Brahma Sutras (Nimbarka commentary)

by Roma Bose | 1940 | 290,526 words

English translation of the Brahma-sutra 3.4.50, including the commentary of Nimbarka and sub-commentary of Srinivasa known as Vedanta-parijata-saurabha and Vedanta-kaustubha resepctively. Also included are the comparative views of important philosophies, viz., from Shankara, Ramanuja, Shrikantha, Bhaskara and Baladeva.

Brahma-Sūtra 3.4.50

< Previous

Next >

English of translation of Brahmasutra 3.4.50 by Roma Bose:

“(there is the rise of knowledge) in this life if obstruction be not present, on account of that being seen.”

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

“If obstruction” be non-existent, then there is rise of knowledge “in this life”; if it be present, in the next, “on account of that being declared” by the text: “Then Naciketas, having obtained the knowledge declared by Death” (Kaṭha 6.18^[1]) and so on.

Śrīnivāsa’s commentary (Vedānta-kaustubha)

Having stated the multitude of means that lead to the rise of knowledge, the author is now considering its time.

On the doubt, viz. whether through the means, demonstrated in the group of aphorisms ending with “Non-manifesting, on account of connection” (Brahma-sūtra 3.4.49), knowledge arises in this life or in the next,—the prima facie view is that in accordance with the scriptural text: “Let one desirous of salvation perform sacrifices” (Taittirīya-saṃhitā 2.5.5^[2]) and so on, people strive for only prosperity in the next life, but not for the rise of knowledge, knowledge being possible in this very life.

With regard to it, we reply: “If obstruction”, i.e. if the obstruction to knowledge, viz. works which are dependent on particular place and time and are about to produce results other than knowledge, “be not present”. That is, if the group of means which lead to knowledge be performed well, there is the rise of knowledge “in this life”; if any obstruction to such works be present, then in the next. Why? “On account of that being seen,” i.e. because the rise of knowledge is found to take place in both ways. That in the absence of any obstruction, there is the rise of knowledge in this life is declared by the text: “Then Naciketas, having attained the knowledge declared by Death and this rule^[3] of the Yoga entirely, attained Brahman and became stainless, deathless” (Kaṭha 6.18). That through the means, practised in one life, there is the rise of knowledge in another life is declared by the text: “Even when in. the womb, Vāmadeva perceived”. If there be a large number of obstructions, the attainment of knowledge is indeed very difficult, in accordance with the scriptural text: “He whom many, though hearing, know not” (Kaṭha 2.7), Hence it is established that the rise of knowledge takes place on the removal of obstructions. There is no fixed rule that knowledge arises in that very life in which the means were performed.

Here ends the section entitled “In this life” (14).

Comparative views of Śaṅkara:

He reads: “Aihikam api aprastuta-pratibandhe....”^[4]. Interpretation same. This is sūtra 51 in his commentary.

Comparative views of Rāmānuja:

He reads: “Aihikama aprastuta-pratibandhe....”. Interpretation of the word “aihikam” different, viz. “What belongs to this world (i.e. meditation aiming at worldly prosperity)”. That is, there are two kinds of meditation, viz. that which aims at worldly prosperity only (“aihikam”) and that which aims at final release. The former may or may not arise in this life according to the absence or presence of obstruction^[5]; and similarly there is no fixed rale with regard to the latter also as will be shown in the next sūtra.

Comparative views of Bhāskara:

He reads: “Aihikam aprasutam pratibandhena darśānat”. Accordingly the sūtra means: “(There is the rise of knowledge) in this life, (if the works which obstruct it have) not sprung up, through (the presence of such an) obstruction (however, there is the rise of knowledge in the next world), because (that) is seen”.^[6] Thus, the import is the same as Nimbārka’s. This is sūtra 48 in his commentary.

Comparative views of Śrīkaṇṭha:

His reading of the sūtra is like Rāmānuja’s reading. Interpretation different, i.e. he is here speaking of the time of the rise of salvation and not of knowledge. Nimbārka speaks of this in the next sūtra. Śrīkaṇṭha interprets the sūtra thus: “(The result of meditation, viz. salvation, arises) in this life (i.e. as soon as the present body ceases), if obstruction be not present, on account of that being seen”. That is, if there be no contrary karmas, then a knower attains release as soon as he dies. But if there be such karmas, he has to be re-born and exhaust them before he can attain release. Hence it is that even knowers like Vāmadeva are seen to have re-births^[7].