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

[SŪ 2. 1. 26. ADH. 9.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 307 facie 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) being without parts’. That is, if the individual soul be the creator, we must conclude that, in as much as it is without parts, its entire self is present in every act. But this is not really the case, e.g. while lifting a blade of grass, the individual soul does not employ its entire force to the act. Or, else we must conclude that the individual soul must be possessed of parts, which also goes against scriptural authority. Hence, we must conclude that the individual soul cannot be the creator.¹ CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sūtras 26–30) SŪTRA 26 “BUT (THE ABOVE OBJECTION HAS NO FORCE) ON ACCOUNT OF SCRIPTURE, SINCE (THE FACT THAT BRAHMAN IS THE CAUSE OF THE WORLD IS) BASED ON SCRIPTURE.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha The stated objection does not hold good. As the truth mentioned in the texts: ‘He wished “May I be many”’ (Tait. 2.6.²), ‘He Himself created Himself’ (Tait. 2.7.³), ‘He became existent and that’ (Tait. 2.6.⁴), ‘So much is His greatness, higher than that is the Person’ (Chānd. 3.12.6.⁵), ‘Just as a spider creates, so from the Person⁶ the Universe originates’ (Muṇḍ. 1.1.7.⁷) and so on, is based on Scripture itself—anything else has no basis to stand upon. Vedānta-kaustubha The author states the correct conclusion. The word “but” is for disposing of the prima facie view. The entire Brahman is not transformed, nor is there any violation of texts. Why? “On account of Scripture.” That is, on account of the mass ¹ G.B. 2.1.26, pp. 58-59, Chap. 2. ² Not quoted by others. ³ Op. cit. ⁴ Op. cit. ⁵ Ś. ⁶ Correct quotation: “Tathā akṣarād bhavati iha viśvam”. Vide Muṇḍ. 1.1.7, p. 9. ⁷ Not quoted by others.