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

132 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ 1 2 25.
ADH. 7 ]
Adhikarana 7· The section entitled 'Vaiśvā-
nara' (Sūtras 25-33)
SŪTRA 25
" VAIŚVĀNARA (IS THE LORD), ON ACCOUNT OF THE DISTINCTIVE
ATTRIBUTES OF THE COMMON TERM."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
'Vaiśvānara' is the Highest Self alone, because that the word
'Vaiśvānara', though a common term, denoting (both) fire and
Brahman, is to be understood as implying Brahman here, follows from
the fact that we know its "distinctive attributes" through the designa-
tion of its parts, such as the heaven as its head and so on.
Vedānta-kaustubha
Thus, it has been pointed out that the Lord is to be meditated on
as the Soul of the movable and the immovable. Now, by pointing
out that the Lord is to be meditated on, in the very same manner, as
Vaiśvānara also, the author shows that the text: " 'Who is our soul ?
What is Brahman " ? ' (Chānd. 5 11.1) refers to the Lord.
In the Chāndogya, the following passage is found, beginning:
" 'Who is our soul ? What is Brahman " ? ' (Chānd. 5 11 1), " 'You
know now that Vaiśvānara Self, tell us about Him alone" ' (Chānd
5.11.6), and continuing: 'But he who meditates on the Vaiśvānara
Self as of the measure of a span only, and as of an unlimited dimension,
—he eats food in all the worlds, in all beings, in all selves. Verily,
of this Vaiśvānara Self, the head, indeed, is the brightly shining
(heaven), the eye the multiform (sun), the breath that which moves
in various paths (i e. the wind), the body the extended (space), the
bladder, indeed, wealth (i.e. water), the feet the earth indeed, the
breast, indeed, the sacrificial altar, the hairs the sacrificial grass, the
heart the Gārhapatya fire, the mind the Anvāhāryapacana fire, the
mouth the Āhavanīya fire' (Chānd. 5.18.1-2). A doubt arises as
to whether here Vaiśvānara is the gastric fire, or the elemental fire,
or the presiding deity of fire, or the Highest Self. The prima facie
view is as follows: The word 'Vaiśvānara' is a common term. Why ?
Because it is applied to the gastric fire, as in the passage: 'This is
the Vaiśvānara fire which is within this person, by means of which

[sū. 1. 2 25.
ADH 7.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 133
this food that is eaten is digested. Its noise is that which one hears
on covering the ears. When one is on the point of departing one does
not hear this sound' (Bṛh 5 9 1); because it is applied also to the
elemental fire, as in the passage: 'For the whole world, the gods
made Agni Vaiśvānara a sign of the day' (Ṛg. V. 10.88.12 ¹);
because it is applied to the fire-god too, as in the passage: 'May we
be in the favour of Vaiśvānara, for verily, he is the king of the worlds,
bliss, lustrous' (Ṛg V 1.98.1 ²); and because it is applied to the
Highest Self, as in the passages 'He threw it in the self, indeed, in
the heart, in Agni Vaiśvānara' (Tait. Br 3 1 8 7 ³). 'This Vaiśvā-
nara arises as having all forms, as the vital-breath, as fire'
(Praśna 1 7)
With regard to it, we reply: Vaiśvānara is the Highest Person
alone. Why? "On account of the distinctive attributes of the
common word", i e because there are distinctive attributes for taking
the common term 'Vaiśvānara',—applied, equally, to the gastric fire,
the elemental fire, the fire-god and the Highest Self,—as denoting
specifically the Highest Self alone. The sense is that the distinctive
attributes by reason of which the Highest Person alone may be taken
as the primary meaning of the word 'Vaiśvānara', are present here,
as we know them from the text: 'Of this Vaiśvānara Self, the head
indeed is the brightly shining (heaven)' (Chānd. 5 18 2) and so on.
Hence, the word 'Vaiśvānara', though commonly applicable to all
(the four), here denotes the Highest Self (alone), on account of such
distinctive attributes. The gastric fire and the rest cannot possibly
have limbs, like the heaven, and the rest down to the earth,—since
they are not the soul of all, and since in this section, the common term
is qualified by the special attributes of the Lord, such as, 'being the
soul of all' and the rest, mentioned in the introductory text: " 'Who is
our soul? What is Brahman?'" (Chānd. 5.11.1).
1 P. 347, lines 7-8
2 P 81, lines 3-4.
3 P. 265, lines 3-4, (vol 3). Correct quotation: 'Tad . . . hṛdaye
agnau vaiśvānare prāsyat'.

