सांख्यकारिका

(Sāṃkhyakārikā)

Iśvara Kṛṣṇa’s Memorable Verses on Sāmkhya Philosophy, with the Commentary of Gaudapādācārya

As Translated By

Vidyāsudhākara Dr. Har Dutt Sharma, M.A., Ph.D.

Original PDF

Salutations to that Kapila who, feeling compassion on the world sinking in the ocean of ignorance, constructed a boat in the shape of Sāmkhya for crossing (that ocean).

For the good of the pupils, I shall compendiously explain this science briefly and clearly, giving proofs, conclusions and reasons.

Kārikā I

On account of affliction from threefold misery, inquiry (should be instituted) into the means for its removal. If (it be said that) it is useless because of the (existence of) evident means (then we reply—) no, because of the absence of certainty and finality.

The threefold misery, etc. This āryā is introduced:—The exalted sage, Kapila by name, was the son of Brahman. As it is said:

“Sanaka, Sanandana, Sanātana the third, Āsuri, Kapila, Vodhu and Pañcaśikha—,— these seven sages are said to be the sons of Brahman.”

Virtue, knowledge, renunciation and power were born with Kapila. Thus born, seeing this world sinking in the blinding gloom and the succession of samsāra (birth and death), he became filled with compassion and taught this knowledge of twenty-five principles to the brahmin Āsuri, born in his own family,—the knowledge by which misery comes to an end.

“One endowed with the knowledge of the twenty-five principles will undoubtedly get salvation, no matter in what stage of life he is,— whether he has matted hair, or is shaved or has top-knot.”

So it is said:—On account of affliction from three-fold misery inquiry (should be instituted). The three kinds of misery are, internal, external and divine. The internal two-fold: bodily and mental. The bodily misery,—fever, dysentry and the rest,—is due to the disorder of wind, bile or phlegm; mental is separation from what is liked, and union with what is not liked and the rest. The external misery, due to four-fold living beings, vis., viviparous, oviparous, born of sweat and born of soil, arises from men, beasts, deer, birds, serpents, gnats, mosquitos, lice, bugs, alligators, sharks, unmoving objects and the rest. The divine misery,—i.e., daiva, because it belongs to gods or comes from heaven, that which arises with reference to these,—is cold, heat, storm, rain, thunder-bolt, and the rest. Thus, on account of affliction from three-fold misery, inquiry should be instituted. Into what?—

Into the means for its removal. Therein which is the means for this removal of that three-fold misery.

If (it be said that) it is useless because of the (existence of) evident means; if (it be said that when) the evident means for removing the three-fold misery are known, this inquiry is useless. For removing the two-fold internal misery, the internal means in the shape of treatment according to medical science, union with the liked ones, preclusion of undesirable, the pungent, bitter and astringent decoctions and the like, are quite evident. In (the case of affliction from) external misery, the evident means for its removal are seen in the shape of protection and the like. If you think that it (i.e. inquiry) is useless in the presence of evident means, (then we reply), no.

Because of the absence of certainty and finality. Because the evident means do not certainly (ekāntataḥ) and finally (atyantataḥ) remove it. Therefore, inquiry should be elsewhere instituted into (finding out) the means which certainly and finally remove (the misery).

————

If inquiry is to be instituted into other than the evident means, still no. Because the revealed means (are known) to remove the three-fold misery. Anuśrava is that which is revealed; (the means) arising from it are (called) ānuśravika. That is proved by the Veda; as it is said:

“We have drunk Soma, become immortal, reached the Heaven and become acquainted with gods. Therefore, indeed, O Immortal One, what can an enemy do against us, how can the old age of a mortal affect us.”

Once upon a time there was a discussion among the gods, viz., Indra and others: How did we become immortal? Having pondered, (they concluded)—Because we—apāma somam—have drunk soma, we have become immortal. Moreover, aganma jyotiḥ,—we have gone, i.e., achieved jyotis, i.e., Heaven. Avidāma devān,—(we) have become acquainted with the divine beings. And so,—kim nūnam asmān kṛṇavad arātiḥ;—nūnam, i.e., certainly, what can arāti, i.e., enemy, kṛṇavad, i.e., do to us? kima dhūrtir amṭta martyasya: O Immortal One (he amṛta), what can dhūrtiḥ, i.e., old age or injury of mortal (martyasya) do to us? Moreover, it is said in the Vedas that final goal (is achieved) by killing animals (in sacrifice): “He who performs the aśvamedha sacrifice conquers all the regions, transgresses death, transgresses sin, and also transgresses (the sin arising from) the murder of a brahmin.” Thus, when certain and final means are revealed in the Vedas, the inquiry is useless,—No. It is said:

Kārikā II

The revealed is like the evident one, It is linked with impurity, destruction and inequality. Other than that is better,—proceeding from the right cognition of the Manifest, Unmanifest and the Knower.

The revealed is like the evident one: dṛṣṭavat, i.e., like the evident, namely, that what is revealed. Why is it like the evident one? Because:—

Linked with impurity, destruction and inequality: Linked with impurity, because of the slaughter of animals. As it is said:

“According to the injunction in the aśvamedha, six hundred animals, minus three, are employed (i.e., slaughtered) at midday.”

Although, dharma is prescribed by the Śrutis and the Smṛtis, still, on account of the mixture (of items), it is full of impurity. Again, “In every yuga thousands of Indras and gods have been surpassed by the time. Time is (therefore) unsurpassable.”

Thus, it is linked with destruction, on account of the destruction of Indra and others. Again, it is endowed with atiśaya, i.e., inequality (due to superiority). By seeing superiority in one, the other feels pain. Thus the revealed means are like the evident ones. If it be asked which is better, then it is replied—

Other than that is better: Other than the revealed and the evident ones is better. Because, it is free from impurity, destruction and inequality. How is it (acquired)? (The author) replies,

From the right cognition of the Manifest, Unmanifest, and Knower: The Manifest are mahat and the rest; that is, intellect, ego the five subtle elements, the eleven organs and the five gross elements. The Unmamfest is the Pradhāna. The Knower is the Puruṣa. Thus, these twenty-five principles are called the Manifest, the Unmanifest and the Knower. In their right cognition lies the preference (over the other means). It has also been said—“One endowed with the knowledge of the twenty-five principles.” etc.

————

Now, what are the special characteristics of the Manifest, the Unmanifest and the Knower? We reply—

Kārikā III

Primal Nature is not an evolute; Mahat, etc., the seven, are evolvents and evolutes; the group of sixteen is evolute; the Spirit is neither an evolute nor an evolvent.

Primal Nature, i.e. pradhāna, (is so called), because it is the origin of the seven evolvents and the evolutes; Primal Nature, because it is the origin and a non-product, is an evolvent. As it is not produced from anything, therefore, Nature cannot be an evolute of anything.

Mahat, etc., the seven are evolvents and evolutes. Mahat, i.e., intellect. Intellect and the rest are seven, viz., intellect, ego and the five subtle elements. They are seven evolvents and evolutes. That is, intellect is produced from the Nature, therefore, it is a product of the Nature,—an evolute. The same (intellect) produces ego and is, therefore, an evolvent. Ego also, being produced from intellect is an evolute; and it is an evolvent as it produces the five subtle elements. The subtle element of sound, being produced from ego is an evolute; and it is an evolvent, as it produces ether. Similarly, the subtle element of touch. being produced from ego, is an evolute; and it is an evolvent as it produces wind. The subtle element of smell, being produced from ego is an evolute; and it is an evolvent as it produces earth. The subtle element of fire, being produced from ego is an evolute; and it is an evolvent as it produces light. The subtle element of taste, being produced from ego, is an evolute; and it is an evolvent as it produces water. Thus, mahat, etc., the seven, are evolvents and evolutes.

