Bhashya
तत्र दृष्टान्त उपादीयते- स यथेति ।सैन्धवखिल्यः- सिन्धोर्विकारः सैन्धवः, सिन्धुशब्देन उदकमभिधीयते, स्यन्दनात् सिन्धुः उदकम्, तद्विकारः तत्र भवो वा सैन्ध- वः, सैन्धवश्चासौ खिल्यश्चेति सैन्धवखिल्यः, खिल एव खिल्यः, स्वार्थे यत्प्रत्ययः- उदके सिन्धौ स्वयोनौ प्रास्तः प्रक्षिप्तः, उदकमेव विलीयमानम् अनुविलीयते ; यत्तत् भौ- मतैजससंपर्कात् काठिन्यप्राप्तिः खिल्यस्य स्वयोनिसंपर्का- दपगच्छति- तत् उदकस्य विलयनम्, तत् अनु सैन्धव- खिल्यो विलीयत इत्युच्यते ; तदेतदाह- उदकमेवानुविली- येतेति ।न ह नैव- अस्य खिल्यस्य उद्ग्रहणाय उद्धृत्य पूर्व- वद्ग्रहणाय ग्रहीतुम्, नैव समर्थः कश्चित्स्यात् सुनिपुणोऽपि ; इव-शब्दोऽनर्थकः ।ग्रहणाय नैव समर्थः ; कस्मात् ? यतो यतः यस्मात् यस्मात् देशात् तदुदकमाददीत, गृहीत्वा आ-स्वादयेत् लवणास्वादमेव तत् उदकम्, न तु खिल्यभावः ।यथा अयं दृष्टान्तः, एवमेव वै अरे मैत्रेयि इदं परमात्माख्यं महद्भूतम्— यस्मात् महतो भूतात् अविद्यया परिच्छिन्ना सती कार्यकारणोपाधिसम्बन्धात्खिल्यभावमापन्नासि, मर्त्या जन्ममरणअशनायापिपासादिसंसारधर्मवत्यसि, नामरूपकार्यात्मिका— अमुष्यान्वयाहमिति, स खिल्यभावस्तव कार्यकारणभूतोपाधिसम्पर्कभ्रान्तिजनितः महति भूते स्वेयोनौ महासमुद्रस्थानीये परमात्मनि अजरेऽमरेऽभये शुद्धे सैन्धवघनवदेकरसे प्रज्ञानघनेऽनन्तेऽपारे निरन्तरे अविद्याजनितभ्रान्तिभेदवर्जिते प्रवेशितः; तस्मिन्प्रविष्टे स्वयोनिग्रस्ते खिल्यभावे अविद्याकृते भेदभावे प्रणाशिते— इदमेकमद्वैतं महद्भूतम्— महच्च तद्भूतं च महद्भूतं सर्वमहत्तरत्वात् आकाशादिकारणत्वाच्च, भूतम्— त्रिष्वपि कालेषु स्वरूपाव्यभिचारात् सर्वदैव परिनिष्पन्नमिति त्रैकालिको निष्ठाप्रत्ययः; अथवा भूतशब्दः परमार्थवाची, महच्च पारमार्थिकं चेत्यर्थः; लौकिकं तु यद्यपि महद्भवति, स्वप्नमायाकृतं हिमवदादिपर्वतोपमं न परमार्थवस्तु; अतो विशिनष्टि— इदं तु महच्च तद्भूतं चेति ।अनन्तम् नास्यान्तोऽविद्यत इत्यनन्तम्; कदाचिदापेक्षिकं स्यादित्यतो विशिनष्टि अपा-द्विवत् तेषु विनश्यत्सु अन्वेव एष विशेषात्मखिल्य-भावो विनश्यति ; यथा उदकालक्तकादिहेत्वपनये सू-र्यचन्द्रस्फटिकादिप्रतिबिम्बो विनश्यति, चन्द्रादिस्वरूप-मेव परमार्थतो व्यवतिष्ठते, तद्वत् प्रज्ञानघनमनन्तमपारंस्वच्छं व्यवतिष्ठते ।न तत्र प्रेत्य विशेषसंज्ञास्ति का-र्यकरणसंघातेभ्यो विमुक्तस्य- इत्येवम् अरे मैत्रेयिब्रवीमि- नास्ति विशेषसंज्ञेति- अहमसौ अमुष्य पुत्रःममेदं क्षेत्रं धनम् सुखी दुःखीत्येवमादिलक्षणा, अविद्या-कृतत्वात्तस्याः ; अविद्यायाश्च ब्रह्मविद्यया निरन्वयतो नाशि-तत्त्वात् कुतो विशेषसंज्ञासंभवो ब्रह्मविदः चैतन्यस्वभावा-वस्थितस्य ; शरीरावस्थितस्यापि विशेषसंज्ञा नोपपद्यते कि-मुत कार्यकारणविमुक्तस्य सर्वतः ।इति ह उवाच उक्तवा-न्किल परमार्थदर्शनं मैत्रेय्यै भार्यायै याज्ञवल्क्यः ॥
In plain words
Here's an example: 'It is like...' A lump of rock-salt -- saindhava, something that comes from the sea, since 'sindhu' really just means water, the flowing thing; and 'khilya' is just a clod, a lump, no more than that, the ending doesn't add anything. Drop it into water -- into the very sea it came from -- and it dissolves right along with the water. The hardness it picked up out on dry land, from earth and fire, simply leaves the moment it touches its own source again; that's the water dissolving it, and following right behind, the lump itself dissolves. That's exactly what the verse means: it dissolves right along with the water. And 'not' means not at all -- nobody, no matter how skilled, could scoop it