Mundaka-2-1-3-etasmājjāyate

Sri Shankara’s Commentary (Bhashya) translated by S. Sitarama Sastri

Com.—As Devadatta is said to be ‘aputra’ when a ‘putra’ is not born to him, so it is explained how it is said in this connection that in the case of the purusha the prana, etc., do not exist; because from this purusha alone viewed as conditioned by the seed of name and form is born the prana, the modification of the object of ignorance, a mere name and in its nature a non-entity; for, another Sruti says ‘The name is mere speech, a modification and a falsehood’; by prana, which is an object of ignorance and a falsehood, the highest cannot be said to be possessed of it (prana), as a sonless man cannot be said to have a son, by a son seen in dreams; similarly the mind, all the sensory organs and their objects are born of this. Therefore, that he is really without prana, etc., is established. It should be known that just as these prana, etc., did not really exist before the creation, so, even after absorption as the organs, the mind and the senses, so the bhutas which are the causes of the bodies and objects. ‘Kham,’ the aka s, the air internal and external, o various kinds such as avaha, etc.; ‘Jotihi’, fire. ‘Apah’, water. ‘Prithivi,’ earth. ‘Visvasya,’ o all. All these whose attributes are sound, touch, form, taste and smell and which are respectively formed by the combination of the latter with the previous attributes are born of him. Having briefly stated the immortal, unconditioned, eternal Purusha, the object of para vidya, by the text ‘Bright, formless, etc.,’ the Sruti next proceeded to explain his nature in detail and at length. It is only when a thing is explained briefly and at length it becomes capable of being easily understood as if explained by Sutras and by their commentaries.

Links
Various resources on the Mundakopanishad
Upanishad Series – Mundakopanishad Commentary by Swami Chinmayananda