Brahma-Sūtra 3.3.64 (correct conclusion, end)

English of translation of Brahmasutra 3.3.64 by Roma Bose:

“And on account of scriptural text.”

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

This is so also because the scriptural text: “Verily, the Brāhmaṇa priest who knows (or meditates) thus protects the sacrifice, the sacrifices and all officiating priests” (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 4.7.10^[1]) shows that there is no fixed rule that these meditations are to he regularly included (in the sacrifices).

Here ends the third section of the third quarter of the Vedānta-pārijāta-saurabha, an interpretation of the Śārīraka-mīmāṃsā texts, by the reverend Nimbārka.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

Farther, as declared by Scripture itself, there is indeed no fixed rule that the meditations based on the subsidiary parts of sacrifices are to be regularly included in those sacrifices. The scriptural text: “Verily, the Brāhmaṇa priest who knows (or meditates) thus protects the sacrifice, the sacrificer and all officiating priests” (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 4.7.10), designating the protecting of all sacrifices, sacrifices and the rest of the knowers by the Brāhmaṇa priest, shows that there is no fixed rule about the regular inclusion of meditations.^[2] Hence it is established that there is no regular inclusion, in sacrificial acts, of the meditations based on their subsidiary parts, like the udgītha and the rest, but only optional inclusion, like the milking-vessel.^[3]

Here ends the section entitled “Of the same nature as the bases” (26).

Here ends the third section of the third quarter of the holy Vedānta-kaustubha, a commentary on the Śārīraka-mīmāṃsā, composed by the reverend teacher Śrīnivāsa, dwelling under the lotus-feet of the reverend Nimbārka, the founder and teacher of the sect of the holy Sanatkumāra.

Comparative views of Baladeva:

This is sūtra 68 in his commentary. “And because it is seen.” That is, it is more natural to suppose the eyes to see, the ears to hear and so on than to suppose every other member. Hence the conclusion is that every member of the body of the Lord is to be meditated on as (endowed with its own attributes).^[4]

Résumé:

The third quarter of the third chapter contains:

(1) 64 sūtras and 26 adhikaraṇas, according to Nimbārka;
(2) 66 sūtras and 36 adhikaraṇas, according to Śaṅkara;
(3) 64 sūtras and 26 adhikaraṇas, according to Rāmānuja;
(4) 65 sūtras and 34 adhikaraṇas, according to Bhāskara;
(5) 64 sūtras and 36 adhikaraṇas, according to Śrīkaṇṭha;
(6) 68 sūtras and 34 adhikaraṇas, according to Baladeva.

Śaṅkara breaks each of the sūtras 35 and 46 in Nimbārka’s commentary into two separate sūtras.

Rāmānuja inverts the order of sūtras 31 and 32 in Nimbārka’s commentary.

Bhāskara breaks sūtra 46 in Nimbārka’s commentary into two separate sūtras.

Śrīkaṇṭha inverts the order of sūtras 29-30, and 31-32 in Nimbārka’s commentary.

Baladeva breaks each of sūtras 3, 35, 46 and 48 in Nimbārka’s commentary into two separate sūtras.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Quoted by Śaṅkara, Rāmānuja, Bhāskara and Śrīkaṇṭha.

[2]:

For if meditation were included regularly in all sacrificial acts, then all priests would have such a knowledge and so the text would not have specially announced that a Brāhmaṇa priest who possesses such a knowledge protects others.

[3]:

See under Viṣṇu-purāṇa 3.3.41.

[4]:

Govinda-bhāṣya 3.3.08, p, 232, Chap. 3.