[sū 1. 2. 26.
134 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 7 ]
SŪTRA 26
"THAT WHICH IS STATED BY SMṚTI MUST BE AN INDICATION,
THUS."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The form, stated in Smṛti as well, in the passage: 'Of whom,
fire is the mouth, the heaven the head' (Mahā. 12 1656.6 ¹), "must"
be a decisive factor in proving that Vaiśvānara is the Highest Self.
Vedānta-kaustubha
The word "thus" implies the reason. For this reason, too,
Vaiśvānara is the Highest Self alone,—because "that which is stated
by Smṛti must be an indication" of the fact that the word 'Vaiśvānara'
denotes the Highest Self The phrase "That which is stated by
Smṛti" means that the form, characterized by having the heaven for
the head and the rest, denoted by the scriptural text: 'The head,
indeed, is the brightly shining (heaven)' (Chānd 5 18 2) and so on,
is mentioned also by a Smṛti which follows Scripture. That very
thing must be "an indication", i.e. a decisive factor here,—this is
the sense The Smṛti-passages are the following: 'Of whom fire is
the mouth, the heaven the head, the sky the navel, the earth the feet,
the sun the eye, the regions the ear,—obeisance to Him, the Soul of
the world' (Mahā. 12 1656b–1657a ²), 'Of whom the heaven is the
head, the wise declare, the sky, verily, the navel, the sun and the
moon the eyes, the regions the ear, the earth the feet,—He is the
inconceivable Soul, the maker of all beings' For this very reason, it
has been said: 'Scripture and Smṛti are celebrated to be the two
eyes of the wise. Deprived of one, one is said to be "one-eyed",
deprived of both "blind"'.
Or, (an alternative explanation of the sūtra:) the phrase: "That
which is stated by Smṛti" means as follows: (The form) which is
recognized in the following manner thus: What is celebrated in
another scriptural text, viz. 'Fire is his head, the eyes the sun and the
moon' (Muṇḍ. 2.1.4), and so on, as well as in the stated Smṛti-passages
as the form of the Highest Self, that alone, is stated here (in Chānd.
5.18.2),—that form must be an indication, i.e a sign, that Vaiśvānara
is the Highest Self.
¹ Ś. R ² P. 424, lines 2-3, vol. 3

[sū. 1. 2. 27.
ADH. 7.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 135
SŪTRA 27
"IF IT BE OBJECTED THAT (VAIŚVĀNARA IS THE GASTRIC FIRE) ON
ACCOUNT OF WORD AND THE REST, ON ACCOUNT OF ABIDING
WITHIN, NOT (THE HIGHEST SELF). (WE REPLY.) NO, ON ACCOUNT
OF TEACHING THE VISION (OF THE LORD) THUS, ON ACCOUNT OF
IMPOSSIBILITY, AND (BECAUSE) THEY READ HIM ALSO AS A
PERSON "1
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
If it be objected that since the word 'Vaiśvānara' conventionally
denotes the gastric fire, since there is the designation of a triad of
fires, since it is mentioned as the abode of the offering to the vital-
breaths, and since it is declared by Scripture to be abiding within,
Vaiśvānara is not the Highest Self, but the gastric fire,—
(We reply.) "No", "as" the Supreme Lord is "taught to be
viewed" "thus", i.e. in the gastric fire; "for" if the Supreme Lord
be not understood here, then having the heaven as the head and the
rest 'is not possible', and it is declared by Scripture to be a
person,—so Vaiśvānara is none but the Highest Self.
Vedānta-kaustubha
If it be objected: The Highest Self cannot be denoted by the
word 'Vaiśvānara' here, but the gastric fire. Why? "On account
of words and the rest," i.e. the reasons which begin with 'word'
are 'reasons beginning with word',2—'on account of those'.3
Those reasons are as follows: First, the 'word' here is 'Vaiśvānara',
and that conventionally denotes the gastric fire, and when a literal
meaning is possible, it is improper to suppose any other meaning.
Secondly, there is the word 'fire', i.e. there is a co-ordination between
Vaiśvānara and the word 'fire' in the Vājasaneyaka-text, viz. 'This is
the Vaiśvānara fire' (Śat. Br. 10 6.1.11 4). Thirdly, a triad of fires
is designated in the text ; 'The heart is the Gārhapatya fire, the mind
the Anvāhārya' (Chānd. 5.18.2) and so on. Fourthly, Vaiśvānara
is declared by Scripture to be the support of the offering to the
――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
1 The C S S ed. omits 'iti cen na', p. 11.
2 Śabdādayaḥ.
3 This explains the compound 'śabdādibhyaḥ'.
4 P. 805, line 17