The group of sixteen is evolute. The five organs of sense, the five organs of action, the eleventh mind and the five gross elements,— this group of sixteen is only evolute. It is but a product.

The Spirit is neither an evolvent nor an evolute.

————

By what and how many means of cognition are these three categories, namely the Manifest, the Unmanifest and the Knower known?—Which (category) by which (means of cognition)? In this world, the knowables are proved by means of proof, as rice by the (weight) seer and sandal by balance. Therefore, the means of cognition should be defined.

Kārikā IV

The means of right cognition are recognised to be of three kinds,—perception. inference and valid testimony; as all the means of right cognition are proven (to be included in these three). Verily, a provable is proved by means of right cognition.

Perception. The ear, the skin, the eye, the tongue, and the nose are the five organs of sense. Sound, touch, sight, taste and smell are respectively the five objects of these. The ear comprehends sound; the skin, touch; the tongue, taste; the nose, smell. This means of right cognition is called perception.

An object which cannot be apprehended by perception or inference is apprehended by valid testimony. For example, (the existence of) Indra, the king of gods; the northern Kurus; the nymphs in the Heaven and so on. That which is not apprehended by perception or inference is apprehended by valid testimony. Moreover, it is said:

“Scripture is valid testimony. A person is called valid because he is free from blemishes. He who is free from blemishes will not tell a lie, because there is no occasion for that.”

“He who is engaged in his duties is free from attachment and aversion, and is always respected by persons like himself,—such a person is known to be valid.”

All the other means of cognition are included in these three. Jaimini (says): there are six means of right cognition. Well, what are these means of right cognition?—Presumption (arthāpatti), Probability (sambhava), Negation (abhāva), Imagination (pratibhā), Tradition (aitihya) and Analogy (upamāna),—are the six means of right cognition.

The Presumption is of two kinds—“seen or heard.” “Seen”, e.g., if the existence of soul is admitted in one case then it is admitted in other cases as well. “Heard”, e.g., Devadatta does not eat during the day, and yet he looks stout. Therefore, it is presumed that he eats at night. The Probability, e.g., when one says a prastha, the probability of four kuḍavas in it, is established. Negation is of the nature of antecedent, mutual, total and consequent. Antecedent Negation, as of Devadatta in boyhood and youth. Mutual Negation, as of jar in cloth. Total Negation, as of horns in a man, or the son of a barren woman, or a flower in the sky. Consequent Negation is the negation due to destruction, as of a piece of burnt cloth. As a consequence of seeing dry grain, negation of rains is understood. Thus, Negation is of various kinds. Imagination, as—

“The country lying to the south of the Vindhyas and the north of the Sahya and extending up to the seas, is lovely”; hearing this, imagination arises that there are lovely qualities in that country. Imagination is a cognition which follows (an utterance). Tradition,—as people say that a yakṣiṇi resides on this bunyan tree; this is tradition. Analogy,—as a gavaya is like a cow; a tank is like sea. These six means of right cognition are comprehended by Perception and the rest. The Presumption is comprehended by Inference; Probability, Negation, Imagination, Tradition and Analogy are comprehended by Valid Testimony.

Therefore, all the other means of right cognition being proved to be included in these three, only three kinds of means of right cognition are recognised, means that by these three means of right cognition, other means of right cognition are established.

Because, the provables are proved by means of right cognition. The things to be proved are—Primal Nature, intellect, ego, the five subtle elements, the eleven organs, the five gross elements and the Spirit. These twenty-five categories are called the Manifest, the Unmanifest and the Knower. Out of these, some are to be proved by means of Perception, some by Inference and some by Valid Testimony. These are the three means of right cognition. ———— Now the definitions of each are given—

Kārikā V

Perception is the application (of senses) to (their special) objects; Inference is said to be of three kinds: it is preceded by the (knowledge of) linga (the Middle term) and the lingin (the Major term). And Valid Testimony consists of holy teachers and revelation.

Dṛṣṭa or Perception is the application of the senses—ear and the rest,— to their special objects, viz., sound and the rest.

Inference is said to be of three kinds: Pūrvavat (a priori), Śeṣavat (a posteriori) and Sāmānyatodṛṣṭa (commonly seen or analogous). That which has got (i.e., which is inferred from) an antecedent (i.e., cause) is called Pūrvavat; for example, one infers rain, seeing the rising cloud, as seen before. Śeṣavat, for example, after finding a pala of water from the sea to be saltish, one infers that the rest (of water) is also saltish. Sāmānyatodṛṣṭa, for example when the moon and the stars are observed to move from one place to another, one infers their locomotion, as in the case of Caitra. Just as when one observes Caitra, leaving one place and reaching another, one infers that Caitra has locomotion, so (have) the moon and the stars (locomotion). Similarly, observing a mango tree in blossom (at a particular place), one infers that the mango trees are in blossom at other places (also). This is Sāmānyatodṛṣṭa.

Moreover, it is preceded by the (knowledge of) linga (the Middle term) and the lingin (the Major term). That inference is preceded by the knowledge of the Middle term, where a Major term is inferred by means of a Middle term; e.g., by (perceiving) a staff, (the possessor) is inferred to be a mendicant. That preceded by a Major term is—where a Middle term is inferred from the observation of a Major term; e.g., seeing a mendicant, one infers that this triple-staff belongs to him.

And Valid Testimony consists of the holy teachers and revelation; Āpta, i.e., holy teachers, like Brahman and the rest. Śruti is the Veda. The holy teachers and the Veda are called Āpta-śruti. They are called Valid Testimony.

————

Thus three kinds of Means of Right Cognition have been defined. Now, it is explained what is to be proved by which Means of Right Cognition:—

Kārikā VI

By means of Inference based on Analogy, the objects beyond senses are proved; that which is not proved by this (Inference) and cannot be directly perceived, is proved, by Valid Testimony.

By means of Inference based on Analogy, the objects beyond senses, i.e., the objects which cannot be directly perceived by the senses, are proved. Nature and the Spirit, which are beyond sense-perception, are proved by inference based on analogy. For, the Middle term, Mahat and the rest, has three Attributes. Nature is that which has Mahat and the rest, possessing three Attributes, as its effect. Again, because, this Unconscious (Nature) appears to be conscious, therefore, (it must have) another, i.e., the conscious Spirit, to superintend it (i.e., Nature). Manifest is proved by Perception.

That which is not proved by this (Inference) and cannot be directly perceived, is proved by Valid Testimony. For example:—Indra, the king of gods; the northern Kurus; the nymphs in the Heaven;—all these imperceptibles are proved by Valid Testimony.

————

Here, somebody says:—Nature and the Spirit are not perceived; that what is not perceived in this world, does not exist; so Nature and the Spirit also do not exist; for example, the second head or the third arm (of a man do not exist). It is replied:—In this world, the non-perception of objects is caused by eight causes. They are—

Kārikā VII

On account of excessive distance, (excessive) proximity, injury to senses, inattention, minuteness, obstruction, suppression and mixture with what is similar, (even the existent objects are not perceived).

Here, even existent objects are not perceived on account of excessive distance, for example, of Caitra, Maitra, and Viṣṇumitra living in another country.

