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

[SŪ. 2. 4. 18. ADH. 7.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 469 other than the chief, are the sense-organs' Otherwise, the eye and the rest too being understood—like apāna and so on—simply by the phrase. 'From him arise the vital-breath', the separate mention: 'and all the sense-organs' must be meaningless. Hence the sense- organs being separate entities, their relation with the possessor of the vital-breath or the individual soul must be depicted to be certainly different from their relation with the vital-breath. It cannot be said also that the mind too, which is separately designated, cannot be a sense-organ,—since in accordance with the Smṛti passages, viz.. "The sense-organs of which the mind is the sixth" (Gītā 15.7), "The sense-organs are ten and one" (Gītā 13 6), as well as in accordance with the scriptural text: 'There are ten sense-organs in a person, the soul is the eleventh' (Bṛh. 3.9 4), the mind as well is admitted to be a sense-organ. The separate designation of the mind, too, is not futile, since the mind being the leader of the sense-organs in conformity with the text: '"And of the sense-organs, I am the mind"' (Gītā 10.22), such a separate mention has a meaning. By the scriptural text: '"Come let us assume all become a form of him alone"' (Bṛh. 1.5.21), on the other hand, it is denoted simply that the activities of the sense-organs are under the control of the vital-breath. The sense-organs, also, being under the vital-breath, are called 'vital- breaths',¹ just as in the text: 'All this verily, is Brahman' (Chānd. 3.14.1), the term 'Brahman' has been applied to the world, it being under His control. SŪTRA 18 "ON ACCOUNT OF THE SCRIPTURAL TEXT REGARDING DIFFERENCE AND ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha "On account of the scriptural mention of the difference" of the chief vital-breath from speech and the rest at the end of the section treating of speech, etc. thus: 'Then, verily, they said to the breath in the mouth' (Bṛh. 1.3.7²); "and on account of the difference" of the sense-organs, the apprehenders of sense-objects, from the best vital-breath, the cause of the subsistence of the body, the sense-organs and the rest,—they are separate entities. ¹ Prāṇa. ² Ś, Bh.

[SŪ. 2. 4. 19. 470 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 8.] Vedānta-kaustubha Having begun thus: 'They said to speech' (Bṛh. 1.3.2), and having concluded the section treating of speech and the rest, destroyed by the demons, Scripture goes on to declare the chief vital-breath as different from the sense-organs like speech, etc. in a passage in a different section: 'Then, verily, they said to the breath in the mouth' (Bṛh. 1.3.7) There is also a great difference between them, such as: the best vital-breath is the cause of the holding up of the body, the sense-organs and so on, while the sense-organs have speech and the rest for their objects, and so on. Hence, the sense-organs are different from the chief vital-breath,—this is the sense. Thus it is established that the sense-organs ¹,—presided over by the gods, connected with the individual soul, and denoted by the term 'sense- organ',—are different from the best vital-breath. Here ends the section entitled "The superintending of fire and the rest" (7). COMPARISON Śaṃkara, Bhāskara and Baladeva They divide this sūtra into two different sūtras, thus: "Bheda- śruteḥ" and "Vailakṣaṇāc ca". Adhikaraṇa 8: The section entitled "The making of name and form". (Sūtras 19–21) SŪTRA 19 "BUT THE MAKING OF NAME AND FORM (IS THE FUNCTION) OF HIM WHO RENDERS TRIPARTITE, ON ACCOUNT OF TEACHING." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha The evolution of names and forms too,—mentioned in the texts: 'That divinity thought: "Come, let me, having entered into these ¹ Prāṇas.

