d the (small) star Arundhati at first directs his attention to a
big neighbouring star, saying 'that is Arundhati,' although it is really
not so; and thereupon he withdraws his first statement and points out
the real Arundhati. Analogously the teacher (if he intended to make his
pupil understand the Self through the Non-Self) would in the end
definitely state that the Self is not of the nature of the pradhana. But
no such statement is made; for the sixth Prapa/th/aka arrives at a
conclusion based on the view that the Self is nothing but that which is
(the Sat).

The word 'and' (in the Sutra) is meant to notify that the contradiction
of a previous statement (which would be implied in the rejected
interpretation) is an additional reason for the rejection. Such a
contradiction would result even if it were stated that the pradhana is
to be set aside. For in the beginning of the Prapa/th/aka it is
intimated that through the knowledge of the cause everything becomes
known. Compare the following consecutive sentences, 'Have you ever asked
for that instruction by which we hear what cannot be heard, by which we
perceive what cannot be perceived, by which we know what cannot be
known? What is that instruction? As, my dear, by one clod of clay all
that is made of clay is known, the modification (i.e. the effect) being
a name merely which has its origin in speech, while the truth is that it
is clay merely,' &c. Now if the term 'Sat' denoted the pradhana, which
is merely the cause of the aggregate of the objects of enjoyment, its
knowledge, whether to be set aside or not to be set aside, could never
lead to the knowledge of the aggregate of enjoyers (souls), because the
latter is not an effect of the pradhana. Therefore the pradhana is not
denoted by the term 'Sat.'--For this the Sutrakara gives a further
reason.

9. On account of (the individual Soul) going to the Self (the Self
cannot be the pradhana).

With reference to the cause denoted by the word 'Sat,' Scripture says,
'When a man sleeps here, then, my dear, he becomes united with the Sat,
he is gone to his own (Self). Therefore they say of him, "he sleeps"
(svapiti), because he is gone to his own (svam apita).' (Ch. Up. VI, 8,
1.) This passage explains the well-known verb 'to sleep,' with reference
to the soul. The word, 'his own,' denotes the Self which had before been
denoted by the word Sat; to the Self he (the individual soul) goes, i.e.
into it it is resolved, accordi