gItA bhaashhya sudhaa bindavaH by mahAmahopAdhyAya Shri Pullela ShriRamachandrudu Garu

An excellent Telugu translation of Bhagavad Gita Bhashya into Telugu is by mahaamahopaadhyaaya Shri Pullela Shri Ramachandrudu Garu (Shri Pullela Sri Ramachandra Garu). At the end of the translation is a collection of 70+ quotations from gItaa-bhaashhya of shankaraachaarya bhagavadpaada called as gItaa-bhaashhya-sudhaa-binduH (bhagavadgItaa-bhaashhyamuloni konni shankara vacana-sudhaa-binduvulu in Telugu). The following are the originals in transliteration with annotations from Swami Gambhirananda's English translation.

Postscript 1: A pdf version of this post is available from advaitin.net archives at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaitin/files/sudhA_binduH.pdf.pdf. Link posted in this post#47167 of advaitin-list. Thanks a lot to Shri Sunder-ji for numerous corrections, and Shri Subbu-ji for the initial initiative.

Postscript 2: If one wants to see the devanaagari or other versions, they could use the excellent ITRANS-99 software available from Omkarananda Ashram available from http://www.omkarananda-ashram.org/Sanskrit/itranslator99.htm. Or Otherwise, one could use the online converter available from http://www.aczoom.com/itrans/




OM shrii gurubhyo namaH .

1. braahmaNatvasya hi raxaNe raxitaH syaadvaiidiko dharmaH\, tadadhiinatvaadvarNaashramabhedaanaam.h ||upodghAta \- giitaa\-bhaaShya ||

##When the Brahminhood is preserved, the Vedic Dharma becomes well guarded, for the distintions among the castes and stages of life depend on it.##



2. svaprayojanaabhaave.api bhUtaanujighRRixayaa vaidikaM dharmadvayam.h arjunaaya shokamohamahodadhau nimagnaaya upadidesha\, guNaaadhikairhigRRihIto.anushhThiiyamaanashcha dharmaH prachayaM gamishhyatiiti ||upo. bhaa ||

##Although He had no need for Himself, still for the sake of favoring the creatures He imparted that very two fold Vedic dharma to Arjuna who had sunk into the sea of sorrow and delusion, with the idea that dharma would surely propagate if it is accepted and put into by practice by people who are endowed with an abundance of good qualities.##


3. abhyudayaarthau.api yaH pravR^ittilaxaNo dharmau varNanaashramaaMshchoddishya vihitaH\, sa devaadisthaanapraaptiheturapi san.h\, iishvaraaarpaNabuddhayaa anushhTiiyamaanaH\, sattvashuddhaye bhavati phalaabhisaMdhivarjitaH || upo | bhaa ||


##That dharma, characterized by action and enjoined for different castes and stages of life, even though it is meant for acheiving prosperity and attaining heaven etc. yet, when performed with the attitude of dedication to God and without hankering for (selfish) results, leads to the purification of the internal organ (consisting of citta (mindstuff), buddhi (intellect), manas (mind) and ahaMkaara (ego)).##


4. sarvapraaNinaaM shokamohaadidoshhaavishhTachetasaaM svabhaavata eva svadharmaparityaagaH pratishhiddhasevaa cha syaat.h | svadharme pravR^ittinaamapi teshhaaM vaa~NgmanaHkaayaadiinaaM pravR^ittiH phalaabhisaMdhipuurvikaiva saahaMkaaraa cha bhavati || 2.11 ||


##It is thus that in the case of all creatures whose minds come under the sway of the defects of sorrow, delusion etc. there verily follows, as a matter of course, abandoning their own duties and resorting to prohibited ones. Even when they engage in their own duties their actions with speech, mind, body, etc. are certainly motivated by hankering for rewards, and are accompanied by egoism (Egoism consists in thinking that one is the agent of some work and the enjoyer of its result.)##


5. saMsaarabiijabhuutau shokamohau | tayoshcha sarvakarmasaMnyaasa\- pUrvakaadaatmaj~naanaat.h naanyato nivR^itttiriti tadupadidaxuH sarvalokaanugrahaartham.h arjunaM nimittiikR^itya aaha bhagavaanvaasudevaH || 2.11 ||


##Thus, sorrow and delusion are therefore the sources of the cycles of births and deaths. And their cessation comes from nothing other than the knowledge of the Self which is preceded by the renunciation of all duties. Hence, wishing to impart (knowledge of the Self) for favouring the whole world, Lord Vasudeva, making Arjuna the medium said 'ashochyaananvashochastvaM iti' (2.11)##


6. na hi pittaprashamanaarthinaH vaidyena madhuraM shItalaM cha bhoktavyam.h ityupadishhTe tayoranyataratpittaprashamanakaaraNaM brUhi iti prashnaH saMbhavati || 2.11 ||


##Indeed, when a physician tells a patient who has come for a cure of his biliousness that he should take things which are sweet and soothing, there can be no such request as "Tell me which one of these two is to be taken as a means to cure biliousness"!##

7. na hi atra yuddhakartavyataa vidhiiyate\, yuddha pravR^itta eva hi asau shokamohapratibaddhaH tushhNiimaaste | ataH tasya pratibandhaapanayanamaatraM bhagavataa kR^iyate | tasmaat 'yudhyasva' iti anuvaadamaatram\, na vidhiH || 2.18 ||


##Here, there is no injunction to take up the war as a duty, because he (Arjuna), though he was determined for war, remains silent as a result of being overpowered by sorrow and delusion. Therefore, all that is being done by the Lord is the removal of the obstruction of his duty. "Therefore, join the battle" is only an approval, not an injunction.##


8. vidushhaH karmaasaMbhavavachanaat yaani karmaaNi shaastreNa vidhiiyante taani avidushho vihitaani iti bhagavato nishchayo.avagamyate || 2.21 ||


## From the statement that action is impossible for a man of realization it is understood that the conclusion of the Lord is that, actions enjoined by the scriptures are prescribed for the unenlightened. ##


9. shaastraachaaryopadeshashamadamaadisaMskR^itaM manaH aatmadarshane karaNam.h || 2.21 ||

## [In reply to an objection that the Self is beyond any scope of means of knowledge.] The mind that is purified by the instructions of the scriptures and the teacher, control of the body and organs, etc. becomes the instrument for realizing the Self.##


