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

822 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 4. 2. 12. ADH. 5.] knower, too, departs from the body. That does not stand to reason, "On account of the denial" of a knower's departure from the body, in the scriptural text: "Now he who does not desire, who is without desire, who is free from desire, who has attained his desire, who desires for the self,—his sense-organs do not go out. Having become Brah- man alone, he enters into Brahman" (Bṛh. 4.4 6) and so on. We reply: "No". This denial is not a denial of the departure of the soul from the body. Having referred to the embodied soul, the topic of discussion by the word 'him' in the text: "Now, he who does not desire", the text goes on to deny the departure of those sense-organs "from the embodied soul" by the clause: "His sense- organs do not go out", since by the sixth case 'his', the body, which is not mentioned before as connected with the sense-organs is not referred to. By the texts: "By that light, this soul goes out" (Bṛh. 4.4.2), "He going out, the vital-breath goes out after him" (Bṛh. 4.4.2), "He assumes another newer and a more auspicious form" (Bṛh. 4.4.4) and so on, it is suggested that during the state of trans- migratory existence, the sense-organs of the embodied soul depart in order that there may be the origin of a new body,—and it is this that is denied here. Further, it is suggested that at the time of the knower's departure from the final body, set up so long by the works the effects of which have already begun, he is separated from the sense-organs,— and this too is denied. The sense is that these sense-organs accompany him as he proceeds through the path of gods, and are not separated from him prior to his attaining Brahman. In the reading "of some" branches, viz. "From him the sense-organs do not depart" (Śat. Br. 14.7.2, 8), there is an explicit denial of the departure of the sense- organs from the embodied soul, mentioned as the topic of discussion thus: "He who is without desire, who is free from desire, who has attained his desire" (Śat. Br. 14.7.2, 8), and indicated as an ablative by the fifth case-ending. COMPARISON Śaṁkara He breaks it into two different sūtras: "Pratiṣedhāt . . . . . śārīrāt" and "spaṣṭo . . . . ekeṣām", and takes the first as the prima facie view, the second as the correct conclusion.¹ Thus, he arrives ¹ Pp. 937-38.