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

656 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3. 3. 35. ADH. 16.] Bhāskara Interpretation diametrically opposed. He interprets the first part of the sūtra like Śaṁkara, but arrives at a directly opposite conclusion. Thus, like Nimbārka, according to him also the portion "Antarā---bhedānupapatti" constitutes the prima facie view, the rest the reply. Hence the prima facie view: "(The two passages in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka refer to the same self, for on this view alone the self which is designated as) within (can be the absolute inner self and not relatively only), otherwise (the self would be) like the group of elements none of which can be said to be within another absolutely). (Hence there is) inappropriateness of difference, (i.e. the two passages refer to the same self)". Correct conclusion: "No, as in the case of the difference ('antarā') of teaching". That is, just as there are two different teachings here, so the objects taught by them too must be different. Or, an alter- native explanation: "No, as in the case of another ('antarā') teaching". That is, just as in the Chāndogya the nine repetitions of the dictum: 'Thou art that' show that in every version the object established is different, so here.¹ Baladeva He breaks this sūtra into two different sūtras exactly after Śaṁkara. Interpretation absolutely different. He begins a new adhikaraṇa here (three sūtras) concerned with the topic of the identity between the Lord and His city. Thus: Sūtra 36.—"Within (the city of the Lord, viz. Saṁvyoma or the great Ether), (things appear) like (things in) an elemental city ("bhūta- grāma-vat") (i.e. in an ordinary city) (to the vision) of His own (i.e. to the devotees chosen by the Lord)." That is, in the city of the Lord, everything being a manifestation of the Lord is but the Lord Himself, but they look like material objects to His devotees.² Sūtra 37.—"If it be objected that otherwise (i.e. on the view that there is no difference between the Lord and His city), there is inappropriateness of difference (between the dweller and the resi- dence), (we reply:), no, as in the case of another teaching." That is, ¹ Bh. B. 3.3.35, p. 189. ² G.B. 3.3.36, p. 174, Chap. 3. "Yatratyaṁ vastu-jātaṁ sarvaṁ brah- mātmakam api pṛthivyādi-nirmita-vat sphurati."