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

[sū. 2. 3. 16.
ADH. 7.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 407
Adhikaraṇa 7: The section entitled “The soul”.
(Sūtras 16-17)
SŪTRA 16
“BUT THAT DESIGNATION (OF THE SOUL AS BEING BORN OR DYING)
MUST DEPEND ON (I.E. REFER TO) THE MOBILE AND IMMOBILE
(BODIES), (IT IS) METAPHORICAL (IN REFERENCE TO THE SOUL),
BECAUSE (THERE IS) THE EXISTENCE (OF BIRTH AND DEATH) IF
THERE BE THE EXISTENCE OF THAT (I E. THE BODY).”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The nature of the individual soul is being determined now. “The
designation” like: ‘Devadatta is born and dead’ is metaphorical, and
as such “depends on the mobile and the immobile”,—there being the
“existence” of birth and death when there is the “existence” of the
body.
Vedānta-kaustubha
It has been pointed out above that the ether and the rest originate
from Brahman, the unborn, the highest. Now the problem is being
considered, viz. whether like them the individual soul, too, is some-
thing to be produced or not.
The word ‘soul’ is to be supplied from the immediately following
aphorism. On the doubt, viz. whether the ‘soul’, i e. the individual
soul, originates or not, the prima facie view, viz. In conformity with
the designation, viz. ‘Devadatta is born and dead’, the soul is born
and dies,—is disposed of by the term “but”. This conventional
designation of the origination and dissolution of the soul “must be
metaphorical”, i.e. is figurative in reference to the individual soul.
To the enquiry: In reference to what then is it literal?—(the author)
replies· “Dependent on the mobile and the immobile”, i.e. it refers to
the bodies of the movable and the immovable. Why? “Because
(there is) existence, if there be the existence of that,” i.e. because
there can be origination and dissolution only if there be the existence
of that, i e. the body, in accordance with the scriptural text· ‘This
person being born and obtaining a body . . . He departing and
dying’ (Bṛh. 4.3.8)
COMPARISON
Rāmānuja
This is sūtra 17 in his commentary. He does not begin a new
adhikaraṇa here, but concludes the topic of the order of evolution.