। ॥ §०§ , , , , , , , , । ---- । । । , , , ॥१८॥ । , । , । । , । ॥ §१§
In plain words
By the all-pervading one’s of , that very one, whose range is a divided object of awareness, is spoken of by the names knowledge, conception, determination and the rest.
A shining that cannot be accounted for is called . So the whole host of appearances divided from is ; and there, the of the of itself is the of . There is the object of awareness divided by it, both from the and from one another; that is, what is an object of awareness through the set of instruments, which the of has divided from the , from one another and from what is known. Since this alone is its range, its place of rest, that very , whose self is and whose form is the supreme , is called “knowledge”, “conception” and “determination”. “And the rest” takes in doubt, memory and the like. Consider: the of , held in check by a sense faculty that grasps clearly and by an outer content that is clear, is knowledge. Held in check by and by a content that is not clear, it is conception. Held in check by and by a content that has reached the full measure of being content, it is determination, that is, certainty. The dividedness of the content, and of the outer and inner instruments, cannot be accounted for, since they are not different from that ; yet it is made to shine by the of . Since the resting, then, is in difference, and not in the non-difference of difference, as with , and the like, therefore knowledge, conception and the rest, being divided, are called of that of , which does the linking and whose non-difference from its own nature is never destroyed. Doubt and the rest are divided too, and so is the variety of blue and the rest. So all of it stands unbroken.
But surely: let the of have for its self in the of conception, remembering and the like, which are of the nature of . But the of experience, which is free of and is marked by direct seeing: how is it so there? For is made of joining a particular word, and joining a particular word needs the remembering of the convention. That needs the waking of a , and that in turn a seeing of the same kind. So how, at the first moment, is there any joining with words? To clear away this confusion of the other side, he says:
Even at the moment of direct seeing there is . Otherwise, how could running and the like be accounted for, without linking?