परता पूर्वत्वमनन्यापेक्षाहमिति , अपरत्वम् अपूर्णत्वमन्यापेक्षितेदमिति । अत्र च तत्त्वद्वये भावानां ध्यामलाध्यामलरूपाणामुभयांशस्पर्शात् परापरत्वमिति । वेद्यभावनिष्ठा दशा तत्त्वस्वरूपा तदवभासयितृमन्त्रेश्वरादिशुद्धप्रमातृसंवेद्यवस्तुसारा । या तु तन्निष्ठसंवेदनदशा सा शुद्धा विद्या , तत्प्रमात्रधिष्ठातृत्वं श्रीसदाशिवेश्वरभट्टारकरूपता इति सक्षेपः ॥५॥
एवमेकेषां मते अहम् इत्याच्छादको यो भागः तत्प्रथाप्रधाना शुद्धविद्या । अन्ये तु मन्यन्ते , ---- यो ऽसाविदंभाग आच्छादनीयस्तस्य यदवभासनं तत्प्रधाना शुद्धविद्या । अन्यथा हि स इदमंशः केन भास्यतां मायायास्तत्राभावात् भावे वा प्ररोहप्रसङ्गात् ; अत एवेयं प्ररोहासहिष्णुं यत इदन्तां भासयति ततः शुद्धा । भासनाच्च विद्येति । तत एवाप्ररुढमायाकल्पत्वात् महामायेयं श्रीरौरवादिगुरुभिरुपदिष्टा , तदेतदाह ।
भेदधीर् एव भावेषु कर्तुर्बोधात्मनोऽपि या ।
मायाशक्त्येव सा विद्येत्यन्ये विद्येश्वरा यथा ॥ §०§
मायाप्रमातरि शून्यादिरूपे ऽप्यनुल्लसिते , चिन्मात्र एव प्रमातरि कर्तरि च सति चिदेकरूपष्वपि भावेषु यदचिद्रूपतया भेदप्रकाशनलक्षणं स्वातन्त्र्यं सा शुद्धविद्या मायाशक्त्या तुल्या , वेद्यभागे भेदप्रकाशनात् । न च मायैव , ग्राहकस्य चिन्मात्रभागे तावदविपर्यासनात् , येन प्रकारेण विद्येश्वरा भगवन्तो ऽनन्ताद्या वतन्ते । ते हि शुद्धचिन्मात्रगृहीताहं भावाः स्वतस्तु भिन्नं वेद्यं पश्यन्ति , यथा द्वैतवादिनामीश्वरः । एवं ग्राहकेऽंशतश्चैतन्यरूपात् परमार्थरूपे ग्राह्यविपर्यासनशक्तिः शुद्धविद्या विद्येश्वराणाम् ॥६॥
परे प्राहुः ---- भगवतः प्रमशिवस्याप्ररूढभेदावभासनं सदाशिवेश्वरता । तत्रास्फुटे भेदे इच्छाशक्तिरीश्वरस्य व्याप्रियते , स्फुटत्वे ज्ञानशक्तिः , ग्राह्यग्राहकविपर्यासद्वयप्ररूढौ तु मायाशक्तिः , सा च पशुप्रमातृषु , ग्राहकग्राह्योभयविपर्याससंस्कारे तु अविनिवृत्तेऽपि यदेतत् वस्तुपरमार्थप्रथनं तत्र विद्याशक्तिव्यापारो योगिज्ञानिप्रभृतिष्वपशुप्रमातृषु । तदेतद्दर्शयति ।
तस्यैश्वर्यस्वभावस्य पशुभावे प्रकाशिका ।
विद्याशक्तिः ॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥ ॥ §१§
पशुभावे विपर्यासैकरसत्वलक्षणे पाशनीयत्वे ऽस्वतंत्रत्वे दृश्यद्रष्ट्टदर्शनभेदे सत्यपि जाते पूर्वोक्तयुक्तिबलेन यदेतदैश्वर्यमुक्तं तस्य या प्रकाशिका परमेश्वरशक्तिः ---- यद्वशात् केचिदेव ता युक्तीरादृत्य तदा श्वस्तहृदयाः कृतिनो भवन्ति ---- सा विद्याशक्तिः । अयमेव षडर्धसारादिदृष्टोऽप्यस्याचार्यस्य हृदयमावर्जयति पक्षः , अन्ये इत्यनुक्तेः ।
एतदानन्तर्यौचित्येन च मायातत्त्वनिरूपणात् तदाह
॥॥॥॥॥॥॥ तिरोधानकरी मायाभिधा पुनः ॥ इप्क्_३,१।७ ॥
In plain words
Being higher is being first, the “I” that looks to nothing else; being lower is not being full, the “this” that looks to another. And here, in the two , things, dim and not dim in form, are higher and lower because they touch both parts. The state that rests in being knowable is the of the , and its essence is the real thing felt by the pure , the and the rest, who make it appear. But the state of awareness that rests in that is pure ; and presiding over those is being the revered and . That is it in brief.
So, on the view of some, pure is chiefly the spreading forth of the part that covers, “I”. But others think that pure is chiefly the making appear of that part, “this”, which is to be covered. For otherwise by what would that part “this” be made to shine, since is not there? Or, if it were, it would follow that it takes root. For this very reason, since it makes this-ness shine as unable to bear taking root, it is pure; and it is because it makes things shine. And for that very reason, since it is like a that has not taken root, this was taught by the of the glorious and the rest as . That is what he says:
That very awareness of difference in things which belongs to the doer, though his self is awareness, is , like the of , say others; as it is for the .
Even when the of , in the form of the void and the rest, has not yet risen, and the and doer is alone, the marked by bringing to light difference in things, as though they were not , even though they are of the one form of : that is pure , like the of , since it brings difference to light on the side of the known. And it is not itself, since, to begin with, it does not turn the grasper upside down in its part that is alone; it is the way in which the blessed , Ananta and the rest, abide. For they have taken their I-ness as pure alone, but see the known as different from themselves, as does the Lord of those who hold to duality. So, in a grasper that in part is real in the highest sense, because it is in form, the pure of the is the of turning the grasped upside down.
Others say: being and is the blessed ’s making difference appear before it has taken root. There, when difference is not clear, the Lord’s of will is at work; when it is clear, the of knowledge; but when the two turnings upside down, of grasped and grasper, have taken root, the of , and that is in who are . But where, even though the of turning both grasper and grasped upside down has not gone away, there is this spreading forth of the real thing as it is in the highest truth, there the of is at work, in who are not , , the wise and the rest. That is what he shows:
In the state of a , what brings to light that own nature which is sovereignty is the of .
“In the state of a ”: in being one to be bound, in not being free, marked by being wholly of one taste with turning upside down, even when the difference of seen, seer and seeing has arisen. The of the Supreme Lord that brings to light this sovereignty, spoken of by the force of the reasoning given before, by whose sway some few take those reasonings to heart and, their hearts at rest in them, are fulfilled: that is the of . It is this position, seen in the and the rest as well, that wins this master’s heart, since he does not say “others”.
And since the fittingly comes to be set out right after this, he says:
and the one named , again, brings about hiding.