And there cannot be cognition of both simultaneously.

This sutra complements the previous one with a logical argument. The mind cannot know itself at the same moment it knows an external object.

Ekasamaye means “at the same moment.” Ubhaya is “both.” Anavadhāraṇam is “impossibility of cognition.”

If the mind were self-luminous, it could simultaneously know the object and know itself knowing. But experience shows attention can only focus on one thing at a time. When we observe a thought, we cannot simultaneously observe the act of observing.

This proves there is a witness beyond the mind that illuminates it. The consciousness that knows the mind and its objects cannot be the mind itself.

It is like the eye that cannot see itself directly. A mirror, an external medium, is needed. The mind needs puruṣa to be known.

This analysis leads to recognizing the witnessing consciousness as our true identity.