Bhashya
स वै प्रकृतः स्वयं ज्योतिः पुरुषः, एषः यः स्वप्ने प्रदर्शितः,एतस्मिन्संप्रसादे—सम्यक् प्रसीदति अस्मिन्निति संप्रसादः ;जागरिते देहेन्द्रियव्यापारशतसंनिपातजं हित्वा कालुष्यंतेभ्यो विप्रमुक्तः ईषत् प्रसीदति स्वप्ने, इह तु सुषुप्ते सम्यक्प्रसीदति- इत्यतः सुषुप्तं संप्रसाद उच्यते ; ‘तीर्णो हि तदासर्वान्छोकान्’ इति ‘सलिल एको द्रष्टा’ इति हि वक्ष्यतिसुषुप्तस्थम् आत्मानम्—स वै एषः एतस्मिन् संप्रसादे क्रमेणसंप्रसन्नः सन् सुषुप्ते स्थित्वा ; कथं संप्रसन्नः ? स्वप्नात् सुषुप्तंप्रविविक्षुः स्वप्नावस्थ एव रत्वा रतिमनुभूय मित्रबन्धुजनदर्श-नादिना, चरित्वा विहृत्य अनेकधा चरणफलं श्रममुपलभ्ये-त्यर्थः, दृष्ट्वैव न कृत्वेत्यर्थः, पुण्यं च पुण्यफलम्, पापं चपापफलम् ; न तु पुण्यपापयोः साक्षाद्दर्शनमस्तीत्यवोचाम ;तस्मात् न पुण्यपापाभ्यामनुबद्धः ; यो हि करोति पुण्यपापे,स ताभ्यामनुबध्यते ; न हि दर्शनमात्रेण तदनुबद्धः स्यात् ।नैव अनुबद्धो भवति; यदि हि स्वप्ने कृतमेव तेन स्यात्,तेन अनुबध्येत; स्वप्नादुत्थितोऽपि समन्वागतः स्यात्;न च तत् लोके- स्वप्नकृतकर्मणा अन्वागतत्वप्रसिद्धिः;न हि स्वप्नकृतेन आगसा आगस्कारिणमात्मानं मन्यतेकश्चित्; न च स्वप्नदृश आगः श्रुत्वा लोकः तं गर्हति परि-हरति वा; अतः अनन्वागत एव तेन भवति ; तस्मात् स्वप्नेकुर्वन्निव उपलभ्यते, न तु क्रिया अस्ति परमार्थतः ; ‘उतेवस्त्रीभिः सह मोदमानः’ इति श्लोक उक्तः ; आख्यातारश्चस्वप्नस्य सह इव-शब्देन आचक्षते-हस्तिनोऽद्य घटीकृताःधावन्तीव मया दृष्टा इति ।अतो न तस्य कर्तृत्वमिति ।कथं पुनरस्याकर्तृत्वमिति- कार्यकारणैर्मूर्तेः संश्लेषः मूर्तस्य,स तु क्रियाहेतुर्दृष्टः; न ह्यमूर्तः कश्चित् क्रियावान् दृश्यते;अमूर्तश्च आत्मा, अतोऽसङ्गः ; यस्माच्च असङ्गोऽयं पुरुषः,तस्मात् अनन्वागतः तेन स्वप्नदृष्टेन; अत एव न क्रियाक-र्तृत्वमस्य कथंचिदुपपद्यते ; कार्यकारणसंश्लेषेण हि कर्तृत्वंस्यात् ; स च संश्लेषः सङ्गः अस्य नास्ति, यतः असङ्गोह्ययं पुरुषः ; तस्मात् अमृतः ।एवमेव एतत् याज्ञवल्क्य ;सोऽहं भगवते सहस्रं ददामि ; अतः ऊर्ध्वं विमोक्षायैवब्रूहि ; मोक्षपदार्थैकदेशस्य कर्मप्रविवेकस्य सम्यग्दर्शित-त्वात् ; अतः ऊर्ध्वं विमोक्षायैव ब्रूहीति ॥
In plain words
This, then, is the very self we have been describing — the one shown to us shining in dream, now met again in this deep calm. It is called saṃprasāda, 'perfect settling,' simply because here the self settles completely. In waking life it carries a kind of murkiness stirred up by a hundred restless activities of body and senses; freed from those in dream, it settles a little. But here, in deep sleep, it settles all the way — that is why deep sleep alone earns the name saṃprasāda. 'He has crossed every sorrow then,' the scripture says, and elsewhere: 'the seer becomes a single, undivided expanse' — both describing this same self at rest in deep sleep. So: this self, in this deep calm, settles by stages, coming finally to rest in deep sleep. How does it settle? On its way from dream toward deep sleep, while still within the dream itself, it takes its fill of pleasure — meeting friends, seeing loved ones — and 'having roamed' simply means it has wandered about enough to grow tired of wandering. 'Having only seen,' not having done, is the key: 'the good' means the fruit of merit, 'the evil' the fruit of demerit — we never said he directly witnesses the deeds themselves, only their fruit. So he is not bound by merit or by demerit. It is the one who actually acts who gets bound by merit and demerit; mere seeing binds no one. He is genuinely never bound — because if the dream-deed were truly his, its bond would follow him out of the dream, still clinging when he woke. But that is not how it works in life: no one holds himself guilty of an offense done in a dream, and no one blames or avoids a person for something they merely dreamed. So he really does remain untouched. What looks like acting in a dream is only appearance; no action ever actually occurs there. The verse itself said 'as if delighting with women' — and anyone telling a dream talks the same way: 'I saw elephants, as it were, all yoked together, running.' That little word 'as if' gives it away: there was no real doer here. Why no doer? Because contact with effects and instruments — body and organs — belongs only to something with form, and that contact is the one thing ever seen to cause action. Nothing formless is ever seen to act, and the self has no form at all — so it is untouched by anything. And because this person carries no attachment, he is untouched by anything seen in dream. That is exactly why no kind of agency can ever really belong to him: agency needs contact with effects and instruments, and that contact — that attachment — simply is not there, because this person is, by nature, unattached. And so: he is deathless. 