। ॥ §०§ , , , , , , । । , । , , ॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥ ।} । , ---- , , , । ॥} । , , , , । , , ॥३॥
In plain words
, as it determines afterwards, makes these constructions of action and the rest, which rest on those two and are made of the working of the .
It was shown earlier that the , whose self is self-awareness, is like the thread inside the garland of acts of knowing, and is its life; and it has also been settled that he is free. He, his own nature pure, has for his ; but in the domain of , his own nature contracted, he is a . So when springs up, on the level of , his unfolding is distinct; in the knowing of the senses that is free of , since the state of and has risen there, there is the working of of one who does not stand outside the awareness free of . The , bringing about a determination that comes afterwards, an ascertaining, which is and is what the word “” names, accomplishes these of action, relation and the rest. And these rest on “those two”, which are oneness and manyness. For what appears in is not unreal, since, as has been said, being a real thing is simply being . Nor is it right to give , apart from its having the form of , any other working, under names such as superimposing, determining, conceit and the like. So words such as “they superimpose the outer on what is not outer” are empty of any real thing. And this has been said:
“And if determination is error”
So it runs there. But if the other side were to say, “How could touch the , which is to be made to shine by the knowing of the senses?”, it would be so if were something free on its own. But it is the working of the , and the has for his form the self-awareness within the earlier experience. And this alone is his of the earlier experience: that even at the time when is at work he remains, never letting go of having the earlier experience for his self. So, just as far as the earlier experience is the making shine of the , so far too, the working of the that has become one with the earlier experience, has that very thing for its content. Hence the master has said this:
“This alone is that of earlier experience in the : that even at the time of exclusion that earlier experience stands.”
Therefore the working of the that consists in joining oneness and manyness is the very one in question here. There it stands that alone makes such constructions of action and the rest, whose content is a real thing that is one and many: “these”, the ones the summary statement pointed to. Though even in what is free of there is an appearance of the universal and the rest, as in the appearance of a mere pot and the like, still the universal and the rest are not distinct then. For the categories of universal, relation, action, substance, direction and the rest truly flash forth in what colours things alike, in the arising of a pair of related things, in not letting go of the stream of moments in sequence, in taking in a cluster of parts, in grasping a limit and what has a limit, and the like. So it stands that the universal and the rest, one and many in form, are grasped by the of . And so is the thought that is . On its account let them be called real by ; but that is just a kind of being real. So they are not unreal, as the double moon and the like are.