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

[SŪ. 2. 4. 20.
472 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 8.]
each of the deities tripartite. Why? Having begun thus: "That
divinity thought" (Chānd. 6 3.2), the text goes on to designate,—
through the use of the first person: " 'Let me evolve name and form'"
(Chānd. 6.3.2),—the Lord's resolve to evolve names and forms thus:
" 'Let me make each of them tripartite' " (Chānd. 6.3.3). Then, for
fulfilling this desire, having made each of the deities tripartite prior
to the creation of the egg, having then created the egg, and having
then entered therein, He made names and forms. The scriptural
text about tripartition secondarily implies the process of making each
element five-fold. Thus, as the Supreme Brahman alone, who renders
tripartite, has been designated as the creator of names and forms; and
as the individual soul is incapable of creating names and forms, the
evolution is due to the former alone. The motive for using the
term 'individual soul' (jīvātman) here will be made clear by the
aphorism: "For (Brahman is) without form" (Br. Sū. 3.2.14).
SŪTRA 20
"FLESH AND THE REST ARE OF AN EARTHLY NATURE, IN ACCORD-
ANCE WITH SCRIPTURAL TEXT, AND THE OTHER TOO."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
That in the body there are the evolutes of fire, water and food,
made tripartite, may be ascertained from scriptural text itself, viz.
'From the earth the excreta, flesh and the mind; from water urine,
blood and the vital-breath; from fire the bones, marrow and speech'.¹
Vedānta-kaustubha
With a view to exhibiting the worthlessness of the physical body,
the author is demonstrating that the evolutes of the fire, water and
earth, made tripartite, pertain to the body.
"Flesh and the rest" should be known, "in accordance with
scriptural text", "to be of an earthly nature", i.e. to be arising from,
the earth, made tripartite, and of the form of rice, barley and so on
consumed by the embodied soul. By the phrase: "and so on", the
excreta and the mind are to be understood. The scriptural text is
to the effect: 'The food which is consumed becomes three-fold.
¹ Not quoted by others.

[sū. 2. 4. 21.
ADH. 8.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 473
That which is its grossest portion becomes the excreta, that which is
the medium, the flesh; that which is the finest, the mind’ (Chānd.
6 5 1) Similarly, the three evolutes of each “of the other two also”,
i e. of water and fire, are to be understood. The urine, blood and the
vital-breath,—these are the evolutes of water. The bones, marrow
and speech,—these are the evolutes of fire. Here, the vital-breath
is taken to be an evolute of water, only because it depends on water
for its existence, the vital-breath being really but a special state
of the air itself.¹ Likewise, the designation of the earthly nature
of the mind is only meant for showing that its well-being depends
to the consumption of food ² The evolutes of fire, too, are to be under-
stood in a similar manner.
SŪTRA 21
“BUT ON ACCOUNT OF SPECIALITY, (THERE IS) THAT DESIGNATION,
THAT DESIGNATION.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
“But” they are regarded as different is on the ground of the
preponderance of parts
Here ends the fourth quarter of the second chapter in the Vedānta-
pārijāta-saurabha, the explanation of the Śārīraka-mīmāṁsā
texts by the reverend Nimbārka.
Vedānta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz. What is the ground of distinguishing
among the evolutes of these three elements, made tripartite,—the
author replies:
The term “but” is meant for disposing of the objection. On
account of the preponderance of one element,³ “the designation”, viz.
that this is an evolute of this, this of that and so on, is proper.
¹ Vide Br. Sū. 2.4.9.
² Vide the story of Śvetaketu who failed to remember and recite the Ṛg-verses
and so on when he was fasting, but remembered and answered everything when
he took food. Vide Chānd. 6.8.7.
³ This explains the compound “Vaiśeṣyāt”

474 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 2. 4. 21
ADH. 8.]
The repetition indicates the conclusion of the chapter. Hence it
is established that there is no contradiction whatsoever among the
scriptural texts which are in concordance with regard to Brahman,
Lord Vāsudeva.
Here ends the section entitled “The making of name and
form” (8).
Here ends the fourth quarter of the second chapter of the holy
Vedānta-kaustubha, a commentary on the Śārīraka-mīmāṁsā by the
reverend teacher Śrīnivāsa, dwelling under the lotus-feet of the holy
Nimbārka, the founder and the teacher of the sect of the venerable
Sanatkumāra.
Here ends the second chapter entitled “Non-contradiction”.
Résumé
The fourth quarter of the second chapter contains—
1 21 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Nimbārka;
2. 22 sūtras and 9 adhikaraṇas, according to Śaṁkara;
3. 19 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Rāmānuja;
4. 22 sūtras and 9 adhikaraṇas, according to Bhāskara;
5 19 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Śrīkaṇṭha;
6. 22 sūtras and 15 adhikaraṇas, according to Baladeva.
Śaṁkara, Bhāskara and Baladeva divide sūtra 18 in Nimbārka’s
commentary into two separate sūtras. Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha
take sūtras 2 and 3 in Nimbārka’s commentary as one sūtra, also
sūtras 14 and 15 as one sūtra.
END OF VOLUME I

The provided image appears to be completely blank (solid white) and does not contain any visible text, diagrams, or content to transcribe.

