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

[Sū. 3. 3. 35. ADH. 16.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 653 that (the former reply which describes the self as) within (speaks) of one’s own self possessed of the group of elements, otherwise there is unaccountableness of difference, (we reply:) no". If it be objected: The reply, viz. ' "He who breaths in with the in-breath " ' (Bṛh. 3.4.1), given to the question of Uṣasta, viz. ' " He who is the self within all ' " (Bṛh. 3.4.1), and referring to something "within", should be known to be referring to "one's own self possessed of the group of elements",¹ i e. to the individual soul, since the individual soul being the inner soul of all, viz. of the body, the sense-organs, the mind, the intellect and so on, can appropriately be the inner soul of all. Consequently, the question of Kahola and the answer to it refer to the Highest Self, the primary inner soul, since the Highest Self alone is devoid of hunger and the rest. Thus owing to the difference of form, the questions and answers refer to two vidyās. "Otherwise," i.e. if the vidyās be taken to be identical on the ground that the questions and answers refer to the Highest Self in both cases, the difference of the answers is unaccountable,— (We reply:) "no", i.e. there is no difference of vidyās, as the two sets of questions and answers refer to the same form, viz. to the Highest Self (equally). Thus, to begin with, the question of Uṣasta, viz. ' " He who is manifest and not invisible Brahman, he who is the soul within all, explain him to me " ' (Bṛh. 3 4.1) does indeed refer to the Highest Self alone. It means: Reverend Yājñavalkya, he who is Brahman, explain him to me. I am not asking about Brahman, consisting in His own power (viz. pradhāna, which may also be called Brahman) simply because of its connection with great attributes like existence and the rest.² With this idea he said: 'Explain Brahman who is not invisible and who is the soul'.³ The individual soul too is Brahman because of its connection with the attribute of knowledge.⁴ I am not ¹ I.e. possessed of the body, etc., which are products of the elements. ² I.e. the word 'Brahman', meaning 'one possessed of greatness', may figuratively denote pradhāna too owing to its connection with great attributes. That a thing, though not great by nature, may yet be designated as great because of having great attributes, is shown under V.K. 2.3.28. ³ Pradhāna is not 'not invisible', i.e. its evolutes are visible to all, while the Lord is so to the freed only. Again, pradhāna is not 'soul', which the Lord is. Hence these two epithets show that the word 'Brahman' does not mean here pradhāna, but the Lord alone. ⁴ The individual soul, though atomic by nature, is said to be great because of having great attributes. Vide V.K. 2.3.28.