The offering-vessel by which the knower of Brahman offers the oblation into the fire he sees as Brahman itself: he sees that, apart from the Self, it has no being, as one sees in a piece of mother-of-pearl the absence of silver. So it is said that the offering-vessel is Brahman itself, as one says that what looked like silver is mother-of-pearl itself. What is grasped in the world with the notion 'offering-vessel' is, for this knower of Brahman, Brahman itself; what is grasped with the notion 'oblation' is, for him, Brahman itself. In the same way the fire too is Brahman alone: the fire into which the oblation is offered by Brahman as the doer, the doer being Brahman itself; what is offered by it, the act of offering, is Brahman; and the fruit to be reached by it is Brahman too. By the absorption that is action which is Brahman, his absorption resting on action that is Brahman, Brahman alone is to be reached. Thus, even action done by one who wishes to hold the world together is, in the highest truth, inaction, since it is dissolved away by the cognition of Brahman. This being so, the conferring of the character of sacrifice upon knowledge, for the sake of praising the right vision, fits all the more readily even for the renouncer who has turned from action: what is well known, in the sphere of sacrifice, as offering-vessel and the rest is, for the seer of the supreme truth, in the sphere of the Self, Brahman alone. Otherwise, all being Brahman, the particular declaring of the offering-vessel and the rest as Brahman would be purposeless. Therefore, for the knower who recognises that all this is Brahman alone, there is the absence of action; and there is the absence of action because the cognition of act-factors is absent. A rite named sacrifice is nowhere seen without the cognition of act-factors: every rite, the fire-oblation and the rest, is seen to be attended by the cognition of act-factors such as the particular deity, conveyed by the word, the recipient and so on, and by the doer's conceit and his aim at a fruit; it is not seen as one in which the cognition of the distinctions of act, factor and fruit has been ground away, nor as free of the doer's conceit and the aim at a fruit. But this action is one in which the cognition of the distinctions of offering-vessel and the other factors, of the act and of the fruit, has been ground away by the cognition of Brahman; so it is just inaction. And so it has been shown by 'he who would see inaction in action', 'though engaged in action, he does nothing whatever', 'the qualities move among the qualities', 'I do nothing whatever, so the yoked one, the knower of the truth, should think' and the like; and in showing it so, He grinds away, here and there, the cognition of the distinctions of act, factor and fruit. It is seen, in the optional fire-oblation and the like, that with the grinding-away of the desire the optional fire-oblation ceases to be such; and it is seen that actions done with intent and without intent give rise to particular effects. So here too, for the knower whose cognition of the distinctions of offering-vessel and the other factors, of the act and of the fruit, has been ground away by the cognition of Brahman, even action becomes inaction through the mere outward movement. That is why it was said 'it wholly dissolves'. Here some say: that which is Brahman, the offering-vessel and the rest, that Brahman itself, established as the five kinds of act-factor, does the action; the cognition of offering-vessel and the rest is not removed, but rather the cognition of Brahman is laid upon the offering-vessel and the rest, as the cognition of Viṣṇu is laid upon an image, or the cognition of Brahman upon a name. It could be so, were the passage not for the sake of praising the sacrifice of knowledge. But here the right vision, named the sacrifice of knowledge, is being praised: having set forth many particular rites named sacrifices, the Blessed Lord praises knowledge with 'the sacrifice of knowledge is better than the sacrifice of substance' (Gītā 4.33). And this statement, 'brahma-arpaṇam' and the rest, is fit to confer the character of sacrifice on knowledge; otherwise, all being Brahman, the particular declaring of the offering-vessel and the rest as Brahman would be purposeless. But those who say that, as the vision of Viṣṇu is set upon an image, or the vision of Brahman upon a name, so the vision of Brahman is set upon the offering-vessel and the rest: by them no knowledge of Brahman that could be meant here is stated, since their knowledge would have the offering-vessel and the rest for its object. By a knowledge that consists in setting up a vision the fruit of liberation is not reached, yet it is said that Brahman alone is to be reached by him; and it is a contradiction that the fruit of liberation should be reached without the right vision. It contradicts the matter in hand too: the right vision is the matter in hand, both at 'he who would see inaction in action' and at the end, since the topic closes with the right vision itself. The chapter has worn itself out doing nothing but praise the right vision, with 'the sacrifice of knowledge is better than the sacrifice of substance', 'having gained knowledge he soon reaches the supreme peace' and the like. So to say, abruptly and out of context, that the vision of Brahman is set upon the offering-vessel and the rest, as the vision of Viṣṇu upon an image, is untenable. Therefore the verse is just as we have explained it. Having conferred the character of sacrifice on the right vision, in order to praise it the other sacrifices too are now brought in.

'Offering' (arpana) is that by which the oblation is set forth, the ladle and the rest; being an effect of Brahman, it is Brahman. The oblation whose offering-instrument is that Brahman is 'Brahman-offering'. The oblation is Brahman, and itself become Brahman; into the Brahman-fire, the fire which is Brahman, it is offered by Brahman the agent; so, since all action has Brahman for its self, it is made of Brahman. He who concentrates his mind thus is one whose concentration is on the action which is Brahman. By that concentration on the action which is Brahman, Brahman alone is to be reached: the self's own nature, which, having Brahman for its self, has become Brahman, is to be reached. For seekers of liberation the action being done is itself of the nature of the highest Brahman; joined with this dwelling-on, it has the form of knowledge, and is the direct means to the beholding of the self, not by way of an intervening standing in knowledge. This is the meaning. Having thus set forth how action has the form of knowledge, the Lord states the varieties of the discipline of action.

Krishna makes clear what it is to have the mind settled in knowledge, with 'the offering is Brahman'. All this is called Brahman because its being and activity depend on Him, not because it has His own form. For the Padma says, 'since all is dependent on you, therefore the sages all say that you are all, not that all has your own form'. So too 'all this has consciousness for its eye' (Aitareya Upanishad 5.3), and 'this very One the Bahvrcas know' (Aitareya Aranyaka 3.2.9), and the like. The action, together with the samadhi, is Brahman itself.