Brahma Sutras (Nimbarka commentary)

by Roma Bose | 1940 | 290,526 words

English translation of the Brahma-sutra 1.4.21, 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 1.4.21

< Previous

Next >

English of translation of Brahmasutra 1.4.21 by Roma Bose:

“On account of such a condition of one who is about to depart, auḍulomi (thinks so).”

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

On account of the union of the individual soul, about to depart from the body, with Brahman, Brahman is denoted by a word denoting the individual soul,—so Auḍulomi thinks.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

“On account of such a condition,” i.e. on account of the union of the individual soul with the Supreme Soul,—of the soul which “is about to depart” from the aggregation of the body and the sense-organs, in accordance with the text: ‘As the flowing rivers disappear into the sea, leaving names and forms, so a knower, freed from name and form, attains the celestial Person, higher than the high’ (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 8.3.4); which is endowed with the hearing, the thinking, the meditation and the direct vision of Brahman; and which is well-known to be unborn from the scriptural and Smṛti texts like; ‘A wise man is neither born, nor dies’ (Kaṭha 2.18), ‘This is unborn, eternal, constant’ (Gītā 2.20), i.e. on account of its attaining the state of Brahman, the Supreme Soul is denoted by a term denoting the individual soul,—so thinks the teacher Auḍulomi. On this view, there is a difference between the individual soul and Brahman during the soul’s state of bondage, and non-difference during its state of release. In this manner, there are both difference and non-difference between the individual soul and Brahman. Thus, the meaning of the text is difference and non-difference,—such is the view of the teacher Auḍulomi. Such difference and non-difference are admitted by the reverend Auḍulomi for the benefit of the dull-witted. But really even during the state of bondage, the individual soul, which is atomic in size and possesses little knowledge, though different from Brahman who is all-pervasive, non-deviating in nature and omniscient, is yet non-different from Him, since it has no separate existence and activity,—just as a leaf is non-different from the tree, the ray from the lamp, the attribute from its substratum and the sense-organs from the vital-breath. Likewise, though in release it is non-different from Him, it having no separate existence and activity, at the same time, it is undoubtedly different from Him, in accordance with the text: ‘It is completed in its own form alone’^[1] (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 8.3.4). Otherwise, the imperishableness of the respective natures of both must come to be jeopardized. The view of Āśmarathya, too, should be known to be the same.

Comparative views of Bhāskara and Śrīkaṇṭha:

The commentators give different meanings of the word ‘evam bhāvāt’. According to Śaṅkara and Bhāskara it means ‘on account of attaining identity with the Supreme Soul’;^[2] according to Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha, ‘on account of attaining the state of the Supreme Soul’;^[3] and according to Baladeva, ‘on account of becoming dear to all, etc.’^[4]