. without limbs, betcauso He has no
parts and lombs as His material cause, ay throuds are of a piece of
cloth
If 1t be objected If 1t be admitted that transformation means
the projection of power, then there beng no transformation of the
real nature of the qreator, what 18 the differenco of this view from
the views of the Simkhyas and the rest “—(we reply ) Listen Tho
iP 191 2P iG
४ P 615, Imes 24265 vol 3 Reading “‘srgidnt karate’ Vangav dat od,
also p 1571
Ie accordmg to the Siénkhyas, pradhdna 1 transformed into tho world
while eccording to the Vedintine also nob Brahman Himnelf, but His power uf
the non-sentient (actochakt)—which 1s pradhana—is troneformed into the world
68008 the two views come to the same thing
[80 21 26
ADH 9] VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA 809
Saimkhyas hold that the material cause of the world 18 a substance
which 1s different from the puruga (or the soul) just as a lump of clay
18 different from a potter, which does not possess 1t (viz purusa) as
ite soul, and which 1s possessed. of independent existence and activity
But Brahman, as admitted by the VedAntins, 1s One alone He
transforms Himself mto the form of non sentient objects lke the
ether and the rest by projectaung Ehs power of the enjoyed (ie the
act इ), having projected the sentuent power of the enjoyer (16
the crt इभ) m the form of gods and the rest, and havimg entered.
withm as their inner controller, makes them undergo the frurta of their
respective works, and. contracts them durmng the tame of dissolution,
as 8 tortoise does its limbs, and the sun 118 rays
To the obyectaon, viz even if there be the collection of external
helpers by Brahman, no contradiction arises mn the case in hand,
and hence pradhina, established by the Tantra may be the external
implement, suitable for the production of the world, just as clay 1s
for the production of a pot What is the use of a transformation
consisting mm the projection of powers t—the author reples On this
view, there will be contradiction of scriptural texta This he says
m the words “Because of being based on Soripture”’ Transformation
consisting in the projection of powers 1s accepted, based as rt 18 on
Scripture Jf mmplements lke pradhins and the rest be admutted,
that view will have no basis to stand upon, and the consequence will be
that Brahman will have to depend on another for His creation
Further, the following texts will come to be contradicted, viz ‘ All
this has that for its soul’ (Chind 687 ch), ‘All this, verily, 18
Brahman’ (Chind 3141), ‘Which bemg known, all comes to be
known’ and so on,—-this 1s the sense
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 18 sitra 27 m lus commentary Interpretation same, but
he adds his usual explanation in conclusion that from the transcen-
dental pomt of view, no question of creatzon arses at all and hence
no question as to how, Brahman, who 18 partiess 18 yet not transformed.
in His entirety 1
6 8 2127,p 491
[शौ 2 1 >
310 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH ॥ |
Raiménuja
Interpretation of the word “sabda miilatvat”? different ~ vi
(The fact that Brahman 18 possessed of various powers) 38 braved on
Soripture1 According to Nimbarka, 1t means, as wo have seu
“(The fact that Brahman creates the world, yet remama untranstonin« (|)
28 based on Scripture” 3, while according to दिता, (The tact
that transformation meana nothing but projection of powers) m4 1५५ el
on Soripture
Baladeva
This 18 siitra 27 in his commentary, vz “(But the above obj ¢ tion
does not apply to the case of the Lord, the renal creator) on me count
of Scripture, because (the knowledge of Brahman) 14 bared on Scrip
ture 8
CORRECT CONCLUSION (continued)
SUTRA 27
“ AND SINGE THESE VABIOUS (MODIFICATIONS) (ARK SbEN) IN THF
SOUL ALSO ”
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
When various modifications are appropriate on the purt of indiv!
dual souls, like gods and the reat, how can they posaibly be imappre
pnate on the part of the omnzpotent Lord of all, the cause ¢t the
universe f
Vedanta-kaustubha
The author 78 confirming the stated view on the rule of ‘how mich
more’ 1
No wonder that if the creation of the world be due to one who 14
possessed of true resolves, of inconceivable and infimte powers anil
18 unchangeable by nature, then faulta hike entire creator beg trun
formed and 80 on never result,—‘“amce”, 1 © because “m the xoul
too", 1e m the mdividual sonl which has come to uttam lordship,
“this”, 16 without there resulting any faults hke enture transtomnn
070, “various” creations are seen In accordance with ita own power
a
1 St B 2129 p 60, Part 2
® This 28 the interpretation of Simkara as well
7 GB 2127, p 60, Chap 2
{ist 2 1 27
apH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 311
The second “and” (“‘ca”’) 18 indicative of ‘how much more’? (16
obviousness) 1
To begin with, the forms of swans and the rest, assumed by 10019
dual souls, are well known 1n Soripture >
The followmg अण passages are mdicative of the power of the
king of gods ‘Now he changes into those particular forms repeatedly
He becomes a bearer of the crest and the thunder bolt, armed with a
bow, and wearing the ear mngs, then in an instant, he comes to look
like a Candaila® ‘Then, agai, my son, he comes to be clad in bark,
with a tuft of hair on the top of 018 head and matted hair Then he
comes to have a large body, becomes 778, hkewise stout or thin
Agam he changes himself as fair, dark, hkewise black, ugly or hand.
some, hkewise young or old, learned, dull or ignorant, hkewise short
or long Then the performer of a hundred sacrifices becomes 9 Ingh
caste or a low caste He assumes the forms of a parrot or a crow,
man or cuckoo, and again assumes the forms of a hon, a tiger or an
elephant’, and 80 on
The Smrti passages concerned with power of the sun are as
folows ‘The abode of many wonders 18 the revered Sun, from whom
arise all bemgs, honoured 10 the three worlds’, andsoon अपण्य;
the creaizve power of other gods may be mown from Scmpture itself
The followmg अपि passage 18 mdicative of the power of gods
‘They may make a non god god, anda god non god When incensed,
they may create rulers of worlds and other worlds’
The followmg Smyta passage dempnates the power Cyavana
‘Q, the power of the Brahma sage Cyavana, the great soul! The
ascetac can create other worlds, simply by wishing, through the power
of austerrties '
The followmg Smyti texts refer to the power of Vaéstha’s cow,
vz ‘The cow, with her head and neck raised, look termfic, her
eyes reddened. with anger, and lowing repeatedly Her body, blazing
with anger, shone 178 mid day sun The cow created the Palhavas
from her tail in great frequency m the form of the piling up of the
1 Ie 1? mdividual souls are capable of assuming vamous forms without
themselves undergoing modifications, how muocb more so this must be the case
with the Lord, the omnipotent Being Aawnuiyaka-nydya
४ Video eg Chind 4132, where certam dive sages are said to have
assumed the form ofswans (or fuller accomnt of this story see V K 18 34
® An outcaste born from a स्वा father and a Brdimana mother
[शि 2 1 27
312 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 4DH 9]
charcoal, as 1t were 1, the Dravidas from her tail, the Sakas from he r
urine, the Yavanas from her womb, numorous Sabaras from het
dung, the Cicukas, the Pulindas, the Cinas, the Hiinas, the Sakelaras
from her foam as well as the Mlecchas of various kinds’ (Maha 1 66797
66800, 6682 6688, 6685) and &0 on
Suomularly, other individual souls, too, possess the power of variour
kinds of creations, which are not quoted here for avoiding prolzit;,
and also because they are not suitable here Even un emiment ind. 1-
dual 80718, the power of creating object 1s insignificant, befitting
their own. powers and only given by the Lord It 18 not posable
for even the freed soul to be the creator of the emitre universe This
will be made clear in the aphomsam “Devoid of the actrvity regardings
the universe’ (Br 8a 4417)
COMPARISON
Riménouja and Srikantha
This 18 इति 28 1m their commentanes Interpretation different.
viz And thus in the soul (the attmbutes of the non sentient are not
found), for there are manifold (powers) (um different objects) That
18, we find that the sentient individual soul, which w different from.
non sentient objects, does not possess ther attributes Simulaly,
these non sentient 00160४8 themselves, fire, water and the rest, which.
are different from one another, do not share one another's atimbuter,
but have manifold attmbutes In the very same manner Brahma
who 15 different from both the sentient and the non sentient does not
possess their attributes, but numerous others not found m them 2
Baladeva
This 18 वत्त 281n his commentary Interpretation different, viz
And thus (there are mysterious powers) in the soul (viz Brahman),
because various (powers) (belong to the tree of all desires, or to the
philogopher’s stone) That 18, we believe, on the ground of Sonp-
ture alone, that the tree of all demres and the philosopher's stone
possess Inysterious powers, capable of giving mse to elephants, horses
1 Angor-vre--namul Here the suffix ‘namud’ umplies companson m accord
ance with the rule Pan 3445 SD K 8366 7 714 vol ॐ
4 Grr B 2128, pp 6061 Part? SK B 1228 p 39, Parts 7 and 8
[st 2 1 28
ADH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 219
and the rest So why should we not 0611658, on the very same ground,
that the Lord 1s possessed of mysterious powers † 1
CORRECT CONCLUSION (continued)
SUTRA 28
“AND BEOAUSE THREE 78 FAULT IN BIS OWR Vinw 3
Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha
Let our view stand Since the faults mentioned by you rebound
to your own view, 16 18 proper for you to keep silent
Vedanta-kaustubha
The particle “and”’ (“‘oa”’) 18 meant for disposmg of the doctrines
which are opposed to the Vedanta The S&mkhyas and the rest, who
maintam doctrimes opposed to the Ved&nta, cannot find fault with
our determmation of the cause of the world Why! “Because
there 18 fault in their own views” Thus, the Simkhyas admit that
pradhins, conmsting of the three gunas, and without parta, 1s trans-
formed. into mahat and the rest ‘This bemg so, the consequence 1s
that faults hke entare pradhaina bemg transformed and 80 on must
pertain to their view a8 well Since what 1s without parts cannot be
transformed, pradhfna cannot also be the cause, otherwise there will
result transformation. on the part of puruga as well
If 1+ be argued There are parts of pradhina, viz sativa, rajas
and tamas, and hence the above fault does not result,—({we reply )
In that case, according to your view, pradhina must be an effect,
hke a piece of cloth, and sativa and the rest, which are 18 parts, must
be rts cause, like threads
If 1t be argued again We do not admit that pradhbfina has no
form before, but 1s brought into exstence by ite parta, sattva and the
rest, as 8 piece of cloth by the threads What we holds that pradhana,
already existent im rts peculiar form, 18 the aggregate of sativa and the
rest in & state of equilibmum,—{we reply ) This does not stand ४0
reason If this be so, then too, 1t must be admutted, accordmg to
7 GB 2128, pp 63 64 Chap 2
(fst 23 1 >
3lt VFDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 0]
your view, that when in a state of equilibiium, watt. and the rest
are pradbana, and when in a state of non ¢qulibrium, the v gtve rise
to the world
Moreover, 1f each of these be posseaned of parts, there must
follow infinite regress, but if they be without parts, there must result
the violation of the respective difference between the cause and the
effect, soe there will be no distinction between the causal and the
effected states of the uggregate of the anttva and the reat, which are
devoid of parts
Hereby, the doctrme of Atomiam too should bo known to be
refuted
COMPARISON
All othera, except Baladeva, read “Sapnlesa dose cv”? 1 Intor
pretation same
Baladeva
This is sfitra 29 आ) lus commentary Interpretation different,
viz he does not take this sitia to be referring to the Simkhya view,
but to the view that the individual sonl, and not the Lord, us the
creator of the world Hence the sfitra means, according to hun,
“And because there 28 fault 1m 118 own view” Thats, the objection
raised by the opponent to our view, viz if Brahman be the craatoi,
the question arises whether He creates with His entire energy or 4
portion of it only, apphes equally to the view that the mdividual soul
18 the creator, and while we can answer this objection, the opponent
cannot 9
CORRECT CONCLUSION (contmued)
SUTRA 29
“AND THAT (DIVINITY) IS ENDOWED WITH ALL (POWERS), BEOAUAE
7 IS sHEN ” 9
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
In accordance with the scriptural text ‘Supreme 18 His power,
declared to be manifold, natural 18 the operation of His knowledge
1GB 2120 “QB 2138
> CSS ed leaves ont the “oa p 20
{87 21 29
ADE 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA, 315
and power’ (Svet 681), “that” divimty is “endowed with
powers”, 16 18 able to do everything ्
Vedanta-kaustubha
The author 1s demonstrating the omnipotence of the Highest
Person.
The cause of the world, as admitted by the Simkhyas and others,
vis pradhina and the rest, devoid of a multitude of powers, suttable
for the production of the diverse and multaform world, does not stand
to reason But 17 the case in hand, the Divmity, worshipped by His
own devotees who resort to none else, 18 “endowed with all”, 16
endowed with all powers, “and”, 1e hence, He alone 1s capable of
bemg the cause, and not pradh&na and the rest Why? ‘Because
tt 18 seen,—”, 1e (because) Scmpture (“daréana”’) demonstrates 11
{“tad”),2 viz the divmity who 18 endowed with all powers,—ie
because of the scriptural texta hke ‘The own power of the divinity,
1067 by his own qualzties’ (Svet 1 3), ‘Supreme 1s His power,
declared to be manifold, natural 1s the operation of His knowledge
and action’ (Svet 6 8), ‘ Possessed of true demres, possessed of trus
resolves’ (Ohind 815, 871, 3) and so on, and because of the
णपा passage ‘Hundreds of positave powers like creation and the
rest, which are inconcelvable to the comprehenaton of all bemgs, may
belong to Brahman, O best among the ascetics, as heat to fire’
(VP 1328)
COMPARISON
All others read ‘“Sarvopeté ca tad dardanit”, omitimg si”
Samkara and Bhiskara, begin a new adhikarana here, (ending with the
next sitra)
1 R, Sk, B
¢ Tins explains the compound fad dardandi”
$ P 32
[so 2 1 30)
alb VEDANTA PARISATA YAURABH 4 ADM 9]
CORRECT CONCLUSION (endl)
SUTRA 30
4 [क IT BF OBJHOTED THAT (BRAHMAN 14 NOT Th UAUNP OF Tilly
WORLD) BROAUSE OF THE ABSHNOE OF SENSE-ORGANS, (Wi E REPLY }
THAT HAS BEEN SAID "
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
If 1t be objected that on account of the denial of His som orguus
in the text ‘No action or sense organ of Him exusta’ (Svet 6 44),
1४ 18 not possible for one who 16 endowed with all powers to he the
creator of the world—({we reply ) the anawer to thik has alrcady
been given >
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1b be objected Let Brahman be endowed with all power,
stall, hike milk, without mplementa such as basm, pot and the rest,
hke the seed, without 2mplements, such aa earth, water, and 80 on,
and like gods and others without mmplements befitimg particular
places and tames, He cannot consistently be the creator of effouts,
though possessed of powers, “because of the absence of sense organs’
on His part,1e because He 18 known to be devoid of sense organs
from the text ‘No action or sense organ of Him exists’ (Svet 6 8)—
(We reply ) The reply to this has been given in the aphorwm
“Because of being based on Sompture” (Br Sit 21126) The
meaning of the above scriptural text 18 as follows ‘There exet ‘no
action’,—ie that which 1s to be done for the purpose of obtaming
bliss,—and ‘sense organ” for the production of desired for action,
‘of him’, 168 of the Supreme Lord who 1s one masa of ever present
bliss, the Lord of all and the Creator of the world ® There are sorip-
tural texta to this effect, viz ‘The soul, which conmsts of blisy’
(Taxi 25), ‘Filled with Hibs own self alone’, ‘A flavour, verily, us
He’ (Tart 27), “Having all desires, having all odours, having all
tasks’ (Chand 3142, 4), “Without hands and feet, he ws swift and
9 8612617, without eyes, he sees, without ears he hears’ (Svot 3 19)
and 80 on The declaration by the Lord Himself, too, 18 98 follows
1R SEK, 8 4 Vide Br Si 21 86
3 7 8 the Lord, who 18 ever blaesful does not need to act for attaming any
forthe: एण and He has nof to depend on the senso-organs for His action
{0 2 1 3)
ave 10} VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 817
९५० have no duties, whatsoever, O P&rtha, m the three world, nor
anything unattamed to be attamed, yet I abide m action”’ (कद्व
$22) Hence 1t 18 established that the above mentioned faulta
pertam to the opponent's view alone, but not to the oonclumon estab
hshed by the Vedanta
Here ends the section entitled “The consequence of the
entare”’ (9)
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 78 siitra $1 m his commentary The imterpretation of the
phrase “tad uktam” different, viz “that has been answered (by
Scripture rtaelf)” That 18 the very same Upanisad (viz Svet&éva-
tara) which has been quoted by the opponent im support of 1118
allegataon that the Lord, devoid of sense organs (viz Svet 6 8),
cannot act, answers to the objection by pointing out that though
devoid of sense organs, He can yet act (viz Svet 8 192)
Adhikarana 10 The section entitled “Having
a need” (Siitras 31-86)
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Sitra 31)
SUTRA 31
“(BRsoMaw IS) NOT (THR GAUSE OF THE WORLD), ON ACCOUNT
OF (THE AOTIVITY OF AN AGENT) HAVING A NEED ”
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
It may be objected The Supreme Bemg who has all His demres
eternally fulfilled, 1 not an agent Why? “On account of the
activity of an agent having a need ”
1 08 21831, p 67, Chap 2
[st 2 1 82
818 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 40H 10 |
Vedinta-kaustubha
Now, a doubt 1s raised Let this be so, yet there being no need
on the part of Brahman,—who has His demres eternally fulfilled by
themselves,—for creating the world, 1t 1s not created by Him
The prima facte view 18 as follows Creatorship of the world does
not fit mm on the part of Brahman Why? “On account of the
activity of the agent having a need”, and on account of there bemg
no need on His part for creating the world, as He has His desires
eternally fulfilled
CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sfitras 32-35)
SUTRA 32
“Bur, 48 IN OBDINARY LIFE, (CREATION IS) A MBRE SPORT (TO
Branman) *
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
Wrath regard to 1t, we reply Such creation and the rest of the
Supreme Being are like the mere sport of kings and so on, well known
m. ordinary life
Vedinta-kaustubha
The author 1s atating the correct conclusion
The particle “but” 18 for dispoamg of the prima face view
Just as, in ordimary hfe, the play of a universal monarch, who has
attamed lordship, with various kmds of dice, wooden balls and the
Test, 18 & Mere aport, without any desire indeed for fruit.—so this 18
& mere sport on the part of Brahman as well,1e a mere play witb
the creation of the universe. and so on
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 1s अड 33 in his commentary Interpretation same, but
the phrase ‘“lokavat’” explamed a litle differently, thus As im
ordinary life a man, full of cheerfulness or on awakening from a sound.
sleep, dances about without any motive or need, but mmply from the
fulness of spirit, so 18 the case here! Here Baladeva critaczes the
1GB 2183,p 71, Chap 2
[80 2 1 33
ADH 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 919
Vitstadvarta illustration of a prince engaged im a game of balls (which
18 the Ulustration given us by Nimb&rka as well as we have seen)
by pomimng out that such a game 28 not altogether motiveless, snoce
the prince gets some pleasure from 1t 2
CORRECT CONCLUSION (continued)
SUTRA 33
“(Tomek ARB) NO INEQUALITY AND ORUBLTY (ON THD PART OF
BRAHMAN), BEOAUSS OF (HIS) HAVING REGARD (FOE THE WORKS
OF SOULS), FOR 80 (ScRIPTUED) SHOWS ”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
Inequality and cruelty, due to unequal creation, destruction
and the rest, depend on the works of the indrvidual souls themselves,
and 80 they do not pertam to the creator of the origin and the rest
of the world, as 17. the case of the cloud “So” exactly the sorptural
text “One becomes good by good action, bad by bad action” (Brh
8 2199) “shows”
Vedanta -kaustubha
It may be objected If Brahman creates the universe im mere
sport, He must be open to the charges of mequalty and oruelty
He must be open to the charge of “imequality”,1e of creating an
unequal world, creatmmg as He does different grades of bemgs like
gods, men, animals and soon And, He must be open to the charge
of “cruelty”, 1e of heartlessness, creatang os He does the universe
which 18 an abode of three kinds of sufferings, making the indzvidual
souls, not attached to matter, enter mto connection with 16 at the tame
of dissolution, and thereby causing them sufferings like old age, death,
and the rest
(We reply) No ‘There cannot be any mequality and cruelty
on the part of Brahman Why? “Qn account of (His) having
regard ”,1e@ because in producing different bemgs hke gods and the
rest at the begmmming of the creation of the universe, Brahman has
regard. 07, 1 6 takes 1700 account, their respective works or karmaa,.
1 Op ov, p 72 9 6, 2
[st 2 1 34
320 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ape 10 |
just as the cloud m produamg different kinds of shoots depends on
therr respective seeds
If xt be asked Whence 1s this known? The author rephes
“shows”,16 the holy Sorrpture shows this thus ‘Vor he alone makes
one, whom he wishes to raise up from these worlds, do good deed,
he alone makes one, whom he wishes to lead down, do bad deed”
(Kaus 38), ‘One becomes good by good deeds, bad by bad deeds’
{Brh 8218), ‘The doer of good deeds becomes good, the doer of
bad deeds becomes bad’ (Brh 4 4 5)
COMPARISON
Samkara, Srikantha and Baladeva begin a new adhikarana here
CORRECT CONCLUSION (continued)
UTRA 34
“IF If BH OBJECTHD THAT THIS IS NOT (POSSIBLE), ON ACCOUNT
OF THA NON DISTINCTION OF WORKS, (WE EREPLY ) NO, ON ACOOUNT
OF BEGINNINGLESSNESS, AND (THIS) FITS IN, AND IS OBSERVED
ATSO 39
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
If 1t be objected that mnoe the text ‘*“The exstent alone, my
dear, was this in the begmning”’ (Chind 6211) declares the
‘non-distinction” of works prior to creation, the Supreme Being’s
dependence on the works does not fit m,—(we reply ) “no”, as works
exist even then, the works done by the mdividual souls in previous
Taurths bamg eternal And 4 pmor creation “fita m”, as a sudden
subsequent creation 1s unreasonable 2 And this 18 “observed 2180 2
an the text “The creator fashioned the sun and the moon as he
did before’ (Rg V 10 190 3 3) and so on
> §, B, 8K, B
2 Te since a subsequent creatton cannot anse all on a sudden we have 10
admit that ts arises from a prior creainon
Pp 418 l¢
(fet 21 59
aDH 10 ] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 32]
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1 be objected The reason, vis ‘on account of dependence’,
does not 2617 Why? ‘“Onaccount of the non distinction of works ”
That 1s, the non distinction of the entire world pnor to creation being
ascertained from the text ‘“The emstent alone, my dear, was thus
m the begimnmg, one only, without a second”’ (Chind 621), the
non-distinctaon of the works of the mdividual souls, too, 1s ascertamed
Hence, pridr to creation, there are no works as the cause of the diver
srties of the objects to be created, on which Brahman might depend,—
(We reply ) “‘no” Why? “On account of the begmmingless”
of all That 18, the works, good and bad, done by the mdividual
sows m a previous creation, become the cause of the diveratties m
a subsequent creation. “And” the contmurty of creation “fita m”’
17 accordance with the maxim. of “the seed and the shoot’,! and m
accordance with the above mentioned difference between the manrfest
and unmanifest effect. as well as because a sudden subsequent
creation without a prior creation 18 mexphosable, this Jast reason bemg
indicated by the particle “and” (mm the sfitra) Ths 28 “observed
also” m Sompture That 18, since the text “The creator fashioned
the sun and the moon as he did before’ (Rg V 101903), teaches
the emstence of a prior creation, the eternity of the flow of creation
78 established And in the soriptural and Smrii texts luke ‘ With
roots above, branches below 1s this eternal fig tree’ (Katha 61),
‘With roots above, branches below, the fig tree 28 indestructible,
they say’ (GItA 16 1), the reality as well of mundane existence, as
having the Exustent aa 108 root, and as having the form of a contimuous
stream, 18 established Previously, the effect has deed been deter
mmed to bereal® Inthe texts ‘Without begimnmg and without end’
(Cal 54), ‘A wise man 18 not born, nor dies’ (Katha 2185), ‘Know
prakria (matter) and puruga (soul) to be both begmmuingless’ (Gita
18 19), the eternity, too, of the sentaent and the non sentuent sub
stances, which are the powers of the Supreme Cause, 1s estabhahed
1 1 9 just ag it is umpossble to say whether the seed 1s earlier or the shoot,
80 16 1g imposmble to aay whether harmas are the earlier or the samaira सिपक
they are taken to be beginnmgless
4 Vide V EK 211718 3 Vide VK 21147
¢ Correct quotation “Anddavaii Videp 230
¢ Of a very amular passage in 01708 2 20
21
ist? 2 1 35
922 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 10]
COMPARISON
Samkara
He breaks this 80018 into two different sfitras—thua “Na
anddktvit”’, and ‘upapadyate cy”? t
80881918
He also breaks 1t into two different siitras Further he rvads the
first portion differently, thus ‘“Asmid vibhagiid 111 con niinddstvit”,
(stitra 36), “upapadyate ca”? (siitra 36) 2
Baladeva
He also breaks 1t into two different siitraa exactly after Sumkara
But he takes the first portion only, wz “Noa anddit vit”
as indicated withm the previous adhikarana beginning a new
adbikarana with the second portion “upapudyate 08,
concerned with, showing that the grace of the Lord 18 not partial
Hence 1b means, according to hnn And (the especial grace shown by
the Lord to his devotees) fits im (since 1t is not arbitrary, but depends
on the devotion of the souls themselves), and it 18 observed alao (m
Scripture) 8
OORREOT CONCLUSION (and)
SUTRA 35
“AND BROAUSH OF THE FITTING IN OF ALL ATTRIBUTES >
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
“And because of the fittmg m of all the attmbutes’’ of a cause on
the part of Brahman alone, 16 18 established that our view 18 free from
all contradictions
Here ends the first quarter of the second chapter of the VedAnta
एकु हन saurabha, composed by the reverend Nimbarka
18B pp 408 499
® Bh B p 107
’GB 21386, pp 76 77, Obap 2
[80 2 1 36
aDH 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA $35
Vedianta-kaustubha
‘And on account of the fittmg in * That 18, all the attributes,
mentioned or not mentioned, befitting the cause of the world and
wmappropriate on the part of pradh&na and the reat,—fit m on the part
of Brahman alone Hence, 1) 18 established that the concordance of
Sormptures with regard to Brabman 1s not contradicted by any means
whatsoever
Here ends the section entitled “Having a need” (10)
Here ends the first quarter of the second chapter m the holy
Ved&nta kaustubhsa, commentary on the Sariraka mfimAmsa,
and composed by the reverend. teacher Srinrvisa
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiskara
This 18 sitra 37 xn both the commentaries They teke thus इत प्छ,
to be a new adbikarana by tiself
Baladeva
This 1s stra 37 m 018 commentary Interpretation different,
viz the same theme contanued thus And on account of the fitting
m of all attributes (harmonious in themselves or not) (on the part of
the Lord) Thats, the Lord 1s possessed of paradoxical and myste
rious powers, and. hence 10 16 possible for Him to possess, along with
the attmbutes of perfect justice and impartiality, the attmbute of
showing special favour and partialhty for his devotees as well 1
Résumé
The first section of the second chapter contains—
96 stitras and 10 adhikaranas, according to Numbfrka,
97 sitras and 12 adhikaranas, according to Bhiskara
96 siitras and 11 adhikaranas according to Srikantha
$7 sittras and 11 adhikaranas, accordmg to Baladeva,
1 QB 2137,p 78, 0097 2
ao © mm G be
[so 2 1 35
324 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ApH 10 |
Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva divide each of the sitras 17
and 35 m Nimbarka’s commentary into two separate siitras, while
Rémaénuja and Srikantha divide siitra 11 m Nimb&rka’s commentary
into two separate sutras
SECOND CHAPTER (Adhyaya)
SECOND QUARTER (Pada)
Adhikarana 1 The seotion entitled “the im
possibility of arrangement” (Sfitras 1-10)
SUTRA 1
“AnD ON ACCOUNT OF THH IMPOSSIBILITY OF ARBRANGHMENT
ALSO, NOT THE INFERENCE *
Vedanta-parijata-saurabba
Pradhina, knowable through inference! 18 not the cause of the
world Why? “On account also of the mposability” of a vaned
‘‘ arrangement” from it, not acquainted with the arrangement of the
objects to be created
Vedanta -kaustubha
Thus, with a view to inducing those who desire for salvation to
the hearmg, thmking and the like of the nature, atimbutes and the
rest of the Supreme Person, 1t has been firmly estabhshed above by
the reverend author of the aphorisms that Lord Vasudeva, the Highest
Person, omnipotent, the Lord of all, and the Supreme Person, is the
cause of the origin and the rest of the world, and that the views of the
opponents arise not supported by Scripture has been shown under
the aphorum “Because (the creator of the world) sees, (pradhfina 1s)
not (the creator), (1t 18) non-somptural” (Br त 115) Now, witha
view to establishing the acceptability of the conclusion of the Vedin
tans, the reverend autho: of the aphomams ४ exposing, in this section,
the fallaciousness of the arguments put forward by the opponents
It 1s not to be said that those who desire for release bemg benefitted
through 9 mere expoartion of the conclusion of the Vedintims, what
18 the use of villifying the views of the opponents! Smoe just as
when ® man, giving up the moat benefiois) food, 18 about to take
injurious poison and the like, people try to induce him to food and to
1 Bee footnote 1, p 48 of the book
[x0 22 1
326 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]
dissuade him fiom poison, eto by pomting out the unwholewoment ss of
the latter, 80 the villrfication of the view ot the opponcnts is yustitiahle
for the purpose of preventing people from accepting the viown which
are opposed to the Vedas, and for inducing thove desu my for cmang
pation to our own View
Now, the Samkhyas, discarding the Highest Person omnipotent
and omumuascient, as the cause of the ongin and the rest of the world,
hold prakrti, devoid of any connection with Him, non # ntient and
the equilibrium of the three gunas, to bo the cause of the world Thins
has been said in the treatwo treating of the sity (categories) 1
“The prmary prakyti (.e matter) 1s not an effort There are seven,
beginning with mahat, which are (both) causes and ल ८१५ There are
mxteen which are effects (only) ‘Purusn (16 soul) 18 nelther a canse,
nor an effect’ (Sim Ki 32) Thy state the five reasons for tho
existence of prakyt1 thus The cause w pradhiinn, “(1) on account of
the transformation of the divisions 3, (2) on account of ¢ onc ordande 4,
(3) on account of the actavity preceding from power ० (4) on account
of the distinction between the cause and the ५८८६ ०, (6) on account
of the non-distinction of what 18 pouscsscd of all form’ (Naim Ka
157) The word ‘Vaiéva ripa’ means tho samo as ° Visva-ripa’ or
what 18 possessed of all forms,1e the unrverse of varied configurations
Whatever 18 lumited 18 due to a common cause, like pota and the rest
श्व tee Ee ~ ति Po ee ee
1 Peculiar to the Sémkhyaa sp 4
9 Ie on account of the lunitedness (parindma) of tha offic ta (bhevin) like
mahat and the rest Thus Whatever 28 limited hax ५ cause, like tho pot
The effects are 1711060
they have a cause, vis pradhiina
Te all the effecta possews the common qualities cf pleasure (agtire) pam
(rayae) and delumon (वव) Hence they inust haye a common (का which
possesses ali these qualities viz pradhidna
“Te the cause can give rise to the effect only if 1t haa tho reunite power
Now pradhdéna alone has the power to give rise to mehai and tho revit
5 The difference of the effect from the snuac proves tho axistence of the
cause Thus tbe difference of the pot from a lump of clay vis the fir can
fetoh water, the second not—provea that the pot has clay fur ita common cause
Similarly from the mahat and the rest we argue tw pradhina, differ nt from them
® Ie the whole universe mergea m 9 common cause during disolution,
and such © cause wpradhdna Vide Candnkd चप्यं of Sam BA pp 18 19,
also Gaudapdda bhdsya on same, pp 13 1¢
7P 18
[st 2 2 1
ADH 1] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA $27
Similarly, a mahat and abamkéra, the five pure essences, the eleven
86188 organs, and the five great elements which are limrted are ‘div1
sions’, they are due to one cause which 18 unlimited im space and tame
and the common substratum of three gunas1 Whatever 1s observed
to be connected with something else, 18 due to that one cause, 88
dishes and the rest, connected with the clay, are due tort Similarly,
the external and internal divisions, connected with pleasures (sathva),
pain (rajas) and delusion (tamas) should properly be due to a common
cause consisting 10 pleasure, pain and delusion? Similarly, just aa
there 18 the origin of pota and the like from the power of the cause,
80 the ongm of the effects hke mahat and the reat, too, must be held
to be due to the power of the cause This being 80, the cause, possessed
of such a power, 18 pradhina 8 Moreover, it 18 observed that there
18 8 distinction betweeen the effecta, hke ear mngs and the rest, and
the cause, simular to them, such as gold and the rest, as well as a non-
distinction Similarly, there 18 both distunctaon and non distanctaon
on the part of the mamfold universe Through these two, a cause,
viz the unmanifest which 18 the substratum of all begs and consists
of the three gunas 70 a state of equilibrium, 18 inferred 4
On this suggestion, the author reples ‘The inference”, 1 8
what 1s inferred, viz pradhina, not havmg Brahman as ita common
cause, 28 not the cause of the world Why? “On account of the
impossibilty of arrangement,”’ 18 because it 1s mmposmble that the
arrangement of the world,—variegated by the aggregate of manfold
objects of enjoyment, conforming to the diverse works of the souls,—
can arse from pradbina, not having Brahman for xts cause, an object
of mference, non sentient and devoid of any knowledge of the ob
jecta to be created, as we see in ordinary life that the arrangement
af manifold and variegated palaces, chariots, ornaments and the rest
18 due to one who 18 possessed of the knowledge of the 0019008 to be
created.
