Brahma Sutras (Nimbarka commentary)

by Roma Bose | 1940 | 290,526 words

English translation of the Brahma-sutra 2.3.36, 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 2.3.36

English of translation of Brahmasutra 2.3.36 by Roma Bose:

“Thebe is no restriction as in the case of perception.”

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

“There is no restriction” with regard to the actions based on the perception of their fruits.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

To the objection, viz. if the individual soul be the agent, then having taken into consideration the good and the evil which are the fruits of good and evil works, and being disgusted with the evil, it, with a view to obtaining the good, ought to do what is conducive to the latter,—(the author) replies:

“As in the case of perception.” Just as there is the perception of the good and the evil which are the fruits of good and evil works performed previously, so there is “no restriction” with regard to works, since we find that people are by chance sometimes inclined to what is beneficial and sometimes to what is not beneficial.[1]

Comparative views of Śaṅkara:

This is sūtra 37 in his commentary. Interpretation different, viz. “As in the case of perception, there is non-restriction (with regard to actions)”. That is, just as the soul, though free with regard to perceptions, sometimes perceives what is good, and sometimes what is bad, so the soul, though free to act, sometimes does what is good, and sometimes what is bad.[2]

Comparative views of Rāmānuja, Śrīkaṇṭha and Baladeva:

This is sūtra 36 in the commentaries of the first two, but sūtra 35 in the commentary of the last. They interpret it as following: (If prakṛti were the agent and not the individual soul, then there would be) non-restriction (of actions) as in the case of perception”. That is, just as it has been shown[3] that if the soul be all-pervasive no definite perception will he possible, so if prakṛti be the agent, no definite activity will be possible, since prakṛti being all-pervading and common to all, all activities would produce results in the case of all souls, or produce no results in the case of any one.[4]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

I.e. although a man perceives the good and evil results of his past acts, yet there is no fixed rule that he always afterwards does what is good and avoids what is bad. As he is ruled by external circumstances, he may sometimes be inclined to what is bad, though knowing from his past experiences that such acts lead to harmful consequences.

[2]:

Quoted by Śaṅkara, Baladeva, 2.3.37, p. 625.

[3]:

Under Śrī-bhāṣya (Madras edition) 2.3.32; Brahma-sūtras (Śrīkaṇṭha’s commentary) 2.3.32; Govinda-bhāṣya 2.3.30.

[4]:

Śrī-bhāṣya (Madras edition) 2.3.36, p. 153, Part 2; Brahma-sūtras (Śrīkaṇṭha’s commentary) 2.3.36, p. 153, Parts 7 and 8; Govinda-bhāṣya 2.3.35, p. 208, Chap. 2.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: