- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

Otherwise, this âtman cannot be known by worldly men having desires, because sitting, i.e., not moving, he goes a great distance. Lying, he goes everywhere. Thus the âtman is both joyful and joyless. Thus he has properties mutually opposed; therefore it being impossible to know him, who else but me can know the âtman, who is joyful and joyless. It is only by persons like us of subtle intellect and learning that the âtman can be known. Being conditioned by conflicting attributes of fixity and movement, and of constancy and change, the âtman appears as if itself possessed conflicting attributes like Visvarupa, a sum of various forms, or (more properly) like Chintâmani (a gem which appears according to the fancy of the seer). Therefore, Death indicates the difficulty of knowing the âtman by the statement ‘who else but me can know the âtman.’ The cessation of the activity of the senses is ‘lying;’ in the person lying, there is a cessation of the partial knowledge produced by the senses. In this state the âtman seems to go everywhere, because its knowledge then is of a general character, i.e., unqualified by conditions; but, though fixed in its own nature, when it has special or qualified knowledge it seems to go a great distance, because it is conditioned by the motion of the mind and the rest, but really he is here alone, i.e., in this body. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

This text shows that by knowing him, grief also vanishes. ‘Bodiless,’ the âtman being like the âkâs by its own nature; ‘bodies,’ bodies of the gods, the manes, men and the rest. ‘Perishable,’ devoid of firmness, not eternal; ‘firmly seate,’ eternal, i.e., not subject to modifications; ‘great,’ to avoid the doubt that the greatness may be relative, the text adds ‘all-pervading.’ The word ‘âtman’ is used to show that it is not distinct from one’s Self. The word âtman is primarily used to denote the Pratyagâtman, i.e., the âtman in the body. Having known the âtman of this description, i.e., having realised him in the form ‘I am he,’ the intelligent do not grieve. There is no occasion for such a knower of the âtman to grieve. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

This text says that though this âtman is hard to know, still he can certainly be known well by proper means. This âtman is not attainable by the study of many Vêdâs, or by intelligence, i.e., a retentive memory of the import of books, or by any amount of mere learning. By what then can he be attained is explained. That âtman (self) whom the neophyte seeks, by the same self, i.e., by the seeker, can the âtman be known. The meaning is that, of one who seeks only the âtman, being free from desire, the âtman is attained by the âtman alone. How it is attained is explained. To the man who seeks the âtman, the âtman reveals its real form, i.e., its own true nature. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

Yet something more: who has not turned away from bad conduct, i.e., from sinful acts prohibited and not permitted by the srutis and the smritis, who has no quietude from the activity of the senses, whose mind is not concentrated, i.e., whose mind is deverted off and on; whose mind is not at rest, i.e., whose mind, though collected, is engaged in looking forward to the fruits of being so collected, cannot attain the âtman now treated of, but only by means of the knowledge of Brahman; the meaning is that he alone who has turned away from bad conduct, who is free from the activity of the senses, whose mind is collected, and whose mind is at rest, even in respect of the fruits of its being so collected, taught by a preceptor, attains the âtman above described by knowing him. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

As for him who is not of this description, the sruti says: Of whom Brahmins and Kshatriyas, though the stay of all virtue and the protectors of all, are the food; and Death, though destroyer of all, is only a pickle being insufficient as food. How can one of worldly intellect, devoid of helps above described, know where that âtman is, in this manner, as one who is furnished with the helps above described? (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

The connection of the present valli is this. Knowledge and ignorance have already been described, as leading to many contrary results; but each of them has not been described, in its own nature, with its results. The imagining of the analogy of the chariot is for the purpose of determining them, as also for the easy understanding of the subject. Thus two âtmans are here described for the purpose of distinguishing between the attainer and the attained and the goer and the goal. Drinking, i.e., enjoying; truth, i.e., the fruits of the enjoyer, on the analogy of using the expression ‘the umbrella-carriers go’ when not all of them carry umbrellas. Sukritasya means of deeds done by themselves and is connected with the previous word ‘fruits.’ Lôkê, means in this body. Guhâm pravishtau, means lodged in intelligence. Paramê, superior in relation to the space of the âkâs of the external body. Parârdhê, in the abode of Brahman, for, there, can Brahman be realised. The meaning is that they are lodged in the âkâs within the cavity of the heart; again they are dissimilar like shadow and light, being within the pale of Samsâra and free from Samsâra, respectively. So do the knowers of Brahman tell; not those alone who do not perform Karma say so; but also householders maintaining five sacrificial fires, and others by whom the sacrificial Nachikêta fire has been thrice lit. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

The Nachikêta fire, which is, as it were, a bridge for persons performing sacrifices for the purpose of crossing grief, we can light up. Moreover, what is fearless, and what is the main support of the knowers of Brahman, who wish to go to the other shore of Samsâra, the immortal Brahman known as âtman, we can know. The meaning of the text is that both the unmanifested and the manifested Brahman, the goal of the knowers of Brahman, and those who perform Karma are worthy to be known.