10. naiteshhaaM shlokaanaaM paunaruktyaM chodaniiyam.h\, yataH ekenaiva shlokena aatmanaH nityatvamavikriyatvaM choktam.h ##'##na jaayate mriyate vaa##'## ityaadInaa | tatra yadeva aatmavishhayaM kiMchiduchchate tadetatsmaat shlokaarthaannaatirichyate\; kiMchichchhabdataH punaruktam.h kiMchidarthataH iti | durbodhatvaat.h aatmavastunaH punaH punaH prasa~Ngamaapaadya shabdaantareNa tadeva vastunirUpayati bhagavaan.h vaasudevaH kathaM nu naama saMsaariNaamasaMsaaritvabuddhi\- gocharataamaapannaM sat avyaktaM tattvaM saMsaaranivR^ittaye syaat.h iti || 2.24 ||


##It is not to be argued that 'these verses are repetitive since eternality and changelessness of the Self have been stated in a single verse itself, "Never is this One born, and never does It die," etc. (20). Whatever has been said there (in verse 19) about the Self does not go beyond the meaning of this verse. Something is repeated with those very words, and something ideologically.' Since the object, viz the Self, is inscrutable, therefore Lord Vasudeva raises the topic again and again, and explains that very object in other words so that, somehow, the unmanifest Self may come within the comprehension of the intellect of the transmigrating persons and bring about a cessation of their cycles of births and deaths.##



11. yogasthaH san.h kuru karmaaNi kevalamIshvaraarthanaM\; tatraapi 'iishvaropi me tushhyatu' iti sa~NgaM tyaktvaa || 2.48 ||


##yogasthaH, by becoming established in yoga; O dhananjaya, kuru, undertake; karmaaNi action, for the sake of God alone; even there, tyaktva, casting off, sangam, attached in the form, 'God will be pleased with me'. Undertake work for pleasing God, but not for propitiating Him to become favorable
towards yourself.##

12. sarvatraiva hi adhyaatmashaastre kR^itaarthalaxaNaani yaani taanyeva saadhanaani upadishyante\, yatnasaadhyatvaat.h | yaani yatnasaadhyaani saadhanaani laxaNaani cha bhavanti taani || 2 . 54||


##For in all scriptures without exception, dealing with spirituality, whatever are the characteristics of the man of realization are themselves presented as the disciplines for an aspirant, because these (characteristics) are the result of effort. And those that are disciplines requiring effort, they become the characteristics (of the man of realization). ##


13. taavadeva hi purushhaH yaavadantaHkaraNaM tadiiyaM kaaryaakaarya\- vishhayavivekayogyam.h | tadayogyatve nashhTa eva purushho bhavati || 2.63 ||


##Indeed, a man continues to be himself so long as his mind remains fit to distinguish between what he ought to and ought not to do. When it becomes unfit, a man is verily ruined.##


14. moxasya cha akaaryatvaat.h mumuxoH karmaanarthakyam.h || 3.1 ||

##As Liberation is not a result (of action), actions become useless for one aspiring for Liberation.##


15. yadi vihitaakaraNaat asaMbhaavyamapi pratyavaayaM bruuyaat.h vedaH\, tadaa anarthakaraH vedaH apramaaNamityuktaM syaat.h\; vihitasya karaNaakaraNayoH duHkhamaatraphalatvaat.h || 3.1 ||


##Should the Vedas speak even of the impossible, that sin accrues from the non-performance of enjoined rites, then it will amount to saying that the Vedas are a source of evil and hence invalid! For the result of either doing or not doing what is enjoined would be pain.##


16. tasmaat aj~nena adhikR^itena kartavyameva karma || 3.16 ||


##Action must be undertaken by one who is qualified (for action) but is unenlightened.##



17. praarabdhakarmaayattaH tvaM lokasaMgraham.h eva api lokasya unmaargapravR^ittinivaaraNaM lokasaMgrahaH\, tamevaapi prayojanaM saMpashyan kartum.h arhasi || 3.20 ||

##tvaM: you, who are under the influence of past actions; arhasi, ought; kartum, to perform (your duties); saMpashyan api, keeping also in view; loka-saMgrahaM, the prevention of mankind from going astray; even that purpose.##


18. prakR^itirnaama pUrvakR^itadharmaadharmaadisaMskaaraaH vartamaanajanmaadau abhivyaktaaH || 3.33 ||


##Nature means the impressions of virtue, vice etc. acquired in the past (lives) and which become manifest at the commencement of the present life.##

19. yadi sarvaH jantuH aatmanaH prakR^itisadR^ishameva cheshhTate\, na cha prakR^itishUnyaH kashchit.h asti\, tataH purushhakaarasya vishhayaanupapatteH shaastraanarthakyapraptau idamuchyate || 3.33 ||



##If all beings behave only according to their own nature -- and there is none without nature -- then, since there arises the contingency of the scriptures becoming purposeless owing to the absense of any scope for personal effort, therefore the following is stated [Verse 3.34: indriyasyendriyasyaarthe ...]##

20. yadaa punaH raagadveshhau tatpratipaxeNa niyamayati tadaa shaastradR^ishhTireva purushhaH bhavati\, na prakR^itivashaH || 3.34 ||

##On the other hand, when a person controls love and hatred with the help of their opposites, then he becomes mindful only of scriptural teachings; he ceases to be led by his nature;##


21. kaamo hi udbhUtaH rajaH pravartayan.h purushhaM pravartayati ##'## tR^ishhNayaa hi ahaM kaaritaH ##'## iti duHkhitaanaaM rajaHkaarye sevaadau pravR^ittaanaaM pralaapaH shrUyate || 3.37 ||


##When desire comes into being, it instigates a person by arousing rajas. People who are engaged in service etc. which are effects of rajas, and who are striken with sorrow are heard to lament, "I have been led to act by desire indeed"##

22. ##'## xipraM hi maanushhe loke ##'## iti visheshhaNaat.h anyeshhvapi karmaphalasiddhiM darshayati bhagavaan.h || 4.12 ||

##By the specific statement, "For, in the human world, success comes quickly", the Lord shows that results of actions can accrue even in the other worlds.##

23. tadetat.h uktaprativachanamapi asakR^it.h atyantavipariitadarshanabhaavitatayaa momuhyamaano lokaH shrutamapi asakR^it.h tattvaM vismR^ittya vismR^ittya mithyaaprasa~Ngam.h avataaryaavataarya chodayati iti punaH punaH uttaramaaha bhagavaan.h\, durvij~neyatvaM cha aalaxya vastunaH || 4.18 ||


##Although this answer has been given more than once, still a man becomes repeatedly deluded under the influence of a totallly opposite perception. And forgetting the truth that has been heard again and again, he repeatedly raises false issues and questions! And therefore, observing that the subject is difficult to understand, the Lord gives His answer again and again.##