[SŪ. 2. 4 19. ADH. 8.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 471 three deities with this living soul, evolve name and forms"' (Chānd 6.3.2 ¹), '"Let me make each of them tripartite"' (Chānd. 6.3 3 ²)— is the work of the Supreme Being alone "who renders tripartite". He alone who made each of the deities tripartite is the creator of names and forms like fire, sun and the rest. Why? Because beginning thus: 'That divinity' (Chānd. 6.3.2), the text goes on to teach that the evolution (of names and forms) is due to the Supreme Deity thus: '"Let me, having entered with this living soul, evolve name and form"' ³ (Chānd. 6.3.2). Vedānta-kaustubha Thus, there being an enquiry with regard to the characteristic marks of the object which one should desire to enquire into (viz. Brahman), it has been established in the preceding chapter ⁴, that He is the cause of the world. Here, on the other hand, with a view to confirming it and demonstrating the cause of the world as held by us, it has been firmly established, after an examination of the cause as designated by others, ⁵ that the ether and the rest are created by Brahman. Then, the author is, now, removing a doubt as to whether the evolution of name and form is due to the Supreme Brahman—a doubt arising from the word 'individual soul' in the scriptural text to be cited hereafter. The evolution of name and form is mentioned in the Chāndogya, under the section teaching of the Existent, in the passages: 'That divinity thought: "Come, let me, having entered into these three deities with the living soul (jīvātman), evolve name and form"' (Chānd. 6.3.2), '"Let me make each of them tripartite"' (Chānd. 6.3.3). The question is: Is this evolution due to the individual soul or to the Supreme Soul? If it be suggested: To the individual soul alone, as indicated by the phrase: 'having entered with this living soul',— We reply. The word "but" is meant for disposing of the prima facie view. "The making of name and form," i.e the evolution of name and form, can be the work "of one who renders tripartite", i.e. of the Supreme Soul alone, omniscient and omnipotent who made ¹ Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B. ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤ² Op. cit. ³ Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B. ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤ⁴ Vide Br. Sū. 1.1.2. ⁵ In the 2nd pāda of the 2nd chap.

[SŪ. 2. 4. 20. 472 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 8.] each of the deities tripartite. Why? Having begun thus: "That divinity thought" (Chānd. 6 3.2), the text goes on to designate,— through the use of the first person: " 'Let me evolve name and form'" (Chānd. 6.3.2),—the Lord's resolve to evolve names and forms thus: " 'Let me make each of them tripartite' " (Chānd. 6.3.3). Then, for fulfilling this desire, having made each of the deities tripartite prior to the creation of the egg, having then created the egg, and having then entered therein, He made names and forms. The scriptural text about tripartition secondarily implies the process of making each element five-fold. Thus, as the Supreme Brahman alone, who renders tripartite, has been designated as the creator of names and forms; and as the individual soul is incapable of creating names and forms, the evolution is due to the former alone. The motive for using the term 'individual soul' (jīvātman) here will be made clear by the aphorism: "For (Brahman is) without form" (Br. Sū. 3.2.14). SŪTRA 20 "FLESH AND THE REST ARE OF AN EARTHLY NATURE, IN ACCORD- ANCE WITH SCRIPTURAL TEXT, AND THE OTHER TOO." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha That in the body there are the evolutes of fire, water and food, made tripartite, may be ascertained from scriptural text itself, viz. 'From the earth the excreta, flesh and the mind; from water urine, blood and the vital-breath; from fire the bones, marrow and speech'.¹ Vedānta-kaustubha With a view to exhibiting the worthlessness of the physical body, the author is demonstrating that the evolutes of the fire, water and earth, made tripartite, pertain to the body. "Flesh and the rest" should be known, "in accordance with scriptural text", "to be of an earthly nature", i.e. to be arising from, the earth, made tripartite, and of the form of rice, barley and so on consumed by the embodied soul. By the phrase: "and so on", the excreta and the mind are to be understood. The scriptural text is to the effect: 'The food which is consumed becomes three-fold. ¹ Not quoted by others.

[sū. 2. 4. 21. ADH. 8.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 473 That which is its grossest portion becomes the excreta, that which is the medium, the flesh; that which is the finest, the mind’ (Chānd. 6 5 1) Similarly, the three evolutes of each “of the other two also”, i e. of water and fire, are to be understood. The urine, blood and the vital-breath,—these are the evolutes of water. The bones, marrow and speech,—these are the evolutes of fire. Here, the vital-breath is taken to be an evolute of water, only because it depends on water for its existence, the vital-breath being really but a special state of the air itself.¹ Likewise, the designation of the earthly nature of the mind is only meant for showing that its well-being depends to the consumption of food ² The evolutes of fire, too, are to be under- stood in a similar manner. SŪTRA 21 “BUT ON ACCOUNT OF SPECIALITY, (THERE IS) THAT DESIGNATION, THAT DESIGNATION.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha “But” they are regarded as different is on the ground of the preponderance of parts Here ends the fourth quarter of the second chapter in the Vedānta- pārijāta-saurabha, the explanation of the Śārīraka-mīmāṁsā texts by the reverend Nimbārka. Vedānta-kaustubha To the objection, viz. What is the ground of distinguishing among the evolutes of these three elements, made tripartite,—the author replies: The term “but” is meant for disposing of the objection. On account of the preponderance of one element,³ “the designation”, viz. that this is an evolute of this, this of that and so on, is proper. ¹ Vide Br. Sū. 2.4.9. ² Vide the story of Śvetaketu who failed to remember and recite the Ṛg-verses and so on when he was fasting, but remembered and answered everything when he took food. Vide Chānd. 6.8.7. ³ This explains the compound “Vaiśeṣyāt”