Please provide or re-upload the correct image page.

VOLUME II
THIRD CHAPTER (Adhyāya)
FIRST QUARTER (Pāda)
Adhikarana 1: The section entitled "Obtain-
ing what is different from that". (Sūtras 1-7)
SŪTRA 1
"IN OBTAINING (A BODY) DIFFERENT FROM THAT (THE SOUL)
HASTENS CLOSELY EMBRACED, FROM QUESTION AND DETERMINA-
TION."
The interpretation of the Brahma-sūtras, entitled the Vedānta-
pārijāta-saurabha, composed by the reverend Nimbārka.
The object to be established (viz. Brahman) being definitely
ascertained by means of concordance and non-contradiction,¹ now the
means (sādhanas) are being determined Here with a view to generat-
ing dispassion, the author is, first, exhibiting the soul's going to and
returning from the heaven and the rest. The individual soul, having
the stated marks ² and possessed of the vital-breath, discarding the
present body, goes to another body, as "closely embraced" indeed
by the subtle elements. This is known "from question to determina-
tion", viz.: 'Do you know how in the fifth oblation water comes to
have the speech of man?' (Chānd. 5.3.3 ³) and so on.
THE COMMENTARY ENTITLED VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA, COMPOSED BY
THE REVEREND ŚRĪNIVĀSA.
The object to be resorted to, an ocean of all auspicious attributes,
free by nature from all faults and the object which one should desire
to enquire after—being determined in the two preceding chapters,
¹ The concordance of all the scriptural texts with regard to Brahman has
been demonstrated in the first chapter; and the non-contradiction in the doctrine
of the causality of Brahman, in the second.
² Vide Br. Sū. 2 3 16 ff.
³ Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B.
( 475 )

[SŪ. 3. 1. 1
476 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 1]
now, on an enquiry into the means of attaining Him, the means are
being designated. The first quarter of this first chapter, which explains
the meaning of several Vedānta texts and removes a variety of doubts,
tries to generate a strong feeling of disgust towards mundane existence
by demonstrating the imperfections of the world. The second quarter
tries to generate a yearning for Brahman by demonstrating His
attributes. In the third quarter, discussions about the difference
or non-difference among the meditations on Brahman, as well as the
determination of the combination or non-combination of details
therein, are undertaken. In the fourth quarter, on the other hand,
the doubt being, viz. whether the highest end of men is derived
from knowledge or from action, it is established that the highest end
of man arises from knowledge, while work, which is without any
desire for fruits, is a subsidiary part of knowledge.
To begin. In accordance with the texts: 'Then these vital-
breaths gather round him' (Bṛh. 4.4.1), 'It makes another newer . . .¹
form' (Bṛh. 4.4.4) the individual soul, accompanied by the vital-
breath, the sense-organs and so on, having discarded the prior body,
obtains another body with a view to enjoying the fruits of the works
done by itself. Here a doubt arises, viz. whether it goes closely
embraced by the subtle elements which are the seeds of the future body,
or not so embraced? If the prima facie view be: In accordance
with the view of the Sāṁkhyas, viz.: 'Wherever, in heaven or in hell,
the fruits of work are undergone, there alone the particles of elements,
originating the body which is the abode for undergoing the fruits of
works, are obtained', the soul is accompanied by these—the author
states the correct conclusion.
The individual soul "hastens", i.e. goes, "closely embraced",
i.e. surrounded indeed by the subtle elements, the substratum of the
vital-breath and the rest and the seeds of the future body, "in obtaining
(a body) different from that", i.e. when entering another body. Why?
"On account of question and determination." The question, to
begin with, is contained under the knowledge of five fires,² thus:
'"Do you know how in the fifth oblation water comes to have the
speech of man?"' (Chānd. 5.3.3). "Determination" means answer,
and it, beginning thus: '"In this fire the gods offer reverence. From

¹ "A more auspicious."
² Pañcāgni-vidyā. Vide Chānd. 5.3–5.10.

