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

[sū. 2. 3. 17. 408 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 7.] He reads both "bhākta" and "abhākta" and gives two explanations accordingly. Thus (1) But the designation which depends on (i.e. refers to) the movable and the immovable must be secondary, because of being permeated by the being of that (viz. Brahman). (Here he reads "bhākta".) That is, all the words denoting movable and immovable objects are only secondary with regard to those objects, but really denote Brahman, since all objects are modes of Brahman, (2) or, all the terms denoting movable and immovable objects are primary with regard to Brahman, because the denotative power of all terms depends on the being of Brahman. (Here he reads "abhākta".) ¹ Śrīkaṇṭha This is sūtra 17 in his commentary as well. He reads "abhākta", takes this sūtra as an adhikaraṇa by itself, and interprets it exactly like Rāmānuja.² Baladeva This is sūtra 15 in his commentary. He also reads "abhākta", takes it as an adhikaraṇa by itself, and interprets on the whole like Rāmānuja. Only the interpretation of the word "tad-bhāva- bhāvitvāt" is different; viz. "But the designation dependent on (i.e. referring to) the movable and the immovable must be primary (with regard to the Lord), because that fact (tad-bhāva) (viz. the fact that all words really denote the Lord) is something that follows in future (i.e. is not directly known at once, but is a matter which one comes to know after studying Scripture)".³ SŪTRA 17 "THE SOUL (DOES) NOT (ORIGINATE), ON ACCOUNT OF NON- MENTION IN SCRIPTURE, AND ON ACCOUNT OF ETERNITY (KNOWN) THEREFROM (I.E. FROM SCRIPTURAL TEXTS)." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha The individual "soul" does not originate. Why? Because there is no text about its having origin by nature; and because from 1 Śrī. B. 2.3.17, pp. 132-33, Part 2. 2 Śk. B. 2.3.17, pp. 138-39, Parts 7 and 8. 3 G.B. 2.3.15, pp. 181-82, Chap. 2.