It is a description of these that has been given in the previous text. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

Here a chariot is imagined for the âtman, conditioned in Samsâra, entitled to acquire knowledge and perform Karma for attaining emancipation and for travelling in Samsâra, as a means to reach both. Know the âtman, who is the enjoyer of the fruits of Karma and is in the bondage of Samsâra, to be the lord of the chariot. Know the body to be verily the chariot, because like a chariot the body is drawn by the senses occupying the place of horses. Know also the intelligence to be the driver, furnished with the capacity for determination, because the body is mainly guided by the intelligence, as the chariot is mainly guided by the driver; for, everything done by the body is generally done by the intelligence. Know the mind with its characteristics of volition, doubt, etc., to be the reins; for, the senses, such as the ear, perform their functions when grasped by the mind as horses by the reins. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

Those who are versed in the construction of chariots call the senses, such as the eye and the rest, horses, from the similitude of their drawing the body. Know the objects (such as form, etc.), of these senses, regarded as horses, to be the roads. The intelligent call the âtman combined with the body, the senses and the mind, the enjoyer, i.e., one in Samsâra; for, the pure âtman cannot be the enjoyer. Its enjoyment is only the product of its conditions such as intelligence, etc.; accordingly also, other srutis declare that the pure âtman is certainly not the enjoyer. ‘It seems to think and to move’; only if this is so, in working out the analogy of the chariot to be described, it will be appropriate to understand. ‘The Vishnu Pâda’ as the pure âtman but not otherwise; for, there can be no going beyond Samsâra in the case of the pure âtman. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

This being so, of that driver known as Buddhi, who is not capable of discrimination as to what is to be done or omitted to be done, as the other driver in the guiding of his chariot has a mind like the reins of a chariot not well-grasped by the driver, i.e., uncontrolled by the intellect; of that incompetent driver, i.e., intellect, the senses which stand in the place of the horses become unruly and uncontrollable, as the vicious horses of the other driver. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

But of him who is a driver, the contrary of one already explained, i.e., of the driver who knows and who has the mind always under restraint, the senses standing in the place of the horses can be let go or stopped, i.e., controlled like the good horses of the other driver. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

Now the text mentions the results produced by the driver (intelligence) who is unknowing, as above stated; the lord of the chariot, who does not know and who has not the mind under control and who is, therefore, always unclean, does not attain that immortal great goal already described, by reason of having such a driver. It is not alone that he does not attain that, but he reaches Samsâra marked by births and deaths. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

But the second, i.e., the lord of the chariot who has a discriminating intellect as his driver, i.e., the knowing man, having his mind under control and being, therefore, always clean, reaches that goal from which never falling, he is not born again in Samsâra. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

What that goal is, is now explained; but the man who has discerning intelligence for the driver, whose mind is under control, and who is clean, i.e., the knowing man reaches the end of the road of Samsâra, i.e., realises the Supreme; i.e., is absolved from all the ties of Samsâra. The man of knowledge attains the highest place of Vishnu, i.e., the nature of the all-pervading Brahman, the Paramâtman known as Vâsudêva (the Self-luminous). (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

Now this subsequent portion is introduced for the purpose of showing that the goal to be reached should be understood to be the Pratyak (the internal) âtman, the subtlest proceeding from the gross senses in the ascending degree of subtlety. The senses are gross and those rudiments (Vishaya) from which these spring for their own illumination are subtler than the senses, their own effects, greater than these and the âtman of these, i.e., bound up with these; subtler than these rudiments and greater than these, being the âtman of these, is the mind. Here, by the word mind is denoted the rudiments of the Bhûta (Bhûta Sûkshma) from which mind originates. Than the mind which is the origin of volition, deliberation and the rest, the intellect is subtler, greater, and more possessed of the functions of seeing, hearing, etc., does not shine, as the âtman of any being concealed by ignorance and delusion. Oh, how deep, unfathomable and marvellous this Mâya, that every living being, though really in its nature the Brahman, does not, though instructed, grasp the truth ‘I am the Paramâtman’ and feels convinced, without any instruction that he is such a person's son mistaking for the âtman the combination of the body, and the senses, etc., which is not the âtman and is only perceived by him, like the pot, etc.; indeed, the world wanders repeatedly deluded by the Mâya of the Brahman alone; so the smriti also says ‘Being concealed by Yôgamâya, I do not shine to all, etc.’ Are not these statements inconsistent? Knowing him, the intelligent do not grieve and ‘he does not shine.’ It is not so. It is said he does not shine, because he cannot be known by the unpurified intellect; but he is seen by the purified intellect. Agryayâ, like a point, i.e., concentrated, subtle, i.e., capable of perceiving subtle objects. By whom? By the subtle seers, i.e., by persons, who, by seeing the different degrees of subtlety as pointed out by the rudiments, are subtler than the senses, etc., are characteristically able to see the subtlest, i.e., by learned persons. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

