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

[SŪ. 1. 4. 19.
ADH. 6.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 251
object to be known in Kauṣītaki text (4.19) is the individual soul
or the Supreme Soul, and so on ¹
Adhikaraṇa 6. The section entitled ‘The con-
nection of texts’ (Sūtras 19–22)
SŪTRA 19
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE CONNECTION OF TEXTS.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
In the text. ‘ “O! the self, verily, should be seen” ’ (Bṛh. 2.4.5,
4.5.6 ²), the Supreme Soul should be understood as the object to be
seen, “on account of the connection” of the text with Him alone.
Vedānta-kaustubha
Now, by showing once more the concordance of the scriptural
texts with regard to Brahman, the author is disposing of puruṣa,
admitted by the Sāṁkhyas.
We find the following text in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka under the
Maitreyī-brāhmaṇa, beginning: ‘He said: “O, not for the love of the
husband, verily, is a husband dear, but for the love of the soul is a
husband dear” ’ (Bṛh 2.4.5; 4.5.6), and continuing : ‘ “O, the self,
verily, should be seen, should be heard, should be meditated on” ’
(Bṛh 2.4.5; 4.5.6). Here the doubt is, viz. whether the soul, the
twenty-fifth principle of the Sāṁkhyas, is taught as the object to be
seen, or the Highest Person, Lord Vāsudeva? What is reasonable
here? The prima facie objector thinks: The soul, the twenty-fifth
principle established by the Tantra, is taught as the object to be seen
and so on, as it is possible for it alone to be the object of the acts of
perception and the rest, as it is impossible for Brahman, admitted
by the defendant, to be properly an object of an act, He being unlimited
by so muchness; as the connection of the Self with the dearness of
husband, wife, son and the rest, mentioned in the beginning, is possible
on the part of only puruṣa, mentioned by the Tantra; as in the middle,
too, in the text : ‘ “This great Being, infinite and endless, is but a
¹ Op. cit., pp. 536 et seq. ² Ś, R, Bh, ŚK, B.