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

[sū. 3. 4. 36. ADH. 9.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 753 incumbent on the stages of life, such as, the life of a religious student and so on. The phrase: ‘The self does not perish’ means that the self is not forgotten. Sacrifices and the rest, performed as the mere duties incumbent on the stages of life, lead to the attainment of heaven and so on; those very sacrifices and the rest, performed as auxiliaries to knowledge, give rise to knowledge. Hence there is difference of application, but not difference of works. Hence it is established that the same things are to be performed by both one who is desirous for salvation and one who is not. Here ends the section entitled “Being enjoined” (8). COMPARISON Baladeva He concludes here the topic of the pariniṣṭha devotees. “And (Scripture) shows the non-overpowering (of a pariniṣṭha devotees).” That is, a pariniṣṭha devotee is not overpowered by the fault of not performing the duties incumbent on his own stage of life. He incurs no sins by such an omission.¹ Adhikaraṇa 9: The section entitled “Widower”. (Sūtras 36-39) SŪTRA 36 “BUT (THOSE) ALSO (WHO STAND) BETWEEN, ON ACCOUNT OF THAT BEING SEEN.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha Those “also” who stand “between” the stages of life, are entitled to knowledge, since Raikva and the like are found to be well-grounded in knowledge. ¹ G.B. 3.4.35, pp. 275-276, Chap. 3.

754 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3. 4. 36. ADH. 9 ] Vedānta-kaustubha It has been stated above that those who belong to one or other of the stages of life are entitled to knowledge, and that the works per- formed by them are auxiliaries to knowledge. Now a discussion is being undertaken with a view to establishing that even those who stand midway are entitled to knowledge and the works done by them also are auxiliaries to knowledge. The doubt is as to whether those who stand ‘between’ the stages of life, such as widowers and so on, are entitled to the knowledge of Brahman or not. The prima facie view is that the knowledge of Brahman depends for its origin on the duties incumbent on the stages of life and since those who stand “between” have no duties incumbent on the special stages of life, they are not so entitled. With regard to it, we reply: “Between”. That is, even those who stand between, i.e. outside, the stages of life are entitled to the knowledge of Brahman. Why? “On account of that being seen,” i.e. because “that”, viz the right to the knowledge of Brahman, is found in Scripture and Smṛti to be belonging to Raikva, Saṁvarta and so on. The scriptural text indicating that Raikva is entitled to the knowledge of Brahman has been quoted in the first chapter.¹ The details of the story of Saṁvarta, the son of Aṅgiras, may be seen in the Mahā-bhārata in the chapter treating of the horse-sacrifice thus: ‘“O King, Saṁvarta, Aṅgiras’s son, a pious man, roamed about in all directions, sky-clothed (i.e. naked), perplexing all beings” (Mahā. 14. 137 ²) and so on. The purport is this: Religious duties like sacrifices and the rest, auxiliaries to knowledge and mentioned in the scriptural text: “Him” (Bṛh. 4.4.22) and so on, are to be understood, in the case of house-holders, as Agni-hotra and the rest, productive of knowledge and fit for a house-holder who desires for salvation. In the case of those who belong to those stages of life in which chastity is compulsory, the religious duties, incumbent on those stages of life and other than Agnihotra and so on, are to be understood (as productive of know- ledge). Similarly, in the case of those also who do not belong to any stage of life, muttering of prayers, fasting, worship of the deity and so ¹ Vide V.K. 1.3.34. ² P. 278, line 1, vol. 4.

[SŪ. 3. 4. 37 ADH 9 ] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 755 on, not obligatory to the special stages of life, are to be understood (as productive of knowledge) COMPARISON Baladeva Here he too begins a new adhikaraṇa (three sūtras), but concerned specially with the nirapekṣa devotees only. Literal interpretation same. SŪTRA 37 "MOREOVER, (IT IS) DECLARED IN SMṚTI." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha In the Smṛti passage, viz. "But through the muttering of prayers alone a Brāhmaṇa may attain success,—there is no doubt about it. Whether he does something else or not, a friendly man is called a Brāhmaṇa" (Manu 2.87 ¹), it is declared that they too may easily attain knowledge through the muttering of prayers and so on. Vedānta-kaustubha In the Smṛti passage: "But through the muttering of prayers alone, a Brāhmaṇa may attain success,—there is no doubt about it. Whether he does something else or not, a friendly man is called a Brāhmaṇa" (Manu 2.87), it is declared that through the muttering of prayers alone even those who do not belong to any stage of life may have success. The sense is that when the mind is purified through the muttering of prayers and so on, knowledge arises. Hence they, too, come to have their ends fulfilled. COMPARISON Rāmānuja, Bhāskara and Baladeva They omit the "Ca". Baladeva is here speaking of the nira- pekṣa devotees. 1 P. 46. Ś, R, Śk.

