गोविन्द भाष्य (श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण - अचिन्त्यभेदाभेद वेदान्त ब्रह्मसूत्र भाष्य सटीक)

It is not universal.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The passage (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 1.1.8) referred to in sūtra 4 does not have
all transcendental as its scope. It refers the udgītha-vidyā. Therefore all
transcendental knowledge is not a subordinate aspect of Vedic rituals.
(In the next sūtra Vyāsa refutes the argument given in sūtra 5.)
Sūtra 11
vibhāgaḥ śata-vat
vibhāgaḥ—division; śata—a hundred; vat—like.
The distribution is like a hundred.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The results of Vedic yajñas and transcendental knowledge, as described in
Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.2 (quoted in sūtra 5), are actually different.
Transcendental knowledge brings one result and Vedic yajñas bring a different
result. In this sūtra the example of a hundred is given. A cow and a goat may be
purchased for a hundred coins. The cow cost ninety coins and the goat cost ten
coins. The cost was not equally divided with each costing fifty coins. In the same
way transcendental and Vedic yajñas (combine to determine the future of the
individual soul) but they do not have the same influence in determining it.
In the next sūtra Vyāsa refutes the argument given in sūtra 6.
Sūtra 12
adhyayana-mātra-vataḥ
adhyayana—study; mātra—only; vataḥ—of one who possesses.

Of one who has merely studied.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The passage (from the Taittirīya-saṁhitā, quoted in sūtra 6) states that a person
who has studied the Vedas should be chosen as a priest. It does not mean that the
priest must be advanced in transcendental knowledge of the Supreme Personality
of Godhead and therefore transcendental knowledge is a subordinate part of the
Vedic rituals. The word “brahmiṣṭha" in that passage means, "one who is learned
in the Vedas". It does not mean "one who is wise with transcendental knowledge
of the Supreme Personality of Godhead", for the Śruti-śāstras declare that a person
fixed in transcendental knowledge of the Supreme renounces Vedic rituals.
Therefore a person who properly studies the Vedas, does not misinterpret its
words, and does not desire to gain anything material as a result of his study, is said
to be “brahmiṣṭha" (learned in the Vedas). The affix “iṣṭha" has that meaning here.
Some claim that the word means that the priest must be a knower of the Supreme
and therefore this passage is meant to praise the glories of Vedic yajñas.
Here someone may object: One who has simply studied is not qualified to
perform Vedic yajñas. One must have knowledge also. Studying the Vedas does
not mean simply reading them. It means understanding them. Because the
Upaniṣads are parts of the Vedas, it must be understood that one who understands
the Vedas understands the transcendental knowledge of the Supreme Personality
of Godhead also. In this way it is proved that transcendental knowledge of the
Supreme Personality of Godhead is only one subordinate aspect of the Vedic
yajñas.
If this objection is raised, then I reply: One is not situated in transcendental
knowledge merely by understanding the meanings of the words in the Vedas, but
only when one directly sees the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. Merely
by understanding the meaning of the sentence, "Honey is sweet" one does not
have direct perception of its sweetness. If this were so then merely by
understanding these words one would be able to taste honey. Of course one does
not taste honey in this way. Once, when asked, Nārada Muni declared that, even
though he knew the Ṛg Veda and many other scriptures, still he did not
understand the Supreme. He said:
so 'haṁ mantra-vid evāsmi nātma-vit
"I know many mantras, but I do not know the Supreme Personality of
Godhead."

Therefore, worship of the Lord is something different from mere academic
knowledge of the Vedas. Therefore genuine transcendental knowledge means
direct perception of the Lord, a perception attained by engaging in devotional
service. This knowledge brings with it the attainment of the real goal of human
life. In the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka (Mahā-Nārāyaṇa Upaniṣad 10.6, and Muṇḍaka
Upaniṣad 3.2.6) it is said:
vedānta-vijñāna-suniścitārthāḥ
sannyāsa-yogāt yatayaḥ śuddhatvāḥ
te brahmaloke tu parānta-kāle
parāmṛtāt parimucyanti sarve
"Wise with the knowledge taught in the Vedas, renounced, and pure in heart,
the great souls go to Brahmaloka. When the time comes for the universe's end,
they all become liberated and go to the spiritual world."
Therefore renunciation of the world and academic knowledge of the Vedas are
both subordinate parts of transcendental knowledge of the Supreme. In Śrīmad-
Bhāgavatam (1.2.12) it is said:
tac-chraddadhānā manayo
jñāna-vairāgya-yuktayā
paśyanty ātmani cātmānaṁ
bhaktyā śruta-gṛhītayā
"The seriously inquisitive student or sage, well equipped with knowledge and
detachment, realizes the Absolute Truth by rendering devotional service in terms
of what he has heard from the Vedānta-śruti."*
Here someone may object: The activities of devotional service employ the body,
words, and mind. In the trance of meditation it is possible to directly see the
Supreme Lord with the mind, but how is it possible to directly see the Lord when
the body and words are engaged in worship, japa, or other similar activities?
If this objection is raised, then I reply: Devotional service is naturally filled with
transcendental knowledge and bliss. In the Śruti-śāstra it is said:
sac-cid-ānandaika-rase bhakti-yoge tiṣṭhati
"Devotional service is eternal and full of transcendental knowledge and bliss."
If this were not so then devotees would not have the power to conquer the