[sū. 1. 2 28.
136 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 7.]
vital-breaths in the passage 'Therefore, the first food which one may
come across should be offered' (Chānd. 5 19 1) And, finally, Vaiśvā-
nara abides "within", which, more particularly, is a characteristic
mark of the gastric fire,—the Vājasaneyins declare that Vaiśvānara
abides within in the passage 'For he who knows this Vaiśvānara
fire to be like a man, abiding within a man' (Śat Br 10 6.1 11).
On account of such reasons like "words and the rest", and "on
account of abiding within", the Highest Self cannot be understood,—
(We reply) "No", "on account of teaching the vision (of the
Lord) thus", i e. since such an object (viz. the gastric fire) is taught
to be meditated on under the aspect of the Lord, i e since the Supreme
Lord is enjoined to be meditated on as qualified by the gastric fire,
i.e since the above-mentioned Supreme Soul, who is Vaiśvānara
(or the universal soul) being the soul of all, is taught to be in the gastric
fire and the rest as their soul If it be objected: In that case, let
gastric fire itself be Vaiśvānara primarily,—we reply: no, "because
that is impossible", i e. because having the heaven as the head and
the rest is impossible on the part of the gastric fire. This means,
it is possible on the part of the Highest Self alone, who is the soul
of all, and not on the part of any one else. "And also", the Vājasa-
neyins "read" "him", i e. Vaiśvānara, "as a person" in the passage:
'That Vaiśvānara fire is the person' (Śat Br 10 6.1.11). It is
possible for the Highest Self to be a Person, He being the soul of all,
but this is not possible if the mere gastric fire be understood here.
The word "and" ¹ denotes that this is universally known, i.e. that
the Highest Self is a Person is well-known from scriptural texts like-
'The Person, verily, is all this' (Śvet. 3 15), 'There is nothing higher
than the Person' (Katha 3 11) and so on.
SŪTRA 28
"FOR THAT VERY REASON, NOT THE DEITY, NOR THE ELEMENT."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
On account of those "very" reasons stated above, "the deity and
the element" are "not" to be understood by the word 'Vaiśvānara'.
¹ 'Ca' in the sūtra.

[SŪ. 1. 2. 29.
ADH 7 ] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 137
Vedānta-kaustubha
“For that very reason”, i.e. on account of the very reasons
stated above, the presiding “deity” of fire is not to be understood
the word ‘Vaiśvānara’, and the “element”, i.e. the elemental fire,
also is not to be understood.
SŪTRA 29
“ (THERE IS) NO CONTRADICTION, EVEN (IF THE WORD “ VAISVĀ-
NARA ” DENOTES THE LORD) DIRECTLY, JAIMINI (THINKS SO).”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The Lord Vaiśvānara is ‘all and man’, i.e. the soul of all,—to
be meditated on “directly” as such,—thus, the teacher “Jaimini”
thinks, involves “no contradiction”.
Vedānta-kaustubha
Thus, the word ‘Vaiśvānara’ has been proved to be referring to
Brahman, first on the ground of the reasons like ‘distinctive attributes
of a common term’ (Br. Sū. 1.2.25) and the rest. Again, there being
a doubt,—viz. on account of words and the rest, as well as on account
of abiding within, it refers to the gastric fire,—it has been once more
proved, for the sake of removing incompatibility, to be referring to
Brahman alone, qualified by the gastric fire, on the ground of the
reasons like: ‘because of teaching the vision (of the Lord) thus’ (Br.
Sū. 1.2.27) and so on. Now, by showing that the word ‘Vaiśvānara’
denotes Brahman etymologically too, so that He may be directly
worshipped as such, the author shows that another teacher too (viz.
Jaimini) confirms his own view.
The teacher “Jaimini” thinks that as the word ‘Vaiśvānara’,
even without being viewed as denoting the Lord, only so far as He is
qualified by the gastric fire, refers directly to the Highest Self, in-
tending to designate as it does His special qualities,—so Vaiśvānara
is to be meditated on “directly” as the Highest Self indeed. This
view involves “no contradiction”.¹
¹ I.e. it has been said in the previous sūtra that Vaiśvānara stands for the
Lord only so far as the Lord is qualified by the gastric fire. But now it is said
that Vaiśvānara stands for the Lord directly, without any qualification.

[sū. 1. 2. 30.
138 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 7.]
Etymologically, ‘Vaiśvānara’ implies ‘he who is all and man’,
He being the Universal Soul, or ‘one who is the man, i.e. the maker
of all’, He being the Universal Cause; or ‘one by whom all men are
to be controlled’, He being the Universal Controller The long vowel
(i.e. ‘ā’ in the word ‘Vaiśvānara’) follows from the rule ‘when “nara”
follows “viśva”, the “a” in the latter is lengthened to designate a
name’ (Pāṇ 6 3 129, SD. K 1048¹). The taddhita-suffix (by which
the word ‘Vaiśvānara’ is derived from the word ‘Vaiśvanara’) is
added without changing the meaning, as in the case of ‘rākṣasa’
(derived from ‘rakṣas’), ‘vāyasa’ (derived from ‘vayas’) and so on.²
The co-ordination of the words ‘Agni’ and ‘Vaiśvānara’, too,
is appropriate ‘Agni’ is ‘one who goes, i.e. goes to or manifests
himself in the heart-lotus’,—the ‘na’ (in the root ‘aṅg’) is elided in
accordance with the rule. ‘And, the “na” of “aṅga” is elided’³
(Uṇādi-sūtra 490)⁴—, or ‘one who causes one to go, i.e. causes the
first birth of the Universe
SŪTRA 30
“ON ACCOUNT OF MANIFESTATION, ĀŚMARATHYA (THINKS SO).”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
With a view to favouring His worshippers who are devoted to
Him alone and to none else, the Highest Self though infinite, manifests
Himself in accordance with the respective capacities of His devotees.
As such, He can fittingly be regarded as of the size of merely a span,
—this is so “on account of manifestation”, so the sage “Āśmarathya”
thinks.
Vedānta-kaustubha
(The author) explains, in accordance with the approbation of
Āśmarathya, the text about that which is of the size of merely a
span.
In the text: ‘But who meditates on the Vaiśvānara Self as of
the measure of a span only and as of an unlimited dimension’ (Chānd.