[sū. 3. 4. 39. 756 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 9.] SŪTRA 38 "AND (THERE IS) A SPECIAL FACILITATION." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha There is "facilitation" of knowledge also through the particular acts of duties performed in a previous life. This is declared by Smṛti too: "'Perfected through many births, he then goes to a supreme goal'" (Gītā 6.45 ¹) Vedānta-kaustubha There is "facilitation" of knowledge through the particular works done in the course of many lives. It is declared by Smṛti too thus: "'Perfected through many lives, he then goes to a supreme goal'" (Gītā 6.45). The sense is that in those cases where there is the presence of knowledge, but the absence of any duties incumbent on the special stages of life,—mentioned above and auxiliaries to knowledge,—other duties incumbent on the stages of life, performed in previous births, are to be inferred. COMPARISON Baladeva He relates this sūtra specially with the nirapekṣa devotees only, thus: "And (the nirapekṣa devotees attain knowledge easily through) the special grace (of the Lord)". SŪTRA 39 "BUT THAN THIS THE OTHER IS BETTER, ON ACCOUNT OF INDICA- TION." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha Being within a stage of life is "better" than standing midway, also "on account of the indication", viz. "Let one not remain without a stage of life" (D.Sm. 1.10 ²). ¹ Ś, Bh. ² P. 71, line 13. Ś, R, Bh, Śk.

[SŪ. 3. 4 39. ADH. 9.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 757 Vedānta-kaustubha "Than this," i.e. than standing midway, "the other", i.e. being within a stage of life, is "better", since it secures the perfection of the means to knowledge, i.e. is productive of knowledge within a short time. Why? "On account of indication." The scriptural text: "By it goes the knower of Brahman, the doer of meritorious deeds, the shining one" (Bṛh. 4 4.9) shows the going of those belonging to particular stages of life through the path of gods. The meaning of the text is that 'the knower of Brahman', 'the doer of the meritorious deeds', i.e. the doer of the works incumbent on his own stage of life, "by it", i.e. by means of knowledge increased by works, go to Brahman through the path of gods—on account of such a scriptural reference to 'the doer of meritorious deeds' And, there are four stages of life in conformity with the text: "And those who in the forest" (Chānd. 5.10.1). On account of Smṛti passages as well, such as. "Let not a twice-born remain outside the stages of life even for a single day" ¹ (D.Sm. 1.10), "If one stays outside the stages of life for a year, one should undergo penance. The Highest Person, forsooth, the soul of the Universe, is pleased by a person who practises the duties incumbent on his caste and stage of life; nothing else pleases Him", and so on. If, accidentally, it be impossible for one to enter any stage of life, then one may attain salvation through the muttering of prayers, fasting, charity, worship of the deity, non-violence, contentment, straightforwardness, company of the great and so on. Thus says Yājñavalkya: "Being within a stage of life is not the sole impetus to performing religious duties; let a Brāhmaṇa practise them (whether he be within a special stage of life or not). Hence, let no one do to others what is unpalatable to one's own self". It is said in historical legends too: "For what is the use of an āśrama to one who abiding in knowledge is modest, who has the senses under control and who abides in honesty?" For that very reason, it has been said in the Mahā-bhārata that even in the absence of the mark of an āśrama, one should perform religious duties thus: "Even one who is corrupted should perform religious duties. The mark (of an āśrama) is not the cause of religious duties". Hence it is

¹ The text reads "kṣaṇam".

[sū 3 4. 40. 758 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 10.] established that in spite of the greater excellence of the state of belonging to a stage of life, knowledge may be gained even by those who do not belong to any special stage of life,—such as bachelors, widowers and so on,—through the muttering of prayers and the like. Here ends the section entitled “Widowers” (9) COMPARISON Śaṃkara and Bhāskara All others add a “ca” at the end. Baladeva He too begins a new adhikarana here (five sūtras), concerned with the question, viz. whether one who belongs to a stage of life is higher or one who does not, and arrives at a conclusion opposite to that of Nimbārka, viz. that one who does not belong to any stage of life is higher. Hence the sūtra: “But than this (i.e. the state of belonging to a particular āśrama) the other (i.e the state of not belonging to any āśrama, viz that of a nirapekṣa devotee) is better, on account of indicatory mark”.¹ Adhikaraṇa 10: The section entitled “One who has become that”. (Sūtras 40–43) SŪTRA 40 “BUT OF ONE WHO HAS BECOME THAT THERE IS NO BECOMING NOT THAT, (THIS IS THE VIEW) OF JAIMINI TOO ON ACCOUNT OF RESTRICTION, ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABSENCE OF THE FORMS OF THAT.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha “But” the giving up of the state of chastity which one has reached is not allowed,—this the view of “Jaimini too”, on account of the ¹ G.B. 3.4.39, p. 281, Chap. 3. “Atah sāśramatvād itran nirāśramatvam eva jyāyaḥ śreṣṭhaṃ vidyā-sādhanam mantavyam ”

