Sūtra 1.3.27

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration, Word-for-word and English translation of Sūtra 1.3.27:

विरोधः कर्मणीति चेन् नानेक-प्रतिपत्तेर् दर्शनात्

virodhaḥ karmaṇīti cen nāneka-pratipatter darśanāt

virodhaḥ – contradiction; karmaṇi – in activities; iti – thus; cet – if; na – not; aneka – many; pratipatteḥ – because of the acceptance; darśanāt – because of seeing.

“[If it is objected that this idea] is refuted by the activities of the devas, then I say no, because it is seen [that the devas have the power to manifest] many [forms simultaneously.]” (27)

Sūtra pagination:
Adhyāya 1:
  The subject matter of all Vedic literatures is Brahman;
Pāda 3:
  Scriptural Texts that may Seem to Describe the Jīva or some other Topic, but in Truth Describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead.;
Adhikaraṇa 7:
  The Devas Can Meditate on the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa’s commentary (Govinda-bhāṣya)

There is no contradiction here if it accepted that the devas are embodied souls with material bodies. Why? The Sūtra says aneka-pratipatter darśanāt: “Because it is seen that the devas have the power to manifest many forms simultaneously.”

This is so because the scriptures describe that many powerful beings, such as Saubhari Muni, Kardama Muni and others, are able to manifest many forms simultaneously.

विभज्य नवधात्मानं
मानवीं सुरतोत्सुकाम्
रामां निरमयन् रेमे
वर्ष-पूगान् मुहूर्तवत्

vibhajya navadhātmānaṃ
mānavīṃ suratotsukām
rāmāṃ niramayan reme
varṣa-pūgān muhūrtavat

“After coming back to his hermitage, Kardama divided himself into nine personalities just to give pleasure to Devahūti, the daughter of Manu, who was eager for sex life. In that way he enjoyed with her for many, many years, which passed just like a moment.” [Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 3.23.44]

The objector may say: “It may be that there is no contradiction in the description of the devas’ activities for those who believe that the devas have bodies. There remains, however, a contradiction in the description of the words of the Vedas. Before the birth and after the death of each demigod, a period would exist when the name of that demigod would not have any meaning. At that time the words of the Vedas would become meaningless, like the statement ‘the son of a barren woman.’ In this way this idea is refuted. The Mīmāṃsā-Sūtra says: autpattikas tu śabdenārthasya sambandhaḥ: ‘In the Vedas the relation between name and the object named is eternal.’ This idea [that the devas are embodied souls] would then contradict the eternality of the names in the Vedas.”

If this objection is raised, then he [Vyāsa] replies: