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

[sū. 3. 4. 20. ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 733 sacrificial faggot below (the ladle). He holds it above for the gods" (Āp. Ś.S. 9.11.8-9)—here though occurring in the same sentence with the holding of the faggot below the ladle, the holding of the faggot, by separating it, over the clarified butter placed in a ladle is enjoined because of being something new (not enjoined before),¹— so here too. It has been said in the section treating of what is com- plimentary (action): "But (there is) an injunction with regard to the holding, on account of being something new" (Pū. Mī. Sū. 3.4.3²). Although with regard to this stage of life, there is an injunction cele- brated in a text of the Jābāla, viz "Having completed the life of a religious student, let one become a house-holder. Having become a house-holder, let one become a dweller in the forest. Having become a dweller in the forest, let one wander forth. Or else, let one wander forth from the very life of a religious student, or from the house, or from the forest. The day one gets indifferent to the world, let him wander forth on that very day" (Jābāla 4),—yet it is shown by his Holiness that the other stage of life occurs in other texts as well irrespective of that,—this is to be understood here. The texts, viz. "He who extinguishes the fire is the slayer of the hero of the gods" (Tait. Sam. 1.5.2). "After having brought an acceptable gift for the teacher, let him not cut off the line of progeny" (Tait. I. 11), "One who is childless does not possess the world" (Ait. Br. 33.1) and so on, are concerned with people hankering after enjoyment. Hence it is established that the end of men arises from knowledge. Here ends the section entitled "The end of Men" (1). COMPARISON Baladeva He continues here the same topic, viz. whether a knower of Brah- man must work or not. Hence the sūtra: "Or (the text designating ¹ I.e. the above passage may be conceived as a coherent and unbroken whole if we take it to be referring to one thing only, viz the holding of the faggot below. Nevertheless, we conceive it as enjoining the holding of the faggot above too, since this latter is not enjoined anywhere else. ² The sūtra really reads: "Vidhīstu apūrvatvāt syāt".

734 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 3. 4. 21. ADH. 2.] that a knower of Brahman may perform his duties in any way is) an injunction, like the holding (i.e. studying)". That is, the above text is an injunction with reference to the pariṇiṣṭha devotees, allowing them to act according to their will, just like the injunction, viz. that a Brāhmaṇa is to be initiated in order that he may study the Veda ¹ Adhikaraṇa 2: The section entitled "A Mere Eulogy". (Sūtras 21-22) SŪTRA 21 "IF IT BE OBJECTED THAT (THE TEXTS ABOUT THE BEST ESSENCE AND THE LIKE ARE MERE EULOGY, ON ACCOUNT OF TAKING (THEM AS CONNECTED WITH PARTS OF SACRIFICES,) (THEN WE REPLY ) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF BEING NEW." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha If it be objected that texts like: "This is the best essence among the essences" (Chānd. 1. 1.3 ²) and so on, are "mere eulogy" of udgītha and the rest, the subsidiary parts of sacrificial acts, since the best essence and the rest are taken as related to them,—(we reply.) "No". This being not established before, here there is an injunction with regard to the udgītha and the rest to be looked upon as the best essence. Vedānta-kaustubha It has been established above that since in the text: "There are three branches" (Chānd. 2.2.3, 1) and so on, the other stage of life is mentioned as equal to the stage of a house-holder, the former is to be adopted. Similarly, as the groups of texts about the best essence are similar to the texts about the sacrificial ladle the sun and so on which relate to the subsidiary parts of sacrificial acts, the former too are subsidiary parts of such acts,—apprehending this objection, (the author) is now disposing of it. ¹ G.B. 3.4.20, p. 257, Chap. 3. ² Ś, R, Bh, Śk.

[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.

