Brahma-Sūtra 3.2.30

English of translation of Brahmasutra 3.2.30 by Roma Bose:

“And on account of negation.”

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

“And on account of the negation,” viz. “He is not smeared with the misery of the world” (Kaṭha 5.1), Brahman, the topic of discussion, does not possess any imperfections.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

Moreover, although Brahman, as abiding within all, and being the cause of all, has everything as His form, yet He has no connection with imperfections, “also on account of the negation” of imperfections, celebrated in Scripture thus: “Just as the sun, the eye of the whole world, is not smeared with the external faults of the eyes, so the one inner soul of all beings is not smeared with the misery of the world, being external (to it)” (Kaṭha 5.11). “Just as the one air, entered in the world, corresponds in form to every form, so the one inner soul of all beings corresponds in form to every form, and is (yet) external (to it)” (Kaṭha 5.10) and so on. Hence it is established that Brahman, having everything as His form, is untouched by every fault, is an abode of a mass of auspicious attributes and is the highest of all.

Here ends the section entitled “The so-muchness resulting from what has been previously declared” (6).

Comparative views of Śaṅkara and Bhāskara:

This is sūtra 31 in Bhāskara’s commentary. Interpretation different, viz. “And on account of the denial (of a reality besides Brahman, non-difference is the ultimate truth)”.^[1]

Comparative views of Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha:

This is sūtra 29 in their commentaries. Interpretation different, viz. “On account of the denial (of the attributes of the non-sentient^[2] on the part of Brahman, they stand in the relation of attribute and substance)”.^[3]

Comparative views of Baladeva:

This is sūtra 31 in his commentary. He concludes the topic of the identity between Brahman and His attributes thus: “On account of the prohibition (by Scripture of any difference between Brahman and His attributes, they are never to be taken as different)”.^[4]

To sum up: Sūtras 27-50 are interpreted in four different ways thus:—

(1) According to Nimbārka, sūtra 27 states the relation between Brahman and the non-sentient; sūtra 28 states the relation between Brahman and the sentient; and sūtras 29-30 state that Brahman’s having the corporeal and incorporeal forms gives rise to no objections.

(2) According to Śaṅkara and Bhāskara, sūtras 27-28 state two prima facie views regarding the relation between Brahman and the sentient; and sūtras 29-30 state the right conclusion.

(3) According to Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha, sūtras 27-28 state two prima facie views regarding the relation between Brahman and the non-sentient; and sūtras 29-30 state the right conclusion.

(4) According to Baladeva, all these four sūtras show the identity between Brahman and His attributes.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Brahma-sūtras (Śaṅkara’s commentary) 3.2.30, p. 744; Brahma-sūtras (Bhāskara’s Commentary) 3.2.31 (written as 3.2.30), p. 171.

[2]:

Śrīkaṇṭha adds the sentient too.

[3]:

Śrī-bhāṣya (Madras edition) 3.2.29, p. 247, Part 2; Brahma-sūtras (Śrīkaṇṭha’s commentary) 3.2.29, pp. 259-200, Part 9.

[4]:

Govinda-bhāṣya 3.2.31, p. 88, Chap. 3.