Supreme Lord and bring Him under their control. The activities of devotional
service invoke the appearance of the Lord, who comes in His spiritual and blissful
form, with the graceful hair on His head and the other features of His body. In the
nyāya-śāstra it is said:
śrutes tu śabda-mūlatvāt
In this way it is shown that the Supreme extraordinary, inconceivable, and
beyond the limits imposed by the material world. He cannot be understood by
material logic.
Sūtra 13
nāviśeṣāt
na—not; aviśeṣāt—because of being not specific.
No. For it is not specific.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The Śruti-śāstra does not order that a person wise with transcendental
knowledge of Supreme must perform Vedic rituals throughout his entire life. Why
is that? The sūtra explains: "aviśeṣāt" (for it is not specifically stated). In the
Mahā-Nārāyaṇa Upaniṣad of the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka 10.5 it is said:
na karmaṇā na prajayā dhanena tyāgenaike amṛtatvam ānaśuḥ
"By performing Vedic rituals, fathering good children, or giving wealth in
charity one does not attain liberation. It is by renunciation that one attains
liberation."
In this way there is no specific order that one must always perform Vedic
rituals. The Śruti-śāstra gives different instructions about Vedic rituals (sometimes
encouraging and sometimes discouraging them) because these instructions are
intended for different āśramas.
After thus refuting these objections, the author of the sūtras proceeds to

श्रुति-शास्त्र द्वारा प्रतिपादित वैदिक कर्मों के वर्णन का वास्तविक प्रयोजन:
॥ ब्रह्मसूत्रम् — सूत्र १४ ॥
स्तुतयेऽनुमतिर्वा ॥ १४ ॥
पदच्छेद एवं शब्दार्थ: स्तुतये — स्तुति के लिए; अनुमतिः — अनुमति (अनुज्ञा); वा — अथवा (अवधारणार्थक / निश्चय के लिए)।
सूत्रार्थ: अथवा, (कर्मानुष्ठान की) अनुमति विद्या की स्तुति के लिए है।
श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण विरचित तात्पर्य (गोविन्दभाष्य):
यहाँ 'वा' (अथवा) शब्द अवधारण (निश्चय / बल देने) के अर्थ में प्रयुक्त हुआ है। ईशोपनिषद् (मन्त्र २) में जो यह अनुमति दी गई है
कि मनुष्य जीवन-पर्यन्त वैदिक कर्मों का अनुष्ठान कर सकता है,
वह केवल इसलिए दी गई है जिससे कि पराविद्या (दिव्य ज्ञान) की महिमा का गुणगान हो सके। यह श्रुति-वाक्य
पराविद्या की स्तुति करता है; क्योंकि जो व्यक्ति तत्त्वज्ञान से सम्पन्न है,
वह जीवन भर वैदिक कर्मों को करते हुए भी
कर्म-बन्धनों (कर्मफलों) से सर्वथा अलिप्त रहता है। ईशोपनिषद् (मन्त्र २) में कहा गया है:
एवं त्वयि नान्यथेतोऽस्ति [न कर्म लिप्यते नरे] ॥
"इस प्रकार का कर्म मनुष्य को कर्म-नियम (कर्म-बन्धन) से नहीं बाँधता।
मनुष्य के लिए इसके अतिरिक्त अन्य कोई मार्ग नहीं है।"
(सिद्धान्त:) इस प्रकार इस पूर्वपक्षीय विचार का पूर्णतया निरसन हो जाता है कि तत्त्वज्ञान
वैदिक कर्मकाण्ड का कोई गौण (अधीनस्थ / अङ्गभूत) विषय है।
अधिकरण ४
विद्या-माहात्म्य (परम ज्ञान की महिमा)
श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण द्वारा प्रस्तुत अवतरणिका:
अब, जबकि तत्त्वज्ञान की स्वतन्त्रता (पुरुषार्थहेतुत्व) प्रतिपादित कर दी गई है,

the great glory of transcendental knowledge will be described. In the Vājasaneyī
śruti (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.23) it is said:
eṣa nityo mahimā brāhmaṇasya na karmaṇā vardhate no kanīyān
"Karma can neither lessen nor increase the eternal glory of one who
understands the Supreme."
Saṁśaya (doubt): Do they who are situated in transcendental knowledge have
the right to act in any way they please or do they not have that right?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): By abandoning prescribed duties one
commits a sin. Therefore a person in transcendental knowledge does not have the
right to act as he pleases.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion.
Sūtra 15
kāma-kāreṇa caike
kāma—desire; kāreṇa—by doing; ca—and; eke—some.
Also, some say he may act as he pleases.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
To show mercy to the people of the world a person situated in transcendental
knowledge may sometimes voluntarily perform Vedic rituals even though he gains
no personal benefit by performing them and neither is he faulted if he does not
perform them. His glory is eternal, as is explained in Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad
4.4.23 (quoted in the previous purport). Therefore a person situated in
transcendental knowledge can act as he likes and he is never touched by sin.
Here the word "brāhmaṇa" means "he who has directly seen the Supreme
Personality of Godhead". Such a person does not become virtuous by performing
Vedic rituals, and neither does he do anything wrong by failing to perform them.
As a lotus leaf is untouched by water, so he is untouched by the good karma
generated by Vedic rituals. As a handful of straw is at once consumed by a blazing
fire, so all his sins are at once burned to ashes. All of this shows the great power of

