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

[SŪ. 4. 1. 6
ADH. 4.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 789
ideas of the sun and the rest" are to be super-imposed on the udgītha
and so on, on account of the superiority of the sun, etc.
Vedānta-kaustubha
Certain meditations, based on the subsidiary parts, are mentioned
in Scripture thus: "Verily, he who is the sun, let one meditate on him
as the udgītha" (Chānd. 1.3.1) and so on. Here, on the suggestion
that on account of the superiority of the udgītha and the rest,—as
the subordinate parts of sacrificial acts which are means to an end,—
to the sun, etc., which lead to no end, the ideas of the udgītha, etc.,
are to be super-imposed on the sun and so on—the author now states
the correct conclusion.
"The ideas of the sun and the rest," i.e. the views of the sun and
the rest alone, are to be super-imposed "on the subsidiary parts",
i.e. on the subordinate members of sacrificial acts. Why? "On
account of appropriateness," i.e. because the superiority of the sun
and the rest is appropriate. When the udgītha and the rest are
ceremoniously purified by being viewed as the sun, etc., then alone can
the sacrificial acts come to produce results. Hence the superiority of
the sun and the rest stands to reason. So it is established that the
view of the sun, etc., is to be super-imposed on the udgītha and the rest.
Here ends the section entitled "The ideas of the sun and the
rest" (4).
COMPARISON
Śaṁkara
He reads "aṅgeṣu" instead of "aṅge".¹
Baladeva
He too takes this sūtra as forming an adhikaraṇa by itself, but,
as usual, concerned with an entirely different topic, thus: "The ideas
of the sun and the rest (as generating from the eyes of the Lord and
¹ Ś. B. 4.1.6, p. 9, Chap 4

790 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 4. 1. 7.
ADH. 5.]
so on, should be super-imposed) on the limb (of the Lord), on account
of appropriateness". That is, the Lord is to be contemplated on as
producing the sun from His eyes and so on.¹
Adhikarana 5: The section entitled "Sitting".
(Sūtras 7-11)
SŪTRA 7
"SITTING, ON ACCOUNT OF POSSIBILITY."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
One should practise meditation "sitting" only, since meditation
is possible only on the part of one who is sitting.
Vedānta-kaustubha
It has been proved above that meditation, the special cause of a
direct vision of Brahman, is to be repeated more than once. Now,
the problem is being considered as to whether it is to be practised
somehow without following any restrictive rule, or only in a sitting
posture.
On the doubt, viz. whether there is no restrictive rule how medita-
tion is to be practised,—whether in a sitting posture, as lying down,
walking or standing still; or whether there is a restrictive rule that it is
to be practised in a sitting posture alone,—if the prima facie view
be that there being no cause for such a restriction, there is no restric-
tion,—
We reply: "sitting". Why? "On account of possibility,"
i.e. because meditation is possible on the part of a devotee who is
sitting. One who is lying down may fall asleep, while one who is
walking or standing still may have his attention diverted owing to
his effort for holding the body up and so on, and as such no meditation
is possible on their part.
¹ G.B. 4.1.6, p. 9, Chap. 4.

[SŪ. 4. 1. 8-9.
ADH. 5.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 791
SŪTRA 8
“AND ON ACCOUNT OF CONTEMPLATION.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
Meditation being of the form of contemplation, it is to be carried
on in a sitting posture alone.
Vedānta-kaustubha
“And” meditation being of the form of contemplation, as evident
from the text: “Should be meditated on” (Bṛh. 2.4.5, 4.5.6); and
contemplation, consisting of a continuous stream of ideas having the
form of the object contemplated, being possible only on the part of a
contemplating devotee who is sitting, there can be no question as to
the propriety of the above restrictive rule,—this is the sense.
SŪTRA 9
“AND WITH REFERENCE TO IMMOBILITY.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
In the text: “The earth contemplates, as it were” (Chānd.
7.6.1 ¹), the word ‘contemplates’ has been used “with reference to
(its) immobility”. Hence one should practise meditation in a sitting
posture only.
Vedānta-kaustubha
In the scriptural text: “The earth contemplates, as it were. The
heaven contemplates, as it were. Water contemplates, as it were.
The mountains contemplate, as it were” (Chānd. 7.6.1), the term
‘contemplates’ has been used “with reference to the immobility”
of the earth and the rest. On account of this indicatory mark too,
meditation, having the form of contemplation, knowing and so on,
is to be practised in a sitting posture alone.
1 Ś. R. Bh. ŚK. B.