On account of excessive proximity: e.g., an eye cannot perceive collyrium in itself.

On account of injury to senses: e.g., deaf and blind men do not apprehend sound and colour.

On account of inattention: e.g., a man who is distracted does not hear anything, however well-said.

On account of minuteness: e.g., the atoms of smoke, heat, water and frost are not visible in the sky.

On account of obstruction: e.g., an object obstructed by a wall is invisible.

On account of suppression: e.g., the planets, asterisms, and stars are invisible on account of the suppression (of their light) by the sun.

On account of mixture with what is similar: e.g., a grain of bean in a heap of beans, or a lotus and a myrabolan in a heap lotuses and myrabolans, and a pigeon in a flock of pigeons, are invisible, because, mixed with what is similar. Thus, existent objects are not perceived in this world on account of these eight causes.

Thus, what is ascertained does exist. Now, it is explained why there is no apprehension of Nature and the Spirit, and how can they be apprehended:—

Kārikā VIII

The non-apprehension of Nature is due to its minuteness and not to non-existence. It is ascertained from its effects. Those effects are Mahat and the rest, and they are similar and dissimilar to Nature.

Its non-apprehension is due to minuteness. (Non-apprehension) of Nature. Nature is not apprehended on account of minuteness. As even the existent atoms of smoke, heat, water and frost are invisible in the sky. Then, how is it to be ascertained?—

It is to be ascertained from its effects. A cause is inferred from the observation of an effect. Nature, as the cause, does exist, whose effects are these;—intellect, ego, the five subtle elements, the eleven organs and the five gross elements they are the effects of that (Nature).

Those effects are dissimilar to Nature.—Prakṛti is Nature; dissimilar to it, i.e., dissimilar to Nature.

And similar:—and similar in form. Even in this world, a son is similar as well as dissimilar to his father. The causes of similarity and dissimilarity, we shall explain later on.

————

On account of disagreement among teachers, a doubt arises—. Are all these effects, viz., Mahat and the rest, existent or non-existent in their cause, i.e. Nature?—For in this school of Sāmkya philosophy, the effect is existent; with the Buddhists and the rest, it is non-existent. If it is existent, it cannot be non-existent; if, however, it is non-existent, then it cannot be existent. This is a contradiction. Therefore, it is said:—

Kārikā IX

The effect is existent (in its cause), since, non-existent cannot be produced, since the material (cause) is selected, since everything cannot be produced (from anything), since a potent (cause) produces that of which it is capable and since (effect is) of the same nature as the cause.

Since non-existent cannot be produced; non-existent is that which does not exist. Since there can be no production of non-existent thing, so an effect does exist (in its cause). In this world we do not see the production of a non-existent object, as oil cannot be produced from sand (wherein oil is non-existent). So, since only an existent object can be produced, the Manifest does exist before its production in Nature. Therefore, the effect is existent.

Morever, since the material (cause) is selected Upādāna is the material cause; on account of selecting it. In this world, a man selects the material cause of that thing which he wants. One who wants curds selects milk and not water. Therefore, the effect exists.

Again, since everything cannot be produced. Everything cannot be produced from anywhere. For example, gold cannot be produced from silver, grass, dust and sand. So the effect is existent, because everything cannot be produced from anywhere.

And again, since a potent thing can produce that of which it is capable. Here we see that only a potent thing, like the potter or the means like earth, wheel, a thread of rags, water etc., can produce, from the earth a pot, which is capable of being produced. Therefore, the effect is existent.

And also, since (the effect is) of the same nature as that cause. The effect is of the same nature of which the cause is; e.g., barley (is produced) from barley and rice from rice. If the effect were not existent, then rice could be produced from kodravas; and as it is not so, therefore, the effect is existent. Thus, there are five causes (proving) the existence of the mergent, viz., Mahat and the rest, in Nature. Therefore, it is proved that only existent is produced and not non-existent.

Now he explains the similarity and dissimilarity (of Mahat and the rest) with Nature:—

Kārikā X

The Manifest is caused, non-eternal, non-pervading, active, manifold, dependent, mergent, conjunct and subordinate. The Unmanifest is just the reverse.

The Manifest, viz., the effect like Mahat and the rest, is caused. Hetumat is that which has got a cause. Upādāna, Heta, Kāraṇa and Nimitta are synonyms. The Manifest has Nature for its cause: therefore, the entire Manifest up to the five gross elements, is caused. The principle of intellect is caused by Nature; the principle of ego is caused by intellect; the five subtle elements and the eleven organs are caused by the ego; sky is caused by the subtle element of sound; wind is caused by the subtle element of touch; glow is caused by the subtle element of colour; water is caused by the subtle element of taste; earth is caused by the subtle element of smell. Thus, the entire Manifest up to the five gross elements is caused.

Again, it is non-eternal; because it is produced from another. For example, a jar is non-eternal, because it is produced from a lump of clay.

Again, it is non-pervading; that is, it is not all-pervading. The Manifest is not all-pervading as the Nature and the Spirit are.

Again, it is active; it migrates at the time of creation. Because, it migrates along with the subtle body endowed with thirteen instruments, it is active.

Again, it is manifold; viz., intellect, ego, the five subtle elements, the eleven organs and the five gross elements.

Again, it is dependent, i.e., dependent on its cause; intellect depends upon Nature, ego depends upon intellect, the eleven organs and the five subtle elements depend upon ego; and the five gross elements depend upon the five subtle elements.

Again, it is mergent. It is endowed with (the characteristic of) merging. At the period of dissolution the five gross elements merge in five subtle elements; the latter along with the eleven organs (merge) in ego; ego (merges) in the intellect; and the intellect (merges) in the Nature.

Again, it is conjunct (i.e. made up of parts ); sound, touch, taste, colour and smell are the parts;—endowed with them.

Again, it is subordinate, i.e., it is not independent. As intellect is subordinate to Nature; ego is subordinate to intellect; the five subtle elements and the eleven organs are subordinate to ego; and the five gross elements are subordinate to the five subtle elements. Thus, the Manifest which is subordinate, dependent on another, is explained.

Now, we shall describe the Unmanifest. The Unmanifest is the reverse, i.e., just the reverse of these characteristics belong to the Unmanifest. The Manifest has been described as caused. There is nothing higher than Nature. And as the Nature is not produced, so the unmanifest is uncaused.

Similarly, the Manifest is non-eternal; the Unmanifest is eternal, because not produced. It is not produced from anything like the gross elements. So, it is eternal.

Moreover, the Manifest is non-pervading: the Unmanifest is all-pervading, being omnipresent.

The Manifest is active; the Unmanifest is inactive, also because of omnipresence.

The Manifest is manifold; the Unmanifest is one, because it is the cause. The Unmanifest is the only cause of all the three worlds; therefore, the Nature is one.

Again, the Manifest is dependent; the Unmanifest is independent, being a non-effect. There is nothing higher than the Nature of which the Nature could be an effect.

Again, the Manifest is mergent; the Unmanifest is non-mergent, because it is eternal. The mergent, Mahat, etc., merge in one another at the time of dissolution. (But) the Nature is not such. Therefore, the Nature is non-mergent.

Again, the Manifest is conjunct; the Unmanifest is without parts. Sound, touch, taste, colour and smell do not exist in the Nature.

Again. the Manifest is subordinate: the Unmanifest is independent, is its own master.

————

Thus, the dissimilarity between the Manifest and the Unmanifest has been described; now, the similarity (between the two) is explained, as it was said that it (i.e. the product of the Nature) is also similar (to the Nature).

