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

294 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [sū. 2 1. 17.
ADH. 6.]
non-existence prior to creation, in the text · "The non-existent,
verily, was this in the beginning" (Chānd. 3.19 1),—
(We reply ·) "no", why ? Because there is "such a designation"
"on account of a different attribute". That is, the attribute of having
name and form unmanifest is different from the attibute of having
name and form manifest, and it is because of this different attribute
that the world is designated thus in the text · "The non-existent,
verily, was this in the beginning" (Chānd 3 19.1), but is never
denoted to be non-existent by nature
If it be asked Whence is this known ? We reply · 'From the
complementary passage.' For the complementary passage · "That
was existent" (Chānd. 3 19 1), refers to the topic of our discussion,
viz. the world, by the term 'that' and from this it is known that the
term 'non-existent' in the beginning denotes the subtle reality with
name and form unmanifest.
The author states another reason for the pre-existence of the
effect, viz "From reasoning" That is, the existence of the effect
is ascertained from reason as well. To the question: What is that
reason whereby the existence of the effect is ascertained ? We reply:
On our view, names and forms, knowable by means of the evidence
of direct perception and the rest, are all real, on account of being
perceived. An agent, viz a potter, makes a pot out of a lump of
clay that is existent Here, like the lump of clay, the existence of the
pot, too, is known from direct perception. Hence, the activity of
the agent, too, is not useless. If it be objected that as the pot already
exists, like the lump of clay, the activity of the agent has no meaning,—
(we reply .) not so, since its purpose is simply manifestation. The pot
which was unmanifest before is made manifest, hence the activity
of the agent is not useless. The names and forms, mentioned in the
Veda, are used just as they were before ¹ It should be known that,
on our view, the conventional usage of names and forms is not un-
precedented. The origin of a non-existent effect, on the other hand,
does not fit in, since the origin of a barley-sprout from fire is never seen.
It cannot be said that although fire has no power of producing such
an effect, it has, nonetheless, the power of producing sparks,—
for, in an effect, produced from gold and the rest of a known weight,
―――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
¹ Vide V.K 1.3 28–30.