792 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 4. 1. 10-11.
ADH. 5.]
SŪTRA 10
“AND SMRTIS DECLARE ”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
“And the Smṛti texts declare”: “Having placed in a clean
spot” (Gītā 6.11 ¹) and so on.
Vedānta-kaustubha
“And Smṛti texts declare” that contemplation is possible only
on the part of one who is sitting, thus: “Having placed, on a clean
spot, one’s steady seat that is neither very high nor very low and
consists of a cloth, deer-skin, and kuśa-grass, one over the other;
having sat there on the seat, concentrating one’s mind and with the
functions of the mind and sense-organs controlled, let one practise
deep meditation for the purification of his self” (Gītā 6.11) and so on.
―――
SŪTRA 11
“WHERE CONCENTRATION (IS POSSIBLE) THERE, ON ACCOUNT OF
NON-SPECIFICATION.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
“Where” concentration of the mind is possible “there” one
should practise meditation, there being no mention in Scripture of a
special place and the rest over and above this.
Vedānta-kaustubha
“Where,” i.e. in whatever place, time and so on, “concentra-
tion” of the mind is possible, “there” meditation is to be practised,
there being no mention in Scripture of a special place, time and so on.
“In a clean level spot; free from pebbles, fire and sand; favourable to
the mind by reason of sound, pond and so on; but not hurtful to
―――
¹ Op cit

[sū. 4. 1. 12.
ADH. 6.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 793
the eye; full of caves and free from wind,—let one apply one's self
(to meditation)" (Śvet 2.10),—this text of the Śvetāśvataras also
speaks of a place favourable to the concentration of the mind, but
not of any special place and so on, as evident from the concluding
phrase: 'favourable to the mind'. Hence, it is established that
meditation is to be carried on in a sitting posture.
Here ends the section entitled "Sitting" (5).
Adhikaraṇa 6: The section entitled "Until
death". (Sūtra 12)
SŪTRA 12
"UNTIL DEATH, FOR THERE ALSO (IT) IS SEEN."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
Meditation is to be carried on "until death", since "there also"
that "is seen" in the text: "Verily, having stayed thus as long as he
lives" (Chānd. 8.15.1 ¹) and so on.
Vedānta-kaustubha
It has been stated above that the means are to be practised
repeatedly. Now, the duration of meditation is being considered.
On the doubt, viz. whether meditation, denoted by the terms
'contemplation', 'knowing' and so on, is to be finished within a short
time, or is to be continued till the fall of the body,—if it be suggested
that it is to be finished within a short time, that much being sufficient
to satisfy the demands of the scriptural texts which teach repetition
more than one,—
We reply: "Until death". Meditation is to be continued unin-
terruptedly until death. The word "for" states the reason for this:
That there is the continuance of the thought of the object to be medi-
tated on "there also", i.e. during that period (viz. from the beginning
till death), "is seen", i.e. declared by the scriptural text: "Now, verily,
1 R ŚK.

[SŪ. 4. 1. 12.
794 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 6.]
a person consists of purpose. With whatever purpose he departs
from this world, that he becomes on departing to that world” (Śat.
Br. 10 6.3, 1 ¹) The phrase ‘consists of purpose’ means ‘is given
primarily to contemplation’. Similarly, that there is the continuance
of the thought of the object to be meditated on till life lasts is declared
also by the scriptural text: “Verily, having stayed thus as long as he
lives, he attains the world of Brahman” (Chānd. 8.15.1); and in
the Smṛti passage: “ ‘Remembering whatever being he leaves the body
at the end, to that alone he goes, O son of Kuntī, ever permeated by
its nature’ ” (Gītā 8.6). Hence it is established that meditation is to
be continued day after day until death.
Here ends the section entitled “Until death” (6).
COMPARISON
Śaṃkara
Although literally Śaṃkara interprets the sūtras 7–12 like
Nimbārka, yet there is a great difference between them, viz. while
Nimbārka is speaking here of the meditation which leads to salvation,
Śaṃkara especially excludes such a meditation and speaks of that
meditation alone which leads to worldly prosperity. Thus, he points
out that the rule about the posture of meditation holds good only
in the case of that meditation which leads to worldly prosperity
(“abhyudaya-phalopāsanā”), but neither in the case of the meditation
on the subordinate members of sacrifices (“karmāṅgopāsanā”), nor
in the case of the meditation which aims at real knowledge (“samyag
darśanopāsanā”), since the first depends on action, the second on
object.² Similarly, the rule regarding the duration of meditation
does not hold good in the case of the meditation aiming at knowledge,
since a jīvan-mukta, i.e. one who has attained knowledge by medita-
tion and has become freed thereby, need not carry on meditation
further as long as he lives.³
¹ P. 806, lines 14-15.
² Ś.B. 4.1.7, pp. 915-916. “Karmāṅga-sambandhiṣu tāvad upāsaneṣu
karma-tantratvāt na āsanādi-cintā; nāpi samyag-darśane, vastu-tantratvāt
jñānasya”.
³ Op. cit., 4.1.12, p. 918.

