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

[SŪ. 1. 2. 21.
126 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 5.]
contrast to Brahman, (the seer of everything),—such is the distinction
(between Brahman, and the soul, though both are seers) Here too,
the difference of nature between the individual soul and Brahman is
established by Scripture and aphorism This difference should not
be understood in the sense the logicians understand it to exist between
the individual soul and the Lord, (i e. as absolute difference), but
(it implies that the individual soul) is a part of Brahman who is One
alone, as mentioned in the text: 'Brahman,¹ one, without a second'
(Chānd. 6.2.1), without an equal or a superior, the governor, possessed
of infinite powers and an ocean of auspicious qualities. Although
here in the introductory chapter, the individual soul, possessed of the
stated marks, is said to be different from the Lord, because of its own
peculiar qualities, mentioned in the Veda, viz 'being an object to be
controlled' and so on,—yet just as an attribute is different from its
substratum (yet non-different from it), so it is non-different from its
own controller, as it is incapable of having an independent existence
or activity, and as it does not contradict the attributes, such as, 'being
one', 'being without a second' and so on, belonging to the Whole
of which it is a part ² Thus, the qualities of 'being subject to bondage
and release', 'having little knowledge' and the rest, pertain to the
part, (viz. the individual soul); while the qualities of 'being ever-free',
'being omniscient', 'being unenveloped (by nescience)', 'being the
object to be approached by the freed' and the rest, are peculiar to
Brahman. Hence, no fault of an intermixture of qualities arises here.
Similarly, 'materiality', 'mutability' and the like are the peculiar
qualities of the non-sentient, a power of Brahman; while 'omnipotence',
'omniscience' and the rest, are peculiar to Brahman, the possessor of the
power. Although prakṛti is different from Brahman as a power, yet it
is non-different from Brahman, as a power has no separate activity,
etc. Thus, a relation of difference-non-difference between the three
realities is the view of the followers of the Upaniṣads (i.e. Vedāntins)
Here ends the section entitled 'The inner controller' (5).
1 The word 'Brahman' not included in the original text.
2 I e if the individual soul were different from Brahman, then it would
have been a second principle besides Brahman and would have thereby contra-
dicted His Oneness. But as it does not do so, it must be non-different from Him