Although the seen ceases to exist for one whose purpose is accomplished [the liberated puruṣa], it has not ceased to exist altogether, since it is common to other [not-liberated] puruṣas.

Bryant Commentary:

This sūtra situates the Yoga tradition as realist (the view that the world is objectively and externally real irrespective of whether we perceive it) as opposed to idealist (the world is not objectively or externally real but a product of the mind); indeed, Dasgupta uses the term “reals” for the guṇas. Patañjali and the commentarial tradition will take some pains to refute the idealist viewpoint in Chapter IV. The “seen” may have accomplished its purpose, kṛta-artha, for the fortunate successful yogī who has attained liberation, and thus may cease to exist, naṣṭam, for such a soul, but only in the sense that the liberated soul ceases to be aware of it; it has not accomplished its purpose for all other puruṣas, says Vyāsa. It needs to provide objects of experience for everyone else. Therefore, it still has a purpose and does not cease to exist, anaṣṭam. Color may not be seen by a blind man, says Vācaspati Miśra, but it does not cease to be, since it is seen by those who are not blind. In this sense, the conjunction between the seers (in the sense of the totality of puruṣas) and the seen is said to be eternal, because the puruṣas are innumerable, so one need not posit the hypothetical possibility that eventually all puruṣas will become liberated, causing prakṛti to become redundant due to an absence of puruṣas needing experience.

This sūtra is important to the Yoga school, Vijñānabhikṣu points out, since otherwise its opponents might question its tenets such as that prakṛti is eternal, creation is ongoing, and Īśvara is eternally sovereign. Moreover, the commentators are motivated by this sūtra to argue the position of the Yoga and Sāṅkhya schools, which posit an eternal plurality of puruṣas, whether in the liberated or nonliberated state, in distinction to the advaita, or nondualist, school of Vedānta, which holds that the plurality and individuality of the puruṣas exist only in the nonliberated state of ignorance. This particular school of Vedānta posits that upon attaining enlightenment, the puruṣa (more typically referred to as ātman by followers of Vedānta) realizes that all plurality and individuality is the product of illusion, and merges into the all-encompassing, nondual, absolute truth, Brahman.

To buttress their view of an eternal plurality of puruṣas scripturally, several commentators point to the verse in the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (IV.5) that speaks metaphorically of a nanny goat (prakṛti), whose nature is that of the guṇas and who produces evolutes of the same nature, being enjoyed by one passionate billy goat (puruṣa) but abandoned by another billy goat who has finished enjoying her. This resonates with Patañjali’s sūtra here. Just because one billy goat may leave the nanny goat, she nonetheless remains to be enjoyed by another billy goat: One puruṣa may become liberated, but all the other unliberated puruṣas remain experiencing prakṛti. Therefore, whether in the liberated or nonliberated states, there must be a plurality of puruṣas, and each one must be individual. This is the view of all six schools of classical Hindu thought except the subbranch of the Vedānta school, advaita Vedānta.

Although the seen ceases to exist for one whose purpose is accomplished [the liberated puruṣa], it has not ceased to exist altogether, since it is common to other [not-liberated] puruṣas.

Bryant Commentary:

This sūtra situates the Yoga tradition as realist (the view that the world is objectively and externally real irrespective of whether we perceive it) as opposed to idealist (the world is not objectively or externally real but a product of the mind); indeed, Dasgupta uses the term “reals” for the guṇas.44 Patañjali and the commentarial tradition will take some pains to refute the idealist viewpoint in Chapter IV. The “seen” may have accomplished its purpose, kṛta-artha, for the fortunate successful yogī who has attained liberation, and thus may cease to exist, naṣṭam, for such a soul, but only in the sense that the liberated soul ceases to be aware of it; it has not accomplished its purpose for all other puruṣas, says Vyāsa. It needs to provide objects of experience for everyone else. Therefore, it still has a purpose and does not cease to exist, anaṣṭam. Color may not be seen by a blind man, says Vācaspati Miśra, but it does not cease to be, since it is seen by those who are not blind. In this sense, the conjunction between the seers (in the sense of the totality of puruṣas) and the seen is said to be eternal, because the puruṣas are innumerable, so one need not posit the hypothetical possibility that eventually all puruṣas will become liberated, causing prakṛti to become redundant due to an absence of puruṣas needing experience.

This sūtra is important to the Yoga school, Vijñānabhikṣu points out, since otherwise its opponents might question its tenets such as that prakṛti is eternal, creation is ongoing, and Īśvara is eternally sovereign. Moreover, the commentators are motivated by this sūtra to argue the position of the Yoga and Sāṅkhya schools, which posit an eternal plurality of puruṣas, whether in the liberated or nonliberated state, in distinction to the advaita, or nondualist, school of Vedānta, which holds that the plurality and individuality of the puruṣas exist only in the nonliberated state of ignorance. This particular school of Vedānta posits that upon attaining enlightenment, the puruṣa (more typically referred to as ātman by followers of Vedānta) realizes that all plurality and individuality is the product of illusion, and merges into the all-encompassing, nondual, absolute truth, Brahman.