Kārikā XI

The Manifest is composed of the three Attributes, non-discriminated, objective, general, non-intelligent and productive. So also is the Nature. The Spirit is the reverse of that, as well as similar.

The Manifest is composed of the three Attributes. It has the three Attributes, viz., Sattva, Rajas and Tamas.

The Manifest is non-discriminated; that is, it is devoid of discrimination. It is not possible to discriminate (between the two) that this is the Manifest and these are the Attributes, as we can do (in the case of a bull and a horse) that this is a bull and this is a horse.

Again, the Manifest is objective; that is, it is an object of enjoyment; because, it is an object (of enjoyment) for all the Spirits.

Again, the Manifest is general; because, it is common to all (the Spirits) like a harlot.

The Manifest is non-intelligent; that is, it is not conscious of pleasure, pain and delusion.

Again, the Manifest is productive. For example, from intellect, ego is produced; from ego, the five subtle elements and the eleven organs are produced; from the five subtle elements, the five gross elements (are produced).

Thus, these characteristics of the Manifest ending with productiveness have been described. The Unmanifest is similar in these (characteristics).—As the manifest is, so also is the Nature. The Manifest is composed of the three Attributes; the Unmanifest, whose products, viz., Mahat and the rest, are composed of the three Attributes, is also composed of the three Attributes. In this world, the effect has the same essence as the cause has; e.g., a piece of cloth woven out of black yarn will be black.

Again, the Manifest is non-discriminated; the Nature also cannot be discriminated from the three Attributes, It is not possible to discriminate that the Nature is other than the three Attributes; so the Nature is non-discriminated.

Again the Manifest is objective; the Nature also is objective, because it is an object of enjoyment for all the Spirits.

Again, the Manifest is general; so also is the Nature, being common to all.

Again, the Manifest is non-intelligent; the Nature also is not conscious of pleasure, pain and delusion. How do you infer this?—We see that from a non-intelligent lump of clay, a non-intelligent jar is produced.

Thus the Nature also has been described. Now, we are going to explain—“the Spirit is the reverse oof that as well as similar.” The reverse of that, i.e., the Spirit is the reverse o f the Manifest and the Unmanifest. For example:—

The Manifest and the Unmanifest are compose of the three Attributes; the Spirit is Attribute-less.

The Manifest and the Unmanifest are non-discriminated; the Spirit is discriminating.

The Manifest and the Unmanifest are objective; the Spirit is non-objective.

The Manifest and the Unmanifest are general; the Spirit is non-general (i.e., individual).

The Manifest and the Unmanifest are non-intelligent, the Spirit is conscious of pleasure, pain and delusion; it knows them; therefore, it is intelligent.

The Manifest and the Nature are productive; the Spirit is non-productive. Nothing is produced from the Spirit. Therefore, it is said that the Spirit is the reverse of that.

As to the remark that the Spirit is similar to that, it has been explained in the previous verse, viz., as the Nature is uncaused, so is the Spirit. It was said there that the Manifest is caused, non-eternal and so on, the Unmanifest is the reverse of that.

Here, the Manifest is caused; the Unmanifest is uncaused; so is the Spirit uncaused, because it is not produced.

The Manifest is non-eternal; the Unmanifest is eternal; so also is the Spirit eternal.

The Manifest is non-pervading; the Unmanifest is pervading; so also is the Spirit pervading, being omnipresent.

The Manifest is active; the Unmanifest is inactive; so also is the Spirit inactive, again because, it is omnipresent.

The Manifest is manifold; the Unmanifest is one; so also is the Spirit one.

The Manifest is dependent; the Unmanifest is independent; so also is the Spirit independent.

The Manifest is mergent; the Unmanifest is non-mergent; so also is the Spirit non-mergent, because it does not merge anywhere.

The Manifest is conjunct; the Unmanifest is non-conjunct; so also is the Spirit non-conjunct. There are no parts (in the shape) of sound and the rest in the Spirit.

And again, the Manifest is subordinate; the Unmanifest is non-Subordinate; so also is the Spirit non-subordinate, i.e., is its own master.

Thus, the similarity of the Unmanifest with the Spirit was explained in the previous verse. In the present verse, viz., “Composed of the Attributes, non-discriminated. etc.,” the similarity of the Manifest with the Nature and the dissimilarity with the Spirit have been explained.

————

It has been said that the Manifest and the Unmanifest are composed of three Attributes. Now, what are those three Attributes?—The following is stated to explain their nature:—

Kārilā XII

The Attributes are of the nature of pleasure, pain and delusion; they are adapted to illuminate, to activate and to restrain. They mutually suppress, support, produce, consort and exist.

The Attributes, viz., Sattva, Rajas and Tamas are of the nature of pleasure, pain and delusion. The Sattva is of the nature of prīti; prīti is p]easure; it is of this nature. The Rajas is of the nature of aprīti; aprīti is pain. The Tamas is of the nature of viṣāda; viṣāda is delusion.

Again, they are adapted to illuminate, to activate and to restrain. The word artha stands for ‘competency’. Ptakāśārtham Sattvam means ‘competent to illuminate’. Rajas is adapted to activate. Tamas is adapted to restrain, i.e., is competent to fix a thing. That is, the Attributes are of the nature of illumination, activity and fixture.

Again,—and they mutually suppress, support, produce, consort and exist. That is, they are mutually suppressive, mutually supporting, mutually productive, mutually consorting and mutually existing. Mutually suppressive; they mutually, i.e., one another, suppress, i.e., manifest themselves with the characteristics of pleasure, pain, etc. That means,—when Sattva is predominant, then it is so by suppressing the Rajas and Tamas with its characteristics; and it exhibits itself as pleasure and illumination. When Rajas is (predominent), then it is so (by suppressing) the Sattva and Tamas with its characteristics of pain and activity. When Tamas is (predominant), then it is so (by suppressing) the Sattva and Rajas with its characteristics of delusion and fixture. And the Attributes are mutually supporting like a binary. They are mutually productive, as a lump of clay produces jar. And they are mutually consorting; as husband and wife are mutually consorting, so are the Attributes. And it is said:—

“The consort of Rajas is Sattva, the consort of Sattva is Rajas; the consort of Sattva and Rajas, is said to be Tamas.” (Devībhāgavata, III, 8). That is, they are the help-mates of one another. And, they mutually exist, i.e., they co-exist, according to the text, “The Attributes exist in the Attributes,” (Bhagavadgītā, III, 28). Just as a beautiful and virtuous woman is a source of pleasure to all; but the same woman is a source of pain to her co-wives; and the same woman produces delusion in the passionate (people); similarly, Sattva is the source of the existence of Rajas and Tamas. Just as a king ever assiduous in protecting his subjects and punishing the wicked, produces pleasure in the good (people) and pain and delusion in the wicked, similarly, Rajas brings about the existence of Sattva and Tamas. In the same way, Tamas brings about the existence of Sattva and Rajas by its own nature of covering (things). For example, the clouds, covering the sky, produce pleasure in the world;—they urge the farmer to activity by their rain, and produce delusion in the separated (lovers). Thus, the Attributes are mutually existent.

————

Moreover:—

Kārikā XIII

Sattva is considered to be light and bright, Rajas exciting and mobile, and Tamas is only heavy and enveloping. Like a lamp, their function is to gain an end.

Sattva is light and bright. When Sattva predominates then the limbs become light, the intellect becomes bright and the organs become clear (i.e. acute).

Rajas is exciting and mobile. Upaṣṭambhaka is that which excites or stimulates. Just as a bull is very much excited at the sight of another bull, so is the nature of Rajas. And Rajas is observed to be mobile. A man of the nature of Rajas is fickle-minded.

Tamas is only heavy and enveloping. When Tamas predominates, then the limbs become heavy and the organs become enveloped (i.e., dull)—incapable of apprehending their objects.

Here, one may ask—How do the mutually opposed Attributes produce one common effect, although acting according to their own individual intentions?—(Reply), like a Lamp, their function is to gain an end. Pradīpavat means like a Lamp. Their function is considered to be aiming to achieve a common end. Just as a lamp composed of oil, fire and the wick, which are opposed to one another,— illuminates objects, so Sattva, Rajas and Tamas, although opposed to one another, produce an effect.

————

Another question arises here,—you have explained that the Nature and the Manifest are “composed of the three Attributes, non-discriminated and objective.” How do you know that the Nature, and the manifested Mahat, etc., are composed of the three Attributes, etc.? This is answered—

Kārikā XIV

The qualities of non-discriminatedness and the rest (of the characteristics of the Manifest) are proved (to exist in the Manifest) by the possession of the three Attributes and by the absence of its (i.e. of the Manifest) reverse. The Unmanifest is also proved by the effect being of the same nature as its cause.

The characteristics of non-discriminatedness and the rest exist in Mahat and the rest, because they are of the nature of the three Attributes; but they (i.e., the characteristics) are not proved (to exist) in the Unmanifest.—Therefore, it is said—By the absence of its reverse; the reverse of it, the absence thereof, i.e., the absence of the reverse; thus the Unmanifest is proved. For example, wherever there is yarn, there is cloth; the yarn and the cloth are not different things;—Why? Because, there is absence of the reverse. Thus, there is a relationship (sambandha) established between the Manifest and the Unmanifest. Far away is the Unmanifest, but the Manifest is at hand. So, one who sees the Manifest, sees also the Unmanifest; because, there is the absence of its, reverse.

Hence also the Unmanifest is proved—Because of an effect being of the same nature as its cause. We see in this world that whatever the essence of a cause, the same is that of the effect. As—from black yarn, only black cloth is produced. Thus, the mergent Mahat and the rest are non-discriminated, objective, general, non-intelligent and productive. So, whatever the essence of the mergent, the Unmanifest is also proved to possess the same essence.

————

“On account of the possession of the three Attributes, non-discriminatedness and the rest are proved to exist in the Manifest; By the absence of the reverse and by the effect being of the same nature as its cause, the Unmanifest is also proved”,— this is false. Because, all what we do not apprehend in this world, does not exist. (To this it is replied),— do not say so; because one cannot apprehend smell in stones, etc., although it is there. Similarly, the Nature also does exist, but is not apprehended.

Kārikā XV

(The Unmanifest cause does exist), because of the finiteness of the specific objects, because of natural sequence, because of activity depending upon efficiency, because of distinction between cause and effect and because of the merging of this diverse (evolved).

The Unmanifest cause exists—this is the relation of government of subject and predicate in the sentence. Because of the finiteness of the specific objects. In this world, wherever, we find an agent, we see a finiteness of his. For example, a potter makes only finite jars from finite lumps of clay; so does Mahat also. The mergent Mahat and the rest are finite and are the specific effects of the Nature. Intellect is one, ego is one, the subtle elements are five, the organs are eleven and the gross elements are five.—Thus, on account of the finiteness of the specific objects, there is Nature as the cause which produces the finite Manifest. If there were no Nature, then even this Manifest would have been infinite. And so, on account of the finiteness of the specific objects, there is Nature, wherefrom this Manifest has sprung up.

Again, because of natural sequence. This is quite well known in this world that when one sees a boy engaged in performing sacred rites, one infers that his parents are naturally brahmins. Similarly, seeing this mergent (i.e. the evolved), we arrive at a thing which must be its cause. Thus, by natural sequence there is Nature.

Again, because of activity depending upon efficiency. Here a man does that for which he is efficient. For example, a potter who is efficient to produce a jar, produces only a jar and not cloth or chariot.

Again. there is Nature as the cause. How?—Because of distinction between cause and effect. Kāraṇa is that which produces; kārya is that which is produced. (There is) a distinction (of functions) of cause and effect. For example, as a jar is competent to hold curds, honey, water and milk, so is not a lump of clay (competent). Or, a lump of clay produces a jar, but a jar does not produce lump of clay. Thus, seeing the mergent Mahat and the rest, it is inferred that there is a separate cause from which this Manifest has separated (i.e., evolved) itself.

And again, because of the merging of the diverse (evoloved). Viśva means universe; its rūpa is manifestation. The abstraction of viśvarūpa is vaiśvarūpya (i.e., manifested or evolved); on account of its merging there is Nature; because there is no mutual distinction between the three worlds and the five gross elements,—i.e.; the three worlds are included in the five gross elements. At the time of dissolution, the five gross elements, viz., earth, water, fire, air and ether, merge into the modified five subtle elements in the order of creation; the five subtle elements and the eleven organs (merge) into ego; ego (merges) into intellect; intellect (merges) into Nature. Thus, the three worlds merge into Nature at the time of dissolution. From such merging of the Manifest and the Unmanifest, like that of milk and curds, there does exist the Unmanifest as the cause.

————

And for this reason:—

Kārikā XVI

The Unmanifest as the cause does exist. It functions through the three Attributes by combining and by modification, like water, due to the particular characteristics of the abode of each of the Attributes.

The well-known Unmanifest as the cause does exist from which proceed the mergent Mahat and the rest.

Triguṇataḥ.—i.e., from (the Nature) possessed of the three Attributes. Triguṇa is that which has the three Attributes, viz., Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. Then, what is the sense?—(It is)—that the Nature is the equilibrium of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas.

Again, by combining. As the three streams of the Ganges falling on the head of Rudra, (combine to) produce one stream, so the Unmanifest endowed with the three Attributes produces one Manifest. Or, as the combined threads produce cloth, so the Unmanifest creates Mahat and the rest, on account of the combination of the three Attributes. So, the manifested universe proceeds from the three Attributes and their combination.

Well, as the entire Manifest proceeds from one Nature, so the former must be uniform.—This objection (does) not (arise). Because by modification, like water, due to the particular characteristics of abode of each of the Attributes. The three worlds born of one Nature are not of uniform nature. Gods are happy, men are unhappy and the animals are deluded. The Manifest, proceeding from one Unmanifest, becomes like water on account of modification based on the particular characteristics abiding in each of the three Attributes. The repetition of prati denotes “succession.” Guṇāśraya means the abode of the Attributes;—its particular characteristic.—Taking- into consideration the particular characteristics of the abode of the three Attributes, the Manifest is created from the modification based upon the particular characteristics of the abode of the three Attributes. For example, water falling from the sky is of uniform nature; but coming into contact with different forms, that water becomes of different forms, due to different tastes. Similarly, the three worlds proceeding from one Nature, are not of uniform nature. Among the gods, the Sattva is predominant, and Rajas and Tamas are indifferent; so they are very happy. Among men, the Rajas is predominant, and Sattva and Tamas are indifferent; therefore, they are very unhappy, Among animals the Tamas is predominant, and Sattva and Rajas are indifferent; so they are very insensible.

