manner of apprehension, etc., for Emancipation is absorption into the Supreme Soul which is independent of all the said conditions.  The commentator explains that these observations become necessary to show that Emancipation is possible.  In the previous section the speaker drew repeated illustrations for showing that the soul, to be manifest, depended on the body.  The hearer is, therefore, cautioned against the impression that the soul’s dependence on the body is of such an indissoluble kind that it is incapable of detachment from the body, which of course, is necessary for Emancipation or absorption into the Supreme Soul.

684.  Caswasasya is an instance of Bhavapradhananirdesa, i.e., of a reference to the principal attribute connected by it.

685.  Indriaih rupyante or nirupyante, hence Indriyarupani.

686.  The objects to be abandoned are those which the senses apprehend and those which belong to primordial matter.  Those last, as distinguished from the former, are, of course, all the linga or subtile forms or existents which are made up of the tanmatras of the grosser elements.

687.  Or, regains his real nature.

688.  I adopt the Bombay reading aptavan instead of the Bengal reading atmavit.  Pravrittam Dharmam, as explained previously, is that Dharma or practice in which there is pravritti and not nivritti or abstention.

689.  The sense is this:  by abstaining from the objects of the senses one may conquer one’s desire for them.  But one does not succeed by that method alone in totally freeing oneself from the very principle of desire.  It is not till one succeeds in beholding one’s soul that one’s principle of desire itself becomes suppressed.

690.  The separate existence of an objective world is denied in the first clause here.  All objects of the senses are said here to have only a subjective existence; hence the possibility of their being withdrawn into the mind.  The latest definition of matter, in European philosophy, is that it is a permanent possibility of sensations.

691.  Te is explained by the commentator as Brahmabhigatah.  K.P.  Singha wrongly renders the last foot of the second line.  The Burdwan version is correct.

692.  Te in the first line is equal to tava.

693.  I follow the commentator in so far as he is intelligible.  It is evident that the words Jnanam and Jneyam are used in the original not consistently throughout.

694.  The meaning seems to be this:  ordinary men regard all external objects as possessing an independent existence, and their attributes also as things different from the substances which own them.  The first step to attain to is the conviction that attributes and substances are the same, or that the attributes are the substances.  This accords with the European Idealism.  The next stage, of course, is to annihilate the attributes themselves by contemplation.  The result of this is the attainment of Brahma.