Brahma Sutras (Nimbarka commentary)

by Roma Bose | 1940 | 290,526 words

English translation of the Brahma-sutra 1.3.27, including the commentary of Nimbarka and sub-commentary of Srinivasa known as Vedanta-parijata-saurabha and Vedanta-kaustubha resepctively. Also included are the comparative views of important philosophies, viz., from Shankara, Ramanuja, Shrikantha, Bhaskara and Baladeva.

Brahma-Sūtra 1.3.27

English of translation of Brahmasutra 1.3.27 by Roma Bose:

“If it be objected that (if the Gods be possessed of bodies) a contradiction with regard to works (will result), (we reply:) no, because of the observation of the assumption of many (bodies by the Gods, etc.).”

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

If it be objected: Since the worship of Brahman is not possible without a body, their corporality must surely be admitted. But if that be so, it will give rise to a “contradiction with regard to works”,—(We reply:) “no” such objection can arise. Why? “Because of the observation of the assumption” simultaneously of many bodies even by one and the same deity.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

If it be objected: Although the corporality of the gods, as of us, is an inevitable conclusion, as the activities in connection with the repeated practice of ‘hearing’, ‘thinking’ and‘meditating’ are possible only on the part of one who is endowed with a body, sense-organs and mind, and as in that way alone it is possible for them to be the benefactors of sacrifices, through their actual presence, like sacrificing priests and the rest,[1]—yet if they be possessed of bodies, there will be “a contradiction with regard to works”, viz. sacrifices and the rest, since the simultaneous presence of one body (i.e. of one god) in many sacrifices is impossible,[2]

(We reply:) “No”. Why? “Because of the observation of many worships.”[3] “Many”, i.e. of various forms, “worship”, “on account of the observation of that”. Thus, just as one and the same teacher is found to be saluted simultaneously by many saluting disciples, just as one and the same sun is found to be worshipped simultaneously by many worshipping men, so there is no inconsistency in supposing that different sacrificers offer their own objects to one and the same corporal deity who abides in his own place. Hence no harm is done to sacrifices.

Or else, there may be another construction of the phrase “aneka-pratipatter darśanāt”. If it be objected that there will be “a contradiction with regard to works” in the stated way,—(we reply:) “No”. Why? “On account of the assumption of many”, i.e. on account of the assumption of many forms, or on account of the attainment of many bodies, by one and the same person who is perfected by Yoga. Why? “Because of the observation” of it in Scripture. Thus, in the Mokṣa-dharma,[4] a question being put forth concerning the Sāṃkhya and the Yoga thus: ‘“Reverend father, it behoves you to tell me in particular about the Sāṃkhya and the Yoga. Everything, O knower of sacred duties, is known to you, O best among the Kurus”!’ (Mahābhārata (Asiatic Society edition) 12.11037[5]), the text, having set forth an eulogy of the Sāṃkhya and the Yoga, goes on: ‘“Those who are endowed with the power of the Yoga and are self-controlled and majestic, enter, O Pārtha, through Yoga into Prajāpatis, sages, gods and the great elements, Neither Yama, nor the angry Antaka,[6] nor the supremely mighty Mṛtyu lords it, O king, over the Yoga of unmeasured might. A yogin, O mightiest of the Bhāratas, can, by reason of attaining strength,[7] create many bodies for himself, and move about the world by them all. By some he may attain (i.e. enjoy) objects, by others, he may practise a severe penance, and he may again contract them, as the sun does the multitude of its rays’ (Mahābhārata (Asiatic Society edition) 12.11060-64[8]).

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

That is, if gods be possessed of bodies, then they may themselves be present at sacrifices, like the priests, and conduce to their proper performance, etc.

[2]:

That is, one and the same god is simultaneously invoked in many sacrifices, but evidently, he cannot be simultaneously present in many places.

[3]:

The compound ‘aneka-pratipatter darśanāt’ is explained as follows.

[4]:

Name of a section of the twelfth book of the Mahābhārata, from chap. 174 to the end.

[5]:

P. 754, line 27, vol. 3.

[6]:

Name of Yama, the god of Death.

[7]:

Here the śatṛ-suffix implies reason.

[8]:

P. 755, lines 20-23, vol. 3.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: