Bhashya
न तत्र विषयाः स्वप्ने रथादिलक्षणाः ; तथा न रथ-योगाः, रथेषु युज्यन्त इति रथयोगाः अश्वादयः तत्र नविद्यन्ते ; न च पन्थानः रथमार्गाः भवन्ति ।अथ रथान्रथयोगान् पथश्च सृजते स्वयम् ।कथं पुनः सृजते रथादिसाधनानां वृक्षादीनामभावे ।उच्यते— ननु उक्तम् ‘अस्य लोकस्य सर्वावतो मात्रामपादाय स्वयं विहृत्य स्वयं निर्माय’ इति ; अन्तःकरणवृत्तिः अस्य लोकस्य वासना मात्रा, तामपादाय, रथादिवासना रूपान्तःकरणवृत्तिः तदुपलब्धिनिमित्तेन कर्मणा चोद्यमाना दृश्यत्वेन व्यवतिष्ठते ; तदुच्यते— स्वयं निर्मायेति ; तदेव आह— रथादीन्सृजत इति ; न तु तत्र करणं वा, करणानुग्राहकाणि वा आदित्यादिज्योतींषि, तदवभास्या वा रथादयो विषयाः विद्यन्ते ; तद्वासनामात्रं तु केवलं तदुपलब्धिकर्मनिमित्तचोदितोद्भूतान्तःकरणवृत्त्याश्रय दृश्यते ।तत् यस्य ज्योतिषो दृश्यते अलुप्तदृशः, तत् आत्मज्योतिः अत्र केवलम् असिरिव कोशात् विविक्तम् ।तथा न तत्र आनन्दाः सुखविशेषाः, मुदः हर्षाः पुत्रादिलाभनिमित्ताः, प्रमुदः ते एव प्रकर्षोपेताः ; अथ च आनन्दादीन् सृजते ।तथा न तत्र वेशान्ताः पल्वलाः, पुष्करिण्यः तडागाः, स्रवन्त्यः नद्यः भवन्ति ; अथ वेशान्तादीन्सृजते वासनामात्ररूपान् ।यस्मात् सः हि कर्ता ; तद्वासनाश्रयचित्तवृत्त्युद्भवनिमित्तकर्महेतुत्वेनेति अवोचाम तस्य कर्तृत्वम् ; न तु साक्षादेव तत्र क्रिया संभवति, साधनाभावात् ; न हि कारकमन्तरेण क्रिया संभवति ; न च तत्र हस्तपादादीनिक्रियाकारकाणि संभवन्ति; यत्र तु तानि विद्यन्ते जाग- रिते, तत्र आत्मज्योतिरवभासितैः कार्यकारणैः रथादिवास- नाश्रयान्तःकरणवृत्त्युद्भवनिमित्तं कर्म निर्वर्त्यते; तेनोच्यते — स हि कर्तेति; तदुक्तम् 'आत्मनैवायं ज्योतिषास्ते पल्य- यते कर्म कुरुते' इति; तत्रापि न परमार्थतः स्वतः कर्तृत्वं चैतन्यज्योतिषः अवभासकत्वव्यतिरेकेण- यत् चैतन्यात्म- ज्योतिषा अन्तःकरणद्वारेण अवभासयति कार्यकारणानि, तदवभासितानि कर्मसु व्याप्रियन्ते कार्यकारणानि, तत्र कर्तृ- त्वमुपचर्यते आत्मनः ।यदुक्तम् 'ध्यायतीव लेलायतीव' इति, तदेव अनूद्यते- स हि कर्तेति इह हेत्वर्थम् ॥
In plain words
In that dream, no chariot actually exists, none of its kind. Likewise there are no chariot-teams -- no horses harnessed to anything -- and no roads for a chariot to run on. And yet he creates chariots, harnesses, and roads, entirely on his own. But how, with no trees to cut timber from, no materials of any kind? Here is how: remember what was already said -- he takes a portion of this all-possessing world, breaks it down himself, and builds with it himself. That 'portion' is nothing but a modification of the mind, an impression left behind by this world. Taking that impression -- the mind shaped into the form of a chariot, say -- and stirred into motion by the very deed that is going to make it visible, it settles into place as something seen. That is exactly what 'building it himself' means; it's the same thing as 'he creates chariots.' None of this needs an actual sense organ, no sunlight assisting an eye, no chariot lit up out there for anyone to see -- there is only the impression itself, resting on a stirred modification of the mind, and nothing more. What actually sees that impression is the one light whose seeing never once fails: the self's own light, standing here entirely alone, like a sword drawn clean out of its sheath. Same with joy. No pleasure, no delight over a son's success, no rapture at its peak actually exists there -- and yet he creates joy, delight, rapture. Same with lake-shores, lotus-ponds, flowing rivers -- none of them exist there, and yet he creates lake-shores, ponds, rivers, all of it out of pure impression. And this is exactly why he is called the maker: because he is the cause, through the karma that stirs the mind's own modification into motion -- not because any action is literally happening there. There's no instrument for it to happen with. Action needs something to act with, and in a dream there is no hand, no foot, nothing to act with at all. Only in waking, where hands and feet really exist, does action actually get carried out -- by effects and instruments the self's light has illumined, and precisely for the sake of stirring up that same chariot-shaped modification of the mind. That is why we say, 'for he