ॐ mayamatram tu kartsnyenanabhivyaktasvarupatvat ॐ || 3.2.3||
But the dream creation is a mere Maya, because of its nature of not being a complete manifestation of the totality of attributes (found in the wakeful state).
ॐ parabhidhyanattu tirohitam tato hyasya bandhaviparyayau ॐ || 3.2.5||
From the meditation on the supreme Lord, however, becomes manifest that which remains obscured; because the soul's bondage and freedom are derived from Him.
ॐ na bhedaditi cenna pratyekamatadvacanat ॐ || 3.2.12||
If it be argued that (Brahman cannot have only one characteristic), on account of differences (met with in the scriptures), (we say that) it is not so, because the scriptures negate each of these differences individually.
Since Brahman has entered into the limiting adjuncts, It seems to participate in their increase and decrease. The illustration is apt since the illustration and thing illustrated have propriety from this point of view.
And the effulgent Self appears to be different during activity, as is the case with light etc.; yet (intrinsically) there is non-difference as is evident from repetition (of "That thou art").
But since both difference and non-difference are mentioned, the relationship (between the supreme Self and the individual is) as that between the snake and its coil.
For the sake of intellectual grasp (Brahman's magnitude is spoken of) just like the feet (of the mind or of space), (or the quarters of the karsapana).
Hereby (is established) the omnipresence (of the Self), (as is known) on the strength of (Upanishadic) words like extension and other sources (ie., Smriti and logic).