24. naapi nityaanaam.h akaraNaat.h abhaavaat.h pratyavaayabhaavotpattiH\, ##'## naasato vidyate bhaavaH ##'## iti vachanaat.h ##'## kathaM asataH sajjaayeta' iti cha darshitam.h asataH sajjanmapratishhedhaat.h | asataH sadutpattiM bruvataa asadeva sadbhavet.h\, sa cha api asat.h bhavet.h ityuktaM syaat.h | taccha ayuktam.h sarvapramANavirodhaat.h | na cha nishhphalaM vidadhyaat.h karma shaastram.h\, duHkhasvarUpatvaat.h\, duHkhasya cha buddhipuurvakatayaa kaaryatvaanupapatteH | tadakaraNe cha narakapaataabhyupagamaat.h anarthaayaiiva ubhayathaa api karaNe cha akaraNe cha shaastraM nishhphalaM kalpitaM syaat.h || 4.18 ||

##Nor can any evil, which is an entity, arise from the non-performance of nityakarmas, which is an non-entity, for there is the statement, "Of the unreal, there is no non-being"2.16, and (in the Upanishad) it has been pointed out, "How can existence originate from non-existence?" (Ch. 4.2.2). Since emergence of the existent from the nonexistent has been denied, therefore anyone's assertion that the existence originates from the nonexistent will amount to saying that a non-entity becomes an entity, and an entity becomes a non-entity. And that is not rational because it runs counter to all the means of valid knowledge.


Further, the scriptures cannot enjoin fruitless actions, they being naturally painful; and it is illogical that what is painful should be done intentionally. Also, if it is admitted that falling into hell results from their non-performace (i.e., of the nityakarmas), the that too is surely a source of evil. In either case, whether one undertakes them or not, the scriptures will be imagines to be useless. And that will be a contradiction with your standpoint when, after holding that the nityakarmas are fruitless, you assert that they lead to Liberation.##

25. j~naanavanto.api kechit yathaavat.h tattvadarshanashiilaaH\, apare na \; ato vishinashhTi tattvadarshinaH iti| ye samyagdarshinaH taiH upadishhTaM j~naanaM kaaryaxamaM bhavati netarat.h iti bhagavato matam.h || 4.34 ||


##Although people may be wise, some of them are apt to know the Truth just as it is, while others may not be so. Hence the qualification, "why have realized the Truth". The considered view of the Lord is that Knowledge imparted by those who have full enlightenment becomes effective, not any other.##

26. saMnyaasakarmayogau j~naanatadupaayasamabuddhitvaadisaMyuktau saaMkhyayogashabdavaachchyau iti bhagavato matam.h || 5.4 ||

##Those very 'renunciation' and 'karma-yoga', when they are (respectively) associated with Knowledge and such of Its means as equanimity etc. are meant by the words "Samkhya" and "yoga". This is Lord's view.##

27. dR^ishyate hi brahmavit.h shhaDa~Ngavit.h chaturvedavit.h iti puujaadaanaadau guNavisheshhasaMbandhaH kaaraNam.h || 5.19 ||

##It is indeed seen that in worship, charity, etc., the determining factors are the possession of such special qualities as being 'a knower of Brahman', 'versed in the six auxiliary branches of Vedic learning', and 'versed in the four Vedas'.##


28. svaM naasikaagraM saMprexya samyak.h prexaNam.h darshanaM kR^itveva iti | ivashabdo lupto drashhTavyaH | na hi svanaasikaagrasaMprexaNamiha vidhitsitam.h | kiM tarhi ? chaxushho dR^ishhTisaMnipaataH | sa cha antaHkaraNasamaadhaanaapexo vivaxitaH | svanaasikaagrasaMprexaNameva chet.h vivaxitam.h\, manaH tatraiva samaadhiiyeta\, naatmani || 6.13 ||


##svaM naasikaagraM, at the tip of his own nose -- looking at it intently, as it were; ca, and anavalokyam, not looking; dishah, around, i.e., not glancing in various directions -- The words 'as it were' are to be understood because what is intended here is not an injunction for looking at the tip of one's own nose! What then? It is the fixing of the gaze of the eyes by withdrawing it from external objects; and that is enjoined with a view to concentrating the mind. (What is sought to be presented here as the primary objective is the concentration of mind. If the gaze be directed outward, then it will result in interrupting that concentration. Therefore the purpose is to first fix the gaze of the eyes within.) If the intention were merely the looking at the tip of the nose, then the mind would remain fixed there itself, not on the Self.##


29. ekasya devasya sarvaadhyaxabhuutachaitanyamaatrasya paramaarthataH sarvabhogaanabhisaMbandhinaH anyasya chetanaantarasya abhaave bhoktuH anyasya abhaavaat.h | kiMnimittaa iyaM sR^ishhTiH ityatra prashnaprativachane anupapanne\, ##'## ko addhaa veda ka iha pravochat.h | kutam aajaataa kuta iyaM visR^ishhTiH ##'## ityaadimantravarNebhyaH || 9. 10 ||


##Threre is no other conscious being apart from the one Deity -- who is the witness of all as the absolute Consciousness, and who in reality has no contact with any kind of enjoyment -- therefore there is no other enjoyer. Hence, in this context, the question, "For what purpose is this creation?", and its answer are baseless -- in accordance with the Vedic text, "Who know (It) truly, who can fully speak about this here? From where has this come? From where is this variegated creation? (3.54.5, 10.129.6)"##


30. j~naanadiipena vivekapratyayaruupeNa bhaktiprasaadasnehaabhishhiktena madbhaavanaabhiniveshavaateritena brahmacharyaadisaadhanasaMskaarava\- tpraj~naavartinaa viraktaantaHkaraNaadhaareNa vishhayavyaavR^ittachitta\- raagadveshhaakalushhitanivaataapavarakasthena nityapravR^ittaikaagryadhyaana\- janitasamyagdarshanabhaasvataa j~naanadiipenetyarthaH || 10.11 ||


##j~naanadiipena, with the lamp of Knowledge , in the form of discriminating comprehension; i.e., bhaasvataa, with the luminous lamp of Knowledge -- fed by the oil of divine grace resulting from devotion, fanned by the wind of intensity of meditation on Me, having the wick of the intellect imbued with the impressions arising from such disciplines as celibacy etc. in the receptacle of the detached mind, placed in the windless shelter of the mind withdrawn from objects and untainted by likes and dislikes, and made luminous by full Illumination resulting from the practise of constant concentration and meditation. [Who says there is no poetry in bhaashhya literature?]##

31. brahmaaNaM chaturmukham.h iisham.h iishitaaraM prajaanaaM kamalaasanasthaM pR^ithiviipadmamadhye merukarNikaasanasthamityarthaH || 11.15 ||

##Brahma, with four faces; iisham, the Ruler of creatures; kamalaasana-stham sitting on a lotus seat, i.e., sitting on Mount Meru which forms the pericarp of the lotus that is the earth;##