736 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 3. 4. 22. ADH. 2.] something new". That is, that a knower is at liberty to act at will is not enjoined before, and it is enjoined in the above texts ¹ SŪTRA 22 "AND ON ACCOUNT OF TEXTS (INDICATIVE OF) THE EXISTENCE (OF INJUNCTION)." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha "And" on account of the injunctive "text", viz. "Let one medi- tate on the udgītha" (Chānd 1.1.1 ²). Vedānta-kaustubha "And" on account of injunctive "texts" like: "Let one meditate on the udgītha" (Chānd. 1 1.1), "Let one meditate on the sāman" (Chānd. 2 2.1) and so on, it is established that the quoted texts enjoin the udgītha and the rest to be viewed (i e. meditated on) as the best essence and so on. Here ends the section entitled "Mere Eulogy" (2). COMPARISON Baladeva Here he concludes the topic that a knower may perform actions at will. Thus the sūtra: "And on account of texts (indicative of) in- tense love". That is, the pariniṣṭha devotee is so absorbed in love and devotion for the Lord that he has no time for performing ordinary works.³ ¹ G.B. 3.4.21, pp. 257-258, Chap. 3. ² Ś, R, Bh, Śk. ³ G.B. 3.4.22, pp. 258-259, Chap. 3.

[sū. 3. 4. 23. ADH. 3.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 737 Adhikaraṇa 3: The section entitled "The legends recited at the Aśva-medha". (Sūtras 23-24) SŪTRA 23 "IF IT BE SAID THAT (THE SCRIPTURAL STORIES) ARE MEANT TO BE RECITED AT THE AŚVA-MEDHA, (WE REPLY:) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF BEING SPECIFIED." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha It is not to be thought that the scriptural stories in the Vedāntas are meant to be recited at the Aśva-medha sacrifice,¹—since only some are specified (to be so) by texts, beginning: "He is to tell the legends recited at the Aśva-medha" and continuing: "Manu, Vivasvat's son, the King" (Śat. Br. 13 4.3, 3 ²) and so on. Vedānta-kaustubha Apprehending the objection that the texts about the best essence are concerned with something else, it has been shown that they relate to meditation (and not to action). Similarly, apprehending the objection that the texts dealing with particular stories are concerned with something else, (the author) shows that they (too) relate to meditation. In the different Vedāntas, there are many texts relating stories, such as: "Forsooth, Pratardana, the son of Divodāsa, went to the favourite place of Indra" (Kauṣ. 3.1), "Now, there was Jānaśruti, the great-grandson (of Janaśruti) a pious giver, a liberal donor, a preparer of much food" (Chānd. 4.1.1), "Now, there was Śvetaketu, the son of Aruṇa" (Chānd. 6.1.1), "Yājñavalkya had two wives, Maitreyī and Kātyāyanī" (Bṛh. 4.5.1) and so on. Here the doubt is, viz. whether they are meant to be recited at the Aśva-medha sacrifice, or whether they subserve the injunction of meditation. What is reasonable to begin with? "If it be said that they are meant to be recited at the Aśva-medha, (we reply) no." Why? "On ¹ A pāriplava is a legend to be recited at the Aśva-medha sacrifice and repeated at certain intervals throughout the year. ² Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B.

[SŪ. 3. 4 24 738 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 3.] account of being specified," i.e. in the text beginning "He is to tell the legends recited at the Aśva-medha" and continuing "Manu, Vivasvat's son, the King" (Śat Br 13 4.3, 3) and so on, certain texts alone are specified as those to be recited at the Aśva-medha. COMPARISON Bhāskara He takes this sūtra and the next as constituting a single sūtra, and reads "pāriplavārtha" instead of "pāriplavārthā" ¹. ——— SŪTRA 24 "AND THIS BEING SO, ON ACCOUNT OF THE CONNECTION (OF THESE STORIES WITH MEDITATION) AS FORMING PART OF A COHERENT WHOLE." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha This being so, on account of the connection" of other (stories) with injunction,—such as: "Should be seen" (Bṛh. 2.4.5, 4.5.6 ²) and so on—"as forming part of a coherent whole", they subserve the purpose of meditation. Vedānta-kaustubha "And this being so," i.e. all the scriptural stories being not legends to be recited at the Aśva-medha, only some being so, these former scriptural stories subserve the end of the injunction of meditation, "on account of their connection" with injunctions like "O, the self should be seen" (Bṛh. 2.4.5; 4.5.6) and so on, "as forming part of a coherent whole". Hence it is established that the scriptural stories subserve the purpose of the injunction of meditation. Here ends the section entitled "The legends recited at the Aśva-medha" (3). ¹ Bh. B. 3.4.23, p. 207. ² Ś, R, Bh, B.