The particle ‘‘and”’ (7. the गो) mdicates that the reasons,
mtended for proving the existence of pradh&na, can very well be set
amide by valid opposite arguments, ance the followmg mference
1 This explams the first reason
9 Thw explams the second reason
® This explains the third reason
* Thi explems the fourth and the fifth reasons
[so 22 2
828 VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 1]
establahes the non validity of the object establish cl (by the Samkhya,
viz pradhina ) —
Pradhiina as admitted by the SAmkhyas and not havmg Brah
man for 108 soul, 18 non existent,
because 19 18 not perceived
Whatever 1s this (1e not percerverl) 14 that (16 non eastent),
like the sky flower
Whatever 1s not thin (ie not non peromved) ४ not that (io
not non existent),
hke the sun
COMPARISON
Ramfnuja and Srikantha
They take this and the next alitra as one aiitra
SUTRA 2
“AND ON AGOOUNT oF ACTIVITY ”
Vedinta-pirijita-saurabha
And on account of the impossibihty of spontancous activity
(on 708 part), not the inference (1e the infermble pratlhdna)
Vedinta-kanetubha
The phrase beginning with ‘on account of imyxxuubility’ ia to
be supphed here And because activity,—vir apomtancous fallmg
away from the state of the equilibrium of the three gunas,—is
impossible on the part of pradhana which 18 non sentient ond an
object of mferenco Thus, pradhina, knowable through infeicnee,
is not the cause of the world, since 1t 18 observed im ordinary life that
non-sentient objects like chariota and the rest, are moved to action
only when supermtended by conscious beings
[et 223
anu 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 329
SUTRA 3
“AND If If BH ARGUHD THAT (PRADHAWA ACTS SPONTANBOUSLY)
LIKE MILK AND WATER, (WH REPLY ) THERE TOO (LORD 18 THR
INCITER) °
Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha
Tf 1t be argued that hke muik, etc pradhina acts for the omgin
and the rest of the world by itself, (we reply ) that “there too”
the Supreme Being 18 the maiter 1s learnt from the scriptural text
“Who abiding within water” (Brh 3'7 41)
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 10 be argued How can 1t be said that on account of the m
possibihty of spontaneous activity on 108 part the non sentient pra
dhina 18 not the cause of the world? Just as milk, though non
sentient, 18 by itself transformed into the form of sour milk, and flows
spontaneously for the nourshment of the calf, and just as water
discharged. from the cloud 18 transformed into the form of various
saps of the earth, aa well as into the forms of 108, bubble and the reat,
and pours down spontaneously for the growth, of plants and the reat,
as well as flows on, so exactly pradhaina too, mdependent of a sen
tuent bemg, having entered into a state of mutual mequality of the
reat too, no activity 1s possible mdependently of a sentient bemg
On the contrary, milk and the rest attam the form of sour milk and
so on only when supermtended by a sentient bemg It 18 the cow
herself, fond of her calf, that makes the milk flow out of fihal affection,
and bemg liquid the milk oozes oub If 1t be argued that even when
the calf 18 dead, the presence of the milk 1s observed, and. hence to say
that 1t 1s the cow that makes the milk flow out of filal affection does
not stand to reason,—(we reply ) there 18 the flow of the milk then by
reason of her remembrance of the calf, or else 1t 18 exphcable on the
ground. of her love for her master >
1§ R, Bh
# 1 © the cow gives milk even when the calf is dead because she still remem
bers the oalf, or because she loves her master and wants to be of benedit to ham
[7 2 2 4
990 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBRABHA ADH 1]
Water, too, comes to have the form of 108, bubble and the rest
only when supermtended by a conscious being, appears to be of the
form of various saps through its contact with the earth, and flows on
ag dependent on & low ground 1 and on account of bemg liquid lHvery
thing being supemntended by a sentient bemg, the above examples
all fit in, in accordance with the scriptural texts ‘Who abiding withm
water’ (Brh 374) ‘“At the command of this Impershable, Garg,
some rivers flow to the east’ ’ (Brh 3 8 9) andsoon Hence the 17
ference (1e the infernble pradhf&na) 18 not the cause of the world
SUTRA 4
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THI) NON EXISTENCE OF A SEPARATE (40
OCESSORY), (PRADHANA 78 NOT THH CAUSE), ON ACCOUNT OF NON
DEPENDENOE ”’
Vedainta-parijaita-saurabha
Pradhfina, not supermtended by an intelligent pmnciple, 1s not
the cause of the world Why? “On account of the non existence”
of an accessory other than it, since according to you 1t does not de
pend on anything else
Vedanta -kaustubha
For this reason, too, the cause of the world 18 not the mference
(16 the infermble pradhina) Why? “On account of the non
existence of what 18 different ** That 1s, 1f pradhina,—which, 18 not
superintended by an intelhgent principle, but 1s independent, non
sentient and an object of wnference,—be the cause of the world, there
will be activity on ita part at all tumes, and this being 80, there would
not be, at any time, what 1s different from activity, 16 mactivity on
108 part >
Or (an alternative explanation), the 86086 18 On account of the
absence of an object to be instigated or of an instigator other than
The resson for this, again, 18 “‘on account of non depen
dence”, 16 asccording to your view, as the creator of the world,
1 Ie the fowmg of the water depends on ita bemg on a sloping ground
> le there would be eternal creation and no dissolution
lst 2265
4DH 1] VEDANTA PABLIATA SAURABHA 331
pradhiina does not depend on an accessory It cannot be said also
that the vanegated works are the instigator of pradhina,—because
works will then become the cause of the world, because the mde
pendence of pradhina 17 creating the world will be set aside, and, finally,
because this 18 umpossible Works, on the other hand, are not able
to give even fruits like merit or demerit, pleasure or pam, their agent,
too, does not obtain the fruit by himself Hence, how can those works,
performed by the individual souls who are vitiated by their contact
with prakrtii or matter, be able to instigate pradhina ? ‘The fact is that
the works bear fruits through the wish of the Lord, and thus ther
agent obtams fruits, as declared by the Lord Himself ‘ “Pleasure,
pain, existence, non existence, fear and absence of fear, non violence,
equanimity, contentment, penance, charity, fame and absence of
fame,—the various states of beings arise from me 81078 ` ` (Gra 10
40-56) + 18 not to be said that pradhina acta through ita prommuity
to purusa,—for ita proximity 00 purnsa being eternal, ita activity, too,
must be eternal This will be made clear m details under the
aphorism “As in the case of a man and stone” (Br Sa 2 2 7)
COMPARISON
Ramdnuja and Srikantha
This 1s sitra 3 m ther commentanes Their explanation 18
simular to the first explanation given by Srinivasa, viz “Because
of the non existence of what 18 different (from creation, viz dis
solution), on acoount of (its) non dependence (to anything else),
(pradhfna 18 not the cause of the world)”’ 1
SUTRA 5
“* AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE NON BXISTHNOH ELSEWHERE, NOT LIKE
GR4SS AND THE EEST ”’
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
Smee there 18 no transformation of the grass and the rest, eaten
by an ox, into the form of milk, 1t cannot be said that just as the grass
1 तित. B 228, p 74 Part? SK B 228, pp 57 58, Parte 7 and 8
[श 2 2 6
982 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA apy 1 |
and the rest, eaten by cows, eto become milk by themselves, 80 the
unmantfest, too, 18 transformed into the form of mahat and the rest
Vedainta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected Just as grass, water, eto are transformed into
the form of milk, so the unmanifest 1s transformed into tho form of
mahat and the rest, mdependently mndeed of another efficient cause,
—the author replies “No” This cannot be sad Why? “On ac-
count of the non existence elsewhere,” 16 because “elsewhere”, or
in the case of oxen and the rest, other than that of cows, eto there
18 no transformation of the grass, water and so on, eaten by them,
into the form of mik The particle “and” imphes that mnoe the
transformation of the grass, eto , eaten by cows, mto the form of milk
18 admutted to be due to an intelligent principle, bkewise pradhina, too,
18 transformed 1700 the form of mahat and the rest as supenntended
by an intelligent prmcple alone, and not by itself
COMPARISON
Raméanoja and Srikantha
They change the order of the stitras 5-9 which will be noticed at
the end of sitra 9 Interpretation same
SUTRA 6
“]iVEN IF THHES BH THE ADMISSION (OF ACTIVITY ON THE PABT
OF PRADHANA, STILL THEN IT CANNOT BE THR OAUSH), ON ACCOUNT
OF THE ABSENOR OF A PURPOSE”
Vedinta -pirijita-saurabha
° पकड if there be the admission” of activity on the part of
pradhina somehow or other, still pradhina cannot be the cause,
since 9 purpose for such an activity 1s mmposaible on ita part, it
bemg non-sentient
Vedinta-kaustubha
It has been said under the aphomam “And on account of acti
vity’’ (Br Sti 222) that pradhina has no power of mdependent
activity, and hence 1s not the cause of the world Now the author
[80 227
ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 3338
points out here that “even if there be the admission of activity on
ita part per force 1, stall then pradh&na 18 not capable of bemg the cause
Why? “On account of the absence of a purpose,” that 18, because
there 18 no purpose for the creation of the world, seeing that the souls,
merged in their own bliss, prior to creation, have no regard for en
joyment or emancipation, while pradhina, bemg non sentient, 18
not capable of having enjoyment and the rest It cannot be said
What purpose can the Highest Person, who has all His demres ful
filled, have m creatang the world i—snce that has already been. pomted
out under the aphoriam “But as im ordinary hfe, a mere sport”
(Br Si 21 82)
Or (an alternative explanation of the phrase “arth&bhavat’’ )
the sense 18 On account of the absurdity of the statement, made per
force (and not on the ground of reason), पाह =" Pradhiéina acts by 1taelf’,
just bike the statement ‘The ether 1s running’
COMPARISON
Ramfnuja and Srikantha
They change the order of sfitras, which will be noticed at the end
of sitra 9
SUTRA 7
‘Ivy 7 BH ARGUED 4S IN THR GASH OF A MAN AND ASTON,
(WH BEPLY ) THEM ALSO
Vedainta-prijaita-saurabha
If 1t be argued that just as a blind man makes © lame man move,
or the stone (1e the magnet) the 10, so does puruga move pradh&na,
—(we reply ) in that case, the assumption of the non activity (of
puruga) will be contradicted, and pradhana bemg something to be
instigated by another will cease to be the primary cause of the world
Vedinta-kaustubha
If rt be argued just as > lame man,—who has the power of vision,
but 1s devoid of the power of motion,—lost acedentally from Ins caravan
1 Ie somehow or other
(st 227
394 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 1 |
and wishing to go to & desired place, on finding a blind man,—who has
the power of motion, but 1s devoid of the power of vison,—makes
him move by mountmg on him, and just as the magnet makes the iron
move, 80 exactly, though devoid of the power of action, the soul,
possessed of the power of vision, makes pradhina, devoid of the power
of vision, move by ita mere proximity Hence, m spite of the non
sentence of pradhiina, the activities of creation and the rest, are possible
00.108 part,—the answeris “Thenalso”,1e even onthe ground of such
examples, no actrvity 1s posmble on the part of the object exemplrfied,
viz pradhina Thus, if puruga be admitted to be the mover of
pradhina, then the mitral proposition, viz that puruga 18 not an
agent, will come to be contradicted If pradh&na be an object to
be moved by puruga, then the initial propomtion, viz that pradhine
18 by itself the cause of the world, will come to be contradicted
Although the power of motion 18 not manifest 17 a lame man, he being
without legs, yet he directs the man, who has the power of motion,
by means ofspeech And the ao directed man, though not having the
power of vision manifest because of his blindness, yet bemg a sentient
beng, moves m accordance with his (viz the lame man’s) words
The stone (viz the magnet), on the other hand, moves the iron
(only) when brought mto connection with 1t by a man, and the णा
does not move by nature Moreover, 7४ has been said under the
aphoneam “If it be argued hke milk and water, there too” (Br
Sti 2293), that everywhere and at all tames the Omnzpotent and
Omniscient Bemg abides as the mover ofall Further, the proxmuity
of puruga and एभि being eternal, there was no absence of such 8
proximity before 06006 the order of creation and dissolution, as well
98 the respective difference between bondage and release,—due to
the prommuty of prakri and puroga—, are not possible, and there
must result eternal activity and absence of dissolution In the case
in hand, on the contrary, there 1s no defect whataoever, since 1b has
been said that “And that (divmity) 18 endowed with all (powers)”’
(Br 97 2 1 29)
[श 22 8
ADH | | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 835
SUTRA 8
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF BEING PRHPON
DHRANT *’
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
As 1t 18 rmpossible for the gunas, which are m a state of equ
hbrum at the tume of dissolution, to enter in a relation of mutual
subordination and preponderance, 80 the inference (1e the infer
018 pradha&na) 1s not the cause of the world
Vedanta -kaustubha
For this reason also the inference (1e the mfernble pradhina)
18 not the cause of the world Why? “Qn account of the umposm
bility of beng preponderant '' Thus, 1s predhina,—consisting of the
three gunss 10. a state of equilibrium, not regulated by an intelhgent
principle and estabhshed by mference aa admitted by you,—trans
formed into the form of the world by means of entering into a state of
mutual subordination and preponderance (of the gunaa), or mde
pendently of any such state? If the first, then the preponderance of
one among (these three gunas) sativa, rajas and tamas, which are
in ® state of equilibrium prior to creation and are mutually inde
pendent, bemg impossible, 10 18 nob posmble for pradhina to be the
cause of the world If the second, then pradh&na, consistmg of the
three gunas 19. © state of equilibrium and immutable, 15 not trans
formed. mto the form of the world al) the more,——there being no state
of mequahty conmsting 70 a mutual subordmation and preponder
ance (of the gunas)
It cannot be said also that at the tame of creation there 18 a lapse
from the state of equilibrium and the gunas entering mto a state of
mutual subordination and preponderance, thereby the world arises,—
for this leads to the horns of a dilemma ‘Thus, 18 10 admutted by you
that the lapse from the state of equilibrium, at that time, 1 sponte-
neous, or that 10 18 due to the Omnuaent Bemg? The first alter
native 18 not valid because of the umpossibility of a spontaneous lapse
without a cause, and also because of the following
Whatever has a cause has lapse,
hke seeds and the rest
Whatever has no cause has no lapse,
hke the soul
[st 2 2 9
336 VEDANTA PARIJATA-SAUBABHA aDH 1]
The second alternative, too, 1s not valid, because that 18 not
admitted and because that will be fallmgin with the view of your
opponents
SUTRA 9
‘‘AwD IF THERE BE AN INFHRENOH IN ANOTHER WAY, (PBADHANA
CANNOT STILL BH THE CAUSE) ON ACOOUNT OF THE ABSENOB OF
THE POWER OF BRING 4 ENOWER ”’
Vedanta-p&irijata-saurabha
“And if there be an inference” with regard to pradhAns “in
another way "°, stall then ^" 0) account of the absence of the power of
being a knower” on the part of pradhfna, the world 18 not due to 1t
Vedainta-kaustubha
Just as there may be the ongin of effecta, preceded by (pradhfina's)
entering into a state of mutual subordination and preponderance
in & way other than the stated, 80 प an inference be made with regard.
to pradhina, stall then “on account of the absence of the power of
bemg a knower”’,1e on account of pradhina berng devoid of the power
of being a knower, the objections, viz impossibility of arrangement
and the rest, mentioned above, must remam in 008 Hence the
inference @ 8 the mfernble pradhfna) 1s not the cause of the world
COMPARISON
Raimfnuja and Srikantha
Interpretation same, but they read sfitras 5-9 70. a different order
Thus —
Nembdrka, etc Rdmanwa, etc
०८. Anyatra-bhivéic ca "(Si 5) “Anyatra bhivic 08 "
(Sai 4)
"‘ Abhyupagame * (80 6) “Purugiémavat ` (Si 6)
“Purusiémavat ` (ॐ 7) “Angitva ” (Sf 4)
‘Atgitva "` (Si 8) “Anyathinumitan '' (ति 7)
“Anyathinumitan = (ॐ 9) “Abbyupagame ” (Si 8)
[80 2 2 10
avxH 1] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 337
SUTRA 10
“Awp ON ACCOUNT OF CONTBADIOTION, (THH SAMEHYA DOCTRINE
78) INCONSISTENT *”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
The view of Kapila 18 “inconsistent”, because of the opposition
between its prior and subsequent (statements)
Ved&anta-kaustubha
The view of Kapila 1s “moonmstent’” m every way Why?
Because of rts opposition to the Vedinta,-—that 18, the Vedintas,
independent of all proofs, authoritatzve by themselves and eternally
establshed, estabhsh the omniscient and omnipotent Lord of all as
the cause of the omgin and the rest of the world, and the admisson
of the doctrme of 9 non sentient cause 18 opposed to this,—because
of that ,—because of the rejection of a doctrine based on mere reasoning
in the passage ‘This knowledge 1s not attamable through reasonmg’
(Katha 29), and because of the oppomtion. between 108 pmor and.
subsequent (statements) Thus, they hold that puruga (or the soul)
18 all pervading, devoid of attributes, mere consciousness, isolated
(from prakri1) by nature, non attached like a lotus leaf! and imactrve
Then again, they maintam also that prakria 1s an agent through ite
mere proximity to purugs, and that through the super mnposition of
nescience that very same (puruga) comes to have the attributes of
‘beng an agent’, ‘bemg an enjoyer’ and so on, to be afflicted by the
three kmds of museries,? and to be subject to tranamigratory
emstence Again, they teach that the salvation of purusa proceeds
from the knowledge of prakyta and purusa Thus, a moltatude of
moonsistencies between prior and subsequent (statements) may be
found there
In the case under discussion, on the other hand, since in accordance
with the Smrti passages ‘‘‘ The evil doers, the deluded, and the vileat
men do not attam me,—they whose wisdom 1s destroyed by nescience
and who have resorted to demoniacal nature’”’’ (GIt& 7 15), ‘Know
ledge 18 enveloped by non knowledge, thereby beings are deluded’
1 Te yust as > lotus leaf 8 not wetted by water, so the soul ig not attached
to anythmg
4 ‘Viz phymeal, mental and elemental
22
[80 2 2 11
338 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 2 ]
(४8 615), १.५४ the end of many births, one who 16 possessed of
knowledge attams me”’ (Qité 719), ‘“ Those who attam me cross
over this miy&"’ (Gité 714), ‘Many, punfied by the penance of
knowledge come to attam my nature”’ (Gita 410), the causes of
bondage, as well as of salvation,—lberating the bound soul from ita
bondage, unprecedented, and characteruzzed by the attammoent of
His nature,—is well established, there 1s not even a ahadow of any
contradiction among prior and subsequent (stutements) Hence
it 1s estabhahed that there 18 no contradiction of the concordance of
the scriptural texta (with regard to Brahman) by the view of Kapula,
which 18 opposed to the Veda and 1s set forward by means of fallacious
reasoning
Here ends the section entitled “The mposability of arrange-
ment” (1)
COMPARISON
While Nimb&rka adduces two reasons as to why the Simkhya
doctrine 18 ‘inconsistent’, viz (1) oppositon to the Vedanta, (2)
internal contradictions,—others adduce only one, viz
Ram&nuja, Srikantha and Baladeva adduce the second,! Bhiskaro
adduces the first® Hence they do not attach any special meanng
to the particle “ca’’ in the siitra
Adhikarana2 The section entitled “The great
andthe long” (Sttras 11-17)
SUTRA 11
“FoR, JUST 48 THE (OBIGIN) OF THE GREAT AND THH LONG FROM
THH SHORT AND THE SPHERICAL (18 UNTENABLE) (SO EVERYTHING
18 UNTHNABLE IN THE VAISESIKA THEORY) ”
Vedanta-parijdta-saurabha
Since if they be possessed of parta, then there will result an
infinite regress , and. 1f without parta, then 1t will be mposstble for them.
2 88 2210 p 513 St B 229 pp 78 #, 25४2, AE B 229, p 61,
Parte 7and 8 GB 2210, p 96, Chap 2
Bh B 2210 p 112
(st 2 2 11
ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 380
to be the producer of other evolutes 1,—there 1s moonsistency ग
the origin of the bmary compounds from the atoms, and there 1s all
the more consistency 710 the origin of ternary compounds from these
(bmary compounds) Jake this, everything admitted by the main
{81188 of the atomic view 18 consistent
Vedanta -kaustubha
Apprehending the objection, vz Let pradbAna, not superm
tended by an mitelligent principle, be not the cause of the world,
but let the groups of atoms, under the control of the wish of the
Supreme Lord, be the cause of the world,—the author 1s now pointing
out the moonsistencies in the atomuc doctrine as well
The procedure of the atomusts is the following A substance
produces another substance, a quality another quality, and the pro
duction of the effect proceeds from three causes, viz the mberent,
the non mherent and efficient 8 , just as an effect, viz a piece of cloth, 1s
produced by the threads which are the inherent cause, by ther mutual
conjunction which 18 the non inherent cause, and by the shuttle, the
loom, the weaver and the rest, which are the efficient cause Like
wise, there are four kmds of atoms, distingwished as earth atoms,
water atoms, fire atoms and air atoms, and they are eternal, without
parts, possessed. of colour and the rest, and spherical m extension,
and remain without producmg effects at the tame of dissolution
At the tame of creation, the atoms become the mherent cause for the
production of the effect (viz the world), their conjunction, the non-
inherent cause, and the unseen principle » the efficient cause Thus,
through the wish of the Lord, first motion arises in the air-atoms, then
& conjunction (between them) and thereby an effect, viz a bmary
compound, arises from two atoms, a ternary compound arises from.
three binary compounds, a quaternary compound arises from four
ternary compotinds, and so on, and through this process, finally, the
great air arises and remaims trembling in space In the very same
manner, fire arises from the fire atoms and remama shining im the
form of earthly fire and 80 on In the very same manner, the great
1 O88 ed reads “parimina” mstead of “yartndma”,p 31
9 Samavdyin, asamavdyin, numnstia
*Ie the ment or demert attachmg to a mans conduct m ona utete of
exatence and the correspondimg reward or punixhment with which he 1s visited
m another
[st 2 2 11
340 VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]
ocean arses from the water atoms and remains flowing In the very
same manner, the great earth arises from the earth atoma and remams
immobile in the form of clay, stones and the rest Again, the qualities
of the effects arise from the qualities of the cause Justas the qualities
of a piece of cloth amse from the qualitaes of the thread,—a red cloth
bemg found to anse from red threads,—so the qualities of whitencas
and the hke, mbermg m the bmary compounds and the rest, arise
from the qualities of whiteness, etc mbhenng in the atoms Bat
the combination of two ample atoms, producing a bmary compound,
produces different measures, viz muinuteness and shortness, in the
binary compound, but do not produce spheriatty, the measure of the
emple atoms themselves,—because, then, there will result an mtense
fineness (on the part of the bmmary compound which 1t has not)
Smnilarly, at the tame of dissolution, too, through the wish of the
Lord, there 18 motion m the atoms, thereby the dissolution of ther
conjunction, thereby the dissolution of the bimary compounds and 80
on, and in this manner, finally, there 1s the dissolution of the earth
and the rest
‘hus view 1s being refuted here The particle “or’’ m the aphorism,
28 meant for unplying the aggregate (of defects m the atomic doctrine)
left unsaid The word ‘moonsistent’ 1s to be supplied from above
The phrase “from the short and the sphencal” 18 to be apphed by
dividing 16 17 a compatable manner Thuis beimg so, lke the doctrine
of the omgin of a short binary compound from two smple spherioal
atoms, and hke the doctrme of the ongin of the great and long ternary
compounds from the short (bmary compounds), everything else too,
maintained by them (viz the atomusta), 18 moonsstent—this 18 the
construction of the words of the aphorism
The sense 18 this The ompim of bimary compounds from atoms
18 impossible That bemg impossible, the omgm of the ternary com
pounds from the bmary compounds 18 all the more mposable In
exactly the same manner, whatever 1s mamtamed by the atomusts
18 simply inconsistent Thus, 16 1s observed that the parta, viz the
threads and the rest, produce a whole, viz a piece of cloth, only by
bemg conjomed (with one another) by means of their six sides which
are their own parts An atom, too, 18 established to have aix parts
through its connection with the mx quarters As haa been said
‘An atom has sx parts because of 108 senultaneous connection with the
mx (quarters)’ Hence, even the atoms must be productive of effects
[st 2 2 12
ADH 2} VEDANTA PARITATA SAURABHA 341
as possessed of parts indeed If they be so, then they themselves
will become effects hke the binary compounds because of possessing
parta And the parts of the atoms too,—oonjomed (with, one another)
by means of their stx sides which are their own parts, and eatabliahing
thet the atoms have parts,—must have parts, that parts, again,
farther parts and 80 on, and thus there must be an infinite regress
If the atoms be admutted to be without parts, then uf there be the
conjunction of even a hundred atoms which fill no space, there will
not be any extension different from that of a mangle atom, and hence
there will never be (different kinds of extensions lke) mmuteness,
shortness and the rest Thus, the omgin of the binary compounds
18 Impossible, 170. their absence, the ongm of the ternary compounds
18 impossible, and hence the origin of the world must be umpossible
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiskara
Interpretation different ‘They take ths sittra as constatutng
an adhikarana by itself, concerned with refutang the Vaifemka objec
tion, viz that the qualities of the cause must mhere 170 the effect
Hence if the intelligent Brahman be the cause of the world, then
the quality of intelligence must be found in the world But mnce this
18 not the case, He 18 not 178 cause! The answeris Or just 88 (there
18 the omgm of) big and long (ternary compounds) from minute and
short (bmary compounds) so there 1s the ongin of the non mntelligent
world from the intelligent Brahman 2
SOTRA 12
“EVEN IN BOTH WAYS THERE IS NO ACTION (ON THE PART OF THE
ATOMS), HENGE THHRH IS THE ABSHNOE OF THAT (VIZ CEHATION) ”
Vedanta-piarijita-saurabha
Because it 18 umpossaible for the unseen prmarple to mhere m the
atoms, 98 well as because 1t 1s mpossible for 1t, connected with the
1 Note that an exactly sumiar objection has been put forward and refuted
under Br Si 214-11 85106 there 18 no sense m repeating ib here As such
Nimbdrka's way of interpreting seems preferable
£8B 2211 pp 51819, Bh B 2211, pp 118 14
[so 2 2 12
342 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]
soul, to be the instigator of the motion of the atoms,—thus “even in
both ways” the first motion of the atoms 18 not possible ‘Hence
there 18 the absence”’ of the creation of the world through the successive
order of binary compounds and the rest, due to conjunction, which
again 18 due to the motion of the atoms
Vediainta-kaustubha
The author 18 elucidating the statement (made in the last aphorism),
viz Like the (ongm of) the great and the long, everything else, too,
maintained by them, 18 nconmstent
“Even 7 both ways’’, no motion 18 possible in the atoms at the
tame of creation ‘“‘Hence”,1e6 for this reason, viz on account of
the umpossibility of motion, “there 18 the absence of that”, 1 © of the
origin and the rest of the world through the successive order of binary
compounds, ternary compounds and so on, due to the conjuncthon
ofatoms The phrase “in both ways’? means Does the first motion
(of the atoms) amse by itself, or through the atoms? The first alter
native 18 not tenable, beng mmpossble Never does motion, ansing
by itself, proceed to brmg water mm a pitcher It cannot be said
also that 1t arises through a cause, because at that time (16 at the
tame of creation) there exist no human effort, vibration, umpact and
the rest (which might have been such ® cause) The second alter
native, too, 18 not tenable, because then the atoms must become
sentient, 1t beg umpossible for non sentaent atoms to be the wnstagator
of motion In the building of a palace and the hike, the stones and the
reat do not themselves act in conjunction with other works (connected
with the building)
Or 1, (1 1t be saad that) the motion which arises m the atoms at
that time 1s caused by the unseen principle, (we reply) There 1s
negation of motion “in erther way’’ ‘Thus, does the unseen prinaple
which causes the motion of the atoms inhere 17 the atoms, or in the
individual soul? ‘The first alternative 18 not tenable, because the
unseen principle, being originated by the good and evil deeds of the
individual souls, cannot reside in something non sentient, because
beung non senizent, 1t 18 not possible for the unforeseen principle to
be the cause of motion, because the performance of good and evil
1 An alternative explanation of the word ‘ Ubhayathd'
[st 2 2 13
ADE 2] VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA 343
deeds beng 1mposaible on the part of atoms, the unseen principle
must be necessarily admitted to be natural (to them), and in that case
there will result the omgin of motion at 8] 068 The second alter
native, too, 18 not tenable, because 1t 18 all the more mmposmble for
the unseen princrple, mhermg in the individual soul, to urge the
motion of the non sentient (atoms) ‘Thus, there 1s no motion “even
10 beth ways”
“Or 1 else no motion 18 possible, whether 1t be due to the dividual
soul, or due to the Lord Thus, does the dividual soul give mse to
the first motion through its own destiny (adpsta), or through 108 prox
mity, or through 1ta attribute of consciousness? ‘Not the first, because
of the above mentioned fault Not through ite proxmity also,
because the proxmmity of the individual soul to the atoms bemg eternal,
the consequence will be that 1t will ever give mse to the world Nor
even through consciousness, because of the absence of conscousness
then And motion does not proceed from the Lord as well Is the
Lord, according to your view, demgnated in the Veda or established
by inference and the rest* If 1t be said Demgnated in the Veda,
then have faith in the procedure mentioned by Scripture thus ‘Every
thing has that for its soul’ (Chand 6 8 7, etc ), ‘He became existence
and that’ (Tait 26), and bemg overwhelmed with the sentiment
of love for Him, be free from affiction,—what 1s the use of your
doctrine of atoms? If 1t be said Hstablished through mference and
the reat,—(we reply ) that 1t (viz imference) 18 not even established
has been proved above #
SUTRA 13
“(Tae VasEgikKA DOCTRINE IS UNTENABLE) ALSO ON ACCOUNT
OF THE ADMISSION OF THE RELATION OF INHEBENOH, ON ACCOUNT
OF AN INFINITH REGRESS (ARISING THEREFROM) RHCAUSE OF
SAMENESS '
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
“On account also of the admission of the relation of nherence,”’
the doctrine of atoms 18 not posaible, since just as 8 bmary compound
18 connected with 18 own cause by the relation of mherence, bemg
+ A thred alternative explanation of the word ‘Ubhayathad”
‘Vide VE 118
[st 2 2 18
344 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]
absolutely different therefrom, eo the relation of mnherence itaelf, too,
18 to be connected with the two related objects by another relataon
of inherencs, ris absolute difference (from the two related objects)
being the same, that, too, by another relaizon, and so on—thus there
will be an infimte regress
Vedinta-kaustubha
The phrase ‘on account of the absence of that’ 18 to be supplied
For this reason also, the orgm and the rest of the world 1 the
auocesarve order of the creatzon of binary compounds and the rest,
due to the conjunction of the atoms 18 not posmble Why? “On
account of the admission of the relation of mherence” Among
separable objects, there 1s & relation of conjunction,! as between &
rope and & pot Among inseparable objects, on the other hand,
there 18 ॐ relation of mherence,? just as © piece of cloth exsts m
the threads by the relation of inherence, a pot in the two pot sherds,
00 688 IN & cow and whiteness and the rest 17 & piece of cloth The
relation between objects which are causes and effects 18 just this
relation of inherence, snd this relation 18 proclasmed to be one, eternal,
and all pervading like the ether —on account of the admission of such
& relation of mherence—this 18 the sense
If it be asked What objection 1s there xf such a relation of m
herence be admittedi—(the author) reples ‘On account of an
infimte regress because of sameness’’ That 18, just as a bimary
compound, absolutely different from its mbherent cause (viz the
two mmple atoms), necessanly awaita a relatzon of mherence (for
bemg connected with them), 80 the relation of mherence iteelf, bemg
absolutely different from the two related objecta, 18 to be connected
with them by means of another relation of mherence,—“ because of
the samenesa”’ of absolute difference (1 © because there 18 absolute
difference equally in both the cases, also because what 18 rteelf unrelated
is never observed to be a relation)—that, too, by another relation of
mberence, and that, too, and so on, thus “on account of finite
regress’’, the atomic theory defeats rteelf
1 Samyoga 2 Samavdya
[st 22 1415
ADH 2] VEDANTA PARIJITA SAURABHA 845
SUTRA 14
“AND ON ACOOUNT OF THE EXISTHNOH (OF) BTBENAL (ACTIVITY
AND INACTIVITY) ALONE ”’
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
If the atoms be active by nature, there beng the exstence of
(eternal) activity, there will result eternal creation, otherwise there
will result eternal dissolution, and hence there 1s the absence of that
(viz, creation)
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this, too, the atomic theory 18 untenable Why? If the
atoms be admitted to be active by nature, then there bemg eternal
actayity alone, there cannot be dissolution. If, they be admutted
to be inactive by nature, there bemg eternal imactivity alone, the
absence of creation will necessarily result—this 18 the sense
COMPARISON
Raménuja, Srikantha and Baladeva
This 18 sutra 13 m the commentames of the first two Interpre
tation different, viz “(Lf the samaviya be admitted to be eternal,
the terms related by 20, viz ternary compounds, eto, 1e the world
too must be) eternal indeed, on account of the existence ie eternity
of the samavaya)’’ 1
SUTRA 15
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF (THH ATOMS) HAVING COLOUR AND 80 OF,
THH RHVERSE (VIEW WOULD FOLLOW), BEHOAUSH OF OBSERVA
TION *’
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
And on account of the atoms having colour and the rest in accord
ance with the respective effects, there must be non-eternity, which 18
the “‘reverse’’ of eternity, (on their part), since 0008 and the rest,
posseased of colour and so on, are observed to be non-eternal Other
wise, the effects must be devoid of colour, etc
18 B 2218 p 86 Part2, SK B 2218 p 75, Parta 7 and 8, GB
2214,p 107 Ghap 2
[st 2 2 16
346 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 2]
Vedanta-kaustubha
Since the effects are possessed of colour, etc, the atoms, too, are
admutted to be possessed of colour and so 07 1 ‘Thus, amoe the four
kinds of atoms are possessed of colour and 80 on, 16 possessed of
colour, taste, amell and touch,—non eternity, the “reverse”’ of eternity,
resulta, aa pota and the reat, possessed of colour and so on, are found
to be non eternal If they be not admitted to be possessed of colour
and the 1118, then the fact that the effects are possessed of colour and
80 on will come to be contradicted, and the imitial propostzon “Pos
sessed of parts and eternal’ too will come to be contradicted For
this reason too, there 18 the absence of that (viz creation),—this 18
the meaning of the particle “and” The sense 18 that an unseen
object cannot be determined mm accordance with whatis seen Hence
the cause of the world 18 to be understood mm accordance with Scrip
ture
SUTRA 16
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF FAULT IN BOTH WAYS”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
If the atoms be possessed of more numerous qualities,* then the
earth, water, fire and air will become similar If they be possessed.
of less numerous qualities,® then, too, all the different 008 of atoms
bemg connected with one quahty each, the earth and the rest too,
having qualities corresponding to their causes, must be connected
with one quahty each,—this ‘on account of fault m both ways”,
there 18 indeed the absence of that (viz creation)
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this reason also, the procedure admitted by the atomusts
18 not posable Why* Because whether the atoms be admitted to
be possessed of more numerous qualities, or to be possessed of less
numerous qualities, “im both ways’, too, there 1s fault Since the
1 An effect oan have no qualities which the cause has not
9 Te every kmd of atoms are possessed of the five qualitues of colour and
the rest
ॐ Te each be posseased of 1ts peculiar qualities
[80 2 2 16
ALDH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 347
qualities of the effect are due to the quahties of the cause, all the
qualities of the cause, euch 88 colour, taste and the rest, must attach
to all the effects As ९ result, there must be smell and taste m fire,
colour, taste and smell 11 air, and the grossneas on the part of the atoms,
since the earth, which has the most numerous qualities, 18 observed.
to be gross If they be possessed of less numerous qualities, then
all must have one quality each If this be so, then there must be
touch 77. fire, colour and touch in water, colour, touch and taste in
earth, because, those particular qualities are absent from those
pertioular atoms Otherwise, there will result everything every
where
Tf 1t be argued that the earth 1s observed to be possessed of
colour, taste, smell and touch, water to be endowed with the attributes
of colour, taste and touch, the fire to be posseased of colour and touch,
and the arr 18 to be possessed of touch Corresponding to these qua
1०68, some atoms are supposed to be possessed of more numerous
quahties, others less numerous Hence the above objection cannot
be raised,—
(We reply ) No, for 10 that case, too, those that have more
numerous qualitaes will be deprived of their atomimty+ In the case
in hand, on the other hand, there 18 no fault whatsoever, snoe the
world has the ommscient and omnipotent Lord of all as its matenal
006
COMPARISON
Raimgnuja, Srikantha and Baladeva
This 18 sutra 16 in the commentanes of the first two
Interpretation different—viz an eluadation of the previous
siitra, viz “Because there 18 fault m both ways’’, 1e either if the
atoms be possessed of colour, etc , or if they be not On the first,
they cannot be eternal, on the second, their effects cannot be pos
sessed of colour and the reat ४
‡ Since mersase 770. qualities cannot take place unless there is & amnultaneous
INCreeass I ZS
9 त B 2215, pp 8687, Part 2 SK B 2215 p 77, Parte 7 and 8,
GB 2216,p 107, Chap 9
[80 2 2 17-18
948 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA aDH 3]
SUTRA 17
“AND BHOAUSE OF NON ACOEPTANOE, (THERE MUST BH AR)
ABSOLUTE DISREGARD (FOR THE ATOMIO THHORY) ”
Vedainta-parijaita-saurabha
Because of the rejection of atomism by the wise, “an absolute
disregard.” for 1t 18 to be shown by those who are desirous of salvation
Veddanta-kaustubha
Certam portions,—suoh as the doctrine of a pre existent cause and
the rest,—of the doctrme of the causality of pradh&na, though rejected
on the ground of 18 opposition to Serpture and reasoning, has been
accepted by those who are versed in the Veda But “because of the
non acceptance”, 16 rejection, by the wise, m toto, of the doctrine
of the causality of the atoms, mmagined by the Vaisesikas, because of
108 opposition to reasoning, and because of ita opposition to the Veda,
“there 18 an absolute disregard”,—ie the doctrme of the causality
of atoms 1s to be disregarded by those who wish for the highest
Hence 10 18 established that there 18 no contradiction of the
doctrine of the causality of Brahman by the doctrine of the causality
of atoms which 18 to be rejected from a distance
Here ends the section entitled “The great and the long” (2)
Adhikaranas 3 The section entitled “The
aggregate (Sitras 18-27)
SUTRA 18
“EVEN If THE AGGREGATE HAVING TWO CAUSES (BE ADMITTED),
(THERE IS) THH NON BSTABLISHMENT OF THAT (VIZ OF THE
AGGREGATES) ”
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
The author 1s refutang the view of Sugata 1
Kiven if the aggregates of the element and the elemental, the
mind and the mental be admutted, still then, on account of the non
1 Ie of the Buddhists
[80 2 2 18
ADH 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 349
sentence of the objects aggregated, as well as on account of non
admuasion of another cause of the aggregation, the aggregates are not
poasible
Vedanta-kaustubha
Kapila, the mamtamer of the doctrme of pre existing effeota,
holds that pradh&na, not having Brahman for ita soul, 28 the cause
of the world He has been refuted by reason of mamtammg what 18
opposed to the doctrine of the causality of Brahman and the Vedic
doctmme Kanda, inferior even to him im intelligence and the
maintainer of the doctrine of non existing effects, holds the cause of
the world to be of various kinds 1, and hence he has been refuted by
reason of mamtammg what 28 opposed to the ‘great’? Now, the
doctrme of the Buddhists, mferior to that even, 1s being refuted, on
account of 108 similarity to that ®
The doctrme taught by the Buddha being interpreted differently,
four views were propounded by his four classes of 0801168 These
followers are called, (1) श्यावा, (2) Sautrintuke, (8) Yogictra,
and (4) Midhyamika Among these, the first two mamtain the
realty of external objects Among them, agam, the first mamtais
that external objecta are directly percervable According to hm,
external 0016008, hke pots and the rest, are knowable by the evidence
of direct perception The other maintams that external objects are
inferrible through cognitions According to him, external objects hike
pots and rest, which are not directly perceived, are wnferred through
coguttions, produced m the forms of potas and so on and directly
percerved The third mamtamas the reality of cognitions alone without
any substratum He holds that external objecta are lke dreams
All of them maintam that the objects admitted by them are momen
tary The view of the fourth 1s that everything 18 void He holds
that the contanuous stream of cognitions, freed from object and
subject forms, persista from moment to moment of the bams of past
impressions, like a lamp in 8 place sheltered from wind But when
past impressions are destroyed, 16 attams a complete extinction hke
the lamp itself, this attamment of non-existence 18 salvation The
others, on the other hand, hold that there 18 no mterruption m the
1 Viz the four kmds of atoms 2 Vide Br Si 2217
9 The Buddhusts too admit the aggregainon of atoms like the Vardenkas
80 2 2 18
350 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 3]
contmuous stream of cognitiong Among them, the views of the
# ०8088 and the Madhyamika will be refuted Inter But in this
section, the views of the realists, viz the Vaibh&saikas and the
Sautrintikas, are bemg refuted together
Thus, they speak of five groups,! viz colour, cognition, feeling,
name and ympression 2 Among these, the colour group conmsts 11) the
four elementa, lke the earth and the rest, and the elemental m the
form of the body, sense organs, and sense objects Among these, the
earth atoms, possessed of colour, taste, smell and touch, and hard by
nature, are aggregated into the form of the earth, the water atoms,
possessed of colour, taste and smell, and viscid by nature, are
aggregated into the form of water, the fire atoms, possessed of colour
and touch, and hot by nature, are aggregated mto the form of fire,
likewise the air atoms, possessed of touch and mobule by nature, are
aggregated into the form of air, and the four elements, like the earth
and the rest, are aggregated into the form of body, sense organs and
Rense-objects In this way, these four kmds of momentary atoms are
held to be the cause of the aggregation of the elements and the
elemental The colour group, consisting of the elements and the
elemental and due to the atoms, 1s the external aggregate The
cognition group consists m a stream of cognitions like the cognition
of a pot, cognition of a piece of cloth, and so on, based on the internal
cognition of the ‘I’, and subsistmg unmterruptedly This alone 18
the agent, the enjoyer and the soul, and from xt alone all ordinary
practical transactions proceed The feelmg group consista in pleasur
able or painful experiences The name group consists m the cognition
of secondary marks, eg (in the cogmtion ) ‘a cow possessed of
auspiciousness’, the cow 1s distinguished by the secondary mark of
auspiciousness ‘The impression group consists mm the mental qualities
of attachment, aversion, delusion, pnde, maloe, fear, grief, depression
and 80 on These last four kinds of groups are said to be the mmd
and the mental Among these, the cognition group 18 said to be the
mind. or the soul, others mental , and thus they are mternally aggregated
im such a way as to be the substratum of ordimary practical transactions
This 18 the internal aggregate, due to the four groups, begmnng
with the cognition group The soul and the ether, other than the
1 Skandha
> Ripa, vyfidna vedand, sanyAd and samebira
(at 2 2 19
ADH 3] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 361
two aggregates, are non existent by nature These two aggregates
make the course of mundane existence possible, and practical hfe
bemg thus made posable, there 18 no need, 1t 18 thought, of an eternal
soul
(Correct conclusion ) With regard to1t wereply Evenif there be
the admission, mn the above way, of aggregates,1e of groups having
two causes, still then “there 18 the non establishment of that’”’,—ie
establshment “of that’, viz of that which has two causes, too, 1s
mdeed impossible The 86288 18 because the spontaneous aggregation
of non sentient objects, mutually mdependent, 18 not posable, and.