32. na hi iishvaradvayaM saMbhavati anekeshvaratve vyavahaaraanupapatteH || 11. 43 ||


##There is no possibility of two Gods. Because all dealings will come to naught if there be many Gods.##


33. yathaa agastyena braahmaNena samudraH piitaH iti idaaniiMtanaaH api braahmaNaaH braahmaNatvasaamaanyaat.h stuuyante . evaM karmaphalatyaagaat.h karmayogasya shreyaHsaadhanatvamabhihitam.h || 12.12 ||


##As for instance, by saying that the sea was drunk by Brahmin Agastya, the Brahmanas of the present day are also praised owing to the similarity of Brahminhood. In this way it has been said that karma-yoga becomes a means for Liberation, since it involves renunciation of the rewards of works.##


34. avidyaamaatraM saMsaaraH yathaadR^ishhTivishhayaH eva | na xetraj~nasya
kevalasya avidyaa tatkaaryaM cha | na cha mithyaaj~naanaM paramaarthavastu
duushhayituM samartham.h | na hi uushhaaradeshaM snehena pa~NkiikartuM shaknoti
mariichyudakam.h | tathaa avidyaa xetraj~nasya na kiMchit.h kartuM shaknoti |
ataH uktam.h idam-- ##'## xetraj~naM chaapi maaM viddhi ##'##\, ##'## aj~naanenaavR^itaM j~naanam.h ##'##
iti cha || 13.2 ||


##The mundane state consists of nothing but ignorance, and is an object of perception (to the ignorant man who sees it) just as it appears to him. Ignorance and its effects do not belong to the Knower of the field, the Absolute. Moreover, false knowledge cannot taint the supreme Reality. For, water in a mirage cannot make a desert muddy with its moisture. Similarly, ignorance cannot act in any way on the Knower of the field. Hence has this been said, "And understand Me to be the knower of the field" [13.2], as also, "Knowledge remains covered by ignorance" [5.15]##

35. nanu sarvaxetreshhu eka eva iishvaraH\, na anyaH tadvyatiriktaH bhoktaa vidyate chet.h\, tataH iishvarasya saMsaaritvaM praaptam.h\; iishvaravyatirekeNa vaa saMsaariNaH anyasya abhaavaat.h saMsaaraabhaavaprasa~NgaH | tachcha ubhayamanishhTam.h bandhamoxataddhetushaastraanarthakyaprasa~Ngaat.h\, pratyaxaadipramaaNavirodhaachcha | pratyaxeNa taavat.h sukhaduHkhataddhetulaxaNaH saMsaaraH upalabhyate\; jagadvaiichitryopalabdheshcha dharmaadharmanimittaH saMsaaraH anumiiyate | sarvametat.h anupapannamaatmeshvaraikatve | na \; j~naanaaj~naanayoH anyatvenopapatteH ||13.2||

##Objection: Well, if it be that in all the fields there exists God alone, and none else other than Him, as the enjoyer, then God will become a mundane being; or due to the absense of any mundane creature other than God, there will arise the contingency of the negation of mundane existence. And both these are undesirable, since the scriptures dealing with bondage, Liberation and their causes will become useless, and also because they contradict such valid means of knowledge as direct perception.

In the first place, mundane existence which is characterized by happiness, sorrow and their cause is apprehended through direct perception. Besides, from the perception of variety in the world it can be inferred that mundane existence results from virtue and vice. All this becomes illogical if God and individual soul be one.

Reply: No, because this becomes justifiable owing to the difference between Knowledge and Ignorance.##

36. sarvajantuunaaM hi prasiddhaH dehaadishhu anaatmasu aatmabhaavaH nishchitaH avidyaakR^itaH\, yathaa sthaaNau purushhanishchayaH . na cha etaavataa purushhadharmaH sthaaNoH bhavati\, sthaaNudharmo vaa purushhasya . tathaa na chaitanyadharmo dehasya\, dehadharmo vaa chetanasya . sukhaduHkhamohaatmakatvaadiH aatmanaH na yuktaH\; avidyaakR^itatvaavisheshhat.h\, jaraamR^ityutvaat.h ||13.2||



##It is a well known fact in the case of all creatures that their self-identity with the body etc. which are not Self is definitely caused by ignorance. Just as, when a stump of tree is firmly regarded as a man, the qualities of a man do not thereby come to exist in the stump, nor do the qualities of the stump come to the person, similarly the property of consciousness does not come to the body, nor those of the body to the consciousness. It is not proper that the Self should be identified with happiness, sorrow, delusion etc., since they, like decreptitude and death, are equally the products of ignorance.##



36*. saMsaarasaMsaaritvaabhaave shaastraanarthakyaadidoshhaH syaaditi chet.h\, na \; sarvairabhyupagatatvaat.h | sarvaiH hi aatmavaadibhiH abhyupagataH doshhaH na ekena parihartavyaH bhavati | katham.h abhyupagataH iti \? muktaatmanaaM hi saMsaarasaMsaaritvavyavahaaraabhaavaH sarvaireva aatmaavaadibhiH ishhyate | na cha teshhaaM shaastraanarthakyaadidoshhapraaptiH abhyupagataa | tathaa naH xetraj~naanaam iishvaraikatve sati\, shaastraanarthakyaM bhavatu\; avidyaavishhaye cha arthavattvam.h -- yathaa dvaitavaadinaaM sarveshhaaM bandhaavasthaayaameva shaastraadyarthavattvaM\, na muktaavasthaayaaM\, evam.h ||13.2||

##Objection: Owing to the nonexistence of the world and the mundane creatures, there will arise the defect of the uselessness of the scriptures, etc.

Reply: No, snce this (defect) is admitted by all. A defect that is admitted by all who believe in the Self is not be explained by one alone!

Objection: How has this been admitted by all?

Reply: People of all schools of thought who believe in the Self admit that there is no wordly behaviour or the behaviour of a worldling in the liberated ones. Yet, in their case (i.e., in those various schools), it is not admitted that there is any possibility of such a defect as the scriptures becoming useless etc. Similarly, in our case let the scriptures be useless when the knowers of the field become identified with God; and purposeful within the sphere of ignorance. This is just as in the case of all the dualists, where it is admitted that the scriptures etc. become useful in the state of bondage, not in the case of Liberation.
##




37. atha kimidaM saMsaariNaamiva ##'## ahamevam.h ##'##\, ##'## mamaivedam.h ##'## iti
paNDitaanaamapi \? shruNu\; idaM tat.h paaNDityam.h\, yat.h xetre eva
aatmadarshanam.h | yadi punaH xetraj~nam.h avikriyaM pashyeyuH\, tataH
na bhogaM karma vaa aakaaMxeyuH ##'## mama syaat.h ##'## iti | vikriyaiva bhogakarmaNii ||13.2||

##Objection: Then, what is this that even learned say like the worldly people, 'Thus amd I', 'This verily belongs to Me'?

