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

[sū. 1. 1. 1.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 7
release,—such is the construction,—in accordance with the following
scriptural passages: viz. ‘Having examined the worlds acquired by
work, let a Brāhmaṇa be indifferent to them’ (Muṇḍ. 1.2.12), ‘When the
seer sees the golden-coloured Creator, the Lord, the Person, the
source of Brahmā, the wise man, having discarded merit and
demerit, and stainless, attains supreme identity’ (Muṇḍ. 3.1.3),
‘When he sees the other, the Lord who is propitious and His great-
ness, he comes to be freed from sorrow’ (Muṇḍ. 3 1.2; Śvet. 4.7),
‘Thinking itself and the Mover as different, then favoured by Him,
it goes to immortality’ (Śvet. 1.6), ‘The knot of the heart is broken,
all doubts are solved and his works perish, when He, who is high and
low, is seen’ (Muṇḍ. 2.2 8), ‘He can be obtained by him alone whom
He chooses. To him this self reveals its own form’ (Kaṭha 2 23),
‘One who has come to be freed from sorrow sees Him who is without
active will and His greatness, through the grace of the Lord’
(Śvet. 3.20), ‘For the sake of this knowledge, let him, with fuel in
hand, approach the teacher alone, who is versed in Scripture, and
devoted to Brahman. To him, who has approached him, whose
mind is completely calm, and who is endowed with tranquillity, the
wise teacher truly told that knowledge of Brahman, through which
he knows the Imperishable, the Person, the True’ (Muṇḍ. 1.2.12-13),
‘Be one to whom the preceptor is a God’ (Tait. 1.11), ‘To one who
has the highest devotion for the Lord, as for God so for his teacher,
to that great-souled one these matters which have been declared
become manifest’ (Śvet. 6.23).
The compound “Brahma-jijñāsā” is to be explained as ‘The
enquiry concerning Brahman’¹ The genitive case: ‘concerning
Brahman’² expresses the object, in accordance with the rule ‘The
subject and the object (take the genitive case) when they are used
along with a word ending with a kṛt-affix’ (Pāṇ. 2.3.65, SD.K. 623).³
‘The enquiry concerning Brahman’ is a compound with the object-
genitive,⁴ in accordance with the rule ‘The genitive is compounded,
when used along with a word ending with the kṛt-affix (and the
compound comes under the category of the Ṣaṣṭhī-tat-puruṣa)’
(K.V.S. 1317, quoted in SD.K. 703).⁵

¹ Brahmaṇo jijñāsā. ² Brahmaṇaḥ.
³ P. 452, vol. 1.
⁴ I e. a genitive denoting an object. ⁵ P. 496, vol. 1.

[SŪ. 1. 1. 1.
8 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 1.]
Brahman is none but Lord Kṛṣṇa, the substratum of in-
conceivable, infinite, unsurpassed, natural and greatest nature and
qualities and so on, omniscient, omnipotent, the Lord of all, the
cause of all, without an equal or a superior, all-pervading, and the
one topic of all the Vedas, as known from the following scriptural
and Smṛti passages, viz.: ‘He grows and causes to grow, hence
He is called the supreme Brahman’, ‘Who is omniscient, all-knowing’
(Muṇḍ. 1.1.9, 2.2.7), ‘Supreme is his power, declared to be of various
kinds, and natural is the operation of his knowledge and strength’,
(Śvet. 6 8), ‘This is the Lord of all’ (Bṛh 4 4 22), ‘Him, the supreme
and great Lord among the lords, Him, the great God among the gods’
(Śvet. 6.7), ‘He has no work or organ, nothing is seen to be equal
or superior to Him’ (Śvet. 6 8), ‘The Lord of matter and soul, the
Lord of the attributes’ (Śvet. 6 16), ‘The One God is hidden in all
beings, all-pervading, and the inner soul of all beings’ (Śvet. 6.11),
‘Kṛṣṇa alone alone is the Supreme Deity. Let one meditate on
Him’ (G.P.T.¹), ‘ “I am the source of all, everything originates from
me” ’ (Gītā 10.8), ‘ “There is nothing else higher than me, O Dhanañ-
jaya” ’ (Gītā 7.7), ‘ “I alone am to be known through all the Vedas” ’
(Gītā 15.15) and so on. (This explains the term “Brahman”.)
(Now, the explanation of the term “jijñāsā”:) Knowledge
with regard to Him (viz. such Brahman) alone, i.e. the desire with
regard to the knowledge of one so desired (viz. Brahman),—this is
the sense. Scripture declares this in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka passage:
‘O, the self is to be seen, to be heard, to be thought, to be meditated
on’ (Bṛh. 2.4.5; 4.5.6), as well as in the Chāndogya passage: ‘But
the Plenty alone is to be enquired into’ (Chānd. 7.23.1). In the
passage: ‘O Maitreyī, the self is to be seen’, the suffix ‘tavya’ has the
sense of ‘fitness’ simply, in accordance with the aphorism ‘The
suffixes “kṛt” and “tṛc” are used in the sense of fitness’ (Pāṇ. 3.3.169;
Ś.D.K. 2822 ²), because the direct vision of Brahman is not something
to be enjoined,³ it being established to be the intimate and inner
means to salvation by the following texts:—‘The knot of the heart
is broken, all doubts are solved and his works perish, when the soul,
¹ P. 205. ² P. 569.
³ That is, the above quotation simply means that the Self (Brahman) is
fit or worthy to be seen, and not that the Self should be seen,—no injunction
here with regard to seeing See p. 9, footnote 4.

