914.  Na kritina, i.e., kriti eva.  ‘Nirakriti’ is regardless of dress and appearance.  K.P.  Singha wrongly translates both these words.

915. i.e., who has neither friend nor foe.  This means that he regards all creatures with an equal eye, showing particular favour to none, and having no dislike for any.  Coldness of heart is not implied, but impartial and equal benevolence for all.  Taking praise and blame equally, i.e., never rejoicing at praise nor grieving at blame.

916.  It is said that with the practice of Yoga, during the first stages, certain extraordinary powers come to the Yogin whether he wishes for them or not.  In a previous Section it has been said that that Yogin who suffers himself to be led away by these extraordinary acquisitions, goes to hell, i.e., fails to attain to Emancipation beside which heaven itself with the status of Indra is only hell.  Hence, he who transcends the puissance that Yoga brings about becomes Emancipate.

917.  Dhirah is explained as dhyanavan.  Santi has reference to Emancipation, for it is Emancipation alone that can give tranquillity or final rest.  The commentator points out that in this verse the speaker shows a decided preference for the Sankhya philosophy.

918.  Vide Gita, verses 4 and 5, Chapter V.

919.  Brahmanam is arsha for Brahmam.

920.  I follow Nilakantha’s gloss in rendering the words Vidya, Pravritti and Nivritti, as used in this verse.  By the first, the commentator thinks, is meant that course of instruction in consequence of which error may be dispelled and truth acquired.  The usual illustration of the cord and the snake is given.  The former maybe mistaken for the latter, but when the mistake ceases, correct apprehension follows.  Pravritti has been sufficiently indicated in the text in which the words of the gloss has been incorporated.  By Nivritti is meant the doctrine of the Sunyavadins and Lokayatikas (evidently the Buddhists) who seek annihilation or extinction as the only true Emancipation.  Both the Vernacular translators are wrong.  The Burdwan translator, as usual, citing the very words of the gloss, misunderstands them completely.

921.  The construction of the first line is ’yastu achetanah bhavam vina swabhavena (sarvam bhati iti) pasyan, etc., etc., pushyate (sa na kinchana labhate).’  Bhavan is explained as ‘adhishthanasattam.’  The commentator is of opinion that the speaker refers in this verse to the Sunyavadins.

922.  The Bombay text reads Putwatrinamishikamva.

923.  Enam is singular.  The commentator thinks it should be taken distributively.  In verse 3, the doctrine of the Nihilists (Sunyavadins) has been referred to.  In verse 4, that of the Lokayatikas.  In both, Nature is spoken of as the cause, with this difference that the former regard the universe to be only an erroneous impression of an existent entity, while the latter regard it as a real entity flowing from and manifesting itself under its own nature.  Both doctrines, the speaker says, are false.