Reply: Listen. This is the learnedness which consists in seeing the field as the Self! On the contrary, they should realize the unchanging Knower of the field, then they will not crave for enjoyment or action with the idea, 'May this be mine.' Enjoyment and action are mere perversions.
##


38. idaM cha anyat.h paaNDityaM keshhaaMchit.h astu -- xetraj~naH iishvara eva | xetraM cha anyat.h xetraj~nasyaiva vishhayaH | ahaM tu saMsaarii sukhii duHkhii cha | saMsaaroparamashcha mama kartavyaH xetraxetravij~naanena\, dhyaanena cha iishvaraM xetraj~naM saaxaatkR^itvaa tatsvaruupaavasthaaneneti | yashcha evaM budhyate\, yashcha bodhayati\, naasau xetraj~naH iti | evaM manvaanaH yaH saH paNDitaapasadaH\, saMsaaramoxayoH shaastrasya cha arthavattvaM karomiiti\; aatmahaa svayaM muuDhaH anyaaMshcha vyaamohayati shaastraarthasaMpradaayarahitatvaat.h shrutahaanim.h ashrutakalpanaaM cha kurvan.h | tasmaat.h asaMpradaayavidapi sarvashaastravidapi muurkhavadeva upexayaNiiyaH ||13.2||


##Some may have this other kind of learnedness: "The Knower of the field is God Himself; and the field is something different and an object of knowledge to the Knower of the field. But I am a mundane being, happy and sorrowful. And it is my duty to bring about the cessation of worldly existence through the knowledge of the field and the Knower of the field, and by continuing to dwell in His true nature after directly perceiving through meditation God, the Knower of the field." And he who understands this, he who teaches that 'he (the taught) is not the knower of the field,' and he who, being under such an idea, thinks, 'I shall render meaningful the scriptures dealing with the worldly state and Liberation' -- is the meanest among the learned. That Self-immolator, being devoid of any link with the traditional interpreters of the purport of the scriptures, misinterprets what is enjoined in the scriptures and imagines what is not spoken there, and thereby himself becoming deluded, befools others too. Hence, one who is not a knower of the traditional interpretation is to be ignored like a fool, though he may be versed in all the scriptures.##


39. atra aaha -- saa avidyaa kasya iti | yasya dR^ishyate tasya eva | kasya dR^ishyate iti | atra uchyate -- ##'## avidyaa kasya dR^ishyate\?##'## iti prashnaH nirarthakaH | katham.h\? dR^ishyate chet.h avidyaa\, tadvantamapi pashyasi | na cha tadvati upalabhyamaane ##'## saa kasya ##'## iti prashno yuktaH | na hi gomati upalabhyamaane ##'## gaavaH kasya\?##'## iti prashnaH arthavaan.h bhavati | nanu vishhamo dR^ishhTaantaH | gavaaM tadvatashcha pratyaxatvaat.h tatsaMbandho.api pratyaxa iti prashno nirarthakaH | na tathaa avidyaa tadvaaMshcha pratyaxau\, yataH prashnaH nirarthakaH syaat.h | apratyaxeNa avidyaavataa avidyaasaMbandhe j~naate\, kiM tava syaat.h \? avidyaayaaH anarthahetutvaat.h parihartavyaa syaat.h | yasya avidyaa\, saH taaM pariharishhyati | nanu mamaiva avidyaa | jaanaasi tarhi avidyaaM tadvantaM cha aatmaanam.h ||13.2||


##Here, (the opponent) asks: to whom does ignorance belong?

(The answer is that) it belongs verily to him by whom it is experienced!

Objection: In whom is it perceived?

Reply: Here the answer is: It is pointless to ask, 'In whom is ignorance experienced?'

Objection: How?

Reply: If ignorance be perceived by (you), then you perceive its possessor as well. Moreover, when that possessor of ignorance is perceived it is not reasonable to ask, 'In whom is it perceived?' For when an owner of cattle is seen, the question, 'To whom do the cattle belong', does not become meaningful.

Objection: Well, is not the illustration dissimilar? Since the cattle and their owner are directly perceived, their relation also is directly perceived. Hence the question is meaningless. Ignorance and its possessor are not directly perceived in that manner, in which case the question would have been meaningless.

Reply: What will it matter to you if you know the relation of ignorance with a person who is not directly perceived as possessed of ignorance?

Opponent: Since ignorance is a source of evil, thefore it should be got rid of.

Reply: He to whom ignorance belongs will get rid of it!

Opponent: Indeed ignorance belongs to myself.

Reply: In that case, you know ignorance as also youself who possess it?
##


40. sarvo hi shabdaH arthaprakaashanaaya prayuktaH\, shruuyamaaNashcha shrotRRibhiH\, jaatikriyaaguNasaMbandhadvaareNa sa.nketagrahaNasavyapexaH arthaM pratyaayayati\; na anyathaa\, adR^ishhTatvaat.h | tat.h yathaa -- ##'##gauH##'## \, ##'##ashvaH##'## iti vaa jaatitaH\, ##'## pachati'\, ##'## paThati##'## iti vaa kriyaataH\, ##'## shuklaH####\, ##'## kR^ishhNaH ##'## iti vaa guNataH\, ##'##dhanii ##'##\, ##'## gomaan.h ##'## iti vaa saMbandhataH || 13.12 ||


##For every word used for expressing an object, when heard by listeners, makes them understand its meaning through the comprehension of its significance with the help of genus, action, quality and relation; not in other way, because that is not a matter of experience. To illustrate this: a cow, a horse, etc. (is comprehended) through genus; cooking or reading, through action; white or black through quality; a rich person or an owner of cows through relation.##

41. kaH punaH ayaM saMsaaro naama\? sukhaduHkhasaMbhogaH saMsaaraH | purushhasya sukhaduHkhaanaaM saMbhoktR^itvaM saMsaaritvamiti || 13.20 ||


##What again is this that is called wordly existence? Worldly existence consists in the experience of happiness and sorrow; and the state of mundane existence of the soul consists in its being the experiencer of happiness and sorrow.##


