Brahma-Sūtra 2.4.19

English of translation of Brahmasutra 2.4.19 by Roma Bose:

“But the making of name and form (is the function) of him who renders tripartite, on account of teaching.”

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

The evolution of names and forms too,—mentioned in the texts: ‘That divinity thought: “Come, let me, having entered into these three deities with this living soul, evolve name and forms”’ (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.3.2^[1]), ‘“Let me make each of them tripartite”’ (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.3.3^[2])—is the work of the Supreme Being alone “who renders tripartite”. He alone who made each of the deities tripartite is the creator of names and forms like fire, sun and the rest. Why? Because beginning thus: ‘That divinity’ (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.3.2), the text goes on to teach that the evolution (of names and forms) is due to the Supreme Deity thus: ‘“Let me, having entered with this living soul, evolve name and form”’^[3] (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.3.2).

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

Thus, there being an enquiry with regard to the characteristic marks of the object which one should desire to enquire into (viz. Brahman), it has been established in the preceding chapter^[4], that He is the cause of the world. Here, on the other hand, with a view to confirming it and demonstrating the cause of the world as held by us, it has been firmly established, after an examination of the cause as designated by others,^[5] that the ether and the rest are created by Brahman. Then, the author is, now, removing a doubt as to whether the evolution of name and form is due to the Supreme Brahman—a doubt arising from the word ‘individual soul’ in the scriptural text to be cited hereafter.

The evolution of name and form is mentioned in the Chāndogya, under the section teaching of the Existent, in the passages: ‘That divinity thought: “Come, let me, having entered into these three deities with the living soul (jīvātman), evolve name and form”’ (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.3.2), “‘Let me make each of them tripartite”’ (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.3.3). The question is: Is this evolution due to the individual soul or to the Supreme Soul? If it be suggested: To the individual soul alone, as indicated by the phrase: ‘having entered with this living soul’,—

We reply: The word “but” is meant for disposing of the prima facie view. “The making of name and form,” i.e. the evolution of name and form, can be the work “of one who renders tripartite”, i.e. of the Supreme Soul alone, omniscient and omnipotent who made each of the deities tripartite. Why? Haying begun thus: “That divinity thought” (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.3.2), the text goes on to designate,—through the use of the first person: ‘“Let me evolve name and form”’ (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.3.2),—the Lord’s resolve to evolve names and forms thus: ‘“Let me make each of them tripartite”’ (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.3.3). Then, for fulfilling this desire, having made each of the deities tripartite prior to the creation of the egg, having then created the egg, and having then entered therein, He made names and forms. The scriptural text about tripartition secondarily implies the process of making each element five-fold. Thus, as the Supreme Brahman alone, who renders tripartite, has been designated as the creator of names and forms; and as the individual soul is incapable of creating names and forms, the evolution is due to the former alone. The motive for using the term ‘individual soul’ (jīvātman) here will be made clear by the aphorism: “For (Brahman is) without form” (Brahma-sūtra 3.2.14).

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Quoted by Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, Bhāskara, Śrīkaṇṭha, Baladeva.

[2]:

Op. cit.

[3]:

Quoted by Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, Bhāskara, Śrīkaṇṭha, Baladeva.

[4]:

Vide Br. Śū. 1.1.2.

[5]:

In the 2nd pāda of the 2nd chap.