474 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 2. 4. 21 ADH. 8.] The repetition indicates the conclusion of the chapter. Hence it is established that there is no contradiction whatsoever among the scriptural texts which are in concordance with regard to Brahman, Lord Vāsudeva. Here ends the section entitled “The making of name and form” (8). Here ends the fourth quarter of the second chapter of the holy Vedānta-kaustubha, a commentary on the Śārīraka-mīmāṁsā by the reverend teacher Śrīnivāsa, dwelling under the lotus-feet of the holy Nimbārka, the founder and the teacher of the sect of the venerable Sanatkumāra. Here ends the second chapter entitled “Non-contradiction”. Résumé The fourth quarter of the second chapter contains— 1 21 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Nimbārka; 2. 22 sūtras and 9 adhikaraṇas, according to Śaṁkara; 3. 19 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Rāmānuja; 4. 22 sūtras and 9 adhikaraṇas, according to Bhāskara; 5 19 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Śrīkaṇṭha; 6. 22 sūtras and 15 adhikaraṇas, according to Baladeva. Śaṁkara, Bhāskara and Baladeva divide sūtra 18 in Nimbārka’s commentary into two separate sūtras. Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha take sūtras 2 and 3 in Nimbārka’s commentary as one sūtra, also sūtras 14 and 15 as one sūtra. END OF VOLUME I

The provided image appears to be completely blank (solid white) and does not contain any visible text, diagrams, or content to transcribe.

Please provide or re-upload the correct image page.

VOLUME II THIRD CHAPTER (Adhyāya) FIRST QUARTER (Pāda) Adhikarana 1: The section entitled "Obtain- ing what is different from that". (Sūtras 1-7) SŪTRA 1 "IN OBTAINING (A BODY) DIFFERENT FROM THAT (THE SOUL) HASTENS CLOSELY EMBRACED, FROM QUESTION AND DETERMINA- TION." The interpretation of the Brahma-sūtras, entitled the Vedānta- pārijāta-saurabha, composed by the reverend Nimbārka. The object to be established (viz. Brahman) being definitely ascertained by means of concordance and non-contradiction,¹ now the means (sādhanas) are being determined Here with a view to generat- ing dispassion, the author is, first, exhibiting the soul's going to and returning from the heaven and the rest. The individual soul, having the stated marks ² and possessed of the vital-breath, discarding the present body, goes to another body, as "closely embraced" indeed by the subtle elements. This is known "from question to determina- tion", viz.: 'Do you know how in the fifth oblation water comes to have the speech of man?' (Chānd. 5.3.3 ³) and so on. THE COMMENTARY ENTITLED VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA, COMPOSED BY THE REVEREND ŚRĪNIVĀSA. The object to be resorted to, an ocean of all auspicious attributes, free by nature from all faults and the object which one should desire to enquire after—being determined in the two preceding chapters, ¹ The concordance of all the scriptural texts with regard to Brahman has been demonstrated in the first chapter; and the non-contradiction in the doctrine of the causality of Brahman, in the second. ² Vide Br. Sū. 2 3 16 ff. ³ Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B. ( 475 )

[SŪ. 3. 1. 1 476 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 1] now, on an enquiry into the means of attaining Him, the means are being designated. The first quarter of this first chapter, which explains the meaning of several Vedānta texts and removes a variety of doubts, tries to generate a strong feeling of disgust towards mundane existence by demonstrating the imperfections of the world. The second quarter tries to generate a yearning for Brahman by demonstrating His attributes. In the third quarter, discussions about the difference or non-difference among the meditations on Brahman, as well as the determination of the combination or non-combination of details therein, are undertaken. In the fourth quarter, on the other hand, the doubt being, viz. whether the highest end of men is derived from knowledge or from action, it is established that the highest end of man arises from knowledge, while work, which is without any desire for fruits, is a subsidiary part of knowledge. To begin. In accordance with the texts: 'Then these vital- breaths gather round him' (Bṛh. 4.4.1), 'It makes another newer . . .¹ form' (Bṛh. 4.4.4) the individual soul, accompanied by the vital- breath, the sense-organs and so on, having discarded the prior body, obtains another body with a view to enjoying the fruits of the works done by itself. Here a doubt arises, viz. whether it goes closely embraced by the subtle elements which are the seeds of the future body, or not so embraced? If the prima facie view be: In accordance with the view of the Sāṁkhyas, viz.: 'Wherever, in heaven or in hell, the fruits of work are undergone, there alone the particles of elements, originating the body which is the abode for undergoing the fruits of works, are obtained', the soul is accompanied by these—the author states the correct conclusion. The individual soul "hastens", i.e. goes, "closely embraced", i.e. surrounded indeed by the subtle elements, the substratum of the vital-breath and the rest and the seeds of the future body, "in obtaining (a body) different from that", i.e. when entering another body. Why? "On account of question and determination." The question, to begin with, is contained under the knowledge of five fires,² thus: '"Do you know how in the fifth oblation water comes to have the speech of man?"' (Chānd. 5.3.3). "Determination" means answer, and it, beginning thus: '"In this fire the gods offer reverence. From