[SŪ. 3. 4. 40. ADH. 10.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 759 absence of texts, on account of the absence of a cause, on account of the absence of good custom. Vedānta-kaustubha Now the problem is being considered, viz. whether those also who have fallen from the stage of a perpetual religious student bound by chastity and so on are entitled to knowledge or not. It has been established above that there are such stages of life where chastity is obligatory. The doubt is as to whether those who have fallen from these are entitled to the knowledge of Brahman, or not. If it be suggested that like widowers and so on, they are so entitled, through the muttering of prayers and so on,— We reply: The word "but" is meant for disposing of the objec- tion. "Of one who has become that," i.e. of one who has reached, as a supreme fruit, the stage where chastity is obligatory, there is "no becoming not that", i.e. no falling off,—this is the view "of Jaimini too". The word "too" indicates that the author’s own view is confirmed through being held by Jaimini as well. The sense is that it being impossible for a perpetual religious student bound by chastity ¹, a hermit belonging to the third religious order ² and a mendicant belonging to the fourth religious order ³ to stay outside a stage of life like widowers and the rest, they cannot be entitled to the knowledge of Brahman The author states the reasons why such a falling off is not allow- able thus: "On account of restriction, on account of the absence of the forms of that", that is, on account of the restriction with regard to the non-deviation from a stage of life, in the passages: A "student of sacred knowledge, dwelling in the house of a teacher, exhausting himself completely in the house of a teacher, is the third" (Chānd. 2.23.1), "One should go to the forest, thence one should not return any more". "Having once given up the fire, one should not return any more" (Kaṭha 5.4). The compound "on account of the absence of the forms of that" is to be explained as follows: The word "that" means 'not becoming that'. The words "the forms" mean scriptural texts. Hence, the clause means: because of the absence of texts indicative of the falling from a stage of life. That means, there are

¹ Naiṣṭhika. ² Vaikhānasa. ³ Parivrājaka.

760 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3. 4 40. ADH. 10.] no texts negativing the steady adherence to a stage of life. By the plural (in “abhāvebhyaḥ”) other kinds of absence are to be under- stood, viz. on account of the absence of texts indicative of descent (from a higher stage), unlike the texts indicative of ascent (to a higher stage), such as: “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” (Jābāla 4), on account of the absence of any cause for such a falling off; and on account of the absence of good custom. COMPARISON Śaṁkara Reading slightly different, viz. “niyamātad rūpābhāvebhyaḥ”.¹ Bhāskara Reading slightly different, viz. “Jaimini” instead of “Jaimineḥ” ² Baladeva Reading like Śaṁkara’s. Interpretation different, viz. “But one who has become that (viz. a nirapekṣa), there is no becoming not that, (this is the view) of Jaimini too, on account of the restriction (viz. that the senses of the nirapekṣa devotee are devoted to the Lord alone and never to worldly objects), on account of the want of desire (for anything other than Brahman), and on account of the absence (of the life of a house-holder)”. That is, a nirapekṣa devotee never deviates from his vow and enters worldly life.³ ¹ Ś.B. 3.4.40, p. 885 ² Bh. B. 3.4.39, (written as 3.4.40), p. 213. ³ G.B 3.4.40, pp. 283-284, Chap. 3

[sū. 3. 4. 41. ADH. 10.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 761 SŪTRA 41 “AND NOT EVEN (THE EXPIATION) TREATED (IN THE SECTION) ABOUT RIGHTS (IS POSSIBLE ON THE PART OF A TRANSGRESSING HERMIT AND THE LIKE), ON ACCOUNT OF ITS INEFFECTIVENESS BY REASON OF THE INFERENCE (I.E. SMṚTI PASSAGE) ABOUT THE FALL.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha The expiation, formulated in the section treating of rights,¹ is not possible on the part of a perpetual religious student bound by chastity, “On account of its ineffectiveness” in his case, in conformity with the Smṛti passage: “But the twice-born who having ascended the state of a perpetual religious student bound by chastity deviates therefrom,—I do not see any expiation whereby he, the slayer of himself, may be purified” (Agni 165.23a–24b,² A. Sm. 816 ³) Vedānta-kaustubha To the objection, viz. Inadvertence (and not wilful negligence) may be the cause of one’s deviation from the stage of life one has reached; and expiation may entitle such a fallen one to knowledge once more,—the author replies ‘no’. An expiation is mentioned in the text: “A religious student who has deviated from the vow of chastity should sacrifice an ass to Nirṛti”. It is formulated in the sixth chapter, treating of rights, under the aphorism: “The Avakīrṇi-paśu (sacrifice) also (is to be performed like that (viz. the Sthapati-iṣṭi), since the time for the installation of fire has not arrived” (Pū. Mī. Sū. 6.8.22). This is said to be “treated (in the section) about rights”. This is not available for one who has deviated from the vow of a perpetual religious student bound by chastity. Why? “On account of its ineffectiveness by reason of the inference about the fall”, i.e. because in conformity with a Smṛti passage indicating the fall as very difficult to be atoned for, the expiation is not effective for him. The Smṛti passage is as follows: “But the twice-born who having ascended the state of a ¹ Pū. Mī. Sū. 6.8.22. ² Pp. 158-159. Ś, R, Bh, Śk. ³ P. 33, line 19. Reading slightly different, viz. “Yena śuddhyati kar- maṇā”.

