Adhik. I, II, III (1-3) reconcile the different accounts given in the
Upanishads as to the stations of the way which leads the vidvân up to
Brahman.
Adhik. IV (4-6)--By the 'stations' we have, however, to understand not
only the subdivisions of the way but also the divine beings which lead
the soul on.
The remaining part of the pâda is by /S/a@nkara divided into two
adhikara/n/as. Of these the former one (7-14) teaches that the Brahman
to which the departed soul is led by the guardians of the path of the
gods is not the highest Brahman, but the effected (kârya) or qualified
(/s/agu/n/a) Brahman. This is the opinion propounded in Sûtras 7-11 by
Bâdari, and, finally, accepted by /S/a@nkara in his commentary on Sûtra
14. In Sûtras 12-14 Jaimini defends the opposite view, according to
which the soul of the vidvân goes to the highest Brahman, not to the
kâryam brahma. But Jaimini's view, although set forth in the latter part
of the adhikara/n/a, is, according to /S/a@nkara, a mere pûrvapaksha,
while Bâdari's opinion represents the siddhânta.--The latter of the two
adhikara/n/as (VI of the whole pâda; 15, 16) records the opinion of
Bâdarâya/n/a on a collateral question, viz. whether, or not, all those
who worship the effected Brahman are led to it. The decision is that
those only are guided to Brahman who have not worshipped it under a
pratîka form.
According to Râmânuja, Sûtras 7-16 form one adhikara/n/a only, in which
the views of Bâdari and of Jaimini represent two pûrvapakshas, while
Bâdarâya/n/a's opinion is adopted as the siddhânta. The question is
whether the guardians of the path lead to Brahman only those who worship
the effected Brahman, i.e. Hira/n/yagarbha, or those who worship the
highest Brahman, or those who worship the individual soul as free from
Prak/ri/ti, and having Brahman for its Self (ye pratyagâtmâna/m/
prak/ri/tiviyukta/m/ brahmâtmakam upâsate).--The first view is
maintained by Bâdari in Sûtra 7, 'The guardians lead to Brahman those
who worship the effected Brahman, because going is possible towards the
latter only;' for no movement can take place towards the highest and as
such omnipresent Brahman.--The explanation of Sûtra 9 is similar to that
of /S/a@nkara; but more clearly replies to the objection (that, if
Hira/n/yagarbha were meant in the passage, 'purusho /s/a mânava/h/ sa
etân brahma gamayati,' the text would read 'sa etân brahmâ/n/am
gamayati') that Hira/n/yagarbha is called Brahman on account of his
nearness to Brahman, i.e. on account of his prathamajatva.--The
explanation of 10, 11 is essentially the same as in /S/a@nkara; so also
of l2-l4.--The siddhânta view is established in Sûtra 13, 'It is the
opinion of Bâdarâya/n/a that it, i.e. the ga/n/a of the guardians, leads
to Brahman those who do not take their stand on what is pratîka, i.e.
those who worship the highest Brahman, and those who meditate on the
individual Self as dissociated from prak/ri/ti, and having Brahman for
its Self, but not those who worship Brahman under pratîkas. For both
views--that of Jaimini as well as that of Bâdari--are faulty.' The kârya
view contradicts such passages as 'asmâ/k/ charîrât samutthâya para/m/
jyotir upasampadya,' &c.; the para view, such passages as that in the
pa/ñk/âgni-vidyâ, which declares that ya ittha/m/ vidu/h/, i.e. those
who know the pa/ñk/âgni-vidyâ, are also led up to Brahman.