[sū. 3. 1. 2.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 477
that offering Soma, the king, arises ’ ” (Chānd. 5.4.2) and so on,
establishes that water alone, offered to the heaven-world and so on,
becomes denotable by that term thus ‘ “In the fifth oblation water
comes to have the speech of man” ’ (Chānd 5.9.1). The sense is
this : ‘The gods’, i. e. the vital-breaths which are the associates of the
individual soul, ‘offer’, i. e. throw, ‘reverence’ to the heaven-world,
imagined as fire, and that is transformed into an immortal body,
called ‘Soma, the king’. Those very gods offer that body to the
fire of cloud; and that body, offered thereto, becomes rain. The very
same gods offer that rain to the fire of earth, and that, offered thereto,
assumes the form of food. The very same gods offer that food to the
fire of person; and offered thereto, that food assumes the form of
semen. The very same gods offer that semen to the fire of woman,
and that semen, offered thereto, becomes an embryo and obtains
the name of a person. In this way, water comes to attain the name
of a person. Although acquainted with all this, the king Pravāhaṇa,
having put to Śvetaketu the questions about the goal of workers,
asked this too thus: ‘Do you know how in the fifth oblation water
comes to have the speech of man?’ (Chānd. 5.3.3). Thus asked,
Śvetaketu, approaching his father Gautama, said. ‘I have been asked
thus by the king, I do not know its answer’. Gautama, himself not
knowing it, approached the king and said : ‘Impart that knowledge
to us’ Thereupon the king answered Gautama. From such question
and answer, it is definitely ascertained that the individual soul goes
to another body as closely embraced indeed by the invisible subtle
elements.
SŪTRA 2
“BUT ON ACCOUNT OF (WATER) CONSISTING OF THE THREE
(ELEMENTS), ON ACCOUNT OF PREPONDERANCE.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
Since water consists of the three elements in accordance with
the scriptural text about tripartition,¹ the other two are also to be
understood here. The mention of water only, on the other hand,
fits in on account of its preponderance.
¹ Vide Chānd. 6.3.3. See Br. Sū. 2.4.19–21.

478 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3. 1. 3.
ADH. 1.]
Vedānta-kaustubha
Apprehending the objection, viz., since in the question: ‘ “Do
you know how in the fifth oblation’ ” (Chānd. 5.3 3), and likewise
in the determination (i.e. answer), there is the mention of the term
‘water’, it is known that the soul goes surrounded by water. This
being so, it cannot be said that it goes surrounded by all the subtle
elements,—the author says:
The term “but” is meant for disposing of the objection. Since
water consists of the three elements in accordance with the scriptural
text: ‘ “Let me make each of them tripartite’ ” (Chānd. 6.3.3),
the other two also are understood, viz. food and fire, the rise of the
body from mere water being impossible. Why, then, there is the
mention of water only in the question as well as in the answer?²—
to this the author replies: “On account of preponderance” of
water, it alone has been mentioned. Although it appears that
in the body there is the preponderance of the earth, since it is observed
to be hard, yet on account of there being the preponderance of water
in semen and blood, the statement: “On account of preponderance”
is perfectly justifiable.
COMPARISON
Bhāskara
Reading different, viz. “Ātmakāt tu . . .”.¹
SŪTRA 3
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF THE GOING OF THE SENSE-ORGANS.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
And because of the scriptural declaration of the going of the sense-
organs thus “He going out . . . all the sense-organs go out after him”
(Bṛh. 4.4.2²), the soul goes, closely embraced indeed by the subtle
elements.
Vedānta-kaustubha
In accordance with the scriptural text: ‘He going out the vital-
breath goes out after him. The vital-breath going out, all the sense-
¹ Bh. B. 3 1 2, p. 152. ² Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B

