। , । । ---- , । , ---- , । , , , , , , , , । । , , । ---- , । । ॥५॥ । ॥ §०§
In plain words
Or one who seeks the effective action of concealment would divide out things that spread over a wide space. Or one who wants to learn, “in dealings, what sort of thing do the elders call long?”, or who wishes to teach it, would make the division in this way. So it is that the there are divided. But it is one because it rests in one of space and one of time. For it is the of space and time alone that bestow the form of the particular, since their working stays close to carrying out the cutting down of the pervasiveness and the permanence that make for the form of a universal. In the same way as being a man, the other too, such as being a , are to be set out. So here, to begin with, the division of is the better known, because a man is the ground of a great many properties shared by the insentient and the not insentient. By this example, in smoke too the known divisions of , being smoke, being of sandalwood, having risen from white sandalwood and the like, are to be divided out. And by a well-known example, in the pot too, whose parts are not well known, there is a division into parts of . Consider: someone all but heartbroken, thinking “there is nothing at all here”, on seeing a pot sees only the of being, “this is here”, and does not heed the other even by name. So too one who wants to fetch water sees the of pot; one who wants a real thing fit to be freely carried off and brought back, the of substance; one who wants its price and the like, the appearance of gold; one who wants something to delight the heart, the of brightness. The words “and the like” take in one who wants something firmer, who sees the of firmness: so it is to be understood. The same is to be applied to liking and learning too. So these divisions of themselves are the real thing, because to be a real thing is, in essence, to shine as an . The too that is the life of an is of each alone, because the word, which is inner speech and is like the very life of awareness, rests on each alone: “existent”, “pot”, “red” and so on. Doing effective action too is fixed, by presence and absence, to each alone, since the of being brings about no more than warding off heartbreak. As for the need there for another , it is like the need for the of a vessel when an effective action is to be done with the of fire: because it is inseparable from making that shine, a further , fixed as it is, is also needed. So it is established that by whatever face an object is considered, by that face it is a bare and nothing more, because it is in just that way that it appears, is held in awareness, and does effective action. So, by degrees of being better known, known and not known, the author has set out even a single object in three ways: in “long, round”, in “smoke”, and in “being, pot”.
But surely, if being a real thing is in this way of each alone, the single pot as a whole would not be a real thing. With this doubt in view, he says:
From the division of comes the fixed effective action of real things; and again, from their appearing as sharing a common ground, that of things that are not divided.