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

[SŪ 3. 4. 21.
ADH. 2.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 735
Under the udgītha-meditation and the like, the following are
mentioned by Scripture: "This is the best essence among the essences,
the supreme and the highest place, the eighth,—the udgītha" (Chānd.
1.1 3), "The Ṛic is this earth indeed, the Sāman the fire" (Chānd.
1.6.1), "Verily, this world is the piled up fire" (Śat. Br. 10.5 4, 1 ¹),
"This earth forsooth, is the hymn" (Ait Ār. 2.1.2 ²) and so on. Here
the doubt is, viz. whether the texts about the best essence and so
on are concerned simply with an eulogy of the udgītha and the rest
which are subsidiary parts of sacrifices, or whether they enjoin the
udgītha and the rest to be looked upon as the best essence and so on.
With regard to this, (the author) states the prima facie view: "If
it be objected: mere eulogy, on account of taking". That is, they are
concerned simply with eulogy. Why ? "On account of taking,"
i e. as the groups of texts about the best essence and so on are similar
to the texts eulogizing the subsidiary parts of sacrificial parts, such as:
"This earth indeed in the sacrificial ladle, the sun the tortoise, the
heavenly world the āhavanīya-fire", and so on, they must be taken
as concerned with the glorification of udgītha and the rest which are
subordinate members of sacrificial acts.
To this we say: "No." This cannot be said. Why? "On
account of being something new," i.e. because the udgītha and the
rest are not established as the best of essence by any other means or
proof. The injunction refers to the udgītha and the rest to be looked
upon as the best essence and so on, it being unreasonble to take a
text to be concerned with the glorification of the udgītha and the rest,
enjoined in a different place, when it is possible to interpret it in relation
to its own context.
COMPARISON
Baladeva
He does not begin a new adhikaraṇa here, but continues the
topic of the previous section, viz. that a knower of Brahman is at
liberty to act at will. Hence the sūtra: "If it be said that (the texts
allowing a knower to act at will are) mere glorification, on account of
(their) reference (to works), (we reply:) No, on account of being
¹ P. 798, line 17.
² P. 101.