, Jivan-mukti has been spoken
of. In this verse, the observations apply to Videha-kaivalya.

1602. Vadanti is stuvanti. Such men hymn its praises by regarding it as
Supreme Deity possessed of attributes. Those attributes, of course, are
the result of illusion, for in its real nature there can be no attributes
in Brahma.

1603. Brahma is knowledge without duality i.e., knowledge without the
consciousness of knower and known. The knowledge or cognition of an
object, when object is annihilated, assumes the form of that knowledge
which is called Brahma.

1604. The commentator explains that the object of this verse is to show
that among mobile creatures those endued with knowledge are superior, and
among all kinds of knowledge, the knowledge occurring in the Sankhya
system is the highest.

1605. i.e., if in consequence of any defect of practice or Sadhana, the
Sankhyas fail to attain to Emancipation, they at least become translated
into gods.

1606. i.e., it is everything.

1607. That Narayana who does all this is the embodiment of the Sankhya
system.

1608. The commentator explains the compound Adhyatmagatinischayam
differently.

1609. Both the vernacular translator render this verse wrongly.

1610. Vasyante is explained by the commentator as implying Brahmanah ante
and not 'at the end of that night'. The line occurs in Manu (Chap. 1. 74)
where ante refers to Brahmana's day and night. Vasishtha here refers to
Mohapralaya and not any intermediate Pralaya.

1611. In the creation of Mahan or Prajapati or Virat, and of
Consciousness, the element of Tamas or ignorance predominates.

1612. This is a very abstruse verse. I am not sure that I have understood
it correctly, What is said here seems to be this from Akshara arose
Hiranyagarbha: from Hiranyagarbha arose Virat. This, that or the other is
worshipped by ordinary men, while persons possessed of real insight do
not invest any of them with attributes worthy of worship. The speaker
says that the ascription of attributes, called Ignorance, and the
non-ascription for destruction of that ascriptions called Knowledge,
(with respect to Virat or Hiranyagarbha or Akshara) then arose. It might
be asked that when there were no men as yet to worship or to condemn such
worship, how could the two arise? The answer is that the two, in their
subtile forms, came into existence and were afterwards availed of by men
when men come into being.

1613. From Akshara or the Indestruct