वेदान्त पारिजात सौरभ (भगवद् निम्बार्काचार्य - द्वैताद्वैत वेदान्त ब्रह्मसूत्र भाष्य सटीक)

[SŪ. 1. 4. 19. ADH. 6.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 251 object to be known in Kauṣītaki text (4.19) is the individual soul or the Supreme Soul, and so on ¹ Adhikaraṇa 6. The section entitled ‘The con- nection of texts’ (Sūtras 19–22) SŪTRA 19 “AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE CONNECTION OF TEXTS.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha In the text. ‘ “O! the self, verily, should be seen” ’ (Bṛh. 2.4.5, 4.5.6 ²), the Supreme Soul should be understood as the object to be seen, “on account of the connection” of the text with Him alone. Vedānta-kaustubha Now, by showing once more the concordance of the scriptural texts with regard to Brahman, the author is disposing of puruṣa, admitted by the Sāṁkhyas. We find the following text in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka under the Maitreyī-brāhmaṇa, beginning: ‘He said: “O, not for the love of the husband, verily, is a husband dear, but for the love of the soul is a husband dear” ’ (Bṛh 2.4.5; 4.5.6), and continuing : ‘ “O, the self, verily, should be seen, should be heard, should be meditated on” ’ (Bṛh 2.4.5; 4.5.6). Here the doubt is, viz. whether the soul, the twenty-fifth principle of the Sāṁkhyas, is taught as the object to be seen, or the Highest Person, Lord Vāsudeva? What is reasonable here? The prima facie objector thinks: The soul, the twenty-fifth principle established by the Tantra, is taught as the object to be seen and so on, as it is possible for it alone to be the object of the acts of perception and the rest, as it is impossible for Brahman, admitted by the defendant, to be properly an object of an act, He being unlimited by so muchness; as the connection of the Self with the dearness of husband, wife, son and the rest, mentioned in the beginning, is possible on the part of only puruṣa, mentioned by the Tantra; as in the middle, too, in the text : ‘ “This great Being, infinite and endless, is but a ¹ Op. cit., pp. 536 et seq. ² Ś, R, Bh, ŚK, B.