Madhvaon Brahma Sūtra 3.2.13

Thus, t.e., as absolutely non-different; and also as having innumerable identical forms, some sakhins read of Him in their texts (thus): “Though destitute of separate parts, He is of unlimited parts (which are all wholes) of identical essence; He is the cause of ending all mistaken notions (wrong knowledge) j he is the sage who knows that Lord that is declared by the sacred syl- lable * Om ’ and consists of bliss” (Man. IV. 7). Again the statement of separateness, while the non-difference really exists, proceeds from the difference of places and positions themselves as well as from the inconceivable power of the Lord, and as such it is consistent. It is also said in the Brahma Tarka, “ Though the Supreme Lord is destitute of all defects and unassailed by short- comings, still being the witness and the author of bondage, etc., (all the states to which the beings are subject). He is called Baddha (that which is bound). Similarly though the Lord is essentially of indi- vidual character (devoid of parts), still he is spoken of as different individuals on account of His being present in things that are separate.” It has been said that the Lord is of different hues and forms; but that would1 involve destructibility. In reply to this objection, the Sutrakara says: