O master! O Lord! You who are always full of knowledge, unaffected by time and complete, would call me for consultation and ask me, just as ignorant people would do, attentive to my advice. When you, though full of knowledge, act in this way, it bewilders my mind. In various undertaking such as killing Jarāsandha or performing a rājasūya sacrifice, he would definitely call me and ask “Uddhava, tell me what I should do.” He was always aware of everything (sadātma-bodhaḥ) and was complete (akhaṇḍa), and not worn out by such things as time (akuṇthita). Though he possessed the samvit-śakti, he was like a fool, asking like a person who does not know. But he was not inattentive to the advice. Being at once ignorant and full of knowledge bewilders the mind indeed (iva). In this verse it is said he was like a fool. One could explain that this means that he appeared like a fool but was not. Thus this is bewildering, but actually it only seems to be bewildering (iva). Thus there is no incongruity here. However, it would be useless to raise a point in the sentence where the statements are not contradictory, and therefore this type of explanation is rejected.