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

[SŪ. 3. 3. 6.
584 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 2.]
Baladeva
This is sūtra 6 in his commentary. He begins a new adhikaraṇa
here (two sūtras) concerned with the problem of the coalescence of
the attributes of the Lord. Brahman is described variously in various
texts. In one place, He is described as Kṛṣṇa, in another as Rāma,
in another as Nṛsiṁha and so on. Hence the problem is whether
all of these different attributes of the Lord,—His sweetness, heroism,
terribleness, and so on—are to be combined when meditating on Him,
or not. The prima facie view is that they being contradictory attributes
are not to be combined. Hence the reply: “And if (the meditation) be
the same, the combination (of attributes) (is permissible), on account
of the non-difference of the object (viz. Brahman), as in the case of
what is complementary to injunction”. That is, in the case of the
common meditation on pure Brahman, the object of meditation being
the same, all the attributes are to be combined, just as Agni-hotra
being the same, all its details are to be combined ¹
Adhikaraṇa 2: The section entitled “Differ-
ence”. (Sūtras 6–9)
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Sūtra 6)
SŪTRA 6
“IF IT BE OBJECTED THAT (THERE IS) DIFFERENCE (BETWEEN THE
TWO UDGĪTHA-VIDYĀS) ON ACCOUNT OF SCRIPTURAL TEXT, (WE
REPLY.) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF NON-DIFFERENCE.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
It is stated in the Vājasaneyaka: “Then, verily, they said to this
breath in the mouth: ‘Sing the udgītha for us’. ‘So be it’—that
breath sang the udgītha for them” (Bṛh. 1.3.7 ²). And it is stated
in the Chāndogya too: “Then, verily, he who is this chief vital-breath
him they worshipped as the udgītha” (Chānd. 1.2.7 ³). On the doubt,
viz. whether the vidyās are the same here, or different, the prima
facie view is that the vidyās are the same. If it be objected that
¹ G.B. 3.3.6, pp 119-120, Chap. 3.
² Ś, R, Bh, ŚK. ³ Op. cit.