[sū. 1. 1. 1.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 9
the Lord ¹ is seen' (Muṇḍ 2.2.8), 'Stainless, he attains a supreme
identity' (Muṇḍ. 3.1 3), 'When he sees his glory, he becomes freed
from grief' (Muṇḍ 3.1.2, Śvet 4.7), ' "Then knowing me in truth,
he forthwith enters into that" ' (Gītā 18.55), and so on Thus, with
a view to having an access to 'seeing',²---which is known from another
text, which consists in a direct vision of the Lord, and which is the
unique means to salvation,---it is 'meditation',³---which is an intimate
and inner means to it (viz. 'seeing'),---that is enjoined here.⁴ By
the term 'knowledge', the reverend Bādarāyaṇa designated, in the
aphorisms, the very same thing (viz. meditation), which is a synonym
for the words 'contemplation', 'knowledge', 'supreme devotion',
'steadfast remembrance', the rule being that tho aphorism and the
text indicating the subject-matter (viz. the Upaniṣad-texts) must
both have the same meaning. Now, here also, the texts denoting
the subject-matter are of a greater weight, as they, as the primary
object, are authoritative by themselves; and hence, the meaning of
the aphorisms is to be interproted in accordance with them alone,
otherwise they cannot stand in a relation of subject-matter and what
treats of the subject-matter.⁵ In Scripture, 'hearing' ⁶ and 'thinking' ⁷
are laid down as moans to 'meditation',⁸ since these two also are
indirect means to the attainment of salvation. Thus, having ascer-
tained that the Vedānta-texts are concerned with demonstrating the
nature, attributes and the rest of the Lord, one approaches a preceptor,
who has directly intuited the nature and the rest of Brahman, the
object to be worshipped demonstrable by the Vedānta-texts, and
learns the meaning of those texts from him who has himself realized

¹ Correct reading 'Tasmin dṛṣṭe parāvare', or when he, who is high and
low, is seen Vide Muṇḍ. 2.2.8, p 31, C.U, p 528
² Śravaṇa. ³ Nididhyāsana.
⁴ That is, in the above text (Bṛh.), the Lord is not enjoined to be seen
but to be meditated on, meditation leading to seeing or direct vision which is
the immediate cause of salvation.
⁵ That is, the Vedānta-sūtras lay down what is contained in the Upaniṣads
Henco tho Vedānta-sūtras are the viṣayin or what treat of the subject-matter,
and the Upaniṣad-texts are the viṣaya, or the subject treated. Now, the viṣayin
and the viṣaya must, evidently, refer to the same thing. And here, the viṣaya
bemg of a greater force, the viṣayin must be understood in accordance with
the viṣaya, or the sūtras are to be understood in the light of the Upaniṣads.
Hence as the latter enjoin meditation, the former must also do so.
⁶ Śravaṇa. ⁷ Manana. ⁸ Nididhyāsana.

[SŪ. 1. 1. 1.
10 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 1.]
that meaning directly. This is 'hearing'.¹ 'Thinking' is a kind of
reflection, by means of arguments which are in conformity with
Scripture, with a view to making the meaning of what has been
'heard' and taught, the object of one's own realization.² 'Meditating'
means a ceaseless contemplation on the object of 'thinking', which
(contemplation) is the unique cause of a direct vision (of the Lord).
Accordingly, this (viz. the above Bṛhadāraṇyaka-text) is an apūrva-
vidhi ³ concerning 'meditation', since (salvation is) absolutely
unobtainable (without meditation).⁴
The explanation of the (above-quoted Chāndogya) text 'The
Plenty', etc., may be seen under the explanation of the aphorism
'The Plenty', etc. (Br. Sū. 1.3.7).
The resulting meaning is that salvation can be obtained by an
individual, eternally fettered, and desiring for salvation, who was,
by chance, looked upon (with favour) by Madhusūdana at the time
of his birth,⁵ who has practised the group of means (to salvation), who
has worshipped the feet of his preceptor, and who has a direct vision
of Brahman, obtained through the hearing of, thinking upon and
meditating on Him, knowable through the Vedānta.
¹ That is, a man first ascertains that the Vedānta-texts demonstrate the
Lord, and then approaches a teacher and learns the meaning of those texts
from him.
² That is, for realizing directly for himself what he has so far accepted on
the authority of his preceptor.
³ An 'apūrva-vidhi' is a vidhi which enjoins something that is absolutely
necessary and indispensable for the production of the desired result, e. g. when
it is enjoined: 'The rice-grains are to be sprinkled over with water', it is meant
that without this sprinkling, the desired result, viz. the saṁskāra of these rice-
grains or making them fit for being used in a sacrifice cannot be attained by any
other means. Hence, here the vidhi with regard to the sprinkling is an 'apūrva-
vidhi'. In the very same manner, the above Bṛhadāraṇyaka text: 'The self
should be seen, be heard, be thought, be meditated on', lays down an 'apūrva-
vidhi' regarding meditation, since without meditation, the desired result, viz.
salvation, cannot be attained by any other means.
For the different kinds of vidhis—viz. apūrva, niyama and pari-saṁkhyā,
see V R M., pp. 41-43.
⁴ This finishes the explanation of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka text 'O friend, the
self should be seen', etc.
⁵ Vide V.R.M., p. 133; also p. 142, where it is said that only one man in
a thousand is looked at with favour by Madhusūdana at the time of his birth,
and that not by chance, but because of the merits accumulated through thousands
of previous births.

[sū. 1. 1. 1.
ADH. 1 ] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 11
Salvation means attaining the nature of the Lord, resulting from
the cessation of the bondage of matter in its causal ¹ and effected
forms,² as known from the scriptural text: ‘Having attained the
form of supreme light, he is completed in his own form” (Chānd.
8 3.4 ; 8.12.2, 3); as well as from the aphorisms ‘Because release is
taught of him who takes his stand upon it’ (Br. Sū. 1.1.7), ‘And
(Scripture) teaches in it the union of this with that’ (Br Sū 1.1.20)
and so on, and from the Smṛti passage, viz : ‘The attainment of the
Lord, characterized by a feeling of unsurpassed joy and happiness,
exclusive and absolute, is supposed to be an antidote (to the disease
of transmigratory existence)’, ‘ “Many people, purified by the penance
of knowledge have come to attain my nature” ’ (Gītā 4.10) and so
on. The word ‘nature’ ³ has been explained by the Lord Himself
in the passage ‘ “Resorting to this knowledge, they have come to have
similarity with me” ’ (Gītā 14.2). This we shall expound more
clearly in the chapter dealing with the fruit.⁴
Then, in answer to the enquiry :—Of what nature is the individual,
desiring salvation ? Of what nature is his bondage ?—the scriptural
truth is being considered now, in order that those who desire for
salvation may have an easy access to Scripture.
Now, there are three kinds of reality, distinguished as the sentient,
the non-sentient and Brahman, because in the aphorisms as well,
a trinity of reals has been mentioned, viz. the object to be enquired
into (i.e. Brahman), the enquirer (i.e. the sentient), and māyā (i.e.
the non-sentient) which consists in the three guṇas and is the original
cause of his (viz. the enquirer's) nescience, as otherwise the very
enquiry will be impossible; and also because of the following scriptural
and Smṛti texts, viz. ‘By knowing the enjoyer, the object enjoyed
and the Mover, everything has been said. This is the three-fold
Brahman’ (Śvet. 1.21). ‘Perishable are all beings, the changeless
is called the Imperishable’ (Gītā 15.16), ‘But the Highest Person is
another, declared to be the supreme self’ (Gītā 15.17) and so on.
Among these, the sentient substance is different from the class
of non-sentient substances; is of the nature of knowledge; possessed
of the attributes of being a knower, being an agent and so on, of the
¹ I.e. pradhāna, the primal matter.
² I.e. the body, an effect of pradhāna.
³ Bhāva. ⁴ Viz. the fourth chapter.

