Brahma-Sūtra 3.4.45 (correct conclusion)

English of translation of Brahmasutra 3.4.45 by Roma Bose:

“The work of the priest, so Auḍulomi (thinks), because for that (he) is bought.”

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

The meditation based on the subsidiary parts of sacrificial acts is performed by the officiating priest, because the priest has been bought “for that”^[1], i.e. for the sacrificial act; and the result produced pertains to the sacrificer^[2].

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

The meditation on the udgītha and the rest, which are subsidiary parts of sacrificial acts, is to be performed by the officiating priest—“so” the teacher “Auḍulomi” thinks. Why? The word “because” states the reason. That is, as the officiating priest, who performs the sacrificial act, has been “bought” with fees by the sacrificer “for that”, i.e. for the sacrificial act together with its subsidiary parts, so it is to be performed by him alone.

If it be objected that the result produced, viz. greater potency, mentioned in the scriptural text: “What alone one does with knowledge, that alone becomes more potent” (Chāndogya-upaniṣad 1.1.10), can belong only to one who meditates,—we reply: not so. In accordance with the maxim: “The fruit mentioned in Scripture (accrues) to the instigator” (Pūrva-mīmāṃsā-sūtra 3.7.18^[3]), and in accordance with the scriptural text: “Whatever blessing, forsooth, the priests pray for, all those accrue to the sacrificer” (Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa 1.1.1, 26^[4]), the fruit belongs to the sacrificer alone. Hence it is established that the meditation based on the subordinate members of sacrificial acts is the work of the officiating priest.

Here ends the section entitled “The Lord” (11).

Comparative views of Śaṅkara:

After this sūtra, he reads a sūtra “Śruteś ca”, not found in Nimbārka’s commentary. Here he quotes some passages to the effect that the fruit belongs to the sacrificer himself^[5].

Comparative views of Baladeva:

Interpretation absolutely different, viz. “the work of the priest, so Auḍulomi (thinks), for (the Lord) is bought for him”. That is, just as an officiating priest sells himself, as it were, to the sacrifices, so the Lord sells Himself to the nirapekṣa devotees.^[6]

He too like Śaṅkara reads a sūtra “Śruteś ca” after this sūtra.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

[Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series] ed. reads “tasya”, p. 77.

[2]:

This last portion: “and... sacrificer” not found in the [Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series] ed. Brindāban ed. reads “phalasya”, p. 1164.

[3]:

P. 395, vol. 1.

[4]:

P. 25, lines 7-8.

[5]:

Brahma-sūtras (Śaṅkara’s commentary) 3.4.46, p. 890.

[6]:

Govinda-bhāṣya 3.4.45, p. 291, Chap. 3.