also because of ther momentarimess, the aggregate of the elements
and the elemental, as well as the aggregate of the mmd and the mental,
are not possible Further, because of the non admismon of a
permanent enjoyer, of a sentient controllear—one who brings about the
aggregation, of an omniscient and universal Lord, as well as because
of the consequence of the world becoming super sensible by reason of
the super sensibleness of the atoms themselves, the course of mundane
existence must disappear The sense 18 that this view 19 faulty,
since it rejects Brahman, taught by the beginnmgleas Veda, 81705 10
admuita the aggregates of atoms, unseen and unheard, and since a
cause for the aggregation 18 impossible
SUTRA 19
“IT? IT BH OBJBOTED THAT (ON ACCOUNT OF THE MUTUAL CAUSALITY
(OF NHSCIENOE AND THE REST), (THE AGGREGATION) 78 POSSIBLE,
(WE BEPLY ) NO, 21004089 OF (THEIR) NOT BEING THE OAUSH OF
AGGEBGATION "°
Vedinta-padrijaita-saurabha
It cannot also be that no account of the mutual causahty of
0980808, past Impressions, cognition, name and form, six supports 1
and the rest, the aggregation and the reat, are possible,—for they, too,
are not the causes of aggregation
1 Amdyd samskdra, vyfidna nima-ripa, gaddyaiana, etc For explanation,
see below V K
[so 2 2 19
352 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 3]
Veddinta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected. In sprite of the non admussion of a sentient and
omniscient bemg as bringing about the aggregation, no harm 18 done,
gince our View admita the mutual causality of nescience and the rest
That which goes towards the effect aa 108 cause 1s ‘pratyaya’,ie the
cause, the state of that, no account of that,! all aggregation and the
rest become possible Thus, nescience and the rest, fanotsonmg
from all eternity, are admyrtted to be the causes of the contmuous
stream of cognitions Among these, the word ‘nescience’ 18 denotative
of error, such as, taking the non permanent as permanent, taking
what 18 not the way (to salvation) as the way and 80 00 Through it
past impressions, consisting 1 attachment and so on to sense objecta
hke colour and the like, arises It1s through thus that activity springs
forth when occasion amses Activity conmsts mm good and bad deeds,
m, accordance with the declaration by the Buddha ‘There 18 action,
there 18 result’ ‘Through this alone cognition arises Thence the
four (elements like) the earth and the rest, the cause of the aggregate,
viz the body, arise, and that very thmg 18 said to be name because
of bemg the substratum of name From them amses the body, from
7 the mx supports, viz the five organs of knowledge and the mmd,
from them. touch, from 2४ feelmg, viz pleasure, pam and the rest,
from 1t nescience and the reat once more Thus, the objects revolving
unceasingly lke water wheels, aggregation 78 posable therefrom
Hence, everything 1n our doctrine 18 indeed conmstent,—
(We reply) “no” Why? “Because of (ther) not bemg the
cause of aggregation,” 1 6 because nesmence and the rest are not the
causes of aggregation, for 1b can by no means be said that nescence,
consisting in the error of taking a person at & distance to be a post, 18
the cause of the aggregation of the already existing person Lakewine,
attachment and the rest too, caused by 1t (viz nescience), are not the
cause of aggregation.
OOMPARISON
Samkara and Baladeva
Readmg different, viz “Itaretara pratyayatvid 1t1 cen notpatta
mitra nimrttatvat’’ Interpretation different acoordmgly viz “If
16 be said that because of the mutual causality (of nescience and the
1 Tins explams the compound “pratyayateds >
[80 2 2 20
ADH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 63
rest), (aggregation 1s possible), (we reply ) no, because of (their) bemg
the causes of the omgin only (of the 1mmediately subsequent effects,
and not of aggregation) ˆ 7
Bhaskara
Reading slightly different, viz ‘“Itaretara pratyaya manyat
vat ie
SUTRA 20
“Agp BECAUSE OF THE ORSSATION OF THE PRIOR OWN THE
PRODUCTION OF THE SUBSEQUENT °
Vedanta-pirijata-saurabha
For this reason, too, this doctrme 18 not reasonable,—ance “on
the production of the subsequent”, thare resulta the destruction of the
prior, it bemg momentary
Vedanta-kaustubha
Tf 1b be argued that as the prior 18 the cause of the production of
the later, so our doctrme 1s conmstent,—{we reply ) no “Because
of the cessation of the prior on the production of the subsequent "°
In ordmary life, causality 1s observed to belong only to an existent
lump of clay, the prior, at the time of the production of a pot, the
subsequent But on your view, on account of the momentarmess of
all existing objects, the prior moment 18 destroyed and cannot, there
fore, be the cause of the subsequent moment Here a momentary
existence 18 said to be ‘moment’ Now, to begm with, doas the pror
moment of the pot 8 give mse to the subsequent effect which ests
at the same time, or as iteelf unompmated, or as itself destroyed ¢
The first alternative 18 not tenable, because that (viz the effect) also
(will give rise to) another effect existing at the same tame, that,
toc, to another and so on, and thus everythmg will last only for a
moment sunultaneously, and because the conventional distmmction
between the pmor and the subsequent will come to an end The
18B 2219 p 587 GB 2219, pp 118 114, Chap 2
2 Bh B 2.219, p 117
9 Ie the pmor momentary existence pot
23
[st 2 2 @
354 VEDANTA PARIJATA-SAURABHA ADH 3]
second alternatzve, 400, 18 not tenable, that bemg impossible More
over, to say that (the cause) 1s unonginated 1s to umply nothing but
108 non-existence, and if 10 (viz non existence) be a cause, then by
reason of the absence of obstructions, there may be the omgm of
everythmg everywhere The third alternative, too, 1s not tenable
because the prior bemg destroyed, there will be agam the origm of
everythmg everywhere It cannot be said that the prior momentary
existence persista up to the omgin of the subsequent momentary
existence, for then, 1ts momentamness will come to be abandoned
SUTRA 21
“(LF It BE ADMITTED THAT THE EFFHOT ORIGINATES) WHEN (THE
OAUSE IS) NOT RXISTENT, (THEN THERE IS) THE OONTRADIOTION OF
THE INTTIAL PROPOSITION, OTHBRWISH THERE IS SIMULTANEOUS
wag ”’
Veddnta-parijaita-saurabha
On the admuiseion of the orgin of the effect when the cause 1s non
existent, there must result the “contradiction of the muztial propos
tion”, viz that there 18 the origin of cognitions from four causes, Viz
sense organs, hght, direction of the mind and sense objects On the
admission of the ongin of the effect when the cause 1s existent, there
must be the omgm of another momentary existence when the prior
momentary existence 1s still present, and thus there must be
“‘amultaneousness” according to your view, the mamtaimers of the
doctrine of momentarmess !
Vedanta-kaustubha
The author condemns the causeless origm of effects
If 1t be argued that let there be the production of the subsequent
(effect) without a cause, and this being so, the above objection cannot
be raused—then we reply If1t be admitted that there 8 the ong of
the effect even when the cause 1s non existent, then there must be the
“contradiction of the mutial propomtion” Thus, there must be the
“contradiction”, 16 abandonment, of your inztial proposition that
in the production of cogmtions, there are four causes, the maim
cause, viz the sense organs like the eyes and the rest, the auxhary
cause, viz light, the immediate cause, iz the direction of the mind,
[st 2 2 22
ADH 3] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 366
and the supporting cause, viz the sense objecta! Moreover, even if
the causeless origm of effect be admutted, the above mentzoned fault,
vis the orgin of everythmg everywhere, remains unavoidable If,
again, to avoid this difficulty, the case be admitted to be “otherwise”,
1 © 1£1t be admitted that the effect origmates when the cause 1s existent,
then there must be “mmultaneousness”,1e there must be sumulta-
neous existence of the cause and the effect That 1, the above
mentioned objection remainsinforce Thus, does the prior momentary
existence pot come to be the cause of another momentary existence
pot at the tre when 16 (the prior) iteelf exusta, or does 1 become the
cause of the subsequent moment,—which 18 bemg generated,—by
lasting tall the time of ita production? In exther case, there 1s simul
taneousness On the first alternative, all the momentary existences
will come to be perceived at the same time, and the conventional
distanction between the prior and the subsequent will come to an end
On the second alternative, their momentarmess will be abohshed,
and owing to the persistence of two momentary extences, there
must follow @ simultaneous perception of two momentary existences
in the same place
COMPARISON
Baladeva
The meaning of the phrase “pratiyfioparodhah” different, viz
contradiction of the initial proposition (viz that the world omgmates
from the skandhas) 2
SUTRA 22
“(THERE 78) THE NON ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CONSCIOUS AND
UNCONSOIOUS DESTRUCTION ° ON ACCOUNT OF THE NON INTHRRUP
TION (OF THE STREAM OF COGNITIONS) ”
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
There 18 no possibility for the causal or causeless destruction,*
because there 18 no possibility of an imterruption of the contmnuous
series and because there 1s a recognition of the members of the series
i sahakdrin samanantara Glambana
* 8 2221,pp 116 16, Chap 2
: and aprah samkhyd
* For explanation, see below V K
80 2 2 22
356 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA. ADH 3]
Vedinta-kaustubha
Thus, first the (doctrine of) omgm, admitted by the opponents,
has been disposed of Now the (doctrime of) destruction too, admitted
by them, 18 bemg disposed of
The destruction which is preceded by an act of thought 1s
‘conscious destruction” , destruction not so preceded 18 “unconscious
destruction’’ These two kinds of destruction are admitted by them
Among these, the destruction of emsting objecta,—which 18 caused by
the blow of a hammer and the rest, which consiste of the termination
of a seTies of similar momentary existences, and which 1s percervable
and gross,—is 8810. to be preceded by an act of thought The destruc
tion of existent objects,—which 18 not percervable, subtle, causeless
and. takes place m a series of similar momentary existences at every
moment,—is said to be non preceded by an act of thought There 1s
the “non estabhshment’’, 1e wnpossbility, of these two kinds of
destruction with regard to the continuous series and the single members
of the series Why? “On account of the non mterruption of the
series’ ‘First, no causal destruction of the series 18 possible Thus,
1t bag admitted by you that there 1s the destruction, at every moment
of existing objects with regard to a prior member of the series, 1t 18
admitted that in spite of bemg destroyed, there 1s the ongin from 1t
of a subsequent (member) which 1s caused by 1t and 1s non exstent
indeed The sense 18 that m spite of a momentary member of the
series being destroyed, at that moment, by the blow of a hammer and.
the rest, the origm of a subsequent member 18 possible, no account of
the absence of umpedimenta, and thereby a subsequent series being
possible, the causal destruction of the 86168 18 not possible In the
cage under discussion, on the other hand, omgmation and destruction.
are said to be the different states of clay and the rest that are indeed.
existent But, on your view, the mterruption of the continuous series
18 not possible even by the blow of a hundred hammers at all tumes—
this 1s the sense
Moreover, 1f there be the destruction of the last member of the
series through © cause, then there cannot be properly the destruction
of others, too, without causes, and hence there must result the percep
tion of many [0008 m the place of one pot It cannot be said also
that they are subject to a causeless destruction, taking place at every
moment in 9 series of mmilar momentary existences, and as such the
[80 2 2 23
avy 3] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA 95'7
above objection cannot be raised,—for then such & destruction bemy
7088715 on the part of the last member of the series, a causal destruction
becomes meaningless It cannot be said also that there ४ the ongin
of e series of dissimilar momentary existences through (the blow of) a
hammer and the rest too, and as such the above objection cannot be
78960 ,-- 0609786 when the prior member 18 destroyed by a hammer
and so on, too, there reaultang the omgm of a subsequent one, simular
to xt, by reason of the absence of contrary circumstances, there 18 no
possibikty for 9 series of dissimilar existences, and because of the
absence of any reason for the ormgmation of a series of dissumilar
existences
A causeless destruction of the senes, too, 28 not possible, for then
the disappearance of the entire Universe Wil result
In the same manner, these two (viz the causeless and causal
destructions) ate not possible with regard to the angle mambera of the
series,—for if here the causeless destraction of partacular members
be admitted, then the destruction once more of the momentary
members by the hammer and. the rest will be imposable A causeless
destruction, too, cannot become the annihilator of exstent objects,
amnce single members of the series, like pots and the rest, are recognized 1
COMPARISON
Bhaskara
Reading different, viz “asambhavah” in place of “‘avicchedSt” >
SUTRA 23
“AND ON ACOOURT OF FAULT IN BOTH WAYS”
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
Because the series has no existence beyond the single members
of the series, and because single members themselves are momentary,
॥ ~ ` श | eg व
1 + © there can be no complete destruction of that wluch m, og when
a vessel of clay 18 smashed to preces, we stil] pereai\o and recognize the inaterial
viz olay which contunues to exist
° Bh B 2222, p 120
[80 2 2 23
358 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 3]
ther view, viz that salvation 18 the cessation of nescience, too, 8
inconastent
Vedainta-kaustubha
For this reason also, the Buddhistio view 18 inconmstent Why?
Because there 18 “fault” in ther view of salvation even “im both
ways ‘Thus, salvation 18 held by them te be the cessation of nescience
and the rest 18 thos (a. cessatzon) of the series or of the smgle members
of the series? Not the first, because as the semes has no existence
beyond the mngle members, 1t (viz the cessation of the series) 18
meapable of (bringing about) salvation Not the second, because the
single members are momentary
Moreover, 1s salvation, consisting in the cessation of nescence
and the rest, due to a cause or not! If the first,1e on the view
Salvation arises from the repeated practice of four fold truths, viz
the truth that there 1s a cause, the truth that there 1s cessation, the
truth that there 1s suffermg and the truth that there 18 ® path! The
truth that there 18 & cause means the knowledge, 1e ascertainment,
that everything has anongm The truth that there 18 cessation means
that everything 1s momentary The truth that there 18 suffermg
7168708 that everything 1s full of suffermg The truth that there 18 a
path means that everything 28 void, everything 18 soulleas,—on this
view, the cessation. of attachment and the rest being admitted to arise
from these, the initial propomtion, viz that there 18 a causeless destruc
tion, wsetaside If the second, the teaching of the means will become
futile And thus there 1s fault m both the ways
COMPARISON
Raminuja
This 18 sitra 22 in his commentary Interpretation different,
viz ‘Because there 1s fault im both ways’”’,1e the Buddhistic views
of ongmation ftom nothmg and passmg away mto nothing are both
open to objections *
Bhiskara
This siitra 1s not found m the commentary of Bh&skara
1 Samuddya mrodha, dubkha mdrga
a irr B 2222,p 08
[श 2 2 24
4DH 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 359
Srikantha
This 18 stitra 22 1n his commentary too His interpretation 1s also
very similar to that of R&iminuja, viz on the Buddhist view, the
origmated. effect 18 unreal, (since 1t passes away as soon as 16 arises),
also the effect arises from non existent cause (emcee the cause which 18
momentary 18 no more, when the effect comes to be) Hence the
Buddhist view 18 untenable 1
——
SUTRA 24
‘AND IN THE ETHER TOO, ON ACCOUNT OF THE NON DISTINCTION २
Vedanta-piarijata-saurabha
And the imitial proposition enunciated by them was that there
18 non-existence “in the ether’’,® and this 18 not reasonable, “on
account of (1ta) non distinction” from the earth and the rest
Vedainta-kaustubha
They maintain that the destruction of existing 0016608 which 18
preceded. by an act of thought, the destruction which is not preceded
by an act of thought, and the ether,—these three are non-entities,
and as such, non definable, causelesa and unreal Among thease, the
two kinds of destruction have been disposed of Incidentally, salva-
tion, consisting 17 the cessation of nescience, has been condemned
Now, the reverend author of the aphorisms, maintaming the demon-
strated conclumon of Sarnpture, 13 condemning the (doctrme of) the
non definableness of the ether, the remamung one
The mutual proposition of the non substantiality of the ether 18
not reasonable, “on account of the non distinction” of the ether,
mn point of substantiality, from the earth and the rest,—and just as
terrestrial ammmals move on the earth, and the acquatic animals m
water, 80 do the flying animals in the aky,—and also on account
of the scriptural declaration of the producbleness of the ether, 176
other positive entities,—this 18 indicated by the particle “and” (m
the stitra),—2m the passage “From him amse the vital breath, the
168K B 2222, p 86, Parts 7 and 8
2Ie the ether w 9 non entuty
[st 2 2 26 26
360 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 3]
mind, and all the sense organs, the ether, the air, the hght, water and
the earth, the supporter ofall” (Mund 213) Thesubstantzality of the
ether was approved by the Buddha as well, who said out of compassion
‘As long as there 1s the existence of the ether, and as long as there
18 the existence of the world, so long may there be the existence of
me, the destroyer of the suffermgs of the world ’
COMPARISON
a
Bhaskara
This 18 sitra 23 in Bhaakara! Interpretatuon of the word.
“avidesit” different, viz “from the same (scriptural text, viz Tait
21)” 1t 18 known that the ether hke the arr and the yest, arses from
the soul 2
SUTRA 25
“AND ON AGOOUNT OF REMEMBRANCE °
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
And on account of the recognition, viz “This 28 that’, this doctrme
18 untrue
Vedinta-kaustubha
For this too the doctrne of momentarmness 18 not reasonable
Why? “On account of remembrance”,1¢6 on account of the remem-
brance of an entaty, percerved by one Hence an eternal soul, the
experiencer, must of necessity be acknowledged, otherwise the cessation.
of all practical activities will result
SOTRA 26
^ (गषत GOAN BE NO ORIGINATION) FBOM THE NON EXISTENT,
BECAUSE OF NON OBSERVATION '
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
An entity does not amse from a non entity, “‘on account of non-
observation”
1 Wrrtten as sutra 2 2 24 in conformity with Samkara a number
> Bh B 2223,p 121
[80 2 2 27
ADH 3] VEDANTA-PABIJATA SAURABHA 361
Vedadnta-kaustubha
It 18 assumed. by the Buddhists that there 1s the omgm of an
entity from a non-entity This 1s not reasonable Why? Because
the ongin of potas and the rest from non existent olay, eto 1 never
observed,—on the contrary, their omgm from emstent clay and the
rest alone 1s observed
COMPARISON
Srikantha and Baladeva
This 1s siitra 25 in the commentary of Srtkantha He begins ®
new adhikarana here, ending with the next siitra, concerned with the
refutation of the Sautrantaka school of the reahst Buddhista
According to him, the preceding siitras are concerned with the
refutation of the Vaibhiaka 80100} only But Nimbérka refutes
these two schools together
Baladeva also takes this sfitra as concerned speaally with the
refutation of the Sautrantaka school, though he does not begin a new
adhikarana 8006 he takes the next siltra to be refermng to both the
schools equally
They mterpret the stitra in the same manner, viz (‘'There 15 no
origin of things from) the non exstent, on account of non perception ”
That 1s, the Sautrantika view that an object 1s mwferred from the
impressions left on our mind by it 1s absurd, for a momentary, and as
such & non existent, something cannot produce any umpressions 2
SOTRA 27
“AND THUS (THERE WILL BE) ACCOMPLISHMENT ON THE PART OF
THE INACTIVE AS WELL"
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
Otherwise, there may be the “accom ° of ends hke
knowledge and the rest on the part of one who has not resorted to
any means
18K B 2225,p 09, Parta 7and8,@B 2226,p 122, Ohap 2
[80 2 2 28
362 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4
Vedinta-kaustubha
Moreover, just as 1t 18 admitted by you that there 18 the ongm
of entity from non entity, so there will result the “accomplishment”
of the demred for effects, through the more non existence of implementa,
even “on the part of the mactive”,1e on the part of those who have
1809060 the implements leading to their demred ends But there 18
never any attamment of knowledge and the rest by one who 18 Inactive,
and > perpetual relgious student, leadmg a hfe of chastaty! and
unmarried, never gets a son Hence, 1४ 1s established that the
demonstrated conclusion of Scripture 18 not contradicted by the views
of the Vaibhimkas and the Sautrintikas, based on a mere semblance
of (and not real) reason
Here ends the section entitled ‘‘ The aggregate ”’ (8)
Adhikarana 4 The section entitled ‘“Percep
tion” (Sutras 28-81)
SUTRA 28
“(THBRE 18) NO NON EXISTHNOH (OF EXTERNAL OBJECTS), ON
ACOOUNT OF PHROBPTION ”’
Vedainta-parijaita-saurabha
There 18 “no non existence” of external objecta as held by the
Taintainers of the reality of consciousness alone, but they are, indeed,
existent Why? “Qn account of perception ”
Vedainta-kaustubha
Now, the view of the Yogtic&ra 1s being disposed of
The Yogi&icira Buddhist, the mamtamer of the reality of
consciousness alone, holds that those objecta which are other than
consciousness are all nonexstent Thus, to think that manifold
external objects exist is an error There are only manifold cognitions
which are momentary, variegated, perceptible and have definite forms
Only cognitions lke ‘blue’, ‘yellow’, which have definite forms, are
revealed (directly to the mmd) It must be admitted certamly even
by the maintamers of the reality of external objects that the cognitions
arising from the contact of sense organs with those particular objects
1 Narsfhika
[8 2 2 28
ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 363
have forms of those objecta respectively If this be so, then all
practical transactions being possible through those forms alone, what
18 the use of umagining external objecta? It (viz a cognition) bemg
self manifesting like a lamp, 18 directly perceived If what 1s non
percetved be cognized, then there will be non distinction between one’s
own cognitions and the cogtition of others But there 18 1058
a distinction (between them) A man acta or reframs from acting on
the basis of his own cognitions ‘This has been declared by Viprabhikeu
as well thus ‘There is no understanding of the meanmg of what 18
non percerved The cognitive self, though non divided, 18 yet looked.
upon by men of perverted understanding to be possessed of the
differences of object percerved, the percerver and consciousness ’
Thus, the object form 1s the object to be known, the percerver form 18
the act of knowledge, and his consciousness 1s the result, and thus
these three are 1magined in one and the same process of conamousness
Hence there are no external objecta
For this reason also (there are no external objecta—viz) On
account of being uniformly perceived together, there 18 no difference
between ‘blue’ and 1t8 cognition Whenever there 1s the cognition of
blue, blue, too, 18 cognized at the very same moment Hence, there 18
no difference between. these two
For this reason, too, (there are no external objecta, viz ) The
cognitions in our waking state are devoid of ( © do not correspond to)
external objects, because they are mere cognitions, like the dream
cognitions and the rest
If 1t be asked How can there be a variety of cognitions im the
absence of external 0016008 1 We reply owing to the vanety of the
past impressions The vanety (of cognitions) 18 explicable by reagon.
of the fact that the cognitions and the past impressions stand m the
relation of mutual causes and effects, hke the seed and the shoot
(Correct conclumon) On this suggestion, we reply The non
existence of external objects 18 not possible Why? “On account of
perception,”’ 16 because of the direct perception of external objects,
other than cognitions Although the idrvidual soul, having the
stated marks, 1s eternal knowledge by nature and 2४8 attribute of
knowledge, too, 18 indeed eternal like the ray of the sun, yet mnoe
it haa its knowledge veiled by 76801608 due to the begmningless m&yé,1
1 Ile व्व or matter
[st 2 2 20
26४ VEDANTA PARLIATA SAURABHA ADH 4]
1# errs 11 cogmizing objects in birth after birth, na well as m one birth
even And 1t knows once more the sun and the rest, installed by the
Highest Self, as well & the objects collected by 108 father and fore
fathers, which are all already existent, from the surrounding company
of people The sense 18 that, henco, therd 18 no non-existence of the
0016608 which are different from knowledge, the sun and the moon,
fire, mountain, the carth, water, cow, horse and the rest bemg
established on the ground of direct perception
The argument,—viz It 18 to be admitted certamly even by
the mamtaimers of the reality of external objects that cognitions
anmng from the contact of sense organs with those particular objects
have the forms of those objecta respectively If this be so, then all
practical transactions being [00881016 through those forms alone, what
18 tho use of 1magining external objects !—21s not tenable, mance 17 the
absence of objects, the cognztiona of the objecta cannot have forme
similar to them ‘Thus, an external object is other than knowledge
and 1ts knowledge 18 other than 1t
The argument—viz_ that owing to their being uniformly perceived.
together, there 18 no difference between blue and 168 perception,—too,
18 not tenable, for there 8 an admussion of difference through this
very admission of a simultaneous perception 1
SUTRA 29
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF DISSIMILARITY, (THE WAKING COGNITIONE
ABE) NOT LIKE DEEAMS AND THE BEST ”’
Vediinta-parijata-saurabha
The baselessness of the cognitions of the walang state cannot be
established on the analogy of the dream cognitions and the rest, on
account of there bemg no parallelism between the two cases, as well
88 on account of dream consciousness too, having s basis
1 That ws to say that A and B are perceived together 18 to say that there
28 & difference between them Otherwise there is no sense 17 saying that A and.
B are porcerved together
[sa 2 2 30
ADH 4] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 966
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the argument, viz The cognitions m the waking state do not
correspond to external objects, because they are mere cognitions,
like the dream cognitions and the rest, we reply
Tt cannot be said that the cognitions m the waking state are
without a basis “lke dreams and the rest”, 16 hke the dream
cognitions and the illusory cognitions Why? “On account of
disamilanity,”1e because there 18 disaumulanty between the cognitions
m the waking state and the dream cognitions, as the former are due
to attentive sense organs, while the latter to inattentive sense-organs,
also because—as indicated by the particle “and” (m the stitra)—
even the dream cognitions have bases
SUTRA 30
“Tm EXISTHNGH (OF PAST IMPRESSIONS) NOT (POSSIBLE), ON
ACOOUNT OF NON PEROEPTION ”
Vediainta-pirijaita-saurabha
Moreover, the “existence” of past umpressions 18 admitted by
you i order that there may be varmety m knowledge, this w not
posmble, 8006 according to your view, external objecta are not
perceived.
Vedinta-kauetubha
Moreover, 1£ knowledge be without a basis, then ita varieties,
such as the knowledge of a pot, the knowledge of blue, the knowledge
of yellow and so on, are not possible = be said that past impressions
are the cause of the variety of knowledge,—{we reply) ‘“‘the existence”
of past impressions 1s not poamble on your view Why? “On account
of non-perception.”’,1e6 because of the non perception of the cause of
past impressions, or, because no such cause 18 possible on your view
The direct perception of external objects 1s the cause of past
impressions, and that is not possible in your case, owing to your
non admission of external objecta
fst 2 2 3)
366 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 4]
COMPARISON
R&mnuja and Srikantha
This 1s siitra 20 in their commentanes Interpretation slightly
different, viz “The emstence (of cognition devoid of corresponding
thmgs) 1s not (possible), because of non perception” >
मी 1 रि
SUTRA 31
“Ont ACCOUNT OF MOMENTARINESS ”’
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
There 18 no existence of past impressions, “on account of the
momentariness’’ of their substratum on your view
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this reason, too, the existence of past impresmons 28 not
possible Why? “On account of the momentarmess” of their sub
stratum, the receptacle consciousness,* viz the ‘I’, as well as of the
single members of the uninterrupted semes Hence, the variety of
knowledge 18 due to the variety of 0016008 Therefore, 11 18 estabbshed
that the settled conclusion of Sompture 18 not contradicted by the
Yogtotira view which 1s but a childish prattle
Here ends the section entztled “Perception” (4)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Baladeva
They add a “ca” at the end 8
1 अल B £229,p 109, Part 2,SK B 2229, pp 9708 Parts 7 and 8
The Vtffdna ekandha conmsta of vyfidnas or cognitions
of two Innds dlayo-wyfidna and pravriii-vyjfdna The former conmste of cogn
tions which refer to the ‘I the ego while the latter those that refer to the s0
called external 07100608
28.5 2281 p 6467, ५8 39331
[st 2 2 32
4DH 5] VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA 987
1801490 0]8, Bhdskara and Srikantha
This sutra 18 not found mn their commentaries
Adhikarana 6 The section entitled “Incon-
sistency inevery way” (3१४५८९४ $2)
SUTRA 32
“AnD BROAUSH OF THE INCONSISTHNOY (OF THE DOCTRINE OF A
UNIVERSAL VOID) IN EVERY Way ”’
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
The doctrine of void, too, 1s erroneous, because 10 1s moonmatent
“mm every way”, bemg opposed to the evidence of direct perception.
aid the reat
Vedinta-kaustubha
Now the doctrme of universal void, as held by the Midhyamukas,.
18 bemg disposed of
(The view 18 a8 follows ) All the objects mentioned m the sacred
works composed by the omniscient one (viz the Buddha), are mmply
for the sake of suiting the intellectual capacities of his disarples, but-
are not really existent, owmg to the umpoasibility of the origm and.
destruction (of thigs) The ong of entaty from non entity 1
mappropnate (And if an entity amses from another entity, the
question 18 ) Is the entaby which amses from another entity disamular
to the Jatter or mmular? If the first, then there will be the ongn of
everything everywhere If the second, then frurtlessness would result
hke the grinding of what has already been ground! Owing to auch
mexplicability of origin, destruction, too, 18 mexplicable 66708, the
doctmme of vod 1s to beaccepted Thus, salvation conmsta in attamme
a state of vo1d,—such isthe view ofthe Buddha And this1s perfectly
reasonable, smoe void 18 not proved by anything else, (but 18 self-
proved) The conventional distinctions of percerver and the object
percetved and 80 On are mere errors
1 Te on the first alternative a gold ring may arse from clay, on the second,
there 18 210 sense In producmg somethmg already exatent, gold (rmg) from gold.
[80 2 2 39
368 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 5]
With regard to 10 we reply The doctmne of universal void does
not stand to reason Why! 2609086 11 the mamtamer of the doctrme
of universal void be unreal, then there will result the reality of all, if
real, then there will result the abandonment of the initial proposition
“And on account of the mcoonsstency, in every way,” of the doctrme
of universal void, the view that everything 18 void 18 unreasonable,—
because the entire world 1s perceived to be true both by the disputant
and the respondent, because there 18 no proof of void, and because 1t
18 7 conflict with the Buddha’s doctrine, establishing the easience of
momentary objects The sense 18 that the view of the Midhyamuikas
who maintam that everything 18 void, who are unacquainted with the
process of origination and destruction, and who are just like an owl
not perceiving the sun by reason of defecitve eyesight, 1s erroneous
inevery way It 18 estabhshed, thus, that there 18 not even an odour
of contradiction in the view of Scripture
Here ends the section entitled “Inconsistency m every way”’ (5)
COMPARISON
Samkara
Interpretation different He takes 1t as a refutatzon of the
Buddhists doctrine m general, not particularly of the doctrme of
universal void He pomts out at the end of sitra 31 that the third
school of Buddhism, viz the doctrne of universal void, 18 set amde
by all evidence, and as such requires no special and separate
refutation +
Bhaskara
This stttra too 1s not found in his commentary He pointe out at
the end of siitre 29 (stitra 30 according to Nimb&rka) that the doctrine
of universal void 1s refuted through the refutation of the doctrine of
the sole reality of cognitions 2
1 Vide SB 22381 p 668
* Bh. B 2220 (wntten 88 2280 m conformity with Stmkara’s number)
ॐ 196
[st 2 2 98
ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 969
Adhikarana 6 The section entitled “Impossible
inone” (Sfitras 33-3 6)
SUTRA 33
“(Tam JAINA DOCTRINE IS) NOT (TENABLE), ON ACOOUNT OF THE
IMPOSSIBILITY (OF CONTRADICTORY ATTRIBUTES) IN ONH (AND
THE SAME THING) `
Vediainta-p&rijata-saurabha
The Jaimas ascribe contradictory atimbutes lke exstence and
non-existence and so on to all thmgs This does not stand to reason,
because the co existence of contradictory atiributes, like existence and
non-existence and the rest, 1s umpossible, lke that of shadow and
hght
Vedianta-kaustubha
The view of the Buddhists, who leave the hem of their lower
garment loose and untucked, has been disposed of Now the view of
the Jamas, the naked, are bemg disposed of
They hold that the mniverse comprises souls and non souls, and
18 Without a Lord They mamtam also that atoms are the causes
of the world They imagine couples of contradictory attributes, like
existence and non existence, in all the categories Thus, according to
them, there are seven categories, summing up all somptural teachings,
viz soul, non soul, mflux (of foreign matter 1710 the soul), (ris)
stoppage, freedom from decay, bondage and release 1
Among these, the souls are sentient, and endowed with the
attributes of knowledge, perception, happiness and strength Thus,
knowledge means the apprehension of the real nature of objects through
the nght discrimination between the souland the non soul Perception
means cognizing objects, bemg free from attachment and detachment
The souls in bondage have worldly happiness, while the freed souls
have the happmess which mberes 17. themselves Likewise
means proper endurance These souls are possessed of parta, and are
of the mze of the body Among them, some are souls m bondage,
some are freed souls, some are ever perfect The freed souls are
omniscient and possessed of unsurpassed happiness
1 Jiva, ajtva, कच्छ) samwara niryara, bandha and mokga
24
[80 2 2 88
270 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]
The non soul 1s the group of objecta to be enjoyed by the souls
It 18 divided mto ment, demerit, matter, tume and space! Thus,
merit 18 a special kind of substance, mfermble from proper actions
Demerit 1s the cause of the existence of the non freed Matter 28 8
substance posseased of colour, smell, taste and touch It 1s of two
kinds, viz atoms, and their aggregates The atoms are the causes
of the earth and the rest, and they are not of four kinds, as held by
the logimans, but are identical in nature ‘The distmotions of the
earth and the rest are due to the modifications of these atoms The
four fold elementa begmning with the earth, as well as the body,
the worlds and so on, are their aggregates ‘Time, on the other hand,
18 ॐ special kind of substance which 1s the cause of the conventional
distinctions of long, quick and fast and so on, and 18 atomic m form
Space 18 the absence of covermg It 1s of two kinds, vz worldly-
pace which 1s mundane, and non worldly space,? which 1s the abode of
the freed souls
Influx means the activity of the sense organs which causes 8 person
to know ॐ sense objects Or else, influx means karma which comphes
to,£1¢ follows after, pervadmg the agent (16 pertains to him)
Stoppage means that which stops 5 the activities of the sense
organs, 1e the stoppage of the sense organs, consisting m © deep
meditation
Hreedom from decay means that which destroys ® the prior-
accumulated sms, 16 austerities known from the teaching of the
Arhatas, consisting m not bathmg, not speaking, squatting on the
thighs with the lower legs crossed over each other,’ eating what 18 sprt
out from the mouth, mounting on heated stone, plucking out the
hairs on the head and so on
Bondage means karma, and 18 of eight 1068 Among these,
there are four destructive karmas,28—viz relatmg to the obscuration of
knowledge, relating to the mental blimdness of perception, relatmg to
delusion, and relating to what bmders °—which obstruct the attmbutes
of the souls, viz knowledge, perception, happmess and strength
9 Lokdbdéa and alokdbisa 8 Aérdvayah sh déraca
4 Afravah tt dérava 5 Samernots st samwvara
9 Nejarayatt itt Nirjara १ Virdeons
8 Ghd barma
[so 2 2 33
ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 871
And, there are four non destructave karmas,J—vyiz relating to the
knowable, relating to the name, relating to family descent and relating
to hfe,*—which are the causes of the body, ita sense of egoity, regard
and disregard for the happimess and the reat due thereto
On the cessation of bondage, there 18 salvation, or the manifestation.
of the natural and real nature of the soul through the grace of the ever-
perfect Arhatas
They have also a set of different categories, consistmg in five
ontological categories,® viz. the category of the soul, the category of
matter, the category of merit, the category of demertt and the oategory
of space * The term ontological category (astikfya) 1s denotative of
conventional objects occupymg many places (Ihe compound
° [ष्क 18 to be explamed as) a Karma dhiraya thus The soul
18 the category, and 80 on m all other cases too To all these, they
apply the system of seven paralogisms,® viz May be 10 18, may be 16
18 not, may be 17 1s not predicable, may be 10 16 and 1s not, may be rt 18
and 18 not predicable, may be 1# 18 not and 18 not predicable, may be
1 18, 16 18 not, and 18 not predicable? (The compound ‘Sapta bhangi
naya’ 18 to be explained thus ) The aggregate of the seven dialectacal
formula 18 ‘sapta bhangi,® rts reasonmg’ (sapta-bhang! naya) The
word ‘may’ (sy&t) 1s an mdeclinable represented by a verbal endmg,
and should be understood to have the meaning of ‘littleness’ Thus,
th 18 to be construed as—It exsts partly and does not exst partly,
andsoon The sense 18 this The whole 70888 of object, consisting of
substances and modifications 918 variable The form of the substance
being one, permanent and conceivable as existent, exstence, oneness,
permanence and the rest are justifiable in reference tort The modifica
tions are the particular states of the substance, having the forma
of pots, pieces of cloth and the rest And they being many,
1 Aghdt-barma.
4 Vedaniya, ndemka, gotrika, dyugka 3 Astikdya
५ Jivdsikdya, pudgaldsnkdya, adharmdshkdya, dkdddehkdya.
® Jivad ofecu ashkdyad oa ® Sapia bhafigi-nayo
१ Sydd ash, sydn ndsh, sydd avyakiavya, sydd asti oa कद on sydd ash
cdvyakiavyad ca, sydn ndsh codvyakiavyad oa sydd ast oa ndsh
¢ Here the ending ‘1' 18 m accordance with Pin 2417, SD EK 8&2l,
modified by the Vdrttika-slira of Kdiydyana 1666, “Akdrdniottarapado deiguh
adriyom jah” Vide B.M,p 648, vol 1
* Dravys and paryydya
[80 2 2 33
872 VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]
non permanent and conceivable as non existent, non existence, non
permanence and the rest are justifiable m reference to them
With regard to 1t we reply This cannot be said Why?
