1460.  The scriptures contain both kinds of instruction.  There are declarations that are entirely in favour of Acts or observances.  There are again declarations in favour of Knowledge.  What the speaker asks is that the Rishi should discourse upon what the speaker should do, i.e., whether he should betake himself to the acquisition of Knowledge or to the doing of acts.

1461. i.e., Each Asrama speaks of particular observances and courses of conduct as beneficial.  This, therefore, is a source of confusion to men of plain understandings.  Is there no distinction then among duties or observances in respect of their beneficial character?  This is the question propounded.  The commentator thinks by the word asramas is meant the four principal faiths and not the modes of life.

1462.  I retain the word asrama in the English version as it is very doubtful in what sense it has been used in the original.  The commentator explains that by four asramas are meant the four principal forms of creed prevalent at one time in India.  The first is that there is no such thing as virtue or righteousness.  This is ascribed to Sakya Simha or Buddha.  The second is that righteousness consists in only the worship of trees, etc.  The third is that only is righteousness which the Vedas have laid down.  The fourth is that transcending righteousness and its reverse there is something for whose attainment one should strive.  Yatha samkalpitah is explained by the commentator as yo yena sreyastena bhavitastasya tadeva sreyah.

1463.  Gunoddesam is Gunakirtanam or the announcement of merits.  What Narada says here is this:  the asramas are four.  The merits of each have been proclaimed by their respective founders.  The principal merit each claims is that it leads to knowledge of Self.  Now, the announcement is nanarupam; it is also prithak; and lastly, it is viprasthitam or contradictory, for, as the commentator points out, that which a particular asrama announces to be righteous is according to another unrighteous.  Both the vernacular translators give incorrect versions.

1464.  Te refers to asramas.  Abhipretam is atma-tattwarupam.  Yanti is equivalent to prapayanti.

1465.  Mitranam is taken by the commentator to be equivalent to sarva-bhuta-labhayapadanam, i.e., they who have given the pledge of harmlessness to all creatures.  By enemies is meant here the envious and harmful.

1466.  In previous Sections the nature of Truth has been discussed.  A formal truth may be as sinful as a lie, and a lie may be as meritorious as a Truth.  Hence, the ascertainment of Truth is not easy.

1467.  Atiyoga and Ayoga are well-known words which have no chance of being misunderstood in the way in which they have been misunderstood by both the vernacular translators.  Indeed.  K.P.  Singha blunders ridiculously, while the Burdwan translator limits them to only the use of food, supposing the commentator’s concrete examples exhaust the meaning.