¹ P. 654, vol. 1.
² Vide Pāṇ 4.1 104, SD K. 1106, p. 682, vol. 1, and Pāṇ. 5.4 38, SD. K.
2106, p. 936, vol. 1
³ And ‘ni’ is added, as mentioned in the sūtra 488. Thus, aṅg = ag+ni =
agni.
⁴ SD. K., p. 634, vol 2.

[SŪ. 1. 2. 31
ADH. 7.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 139
5 18 1), it is perfectly justifiable to hold that even one whose 'measure'
or limit, has disappeared 'on all sides' or entirely ¹, i e. even the
Highest Person, who is unlimited, can be of the measure of a span
merely, i.e. of the extent measured by the thumb and the forefinger.
How? "On account of manifestation." That is, with a view to
favouring those who are devoted to none else except to Him, the Lord
manifests Himself in the heart-lotus in a form, which is eternal, blissful
and non-material, which is of the size of a span and is the fulfiller of
the desire of His own devotees, just as He manifested Himself in
the limited space of a pillar as a man-lion.² This is the view of the
teacher Āśmarathya
Or, (an alternative explanation of the sūtra), with a view to
favouring the dull-witted devotees (i.e. who can grasp gross objects
only), the Lord squeezes Himself, as it were, into gross regions only;
though all-pervading, He limits Himself in accordance with their
respective intelligence and manifests Himself in those respective
places. Thus, "on account of manifestation", He can, very well, be
of the measure of merely a span,—so thinks "Āśmarathya",—this
is the sense.
COMPARISON
Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha
Interpretation of the word 'abhivyakteḥ' different, viz 'on
account of definiteness', i e the texts speaks of the Lord of a definite
extent with a view to rendering the thought of the meditating devotee
more definite.³
SŪTRA 31
"ON ACCOUNT OF REMEMBRANCE, BĀDARI (THINKS SO)."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The imagination of a body from head to foot is "on account of
remembrance", i.e. for the purpose of recollection (or meditation),—
so thinks the teacher "Bādari".
¹ Abhitaḥ vigataḥ mānaḥ = abhivimānaḥ.
² The reference is to the killing of Hiraṇyakaśipu by the Lord in the form
of a man-lion Vide Mahā 3.15835, etc.
³ Śrī. B 1 2.30, p. 274, Part 1 ŚK. B. 1.2.30, p 392 Part 1

[SŪ. 1. 2 32.
140 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH 7 |
Vedānta-kaustubha
On the enquiry What purpose is served by such a manifestation
of a Being,—who is of the size of merely a span,—in the heart-lotus
of the sharp-witted (i.e. those who are capable of grasping subtle
things)? On the enquiry What purpose is served by such worship
of a Being,—who is limited as having limbs like head and the rest
in the heaven and so on,—on the part of the dull-witted (i.e. those
who are capable of grasping gross things)?—it is said here
The manifestation, in the heart-lotus, of the Highest Self as of
the size of merely a span, similarly the imagination of His body, from
head to foot, in the regions of the heaven and the rest, are "on account
of remembrance", i.e. serve the purpose of recollection, or meditation
in that way, for attaining the Supreme Lord This is the view of
the teacher "Bādari"
————
SŪTRA 32
"ON ACCOUNT OF IDENTIFICATION, SO JAIMINI THINKS, FOR THUS
(SCRIPTURE) SHOWS "
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The imagination of their ¹ breast and the rest as the sacrificial
altar and so on is for the purpose of effecting "an identification"
of Agni-hotra with the offering to the vital-breaths, which is a sub-
sidiary element of the Vaiśvānara-vidyā, practised by a worshipper
of Vaiśvānara,—"so" the teacher "Jaimini" thinks That very thing
the scriptural text 'Now, he who offers the Agni-hotra, knowing this
thus' (Chānd 5 24 2 ²), 'shows'.
Vedānta-kaustubha
If it be asked: If the Highest Self, having thus the three worlds
as His body, be denoted by the term 'Vaiśvānara', then, what is the
purpose of imagining the breast and the rest of the worshipper as the
sacrificial altar and so on thus: 'The breast is the sacrificial altar,
the hairs the sacrificial grass, the heart the Gārhapatya fire, the mind
the Anvāhāryapacana fire' (Chānd. 5 18.2)?—the author replies
here:
——————————————————————————————————————————
¹ I.e. of those who meditate on Vaiśvānara
² Ś, R, SK.