[sū. 3. 4. 25. ADH. 4.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 739 Adhikaraṇa 4: The section entitled “The kindling of fire” (Sūtra 25) SŪTRA 25 “AND FOR THIS VERY REASON, (IN THE CASE OF THOSE WHO OBSERVE CHASTITY, KNOWLEDGE IS) INDEPENDENT OF THE KIN- DLING OF FIRE AND SO ON.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha In accordance with the scriptural text: “One who is devoted to Brahman goes to immortality” (Chānd 2.23 1 ¹), in the case of those who are bound by chastity, knowledge is “independent of the kindling of fire and so on” Vedānta-kaustubha It has been stated above that the stages belonging to one bound by chastity are mentioned in Scripture. Immediately after that, two more points ² were considered by reason of their association with what has been shown Now, on the doubt, viz. whether by reason of the absence of acts like sacrifices and so on which are subsidiary parts of knowledge, knowledge too, the whole, is possible in those stages or not: and on the suggestion that it is not possible, but is possible in the stage of a house-holder, involving the knowledge of sacrifices and so on,—(the author) states the correct conclusion. From the scriptural texts, such as: “Desiring which people live the life of religious studentship that word I declare to you in brief” (Kaṭha 2.15), “Desiring this world alone mendicants wander forth” (Bṛh. 4.4.22), “One who stands firm on Brahman attains immortality” (Chānd. 2 23.2), “And those who meditate on faith and austerity in the forest” (Chānd. 5.10.1) and so on, they (viz. those who are bound by chastity) are known to have knowledge. “And for this very reason,” it is definitely ascertained that in their case knowledge is “independent of the kindling of fire and so on”, i.e. independent

¹ Correct quotation, “Brahma-saṁsthā”. C.U., p. 656. ² Viz. that the (a) udgītha texts and (b) the scriptural stories subserve the purpose of meditation.

[SŪ. 3. 4. 25. 740 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 4.] of the sacrificial acts to be accomplished by placing the fire on the sacrificial fire-place, i e is brought about by the proper duties, in- cumbent on their own stage of life, such as hearing, thinking, medita- ting and so on. During the stage of a house-holder there being a variety of unavoidable worldly and scriptural duties, the full develop- ment of knowledge, the means to the highest end of men, is not possible; and hence the intentional giving up of the life of a house-holder for the sake of that (viz knowledge) is known from Scripture itself. Therefore, it is established that in the case of those who are bound by chastity, knowledge is all the more possible. Here ends the section entitled "The kindling of fire" (4). COMPARISON Śaṁkara While Nimbārka holds that knowledge is independent of works only in the case of those who are bound by chastity, Śaṁkara is of the opinion that this is so in all cases, and does not speak here especially of those only who observe chastity. Accordingly he, interprets the phrase "ata eva" as "because the highest end of men arises from knowledge" (established Br. Sū. 3.4.1 ¹). Baladeva He also does not speak here of those alone who are bound by chastity. Hence the sūtra: "For this very reason, (i.e. because vidyā is independent of karma, it) does not depend on the kindling of fire and the like, (for manifesting its fruit)". That is, there is no necessity for a combination of vidyā and karma for leading to salvation, but vidyā alone is sufficient.² ¹ Ś B. 3.4.25, p. 874. ² G.B 3.4.25.