¹ "A more auspicious." ² Pañcāgni-vidyā. Vide Chānd. 5.3–5.10.

[sū. 3. 1. 2. ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 477 that offering Soma, the king, arises ’ ” (Chānd. 5.4.2) and so on, establishes that water alone, offered to the heaven-world and so on, becomes denotable by that term thus ‘ “In the fifth oblation water comes to have the speech of man” ’ (Chānd 5.9.1). The sense is this : ‘The gods’, i. e. the vital-breaths which are the associates of the individual soul, ‘offer’, i. e. throw, ‘reverence’ to the heaven-world, imagined as fire, and that is transformed into an immortal body, called ‘Soma, the king’. Those very gods offer that body to the fire of cloud; and that body, offered thereto, becomes rain. The very same gods offer that rain to the fire of earth, and that, offered thereto, assumes the form of food. The very same gods offer that food to the fire of person; and offered thereto, that food assumes the form of semen. The very same gods offer that semen to the fire of woman, and that semen, offered thereto, becomes an embryo and obtains the name of a person. In this way, water comes to attain the name of a person. Although acquainted with all this, the king Pravāhaṇa, having put to Śvetaketu the questions about the goal of workers, asked this too thus: ‘Do you know how in the fifth oblation water comes to have the speech of man?’ (Chānd. 5.3.3). Thus asked, Śvetaketu, approaching his father Gautama, said. ‘I have been asked thus by the king, I do not know its answer’. Gautama, himself not knowing it, approached the king and said : ‘Impart that knowledge to us’ Thereupon the king answered Gautama. From such question and answer, it is definitely ascertained that the individual soul goes to another body as closely embraced indeed by the invisible subtle elements. SŪTRA 2 “BUT ON ACCOUNT OF (WATER) CONSISTING OF THE THREE (ELEMENTS), ON ACCOUNT OF PREPONDERANCE.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha Since water consists of the three elements in accordance with the scriptural text about tripartition,¹ the other two are also to be understood here. The mention of water only, on the other hand, fits in on account of its preponderance. ¹ Vide Chānd. 6.3.3. See Br. Sū. 2.4.19–21.

478 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3. 1. 3. ADH. 1.] Vedānta-kaustubha Apprehending the objection, viz., since in the question: ‘ “Do you know how in the fifth oblation’ ” (Chānd. 5.3 3), and likewise in the determination (i.e. answer), there is the mention of the term ‘water’, it is known that the soul goes surrounded by water. This being so, it cannot be said that it goes surrounded by all the subtle elements,—the author says: The term “but” is meant for disposing of the objection. Since water consists of the three elements in accordance with the scriptural text: ‘ “Let me make each of them tripartite’ ” (Chānd. 6.3.3), the other two also are understood, viz. food and fire, the rise of the body from mere water being impossible. Why, then, there is the mention of water only in the question as well as in the answer?²— to this the author replies: “On account of preponderance” of water, it alone has been mentioned. Although it appears that in the body there is the preponderance of the earth, since it is observed to be hard, yet on account of there being the preponderance of water in semen and blood, the statement: “On account of preponderance” is perfectly justifiable. COMPARISON Bhāskara Reading different, viz. “Ātmakāt tu . . .”.¹ SŪTRA 3 “AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE GOING OF THE SENSE-ORGANS.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha And because of the scriptural declaration of the going of the sense- organs thus “He going out . . . all the sense-organs go out after him” (Bṛh. 4.4.2²), the soul goes, closely embraced indeed by the subtle elements. Vedānta-kaustubha In accordance with the scriptural text: ‘He going out the vital- breath goes out after him. The vital-breath going out, all the sense- ¹ Bh. B. 3 1 2, p. 152. ² Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B

