। ॥ ४७१ ॥
In plain words
Both are joined to a limiting adjunct, and joined in exactly the same way — the Lord and the individual alike. Then how is bondage the individual's alone, and not the Lord's? How can that be?
Close to the Sanskrit
The connection with a limiting adjunct is exactly the same for both, for Īśvara and the jīva. How is bondage the jīva's alone, and does not belong to Īśvara — how is that?