BG 9.5

9.5 Na ca bhutani, nor do the beings, beginning from Brahma; matsthani, dwell in Me. Pasya, behold; me, My; aisvaram, divine; yogam, Yoga, action, performance, i.e. this real nature of Myself. The Upanisadic text, too, similarly shows the absence of association (of the Self) due to Its being free from contact: '৷৷.unattached, for It is never attached' (Br. 3.9.26). Behold this other wonder: I am the bhuta-bhrt, sustainer of beings, though I am unattached. Ca, but; mama atma, My Self; na bhutasthah, is not contained in the bengs. As it has been explained according to the logic stated above, there is no possibility of Its remaining contained in beings. How, again, is it said, 'It is My Self? Following human understanding, having separated the aggregate of body etc. (from the Self) and superimposing eoism of them, the Lord calls It 'My Self'. But not that He has said so by ignorantly thinking like ordinary mortals that the Self is different from Himself. So also, I am the bhuta-bhavanah, originator of beings, one who gives birth to or nourishes the beings. By way of establishing with the help of an illustration the subject-matter [Subject-matter-that the Self, which has no contact with …

9.5 And yet beings do not abide in Me. Behold My divine Yoga. I am the upholder of all beings and yet I am not in them. My will alone causes their existence.

9.5 Nevertheless, they do not consciously abide in Me. Such is My Divine Sovereignty that though I, the Supreme Self, am the cause and upholder of all, yet I remain outside.

9.5 Nevertheless, they do not consciously abide in Me. Such is My Divine Sovereignty that though I, the Supreme Self, am the cause and upholder of all, yet I remain outside.

9.5. Yet, the beings do not exist in Me. Look at the Sovereign Yoga of Mine. My Self is the sustainer of the beings, does not exist in beings, and cuases beings to be born.

9.5 And yet beings do not abide in Me. Behold My divine Yoga. I am the upholder of all beings and yet I am not in them. My will alone causes their existence.

9.5 Nor do the beings dwell in Me. Behod My divine Yoga! I am the sustainer and originator of beings, but My Self is not contained in the beings.

9.5 And yet 'beings do not abide in Me,' as I do not support them as a jug or any kind of vessel supports the water contained in them. How then are they contained? By My will. Behold My divine Yoga power, namely, My wonderful divine modes, unie to Me alone and having no comparison elsewhere. What are these modes? 'I am the upholder of all beings and yet I am not in them - My will sustains all beings.' The meaning is I am the supporter of all beings, and yet I derive no help for Myself whatever from them. My will alone projects, sustains and controls all beings. He gives an illustration to show how all beings depend on His will for their being and acts:

9.5 Na ca etc. Yet, the beings do not exist in Me : For, the persons, who are blind with nescience, do not see the reality. The ignorant do not consider the Absolute Lord - Who is of the nature of infinite Consciousness - as a basis of determinate knowledge of all objects. On the other hand conceiving [like] 'I, the lean Devadatta, know this, as existing here on the floor', they view [things of] finite nature aone as the basis [of determination]. But why this contradiction ? On this doubt [the Lord] says Look at the Sovereign Yoga of Mine. Yoga signifies the Power [of the Absolute], because it is being employed. This is indeed My Sovereignty, which is the Freedom of behaving in this manner in a highly strange way. This is the idea (here).

9.5 Na ca bhutani, nor do the beings, beginning from Brahma; matsthani, dwell in Me. Pasya, behold; me, My; aisvaram, divine; yogam, Yoga, action, performance, i.e. this real nature of Myself. The Upanisadic text, too, similarly shows the absence of association (of the Self) due to Its being free from contact: '৷৷.unattached, for It is never attached' (Br. 3.9.26). Behold this other wonder: I am the bhuta-bhrt, sustainer of beings, though I am unattached. Ca, but; mama atma, My Self; na bhutasthah, is not contained in the bengs. As it has been explained according to the logic stated above, there is no possibility of Its remaining contained in beings. How, again, is it said, 'It is My Self? Following human understanding, having separated the aggregate of body etc. (from the Self) and superimposing eoism of them, the Lord calls It 'My Self'. But not that He has said so by ignorantly thinking like ordinary mortals that the Self is different from Himself. So also, I am the bhuta-bhavanah, originator of beings, one who gives birth to or nourishes the beings. By way of establishing with the help of an illustration the subject-matter [Subject-matter-that the Self, which has no contact with anything, is the substratum of creation, continuance and dissolution.] dealt with in the aforesaid two verses, the Lord says:

And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.