[sū. 3. 1. 4. ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 479 organs go out after it’ (Bṛh. 4 4.2); in accordance with the Smṛti passages · ‘ “It draws the sense-organs of which the mind is the sixth” ’ (Gītā 15 7), ‘ “When the lord obtains a body and when he departs from it, he goes taking them, as the wind take fragrances from their abodes” ’ (Gītā 15.8), as well as on account of this going of the sense- organs like speech and the rest together with the chief (vital-breath), the soul goes closely embraced indeed by the subtle elements, as going is not possible on the part of the sense-organs which are without a substratum,—this is the sense SŪTRA 4 “IF IT BE OBJECTED: ON ACCOUNT OF THE SCRIPTURAL MENTION OF THE GOING (OF SPEECH AND THE REST) TO FIRE AND THE REST, —(WE REPLY:) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF METAPHORICAL NATURE ” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha If it be objected: Because of the scriptural mention of the “going”, i.e. disappearance, of speech and the rest into fire and so on thus · ‘When the speech of this dead man goes into fire, his breath into the air, his eye into the sun’ (Bṛh. 3 2 13 ¹) and so on, they do not go with the soul,—(we reply ) “No”, “on account of the metaphorical nature” of the text about fire and the rest, it being cited together with the text: ‘His body-hairs to the medicinal herbs, his hairs on the head to the trees’ (Bṛh. 3 2 13 ²). Vedānta-kaustubha If it be objected · The going of the sense-organs with the individual soul is not justifiable, since the text: ‘When the speech of this dead man goes into fire, his breath into the air, his eye into the sun’ (Bṛh. 3.2 13) mentions the “going”, i e. the disappearance at the time of the death of the body, of the sense-organs like speech and the rest, into the deities like fire and so on,—(we reply :) “No” Why ? “On account of metaphorical nature”. That is, the scriptural ¹ Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B. ² Op. cit.

480 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 3 1. 5 ADH. 1.] text about the dissolution of speech and the rest into fire and so on is only figurative, concerned with the passing out of the presiding deities, while the text: ‘The vital-breath going out’ (Bṛh. 4 4 2) may be interpreted literally. The metaphorical nature of the text: ‘When the speech of this dead man’ (Bṛh. 3 12 13) is known from the fact of its being cited together with the text: ‘His body- hairs to the medicinal herbs, his hairs on the head to the trees’ (Bṛh. 3 12.13) It is never found that the body-hairs and the rest of a dead man dissolve into the medicinal herbs, etc. SŪTRA 5 “IF IT BE OBJECTED ON ACCOUNT OF NON-MENTION IN THE FIRST, (WE REPLY :) IT ALONE,¹ ON ACCOUNT OF FITTING IN ” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha If it be objected: “On account of the non-mention of water “in the first” fire, how can it become a person in the fifth oblation ? —(we reply .) “No”, since by the term ‘reverence’ “it alone” is denoted “on account of the fitting in” of the introduction and the rest (on this view alone). Vedānta-kaustubha If it be objected: In the text ‘In this fire the gods offer reverence’ (Chānd. 5 4 2) reverence is mentioned as the object to be offered “in the first” fire, but there is no mention of water, and hence how can water become a person in the fifth oblation; and how, in the absence of its mention at first, can the going of the soul as closely embraced by the subtle elements (i e. waters) be admitted on the ground of its consisting of the three (elements) ?— (We reply:) “No”. The term “for” implies the reason, i.e because “the very same” water, mentioned in the question; ‘“Do you know how in the fifth oblation water comes to have the speech of man ? ”’ (Chānd. 5 3.3), is denoted by the word ‘reverence’. Why? “On account of fitting in”, i e. on account of the fitting in of the introduction and the conclusion, otherwise the question and the ¹ The word ‘Ap’ (=water) is always plural. Hence the plural form “tāḥ” has been used in the sūtra.

