Brahma-Sūtra 1.3.22

English of translation of Brahmasutra 1.3.22 by Roma Bose:

“And because of the imitation of that.”

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

“And because of the imitation” “of that”, i.e. of that which has its real nature ever manifest, in accordance with the passage: ‘He alone shining, everything shines’ (Kaṭha 5.15; Muṇḍaka-upaniṣad 2.2.10; Śvetāśvatara-upaniṣad 6.14^[1]), the individual soul, the imitator, cannot be the ‘small one’, having its real nature ever-manifest.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

The author says that for this reason, too, the individual soul is not the small ether.

Because of the imitation “of that”, i.e. of the small ether having the eight-fold attributes ever manifest, by that which has its attributes of freedom from sins and the rest manifest (and not ever manifest) the ‘small one’ is none but the Highest Self. Just as in the Muṇḍaka, declaring the imitation of the Lord by all in the passage: ‘He alone shining, everything shines’ (Muṇḍaka-upaniṣad 2.2.10); and declaring further that everything is to be manifested by the Lord in the passage: ‘Through his light all this shines’ (Muṇḍaka-upaniṣad 2.2.10), all things which are imitators and objects to be manifested cannot be the object which is imitated and the object which manifests,—so the individual soul, mentioned by Prajāpati, and an imitator, cannot be Brahman, denoted by the term ‘small’, and object to be imitated.

Comparative views of Śaṅkara and Bhāskara:

Interpretation different, viz. according to them, the sūtras 22-23 form a new adhikaraṇa, designating that the passage Muṇḍaka 2.2.10 refers not to a luminous substance, but to the Supreme Soul.^[2] But according to Nimbārka, they form parts of the preceding adhikaraṇa, setting forth additional arguments as to why the ‘small ether’ is none but the Supreme Soul.

Comparative views of Rāmānuja, Śrīkaṇṭha and Baladeva:

According to all, the word ‘anukṛteḥ’ means ‘because of similarity’. That is, the individual soul is not the ‘small one’ or Brahman, because it is only similar to Him.^[3]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Quoted by Śaṅkara and Bhāskara.

[2]:

Brahma-sūtras (Śaṅkara’s commentary) 1.3.22, pp. 340ff; Brahma-sūtras (Bhāskara’s Commentary) 1.3.22, pp. 58 et seq.

[3]:

Śrī-bhāṣya (Madras edition) 1.3.21, p. 313, Part 1, ‘Tad-anukāras tat-sāmyam’.
Brahma-sūtras (Śrīkaṇṭha’s commentary) 1.3.21, pp. 444-5, Part 5; Govinda-bhāṣya 1.3.22.