Footnote 181:[(return)]
Viz. of that which is within it. Ânanda Giri proposes two explanations: na keti, paraviseshanatvenety atra paro daharâkâsa upâdânât tasminn iti saptamyanta-takkhabdasyeti seshah. Yadvâ parasabdo s ntahsthavastuvishayas tadviseshanalvena tasminn iti daharâkâsasyokter ity arthah. Takkhabdasya samnikrishtânvayayoge viprakrishtânvayasya jaghanyatvâd âkâsântargatam dhyeyam iti bhâvah.
Footnote 182:[(return)]
A vâkyabheda—split of the sentence—takes place according to the Mîmâmsâ when one and the same sentence contains two new statements which are different.
Footnote 183:[(return)]
While the explanation of Brahman by jîva would compel us to assume that the word Brahman secondarily denotes the individual soul.
Footnote 184:[(return)]
Upalabdher adhishthânam brahmana deha ishyate. Tenâsâdhâranatvena deho brahmapuram bhavet. Bhâmatî.
Footnote 185:[(return)]
I.e. Brahmâ, the lower Brahman.
Footnote 186:[(return)]
The masculine 'âvirbhûtasvarûpah' qualifies the substantive jîvah which has to be supplied. Properly speaking the jîva whose true nature has become manifest, i.e. which has become Brahman, is no longer jîva; hence the explanatory statement that the term jîva is used with reference to what the jîva was before it became Brahman.
Footnote 187:[(return)]
To state another reason showing that the first and second chapters of Prajâpati's instruction refer to the same subject.
Footnote 188:[(return)]
I.e. of whom cognition is not a mere attribute.
Footnote 189:[(return)]
Although in reality there is no such thing as an individual soul.
Footnote 190:[(return)]
Nanu jîvabrahmanor aikyam na kvâpi sûtrakâro mukhato vadati kim tu sarvatra bhedam eva, ato naikyam ishtam tatrâha pratipâdyam tv iti.