back out and hold it in your hand the way you once did; the word 'as if' here isn't really comparing anything, it's just emphasis. Nobody could grasp it -- why? Because wherever you dip into that water and taste it, all you get is salt. The lump, as a separate thing, is simply gone. And that is exactly your own story, dear Maitreyī. This vast Being we call the Supreme Self -- from that vast Being, wrapped in ignorance, tangled up in the machinery of cause and effect, you became a 'lump': mortal, born, dying, hungry, thirsty, carrying a name and a shape and calling it 'me' -- 'I belong to this family.' That whole sense of being a separate lump, born only out of a mistaken contact with cause and effect, gets sent back into the vast ocean it came from: the Supreme Self -- ageless, deathless, fearless, pure, one taste all the way through like a block of salt, a solid mass of awareness, infinite, without a shore, unbroken, untouched by any of the divisions ignorance ever invented. And once it has gone back in -- once that separateness, that whole ignorance-made sense of being apart, is completely undone -- what's left is just this: one, without a second, the vast Being. It's called 'great' because nothing outweighs it and everything, even space, comes from it; and it's called 'existent' because it never for a moment stops being exactly what it is, in the past, the present, or the future -- it simply always is. Or, another way to put it: 'existent' here means 'really real', so the phrase says it's both great and truly real -- because plenty of things in this world are called great, a snow-capped mountain and the like, but they're no more solid than something out of a dream; not one of them is ultimately real. That's why the verse insists: this, though, really is both great and real. 'Infinite' -- because it simply has no edge anywhere. And in case you think that's just a comparison, the text pushes further still [the text breaks off oddly here in the source] -- and once those props are gone, this whole sense of being a separate lump goes with them. It's like a reflection of the sun or moon in water or on a smear of dye: take away the water, the dye, and the reflection vanishes -- but the real moon was never touched, it just goes on being the moon. In exactly that way, what's left standing is this vast, clear, infinite, shoreless awareness. After that, there's no more sense of 'me' left over for someone free of the body and its machinery -- and that, Maitreyī, is exactly what I'm telling you: there's no 'me' left. Not 'I'm so-and-so, this one's son, this field is mine, this money is mine, I'm happy, I'm miserable' -- none of that, because all of it was only ever a trick of ignorance. And since knowledge of Brahman wipes ignorance out completely, without a trace, where would any of that 'me' even come from, for someone who has settled into being pure awareness itself? Even while still in the body it doesn't really hold up -- so how much less for someone entirely free of the body and its causes. This is what Yājñavalkya told his wife Maitreyī: a direct look at what is ultimately real.