[sū. 4. 1. 13.
ADH. 7.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 795
Baladeva
He interprets the phrase: “tatrāpi” to mean ‘even after death’.
That is, the devotee not only practises meditation as long as he lives,
but even after death, i e. even when he is freed, since the Lord is so
beautiful that he is drawn to worshipping Him, though not enjoined
to do so.¹
――――――
Adhikaraṇa 7. The section entitled “On the
attainment of that”. (Sūtra 13)
SŪTRA 13
“ON THE ATTAINMENT OF THAT, (THERE FOLLOW) NON-CLINGING
AND DESTRUCTION OF SUBSEQUENT AND PRIOR SINS ON ACCOUNT
OF THE DESIGNATION OF THAT ”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
There take place “the non-clinging and destruction of subse-
quent and prior sins” on the part of a knower. Why? “On account
of the designation,” viz. “To one who knows thus, evil deeds do not
cling” (Chānd 4.14.3 ²), “All his sins are burnt” (Chānd. 5.24.3 ³).
Vedānta-kaustubha
Thus, for indicating clearly that if one wishes to have the
obstructions removed in order that he may directly attain the
place of the Highest Person, one should resort to the means with
the greatest care, a discussion about the repetition of the means
and so on was undertaken in the chapter dealing with the end.
Now, the author shows how on the rise of knowledge all obstructions
cease immediately.
The text: “Just as water does not cling to the lotus-leaf, so no
evil deeds cling to one who knows thus” (Chānd. 4.14.3), declares
――――――
¹ G.B. 4 1.12, p. 15, Chap. 4. “Mokṣa-paryyantam upāsanaṁ kāryyam iti.
Tatrāpi mokṣe ca.”
² Ś. R. Bh. ŚK. B. ³ Op. cit.
21

796 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 4. 1. 13.
ADH. 7.]
that there is the non-clinging of the subsequent sins on the part of a
knower Again, the texts: "Just as a tuft of the Iṣīkā-reed placed
on a fire is burnt up, so all his sins are burnt up" (Chānd 5.24.3),
"And all his works decay when he who is high and low is seen"
(Muṇḍ. 2.2 8), declare that all his prior sins are destroyed. Here the
doubt is as to whether the non-clinging and destruction respectively,
of the subsequent and prior sins on the part of one who has attained
knowledge are justifiable or not. If it be suggested. In accordance
with the declaration: "A work done, good or bad, must necessarily
be experienced" (Br V.P. 26.70 ¹) and so on, the consequences of
the work done must necessarily be undergone. Hence the non-clinging
and destruction of subsequent and prior sins are not justifiable; the
scriptural texts about such non-clinging and destruction simply
refer to the cessation of works the consequences of which have already
been undergone,—
We reply: "On the attainment" of knowledge, otherwise called
'steady remembrance', 'highest devotion' and so on, through the
maturity of such a meditation, "the non-clinging and destruction of
subsequent and prior sins" are justifiable. Why? "On account
of the designation of that," i.e on account of the designation of the
non-clinging of the subsequent sins in the text: "To one who knows
thus, evil deeds do not cling" (Chānd. 4.14.13),—this designation
cannot be taken to be referring to the non-clinging of works the
consequences of which have already been undergone, since in their
case there being no question of clinging at all, there is no sense in the
denial;—and on account of the designation of the destruction of prior
sins in the passages: "So all his sins are burnt up" (Chānd. 5 24.3),
"And all his sins decay when he who is high and low is seen" (Muṇḍ.
2.2.8). This designation too cannot be taken to be referring to works
the consequences of which have already been undergone since the
destruction of such works holds good equally in the case of a non-
knower; and since the declaration: "A work which is not experi-
enced does not decay even in hundreds of millions of ages. It must be
experienced necessarily" (Br. V.P. 26.70) and so on, refers to the
case of non-knowers, and to works which have begun to produce
consequences. Hence it is established that the non-clinging and

¹ P. 119, col. 2, line 12.
21B

{SŪ. 4. 1. 14.
ADH. 8] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 797
destruction of a knower’s subsequent and prior sins, sprung up from
thoughtlessness, are indeed justifiable.
Here ends the section entitled “On the attainment of that” (7).
Adhikaraṇa 8: The section entitled “The
other”. (Sūtra 14)
SŪTRA 14
“OF THE OTHER TOO, (THERE IS) NON-CLINGING THUS, BUT ON THE
FALL.”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
Since the good deeds also, aiming at selfish ends, are incompatible
with salvation, just as the sins are, there result the non-clinging of
the subsequent and the destruction of the prior (in their case too).
Immediately after the non-clinging and destruction of the subsequent
and prior (merits and sins), salvation arises at once “on the fall” of
the body.
Vedānta-kaustubha
In the immediately adjoining sūtra, it has been said that there
is the cessation of the knower’s evil deeds, sprung up from thought-
lessness. Now the author points out that there is the cessation of his
good deeds no less.
If it be suggested: subsequent and prior sins being harmful,
let there be the non-clinging and destruction, respectively, of subse-
quent and prior sins, through knowledge. But such non-clinging
and destruction of good deeds through knowledge are not justifiable,
since they being enjoined in Scripture are not incompatible with
knowledge,—the author extends the above reasoning here too thus:
“Of the other too”. That is, as in the case of sins, there must be non-
clinging and destruction, through knowledge, of what is other than
sins, i.e. of the good deeds too which aim at selfish ends. Why?
On account of the designation of that, i.e. just as the evil deeds are
designated as rejectible by one desirous of salvation, since they are
incompatible with salvation, so the good deeds, too, are likewise

798 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ 4 1 15.
ADH. 9.]
designated,—on account of that. And there is the designation of both
good and evil deeds as equally rejectible, both being equally incom-
patible with salvation. The following texts refer both to good and
evil deeds: "All sins return therefrom" (Chānd. 8.4.1). "He
shakes off good and evil deeds" (Kauṣ. 1.4) "Verily, he crosses both
these" (Bṛh. 4.4.22) Thus, when there are no more good and evil
deeds, which are incompatible with salvation, salvation arises at
once "on the fall", i.e. on the fall of the body. The word "but"
(in the sūtra) implies emphasis Hence it is established that the non-
clinging and destruction of the good deeds, too, are justifiable.
Here ends the section entitled "The other" (8)
COMPARISON
Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha
Interpretation of the phrase: "pāte tu" is different, viz. 'There
is the destruction of the good deeds, which facilitate knowledge, on
the fall of the body and not here and now.¹
Adhikaraṇa 9: The section entitled "The works
the effects of which have not yet begun".
(Sūtra 15)
SŪTRA 15
"BUT ONLY THOSE FORMER (WORKS) THE EFFECTS OF WHICH HAVE
NOT YET BEGUN, BECAUSE TILL THAT."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
On the attainment of knowledge, "the former" good and evil
deeds, the effects of which have not yet begun, alone perish. Why?
Because in the scriptural text: "For him there is delay so long I am
¹ Śrī. B. 4.1.14, p. 416, Part 2; ŚK. B. 4.1.14, pp. 441-442, Parts 10 and 11.