[SŪ. 3 4. 42. 762 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 10.] perpetual religious student, bound by chastity, deviates therefrom,— I do not see any expiation whereby he, the slayer of himself, may be purified" (Agni 165.23a-34b, A.Sm. 8.16). The word "even" (in the sūtra) suggests that the stated expiation is valid for a religious student who becomes a house-holder after the completion of his study.¹ COMPARISON Baladeva Interpretation totally different, viz. "and (the nirapekṣa devotee does) not (desire for) even the office (of world-rulership and the like), on account of the inference (i.e. possibility) of fall (from such office), (and) because (he has) no connection with those (offices)", i.e. no wish for them.² OPPONENT'S VIEW (Sūtra 42) SŪTRA 42 "BUT PRECEDED BY ‘UPA’, (I.E. A MINOR SIN) EVEN, SOME (THINK SO), (THEY CLAIM) THE EXISTENCE (OF AN EXPIATION FOR IT), AS IN THE CASE OF EATING, THAT HAS BEEN SAID." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha "But some" think that the deviation of a perpetual religious student bound by chastity ³ from his vow of chastity is a minor sin, and hence there is an expiation for it, since he too is equally a religious student like one who is a religious student for a time only and not for life ⁴, "as in the case of the taking" of intoxicating liquor. "That has been said :” “ ‘Of the subsequent ones, what is non-contradictory.’ ” ⁵ ¹ I.e. an upakurvāṇa. A naiṣṭhika remains a religious student all his life, but an upakurvāṇa only for a time. ² G.B. 3.4.41, p. 285, Chap. 3. ³ A naiṣṭhika. ⁴ An upakurvāṇa. ⁵ R. Śk.

[sū. 3. 4. 42. ADH 10 ] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 763 Vedanta-kaustubha "Preceded by 'upa'," i e. the deviation of a perpetual religious student and so on, bound by chastity and the rest, from their vow of chastity by going to women and so on, is "preceded by the word 'upa'", i.e is but a minor (upa) sin (pātaka); not a major sin that cannot be atoned for. The word "even" implies reason. "Some" teachers think that they too being equally religious students, there is "the existence" of an expiation for them as for those who are reli- gious students for a time, but not always. "As in the case of eating." Just as the prohibition with regard to the taking of spirituous liquor and so on and the expiation thereof apply equally to those who are religious students for life and those who are so for a time only,—so is the case here. "That has been said" by the Smṛti-writer: "Of the subse- quent ones, what is non-contradictory to that". The sense is that what has been said with regard to one who is a religious student for a time is possible in the case of one who belongs to a subsequent stage of life, viz. one who is religious student for life and so on, in so far as it is not contradictory to the stage of life of the latter. In this way, an expiation for the deviation of perpetual religious students from their vow of chastity being possible, they come to be entitled to knowledge once again Similar is the case with the hermits belong- ing to the third order of life and the wandering mendicants belonging to the fourth order COMPARISON Śaṁkara He takes it to be forming an adhikaraṇa by itself. Interpretation same. Bhāskara This sūtra is not found in his commentary. Baladeva Interpretation absolutely different, viz. "But what is preceded by 'upa' (i.e. upāsanā or meditation) (is the only object desired by a nirapekṣa devotee) some (branches declare so), (and) the sentiment (of devotion) is like food (to him), that has been said (in Scripture)" ¹. ¹ G.B. 3.4.42, pp. 286-287, Chap. 3. 19

764 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 3. 4. 43. ADH. 10 ] CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sūtra 43) SŪTRA 43 "BUT (SUCH A TRANSGRESSOR IS) OUTSIDE (THE SPHERE OF KNOW- LEDGE), IN EITHER CASE EVEN, ON ACCOUNT OF SMṚTI AND ON ACCOUNT OF CONDUCT." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha Whether the deviation of perpetual religious students from their own stage of life be a major or a minor sin, "in either case even", they are "outside" the right to the knowledge of Brahman, "on account of the Smṛti passage: "I do not see any expiation whereby he, the killer of himself, may be purified" (Agni 165.24b ¹) "and on account of the conduct" of the good Vedānta-kaustubha Whether the deviation of those who are bound by chastity from their own stage of life be a major or a minor sin, "in either case even" they are to be kept "outside" ² indeed by the good. Why? "On account of Smṛti and on account of conduct," i.e. on account of the Smṛti passage censuring such a deviation, viz.: "I do not see any expiation whereby he, the killer of himself, may be purified" (Agni 165.24b), "If one sees a Brāhmaṇa who ascended (to a high stage) has fallen (therefrom), one should undergo the Cāndrāyaṇa ³ penance"; and on account of the conduct of the good who always shun one who has deviated from the vow of chastity. Hence it is established that those who have deviated from their stages of life are not entitled to the knowledge of Brahman. Here ends the section entitled "One who has become that" (10) ¹ Ś, R, Śk. ² Note that the interpretation of the term "bahiḥ" is different from Nim- bārka's. ³ An expiatory penance regulated by the moon's age. The method is to begin with taking fifteen mouthfuls of food at the full moon, and decrease it daily by one mouthful during the dark-half, and increase by one mouthful again during the bright-half. Vide Manu 6.20 and Kullukabhaṭṭa's commentary. 19B

[sū. 3. 4. 44. ADH. 11.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 765 COMPARISON Śaṃkara He takes it as forming an adhikaraṇa by itself, and interprets the work “bahiḥ” like Śrīnivāsa ¹ Bhāskara He omits the word “api” and interprets the word “bahiḥ” like Śrīnivāsa ² This is sūtra 41 in his commentary Baladeva He too omits the word “api” Interpretation absolutely different, viz “(The nirapekṣa devotee is) outside (all worldly entanglements) in both ways, (viz.) on account of Smṛti and on account of conduct” ³ Adhikaraṇa 11: The section entitled “The Lord”. (Sūtras 44-45) OPPONENT'S VIEW (Sūtra 44) SŪTRA 44 “OF THE LORD, ON ACCOUNT OF THE SCRIPTURAL STATEMENT ABOUT FRUIT, SO ĀTREYA (THINKS).” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha The meditation based on the subsidiary parts of sacrificial acts is performed by the sacrificer, “so Ātreya” thinks, on account of the scriptural statement about the result attained, viz “What alone one does with knowledge” (Chānd. 1.1.10 ⁴). ¹ Ś.B. 3.4.43, p. 888. ² Bh. B. 3.4 41, (written as 3.4.42), p. 214. ³ G.B. 3.4.43, pp. 287-288, Chap. 3. ⁴ Not quoted by others.

766 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3. 4. 45. ADH. 11.] Vedānta-kaustubha The view of one who knows is acceptable, but not that of one who does not know. Hence in the previous section the view of Jaimini has been accepted, while that of others has been rejected. Now by showing that the meditation on the subsidiary parts is the work of the officiating priest, and having thereby rejected the view of one who does not know, the author is again demonstrating that the view of only one who knows is acceptable. On the doubt, viz. whether the meditation on the udgītha and the rest, the subsidiary parts of sacrificial acts, is the work of the sacrificer, the Lord, or of the sacrificing priest,—"of the Lord, so" the teacher "Ātreya" thinks. Why? "On account of the scriptural text about fruit," i.e. because in the text: "What alone one does with knowledge" (Chānd. 1.1.10) the result produced, viz. greater potency, is declared to be pertaining to the sacrificer. COMPARISON Baladeva He too begins a new adhikaraṇa here (three sūtras), but concerned with an entirely different topic, viz. the special favour shown by the Lord to His nirapekṣa devotees. Hence the sūtra: "From the Lord (arises the fulfilment of all the wants of the nirapekṣa devotee), on account of the scriptural text about fruit, so Ātreya thinks".¹ Hence he does not take this sūtra as representing the opponent's view. CORRECT CONCLUSION (Sūtra 45) SŪTRA 45 "THE WORK OF THE PRIEST, SO AUḌULOMI (THINKS), BECAUSE FOR THAT (HE) IS BOUGHT." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha The meditation based on the subsidiary parts of sacrificial acts is performed by the officiating priest, because the priest has been ¹ G.B. 3.4.44, pp. 289-290, Chap. 3.