[sū. 1. 2. 33.
ADH. 7.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 141
The imagining of the worshippers as the sacrificial altar and the
rest is for the purpose of effecting an "identification" of Agni-hotra
with the offering to the vital-breath, which is a subsidiary element
of the Vaiśvānara-vidyā, practised by the worshippers of Vaiśvānara,
— "so" the teacher "Jaimini" thinks. "For thus", i.e. this very
identification of the offering to the vital-breath and the Agni-hotra,
"Scripture shows" in the following passage. 'Now, he who offers
the Agni-hotra knowing this thus, his offering is made to all the worlds,
to all beings, to all selves' (Chānd. 5.24 2).
COMPARISON
Baladeva
The interpretation of the word 'sampatteḥ' different, viz 'on
account of mysterious power or lordliness'. Hence the sūtra ·
'(The Lord is said to be of the measure of a span) on account of (His)
mysterious power, so Jaimini (thinks), for thus Scripture shows (viz
that the Lord is possessed of such powers)'.¹
SŪTRA 33
"AND THEY RECORD THIS IN THAT."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
"And they record" "this", i.e. Vaiśvānara having the heaven as
his head and so on, as a Person in the body of the worshipper.
Here ends the second quarter of the first chapter in the Vedānta-
pārijāta-saurabha, an interpretation of the Śārīraka-mīmāṁsā
texts and composed by the Reverend Nimbārka
Vedānta-kaustubha
And moreover, the Vājins "record" "this", i.e. the Lord Vaiśvā-
nara, "in that", i.e. in the body of the worshipper, in the passage ·
'He who knows this Vaiśvānara fire as a man, abiding within man'
(Śat. Br. 10.6.1.11). That is to say, these too, viz. his being a person,
¹ G.B. 1.2.32, p. 142, Chap. 1.

[SŪ. 1. 2. 33.
142 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 7.]
as well as his abiding within, are indicative of the fact that Vaiśvānara
is Brahman. The sense is that if the gastric fire be understood here,
then the circumstance of abiding within a person will, of course, be
possible, but not that of being like a person Hence, it is established
that Vaiśvānara is the Highest Self.
Here ends the section entitled 'Vaiśvānara' (7).
Here ends the second quarter of the first chapter in the commentary,
the holy Vedānta-kaustubha.
COMPARISON
Baladeva
Interpretation different, viz. 'And they (viz the Ātharvani-
kas) record this (viz. the existence of such mysterious powers) in that
(viz. in the Lord)'.¹
Résumé
The second quarter of the first chapter contains:—
(1) 33 sūtras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Nimbārka ;
(2) 32 sūtras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Śaṃkara ;
(3) 33 sūtras and 6 adhikaranas, according to Rāmānuja ;
(4) 32 sūtras and 7 adhikaranas, according to Bhāskara ;
(5) 33 sūtras and 9 adhikaranas, according to Śrīkaṇṭha ;
(6) 33 sūtras and 7 adhikaraṇas, according to Baladeva.
Śaṃkara and Bhāskara and Baladeva omit the sūtra 16 in
Nimbārka's commentary. Nimbārka omits the sūtra 24 in Bhās-
kara's commentary.
1 G.B. 1.2.33, p. 143, Chap. 1.

FIRST CHAPTER (Adhyāya)
THIRD QUARTER (Pāda)
Adhikaraṇa 1 The section entitled 'The
heaven, the earth, and so on' (Sūtras 1-7)
SŪTRA 1
"THE SUPPORT OF THE HEAVEN, THE EARTH AND THE REST (IS
BRAHMAN ALONE), ON ACCOUNT OF THE TERM 'OWN' "
Vedānta-pārijāta saurabha
"The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest", stated in
the passage 'In whom the heaven' (Mund. 2.2.5¹) and so on, is
Brahman, "on account of the term 'own'", i.e. on account of the
word 'soul' and the rest which are denotative of Brahman.
Vedānta-kaustubha
Now the reverend author of the aphorisms is showing that to
be the support of the three worlds, too, is possible on the part of the
Lord alone who has the heaven for His head and so on and is the soul
of the three worlds.
In the Muṇḍaka, we read: 'He in whom the heaven, the earth
and the sky are woven, and the mind together with all the vital-
breaths,—Him alone know as the one soul; give up other words.
He is the bridge to immortality' (Muṇḍ. 2.2.5). Here a doubt
arises—viz. whether that which is indicated as the support of the
heaven and the rest by the locative 'in whom' is pradhāna or the
individual soul, or the Supreme Soul, the cause of the birth and the
rest of the world. What is suggested here to begin with? The
prima facie view is as follows: Let pradhāna be the support. As it
is found that an effect arises from and dissolves into its own cause,
it is reasonable to hold that it has its own cause as its support. (This
is so), also on account of the scriptural mention of 'bridge'. To be
a bridge means to be limited; but Brahman is not limited as declared
¹ Ś, R, Bh, ŚK, B.

