Brahma-Sūtra 3.4.43 (correct conclusion)

English of translation of Brahmasutra 3.4.43 by Roma Bose:

“But (such a transgressor is) outside (the sphere of knowledge), in either case even, on account of smṛti and on account of conduct.”

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

Whether the deviation of perpetual religious students from their own stage of life be a major or a minor sin, “in either case even”, they are “outside” the right to the knowledge of Brahman, “on account of the Smṛti passage: “I do not see any expiation whereby he, the killer of himself, may be purified” (Agni 165.24b^[1]) “and on account of the conduct” of the good.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

Whether the deviation of those who are bound by chastity from their own stage of life be a major or a minor sin, “in either case even” they are to be kept “outside”^[2] indeed by the good. Why? “On account of Smṛti and on account of conduct,” i.e. on account of the Smṛti passage censuring such a deviation, viz.: “I do not see any expiation whereby he, the killer of himself, may be purified” (Agni 165.245), “If one sees a Brāhmaṇa who ascended (to a high stage) has fallen (therefrom), one should undergo the Cāndrāyana^[3] penance”; and on account of the conduct of the good who always shun one who has deviated from the vow of chastity. Hence it is established that those who have deviated from their stages of life are not entitled to the knowledge of Brahman.

Here ends the section entitled “One who has become that” (10).

Comparative views of Śaṅkara:

He takes it as forming an adhikaraṇa by itself, and interprets the work “bahiḥ” like Śrīnivāsa.^[4]

Comparative views of Bhāskara:

He omits the word “api” and interprets the word “bahiḥ” like Śrīnivāsa^[5]. This is sūtra 41 in his commentary.

Comparative views of Baladeva:

He too omits the word “api”. Interpretation absolutely different, viz. “(The nirapekṣa devotee is) outside (all worldly entanglements) in both ways, (viz.) on account of Smṛti and on account of conduct”.^[6]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Quoted by Śaṃkara, Rāmānuja and Śrīkaṇṭha

[2]:

Note that the interpretation of the term “bahiḥ” is different from Nimbārka’s.

[3]:

An expiatory penance regulated by the moon’s age. The method is to begin with taking fifteen mouthfuls of food at the full moon, and decrease it daily by one mouthful during the dark-half, and increase by one mouthful again during the bright-half. Vide Manu 6.20 and Kullukabhaṭṭa’s commentary.

[4]:

Brahma-sūtras (Śaṅkara’s commentary) 3.4.43, p. 888.

[5]:

Brahma-sūtras (Bhāskara’s Commentary) 3.4.41, (written as 3.4.42), p. 214.

[6]:

Govinda-bhāṣya 3.4.43, pp. 287-288, Chap. 3.