transcendental knowledge. This is further explained in the following sūtra.
Sūtra 16
upamardaṁ ca
upamardam—destruction; ca—also.
Destruction also.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
in the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad it is said:
bhidyate hṛdaya-ganthiś
chidyante sarva-saṁśayāḥ
kṣīyante cāsya karmāṇi
tasmin dṛṣṭe parāvare
"The knot in the heart is pierced, and all misgivings are cut to pieces. The chain
of fruitive actions is terminated when one sees* the Supreme Personality of
Godhead."
In Bhagavad-gītā (4.37) the Supreme Personality of Godhead explains:
yathaidhāṁsi samiddho 'gnir
bhasmasāt kurute 'rjuna
jñānāgniḥ sarva-karmāṇi
bhasmasāt kurute 'rjuna
"As blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of
knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities."*
These verses show that transcendental knowledge destroys the reactions of past
fruitive deeds. Because transcendental knowledge thus destroys all karmic
reactions, whether partially experienced or waiting to be experienced in the future,
a person situated in transcendental knowledge is not at fault if he renounced the
fruitive actions of Vedic rituals. This is not very surprising.

Here someone may object: Is it not so that past karmic reactions are destroyed
only by experiencing them?
If this is said, then I reply: Although transcendental knowledge has the power
to burn away all past karmic reactions, by the Lord's desire, in order to preserve
the appearance of the ordinary workings of karma, transcendental knowledge does
not completely burn away all the karmic reactions created in the present body. In
this way the karma of a person situated in transcendental knowledge is like a cloth
that has been singed by fire. That is what is meant by the scriptures' statement that
karmic reactions are destroyed only by experiencing them,. This will be further
explained in sūtra 4.1.15.
Sūtra 17
ūrdhva-retaḥsu ca śabde hi
ūrdhva—up; retaḥsu—semen; ca—and; śabde—in the Śruti-śāstra; hi—indeed.
In the Śruti-śāstras indeed among the celibates.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The pariṇiṣṭhita devotees and especially the sannyāsīs and other celibates
advanced in transcendental knowledge are especially free to act as they like. This
truth explained in the Śruti-śāstra again confirms the truth that transcendental
knowledge is independent of the Vedic rituals. The scriptural passage referred to
in this sūtra is from the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (3.5.1) and is given below:
tasmād brāhmaṇaḥ pāṇḍityaṁ nirvidya bālyena tiṣṭhāset. bālyaṁ ca pāṇḍityaṁ ca
nirvidyātha munir amaunaṁ ca maunaṁ ca nirvidyātha brāhmaṇaḥ kena syād
yena syāt tenedṛśaḥ.
"A brāhmaṇa should then renounce scholarship and become like a child. Then
he should renounce both scholarship and childlike simplicity and become a silent
sage. Then he should renounce the stance of either being or not being a silent sage.
Then he becomes a brāhmaṇa, a person who directly sees the Supreme Personality
of Godhead. When he attains this stage he may act in whatever way he likes."
In Bhagavad-gītā (3.25) the Supreme Personality of Godhead explains:

saktāḥ karmaṇy avidvāṁso
yathā kurvanti bhārata
kuryād vidvāṁs tathāsaktaś
cikīrṣur loka-saṅgraham
"As the ignorant perform their duties with attachment to results, the learned
may similarly act, but without attachment, for the sake of leading people on the
right path."*
In the next sūtra Jaimini Muni gives a different opinion.
Sūtra 18
parāmarśaṁ jaiminir acodanā cāpavadati hi
parāmarśam—favorable idea; jaiminiḥ—Jaimini; acodanā—not ordering; ca—
and; apavadati—criticizes; hi—because.
Jaimini favors it. It is not ordered, and because indeed it is forbidden.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
A person situated in transcendental knowledge has the freedom to perform
prescribed Vedic rituals and duties in whatever way he likes. That is the meaning
of the Śruti-śāstra's explanation that he may act as he likes.
The word "hi" here means "because". The word parāmarśam" means that the
Śruti-śāstra orders that even one situated in transcendental knowledge must
perform Vedic rituals, and the word "apavadati" means that the Śruti-śāstra forbids
that he stop performing Vedic rituals. The word “acodanā" means that a person
situated in transcendental knowledge may renounce those activities not prescribed
by the scriptures. That is the meaning here.
Īśopaniṣad mantra 2 and the passage from Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa (quoted in the
purport of sūtra 7) both forbid the renunciation of Vedic rituals. They do not say
that one should renounce Vedic rituals.
Therefore there is a contradiction, with some texts encouraging performance of
Vedic rituals and some encouraging renunciation of Vedic rituals. It is not that the
texts encouraging renunciation are wrong. These texts are intended for persons
who are crippled, mute, or in some other way unable to perform Vedic rituals.
Therefore even they who are situated in transcendental knowledge should
continue to perform Vedic rituals.