12 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 1. 1. 1.
ADH. 1.]
form of an Ego, has its very nature, existence and activity under the
control of the Lord, is atomic in size, different in every body; and
subject to bondage and release. As has been said: 'The individual
soul is of the nature of knowledge, under the control of the Lord, fit
to be associated with and dissociated from a body, atomic, different
in every body, possessed of the quality of being a knower and that
which they call, endless But through the grace of the Lord, verily
they know it, the form of which is associated with beginningless Māyā ¹
The (ever-) free, the bound and the bound-freed,² (such are the three-
broad classes of souls), and then again it should be known that there
is a multitude of divisions (of these, viz. the ever-free, etc.)'. (D.Ś.
1-2).³ There are scriptural and Smṛti texts, as well as aphorisms to
this effect, viz.: 'Verily, different from this (soul) consisting of the
mind is another internal soul, consisting of intelligence' (Tait. 2.4),
'Just as a lump of salt is without an inside and an outside, and is
entirely a mass of savour simply, so, verily, O! this self is without
an inside or an outside, and is entirely a mass of intelligence simply'
(Bṛh. 4.5.13), 'Here this person becomes self-illuminating' (Bṛh
4 3.9 14), 'O! undecaying, verily, is this self, possessing indestructible-
ness as its attribute' (Bṛh. 4.5.14), 'Now he who knows: "Let me
smell this", which self is he?' 'This person who among the senses
is made of knowledge, who is the light within the heart' (Bṛh. 4.3.7).
'This, verily, is the person of the essence of intelligence who sees,
. . . . hears, tastes, smells, thinks and knows' (Praśna 4 9),⁴
'There is, verily, no cessation of the seeing of the seer, because it
(i.e. the soul) is indestructible; there is, verily, no cessation of the
hearing of the hearer, because it is indestructible; there is, verily, no
cessation of the thinking of the thinker, because it is indestructible;
there is, verily, no cessation of the knowing of the knower, because it
is indestructible' (Bṛh. 4 3.23), '"By whom, O! should the knower
be known?"' (Bṛh 2 4.14, 4.5.15), 'This person simply knows',
'The seer does not see death, nor disease, nor, again, suffering'
¹ That is, the real nature of the soul is distorted through its connection
with māyā or matter and karma, yet individuals can know the real nature of
their selves through the grace of the Lord See V.R.M., pp. 20-21.
² That is, the souls which were bound once, but are freed now
³ For details, see V.R.M.
⁴ Quotation incomplete. The correct quotation is ' . . who sees, touches,
hears, smells, tastes, thinks, knows and acts'. Vide Praśna 4.9, pp. 41-42.

[SŪ. 1. 1. 1.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 13
(Chānd. 7. 26. 2). 'He is the best person, . . not remembering
this appendage of the body' (Chānd. 8.12.3), 'So exactly do the
seer's sixteen parts, going to the Person, on attaining the Person,
merge in (Him)' (Praśna 6.5), '"Just as the one sun manifests the
entire world, so O Bhārata, does the owner of the field (viz. the indivi-
dual soul) manifest the whole field (viz. the body)"' (Gītā 13 34), 'A
knower, for that very reason' (Br. Sū. 2.3.19), 'An agent, on account
of scripture having a sense (Br. Sū. 2.3.32).¹ 'I am thou, verily,
O Deity! he is I, I am Brahman, thus I bow down to the Death of
death', 'He shining alone, everything shines after him; through his
light all this shines' (Kaṭha 2 2.15), 'He alone makes him, whom
he wishes to lead upwards from these worlds, do good deeds. He alone
makes him, whom he wishes to lead downwards from these worlds,
do evil deeds' (Kaus. 3.8), 'Whether He may make him do good or
evil, not even thereby is the Lord in fault', 'The individual soul is
small in power, not independent and insignificant';² 'Atomic,
verily, is this soul. These two, merit and demerit, bind it', 'The
individual soul should be known as the hundredth part of the tip of
a hair, divided a hundredfold, yet it is capable of infinity' (Śvet.
5.9), 'Verily, (the soul) is perceived to be like the tip of the spoke
of a wheel only, and insignificant, through its quality of buddhi, and
through its own attributes' (Śvet. 5.8), '(There is the mention,
of departing, going and returning' (Br. Sū 2.3.19), 'If it be said,
not atomic, because Scripture declares what is not that, (we reply :)
no, because the topic is something else' (Br. Sū. 2.3.21), 'That designa-
tion is on account of having that quality for its essence, as in the
case of the Intelligent soul' (Br. Sū. 2.3.28);³ 'The Eternal
among the eternal, the Conscious among the conscious, the One
among the many, who bestows objects of desire' (Kaṭha 5.13), 'A
part, on account of the designation of a plurality' (Br. Sū. 2.3.42),⁴
"There is indeed another different soul, called the elemental soul,—
¹ These texts and aphorisms set forth the essential nature of the individual
soul, viz. that it is knowledge by nature, a knower, an agent and an enjoyer
² These texts also set forth the essential nature of the soul, viz. its
dependence on the Lord for its activity and its non-difference from Him in that
sense.
³ These texts and sūtras set forth the size of the soul, viz. its atomicity.
⁴ These texts and aphorisms set forth the number of the souls, viz. that
there is a plurality of souls

