256.  Sankara accepts the reading Gururgariyan, Sreedhara takes it as Gururgariyan.  In either case the difference in meaning is not material.

257.  Sankara connects Adhyayana with Veda and Yajna.  This seems to be right explanation.

258.  Ata urddham is ‘after this,’ or ‘hereafter on high’ as Mr. Davies renders it.

259.  Although the limitation “for fruit” does not occur in the text, yet, it is evident, it should be understood.  Krishna does not recommend the total abandonment of actions, but abandonment for their fruit.  Mr. Davies renders arambha as “enterprise.”

260.  The learned, i.e., they that are themselves acquainted with is Kshetra and what not.  As explained by Krishna himself below, Kshetra is Matter, and Kshetrajna is Soul.

261.  Dukha-dosha is explained by both Sankara and Sreedhara as a Dwanda compound.

262.  Vivikta is explained by the commentators as Suddha or Chittaprasadakara.  There can be no doubt, however, that it is in opposition to Janasamsadi following.  Hence I render it “lonely”.

263.  The object of the knowledge of truth is the dispelling of ignorance and the acquisition of happiness.

264.  Nor having eyes, etc., yet seeing, etc.; without attributes, yet having or enjoying all that the attributes give.

265.  All modifications, i.e., of material forms; all qualities, i.e., pleasure, pain, etc.  The word rendered “nature” is Prakriti (primal matter), and that rendered “spirit” is Purusha (the active principle).  Vikarna and Gunan include all material forms and attributes of the soul.

266.  Karya-karana-karttritwa is explained by both Sankara and Sreedhara to mean “the capacity of working (residing) in the body and the senses.”  K. T. Telang adopts this.  Mr. Davies in his text has “in the activity of the organs of action.”  In course of his philological notes, however, he gives the correct rendering.  ‘Is said to be’ is explained by Sreedhara. as referring to Kapila and others.

267.  It is the embodied spirit only that can enjoy the qualities of Nature.  Then again, the kind of connection it has with those qualities settles its birth in good or evil wombs.

268.  Mr. Davies misunderstands the grammatical connection of the words in the second line of this verse.  K. T. Telang, following Sreedhara, says, the word should be rendered “approver.”

269.  What is heard, i.e., the Srutis or the sacred doctrines.

270.  Destroying self by self is to be deprived of true knowledge.

271.  Sarvatra in the second line is explained by Sreedhara as “in every body, superior and inferior.”  Grammatically it may mean also, “in every part of the body.”  Such a theory, however, of the seat of the soul would be contrary to all Hindu ideas.

272.  Bhuta-Prakriti-moksha is explained by both Sankara and Sreedhara as moksha or deliverance from the prakriti (nature) of bhutas’ or entities.  It is true knowledge that effects such deliverance.  Mr. Davies renders it “deliverance of beings from Nature.”  This is evidently incorrect.  “Beings” is not synonymous with self or soul.