————

Thus, by these two verses, the existence of the Nature is known. Now, after this, the author proceeds to prove the existence of the Spirit:—

Kārikā XVII

The Spirit exists, since composite (objects) are meant for another; since it is the reverse of that which has the three Attributes and the rest; since there must be control; since there must he someone who enjoys; and since there is activity for release.

It had been pointed out that the release is obtained by the discriminative knowledge of the Manifest, the Unmanifest and the Knower. So, after (the knowledge of) the Manifest, the Unmanifest has been known (to exist) by five reasons (verse 15). Like the Unmanifest the Spirit also is subtle. Now, its existence is proved by inference. The Spirit exists. How?—Since composite objects are meant for another. It is inferred that the composition of Mahat and the rest is meant for the Spirit, because, it ( i.e., composition) is unconscious like a bed. For example. a bed-is composed of gātrotpalaka(?), a foot-stool, a covering cloth of cotton and a pillow; it serves another person’s purpose and not its own. The different parts, viz., gātrotpalaka, etc., of the bed cannot serve any mutual purpose. So, it is inferred that there is a man who sleeps on the bed,—for whom this bed is meant. So, this body, a composite of five gross elements, is meant for another. There exists the Spirit for whom this enjoyable body is born; the body which is a composite of Mahat and the rest.

Hence also, the Spirit exists:—since it is the rerverse of that which has the three Attributes, viz., “possessed of the three Attributes, non-discriminated, objective, etc.,” mentioned in the previous verse,—the reverse of this. Because. it was said: “the Spirit is similar and dissimilar to that.”

Since there must be control. As here, a chariot, united to horses capable of leaping, galloping and running, functions only when controlled by a charioteer, so does the body function on account of the control of the Spirit. As it is said in the Ṣaṣṭitantra—“The Nature functions when controlled by the Spirit.”

Hence, the Spirit exists.—Since there must be someone who enjoys. For example, we infer that there must be an enjoyer of mixed food flavoured with the six flavours, viz., sweet, sour, salt, pungent, bitter and astringent; similarly, because the mergent Mahat and the rest are not enjoyers, (we infer) that the Spirit exists,—for whose enjoyment this body is.

Hence, also ( the Spirit exists ), since there is activity for release. Kaivalya is the abstraction of kevala (alone); the activity for this purpose; from this activity for its own release, it is inferred that the Spirit exists. For, everybody, learned or otherwise, desires for the cessation of the cycle of his births and deaths. For these reasons there exists the Spirit apart from the body.

————

“Is that Spirit one, controlling all the bodies like a string passing through a chain of jewels, or are there many Spirits controlling each body?”—To this is replied:—

Kārikā XVIII

The plurality of the Spirits is established, because birth, death and organs are allotted separately; because there is no activity at one time, and because there are different modifications of the three Attributes.

Janmamaraṇakaraṇāni, means birth, death and the organs; because of their pratiniyama, i.e., separate allotment of each. If there were one Spirit, then when one (Spirit) were to be born, all would be born or when one were to die all would die; or when one were to have any organic defect in the shape of deafness, blindness, dumbness, mutilation or lameness, then all would be deaf, blind, mutilated or lame. But it does not happen so. Therefore, because birth, death and the organs are allotted separately, the plurality of the Spirits is established.

Again, because there is no activity at one time. Yugapat means at one time;—ayugapat, i.e., not at one time, pravartanam. i.e. activity. Because we see that all people are not engaged in virtue and the rest at one and the same time. Some are engaged in virtue, others in vice, some in renunciation and some in knowledge. Therefore, by there being no activity at one time, ‘there are many Spirits’ is proved.

And moreover, because there are different modifications of the three Attributes. Also, by the different modifications of the three Attributes, plurality of the Spirits is proved. For example, in ordinary life, a Sāttvika person is happy, a Rājasa person is unhappy and a Tāmasa person is under delusion. Thus, by the various vicissitudes, plurality of the Spirits is established.

————

Now it is stated that the Spirit is inactive:—

Karika XIX

And from that contrast it follows that the Spirit is endowed with the characteristics of witnessing, isolation, indifference, perception and inactivity.

And from that contrast:—from that aforesaid viparyāsa, i.e., contrast of the possession of the three Attributes. The Spirit is devoid of the Attributes, is discriminative and enjoyer. The contrast is of these qualities in the Spirit, as said before.

Therefore, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas being agents (active), it follows that the Spirit is endowed with the characteristics of witnessing;—that (Spirit) which is the subject of plurality. Only the Attributes; which are agents are active; the witness neither acts nor desists from acting.

Moreover, (the Spirit is endowed with) isolation; kaivalya is the property of being isolated or different. That is, isolated or different from that which is possessed of the three Attributes.

Indifference is the property of being indifferent. The Spirit is indifferent like a samnyāsin. Just as a samnyāsin is indifferent towards the villagers engaged in tilling, so the Spirit also remains indifferent (i.e., inactive) while the (three) Attributes are active.

Therefore, (the Spirit is endowed with) perception and inactivity. Because the Spirit is indifferent, therefore, it is the perceiver and not-agent of those actions. The Attributes, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas function as agents and action, and not the Spirit. Thus also the existence of the Spirit is proved.

————

(Objection)—“If the Spirit is a non-agent, then how does it exercise volition (in the shape of),—‘I shall practise virtue, I will not practise vice’. Therefore, it is an agent. But you say that the Spirit is non-agent; in this way there will be fault both wsys.” (Answer)—So, it is replied:

Kārikā XX

Therefore, the non-intelligent linga becomes as if intelligent on account of its contact with that (Spirit). And although the activity belongs to the Attributes, yet the indifferent (Spirit) seems as if it were an agent.

Here, the intelligence (really) belongs to the Spirit; therefore, the linga, viz., Mahat and the rest, coming into contact with the reflection of the intelligent (Spirit), becomes as if intelligent. As here, a jar becomes cold when it comes into contact with coolness, and becomes hot when it comes into contact with heat, so the linga, viz., Mahat and the rest, by coming into contact with that i.e., by coming into contact with the Spirit, becomes as if intelligent. Therefore, the volition is exercised by the Attributes and not by the Spirit.

Although, people use (such phrases), ‘a man acts or walks’, still the Spirit is non-agent. How?—(Reply)—And though the activity belong to the Attributes, yet the indifferent (Spirit) seems as if it were an agent. Though the activity resides in the Attributes, yet, even the indifferent Spirit becomes as if it were an agent not an (actual) agent. There is an illustration of this:—As a person, who is not a thief, when arrested along with thieves becomes a thief, so the (real) agents are the Attributes but the Spirit, although indifferent, yet by coming into contact with them (the Attributes), becomes active,—by coming into contact with the agents. Thus, the distinction of the Manifest, the Unmanifest and the Spirit has been explained; from discrimination of which release is obtained.

————

Well, for what purpose is the union of the Nature and the Spirit brought about? It is replied:—

Kārikā XXI

(The union) of the Spirit (with the Nature) is for contemplation (of the Nature); (the union) of the Nature (with the Spirit) is for liberation. The union of both (i.e., the Spirit and the Nature) is like that of a lame man with a blind man. The creation is brought about by that (union).

The union of the Spirit with the Nature is for contemplation. The Spirit contemplates the Nature, i.e., its effects beginning from Mahat and ending with the gross elements.

For this reason the union of the Nature with the Spirit is for liberation.