[SŪ. 1. 1. 1.
14 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 1.]
he who being overcome by the white or dark fruits of works, attains
a good or bad birth. . . . Because of being deluded, he does not
see the Lord, the causer of action and dwelling within the self. He is
borne along and defiled by the properties of matter' (Maitrī. 3.2),¹
'An unborn one, verily, lies by, enjoying. Another unborn one
discards her, who has been enjoyed' (Śvet. 4.15), 'Stainless, he
attains a supreme identity' (Muṇḍ. 3.1 3), 'He does not return
again' (K.R. 2), 'Non-return, on account of scriptural texts' (Br. Sū.
4.4.22)² and so on.
The non-sentient substance is of three kinds, viz. what is derived
from matter, what is not derived from matter and time ³ As has been
said:—'What is derived from matter, what is not derived from matter
and time,—these are held to be the non-sentient. (The second is)
denotable by the term 'māyā', 'pradhāna' and the rest, and there are
distinctions of white and the rest in it, although it is the same'
(D.Ś. 3.). Among these, the substance which is the substratum of the
three guṇas is the prākṛta It is eternal as well as subject to changes
like transformation and so on, as declared by the following scriptural
texts:—'A cow she is white, black and red, without beginning and
end,⁴ the progenitress, and the source of all beings, milking all wishes
for the Lord' (Cūl. 5), 'There is an unborn one red, white and black,
producing many progeny of the same nature' (Śvet. 4.5) and so on;
by the Smṛti passages, viz. : 'This, consisting of the three guṇas, is
the source of the world and is without beginning and end' (V.P.
1.2.21a),⁵ 'Non-sentient, for the sake of another, ever-changing,
consisting of the three guṇas, the field of works—such is said to be the
form of prakṛti' and so on; as well as by the following aphorisms:
'It has a sense, on account of its subordination to Him' (Br. Sū.
1.4.3), 'As in the case of the sacrificial ladle, for want of any specifi-
cation' (Br. Sū. 1.4.8), 'But that which has light for its cause,
because thus, in fact, some read' (Br. Sū. 1.4.9) and so on. The
1 Quotation incorrect. Vide Maitrī., pp. 369, 371. Correct quotation
translated.
2 These texts and aphorisms set forth the liability of the souls to bondage
and release.
3 Prākṛta, aprākṛta and kāla.
4 Correct reading 'anāda-vatī' or without sound. For correct quotation,
vide Cūl. 5, p. 230.
5 P. 14.

[SŪ. 1. 1. 1.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 15
gunas are sattva, rajas and tamas. That very prakṛti, being trans-
formed, through its own guṇas, into the body, the sense-organs, the
mind and intelligence of the individual souls, and through being a
hindrance to salvation, is said to be the cause of the bondage of the
individual soul. It is the cause of the universe, beginning with the
mahat and ending with the cosmic egg, and its products are to be
known as non-permanent.
Next, the aprākṛta is a non-sentient substance, absolutely different
from prakṛti consisting of three guṇas and time, occupies a region
different from the sphere of prakṛti, and is denoted by the terms
‘eternal manifestation’, ‘the region of Viṣṇu’, ‘the supreme void’,
‘the supreme place’, ‘the world of Brahman’ and so on, as declared by
the following scriptural texts and aphorisms:—‘Of the colour of the
sun, beyond darkness’ (Śvet 3.8; Gītā 8.9), ‘He who is its Master
in the supreme void’, ‘That supreme region of Viṣṇu the wise see
always’ (Nṛ Pūr. 5.10; Skanda 15; Mukti 2.77, Vāsu 4), ‘But the
man whose charioteer is intelligence, and the mind, the reins, attains
the end of the road, the supreme place of Viṣṇu’ (Kaṭha 3.9), ‘Having
obtained the soul, I become united with the uncreated world of Brah-
man’ (Chānd. 8.13.1), ‘He does not return again’ (K.R. 2), ‘Non-
return, on account of scriptural texts’ (Br. Sū. 4.4.22) and so on; as
well as by the following verses in the Mahā-bhārata—viz.: ‘Whom
they call prakṛti, the eternal, because He is the original source of all
beings—the Divinity, without beginning and end, the Lord Nārā-
yaṇa, Hari. His supreme place is manifested beyond the abode of
Brahmā. That celestial, luminous place which the gods do not see,
more brilliant than the sun and fire, is the place of Viṣṇu the Great,
and through its own rays, O king! it is difficult to be seen by gods
and demons. The ascetics endowed with penance, infused with aus-
picious deeds, perfected by Yoga, great-souled, and devoid of ignorance
and delusion, go there to Lord Nārāyaṇa, Hari, the adorable. Having
gone there, they do not, O Bhārata, return to this world again. This
place is, O king, eternal and undecaying, for this, O Yudhiṣṭhira, is
always the proof of the Lord. Higher than the seat of Brahmā is
that supreme place of Viṣṇu, which some people who are endowed
with knowledge and intelligence, and want to reach the supreme place,
know to be pure, eternal, luminous and the supreme Brahman. That
place is immensely holy, full of holy families, going where men do not
grieve, do not return, do not feel pain. But those Sāttvatas attain

[sū. 1. 1. 1.
16 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 1.]
here the place of Brahman'. The same thing is found in the Gītā.
Compare, e.g. the statement by the Lord, viz. ‘“‘Through His grace,¹
you shall obtain supreme peace and an eternal place’”’ (Gītā 18.62).
And through the beginningless desire of the Lord, it is manifold in
forms, as the objects of His enjoyment and of His ever-free souls, and
not liable to any alternations of evolution and the rest; since it is
beyond time, in accordance with the text: ‘That manifestation, of
which time, composed of Kalās ² and minutes, is not the cause of
transformation. Your eight-fold attributes and lordship, O Lord, are
natural and supreme’. Next, time is a species of non-sentient sub-
stance, different from both the prākṛta and the aprākṛta, eternal and
all-pervading, in accordance with the scriptural text; ‘Now, eternal,
verily, are the soul, matter and time’; and also because in the text;
‘“‘Existent alone, my dear, was this in the beginning’”’ (Chānd.
6.2.1), the existence of time, denoted by the term ‘beginning’, is
declared; as well as on account of the Smṛti passage:—‘The Lord
Time is beginningless, and has, O Brahmin, no end’ (V.P. 1.2.26a ³).
‘There can be no apprehension in the world which does not involve time.’
It is the special cause of the conventional uses (of such terms) as
‘past’, ‘future’, ‘present’, ‘simultaneous’, ‘lasting’, ‘quick’ and so on;
assisting in the creation and the rest; and the special cause of the con-
ventional use (of different measures of time), beginning with the
paramāṇu and ending with the parārdha.⁴ Since it is well-known
from the Purāṇas, no detailed account is given here. All objects
derived from prakṛti are dependent on time. But although time is
the regulator of everything, it is itself regulated by the Supreme Lord,
in accordance with the text: ‘Who is a knower, the Time of time,
possessor of attributes, omniscient’ (Śvet. 6.2).
The meaning of the word “Brahman” has already been expounded
above. He is Lord Kṛṣṇa, an abode of groups of qualities like Creator-
ship of the world and the rest, to be mentioned hereafter, and is denoted
by the words ‘Supreme Brahman’, ‘Nārāyaṇa’, ‘Vāsudeva’ and so on.
As has been said: ‘Let us meditate on Kṛṣṇa, on Hari, with eyes like
¹ Correct quotation ‘tat-prasādāt’ and not ‘mat-prasādāt’.
² Kalā is a particular division of time. M. W., p. 261.
³ P. 15.
⁴ A paramāṇu is the time taken by the sun to traverse past an atom of
matter and so on. Vide V.R.M., p. 38, for details.