[SŪ. 4. 1. 15.
ADH. 9.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 799
(=he is) free; then I shall ¹ (=he will) attain Brahman" (Chānd.
6 14.2 ²), it is declared that salvation does not arise till there is the
fall of the body.
Vedānta-kaustubha
It has been established that both good and evil deeds are de-
stroyed through knowledge. Now, to the objection, viz. Let there be
the destruction of those good and evil deeds, too, the effects of which
have already begun,—the author replies here.
On the doubt, viz. whether through knowledge there is the de-
struction of all good and evil deeds, i e. equally of those the effects of
which have already begun and those the effects of which have not
yet begun, or of those alone the effects of which have not begun,—
if it be suggested: since no specification is mentioned in scriptural
texts like: "And his works perish when he who is high and low is
seen" (Mund. 2 2.8), "All sins are burnt up" (Chānd. 5.24.3), there
is the destruction of all without distinction,—
The author states the correct conclusion. "Only those the effects
of which have not begun yet". The "former" good and bad deeds
the effects of which have not begun yet alone perish through know-
ledge, but not those the effects of which have already begun. Why?
"Because till that," i e. because in the scriptural text: "For him there
is delay only so long I am (=he is) not free; then I shall (=he will)
attain (Brahman)" (Chānd 6.14.2), it is declared that there is delay
for the knower till the fall of the body. This being so, the non-specific
texts are to be interpreted in the light of the specific text. Hence
it is established that through knowledge there is no destruction of
those good and evil deeds the effects of which have already begun.
Here ends the section entitled "The works the effects of which
have not yet begun" (9).
¹ See V K. 1.1.7.
² Ś, R, Bh, ŚK, B.

800 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA [SŪ. 4. 1. 16.
ADH. 10.]
Adhikarana 10: The section entitled "Agni-
hotra". (Sūtras 16-18)
SŪTRA 16
"BUT THE AGNI-HOTRA AND THE REST (ARE TO BE PERFORMED)
WITH A VIEW TO THAT EFFECT (VIZ. KNOWLEDGE) ALONE, ON
ACCOUNT OF THE OBSERVATION OF THAT."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
It is not to be apprehended that through knowledge there results
the cessation of the duties incumbent on one's own stage of life, such
as, Agni-hotra ¹, charity, austerity and so on. They are to be per-
formed indeed, as they foster knowledge The scriptural text about
sacrifice and so on, prove them to be productive of knowledge
Vedānta-kaustubha
It has been stated that through the might of knowledge, there
results the non-clinging of the other too, i.e. of the good deeds too.
Similarly, there results the non-clinging of the daily and occasional
duties incumbent on one's own stage of life Hence they are not to
be performed,—this objection the author disposes of now.
On the doubt, viz. whether the daily and occasional duties like
the Agni-hotra and the rest are to be performed by a knower or not,—
if it be suggested: Through knowledge there result the non-clinging
and destruction of good and evil deeds. What is the use of performing
them, seeing that there results the cessation of the Agni-hotra and the
rest too, they too being good deeds equally?—
We reply: The word "but" clearly indicates the speciality of the
Agni-hotra and the rest. "The Agni-hotra and the rest," i.e. the daily
and occasional duties incumbent on one's own stage of life, are to be
performed by a knower "with a view to that effect alone",
viz. the production of knowledge alone. Why? "On account
of the observation of that," i.e. because the text: "Him, the Brāh-
maṇas desire to know,² by sacrifice, by charity, by austerity, by
¹ Oblation to fire.
² "By the recitation of the Veda."

[SŪ. 4. 1. 17.
ADH. 10.] VEDĀNTA-KAÚSTUBHA 801
fasting” (Bṛh. 4.4.22) declares the duties incumbent on one’s own stage
of life, such as, Agni-hotra and the rest, to be means to knowledge.
Knowledge is to be acquired so long as life lasts. Hence the duties
incumbent on the stages of life are to be performed so long as life
lasts.
COMPARISON
Śaṁkara and Bhāskara
Interpretation of the phrase “tat-kāryyāya” different, viz. “for
the sake of that effect (viz salvation)”. That is, just as knowledge
produces salvation, so does works like Agni-hotra and the rest.¹ Of
course, Śaṁkara points out that works are indirect means to salvation,
i.e produce knowledge which produces salvation; while according
to Bhāskara, it is a direct means.
SŪTRA 17
“FOR (THERE ARE) ALSO (GOOD AND BAD WORKS) OTHER THAN
THESE (TO WHICH REFER THE TEXT) OF SOME (ABOUT THE DIVISION)
OF BOTH (MERIT AND DEMERIT) ”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
“Other than” these works the effects of which have been pro-
duced, viz. those that are productive of knowledge, there are “also”
works the effects of which have not been produced. To these refer
the text of “some”, designating the division “of both” merit and
demerit, viz. “The friends, the good deeds, the enemies, the bad
deeds”.²
Vedānta-kaustubha
To the objection, viz. To what then does the following text
refer to: “His sons inherit his property, his friends the good deeds, his
enemies the bad deeds”?—the author replies:
1 Ś.B. 4.1.16, pp. 923-24, Bh. B. 4.1.16, p. 225.
2 Ś, R, Bh, ŚK, B.

