सुसूक्ष्मशक्तित्रितयसामरस्येन वर्तते ।चिद्रूपाह्लादपरमो निर्विभागः परस्तदा ॥ ४ ॥शिवैक्याख्यातिरूपभ्रान्तिमयसंसारावस्था यावन्नोन्मिषति, तावदपि तावत्येवोक्तरूपशिवता ।तथा च शक्तिपञ्चकमपि तदानीमेकरूपमपि व्यवहारापेक्षया कार्यसंभवादस्त्येव ।तथा हि परापरावस्थायां योऽहमिति स … प्रत्यवमर्शात्मा प्रकाशः, स एव परानपेक्षः पूर्णत्वादानन्दरूपो निर्वृतचिन्मयः स्थित एव ।सैव स्वतन्त्रा मुख्या शिवता ।तदुक्तं चिदाह्लादेति ।पूर्णचिदानन्दमात्रेऽनुभवः प्रकाशनं नतु बाह्ये, तत एव तत्रैव लयो यस्य स तथा ।अनेन निर्वृतचित्कथिता ।इच्छाज्ञानक्रियास्तु भिन्नाविषयाद्यपेक्षया स्फुटीभवन्ति ।परावस्थायां पुनः पूर्णोऽहमित्येव स्वस्वभावः प्रकाशते, तावत्प्रकाशत्वात् तदेव ज्ञानं, संरम्भरूपत्वात् सैव क्रिया, तत्स्वभावत्वेन तदभ्युपगमादिच्छापि स्थितैवेत्याह तदिच्छा तावतीति ।तावच्च स्वरूपं क्रियेति योज्यम् ।अथवा तावज्ज्ञानमिति तावेच्छब्दः क्रियायां स्त्रीलिङ्गः परिणमनीयः ।द्वितीयस्त्वन्ते तावच्छब्दः क्रमार्थः परापराद्यवस्थापेक्षः ।अत एव भिन्नविषयाभावेऽपि अभ्युपगमप्रकाशसंरम्भाणां सर्वदा प्रकाशमयत्वेनाविचलनादिच्छादिव्यवहारयोग्यतैवेत्युक्तं सुसूक्ष्मेति ।सुसूक्ष्मत्वमेषितव्याद्यभावेन विभागापरिकल्पनात् ।अत एव शक्तिसामरस्यं पूर्णचिन्मात्रप्रकाशनात्मत्वात् चिद्रूपाह्लादपरत्वं चोक्तम् ।सैव च निर्विभागता परावस्था यदैवमास्ते परस्तदेत्युक्ता ॥ ३-४ ॥
In plain words
He exists in the oneness of savour of the three most subtle powers, wholly given to the delight whose form is cit, undivided: he is then the supreme. As long as the state of saṃsāra, made of the error that is the non-recognition of oneness with Śiva, has not opened out, for that long too being Śiva in the form described is just that much. And so the five powers too, though at that time they are of one form, are present all the same with regard to usage, since an effect is possible. For in the supreme-and-lower state, what is ‘I’ is that … prakāśa whose nature is pratyavamarśa; and that very prakāśa, depending on nothing other because it is full, abides of the form of ānanda, made of blissful cit. That itself is free and primary being Śiva. That is what is said by ‘the delight of cit’. His experience, his shining forth, is in the full ānanda of cit alone and not in anything outside; for that very reason his dissolving is there alone: such is he. By this blissful cit is described. Will, knowledge and action, though, become distinct in relation to a separate object and the rest. In the supreme state, however, one's own nature shines simply as ‘I am full’. Because it shines just that far, that itself is knowledge; because it is of the form of exertion, that itself is action; and because, being of that nature, it accepts that, will too is surely present: so he says ‘then his will is that much’. And it is to be construed: ‘that much’, his own form, ‘is action’. Or else, the word ‘tāvat’ in ‘tāvaj jñānam’ is to be carried over to action and turned into the feminine; the second ‘tāvat’, at the end, then means sequence, with regard to the supreme-and-lower state and the rest. For that very reason, even where there is no separate object, acceptance, shining and exertion, being always made of prakāśa, never waver, and so they are fit to be spoken of as will and the rest: this is said by ‘most subtle’. They are most subtle because, with nothing to be willed and the rest, no division is imagined. For that very reason the oneness of savour of the powers is spoken of, and, since his nature is the shining forth of full cit alone, his being wholly given to the delight whose form is cit. And that very undividedness is the supreme state, which is meant by ‘when he abides thus, he is then the supreme’.