144 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 1 3. 1
ADH 1.]
by the text 'Infinite, boundless' (Bṛh. 2.4.12) The term 'self'
too may be applied to pradhāna thus —
Pradhāna is the self, because of being the benefactor of the soul.
Whoever is the benefactor of some one else is his self; just as (when
it is said) 'Verily, Bhadrasena is my self' Or, else, let the individual
soul be the support, as there is the mention of the word 'soul' in the
text,—the word 'soul' denotes the individual soul primarily, since it
is a sentient being;—as the soul is mentioned in Scripture as the
support of sense-organs like mind and the rest; as the soul is said to
be connected with the vein, as well as to be born, in the passage:
'Where the veins have congregated together like the spokes in the
nave of a wheel, he moves about within, becoming manifold' (Muṇḍ.
2 2 6), and, finally, to be the support of the entire universe, the
object to be enjoyed, fits in on the soul's part, it being an enjoyer.
We reply "The support of the heaven, and the earth and the
rest" is none but the Supreme Brahman. That is, 'dyau' and
'bhu' (make) 'dyubhuvau', that which begins with 'dyu-bhuvau'
is 'dyu-bhuvāu ādi', i.e. all the things beginning with the heaven,
and ending with the vital-breath,—their support is the Highest Self.
Why? "On account of the term 'own'", i.e. on account of the term
'soul', denotative of itself, viz. of the Supreme Soul, the topic of dis-
cussion, and characterized by an adjective as stated in the passage
'Him alone know as the one soul, give up other worlds' (Muṇḍ.
2.2 5),—here, from the adjective 'one' which denotes the Lord, the
soul of all, it is known that the 'soul' is the Supreme Soul;—also
on account of the word 'bridge', mentioned in the passage 'The
bridge to immortality' (Muṇḍ. 2.2.5), i e. the 'bridge' or the support
meaning the cause of attaining 'immortality' or salvation. In
another scriptural text, viz 'By knowing him thus, one becomes
immortal on earth' (Tait. Ār. 3.12 1), He alone is celebrated to be the
cause of the attainment of immortality. Connection with the artery,
too, is possible on the part of the Supreme Soul, in accordance with
the scriptural text: 'But surrounded by the veins he hangs like a
sheath' (Mahānār. 11.9). In accordance with the following scrip-
tural and Smṛti texts, viz. 'Not born, he is born in many ways'
(Vj. S. 31.169 2; Tait. Ār. 3.13.1 3), 'Though unborn, the unchange-
able soul' (Gītā 4.6), it is also possible for Him to be born in many
1 P. 199 2 P. 857, line 17. 3 P. 201.

[sū. 1. 3. 2.
ADH. 1 ] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 145
ways. Finally, to be the support of the instruments of the individual
soul, too, is possible on the part of the Supreme Soul who is the support
of all The following aphorisms ¹, secondary in nature, are but
amplifications of this primary aphorism
SŪTRA 2
"ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION (OF BRAHMAN) THE OBJECT
TO BE APPROACHED BY THE FREED."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest is Brahman
alone Why? "On account of the designation," of such a support
alone as "the object to be approached by the freed", in the passage
'When the seer sees the golden-coloured Creator, the Lord, the
Person, the source of Brahmā, then the knower, having discarded
merit and demerit, stainless, attains the highest identity' (Muṇḍ.
3 1 13 ²) and so on.
Vedānta-kaustubha
The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest is none but
Brahman Why? "On account of the designation (of Brahman)
as the object to be approached by the freed." That which is to
be approached, i e. obtained, by those who are freed from the fettor
of mundane existence is "the object to be approached by the freed",
on account of the "designation", 1.e. indication, of that ³. The
sense is: The reality that is admitted to be the support of the heaven,
the earth and the rest, to be one, to be the bridge to immortality,
and is celebrated elsewhere also as the object to be approached by
the freed,—that very same reality, the one topic of all the Vedas
and without an equal or a superior, is designated as the object to be
obtained by the freed, in the passages: 'The knot of the heart is
undone, all doubts are cut off, and his works perish, when he, who is
high and low, is seen' (Muṇḍ. 2.2.8), 'Just as the flowing rivers
disappear into the ocean discarding name and form, so the knower,
freed from name and form, goes to the Person, who is higher than
―――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
¹ Viz. Br. Sū. 1.3.2–7. ² R, ŚK, B.
³ This explains the compound 'muktopasṛpya-vyapadeśāt'.
10

[sū. 1. 3. 3.
146 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH 1.]
the high' (Muṇḍ 3.2.8) The phrase 'high and low' means: One
to whom the high, i.e. Brahmā, Śiva, and the rest, are inferior The
phrase 'higher than the high' means: the Person who is higher than
the high, i e. the individual soul or prakṛti 1
COMPARISON
Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha
Reading slightly different, viz adds a 'ca' in the end.²
SŪTRA 3
"NOT THE INFERENCE, ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABSENCE OF TEXTS
TO THAT EFFECT."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
Pradhāna, which is arrived at through inference, is not that
support, on account of the absence of texts denoting it.
Vedānta-kaustubha
The support of the heaven, the earth and the rest cannot be
"the inference". The non-sentient cause which is without any
connection with Brahman, viz. pradhāna, inferred by the Sāṁkhyas
on the ground of non-sentient effects, like the elements and the rest ³,
is said to be "the inference", and that is not the support of the heaven,
the earth and the rest. Why? "On account of the absence of texts
to that effect." That is, the "text to that effect" is 'tac-chabda',
"absence of text to that effect" is 'atac-chabda', on account of
that ⁴, or on account of the absence, here, of texts denoting the

1 Note that Nimbārka and Śrīnivāsa understand the word 'Vyapadeśāt'
as referring to different passages.
2 Śrī. B. 1 2 3, p. 283, Part 1. ŚK. B. 1.3.2, p. 401, Part 4.
3 First, we infer that every effect must have a cause, that cause another
cause and so on, and finally there must be an uncaused first cause. Secondly,
we infer that this uncaused first cause must be non-sentient, since the effects
which we perceive are non-sentient, and the effect and its cause must be similar
in nature. It is in this way that the Sāṁkhyas arrive at non-sentient first
cause or pradhāna.
4 This explains the compound 'atac-chabdāt'.

