Bhashya
सोऽहं भगवः एतत्सर्वं जानन्नपि मन्त्रविदेवास्मि शब्दार्थमात्रविज्ञानवानेवास्मीत्यर्थः ।सर्वो हि शब्दः अभिधानमात्रम् अभिधानं च सर्वं मन्त्रेष्वन्तर्भवति ।मन्त्रविदेवास्मि मन्त्रवित्कर्मविदित्यर्थः ।‘मन्त्रेषु कर्माणि’ इति हि वक्ष्यति ।न आत्मवित् न आत्मानं वेद्मि ।नन्वात्मापि मन्त्रैः प्रकाश्यत एवेति कथं मन्त्रविच्चेत् नात्मवित् ? न, अभिधानाभिधेयभेदस्य विकारत्वात् ।न च विकार आत्मेष्यते ।नन्वात्माप्यात्मशब्देन अभिधीयते ।न, ‘यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते’, ‘यत्र नान्यत्पश्यति’ इत्यादिश्रुतेः ।कथं तर्हि ‘आत्मैवाधस्तात्’ ‘स आत्मा’ इत्यादिशब्दाः आत्मानं प्रत्याययन्ति ? नैष दोषः ।देहवति प्रत्यगात्मनि भेदविषये प्रयुज्यमानः शब्दः देहादीनामात्मत्वे प्रत्याख्यायमाने यत्परिशिष्टं सत्, अवाच्यमपि प्रत्याययति— यथा सराजिकायां दृश्यमानायां सेनायां छत्रध्वजपताकादिव्यवहिते अदृश्यमानेऽपिराजनि एष राजा दृश्यत इति भवति शब्दप्रयोगः ; तत्र को-ऽसौ राजेति राजविशेषनिरूपणायां दृश्यमानेतरप्रत्याख्यानेअन्यस्मिन्नदृश्यमानेऽपि राजनि राजप्रतीतिर्भवेत्- तद्वत् ।तस्मात्सोऽहं मन्त्रवित् कर्मविदेवास्मि, कर्मकार्यं च सर्वं वि-कार इति विकारज्ञ एवास्मि, न आत्मवित् न आत्मप्रकृ-तिस्वरूपज्ञ इत्यर्थः ।अत एवोक्तम् 'आचार्यवान्पुरुषो वेद'इति ; 'यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते' इत्यादिश्रुतिभ्यश्च ।श्रुतमाग-मज्ञानमस्त्येव हि यस्मात् मे मम भगवद्दृशेभ्यो युष्मत्स-दृशेभ्यः तरति अतिक्रामति शोकं मनस्तापम् अकृतार्थबुद्धि-ताम् आत्मवित् इति ; अतः सोऽहमनात्मवित्त्वात् हे भगवःशोचामि अकृतार्थबुद्ध्या संतप्ये सर्वदा ; तं मा मां शोकस्यशोकसागरस्य पारम् अन्तं भगवान् तारयतु आत्मज्ञानो-डुपेन कृतार्थबुद्धिमापादयतु अभयं गमयत्वित्यर्थः ।तम्एवमुक्तवन्तं ह उवाच- यद्वै किंच एतदध्यगीष्ठाः अधीत-वानसि, अध्ययनेन तदर्थज्ञानमुपलक्ष्यते, ज्ञातवानसीत्येतत्,नामैवैतत्, 'वाचारम्भणं विकारो नामधेयम्' इति श्रुतेः ॥
In plain words
O venerable master, despite all this study, I know only the words; I do not know the Self. I have mastered the texts and the rituals, but because all rituals and words are mere names, I have only mastered changing phenomena. I do not know the changeless Self. If you ask how one can know the scriptures and yet not know the Self, it is because words deal with distinctions, and the Self is beyond all distinctions. Even when the scriptures use the word 'Atman', they do not name the Self directly; rather, they negate everything that is not the Self—the body, the senses, the mind—until only the inexpressible reality remains. It is like pointing to a royal procession: though the king is hidden behind banners and umbrellas, by ruling out the guards, the horses, and the flags, we come to know who the king is, even if we cannot see him directly. Thus, I know only the modifications of nature, not the source. I have heard from sages like you that he who knows the Self crosses beyond sorrow. But I, my lord, am drowning in grief and feel utterly incomplete. I pray you, ferry me across this ocean of sorrow on the raft of Self-knowledge, and lead me to the state of absolute peace. To Narada, who spoke thus, Sanatkumara replied: 'All that you have studied is indeed nothing but a name. For as the scripture declares, every modification is merely a name, a creation of speech.'
Close to the Sanskrit
I, O venerable one, knowing all this, am only a knower of mantras, meaning I only possess knowledge of words and their meanings. For all words are mere names, and all names are included in mantras. I am only a knower of mantras, meaning a knower of rituals; for the scripture will say 'rituals are in the mantras'. I am not a knower of the Self; I do not know the Self. If it is objected: 'Is not the Self also revealed by mantras? How then can one who knows mantras not know the Self?' The answer is: No, because the distinction between name and named is a modification, and the Self is not accepted as a modification. If it is objected: 'Is not the Self also designated by the word Atman?' The answer is: No, because of scriptures like 'from where words turn back' and 'where one sees no other'. How then do words like 'the Self indeed is below' and 'He is the Self' point to the Self? There is no error here. The word 'Atman', when applied to the embodied inner self in the realm of difference, negates the selfhood of the body and so on, and indirectly reveals that which remains as the reality, though it is inexpressible. Just as in a visible army accompanied by the king, though the king is unseen because he is hidden by umbrellas, banners, and flags, the word 'this is the king' is used; and when one asks 'who is the king?' and rules out everything else that is visible, the understanding of the king arises even though he remains unseen—so it is here. Therefore, I am only a knower of mantras and rituals; and since all effects of rituals are modifications, I only know modifications, not the Self, meaning I do not know the true nature of the Self. Hence it is said: 'He who has a teacher knows', and from scriptures like 'from where words turn back'. I indeed have the scriptural knowledge; but I have heard from masters like your holiness that 'the knower of the Self crosses over grief'. Therefore, O venerable one, because I do not know the Self, I grieve and am always tormented by a sense of unfulfillment. Please, my lord, ferry me across to the other shore of this ocean of grief, make me fulfilled, and lead me to fearlessness. To him who had spoken thus, Sanatkumara said: 'Whatever you have studied is indeed only a name, for scripture says: "All modification is a mere name, originating in speech."'