[sū. 3. 4. 26. ADH. 5.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 741 Adhikarana 5: The section entitled "Depend- ence on all". (Sūtra 26) SŪTRA 26 "AND DEPENDENCE ON ALL, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SCRIP- TURAL TEXT ABOUT SACRIFICE AND SO ON, AS IN THE CASE OF A HORSE." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha In accordance with the scriptural text: "Him the Brāhmanas desire to know by the recitation of the Veda, by sacrifice" (Bṛh 4.4.2 ¹), knowledge depends for its own origination on all the works which are the means, as one depends on a horse for going Vedānta-kaustubha Knowledge being established to be the means to the highest end of men, it might be thought that all works are to be given up. Apprehending this objection, (the author) is now exhibiting their use for producing the desire to know. On the doubt, viz If the highest end of men arises through knowledge alone, then is it independent of all duties incumbent on the stages of life or dependent ?—if it be suggested that the desired end being accomplished through it (viz. knowledge) alone, what is the use of works ? Hence it is independent of all,— We reply: "Dependence on all". The compound "dependence on all" ("sarvāpekṣā") is to be explained as follows. That which depends, for its origin, on all the duties, incumbent on the stages of life, i.e. the subsidiary parts (of knowledge), which are performed by those who are desirous of salva- tion and aim at knowledge. But when it has originated, it does not depend on anything for bringing about the highest end of men. Why ? "In accordance with the scriptural text about sacrifice and the rest," viz. "Him the Brāhmaṇas desire to know by the recitation of the Veda, by sacrifice, by charity, by austerity, by fasting" (Bṛh. 4.4.22). The word 'Vividiṣanti' is to be explained as: They 'desire to know' by sacrifices and the rest. Here, if the primacy of the meaning of the suffix be admitted, then sacrifices and the rest are to be regarded as subsidiary parts of knowledge by way of (producing) a desire (for 1 Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B.

742 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [sū. 3. 4. 26. ADH 5.] knowledge), (i.e. indirectly). If the primacy of the meaning of the root be admitted, then sacrifices and the rest are to be regarded as the subsidiary parts of so desired knowledge directly.¹ A parallel instance is cited: "As in case of a horse". A horse is needed for accomplishing a journey to a desired place; but when the journey is accomplished, it is no longer needed—so is the case here.² It has been said by the Lord as well: ' "The acts of sacrifice, charity and austerity are not to be given up, but are to be performed Sacrifice, charity and austerity are the purifiers of the wise" ' (Gītā 18 8), ' "From whom proceeds the activity of all beings, by whom all this is pervaded, by worshipping Him with his own work, a man attains perfection" ' (Gītā 18.46) Thus it is established that know- ledge,—having the form of worship, meditation, highest devotion, steady remembrance and so on; the destroyer of all evil; the special cause of the attainment of the nature of the Highest Person, denoted by the terms 'Highest Brahman' and so on; and attainable through His grace,—arises, through the grace of Scripture and the spiritual teacher, from the proper performance of the daily and occasional duties, incumbent on one's own stage of life, and constituting the means to the worship of Lord Vāsudeva. Here ends the section entitled "Dependence on all" (5). COMPARISON Śaṁkara The example "aśva-vat" interpreted differently. He points out that knowledge is dependent on work in the sense that work gives rise to it; and independent of work in the sense that once gene- rated, it does not depend on work for bringing about its result, viz. salvation. Hence there is no contradiction in saying that knowledge is independent of work (as done in the previous sūtra) and dependent on it (as done in this sūtra). In this world everything has its own particular use. A horse, e.g. is of no use for drawing the plough, but is of use for drawing the chariot only. Similarly, works are of ¹ See Br. Sū. 1.1.4, pp. 37-38. ² I.e. Karma is needed for the rise of vidyā; but when vidyā has once originated, it is no longer needed.