[sū. 3. 1. 4.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 479
organs go out after it’ (Bṛh. 4 4.2); in accordance with the Smṛti
passages · ‘ “It draws the sense-organs of which the mind is the sixth” ’
(Gītā 15 7), ‘ “When the lord obtains a body and when he departs
from it, he goes taking them, as the wind take fragrances from their
abodes” ’ (Gītā 15.8), as well as on account of this going of the sense-
organs like speech and the rest together with the chief (vital-breath),
the soul goes closely embraced indeed by the subtle elements, as
going is not possible on the part of the sense-organs which are
without a substratum,—this is the sense
SŪTRA 4
“IF IT BE OBJECTED: ON ACCOUNT OF THE SCRIPTURAL MENTION
OF THE GOING (OF SPEECH AND THE REST) TO FIRE AND THE REST,
—(WE REPLY:) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF METAPHORICAL NATURE ”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
If it be objected: Because of the scriptural mention of the
“going”, i.e. disappearance, of speech and the rest into fire and so
on thus · ‘When the speech of this dead man goes into fire, his breath
into the air, his eye into the sun’ (Bṛh. 3 2 13 ¹) and so on, they
do not go with the soul,—(we reply ) “No”, “on account of the
metaphorical nature” of the text about fire and the rest, it being
cited together with the text: ‘His body-hairs to the medicinal herbs,
his hairs on the head to the trees’ (Bṛh. 3 2 13 ²).
Vedānta-kaustubha
If it be objected · The going of the sense-organs with the individual
soul is not justifiable, since the text: ‘When the speech of this dead
man goes into fire, his breath into the air, his eye into the sun’
(Bṛh. 3.2 13) mentions the “going”, i e. the disappearance at the
time of the death of the body, of the sense-organs like speech and
the rest, into the deities like fire and so on,—(we reply :) “No”
Why ? “On account of metaphorical nature”. That is, the scriptural
¹ Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B. ² Op. cit.

480 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 3 1. 5
ADH. 1.]
text about the dissolution of speech and the rest into fire and so
on is only figurative, concerned with the passing out of the presiding
deities, while the text: ‘The vital-breath going out’ (Bṛh. 4 4 2)
may be interpreted literally. The metaphorical nature of the text:
‘When the speech of this dead man’ (Bṛh. 3 12 13) is known from
the fact of its being cited together with the text: ‘His body-
hairs to the medicinal herbs, his hairs on the head to the trees’
(Bṛh. 3 12.13) It is never found that the body-hairs and the rest
of a dead man dissolve into the medicinal herbs, etc.
SŪTRA 5
“IF IT BE OBJECTED ON ACCOUNT OF NON-MENTION IN THE FIRST,
(WE REPLY :) IT ALONE,¹ ON ACCOUNT OF FITTING IN ”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
If it be objected: “On account of the non-mention of water
“in the first” fire, how can it become a person in the fifth oblation ?
—(we reply .) “No”, since by the term ‘reverence’ “it alone” is denoted
“on account of the fitting in” of the introduction and the rest (on
this view alone).
Vedānta-kaustubha
If it be objected: In the text ‘In this fire the gods offer
reverence’ (Chānd. 5 4 2) reverence is mentioned as the object to
be offered “in the first” fire, but there is no mention of water,
and hence how can water become a person in the fifth oblation; and
how, in the absence of its mention at first, can the going of the soul
as closely embraced by the subtle elements (i e. waters) be admitted
on the ground of its consisting of the three (elements) ?—
(We reply:) “No”. The term “for” implies the reason, i.e
because “the very same” water, mentioned in the question; ‘“Do
you know how in the fifth oblation water comes to have the speech
of man ? ”’ (Chānd. 5 3.3), is denoted by the word ‘reverence’. Why?
“On account of fitting in”, i e. on account of the fitting in of the
introduction and the conclusion, otherwise the question and the
¹ The word ‘Ap’ (=water) is always plural. Hence the plural form “tāḥ”
has been used in the sūtra.

[sū. 3. 1. 6.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA 481
answer cannot refer to the same topic. Thus, if in the beginning of
the answer, viz. '"In this fire the gods offer reverence"' (Chānd.
5.4.2), given to the question, viz. '"Do you know how in the fifth
oblation water comes to have the speech of a man?"' (Chānd. 5 3 3),
by the term 'reverence' (śraddhā) reverence which is of the form of a
special kind of mental mode be understood, then evidently such
a reverence, a mere mental mode, cannot be referred to in the subse-
quent passage: '"Thus, verily, in the fifth oblation water comes to
have the speech of a man"' (Chānd. 5.9.1).
Thus, there must be (on this view) one kind of question, another
kind of beginning of answer, and another kind of answer. Moreover,
it is impossible for reverence, which is of the form of a mental mode,
to be an object that may be offered; and it is also impossible for the
moon, rain and the rest to have a mental mode as their material
cause. In the text: 'Water indeed produces faith in him for holy
works', water is declared to be the cause of reverence and reverence
is declared to be its effect. Accordingly, the word 'reverence' should
be known to imply water metaphorically.¹ The application of the
word 'reverence' to water is found in Scripture itself. Compare the
passage: 'Reverence, verily, is water Beginning with reverence
alone he performs a sacrifice' (Tait. Sam. 1.6.8.1 ²). The moon
too is declared by Scripture to have reverence for its material cause
in the passage: '"(The gods) offer reverence. From that offering
Soma, the king, arises"' (Chānd. 5.4.2).
SŪTRA 6
'IF IT BE OBJECTED THAT ON ACCOUNT OF NOT BEING MENTIONED,
(WE REPLY) NO, ON ACCOUNT OF THOSE WHO PERFORM SACRIFICES
AND THE REST BEING KNOWN."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
If it be objected that it cannot be said that the individual soul
goes, closely embraced by the subtle elements, because there is no
¹ That is, the cause and the effect being non-different, the effect (reverence)
may stand for the cause (water).
² P. 81, lines 23-24, vol 1.

