Brahma-Sūtra 3.2.11

English of translation of Brahmasutra 3.2.11 by Roma Bose:

“Not on account of place even (is there any imperfection) on the part of the highest, because everywhere (he is described as) possessed of two-fold characteristics.”

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

It has been already proved^[1] that the respective imperfections of the souls do not pertain to the Highest Self, though abiding within all, since He is not subject to karmas. There is no imperfection “on the part of the Highest, on account of place even”, since “everywhere” Brahman is stated to be free from all defects and endowed with all auspicious qualities.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

With a view to generating an aversion to transmigratory existence, the particular states of this individual soul have been briefly demonstrated above. The attributes of Brahman, the Highest Person, such as, being the creator of dream-creation, having true resolves, being the cause of pleasure during deep sleep and so on too have been demonstrated for the sake of generating an yearning for Him. Now, for generating an yearning for the Highest, the reverend author wants to establish that He is free by nature from all faults and is one mass of all auspicious qualities. Hence he says this:

On the doubt, viz. whether those imperfections,—which arising from the different places pertain to the individual soul abiding in those places, viz. waking, dream and deep sleep,—pertain to the Highest Self, or not,—the prima facie view is as follows: Although it has been stated in the first chapter under the aphorism: “If it be objected that enjoyment results, (we reply:) no, on account of difference” (Brahma-sūtra 1.2.8), that those imperfections cling only to the individual soul, a self-conscious agent, but never to the Highest Self who is not subject to karmas,—yet just as, like Yajñadatta, the owner of a house, his friend Devadatta too, who has entered there, comes to be affected by the heat of fire, owing to his connection with that blazing house,—so the imperfections arising from places pertain to the Highest Self too.^[2]

With regard to it we reply: No. There are no imperfections, arising from those particular places, “on the part of the Highest”, i.e. on the part of Brahman full of His own bliss, although He has entered into those places out of compassion as the inner controller of the individual souls, His own parts, for their guidance,—“because” “everywhere”, i.e. in scriptural and Smṛti passages, the Supreme Brahman is established to be “possessed of two-fold characteristics”, i.e. as possessed of the marks of being free by nature from all faults and being an abode of a mass of auspicious qualities. The scriptural texts are to the effect: “The soul that is free from sins, ageless, deathless, griefless, without hunger, without thirst, possessed of true desires, possessed of true resolves” (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 8.7.1, 3), “Who is omniscient, all knowing” (Muṇḍaka-upaniṣad 1.1.9; 2.2.7), “Whose penance consists in knowledge (Muṇḍaka-upaniṣad 1.1.9), “He who knows the bliss of Brahman” (Taittirīya-upaniṣad 2.4.1; 2.9.1), “Natural is the operation of (His) knowledge and strength” (Śvetāśvatara-upaniṣad 6.8) and so on. The Smṛti passages are to the effect: “He possesses all auspicious qualities; and has drawn out, by a particle of His own power, the creation of beings^[3] (Viṣṇu-purāṇa 6.5.84^[4]), “He is possessed of might, power, lordship and supreme knowledge, and is one mass of qualities like His own strength, power and the rest. He is the highest of the high, in whom, the Lord of the high and the low,^[5] there are no miseries and the like” (Viṣṇu-purāṇa 6.5.85^[6]).

Comparative views of Śaṅkara:

Interpretation absolutely different, viz. “Not even on account of place (i.e. limiting adjunct), two-fold characteristics (viz. saviśeṣa and nirviśeṣa) (are possible) on the part of the Highest, for everywhere (Scripture declares it to be nirviśeṣa)”. That is, in Scripture two classes of texts are found, one designating Brahman as possessed of difference, the other designating Brahman as devoid of difference. This gives rise to a doubt, viz. whether Brahman is both saviśeṣa and nirviśeṣa. The answer is that one and the same thing cannot have two different natures. Hence Brahman cannot be saviśeṣa even through the limiting adjuncts which do not change its real nature, but only conceals it for the time being.^[7]

Comparative views of Bhāskara:

Interpretation absolutely different, viz. “Not even on account of place (viz. the world and the rest), two-fold characteristics (viz. sākāra and nirākāra) (are possible) on the part of the Highest, because everywhere (Scripture declares Him to be nirākāra)”. That is, although Brahman has two forms—causal or nirākāra and effected or sākāra,—yet He is to be meditated on in His Nirākāra aspect only, which is His real form and which He never loses even when He comes to have a connection with the world and the rest.^[8]

Comparative views of Baladeva:

Interpretation absolutely different, viz. “Not even on account of place (i.e. by the mere fact of His being in two places), two-fold characteristics (i.e. changes of nature) (are possible) on the part of the Highest, because everywhere (He is present simultaneously)”. That is, though the Lord manifests himself in various places, yet by reason of His mysterious power, He Himself undergoes no change.^[9]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Vide Vedānta-pārijata-saurabha 1.2.8.

[2]:

Here the house stands for the body, Yajñadatta for the soul, Devadatta for the Lord. Just as when the house is on fire, the heat affects not only Yajñadatta, the owner, but also Devadatta, a visitor who has entered into it, so the imperfections inhering in the body affect not only the individual soul, the owner, but also the Lord who has entered into it as its ruler.

[3]:

Reading: “Sva-śakti-leśāvṛta-bhūta-vargaḥ”, meaning: ‘Who has covered the group of beings by a particle of His own power’.

[4]:

P. 837, lines 9-10.

[5]:

Reading; “Parāpareśe”, meaning the same.

[6]:

P. 837, lines 13-16.

[7]:

Brahma-sūtras (Śaṅkara’s commentary) 3.2.11, p. 724, lines 8-17.

[8]:

Brahma-sūtras (Bhāskara’s Commentary) 3.2.11, pp. 164-165.

[9]:

Govinda-bhāṣya pp. 54-55, Chap. 3.