[sū. 1. 3. 4. 147
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA
inferrible pradhāna. On the contrary, there are texts denoting a
sentient being, such as, ‘He who is omniscient’ (Muṇḍ 1.1.9., 2 2.7)
and so on.
COMPARISON
Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha
Reading different, viz. take this sūtra and the next as one sūtra.¹
―――――
SŪTRA 4
“AND THE BEARER OF THE VITAL-BREATH.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
“The bearer of the vital-breath” also is not the support of the
heaven, the earth and the rest Why? On account of the very same
absence of texts to that effect.
Vedānta-kaustubha
The words: ‘not, on account of the absence of texts to that
effect’ are to be supplied from the preceding aphorism. “The bearer
of the vital-breath”, i.e the individual soul, too, is not the support
of the heaven, the earth and the rest, on account of the absence of
texts to that effect;—that means: although the term ‘soul’ is equally
applicable to the individual soul and the Supreme Soul, yet just as
in this section, there are texts like ‘Him alone know as one —He is
the bridge to immortality’ (Muṇḍ 2.2 5), ‘He whois omniscient’ (Muṇḍ.
1.1.9; 2.2.7) and so on, establishing the peculiar qualities of the Supreme
Soul, so there are no texts here, establishing the peculiar qualities
of the individual soul;—also because it is impossible for the individual
soul, which is atomic by nature, to be the support of the heaven,
the earth and the rest. This aphorism is taken separately, because
of its association with the following aphorisms.²
―――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
¹ Śrī B. 1.3.3, p. 283, Part 1.
ŚK. B. 1.3.3, p. 403, Part 4.
² That is, it would not have been necessary to introduce a special sūtra
for the individual soul,—which like pradhāna is precluded in the preceding sūtra,
—if it were not for the reasons given in the following three sūtras, which apply
only to the individual soul, and not to pradhāna.

148 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 1. 3. 5–6.
ADH. 1.]
COMPARISON
All others omit the 'ca' in the end ¹
SŪTRA 5
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE DESIGNATION OF DIFFERENCE”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
Moreover, “on account of the designation of difference” also
between the knower and the object to be known, the support of the
heaven, the earth and the rest is not the bearer of the vital-breath,
(or the individual soul)
Vedānta-kaustubha
The bearer of the vital-breath is not to be understood as the
support of the heaven, the earth and the rest Why? “On account
of the designation of difference”, i.e. because the difference between
the two, viz. between the individual soul—which is possessed of
little knowledge and is subject to bondage and release through the
Lord’s māyā consisting of the three gunas—and the Omniscient
Lord, as the knower and the object to be known, is designated by the
holy Scripture itself in the passage. ‘Him alone know as one’ (Muṇḍ.
2.2 5) The purpose of this repeated declarations of difference is to
point out that with a view to attaining His nature, one should practise
meditation on Him, based on a true knowledge about Him.
SŪTRA 6
“ON ACCOUNT OF THE TOPIC.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The Supreme Self being the topic, the individual soul is not to
be understood as the support of the heaven, the earth and the rest.
¹ Ś.B. 1.3.5, p. 310. Śrī. B. 1.3.4, p. 283, Part 1.
Bh. B. 1.3.5, p. 52. ŚK. B. 1.3.4, p 404, Part 4.
B.B. 1.3.5.

[sū. 1. 3 7.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 149
Vedānta-kaustubha
It is not that the individual soul constitutes the topic so that
it may be understood here. None but the Supreme Soul is the topic
here, as evident from the introductory passage. “ ‘What, my
reverend Sir, being known, all this comes to be known” ? ’ (Muṇḍ.
1.1.3),—all things do not become known when the individual soul
is known, since all things have not the individual soul as their soul—
and as established by the fact that in the passage: ‘Now, the higher
is that whereby that Imperishable is apprehended’ (Muṇḍ. 1.1.5)
and so on, the Supreme Soul alone is referred to.
SŪTRA 7
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF ABIDING AND EATING.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
“On account of the abiding” of the Highest Self as a non-eater,
as well as ‘on account of the eating’ of the individual soul, as laid
down in the text: ‘Two birds’ (Muṇḍ. 3.1.1; cf also Śvet. 4.6 1),
the individual soul is not the support of the heaven and the earth.
Vedānta-kaustubha
The author is once more explaining statements regarding the
difference between the individual soul and Brahman.
The individual soul is not the support of the heaven, the earth
and the rest. Why? “On account of abiding and eating”, “sthiti”
and “odana” (make) “sthityodane”—on account of that 2. “On
account of the abiding” of one bird in the tree, i.e. the body, without
eating the fruit of work and shining, and “on account of the eating”
of the fruit of work by the other as subject to karmas,—as laid down
in the text which refors to the support of the heaven, the earth and
the rest, viz. ‘Of these two, one tastes the sweet berry, the other
looks on without eating’ (Muṇḍ. 1.1.3),—the difference between the
individual soul and Supreme Soul is known. Hence, it is established
1 Ś. R, Bh, ŚK, B
2 This explains the compound ‘sthityodanābhyām’