42. yathaashaastraM xetraxetraj~nalaxaNabhedaparij~naanapuurvakaM praak.h darshitaruupaat.h xetraat.h mu~njaadiva ishhiikaaM yathoktalaxaNaM xetraj~naM pravibhajya ##'## na sattannaasaduchyate ##'## ityanena nirastasarvopaadhivisheshhaM j~neyaM brahmasvaruupeNa yaH pashyati\, xetraM cha maayaanirmitahasti\- svapradR^ishhTavastugandharvanagaraadivat.h ##'## asadeva sadiva avabhaasate ##'## iti evaM nishchitavij~naanaH yaH tasya yathoktasamyagdarshanavirodhaat.h apagachchhati mithyaaj~naanam.h ||13.26||


##After having known the distintion between and the characteristics of the field and the Knower of the field according to the scriptures, and having separated, like a stalk from Munjaa-grass, the above-described Knower of the field from the field whose characteristics have been shown earlier, he who realizes the Knowable (i.e., the Knower of the field) -- which, in accordance with 'That is neither called being nor non-being' (12), is devoid of all distinctions created by adjuncts created by adjuncts, -- as identical with Brahman; and he who has the firm realization that the field is surely unreal like an elephat created by magic, a thing seen in a dream, an imaginary city seen in the sky, etc. and it appears., and it appears as though real -- for him false knowledge becomes eradicated, since it is opposed to the right knowledge described above.##


43. etasmin.h paramaarthasaaMkhyadarshane sthitaanaaM j~naananishhThaanaaM paramahaMsaparivraajakaanaaM tiraskR^itaavidyaavyavahaaraaNaaM karmaadhikaaro naasti iti tatra tatra darshitaM bhagavataa || 13.31 ||


##It has been accordingly shown by the Lord in various places that there is no duty to be performed by those who adhere to this philosophy of discriminating knowledge of the supreme Reality, who are steadfast in Knowledge, who have spurned actions arising out of ignorance, and who are mendicants belonging to the highest Order of monks.##

44. yadyapi udaasiinaa bhavanti kechit.h svaabhipraayeNa\, tathaapi paraabhipraayeNa mitraaripaxayoriva bhavanti iti . ayaM tu tulyo mitraaripaxayoH ityaaha || 14.25 ||


##mitra-ari-paxayoh both towards the side of the friend and of the foe -- although from their own standpoint some may be unattached, still, in others' view they may appear to be siding either with friends or foes; hence it is said 'equally disposed both towards the side of the friend and of the foe'##


45. ##'## udaasiinavat.h ##'## ityaadi ##'## guNaatiitaH sa uchyate ##'## ityetadantam.h uktaM yaavat.h yatnasaadhyaM taavat.h saMnyaasinaH anushhTheyaM guNaatiitatvasaadhanaM mumuxoH\, sthiriibhuutaM tu svasaMvedyaM sat.h guNaatiitasya yateH laxaNaM bhavati iti || 14.26 ||


##The disciplines leading to the state of transcendence of the qualities, which have been stated (in the verses) beginning from 'he who, sitting like one indifferent,' and ending with 'he is said to have gone beyond qualities,' have to be practised by a monk, a seeker of Liberation, so long as they are to be achieved through effort. But when they become firmly ingrained, they become the indications, perceivable to himself, of a monk who has transcended the qualities.##

46. yathaa cha iishvarashaktyaa bhaktaanugrahaadiprayojanaaya brahma pratitishhThate pravartate\, saa shaktiH brahmaiva aham.h\, shaktishaktimatoH ananyatvaat.h ityabhipraayaH || 14.27 ||


##Indeed, that power of God through which Brahman sets out, comes forth, for the purpose of favoring the devotees etc. that power which is Brahman Itself, amd I. For a power and the possessor of that power are non-different.##


47. viraktasya hi saMsaaraat.h bhagavattatvaj~naane adhikaaraH\, na anyasyeti || 15.1 ||


##The competence for the knowledge of the nature of God is only his who has become detached from the world; not of any other.##



48. mamaiva paramaatmanaH naaraayaNasya\, aMshaH bhaagaH avayavaH ekadeshaH iti anarthaantaraM\, jiivaloke jiivaanaaM loke saMsaare jiivabhuutaH kartaa bhoktaa iti prasiddhaH sanaatanaH chiraMtanaH\; yathaa jalasuuryakaH suuryaaMshaH jalanimittaapaaye suuryameva gatvaa na nivartate cha tenaiva aatmanaa gachchhati\, evameva\; yathaa vaa ghaTaadyupaadhiparichchhinno ghaTaadyaakaashaH aakaashaaMshaH san.h ghaTaadinimittaapaaye aakaashaM praapya na nivartate ityevam | ataH upapannam.h uktam.h ##'## yadgatvaa na nivartante ##'## iti || 15.7 ||

##It is eva: verily aMshaH, a part, portion, limb, fragment -- these are all synonymous; mama, of mine, of the supreme Self; which jiiva-bhuutaH sanaatanaH becoming the eternal individual soul, well known as the enjoyer and the agent; jiiva-loke, in the region of living beings, i.e., in the world --

As the sun (reflected) in water is a part of the (actual) sun, and goes to the sun itself and does not return when the water, the cause of the reflection, is removed, so also even this part becomes similarly united with that very Self; of, as space enclosed in a pot., etc, delimited by such adjuncts as the pot etc. being a part of Space does not return after being united with Space when the cause (of limitation), viz pot etc. is destroyed. This being so, it has been rightly stated, 'by reaching which they do not return'
##


49. nanu niravayavasya paramaatmanaH kutaH avayavaH ekadeshaH aMshaH iti\? saavayavatve cha vinaashaprasa~NgaH avayavavibhaagaat.h | naishha doshhaH\, avidyaakR^itopaadhiparichchhinnaH ekadeshaH aMshaH eva kalpito yataH || 15.7 ||

##Objection: How can the partless supreme Self have any limb, fragment or part? If it has limbs, then there arises the contingency of Its becoming destroyed through the dismemberment of the limbs?

