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

[SŪ. 3. 3. 62. 708 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 26.] COMPARISON Baladeva This is sūtra 65 in his commentary. It may be objected that a Chāndogya text (Chānd. 1.6.7) mentions only the lotus-like eyes of the Lord, but not His other limbs. Hence this text must be defective. The answer is: "(There is) no (discrepancy in this text) on account of comprehensiveness". The word "na" (=no) is to be supplied from sūtra 3.3.67. The sense is that the description of the eyes only must be supposed to involve the description of other members of the body of the Lord, and hence the description is not defective.¹ PRIMA FACIE VIEW (concluded) SŪTRA 62 "AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE SCRIPTURAL TEXT ABOUT THE COMMON- NESS OF ATTRIBUTES." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha "And on account of the scriptural text about the commonness of attribute," viz. "Thereby this triad . . . . ² exists" (Chānd. 1.1.9 ³). Vedānta-kaustubha And on account of the scriptural mention of the commonness of "attribute", i.e. of the Om-kāra, the basis of meditation, in all sacri- ficial works, thus: "Thereby this triad . . . . . exists" (Chānd. 1.1.9). The meaning is that 'thereby', i.e. by the Om-kāra, the basis of medita- tion, 'the triad exists', i.e. the works mentioned in the three Vedas proceed.⁴ The sense is that those meditations too which are based on ¹ G.B. 3.3.65, p. 231, Chap. 3. ² Correct quotation: "Tenāyaṁ trayī vidyā vartate". ³ Ś, R, Śk. ⁴ The text continues: "With 'Om' the Adhvaryyu gives orders, with 'Om' the Hotṛ recites, with 'Om' the Udgātṛ sings".