50. Now some say that the personal soul is only the reflection of the
Supreme; but their opinion does not at all hold, since it cannot be
established.

51. For how could there arise a reflection of that Infinite and
stainless one? and how could an insentient [reflection] enjoy the pain
and pleasure arising from the merit and demerit declared in the Veda?

52. There may indeed be a reflection of that which is limited; but how
shall there be one of Him whose attribute is infinity?

53. Ramanuja, the foremost of the learned, condemned this theory of an
original and its reflection; the fact that this doctrine is not
accepted by the learned, will not make it seem more plausible.

54. There is an eternal division between the two, from the words of
the Veda, "two birds;" [Footnote: Rig V. i. 164, 20, "Two birds
associated together, two friends, take refuge in the same tree; one
of them eats the sweet fig; the other, abstaining from food, merely
looks on."] from the mention there of "two friends," how can there
be identity between them?

55. I become Brahman, that is, I cease to have mundane existence
through beholding the soul in Brahman; the result of this would be
the abolition of sorrow, etc., but in no way absolute Oneness.

56. I become Brahman also through beholding Brahman in the soul
[Footnote: Another reading is __brahma.ny atmaniriksha.nat__]; the
result would be the abolition of His being out of sight [Footnote: