Shloka
बहिरन्तश्च भूतानामचरं चरमेव च |
सूक्ष्मत्वात्तदविज्ञेयं दूरस्थं चान्तिके च तत् ||१३-१६||Transliteration
bahirantaśca bhūtānāmacaraṃ carameva ca .
sūkṣmatvāttadavijñeyaṃ dūrasthaṃ cāntike ca tat ||13-16||Translations
Dr.S.Sankaranarayan
13.16. It is without and within every being and is unmoving and yet moving too; due to Its subtle nature It is incomprehensible; It exists far away, yet near It is.
Shri Purohit Swami
13.16 It is within all beings, yet outside; motionless yet moving; too subtle to be perceived; far away yet always near.
Sri Abhinav Gupta
13.16 See Comment under 13.18
Sri Ramanuja
13.16 Abandoning the elements like earth etc., It can exist outside the body. It can exist within them while performing spontaneous activities as established in the Srutis: ‘Eating, playing, enjoying with partners or with vehicles’ (Cha. U., 8.12.3). ‘It is unmoving and yet moving’ - it is by nature, unmoving, It is moving when It has a body. It is so subtle that none can comprehend It. Although existing in a body, this principle, possessed of all powers and omniscient, cannot be comprehended by bound ones because of Its subtlety and Its distinctiveness from the body. It is far away and yet It is very near - though present in one’s own body, It is far away from those who are devoid of modesty and other alities (mentioned above) as also to those who possess contrary alities. To those who possess modesty and such other alities, the same self is very near.
Sri Shankaracharya
13.16 Existing, bahih, outside- the word bahih is used with reference to the body including the skin, which is misconceived through ignorance to be the Self, and which is itself taken as the boundary. Similarly, the word antah, inside, is used with reference to the indwelling Self, making the body itself as the boundary. When ‘outside’ and ‘inside’ are used, there may arise the contingency of the nonexistence of That in the middle. Hence this is said: acaram caram eva ca, moving as well as not moving-even that which appears as the body, moving or not moving, is nothing but the Knowable, in the same way as the appearance of a snake on a rope (is nothing but the rope). In all empirical things, moving as also non-moving, be the Knowable, why should It not be known by all as such? In answer it is said: It is true that It shines through everything; still it is subtle like space. Therefore, although It is the Knowable, tat, It; is avijneyam, incomprehensible to the ignorant people; suksmatvat, due to Its intrinsic subtleness. But to the enlightened It is ever known from the valid means of knowledge such as (the texts), ‘All this is verily the Self’ (Ch. 7.25.2), ‘Brahman alone is all this’ (Nr. Ut.7), etc. It is durastham, far away, since, to the unenlightened, It is unattainable even in millions of years. And tat, That; is antike, near, since It is the Self of the enlightened.
Swami Adidevananda
13.16 It is within and without all beings; It is unmoving and yet moving; It is so subtle that none can comprehend It; It is far away, and yet It is very near.
Swami Gambirananda
13.16 Existing outside and inside all beings; moving as well as non-moving, It is incomprehensible due to subtleness. So also, It is far away, and yet near.
Swami Sivananda
13.16 Without and within (all) beings the unmoving and also the moving; because of Its subtlety, unknowable; and near and far away is That.
Commentaries
Swami Sivananda
13.16 बहिः without? अन्तः within? च and? भूतानाम् of (all) beings? अचरम् the unmoving? चरम् the moving? एव also? च and? सूक्ष्मत्वात् because of Its subtlety? तत् That? अविज्ञेयम् unknowable? दूरस्थम् is far? च and? अन्तिके near? च and? तत् That.Commentary Brahman is subtle like the ether. It is incomprehensible to the unillumined on account of Its extreme subtlety. It is unknowable to the man who is not endowed with the four means of salvation.Brahman is known or realised by the wise. It is realised by the first class aspirant who is eipped with these means. It is near to the wise man or the illumined because It is his very Self. It is very far to the ignorant man who is drowned in worldliness or sensual pleasures. It is not attainable by the ignorant or unenlightened even in millions of years.Near and far away This expression is found in the Isavasya Upanishad (5) and the Mundaka Upanishad (3.17).