'Exactly so, Yājñavalkya,' said Janaka. 'I give you a thousand cows. Now, from here on, speak to me only of liberation' — because one piece of what liberation truly is, the clean separation of action from the self, has now been shown plainly. 'From here on, speak only of liberation,' he said.
Close to the Sanskrit
He indeed, this aforementioned self-luminous person — this one who was shown in the dream state — in this saṃprasāda: it is called saṃprasāda because one becomes thoroughly tranquil in it. Having abandoned, in the waking state, the turbidity born from the concourse of a hundred activities of body and senses, and released from them, he becomes somewhat tranquil in dream; but here, in deep sleep, he becomes thoroughly tranquil — hence deep sleep is called saṃprasāda. 'For then he has crossed over all sorrows,' and 'the seer becomes one undivided mass' — thus indeed the scripture will describe the self situated in deep sleep. He indeed, this one, in this saṃprasāda, having gradually become tranquil, remains in deep sleep. How is he tranquil? Wishing to pass from dream into deep sleep, while still in the very state of dream, having delighted — having experienced that delight through the sight of friends, kinsfolk, and the like — 'having roamed' means having sported about in many ways: the meaning is that he obtains the fruit of that roaming, namely fatigue. 'Having only seen,' not having done — that is the meaning; 'the good' means the fruit of merit, 'the evil' means the fruit of demerit; but we did not mean to say that there is direct perception of merit and demerit themselves. Therefore he is not bound by merit and demerit; for whoever actually performs merit and demerit is bound by those two; by mere seeing alone, one would not be bound by it. He does not become bound at all; for if it were indeed done by him in the dream, he would be bound by it — even upon rising from the dream he would remain marked by that consequence. But that is not so in ordinary experience: there is no recognized fact of being bound by an action done in a dream. For no one considers himself an offender on account of an offense committed in a dream; nor, on hearing of an offense seen by a dreamer, do people condemn or shun him. Hence he indeed remains untouched by it. Therefore, in dream he is only perceived as though acting, but in reality no action exists at all. 'As if delighting together with women' — thus the verse has already stated; and those who narrate a dream likewise use the word 'as if' — 'today I saw, as it were, elephants harnessed together, running,' a person says. Hence there is no agency belonging to it. How, again, is there this non-agency? — Contact, by means of effect and instrument, belongs to a corporeal being; that contact alone is observed to be the cause of action. For no incorporeal thing whatsoever is ever seen to possess action; and the self is without form, hence it is unattached. And because this person is unattached, therefore he remains untouched by what is seen in dream. For this very reason, agency in action cannot in any way be established for him; for agency would arise only through contact with effect and instrument. And that contact, that is, attachment, does not exist for him at all, since this person is indeed unattached. Therefore he is deathless. 'Just so is this, O Yājñavalkya; I give a thousand to the venerable one; from here onward speak only of liberation' — because a portion of the true nature of liberation, namely the discernment of action from the self, has now been correctly demonstrated: 'from here onward speak only of liberation,' thus he said.