To buttress their view of an eternal plurality of puruṣas scripturally, several commentators point to the verse in the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (IV.5) that speaks metaphorically of a nanny goat (prakṛti), whose nature is that of the guṇas and who produces evolutes of the same nature, being enjoyed by one passionate billy goat (puruṣa) but abandoned by another billy goat who has finished enjoying her. This resonates with Patañjali’s sūtra here. Just because one billy goat may leave the nanny goat, she nonetheless remains to be enjoyed by another billy goat: One puruṣa may become liberated, but all the other unliberated puruṣas remain experiencing prakṛti. Therefore, whether in the liberated or nonliberated states, there must be a plurality of puruṣas, and each one must be individual. This is the view of all six schools of classical Hindu thought except the subbranch of the Vedānta school, advaita Vedānta.

Although Ceasing To Exist In Relation To Him Whose Purpose Is Fulfilled The Knowable Does Not Cease To Exist On Account Of Being Of Use To Others.

Once that happens, the phenomenal world no longer appears as such; it continues to exist as a common reality for everyone else, though.

Those who know the True Self have fulfilled life’s purpose. For them, the seen world ceases to exist, although, to others who share the common mind, it does exist.

Although it becomes non-existent for him whose purpose has been fulfilled it continues to exist for others on account of being common to others (besides him).

The relationship with nature ceases for emancipated beings, its purpose having been fulfilled, but its processes continue to affect others.

Iyengar Commentary:

As soon as the vehicles of nature which act as agents of the seer accomplish their task of freeing him from his mental and sensory prison, they are quietened, having accomplished their purpose. The bond between the seer and nature comes to an end. Nature ceases to exist for him. He is able to perceive his own form (svarupa).
However, the vehicles of nature, elements, their subtle qualities, cosmic intelligence, individual self, ego, intelligence, senses of perception and organs of action are common to all, so for others, who remain caught up in the world’s turmoils, the bondage endures.

Although destroyed for one who has attained liberation, it [the seen] still exists for others, being common to them.

Satchidananda Commentary:

According to the Vedantic term, nature is called māyā, or illusion. To whom is it māyā? To the person who has understood it. To others it is still real. The entire world is a sort of factory. In a factory we can see raw materials come in: timber, iron, etc.; but as they pass through different processes and various machines, they come out as finished products, which go to the showroom, the sales section and finally to the consumer. These products don’t return to the workshop again. But the workshop continues to function as raw materials keep passing through it.

The world is our factory. As we pass through we are shaped every minute by different experiences. We become refined as our knowledge develops. Eventually, we understand the world completely and have no business being in the factory any longer. Then we can say, “Once I thought all this was real: money, name, position, beauty. But now I understand that none of this is permanent. I have watched millionaires become paupers, famous beauties become wrinkled.” When that understanding comes, we no longer trust the worldly pleasures nor run after them. When we stop running after the world, the world says, “All right, I won’t bother you any more. But whenever you wish to make use of me, I’m ready to serve you.” Then the world runs after you. But we can’t shape ourselves without the factory’s help. We should know nature first. That is why nature is called the Mother. Only through the Mother can we know God. Nobody on this earth has understood who his or her father is without the mother’s help. She alone can tell us who the father is. Know nature well. Don’t try to run from it. Let there be no running away or dropping out. Escapism never helps us. If we try to leave something now, we will have to face it in a more difficult form later on.

Another thing is: we must always be alert and aware with māyā. The world will try to cheat us in every way. It will attempt to come through every nook and corner. We must have thousands of eyes all over in order to face the world. But we must face it, understand it, analyze it and solve its tests.

Many people are afraid of knowing what their problems are. They just want to swallow a pill and forget everything. Instead, they wake up with several new problems. They want to become ostriches. When there is a danger in sight, they want to bury their heads in the sand. But that doesn’t mean they have solved their problems. Once we solve and understand our problems, we become masters. Once we are masters, we are no longer bound by nature. It becomes our slave.

Though destroyed for him whose goal has been gained, yet is not destroyed, being common to others.

SV Commentary:

The whole idea of this nature is to make the Soul know that it is entirely separate from nature, and when the Soul knows this, nature has no more attractions for it. But the whole of nature vanishes only for that man who has become free. There will always remain an infinite number of others, for whom nature will go on working.

Why is it not destroyed ? “ Although destroyed in relation to him whose objects have been achieved, it is not destroyed, being common to others” than him. Even though destroyed, i.e., passed into annihilation, in relation to one Purusa, whose objects have been achieved, it is not destroyed in reality, because it is common to other Puru§as beside him. Although it is destroyed to the Purusa who has attained wisdom, it is not destroyed in relation to the Purusas who have not attained wisdom, vs it has not done its duty by them yet. It is, therefore, still related to them, as an object of the act of consciousness,* and is as such of course, ensouled by them into form.

This further explains the eternal conjunction of the indestructible energies of the knower and the knowable. As has been said : — The characterised being eternally conjoined, there is eternal conjunction of mere characteristics also.