Close to the Sanskrit
There an example is introduced -- 'sa yathā...'. Saindhava-khilya: 'saindhava' is a modification of sindhu (the sea) -- by the word 'sindhu' water is meant, since sindhu means water because of its flowing; its modification, or that which is born there, is 'saindhava'; and this saindhava which is also a lump ('khilya') -- thus 'saindhava-khilya'; 'khila' itself is 'khilya', the suffix here adding no new sense. Thrown, cast into the water, into the sea, its own source, it dissolves following the very water as it dissolves. That hardness which the lump had acquired from contact with earth and fire departs upon contact with its own source; that is the water's dissolving, and following that, the salt-lump is said to dissolve. This very point is stated: 'it dissolves following the water alone.' 'Not' means 'not at all' -- no one, however skillful, would be able to lift this lump out and grasp it again as before; here the word 'iva' (as it were) adds no separate sense. No one is capable of grasping it; why? Because, from whatever place one might draw that water, having taken and tasted it, that water has only a salty taste -- not the state of being a lump. As this example shows, just so, O dear Maitreyī, this great Being called the Supreme Self -- from which great Being, being delimited by nescience through connection with the adjuncts of cause and effect, you have come to the state of a 'lump'; you are mortal, possessed of the qualities of transmigratory existence such as birth, death, hunger, thirst; you consist of name-and-form as your effect-identity -- [thinking] 'I belong to that lineage' -- that lump-condition of yours, born of the delusion from contact with the adjuncts constituted by cause and effect, is made to enter into the great Being, its own source, comparable to the great ocean, the Supreme Self: unaging, undying, fearless, pure, of one homogeneous essence like a mass of rock-salt, a mass of consciousness, infinite, shoreless, unbroken, free from the distinctions born of nescience. When that has entered -- when the lump-condition, swallowed by its own source, [that is,] the state of difference made by nescience, has been utterly destroyed -- [there remains] this one, non-dual, great Being. It is 'great' and it is 'become' -- 'great' because it is greater than everything and the cause of ether and the rest; 'become', because, its own nature never departing from itself in all three times, it is ever-accomplished -- so the past-participle ending here holds for all three times. Or else, the word 'bhūta' denotes the really existent; the sense is: it is great and it is also really existent. A worldly thing, though it may be great -- like the Himālaya, comparable only to something made in a dream or by illusion -- is not an ultimately real thing; therefore the text further qualifies: 'this, however, is both great and truly existent.' 'Infinite': no end of it is found -- hence 'infinite'; lest it be thought merely relative at some point, the text further qualifies with [the next word] -- [the text is uncertain here] -- when those [supports] perish, this particular self-lump-condition likewise perishes; just as, upon the removal of causes such as water or lac, the reflection of the sun, moon, or crystal disappears, while the real form of the moon and the rest alone remains established in reality -- likewise the mass of consciousness, infinite, shoreless, pure, remains established. There, no particular awareness exists after death, for the one freed from the body-mind aggregates -- this, O Maitreyī, is what I declare: 'there is no particular awareness' -- [awareness] marked by such notions as 'I am so-and-so, son of so-and-so, this field and wealth are mine, I am happy, I am unhappy', because it is a product of nescience; and since nescience is utterly destroyed without residue by knowledge of Brahman, how could the possibility of particular awareness even arise for the knower of Brahman, established in the very nature of pure consciousness? Even for one still dwelling in the body, particular awareness is not tenable -- how much less for one entirely freed from cause and effect. Thus, indeed, Yājñavalkya spoke -- so it is said -- imparting this vision of ultimate reality to Maitreyī, his wife.