1. 'My child, they bring a man hither whom they have taken by the hand, and they say: "He has taken something, he has committed a theft." (When
he denies, they say), "Heat the hatchet for him." If he committed the theft, then he makes himself to be what he is not. Then the false-minded, having covered his true Self by a falsehood, grasps the heated hatchet--he is burnt, and he is killed.
2. 'But if he did not commit the theft, then he makes himself to be what he is. Then the true-minded, having covered his true Self by truth, grasps the heated hatchet--he is not burnt, and he is delivered.
'As that (truthful) man is not burnt, thus has all that exists its self in That. It is the True. It is the Self, and thou, O Svetaketu, art it.' He understood what he said, yea, he understood it.
108:1 The next question is: Why does he who knows, on obtaining the Sat, not return, while he who does not know, though obtaining the Sat in death, returns? An illustration is chosen which is intended to show how knowledge produces a material effect. The belief in the efficacy of ordeals must have existed at the time, and appealing to that belief, the teacher says that the man who knows himself guilty, is really burnt by the heated iron, while the man who knows himself innocent, is not. In the same manner the man who knows his Self to be the true Self, on approaching after death the true Self, is not repelled and sent back into a new existence, while he who does not know, is sent back into a new round of births and deaths. The man who tells a falsehood about himself, loses his true Self and is burnt; the man who has a false conception about his Self, loses likewise his true Self, and not knowing the true Self, even though approaching it in death, he has to suffer till he acquires some day the true knowledge.