[sū. 3. 4. 45. ADH. 11 ] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 767 bought "for that" 1, i.e for the sacrificial act, and the result produced pertains to the sacrificer 2. Vedānta-kaustubha The meditation on the udgītha and the rest, which are subsidiary parts of sacrificial acts, is to be performed by the officiating priest— "so" the teacher "Auḍulomi" thinks. Why? The word "because" states the reason. That is, as the officiating priest, who performs the sacrificial act, has been "bought" with fees by the sacrificer "for that", i.e. for the sacrificial act together with its subsidiary parts, so it is to be performed by him alone If it be objected that the result produced, viz. greater potency, mentioned in the scriptural text: "What alone one does with knowledge, that alone becomes more potent" (Chānd. 1.1.10), can belong only to one who meditates,—we reply: not so. In accordance with the maxim · "The fruit mentioned in Scripture (accrues) to the instigator" (Pū. Mī. Sū. 3.7.18 3), and in accordance with the scriptural text: "What- ever blessing, forsooth, the priests pray for, all those accrue to the sacrificer" (Śat Br. 1.1 1, 26 4), the fruit belongs to the sacrificer alone Hence it is established that the meditation based on the subordinate members of sacrificial acts is the work of the officiating priest Here ends the section entitled "The Lord" (11). COMPARISON Śaṃkara After this sūtra, he reads a sūtra "Śruteś ca", not found in Nimbārka's commentary. Here he quotes some passages to the effect that the fruit belongs to the sacrificer himself 5 1 C.S.S. ed. reads "tasya", p 77. 2 This last portion· "and . sacrificer" not found in the C.S.S. ed. Brindāban ed. reads "phalasya", p. 1164. 3 P. 395, vol. 1. 4 P. 25, lines 7-8. 5 Ś.B. 3.4.46, p. 890.

768 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [sū. 3. 4. 46. ADH. 12.] Baladeva Interpretation absolutely different, viz. “the work of the priest, so Auḍulomi (thinks), for (the Lord) is bought for him”. That is, just as an officiating priest sells himself, as it were, to the sacrificer, so the Lord sells Himself to the nirapekṣa devotees.¹ He too like Śaṁkara reads a sūtra “Śruteś ca” after this sūtra Adhikaraṇa 12. The section entitled “The injunction of another auxiliary”. (Sūtras 46– 48) SŪTRA 46 “(THERE IS) INJUNCTION OF ANOTHER AUXILIARY FOR ONE WHO POSSESSES THAT, AS IN THE CASE OF INJUNCTION AND SO ON, (THE TERM ‘MAUNA’ DENOTING), IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE, A THIRD SOMETHING.” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha In the text: “Hence let a Brāhmaṇa, being disgusted with learning, desire to live in the childlike state; being disgusted with the states of childhood and learning, then he becomes an ascetic” (Bṛh. 3.5.1 ²), the term ‘ascetic’ may, of course, mean ‘one possessed of knowledge’, yet “according to the other alternative”, it may also mean ‘one given to profound reflection’. Hence, “another auxiliary”, “a third” something as distinguished from learning and childlike state, viz. asceticism, has been enjoined here, like sacrifice and the rest and like calmness and the rest. Vedānta-kaustubha Previously, sacrifices and the rest and calmness and the rest have been determined as auxiliaries to one who is possessed of know- ledge. Similarly, asceticism is another auxiliary to one possessed of knowledge. Now, a discussion relating to this is being undertaken. ¹ G.B. 3.4.45, p. 291, Chap. 3. ² Ś, R, Bh, Śk.

[sū. 3 4. 46. ADH 12.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 769 In the Bṛhadāraṇyaka, to the question of Kahola, it is said: “Hence let a Brāhmaṇa, being disgusted with learning, desire to live in the childlike state; being disgusted with the states of childhood and learning, then he becomes an ascetic; being disgusted with the non-ascetic and ascetic states, then he becomes a Brāhmaṇa” (Bṛh. 3.5.1). Here the doubt is as to whether here like the states of child- hood and learning, asceticism too is enjoined, or is only referred back (as something already enjoined) If it be suggested that ‘asceticism’ means knowledge, and that has indeed been already established by the phrase: ‘Being disgusted with learning’, and (hence) the word ‘ascetic’ simply refers back to this,— We reply: “For one who is possessed of that”, i.e. for one possessed of knowledge, “a third”, i.e. a means, viz. asceticism, a third some- thing as distinguished from learning and childlike state, is enjoined. This very thing the author states in the phrase. “An injunction of another auxiliary”. The states of learning and childhood are auxi- liaries to a direct vision of Brahman, the object to be attained, asceti- cism is another auxiliary as distinguished from them; and the word ‘ascetic’ is nothing but an injunction with regard to it. “As in the case of injunction and so on.” An injunction is what is enjoined as helpful, such as, all the duties incumbent on the stages of life, sacrifice, charity and so on, and calmness and the rest. By the words “and so on” the states of learning and childhood are understood. To the argument, viz. that ‘asceticism’ means knowledge, and that has indeed already been established by the phrase: ‘Being disgusted with learning’, and hence the word ‘ascetic refers back to this,—we reply: “In accordance with the other alternative”. That is, since the word ‘ascetic’ is well known to mean, alternately, ‘one given to profound reflection’, as in the statement “Among ascetics also, I am Vyāsa” (Gītā 10.37) ‘asceticism’ is a different thing, a third something, distinguished from the state of learning. Here although in the phrase: ‘Then an ascetic’, there is no employment of the imperative, yet this special kind of reflection, not enjoined before, must be taken as something to be enjoined. As in this way the previous Brāhmaṇas have attained their ends ‘so’ let another Brāhmaṇa too, ‘being dis- gusted with’, i.e. having succeeded with certainty, in ‘the state of learning’, i.e. the duties of a learned man, viz. hearing of the Veda, ‘desire to stay in the childlike state’, i e. wish to stay reflecting. Having succeeded in both, he may be an ‘ascetic’, i.e. given to profound