is the maker.' It was said elsewhere: 'by his own light alone he sits, he moves, he does his work.' But even there, strictly speaking, he isn't the doer on his own account -- only in the sense that he is the illuminator. Because the self's light of consciousness shines through the mind onto the body's instruments, and those illumined instruments then throw themselves into action -- agency gets attributed to the self only in that borrowed, figurative sense. What was said before -- 'as if it thinks, as if it quivers' -- is being restated right here, as 'for he is the maker,' purely to explain why.
Close to the Sanskrit
There, in dream, objects characterized as chariots and the like do not exist; likewise there are no chariot-teams — for chariot-teams means the horses and the like yoked to chariots — these do not exist there; nor are there roads, that is, chariot-paths. Yet he creates chariots, chariot-teams, and roads, himself. But how does he create them, given the absence of the materials for chariots and the like, such as trees? It is explained: was it not said, 'having taken a portion of this all-possessing world, having himself broken it down, having himself fashioned it'? The modification of the inner organ that is the impression of this world is its 'portion'; having taken that, the modification of the inner organ in the form of the impression of a chariot and the like, set in motion by the karma that is the cause of its being perceived, comes to stand forth as a visible object; that is what is meant by 'having himself fashioned it'. That very thing is stated as 'he creates chariots and the like'. But there is, in dream, neither an instrument of perception, nor the lights of the sun and the like that assist such instruments, nor do objects such as chariots, illumined by them, exist; only the mere impression, resting on the modification of the inner organ that has arisen, impelled by the karma that is the cause of its being perceived, is seen. That light of consciousness by which it is seen, whose seeing never fails — that is the self's own light, here alone, isolated, like a sword from its sheath. Likewise there are no joys there — no particular pleasures; no delights — no exultations caused by the gain of a son and the like; no raptures — those very exultations at their highest pitch; and yet he creates joys and the rest. Likewise there are no lake-shores there — no pools; no lotus-ponds — no reservoirs; no flowing streams — no rivers; and yet he creates lake-shores and the rest, in the mere form of impressions. Because he indeed is the maker — this is what we have said with reference to his being the cause by way of the karma that is the cause of the arising of the mental modification that underlies that impression; not that any action literally occurs there directly, since the means of action are absent — for action is not possible without an instrument of action, and there, in dream, instruments of action such as hands and feet do not exist. But where they do exist, namely in waking, there, by the effects and instruments illumined by the self's light, action is accomplished — namely that which is the cause of the arising of the mental modification underlying the impression of chariots and the like; that is why it is said, 'for he is the maker'. It was likewise said elsewhere, 'by his own light alone he sits, he lies down, he does his work' — even there, ultimately, agency does not belong to him independently, apart from his being the illuminator of the light of consciousness — because he, by the light of consciousness that is the self, through the inner organ, illumines the effects and instruments, and those effects and instruments, thus illumined, engage themselves in actions; agency is thereby figuratively ascribed to the self. What was said elsewhere, 'as if it thinks, as if it quivers' — that very thing is restated here as 'for he is the maker', for the sake of giving the reason.