[Missing in the text] (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

[Missing in the text] (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

The text states the means of attaining that Yatchêt, draw into. Prâjnah, one having discernment. What? Vâky, i.e., speech. The word ‘vâk,’ i.e, speech, is illustratively used to denote all the senses. Where? In the mind. The lengthening of the vowel in manasî is a Vedic license; and that mind, let him sink into gnâna, i.e., intellect bright by nature; ‘intellect’ is called âtman here; for, it pervades the mind and the other senses; therefore, it is their ‘Pratyagâtman,’ i.e., internal principle; let him sink the intellect into the âtman; ‘great,’ i.e., first born Hiranyagarbha. The meaning is, let him make his intelligence as clear in its nature as the first born; let him sink that great âtman also into the peaceful âtman, i.e., into the primary âtman whose nature does not admit of any conditions, which is unmodified, which is within all and which is the witness of all the modifications of the intellect. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

Having thus merged into the purusha, the âtman, all the three, i.e., name, form and karma which are produced by false knowledge and are of the nature of action, agents and fruits, by a knowledge of the true nature of his âtman, as the water in the mirage, the serpent in the rope and the colour of the sky, disappear by seeing the true nature of the mirage, rope and the sky, one becomes free from anxiety and calm, his purpose accomplished. Therefore to know that, arise, Oh, living beings sleeping in beginningless ignorance, i.e., turn towards the acquisition of the knowledge of the âtman; and awake, i.e., put an end to the sleep of ignorance, horrible in form and the seed of all misery. How? Having approached excellent preceptors who know that, realise the âtman taught by them, the innermost and in all, thus ‘I am he.’ This is not to be neglected. Thus, the sruti, like a mother, says from compassion; because the object to be known can be realised only by very subtle intelligence. Why is it stated ‘by subtle in-tellect’'? The edge of a razor is pointed, i.e., made sharp and impassable, i.e., passable with difficulty; as that cannot be walked over by the feet, similarly hard to attain, the intelligent say, is the road of the knowledge of truth. The meaning is that because the object to be known is very subtle, they say the road of knowledge leading to that is not easily attainable. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

How the object to be known is very subtle is explained. This earth produced by sound, touch, form, taste and scent, and the object of all the senses, is gross; so is the body. Here, by the elimination one by one, of these gunâs, i.e., attributes from earth and the rest, difference in respect of subtlety, greatness, purity and durability, has been found in the element, from water upwards to the âkâs. Therefore the sruti shows that little need be said of the unsurpassable subtlety, etc., of that in which smell and the rest up to sound inclusive, mere modifications being gross, do not exist; which is soundless, touchless, formless, undecaying, so tasteless eternal and scentless, Brahman thus explained is undecaying; for, what has sound, etc., decays.

But this having no sound, etc., does not decay or suffer diminution; therefore also, it is eternal; for what decays is ephemeral; but this does not decay. Therefore, it is eternal; and being eternal, it is beginningless; i.e., has no cause; what has a beginning, that being an effect, is not eternal and is absorbed into its cause as earth, etc. But this being the cause of all is not an effect and not being an effect, it is eternal. It has no cause into which it could be absorbed; similarly endless, i.e., that which has no end or anything to be done by it. As the ephemeral nature of plantains, etc., is seen, by the fact of their yielding fruit and other results; not even thus, is it seen that Brahman, has an end; therefore also eternal. Beyond the mahat, distinct in nature from the principle known as mahat called intelligence, for it is the witness of all, eternal knowledge being its nature, and Brahman being the âtman of all things. For, it has been already said ‘This âtman concealed in all living beings, etc.’ Constant, i.e., changeless and eternal. Its eternal nature is not relative like that of the earth, etc. Having realised Brahman thus described as the âtman, one releases the âtman from the mouth of Death, i.e., from what is incidental to Death, i.e., from ignorance, desire and karma. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

The sruti, for extolling the knowledge treated of, says: Nachikêtam ] obtained by Nachikêtas. Mrityuprôktam ] told by Death. The story] contained in the three vallis. Old] of ancient date, being narrated in the Vêdâs. Repeating] to Brâhmins. Hearing] from preceptors; world of Brahman ] world which is Brahman; attains glory] having become the âtman, is fit to be worshipped. (Ⅴ)

- Shri Shankaracharia commentary :

Whoever causes this text, this highest secret to be recited verbatim and with meaning, in an assembly of Brâhmins, being himself clean, or causes it to be recited at the time of Srâddha to those who are there fed, that Srâddha is able to secure for him endless fruits. The repetition is for concluding the chapter. (Ⅴ)