The words "kena syāt" in the passage from the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (3.5.1,
quoted in the previous purport) mean, "a person situated in transcendental
knowledge must perform Vedic rituals, but he has some freedom to perform them
in the way that pleases him". It does not mean that he has the right to renounce
Vedic rituals altogether. This is the opinion of Jaimini.
Thus Jaimini believes that this passage orders the performance of Vedic rituals.
In the following words the author of the sūtras gives His opinion, which is that the
person situated in transcendental knowledge really does have the right to act in
any way he likes.
Sūtra 19
anuṣṭheyaṁ bādarāyaṇaḥ sāmya-śruteḥ
anuṣṭheyam—what should be practiced; bādarāyaṇaḥ—Vyāsa; sāmya—equality;
śruteḥ—from the Śruti-śāstra.
Vyāsa says it may be done because the Śruti-śāstra describes equality.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The words "anuṣṭheyaṁ bādarāyaṇaḥ" here mean, "Vyāsa thinks that a person
situated in transcendental knowledge may perform Vedic rituals, or not, as he
chooses". Why is that? The sūtra explains: "sāmya-śruteḥ" (because the Śruti-
śāstra declares that whether he performs these rituals or not it is the same).
The words "When he attains this stage he may act in whatever way he likes," of
Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.5.1 (quoted in the purport of sūtra 17) mean that a
person situated in transcendental knowledge may act in any way, but the result he
obtains is always the same. Jaimini's opinion is that this description of the actions
of a person situated in transcendental knowledge are only words of empty praise,
for one must perform Vedic rituals completely in order to get a good result. If a
person renounces some part of the Vedic rituals he is not equal to a person who
performs all rituals perfectly.
Vedic rituals should be performed by a svaniṣṭha devotee. The statement that a
person who neglects Vedic rituals becomes sinful like a person who kills his own
children (Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa quoted in the purport of sūtra 7) applies only to a
person who is not situated in transcendental knowledge. In this way the seeming
contradictions are reconciled. Jaimini's theory that all scriptural passages
encouraging renunciation are intended for they who are crippled or somehow
unable to perform Vedic rituals is refuted by the passage of Mahā-Nārāyaṇa
Upaniṣad quoted in the purport of sūtra 13.

Sūtra 20
vidhir vā dhāraṇa-vat
vidhiḥ—rules; vā—or; dhāraṇa—studying; vat—like.
Or, the rule may be like studying..
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The words "vidhir vā" mean that the statement “He may act in whatever way he
likes," of Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 3.5.1 (quoted in the purport of sūtra 17) refers
only to a person situated in transcendental knowledge. The sūtra explains,
"dhāraṇa-vat" (it is like studying). This means that as the three higher castes are
eligible to study the Vedas, and others are not eligible, in the same way only a self-
realized pariṇiṣṭhita devotee situated in transcendental knowledge is allowed to act
in whatever way he likes". Others are not allowed. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam the
Supreme Personality of Godhead explains:
śaucam ācamanaṁ snānaṁ
na tu codanayācaret
anyāṁś ca niyamān jñānī
yathāhaṁ līlayeśvaraḥ
"As I, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, voluntarily enjoy transcendental
pastimes, so the person situated in transcendental knowledge performs snāna,
ācamana, śauca, and follows a host of other rules voluntarily, and not because he is
ordered to do so."
In the next sūtra an objection is raised and then answered.
Sūtra 21
stuti-mātram upādānād iti cen nāpūrvatvāt
stuti—praise; mātram—only; upādānāt—because of reference; iti—thus; cet—

... चेत्; न — नहीं; अपूर्वत्वात् — अपूर्व (नवीन विधान) होने के कारण।
यदि यह कहा जाए कि यह केवल स्तुति मात्र है, तो उत्तर है कि नहीं, क्योंकि यह अपूर्व (नवीन) है।
श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण-विरचित तात्पर्य:
अत्र पूर्वपक्षी आह — ये वचन केवल कोरी प्रशंसा (स्तुतिमात्र) हैं, वे यथार्थ सत्य नहीं कहते।
जैसे कोई प्रेमी अपनी प्रेयसी से कहता है, "तुम जो चाहो करने के लिए स्वतंत्र हो",
किन्तु उसका यह वास्तविक अभिप्राय नहीं होता कि प्रेयसी यथार्थतः कुछ भी कर सकती है;
उसी प्रकार यह कहा गया है कि दिव्य ज्ञान में स्थित व्यक्ति स्वेच्छानुसार कुछ भी कर सकता है।
यदि ऐसा आक्षेप हो, तो सूत्र समाधान करता है — "न" (नहीं, ऐसा नहीं है)।
किस कारण से? सूत्र कहता है — "अपूर्वत्वात्" (क्योंकि यह अपूर्व अर्थात् नवीन प्रतिपादन है)।
क्योंकि यह कथन कि साक्षात् परब्रह्म परमात्मा का दर्शन करने वाला व्यक्ति
अपनी इच्छानुसार वैदिक अनुष्ठान कर सकता है, एक सर्वथा अपूर्व उपदेश है;
अतः यह पूर्व-प्रतिपादित विषय की केवल प्रशंसा मात्र नहीं हो सकता। यह इसका तात्पर्य है।
सूत्र २२
भावशब्दाच्च ॥ २२ ॥
भाव — प्रेम (भगवद्भाव); शब्दात् — श्रुति-शब्द होने से; च — और भी।
श्रुति-शास्त्र में भगवत्प्रेम (भाव) का प्रतिपादन होने के कारण भी।
श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण-विरचित तात्पर्य:
मुण्डकोपनिषद् (३.१.४) में कहा गया है —
प्राणो ह्येष सर्वभूतैर्विभाति
विजानन् विद्वान् भवते नातिवादी ।
आत्मक्रीड आत्मरतिः क्रियावा-
नेष ब्रह्मविदां वरिष्ठः ॥
अनुवाद: "परम पुरुष भगवान् ही सबके प्राण हैं। वे समस्त भूत-प्राणियों में पूर्णतः प्रकाशित हैं।
जो उन्हें यथार्थतः जान लेता है, वह तत्त्ववेत्ता विद्वान् होकर व्यर्थ प्रलाप (अतिवाद) नहीं करता।
वह आत्म-क्रीड़ (परमात्मा में ही रमण करने वाला), आत्म-रति (परमात्मा में ही प्रेम रखने वाला) तथा भगवत्सेवा रूपी क्रियावान् होकर ब्रह्मवेत्ताओं में सर्वश्रेष्ठ होता है।"