[sū. 3. 1. 6. ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 481 answer cannot refer to the same topic. Thus, if in the beginning of the answer, viz. '"In this fire the gods offer reverence"' (Chānd. 5.4.2), given to the question, viz. '"Do you know how in the fifth oblation water comes to have the speech of a man?"' (Chānd. 5 3 3), by the term 'reverence' (śraddhā) reverence which is of the form of a special kind of mental mode be understood, then evidently such a reverence, a mere mental mode, cannot be referred to in the subse- quent passage: '"Thus, verily, in the fifth oblation water comes to have the speech of a man"' (Chānd. 5.9.1). Thus, there must be (on this view) one kind of question, another kind of beginning of answer, and another kind of answer. Moreover, it is impossible for reverence, which is of the form of a mental mode, to be an object that may be offered; and it is also impossible for the moon, rain and the rest to have a mental mode as their material cause. In the text: 'Water indeed produces faith in him for holy works', water is declared to be the cause of reverence and reverence is declared to be its effect. Accordingly, the word 'reverence' should be known to imply water metaphorically.¹ The application of the word 'reverence' to water is found in Scripture itself. Compare the passage: 'Reverence, verily, is water Beginning with reverence alone he performs a sacrifice' (Tait. Sam. 1.6.8.1 ²). The moon too is declared by Scripture to have reverence for its material cause in the passage: '"(The gods) offer reverence. From that offering Soma, the king, arises"' (Chānd. 5.4.2). SŪTRA 6 'IF IT BE OBJECTED THAT ON ACCOUNT OF NOT BEING MENTIONED, (WE REPLY) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THOSE WHO PERFORM SACRIFICES AND THE REST BEING KNOWN." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha If it be objected that it cannot be said that the individual soul goes, closely embraced by the subtle elements, because there is no ¹ That is, the cause and the effect being non-different, the effect (reverence) may stand for the cause (water). ² P. 81, lines 23-24, vol 1.

[SŪ. 3. 1. 6. 482 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 1 ] mention of the individual soul as there is of water and the rest,— (we reply:) “no”. Having established that those who perform sacrifices attain the world of the moon through the path of smoke, thus: ‘Those who worship through sacrifice, charitable deeds and alms-giving,—they pass into the smoke’ (Chānd. 5.10.3 ¹), the text goes on to establish them alone by the word ‘Soma’, thus ‘This is Soma, the king’ (Chānd. 5 10.4 ²). As pious workers are referred to in the passage: ‘Soma, the king, arises’ (Chānd. 5 1 2), the above objection has no force. Vedānta-kaustubha If it be objected: water may be denoted by the term ‘person’ in the fifth oblation through the successive order of reverence, moon, rain and so on. Other two elements, too, may be understood on account of water consisting of the three elements. But it cannot be said that the individual soul goes, closely embraced by the elements like water and so on. Why? Because in this text there is no mention of the individual soul as there is of water and the rest,— We reply: “No”. Why? “On account of those who perform sacrifices and the rest being known.” Having established that those who perform sacrifices and so on attain the world of the moon through the path of smoke thus: ‘Those who worship through sacrifices, charitable deeds and alms-giving—they pass into the flame’ (Chānd. 5.10.3), the text goes on to denote them alone (viz. those who perform sacrifices, etc.) by the word ‘Soma, the king’, thus ‘This is Soma, the king’ (Chānd 5.10.4). This being so, in the text under discussion too, viz. ‘In this fire the gods offer reverence. From that offering Soma, the king, arises’ (Chānd. 5.4.2), those who perform sacrifices and the rest are referred to by the words ‘Soma, the king’. So there is indeed the mention of the individual soul. The sense is that it goes, closely embraced by the subtle elements like water and the rest. There is no fault whatsoever here. ¹ Ś, R, Bh, B. ² Correct quotation: “Eṣa Soma rājā”. Vide Chānd. 5 10.4, p. 261 ; Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B.