[SŪ. 1. 1. 1.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 17
lotus, on Brahman, supreme and adorable, free by nature from all
faults, and one mass of infinite auspicious qualities, and having the
vyūhas ¹ as His limbs' (D Ś 4).
The mutual differences among these (three) substances, viz the
sentient, the non-sentient and Brahman are taught by the texts
contained respectively in the different chapters (treating of these
three) and indicating the respective peculiarities of their qualities
and nature. The non-difference of the sentient and the non-sentient
is taught in the following texts — '"Existent alone, my dear, was
this in the beginning, one only, without a second"' (Chānd. 6.2.1),
'The self, verily, was this in the beginning, one only' (Ait. 1.1.1),
'Thou art that' (Chānd. 6.8.7; 6.9.8; 6.10.3; 6.11.3, 6.12.31;
6.13.3; 6.14.3; 6.15.3, 6.16.3), 'This soul is Brahman' (Bṛh. 4.4.5),
'All this, verily, is Brahman' (Chānd. 3.14.1), 'I am you, verily,
O reverend Deity', 'Then he knows the self alone "I am Brahman"'.
In this way, the two kinds of texts being both authoritative in
their primary and literal import, the sentient and the non-sentient,
though of different natures (from Brahman), yet are non-different
from Brahman, because they have their existence and activity under
His control,—just as the sense-organs, though of different natures
(from the vital-breath) are yet non-different from the vital-breath,
because they are under its control, as is well-known from the dialogue
between the vital-breath and the sense-organs in the Chāndogya:
'Verily, they are not called speech, eyes, or mind, but called the vital-
breath alone' (Chānd. 5.1.15). Hence the view of the author of the
aphorisms is that Brahman, the object to be enquired into, is both
different and non-different from the sentient and the non-sentient.
For that very reason, there is no necessity for enquiring into the two
realities (viz. the sentient and the non-sentient), and the doctrine that
through the knowledge of one, there is the knowledge of all ² fits in
well. As has been said: 'Hence, all knowledge concerning all objects
is true, since they, as declared by Scripture and Smṛti, have Brahman

¹ The vyūhas are Vāsudeva, Saṁkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha.
Vide V.R.M., pp. 47–49, for details.
² Vide Chānd 6.1 ff The sense is that the sūtras recommend an enquiry
into Brahman alone, and not into the sentient and the non-sentient, not because
these two are unreal, but simply because by enquiring into Brahman, the Cause.
we come to know of the sentient and the non-sentient too, the effects, and
hence no separate enquiry is necessary.
2

[SŪ. 1. 1. 1.
18 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 1.]
for their essence,—this is the view of those who are versed in the Vedas,
and the Trinity of Reals too is established by Scripture and aphorisms'
(D.Ś.7) The following aphorisms may be referred to: 'A part, on
account of the mention of variety, and otherwise, some even read the
status of a fisherman, a knave and so on' (Br. Sū. 2.3.42), 'But on
account of the mention of both, as in the case of a snake and its coil'
(Br. Sū. 3.2.27), 'Or, like the substratum of light, because of being
light' (Br. Sū. 3.2.28) and so on. Detailed explanations may be seen
further on.
Since this aphorism (Br. Sū. 1.1.1), ascertaining the meaning of
Scripture, is of the nature of an introduction, the indispensable factors
(in the study of a particular subject) are also mentioned virtually by
it, with a view to encouraging people with insight to (the study of)
Scripture. These are the person entitled (to the study), the topic,
the relation and the purpose¹ Among those, one who is desirous of
release and possessed of the stated marks² is the person entitled (to
the study of the Vedānta). The topic is the Lord Vāsudeva, the
Highest Person, denoted by the term 'Brahman' and the rest, omnis-
cient, the substratum of natural, inconceivable and infinite attributes
and powers persisting as long as He Himself does, the Controller of
Brahmā, Rudra, Indra, matter, atoms, time, karma, and Nature, who
is absolutely untouched by faults and who is the substratum of a
natural difference—non-difference from the sentient and the non-
sentient. The relation is that between a topic and what treats of the
topic³ The purpose here is salvation, characterized by attaining the
state of the Lord
Here ends the section entitled 'The enquiry' (1).
Comparison of Nimbārka's reading and interpretation with the readings
and interpretations of Śaṁkara, Rāmānuja, Bhāskara, Śrīkaṇṭha
and Baladeva.⁴
Śaṁkara
Interpretation different. According to Nimbārka, the term
"atha" (=then) signifies: 'after the study of the Veda and the Pūrva-
¹ Adhikārin, viṣaya, sambandha, prayojana ² See above, pp. 11–14.
³ See above, p. 9 of the book and footnote 5 there.
⁴ Only the points of differences will be noted.

