Another argument for our conclusion is that the text 'Doing works here
let a man desire to live a hundred years,' &c. (Is. Up. II), expressly
enjoins lifelong works on him who knows the Self. The general conclusion,
therefore, is that knowledge (meditation) is merely auxiliary to works.
Of this view the next Sûtra finally disposes.
8. But on account of the teaching of the different one, Badarâyana's
(view is valid); as this is seen.
Knowledge by itself benefits man; since Scripture teaches that the
object of knowledge is the highest Brahman which, as it is of an
absolutely faultless and perfect nature, is other than the active
individual soul.
Badarâyana, therefore, holds that knowledge has an independent fruit of
its own. Let the inferential marks (referred to by the Pûrvapakshin) be;
the direct teaching of the texts certainly refers to a being different
from the Self that acts; for we clearly see that their object is the
highest creative Brahman with all its perfections and exalted qualities,
which cannot possibly be attributed to the individual Self whether in
the state of Release or of bondage: 'Free from evil, free from old age,'
&c. &c. In all those texts there is not the slightest trace of any
reference to the wretched individual soul, as insignificant and weak as
a tiny glow-worm, implicated in Nescience and all the other evils of
finite existence. And the fruit of that knowledge of the highest Person
the texts expressly declare, in many places, to be immortality--which
consists in attaining to Him. The view of knowledge by itself
benefitting man therefore is well founded.--The Sûtras proceed to
dispose of the so-called inferential marks.