Reply: This fault does not arise, since Its fragment, which is delimited by an adjunct arising out of ignorance, is imagined to be a part, as it were.
##





50. aadityaadishhu hi sattvaM atyantaprakaasham.h atyantabhaasvaram.h\; ataH tatraiva aavistaraM jyotiH iti tat.h vishishhyate\, na tu tatraiva tat.h adhikamiti | yathaa hi shloke tulye.api mukhasaMsthaane na kaashhThakuDyaadau mukham.h aavirbhavati\, aadarshaadau tu svachchhe svachchhatare cha taaratamyena aavirbhavati\; tadvat.h || 15.12 ||


##Since in the sun etc. the sattva is very much in evidence, is greatly brilliant, therefore there is an abundance of the light (of Consciousness) in them alone. And so it (sun etc.) is specially mentioned. But it is not that it (Consciousness) is abundant only there there. Indeed, as in the world, a face, though in the same position, is not reflected in wood, a wall etc., but in a mirror etc. it is reflected according to the degree in which there are more and more transparent, so is it here.##



51. guNasaMkhyaane kaapile shaastre tadapi guNasaMkhyaanashaastraM guNabhoktR^ivishhaye pramaaNameva | paramaarthabrahmaikatvavishhaye yadyapi virudhyate\, tathaapi te hi kaapilaaH guNaagauNavyaapaaraniruupaNe abhiyuktaaH iti tachchhaastramapi vaxyamaaNaarthastutyarthatvena upaadiiyate iti na virodhaH || 18.19 ||


##Even that philosophy teaching about the guNaas is certainly valid so far as it concerns the experiencer of the guNaas, though it is contradictory so far as the non-duality of the supreme Reality, Brahman, is concerned. Those followers of Kapila are acknowledged authorities in the ascertainment of the functions of the guNaas and their derivatives. Hence, that scripture, too, is being referred to by way of eulogy of the subject-matter going to be spoken of. Therefore, there is no contradiction.##



52. eteshhaaM jaativihitaanaaM karmaNaaM samyaganushhThitaanaaM svargapraaptiH phalaM svabhaavataH || 18.44 ||

##When rightly pursued, the natural result of these duties enjoined for the castes is the attainment of heaven.##

53. svabhaavaniyataM karma kurvaaNo vishhajaH iva kR^imiH kilbishhaM na aapnotiiti uktam.h || 18.48 ||


##It has been said that, as in the case of a worm born in poison, a person does not incur sin while performing his duties which have been dictated by his own nature;##


54. sahajasya karmaNaH svadharmaakhyasya parityaagena paradharmaanushhThaane.api doshhaat.h naiva muchyate\; bhayaavahashcha paradharmaH || 18.48 ||


##One does not get freed from evil by giving up the duty to which one is born -- called one's own duty -- even though (he may be) fulfilling somebody else's duty, Another's duty, too, is fraught with fear.##

55. ekasya abhaavaH\, dvayoH abhaavaH\, sarvasya abhaavaH\, praagabhaavaH\,
pradhvaMsaabhaavaH\, itaretaraabhaavaH\, atyantaabhaavaH iti laxaNato na kenachit.h
visheshho darshayituM shakyaH || 18.48 ||


##Through such descriptions (of abhaava, nonexistence) as nonexistence of one, nonexistence of two, nonexistence of all, antecendent nonexistence, nonexistence after destruction, mutual nonexistence and absolute nonexistence, nobody can show any distinction (as regards nonexistence itself).##


56. vidvaaMstu punaH vidyayaa avidyaayaaM nivR^ittaayaaM shaknotyeva asheshhataH karma parityaktum.h\, avidyaa.adhyaaropitasya sheshhaanupapatteH | na hi taimirikadR^ishhTayaa adhyaaropitasya dvichandraadeH timiraapagame.api sheshhaH avatishhThate ||18.48||


##[The unelightened person is incapable of totally renouncing actions even for a moment (3.5).] The enlightened person, on the other hand, can totally renounce actions when ignorance has been dispelled through Illumination; for it is illogical that there can (then) remain any trace of what has been superimposed through ignorance. Indeed, no trace remains of the two moons, etc. superimposed by the vision affected by (the disease called) Timira when the disease is cured.##


57. j~naanaatmanoshcha ubhayoH niraakaaratve kathaM tadbhaavanaanishhThaa iti\? na\: atyantanirmalatvaatisvachchhatvaatisuuxmatvopapatteH aatmanaH | budhdeshcha aatmavat.h nairmalyaadyupapatteH aatmachaitanyaakaaraabhaasatvopapattiH | buddhyaabhaasaM manaH\, tadaabhaasaani indriyaaNi\, indriyaabhaasashcha dehaH | ataH laukikaiH dehamaatre eva aatmadR^ishhTiH kriyate || 18.50 ||


##Since it can be established that the Self is supremely taintless, pure and subtle, and it can also be established that the intellect can have taintless etc. like the Self, therefore it stands to reason that the intellect can take a form resembling the consciousness of the Self. The mind becomes impressed with the semblance of the intellect; the organs becomes impressed with the semblance of the mind; and the body becomes impressed with the semblance of the organs. Hence it is that the idea of the body itself being the Self is held by ordinary people.##


58. kechittu paNDitaMmanyaaH ##'## niraakaaratvaat.h aatmavastu na upaiti buddhiH| ataH duHsaadhyaa samyagj~naananishhTaa ##'## ityaahuH | satyam.h\, evaM gurusaMpradaayarahitaanaam.h ashrutavedaantaanaam.h atyantabahi\- rvishhayaasaktabuddhiinaaM samyakpramaaNeshhu akR^itashramaaNaam.h | tadvipariitaanaaM tu laukikagraahakadvaitavastuni sadbhuddhiH nitaraaM duHsaMpaadyaa\, aatmachaitanyavyatirekeNa vastvantarasya anupalabdheH ||18.50||


##However, some wiseacres assert that the intellect cannot comprehend the entity called the Self since it is formless; hence, complete steadfastness in Knowledge is impossible. This is truly so for those who have not associated with a traditional like of teachers; who have not heard the Upanishads; whose intellects are too much engrossed with external objects; and who have not applied themselves diligently to the perfect means of knowledge. For those, on the other hand, who are the opposite of these, it is absolutely impossible to have the idea of reality with regard to empirical objects, which are within the realm of duality involving the knower and the known, because in their case there is no perception of any other thing apart from the Consciousness that is the Self.##



59. yathaa svadehasya parichchhedaaya na pramaaNaantaraapexaa\, tato.api aatmanaH antaratamatvaat.h tadavagatiM prati na pramaaNaantaraapexaa; || 18.50 ||


##Just as for knowing one's own body there is no need for any other (external) means of knowledge, so also there is no need of any other means of knowledge for the realization of the Self which is innermost (in relation to the body etc.)##


60. dhyaanayogaparaH nityaM nityagrahaNaM mantrajapaadyanyakartavyaabhaava\- pradarshanaartham.h || 18.52 ||


##dhyaana-yoga-parah -- nityam (ever) is used to indicate the absence of other duties like repetition of mantra (A formula of prayer sacred to any diety) etc.##


61. na hi puurvasamudraM jigamishhoH praatilomyena pratyaksamudrajigamishhuNaa samaanamaargatvaM saMbhavati | pratyagaatmavishhayapratyayasaMtaanakaraNaabhiniveshashcha j~naananishhThaa . saa cha pratyaksamudragamanavat.h karmaNaa sahabhaavitvena virudhyate | parvatasarshhapayoriva antaravaan.h virodhaH pramaaNavidaaM nishchitaH || 18.55 ||

##[Besides, Liberation consists in being established in the changeless real nature of the indwelling Self. Indeed, ] it is not possible that one who wants to go to the eastern sea and the other who wants to go in the opposite direction to the western sea can have the same course!

