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

[SŪ. 1. 1. 4. 36 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 4.] therefore, an enquiry into religious duties' (Pū. Mī. Sū. 1.1.1 ¹), it is said that the Veda has meaning as possessing the fruit to be attained through the injunctions regarding conceptions which are instrumental to the Vedic studies. In the second aphorism which is concerned with mark, viz. 'A religious duty has injunction for its mark' (Pū. Mī. Sū. 1.1 2 ²), it is established, on the ground of the vyāpti: 'What- ever has the Veda for its proof, refers to action', that in the sphere of religious duties, injunction is the authority ³ Here a doubt arises as to whether the artha-vāda-texts like 'The wind is the swiftest deity' (Tait. Sam. 2 1.1 ⁴) are authoritative in the sphere of religious duties, or not With regard to it, the prima facie view is as follows: We have a text: 'Since Scripture is concerned with action, there is purportlessness of what does not refer to it (viz. action)' (Pū. Mī. Sū. 1.2.1 ⁵). (It means.)—'Scripture, i e. the Veda, is 'kriyārtha', i.e. has 'action' alone as its 'purport', or subject-matter or topic,—for this reason, the artha-vāda-texts are not authoritative. What then are they?—anticipating this question, the text goes on to say that 'there is purportlessness of what does not refer to it', i e. let there be simply 'purportlessness' or 'meaninglessness' of that which has not 'action' for its 'purport', viz. of artha-vāda and the rest, and in the very same manner, of the Vedānta-texts as well. Even those (Ve- dānta-) texts which comprise injunctions regarding study: viz. 'One's own text should be studied', cannot be reasonably said to be autho- ritative, since they are (really) concerned with Brahman, leading to no fruit.⁶ (Here ends the prima facie view within the original prima facie view.) With regard to this, we state the correct conclusion: 'Because of their unanimity with the injunctions, let (them be authoritative) through having the glorification of injunctions as their

¹ P. 1, vol. 1. ² P. 3, vol. 1. ³ That is, the inference is as follows:— Whatever has the Veda for its proof, refers to action. A religious duty has the Veda for its proof. ∴ a religious duty refers to action, i.e. is concerned with injunctions and prohibitions. ⁴ P. 125, lines 1-2, vol. 1. ⁵ P. 39, vol. 1. ⁶ That is, there are some Vedānta-texts, which do refer to action, i.e. to injunction, yet they are not to be taken as authoritative, since they really refer to Brahman who is outside the sphere of actions and fruits.