अर्भकौकस्त्वात् तद्व्यपदेशाच्च नेति चेत्, न, निचाय्यत्वादेवं व्योमवच्च ॥ ७ ॥
arbhakaukastvāt tadyapadeśācca neti cet, na, nicāyyatvādevaṃ vyomavacca || 7 ||
arbhakaukastvāt—Because of the smallness of the abode; tadyapadeśāt—on account of its being designated as such (i.e. small); ca—also; na—not; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; nicāyyatvāt—for the sake of contemplation; evaṃ—so; vyomavat—like the ether; ca—and.
7. If it be said that (the passage does) not (refer to Brahman) because of the smallness of the abode (referred to, viz. the heart) and also on account of its being designated as such (i.e. as minute) ; (we say,) not so, (because Brahman has been so characterized) for the sake of comtemplation and because the case is similar to that of the ether.
“He is my self within the heart, smaller than a grain of rice, smaller than a grain of barley” etc. (Chh. 3. 14. 3).
This text occurs in the same section in which we also find “the self consisting of the mind”. The objection is raised that since these limitations are apt not in the case of Brahman but of the individual soul, it is the latter that is referred to by “the self consisting of the mind”. The Sutra refutes it and says that Brahman here is thus characterized, for the convenience of contemplation, as otherwise it is difficult to meditate on the all-pervading Brahman. This does not mar Its omnipresence, as these limitations are merely imagined in Brahman and are not real. The case is analogous to that of the ether in the eye of the needle, which is spoken of as limited and small, whereas in fact it is all-pervading.