770 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ 3 4. 47. ADH 12.] meditation. After that, having succeeded in non-asceticism, i e. in the group of means other than asceticism, as well as 'asceticism', he becomes a 'Brāhmaṇa', i.e comes to attain knowledge,—this is the meaning of the text.¹ COMPARISON Baladeva He too begins a new adhikarana here (one sūtra), but continues the topic of the nirapekṣa devotees. This is sūtra 47 in his com- mentary. Hence the sūtra: "(There is) the injunction of another third auxiliary (viz. meditation), an alternative (to hearing and thinking) for one who has that, (viz for the nirapekṣa devotees), as in the case of injunction and so on" That is, in the case of the svaniṣṭha and pariniṣṭha devotees, sacrifice and calmness, self-control and so on are enjoined as auxiliaries to knowledge But the nirapekṣa devotees already possess these, and so in their case these two sets of auxiliaries cannot be enjoined Hence in their case meditation is enjoined instead, and this they must practise necessarily, just as house-holders and the rest must necessarily perform the saṁdhyā-ceremony and so on ² SŪTRA 47 "BUT ON ACCOUNT OF THE EXISTENCE OF ALL (DUTIES INCUM- BENT ON THE DIFFERENT STAGES OF LIFE), (THERE IS) CONCLUDING WITH THE HOUSE-HOLDER." Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha "The concluding with the house-holder" in the passage: "For- sooth, having stayed thus as long as he lives, he reaches the world of Brahman and does not return any more" (Chānd. 8.15.1³), is meant for exhibiting all religious duties, as in the stage of a house-holder the religious duties, incumbent on all the stages of life, are obligatory. 1 I.e. here pāṇḍitya means śravaṇa, bālya manana and mauna nididhyāsana. 2 G.B. 3.4.47, p. 293-294, Chap. 3. 3 Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B.

Page Transcription (Line-by-Line)

[sū. 3. 4. 47 ADH. 12.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 771 Vedānta-kaustubha It may be objected: If the religious duties like sacrifice, charity, austerity, calmness, self-control and the like, as well as those called hearing, thinking and meditating,—duties that are to be performed by men of all stages of life who desire for salvation,—be auxiliaries to knowledge; and if knowledge, attainable through them and common to men of all stages of life, be the means to salvation, then there cannot be any justification for "concluding with the house-holder" in the Chāndogya-text, which beginning: "Having studied the Veda in the house of a teacher in accordance with rules, in time left over from doing work for the teacher; having returned to his own house, studying his sacred texts in a clean spot" (Chānd. 8.15.1), concludes: "Forsooth, having stayed thus as long as he lives, he reaches the world of Brahman and does not return any more" (Chānd. 8 15 1). Hence, such a conclusion clearly indicates that there are no other stages of life ¹. To this the author replies here. The word "but" is meant for disposing of the objection. That is, simply because the stage of a house-holder has been mentioned at the end, it is not to be thought that there are no stages of life other than that. "On account of the existence of all" religious duties therein, "the concluding with the house-holder" is meant for exhibit- ing all religious duties. COMPARISON Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha The phrase compound "kṛtsna-bhāvāt" interpreted differently, viz. 'on account of the existence (of knowledge) in all (the stages of life)'.² Śrīkaṇṭha takes this sūtra as constituting an adhikaraṇa by itself. Baladeva He too takes it as an adhikaraṇa by itself. Interpretation same.

