Adhik.  XIX (32) decides that, although the general effect of true knowledge is release from all forms of body, yet even such beings as have reached perfect knowledge may retain a body for the purpose of discharging certain offices.—­In the Sri-bhashya, where the Sutra follows immediately on Sutra 30, the adhikara/n/a determines, in close connexion with 30, that, although those who know Brahman as a rule divest themselves of the gross body—­there remaining only a subtle body which enables them to move—­and no longer experience pleasure and pain, yet certain beings, although having reached the cognition of Brahman, remain invested with a gross body, and hence liable to pleasure and pain until they have fully performed certain duties.

Adhik.  XX (33) teaches that the negative attributes of Brahman mentioned in some vidyas—­such as its being not gross, not subtle, &c.—­are to be included in all meditations on Brahman.—­Adhik.  XXI (34) determines that Ka/th/a Up.  III, 1, and Mu.  Up.  III, 1, constitute one vidya only, because both passages refer to the highest Brahman.  According to Ramanuja the Sutra contains a reply to an objection raised against the conclusion arrived at in the preceding Sutra.—­Adhik.  XXII (35, 36) maintains that the two passages, B/ri/.  Up.  III, 4 and III, 5, constitute one vidya only, the object of knowledge being in both cases Brahman viewed as the inner Self of all.—­Adhik.  XXIII (37) on the contrary decides that the passage Ait.  Ar.  II, 2, 4, 6 constitutes not one but two meditations.—­Adhik.  XXIV (38) again determines that the vidya of the True contained in B/ri/.  Up.  V, 4, 5, is one only—­According to Ramanuja, Sutras 35-38 constitute one adhikara/n/a only whose subject is the same as that of XXII according to Sa@nkara.

Adhik.  XXV (39) proves that the passages Ch.  Up.  VIII, 1 and B/ri/.  Up.  IV, 4, 22 cannot constitute one vidya, since the former refers to Brahman as possessing qualities, while the latter is concerned with Brahman as destitute of qualities.—­Adhik.  XXVI (40, 41) treats, according to Sa@nkara, of a minor question connected with Ch.  Up.  V, 11 ff.—­According to the Sri-bhashya, Sutras 39-41 form one adhikara/n/a whose first Sutra reaches essentially the same conclusion as Sa@nkara under 39.  Sutras 40, 41 thereupon discuss a general question concerning the meditations on Brahman.  The qualities, an opponent is supposed to remark, which in the two passages discussed are predicated of Brahman—­such as va/s/itva, satyakamatva, &c.—­cannot be considered real (paramarthika), since other passages (sa esha neti neti, and the like) declare Brahman to be devoid of all qualities.  Hence those qualities cannot be admitted into meditations whose purpose is final release.—­To this objection Sutra 40 replies, ’(Those qualities) are not to be left off (from the meditations on Brahman), since (in the passage under discussion as well as in other passages) they are stated with emphasis[17].’—­But,