Bhashya
सङ्गवशात् पुनरमुं लोकं याति — इत्येवम् ।इति नु एवं नु, कामयमानः संसरति ।यस्मात् कामयमान एव एवं संसरति, अथ तस्मात्, अकामयमानो न कचित्संसरति ।फलासक्तस्य हि गतिरुक्ता ; अकामस्य हि क्रियानुपपत्तेः अकामयमानो मुच्यत एव ।कथं पुनः अकामयमानो भवति ? यः अकामो भवति, असौ अकामयमानः ।कथमकामतेत्युच्यते — यो निष्कामः यस्मान्निर्गताः कामाः सोऽयं निष्कामः ।कथं कामा निर्गच्छन्ति ? य आप्तकामः भवति आप्ताः कामा येन स आप्तकामः ।कथमाप्यन्ते कामाः ? आत्मकामत्वेन, यस्य आत्मैव नान्यः कामयितव्यो वस्त्वन्तरभूतः पदार्थो भवति ; आत्मैव अनन्तरोऽबाह्यः कृत्स्नः प्रज्ञानघन एकरसः नोर्ध्वं न तिर्यक् नाधः आत्मनोऽन्यत् कामयितव्यं वस्त्वन्तरम् — यस्य सर्वमात्मैवाभूत्तत्केन कं पश्येत्, शृणुयात्, मन्वीत, विजानीयाद्वा — एवं विजानन्कं कामयेत ।ज्ञायमानो ह्यन्यत्वेन पदार्थः कामयितव्यो भवति ; न चासावन्यः ब्रह्मविद् आप्तकामस्यास्ति ।य एवात्मकामतया आप्तकामः, स निष्कामः अकामः अकामयमानश्चेति मुच्यते ।न हि यस्य आत्मैव सर्वं भवति, तस्य अनात्मा कामयितव्योऽस्ति ।अनात्मा चान्यः कामयितव्यः, सर्वं च आत्मैवाभूदिति विप्रतिषिद्धम् ।सर्वात्मद्र्शिनः कामयितव्याभावात्कर्मानुपपत्तिः ।ये तु प्रत्यवायपरिहारार्थं कर्म कल्पयन्ति ब्रह्मविदोऽपि, तेषां न आत्मैव सर्वं भवति, प्रत्यवायस्य जिहासितव्यस्य आत्मनोऽन्यस्य अभिप्रेतत्वात् ।येन च अशनायाद्यतीतः नित्यं प्रत्यवायासंबद्धः विदित आत्मा, तं वयं ब्रह्मविदं ब्रूमः ; नित्यमेव अशनायाद्यतीतमात्मानं पश्यति ; यस्माच्च जिहासितव्यमन्यम् उपादेयं वा यो न पश्यति, तस्य कर्म न शक्यत एव संबन्धुम् ।यस्तु अब्रह्मवित्, तस्य भवत्येव प्रत्यवायपरिहारार्थं कर्मेति न विरोधः ।अतः कामाभावात् अकामयमानो न जायते, मुच्यत एव ॥
In plain words
Because that attachment is still clinging to him, he goes back to that world again — that's how it works. 'Thus, indeed' — that's what those two words in the verse mean: someone who desires keeps wandering, exactly as described. And since it's only the desiring one who wanders like that, it follows that the one without desire doesn't wander anywhere at all. We've already traced the path of someone attached to results; and since action simply can't happen without desire driving it, someone free of desire is, without exception, free. But how does someone actually get there — how does a person become desireless? Simple: whoever has no desire left is exactly that. And what does having no desire mean? It means every desire has left him — that is what 'free of desire' means. How do desires leave? By already having what they were after — that's what 'satisfied' means. And how are desires satisfied, once and for all? By wanting nothing but the Self. For someone like that, the Self is everything, and there simply isn't a second thing left over to want. The Self has no inside and no outside, it is whole, one solid mass of awareness, one single flavor through and through — there is nothing above it, beside it, or beneath it that could ever be a separate object to want. When everything has become nothing but the Self for someone, what could he possibly see, hear, think about, or know as something apart from himself? Knowing that, what would there even be left to want? An object can only be wanted once it's recognized as something other than you — and for someone who knows brahman and already has everything, there is no 'other' left to spot. Whoever's only desire is the Self, and is satisfied in that way, is free of desire, without desire, and not desiring — and that is exactly why he is free. Because for someone whose everything is the Self, there is no not-self left over to want. Saying 'there's a not-self, something other, to be wanted' and saying 'everything has become the Self' can't both be true — they cancel each other out. And once you see everything as the Self, there's nothing left to want, so action itself no longer makes sense for you. But there are people who call themselves knowers of brahman and still prescribe rituals just to keep sin at bay — for them, the Self hasn't actually become everything, because they still take something other than the Self seriously: the sin they're trying to avoid. Whoever, though, knows the Self as forever beyond hunger and its like, forever untouched by sin — that's who we call a real knower of brahman. He sees the Self this way permanently, not just sometimes. And since he sees nothing else at all, nothing to reject and nothing to chase, there's simply no way to hook action onto him. Someone who hasn't realized brahman, though, really does need action to avoid sin — so there's no contradiction here at all. So, in the end: because desire is gone, the desireless person is never born again. He is simply, completely free.
Close to the Sanskrit
Owing to the force of attachment, he goes again to that world — thus, in this way. 'iti nu' [in the verse] means 'thus indeed'; [that is:] one who desires transmigrates. Since it is only the one who desires who transmigrates in this way, therefore the one who does not desire does not transmigrate at all. For the destiny of one attached to the fruit has already been stated; for, since action is not possible for one without desire, the one who does not desire is indeed liberated. But how does one become 'not desiring'? He who is without desire, he is 'the one who does not desire.' How is desirelessness described? He who is 'free of desire' — that is, he from whom desires have departed, he is 'free of desire.' How do desires depart? He who is 'one whose desires are fulfilled' — that is, by whom desires have been attained, he is 'one whose desires are fulfilled.' How are desires attained? By being 'one whose only desire is the Self' — that is, for whom the Self alone exists, and there is no other separate thing to be desired; the Self alone — without an inside, without an outside, entire, a mass of consciousness, of a single essence — there is neither above, nor across, nor below, any thing separate from the Self to be desired; for one to whom everything has become the Self alone, by what would he see anything, hear, think, or know as other? — knowing thus, what would he desire? For it is an object known as something other that becomes desirable; and for the knower of brahman whose desires are fulfilled, no such 'other' exists. He who, by having the Self alone as his desire, is one whose desires are fulfilled — he is free of desire, desireless, and 'not desiring'; and thus he is liberated. For one for whom the Self alone is everything, there is no non-self for him to desire. 'A non-self, something other, is to be desired' and 'everything has become the Self alone' — these contradict each other. For one who sees everything as the Self, because there is nothing to be desired, action is not possible. But those who, even though claiming to be knowers of brahman, prescribe action for the sake of avoiding sin — for them the Self is not everything, because something other than the Self, namely the sin to be abandoned, is still held to be real by them. And he by whom the Self is known as one who has transcended hunger and the like, eternally unconnected with sin — him we call a knower of brahman; he perceives the Self as ever transcending hunger and the like; and since he who sees nothing else, whether to be abandoned or to be taken up, action cannot possibly be connected to him at all. But for one who is not a knower of brahman, action for the sake of avoiding sin does indeed exist — so there is no contradiction. Therefore, because desire is absent, the one who does not desire is not born again; he is indeed liberated.