Bhashya
ष्ठिरो ह किल राजासीदित्युक्ते यद्वत् ; इदमिति व्याकृतना-मरूपात्मकं साध्यसाधनलक्षणं यथावर्णितमभिधीयते ; तदि-दंशब्दयोः परोक्षप्रत्यक्षावस्थजगद्वाचकयोः सामानाधिकर-ण्यादेकत्वमेव परोक्षप्रत्यक्षावस्थस्य जगतोऽवगम्यते ; तदे-वेदम्, इदमेव च तद्व्याकृतमासीदिति ।अथैवं सतिनासत् उत्पत्तिर्न सतो विनाशः कार्यस्येत्यवधृतं भवति ।तदेवंभूतं जगत् अव्याकृतं सत् नामरूपाभ्यामेव नाम्नारूपेणैव च, व्याक्रियत ।व्याक्रियतेति कर्मकर्तृप्रयोगात्-त्स्वयमेवात्मैव व्याक्रियत -- वि आ अक्रियत -- विस्पष्टंनामरूपविशेषावधारणमर्यादं व्यक्तीभावमापद्यत -- साम-र्थ्यादाक्षिप्तनियन्तृकर्तृसाधनक्रियानिमित्तम् ।असौ नामेतिसर्वनाम्नाविशेषाभिधानेन नाममात्रं व्यपदिशति ।देव-दत्तो यज्ञदत्त इति वा नामास्येत्यसौनामा अयम् ।तथाइदमिति शुक्लकृष्णादीनामविशेषः ।इदं शुक्लमिदं कृष्णं वारूपमस्येतीदंरूपः ।तदिदम् अव्याकृतं वस्तु, एतर्हि एत-स्मिन्नपि काले, नामरूपाभ्यामेव व्याक्रियते -- असौनामा-यमिदंरूप इति ।यदर्थः सर्वशास्त्रारम्भः, यस्मिन्नविद्ययास्वाभाविक्या कर्तृक्रियाफलाध्यारोपणा कृता, यः कारणंसर्वस्य जगतः, यदात्मके नामरूपे सलिलादिव स्वच्छान्मन-लामिव फेनमव्याकृते व्याक्रियेते, यश्च ताभ्यां नामरूपाभ्यांविलक्षणः स्वतः नित्यशुद्धबुद्धमुक्तस्वभावः—स एषः अ-व्याकृते आत्मभूते नामरूपे व्याकुर्वन्, ब्रह्मादिस्तम्बपर्य-न्तेषु देहेष्विह कर्मफलाश्रयेष्वशनायादिमत्सु प्रविष्टः ॥
In plain words
Just as saying 'a steadfast king existed' refers to a specific person, the word 'idam' (this) denotes the manifest world of means and ends just described. Because the two words 'tat' (that) and 'idam' (this)—referring to the unmanifest and manifest states of the universe—share the same grammatical core, we understand that both states are one and the same: 'that very thing is this' and 'this was that unmanifest reality.' This established, it is clear that an unreal effect has no true birth, and a real entity has no destruction. That very universe, while unmanifest, became differentiated exclusively through name and form. The reflexive passive phrasing 'it differentiated itself' implies that the self alone manifested into clear boundaries of specific names and forms, naturally pointing to a controller, agent, and means. The phrase 'such-and-such is his name' refers to a general label, like Devadatta or Yajnadatta, while 'this form' refers to visible shapes like white or black. That unmanifest reality continues to be differentiated even now through name and form as 'such-and-such a name and such-and-such a form.' This is the ultimate truth for the sake of which all scriptures begin—the ground upon which beginningless ignorance superimposes doership, action, and results. He is the ultimate cause of the universe, within whom name and form arise like foam on water. Yet he remains entirely distinct from name and form, ever pure, luminous, and free by nature. It is he who, having manifested name and form from his own unmanifest essence, entered into all physical bodies—from Brahma down to a blade of grass—where living beings experience hunger and bear the fruits of their actions.
Close to the Sanskrit
Just as when it is said 'a steadfast king was born indeed'; 'idam' (this) describes the differentiated world of means and ends as described. Because of the co-referentiality of the two words 'tat' and 'indam', which denote the world in its unmanifest and manifest states, it is understood that the unmanifest and manifest states of the world are one and the same: 'that was this', and 'this very thing was unmanifest'. Now, this being so, it is established that there is no origination of the non-existent and no destruction of the existent effect. Such a world, being unmanifest, was differentiated through name and form alone—by name and by form. Because of the passive-active usage of the verb 'vyākriyata' ('was differentiated'), it means that the self itself differentiated—distinctly making itself clear with the boundaries of specific names and forms—logically implying a controller, agent, means, and action. By the general pronoun 'asau nāma' ('such-and-such is name'), it designates a mere name—for example, Devadatta or Yajnadatta—'such-and-such is his name'. Similarly, 'idam' (this) is the non-specific [form]; 'this white or black form is his', thus 'idaṁrūpa' (of this form). That unmanifest substance, even at this present time, is differentiated by name and form alone—as 'such-and-such-named, of such-and-such-form'. For the sake of which all scriptures commence, upon which through beginningless ignorance the superimposition of agency, action, and fruit is made, which is the cause of the entire universe, in which name and form are differentiated like foam arising from water or from a clear mind, and who is distinct from those name and form, intrinsically of the nature of eternal purity, awareness, and freedom—this very one, differentiating the unmanifest name and form into his own nature, has entered into bodies here, from Brahma down to a clump of grass, which are subject to hunger and serve as receptacles for the fruits of karma.