[SŪ. 1. 1. 1,
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 19
mīmāṁsā'. But according to Śaṁkara, this is not the case. He
points out that the study of the Pūrva-mīmāṁsā is by no means an
essential pre-requisite to the study of Brahman ¹ There is no essential
connection between the enquiry into religious duties and that into
Brahman On the contrary, there is an absolute difference between
them as regards the result and the object of enquiry.² The result
of the former is the attainment of worldly and heavenly enjoyment,
which is something to be accomplished, while the result of the latter
is salvation, which is not something to be accomplished, being eternal
and ever-accomplished This being so, the essential pre-requisite
to the enquiry into Brahman is not the enquiry into religious duties,
but the acquisition of the four qualifications ³,–viz (1) discrimination
between eternal and non-eternal objects, (2) aversion to the enjoyment
of the objects of sense, here or hereafter, (3) possession of self-restraint,
tranquillity and the rest ⁴ and (4) the desire of emancipation.⁵
Rāmānuja
Reading and interpretation same, only much more elaborate.
Rāmānuja points out that the two Mīmāṁsās—viz. the Karma-
mīmāṁsā and the Brahma-mīmāṁsā constitute one connected whole,
the first naturally leading to the second,⁶ and criticises at length, in
this connection, the Śaṁkarite view that the enquiry into Brahman
does not necessarily presuppose the enquiry into religious duties.⁷
Bhāskara
Literal interpretation same, but import different. Bhāskara
develops here his peculiar doctrine of jñāna-karma-samuccaya, or
¹ Ś B. 1.1 1. 'Dharma-jijñāsāyāḥ prāg api adhīta-Vedāntasya Brahma-
jijñāsopapatteḥ', p. 71
² Ś.B. 1 1.1. 'Dharma-brahma-jijñāsayoh phala-jijñāsya-bhedācca' (p. 74).
³ Sādhana-catuṣṭaya.
⁴ I e. śama (control of the internal organ, viz the mind), dama (control of
the external sense-organs), uparati (indifference to worldly pursuits), titikṣā
(endurance of the opposite extremes, like heat and cold, pleasure and pain,
etc.), śraddhā (faith in the scripture and the spiritual teachers), and samādhāna
(deep concentration).
⁵ Ś.B. 1.1 1. 'Nityānitya-vastu-vivekaḥ, ihāmutrārtha-phalabhoga-virāgaḥ,
śama-damādi-sādhana-sampat, mumukṣutvañ ca',
⁶ Śrī. B. 1.1.1. 'Vakṣyati ca Karma-brahma-mīmāṁsayor aikaśāstryam',
etc., p. 2, vol. 1 (Madras ed.).
⁷ Op. cit., pp. 5–13, vol 1.

[sū. 1. 1. 1.
20 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH 1.]
combination of knowledge and work. Thus, according to both
Nimbārka and Bhāskara, the enqury into Brahman should be under-
taken after an enquiry into religious duties, but for different reasons.
According to Nimbārka, the prior study of the Karma-mīmāṁsā
convinces us of the transitory nature of the fruits of karmas, and this
naturally leads us to the study of the Brahma-mīmāṁsā, with a view
to attaining a permanent fruit therefrom, viz salvation. For this
reason, we study first the Pūrva-mīmāṁsā, and then the Uttara-
mīmāṁsā or the Vedānta.
But according to Bhāskara, we enquire into Karmas before
enquiring into Brahman for quite different reasons, viz. (1) We do
not enquire into Karmas first and then into Brahman, because the
former are transitory, the latter not, but we enquire into both Karmas
and Brahman, for the very same reason, viz. because we know that
they both play an equal part in the attainment of salvation. Salvation
can be obtained through a proper combination of knowledge and works,
and unless we first know the nature of the works themselves, we cannot
possibly decide which kinds of works are to be resorted to and combined
with knowledge, and which kinds to be avoided and not to be so com-
bined. It is for this reason, that we first study the Karma-mīmāṁsā,
and then the Brahma-mīmāṁsā, and combine the obligatory works
with knowledge, avoiding those that are undertaken for selfish ends.
(2) Further, the Vedānta deals with various kinds of meditations
on the subordinate parts of sacrifices—, e.g. the meditation on the
udgītha and so on. But unless we are first acquainted with the
nature of those sacrifices themselves, such meditations are not possible.
It is for this reason also that we first study the Karma-mīmāṁsā,
and then the Brahma-mīmāṁsā.¹
Bhāskara also criticises here the Śāṁkarite interpretation of the
term "atha".²
Śrīkaṇṭha
Literal interpretation same, but import different. That is,
Nimbārka and Śrīkaṇṭha both agree that the Brahma-mīmāṁsā is
to be studied after the study of the Karma-mīmāṁsā, but the reason
for this, as given by Śrīkaṇṭha, is different from that given by Nim-
bārka. We have already seen the reason given by Nimbārka. But

¹ Bh. B. 1. 1. 1, p. 2. ² Op. cit., pp. 3–5.

[sū. 1. 1. 1.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 21
according to Śrīkaṇṭha, we must first study religious duties and then
Brahman, because the two stand in a relation of worship (ārādhanā)
and the worshipped (ārādhya),¹ cause (hetu) and effect,² means
(sādhana) and end (sādhya) ³. The proper performance of Karmas
purifies the mind. But unless we first know the nature, etc. of Karmas,
we cannot perform them properly, i.e. choose the right ones (nitya
and naimittika ones) and avoid others (kāmya ones), and unless we
perform karmas properly, our mind is not purified, and unless our
mind is purified, there can be no rise of knowledge in it. It is for this
reason that we should first study the Karma-mīmāṁsā and then the
Brahma-mīmāṁsā.⁴ Like Rāmānuja, Śrīkaṇṭha holds that the
Karma-mīmāṁsā and the Brahma-mīmāṁsā form one and the same
treatise.⁵
Baladeva
Interpretation different. According to Baladeva also, the word
"atha" means 'immediate sequence', but he points out that it cannot
be said that the study of the Karma-mīmāṁsā is an essential pre-
requisite to the study of the Brahma-mīmāṁsā, for it is often found
that even one who knows the Karma-mīmāṁsā by heart, but who is
deprived of the company of the good, has no desire to enquire into
Brahman, while one who does not know the Karma-mīmāṁsā, but
is purified by truthfulness, prayer, etc. and associates with the good,
has a natural inclination to enquire into Brahman. It cannot be
said also that the term "atha" means that the enquiry into Brahman
can be undertaken only after the acquisition of the four-fold qualifica-
tions, viz. discrimination between the eternal and the non-eternal and
the rest, as held by Śaṁkara, for these cannot be acquired unless one
first associates with the good and the holy.⁶
Hence, what the term "atha" means is as follows:—A man who
has properly studied the Veda and has understood its meaning in a
general way, who has faithfully performed the duties incumbent on
1 ŚK B 1. 1. 1, p 34, Part 1.
2 Op. cit., pp. 37, 39, Part 1.
3 Op. cit., pp. 39, 43, Part 1.
4 ŚK.B. 1.1.1, pp. 33, 39, 43, 50, 68, 70, Part 1. Of course Śrīkaṇṭha is
not a Jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vādin like Bhāskara.
5 ŚK.B 1.1.1, p. 33, Part 1.
6 G B 1. 1. 1, pp. 24-25, chap 1.