Because the sevenfold reasonmg, lke partly existent, partly
non-existent and the rest, 13 not possible “im one object” The
srmultaneous co existence of darkness and light 1s never seen 07
heard In the same manner, couples of contradictory attributes like
existence and non-existence and so on are mdeed impossible m
the same place
If xt be objected Your own view, too, admits couples of
contradictory attributes m one and the same substratum, eg im the
text “All this, venly, 18 Brahman” (Chand 3141), Unity 18
established, while m the texts ‘The Lord of matter and soul, the
Controller of the gunas” (Svet 616), “Two birds” (Mund 311,
Svet 46), plurahty 1s establshed,—{we reply ) No, because this view
18 not based on reasoning, since the real view can be determined, as
mutually non contradictory, through Scmpture alone Thus, 1t bemg
impossible for the enture universe, consisting of the sentient and the
non-sentzent, to be non different from Brahman by nature, it 18 non
different from Him only as having ita existence and activity under
His control (and not by nature), as indicated by the phrase ‘emanating
from Him’ and so on® But there 18 indeed a difference of nature
between the categories, viz the sentient, the non sentient and Brahman,
because the texta designating duality, too, are no less authomtative,—
just as leaves, flowers and the rest are different by nature from the
tree and are non different from 16 on account of having no separate
existence, and just as m spite of the difference of the sense organs
from the vital breath by nature, their non-difference from 1t, as being
under its control, + not mcompatable In the same manner, the
difference and non difference between the Universe and Brahman are
natural and established m Scripture and Smrta What contradiction
18 there? In the very same manner, the complementary passage
confirms the relation of difference non difference between the Universe
and Brahman The phrase ‘emanating from Him" (tajjSit&n) 28
denotaizve of the reason, (meaning) because 1t emanates from that
1 So that 1t might be controverted by reason
2 The text 18 “All this, verily, 18 Brahman, emanatmg from Him, dis
appearing into Him and breathmg m Him ° (Chand 2 14 1)
(st 2 2 34
ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 873
Supreme Cause (tajj&), disappears in Him (talla) and breathes, ie
acta in Him (tadana) The elision of the parta is m accordance with
Vedic use
Moreover, & single cause of the world bemg established by correct
evidence, the causality of a plurality of atoms does not stand to
reason, because that would involve unnecessary cumbrousnass and
also because causality 1s impossible on their parta, owimg to their
non sentence
Further, the one reality, knowable from the Veda, bemg the
giver of salvation, 1t 18 difficult for salvation to result from the grace
of the perfect souls, that bemg umposmble Does the grace of the
perfect souls depend on meditation ornot? Ifthe first, then, salvation
cannot arise through the meditation on one perfect soul among many
perfect souls of the same nature, for there will be the fault of du-
regarding many other equally perfect souls If there be meditation
on all, that would mvolve unnecessary complication If 1t be said
that there 18 one great (soul higher than the others), then you fall m
with a 16806 view On the second alternsizve, the consequence
would be a universal release Moreover, there bemg no evidence of
direct perception and the rest for the existence of perfect souls, 10 18
mm possible that salvation can result from their grace
SOTRA 34
“AND THUS (IF) THE SOUL (BE OF THE OF THE BODY) THER Is
NON ENTIRETY ”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
“Thus”, there must be mcompleteness on the part of the soul,
assumed to be of the suze of the body, when 1¢ attama a large body
Vedanta-kaustubha
Just as their view 18 open to the objection that contradictory
attmbutes are impossible on the part of one and the same substratum,
so their view that the soul 1s of the size of the body, too, 18 open to
+ Siddhae or semi diyme beings, supposed. to be of great purity and holiness
and characterized by the eight supernatural atimbutes
[st 2 2 85 36
374 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 6]
serious objections What objection? Lasten! When the soul, which
18 of the size of the body, having left the body of an ant, attains the
body of an elephant through the mfluence of 108 karmas, then
must be “non entsrety” on ita part, 18 16 would not be able to fill
up the whole of the elephant’s body And when the soul comes out
of the body of the elephant, and enters into a small body, 1t would fail
to be amall hike 7
SUTRA 35
“Nom ALSO IS THERE NON CONTRADICTION ON ACCOUNT OF
MODIFICATION, ON ACOOUNT OF CHANGE AND THH REST ”’
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
It cannot be said also that the soul 1s possessed of parts which are
subject to mcrease and decrease and hence there 1s no contradiction,
—for then there will result the faults of change and the rest (on the
part of the soul)
Vedinta-kaustubha
If 1t be said The soul, accordimg to us, 18 possessed of parts
There 1s aX. morement of rts parts in the body of an elephant, and
decrement ma small body Thus “on account of modification”,
there 18 no contradiction”,—(we reply ) This cannot be said Whyt
“On account of change and the rest,”’ 1e because there will then
result faults hke change and the rest If the soul be possessed of parts,
on your view, then 1t must be mutable like the body and the rest and
also non eternal,—-such and other faults would arise
SUTRA 36
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE PEBMANENOY OF THE TWO (PRECEDING
SIZHS OF THE SOUL) OWING TO THE FINAL (SIZE), THERE 78 NON
DISTINCTION (OF THE शद) ”
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
If xt be said We admit that the “final” mze of the soul 18 constant,
and hence the mitial and the intervening s1zes too must be so,—{we
Toply ) then, there must be “non distinction” everywhere, (and
[श 2 2 36
ADH. 6 | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 375
hence) the doctrime (that the soul 1s of the) mze of the body 1s set
aside
Vedanta-kaustubha
The ze as well as the real nature (which the soul attams) durmg
ita state of salvation, after the destruction of the final body, are
eternal At that tume there 18 no assumption of ® subtle or gross
body (by the soul), so there 18 no contraction orexpanmionofit Thus,
“on account of the permanency of the final” size, as well as of the real
nature (of the soul), the permanency of both the mitaal and mtervening
(mzes) too 18 meant by the Arhatas, and hence there must be “non
distinction” everywhere,—this 18 the sense In short, the soul must
have © permanent and constant size 10 9 gross body as well as 10 a
subtle body, in its state of bondage as well as m rts state of release,
and the doctrine that 10 18 of the mze of the body must be but a childish
prattle Hence, 16 18 established that our conclusion 18 not contradicted.
by the view of the naked (1e the Jamas), based on error
Here ends the section entitled “Impossible m one” (6)
COMPARISON
Baladeva
Interpretation different, viz “On account of the non-distmotion
of the final state, (viz salvation) (from the mundane state), both
bemg permanent” That 18, 00 the Jama view, there 18 no difference
between the state of release and the mundane state, because the
former 18, s0cording to them, & constant progress upward, or remaming
7 the alokikiéa Now, motion, whether in the world or upward 18
always Mundane, and no one can possibly feel any pleasure m the
state of constant motion, or 1n standing still m @ place without any
support Hence there 1s no difference between release and bondage
on this view 1
1 G.B 9 2 86, pp 145 146, Chap 3
[st 2 2 87
376 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7]
Adhikarana’? The section entitled “Paéupati”
(SSitras 37-41)
SUTRA 37
“(THE DOCTRINE) 07 THH LORD (I8 UNTENABLE), ON ACCOUNT OF
INOONSISTHNOY ”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
The Paéupata doctrine 1s to be rejected, because 1b 18 opposed to
the Veda, which establishes a non distinct efficent and matenal cause,
and because it un1tiates a false farth
Vedainta-kaustubha
Now, the Paéapata doctrine 18 being disposed of
The mamtamers of doctrines opposed to the Veda have been
refuted above The M&hefvaras, too, are such They are of four
Ionds, viz KSpBlas, Kaélimukhas, Pééupatas and Sarvas The
beams of ther doctrmes is the treatise composed by Padéupat
The ‘Paficidhya&yi’ + 1s celebrated to be composed by the great Lord
Pasupat: Himself Five categomes are mentioned there, viz cause,
supposed to be the maternal cause, the Lord the effiaent cause The
effect 18 mahat and the reat Concentrated meditation 1s stated mm
the passage, “Through the meditation on the Om kara once, one
should hold (one’s self)" Injunction consists m secret mtuals hke
three ablutions and the rest The end of suffermg 1s salvation
Among these, the Pisupatas and the Kap&las hold that dunng
ita state of bondage, the soul becomes (non-sentient) hke a stone
And the Sarvas hold that the freed soul 18 consciousness They have
minor treatises of ther own, demgnatig their mutual differences
These M&hesvaras, with their imteligence deluded by the Miy&
of the Lord, mamtam and practise, just as they hke—as the means
to the highest end—what 1s “opposed.” to the Veda and not practised
by the wise As the K&p&las say “He who knows the mx mudris,
he who 28 versed in the supreme mudré, he atiams nirvéna by
1 Or having five chapters
2 Kdrana, Kdryya Yoga, Vidht Duhkhdnia
fat 2 2 97
ADH 7 ]
VHDANTA KAUSTUBHA 877
meditating on humself as in the posture of bhagisana The necklace,
the gold ornament, the ear ring, head jewel, ashes, and the holy thread.
are said to be the sux mudris He whose body 18 marked with (mudris)
18 not re born on earth” and 80 00 Lukewise, the Kalamukhas hold.
“Qemg 9 skull (as the drmking vessel), besmearimg one’s self with the
ashes of a dead body, eating the flesh of such a body, carrying a heavy
stack, अपिण up a hquor jar, worshippmg the gods placed on it, and
the rest, 878 means to obtaming all demred results in thu world, as
well as in the next’? In the treatsse of the Sarvas, too, 16 18 8810
“A bracelet made of the Rudraiksa beads on the arm, matted hai on
the head, a skull, beamearig one’s self with ashes’’, and so on
Moreover, 1 18 clearly demonstrated m the Mah&bhirata in the
story of the M&tanga, distressed by the sharp words of a she 888 1
and so on, that 16 18 very difficult for a man of another caste to obtam
Brihmana hood even by means of penance accumulated through
thousands of years But they hold that 1 1s easly obtamable by a
man of 8 different caste thus “By merely entermg m the mittatory
ceremony, one becomes 8 Brihmana at once By understanding the
Kapals rte, a man becomes an ascetic”
(Correct conclusion ) With regard to this, we reply “Of the
Lord” and 80 on The term ‘no’ 1s to be supplied “Of the
1 The story of Mdtariga and the she ass 28 89 follows Once Mdianga who
was endowed with all qualiues and equal to a Brdimana by all means while
traveling on 9 swift chariot drawn by a young ass and 108 mother meroleasly
pierced the young ass mm the nose agamandagain Thereupon ite mother, bemg
much grieved, said to bum that such an act certainly behoved a parson who was
born of a Brdfiynana mother and a Oanddia father, but had he been the son of a
Brakmancs father bis act would bave been otherwise Much aggnoved at this
painful mformation, Mdianga determined to attam 2PrdAmana hood, left home
mmedately and engaged himself in a gsvere penance ‘Therefore Indra bemg
pleased personally appeared before lim to offer him a boon Mdianga asked
for Brdimana hood, which however Jndra deslined to grant by reason of the
fact that he waa the son of a Canddla In. spite of Indra’s straight denial,
Méaiga went on performmg sustereties for a hundred years, standmg on one
leg only Very much pleased, Indra appeared once again only to go back after
saying that 1b was mmpossible for a Cangdia to acquire Brdhmanea hood and that
Mdianga wes most unwise to undergo penance forit This tyme Aldiariga wend
on perfomming penance for © thousand years in the same way D.sappomnted
once more, he performed the severest penance by standing on one finger only
But in spite of this he was never able to attain his heart's demre, simply because
he was a Canddia by birth Vide MahS 13 1870, pp 85%, vol +
[st 2 2 38
378 VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7 |
Lord,” 16 the view of Pasupati 18 not justifiable Why? “On
account of moonmstency,’”’1e because of the moonsmstency 10. their
view by reason of eatabliahmg two causes 1 in direct contradiction to
the soriptural texts like “He thought ‘May I be many’” (Chand
623), ‘He became exstent and that’ (Tart 26), ‘All this has
that for ita soul’ (Chind 6 8 ¶, etc) Moreover, since the practices
hike meditation preceded by the pranava, beamearing one’s self with
the ashes of a corpse and so on, are mutually contradictory, their
View 18 indeed consistent
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiaiskara
This 18 siitra 34 170 Bhiakara’s Commentary They do not take
this adhikarans as a refutation of the Pidupata doctrine only, but of
the Sémkhya yoga as tell, in fact of all the doctrimes generally, which
maintam the Lord to be the efficient cause only and not the material
cause of the world 8
Srikaptha
He takes this adhikarana to be concerned with the refutation of
the doctrme of the Ekadeé! TSntrikas only or of those 89588 according
to whom the Lord 1s the effiaent cause only, while May& 1s the matenal
cause, dakti the instrument 3
SUTRA 38
“AWD ON ACCOUNT OF THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF BELATION ’’
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
“And on account of the umposaibility of relation” between
Pasupati, the mstigator who 18 ‘without a body, and pradhfna and the
rest, to be instigated, Pasupaita 18 not the cause of the world
1 Ie two causes of the world maternal and efficient, drfferent from each
other
8B 2287 p 566, Bh B 22 84 (written as 2237 m conformrty with
Samkarea's number), p 127
9 ई. B 28 37
[st 2 2 39
ADH 7] VEDINTA-KAUSTUBHA 370
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this reason, too, the doctrme of Paéupata 18 not justifiable
Why? A relation between Paéupati, the efficient cause, the mstigator
and pradhina and the rest, to be imstigated, must be admutted,—
and this 18 1mpossible Thus, the M&hesvaras are to be asked the
following Do you, srs, follow Scripture or follow what 1s observed f
If the first, then the stated conclusion, bemg opposed to Sompture,
must be rejected If the second, then 1t 1s observed that there 1s a
relation between potters and the rest only who are possessed of bodies,
and clay and so on Hence no relataon can be establshed between
Paéupata who 28 without a body and pradhfna and the rest, by you,
followmg what 1s obeerved Hence 1 being not posmble for > bodiless
एश to have any relation with pradhfina and the rest, to be ther
mstigetor and 80 on, he 1s not the osuse of the world
COMPARISON
Raimadnuja, Bhiskara and Srikantha
This siitra 18 not found in their commentaries
SUTRA 39
“AWD ON ACOOUNT OF THH IMPOSSIBILITY OF A SUBSTRATUM
([H A BODY) (ON THH PART OF THE LORD) "
Vedainta-pa4rijita-saurabha
“On account of the rmpossibility”’ of an eternal body—since 16 18
opposed to what 1s observed,—as well as of a non eternal one—smce
1 arises later—Paéupati 18 not the cause of the world
Vedinta-kaustubha
If it be argued Let him then have a body, and hence the above
objection cannot be raised—(the author) replles —
“The substratum” of all practical transactions 18 the body—
on acoount of the impossibility of that, their view 18 not jusiafiable
Thus, the body of Pasupaia cannot be eternal, because that 1s opposed.
to what 18 observed Otherwise the 2000468 of potters and the rest,
too, must become eternal Agaim, his body cannot be non eternal,
[श 2 2 40
880 VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAUBRABHA ADH 7]
because a non-eternal body 1s not possible on the part of the cause of
the world, because all the non-sternal objects arise later as effects,
and because Paéupati, the cause, 18 prior to everything 1
COMPARISON
Samkara
Interpretation different, viz “Because rulership (of pradhf&na)
and the rest 18 impossible (on the part of the Lord)” Thatis, pradhins
which 18 non perceived and devoid of colour and the rest, cannot be
ruled by the Lord, since 17 18 found that clay and the reat alone, which
are possessed of colour and so on, are ruled by potters, etc *
Rimanuja, Bhaiskara, Srikantha and Baladeva
Interpretation different, viz “Because rulership (of pradhfns)
18 not posalble (on the part of the Lord)” That 18, Pasupati, who 18
bodiless cannot be the ruler of the pradhina, for only embodied bemgs
like potters and the rest can be rulers $
SOTRA 40
“If ITBH ARGUED 4S LN THE OASE OF SENSE ORGANS, (WA REPLY )
NO, ON ACOOUNT OF ENJOYMENT AND THE BRST ”’
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
It 18 not possible to suppose that the Lord has sense organs and
body lke the individual soul, for there will result enjoyment and the
rest (on the part of the Lord)
Vedainta-kaustubha
If it be argued Just as the bodiless mdividual soul, existing from
all eternity, has a relation with subsequent sense organs and body,
due to preceding sense organs and body, 80 like 1t, Pasupati may have a
1 Ie non eternal objects arse after creation Hence Pasupat: who 28
present before creation cannot possess s non-eternal body
£8.58 2289,p 570 Seep 656 under Somkara
8 St B 32 86, % 118, Partl1,Bh B 9 235 (written as 2288), pp 127 128,
Sk B 2286 p 107, Parta 7and8 G.B 2239
(80 2 2 41
ADE 7 | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 981
relation with a body, and no objection can be ramed here,—({we
reply )no “On account of enjoyment and the 1650 ` ‘The sense 18
{118 If lke the individual soul, the Lord, too, has such a relation with
a body, then all the faults lke experiencing pleasure and pam, and
thereby bemg the agent of good or bad actions and the resi must
pertain to Him also
COMPARISON
Samkara and other
Interpretation different, viz “If1t be argued As in the case of
sense organs, (we reply ) no, on account of enjoyment and the rest”
That 18, 1f 1t be argued that the Lord rules over pradhfina m the same
way as the individual soul rules over its sense organs,—vwe point out
In that case the Lord Himself must undergo pleasure and pain 1
At the end of this siitra, Samkara gives an alternative explanation
of this and the immediately preceding siltras and this explanation
tales with that of Numb&rka
SUTRA 41
“(Tomek WILL RESULT ON THIS VIEW) FINITUDE OR NON
OMNISOLENOE *”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
If there be a connection between Him and the unseen prinaple,*
consisting m merit and the rest, then there must be “finttude” and
“non-omniscience”’ (on His part)
Vedanta-kaustubha
It cannot be said also What objection can there be 17 enjoyment
and the rest result on the part of the Lord? What can a mow flake
do when fallen on the sun §—for 1t 1s unreasonable On acoount of
performing good and bad deeds, due to 06806006 and the cause of
transmigratory exstence, and of undergomg them consequences,
there must of course result “finitude”’,1e hability to bemg created,
18B 2240, p 570, ल B 2287, p 119, Part 8, Bh. B 2286
(written as 2 3 99), p 128,S8k B 2237,p 108 Parts’ 7and8, GB 2240
8 Adreja.
[st 2 2 42
989 VEDANTA PARIJSTA SAURABHA ADH 8]
as well as “non-ommiscience” on the part of the Lord, otherwise the
individual soul, too, must cease to be subject to transmigratory
existence,—s0 much in brief Henoe, it 18 established that the
stated conclusion 1s not contradicted by the doctrine of the M&hesveras
Here ends the section entitled "एकप > (7)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhdskara
According to them, the particle “v&” means ‘or’ and not
‘and’ as held by Nimb&rke, Interpretation different, viz ‘‘(There
must be) erther finittude or non ommscience” That 1s, the Lord
must exther define the measure of the mdividual souls, pradhAna and
Humself, or not define them If He does, then they become finite,
11 he does not, then the Lord becomes non ommnuiscient 1
Adhikarana 8 The section entitled “Imposal
bility of origin” (Sfitras 42-483)
SOTRA 42
“ON ACCOUNT OF THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF OBIGIN ”’
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
Smoe the ongin of the world from Sakta without Puruga 1s
umposaible, the doctrme, too, which mamtainas 16 as the cause 15 not
valid
Vedanta-kaustubha
Now, the author 18 refuting, incidentally, the erroneous view of
the S&ktas, viz that Sakt: alone 1s the producer of the world
The particle ‘no’ 1s to be supphed.
Sakti 18 not the cause of the universe Why? Because the
origin of the unrverse from Sakia, without any connection with Poruga,
18 umpossible The consequence would be that the Saktss, bemg
independent of Puruga, would come to be percerved everywhere
18B 9341, 7 S71, Bh B 2287 (wntten as 2.2 40),p 128
[श 2 2 48
apg 8] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 383
Or else,1 because the omgin of the world 1s impossible, it एक
eternal, Sakt: cannot be ita cause, there bemg 70 proof that the world
18 something produced If 1t be said that the Veda 1s the proof—
(we reply ) Let then the cause of the world be Brahman who 18
estabhshed by the Veda ‘The doctrme of the causahty of Sakti
which 18 without any bas 28 to be rejected
COMPARISON
Samkara, Bhiskara and Srikantha
They take this adhikarana aa concerned with the refutation of the
Pafica-rétra system Thus, according to them this तिक means
On account of the impossibility of origm’’ That 28, the Pafice-réitra
doctrine holds that Samkargana (the individual soul) springs from
Vasudeva (the Highest self), Pradyamna (the mind) from Samkargans
and Amruddha (the principle of egoity) from Pradyumna, 18 not
tenable, for the mndividual soul, which 1s eternal, cannot spring from
the Highest soul 2
RamAnuja
Raéminuys also takes this adukarana as dealmg with the Pafica
rétra doctrme, but not refuting, but establishing, 11 Accordingly,
he takes this and the next stitra as laying down the prema facse
view, the rest the correct conclusion Interpretation ke Samkara
and the rest
SUTRA 43
“AND THE SHNSE ORGAN OF THE CREATION (18) NOT (POSSIBLE) °>
Vedinta-parijaita-saurabha
If 1t be said, there 18 & connectaon (between Sakti and Purnga,)—
(we reply ) No “sense organ”’ 1s possible on the part of Puruga at
that tame
1 An alternatuve explanatuon of the silira
£8.58 2242 pp 572%, Bh B 2238 (written as 2241),p 128, 8K B
2239,p 115 Parts 7 and 8
[st 2 2 44
ddd VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8]
Vedinta-kaustubha
(If 1+ be argued ) There w a creator helpmg Sakti, and the fact
{hat the world 18 somethimg produced, too, 1s inferred on the analogy
of what 18 directly percerved, hence the above objection cannot be
rained,—then (we reply ) No “sense organ” 1s posmble on the part
of the creator, since there 18 no sense organ prior to creataon In ita
absence, it 18 not possible for Purusa to be a helper Moreover, mnce
there 14 no mmularity of the ether and the rest with pots and so on,
the fact that the former are somethmg produced (like the latter}
18 by no means established The term “and” (in the sitra) umphes
that it there be Puruga as the creator, Sakta 18 no longer the cause
COMPARISON
Samkara, Bhaskara and Srikantha
Critiasm of the Pafica-ritra view contunued “(There oan be)
no (omgin) of the organ (viz the mind) from the agent (viz the
individual soul)’’ 1
Ramanuja
This 1s attra 40 in his commentary As poimted out above, he
takes this stitra as laying down 9 prima facie view against the Pafica
ritra doctrme Interpretation like Samkara and others 2
SUTRA 44
“Or Of THERE BE THH BXISTENCH OF INTELLIGHNOR AND 80 OX,
THERE IS NO DENIAL OF THAT”?
Vediainta-parijata-saurabha
If there be the existence of natural intelligence and so on (on. the
part of Saktz), what contradiction can there be in its being the cause
of the world? The doctrme of Sakti 1s set aside by iteelf through the
admission, of Brahman
1§B 2243, p 574 Bh B 2380 (wrrtten as 2243),p 129,8k B 22 40,
p 116 Parts 7 and 8
2&1 B 2240,p 116, Part?
{st 2 2 44
apH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 385
Vedainta-kaustubha
The term “or” has the meaning ‘but’ Salta 1s the abode of a
mass of natural attributes bke knowledge, strength and the rest,
yndependent by nature of anything else, and selfrelying “If there
be the exstence,’’1e admussion, “of knowledge and so on”, mn this
manner, on the other hand, then “there is no demial of that’”’,106 its
causality 18 not demed In this aphomam “And endowed with all
(attributes) `` (Br 8G 21 29), there 18 demgnated a Deity, knowable
through all the Vedintaa, and 1t 18 He thatis admitted by yon Hes
not the power (Saktn) of any one, He 1s the Highest Deity, denoted by
the word ‘Brahman’ and 80 on ‘The sense 18 that the dootrme of
Sait defeate iteelf
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhaskara
The criticism of the Pafica ritra doctrine contanued viz “(Even)
17 there be the existence of knowledge, there 18 no settang aside of that
(viz, of the above objection)” Thats, evenif be said that Samkargane
and the rest are not the mdividual soul and 80 on, but divme bemgs,
endowed. with supreme knowledge and the rest, stall then the objection.
stated before, रण्ड the umpossibility of origmation, remains in force 1
Ramanuja
This 18 sdtra 411m his commentary According to him this sitre
and the next set forth the correct conclumon agamst the above prima
fone view, and defend the Pafica ritra dootrme Thus, 1t means
“Tf (Samkaresana and the rest be) of the nature of knowledge and so
on (16 of the Highest Lord), there 18 no contradiction of that” That
18, the Pafica rétra dootmne 18 not that mdrvidual soul amses from the
Lord, the mind from the individual soul, and 80 on, but simply that the
Highest Lord, viz Vasudeva, out of kindness for people, abides in a
four fold form, so that He may he easily accessible to His devotees 9
Srikantha
This 18 siitra 41 2 018 commentary as well He takes 1 to be a
nme fae view, viz “If there be the assumption of intelhgence and
1 6 8 3244,pp 574, Bh B 22 40 (wntten 23 44), ए 129
४ §4.B 2241, pp 116 127, Part 2
25
[st 2 2 45
886 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 8]
80 on (1 68 of the forms of the mdividual soul and so on), there 18 no
contridiction of that’’ That 1s, the opponenta point out that they
do not hold that there 1s the ongin of the dividual soul and the reat,
but amply that Samkarsana and the reat assume the forms of the
individual soul, etc, 1e rule them Hence the above objection
cannot he raised 1
Baladeva
Interpretation different “If (the body of the Lord be of the)
nature of mntelhgence and the rest, there 18 no contradiction of that”
That 1, 1f the pruma facte objector pots out that although the Lord
cannot have & maternal body, yet He may have a non maternal body
म भन of knowledge and so on, then we reply that uf the Lord of
the Saktas be posseased of such a body, then we have no objection to
their view, श006 1) becomes identical with our doctrine of Brahman
SUTRA 45
“AWD ON ACOOUNT OF CONTRADIOTION °
Vedanta-piirijita-saurabha
And on account of beg opposed to Scmpture and Smrti, the
doctrine of Sakti 1s unauthoritative
Here ends the second quarter of the second chapter in the Vedanta-
pinjata saurabha, an mterpretation of the Sarirake-mimimes
texte, and composed by the reverend Nimb&rka
Vedanta-kaustubha
And because of bemmg opposed to the followmg sorptural and
Smrti texts ‘Person, verly, 18 all this’ (Svet $15), ‘Supreme 1s
His power, declared to be of manrfold, natural 18 the operation of
His knowledge and strength’ (Svet 68), ‘“I am the omgm of all,
everything onginates from me * ’ (Gité 10 8), and so on, the doctrine of
1 Sk B 2241,p 116, Parts 7 and 8
[st 2 2 45
ADH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 387
the causality of Sakti 1s not to be accepted by one who 1s demrous of
salvation Hence, it 18 established that the concordance of the
sonptural texts with regard to Brahman, Lord Krgna, the lord of all
and the soul of all, 8 not contradicted by anythmg whatsoever
Here ends the section entitled “Imposaibihty of omgm” (8)
Here ends the second quarter of the second chapter m the Vedanta-
kaustubhe, a commentary on the Sartraka mimims&, and composed.
by the reverend Srinrvaes, dwellmg under the lotus feet of the holy
Nunbérks, the teacher and founder of the sect of the venerable
Senotkuméra,
COMPARISON
Samkara
(प्रवद of the Pafica raétra doctrine concluded “(The Pafica-
ritre, doctrine 18 to be rejected), because 1t 18 full of (mner) contradio-
10708, abd (because 1t contams passages opposed to the Veda)” +
Ramanuja
Rught conclumon, m defence of the Pafica rétra doctrine, ends
here ‘‘(The above objection cannot be raised) on account of the
contradiction (1 © becasue the Pafica rétra doctrine itself controverta.
that the mdzvidual soul has an origin”’ 9
Bhaiskara
This stitra 18 not found in his commentary
Srikantha
Critaciam of the Pafica rétra doctrine concluded “(In reply to the
above pruna facte view, we point out although the contradicixon with
regard to the omgin of the individual soul and the rest set aside by
the above view, yet the Pafica ratra doctrine 28 not to be accounted)
on account of 1#8 opposition (to Sorpture) 3
8 8 2245, pp 575 76
241 B 2242, pp 1174, Part 2
2 Sic B 2.942, pp 116-119 Parta 7 and 8
[st 2 2 46
388 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8]
Résumé
The second section of the second chapter contains —
45 stitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Nimbarka,
45 siitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Samkara,
42 stitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Ramanuje,
40 siitras and 8 adhikaranas, accordmg to Bhiskara,
42 stitras and 8 adhikaranas, accordmg to Srikantha,,
45 stittras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Baladeva
Ramanuja and Srikantha read siitras 1 and 2 m Numbarka’s
commentary as one siitra, and omit sitras 31 and 38 in Nimbarka
bhaésya
ara th WW =
SECOND CHAPTER (Adhydya)
THIRD QUARTER (Pada)
Adhikarana 1 The section entitled “The
ether’ (ॐत ४८०8 1-6)
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Sitra 1)
SUTRA 1
“Ten BHTHER (DODS) NOT (ORIGINATE), ON ACCOUNT OF NON
MENTION IN SCRIPTURE ”’
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
That there 18 no contradiction 170. our own view has been proved by
means of the views of the opponents Now, 2४ 18 bemg proved that
there is no mutual non contradiction among the acrzptural texta
“The ether’? does “not’’ omgimate Why? Because mm the
Chandogys 1४8 origin 18 not mentioned
Vedanta-kaustubha
Thus, having demonstrated that the views of the opponents are
based on a mere semblance of (and not real) reason, now with a view
to generating intense reverence for Brahman, the cause of the world,
on the part of those who are desirous of salvation, (the author) 1s
demonatratang the origin of *+hoo-éhee.1nd the rest, His effects, as well
as the mutual conmstency az nong the criptural texts (about them)
On the doubt, viz whe-_kbher_the_cher ormginates or not, the prima
fame view 1s aa follows “The ether’? does not originate Why ए
“On account of non-mention in Scripture - Thus in the Chandogya,
the creation. of three only—viz lght, water and food, without the
ether and. the air, 1s mentioned in. the seation concerned about creation.
in the passage beginning ‘He created that Light’ (Chand 6 2 3)
[st 23 23
390 VHDANTA PABLJITA SAURABHA ADH 1]
CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sitra 2)
SOTRA 2
“Bur (THERE) 18 (A TEXT DESIGNATING THH ORIGIN 07, THE
ETHER) ”
Vednta-parijita-saurabha
In the Taitturlyaka, there “1s” 8 text demgnating the origm of
the cther, viz ‘From the soul the ether ongmated’ (Tait 2 11)
Vedanta-kaustubha
To this we reply
The term “but” umphes the acceptance of the correct conclusion
If 1t be objected that m the OhSndogya there 18 no text about the
origin of ether, (we reply ) 1n the Tartturfya there “1s” a text demgnat-
ing the origin of the ether, wz “From this soul, verily, the ether
originated (Tait 21)
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Sitras 3 4)
SUTRA 3
“(IE TEXT ABOUT THE ORIGIN OF THH HTHER IS) METAPHORICAL,
ON AGCOOUNT OF IMPOSSIBILITY, AND ON ACOOUNT OF SCRIPTURAL
TExT `
Vednta-parijaita-saurabba
Because the omgm of the ether, which 1s without parts, 18
impossible, and also because of the scriptural text ‘The air and the
atmosphere—this 1s mortal’ (Brh 233%)}—the text ‘The ether
ongnated’ (Tait 21) 18 “metaphorical”
Vedinta-kaustubha
Thus, mtending to remove the apparent contradictions among
those scriptural texts which deagnate the origin of the ether and those
which do not, His Holiness here raises a doubt based on the view of
those who hold that the ether does not onginate
An objection may be raised The scriptural text demgnatmeg the
omgin of the ether, viz ‘From this soul, verily, the ether originated’
(Tart 21), can be (only) “metaphorical”’, just as m ordmary hip,
1 § R, Bh, Sk, B a§ R, Bh, Sk B
[88 2 9 4
apH I] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 2391
the statement ‘The ether acta’ 18 metaphorical The reason for this
18 “407. account of mposalbility”,1e because the ongin of the ether
which without parts 1s umpossible, seemg that the earth and the rest
alone, which are possessed of parts, oan origmate from the atoms of
the same class ‘The second reason 18 “on account of scmptural
text’’,1e on account of the scriptural text ‘The air and the atmos
phere—this 18 ummortal’ (Brh 2 3 3)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiaiskara
They divide this siitra into two different sfitrasa—viz “Gauny
asambhavét” and “Sabdio ca” ¬
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (concluded)
SUTRA 4
“AND THERE MAY BH (THE USE) OF THE SAMS (THEM ‘ORIGINATED’
IN TWO DIFFERENT SENSES), 4S IN THE GASH OF THE WORD
‘BRAgMAN ` `
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
But the same term ‘ongmated’ “may be” used m a metaphorical
sense with reference to the ether, and 1n a literal sense with reference to
the subsequent (elements),? as in the case of “Desire to enquire
after Brahman by austerity, austermty 18 Brahman” (Tait 3 2 3)
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected How can one and the same word ‘originated’
be used 770. a metaphorical sense with reference to the ether, and in a
literal sense with reference to what follows, we reply
Justasinthetext ‘“Demreto know Brahman by austerty, austerity
15 Brahman’ (Tait 32), the word ‘Brahman’ 18s used in a figurative
sense 1n reference to austerity, but m a literal sense as the object to be
ee)
18B,pp 679 80 Bh B,p 130
9 Viz the ar fire, water, carth, eto mentioned in Tart 21 subsequently
to the ether Theat is, the expreamon The ether omgmates’ is to be understood
~~. CC CS
38 Bh, B
(st 23 5
392 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADE 1]
enquired into, 80 one and the same word ‘origmated’ may be used in
& figurative sense m reference to the ether, and 17 a literal sense m
reference to what follows
CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sfitra 6)
SUTRA 5
“(THEBH 78) NON ABANDONMENT OF THE INITIAL PROPOSITION, ON
ACCOUNT OF NON SEPARATION (KNOWN) FROM SCRIPTURAL THXT `
Veddinta-parijita-saurabha
“On account of the non separation”’ of the mass of 0016008,
beginning with the ether, from Brahman, there 18 no contradiction
of the “initial propomtzon”, viz that there 18 the knowledge of all
through the knowledge of one But xf the ether be something non
originated, then 16 must be outaide the sphere of knowable 00166४8, and
thereby the imtial propoartion will be set aside The non separation
of everything from Brahman 18 known “from the soriptural text”’, v1z
‘Everything has that for 1ta soul’ (Chiind 6 8 71), and 80 on
Vedainta-kaustubha
The author states the correct conclusion
The Tarttiriya text, designating the origin of the ether, 18 literal
and not figurative for the following reason If the ongin of the universe,
beginning with the ether, be admitted, then “on account of the non
separation.” or non difference of the effect, or of the entare expanse of
the universe beginning with the ether, from the object to be known,
the cause, viz Brahman,—as of the leaf from the tree,—-then alone,
there will be “non abandonment” or acceptance of the mitial pro
position, viz that there 18 the knowledge of all through the knowledge
of one, stated m the passage ‘Whereby the unheard becomes heard,
unthought becomes thought’ (Chand 618) otherwise, the mitial
proposrtion will be abandoned.
