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

[SŪ. 3. 3. 41. ADH. 18.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 669 Baladeva This is sūtra 42 in his commentary. Here he concludes the topic of the identity of Śrī with the parā-śakti of the Lord and hence with the Lord Himself. The contention is that if Śrī be identical with the Lord, then no erotic sentiment is possible between them, since any such sentiment is possible only if there be a difference between the lover and the beloved. The answer is : “(Śrī being the highest of the females and the Lord being the best of the males, an erotic sentiment naturally arises between them) when (they) have approached (each other), hence (such a sentiment is possible on the part of the Lord), on account of statement to that effect”. ¹ Adhikaraṇa 18: The section entitled “Non- restriction with regard to the specifying of that”. (Sūtra 41²) SŪTRA 41 “(THERE IS) NON-RESTRICTION WITH REGARD TO THE SPECIFYING OF THAT, ON ACCOUNT OF THAT BEING SEEN, FOR THE FRUIT (VIZ.) NON-OBSTRUCTION IS ‘DIFFERENT’.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha There is “non-restriction” (i.e. no fixed rule) that the meditations that are founded on the subordinate parts of sacrificial acts and are mentioned in texts like: “Let one meditate on the syllable ‘Om’ as the udgītha” (Chānd. 1.1.1³) and so on (are to be included) in those acts. Why? Because in the scriptural text: “Both perform with it, he who knows this thus and he who does not know thus” (Chānd. 1.1.10⁴), such a non-restriction is found. As we learn from Scripture that even a non-worshipper is a performer of sacrificial works through the praṇava, a subsidiary part of sacrificial works, so it is ascertained that there is no restriction with regard to the act of meditation. And hence that the fruit of meditation is “different” from the fruit of work is known from the passage: “What only one does with ¹ G.B. 3.3.42, p. 186, Chap. 3. ² This topic is resumed in Br. Sū. 3.3.59–64. ³ Ś, R, Bh. ⁴ Ś, R, Bh, ŚK.