ntion from acts is said hereto be true and superior, and productive
of real fruit, in the form, that is, of Emancipation. The soul, however,
in the generality of cases, united with ebhih, by which is meant
ayasa-kritam karma, that is, the acts done in pursuance of the religion
of Pravritti, becomes embodied and, therefore, enjoys happiness or
endures misery as the case may be.

51. The sense seems to be this--when a creature stands before a mirror,
its image is formed in the mirror; such reflection, however, never
affects the mirror in the least, for when the object leaves the vicinity
of the mirror, the image or reflection vanishes away. The soul is like
the mirror. Pleasure and pain are like reflections in it. They come and
go away without the soul being at all modified by them in anyway.
Pleasure and pain are destructible, but not so the soul.

52. The ordinary man thinks this conglomeration of diverse objects to be
his self. The man of wisdom who has exhausted his acts does not think so.
He is freed from the obligation of taking a body.

53. The sense probably is this. In the case of ordinary men, the
component parts of the body dissolve away, while Yogins can keep such
parts from dissolution as long as they like.

54. The sense is, the deities bear away to the next world the animals
slain in sacrifices. Though the bodies of such animals are apparently
destroyed, yet their life-breaths and senses continue to exist.

55. The sense is that as wives etc., when lost, are sources of sorrow,
wise men should abstain from contracting such relations. They might then
be free from sorrow.

56. Paraparajnah is one that understands the distinction between body and
sell. Apara is, therefore, one that is not possessed of such knowledge;
hence, as Nilakantha explains, it implies one who has not attained to
Jnana nishtha. What is said in the second line is that he that adores
saguna Brahma, succeeds afterwards, through such adoration, in reaching
to nirguna Brahma.

57. The sense seems to be this: we spring from the unmanifest and
disappear once more in the unmanifest. The Bengal texts read the first
line incorrectly. It is adarsanalapatitah. The second line is
unintelligible. Naham tam vedini is taken by Nilakantha as implying 'I do
not know him,' i.e., him that is Emancipate. Asau cha no vetti mam is
explained as a due to karanabhat. But who is asau? 'I have no
renunciation,' or 'renunciation is not yet mine,' implies that