Brahma-Sūtra 2.2.45

English of translation of Brahmasutra 2.2.45 by Roma Bose:

“And on account of contradiction.”

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

And on account of being opposed to Scripture and Smṛti, the doctrine of Śakti is unauthoritative.

Here ends the second quarter of the second chapter in the Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha, an interpretation of the Śārīraka-mīmāṃsā texts, and composed by the reverend Nimbārka.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

And because of being opposed to the following scriptural and Smṛti texts: ‘Person, verily, is all this’ (Śvetāśvatara-upaniṣad 3.15), ‘Supreme is His power, declared to be of manifold; natural is the operation of His knowledge and strength’ (Śvetāśvatara-upaniṣad 6.8), ‘“I am the origin of all, everything originates from me”’ (Gītā 10.8), and so on, the doctrine of the causality of Śakti is not to be accepted by one who is desirous of salvation. Hence, it is established that the concordance of the scriptural texts with regard to Brahman, Lord Kṛṣṇa, the lord of all and the soul of all, is not contradicted by anything whatsoever.

Here ends the section entitled “Impossibility of origin” (8).

Here ends the second quarter of the second chapter in the Vedānta-kaustubha, a commentary on the Śārīraka-mīmāṃsā, and composed by the reverend Śrīnivāsa, dwelling under the lotus-feet of the holy Nimbārka, the teacher and founder of the sect of the venerable Sanatkumāra.

Comparative views of Śaṅkara:

Criticism of the Pañcarātra doctrine concluded: “(The Pañcarātra doctrine is to be rejected), because it is full of (inner) contradictions; and (because it contains passages opposed to the Veda)”.^[1]

Comparative views of Rāmānuja:

Right conclusion, in defence of the Pañcarātra doctrine, ends here: “(The above objection cannot be raised) on account of the contradiction (i.e. becasue the Pañcarātra doctrine itself controverts that the individual soul has an origin”.^[2]

Comparative views of Bhāskara:

This sūtra is not found in his commentary.

Comparative views of Śrīkaṇṭha:

Criticism of the Pañcarātra doctrine concluded: “(In reply to the above prima facie view, we point out although the contradiction with regard to the origin of the individual soul and the rest set aside by the above view, yet the Pañcarātra doctrine is not to be accounted) on account of its opposition (to Scripture).^[3]

Résumé

The second section of the second chapter contains:—

1. 45 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Nimbārka;
2. 45 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Śaṅkara;
3. 42 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Rāmānuja;
4. 40 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Bhāskara;
5. 42 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Śrīkaṇṭha;
6. 45 sūtras and 8 adhikaraṇas, according to Baladeva.

Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha read sūtras 1 and 2 in Nimbārka’s commentary as one sūtra; and omit sūtras 31 and 38 in Nimbārka-bhāṣya.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Brahma-sūtras (Śaṅkara’s commentary) 2.2.45, pp. 575-76.

[2]:

Śrī-bhāṣya (Madras edition) 2.2.42, pp. 117ff., Part 2.

[3]:

Brahma-sūtras (Śrīkaṇṭha’s commentary) 2.2.42, pp. 116-119, Parts 7 and 8.