And steadfastness in Knowledge consists in being totally absorbed in maintaining a current of thought with regard to the indwelling Self. And that is opposed to coexistence with duties, like going to western sea. It has been the conclusion of those versed in the valid means of knowledge that the difference between them is as wide as that between a mountain and a mustard seed.##


62. akaaryatvaachcha niHshreyasasya karmasaadhanatvaanupapattiH | na hi nityaM vastuH karmaNaa j~naanena va kriyate || 18.66 ||


##[... The highest good cannot be attained through mere actions, nor by a combination of Knowledge and action. Besides,] since Liberation is not a product, thefore it is illogical that it should have action as its means. Indeed, an eternal entity cannot be produced by either action or Knowledge.##


63. na karmaNo.asti niHshreyasasaadhanatvam.h | na cha j~naanakarmaNoH samuchchitayoH | naapi j~naanasya kaivalyaphalasya karmasaahaayyaapexaa\, avidyaanivart0akatvena virodhaat.h . na hi tamaH tamasaH nivartakam.h . ataH kevalameva j~naanaM niHshreyasasaadhanam.h iti || 18.66 ||


##Action does not constitute the means to the highest good. Nor do Knowledge and action in combination. Further, Knowledge which has Liberation as its result can have no dependence on the assistance of action, because, being the remover of ignorance, it is opposed (to action). Verily, darkness cannot be dispeller of darkness. Therefore, Knowledge alone is the means to the highest good.##


64. avihitamapratishhiddhaM cha karma tatkaalaphalam.h\, na tu shaastrachoditaM pratishhiddhaM vaa tatkaalaphalaM bhavet.h || 18.66 ||


##Actions which have not been enjoined or prihibited (by the scriptures) produce immediate results. But those enjoined or prohibited by the scriptures do not produce immediate results.##


65. bhakteH punargrahaNaat.h bhaktimaatreNa kevalena shaastrasaMpradaane paatraM bhavatiiti gamyate || 18.68 ||


##By the repetition of (the word) bhakti (devotion) [in the word madbhakteshu] it is understood that one becomes fit for being taught (this) Scripture by virtue of devotion alone to Him.##


66. shishhyasya shaastraarthagrahaNaagrahaNavivekabubhutsyayaa pR^ichchhati | tadagrahaNe j~naate punaH graahayishhyaami upaayaantareNaapi iti prashhTuH abhipraayaH | yatnaantaraM cha aasthaaya shishhyasya kR^itaarthataa kartavyaa iti aachaaryadharmaH pradarshito bhavati || 18.72 ||


##In order to ascertain whether or not the disciple has comprehended the meaning of the Scripture, the Lord asks (the following question), the intention of the questioner being, "If it is known that it has not been comprehended, I shall again make him grasp it through other means." Hereby is shown the duty of the teacher that a student should be made to achieve his goal by taking the help of a different method.##

67. anena mohanaashaprashnaprativachanena sarvashaastraarthaj~naanaphalam.h etaavadeveti nishchitaM darshitaM bhavati\, yataH j~naanaat.h mohanaashaH aatmasmR^itilaabhashcheti || 18.73 ||

##By this question about the destruction of delusion and the answer to it, it becomes conclusively revealed that the fruit derived from understanding the import of the entire Scripture is this much alone -- which is the destruction of delusion arising from ignorance and the regaining of memory about the Self.##

68. yathaa cha saattvikaadipurushhaH sattvaadikaaryaaNi aatmaanaM prati prakaashya nivR^ittaani kaa~Nxati\, na tathaa guNaatiito nivR^ittaani kaa~Nxati ityarthaH | etat.h na parapratyaxaM li~Ngam.h | kiM tarhi\? svaatmapratyaxatvaat.h aatmavishhayameva etat.h laxaNam.h | na hi svaatmavishhayaM dveshhamaakaa~NxaaM vaa paraH pashyati || 14.22 ||

##Unlike a person having sattva etc. who longs for the effects of sattva etc. which withdraw themselves after becoming manifest to him, the person who has gone beyond the qualities na kaaNxati, does not long for them in that way, nivrittani, when the disappear. This is the idea.

This is not an indication that can be perceived by others. What then? Since this characteristic is perceivable to oneself, it is merely subjective. For dislike or longing, which is a subjective experience of a person, is not seen by another.##

69. xetraxetrayoH vishhayavishhayiNoH bhinnasvabhaavayoH itaretarataddharmaadhyaasa\- laxaNaH saMyogaH xetraxetraj~nasvaruupavivekaabhaavanibandhanaH\, rajjushuktikaadiinaaM tadvivekaj~naanaabhaavaat.h adhyaaropitasarparajataadisaMyogavat.h | saH ayaM adhyaasasvaruupaH xetraxetraj~nayoH saMyogaH mithyaaj~naanalaxaNaH || ##(## brahmasuutrabhaashhyasthaadhyaasabhaashhya gatavaakyaanukaari vaakyam ##)## || 13.26 ||

##[Objection: What is meant by this 'association of the field, and the Knower of the field'?

Reply: The answer is:] The association of the field and the Knower of the field -- which are the object and the subject, respectively, and are of different natures -- is in the form of superimposition of each of the other as also of their qualities, as a consequence of the absence of discrimination between the real natures of the field and the Knower of the field. This is like association of a rope, nacre, etc. with the superimposed snake, silver, etc. owing to the absence of discrimination between them. This association of the field and the Knower of the field in the form of superimposition is described as false knowledge.
##

70. mithyaatve.api upaayasya upeyasatyatayaa satyatvameva syaat.h\, yathaa arthavaadaanaaM vidhisheshhaaNaam.h\; loke.api balonmattaadiinaaM paya{}aadau paayayitavye chuuDaavardhanaadivachanam.h | prakaaraantarasthaanaaM cha saaxaadeva vaa praamaaNyaM siddham.h praagaatmaj~naanaat.h dehaabhimaananimittapratyaxaadipraamaaNyavat.h || 18.66 ||


##Although the means be unreal (in itself), still it may be meaningful in relation to the truth of the purpose it serves, as are the eulogistic sentences (arthavaada) occuring along with injunctions. Even in the world, when it becomes necessary to make a child or a lunatic drink milk etc. it is said that it will help growth of hair etc! Before the dawn of Knowledge, the (ritualistic) Vedic texts concerned with a different situation (The situation obtaining before the dawn of Self-knowledge) are also as valid in themselves as are direct perception etc. occuring due to Self-identification with the body etc.##