It is not the purpose of this verse to deny that which is seen to exist now, was non-existent before creation and would be non-existent after destruction. That would be contradiction in itself. Because in normal practice every one deals in life with such objects as if they did not exist before and will also cease to exist hereafter. There is no reason to assume that this is due to delusion. There is also no evidence to say that the statements like नासतो विद्यते भव: are due to delusion, thus in Brahma Tarka.
All acts, prior to creation and after the dissolution, do not exist, is the Vedic statement. If (it is assumed that) in each action, the specific form was not manifest before it was born, but came to be formed only later, then wisdom and normal circumstances would not justify such statement. If (it is assumed that) according to wisdom and normal circumstances, an archetype existed before the form came to exist then (it will have to be accepted that) before any thing is born it did not, in fact, exist Even due to the experiences of change, there would be the action and its result. Because of this change, the experience of body becomes apparent. Normal affairs of the world take place on the basis of this change and the experience of the change alone.