VI. 8.] PRASNOPANISHAD-BRASHYA 63 VEDANTA SUTRAS OP BADARAYANA: 11. 1. 21-23.1 & (Sri Bhāşya of Sri Ramanuja) II. 1.21 "From the designation of the oiher (as non. different from Brahman) there result (Bra. hman's) not creating what is beneficial, and other imperfections". COMMENTARY: Śri Bhasya : "Thou art that " This Self is Brahman these and similar texts which declare the non-difference of the world from Brahman, teach, as has been said before, at the same time the non-difference from Brahman of the individual soul also. But an objection here presents itself. If these texts really imply that the other one; i e., the soul is Brahman, there will follow certain imperfections on Brahman's part, viz., that Brahman endowed as it is with omniscience, the power of realising its purposes, and so on, does not create a world of a nature beneficial to itself, but rather creates a world non-beneficial to itself, and the like. This world no doubt is a storehouse of numberless pains, either originating in living beings themselves or due to the action of other natural beings, or caused by superuatural agencies. No rational independent person endeavours to produce what is clearly non beneficial to himself. And as you hold the view of the non-difference of the world from Brahman, you yourself set aside all those texts which declare Brahman to be different from the soul; for were there such difference, the doctrine of general non-difference could not be established. " Should it be maintained that the texts declaring difference refer to difference due to limiting adjuncts, while the texts declaring non-difference mean essential non-difference we must ask the following question-does the non-conditioned Brahman know, or does it not know, the soul which is 1, hibaut's translation S. B. E. vol. XL VIII. pp. 467-471.
