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

[SŪ. 3. 3. 17 604 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 4.] COMPARISON Saṁkara and Bhāskara They begin a new adhikaraṇa here (two sūtras), concerned with a different problem, viz. a discussion about a passage in the Aitareya- āraṇyaka (2.4 1). The question is as to whether the term ‘self’ in this passage stands for Brahman or for Hiraṇyagarbha. The answer is: “(There is) the understanding of the self (i.e. Brahman) (by the term ‘self’ in the passage), as in other (places) (i.e. in Tait. 2 1, etc ), on account of what follows (1.e. the word ‘perceives’)”.¹ Śrīkaṇṭha He continues the above topic, viz. whether the selves consisting of food and so on are to be meditated on or not. The answer is that as the self consisting of bliss is nothing but the Supreme Brahman, that alone is to be meditated on and not the other selves. Hence the sūtra. “(In Tait. 2.5 by the term ‘self’ there is) the understanding of the self (i e. Brahman), as in other places (i.e. in Tait. 2.1, etc.), (this is known also) from what follows”. Thus, literal interpretation is the same, though import different.² SŪTRA 17 “IF IT BE OBJECTED • ON ACCOUNT OF THE CONNECTION (OF THE TERM ‘SELF’ WITH WHAT IS NOT-SELF, THERE IS NO UNDERSTANDING OF SELF HERE, WE REPLY.) THERE MAY BE (SUCH AN UNDERSTAND- ING), ON ACCOUNT OF ASCERTAINMENT.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha If it be objected that since the term ‘self’ is found to refer to the vital-breath and the rest in the previous cases, in the text: “The self, consisting of bliss” (Tait 2.5³), the Supreme Self is not meant by the term ‘self’—(we reply:) “There may be” indeed such an understanding by that term,—as we know that in the previous cases ¹ Ś.B. 3.3.16, pp. 775 ff.; Bh. B. 3.3.16, p. 180. ² ŚK. B. 3.3.16, pp. 309-310, Part 9. ³ Not quoted by others. 9B