[SŪ. 3. 1. 6.
482 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 1 ]
mention of the individual soul as there is of water and the rest,—
(we reply:) “no”. Having established that those who perform
sacrifices attain the world of the moon through the path of smoke,
thus: ‘Those who worship through sacrifice, charitable deeds and
alms-giving,—they pass into the smoke’ (Chānd. 5.10.3 ¹), the text
goes on to establish them alone by the word ‘Soma’, thus ‘This is
Soma, the king’ (Chānd. 5 10.4 ²). As pious workers are referred to
in the passage: ‘Soma, the king, arises’ (Chānd. 5 1 2), the above
objection has no force.
Vedānta-kaustubha
If it be objected: water may be denoted by the term ‘person’ in
the fifth oblation through the successive order of reverence, moon,
rain and so on. Other two elements, too, may be understood on
account of water consisting of the three elements. But it cannot be
said that the individual soul goes, closely embraced by the elements
like water and so on. Why? Because in this text there is no mention
of the individual soul as there is of water and the rest,—
We reply: “No”. Why? “On account of those who perform
sacrifices and the rest being known.” Having established that those
who perform sacrifices and so on attain the world of the moon through
the path of smoke thus: ‘Those who worship through sacrifices,
charitable deeds and alms-giving—they pass into the flame’ (Chānd.
5.10.3), the text goes on to denote them alone (viz. those who
perform sacrifices, etc.) by the word ‘Soma, the king’, thus ‘This is
Soma, the king’ (Chānd 5.10.4). This being so, in the text under
discussion too, viz. ‘In this fire the gods offer reverence. From that
offering Soma, the king, arises’ (Chānd. 5.4.2), those who perform
sacrifices and the rest are referred to by the words ‘Soma, the king’.
So there is indeed the mention of the individual soul. The sense is
that it goes, closely embraced by the subtle elements like water and
the rest. There is no fault whatsoever here.
¹ Ś, R, Bh, B.
² Correct quotation: “Eṣa Soma rājā”. Vide Chānd. 5 10.4, p. 261 ; Ś, R,
Bh, Śk, B.

[sū. 3. 1. 7.
ADH. 1.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 483
SŪTRA 7
“OR (THAT DESIGNATION IS) METAPHORICAL, ON ACCOUNT OF
BEING NOT ACQUAINTED WITH THE SOUL, FOR THIS (SCRIPTURE)
SHOWS.
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The mere workers “being not acquainted with the soul”, stand
in a subordinate relation to the gods, and hence the designation of
those who perform sacrifices and the rest as edible, viz. ‘That
is the food of the gods. The gods eat that’ (Chānd 5 10 4 ¹) is
“metaphorical”, in accordance with the scriptural text: ‘He is like
a beast of the gods’ (Brh. 1.4.10 ²).
Vedānta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz. The going of the souls, which perform
sacrifices and the rest, to the world of the moon for undergoing the
fruits of works appears to be inconsistent, because in the text ‘That
is the food of the gods. The gods eat that’ (Chānd. 5.10.4), Soma
is mentioned as the food of the gods. Hence it cannot be said
that the text: ‘Soma, the king, arises’ (Chānd. 5.4.2) refers to the
souls which perform sacrifices and the rest, it being impossible for the
souls to be food,—the author replies:
The term “Or” is meant for disposing of the objection. Since
those who perform sacrifices and the rest are only implements of
enjoyment,—like sons, servants and so on,—to the gods, the statement
that they are food is “metaphorical”, i.e figurative, but not literal,
in conformity with the denial of chewing (i.e. actual eating) on the
part of the gods in the passage: ‘The gods, verily, do not eat, do not
drink, (but) are satisfied by seeing that very nectar’ (Brh 1.4.10).
If it be objected It is unreasonable to hold that one who has
become a god (viz. Soma) too is the implement of another’s enjoyment,
like sons, servants and the rest,—(We reply.) no, “on account of
being not acquainted with the soul”. Even then, it is indeed reason-
able to hold that the mere workers “on account of not being acquainted
with the soul”, are the implements of the enjoyment of those who are
possessed of knowledge.