That union of both should be considered to be like that of a lame man with a blind man. For example, one man is lame, the other is blind. These two men were travelling with difficulty; the caravan was attacked by the robbers in the forest; these two were deserted by their friends and wandered haphazardly; in course of their wandering they encountered each other. This reunion of theirs, on account of each relying on the words of the other serves the purpose of walking and seeing. The blind man mounted the lame man on his shoulders. Thus, the blind man walks by the road shown by the lame man mounted on the former’s body, and the lame man (walks) mounted on the blind mans body. Similarly the Spirit, like the lame man, has the power of contemplation, but not of action. The Nature like the blind man has the power of action, but not of contemplation. And just as there will be separation of the blind man from the lame man, after their mutual object of reaching the desired-for spot is achieved, so the Nature also ceases to act after bringing about the release of the Spirit; and the Spirit becomes isolated after contemplating the Nature. After their mutual object is gained, separation will come about.

And moreover, the creation is brought about by that, Tatkṛtāt, i.e., brought about by that union; sargaḥ, i.e., creation. Just as a son is born by the union of man and woman, similarly, the creation is brought about by the union of the Spirit and Nature.

————

Now the author proceeds to explain all the products:—

Kārikā XXII

From the Nature proceeds the intellect; thence ego, thence the group of sixteen, and from five out of this group of sixteen, the five gross elements.

Prakṛti (Nature), pradhāna, brahman, avyakta, bahudhātmaka, and māyā are synonyms. From the Nature, .devoid of characteristics, the Intellect is born. Mahat is born with buddhi, āsuri, mati, khyāti, jñāna and prajñā as synonyms.

From that Mahat, the ego is born. Ahamkāra, bhūtādi, vaikṭta, taijasa and abhimāna are synonyms.

From that the group of sixteen. From that ego the group of sixteen, the group having sixteen forms, is produced. That is, the five subtle elements, viz., the subtle element of sound, the subtle element of touch, the subtle element of colour, the subtle element of taste and the subtle element of smell; then the eleven organs—the five organs of sense, viz., ear, skin, eye, tongue and nose, the five organs of action, viz., tongue, hands, feet, anus and the organs of procreation, and the eleventh mind having the characteristics of both (organs of sense and action). This group of sixteen is produced from the ego.

And, from five, the five gross elements; out of that group of sixteen, from the five subtle elements, the five gross elements are born. As it is said:—ether from the subtle element of sound, wind from the subtle element of touch, fire from the subtle element of light, water from the subtle element of taste and earth from the subtle element of smell. Thus from five atoms (i.e., atom-like subtle elements). the five gross elements are born.

————

It has been said before that the liberation results from the discriminative knowledge of the Manifest, the Unmanifest and the Knower. In this connection, (the Manifest) of twenty-three kinds, beginning with Mahat and ending with the gross elements, has been described. The Unmanifest is also explained by “Because of the finiteness of the specific objects” (verse 15). The Spirit also has been explained by the reasons (mentioned in) “Because the composite objects are meant for another” (verse 17). Thus, they make up the twenty-five principles. He who knows all the three worlds pervaded by these (becomes liberated). Tattva is the abstraction of Tad, i.e., existence. As it is said—

“He who knows the twenty-five principles, becomes liberated, no matter in what stage of life he is,—whether he has clotted hair or is shaved or has a tuft of hair; there is no doubt about it.”

They (i.e., the twenty-five principles) are:—The Nature, the Spirit, the Intellect, the Ego, the five subtle elements, the eleven organs and the five gross elements. It has been said that the intellect is born of Nature; what is the nature of that intellect?—It is described:—

Kārikā XXIII

The intellect is determination.—Virtue. Knowledge, non-attachment and power constitute its Sāttvika form. The Tāmasa form is its reverse.

Determination is the definition of intellect. Adhyavasāya is ascertainment, and it is (present in the intellect) like the future germination of sprout in a seed. That is, it is the definite cognition which arises when one determines that “this is jar,” “this is cloth”.

That intellect has eight parts, according as it is Sāttvika or Tāmasa. The Sāttvika form of intellect is of four kinds, viz., virtue, knowledge, non-attachment and power. The virtue is of the nature of mercy, charity, the (five) yamas (restraints) and the (five) niyamas (obligations). The yamas and the niyamas are described in the treatise of Patañjali. “Non-injury, truth, non-stealing, celibacy and non-acceptnnce of gifts are the yamas.” (Yogasūtra, 11, 30). “Purity, contentment, austerity, study of the Vedas and the meditation of God are the niyamas” (Ibid, II, 32). Light (prakāśa), underslanding (avagama) and manifestation (bhāna) are the synonyms of knowledge. The external knowledge comprises of the Vedas along with the six branches of pronunciation, ritual, grammar, etymology, prosody and astronomy, the Purāṇas, the Nyāya, the Mimāmsā and the Dharmaśāstras. The internal knowledge is the (discriminative) knowledge of the Nature and the Spirit. This Nature is the equilibrium of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. This Spirit is accomplished, free from the Attributes, pervading and intelligent. The result of the external knowledge is celebrity and admiration among the people. The result of the internal knowledge is liberation. The non-attachment also is of two kinds;—external and internal The external (non-attachment) is freedom from attachment towards the objects (of senses), arising from disgust due to the observation of the defects of earning, protecting, decreasing, attachment and injury (in those objects). The internal; the internal non-attachment arises in the mind of that person who desires to get liberation, i.e., who becomes dispassionate by observing that even the Nature is like a magic or dream. Power is lordliness. It is of eight kinds:—animā, mahimā, garimā, laghimā, prāpti, prākāmya, iśitva, vaśitva and yatrakāmāvasāyitva. Animā is the state of an atom. That is, a person (possessed of this power) wanders over the world in an atomlike minute form. Mahimā: (possessed of this power) a man wanders in large form. Laghimā: on account of becormng as light as the fibre of a lotus-stalk. (a person possessed of this power) can stay on the tips of the filaments of flowers. Prāpti: (a person possessed of this power) gets the desired for object, wherever it may be. Prākāmya: (a person possessed of this power) can do whatever he likes. Iśitva: (a person possessed of this power) reigns over all the three worlds on account of his lordliness. Vaśitva: everything comes in the power (of the person possessed of this). Yatrakāmāvasāyitva: (A person possessed of this power) can stand, sit or wander over anything, from Brahman to grass, wherever he desires. These four are the Sāttvika forms of the intellect. When Sattva overcomes Rajas and Tamas, then a man acquires these intellectual qualities of virtue and the rest.

And moreover, the Tāmasa form is the reverse of this. The Tāmasa form of intellect is the reverse of this, virtue and the rest. The reverse of virtue is vice; similarly, ignorance, attachment and absence of lordly powers (are the reverse of knowledge, non-attachmnt and lordly powers respectively). Thus intellect having eight forms according to its Sāttvika and Tāmasa nature is born of the Unmanifest possessed of the three Attrtbutes.

————

The definition of intellect has been given; now, the nature of ego is described:—

Kārikā XXIV

Ego is self-consciousness. Two kinds of creations proceed from it, viz., the group of eleven and the five-fold subtle elements.

The group of eleven; the eleven organs; and the group of subtle elements which is five-fold, i.e., endowed with the five characteristics, viz., endowed with the subtle elements of sound, touch, colour, taste and smell.

————

(What sort of) creation from whal sort,—is now explained:—

Kārikā XXV

From The Vaikṛta Ego (proceeds) The Group Of Eleven, Characterized By Sattva. From The Bhūtādi Ego (proceeds) The Group Of Subtle Elements Which Is Tāmasa. From The Taijasa Ego (proceed) Both.

