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

656 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3. 3. 35.
ADH. 16.]
Bhāskara
Interpretation diametrically opposed. He interprets the first
part of the sūtra like Śaṁkara, but arrives at a directly opposite
conclusion. Thus, like Nimbārka, according to him also the portion
"Antarā---bhedānupapatti" constitutes the prima facie view, the
rest the reply. Hence the prima facie view: "(The two passages in
the Bṛhadāraṇyaka refer to the same self, for on this view alone the
self which is designated as) within (can be the absolute inner self and
not relatively only), otherwise (the self would be) like the group of
elements none of which can be said to be within another absolutely).
(Hence there is) inappropriateness of difference, (i.e. the two passages
refer to the same self)".
Correct conclusion: "No, as in the case of the difference ('antarā')
of teaching". That is, just as there are two different teachings here,
so the objects taught by them too must be different. Or, an alter-
native explanation: "No, as in the case of another ('antarā')
teaching". That is, just as in the Chāndogya the nine repetitions of
the dictum: 'Thou art that' show that in every version the object
established is different, so here.¹
Baladeva
He breaks this sūtra into two different sūtras exactly after
Śaṁkara. Interpretation absolutely different. He begins a new
adhikaraṇa here (three sūtras) concerned with the topic of the identity
between the Lord and His city. Thus:
Sūtra 36.—"Within (the city of the Lord, viz. Saṁvyoma or the
great Ether), (things appear) like (things in) an elemental city ("bhūta-
grāma-vat") (i.e. in an ordinary city) (to the vision) of His own (i.e.
to the devotees chosen by the Lord)." That is, in the city of the
Lord, everything being a manifestation of the Lord is but the Lord
Himself, but they look like material objects to His devotees.²
Sūtra 37.—"If it be objected that otherwise (i.e. on the view
that there is no difference between the Lord and His city), there is
inappropriateness of difference (between the dweller and the resi-
dence), (we reply:), no, as in the case of another teaching." That is,
¹ Bh. B. 3.3.35, p. 189.
² G.B. 3.3.36, p. 174, Chap. 3. "Yatratyaṁ vastu-jātaṁ sarvaṁ brah-
mātmakam api pṛthivyādi-nirmita-vat sphurati."