The cause of non separation 18 ‘ On account of scriptural text”,
te onaccount of the texts ‘The existent alone, my dear, was this 17
the beginning, one only, without a second’ (Chind 621), “Kvery-
thing has that for 1ts soul’ (Chind 6 87, etc ), and 80 on
1§ Bh B
इतं 2 3 6
ADH 1] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA 393
The allegation stated under the aphoram Metaphorical, on
wecount of impossibility and on account of scriptural text’ (Br Si
+33), viz that the origin of what 1s without parts bemg imposable,
ihe soriptural text designating the ongin of the ether 1s metaphoncal.—
8 not tenable, since reasoning has no scope with regard to matters
which are beyond the cognizance of the senses and are determined. by
Scripture Buthowcanthenthetext ‘The ar and the atmosphere—
this 18 immortal’ (Brh 2338) be accountable? In this passage the
permanency of the ether 1s established on the analogy of the statement
'The gods are immortal’, and henos the immortahty of the ether 008 17
The allegation made under the aphonsam “And there may be
(the use) of the same (term mm two different senses), as in the case of
the word ‘Brahman’” (Br Si 234), too, 28 not tenable, ance the
word ‘Brahman’ being mentioned twice, the example 18 not to the
out 1
. COMPARISON
Raimfnuja and Srikantha
They break this sitra into two parts—viz “ Pratayflahaimr se
and “Sabdebhyah” The meanmg of the last portion 1s different, viz
(That the ether has an origin 18 known) from scriptural text (also) >
CORRECT CONCLUSION (end)
SUTRA 6
“Bor «aS FAR AS THERE 18 EFFECT, THERE IS DIVISION, AS IN
ORDINARY LIFE ””
Vedanta- parijata-saurabha
The author concludes It bemg established by the texta ‘All
this has that for rts soul’ (Chand 6 87, eto 8) and the rest that the
1 In Tart 21, the term ‘omgmated 1s mentioned only once, while in the
analomosl passage quoted the term Brabman 18 mentioned twice separately
Hence, while:t may be said that of the two separately mentioned words ‘Brahman’,
one 18 Ixteral, the other figurative, 1b cannot be said that the word. ‘ongmated.
which is mentioned only once 29 simultaneously hteral and figurative
s इल 8 125 Part? Sk. B,pp 124125 Parta7and8
2 R, Sk, B
fst 2 3 6
304 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ApH 1]
entire expanse of the universe, beginning with the ether, has Brahman
for its soul, 1t 18 definitely ascertamed that the ether 18 an effect
Likewise, 1t 18 known that “as far as there 18 effect”’ there 1s origin
indeed! The non mention of the ether and the mention of light
and the rest as objects to be created m the text ‘He created that
light’? (Chind 628) fit m, “as 17 ordimary bfe’? In ordmary hie,
when referrmg to the group of Devadatta’s sons the ongin of some
of them 1s mentioned, thereby the omgm of all the rest 18 mentaoned
Vedainta-kaustubha
To the objection, v1z nce 17 the ChAndogya there 18 no indication
of the ompn of the ether, the scmptural text demgnatmg orgm 18
nictaphorical,—(the author) rephes
The term “but” 1s for dispomng of the objection “As far as
there 18 effect’, 16 the entire expanse of the umverse, there 18
“thyimion’ indeed The Chandogys texts, viz ‘“‘ The exstent, alone,
my dear, was this in the beginning”’ (Ohind 6 21), and ‘“ Whereby
the unheard becomes heard, the unthought becomes thought, the
unknown known”’ (Qhind 613) demgnate (respectively) that
everything, beginning with the ether, and denoted by the term ‘this’
conmsted of the cause mm essence prmor 0 creation, and 18 knowable
through the knowledge of the cause Hence, in the OhAndogya the
“division”, 18 the ongin, of the entare expamse of the universe,
beginning with the ether, from the cause, 18 indeed stated
To the enquiry Why then the omgm of the hght and the reat
alone 18 mentioned, without any mention of the ether and the air *—
we reply ‘As in ordmary hfe’ Just as m ordinary life, through
the mention of the origin of some sons of © person, there may be the
mention of the omgm of all the rest, so through the statement of the
ongin of hight and the rest, the origin of the ether and so on, too,
18 10068 mentioned Hence, 1t 18 established that the ether has
Brahman for 1ta material cause
Here ends the section entitled “The ether” (1)
1 Ile whatever is an effect has an omgin
{fst 2 3 7
ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 295
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiskara
This 18 sitra 7 1m their commentanes The interpretation of the
word. “vibhiga”’ 1s different According to them 1t means ‘division’,
and not “omgin’’ as held by Nimbaérka ‘Thus they argue —
Whatever 1s an effect 1s divided.
The ether 18 divided (from the earth and 80 on)
the ether 18 an effect 1
But Nimbérks argues —
Whatever 1s an effect has an origin
The ether 18 an effect
the ether has an ongin
Thus, they establish what Nimb&rka assumes (viz that the
ether 1s an effect)
The interpretation of the phrase “As in ordmary Ife” too 18
different, viz they connect 1t with the preceding part of the sittra,
meanmg—In ordinary hfe we observe that whatever 18 an effect 18
divided
Adhikarans 2 The section entitled “The Air”
(Sitra 7)
SUTRA 7
"तकण (THE ORIGIN OF) THE ATE (TOO) IS EXPLAINED "
Vedanta-parijdta-saurabha
By this pmaciple of the origin of the eather, the air, too, 18 explammed
Vedinta-kaustubha
Some may attribute eternity to the air on the ground of the texta
‘The ar and the atmosphere—this 1s immortal’ (Brh 238 2), “The
divinity which does not set 18 the aur’ (Beh 1522) 87 80 on For
disposing of this (view), the author says now
“Hereby”, 16 by the establishment of the orig of the ether,
the ongm of the “air”, too, should be known to be “explaimed”,
1 88 237,p 586, Bh 8 237,p 181
[80 23 8
396 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA. apa 3]
the refutation of the prima facse view bemg the same (in both cases)
The denial of the dissolution (of the air) by the phrase ‘does not set”
18 (only) relative Hence, 1t1s established that the air has an origin
Here ends the sectaon entitled “The Air” (2)
Adhikarana 3 The section entitled “Non-
origination” (87४८8 8)
SUTRA 8
“BUT THERE 78 HON ORIGINATION OF THE BEXIYTENT BRING, ON
AGOOUNT OF IMPOSSIBILITY ">
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
There 28 indeed “non ongination”’, 16 non production, “of the
existent bemng”’’,1e of Brahman, because the onigm of the cause of the
world 18 17010088 716
Vedinta-kaustubha
Now the author 1s removing the suspicion, viz If even the ether
and. the air, demgnated by Soripture as mortal, be omgmated, then
there may be the origin of Brahman too
There 1s mdeed “non ongm’’, 16 no birth, of Brahman, the
Highest Person Why! ‘On account of mmposabilty,” ie because
the origin of the cause of all 1s amposmble,—otherwise, there must be
& cause of that too, a cause of that too and so on, and there must be
an infinite regress ,—because (He) 18 declared to be the cause of all by
the text ‘He 1s the cause, the cause of the Jord of causes’? (Svet
69), and because any other cause 1s excluded by the passage ‘Of
him there 18 no producer and lord’ (Svet 69) For thia very reason,
it 18 establahed that there 1s no omgin of the Supreme Person, who 18
ever present and unborn indeed, though declared by Scripture to be
1 Correct quotation “Kargddhipddhipa"’, meaning ‘The Lotd of the lord
of sense organa, (vis the mdividual soul)’ Vide Svet 6 9, p 70
fst 2 3 9
^+ प्र 4] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 397
manifold for the sake of producing effects, thus ‘Bemg unborn, he
appears manifold’ (Vj 8 311951, Tart Ar 313153)
Here ends the section entitled “Non origmation”’ (3)
COMPARISON
Bhaskara
This 18 sitra 9 mm his commentary Interpretation absolutely
different, viz But (xf 1t be objected that qualities like touch, sound,
etc , 88 well as space, tyme, number, size, etc , are not declared by
Sompture to have an origin, and hence they must all be eternal,—
then we reply The eternity of what 18 exstent (viz qualities, eta )
18 umpossible, because of the non fittzng im (16 non utihty) (of the
scriptural texts to declare ther ongm) That 18, 1t 18 not at all
necessary for Sorrpture to demgaate separately the ongm of these
quahhes, eto since 1b 18 quite sufficient to designate the ongim of the
objects alone, that umplying the omgin of the qualities amultaneously
Sumilarly, tame 18 nothmg but the motion of the sun and hence its
origin, though not mentioned separately, 1s umphed by the mention
of the orign ofthe sun Likewise the other things are to be explamed
In conclasion Bhiskara oritiazes Samkara’s mterpretation of the
sutra,—which 18 identical with Nimbarka’s 3
Adhikarana 4 The seation entitled “The
light” (8१४०८४१५ 913)
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Sitras 9-12)
SOTRA 9
“त्रत THR LIGHT (ORIGINATES FROM THA AIR), FOR THUS
(SGRIPTURE) DECLARES "
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
“The hght” orgmates from the air, mm accordance with the
sonptural text ‘Fire from the ar’ (Tat 2 1 +)
५ 861, 1:28 1¶ Readmg ‘vydyaie' 9 % 201 Reading op off
° Bh B 239, pp 131 82 ¢ 8, R, Bh, Sk, B
[80 2 3 10
398 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4]
Vedinta-kaustubha
It has been pointed ont above that everythmg except Brahman
has origin, and that Brahman 18 untouched by the faulta of produable
7888 and the rest Now, the problem 1s bemg considered, viz whether
each precedmg object, or Brahman, its mner soul, 18 the cause of each
succeeding object, to be produced successively
On the doubt, viz whether the bght omgmates from the am or
from Brahman, 108 (viz the 9718) 10767 soul,—the prima face view
18 as follows The lght 1s an effect Hence, 10 omgimates from the
immediate cause air The prema facie objector ponte out the authority
for this thus The Tazttirlya text ‘Hrom the air fire’ (Tait 21)
“declares that”’ alone
COMPARISON
Samkara, Bhdskara and Baladeva
This 18 sitra 10 m the commentaries of the first two They do
not take this stitra as laying down a prema facie view, but as the correct
conclusion It means, therefore “The light (does not arise directly
from the Lord, but from the air), for thus (Scripture) declares” 1
PRIMA FAOIE VIHW (continued)
SUTRA 10
^“ प ^ ताः (ORIGINATES FROM THR LIGHT) "
Vedinta-pirijata-saurabha
“Water” ongmates from light, m accordance with the scmnptural
text ‘Water from fire’ (‘Tait 213)
Vedanta -kaustubha
The phrase “Hence, for thus’ 18 to be supplied here Hence,1¢
on account of the very proxumity, water onginates from lght The
somptural text ‘Water from fire’ (Tat 21%) declares that very
0५, 8 B 3 8 10, 2 182 GB 889
‰ ५
>
Fr
OF
[so 2 3 11 19
ADH 4] VEDANTA PIRLJATA SAURABHA 399
COMPARISON
Samkara, Bhaskara and Baladeva
This 18 sitra 11 m the commentaries of the first two As before
they do not take this as a prema facse sutra, but as a addhfnta one,
meaning “Water (omgimates from hght)’’ 1
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (continued)
SUTRA 11
“TH HARTH (ORIGINATES FROM WATER)”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
The earth originates from water, mn accordance with the soriptural
text “They (viz waters) created food’ (Chand 6 2 43)
Vedinta-kaustubha
The earth onginates from water The scriptural text ‘Those
waters thought ‘May we procreate’ They created food’ (Chand
624) declares this Similarly, 1b should be known that everywhere
the omgin of the effect takes place from the ummediately preceding
09289
COMPARISON
Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva
This sitra 18 not found in their commentanes
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (concluded)
SUTRA 12
“(THE WOBD ‘FOOD’ DENOTES) THE HARTH, ON ACCOUNT OF
SUBJECT MATINR, COLOUR AND ANOTHER SORIETURAL TEXT "’
Vedainta-pirijata-saurabha
By the term ‘food’ “the earth” 18 denoted, because the subject-
matter 18 the (creation of the) great elements, because ita colour 18
1" 828 9311 p $96; Bh B 2811 p 182 GB £310
१ BR, Sk
[80 2 8 19
400 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 4}
declared by the scmptural text ‘What 18 black is of the food’
(Chand 6411), and, finally, because of another scmptural text
“The earth from water’ (Tait 2 1 2)
Vedainta-kaustubha
Incidentally, the meaning of the word ‘food’, mentioned in the
scriptural text ‘They created the food’ (Chind 624), 1s bemg
indicated through the prema facse objector himself In accordance
with the complementary text, viz ‘Wherever 1t rams, then there 18
plenty of food’ (Ohand 624), 706, barley, and the like are not
ment by the word ‘food’, but the earth alone 18 the object denoted by
the word ‘food’ Why? ‘Qn account of subject matter, colour, and
another scriptural text,’ that 1s, because m accordance with the text
“He created that light, He created that water’ (Chind 6 2 3),
the subject matter here 1s the omgin of the great element, because m
the complementary passage ‘That which 1s the red colour of fire 18
the colour of the light, that which 18 white 18 of water, that which 18
black 18 of the 1006 ` (Chind 641) the colour (of the earth 18 men
taoned), and because there are other scemptural texta occurrmg in
connection with the same topic, yz “Water from fire, the earth from
water’ (Tait 21), “What was the froth of the earth became solidified
‘That became the earth’ (Brh 1 2 2)
COMPARISON
Samkara, Bhaiskara and Baladeva
This 1s sitra 12 m the commentaries of the first two, and stitra 11
च the commentary of the last Interpretation same, though not a4
pruma facts View
CORRECT CONOLUSION (Sfitra 13)
SUTRA 13
“Burt ON ACCOUNT OF HIS DESIRE, ON ACCOUNT OF HIS MARK,
Ha (1s THH CRHATOR) ˆ
Vedanta-périjata-saurabha
The author states the correct conclusion “On account of His
desire,” viz ‘“‘ May Ibe many”’ (Chand 6 2 3), as well as on account
1 6, R, Bh, Sk, B 9 R, Bh, Sk, B
[so 2 3 13
ADH 4] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 401
of the scriptural text teaching Him,—the Supreme Person, the:r mner
soul, 1s the creator of their effects
Vedinta-kaustubha
The author states the correct conclusion
The prima facie view 1s rejected by the term “but” “He”
alone,1e Lord Vasudeva, the supreme cause and the Lord of all and.
the 17167 soul of the air and the rest, 18 the creator of the effecta like
hghtandtherest Why? “Onaccount of His deamre,’’16 on account
of the desire, or resolve, of Him, or of the Highest Person, viz. ‘“May
I be many”’ (Chand 623), (and) “On account of His mark”,
16 on account of the group of texts teachmg Hm, vw ‘Abiding
within the earth’ (Brh 373), ‘He who abiding withm water’
(Brh 374), ‘He who abidmg withm the hght’ (Brh 3714),
‘He who abidmg within the arr’ (Brh 377) ‘He who abiding
within the ether’ (Brh 3712), “That riself created itself’ (Tait
27)andsoon Hereby 1४ should be known thatim the passages ‘That
hght thought’ (Chind 6253), ‘Those waters percarved’ (Chind
624) and so on too, the thmking of the Supreme Bemg alone (18
mentioned) Hence, 1t 1s established that no mdependent creatorship
belongs to anything else,—it 18 the Supreme Soul alone who 1s the
primary creator everywhere
Here ends the section entitled “The light” (4)
COMPARISON
All others read “Tad-abhidhyfinid eva प, adding an “eva”
Samkara, Bhiskara and Srikantha
Interpretation same, though they do not take this siitra 88
answering to a prima facie view ‘This sittra, according to them,
removes the suspicion, that might have arisen from the above demgna
tion of the successive production of elements, viz that the elements
give rise to other elementa by themselves The fact 1s that xt 18 the
Lord himself abidmg within those elements that grves mse to the
next effect 1
५ & 8 2 3 13, pp 508, Bh B 2313,p 138, ५8 2312
[st 2 3 14
402 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 6]
Adhikarana 65 The section entitled “The
reverse (Sttra 14)
SUTRA 14
“But THe ORDER (OF DISSOLUTION) (8) BEVEBSH TO THAT, AND
(THIS) FITS ON ”’
Vedanta -parijita-saurabha
The order of dissolution 18 reverse “to that’’,1e to the order of
creation”’, 170. accordance with the scriptural text ‘The earth merged
m water’ (Subile 241) “And’’ this “fits im” on the prnaple of
salt and, water
Vedainta-kaustubha
‘Thus, the order of the orgin of elements has been determined in
bref Now, madentally, thes order of dissolution 18 being determined.
On the doubt as to whether the order of dissolution 1s the same as
the order of creation, or reverse, the suggestion bemg Since even
when the prior created. object 1s destroyed, the posterior one 1s 2088016,
(dhysolutaon takes place) through the same order as that of ongmation
alone —
(The author) states the correct conclumon “But the order 18
reverse to that’’ The order of dissolution must be understood to be
the “reverse’” “to that’’,1e to the order of the ongmation of objects,
which 1s mentioned m Scripture m the text ‘From this soul, venly,
the ether orgmated, from the ether the ar, from the ai the fire,
from the fire water, from water the earth’ (Tait 21), ‘““What was,
then, existent?” He said, to them ^" Nesther being, nor non bemg,
nor bemg and non bemg rom hrm darkness arises, from darkness
bhitéd1,2 from bhit&di the ether, from the ether the ar, from
the ar the fire, from the fire water, from water the earth
That egg arose”’ (Sub&la 11-3), and which 1 established by a
thousand Smrti passages, viz “The divinity 18 without beginning and
without end, hkewise, indivisible, ageless, rmmortal, celebrated to be
unmantfest, constant, likewise undecaymg, and mmortal, sprung
up from whom bemgs are born and die That divinity first created
what 1s called mahat from name, the great abhamk&ra as well. Mahat
1P 465
2 Or the Mnasa ahamkdra 9108 VR.M,p 25
[st 2 3 14
ADH 5] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 403
created ahamk&ra Then the Lord, the Master, who 18 the support of
all elementa, (created) what 1s celebrated to be the ether rom the
ether origmated water, from water fire and arr, then from the conjunc
tzon of fire and air the earth originated’, and 80 on And this “fits
10 °» on the ground of the scriptural text “The earth merges in water,
water merges 1n the fire, the fire merges in the air, the air merges m
the ether, the ether mto the sense-organs, the sense organs in the
subtle essences, the subtle essences in bhittaédi, फणिता m mahat,
mahat in the unmanifest’ (Subéla 2 4), on the ground of the followmg
Smrt passage, viz “The earth, the support of the world, merges,
divine sage, 10. water, water merges in the fire, the fire merges m
the air’ , and on the ground of observing salt, 106 and the lke to be
desolved into water What 18 not mentioned, by the text about
creation, 7 the order of the origmation of prakria, mahat, ahamkira,
the ether and so on, 18 to be supplied from the text about dissolution,
1e the construction 18 ‘The ether (merges 70) the sense organs, the
sense organs in the subtle essences, the subtle essences in bhfitdd:’
The ether merges in the subtle essences, the subtle essences merge in
bhittadi,1e in témasa shamkdra, the sense organs 1n sense Organs, 1 6
m the raéjasa abamk&ra,—smoe here by the word ‘sense-organ’
ahamk&re is understood there being non difference between cause and
effect The plural number, viz ‘subtle essences’ 1s meant for showmg
that the dissolution of the earth and the reat takes place through the
subtle essences of smell and the rest On account of the three foldness
of ahamkara, the plural number, viz ‘In the sense organs’, has been
used Thus, 10 18 established that dissolution, taking place in the
above inverted order, 18 not contradicted by anything whatsoever
Here ends the section entitled “The reverse”’ (5)
COMPARISON
Ramanuja and Baladeva
This 18 stitra 16 17 Rim&nuja’s commentary He does not begin
a new adhikarana here, concerned with the order of dissoluizon, but
comtanues the topic of the order of evolution Thus the sfitra means
according to him And the order (of the orgimation of the vital-
breath and the rest), on the contrary, (stated) 170 a reverse order (to
[80 23 18
404 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 6}
the real order of 80068807) fits in (only 1 there be the ongination of
all effects directly) from thence (1¢ Brahman)
That 18, in Soripture we have many passages which designate the
vital breath and the rest as msing directly from Brahman, in opposition
to the real order of evolution, viz prakrti, mahat, and so on, and
these texts are explioable only on the supposition that everything really
arises from Brahman. directly 1
This 18 sittra 18 in Baladeva’s commentary, who follows Raménuja
exactly with the difference that he takes this siitra as constituting an
adhikarana by itself 9
Srikantha
This 18 sitra 15 m his commentary, reading different, viz
substitutes “pairamparyens’’, in place of ‘viparyyayena”’ Interpre
tation too different, viz be begins a new adhikarana here, ending with
the next sfitra, and concerned with the question of the origin of sense
organs, mind and the like,—which according to Nimbarka begina with
the next sitra 3
Adhikarana 6 The section entitled “Knowledge
whichintervenes” (87४८७ 15)
SOTRA 15
“Ty If BE OBJHOTED THAT KNOWLEDGH AND MIND (MUST BR
PLACED) BETWHEN (BRanMAN AND THE HLEMENTS) ON ACCOUNT
OF 20S INDICATION (IN SCRIPTURAL TEXT), (AND THAT THH ABOVE
ORDER OF CBBATION 78 SHT ASIDE) BY (THIS) ORDER, (WH BEPLY )
NO, ON ACCOUNT OF NON DIFFERENCE ”’
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
If rt be objected “On account of the indication”, viz ‘From
him arise the vital breath, the mind, and all the sense organs’ (Mund
2134), “knowledge and mind” must be between Brahman and the
elements, and “by the order” obtamed in this way the above-
mentioned order 18 contradicted,—
+ ft ॐ 2316, 2 131, Part 2
9 73 2818, 9 177, Chap 2
8 Sk B 28165, pp 186 36, Parts 7 end 8 ¢ 8, R, B, 8k, B
[80 2 $ 16
ADH 6] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 405
(We reply } “no”, because the above text 1s not concerned with
a specific order, and because the text ‘From him arse the vital
breath, the mind and all sense organs’ (Mund 218) (1 concerned
with laymg down only) “the non difference”’ of the origin of knowledge
and mind as well as of the ether and the rest from Brahman alone 1
In the text under discussion, viz ‘From this soul, verly, the ether
originated’ (96 21%), establishing the order of the creation of 618
ments,—in between the soul and the ether, the categories of the unmani
fest, mahat and ahamké&ra, well known from texts concerned with the
orders of creation and dissolution and figuratively umphed by the
phrase “knowledge and mind”’ (in the siltra), are to be known,—s0
much in bnef
Vedinta-kaustubha
With a view to encouraging meditation, and generating reverence
for Brahman, Lord Vasudeva, the place from which the world emanates
and into which it enters, as well as for generating an, aversion to the
world, the orders of creation and dissolution have been determmed
Now, the order of the ongin of knowledge and mind, which promote
meditation, 13 bemg established in harmony with the order of the
origin of elements
If 1t be objected The above mentioned order of the omgin of
elements 18 set aside by the order of the origin of knowledge and mind
Thus, knowledge 1s that through which a thing 1s known, 1 8 sense
organ. The sense organs and the mind must be m between Brahman
and the elements Why? “On account of ita indication” An
indication (linga) or a mark 1s that through which something 1s pamted,®
18 known, an indication of that,1e of creation, on account of that, 4
that 28, on account of the scmptural text undicatmg their creation,
viz ‘From him 87186 the vital breath, the mind, and all sense
organs, the ether, the au, the fire, water and the earth, the support
of all’ (Mund 218) Hence the above mentioned order 18 set aside
by 1b —
1 Ie the above Mung text simply shows that yust asthe ether ete risefrom
Brahman, so exactly do the sense-organs, the mind, etc too,—-but does not lay
down. a definite order of creation See V E below
> Not quoted by others in this connection
ॐ Root,/lnig = to paint
4 This explams the compound “ital वची"
[st 2 3 16
400 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 6]
(We roply) “No” Why? “On account of non difference,”
16 because of the non differc nes of the omgin of knowledge and mind,
as woll as of the othe: and the rest, from Brahman alone The text
‘From hm ane tho vital breath’ (Mund 213) and so on amply
pomts out that there 1s the origin of ell from Brahniun, and 1 not set
amde by the above mentioned order In tho vory saine manner
scriptural texts hke ‘Hoe creatid the vital breath, from the vital
breath reverence, the other, the ai, the fire, water, the earth, the sense
organs, the mind, food’ (Prasna 6 4) and so on, domgnate that every
thing arizos from Brahman, and do not set forth a particular order
The meaning of the word ‘vital breath’ m the passage “From him
arise the vital breath, the mmd and all sense organx’ (Mund 21 8)
Will bocome clear late: on! And, thus it 1 cxtabhshed that in the
aphorsam “But there w” (Br 9 232), only a portion (of the real
0061 of creation) has been montioned by the author of tho aphornems
So, m the abmdged texts demguatmg the order of the ongination of
elements, such an ‘rom tho soul the ether originated’ (Tart 21)
and so on, the portions not mentioned, viz prakrti, mahal and the
reat, eatublushed by other texts concerned about creation and ताण
tion, and figuratively implied by the phrase “knowledge and mind”
(7) the sittra), are necessarily understood, but thore is no contradiction
whatsoever of tho texts deaignatung the order of the omgmation of
elements by other texta
Here ends the section entatled “Knowledge which intervenes” (6)
COMPARISON
Samkara
The interpretation of the word “avidesit” different, viz “On
account of the non difference (of the organs from the elemonts)”’
That 18, the organs bomg of the same nature as the elements, the
origmation of the former 1s the same as that of the latter, and not
different >
1 Vide Br Si 249
४ 383 2915 p 602
[st 2 3 16
ADH 7] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 407
Adhikerana 7 The section entitled “The soul”
(8 १४८७8 16-17)
SUTRA 16
“BUT THAT DESIGNATION (OF THE SOUL AS BHING BORN OR DYING)
MUST DEPEND ON (18 REFER TO) THE MOBILE AND IMMOBILA
(2071708), (IT 18) MHTAPHORICAL (IN REFHEENCH TO THH SOUL),
BECAUSE (THHREH 18} THE EXISTHNOE (OF BIRTH AND DEATH) IF
THERE BE THH EXISTENCE OF THAT (IH THE BODY) ”
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
The nature of the individual soul 18 bobmg determmed now “The
dempnation” like ‘“Devadatta 16 born and dead’ 1s metaphorical, and
as such “depends on the mobile and the mmmobuile”,—there bemmg the
“existence” of birth and death when there 1s the “existence” of the
body
Vedinta-kaustubha
It has been pomted out above that the ether and the rest omginate
from Brahman, the unborn, the highest Now the problem 38 bemg
considered, viz, whether lke them the mdrvidual soul, too, 18 some
thing to be produced or not
The word ‘soul’ 1s to be suppled from the ummediately followmg
aphoriam On the doubt, viz whether the ‘soul’,1e the mdividual
soul, onginates or not, the pruna face view viz In conformity with
the demgnation, viz ‘Devadatta 18 born and dead’, the soul is born
and dies,—is disposed of by the term “but” This conventional
designation of the orgimation and dissolution of the soul “must be
metaphorical”, 1 © 18 figurative m reference to the individual soul
To the enqury In reference to what then 15 1 literal !—{the author)
replies “Dependent on the mobile and the mmobile”,1¢e 1% refers to
the bodies of the movable and the immovable Why? “Because
(there 1s) existence, 1f there be the existence of that,” 16 because
there can be origmation and dissolution only if there be the existence
of that, 18 the body, m accordance with the scmptural text “Tlus
person beng born and obtamimg a body He departing and
dying’ (Brh 4 3 8)
COMPARISON
RéAmanula
This 18 sitra 17 17 his commentary He 0088 not begin a nen
adhikarana here, but concludes the topio of the order of evolution
[श 2 3 17
408 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7]
He reads both “bhakta” and “abhikta”’ and gives two explanations
accordingly Thus (1) But the demgnation which depends on
(1 © refers to) the movable and the mmovable must be secondary,
because of being permeated by the bemg of that (wiz Brahman)
(Here he reads “bhikta”’) That 1s, all the words denotang movable
and immovable objects are only secondary with regard to those
objects, but really denote Brahman, mnce all objects are modes of
Brahman, (2) or, all the terms denotang movable and immovable
objects are primary with regard to Brahman, because the denotative
power of all terms depends on the bemg of Brahman (Here he reads
| । 1 871) द BS ) |
Srikantha
This 18 stitra 17 m 018 commentary as well He reads “abhikta”’,
takes this sfitra as an adhikarana by itself, and mterpreta 1t exactly
hike R&aminuja >
Baladeva
This 18 उति 15 m his commentary He also reads “abhakta”’,
takes 1t as an adhikarana by 10991 and mterprets on the whole
like R&émf&nuja Only the mterpretation of the word “tad bh&va
bh&vitvit” is different, viz “But the demgnation dependent on (1 6
referrmg to) the movable and the immovable must be prmary (with
regard to the Lord), because that fact (tad bhiva) (viz the fact that
all words really denote the Lord) 1s somethmg that follows m future
(16 28 not directly Known at once, but 1s a matter which one comes to
know after studymg Scripture)” ®
SUTRA 17
“Tam 807, (098) NOT (ORIGINATE), ON ACCOUNT OF NON-
MENTION IN SORIPTURE, AND ON AOCOUNT OF ETEENITY (KNOWN)
THEREFROM (I FROM SORIPTURAL THXTS) ”
Vedinta -parijaita-saurabha
The mdividual “soul” does not omgmate Why! Because there
18 no text about 108 having omgm by nature, and because from
¬ ल B 2317 pp 182 33, Part 2
2 & B 3317, pp 188 30, Parts 7 and 8
3 GB 2315, pp 181 89, Chap 2
[st 23 17
ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 409
the scriptural texts ‘A wise man 18 neither born nor dies’ (Katha
2181), “Eternal among the eternal’ (Katha 5183), ‘An unborn
one, verily, hes by, enjoying’ (Svet 45%) and so on, the eternity of
the individual soul 1s known
Vedainta-kaustubha
If it be argued In conformity with the texts ‘One desirous of
heaven should perform sacrifices’ (Tait Sam 2 6 54), eto, which lay
down the means to attaming lordship im the next world, let the demgna
{10 ‘Devadatta 18 born and dead’ refer to the birth and death of
the body But like the ether and the rest, birth and death must
एवा to the individual soul as well at the tame of creataon and
dissolution (respectively) Thus there 1s no conflict whatsoever with
Sarpture” The smgular nomber ‘soul’ implies the class,5 m
acoordance with the scriptural text teaching the plurality of souls,
viz ‘Eternal among the eternal, consmous among the conscious’
(Katha 518, Svet 6 13), and m accordance with the aphomam, to be
mentioned hereafter, viz “And on account of non-contunuity, there
18 no confusion” (Br ७ 2348) ‘The soul 18 not born, nor dies
Why? ‘On account of non mention m Scripture’, 1e because there
are no scriptural texts designatimg the birth and death (of the soul)
at the time of creation and dissolution, and, because on the contrary,
“the eterntty’’ of the soul 28 known “therefrom”, 18 from the
scriptural texts like ‘“* Impershable, verily, O | 38 this soul, possessing
the virtue of bemg indestructable”’ (Brh 4514), “A wise man 18
neither born, nor dies’ (Katha 2 8), ‘Eternal among the eternal, the
conacious among the conscious, the one among the many, who bestows
objecta of desires’ (Katha 618, Svet 6 13), ‘The two unborn ones,
the knower and the non knower, the lord and the non lord’ (Svet
19), ‘One unborn one, verily, hes by, enjoyimg Another unborn one
leaves her who has been enjoyed’ (Svet 45) and so on, aa well as
from the following Smrti passages, viz ‘ “ Nor at any tame, verily, was
18 > Sk B aR, Sk, B
8 Not quoted by others é P 208, hne 27, vol 2
® And not that there 1s only one soul
[8808 23 17
410 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 7 |
I not, nor you, nor these lords of men, nor, verily, shall we ever not
be hereafter” ’ (Git& 212), ‘“‘ Unborn, eternal, constant and ancent,
he 18 not killed when the body 8 nlled”’’ (Gita 2 20), ‘ ““ Who knows
him to be imperishable, eternal, unborn and ummutable, how can that
man kill one, 0 P&rtha, or cause one to be killed ?”’ (Gita 2 21)
and 80 on
If 1b be objected There are scriptural texts demgnatang the
origm of the world together with the sentaent, such as, “All come
forth from this soul’, “Born of whom, the progenitreas of the universe
16 loose the souls with water on the earth’ (Mahinaér 14), “The
lord of bemgs created bemga’ (Teast Br 1110,11) ‘All these bemgs,
my dear, have Being as their root, Beng as ther abode, Bemg as their
support’ ˆ (Chand 684), “‘Hrom whom, verly, these beings arse,
through whom they live when born, to whom they go and enter” ’
(Tart 31) and 80 on Henoe, the demal of birth and death of the
individual soul is not reasonable Jor this very reason, the iuitial
proposition that through the knowledge of one there 18 the Knowledge
of all, 15 establshed,—
(We reply ) “No”, because the quoted texts teach that individual
soul has an origm, which (1s not actual origin, but mmply) consists in
the expansion of 708 knowledge, caused by 1ts connection with the body,
subsequent to 208 giving up ita real nature at the tame of dissolution.
Lf this be so, then the mdrxvidual soul too being an effect of Brahman,
the above तचा propomitzon 1s established. And hence, 7 18 established
that Brahman, who 170 His causal state possesses the non divided names
and forms 88 His powers and 18 without an equal or 9 superior,—in
accordance with the text ‘The exstent alone, my dear, was this m
the begmmning, one only, wrthout a second’’”’ (Chand 6 2 1),—comes
Himself, a8 possessed of the manfest names and forms as His
powers at the tue of the production of effects, to abide as three-
fold, viz 1m the forms of the enjoyer (16 the at), the object enjoyed
(18 the aat) and the controller (1 8 Brahman) ‘There is no con-
tradiction here by any text whatever
Here ends the section entatled “The soul”’ (7)
+ P 28, 78 16 vol 1
[st 2 3 18
ADH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 411
COMPARISON
Raménuja, Srikantha and Baladeva
They read “fruteh” instead of “agruteh”’! Interpretation same
Adhikarana 8 The section entitled “The
Enower (Stra 18)
SUTRA 18
“(THH SOUL 28) A KNOWBE, FOR THAT VERRY BHASON ”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
The soul, which 18 an ego, 18 a knower
Vedanta -kaustubha
Thus, 1t has been pomted out that the soul does not ongmate
like the ether and. the reat, since 1t 18 eternal, as established by Soripture
Nov, mmadentally, 1ts nature, etc are bemg determmed.
