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

[SŪ. 3. 3. 41.
ADH. 18.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 669
Baladeva
This is sūtra 42 in his commentary. Here he concludes the topic
of the identity of Śrī with the parā-śakti of the Lord and hence with
the Lord Himself. The contention is that if Śrī be identical with the
Lord, then no erotic sentiment is possible between them, since any
such sentiment is possible only if there be a difference between the
lover and the beloved. The answer is : “(Śrī being the highest of the
females and the Lord being the best of the males, an erotic sentiment
naturally arises between them) when (they) have approached (each
other), hence (such a sentiment is possible on the part of the Lord),
on account of statement to that effect”. ¹
Adhikaraṇa 18: The section entitled “Non-
restriction with regard to the specifying of
that”. (Sūtra 41²)
SŪTRA 41
“(THERE IS) NON-RESTRICTION WITH REGARD TO THE SPECIFYING
OF THAT, ON ACCOUNT OF THAT BEING SEEN, FOR THE FRUIT
(VIZ.) NON-OBSTRUCTION IS ‘DIFFERENT’.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
There is “non-restriction” (i.e. no fixed rule) that the meditations
that are founded on the subordinate parts of sacrificial acts and are
mentioned in texts like: “Let one meditate on the syllable ‘Om’ as the
udgītha” (Chānd. 1.1.1³) and so on (are to be included) in those acts.
Why? Because in the scriptural text: “Both perform with it, he who
knows this thus and he who does not know thus” (Chānd. 1.1.10⁴),
such a non-restriction is found. As we learn from Scripture that
even a non-worshipper is a performer of sacrificial works through
the praṇava, a subsidiary part of sacrificial works, so it is ascertained
that there is no restriction with regard to the act of meditation.
And hence that the fruit of meditation is “different” from the fruit
of work is known from the passage: “What only one does with
¹ G.B. 3.3.42, p. 186, Chap. 3.
² This topic is resumed in Br. Sū. 3.3.59–64.
³ Ś, R, Bh. ⁴ Ś, R, Bh, ŚK.