22 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 1. 1. 2.
ADH. 2.]
his own stage of life, who is truthful and so on, whose mind has become
purified by the performance of duties in a disinterested spirit and who
has come into contact with a knower of truth, should then commence
an enquiry into Brahman, for then he is convinced that the fruits of
works undertaken with selfish ends in view are but transitory, while
Brahman alone is the cause of eternal happiness.¹
Thus, the five pre-requisites to the enquiry into Brahman are:—
(1) Study of the Veda (2) Proper performance of the duties incum-
bent on one's own stage of life. (3) Purification of the mind by such
performance of works in a disinterested spirit. (4) Association with
the good and the holy (5) The consequent acquirement of the faculty
of discriminating between the permanent and the non-permanent,
disgust for non-permanent worldly objects and desire to know the
permanent in details
All the commentators agree in holding that the word "ataḥ"
means 'because the fruits of Karmas are transitory, while the know-
ledge of Brahman alone leads to eternal bliss'.
Adhikarana 2: The section entitled 'The Origin'.
(Sūtra 2)
SŪTRA 2
"(BRAHMAN IS THAT) FROM WHOM (ARISE) THE ORIGIN AND THE
REST OF THIS (WORLD)."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
Now, with regard to the characteristics of Brahman, the author
states the correct conclusion:
That very Lord—the substratum of infinite attributes like
omniscience, etc. and the ruler of Brahmā, Śiva time and the rest,—
from whom arise the origination, subsistence and dissolution "of this",
i.e. of the universe,—endowed with manifold combinations, the
abode of innumerable peculiarities of names and forms and the like;
and the form of which is inconceivable,—is Brahman, the object of
the above statement (viz. Sū. 1.1.1)—this is the meaning of the
characterizing text.
¹ Op. cit., pp. 19-20, chap. 1.

[sū. 1. 1. 2.
ADH. 2 ] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 23
Vedānta-kaustubha
Brahman, called Lord Kṛṣṇa, great in qualities, powers and nature,
has been established in the previous section. Now, with reference to
the enquiry: What are His characteristics?—the same Being (viz.
Brahman) is being demonstrated, as having the qualities of 'being
the agent of the origin and the rest of the world', 'being omniscient',
'being true' and so on.
Here the words "of this" denote the effect, viz. the world; and
the words "from whom" denote the cause. The word 'Brahman'
is to be supplied here from the previous aphorism. And, there being
an universal correlation between the terms 'yat' and 'tat', the term
'tat' too must be supplied here.¹
(Next the compound "janmādi" is explained—) 'That of
which "origin" is the beginning'—is "janmādi", i.e. creation, sub-
sistence, dissolution and salvation. This is a Bahuvrīhi compound
of the tad-guṇa-saṃjñāna type.²
That "from whom",—i.e. the Lord, the Highest Person, the
Lord of all, omniscient, omnipotent, the supreme cause and the ruler
of all,—arise the origination, subsistence, dissolution, and salvation
"of this", i.e. of the world, which is manifested by names and forms
connected with enjoyers (viz. the souls) divided variously; which is the
constant abode of the enjoying of place, time and fruits; and the
composition of which is beyond the grasp of reasoning—is Brahman.
He alone is to be enquired into by those who desire for salvation,—
this is the construction of the words in the aphorism.
¹ Thus the construction of the sūtra is:—'Janmādy asya yataḥ Brahmaṇaḥ
tataḥ'.
² There are two kinds of Bahuvrīhi, viz. tad-guṇa-saṃjñāna and atad-guṇa-
saṃjñāna. In the former case, the compounds, the noun (viśeṣya) has direct
connection with and implies the words compounded (viśeṣaṇas), e.g. when it is said
'Bring the man with long ears' (Lamba-karṇaṃ ānaya), the bringing of the man
implies the bringing of his attribute, viz the ears, as well and the man (viśeṣya)
and his ears (viśeṣaṇas) are directly connected. In the latter case, there is no
such direct connection between the compound and the words compounded, e g
when it is said 'Bring the man who has seen the sea' (Dṛṣṭa-sāgaraṃ ānaya),
the bringing of the man does not imply the bringing of his attribute, viz the sea,
and there is no direct connection between the two.
Now, 'Janmādi' is a Bahuvrīhi of the first kind and hence it includes in
its meaning 'janma' too.

[SŪ. 1. 1. 2.
24 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 2.]
There are scriptural texts to this effect,—beginning:—'Bhrgu,
the son of Varuna approached his father, (with the request) "Sir,
teach me Brahman"' (Tait. 3 1), and continuing:—' "From, whom,
verily, all these beings arise, by whom they, so born, live and to whom
they go forth and enter,—enquire into that, that is Brahman" '
(Tait 3.1), 'Brahman is truth, knowledge and infinite' (Tait. 2.1)
and so on. (The meaning of the first of the above two texts is:—)
'From whom', i.e from Lord Purusottama, 'all these beings', i.e all
objects from the mahat down to a tuft of grass, 'arise',—hereby the
origination (of the world from the Lord) is indicated. 'By whom, they,
so born, live',—hereby the subsistence (of the world in Brahman) is
indicated. 'They enter',—hereby the dissolution (of the world into
the Lord) is shown. 'To whom they go forth',—meaning—'whom
they attain after the destruction of all karmas',—hereby salvation
(of the souls) is indicated. Here 'origination' means the expansion
of the manifold consciousness of the sentient being, due to its connec-
tion with a body and the rest; and 'dissolution' means its entrance
into the Cause (viz Brahman), resulting from the contraction of its
consciousness. This will be made clear under the explanations of the
two aphorisms, viz. 'Dependent on the movable and the immovable'
(Br. Sū. 2.3.16) and so on. The distinction (between the sentient
and the non-sentient) is that the non-sentient is more primary, having
a different form at the beginning of creation ¹
The meaning of the second text, on the other hand, is that
Brahman possesses the attributes of truth, knowledge and infinitude.
Here, the word 'truth' distinguishes the Lord from what is not true,
the word 'knowledge' from the group of the non-sentient, and the
word 'infinite' from the group of the sentient
And, thus it is established that the characteristic mark of Brahman
is that He, being the one non-distinct material and efficient cause of
the universe, is possessed of truth and the rest He is the material
cause ² in the sense of being the manifestor, in a gross form, of His own
¹ That is, the non-sentient is more primary than the sentient in the sense
that it is prior to the sentient in point of time. Right in the beginning of
creation, the individual soul does not exist, in the sense that there is nobody
with which it may be connected, but pradhāna does, though not in the form
of particular non-sentient substances like stones and houses, etc., and the
body comes to be evolved later on. Cf Sāṁkhya theory of evolution.
² Upādānatva.