[SŪ. 3. 4 27. ADH 6] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 743 no use in bringing about the result of knowledge, but are of use only for giving rise to it.¹ Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha They too interpret the example "aśva-vat" differently thus: Just as a horse, though the real means of going, depends on some other assisting factors, viz. saddle, attendants, grooming and the like, so knowledge, though the real means to salvation, depends on the co- operation of works.² Bhāskara This is sūtra 25 in his commentary. Interpretation different. In direct contrast to Nimbārka, he points out that Karma is not the cause of the origin of knowledge ³, but its essential part bringing about salvation. Thus, here he stresses his doctrine of the combina- tion of knowledge and work. He interprets the example "aśva-vat" thus: "Just as a horse is fit for carrying a man, but not for drawing a plough, so knowledge, combined with work, is fit for leading to salvation, and not mere knowledge".⁴ Adhikaraṇa 6: The section entitled "Calm- ness, self-control and so on". (Sūtra 27) SŪTRA 27 "BUT STILL (THE SEEKER AFTER THE KNOWLEDGE OF BRAH- MAN) MUST BE ENDOWED WITH CALMNESS, SELF-CONTROL AND SO ON; SINCE, ON ACCOUNT OF THE INJUNCTION OF THESE AS THE SUBSIDIARY PARTS OF THAT (VIZ. KNOWLEDGE), THEY ARE TO BE PRACTISED NECESSARILY." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha Although in the case of one who desires to know Brahman, knowledge may be brought about through the proper performance ¹ Ś.B. 3.4.26, pp. 875-876. ² Śrī. B. 3.4.26, p. 376, Part 2; ŚK. B. 3.4.26, p. 398, Parts 10 and 11. ³ "Na ca jñāna-svarūpotpattau karma vyapriyate; śravaṇamananādi tad-utpatti-kāraṇam. ⁴ Bh. B. 3 2.25 (written as 3.2.26), p. 210

744 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3. 4. 27. ADH. 6 ] of the duties incumbent on his own stage of life, yet he "must be endowed with calmness, self-control and so on", since, "on account of the injunction" of calmness and the rest in the passage. "Hence, he who knows thus, having become calm, self-restrained, indifferent, patient and collected, should see the self in the self alone" (Bṛh 4.4.23 ¹), "they are to be practised necessarily". Vedānta-kaustubha Having thus determined the external means to the origination of knowledge, the author is now determining the internal means. On the doubt, viz. whether a seeker after the knowledge of Brahman must be endowed with calmness, self-control and so on in order that there may be the rise of knowledge, or not,—if it be sug- gested: Since calmness and the rest, being posterior to the rise of knowledge, are not its subsidiary parts, and since the rise of know- ledge is possible by means of those works alone which are mentioned in the text: "Him the Brāhmaṇas desire to know by the recitation of the Veda" (Bṛh. 4.4.22), it is not reasonable to suppose that the seekers after the knowledge of Brahman should be endowed with calmness and so on,— We reply: the word "but" is meant for disposing of the objection. Although knowledge is possible on the part of a seeker after the knowledge of Brahman through the purification of the mind by works, "still" he "must be endowed with calmness, self-control and so on". Why? They "are to be performed necessarily", on account of the injunction of them as subsidiary parts of that, i.e. because calmness, self-control and the rest have been enjoined as the subsi- diary parts of knowledge, and because "they" are enjoined in the text: "Hence, he who knows thus, having become calm, self- restrained, indifferent, patient and collected, should see the self in the self alone" (Bṛh. 4.4.23). Through calmness, self-control, and so on, one-pointed attention arises (directly), in accordance with the scriptural text: "By religious duty he drives away evil (Mahānār. 22.1). And through works, one-pointed attention arises (indirectly) by way of the removal of sins; thence there is the rise of knowledge;

¹ Ś, R, Bh, ŚK, B.

[sū. 3. 4. 28. ADH. 7 ] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 745 thence, again, there is a still greater rise of calmness and so on 1 Hence it is established that one who seeks knowledge must be endowed with calmness and so on. Here ends the section entitled "Calmness, self-control and so on" (6). COMPARISON Śaṃkara The word "tathāpi" interpreted differently, viz. even if it be granted that the text about sacrifices and so on (Bṛh. 4.4.22) contain no injunction and the rest It is shown later on that the above text is really injunctive. He does not take it as constituting an adhikaraṇa by itself, but as included under the previous one.2 Adhikaraṇa 7: The section entitled "The per- mission of all food" (Sūtras 28-31) SŪTRA 28 "AND THE PERMISSION OF ALL FOOD (IS VALID) IN THE EVENT OF DANGER TO LIFE, ON ACCOUNT OF THAT BEING SEEN." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha The permission of all food in the text: "Verily, to one who knows thus, there is nothing whatever that is not food" (Chānd. 5.2.1 3), is valid only "in the event of danger to life", for Cākrāyaṇa ate the leavings of a rich man when his life was in danger, this being found in Scripture. 1 I.e. calmness and the rest produce (1) attention, which produces (2) knowledge; while works first produce (1) mental purity, which produces (2) attention, which finally produces (3) knowledge. Hence, the former are more direct means to knowledge than the latter. Further, calmness, and the rest are both causes and effects, i.e. they give rise to knowledge, but when knowledge has originated, it in its turn produces a greater degree of calmness and so on. 2 Ś.B. 3.4.27, pp. 876-877. 3 Ś, R, Bh, ŚK, B.

