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

294 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [sū. 2 1. 17. ADH. 6.] non-existence prior to creation, in the text · "The non-existent, verily, was this in the beginning" (Chānd. 3.19 1),— (We reply ·) "no", why ? Because there is "such a designation" "on account of a different attribute". That is, the attribute of having name and form unmanifest is different from the attibute of having name and form manifest, and it is because of this different attribute that the world is designated thus in the text · "The non-existent, verily, was this in the beginning" (Chānd 3 19.1), but is never denoted to be non-existent by nature If it be asked Whence is this known ? We reply · 'From the complementary passage.' For the complementary passage · "That was existent" (Chānd. 3 19 1), refers to the topic of our discussion, viz. the world, by the term 'that' and from this it is known that the term 'non-existent' in the beginning denotes the subtle reality with name and form unmanifest. The author states another reason for the pre-existence of the effect, viz "From reasoning" That is, the existence of the effect is ascertained from reason as well. To the question: What is that reason whereby the existence of the effect is 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 being perceived. An agent, viz a potter, makes a pot out of a lump of clay that is existent Here, like the lump of clay, the existence of the pot, too, is known from direct perception. Hence, the activity of the agent, too, is not useless. If it be objected that as the pot already exists, like the lump of clay, the activity of the agent has no meaning,— (we reply .) not so, since its purpose is simply manifestation. The pot which was unmanifest before is made manifest, hence the activity of the agent is not useless. The names and forms, mentioned in the Veda, are used just as they were before ¹ It should be known that, on our view, the conventional usage of names and forms is not un- precedented. The origin of a non-existent effect, on the other hand, does not fit in, since the origin of a barley-sprout from fire is never seen. It cannot be said that although fire has no power of producing such an effect, it has, nonetheless, the power of producing sparks,— for, in an effect, produced from gold and the rest of a known weight, ――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――― ¹ Vide V.K 1.3 28–30.