person turns from the logicians' debates. He meditates on the Lord's pastimes. He
loves the Lord. He serves the Lord. He is the best of transcendentalists."
This verse clearly describes the devotees' love for the Lord. The word "ratiḥ"
here means "love". The words "bhāva", "rati", "prema" all mean "love". A
pariṇiṣṭhita devotee who has fallen in love with the Supreme Lord has not the time
to perform Vedic rituals very completely, although for the sake of the people in
general he may sometimes perform them to a certain extent. In this way it is seen
that transcendental knowledge is independent of Vedic rituals.
Fearing that another objection may be raised, the author of the sūtras gives the
following reply.
Sūtra 23
pāriplavārthā iti cen na viśeṣitatvāt
pāriplava—restlessness; arthāḥ—meanings; iti—thus; cet—if; na—not;
viśeṣitatvāt—because of being specific.
If it is said that they are pāriplava stories, then I reply no, for those are specific.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.5.1) it is said:
atha ha yājñavalkyasya dve bhārye babhuvatur maitreyī ca kātyāyanī ca
"Yājñavalkya had two wives: Maitreyī and Kātyāyanī."
In the Taittirīya Upaniṣad (3.1) it is said:
bhṛgur vai vāruṇir varuṇaṁ pitaram upasasāra adhīhi bhagavo brahmeti
"Bhṛgu approached his father, Varuṇa, and asked, O master, please teach me
about the Supreme."
In the Kauṣītakī Upaniṣad (3.1) it is said:

॥ तृतीयोऽध्यायः । चतुर्थः पादः । पारिप्लवाधिकरणम् ॥
श्रुति-वाक्य-सन्दर्भः (कौषीतकि-उपनिषद् ३।१) —
प्रतर्दनो ह वै दैवोदासिरिन्द्रस्य प्रियं धामोपजगाम युद्धेन च पौरुषेण च ॥
हिन्दी-अनुवादः —
दिवोदास के पुत्र प्रतर्दन पराक्रम और युद्ध-कौशल के प्रभाव से इन्द्र के प्रिय धाम को प्राप्त हुए।
तथा छान्दोग्योपनिषदि (४।१।१) —
जानश्रुतिर्ह पौत्रायणः श्रद्धादेयो बहुदायी बहुपाक आस ॥
हिन्दी-अनुवादः —
पौत्रायण जानश्रुति परम श्रद्धालु, प्रचुर दान देने वाले तथा सर्वदा अन्न-सत्र चलाने वाले थे।
पूर्वपक्षः —
ननु उपनिषत्सु यानि आख्यानानि श्रूयन्ते—यथा प्रतर्दन-जानश्रुति-याज्ञवल्क्य-मैत्रेयी-संवादादीनि—किं तानि पारिप्लव-प्रयोगार्थानि कर्माङ्गानि, उत विद्या-स्तुत्यर्थानि?
तत्र प्राप्तं तावत्—आख्यानानां कर्मशेषत्वम्। कुतः? पारिप्लव-कर्मार्थत्वात्। श्रूयते हि अश्वमेधे—
"सर्वाण्याख्यानानि पारिप्लवे शंसन्ति" (शतपथब्राह्मणम् १३।४।३।१५) इति।
हिन्दी-अनुवादः —
"अश्वमेध यज्ञ के पारिप्लव-अनुष्ठान में समस्त आख्यानों (कथाओं) का शंसन (गान) करना चाहिए।"
अतः 'सर्वाणि' इति विशेषण-श्रवणात् वेदान्तोक्तानि सर्वोपनिषद्-आख्यानान्यपि कर्मार्थानां पारिप्लवानाम् अङ्गभूतानि स्युः।
यदि सर्वाणि आख्यानानि कर्माङ्गानि, तर्हि उपनिषदां कर्मशेषत्वात् विद्यायाः स्वातन्त्र्यं न सिध्यति।
सिद्धान्त-सूत्रम् (ब्रह्मसूत्रम् ३।४।२३) —
पारिप्लवार्था इति चेन्न विशेषितत्वात् ॥ २३ ॥
पदच्छेदः —
पारिप्लवार्थाः, इति, चेत्, न, विशेषितत्वात्।
शाङ्कर-भाष्यम् / सिद्धान्त-विवेचनम् —
'पारिप्लवार्थाः' उपनिषदाख्यानानि कर्मार्थाः भविष्यन्तीति 'चेत्', तन्न। कस्मात्? 'विशेषितत्वात्'।
पारिप्लवे हि कतिपयानि एव आख्यानानि विशेषितानि विहितानि दृश्यन्ते, न सर्वाणि।
तथा हि श्रुतिः प्रतिदिनं विशिष्याख्यानानि समाम्नाति—
"मनुर्वैवस्वतो राजा तस्य मनुष्या विशः" इति प्रथमेऽहनि,
"यमो वैवस्वतो राजा तस्य पितरो विशः" इति द्वितीयेऽहनि,
"वरुणो वैवस्वतो राजा तस्य गन्धर्वा विशः" इति तृतीयेऽहनि—इत्येवमादिना प्रकारेण विहितानि।
हिन्दी-व्याख्या —
यदि कोई कहे कि उपनिषद् की ये कथाएँ पारिप्लव (यज्ञ में चित्त-विनोदन एवं कर्माङ्ग) के लिए हैं, तो यह कथन युक्त नहीं है;
क्योंकि श्रुति ने पारिप्लव में पढ़े जाने वाले आख्यानों का विशेष रूप से परिगणन (निर्देश) किया है।
प्रथम दिन वैवस्वत मनु की कथा, द्वितीय दिन वैवस्वत यम की कथा, तृतीय दिन वरुण की कथा—इत्यादि रूप से विशेष कथाओं का ही विधान है।
निष्कर्षः —
अतः "सर्वाण्याख्यानानि पारिप्लवे शंसन्ति" इति सामान्य-वचनस्य संकोचः कार्यः;
पारिप्लव-प्रकरण-पठितानामेव आख्यानानां तत्र ग्रहणं भवति, न तु उपनिषद्-गतानाम्।
तस्मात् उपनिषद्-आख्यानानि न कर्माङ्गानि, अपितु आत्मविद्या-प्रतिपत्ति-सौकर्यार्थानि विद्या-स्तुत्यर्थानि च भवन्ति।