¹ Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B. ² Op. cit.

484 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 3. 1 8
ADH. 2.]
With a view to dispelling the notion that the view established
by him is based only on what is seen,¹ the author says. “For this
(Scripture) shows”. The scriptural text: ‘He is like a beast of the
gods’ (Bṛh 1.4 10) “shows” that the individual soul, because of
being not acquainted with the Ātman, is an implement of the
enjoyment of gods
Here ends the section entitled “Obtaining what is different from
that” (1).
COMPARISON
Bhāskara
Reading slightly different, viz he substitutes “Ca” for “Vā” ²
Adhikarana 2: The section entitled “The
passing away of works”. (Sūtras 8—11)
SŪTRA 8
“ON THE PASSING AWAY OF WORKS, (THE SOUL RE-DESCENDS AS)
POSSESSED OF THE REMNANTS OF RESULTS, ON ACCOUNT OF WHAT
IS SEEN (I.E. SCRIPTURE) AND SMṚTI, AS (IT) HAD COME AND NOT
THUS.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
On the decay of the works, productive of fruits in the next world,
the soul, possessed of the works, productive of fruits in this world,
re-descends “as (it had) come and not thus”, in accordance with
the scriptural text: ‘Hence those who are of a pleasant conduct here,
the prospect is indeed that they will attain a pleasant birth’ (Chānd.
5.10.7 ³), and in accordance with the Smṛti passage: ‘Men of (different)
castes and stages of life, who are devoted to their own works, having
departed and having undergone the fruits of works, attain, through
the remnant of that, births in distinguished castes and families,
¹ Vide the objection above that the soul is never seen to be food.
² Bh. B 3.1.7, p. 154.
³ Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B.

[sū. 3. 1 8
ADH 2.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 485
endowed with beauty, longevity, scriptural knowledge, wealth,
happiness and intelligence' (G D.S 11.2.9 ¹).
Vedānta-kaustubha
Thus it has been established that the workers, while ascending,
are closely embraced by water and the rest Now, if all Karmas
be exhausted by enjoyment there, the souls cannot evidently attain
again various kinds of bodies,—it is being established now that
while descending, they are possessed of the remnants of the
consequences of their acts
In the text 'Having dwelt there as long as there is a remnant
(of their good works) (Sampāta), then they return again by the way
they came' (Chānd. 5 10.5) and so on, the descent of those who
are in heaven is recorded. Here a doubt arises, viz whether the
soul, which is in heaven, re-descends without any remnants of the
results of its acts, or as possessed of the remnants of results. The
prima facie view is as follows The word "Sampāta" means whereby
one falls down,² i e work Hence in accordance with the text.
'Having dwelt as long as there is sampāta' (Chānd. 5.10 5), the
soul enjoys all the fruits of its works. This being so, after enjoying all
works, the soul re-descends without any remnants of the results of
its acts.
With regard to it, we reply. "On the passing away", i e. on the
decay, through enjoyment, "of works", i.e only of works like sacrifices
and the rest, performed with the attainment of heaven in view, the
individual soul, "possessed of the remnants of consequences", re-
descends "as (it had) come", i.e. as it had gone, or in the way of its
ascent, "and not thus", i e in a different way. By the scripture
text. 'As long as there is sampāta' (Chānd. 5.10.5) and so on, the
group of works, the cause of the attainment of heaven, is denoted.
By the term "remnants of results" ("anuśaya") the works, other
than the above and the causes of the attainment of the body and
the rest, are understood. The sense is that one, who is possessed of
these remnants of results, re-descends by the way of its ascent, the
order of which is: smoke. night, the other (viz, the dark) fortnight,

¹ P. 15, lines 18–20. Slight variations are found.
S, R, Bh.
² Sampataty anena sampātaḥ.