[sū. 3. 1. 7. ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 483 SŪTRA 7 “OR (THAT DESIGNATION IS) METAPHORICAL, ON ACCOUNT OF BEING NOT ACQUAINTED WITH THE SOUL, FOR THIS (SCRIPTURE) SHOWS. Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha The mere workers “being not acquainted with the soul”, stand in a subordinate relation to the gods, and hence the designation of those who perform sacrifices and the rest as edible, viz. ‘That is the food of the gods. The gods eat that’ (Chānd 5 10 4 ¹) is “metaphorical”, in accordance with the scriptural text: ‘He is like a beast of the gods’ (Brh. 1.4.10 ²). Vedānta-kaustubha To the objection, viz. The going of the souls, which perform sacrifices and the rest, to the world of the moon for undergoing the fruits of works appears to be inconsistent, because in the text ‘That is the food of the gods. The gods eat that’ (Chānd. 5.10.4), Soma is mentioned as the food of the gods. Hence it cannot be said that the text: ‘Soma, the king, arises’ (Chānd. 5.4.2) refers to the souls which perform sacrifices and the rest, it being impossible for the souls to be food,—the author replies: The term “Or” is meant for disposing of the objection. Since those who perform sacrifices and the rest are only implements of enjoyment,—like sons, servants and so on,—to the gods, the statement that they are food is “metaphorical”, i.e figurative, but not literal, in conformity with the denial of chewing (i.e. actual eating) on the part of the gods in the passage: ‘The gods, verily, do not eat, do not drink, (but) are satisfied by seeing that very nectar’ (Brh 1.4.10). If it be objected It is unreasonable to hold that one who has become a god (viz. Soma) too is the implement of another’s enjoyment, like sons, servants and the rest,—(We reply.) no, “on account of being not acquainted with the soul”. Even then, it is indeed reason- able to hold that the mere workers “on account of not being acquainted with the soul”, are the implements of the enjoyment of those who are possessed of knowledge.

¹ Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B. ² Op. cit.

484 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 3. 1 8 ADH. 2.] With a view to dispelling the notion that the view established by him is based only on what is seen,¹ the author says. “For this (Scripture) shows”. The scriptural text: ‘He is like a beast of the gods’ (Bṛh 1.4 10) “shows” that the individual soul, because of being not acquainted with the Ātman, is an implement of the enjoyment of gods Here ends the section entitled “Obtaining what is different from that” (1). COMPARISON Bhāskara Reading slightly different, viz he substitutes “Ca” for “Vā” ² Adhikarana 2: The section entitled “The passing away of works”. (Sūtras 8—11) SŪTRA 8 “ON THE PASSING AWAY OF WORKS, (THE SOUL RE-DESCENDS AS) POSSESSED OF THE REMNANTS OF RESULTS, ON ACCOUNT OF WHAT IS SEEN (I.E. SCRIPTURE) AND SMṚTI, AS (IT) HAD COME AND NOT THUS.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha On the decay of the works, productive of fruits in the next world, the soul, possessed of the works, productive of fruits in this world, re-descends “as (it had) come and not thus”, in accordance with the scriptural text: ‘Hence those who are of a pleasant conduct here, the prospect is indeed that they will attain a pleasant birth’ (Chānd. 5.10.7 ³), and in accordance with the Smṛti passage: ‘Men of (different) castes and stages of life, who are devoted to their own works, having departed and having undergone the fruits of works, attain, through the remnant of that, births in distinguished castes and families, ¹ Vide the objection above that the soul is never seen to be food. ² Bh. B 3.1.7, p. 154. ³ Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B.

[sū. 3. 1 8 ADH 2.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 485 endowed with beauty, longevity, scriptural knowledge, wealth, happiness and intelligence' (G D.S 11.2.9 ¹). Vedānta-kaustubha Thus it has been established that the workers, while ascending, are closely embraced by water and the rest Now, if all Karmas be exhausted by enjoyment there, the souls cannot evidently attain again various kinds of bodies,—it is being established now that while descending, they are possessed of the remnants of the consequences of their acts In the text 'Having dwelt there as long as there is a remnant (of their good works) (Sampāta), then they return again by the way they came' (Chānd. 5 10.5) and so on, the descent of those who are in heaven is recorded. Here a doubt arises, viz whether the soul, which is in heaven, re-descends without any remnants of the results of its acts, or as possessed of the remnants of results. The prima facie view is as follows The word "Sampāta" means whereby one falls down,² i e work Hence in accordance with the text. 'Having dwelt as long as there is sampāta' (Chānd. 5.10 5), the soul enjoys all the fruits of its works. This being so, after enjoying all works, the soul re-descends without any remnants of the results of its acts. With regard to it, we reply. "On the passing away", i e. on the decay, through enjoyment, "of works", i.e only of works like sacrifices and the rest, performed with the attainment of heaven in view, the individual soul, "possessed of the remnants of consequences", re- descends "as (it had) come", i.e. as it had gone, or in the way of its ascent, "and not thus", i e in a different way. By the scripture text. 'As long as there is sampāta' (Chānd. 5.10.5) and so on, the group of works, the cause of the attainment of heaven, is denoted. By the term "remnants of results" ("anuśaya") the works, other than the above and the causes of the attainment of the body and the rest, are understood. The sense is that one, who is possessed of these remnants of results, re-descends by the way of its ascent, the order of which is: smoke. night, the other (viz, the dark) fortnight,

¹ P. 15, lines 18–20. Slight variations are found. S, R, Bh. ² Sampataty anena sampātaḥ.

