291 ([return])
[ ‘That’ evidently refers to sacrifice, penance, and gift, in the clause before. The commentators, however, suggest that it may, besides, refer to Brahma. I am myself not sure that it does not refer to Brahma.]
292 ([return])
[ What the author wishes to lay down in these verses is that the words OM, TAT, and SAT, have each their respective uses. When used as directed here, such use cures the defects of the respective actions to which they are applied, it being understood that all three denote Brahma.]
293 ([return])
[ Sanyasa I render Renunciation. K. T. Telang does the same. Mr. Davies renders it “abstention.” So ‘Tyaga’ I render “abandonment.” Mr. Davies renders it “renunciation.” What the two words, however, mean is explained fully in the verses that follow.]
294 ([return])
[ Both Sankara and Sreedhara explain the second line consisting of two propositions, the connecting verb bhavet being understood.]
295 ([return])
[ I have used “when” for “whatever” to make the sentence grammatical.]