The word ‘soul’ 18 to be supphed from the preceding aphornsm
By the phrase “for this reason”’, the reason mentioned by the term
‘therefrom’ (1 the preceding siitra) 18 referred to On the doubt, viz
whether the soul 1s non-sentent by nature, but possessed of the
attmbute of knowledge or mere consciousness, or knowledge by nature
yet possessed of (the attribute of) beng a knower,—the Vaifionkas*
and the like hold that 1t 1s non sentient, yet posseased of the attmbute
of knowledge, while the Samkhyas and the rest hold that the soul 1s
mere conscloushess
With regard to 1t we reply “A knower”,16 the mdividual soul
18 nothing but a knower,1e nothing but knowledge by nature, yet
possessed of (the attmbute of) being a kmower Why? On the
ground of the following scriptural texta, viz ‘Hero this person
becomes selfilluminating’ (Brh 439, 14), ‘The person who is
made of knowledge among the vital breaths, who 18 the hght in the
heart’ (ॐ 437), “There 18 no annihilation of the knowledge of
18 B 2818, p 186, Part 2, Sk 23 3818 p 140 Parts 7 and 8, GB
$816
§ Vide V Si 81 18, and Stenkara Mitra s commentary, p 161
[st 2 3 18
412 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 8]
the knower, because of his mperishabilty’ (Beh 4 8 30), ' " Whereby
should one know, 0 | the knower?”’ (Brh 2414, 4516), ‘This
person simply knows’, ‘Hor he 18 the one who 6668, 1 hears,
smells, ४ thinks, concervea, does, the mtelhgent self’ (Pradna 4 9)
and 80 on
The doctrine of the non sentient soul, on the other hand, 18 to be
rejected,—because then the attribute of knowledge by 11861, bemg
the effector of all practical transactions, will come to attam primacy,
and hence the non sentient substratum of the atimbute (viz the
soul), bemg non hable to salvation or bondage, virtue or vice, will
come to be non primary or useless hke the mpple on the neck of 8
goat, ° and finally, because of 1ts opposttzon to Scripture
The doctrine of mere consciousness, too, 18 to be rejected, because
if consciousness be all pervading, then there will be no perception of
the pleasure and the lke pertaiming to the entare body, but if xt be
atomic in aize, then there will be no experience of the pleasure and the
hke pertammg to hands, feet and 80 on
Hence it 18 established that this soul, known through self-
consciousness, 18 knowledge by nature and a knower
Here ends the section entitled “The knower” (8)
COMPARISON
Samkara
Interpretation different—viz he interpreta the word “jfia” as
eternal consciousness and not as 9 knower 4
1 Touches
9 Tastes
9 An emblem of any useless or worthless object or person.
५ 82 2218 p 609
[8 2 3 19
ADH 9] VEDANTA-KAUSTIUBHA 413
Adhikarana 9 The section entitled “Depar
ture” (Sitras 19-31)
SUTRA 19
“ (THE INDIVIDUAL SOULIS ATOMIO ON ACCOUNT OF THE SORIPTUEAL
MENTION) OF DHPAETURE, GOING AND RETURNING ”’
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
The individual soul 1s atomic, because in the texts ‘By that
hight this soul departa through the eye, or through the head, or through
other parta of the body’ (अ 44214), ‘Whoever, verily, depart
from tha world, all go to the moon alone’ (Kaus 1 2%), ‘Havmg
come back from that world to this world for action’ (Brh 4463)
and so on, there is the mention “‘of departure, gomg and returning”’
Vedanta-kaustubha
Thus, 1t has been proved that the mndzyidual soul 1s eternal and a
knower Now 108 mze 18 bemg determined.
On the doubt, viz whether this soul 18 of a middle mze,* or of an
all pervading size, or of an atomic aize,—if 7४ be suggested Jt must
be of a middle mze, since pleasure and. the rest are experienced all
over the body Or, 1b must be of an all pervading mze,—
We reply The individual soul is capable “of departmg, gomg
and returmng” These three are not possible if 1+ be all pervading
Moreover, if 1t be all-pervading, then experences of pleasure and the
hke will result everywhere If, on the other hand, 1t be of a middle
maze, then 1t must be non-eternal Hence, the atomicity of the soul
18 the only remaiing alternative In the passage ‘When he departs
from this body, he departs together with all these’ (Kaus 8 $5), 208
departure 1s mentaoned In the passage ‘Whoever, verily, depart
from this world, all go to the moon alone’ (Kaug 1 2), rts gomg
18 Mentioned And, m the passage ‘Having come back from that
world to this world for action’ (Brh 4: 4 6), 1te returning is mentioned
1R 8४, B
॥ 8, Bh, Sk.
28 R Sk, B
4 7 8 of the alse of the body
5 Note that Nunbddrke quotes a different text here
[st 2 3 20 21
414 VEDINTA-PABLJETA SAUEBABHA 4DH 9]
COMPARISON
Samkara
He takes sitras 19-27 as laymg down the prema facie view
Lateral interpretation. same
SUTRA 20
“AND (THERE IS POSSIBILITY) OF THA SUBSEQUENT TWO (VIZ
GOING AND BETURBNING) THROUGH ONR’S SELF”
Vedanta-piarijdta-saurabha
Sometimes departing may be possible on the part of even one
who 18 not moving, as 170. the case of the cessation of the rulership of a
village? But, mnoe there 18 posmbility “of the subsequent two
through one’s self” alone, the individual soul 1s atom1o
Vedainta-kaustubha
As m the case of the cessation of the rulership of a village,
departmg, which consists in the cessation of the rulership of the body,
may sometimes be possible on the part of the soul even when 7४ 18
not moving But, amnoe there oan be the accomplahment “of the
subsequent two”, wiz gomg and returnmg’’, “through one’s self”’
alone, 1b 15 established. that the mdrvidual soul 18 atomic
SUTRA 21
“Ty I~ BR OBJHCTHD THAT (THE SOUL गड) NOT ATOMIO, BECAUSE
OF THE SORIPTURAL MANTION OF WHAT IS NOT THAT, (WH EHFLY )
RO, ON ACCOUNT OF THE TOPIO BEING SOMETHING HLSE ”
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
If 1b be objected In accordance with the text, referrmg to the
individual soul and deaignstmg “what 1s not that”, viz “He, verly,
18 the great’ (Brh 44224), the mdividual soul 18 “not atomic”,—
1 7 8 when somebody ceases to be the ruler of a yillage he may be said to
* go out”
9 8, R, Bh, Sk, B
[80 2 3 22
ADH 9] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 416
(we reply } “no”, because m the middie, the tome 78 the Supreme
Soul
Vedanta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected. The mdividual soul w “not atomic” Why?
“Because of the scriptural mention of what 38 not that,”—‘“that”
means atomicity, “what 18 not that’ means non atomicity, on account
of the scrzptural mention of that,.—i e because 170. connection with the
discourse on the individual soul, viz “He who 1s made of knowledge
among the vital breaths, who 1s the ght within the soul’ (अ 4 8 7),
there 18 the mention of greatness m the scriptural text ‘He, verily, 18
the great, unborn soul’ (Brh 4 4 25),—
(We reply) “No” Why? “On aocount of the topic bemg
something 6186; ' 1 6 because the topic 18 here something other than
the mdividual soul referred to in the begmning,ie the Supreme Soul,
who 18 the topic to be established in the middle of the section, 1m the
text ‘By whom the soul has been found and reahzed’ (Brh 4 4 18)
SUTRA 22
“AND ON ACOOUNT OF THE WORD ITSELF AND OF MEASUEDS ”
Veddnta-parijata-saurabha
“On account of the word itself (viz ‘atomio’) and of measure,”
mentioned (respectively) m the texta “This atomic soul’ (Mund
$194), ‘An mdividual soul 18 & part of the hundredth part of the
tap of 9 hair, divided a hundredfold’ (Svet § 9 8), the individual soul
1 atomic
Veddnta-kaustubha
The phrase “the word itself” means the word which 18 denotative
of 18 own atomicity The word “measure” means the measure which
18 separated from * all gross measures,1e an mtensely mmnte measure
On account of these two, the mdividual छता is atomic The word
1186118 mentioned in the text ‘This afore soul m which the five fold
vital breath has entered 1s to be known by means of thought’ (Mund
1 This explams the compound “ atacohruteh"
9 6, R, B, Sk, B a 68, 7, Bh, B
& Uddhriya minam = Unmdnam
[80 2 ॐ 28 24
416 VEDANTA PARIJTATA SAURABHA ADH 9]
319) The measure 18 mentioned in the text ‘An individual soul
18 & part of the hundredth part of the tap of a harr, divided a hundred
fold’ (Svet 59) ‘For the lower one 1s seen to be like the pomt of
the spoke of a wheel only’ (Svet 5 8)
SUTRA 23
“NoN CONTEADIOTION, 4S IN THH GASH OF THA SANDAL-PASTE sid
Vedinta-parijdta-saurabha
Just as a drop of sandal paste, though occupymg one spot of the
body, refreshes the entire body, so exactly does the soul illuminate
Hence, the experience of pleasure and the hke over the whole body
18 707 inconsistent
Vedinta-kaustubha
If 16 be objected If the soul be atomic in mze, then how can
pleasure and the like be experienced over the whole body !—we reply
There 38 no such contradiction Just as one drop of yellow sandal
paste, occupying one spot of the body, produces, through ita own
quality, a pleasurable sensation extending over the entare body, so
the soul too, occupying one spot of the body, experiences, through 108
own quality, the pleasure and the hke extending over the entire body,
in accordance with the अणा passage ‘This soul, though only atomic,
abides pervading 108 own body, as does a drop of yellow sandal paste,
pervading the body’ for this very reason it has been said by the
Lord too ‘“Just as one sun uUlummates this entare world, so the
field owner (1e the soul) illummates the entire field (1e the body),
O Bharata !*’* (Gita 18 33)
SUTRA 24
“I? IT BE OBJHOTED THAT (THE TWO O4SHS ARH NOT PARALLEL)
ON ACOOUNT OF THE SPHOIALITY OF ABODB, (WE REPLY ) NO, ON
ACOOUNT OF THE ADMISSION (OF AN ABODE, VIZ ) IN THE HHABT
CERTAINLY ””
VedAnta-parijaita-saurabha
If 1b be objected The example of the sandal paste is not
appropriate, “on account of the speciality of abode”’,—xt 18 directly
[st 2 3 26
ADE 9 |] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 417
observed that the drop of sandal paste occupies one spot of the body,
but 1¢ 13 not known that the individual soul occupies ons part of the
body, since consciousness 18 experienced. everywhere,—on acoount of
such a difference of abode between the two,—
(We reply ) “No” Why? “On account of the admission,” viz
that the soul, atomic m size, abides 7 one part of the body,1e “in
the heart”, by the scriptural text ‘He who 18 made of knowledge
among the vital breaths, who 1s the hght withm the heart’ (Brh
4422) The meaning of the term “certainly” 18 that 1४ 28 the
attribute of knowledge (and not the atomic soul rtself) which abides
in the whole body
SUTRA 25
‘Or THROUGH ATTRIBUTE, LIKH LIGHT ”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
The Hloumination of the body takes place only through the attribute
of the soul, like the light of a lamp and the 1४8 mm a room
Veddanta-kaustubha
To the objectzon, viz the doctrine that there 18 © relation of
attmbute and substratum (between knowledge and the soul) 18 not
proper, since our purpose 28 served by the very nature only (of the
soul),—(the author) reples
The term “or’’ 78 for disposing of the objection The sense 18
that the experience of the pleasure and the hke, pertammg to the
entire body, by the atomic soul, occupying one part of the body, 18
posable through rts attribute of knowledge which 18 all pervading
“Ag 77) ordmary hfe” In ordmary 1118, a gem, the sun, a hght and
so on, though occupying one place, illuminate many places, aa the
case may be, through their atimbute alone Or else, (the combination)
may be disjomed as “as m the case of hght”,16 like the hght of
gems and the rest The doctmne of an attrbuteless soul, as admitted
by the Samkhyas, has been disposed of above +
COMPARISON
Samkara reads “‘lJokavat”, all others “dlokavat”
1 Vide V.K 1318
27
[st 2 8 26 27
418 VHDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 9]
SUTRA 26
“Tau BXTHNDING BEYOND (OF KNOWLEDGE) IS AS IN THE 048
OF SMELL, FOR THIS (SORIPTUBH) SHOWS "
Vedainta-parijdta-saurabha
But the “extending beyond” of the attmbute of knowledge fits
in “as 110. the case of smell” The scriptural text ‘He has entered
here up to the body hairs and finger nails’ (Kaug 420+) “shows”
the individual soul to be the substratum of such an attribute
Veddnta-kaustubha
“The extendmg” of the attmbute of knowledge beyond the soul,
108 substratum which 1s situated within the heart, 1e 208 occupying
9 larger space, 18 “as m the case of amell”, 16 18 just lke amell
occupying a larger space than the flower which occupies a amaller
space The scriptural text ‘He has entered here up to the body
hairs and finger nails’ (Kaug 420) “shows” the soul's pervason
over the entire body by means of ita attribute of knowledge, extending
over © larger space
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhaskara
They break this siitra mto two different ones, viz “Vyatireko
gandhavat” and “Tath& oa darfayati”’ 3
Raimanuja
He too reads “ca”? m place of “hi”, but does not break 1t into
two sutras
SOTRA 27
“Own ACCOUNT OF THE SHPARATE TRACHING °”
Veddanta-parijaita-saurabha
Although there 1s no distanction between the soul and its knowledge
m respect of bemg knowledge, yet a relation of substratum and
+. 2_Not quoted by.others ~ Jor-correct-quotation vide Kaug,p 141
9 825 pp 61516 Bh B p 186
fet 2 3 28
ADH 9] VHDANTA PARLIATA SAUBABHA 419
attribute (between them) 1s indeed proper Why? “On account of
the separate teaching,” viz “Having mounted the body by means of
intelligence” (Kaug 3 61)
Vedainta-kaustubha
Apprehending the objection, viz Let Knowledge be the essence
of the soul Hence here the distinction,—viz the subsiratum 18
atom, the attribute all pervading—is not proper,—(the author)
here
“On account of the separate teaching”’ of the atimbute from the
substratum, the soul, m the passages ‘Having mounted the body
by means of intelhgence’ (Kaug 3 6), ‘Having taken by hus intelligence
the mtelhgence of these > (Brh 2117) That 1s, m spite of
there beng no distinction between the two 1n respect of being know
ledge, there can very well be ® relation of substratum and attribute
between them, since 1t 18 mentioned. m Sempture LHdquality of nature
0088 not necessarily mean identity, since 16 1s found that 10 sprte of
there beng no distinction between light and ita substratum,—both
being equally hght,—there 1s stall & difference between them
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 18 sitra 26 10. his commentary, mterpretation different It
answers to the objection that mtelligence 18 not a permanent attnbute
of the soul Hence the sitra “Intelligence 18 a permanent atimbute
of the soul) mmoe there 1s a separate (1e distinct) statement (in
Sormpture to that effect)’’ 9
SUTRA 28
“Bur THERE 18 THAT DESIGNATION ON AOCOUNT OF (THE SOUL'S)
HAVING THAT ATTRIBUTE AS ITS ESSENOH, 4S IN THE CASE OF THE
INTELLIGHNT BHING *”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
“As m the 0886 of the intelligent one,’ 1 © (just as Brahman 18
said. to be great, because He is possessed of great attributes, on the
14 9 GB 2826,p 197, Ohap 2
[st 2 3 28
420 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 9}
ground of etymology thus) "Brahman’ 1s one in whom there are great
qualities,’ so the soul has been designated as “Hternal, all pervading”
(Mond 1162), because of possessing great attributes In the first
case, the Initelhgent Bemg, great by Himself, 18 great by reason of His
attributes too In the second case, on the other hand, the mdzvidual
soul, atomic in size, 18 great by reason of ita attribute only,—this 18
the distinction
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz If the individual soul be atomic by nature,
then the texts which establish ita all pervasiveness must be con
tradicted, such as ‘Hternal, all pervasive, omnypresent, extremely
subtle’ (Mund 116), ‘Eternal, all pervasive, rmmobile’ (Gita 2 24)
and so on,—the author replies No
The term “but’’ 18 for dispomng of the objection On account of
having an all-pervasrve attribute as 108 very essence, “that deaigna-
tion”, viz the designation of the all pervasrveness of the soul, such as
‘Hternal, all pervasive’ (Mund 11 6), fits in “As m the case of
the mwnteligent bemg’’ Greatness 18 said to belong to the Intelbgent
Bemg through His connection with great attimbutes as well, n accord.
ance with the saying ‘Brahman’ is one m whom there are great
attributes The Intellbgent Bemg bemg great dy nature as well, the
example holds good only partaally ® Sumularly, there 1s this demgnation.
of the all-peryasiveness (of the soul) on the ground of 1ta all pervasive
attribute only, and not dy nature This should be understood here
Vasudeva, the Highest Person, 1s without an equal and a superior and.
all pervasive, 171 accordance with the scriptural text ‘Nothmg 28
observed to be exther equal to Him or higher than Him’ (Svet 6 8)
The all pervasiveness of others, such as, prakrii, tume, and the attribute
of the mdividual soul (viz knowledge), 18 relatrve (and not absolute)
There are contraction and expansion of even such an stimbute which
18 peculiar to the mdividual soul, and eternal, m accordance with the
declarations by the Lord Himself ‘“ Knowledge 18 enveloped by
1 Drh--man.
१ Not quoted by others
8 Te the case of Brahman and the mdvidual soul are not parallel in ail
respects but m some respecia only The former is great by nature, as well as
great by attmbutes, while the latter 24 atom by nature yet great by attributes
Fence the two cases are parallel only mm respect of the second pomt, and not of
the first as evident
[80 2 3 28
ADH 9] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 421
06806708 Thereby beings are deluded ° ’ (Git& 5 15), ‘ “‘ In whom that
nescience has been destroyed by knowledge, m them knowledge shines
forth lke the sun, O Bhirata!’’’ (Gita 5 16 4)
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 1s stitra 29 mn lus commentary Interpretation absolutely
different He takes this and the following three शी ड as laying down
the correct conclusion, viz that the soul 18 all pervasive, m answer to
the prima facte view set forth in ten siitras above Thus, this siitra
means, according to him “But there 18 that desgnation (of the
atomicity of the soul) on account of 108 having that atimbute (viz
buddh1) as 1ta essence, a8 in the case of the mtelligent bemg’’ That
18, Just as Brahman, though all pervading, 1s demgnated to be atomic
for the purpose of meditation, so the imdividual soul, though all
pervading, 18 designated to be atomic through ita lmitang adjunot of
buddhi >
RamAnuja, Srikantha and Baladeva
This 18 80८8 29 in the commentaries of the first two, and इति 27
in the commentary of the last Baladeva leaves out “tu” Inter
pretation different—viz “But there 18 that demgnation (16 the
deagnation of the soul as knowledge) on account of ita having that
attmbute as 108 easence, 98 77. the case of the intelhgent one” Thats,
yost &8 the Lord, though a knower, 1s sometimes demgnated as know
ledge, so the individual soul too, though a knower, 1 sometimes
designated as knowledge, 8008 1t possesses Knowledge aa its essential
atimbute They contunue the same tomo m the following four
sitras, although hteral interpretation 18 the same
Bhéskara
This 18 उत्क 29 m his commentary Interpretation absolutely
different Here he points out that the atomuaty of the soul, considered.
80 long, 18 not the real form of the soul, but only its transmigratory
1 Correct quotation. ‘ PraldéayaiYaiparam” Vide Cité, 6 16, p 303
४ 878 2320, pp 616 ff
8s B 2329 p 144, Pat? Sk B 2339 p 147, Parts 7 and 8, GB
2827 p 108, Chap 2
[st 2 3 29
429 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 9]
form Here he follows Samkara, and pomta ont that just as the all
pervading Brahman 1s said to be atomic m reference to His abode,
viz the heart, so the all pervading soul 18 said to be atomic through
1४8 attributes of passion and the rest 1
SUTRA 29
“ALSO BEGAUSH OF LASTING AS LONG AS THE SOUL DOES, THERE
18 NO FAULT, BECAUSE IT 18 SEEN ”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
The demgnation of the soul’s all pervasrveness, due to ita attr
bute, 18 not inconmstent “Also because of’ the attmbute lasting ss
long as the soul does, there 1s no fault, because xt 18 seen”, 216
because it 1s found im the passage ‘“For there 18 no coasation of the
knowledge of the knower, because of his umpemshabihty Impensh
able, ndeed 01218 this soul”’ (Brh 48 303)
Vedainta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz The attribute of the soul bemg sometimes
present and sometimes not, ita all pervasiveness due thereto vanishes,
and as such the demgnation of 11a all pervasiveness 28 open to objections
-——(the author) rephes
The term “also” 18 meant for dispoamg of the objection The
goul 18 indeed eternal As 108 attribute too “laste as long as the soul
००९8०, 1 8 18 an aternal attmbute accompanying the soul, so the
designation of the soul’s all pervasiveness 18 not open to objections,
because we find that there are texts designating the attmbute as lasting
as long as the soul does, such as ‘“For there 18 no cessation of the
knowledge of the knower, because of his impershabihty Impersh-
able, verily, 01 18 1718 soul’’’ (Brh 43 80)
1 Bh B 23 20, p 137
2 (088 ed,p 440, omits the whole sentence which 1s but a repetituon of the
sutra itself The other edrtion retains it
8 Not quoted by others
[at 2 8 30
ADH 9] VEDANTA PARIJATA BAUBABHA 423
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 18 sitra 30 m 1118 commentary Interpretation different
Samkara contanues the same theme, and points out that the soul’s
connection with buddhi laste so long as the tranamigratory state does 1
Raménuja and Srikantha
This 18 stitra 30 in their commentaries as well The interpretation
of the word “tad darfan&t’’ different, viz because it 1s seen that
all cows, hornless and 80 on, are called ‘cow’ (since they all possess
the generic character of cowneas) 9
Bhiskara
This 18 808 30 17 bis commentary too Interpretation different,
vis like Samkara’s 3
Baladeva
This 18 siitra 28 m his commentary Interpretation of the word.
“tad daréanit”’ different, viz because rt 18 seen that the sun and
ita ght are oo eternal, and that the sun 28 both hght and the
illummator 4
SUTRA 30
“But ON ACCOUNT OF THE APPROPRIATENESS OF MANIFESTATION
OF THAT WHICH IS EXISTHNT, AS IN THE CASH OF VIRILITY AND
80 on ””
Vedainta-parijita-saurabha
During the waking state there 18 the “mamfestation” “of this”,
16 of knowledge, which 1s “existent’’ mdeed durmg the states of
deep sleep and so on Hence, the atirbute of knowledge does laat
so long as the soul rtaelf does, just as in youth there 1s the manzfestation
of राक्र and 80 on, which are existenth mdeed durmg childhood
1§.B 2830 pp 619 ff
2&1 B 23380 p 144 Part?, Sk B 9 8 20, 147, Parts 7and 8
9 Bh. B 2330, pp 187 38
‘GB 2328
[80 2 8 31
VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA ADH 9]
Vedainta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz if knowledge, the attmbnute of the soul,
be eternal, then why should there be no perception of 1t durmg the
states of deep sleep and the rest {—(the author) replies
The term “but” mmples emphams Knowledge, the attribute
of the soul, does last 88 long as the soul iteelf does Why? “On
account of the appropriateness of the manifestation of that which 1s
existent ˆ` That 1s, the attmbute of knowledge, which 1s “existent
indeed ' "3 3 6 18 present indeed, 77 © non manifest form during the states
of deep sleep and the rest 1s mamfested during the waking state,—
just as mm youth there 18 the manifestation of “vimlity and so on”
which are existent indeed durmg childhood By the phrase “and 80
on”’ the natural qualties of magnanumity, good conduct and the lke
are to be understood.
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhaskara
This 18 8078 31 17. therr commentanmes Interpretation different,
they contmue the same theme—viz the soul’s connection with buddhi
exists potentially m the state of deep sleep, eto and 18 manifested in
the state of waking 4
SUTRA 31
“OTHERWISE THERE (WILL BH) THE CONSEQUENCE OF BIHBNAL
PERCHETION AND NON PHROHPTION, OB A BSSTBIOTION WITH
REGARD TO THH ONE OB THE OTHER ”’
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
On the doctrine of an all-pervasive soul, the perception and the
non-perception, the bondage and the release of the soul must all
become eternal The soul will be erther eternally fettered or eternally
free,—thus there must be “a restriction with regard to the one or the
other”
Vedinta-kaustubha
This aphomsem is meant for mdicatmg the defects in the visw
of those who mamtam the all pervasrveness of the soul which 18
1§B 28381,p 621,Bh B 2381,p 188
68 2 8 81
ADH 9] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 425
consciousness 9“QOtherwise,”’1e on any view other than our view,
viz that the soul 1s possessed of the essential attributes of bemg a
knower, knowledge by nature and atomic in mze,1¢6 on the doctrine
that the soul 18 consciousness merely and all pervading, there must be
the “consequence of eternal perception and non perception” On
account of the all pervadmg soul being ever unenveloped, there will be
perception, on account of the existence of mundane existence, non-
perception In this way, there will result sumultaneous bondage and
release, “07 8 restriction with regard to the one or the other” On
our view, on the other hand, the individual soul beimg of the mze of
an atom, going and returning, bemg enveloped and bemg unenveloped,
the object to be approached and the one approaching, are all posable,
and hence the respective difference between bondage and release,
too, 8 possible But on your view, there will result one or the other
only of bondage and release, haying the stated marks There must be
eternal bondage alone on the part of the soul which 1s consciousness
merely and ummobile, or there must be salvation slone,—such &
restriction will result Hence, 1t 1s establshed that the mdividual
soul 18 possessed of the attribute of bemg a knower, 18 knowledge by
nature and atomic in size
Here ends the section entitled “Departure” (9)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiskara
This 18 sutra $2 1n their commentanes Interpretation different
as before They adduoce here an argument for the existence of 0066701;
bemg connected with which the all pervading soul becomes atomio
Thus (The existence of buddhi must be admitted) otherwise there will
be the consequence of eternal perception and non perception. 1
1 8.8 2382,p 622 Bh 2 9889, 9 188
[st 2 3 82
426 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 10]
Adhikarana 10 The section entitled “The
agent” (8४८98 32 39)
SUTRA 32
“([HR INDIVIDUAL SOUL IS) AN AGENT, BEOAUSH OF SORIPTURE
HAVING A SENSE ”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
The soul mdeed 18 “an agent’, because the scrptural texts,
informing us about the means to enjoyment and salvation, such 88
“One desiring heaven should perform a sacrifice’ (Tart Sam 25 651),
“One desurmg salvation should worship Brahman’® and so on, have
& 86786
Vedinta-kaustubha
Now incidentally, the problem whether the soul 18 an agent 18
being discussed.
-On the doubt, viz whether the mdividual soul 18 an agent or
not,—if the prima facse view be as follows In the Katha रधा if
78 demed that the individual soul 18 an agent, thus ‘If the killer
thinks to एणा], xf the killed thmks himself 1166, both these do not
know ‘This one does not lull, nor 18 killed’ (Katha 219), and 1b
has been declared by the Lord too ‘“‘All actions are done by the
ganas of prakyii The soul, deluded by egomum, thmks ‘I am the
agent’”’’ (Git& 327) Hence, the gunas alone are agents, but never
the soul,—
We reply The soul alone 18 the agent Why! “Because of
Scerpture having a sense”, 1e because the scrptural texts, teaching
the means which are dependent on sentient beings, subject to enjoyment
and salvation, viz ‘Only doing works here, let one demre to lve a
hundred years’ (188 2), ‘One dearrmg heaven should perform sacrifices ’
(Tart Sam 266), ‘One desiring salvation should worship Brahman’,
‘Let one worship calmly’ (Chand 3141) and so on, have a sense
Tf those non sentient objects (viz the gunas) be the agent, the soriptural
texta teaching the means must be senseless
The (above quoted) scriptural text, on the other hand, shows that
the soul bemg eternal cannot be killed, but 7 1s not by any means
1 R, B, p 208, line 27, vol 2
2R B
{80 2 3 33
ADE 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 427
concerned with denying that the soul 18 an agent The Smrt
passage, too, shows only that the soul, which 1s deluded by the gunas
of prakyii, 18 an agent of mundane activities through those gunas
And, this has been stated by the Lord Himself thus ‘ “^ Those deluded
by the gunas of prakri are attached to the actrvities of the gunas”’’
(१६ 9 2 9) If the gunas be the agent and not the soul, then the
following statements will be nullfled viz ‘But 1f you will not carry
on this mghteous warfare’’’ (108 2 33), ‘For through action slone
Janaks and the rest have attaimed to perfection Havmg an eye to
the good of the world also, you should perform 96007." (Gitta 8 20),
‘Whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you offer, whatever
you give, whatever you practise as penance,—make that an offering
to me”’ (QGIt& 9 27), ˆ“ am firm, with my doubta removed I-willdo
according to your word”’’ (Git& 18 78) and so on.
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhaskara
This 18 8778 38 in their commentaries Literal mterpretation
same, but they hold that the soul’s state of bemg an agent 18 not
natural, but due to limiting adjunctse+ The same remarks apply to
the followmg three stitras also, which will not be noted separately
SUTRA 33
“On ACCOUNT OF THR THACHING OF (THE SOUL’S) MOVING ABOUT”
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
“On account of the teachmg of (the soul’s) moving about,”
in the passage He moves around in his own body as 0881786 ° (Brh
2 1 18 2); 10 18 an agent
Vedainta-kaustubha
“On account of the teaching” of the soul's “moving about”,
16 of 18 roammg around, m the passages ‘He, the ummortal, goes
1 828 2882,p 629 Bh B 2882,p 188 or the drfferent senses of the
Trora ‘ कि pee Bh B, eto
28, R, Bh Sk
[st 2 8 3436
438 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBABHA ADH 10]
wherever he wishes’ (अ 4312), ‘He moves around in his own
body as desired’ (Brh 21 18), the individual soul 1s an agent,—+this
is the sense
COMPARISON
Rimanuja and Srikantha
They take this sfitra and the next as one sutra by reversing the
order and adding a “oa” thus “Up&déndt vihBropadedic oa” 1
SUTRA 34
“ON ACOOUNT OF TAKING ”
Vedanta-parijaita-saurabha
Because of the scrptural mention of the taking (by the soul}
thus “So exactly he, having taken the senses’ (Brh 2 1 18)
Vedanta-kaustubha
On account of the sor:ptural mention of the taking (by the soul}
m the passage which introduces the topic thus ‘Just as a king’,
and contanues ‘So exactly does he, having taken these senses’ (Brh
2118), ‘Havmg taken by his intelligence of these senses’ (Brh
2 1 1.7), the mdividual soul 18 an agent
SUTRA 35
“ATSO ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION (OF THE SOUL AS AN
AGENT) WITH REGARD TO ACTIONS, OTHEBWISH, (THERE WILL BE)
REVERSAL OF DHSORIPTION *”
Vedinta -parijata -saurahha
“Also on account of the designation (of the soul) as an agent”
thus ‘Understandimg performs a sacrifice’ (Tait 2 6 5), the soul 1s an
agent If by the word ‘understanding’ buddhi be understood and not
the individual soul, the mstrumental case would have been used 8
1 &ल B,p 169, २8 8 Sk,B p 158 Parts 7 and 8
9 8, R, Bh, Sk, B
3 Jo the wnstromental cage ‘vyfdnena’ would have been used.
{80 2 3 96
477 10] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 429
Vedgnta-kaustubha
“Also on account of the demgnation” of the individual soul,
denoted by the term ‘knowledge’, as an agent of ordmary and Vedio
“actons” thus ‘Understanding performs a sacrifice, performs
४0008 88 well’ (Tait 2 5), the individual soul 18 an agent
Lf 1t be objected By the term ‘understandmg’ buddhi 18 to be
understood and not the individual soul,—{the author) reples “Other
wise, 1e if by the term ‘understanding’ the mdividual soul be not
understood, but buddhi 1s understood, then there must be “reversal
of the description”’, 1e buddhi bemg the mstrument, there must
have been the demgnation of an mstrument thus ‘by understanding’
But there 1s no such designation Henoe, here 1s & designatzon of an
agent by the stated case ending, viz ‘Understandmg’ Hence the
individual soul 1s an agent
SUTRA 36
“'T eR IS NO RESTRICTION AS IN THE CASH OF PERORBPTION ”
Vedainta-padrijaita-saurabha
“‘ There 18 no restriction’ with regard to the actiona based on the
perception of their fruxta
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz if the individual soul be the agent, then
having taken into consideration the good and the evil which are the
frorta of good and evil works, and bemg diagusted with the evil, 1,
with 9 view to obtaining the good, ought to do what 1s conducive to
the latter,—(the author) rephes
‘As 77 the case of perception ˆ Just as there 1s the perception
of the good and the evil which are the fruits of good and evil works
performed previously, so there 18 “no restriction ' with regard to works,
amos we find that people are by chance sometimes inclmed to what 16
beneficial and sometames to what 1s not beneficial ¬
1 1 © although a man percerves the good and evil resulta of his past acta
yot there 18 no fixed rule that he always afterwards does what 18 good and avoids
what ia bad Aa he is ruled by external circumstances, he may sometimes be
inchned to what 1s bad, fhough knowing from his past experiences that such acts
lead to harmful consequences
[at 2 3 87
430 VEDANTA PAELJATA-SAUBABHA 4DH 101
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 18 sitra 37 m his commentary Interpretation different,
viz “Asin the case of perception, there 18 non restriction (with regard
to actions)” Thai 18, just as the soul, though free with regard to
perceptions, sometimes percerves what 1s good, and sometimes what
18 bad, so the soul, though free to act, sometimes does what 1s good,
and sometmmes what 18 bad 1
Ramfanuja, Srikantha and Baladeva
This 18 sittra 36 in the commentaries of the first two, but siltra 35
in the commentary of the last They mterpret it as followmg (If
prakria were the agent and not the individual soul, then there would
be) non restriction (of actions) as in the case of perception”’ That 18,
just 88 1† has been shown ? that if the soul be all pervasive no definite
perception. will be possible, so 1f prakrta be the agent, no definte activity
will be poamble, mmnce prakrt: bemg all pervading and common to all,
all activities would. produce resulta in the case of all souls, or produce
no resulta 1n the case of any one *
SUTRA 37
“Ow ACCOUNT OF THR REEVEBSAL OF POWER”
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
If buddhi be the agent, then 1ts mstrumental power will cease,
and 1t must come to have the power ofanagent Hence the individual
soul 18 the agent
Vedinta-kaustabha
To the objection, viz m the text ‘Understanding performs a
sacrifice’ (Tart 25), by the word ‘understanding’ buddhi alone 1s to
be understood, and 1४ 28 the agent Hence there mstrumental case
has not been used “—(the author) replies
1§ 2, 8397 p 626
2 Under &न B 2882 Sk B 3882, GB 2830
9 fr B 2836, p 158 Part 2, Sk B 2886 p 169, Parta 7 and 8, G.B
2 $ 36, p 208 Chap 3
4 Vide VPS 283865 above
[st 2 3 38
ADH 10 | VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 43
The individual soul alone 18 the agent If buddhi be admitted to
be the agent, then “‘on account of the reversal of power”, 208 instru-
mental power will 06986; and 17 must come to have the power of an
agent Moreover, 1f buddhi be the agent, then the power of enjoyment,
too, must pertain to 10 alone ‘This bemg so, bondage and release
must result on the part of buddh: alone
COMPARISON
RaémAnvja, Srikantha and Baladeva
This 18 sutra 37 in the commentaries of the first two, but sfitra 36
in the commentary of the last Ther interpretation 18 smular to the
last portion of Srintvfsa’s interpretation, viz that xf buddhi or prakria
be the agent, the power of enjoyment too must belong to 101
SUTRA 38
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABSENCE OF DEEP CONCENTRATION ”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
If the soul be not an agent, then “the absence of deep
concentration”, due to something which 18 absolutely driferent from
the non sentient,* will result, and hence the soul is the agent
Vedanta-kaustubha
“Deep concentration”’ means abiding as having Brahman for
one’s soul, after meditating on one’s own form,—distinot from the body,
pense-Organs, mind and intelligence,—preceded by the stopping of the
functions of the mind. As the “‘absence of such a deep concentration”,
the means to aalvation, will result, rf the dividual soul be not an
agent,—it 18 known that the individual soul alone 18 the agent
1g 8 2887 p 158, Part 2 Sk B 2837,p 154, Parta7and& GB
2386, pp 208 9, Chap ॐ
9 Acciana-mdirdt,1e from even the shghtest portion of the non-sentient
[st 2 3 39
432 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 10]
SUTRA 39
“AND LIKE A CARPENTER, IN BOTH WAYS”
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
The soul scte or does not act according to 1ta own wish, “hke 8
carpenter’’, and as such a situation 1s possible “in both ways” If
buddhi be the agent, then there bemg the absence of demre and the
like on ita part, there will be the absence of such a situation
Vedainta-kaustubha
The soul,—the nature of which 18 to act or abstam from acting, and
which 18 possessed of the attributes of ‘bemg an agent’ and 80 on, Jastng
80 long as 11 1tself does,—though connected with a group of instruments
like speech and the like, performs action or does not perform action
according to 1ts wish, and thus if the soul be an agent a situation is
possible “in both ways’’,—yjust as 8 carpenter, though provided with
mstrumenta like axe and the rest, constructs chariots, eto , according to
his wish ‘But acting or reframmmng from action 18 not posmble on the
part of buddhi, which 1s an instrument lke the axe, by reason of its
non sentzence On account of the etermty of its proxumity to 4
sentient bemg, as well as on account of the absence, on its part,—of
any demre—the cause of action or maction,—there must be either
eternal activity or eternal non activity, on rts part Hence, it 18
estabhahed that the soul alone 18 the agent
Here ends the section entitled ‘' The agent” (10)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiaiskara
This 18 sutra 40 in their commentaries Interpretation absolutely
different ‘They take 1t to be formimg an adhikarana by rteelf, con-
cerned with the question whether the mdividual soul 1s an agent by
nature or as connected with [णक adyuncta, and accept the second
alternatrve Hence the parallel mstance “ie yathi ca taksa”’
18 interpreted differently by them thus In ordmary 8 a carpenter
18 miserable and so long as he 18 an agent,1e works with his tools,
{80 2 3 40
ADH 11 | VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 433
eto But when he returns home, lays sade his tools and 1s no longer
an agent, he becomes happy In the very same manner the soul
suffers 80 long as 1t 18 aN agent through nescience, but when 1 returns
1018, 1 © realizes 1ts real state, frees 1taclf from sense organs and so on,
and ceases to be an agent, 1t becomes happy 1
Baladeva
This 18 sutra 38 m his commentary He takes 1t to be an
adhikarana by riself Interpretation different, viz “And hke the
carpenter (the soul 18 active) in two ways’? That 18, the carpenter 18
an mdirect agent through the medzum of its wnstruments, and also a
drect agent mm handling those instruments themselves f§imilarly,
the soul 18 an indirect agent through 108 sense organs, and 1s also a
direct agent in the act of controlling those sense organs 2
Adhikarana 11 The 8680107 entitled “Under
the control of the Highest” (87४२८88 40 41)
SUTRA 40
“But (THE AGHNTSHIP OF THE SOUL PROOHEDS) FROM TH HicHusT,
BHOAUSE THAT IS TAUGHT BY SORIPTURR ”
Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha
The agentahip of that nd1vidual soul proceeds “from the Highest”
as 118 cause, in accordance with the scnptural text “Entered within,
the ruler of men” (Lait Ar 311 1, 2 8)
Vedainta-kaustubha
Now the problem 1s being discussed whether the mdividual soul
18 an agent as controlled by the Ehghest Soul, or independently
On the doubt, viz whether the stated agentshzp of the individual
soul 18 under 208 own control or under the control of the Highest Soul,
if the prema facte view be Under its own control alone In ordimary
88 2840, pp 628 29, Bh B 2340,p 139
9 428 2838 p 120, Ohap 2
3 ए; 181
28
[st 2 8 41
434 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAUBRABHA ^ 11]
018, a man engages himself to tilung and the hke by himself out of
demre for crops, but does not wait for the Highest,—
We reply The agentahrp of the mdividual soul proceeds “from
the Highest” as its cause Why? On the ground of the following
scriptural texta ‘Yor he alone makes one, whom he wishes to raise
up from these worlds, do good deeds He alone makes one, whom
he wishes to lead down from these worlds, dp bad deeds’ (Kaug
9 8), ‘Hntered withm, the ruler of men’ (ग्या; Ar 3111, 2), “Who
rules the soul with’ (Sat Br 1467, 302) and 80 on, as well aa on
the ground of the Smrti passages, viz =" “And J am mtuated withm the
heart ofall From me proceed memory, knowledge and their absence” °
(Gita 15 15)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiskara
Literal interpretation same, although as before they are speaking
of the soul’s agentahip bemg due to lmiting adjuncts The same
remarks apply to ther interpretation of the next sitra
SUTRA 41
“Bow (rae LORD MAKES THE SOUL ACT) HAVING REGARD TO THR
BEFORTS MADE, ON ACCOUNT OF THE FUTILITY OF WHAT 18
ENJOINED AND WHAT IS PROHIBITHD AND 80 ON ””
Vedainta-parijita-saurabha
The term “but” 18 meant for disposing of the fault of mequalty.
