Brahma-Sūtra 2.2.14

English of translation of Brahmasutra 2.2.14 by Roma Bose:

“And on account of the existence (of) eternal (activity and inactivity) alone.”

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

If the atoms be active by nature, there being the existence of (eternal) activity, there will result eternal creation; otherwise there will result eternal dissolution; and hence there is the absence of that (viz. creation).

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

For this, too, the atomic theory is untenable. Why? If the atoms be admitted to be active by nature, then there being eternal activity alone, there cannot be dissolution. If, they be admitted to be inactive by nature, there being eternal inactivity alone, the absence of creation will necessarily result—this is the sense.

Comparative views of Rāmānuja, Śrīkaṇṭha and Baladeva:

This is sūtra 13 in the commentaries of the first two. Interpretation different, viz. “(If the samavāya be admitted to be eternal, the terms related by it, viz. ternary compounds, etc., i.e. the world too must be) eternal indeed, on account of the existence (i.e. eternity of the samavāya)”.^[1]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Śrī-bhāṣya (Madras edition) 2.2.13, p. 86, Part 2; Brahma-sūtras (Śrīkaṇṭha’s commentary) 2.2.13, p. 75, Parts 7 and 8; Govinda-bhāṣya 2.2.14, p. 107, Chap. 2.