Sūtra 24
tathā caika-vākyatopabandhāt
tathā—so; ca—and; eka—one; vākyatā—statement; upabandhāt—because of
the connection.
It is also so because of the unity of the statements.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Because they are not pāriplava stories, it is should be understood that the
stories of the Upaniṣads are meant to teach transcendental knowledge. Why is
that? The sūtra explains, “eka-vākyatopabandhāt" (because of the unity of the
statements). Thus in the story beginning with the description of Yājñavalkya and
his wives it is said (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.4.22):
ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ śrotavyaḥ
"One should hear of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. One should gaze
upon Him."
It this way it is seen that because of their context these stories are meant to
teach transcendental knowledge. As the story beginning with the words "so 'rodīt"
is a story meant to teach Vedic rituals and is not a pāriplava story, so the stories of
the Upaniṣads are meant to teach transcendental knowledge. That is the meaning.
Because it teaches the supreme goal of life, transcendental knowledge is
independent of Vedic rituals. Great saints therefore strive to attain transcendental
knowledge. The stories of the Upaniṣads give concrete examples of the truths of
transcendental knowledge. For example, they will give concrete examples to show
the truth of the Śruti-śāstras' statement (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.14.2):
ācāryavān puruṣo veda
"One who approaches a bona fide spiritual master can understand everything
about spiritual realization."*
In this way also it is seen that transcendental knowledge is independent of
Vedic rituals.

Sūtra 25
ata eva cāgnīndhanādy-anapekṣā
ataḥ eva—therefore; ca—also; agni—fire; indhana—igniting; ādi—beginning
with; anapekṣā—no need.
Therefore also there is no need to light the fire or perform other duties.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Because it is thus independent of Vedic rituals, transcendental knowledge does
not need the help of the lighting of the sacred fire or the other activities of those
rituals to give its result. Thus the idea that transcendental knowledge and the
performance of Vedic rituals must be combined in order to bring liberation is
refuted.
Adhikaraṇa 5
The Person Qualified To Attain Transcendental Knowledge
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Now will be described the characteristics of a person qualified to learn
transcendental knowledge. In Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.22) it is said:
tam etaṁ vedānuvacanena vividiṣanti yajñena dānena tapasānāśakena
"By study of the Vedas, by yajña, by charity, by austerity, and by fasting the
brāhmaṇas strive to understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead."
In Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.4.23) it is said:

tasmād evam-vic chānto danta uparatas titikṣuḥ śraddhā-vitto bhūtvātmany
evātmānaṁ paśyet
"A person who is wise, peaceful, self-controlled, free from material desires,
tolerant, and forgiving, and whose wealth is faith, is able to see the Supreme
Personality of Godhead present as the Supersoul in his heart."
In this way it is seen that there are two lists of qualifications to understand the
Supreme Personality of Godhead. One list begins with Vedic yajñas ands the other
with peacefulness.
Saṁśaya (doubt): Are both sets of qualifications necessary or not?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (6.14.2) it is
said:
ācāryavān puruṣo veda
"One who approaches a bona fide spiritual master can understand everything
about spiritual realization."*
Therefore to attain transcendental knowledge one need only find a spiritual
master. Nothing else is required.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
his conclusion.
Sūtra 26
sarvāpekṣā ca yajñādi-śrutir aśva-vat
sarva—of all; apekṣā—need; ca—also; yajña—yajnas; ādi—beginning; śrutiḥ—
the Śruti-śāstra; aśva—horse; vat—like.
Also, all are needed. The Śruti-śāstra mentions yajñas and other things. They
are like a horse.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa

ब्रह्मसूत्रम् — तृतीयाध्यायः, चतुर्थः पादः

सर्वपेक्षाधिकरणम् (सूत्र २६-२७)

[पूर्वसूत्र-भाष्यशेषः — सूत्रम् २६]
संस्कृत-भाष्यम् (श्रीगोविन्दभाष्यम् — श्रीबलदेवविद्याभूषणविरचितम्):
यद्यपि विद्या स्वफलोत्पादने निरपेक्षा, तथापि स्वोत्पत्तौ यज्ञादीनि सर्वाण्याश्रमानुष्ठेयानि कर्माणि अपेक्षते।
कुतः? 'यज्ञादिश्रुतेः'—तमेतं वेदानुवचनेन ब्राह्मणा विविदिषन्ति यज्ञेन दानेन तपसाऽनाशकेन (बृहदारण्यकोपनिषत् ४।४।२२) इति श्रुतेः।
अत्र उदाहरणम्—'अश्ववत्'। यथा कश्चित् जनः ग्रामगमनाय अश्वम् अपेक्षते, न तु ग्रामं प्राप्तवतोऽश्वेनास्ति प्रयोजनम्;
तथैव विद्याया उत्पत्तये कर्मापेक्षितम्, न तु लब्धविद्यायाः फलप्राप्तये।
हिन्दी-अनुवादः
यद्यपि आत्मविद्या (ब्रह्मज्ञान) अपने मोक्षरूपी फल को देने के लिए किसी अन्य साधन की अपेक्षा नहीं रखती, तथापि उस ज्ञान की उत्पत्ति के लिए यज्ञ आदि समस्त पुण्य-कर्मों की आवश्यकता होती है।
ऐसा क्यों है? सूत्रकार कहते हैं—'यज्ञादिश्रुतेः' अर्थात् श्रुति में स्पष्ट रूप से यज्ञ आदि का विधान है।
बृहदारण्यक उपनिषद् (४।४।२२ तथा २३) में ज्ञान-प्राप्ति के लिए दो सूचियाँ प्रस्तुत की गई हैं—एक में यज्ञ, दान आदि कर्म हैं तथा दूसरी में शम, दम आदि आन्तरिक गुण।
सूत्रकार यहाँ 'अश्ववत्' (घोड़े के समान) दृष्टान्त देते हैं—जैसे गन्तव्य तक पहुँचने के लिए घोड़े की आवश्यकता होती है, किन्तु गन्तव्य पर पहुँच जाने के बाद घोड़े की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं रह जाती; वैसे ही ज्ञान की उत्पत्ति में कर्मों की अपेक्षा है, फलप्राप्ति में नहीं।
[आशङ्का / पूर्वपक्षः]
ननु यदि यज्ञादिभिरेव विद्या सिद्ध्यति, तर्हि शमदमादीनां किं कृत्यम्?
यदि प्रथम सूची के यज्ञ आदि कर्मों से ही ज्ञान उत्पन्न हो जाता है, तब शम-दमादि द्वितीय सूची के साधनों के अनुष्ठान की क्या आवश्यकता है?
एतस्यां शङ्कायामुच्यते—
[सिद्धान्त-सूत्रम् २७]
शमदमाद्युपेतस्तु स्यात्तथापि तु तद्विधेस्तदङ्गतया तेषामवश्यानुष्ठेयत्वात् ॥ २७ ॥
पदच्छेदः एवं पदार्थः:
• शम-दमादि-उपेतः = शम (मनोनिग्रह), दम (इन्द्रियनिग्रह) आदि से सम्पन्न।
• तु = निश्चय ही (शङ्का-निवारणार्थ)।
• स्यात् = होना चाहिए (साधक को ऐसा होना आवश्यक है)।
• तथापि = फिर भी (यज्ञादि के अनुष्ठान के बाद भी)।
• तु = किन्तु / विशेषतः।
• तद्विधेः = उनके विधान होने से (श्रुति द्वारा विहित होने के कारण)।
• तदङ्गतया = विद्या के अङ्ग होने से।
• तेषाम् = उनका (शम, दम आदि का)।
• अवश्यानुष्ठेयत्वात् = अवश्य अनुष्ठान (अभ्यास) कर्तव्य होने से।
उपनिषत्-श्रुति-प्रमाणम्:
तस्मादेवंविच्छान्तो दान्त उपरतस्तितिक्षुः समाहितो भूत्वाऽऽत्मन्येवात्मानं पश्यति। (बृहदारण्यकोपनिषत् ४।४।२३)
श्रीगोविन्दभाष्यम् (श्रील बलदेव विद्याभूषण):
सूत्रे तु-शब्दद्वयम् अवधारणे शङ्कानिरासे च प्रयुक्तम्।
यद्यपि यज्ञादिसम्पत्तौ विद्या सम्भाव्यते, 'तथापि' मुमुक्षुः शमदमादियुक्त एव 'स्यात्'।
कुतः? 'तद्विधेः'—"शान्तो दान्त उपरतस्तितिक्षुः समाहितो भूत्वा" इति श्रुतौ तेषां विधानात्।
यज्ञादीनि बहिरङ्गानि कर्माणि, शमदमादीनि च विद्याया अन्तरङ्गतया विधीयन्ते।
अतः विद्याङ्गत्वात् तेषां शमदमादीनाम् अवश्यानुष्ठेयत्वं सिद्ध्यति।
हिन्दी-भावार्थ एवं व्याख्या:
सूत्र में दो बार प्रयुक्त 'तु' शब्द निश्चय का द्योतक है और शङ्का का निराकरण करता है।
यद्यपि यज्ञादि पुण्य-कर्म ब्रह्मज्ञान की प्राप्ति के लिए आवश्यक साधन हैं, तथापि साधक को निश्चय ही शम, दम, तितिक्षा आदि से युक्त होना चाहिए।
ऐसा क्यों? क्योंकि श्रुति में उनका साक्षात् विधान है ("शान्तो दान्त उपरतस्तितिक्षुः...")।
यज्ञ, दान आदि बहिर्मुख अशुद्धि को दूर करने वाले बहिरङ्ग साधन हैं, जबकि शम (मन का संयम), दम (इन्द्रिय-संयम) आदि ज्ञान के साक्षात् अन्तरङ्ग साधन हैं।
अतएव, ज्ञान के पूर्ण सहायक अङ्ग होने के कारण मुमुक्षु साधक के द्वारा इनका अनुष्ठान अनिवार्य रूप से किया जाना चाहिए।

Because they are parts they must be attained). This means that peacefulness and
the other virtues mentioned here are parts of transcendental knowledge and
therefore they must also be attained.
The qualities given in both lists must be attained. The qualities on the first list,
which begins with yajñas, are external qualities, and those on the second list,
which begins with peacefulness, are internal qualities. In this way they are
distinguished. The word "ādi" (beginning with) here means that truthfulness and
many other qualities are also to be added to these lists.
Adhikaraṇa 6
A Person Situated in Transcendental Knowledge Is Not Free To Sin
Introduction by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
Now will be explained the truth that a person situated in transcendental
knowledge should not commit forbidden acts. In the Śruti-śāstra it is said:
yadi ha vā apy evam-vin nikhilaṁ bhakṣayitaivam eva sa bhavati
"If a person situated in transcendental knowledge eats anything impure he
remains pure nevertheless."
Saṁśaya (doubt): Do these words order a person situated in transcendental
knowledge that he must eat any and all foods, or do they merely give permission
that he may eat any food he wishes?
Pūrvapakṣa (the opponent speaks): No argument has the power to refute that
this is an order. The person situated in transcendental knowledge is therefore
ordered that must eat any and all foods.
Siddhānta (conclusion): In the following words the author of the sūtras gives
His conclusion.
Sūtra 28
sarvānnānumatiś ca prāṇātyaye tad-darśanāt

sarva—all; anna—food; anumatiḥ—permission; ca—and; prāṇa—of life;
atyaye—at the end; tat—that; darśanāt—because of revelation of Śruti-śāstra.
Also, permission to eat all foods is given when life is in danger, for that is the
revelation of scripture.
Purport by Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
The word "ca" (also) is used here for emphasis. When proper foods are not
available and there is danger that life may come to an end, then permission is
given to eat any and all foods. Why is that? The sūtra explains, "tad darśanāt" (for
that is the revelation of scripture). In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (1.10.1-4) it is said:
maṭacī-hateṣu kuruṣvāṭikyā saha jāyayoṣastir ha cākrāyaṇa ibhya-grāme
pradrāṇaka uvāsa. sa hebhyam kulmāṣān khadantaṁ vibhikṣe taṁ hovāca. neto
'nye vidyante yac ca ye ma imā upanihitā iti. eteṣāṁ me dehīti hovāca tān asmai
pradadau hantānupānam ity ucchiṣṭaṁ vai me pītaṁ syād iti hovāca. na svidete 'py
ucchiṣṭa iti na va ajīviṣyāmīmān akhadann iti hovāca kāmo me uda-pānam iti.
"A poor man named Uṣasti Cākrāyaṇa lived with his wife Aṭiki in the village of
Ibhya-grāma in the country of the Kurus. One year there was a famine and the
crops were destroyed by hailstones. Uṣasti begged food from a rich man who was
eating beans. The rich man said, All I have is these beans. I have nothing else.' The poor man said, Please give me that.' So the rich man give his remnants to
him. Then the rich man said, Here is something to drink.' The poor man replied, You have already drunk some of that and therefore I should not drink it.' The rich
man said, Is it not that I have also eaten some of these beans?' The poor man replied, Without eating these beans I would not be able to remain alive, but
drinking water I do not need. I can drink any time I wish."
The truth is thus seen in this story of Cākrāyaṇa. In order to save his live the
saintly sage named Cākrāyaṇa ate the remnants of beans eaten by a rich man, but,
fearing that he was accepting the remnants of another, he was not willing to drink
the water offered by the rich man, for he could easily obtain water whenever he
wished. On the following day the sage ate the leftovers of those beans, thus eating
his own remnants. This story is also recounted in other places in the scriptures.
Sūtra 29