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

[Sū. 3. 3. 2.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 577
5.13 2, etc.), as well as of forms, name and of connection, viz. the
attainment of Brahman, the vidyās are identical. In this case, the root
‘as’ indicates that the injunction is same, the form, viz. Vaiśvānara,
is the same; and the name also is the same, viz. Vaiśvānara-vidyā.
COMPARISON.
Śaṁkara
Literal interpretation same. But the fundamental difference is
that according to Śaṁkara, all these vidyās are concerned with
Saguna or lower Brahman only, and are not as such means to the
attainment of the Nirguna or the higher Brahman. Some of them
lead to the attainment of results here, while others lead to salvation
on gradually by way of generating knowledge.¹
Baladeva
He does not refer to the various vidyās, mentioned in the various
Upaniṣads. In fact, as we shall see, he does not regard this pāda as
dealing with the vidyās at all. He interprets the word: “Sarva-
vedānta-pratyam” as “Sarva-veda-antapratyam”. The word “anta”
means settled conclusion. Hence the sūtra: “The settled conclusion
of all the Vedas is the knowledge (of Brahman), on account of the
non-difference of injunction and the rest”. That is all the Vedas
seek to teach Brahman, since all of them enjoin meditation on
Brahman.²
SŪTRA 2
“IF IT BE OBJECTED THAT ON ACCOUNT OF THE DIFFERENCES (OF
THE OBJECT OF MEDITATION, THERE IS) NO (IDENTITY OF VIDYĀ),
(WE REPLY:) (THERE MAY BE REPETITION) EVEN WITH REGARD TO
ONE (VIDYĀ).”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
If it be objected: the object of meditation is not the same,
otherwise the same vidyā would not have been repeated in different
Scriptures. Hence the vidyās are different—(we reply:) No, because
¹ Ś.B. 3.3.1, p. 754. ² [G.B.] 3.3.1.