1069. i.e., one that only knows the Vedas and has observed the vow of Brahmacharya is not a superior Brahmana.  To become so requires something more.

1070.  I follow the commentator closely in rendering this verse.  Sarvavit is taken in the sense of Brahmavit.  Akamah is one contented with knowledge of Self.  Such a man, the Srutis declare, never dies or perishes.  The two negatives in the last clause nullify each other.  The Burdwan translator, with the gloss before him, for he cites copiously from it, misunderstands the negatives.  K.P.  Singha is correct.

1071.  Avidhanat is explained as dayanaishkainyayorananusaranat.

1072.  Kamakantah is explained as kamaih kantah, i.e., manoharah.

1073.  Heaven is Brahma invested with attributes.  Tranquillity of soul is Brahma uninvested with attributes.  Upanishat is explained as rahasyam.  This ’render ‘recondite object’.  The sense of the verse is that each of the things mentioned is useless without that which comes next; and as tranquillity or Brahma uninvested with attributes is the ultimate end, the Vedas and truth, etc., are valuable only because they lead to tranquillity.

1074.  Both the Vernacular translators have rendered this verse wrongly.  In the first place, ichcchasi is equivalent to ichccheta.  Santoshat is ’for the sake of santosha.  Sattwam is buddhiprasadam.  Manas is explained as sankalpa or samsaya.  The grammatical order is sokamanasoh santapya kledanam.  The commentator adds santapamiti namulantam, i.e., formed by the suffix namul.

1075.  Samagrah is literally ‘full or complete,’ implying that such a man becomes jnana-triptah.  Only five attributes are mentioned in this verse but santosha mentioned in verse 13 should be taken to make up six.

1076.  Both the vernacular translators have rendered this verse incorrectly.  In the first place shadbhih has reference to the six things mentioned in verse 11 and 12 above.  These six again should be satwagunopetaih, i.e., destitute of the attributes of Rajas and Tamas.  Unless freed from those two, even the six, of themselves, will not lead to knowledge of the Soul.  Tribhih has reference to Sravana, manana, and nididhyasana.  Ihastham is ‘residing within the body.’  Pretya implies transcending consciousness of body or jivati eva dehe dehabhimanadutthaya.  Tam gunam is muktalakshanam.  The sense, in simple words, is this:  transcending all consciousness of body they that succeed in knowing the Soul which resides within the body become emancipated.  The first line of the verse simply points out how the Soul may be known.

1077.  Anweti is explained as vardhate.

1078.  The reading I adopt is saviseshani, and not aviseshani although the latter is not incorrect.  In treatises on yoga, viseshah imply the gross elements and the eleven senses including the mind.  Aviseshah imply the five subtile elements (tanmatrani) and buddhi.  By Gunan is meant Mahat and Avyakta or Prakriti.  If aviseshani be taken, the reference to the subtile elements would imply that the grosser once have already been transcended.