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

[SŪ. 1. 1. 8.
48 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 5.]
by Scripture, omniscient and the well-wisher of men. Because of the
absence of these two kinds of texts, pradhāna is not denoted by the
terms 'existent' and the like.
Vedānta-kaustubha
If the non-sentient pradhāna alone were taught as that which is
denoted by the terms 'existent', 'perceiver' and the like, then, in
order to prevent reliance upon that, Scripture, omniscient, well-
wishing, and intending to instruct Brahman, should have told that
it is to be rejected, just as a mother says to her son, about to take
something not good, 'Son, this is not good'. But there is no statement
that it is to be rejected; on the contrary, an identity with it is taught
in the passage: 'Thou art that' (Chānd. 6.8 7; 6.9.8; 6.10.3; 6.11.3;
6.12.3; 6.13.3; 6.14.3, 6.15.3; 6.16.3). The term "and" is meant for
including (another reason, viz.) the absence of statement indicating
the purpose of such a teaching.
COMPARISON
Śamkara
Reading same, interpretation same on the whole. Only, while
Nimbārka interprets the term "Ca" to mean 'the purpose of such a
teaching', Śamkara takes it to mean 'the contradiction of the initial
proposition', viz. the cause being known, the effects are also known.¹
Evidently, through the knowledge of the non-sentient pradhāna, there
can be no knowledge of the sentient souls. Hence pradhāna cannot
be the cause of the universe.²
Rāmānuja
Reading and interpretation same. He gives no special meaning
of the term "ca", but takes it to mean simply 'also', and not a second
reason.³
Bhāskara
Reading and interpretation same on the whole. Bhāskara inter-
prets this sūtra exactly after Śamkara, taking the term "ca" to mean
'contradiction of the initial proposition'.⁴
1 Vide Chānd. 6.1. 2 Ś.B. 1.1.8, p. 209.
3 Śrī. B. 1.1.8, p. 163, vol. 1. 4 Bh. B. 1.1.8, p. 23.