ed are embodied or disembodied
according to their wish and will.

Adhik. VI (11, 12) explains how the soul of the released can animate
several bodies at the same time.--Sutra 12 gives, according to
/S/a@nkara, the additional explanation that those passages which declare
the absence of all specific cognition on the part of the released soul
do not refer to the partly released soul of the devotee, but either to
the soul in the state of deep sleep (svapyaya = sushupti), or to the
fully released soul of the sage (sampatti = kaivalya).--Ramanuja
explains that the passages speaking of absence of consciousness refer
either to the state of deep sleep, or to the time of dying (sampatti =
mata/n/am according to 'van manasi sampadyate,' &c.).

Adhik. VII (17-21).--The released jivas participate in all the
perfections and powers of the Lord, with the exception of the power of
creating and sustaining the world. They do not return to new forms of
embodied existence.

After having, in this way, rendered ourselves acquainted with the
contents of the Brahma-sutras according to the views of /S/a@nkara as
well as Ramanuja, we have now to consider the question which of the two
modes of interpretation represents--or at any rate more closely
approximates to the true meaning of the Sutras. That few of the Sutras
are intelligible if taken by themselves, we have already remarked above;
but this does not exclude the possibility of our deciding with a fair
degree of certainty which of the two interpretations proposed agrees
better with the text, at least in a certain number of cases.

We have to note in the first place that, in spite of very numerous
discrepancies,--of which only the more important ones have been singled
out in the conspectus of contents,--the two commentators are at one as
to the general drift of the Sutras and the arrangement of topics. As a
rule, the adhikara/n/as discuss one or several Vedic passages bearing
upon a certain point of the system, and in the vast majority of cases
the two commentators agree as to which are the special texts referred
to. And, moreover, in a very large number of cases the agreement extends
to the interpretation to be put on those passages and on the Sutras.
This far-reaching agreement certainly tends to inspire us with a certain
confidence as to the existence of an old tradition concerning the
meaning of the Sutras on which the bulk of the interpretations of
/S/a@nkara as well as of Ramanuja ar