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

[SŪ 3. 4. 21. ADH. 2.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 735 Under the udgītha-meditation and the like, the following are mentioned by Scripture: "This is the best essence among the essences, the supreme and the highest place, the eighth,—the udgītha" (Chānd. 1.1 3), "The Ṛic is this earth indeed, the Sāman the fire" (Chānd. 1.6.1), "Verily, this world is the piled up fire" (Śat. Br. 10.5 4, 1 ¹), "This earth forsooth, is the hymn" (Ait Ār. 2.1.2 ²) and so on. Here the doubt is, viz. whether the texts about the best essence and so on are concerned simply with an eulogy of the udgītha and the rest which are subsidiary parts of sacrifices, or whether they enjoin the udgītha and the rest to be looked upon as the best essence and so on. With regard to this, (the author) states the prima facie view: "If it be objected: mere eulogy, on account of taking". That is, they are concerned simply with eulogy. Why ? "On account of taking," i e. as the groups of texts about the best essence and so on are similar to the texts eulogizing the subsidiary parts of sacrificial parts, such as: "This earth indeed in the sacrificial ladle, the sun the tortoise, the heavenly world the āhavanīya-fire", and so on, they must be taken as concerned with the glorification of udgītha and the rest which are subordinate members of sacrificial acts. To this we say: "No." This cannot be said. Why? "On account of being something new," i.e. because the udgītha and the rest are not established as the best of essence by any other means or proof. The injunction refers to the udgītha and the rest to be looked upon as the best essence and so on, it being unreasonble to take a text to be concerned with the glorification of the udgītha and the rest, enjoined in a different place, when it is possible to interpret it in relation to its own context. COMPARISON Baladeva He does not begin a new adhikaraṇa here, but continues the topic of the previous section, viz. that a knower of Brahman is at liberty to act at will. Hence the sūtra: "If it be said that (the texts allowing a knower to act at will are) mere glorification, on account of (their) reference (to works), (we reply:) No, on account of being ¹ P. 798, line 17. ² P. 101.