150 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ 1. 3. 8.
ADH. 2.]
that the independent and omniscient Supreme Soul alone is the bridge
to immortality; and as the soul of all, He is also the support of the
heaven, the earth and the rest.
Here ends the section entitled 'The heaven, the earth and the
rest' (1)
COMPARISON
Śaṁkara
Reading and interpretation same, but points out at the end in
his usual manner that the distinction between the individual soul
and Brahman is no more real than that between the ether within a
pot and the universal ether and so on.¹
Adhikaraṇa 2: The section entitled 'The plenty'.
(Sūtras 8-9)
SŪTRA 8
"THE PLENTY (IS THE LORD), BECAUSE OF THE TEACHING (OF IT)
AS ABOVE SERENITY (VIZ. THE VITAL-BREATH)."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The Plenty, taught by the highest teacher, the venerable Sanat-
kumāra, to our preceptor, the reverend Nārada, in the passage:
'But the Plenty alone should be enquired after' (Chānd. 7.22 1 ²),
is not the vital-breath, but the Highest Person Why? "Because
of the teaching" of the Plenty as "above" the vital-breath.
Vedānta-kaustubha
Now, the reverend author of the aphorisms is showing that the
text: 'But the Plenty alone should be enquired after' (Chānd. 7.22.1)
and so on, refers to Brahman.
¹ Ś.B 1 3.7, p. 31 ² Ś, R, Bh, ŚK, B.

[sū. 1. 3. 8.
ADH. 2.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 151
The following is recorded by the Chāndogas: '“It has been heard
by me from men like you that one who knows the soul crosses over
sorrow. I am such a sorrowing one, reverend sir! Cause me, sir,
to cross over the sorrow”' (Chānd. 7.1.3), thus asked by Nārada,
his preceptor, the reverend Sanatkumāra, the teacher of the doctrine
of salvation, taught: 'The name is Brahman' (Chānd. 7 1.5). Again,
asked thus: '“Is there, sir, more than name”?' (Chānd. 7.1.5),
he taught: '“Speech, verily, is more than name”' (Chānd. 7.2.1).
In this way, fifteen objects, beginning with name and ending with
the vital-breath, were taught.¹ After having taught the vital-breath,
he, without being asked any further question, taught the following
'“But he, verily, speaks superiorly who speaks superiorly through
truth”' (Chānd. 7.16.1), '“But the Plenty alone should be enquired
after”. “I enquire, sir, after the Plenty.” “Where one does not see
another, does not hear another, does not know another, that is the
Plenty. But where one sees another, hears another, knows another,
that is the small”' (Chānd. 7.23.1–24.1). Here the term 'plenty'
(bhūman) denotes 'muchness'. It is derived in the following manner:
The suffix 'imanic' is added to the word 'bahu' (much) in the sense of
'the nature thereof'², in accordance with the rule. 'The (suffix)
“imanic” is optionally added to the words “pṛthu” and the rest' (Pāṇ.
5.1.122, SD. K. 1784 ³) (in order to indicate the sense 'the nature
thereof'—Pāṇ. 5.1.119, SD. K. 1781). Then the root (viz. bahu)
and the suffix (viz. imanic) undergo a change in accordance with the
rule: 'After “bahu”, the first letters of “iman” and “īyas” affixes
are elided, and “bahu” is replaced by the word “bhū”' (Pāṇ. 6.4.154,
158; SD. K. 2017 ⁴). Here 'muchness' means 'immensity' (i.e.
quantitative greatness), and not numerosity (i.e. numerical greatness),
because just as the term 'bahu' denotes number, as in the examples:
'In expressing numerosity the plural case affix is used' (Pāṇ. 1.4.21 :
SD. K. 187 ⁵), 'Many, purified by the penance of knowledge' (Gītā.
4.10), 'After many births' (Gītā. 7.19) and so on, so it is seen to be
applied in the sense of 'immensity' also, in contrast to smallness, as
in the example: 'He who renders service, be it great or small, to one
who has heard Scripture'. Here, too, the term 'plenty' being used
¹ Vide Chānd. 7.1 et seq. ² Tasya bhāvaḥ
³ P. 894, vol. 1. Correct quotation translated: 'Pṛthvādibhya imanic vā'.
⁴ P. 908, vol. 1. That is, bahu+imanic = bhū+man = bhūman.
⁵ P. 114, vol. 1.