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

[SŪ. 3. 3. 17
604 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 4.]
COMPARISON
Saṁkara and Bhāskara
They begin a new adhikaraṇa here (two sūtras), concerned with
a different problem, viz. a discussion about a passage in the Aitareya-
āraṇyaka (2.4 1). The question is as to whether the term ‘self’ in
this passage stands for Brahman or for Hiraṇyagarbha. The answer
is: “(There is) the understanding of the self (i.e. Brahman) (by the
term ‘self’ in the passage), as in other (places) (i.e. in Tait. 2 1, etc ),
on account of what follows (1.e. the word ‘perceives’)”.¹
Śrīkaṇṭha
He continues the above topic, viz. whether the selves consisting
of food and so on are to be meditated on or not. The answer is that
as the self consisting of bliss is nothing but the Supreme Brahman,
that alone is to be meditated on and not the other selves. Hence the
sūtra. “(In Tait. 2.5 by the term ‘self’ there is) the understanding
of the self (i e. Brahman), as in other places (i.e. in Tait. 2.1, etc.),
(this is known also) from what follows”. Thus, literal interpretation
is the same, though import different.²
SŪTRA 17
“IF IT BE OBJECTED • ON ACCOUNT OF THE CONNECTION (OF THE
TERM ‘SELF’ WITH WHAT IS NOT-SELF, THERE IS NO UNDERSTANDING
OF SELF HERE, WE REPLY.) THERE MAY BE (SUCH AN UNDERSTAND-
ING), ON ACCOUNT OF ASCERTAINMENT.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
If it be objected that since the term ‘self’ is found to refer to
the vital-breath and the rest in the previous cases, in the text: “The
self, consisting of bliss” (Tait 2.5³), the Supreme Self is not meant
by the term ‘self’—(we reply:) “There may be” indeed such an
understanding by that term,—as we know that in the previous cases
¹ Ś.B. 3.3.16, pp. 775 ff.; Bh. B. 3.3.16, p. 180.
² ŚK. B. 3.3.16, pp. 309-310, Part 9.
³ Not quoted by others.
9B