From the Kausītaki Upaniṣad we read:

“One lives even without speech. We see the dumb. One lives without sight. We see the blind. One lives without hearing. We see the deaf. One lives without the mind. We see the infants. One lives without the arms. One lives without the legs. This indeed we all see. Now, this breath alone is the intelligence Self that takes hold of this body and make it rise up. Therefore, it is said that it should be worshipped as Uktha only. This one is the all pervading. That which is breath that is intelligence; and that which is intelligence that is breath. This is the view and this is the understanding regarding it. When a person is asleep, does not see any dreams, he becomes one with breath alone. Then speech with all the names goes to him, the eye with all the forms goes to him, the ear with all the sounds goes to him, the mind with all the thoughts goes to him. When he wakes up, just as the sparks fly in all directions from a burning fire, thus breaths proceed from that self to their respective abodes, gods from the breaths and worlds from the gods. Now, this breath alone is the intelligence Self that takes hold of this body and make it rise up. Therefore, it is said that it should be worshipped as Uktha only. This one is the all pervading. That which is breath that is intelligence; and that which is intelligence that is breath. This is the proof and this is the understanding regarding it. When a person is sick, about to die, has become weak and fallen unconscious, they speak of him, ‘His consciousness has departed, he does not hear, does not see, does not speak with the speech, and does not think.’ He becomes one with the breath only. Then speech with all names goes to him. The eye with all forms goes to him. The ear, with all sounds goes to him. The mind with all the thoughts goes to him. And when he departs from the body, he departs along with all these.”

This teaching presents the microcosmic analogy: in suṣupti all functions and their objects merge into prāṇa, remaining in a potential state, and re-emerge upon waking. The same process occurs at death, when these faculties withdraw and accompany the departing jīva.

The Brahmasūtra Bhāṣya addresses an objection regarding pralaya:

“Since at the end of a cycle everything is completely destroyed and creation begins afresh at the beginning of the next cycle, there is a break in the continuity of existence; so even as types the gods are not eternal. This upsets the eternal relation of Vedic words and the objects they represent, and consequently the eternity of the Vedas and their authority fall to the ground. This Sutra refutes it. Just as a person after waking from deep sleep finds no break in the continuity of existence, so also in the state of Pralaya (end of a cycle) the world is in a potential state—in seed form—in ignorance, and not completely destroyed; at the beginning of the next cycle it is again manifested into a gross form with all the previous variety of names and forms. As the world does not become absolutely non-existent, the eternity of the relation between Vedic words and their objects is not contradicted, and consequently the authoritativeness of the Vedas remains. This eternal existence of the world in gross and fine forms alternatively and the similarity of the names and forms are brought out by the Śruti and Smṛti texts. ‘As formerly the Lord ordered the sun and the moon, heaven, earth, the sky’ etc. (Rig-Veda 10.190.3).”

Here the macrocosmic process is shown to mirror the microcosmic: pralaya is not annihilation but an unmanifest seed-state, just as in deep sleep the senses and their objects withdraw but are not destroyed. The analogy between waking from deep sleep and the re-manifestation of the cosmos at the end of pralaya explicitly connects the two.

By contrast, a separate philosophical point states:

“No, for it is intrinsic. The natural state of a substance is immutable, for it exists in its own right. Mutability is not its real nature, since that depends on other factors. The real condition of a substance cannot be dependent on external agencies. Any peculiarity that arises in an existing substance is a result of external agencies, and a peculiarity implies a change. The perceptions occurring in the dream and waking states are but modal expressions, for the true state of a thing is that which exists in its own right, and the unreal state is that which depends on others, inasmuch as it ceases with the cessation of others. Hence, unlike what happens in the dream and waking states, no modality occurs in deep sleep, for the non-perception in the latter state is natural.”

This is a discussion about the immutable, intrinsic state of a substance — here applied to deep sleep as a natural state of non-perception. It does not address the continuity of names and forms in potential form, nor the analogy between suṣupti and pralaya. It is concerned with changelessness and epistemology, not with the seed-state preservation described in the Kausītaki Upaniṣad and the Brahmasūtra Bhāṣya.

Taken together, the Upaniṣadic and Brahmasūtra passages form a consistent doctrine: what happens to the individual in deep sleep is the same type of withdrawal and seed-state preservation that happens to the cosmos in pralaya, with re-emergence restoring continuity in both cases. The other philosophical excerpt, while true in its own domain, is not evidence for this specific suṣupti–pralaya parallel.