486 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 3. 1. 8
ADH. 2.]
the six months of the northern progress of the sun, the world of fathers,
the ether and the moon,¹ i e. through the order: the moon, the ether,
the air, smoke, mist, cloud and rain ² Why ? "On account of what is
seen and Smṛti." 'What is seen' means Scripture, and it declares
the descent of the soul as possessed of the remnants of its works
thus: 'Then those who are of a pleasant conduct here,—the
prospect is indeed that they will attain a pleasant birth, the birth
of a Brāhmaṇa, or the birth of Kṣatriya, or the birth of a Vaiśya
Now, who are of a stinking conduct here,—the prospect is indeed that
they will attain a stinking birth, the birth of a dog, or the birth of
a pig, or the birth of a Caṇḍāla' ³ (Chānd. 5 10.7). The sense is:
'Those who are of a pleasant conduct', i.e. those who perform good
deeds, when re-descended here from heaven, attain the births of a
Brāhmaṇa and the rest But 'those who are of a stinking conduct',
i e. those who perform contemptible deeds, having returned here from
hell, attain the births of dogs, pigs, and the rest Smṛti too declares
the descent of the soul as possessed of the remnants of its works
thus· 'Men of (different) castes and stages of life, who are devoted
to their own works, having departed and having undergone the fruits
of works, attain, through the remnant of these, births in distinguished
castes and families, endowed with beauty, longevity, scriptural
knowledge, wealth, happiness and intelligence' (G.D.S. 11 29).
COMPARISON
Bhāskara
Reading slightly different, viz. he leaves out the "Ca".⁴
Baladeva
He divides this sūtra into two separate sūtras,—thus· "Kṛtā'tyaye
. . ." and "Yathetam . . . ca" ⁵
¹ Vide Chānd. 5.10.3-4. This is, the order of ascent.
² Vide Chānd. 5.10.5-6. That is, the order of descent is partly similar
("Yathetam") to that of ascent, and partly dissimilar ("anevam ") to it. The two
journeys are alike, as in both cases the soul passes through the moon, the ether
and smoke; but different, as the descending soul passes through the air and does
not pass through the world of fathers and the rest of the stages of ascent. Vide
also Bṛh. 6 2.16—exactly similar account given.
³ An outcaste, born of a Brāhmaṇa mother and a Śūdra father.
⁴ Bh. B 3.1.8, p. 154. ⁵ G.B 3.1.8.

[SŪ. 3. 1. 9.
ADH. 2] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 487
SŪTRA 9
"IF IT BE OBJECTED ON ACCOUNT OF CONDUCT, (WE REPLY.)
NO, (THE TEXT IS) MEANT TO CONNOTE THAT (VIZ WORK) META-
PHORICALLY, SO KĀRṢṆĀJINI THINKS."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
If it be objected that in the phrase "of a pleasant conduct"
(ramaṇīya-caraṇā) (Chānd. 5 10 7), the word 'caraṇa' means conduct.
Our purpose being served therefrom alone, the descent of the soul
as possessed of the remnants of its works is not possible,—(We reply )
"No", since the text about 'Caraṇa' "is meant to connote" work,
"so Kārṣṇājini" thinks
Vedānta-kaustubha
If it be objected : If in the text : 'Those who are of a pleasant
conduct attain a pleasant birth. Those who are of a stinking conduct
attain a stinking birth' (Chānd. 5.10.7), the word 'Caraṇa' means
good and bad deeds, then alone we can assert that the soul descends
as possessed of the remnants of its work for attaining good and bad
births: but that is not the case. Why ? "On account of conduct,"
i.e. on account of behaviour. As the attainment of good and bad
births, is mentioned here the word 'Caraṇa' does not mean work,
but only conduct ; and this latter has been designated in the Veda
by the word 'good conduct' as different indeed from work thus :
'Those works which are irreproachable are to be practised and not
others. Those that are our good should be revered by you and not
others' (Tait. 1 11). Hence to say that the soul re-descends as
possessed of the remnants of its works is inconsistent,—
(We reply :) "No", since the teacher "Kārṣṇājini" thinks that
the scriptural text about 'caraṇa', is "meant to connote" work
"metaphorically", as in the absence of good and bad deeds, the
attainment of good and bad births from mere conduct is impossible.
COMPARISON
Śaṁkara and Bhāskara
Reading different, viz. omit "tad" ¹
¹ Ś.B. 3.1.9, p. 691; Bh. B. 3.1.9, p. 155.

