^168:1 Here, again, the commentator seems to be right, but his interpretation does violence to the context. The dangers which a man sees in his sleep are represented as mere imaginations, so is his idea of being of god or a king, while the idea that he is all this (aham evedam sarvah, i.e. idam sarvam, see Sankara, p. 873, l. 11) is represented as the highest and real state. But it is impossible to begin a new sentence with aham evedam sarvam, and though it is true that all the preceding fancies are qualified by iva, I prefer to take deva and ragan as steps leading to the sarvatmatva.

^168:2 The Madhyandinas repeat here the sentence from yatra supto to pasyati, from the end of section 19.

^168:3 The Kanva text reads atikkhanda apahatapapma. Sankara explains atikkhanda by atikkhandam, and excuses it as svadhyayadharmah pathah. The Madhyandinas read atikkhando, but place the whole sentence where the Kanvas put aptakamam &c., at the end of section 21.

^169:1 The Kanvas read sokantaram, the Madhyandinas asokantaram, but the commentators arrive at the same result, namely, that it means sokasunyam, free from grief Sankara says: sokantaram sokakkhidram sokasunyam ityetak, khokamadhyaman iti vi; sarvathapy asokam. Dvivedaganga says: na vidyate soko 'ntare madhye yasya tad asokantaram (ra, Weber) sokasunyam.

^169:2 Bhrunahan, varishthabrabmahanta.

^169:3 The son of a Sudra father and a Brahmana mother.

^169:4 The son of a Sudra father and a Kshatriya mother.

^169:5 A mendicant.

^169:6 A Vanaprastha, who performs penances.

^169:7 I have translated as if the text were ananvagatah punyena ananvagatah papena. We find anvagata used in a similar way in section section 15, 16, &c. But the Kanvas read ananvagatam punyena ananvagatam papena, and Sankara explains the neuter by referring it to rupam (rupaparatvan napumsakalingam). The Madhyandinas, if we may trust Weber's edition, read ananvagatah punyenanvagatah papena. The second anvagatah may be a mere misprint, but Dvivedaganga seems to have read ananvagatam, like the Kanvas, for he says: ananvagatam iti rupavishayo napumsakanirdesah.

^169:8 This is the old Upanishad argument that the true sense is the Self, and not the eye. Although therefore in the state of profound sleep, where the eye and the other senses rest, it might be said that the purusha does not see, yet he is a seer all the time, though he does not see with the eye. The seer cannot lose his character of seeing, as little as the fire can lose its character of burning, so long as it is fire. The Self sees by its own light, like the sun, even where there is no second, no object but the Self, that could be seen.

^171:1 Salila is explained as salilavat, like the ocean, the seer being one like the ocean, which is one only. Dr. Deussen takes salila as a locative, and translates it 'In dem Gewoge,' referring to Svetasvatara-upanishad VI, 15.