They say one is the result of knowledge, and another the result of ignorance. Thus we have heard from the wise who explained it to us.

This brief verse serves as a bridge, acknowledging the tradition of teaching.

Anyat eva āhuḥ vidyayā — they say one is the result of vidyā (knowledge). The fruit of knowledge is distinct.

Anyat āhuḥ avidyayā — and another is the result of avidyā (ignorance/ritual action). The fruit of action without knowledge is different.

Iti śuśruma dhīrāṇām — thus we have heard from the dhīra (sages, those firm in wisdom). Upanishadic knowledge is not individual invention but transmission from a tradition of realized ones.

Ye naḥ tat vicacakṣire — who explained it to us, who clarified it for us. Vicacakṣire implies making one see, illuminating, explaining with clarity.

This verse emphasizes the importance of the guru, the teacher who has received and transmits knowledge. The Īśopaniṣad does not claim to be philosophical speculation but the distillation of direct experience of sages, passed from generation to generation.

The verse also prepares the ground for the synthesis to come: if results are different, how to integrate them? The next verse will give the answer.