[SŪ. 4. 1. 17.
802 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 10.]
"Other than those" works which are productive of knowledge,
there are "also" good and bad works the results of which have been
obstructed by some works of greater strength. "As" some works
are undertaken for the sake of selfish ends and what is prohibited is
performed through thoughtlessness,¹ so the text "of some", desig-
nating the division "of both" merit and demerit, refer to these above
works only. The declaration of non-clinging and destruction, viz
"The friends the good deeds, the enemies the bad deeds" should be
known to be referring to those works
COMPARISON
Śaṃkara and Bhāskara
They interpret the word "ubhayayoḥ" differently, viz. '(Thus
is the view) of both (Jaimini and Bādarāyaṇa)' ²
Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha
According to them the word "ubhayayoḥ" means '(There are
works) of both (kind, i.e. either prior or subsequent to the rise of
knowledge, which are obstructed from producing results)'.³
Baladeva
He begins a new adhikarana here (three sūtras), concerned with
the case of some Nirapekṣa devotees. Hence the sūtra: "Because
other than this (viz. the Chāndogya text) (there is) another (text of
Śāṭyāyanins) also, (there is the destruction) of both (good and evil
prārabdha-karmas in the case of some nirapekṣa devotees)". That
is, the Chāndogya text (Chānd. 6.14.2) declares that a man has to
wait until those works the effects of which have already begun to
operate are exhausted. But this rule does not hold good in
the case of some nirapekṣa devotees, where, as declared by the text
of the Śāṭyāyanins, even their prārabdha good and evil deeds go to
their friends and foes respectively. Thus, some nirapekṣa devotees
1 All these works are other than those which produce knowledge.
2 Ś.B. 4.1.17, p. 925; Bh. B. 4.1.7, p. 226.
3 Śrī. B. 4 1.17, p. 418, Part 2; ŚK. B. 4.1.17, p. 448, Parts 10 and 11.

[sū. 4. 1 18.
ADH. 10.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 803
become free at once, without having to wait for the full exhaustion
of their prārabdha-karmas ¹
SŪTRA 18
“BECAUSE ‘WHAT ALONE WITH KNOWLEDGE’—SO (SCRIPTURE
DECLARES).”
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
For, with a view to indicating the strength and weakness of works,
it is said, “What alone one does with knowledge” (Chānd. 1.1.10 ²).
Vedānta-kaustubha
The author here refers again to the greater potency of some
works and the lesser potency of others, mentioned under the aphorism
“For (there is) a separate fruit, (viz.) non-obstruction” (Br. Sū
3.3.41).
The text: “What alone one does with knowledge that alone is
more potent” (Chānd. 1 1 10) designates the greater potency of some
works and the lesser potency of others. Among these, works of greater
strength first begin to produce their own fruits. Hence, when such
works of greater strength are about to produce their fruits, certain
other good and bad deeds of lesser strength, performed with a view
to attaining certain ends, remain without producing those results,
like a weak cow kept off from water, grass and so on by a stronger
one. When the knower becomes free immediately after the decay
of those works the effects of which have already begun, those above
works go to his friends and foes respectively,—this is the sense.
Hence it is established that with a view to the rise of knowledge, the
duties incumbent on his own stage of life, such as, Agni-hotra and the
rest, are to be performed by a house-holder; and works like aus-
terity, muttering of prayers and so on by one who is bound by
chastity.
Here ends the section entitled “Agni-hotra” (10).
¹ G.B. 4.1.17, pp 26–28, Chap. 4. ² Ś. R. SK. B.

