Bhashya
तं चेत् एवमुक्तवन्तमाचार्यं यदि ब्रूयुः अन्तेवासिनश्चो-दयेयुः ; कथम् ? यदिदमस्मिन्ब्रह्मपुरे परिच्छिन्ने अन्तःदहरं पुण्डरीकं वेश्म, ततोऽप्यन्तः अल्पतर एव आकाशः ।पुण्डरीक एव वेश्मनि तावत्किं स्यात् ।किं ततोऽल्पतरे खेयद्वेवेदित्याहुः ।दहरोऽस्मिन्नन्तराकाशः किं तदत्र विद्यते, नकिंचन विद्यत इत्यभिप्रायः ।यदि नाम बदरमात्रं किमपि
In plain words
If the disciples, hearing this instruction, should question their teacher, they might ask: 'How can this be? If this physical body is a limited city, and within it is only a tiny lotus-chamber, and inside that chamber is an even smaller space, what could possibly exist there? What could be found in a space so minute that you say it must be sought out and realized? In such a tiny inner void, surely nothing at all can exist.' This is the doubt they raise. After all, even if there were something inside, it could be no larger than a tiny plum...
Close to the Sanskrit
If the disciples should say to that teacher who has spoken thus, and if they should question: How? 'If within this limited city of Brahman there is a small lotus-dwelling, and inside that is an even smaller space; what indeed could exist in that lotus-dwelling itself? What could exist in that even smaller space of which they say it is to be known? What is it that exists in this small inner space? Nothing whatsoever exists'—this is the intention of their objection. Even if there were something only the size of a jujube fruit...