488 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 3. 1 10-11.
ADH. 2.]
SŪTRA 10
"IF IT BE OBJECTED THAT (THERE IS) FUTILITY, (WE REPLY)
NO, BECAUSE OF THE DEPENDENCE ON THAT"
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
If it be objected that in that case there may be "futility of
conduct,—(we reply) "no", "because of the dependence" of works
on conduct.
Vedānta-kaustubha
If it be objected that there may be "futility" of conduct called
'caraṇa', if it be admitted that the scriptural text about 'caraṇa'
is meant for connoting work,—(we reply) "no", "because of the
dependence" of good and bad works on good and bad conduct, the
former being accomplishable by the latter, in accordance with the
Smṛti passage: "The Vedas do not purify one who is devoid of good
conduct' (V. Sm. 6.3 ¹).
SŪTRA 11
"BUT (THE WORD 'CARAṆA' MEANS) NOTHING BUT GOOD AND BAD
WORKS, SO BĀDARI (THINKS)."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
"Good and bad works" are denoted by the word 'caraṇa', "so
Bādari" (holds).
Vedānta-kaustubha
In the phrase: 'of a pleasant conduct' (ramaṇīya-caraṇā) the
word 'caraṇa' means good deed; and in the phrase 'of a stinking
conduct' (kapūya-caraṇā), the word 'caraṇa' means bad deed. Thus
by the term 'caraṇa' good and bad deeds are denoted. The separate
designation has a meaning in accordance with the maxim of a
Brāhmaṇa-mendicant,²—"but this", the teacher "Bādari" holds
¹ P. 197, line 7.
Ś, R, Bh.
² I.e. the Brāhmaṇa-parivrājaka-nyāya, which is the same as the Brāhmaṇa-
Vasiṣṭha-nyāya and the Go-balīvarda-nyāya. When it is said: 'The Brāhmaṇas
should be fed, the mendicants as well', the separate mention of the latter, who are
really included in the former, merely emphasizes their position as a special

[sū. 3. 1. 12
ADH 3 ] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 489
Hence it is established that the soul re-descends as possessed of the
remnants of its works
Here ends the section entitled “The passing away of works” (2)
COMPARISON
Bhāskara
Reading slightly different, viz. he omits the word “iti”.¹
Adhikaraṇa 3: The section entitled “Those who
do not perform sacrifices and the rest”. (Sūtras
12–21)
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (Sūtras 12–16)
SŪTRA 12
“AND (THE ASCENT) OF EVEN THOSE WHO DO NOT PERFORM
SACRIFICES AND THE REST IS DECLARED BY SCRIPTURE.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The going of those who do not perform sacrifices and the rest is
being considered. Here, first, the prima facie view is as follows:
The going of even the wicked, who are attached to what is prohibited
and averse to what is enjoined, “is declared in Scripture” thus
‘Whoever, verily, depart from this world,—they all go to the moon’
(Kauṣ. 1 2²).
Vedānta-kaustubha
Thus, the ascent of those, who perform sacrifices, works of public
utility and so on, to the moon and their descent therefrom have been
considered. Now the question is being considered, viz. whether those
also who do not perform sacrifices and the rest go to the region of
the moon or not.
part of the general body. (Vide L.N., p. 28, Part 1.) In the same way, here
though ‘caraṇa’ (= good and bad work) is really included under the general
term ‘karma’ (= work), yet the former is sometimes spoken of separately to
bring it out specially.
¹ Bh. B. 3.1.11, p. 155.
² Ś, R, Bh, Śk, B.

490 VEDĀNTA PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [sū. 3. 1. 13.
ADH. 3.]
On the doubt, viz. whether those who do not perform sacrifices
and the rest, too, go to the region of the moon or not,—the prima
facie view is as follows. The word "aniṣṭha" (in the sūtra) means
forbidden deeds, and the word "ādi" means the giving up of what
is enjoined. The going of even those who perform what is forbidden
and give up what is enjoined "is declared" by a Kauṣītaki-text, viz.
'Whoever, verily, depart from this world,—they all go to the region
of the moon' (Kauṣ. 1. 2).
PRIMA FACIE VIEW (continued)
SŪTRA 13
"BUT (THERE ARE) ASCENT AND DESCENT OF OTHERS, HAVING
EXPERIENCED (THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR EVIL DEEDS) IN THE
ABODE OF YAMA, SUCH A GOING BEING DECLARED."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
"There are ascent to and descent from" the orb of the moon on
the part of those who do not perform sacrifices and the rest, after
they have experienced sufferings in the abode of Yama, "such a
going being declared" in texts like: ' "He comes under my sway
again and again" ' (Kaṭha. 2.6 ¹), 'The son of Vivasvat, the meeting
of place ² of men' (Ṛg. 10.14. 1 ³) and so on.
Vedānta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz. If both the pious and the impious go to
the moon, then Scripture, concerned with injunctions and prohibitions,
must be futile,—(the prima facie objector) replies:
The term "but" is meant for disposing of the above objection.
That is, the pious as well as the impious do not go to the moon, and
hence the two kinds of scriptural texts are not futile by any means
Then what is the difference between these two cases?—We reply:
"On account of such a going being declared", i.e. because the going
¹ Ś, R., Bh, B.
² Correct reading translated, viz "saṁgama" and not "saṁyamana".
³ P. 270, line 9.
Ś, R., Bh, Sk.