The Highest Bemg, who has “regard” for the works done by the
undividual soul, makes 1t do good deeds and the rest mn another birth
too, “on account of the futahty of what 1s enjomed and what 1s pro-
hibtted ”
Vedinta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz if the Supreme Soul be the matigator, then
He must be open to the charge of mequality and rest,—the author,
rephes
1 P 1074 lune 18
[st 2 3 41
ADE 11] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 435
The term “but” 18 meant for disposing of the above objection
The Supreme Soul, who has “ regard” for, 16 takes into account,
the efforta made by the individual soul, 16 for 15 good and bad
deeds, makes 1# do good deeds and the rest m another birth too, and
gives it pleasure and the like accordmgly Hence, He cannot be
charged with partiality, ete
if 1t be asked Why should the Supreme Bemg take into account
the efforts made by the individual soul*—the author reples “On
account of the futality of what 1s enjomed and what 1s prohibited”
If the Highest Person takes into account the efforts made by the soul,
then alons, injunctions and prohibitions, such as, ‘One who desires
for heaven should perform the Jyotistoma sacrifice’ (Ap 8 8 10211),
“A Brabmana must not be killed” and so on, do not become futile
The meanmmg of the phrase, “and 80 on” 18 that faults hke suffermg
arising from good deeds, and happmess arising from bad deeds, and
80 on, result Simcoe the Supreme Soul takes mto account the works
done by souls, He cannot, by any means, be charged with mequality,
eto , though He 1s the imstagator of what 18 enjomed and what 1s pro
hibited, and 1s, thereby, the bestower of favour and disfavour Under
the aphoram “(There are) no mequality and cruelty (on the part of
the Lord), because of (His) haying regard (for the works of souls)”
(Br 98. 21 83), 1t has been said that no mequality and the rest pertamn
to the Highest m His creation of the variegated world—this 1s the
dustmeotion? Hence, the Highest Person, omnipotent and the Lord
of all, 1s the mstigator of good deeds and the rest im accordance with the
good and bad deeds performed before, and 1s the giver of fruits accord-
ugly to them ‘Thus, 16 18 estabbshed that the wndividual soul 18 an
agent as controlled by the Highest
Here ends the section enfatled “The Highest’’ (11)
1 P 209 vol 2
9 1 © there 18 no repetition here, amce under Br 8G 21 83 1b bas been
shown that the Lord 1s not partial as a creator whereas 10 19 bemg shown here
that He 1s not partual as an snaiigaior to action
[st 2 3 42
436 VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA ADH 12]
Adhikarana 12 The section entitled “A
part” (Sttras 42-62)
SUTRA 42
“(Tam INDIVIDUAL 78) ^ PART (OF BRAMAN), ON ACCOUNT OF
THE DESIGNATION OF VARIETY, AND OTHHRWISE, ALSO SOME
READ (THAT BranManN IS OF) THE NATUBH OF FISHERMEN,
GAMBLERS AND THE REST”
Vedinta-pairijata-saurabha
The individual soul 1s a part of the Supreme Soul, m accordance
with the desgnation of difference m texta lke ‘The two unborn
ones, the knower and the non knower, the lord and the non lord’
(Svet 19) and so on}, and on account of the designation of non
difference m texts like ‘Thou art that’ (Ohind 686, eto) And
“also” the Atharvanikas “read” that Brahman 18 of “the nature of
fishermen, gamblers and the rest”, thus “Brahman are the fishermen,
Brahman are the slaves, Brahman are these gamblers”’ >
Vedanta-kaustubha
It has been pointed out that the agentahip of the mdividual soul
18 under the control of Brahman Now, the author 18 pomting out
the relation between the two, consstently with the scmptural texts
designating both difference and non difference
On the doubt, vz whether the individual soul 18 different from
Brahman or non different from Him, or a part of Brahman and as
such both different and non different from Him,—zf 1b be suggested.
The imdividual soul must be different from Brahman, as a man 18
from the king, because the texts designating non difference are figura-
tive and because a non difference between the non knowing and the
all knowing 18 mmposaible Or, 10 must be non different only (from
Brahman), because the scriptural texts designating difference are
figurattve There bemg a mutual oppomtion between difference and
non difference, of erther the texts about difference or the texts about
non difference must certamly be metaphorical,—
IR ४ 8, R Bh, Sk, B
[st 2 3 42
ADH 12] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 437
We reply The individual soul 1s neither absolutely different
from the Highest Person, nor absolutely non different from Hm, but
18 & part of the Highest Self, m accordance with the sarptural text
“For he 1s a part of the Highest” A ‘part’ means a ‘power’, m
accordance with the scriptural text “This individual soul, a power
of the Highest, 18 small m power and not mdependent” A ‘part’
should not be understood here as ® portion, actually severed hke a
portion of wealth and the rest, for rf the mdrvidual soul be & portion
cut off from Brahman, then texts lke ‘Without part’ (Svet 6 19)
and the like, will be contradicted, and because if 1t be like a portion
of wealth, there will result an absolute difference (between Brahman
and the soul) and hence the texta hke ‘Thou art that’ (Chind 68 6,
etc ) will be set aside (The true view 218 ) The mdividual soul 18;
by nature, different from the Supreme Person, predicated to be the
whole, and the ocean of a mass of attmbutes like 0701118 06008 and the
rest,—aimoe it 18 predicated to be a part, and 1s subject to bondage
and release But 1t 28 yet non-different from Him, as 108 existence
and activity are under the control ofthe whole Why* “On account
of the designation of variety”, 16 on account of the demgnation of
difference, “and otherwise’’,1e and on account of the designation
of non difference The sense 18 that the two 008 of texta being of
equal force, there 18 a uatural difference—non difference between the
madiyidual soul and the Supreme Soul ‘The following are deagnations
of duference ‘Who rules the soul withm’ (Sat Br 1467, 30%),
‘Entered within, the ruler of men’ (Tat Ar 3111, 2%), ‘The soul,
verily, 18 supreme, self dependent, possessed of superior qualities’,
‘The mdividual soul 18 possessed of httle power, not self dependent,
lowly’, “The two unborn ones, the knower and the non knower, the
lord and the non lord’ (Svet 19) and so on ‘The following are
dempnations of non difference “Thou art that’ (Chand 686, etc),
‘Tins soul 1 Brahman’ (Brh 26519, 4465), ‘I am Brahman’
(Brh 1410) and 80 on And “also” the followers of one branch,
viz the Atharvamkas, “read” that Brahman 18 of the “nature of
fishermen, gamblers and the hike” thus “Brahman are these fishermen,
Brahman are the slaves, Brahman are these gamblers”
1 P 1074 hns 18 > 2 181
[80 2 3 4344
438 VEDINTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 12]
COMPARISON
Samkara
lateral interpretation same, although as usual Samkara holds
that the soul 1s not a real part of Brahman, but a part as st were 7
The same remarks apply to the followmg two siitras
SUTRA 43
“On ACCOUNT OF THE WORDING OF 4 SACRED TEXT ”
Vedinta-pirijaita-saurabha
“On account of the wording of the sacred text,’’ viz “A foot of
him are all bemga’ (2 V 10 908 *, Chand 3126), the md:vidual
soul 18 & part of Brahman
Vedinta-kaustubha
The imdrvidual soul 1s nothing but 9 part of the Supreme Soul
Why? Also “on account of the wording of the sacred text’? ‘A foot
of him are all bemgs, three feet of him are smmortal in the heaven’
(Rg V 10908, Chand 3126) A ‘feet’ means a ‘part’
SOTRA 44
“AWD, MOBHOVER, (TT 18) DECLARED BY Super”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
Tt 18 declared by Smrti also that the dividual soul 18 & part ot
Brahman thus ‘“A part of my own self, m the world of men, has
become the mdrvidual soul, the eternal "` ` (Gité 15 7 8)
त्क श ण्म
1 8 8 2 8 48, © 636
2 P 340, line 19
6 R Bh 61, 8
9 68, 2, Bh, Sk, B
[st 28 45
ADE 12] VEDINTA-KAUSTUBHA 439
Vedinta-kaustubha
Tt has been declared m a Smpii passage by the Highest Person
Himself that the dividual soul 1s a part of Brahman, thus ‘“‘A part
of my own self, in the world of men, has become the mnd:vidual soul,
the eternal’ ` (Gita 15 7)
COMPARISON
Ram4nuja
He omits the “ca”’ 1
SUTRA 45
“Bur LIX LIGHT AND THE REST, NOT 80 THE HigHasst ”’
Vedanta -parijita-saurabha
Though the individual soul 1s a part of the Supreme Person, yet
the whole (.e the Lord) does not experience pleasure and pain, just
as “light and the rest’’ are devoid of the virtue or vice inhering 1n their
parta
7 Vedinta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz then the virtue or vice pertaming to the
individual soul may belong to the Sapreme Soul too, seemg that a
part has no separate existence from the whole,—the author replies
here
“The Highest,” 16 the Supreme Soul, does “not” become
“so”,1e does not come to share the virtue and vice pertammmg to the
mdividual soul The author states a parallel mstance “Like hghit
and the rest”, 1 8 just as “lght”’,1e the sun and the rest, are not
touched. by the attributes of their rays which are their parta,ie by
ther contact and the rest with pure and impure objecta By the
phrase “and the rest”, the ether and the like are understood, 1¢
just as the ether and the like are not touched by the good qualities
found im the sound of conch-shell, cackoos and so on, nor by the bad
qualities found in the sound of crows and the hke The term “but”
18 Suggestive of the absence of an intermixture of the attmbutes of the
part and the whole ‘The objections, resulting from the apprehension
1 SB 2344 p 161, Part 2
[st 2 8 46
440 VEDANTA EAUSTUBHA ADH 12]
that the Highest Bemg 1s subject to karmas by reason of His connec-
tion with the hearta of mdividual souls which are subject to Kkarmas,
have been disposed of, on the ground that the Lord 18 not subject to
Karmas, under the aphomem “Enjoyment resulta” (Br Si 12 8)
Under the aphomsm “Not even on account of place” (Br अ 321),
we shall dispose of (the objection based on Brahman’s being connected.
with “places’, viz the hearts) on the ground that the Lord, having
the ‘places’ by nature, 18 yet not subject to karmas Here, on the
other hand, xt should be known that the objections ramwed on the
ground of His own parts are disposed of 1
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 18 sitra 46 1 018 commentary The general import of the
siitra, as well as the interpretation of the phrase 1e “prakAéidivat”’
different He develops ४18 doctmne of upaidhi here Thus, the
शपि means, according to him Just as the hght of the sun and the
moon, pervading the entire expanse of the ether, appears to be straight
or bent accordingly as the lmmitmg adjunct with which 1t 1s in contact,
viz finger, eto are straight or bent, but does not become so really,
or just as the ether, though mmagmed to move when jars are moving,
0068 not really move, or just as the sun does not really tremble when
1t8 images on water tremble, so although the individual soul undergoes
pleasure and, pain, Brahman does not, since the soul 18 but a fictatious
part of Brahman, due to limiting adjuncts, and not > real part 9
Ramanuja and Srikantha
They too develop here their peculiar theory of Viéistidvarta
Thus, the इतित means, according to them “(The mdzvidual soul 18 a
part of Brahman) as light and the rest (of the sun, etc 28 of the sun
and so on), not so the highest (1e Brahman 18 not of the same nature
1 Ie there 18 no शश्वत्तव, here Under Br अ 1 2 8, rb has been shown
that Brahman, though connected with the hearts of individual souls 18 not subject
to their pleasures and pam in this sutra 10 w shown that Brahman, though
connected with the mdividual souls as their whole is not yet subject to their
pleasure and pam And under Br Su 3 21,16 will be shown that Brahman,
though the ener controler, 12 not subject to the states and faults of souls
3 828 28 46, pp 688 639
[st 2 8 46
«+त 12] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 441
as the soul)” That 1s, the soul 18 a part of Brahman in the sense of
beng an attribute (visegana) of Brahman, and just aa the attmbute and
its substratum are not identical, so the soul and Brahman are not 1
They continue the same topic mm the following two अति पड
Baladeva
This 18 इतिप 44 m his commentary Interpretaizon absolutely
different He begins a new adhikarana here (five 80198) concerned
with the question of the Lord’s mcarnations Thus, this sitra means,
aocording to him ‘But supreme (carnations of the Lord are) not 80 ,
(16 parts of the Lord as the mdividual souls are), as in the case of
hght” That 1s, just aa though the sun and the fire fly are both called
‘ght’, yet the word. has a different meanmg when apphed to the sun,
so though the moarnations and ordimary individual souls are both
called “parta’ of the Lord, yet the word has a different meanmg when
applied to the incarnations,1e 1t means then the entare Lord 2
SUTRA 46
५.७7 SMBTIS DECLABE ”
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
“And Smrtis declare” ‘Of these, He who 18 the Supreme Soul 18
declared to be eternal and free from the properties of matter, and He
18 not touched by the fruits too, just aa & lotus leaf 18 not touched by
water’ The active self, on the other hand, 1s something different,
who 18 subject to bondage and release’ (Mah& 12 18754-13755 4)
Vedainta-kaustubha
The sages also declare that the part alone 18 subject to the fruita
of action done by rteelf, but not the whole, thus ‘Of these, He who
18 the Supreme Soul 1s declared to be eternal and free from the properties
of matter, and He 18 not touched by the fruita too, just as a lotus
leaf is not touched by water —Thbe active self, on the other hand,
1 §ल B 2845 pp 161 62, Part2,8k B 23848, pp 161 62, Parts 7 and 8
2GB 2844, pp 328 24, Chap 2
8 One line omitted 4 P 852, hnes 9 10 vol 3
[st 2 8 47
442 VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA ape 12]
18 something different, who 18 subject to bondage and release He 1s
subject to seventeen क्वाह (Mahi 1213754-56a) It has been
declared by Scripture, too, thus ‘Of the two, one eats the sweet berry,
the other, without eatmg looks on’ (Svet 46, Mund 3 1 1)
COMPARISON
RamAnuja and Srikantha
They quote from अणा to show that the soul 1s the attribute of
the Lord 1
Baladeva
He quotes from Smrta to show that the mcoarnations are not parta
of the Lord m the same sense the mdividual souls are >
SUTRA 47
“INJUNCTION AND PROHIBITION (FIT IN) ON ACCOUNT OF (THE
SOULS’) CONNEOTION WITH BODIES, AS IN THE CASE OF FIRE AND
80 ON ”?
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
“Inyuncfaon and prohibition” like ‘One who 1s desirous of heaven.
should perform sacrifices’ (Tat Sam 2553),‘A Sidra 18 not to be
mutiated to 9 sacrifice’ (Tart Sam 711) and so on do indeed fit in,
on. account of the connection of the individual souls with different
bodies, m sprte of their being an equality among them as parts of
Brahman, just as fire 18 brought from the house of a Srotmya,5 but not
from the crematory, or just as water and the like, touched by clean.
persons, pots and so on are accepted and not others
Vedanta-kaustubha
Tf the individual souls be all equal as parte and the rest of Brahman,
then to whom can the imjunctions and prohibitions refer? 1456670 |
In spite of ther sameness, myjunctions and prohibitions hke ‘One
1 St B 2346,p 162 Part 2,Sk.B 28 46, 7 160, Parts 7 and 8
24GB 2345
8 P 208 108 27 vol 2 Not quoted by others
4 P 24] line 21, vol 2 Not quoted by others
9 A Brdimana versed in the Veda
{st 2 3 48
^+ 12] VEDANTA PABIJATA SAUBABHA 4.43
demrous of heaven should perform sacrifices’ (Tart Sam 2655),
‘Hence a Sidra 18 not to be inituated to 9 sacrifice’ (Tait Sam 71 1)
fit in on account of their connection with different bodies, “as m the
0888 Of fire and 80 on”’, 1 6 कमेनत
brought from the house of a ya, but one from crematory and the
hke 18 rejected, and just as the urme and exorement of cows and the
hke are enjoined as holy, but those very things of different animals
are rejected.
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiskara
He develops m this connection his doctrme of Adhyiaa 1
Bhaiskara too speaks of his peculiar doctrme of Up&dhi
Baladeva
This 18 sitra 46 m 718 commentary He contmues the same
theme,—viz the distmction between imoarnations and ordinary
individuals He interprets the sitra thus (In the case of individual
souls there are) injunctions and prohibitions, on account of (their)
connection with bodies, as in the case of light (1e the eye)? That 18,
the individual soul, though a part of the Lord, is yet connected with
neacience and, a body, and 18 as such under the control of the Lord
for rta activity and ynactivity and soon But an mcarnation, though
a part of the Lord, 18 not under His control, just as the eye or the
power of vision, though a part of the sun, depends upon the per
mission,1e the presence, of the sun for ita activity or otherwise, but
a ray of the sun, as & part of the sun, 18 identical with 1t, and does not
depend upon any permission and the like of the sun
SUTRA 48
“AND ON AOCOUNT OF NON HXTHNSION THERE IS NO EXTENSION ”’
Vedainta-pairijdta-saurabha
In spite of the fact that the mdividual souls are parts of the
all pervasive Bemg, and in spite of the fact that they themselves are
1 88 2848,pp 640 Bh B 2348 p 142
SGB 2346 pp 226 27,Chap 2
[80 2 8 49
4A4. VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 12]
all pervasive by reason of their (all pervasive) attribute (of knowledge),1
the mdividual souls, bemg atomic by nature, are not all pervamve,
and as such there 1s no confusion among karmas
Vedinta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz On your view, too, on account of beng
parts of the all pervasive Bemg, aa well 88 on account of posseamng
an all pervaarve atimbute, all the souls come to experience the
pleasures and the hke in all the bodies, and as such ® confusion among
karmas, a8 well 88 a confusion among the enjoyments of their fruita.
will result Hence, as the view that the soul 1s a part of the all
pervading Brahman, 1s atomio by itself and 1s all pervasive by reason
of its attribute, mvolves unnecessary complications, so Kapila’s
doctrine of the soul, viz that the soul 18 all pervamve by itself, 18
more acceptable,—the author rephes here
“On account of the non extension,” 16 non all pervasiveness
of the souls,—mutually distanct by reason of being atomic, and distinct
also from the Whole (1e the Lord) by bemg predicated as parts,—
“there 1s no confusion” ‘The term “and” indicates the contraction
of the soul’s knowledge during 108 state of bondage
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 1s sitra 47 in his commentary The same topic continued
“And on account of the non extension (1e mcompleteness of the
mdividual soul, there 38) no (possibility of) a confumion (between x6
and an incarnation)’’ That 18, the soul 1s atomic and not full and
perfect hke an mecarnation, hence different from him 3
SOTRA 49
“AND (THH DOCTRINES OF THH ALI-PERVASIVHNESS OF THE SOUL)
AEH FALLACIES MERELY ”
Vedainta-pdrijaita-saurabha
And the doctrines of an all pervasive soul and the rest of the
opponents lke Kapila and others are “fallanous merely’, amoe,
1 Vide VPS 38 98 *GB 2347, p 227, Chap 2
fst 28 49
ADE 12] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 445
on those views, there resulta a confusion (among karmas and so on
of the souls)
Vedainta-kaustubha
But the doctrines of an all pervasive soul and the rest of Kapila,
Kanda and so on are “fallacious merely’’, as they have no (scriptural)
bess, and as, on these views, there a confusion among all practical
transactions will resuli By the term “and” 1i 1a mdicated that
such teachers sumply delude people
COMPARISON
Samkara
This 18 इति 501n his commentary 0616808 “abbisah’’ in place
of “&bhasih’” Interpretation absolutely different, viz “(The mdrv1
dual soul 1s) only a reflection (of Brahman)*’ Thus, here he develops
his doctrine of Pratabimba 1
Ramanuja
He reads “a&bbdsah’’, and interprets the sitra thus “(The view
that Brahman 1s obscured. by limrtang adjunct or nesmence) 18 mmply
a fallacy” He accepts the alternative reading “A&bhasih” too and
ponta out that in that case the 8009 will mean “(The various reasons
advanced by the supporters of the above doctmne) are sumply
fallacies” 2
Bhaskara
This 18 sitra 60 in his commentary He substitutes “va” m
place of “‘ca’? He, also, hke Ram&nouja, directa this sitra agamat
the Samkarite view, thus ‘‘(Nesaenoces are) sumply fallacies” >
Srikantha
He too directs this sfiitra against the Samkante view, interpreting
10 hke Ramaénuja’s second interpretation *
Baladeva
This 18 stitra 48 1n his commentary He reads “‘ibhaisah’? The
same topic conlanued, viz “(The reason adduced by the prema facte
1 8 8 2850,pp 642 9 St B 2349 p 163, Part 2
४ 20. B 2380 p 142 4 अ B 3 8 49, 7 161 Parta 7 and 8
[st 2 $ 60
446 VEDANTA PABIJATA SAURABHA ADH 12]
objector to prove the mmulanty of the soul with the incarnation) 15 ॐ
mere fallacy” That 18, the argument
The soul 1s a part of the Lord
The incarnation 1s a part of the Lord
the soul 1s equal to the incarnation,
evidently involves the logical fallacy of undistributed middle +
SUTRA 50
““BROAUSH OF THE NON BESTRIOTION WITH REGARD TO TH
UNSEEN PRINOIPLE ”
Vedanta -parijita-saurabha
On the doctrine of an all pervastve soul, confusion 18 unavoidable
even if recourse be taken to the unseen pmnaiple, “because of the
non restriction with regard to the unseen pmnciple’’
Vedanta-kanustubha
To the argument, viz there 18 no confusion among all practical
transactions on our view too, since the unseen principle 1s the regulator,
—the author replies
Confumon resulta undeed on the view of the opponents, ‘‘ because
of the non-restriction with regard to the unseen principle’’, viz to
whom may the unforeseen prinaple, generated 1 the vicmty of all
the all pervasrve souls, belong and to whom not
COMPARISON
RamfAnuja and Srikantha
Interpretation same, only they direct this and the remaimmng
एत ४8 to the refutation of the Samkarite view, and not to the view
of Kapila and others
Baladeva
This 18 हर्त क 60 1n his commentary He begins a new adhikarana
here (three stitras), concerned with proving the mutual driference
among the individual souls Thus, this sitra means, according to
1 @ 75 2848 p 288, Chap 2
[st 2 3 61
ADH 12] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 447
him “(The mdividual souls, though emmular m ther essential nature,
are yet different from one another) on account of the non determinate
ness (16 non similarity) of (ther) deatumes” 1
SOTRA 51
“AND IT IS SO EVEN WITH REGARD TO DETERMINATION AND THD
LIKE ”’
Vedainta-parijita-saurabha
There 1s no restriction “even with regard to determmmations and.
the hke”, such as ‘I shall do this and not that’
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the argument, viz A restriction 18 possible, viz the unseen.
principle belongs to one who has the determmation ‘I shall do this
and not that’,—the author replies here
“Determination’’ means resoluion By the phrase “and the
hke” reverence and 80 on are understood ‘There 1s, indeed, no
restriction with regard to the unseen principle even in the case of
resolution, reverence and the rest
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 18 8078 51 17 his commentary He contanues the same theme,
viz “And thus (the mdrvidual souls are different) with regard to
(ther) 068 and the rest also” 1090 18, adrgta or the unseen principle
18 the ultzmate cause which determines the difference between the
souls, and not their desires, mclmations and the hke, which are only
the secondary causes >
1GB 2849 p 220, Chap 2
9 © 5 2350,p 280, Ohap 2
[80 2 9 52
448 VEDANTA PABLJATA SAURABHA ADH 12]
SUTRA 52
“Iz If BH OBJECTED ON ACCOUNT OF PLACE, (WE BEPLY ) NO,
ON AOCOUNT OF INGLUSION ”’
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
If 1t be argued that “‘on account of the place”’ of the self, mtuated
within ita own body, everything 1s conmstent,—(we reply ) “no”
“On account of the mclumon” therem of the places of all the souls
Here ends the third quarter m the second chapter of the Vedanta
parte saurabba, an interpretation of the Sariraka mim&imsd
texts, and composed by the reverend Nimb&rka
Vedainta-kaustubha
If + be objected A definite restriction 18 possible with regard to
determinations and the rest, “on acoonnt of 70180817, 1 6 1018 17 the region
of the soul, stuated within 108 own body alone, that the conjunction
of the mind (with the soul) takes place,—on account of such a place of
the soul,—({we reply ) “no’’, “on account of the molumon”’ therein
of the places of other souls too The sense 18 this Since all the
souls are connected with one and the same mind, the determunations
and the rest, due to the conjunction of the mind (with the soul), must
be common to all, and hence the nnseen principle, due to them, must
indeed be common to all This being so, the confumon among all
practical transactions remains as before Hence, rt 1s established:
that the imdividual soul 1s a part of Brabman, Lord Vasudeva, is
atomic in aize, knowledge by nature, possessed of the atimbutes of
“bemg an agent’, “bemg © knower’ and so on and different in every
body
Here ends the section entitled “A part” (12)
Here ends the third quarter of the second chapter in the holy
Vedanta kaustubha, a नूलवतलाः fam the Sariraka mim&msa and
composed by the reverend teacher visa, dwelling under the lotus
feet of the holy Nimb&rka
(s0 2 3 52
ADH 12] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 449
COMPARISON
Baladeva
This 18 sfitra 51 1n his commentary The same topic continued
“Tf 1t be objected (that the difference among the individual souls 1s)
due to the difference of (their) environments, (we reply ) no, because
(the difference of environments, such as heaven, hell, and different
0४8 in the world) are moluded under (1e due to) भता ` That 1,
finally, adrgta or the unseen prinaple 1s the cause of the difference
among the souls +
Résumé
The third quarter of the second chapter contamns—
52 siitras and 12 adhikaranas, according to Nimbairka
58 siitras and 17 adhikaranas, according to
62 siitras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Raémé&nuja,
69 sittras and 17 adhikaranas, according to Bh&skara
52 sittras and 12 admkaranaa, according to Srikantha
51 siitras and 11 adhikaranas, acoordmg to Baladeva
Samkara and Bhi&skara break each of the stitras 3 and 26 m
Nimbérka’s commentary into two different ones, and omzt sttra 11
Ramanuja and Srikantha break sitra 5 m Nimbérka’s com
mentary mto two different sfitras, and take sfitras 33 and 84 m 10 as
one stitra, reversing the order
Baladeva omits siitra 11 in Nimbé&rka’s commentary
aan Pr G be
1GB 23651,p 280, Chap 2
29
SECOND CHAPTER (Adhyiya)
FOURTH QUARTER (Pada)
Adhikarana 1 The seotionentitled “The origin
of the sense organs” (Stitras 1 - 4)
SUTRA 1
*LIZEWISH THE SENSE ORGANS >°
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
The origin of the organs 18 beimg considered The sense organs
originate hke the ether and the rest
Vedanta -kaustubha
In the preceding quarter, the absence of any contradiction among
the scriptural texts regarding the ether and the rest has been shown
Now, the author 1s showing the non contradictory nature of the
seruptural texts regarding the organs of the individual soul
On the doubt, viz whether the sense organs omgimate or not,
the prema facte view 1s as follows In the discussions about origin,
© @ im the scriptural text ‘From this soul the ether has origmated ’
(Tait 21), there 1s no mention of the origin of the sense organs,
and im the scriptural text ‘“'TThe non existent, venly, was this in the
beginning’’ ‘Then they said ^" What was that non-existent = ¶ ‘“‘'The
Bapes, verily, were the non existent in the beginning’ Then they
said “° Who were those sages’’ “The sense organs, verily, were the
Bepres’’” (Sat Br 611, 11), the sense organs are declared to exst
prior to creatzon, hence they do not origmate
With regard to 1t, we reply Just as the elements lke the ether
and the rest, mentioned in the passage ‘ Hrom him arise the vital-
breath, the mind and all the sense organs, the ether, the aur, fire’
(Mund 21 3), omgmate, “so the sense organs’’, too, onginate
1 > 499 11788 1 2
[80 24 2
ADH 1] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 451
COMPARISON
Srikantha
Interpretation different, viz he takes 1t to be settang down the
prema face view thus ‘(Just as the individual soul 18 eternal) so are
the sense organs 1 (as declared by Scripture 9)
SUTRA 2
“On aCCOUNT OF THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF A SEOONDARY (ORIGIN) °"
Vedainta-pdarijita-saurabha
It cannot be said also that 1n the section concerned with creation,
eg in the passage “Brom the self the ether has ongmated”’ (Tait
21), there bemg no mention of the omgm of the organs, the text
regarding the omgin of the organs 1s secondary,—“on account of the
impossibility of a secondary” (orgm) That is, the sense-organs
must have omgin, as the majority of scriptural texts deagnate such an
origin, and as, otherwise, the 1101941 proposition that there 18 the
knowledge of all through the knowledge of one will come to be con
tradicted.
Vedanta-kaustubha
Having rejected the doubt,—viz by reason of 1#8 oppomtion
to the scriptural text ‘“The non exstent, verily, was this in the
beginning’’* (Tait 2'7), the scriptural text about the orgin of the
sense organs 18 secondary,—the author states the reason for the view
that the sense organs, too, omginate
The compound “gaunyfisambhava”’ 18 to be explained as ‘mmpos
ability of a secondary (origm)’, 1e the acriptural text about the
orig of the sense organs cannot be secondary Hence the sense
organs do omgmate If 2४ be asked Why mmpossble i—({we reply )
Because the scriptural text about origi can be understood hterally,
because there are numerous sorrptural texta regarding such an omgin,
and because otherwise the आ proposttion will come to be con
tradicted, 1e because there are numerous scriptural texts designat
mg origination, such as ‘From him 82186 the viial breath, the
18k B 3 4.1, 7 168
8 7 9 Sat Br 61 1, 1—quoted by SHinivdes
[st 2 4 9
452 VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]
mind and all the sense organs’ (Mund 21 3), ‘Just as small sparks
come forth from fire, so exactly do all the sense organs from this soul’
(Brh 2120), ‘Seven sense organs amse’ (Mund 217) Having
made the initial assertion, viz that there 1s the knowledge of one
through the knowledge of all thus ‘ “What bemg known, ar, all this
comes to be known?”’ (Mund 2 1 8), the text goes on to deolare,
in order to prove it, that ‘From him amse the vital breath, the mind
aud all the sense-organs’ (Mund 213) and so on ‘This mral
propomiaon 1A proved only if all the effects, hke the sense-organs and
the rest, aro admitted to have Hum as ther matemal cause The
text ‘The non-existent alone was this in the begmnmg’
(Sat Br 611, 1), on the other hand, 18 to be explamed as referring
to the cause Hence there 18 no contradiction
COMPARISON
Ramanuja
He takes thus and the next sfitra as one sfitra Interpretation
chfferent, viz “(The plural number m the text) 1s secondary, be
cause of impossibihty”’,1e because prior to creation Brahman alone
exists 2
Srikantha
He regards this sfitra aa answering the prema face objection
He too bke Ramfnuja takes this and the next siltra aa forming 4
single attra, and mterprete 1४ yust 86 Ram&nuja
Baladeva
Interpretation just like Ramfnuja's
1 Vis Mat Br 611, 1 866 Sttnwaea above It bas been stated under
the previous siléra that the words ‘sense organs and ‘sages’ in that passage denote
Brahman But bow then to account for the plural number ?—to this question
she present eilira replies
adc B 2432, p 170, Part 2
fst 24 34
ADH 1] VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA 458
SOTRA 3
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE DIRECT MENTION (IN) THAT OF WHAT
78 PRIOR ”’
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
“Qn account of the direct mention,” m that text, of the varb,—
used in 108 primary sense 17 connection with the ether and the rest,—
in reference to the sense organs as well, the omgin of the sense-organs
18 primary
Vedinta-kaustubha
For this reason, too, the origin of the sense organs 18 prmary,—
80 says the author
“On account of the direct mention,” m “that’’,1e 1 the text
“Hrom him arise the vital breath, the mind and all the sense organs,
the ether, the arr’ (Mund 2153), of the word ‘amses’,—used 1n its
primary sense with reference to the ether and so on,—with reference
to the sense organs, mentioned even prior to the ether and the rest,—
the scrptural text demgnating the ongin of the sense organs 18, indeed,
primary It 38 not possuble that one and the same word ‘arises’ 18
used in & secondary sense with reference to the sense organs, and in 9
primary sense with reference to the ether and the rest for thus
reason too, rt 18 used 1n & primary sense alone 77 both the cases
COMPARISON
Baladeva
Interpretation exactly hke R&ém&nuja’s second half of the preced
ing sitra ~
SUTRA 4
“Ox ACOOUNT OF SPEECH BEING PRECEDED BY THAT ”’
Vedinta-parijata-saurabha
The sense organs originate like the ether and the reat because
of the mention of speech, the vital breath and the mind as preceded
by hght, water and food m the passage ‘“The mind, my dear, 18
1GB 243 p 234 Chap ॐ
[80 244
4%. VEDINTA KAUSTUBHA ADH 1]
composed of food, the vital breath 1s composed of water, speech 1s
composed of hght”’ (Chind 6 6 41)
Vedinta-kaustubha
To the allegation, viz that in the section treating of creation,
a origin of the sense organs 1s not mentioned,—the author replies
On account of the mention in the Chindogya of speech, the vital
breath and the mind as preceded by hght, water and food respectively,
having Brahman for ther matemal cause, thus ‘“The mmd, my
dear, 18 composed of food, the vital breath 1s composed of water,
speech 18 composed of hght’’’ (Chand 6 & 4), there 1s ongm (of the
sense-organs) Hence it 18 establshed that the sense organs do
onginate on the ground of the following reasons, viz there 18 the
mention of the omgi (of the sense organs) m the section treating of
origin too, there are also numerous texts designating the orgin of
the sense organs, and, finally, the mutaal assertion too that there 18 the
knowledge of all through the knowledge of one 1s established only
on this view
Here ends the section entitled “The ongin of the sense organs” (2)
COMPARISON
Ramanuja
This 18 stitra 3 m 08 commentary Interpretation different
He continues the same topo, viz that the word “priina’ m the above
passage does not stand for the sense organs, but for Brahman Hence
the atitra ‘Because of speech (1 6 names of objects) being preceded
by that (viz the exstence of those objects)” That 18, names of
0019608 pre suppose the existence of objects But prior to creation
there were no objects, and hence no speech or organs of speech and
80 on ®
Srikantha
This 1s siitra 3 17 018 commentary too Interpretation smular
to R&mé&nuja’s, viz “Because of speech (1 6 names and forms) being
preceded by that (1 © by the cre&ataon by the Lord) ®
1 8, 2 ४ त B 248 pp 17071 Chap 2
9 & B 243 p 167 Parts 7 and 8
[80 245
ADH 2] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 455
Baladeva
He also contanues the same topic thus “Because of speech (16
Brahman) being prior to that (viz pradhdna and reat)’ 1
Adhikarana 2 The section entitled “The going
of the seven” (8१४78७8 5 6)
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (80६८७ 5)
SUTRA 5
“QN ACCOUNT OF THE GOING OF THE SHYBN, AND ON ACCOUNT
OF BHING SPHOLFIMD ”’
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
On the doubt, viz whether they are seven or eleven, the prima
face view 18 as follows Because of the gomg (of the sense organs),
mentioned m the passage ‘The vital breath goimg out all the
sense organs go out’ (Brh 4 4 23), and because of their bemg specified.