¹ Vide the same objection raised on another ground in Br. Sū. 3.4.18. ² Śrī. B. 3.4.47, p. 394, part 2; Śk. B. 3.4.47, pp. 411-412, Parts 10 and 11

संस्कृत मूल एवं हिन्दी अनुवाद (Unicode Devanagari)

॥ ब्रह्मसूत्रम् ३.४.४७ ॥ कृत्स्नभावात्तु गृहिणोपसंहारः ॥ ४७ ॥ वेदान्तकौस्तुभः (श्रीश्रीनिवासाचार्यकृतः) पूर्वपक्षः — ननु यज्ञादीनि शमदमादीनि श्रवणादीनि च मुमुक्षूणां सर्वेषामाश्रमिणां धर्मा विद्याङ्गं भवन्ति, तन्निर्वर्त्यविद्या च सर्वाश्रमसाधारणी मुक्तिसाधनं चेत्, तर्हि छान्दोग्ये उपसंहारे गृहिण एव परिग्रहः कुतो न्याय्यः? यथा हि श्रूयते— «आचार्यात् कुलं वेदमधीत्य यथाविधानं गुरोः कर्मातिशेषेणाभिसमावृत्य कुटुम्बे शुचौ देशे स्वाध्यायमधीयानो... स खल्वेवं वर्तयन्यावदायुषं ब्रह्मलोकमभिसम्पद्यते न च पुनरावर्तते न च पुनरावर्तते» (छा० उप० ८.१५.१) इति। अनेन गृहिणैवोपसंहाराद् आश्रमान्तरं नास्तीति गम्यते। सिद्धान्तः — अत्र तु-शब्देन पूर्वपक्षं व्यावर्तयति। न ह्युपसंहारमात्रेणाश्रमान्तराभाव आशङ्कनीयः। यतः गार्हस्थ्ये सर्वधर्माणां ‘कृत्स्नभावात्’—सर्वेषामेवाश्रमाणां धर्माणां न्यूनाधिकभावेन गृहाश्रमेऽन्तर्भावात् सर्वधर्मप्रदर्शनाय गृहिणोपसंहारः कृतः। हिन्दी अनुवाद: आक्षेप (पूर्वपक्ष): यदि यज्ञ, दान, तप, शम, दम तथा श्रवण, मनन एवं निदिध्यासन आदि सभी आश्रमों के मुमुक्षुओं द्वारा अनुष्ठेय धर्म विद्या के अङ्ग हैं, और उनके द्वारा निष्पन्न विद्या सभी आश्रमों के लिए समान रूप से मुक्ति का साधन है, तो छान्दोग्योपनिषद् के उपसंहार में केवल गृहस्थ का ही उल्लेख क्यों किया गया? इससे प्रतीत होता है कि गार्हस्थ्य के अतिरिक्त अन्य कोई आश्रम नहीं है। समाधान (सिद्धान्त): सूत्रस्थ 'तु' शब्द इस पूर्वपक्ष के निराकरणार्थ है। केवल अन्त में गृहस्थ का वर्णन होने से अन्य आश्रमों का अभाव सिद्ध नहीं होता। 'कृत्स्नभावात्' अर्थात् गृहस्थाश्रम में सभी धर्मों (अहिंसा, दम, अध्ययन आदि) का समावेश होने के कारण समस्त आश्रम-धर्मों के उपलक्षण (प्रदर्शन) के लिए गृहस्थ के साथ ग्रन्थ का उपसंहार किया गया है।

[SŪ. 3. 4. 48. 772 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 12] SŪTRA 48 “AS IN THE CASE OF ASCETICISM, ON ACCOUNT OF THE TEACHING OF OTHERS AS WELL ” Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha In the very same manner, the teaching of asceticism in that text is meant for exhibiting all religious duties, since like the teaching of asceticism, there is the teaching of the duties incumbent on all stages of life in the text: “There are three branches of religious duty” (Chānd 2.23.1 ¹) Vedānta-kaustubha The author points out that similarly here too the teaching of asceticism in the passage. “Then an ascetic” (Bṛh. 3.5.1), preceded by that of the life of a mendicant: “Then they live the life of mendi- cants” (Bṛh. 3.5.1), is meant for exhibiting the religious duties in- cumbent on all stages of life. Thus, here too, the teaching of asceticism, preceded by that of the life of a mendicant, in the passage: “The Brāhmaṇas, having risen above the desires for sons, desires for wealth, desires for worlds, live the life of mendicants” (Bṛh. 3.5.1), is meant for exhibiting the religious duties incumbent on all the stages of life. Why ? “As in the case of asceticism,” i.e. because like the teaching of asceticism, there is the “teaching of other” stages of life too in the passage: “There are three branches of religious duty. Sacrifice, study and charity are the first; austerity alone is the second; a student of sacred knowledge living in the house of a preceptor and exhausting himself completely in the house of a teacher is the third. All these become possessors of meritorious worlds. One who stands on Brahman goes to immortality” (Chānd. 2.23.1) and so on. Hence it is estab- lished that the states of learning, childhood and asceticism are en- joined here. Here ends the section entitled “The injunction of another auxiliary” (12). ¹ Ś, R, B.