[SŪ. 4. 1. 19.
804 VEDĀNTA-PĀRIJĀTA-SAURABHA ADH. 11.]
COMPARISON
Śaṃkara
He takes this sūtra as forming an adhikarana by itself, concerned
with the question of the two kinds of Agni-hotra, with or without
knowledge, and points out that the former, of course, has a greater
capability of producing knowledge, yet the latter too is not absolutely
ineffective, but helps the rise of knowledge.¹
Bhāskara
He omits this sūtra, pointing out that it is merely superfluous.²
Baladeva
He continues here the topic of the immediate destruction of the
prārabdha-karmas of some nirapekṣa devotees, and points out that
since the celebrated Chāndogya text (Chānd. 1 1.10) shows the great
potency of vidyā, it is possible that through the grace of vidyā even
the prārabdha-karmas may be destroyed at once.³
Adhikaraṇa 11: The section entitled "The
destruction of others". (Sūtra 19)
SŪTRA 19
"BUT HAVING DESTROYED THE OTHER TWO BY ENJOYMENT,
THEN (HE) ATTAINS (BRAHMAN) "
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
"But having destroyed" the good and evil deeds, the effects of
which have already begun, "by enjoyment", he "attains" Brahman.
Here ends the first quarter of the fourth chapter in the Vedānta-
pārijāta-saurabha, an interpretation of the Śārīraka-mīmāṃsā
texts by the reverend Nimbārka.
¹ Ś B. 4.1.18, pp. 925-926.
² Bh. B. 4.1.17, p. 226.
³ G.B. 4.1.18, p. 29. Chap. 4.

[sū. 4. 1. 19.
ADH. 11.] VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA 805
Vedānta-kaustubha
It has been established at the end of the third chapter that as the
end, viz. knowledge, depends upon the cessation of the obstructions,
viz. the works the effects of which have already begun, so there is no
fixed rule with regard to the time when knowledge is going to arise
actually.¹ But here, it has been said that knowledge arises on the
fall of the body.² Now, anticipating the enquiry, viz. Whence arises
the cessation of the two kinds of works the effects of which have
already begun? On the fall of which body is there salvation?---
the author replies:---
On the doubt, viz. Whether the good and evil works---the effects
of which have already begun, other than the good and evil works the
effects of which have not yet begun, which are the objects of the
non-clinging and destruction, and are mentioned under the aphorisms:
"On the attainment of that, (there are) non-clinging and destruction,
of the subsequent and prior sins, on account of the designation of that"
(Br. Sū. 4.1.13). "Of the other too (there is) non-clinging thus, but
on fall" (Br. Sū. 4.1.14),---are to be experienced in the body in which
knowledge originates, or to be experienced in another body,---if it
be suggested: Since another body is not desired, they are to be
experienced in the body in which knowledge originates; on its fall,
salvation arises,---
We reply: The word "but" is meant for disposing of the objection.
"Having destroyed the other two," i.e. good and evil deeds the effects
of which have already begun, "by enjoyment", whether in the body
in which knowledge originates or in another body, one "attains"
Brahman, in accordance with the text: "What is not experienced
does not perish" (Br. V.P. 26 70). Hereby, the means to the removal
of the obstruction to knowledge, exhibited under the aphorism;
"In this world, if obstruction be not present" (Br. Sū. 3.4.51), too is
explained. Hence, it is established that there is salvation when on
the decay of the works,---the effects of which have already begun,---by
enjoyment, there is the fall of the body at the completion of
enjoyment.
Here ends the section entitled "The destruction of others" (11).

¹ Vide V.P.S. 3.4.51.
² Vide V.P.S. 4.1.14.

806 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA [SŪ. 4. 1. 19. ADH. 11.]
Here ends the first quarter of the fourth chapter in the holy
Vedānta-kaustubha, a commentary on the Śārīraka-mīmāṃsā texts
by the reverend teacher Śrīnivāsa, dwelling under the lotus-feet of
the reverend Nimbārka, the founder and teacher of the holy
Sanatkumāra
COMPARISON
Baladeva
Here he ends the discussion about the Nirapekṣa devotee, thus:
"Having given up the other two (viz. the gross and the subtle bodies),
(the Nirapekṣa devotee) then attains (i.e. joins) in the enjoyment
(of the Lord)".¹
Résumé
The first quarter of the fourth chapter contains:
(1) 19 sūtras and 11 adhikaraṇas, according to Nimbārka;
(2) 19 sūtras and 14 adhikaraṇas, according to Śaṃkara,
(3) 19 sūtras and 11 adhikaraṇas, according to Rāmānuja;
(4) 18 sūtras and 13 adhikaraṇas, according to Bhāskara,
(5) 19 sūtras and 13 adhikaraṇas, according to Śrīkaṇṭha,
(6) 19 sūtras and 13 adhikaraṇas, according to Baladeva.
Bhāskara omits sūtra 18 in Nimbārka's commentary.
1 G.B. 4.1.19, pp. 29-30, Chap. 4.