88 seven only m that very passage ‘He 0068 not see,—does not
emell,—does not taste,—does not speak,—does nob hear,—does not
thmk,—does not touch’ (Brh 4428), the sense organs are seven
only
aad Vedinta-kaustubha
Now, desirous of determming the number of the sense organs,
the author 18 stating the prema face view with a view to removing
the contradictions among the texta about 0
On the doubt, viz whether these sense organs are seven or eleven,
(the prama facts objector replies ) “Because of the going of seven”,
mentioned in the passage ‘The vital breath gomg out, all the sense
organs go out’ (Brh 442), they are seven only How 1s 1t known
that seven alone go out? “Because of (them) bemg speafled,”
18 because m the passage “When the person in the sun moves
about back, then he becomes non knowing of forms, he becomes one,
1QB 244 p 285, Ohap 2
#
3 Not quoted by others The phrase “sis Ghuh कन bhavan" is to be
supphed in each dotted portion
[श 2 4 6
456 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA aDH 2]
he does not see, does not amell, does not taste, does nob speak, does
not hear, does not think, does not touch’ (Brh 441 2), only seven,
hike the eye, eto, are specified
COMPARISON
Samkara
According to him “gateh” = avagateh,1e because of under
standing +
OCORREOT CONCLUSION (80४ 6)
SUTRA 6
“Bor (THERE ABE) HANDS AND THE RUST, (THESE ADDITIONAL
SHNSE ORGANS) BRING HSTABLISHED, THEREFORE (THAT) IS NOT
80 9%
Vedainta-parijata-saurabha
The correct conclusion 18 as follows It bemg definitely ascertamed
from the passage ‘The hand, venly, 18 an organ of sense’ (Brh
3.2 8 2) and go on, that there are more than seven, 16 18 not to be thought
there are only seven sense-organs In accordance with the scriptural
‘There are ten sense organs 17 a person, the soul 18 the
eleventh’ (Brh 9 9 48), there are eleven sense organs
Vedainta-kaustubha
The author states the nght conclusion
The term “but"’ mtmmates the blindness of the prima facte
opponent In the scmptural text “The hand, verily, 1s an organ of
sense It 18 seized by action as an over sense organ, for by the hands
one performs actzon’ (Bfh 328), “the hands and the rest”, over
and above the seven, are mentioned =^" Therefore” the hands and the
rest, over and above the seven, “ bemg establshed”’, and in the pas
sage ‘All the sense organs go out’ (Brh 4 & 2) the gomg ont of all
the sense-organs being not specified, 1+ cannot be thought that there
are only seven of them But the fact 18 that there are eleven sense
organs 1m accordance with the somptural and Smrta texte “There
1§.B 245,p 653
a8, Bh, B 8 Op ow
[8 2 4 7
ADH 3] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 457
are ten sense organs 17 a person, the soul 18 the eleventh’ (Brh 3.2 8),
“The sense organs sare ten and one’ (Gita 155) Among these,
five are organs of knowledge, viz ear, akin, eye, tongue and nose
They have five objecta, viz sound and the rest Jive are organs of
action, viz speech, hands, feet, organ of elmmmation and organ of
generation They have five 0016008 like word and the rest The
internal organ 18 the mind, the cause of resolution and the rest In
this way it 1s established that there are altogether eleven sense-organs
Here ends the section entitled “The going of the seven” (2)
COMPARISON
RaméAnuja, Srikantha and Baladeva
This 18 sitra 5 m the commentaries of the first two, but siitra 6
m the commentary of the last Interpretaizon of the word “sthite’’
different, viz. “because of abiding (in the body and asmsting the soul) 3
AdhikaranaS The 886४107 8701016 “The atom-
1city of the sense organs (Sttra 7)
SUTRA 7
“AND saTOMIC ”’
Vedinta-piarijaita-saurabha
In sccordance with the scriptural text regardmg gomg out, viz
‘All the sense organs go out’ (Brh 44253), the sense organs are
“atomic”
Vedainta-kaustubha
Now the author 18 showing the maze of the sense organs
On the doubt, viz whether the sense organs are atomic or all
pervading, the Simkhyas maintain that they are all pervasive, beng
effects of the unlimited ahamkérea In accordance with the scrptural
1 इम् B 245 p 178, Part 2 Sk B 246, p 169, Parts 7 and 8, GB
246
2 R, &, 5
[60 2 4 8
408 VEDANTA PARLJATA-SAURABHA ADH 4]
text also ‘These are equal and infinite’ (एता 1 5 19), they are
certainly all pervading, this 18 the prima facie view
The correct concluson 18 that m conformity with the soriptural
text about their gomg out, viz ‘The vital breath gomg out, all the
yense-Organs go out’ (Brh 442), they are atomic There 18 10
fixed rule that unlimited effecta amse from what 18 unlimited, + beng
found thot a small flower arises from a huge tree and 80 on The
above quoted scriptural text, on the other hand, amply lays down
that tho sense-o1gans are inumerable, or serves the purpose of medi
tation, mentioned m the soriptural text ‘Now who, verily, meditates
on these, the infimte’ (Brh 1518) Hence 1t 18 establshed that
the sense organs are atomic
Here ends the section entitled “ The atomiaty of the
sense organs” (3)
Adhikarana 4 The section entitled “The origin
of the chief vital breath” (8०१८४ 8)
SUTRA 8
““Awp THE BEST”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
“The best,’ 1 6 the chief vital breath, mentioned mm the scrip-
tural text ‘The vital breath, verily, 18 the oldest and the best’
(Chind 5111), origmmstea like the great elements Why? In
conformity with the same scrptural text, viz ‘Hrom him anse the
vital-breath’ (Mund 21 3)
Vedanta-kaustubha
Now, meaidentally, the orgm of the obief vital breath 18 bemg
considered.
On the doubt, viz whether the chief vital breath, the cause of
the subsistence of body and mentioned im the soriptural text, viz
‘The vital breath, verily, 15 the oldest and the best’ (Ohind 511),
originates hke the great elements,—if 1t be suggested It does not
originate Whyi Because in the text ‘There was neither death,
nor the mmmortal, nor then a magn of mght or day That one breathed
1 8
180 249
ADH 5] VEDANTA PARLJATA SAURABHA 459
without wind by ita self power There was, verily, nothmg whatso
ever other than it, or higher’ (Rg V 1012921), by the words ‘was
‘breathing’, meanmg ‘He existed breathng’, the motion of the vital
breath at the tame of the universal dissolution 18 designated.
We reply “The chief too”, 16 the clef vital breath, too,
originates hike the elements and the rest, since 1n the scriptural text
"From him arse the vital-breath, the mind and all the sense organs,
the ether, the air’ (Mund 21 $), like the omgin of the great elements
and the rest, the origm of the chief vital breath, too, 18 mentioned,
and «ince 1t 18 known that prior to creation there was umty alone
and no diversity
The meaning of the text ‘There was neither death’ (Rg V
10 129 2), on the other hand, 18 as follows ‘Then’,1e at the time
of the universal dissolution, ‘there was no death’, the killer There
was ‘no immortal with self power’, 1e there waa no food of the
gods (amrta) together with the food of fathers (svadh&i) There was
neither the moon, the mgn of the mght, nor the sun, the mgn of the
day ‘That one,’ 16 Brahman alone, the seed of the universe,
“breathed’, 1e existed Of what nature was He? ‘ Breathless,’
168 without effecta hke the air and the rest, viz 1m His causal state
‘There was nothing other than Him,1e Brahman
Henoe 1 18 established that like the ether and the rest, the chief
vital breath too omginates from Brabman
Here ends the seotaon entitled “The omgm of the chief vital-
breath ” (4)
Adhikarana & The section entitled “The air
andfunoction” (8१५४८९६ 9-1 2)
SUTRA 9
“(Tae VItal-BREATH 18} NOT AIR AND FUNOTION, OM ACCOUNT
OF THE SEPARATE THACHING ”
Vedanta-parijata-saurabha
The vital-breath 1s “not’’ mere “air’’, nor 8 sense organ, nor &
“‘fanction” (of the sense organs) But we hold that the vital breath
1 P 887 ता 21-28
[80 249
460 VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA ADE 5]
18 nothing but ar that has assumed a different condition, “on account
of the separate teachmg”, viz ‘From him arise the vital-breath, the
mind and all the sense-organs, the ether, the air’ (Mund 21 8)
Vedanta-kaustubha
Now the author 18 stating the nature of the chief vital breath.
On the doubt, viz whether the vital breath, the oldest, 18 the ar,
one of the great elementa, or the general function of the sense organs,
or nothing but the great element air that has assumed a different
condition, if 1t be suggested In accordance with the statement, viz
“What 1s the vital breath that 18 the ar Thus air 1s five fold, pr&na,
apina, vyains, तक्ष, samfna”,! 1 1s nothing but the ar Or else,
the vital breath 18 the common function of the sense organs as held.
by the Samkhyoas > and is of five kinda,—
We reply The vital breath is “not the air” mmply, nor a general
mode consisting in the function of the sense organs Why! “On
account of the separate teaching,” 18 because mm the text ‘From
him arise the vital breath, the mind and all the sense organs, the ether,
the ar’ (Mund. 218), the vital breath 18 taught as something
different from the second. great element air and from the sense organs
If the vital breath be mere air, then this separate demgnation would
besetamde And, 17 1# be ® mere mode of the sense organs, then, too,
its separate designation from the possessors of the mode (viz the
pense-organs) would be futile, as what arises separately being itself
an object, cannot be the function of other objecta like the sense
organs The vital breath, thus, 1s nothimg but the great element air
that has assumed a different condition, this bemg the only alternative
left Hereby, any conflict with the text ‘What 1s the vital breath
that 18 the a’, too, 18 avoided
1 For the nature and fancizon of these five modes, see V R M
9 Vide Sam 90 2381
{80 2 4 10-11
ADH 5] VEDANTA PABIJITA SAURABHA 461
SUTRA 10
“BUT LIK THH BYBS AND THE REST, (THR VITAL BREATH 18 AN
INSTRUMENT OF THE SOUL), BEGAUSE OF BHING AN OBJECT TO BE
TAUGHT TOGHTHER WITH THEM AND 80 ON ”’
Veddnta-parijaita-saurabha
Though the best, the vital breath 1s but & spemal instrument of
the individual soul, “lke the eyes and the rest” Why? “On
account of bemg an object to be taught and so on,’ 16 on account
of the teaching of the vital breath together with the eyes and the
rest 10 the dialogue among the sense organs and 80 on
The author shows that the vital breath, bemg under the control
of the individual soul, 1s serviceable to the soul like the eyes and the
rest
Vedinta-kaustubha
The meaning of the term “but’’ 18 that im spite of 1ta supenonity
to the sense organs, no independence 1s possible on the part of the
vital breath, as 1s possible on the part of the individual soul The
vital breath 18 “like the eyes and the rest’? That 18, just as the eyes
and. the rest are instruments of the individual soul, so the vrtal-breath
18 & special mstrument of the mdividual soul To the question
Whence 18 1 known that 0 1s an instrament of the soul /—We reply
“Because of bemg an object to be taught together with them”, 1 6
because of the teaching of the vital breath together with them, ie
together with the eyes and the rest, in the dialogue among the sense
organs By the phrase “and so on’’, reasons lke non sentience,
mncapabihty of self dependence and the rest are mphed
UTRA 11
“AND (THERE IS) HO FAULT ON THE GROUND OF (18) NOT BEING
A SENBE ORGAN, FOR THUS (SCRIPTURE) SHOWS ”’
Voedinta -pfirijita-saurabha
If 1t be objected If the vital-breath be an instrument of the
individual soul, then there bamg no activity suitable to 1t, there must
be fault “on the ground of (1ts) not bemg a sense-organ’’,—
[80 2 4 11
462 VEDANTA KAUSTIUBHA ADH 5]
(We reply ) “no”, smoe the somptural text ‘“I alone, dividing
myself five fold, support and hold the body”’ (Praéna 2 81), “shows ”
that the holding up of the body 1s the pecuhar fanction of the vital
breath
Veddnta-kaustubha
If 1t be objected Just as one oan be a perceiver only if there be
some object to be percerved, so a thing may be an imstrument only
if there be some function to be accomplshed by 1t, and this 18 not
found Hence the vital breath cannot be a senseorgan Thus,
as the vital breath 18 not a sense organ, 80 1f 1t be an unstrument of the
individual soul, 16 18 but a futile one,—
We reply “No” ‘There 1s no such fault “For,” 16 mnce,
in order that the vital-breath may be serviceable as an mstrument
of the individual soul, the holy Scripture “shows*’, under the dialogue
among the sense organs, that & purpose 18 served by the vital breath
aa well—one that cannot be served by the sense organs,—viz the
holding up of the body and the sense organs ‘The cluef vital breath
8010. to them “Do not fall m delumon It 18 I alone who, dividing
myself five-fold, support and hold the body’’’ (Prana 2 3)
COMPARISON
Samkara and Bhiskara
According to them the word “skaranatvat’’ answers the prema
facte, viz that uf the vital breath be an organ of the soul, then there
must be # sense object for 1t, lke colour for the eyes andsoon ‘The
answer 18 thai there need be no sense object, mmoe the vital-breath
18 not an organ like the eyes and the rest Stl 1t 1s not devoid of
a function, the holding of the body being its spemal function >
Raiménuja, Srikantha and Baladeva
According to them, the word “akaranatvit” means “On account
of not having a function” That is, no objection can be raised on
> 8
9 828 8411, 662 68,Bh © 2411,p 148
[se 2 4 12
ADH 5] VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA 463
the ground that the vital-breath has no special activity, for 1# does
have a special function 1
SUTRA 12
“(THB VITAL BRHATH) HAVING FIVE MODES IS DESIGNATHD LIKD
THH MIND ”’
Vedanta-parijita-saurabha
Just as the mimd having many modes serves the individual soul
through its own modes hke desre and the rest, so the vital breath,
too, “having five modes, 1s deaignated”’ as serving the soul through
108 modes like ap&ina and the rest
Vedinta-kaustubha
The author points out that the same vital breath 1s deagnated
as manifold through the difference of modes, but these latter are not
separate entities The yital-breath does not serve the soul by only
holding up the body, but by other functions too
Just as in conformity with the text ‘Demre, resolution, doubt,
faith, —*, firmness, lack of firmness, basahfulness, meditation, fear,—
all these are the mind alone’ (Brh 1 5 3), the mind alone, possessed.
of demre and the rest as 1ts modes, serves the individual soul through
ita own modes, but desire, resolution and the rest are not special
kinds of entuties, 80 by the text ‘The prina, apina, vyinas, udina,
amaina—all these are the vital breath’ (Brh 146 8), the vital-breath
alone “1s designated. as having five modes” The apina and the rest
are the modes of the vital-breath itself, but not separate entitzes, and
19 serves the soul through 108 own modes,—this 18 the sense This
being 80, 1t 18 established that the vita! breath 1s the air 1teelf that haa
assumed © different condition, an instrument of the individual soul,
possessed. of many modes and 1s the best
Here ends the section entitled “The air and function” (5)
1 ईत 8 2410,p 177, 2८ 9, Madrased, Ak B 2410,p 174 Parte 7
and8;GB 2411
8 “Taok of farth *
[st 2 4 12-14
464 VEDANTA PABLJZTA SAURABHA ADH 67]
Adhikarana 6 The section entitled “The atom
101 of the best” (Siitra 13)
SUTRA 13
“AND atomic”
Vedanta-p&rijaita-saurabha
In accordance with the scmptural text designating departure,
the vital breath, too, 1s “atomic”
Vedainta-kaustubha
Now the size of the chief vital breath 1s being considered.
On the doubt, viz whether the chief vital breath 1s great m mize
or atomic,—if the suggestion be In accordance with the sarptural
texts ‘Hverything 18 installed in the vital breath’ (Praéna 26),
* For all this 18 covered by the vital breath”, 1b 18 great 17 mze,—
We reply The vital breath, the best, too, should be known to
be “atomic”, un accordance with the scriptural text “He gommg out,
the vital breath goes out after him’’ (Brh 442) ‘The above scrip
tural texts, on the other hand, refer to the vital-breath in 708 collective
aspect Hence, it 18 established that the best (viz the chief vital
breath) 18 atomic
Hare ends the section entitled “The atomicity of the best’’ (6)
Adhikarana 7 The section entitled “The super-
intending of fire and the rest” (Stitras 14-18)
SUTRA 14
‘But THE SUPHRINTHNDING OF FIRE AND THS REST, ON ACCOUNT
OF THE DHOLARATION OF THAT `
Vedanta -parijaita-saurabha
The sense organs proceed to them respective functions as mitiated
by the drvinities hike fire and the rest, m sccordance with the sorip
tural text ‘Hie becoming speech entered into the mouth’ (Art
124%)
18s ©
[४0 2 4 ld
ADH 7] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 465
Vedanta-kaustubha
Now, the activity of the sense organs 1s bemg disonssed
On the doubt, viz whether the sense organs like the eye and the
rest proceed to their respeotive objects through ther own power alone,
or as initiated by their respective presiding divinities,—the suggestion
beang Through their own power, 111 accordance with the scrmptural
text ‘Hor by the eyes ons 8068 colours’ (Brh 3 9 20),—
We reply “Fire and so on” ‘The term “but” is meant for
disposing of the pruna face view Speech and the rest function only
as superintended by fire and so on, 1e by the divimmues hike fire
and soon The word “supermtending” means that which 1s super-
intended or umtaated,1e an object to be mitiated Just as chariots
and the rest move as supermmtended by charioteers and others, 80 18
the case here Why? “On account of the declaration of that”’,
16 “on account of the declaration”, or mention, in the sacred text,
“of that” or of the fact of ther bemg supermtended by fire and the
rest, thus ‘Hire becoming speech entered mto the mouth, the air
becoming the vital breath entered mto the nose, the sun becoming
mght entered into the eyes’ (Ait 124) If there be no relation of the
inttiated and the initiator, fhe entemng of the fire and the rest must
become meaningless The gormptural text ‘For by the eyes’ (Brh
9 9 20) and so on should be known to have served its purpose by
proving sumply that the eyes and the rest are sense-organs
COMPARISON
Raiménuja and Srikantha
They read this and the next sitra as one siitra, mmterpretang it
differently thus “ But the rule of the fire and the reat with the bearer
of the vital breath (16 the mdividual soul) (over the sense organs 28)
on acoount of the thinking of that (viz the Lord), m accordance with
soriptural text ** That 1s, we learn from Scripture that the fire god
and the rest, as well aa the individual soul rule over the sense-organs,
but their rule depends on the will of the Lord?
> This explains the compound “iad-imananit"’
a §ल B 2414, pp 181 89, Part 1 Madras ed Sk B 2414, p 178,
Parts 7 and 8
30
[st 2 4 15
466 VEDANTA-PARIJATA SAURABHA 4DH 7]
Baladeva
Interpretation different, viz “ But the hght (jyotah) 1s the prime
ruler (id.yadhisthina), on account of the declaration of that" That
18, the Lord 1s the pmmary imrator of the sense organs, while the
fire god and the rest, and the individual soul are secondary initiators +
SUTRA 15
“WITH THH POSSBSSOR OF THE VITAL-BRHEATH, ON ACCOUNT OF
SORTPTURAL Text °
Vedanta -parijata-saurabha
There 1s & servant-maater relation between the sense-organs and
the mdividual soul alone The soul 1s the enjoyer, “an account of
the aoriptural text”’ ‘Now where the eye has entered mto the ether,
that 1s the seeing person the eye 1s for seeing’ (तकत, 8 12 44)
Vedainta-kaustubha
If this be so, then enjoyment, too, may pertam to the gods,—to
this the author rephes
The possessor of the vital-breath 1s one who has the vital-breath,
the cause of the holding up of the body and the sense organs The
pense-organs have क servant-master relation “with the posseasor of
the vital breath”, 16 with the mdividual soul This bemg so, the
possessor of the vital breath alone 18 the enjoyer of objects through
the sense organs,—thisisthe sense 9 Why? “On account of scriptural
text”, 16 on account of the scriptural text “Now, where the eye
has entered mto the ether, that 18 the seemg person, the eye 1s for
seeing’ (OhAnd 8 12 4)
1G.B 2414,p 249 Chap 2
# 8,
[80 2 4 16
4DH 7} VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 467
SUTRA 16
“On ACOOUNT OF THS BTERNITY OF THAT”
Vedinta-parijita-saurabha
“On account of the eternty"’ of the above relatzonship with the
individual soul alone, but not with the preaiding dexties
Vedanta-kaustubha
For this 7898070, too, the enjoyer of the frmts, acoomplishable
by the sense organs, 1s ther master, the possessor of the vital-breath
alone, but their prealding deities are not such enjoyers, “on account of
the eternty of that”,1e because there 28 an eternal relation between
the sense-organs and the possessor of the vital breath alone, as proved
by the scriptural text “He gomg out the vital-breath goes out after
bim The vital breath gomg out all the sense organs go out after
it’ (Brh 442) The gods, on the other hand, abide m lghest
lordship, and not im what 1s wretched (vm the body), m accordance
with the scriptural text ‘Evil, verily, does not approach the gods’
(Brh 1 6 201)
COMPARISON
All others add a “oa’’ in the middle thus “Tasya ca mtyatvat”
Samkara
The interpretation of the word “tasya”’ different, viz “Because
of the etermty of that (viz of the mdrvidual soul)” That is, the
individual soul alone abides permanently m the body aa the enjoyer,
but the deriies cannot do so?
Ramfnuja and Srikantha
This 18 sitra 14 10 their commentaries Interpretation different
On account of the etermty of that (vim of the atimbute of bemg
ruled by the Lord) That 18, all objects are eternally ruled by the
Lord alone Hence 1t follows that the rule of the sense-organs by the
dexties and the individual soul really depends upon the will of the
Lord 8
Readmg: ‘ pdpam ` and not ‘anagham" Vide Brh 165 20,p 70
16, pp 667 68
i
> 85 24
agri B 2414, 72 182 Part Sk B 2414 pp 178 70 Parte 7 ७० 8
[st 2 4 17
468 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 7]
Baladeva
Interpretation different, viz And on account of the etermty
of that, (1e of the relationship between the Lord and the gods)
That 18, there bemg an eternal relation between the gods and the
Lord, the real ruler, the gods rule the sense organs and so on, through
the mere will of the Lord 1
SUTRA 17
“THEY (4BE) SENSH ORGANS, ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION
OF THOSE 4S OTHER THAN THE BEST ”’
Vedinta-p&rijita-saurabha
“Qn account of the demgnation of those,” 1 8 of sense organs,
as different from the chief 10 the passage ‘From him amse the vital
breath, the mind and all the sense organs’ (Mund 2 1 39), “they”,
te the sense organs, are different entities called ‘sense organs’, but
not particular modes of the chief ”
Vedanta-kaustubha
Apprehending the objection, viz m conformity with the scrip
tural text ‘ “Come, let us all become a form ofhiun” Of him alone,
they became a form’ (Brh 1 6 21 9), other sense organs, like the
eye and the rest, are different modes of the chief vital breath They
are nob separate entities and cannot, therefore, have a separate re
latzon with the possessor of the vital breath (viz the mndividual soul),
our purpose bemng served if they have a relation with the vital-breath
alone,—the author replies here
* On account of the demgnaton of those,”’1e of them “as duferent
from the chief” vital breath m the passage “Hrom him arise the vital
breath, the mind and all the sense organs’ (Mund 213), separate
entities indeed are demgnated by the scriptural text ‘Those prinas
2
ॐ Vide Brh. 1 5.2) for the story When the different sense organs were
created by Prasdpan, death came and overcame them all, with the exception of
the vital breath. Thereupon, the sense organs decided to assume the form of the
vital breath.
1G.B 2416, p 250, Chap ॐ
8 Bh, ©
[80 2 4 18
ADH 7] VEDANTA PARIJATA-GAURABHA 469
other than the vhiof, are the sense organs’ Otherwise, the eye and the
rest too bemg understood—lke apina and so on—smply by the
phrase ‘From him arse the vital breath’, the separate mention
‘and all the sense-organs’ must be meammgless Hence the sense
organs being soparate entaties, their relation with the possessor of the
vital broath or the mdividual goul must be depicted to be certamnly
different from their relation with the vital breath
It cannot bo said also that the mind too, which 18 separately
designated, cannot be a 86088 organ,—since in accordance with the
Smrti passages, viz “The sense organs of which the mind 1s the axxth”’
(Git 16 '7), “The sense organs are ten and one” (Gité 13 6), as well
as 10 accordance with the sorzptural text ‘There are ten sense-organs
in & person, the soul 18 the eleventh’ (Brh 394), the mid as well 18
admitted to be a sense organ The separate designation of the mmd,
too, is not futule, soe the mind bemg the leader of the sense-organs
in conformity with the text ‘“And of the sense organs, I am the
mind’’’ (अह 10 22), such 9 separate mention has a meamng By
the soriptural text ^^ Come let us assume all become a form of hm
alone’’’ (Brh 1 6 21), on the other hand, 77 18 denoted aumply that the
activities of the sense organs are under the control of the vital-breath
The sense-organs, also, bemg under the vital breath, are called ‘vital
breaths’,2 just as in the text ‘All this vernly, 18 Brahman’ (Chand
8141), the term ‘Brahman’ has been applied to the world, 1t being
under His control
SUTRA 18
‘‘Ow ACCOUNT OF THE SORIPTURAL THXT REGARDING DIFFERENOE
AND ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFEEENOS ”
Vedinta-piarijita-saurabha
“On account of the scriptural mention of the difference’’ of the
chief vital breath from speech and the rest at the end of the section
treating of speech, eto thus “Then, verily, they said to the breath
10 the mouth’ (Brh 1 37 2), “and on account of the difference”’ of
the sense-organs, the apprehenders of sense objecta, from the beat
vital-breath, the cause of the submstence of the body, the sense-organs
and the rest,—they are separate entities
2 Prana, 9 6, Bh
[so 2 4 19
4:70 VEDANTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 8]
Vedainta-kaustubha
Having begun thus ‘They said to speech’ (Brh 192), and
having concluded the section treating of speech and the rest, destroyed.
by the demons, Scripture goes on to declare the chief vital breath as
different from the sense-orgams hke speech, eto mm > passage In ®
different section ‘Then, verily, they said to the breath in the mouth’
(Brh 187) ‘There 18 also ao great difference between them, such
as the best vital breath 18 the oause of the holding up of the body,
the sense organs and so on, while the sense organs have speech and
the rest for their objects, and so on 06008, the sense organs are
different from the chief vital breath,—this 18 the sense Thus 1t
18 established that the sense organs 1,—premded over by the gods,
connected with the individual soul, and denoted by the term “sense
Organ’,—are different from the best vital breath
Here ends the section entitled “The supermtending of fire and
the reat’ (7)
COMPARISON
Samkara, Bhaskara and Baladeva
They divide this sitra into two different siitras, thus ‘‘Bheda
érutehn” and “Vailaksanfic ca”’
Adhikarana 8 The section entitled “The making
of name and form” (80४५८९8 19-21)
SUTRA 19
“BUY THH MAKING OF NAMH AND FORM (78 THE FUNCTION) OF
HIM WHO BHNDHES TRIPARTITE, ON ACOOUNT OF THACHING ”’
Vedanta-parijaita -saurabha
The evolution of names and forms too,—mentioned 1m the texts
‘That divinity thought ‘‘Come, let me, having entered into these
1 Prénas
[so 2 4 19
ADH 8 ] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 471
three deities with this lymg soul, evolve name and forms’’’ (Chand
63214), ‘Let me make each of them tripartte”’ (Chand 6 3 3#)—
18 the work of the Supreme Bemg alone “who renders trmpartite”
He alone who made each of the deities trpartate 1s the creator of names
and forms hike fire, sun and the rest Why? Because beginnmg
thus “That divimty’ (Chiind 6 8 2), the text goes on to teach that
the evolution (of names and forms) 1s due to the Supreme Deity thus
“Let me, having entered with this lvmg soul, evolve name and
form,”’’ 8 (Chind 6 8 2)
Vedanta-kaustubha
Thus, there bemg an enquiry with regard to the characteristio
marks of the object which one should desire to enquire into (viz
Brahman), 1t has been estabhahed m the preceding chapter *, that He
13 the cause of the world Here, on the other hand, with a view to
confirming 1b and demonstrating the cause of the world as held by ua,
10 has been firmly establshed, after an examimation of the cause
as designated by others,5 that the ether and the rest are created by
Brahman ‘Then, the author 8, now, removing 9 doubt as to whether
the evolution of name and form 18 due to the Supreme Brahman—s,
doubt arisimg from the word ‘individual soul’ mm the scriptural text
to be 01#60 hereafter
The evolution of name and form 18 mentioned m the Chandogya,
under the section teaching of the Hxustent, in the passages “That
divimty thought “QOome, let me, havmg entered into these three
dextaes with the ltvmg soul (jIvatman), evolve name and form’”’’
(Ohind 63 2), “‘ Let me make each of them tmpartate”’ (Ohind
633) The questions 8 this evolution due to the imdrvidual soul
or to the Supreme Soul? 1 1 be suggested To the indrvidual soul
alone, as indicated by the phrase ‘having entered with this living
soul’ —
We reply The word “but” 1s meant for dispomng of the prima
fase view “The making of name and form,” ie the evolution of
name and form, can be the work “of one who renders tripartite”,
1e of the Supreme Soul alone, omniscient and omnipotent who made
1 8, R, Bh, Sk, B 9 Op cit
9 8 RB, Bh, Sk, © 4 Vide Br 83 112
6 In the Ind pada of the 2nd chap
[80 ॐ 4 20
472 VEDANTA PARIJATA SAURABHA ADH 8]
each of the deities triparate Why! Having begun thus “That
divimty thought” (Chind 632), the text goes on to designate,—
through the use of the first person ‘ “Let me evolve name and form’”’’
(Chand 68 2),—the Lord’s resolve to evolve names and forms thus
‘Let me make each of them tmpartate’’’ (Chind 633) Then, for
fulfiling this desire, having made each of the dextaes tripartite prior
to the creation of the egg, having then created the egg, and having
then entered therein, He made names and forms The somptural
text about trpartztion secondanly umplies the process of malnng each
element five fold Thus, as the Supreme Brahman alone, who renders
tripartite, has been designated aa the creator of names and forms, and
98 the individual soul 18 capable of creatang names and forms, the
evoluizon 18 due to the former alone The motive for usng the
term “mdividual soul’ (jIvatman) here will be made clear by the
aphorsm “For (Brahman 1s) without form” (Br 88 3 2 14)
SUTRA 20
“WiLESH AND THH REST ABE OF AN EARTHLY NATURE, IN ACCORD
4NOH WITH SORIPTURAL THXT, AND THE OTHER TOO ”
Vedanta-parljaita-saurabha
That in the body there are the evolutes of fire, water and food,
made tripartite, may be ascertamed from scriptural text 14961 viz
‘Brom the earth the excreta, flesh and the mind, from water uri,
blood and the vital breath, from fire the bones, marrow and speech’ 1
Vedinta-kaustubha
“fs. ॥
With a view to exhibiting the worthlessness of flie physical body,
the author 1s demonstrating that the evolutes of the fire, water and
earth, made tripartite, pertain to the body
“Flesh and the rest” should be known, “im accordance with
scriptural text’’, “to be of an earthly nature”’,16 to be श्वा from,
the earth, made trmpartate, and of the form of 106; barley and so on
consumed by the embodied soul By the phrase “and 80 on’’, the
excreta and the mind are to be understood The scriptural text 18
to the effect ‘The food which 1s consumed becomes three fold
1 Not quoted by others
[st 2 4, 21
ADH 8] VEDANTA KAUSTUBHA 473
That which 18 1t8 grossest portion becomes the excreta, that which 18
the medium, the flesh, that which 18 the finest, the mind’ (Chand
661) f&mularly, the three evolutes of each “of the other two also”,
168 of water and fire, are to be understood The urine, blood and the
vital breath,—these are the evolutes of water The bones, marrow
and speech,—these are the evolutes of fire Here, the vital breath
18 taken to be an evolute of water, only because 14 depends on water
for its existence, the vital breath bemg really but a specal state
of the air 10887 1 Likewise, the demgnation of the earthly nature
of the mind 18 only meant for showing that its well bemg depends
to the consumption of food? The evolutes of fire, too, are to be under
stood im & similar manner
SUTRA 21
“BUT ON ACCOUNT OF SPECIALITY, (THERE IS) THAT DRBSIGNATION,
THAT DESIGNATION ”’
Vedanta-parljata-saurabha
“But” they are regarded as different 18 on the ground of the
preponderance of parts
Here ends the fourth quarter of the second chapter in the Vedinta
एण क्रा saurabha, the explanation of the Sariraka mimAmsa
texts by the reverend Nimbarka
Vedanta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz What 18 the ground of distunguishmg
among the evolutes of these three elements, made trmpartite,—the
author replies
The term “but” 1s meant for disposing of the objection On
account of the preponderance of one element, “the designation’, viz
that this 18 an evolute of this, this of that and 80 on, 28 proper
1 Vide Br Su 249
9 Vide the story of Svetakeiu who failed to remember and recite the Ry-verses
and so on when he was fasting but remembered and answered everything when
he took food Vide Chind 6 87
* This explains the compound Vaisegyat’
[80 2 4 £]
474, VEDINTA KAUSTUBEA ADH 8]
The repetition mdicates the conclusion of the chapter Hence it
18 established that there 1s no contradiction whatsoever among the
scriptural texts which are 17 concordance with regard to Brahman,
Lord. Vasudeva
Here ends the section entatled ‘‘ The makmg of name and
form” (8)
Here ends the fourth quarter of the second chapter of the holy
Vedanta kaustubha, a commentary on the Sarfraka-minimed by the
reverend teacher Srin:visa, dwellmg under the lotus feet of the holy
Nimb&rka, the founder and the teacher of the sect of the venerable
Sanatkuméra
Here ends the second chapter entitled “Non contradiction”
Résume
The fourth quarter of the second chapter contams—
21 sfitras and 8 adhikaranass, acoording to Nimbirka,
29 शी 88 and 9 adhikaranas, according to Samkara,
19 siitras and 8 adhikaranas, according to Rimaénuja,
22 sittras and 9 adhikaranas, according to Bhdskara,
19 sftras and § adhikaranas, according to Srikantha,
22 60798 and 15 adbikaranas, according to Baladeva
Samkara, Bhiskara and Baladeva divide stfitra 18 m Nimb&rka’s
commentary into two separate sitras द्वाद] and Srikanths
take stttras 2 and 3 im Nimbé&rka’s commentary ps one gitra, also
pitras 14 and 16 as one sutra
@ © †# ©@9 ¢< ^~
END OF VOLUME I