Brahma Sutras (Nimbarka commentary)
by Roma Bose | 1940 | 290,526 words
English translation of the Brahma-sutra 3.2.23, 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 3.2.23
English of translation of Brahmasutra 3.2.23 by Roma Bose:
“That (viz. Brahman is) Unmanifest, for Scripture states.”
Nimbārka’s commentary (Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha):
The scriptural text: “He is not apprehended by the eye, nor by speech” (Muṇḍaka-upaniṣad 3.1.8[1]) and so on, states that Brahman is “Unmanifest”.
Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)
The author points out that Brahman, immanent in the corporeal and the rest, yet transcendent, is not apprehended by the ordinary sense-organs.
“That,” i.e. Brahman, is “Unmanifest”, “for” Scripture “states”: “His form is not present to vision, no one whosoever sees Him with the eye” (Kaṭha-upaniṣad 6.9; Śvetāśvatara-upaniṣad 4.20), “He is not apprehended by the eye, nor by speech” (Muṇḍaka-upaniṣad 3.1.8) and so on.
Comparative views of Śaṅkara:
Like Nimbārka, he also holds that Brahman is not perceivable by the ordinary sense-organs; although unlike Nimbārka he holds here, as before, that Brahman has no corporeal and incorporeal forms.[2]
Comparative views of Baladeva:
He takes it to be forming an adhikaraṇa by itself.
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
Quoted by Śaṅkara, Baladeva, Bhāskara, Śrīkaṇṭha and Baladeva.
[2]:
Brahma-sūtras (Śaṅkara’s commentary) 3.2,23, p. 741.