विश्वकर्मा मनुस्त्वष्टा स्थविष्ठः स्थविरो ध्रुवः ॥ १९ ॥शब्दादिरहितत्वान्न प्रत्यक्षगम्यः ।नाप्यनुमानगम्यः, तद्व्याप्तलिङ्गाभावात् ।नाप्युपमानसिद्धः, निर्भागत्वेन सादृश्याभावात् ।नाप्यर्थापत्तिग्राह्यः, तद्विनानुपपद्यमानस्यासंभवात् ।नाप्यभावगोचरः, भावरूपत्वात्, अभावसाक्षित्वाच्च ।नापि शास्त्रप्रमाणवेद्यः, प्रमाणजन्यातिशयाभावात् ।यद्येवम्, शास्त्रयोनित्वं कथम्? उच्यते—प्रमाणादिसाक्षित्वेन प्रकाशस्वरूपस्य प्रमाणाविषयत्वेऽपि अध्यस्ततद्रूपनिवर्तकत्वेन शास्त्रप्रमाणकत्वमिति अप्रमेयः, साक्षिरूपत्वात् ।हृषीकाणि इन्द्रियाणि; तेषामीशः क्षेत्रज्ञरूपभाक् ।यद्वा, इन्द्रियाणि यस्य वशे वर्तन्ते स परमात्मा हृषीकेशः ।यस्य वा सूर्यरूपस्य चन्द्ररूपस्य च जगत्प्रीतिकरा हृष्टाः केशा रश्मयः सः हृषीकेशः, 'सूर्यरश्मिर्हरिकेशः पुरस्तात्' इति श्रुतेः ।पृषोदरादित्वात्साधुत्वम् ।यथोक्तं मोक्षधर्मे—
In plain words
Viśvakarmā, Manu, Tvaṣṭā, Sthaviṣṭha, Sthavira, Dhruva. Because He lacks sound and sensory qualities, direct perception cannot reach Him. Inference cannot grasp Him, for there is no universal sign to lead the mind to Him. Analogy fails, since He has no parts and therefore no likeness to anything else. Postulation cannot find Him, for there is no unexplained anomaly demanding Him. The void cannot contain Him, for He is pure existence and the very witness of absence. Nor is He known by scripture in the ordinary way, since scripture does not alter Him with new attributes. If so, how can scripture be His source? Because, although He is the self-luminous witness beyond all proofs, scripture serves as His proof by destroying the false forms superimposed upon Him. Thus He is immeasurable, being pure consciousness itself. Hṛṣīkāni means the senses; He is their lord as the inner dweller. Or else, He is Hṛṣīkeśa because the senses remain under His command. Or He is Hṛṣīkeśa because the sun and moon—those joyful rays of light that delight the world—are His hair, as the Veda declares: 'The sun-rayed, golden-haired one before us.' This word's derivation is justified by irregular grammar rules. As declared in the Mokṣadharma —
Close to the Sanskrit
Viśvakarmā, Manu, Tvaṣṭā, Sthaviṣṭha, Sthavira, Dhruva. Because he is devoid of sound and other attributes, he is not reached by direct perception. Nor is he reached by inference, due to the absence of a pervading sign. Nor is he established by analogy, due to the absence of similarity since he is partless. Nor is he grasped by presumption, due to the impossibility of an unexplained contingency. Nor is he the object of non-existence, because he is of the nature of existence and is the witness of absence. Nor is he known by scriptural proof as an object, due to the absence of any produced modification. If this is so, how can he have scripture as his source? It is said: although he is of the nature of light as the witness of proofs and is not an object of proof, he has scripture as his proof inasmuch as he is the remover of superimposed forms; thus he is unmeasurable, because he is of the nature of the witness. Hṛṣīkāni means the senses; he is their lord, assuming the form of the knower of the field. Or, Hṛṣīkeśa is he under whose control the senses remain. Or, Hṛṣīkeśa is he whose joyful rays, which are of the nature of the sun and moon and bring joy to the world, are hair, according to the śruti: 'The sun-rayed one with green hair in front.' Its correctness is due to the pṛṣodara class. As stated in the Mokṣadharma —