746 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3 4. 28. ADH. 7.] Vedānta-kaustubha It has been stated that calmness and the rest are subsidiary parts of knowledge. Now, wishing to dispose of the objection, viz. like that, the eating of all food, too, is a subsidiary part of knowledge,— the author points out that such eating relates only to cases of life being in danger. In the Bṛhadāraṇyaka, it is said "Verily, what is not food is not taken by him" (Bṛh 6.1.14); as well as in the Chāndogya · "Verily, to one who knows thus, there is nothing whatever that is not food" (Chānd 5.2.1) Here the doubt is, viz, whether this eating of all food by one who knows the vital-breath is valid, as a subsidiary part of the doctrine of the vital-breath, like calmness and so on, even when one is in a healthy state; or only in the event of danger to life. What is reasonable? If it be suggested: when one is in a healthy state,— we reply: only "in the event of danger to life", there is "permission of all food". Why? "On account of that being seen," i e because in the text: "When the Kurus were destroyed by hail-storm ¹" (Chānd. 1.10 1), the eating of improper food is found to be allowable only in the event of life being in danger. When all food being eaten up by a kind of animals called 'maṭacī' there came to be a famine among the Kurus, then the sage Cākrāyaṇa, seized with hunger, ate the leavings of an elephant-keeper ². From this it is known that the eating of all food is permitted even to one who knows the vital-breath only in the event of danger to life. COMPARISON Baladeva Interpretation same, but he takes this adhikaraṇa as concerned specially with the pariniṣṭha devotee. ¹ Śrīnivāsa, however, understands the word as a kind of crop-destroying animals. See below.

• Vide Chānd. 1.10.1–5 for the story. The sage ate the leavings because he would have died without food, but refused to drink leavings because he could survive without drink.

[Sū. 3. 4. 30. ADH. 7.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 747 SŪTRA 29 "AND ON ACCOUNT OF NON-CONTRADICTION." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha "And on account of the non-contradiction" of the text: "If there be purity of food, there is purity of life" (Chānd. 7.26.2 ¹). Vedānta-kaustubha In the text: "If there be purity of food, there is purity of exist- ence. If there be purity of existence, there is steady remembrance", (Chānd. 7.26.2), the purity of food is enjoined as a means to the rise of knowledge. "On account of the non-contradiction also" of that, it is definitely ascertained, that there is permission of all food only in the event of danger to life. COMPARISON Baladeva Interpretation different, viz. "On account of non-obstruction". Although in ordinary cases the taking of improper food obstructs the full manifestation of knowledge, yet when a knower of Brahman is obliged to do so, it does not obstruct his knowledge.² ―――――――――― SŪTRA 30 "MOREOVER (IT IS) DECLARED BY SMṚTI." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha And it is declared by Smṛti too in the passage: "He who being in danger of life eats food from anyone whatsoever is not touched by sin, as a lotus-leaf is not touched by water".³ ―――――――――― ¹ Ś, R, Bh, ŚK. ² G.B. 3.4.29, p. 268, Chap. 3. ³ The first line of the passage is similar to Manu 10.104, last line to Gītā 5.10. Ś, R, Bh, ŚK. 18

