Brahma-Sūtra 3.4.51

English of translation of Brahmasutra 3.4.51 by Roma Bose:

“Similarly, (there is) non-restriction with regard to the fruit, viz. salvation, on account of one having that state being ascertained, on account of one having that state being ascertained.”

Nimbārka’s commentary (Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha):

Likewise, there is “non-restriction with regard to the fruit, viz. salvation”, in accordance with the statement: “For him there is delay so long” (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.14.2^[1]),

Here ends the fourth quarter of the third chapter in the Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha, an interpretation of the Śārīraka-mīmāṃsā texts by the reverend Nimbārka.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

The question as to when a seeker attains knowledge, whether here or hereafter, has been considered above. Now, the question as to when one who has attained knowledge and is a seeker of salvation attains salvation is being considered.

The doubt is as to whether or not there is any universal rule that the fruit of knowledge, viz. salvation, arises only after the knower is freed from, the body in which he has attained knowledge. The prima facie view is as follows:—

As soon as the means are accomplished, the fruit may be attained at that very moment; hence the fruit arises immediately after he is freed from the body.

With regard to it, we reply: “There is non-restriction with regard to the fruit, viz. salvation”. That is, just as there is non-restriction or no universal rule with regard to the rise of knowledge,—viz. in the absence of obstructions, there is the rise of knowledge here; in their presence elsewhere,—“so” there is “non-restriction” with regard to the fruit of knowledge, viz. “salvation”, belonging to one who has attained knowledge. If the works which have begun to bear fruits be absent, then the fruit of knowledge, viz. salvation, belonging to the knower, arises after he is freed from the present body; but if they be present, then after he is freed from still another body,—thus there is no fixed rale here. Why? “On account of one having that state being ascertained,” i.e. because the Chāndogya text: “For him there is delay only so long as I am (i.e, he is) not free, then I shall (i.e. he will)^[2] attain (Brahman)” (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.14.2) speaks of “one having that state”, i.e. one having the state of a knower, or, one by whom knowledge has been obtained. Hence it is established that there is no fixed rule with regard to the fruit, viz. salvation. The repetition of the last words indicates the completion of the chapter.

Here ends the section entitled “The fruit, viz. salvation” (15).

Here ends the fourth quarter of the third chapter in the Vedānta-kaustuba, a commentary on the Śārīraka-mīmāṃsā by the reverend teacher Śrīnivāsa, dwelling under the lotus-feet of the reverend Nimbārka, the founder and the teacher of the sect of the holy Sanatkumāra.

And this third chapter, entitled “The means”, concerned with the discussion about the knowledge of Brahman, is completed.

Comparative views of Śaṅkara:

Interpretation different, viz. “Similarly, (there is) no fixed rule with regard to the fruit, viz. salvation, on account of such a state being ascertained (to be Brahman)”. That is, the result of knowledge is not subject to the same rule as the origin of knowledge. The latter may vary, i.e. take place here or hereafter; but the former is not subject to any variations, but is the same always, since Scripture declares salvation to be Brahman, the unchangeable. ^[3]  

Comparative views of Rāmānuja:

Interpretation same. He points out that just as there is no fixed rule with regard to the rise of the fruit of that kind of meditation which aims at worldly prosperity (considered in the previous sūtra), so there is no fixed rule with regard to the rise of the fruit of that of meditation which aims at salvation.^[4]

Comparative views of Bhāskara:

He interprets the first part, viz. “muktiphalāniyamaḥ” like Nimbārka, the second part, viz. “tadavasthāvdhṛteḥ [tadavasthāv[a?]dhṛteḥ]” like Śaṅkara. Thus, according to him the sūtra means: although there is no fixed rule as to whether salvation is to arise here or hereafter, yet there is no non-fixity in the very nature of salvation, for salvation is nothing but the state of the Highest Lord.^[5]

Comparative views of Śrīkaṇṭha:

Interpretation different, viz. “(There is) no fixed rule that the fruit, viz. salvation (has grades like the fruit of karma) since (salvation) is ascertained to be that condition (viz. the state of Brahman)”, That is, salvation means attaining similarity with the Lord; hence the Lord being the same, salvation does not vary, though there may be gradations in the meditations.^[6]

Résumé:

The fourth quarter of the third chapter contains:

(1) 51 sūtras and 15 adhikaraṇas, according to Nimbārka;
(2) 52 sūtras and 17 adhikaraṇas, according to Śaṅkara;
(3) 51 sūtras and 15 adhikaraṇas, according to Rāmānuja;
(4) 49 sūtras and 16 adhikaraṇas, according to Bhāskara;
(5) 51 sūtras and 17 adhikaraṇas, according to Śrīkaṇṭha;
(6) 52 sūtras and 16 adhikaraṇas, according to Baladeva.

Sūtra 46 in the commentaries of Śaṅkara and Baladeva is not found in Nimbārka’s commentary.

Bhāskara takes sūtras 23 and  24 in Nimbārka’s commentary as forming a single sūtra, and omits sūtra 42.

Brahma-sūtras (Bhāskara’s Commentary) 3.4.49, (written as 3.4.50), p. 217, 

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Quoted by Baladeva.

[2]:

See Vedānta-kaustubha 1.1.7.

[3]:

Brahma-sūtras (Śaṅkara’s commentary) 3.4.51, pp. 896ff.

[4]:

Śrī-bhāṣya (Madras edition) 3.4,51, p. 399, Part 2.

[5]:

Brahma-sūtras (Bhāskara’s Commentary) 3.4.49, (written as 3.4.50), p. 217.

[6]:

Brahma-sūtras (Śrīkaṇṭha’s commentary) 3.4.51, pp. 418-419, Parts 10 and 11.