[SŪ. 1. 1. 2.
ADH 2.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 25
natural powers, denoted by the terms ‘higher’, ‘lower’ and so on,
and reduced to a subtle state, as well as of the effects, existent and
inherent in them respectively. He is the efficient cause ¹ in the sense
of bringing about a union of the sentient beings,—whose attribute of
knowledge is in a state of absolute contraction being under the in-
fluence of the past impressions of their own karmas which are begin-
ningless, and is, thereby, unfit for bringing about the recollection
(in their minds) of the retributive experiences (to be undergone in the
present birth),—with their respective karmas, and the respective
instruments for experiencing them, through manifesting (in them)
knowledge, enabling them to experience the fruits of karmas ²
There is a Smṛti passage too, conformable to the text dealing
with the topic in hand, (i e. the above Taittirīya text, 3.1) in the
Mokṣa-dharma ³ It begins. ‘The Scripture which was mentioned
by Bhṛgu to Bhāradvāja, who asked’ (Mahā. 12.6769b ⁴), and con-
tinues. ‘“He, verily, is the Lord Viṣṇu, celebrated to be infinite,
abiding as the inner Soul of all beings, and difficult to be known by
those who have not obtained the self, who is the creator of the principle
of egoity for the production of all beings, from whom arose the universe,
about whom I have been asked by you here”’ (Mahā 12.6784b–
6786a ⁵).
¹ Nimittatva.
² The Lord is the material cause of the universe in the sense that creation
means the manifestation of His subtle powers of the sentient and the non-
sentient into gross effects That is, during dissolution, the entire universe of
the sentient and the non-sentient merges in the Lord and exists in Him in a
subtle state as His natural powers. Then, in the beginning of a new creation,
the Lord manifests these powers of the sentient and the non-sentient (cit-
śakti and acit-śakti), developing them into grosser effects and producing, thereby,
the universe of names and forms.
And the Lord is the efficient cause of the universe in the sense that He
unites individual souls with their respective karmas, the results of these karmas,
and the instruments for experiencing them—that is, the Lord is the efficient
cause in the sense that He regulates the destinies of individual souls in
accordance with strict justice. During dissolution, the beginningless im-
pressions of past karmas get dimmed and confused; and at the time of a new
creation, the Lord revives these impressions in particular individuals, thereby
making each individual undergo the fruits of his past works Vide V.R M., p. 63.
³ ‘Mokṣa-dharma’ is the name of a section of the twelfth book of the
Mahā-bhārata, from adhyāya 174 to the end.
⁴ P. 604, line 7, vol. 3. ⁵ Op. cit., lines 22–24.

26 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 1. 1. 2.
ADH. 2.]
If it be objected:—'In the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad, a multitude of
causes is spoken of in the passage: 'Time, nature, destiny, accident,
elements and the Person should be known as the Cause' (Śvet. 1.2),
so what authority is there for separating specifically Vāsudeva, the
Highest Person alone as the cause of the world?—(then we reply:)
Listen. A multitude of scriptural and Smṛti passages is our authority
for specifying the cause of the world. Compare the following:—
'He, the One, who governs all these causes, connected with time and
soul' (Śvet. 1.3), 'He who is a knower, the Time of time, possessed
of attributes, omniscient' (Śvet. 6.2), 'Of whom there is neither
a creator, nor a lord' (Śvet. 6.9), 'Verily, Nārāyaṇa was One'
(Mahā. Up. 1.2), 'Then there was Viṣṇu, Hari alone, without parts',
'From Nārāyaṇa is born Brahmā, from Nārāyaṇa is born Rudra'
(Nār. 1), 'From the forehead of this being, wrapt up within himself
in meditation, was born the Person, with three-eyes, trident in hand'
(Mahā. Up. 1.7), 'Kṛṣṇa, the One, the ruler, moving everywhere,
is an object of worship, He who, though one, yet appears as many'.
'"Ka' is the name of Brahman, I am the 'Īśa', i.e. the Lord, of all
beings. We two have sprung up from your body, hence you have
the name 'Keśava'", 'I, Brahmā, the primary Lord of people, am
born from Him, and you have sprung up from me', 'Kṛṣṇa alone is
the source of the worlds, and of their dissolution too', 'Being created
by Kṛṣṇa the universe consisting of the sentient and the non-sentient
has originated'. 'In the Veda, and in Rāmāyaṇa, verily, in the
Bhārata and in the Pañca-rātra, Hari is celebrated everywhere, in
the beginning, in the end, and in the middle' (Hari V. 16232 ¹).
'"I am the origin of the entire world, dissolution similarly"' (Gītā
7.6), '"There is nothing else higher than me, O Dhanañjaya"' (Gītā
7.7), '"I am the source of everything, everything originates from me"'
(Gītā 10.8) and so on. The terms 'Hiraṇyagarbha' and the rest,
which we find sometimes in certain texts concerning the origin and so
on of the world, should be known to be referring to Brahman. Hence
it is established that Lord Kṛṣṇa, the Soul of all, the Lord of all, the
one topic of all the Vedas, is the cause of the world.
Here ends the section entitled 'The Origin' (2).
1 P. 1002, vol 4.