Iyengar: The relationship with nature ceases for emancipated beings, its purpose having been fulfilled, but its processes continue to affect others.
Iyengar’s short commentary says that when the seer is freed
from his mental and sensory prison, “Nature
ceases to exist for him. He is able to perceive
his own form (svrupa). But he points out the bondage endures for the
rest of us.
Bryant: Although the seen ceases to exist for one whose purpose is accomplished [the liberated purusa], it has not ceased to exist altogether, since it is common to other [not-librated] pursuas.
Bryant repeats a commentary from ancient Indian texts: Color may not be seen by a blind man, but it does not cease to be, since it is seen by those who are not blind.
Taimni: Although it becomes non-existent for him whose purpose has been fulfilled it continues to exist for others on account of being common to others (besides him).
Taimni’s commentary continues this discussion by asking if Pakrti (nature) can live on its own? He wisely points out that” contradictions, paradoxes, and inconsistencies are inevitable when we try to see and interpret these realists though the instrumentality of the intellect. “’
Carrera: Although destroyed for him who has attained liberation, it (the seen) exists for others, being common to them.
Carrera says that this sutra describes “the change in the realized yogi’s relationship with the universe”. Our mind is focused on the things around us and our sensory perception. He says the self – our true center of existence “is experienced as an elusive dream. With liberation, the tables are turned: Nature is experienced as the dream while the self is the rock-solid reality”.
Comments