Brahma-Sūtra 3.4.42 (opponent’s view)

English of translation of Brahmasutra 3.4.42 by Roma Bose:

“But preceded by ‘upa’, (i.e. a minor sin) even, some (think so), (they claim) the existence (of an expiation for it), as in the case of eating, that has been said.”

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

“But some” think that the deviation of a perpetual religious student bound by chastity^[1] from his vow of chastity is a minor sin, and hence there is an expiation for it, since he too is equally a religious student like one who is a religious student for a time only and not for life^[2], “as in the case of the taking” of intoxicating liquor. “That has been said:” “Of the subsequent ones, what is non-contradictory.”^[3]

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

“Preceded by ‘upa’,” i.e. the deviation of a perpetual religious student and so on, bound by chastity and the rest, from their vow of chastity by going to women and so on, is “preceded by the word ‘upa’”, i.e. is but a minor (upa) sin (pātaka); not a major sin that cannot be atoned for. The word, “even” implies reason. “Some” teachers think that they too being equally religious students, there is “the existence” of an expiation for them as for those who are religious students for a time, but not always. “As in the case of eating.” Just as the prohibition with regard to the taking of spirituous liquor and so on and the expiation thereof apply equally to those who are religious students for life and those who are so for a time only,—so is the case here. “That has been said” by the Smṛti-writer: “Of the subsequent ones, what is non-contradictory to that”. The sense is that what has been said with regard to one who is a religious student for a time is possible in the case of one who belongs to a subsequent stage of life, viz. one who is religious student for life and so on, in so far as it is not contradictory to the stage of life of the latter. In this way, an expiation for the deviation of perpetual religious students from their vow of chastity being possible, they come to be entitled to knowledge once again. Similar is the case with the hermits belonging to the third order of life and the wandering mendicants belonging to the fourth order.

Comparative views of Śaṅkara:

He takes it to be forming an adhikaraṇa by itself. Interpretation same.

Comparative views of Bhāskara:

This sūtra is not found in his commentary.

Comparative views of Baladeva:

Interpretation absolutely different, viz. “But what is preceded by ‘upa’ (i.e. upāsanā or meditation) (is the only object desired by a nirapekṣa devotee) some (branches declare so), (and) the sentiment (of devotion) is like food (to him), that has been said (in Scripture)”^[4].

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

A naiṣṭhika.

[2]:

An upakurvāṇa.

[3]:

Quoted by Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha.

[4]:

Govinda-bhāṣya 3.4.42, pp. 286-287, Chap. 3.