486 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3. 1. 8 ADH. 2.] the six months of the northern progress of the sun, the world of fathers, the ether and the moon,¹ i e. through the order: the moon, the ether, the air, smoke, mist, cloud and rain ² Why ? "On account of what is seen and Smṛti." 'What is seen' means Scripture, and it declares the descent of the soul as possessed of the remnants of its works thus: 'Then those who are of a pleasant conduct here,—the prospect is indeed that they will attain a pleasant birth, the birth of a Brāhmaṇa, or the birth of Kṣatriya, or the birth of a Vaiśya Now, who are of a stinking conduct here,—the prospect is indeed that they will attain a stinking birth, the birth of a dog, or the birth of a pig, or the birth of a Caṇḍāla' ³ (Chānd. 5 10.7). The sense is: 'Those who are of a pleasant conduct', i.e. those who perform good deeds, when re-descended here from heaven, attain the births of a Brāhmaṇa and the rest But 'those who are of a stinking conduct', i e. those who perform contemptible deeds, having returned here from hell, attain the births of dogs, pigs, and the rest Smṛti too declares the descent of the soul as possessed of the remnants of its works thus· 'Men of (different) castes and stages of life, who are devoted to their own works, having departed and having undergone the fruits of works, attain, through the remnant of these, births in distinguished castes and families, endowed with beauty, longevity, scriptural knowledge, wealth, happiness and intelligence' (G.D.S. 11 29). COMPARISON Bhāskara Reading slightly different, viz. he leaves out the "Ca".⁴ Baladeva He divides this sūtra into two separate sūtras,—thus· "Kṛtā'tyaye . . ." and "Yathetam . . . ca" ⁵ ¹ Vide Chānd. 5.10.3-4. This is, the order of ascent. ² Vide Chānd. 5.10.5-6. That is, the order of descent is partly similar ("Yathetam") to that of ascent, and partly dissimilar ("anevam ") to it. The two journeys are alike, as in both cases the soul passes through the moon, the ether and smoke; but different, as the descending soul passes through the air and does not pass through the world of fathers and the rest of the stages of ascent. Vide also Bṛh. 6 2.16—exactly similar account given. ³ An outcaste, born of a Brāhmaṇa mother and a Śūdra father. ⁴ Bh. B 3.1.8, p. 154. ⁵ G.B 3.1.8.

[SŪ. 3. 1. 9. ADH. 2] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 487 SŪTRA 9 "IF IT BE OBJECTED ON ACCOUNT OF CONDUCT, (WE REPLY.) NO, (THE TEXT IS) MEANT TO CONNOTE THAT (VIZ WORK) META- PHORICALLY, SO KĀRṢṆĀJINI THINKS." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha If it be objected that in the phrase "of a pleasant conduct" (ramaṇīya-caraṇā) (Chānd. 5 10 7), the word 'caraṇa' means conduct. Our purpose being served therefrom alone, the descent of the soul as possessed of the remnants of its works is not possible,—(We reply ) "No", since the text about 'Caraṇa' "is meant to connote" work, "so Kārṣṇājini" thinks Vedānta-kaustubha If it be objected : If in the text : 'Those who are of a pleasant conduct attain a pleasant birth. Those who are of a stinking conduct attain a stinking birth' (Chānd. 5.10.7), the word 'Caraṇa' means good and bad deeds, then alone we can assert that the soul descends as possessed of the remnants of its work for attaining good and bad births: but that is not the case. Why ? "On account of conduct," i.e. on account of behaviour. As the attainment of good and bad births, is mentioned here the word 'Caraṇa' does not mean work, but only conduct ; and this latter has been designated in the Veda by the word 'good conduct' as different indeed from work thus : 'Those works which are irreproachable are to be practised and not others. Those that are our good should be revered by you and not others' (Tait. 1 11). Hence to say that the soul re-descends as possessed of the remnants of its works is inconsistent,— (We reply :) "No", since the teacher "Kārṣṇājini" thinks that the scriptural text about 'caraṇa', is "meant to connote" work "metaphorically", as in the absence of good and bad deeds, the attainment of good and bad births from mere conduct is impossible. COMPARISON Śaṁkara and Bhāskara Reading different, viz. omit "tad" ¹ ¹ Ś.B. 3.1.9, p. 691; Bh. B. 3.1.9, p. 155.