Let us contemplate the subtle deliberations of the sages as they examine the nuances of scriptural teachings. The discussion begins with the question of whether differences in context—such as higher and lower—necessarily imply superiority or inferiority. The sages clarify that this is not so; context alone does not determine such distinctions, just as with the examples of higher and lower things. If a distinction is recognized, it is only because it has already been explained elsewhere, and even then, that distinction persists. The reasoning continues: because of the pervasiveness of certain qualities, it is reasonable to accept their presence. In all cases except for a particular one, there is no essential distinction; bliss and similar attributes belong to the chief principle, the highest reality. The lack of attainment of what is called the “dear head,” along with the fluctuations of increase and decrease, are indeed due to differences in context or circumstance. However, other aspects are guided by the generality of meaning. The sages then observe that, for meditation, there is no specific purpose to be found in certain cases. This is further supported by the use of the word “self,” emphasizing the grasping of the self as is done in other instances, and as indicated by what follows in the teachings. Should one argue that connection is the reason for distinction, it may be so, but only because of specific circumstances. Since the effect is already mentioned, it is not something new; thus, due to non-difference, it is the same as before. This connection applies even elsewhere, in other contexts. Alternatively, there may not be such connection, because distinctions do exist. This is demonstrated by the scriptures themselves. Moreover, because of the collection of qualities and their pervasiveness, the conclusion is reinforced. Even in meditations upon the cosmic person, other attributes are mentioned, affirming the connection. The differences in meaning, starting with the Creator, further clarify the distinctions. When certain elements are omitted—such as the kusha grass or the metres in rites—the word “upāyana” remains, and these omissions are likened to praise or song, as has been previously explained. At the time of funeral rites, there is no crossing over, for so it is declared by others. Yet, at will, actions may be performed, since there is no contradiction in either case. The purpose of the rites is fulfilled in both ways; otherwise, there would be contradiction. This appropriateness is affirmed, for the characteristic purpose is obtained, as in ordinary life. The function of the officiants continues as long as their commission lasts, and there is no restriction for all participants; neither is there contradiction, according to both scriptural statements and inference. However, for those who meditate upon the imperishable, there is a restriction, because of the general and particular nature of the practice, much like subordinate rites. This is affirmed by such reflection. If it is suggested that, as with the group of elements, there would be no other distinction of the self in the interval, the scriptures teach otherwise. The sages declare that interchange occurs, as with the inferior, yet those very qualities—such as truth and others—remain the same. Desire and similar traits arise from the senses and their interactions. Sometimes, omission occurs out of respect, and when presence is indicated, it is because the scriptures state so. There is no fixed rule for determination, as observed in practice; the result is not hindered by separation. Just as in the case of giving, the outcome is not affected. Because the indicative sign is predominant, it is indeed stronger, even in such cases. The prior alternative may arise from the context, just as when an action is undertaken, and this is further extended. Ultimately, it is only knowledge that matters, as determined by the teachings and by what is observed. Thus, the sages conclude their deliberations, having carefully considered the subtle distinctions and connections within the scriptural instructions, always guided by reverence and clarity.