FOURTH CHAPTER (Adhyāya)
SECOND QUARTER (Pada)
Adhikaraṇa 1: The section entitled "Speech"
(Sūtras 1 - 2)
SŪTRA 1
"SPEECH IN THE MIND, ON ACCOUNT OF OBSERVATION AND ON
ACCOUNT OF SCRIPTURAL TEXT."
Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha
The text: "Speech merges into the mind" (Chānd. 6 8.6 ¹)
denotes the merging in, i e. the connection of the organ of speech
with, the mind,—since it is found that the function of the mind con-
tinues even when the organ of speech has ceased to function; "also
on account of the scriptural text": "Speech merges in the mind"
(Chānd. 6.8.6).
Vedānta-kaustubha
It has been said at the end of the previous quarter that the
knower attains Brahman. Now, the knower's departure from the
body for attaining Brahman and similar problems are being consi-
dered. First, the author determines the mode of departure which is
common to a knower and a non-knower.
The doubt is as to whether in the text: "Of this person, my dear,
who has departed, speech merges into the mind, the mind in the vital-
breath, the vital-breath in fire, fire in the Highest Divinity" (Chānd.
6.8.6), the merging of the function of speech in the mind is denoted
or of speech alone having the function. If it be suggested that the
functions of speech and so on are directed to their respective objects
by the mind. Hence the merging of the function of speech in the
mind stands to reason—
We reply: Speech alone having the function merges in the mind.
Why? "On account of observation," i.e. the function of the mind
¹ Ś, R, Bh, ŚK, B.
( 807 )

[SŪ. 4. 2. 1.
808 VEDĀNTA-KAUSTUBHA ADH. 1.]
is observed to continue even when the organ of speech has ceased to
function. Apprehending the objection that this is possible even if
there be the merging of only the function of speech, the author states
the main reason: "And on account of scriptural text", i.e. on account
of the text: "Speech merges in the mind" (Chand. 6.8.6). There is
no text to the effect that the function of speech merges in the mind.
'Merging' is to be understood here as denoting 'connection' and
not 'absorption', since the absorption of speech into the mind, which is
not its material cause, is impossible,¹ since in order that the non-
knower ² may obtain another body, it is essential that speech should
continue, and since it will be stated further on ³ that speech and the
rest are absorbed in the Highest Soul alone.
COMPARISON
Śaṃkara and Bhāskara
Interpretation different. In direct opposition to Nimbārka, who
holds that the organ of speech is connected with the mind, they point
out that the function of speech and not the organ of speech merges
in the mind.⁴
Further, the most fundamental point of difference between
Nimbārka and Śaṃkara is that Śaṃkara all throughout makes a dis-
tinction between the higher knower and the lower knower, i.e. one
who knows Brahman as identical with himself, and one who meditates
on Brahman as different from himself. Hence, while according to
Śaṃkara, this quarter deals with the path of gods belonging only to
the lower knowers or worshippers of the qualified Brahman,⁵ according
to Nimbārka, this is the highest path belonging to all knowers.

¹ I.e. a thing is absorbed in its material cause alone, a gold ear-ring into
gold.
² This mode of departure is common to knowers and non-knowers, as
pointed out above, and a non-knower is born again.
³ Vide Br. Sū. 4.2 14.
⁴ Ś.B. 4.2.1, pp. 929-930; Bh. B. 4.2.1, p. 227.
⁵ While the higher knowers do not need to travel through any path to
attain Brahman, but attain Brahman then and there as soon as real knowledge
dawn. Vide Ś.B. 4.3.14. As we shall see, Śaṃkara takes the entire pāda as
referring to lower knowers, except sūtras 12–16 (12–15 according to Nimbārka's
numbering).