[SŪ. 3. 4. 31. 748 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 7.] Vedānta-kaustubha “Moreover,” the eating of all food from anyone whatsoever both by a knower and a non-knower in the event of danger of life “is declared by Smṛti” thus: “He who being in danger of life eats food from anyone whatsoever is not touched by sin, as a lotus-leaf is not touched by water”. COMPARISON Rāmānuja and Baladeva They omit the “Ca”. SŪTRA 31 “AND SO THERE IS A SCRIPTURAL TEXT AS TO NON-PROCEEDING ACCORDING TO LIKING.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha For this very reason, there is “a scriptural text” for prevent- ing wanton acting, viz.: “Hence let not a Brāhmaṇa drink wine” (Kāṭh. Saṃ. 12.12¹). Vedānta-kaustubha As the permission of all food to both who knows and who does not is valid only in the event of life being in danger, “so” the “scrip- tural text” of the Kaṭhas “as to non-proceeding according to liking”, i.e. the text regarding the reverse of acting as one likes, viz. “Hence let not a Brāhmaṇa drink wine” (Kāṭh. Saṃ. 12 12) fits in. The permission of all food to a worshipper of the vital-breath refers to his being in danger of life. The texts not referring to such a danger, on the other hand, are for the purpose of glorifying those particular vidyās, but are not enjoined as subsidiary parts of the doctrine of the vital-breath, like calmness and so on,—this is the resulting meaning. Hence it is established that the eating of all food is allowable only in cases of danger to life. Here ends the section entitled “The permission of all food” (7).

¹ P. 174, last line but four. Ś, R, Bh, Śk. 18B

[SŪ. 3. 4. 32. ADH. 8.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 749 Adhikaraṇa 8: The section entitled "Being enjoined". (Sūtras 32-35) SŪTRA 32 "AND ON ACCOUNT OF BEING ENJOINED, THE WORK INCUMBENT ON THE STAGES OF LIFE TOO" Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha Sacrifices and the rest, which are subsidiary parts of knowledge, are to be performed also by one, who does not desire for salvation, as the duties incumbent on one's stages of life, "on account of being enjoined" in the passage: "He performs the Agni-hotra sacrifice as long as he lives".¹ Vedānta-kaustubha Under the aphorism: "And dependence on all, in accordance with the scriptural text about sacrifice" (Br. Sū. 3.4.26) it has been said that works like sacrifices and the rest are subsidiary parts of the knowledge of Brahman. After that, two relevant problems have been considered. Now the question is being considered as to whether, for the sake of gaining prosperity, works like sacrifices and the rest are to be performed even by one, who is not desirous of salvation, as the duties incumbent on one's stages of life. On the doubt, viz. the works, mentioned in the text: "Him the Brāhmaṇas desire to know by the recitation of the Veda, by sacrifice" (Bṛh. 4.4.22) and so on, have been accepted previously as auxiliaries to the means to salvation. Do they incur on the part of one who does not desire for salvation, but wishes to fulfill the duties of his stage of life merely, or not? The prima facie view is that sacrifices and the rest, relating to a definite object, cannot be supposed to be mere duties incumbent on the stages of life, and so they do not incur on his part,— We reply: "The work incumbent on the stages of life too". The works like sacrifice, charity and so on, which are mentioned in Scrip- ture as auxiliaries to knowledge, are "works incumbent on the stages 1 Ś, R, Śk.

[SŪ. 3. 4 33. 750 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 8 ] of life too", i e are to be performed even by one, not desirous of salva- tion, as the duties incumbent on his stage of life too. Why? "On account of being enjoined," i e. because in texts like "He performs the Agni-hotra sacrifice as long as he lives" and so on, they are en- joined as merely the works incumbent on the stages of life and to be performed always. The sense is that such works are obligatory on the part of one who carries out only the duties incumbent on his own stage of life, but does not desire for salvation COMPARISON Baladeva He begins a new adhikaraṇa here (two sūtras) concerned with the svaniṣṭha devotees. Hence the sūtra: "On account of being enjoined, the worked incumbent on the stages of life too (are to be performed by the svaniṣṭha devotee)". That is, even when the devotee has come to acquire knowledge, he must go on performing his duties in order to increase his knowledge ¹ SŪTRA 33 "ALSO BECAUSE OF BEING AUXILIARY." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha Since sacrifice and the rest are enjoined "also as auxiliary" to knowledge in the text: "The Brāhmaṇas desire to know by sacri- fice" (Bṛh. 4.4.22 ²), they are to be performed also by one who is desirous of salvation, a double purpose being possible in accordance with the maxim of conjunction and separateness. Vedānta-kaustubha To the objection, viz. : If this be so, then sacrifices and the rest cannot be auxiliaries to knowledge,—the author replies : Since sacrifice and the rest are enjoined "also as auxiliary" to knowledge, by way of bringing about its origination, in the passage : ¹ G.B. 3.4.32, p. 271, Chap. 3. ² Ś, R, Bh.

