Outside all beings and within them; the unmoving and the moving both. Too subtle to be known directly. Standing far away — and yet close at hand. The verse holds four more paired oppositions: outside-inside, unmoving-moving, far-near, and the diagonal — sukshma — too subtle to be cognitively grasped. Each pair refuses to settle into one side.
Shankara reads precisely. The jneya appears as though operating through all sense-faculties and their functions yet is in truth sarva-karana-rahita — devoid of all instruments — as the Shvetashvatara confirms: 'without hands and feet it moves and grasps; without eyes it sees.' This appearance of sense-activity is the superimposition of limiting upadhis on the non-dual witness. Bahir-antah resolves at the level where there is no inside and outside, only the one consciousness that the apparent boundary divides only seemingly.
Madhusudana reads the verse as the antidote to nasat-shanka — the worry that nirguna Brahman might be mere absence. The everywhere-image of 13.13 is followed by the paradox-pairs of 13.14 and 13.15 precisely to hold the seeking mind in the recognition that Brahman is not a thing among things, not even a refined thing. The seeing must release the desire for a possessable object.
Ramanuja reads the verse as describing the atma-tattva that dwells both outside the elements and within every body, moving freely as the Chandogya Upanishad declares: 'sporting, playing, rejoicing.' It is avijneya to samsarins not because it is contentless, but because those who lack the qualities enumerated from 13.7 onward — humility, sincerity, non-injury — cannot reach it. The means and the seeing are bound together; the qualities are not optional ornaments.
Madhva gives a terse, precise gloss: the jneya is that which abhasayati — causes all sense-faculties and their objects to shine forth. Hence sarva-indriya-guna-abhasam. Its freedom from sense-organs was already established; here the emphasis falls on the Lord's illuminating causality — He does not merely permit perception, He is the very light that makes each perception possible. The far-near paradox names Hari's mode: cosmically distant in transcendence, intimately near in indwelling.
Vallabha situates the verse within his prior gloss on anantam and avyaktam: unlimited, un-manifest Krishna performs all sense-functions through what Shvetashvatara calls 'without hands and feet He moves and grasps; without eyes He sees.' The contradiction — all senses yet no senses — is not a logical paradox to be resolved but a declaration of Krishna's mode of presence; the bhakta tastes this without trying to dissolve it.
Shridhara explains sarva-indriya-guna-abhasam as the jneya appearing in the forms of all sense-objects — color, sound, and the rest — as though each faculty's content were a self-expression of the One. Citing the same Shvetashvatara verse to show that the denial of organs is paired with a higher-register affirmation of their functions. Asakta means wholly free from clinging to anything It bears.