[SŪ. 3. 4. 34. ADH. 8.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 751 "Him the Brāhmaṇas desire to know by sacrifice" (Bṛh. 4.4 22) and so on, works like sacrifice and the rest are to be performed also by one who is desirous of salvation. If it be objected that the same works cannot serve the purpose of a stage of life and that of knowledge,— we reply: that is not so, because even the same works may serve different purposes, in accordance with the maxim: "But with regard to one and the same thing being both, there is conjunction and sepa- rateness" (Pū. Mī. Sū. 4.3.5¹). Just as the same quality of being made of the Khādira-wood is laid down as serving the purpose of sacrifices in the passage: "The sacrificial post is made of the Khādira- wood"; and is, again, laid down as serving the purpose of men in the passage: "For one desiring power, let one make a post of the Khādira- wood", so is the case here. COMPARISON Baladeva Here he continues the topic, viz. that the svaniṣṭha devotee should continue to act even after attaining knowledge. Hence the sūtra: "And (the works must be done by the svaniṣṭha devotee) as being auxiliary (to knowledge)", i. e. with a view to its further increment.² SŪTRA 34 "IN EVERY WAY EVEN, THOSE VERY (SACRIFICES AND THE REST ARE THE SAME) ON ACCOUNT OF A DOUBLE INDICATORY MARK." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha "Those very" sacrifices and the rest are to be taken as serving a double purpose, since in both the cases, the works of the same form are recognized. Vedānta-kaustubha The author is proving the non-difference of works. "In every way," i.e. whether taught as duties incumbent on a stage of life or as serving the purpose of knowledge, "those very" ¹ P. 493. ² G.B. 3.2.33, p. 271, Chap. 3.

752 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 3. 4. 35. ADH. 8.] sacrifices and the rest are to be understood. Why? "On account of a double indicatory mark," i.e. because in both the cases works of the same form are recognized. The sense is that sacrifices and the rest, each of the same form indeed, are taught, in both the cases, as duties incumbent on a stage of life, and as auxiliaries to knowledge, by respective texts. COMPARISON Baladeva He begins a new adhikarana here (two sūtras), concerned with the parinistha devotees. The sūtra means according to him, "Under all circumstances even (the pariniṣṭha devotee is to perform his duties of worship and so on), on account of a double mark (viz. Scripture and Smṛti)". That is, the pariniṣṭha devotee should first perform his duties of worship and so on, and do other ordinary duties afterwards.¹ SŪTRA 35 "AND (SCRIPTURE) SHOWS THE NON-OVERPOWERING (OF KNOW- LEDGE)." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha The scriptural text: "By means of religious observance one re- moves one's sins" (Mahānār. 22.1²) "shows the non-overpowering" of knowledge through the removal of sins—which are the cause of the overpowering of knowledge—by the very same sacrifices and so on, celebrated in Scripture. Vedānta-kaustubha The scriptural text: "For the self which one finds out through the life of a religious student does not perish" (Chānd. 8.5.3³) "shows the non-overpowering" of the knowledge of the self by the duties ¹ G.B. 3.4.34, pp. 274-275, Chap. 3. "Pariniṣṭhitena tena bhagavad- dharmāḥ evānuṣṭheyāḥ. Svadharmās tu kathañ cit gauṇa-Kāle." ² P. 23, last line, reading: "anudanti". ³ Note that Śrīnivāsa understands a different passage here by the term "darśayati".