When Rajas and Tamas are overcome by Sattva in the ego, then that ego is Sāttvika. The ancient teachers have named it Vaikṛta. From that Vaikṛta ego, the group of eleven, i.e. the group of eleven organs proceeds. Therefore, the organs are Sāttvika, pure and capable of apprehending their objects. Therefore, it is said:—the group of eleven characterized by Sattva.

And again, from Bhūtādi, the group of subtle elements, which is Tāmasa. When Sattva and Rajas are overcome by Tamas in the ego, then that ego is called Tāmasa. The ancient teachers have named it Bhātādi. From that Bhūtādi ego, the group of five subtle elements proceeds. It is cal1ed Tāmasa, as it is the origin of the gross elements and abounds in Tamas; from this Bhūtādi proceeds the group of subtle elements.

And from Taijasa, both. When Sattva and Tamas are overcome by Rajas then for this reason, that ego gets the name of Taijasa. From that Taijasa both are born. Both means, the group of (eleven) organs and the group of five subtle elements. The Sāttvika ego, becoming Vaikṛta, i.e. modified, takes the help of the Taijasa ego, at the time of producing the eleven organs. The Sāttvika ego is inactive; it is capable of producing the organs, (only) when united to Taijasa (ego). Similarly, the Tāmasa ego, termed as Bhūtādi and being inactive, produces the five subtle elements, (only) when united to the active Taijasa ego. Therefore it is said:—from Taijasa both. Thus, the Taijasa ego (in the company of Sāttvika and Tāmasa ones) produces the eleven organs and the five subtle elements.

————

It has been mentioned that the group of eleven (organs) is Sāttvika. What are the names of those, which are born of the modified Sāttvika ego?—This is exploined:—

Kārikā XXVI

The organs of sense are eye, ear, nose, tongue and skin. Speech, hands, feet, anus, and the organ of procreation are called the organs of action.

Frown eye up to skin are called the organs of sense. Sparśana, i.e. by which one touches, is the skin-organ. The word Sparśana is used in that sense. Therefore, the text reads—“Sparśanakāni”. They are called the five organs of sense, because they apprehend the five objects, viz., sound, touch, colour, taste and smell.

Speech hands, feet, anus and the organ of procreation are called the organs of action. The organs of action are so called because they (perform) action. The speech utters, the hands variously act, the feet perform going and coming, the anus execrates and the organ of procreation (produces) pleasure by procreating children.

————

Thus, on the basis of organs of sense and organs of action, ten organs have been described. What is the nature, and of what essence is the mind?—this is now explained:—

Kārikā XXVII

Here, the mind is of the nature of both (organs of sense and action). It is determinative, and is also an organ on account of similarity. This diversity (of the organs) and the diversities of external things, arise from the specific modifications of the Attributes.

Here, in the set of organs, the mind is of the nature of both. Among the organs of sense, it is like an organ of sense; among the organs of action, it is like an organ of action. Why?—(Because) it determines the functioning of the organs of sense and action. Therefore, the mind is of the nature of both, Sankalpaka, because it determines.

Moreover, (it is an) organ on account of similarity. That is, on account of possessing similar chnracteristics. The organs of sense, as well as of action, proceeding along with the mind from the Sāttvika ego, bring about the similarity of the mind. On account of that similarity the mind also is an organ. Thus, these eleven organs are produced from the Sāttvika or Vaikṛta ego. Then, what is the function of the mind? Determination is the function of mind. The functions of the organs of sense are sound and the rest. The functions of the organs of action are speech and the rest.

Now, aee these different organs, apprehending different objects, created by God or are they self-generated?—Because, the Nature, intellect and ego are non-intelligent, and the Spirit is also inactive—. In this connection it is replied. Herein, among the (followers of the) Sāmkhya (doctrine), there is a certain spontaneity as the cause (?). In this respect it is said.—The diversity (of the organs) and the external diversities arise from the specific modifications, of the Attributes. These eleven organs (function in different objects):—sound, touch, colour, taste and smell (are the functions) of the five (organs of sense); speech, taking, walking, excretion and pleasure (are the functions) of the five (organs of action); and determination (is the function) of mind. Thus, these different objects of the different organs, arise from the specific modification or the Attributes. Guṇapariṇāma is the modification of the Attributes. On account of its (i.e., of the modification) specification, arise the diversity (of organs) and the external diversities. So, this diversity is not caused by God, ego, intellect, Nature or the Spirit, but is caused by the spontaneous modification of the Attributes. But, can there be any activity among the Attributes, which are non-intelligent? Yes, there can be. As it will be pointed out in this very book.—

“Just as there is an activity in the non-intelligent milk for the growth of the calf, similarly, there is an activity in the Nature for bringing about the liberation of the soul.” (Kār. 57).

So, the non-intelligent Attributes become modified as the eleven organs. The specifications also are caused by these (Attributes). Hence, the eye is placed at a higher place (in the body) for observation, and so are nose, ear, tongue ( placed at their proper places in the body) for apprehending their particular objects: similarly, the organs of action are at their proper places for apprehending their particular objects,—only these (organs) are a result of the spontaneous modification of the Attributes, and not the objects of these organs (?). For, it is said in another text:—“The Attributes function in the Attributes.” The functioning of the Attributes has the Attributes themselves as its own field. So, the external diversities are the result of only the Attributes, whose cause is Nature.

————

Now the various functions of the different organs described:—

Kārikā XXVIII

The function of five (organs of sense) with respect to sound and the rest, is bare awaredness; while the functions of (the other) five (organs of action) are speech, taking, walking, excretion and pleasure.

The word Mātra stands in the sense of ‘uniqueness’ or the exclusion of what is not specified; as in the

sentence, ‘alms alone are received,’ that is, no other speciality; so the eye functions with respect to colour only and not to taste and the rest. Similar is the case with others. That is,—(the object) of eye is colour, of tongue is taste, of nose is smell, of ear is sound and of skin is touch;—thus the (field of) functioning of the organs of sense is described.

Now, the (field of) functioning of the organs of action is described:—Of (the other) five are speech, talking, walking, excretion and pleasure, i.e., of the organs of action or speech speaking, of hands taking, of feet walking, of anus excretion of the filth from the food eaten and of the organ of procreation pleasure and birth of progeny—are the obtects or (the field of) functioning. This is the syntactic relation (of the sentence).

————

Now, the functions of intellect, ego and mind are described:—

Kārikā XXIX

The function of the three (internal organs) is the specific nature of each and it is not common (to the three). The common function of the organs is (the circulation of) the five vital airs, viz., Prāna and the rest.

The specific nature of each, means ‘of the nature of its own characteristics’. The definition of intellect has been given as “Determination is intellect” (Kār. 23); this is also the function of intellect. Similarly, “Ego is self-consciousness” (Kār. 24), is the definition of ego, and also the function of ego. “Mind is determinative” (Kār. 27), is the definition of mind; therefore, the function of mind is only determinativeness. (Thus) the function of the three, viz., intellect. ego and mind, is the specific nature of each.

Not common. Even that functioning of the organs of sense (as well as or action?) which has been explained before, is specific.

Now, the function which is common is explained. The common function of the organs. That is, the function of the organs which is common (to them). The five vital airs, viz., Prāna and the rest. The five vital airs, viz., Prāna, Apāna, Samāna, Udāna and Vyāna are the common function of all the organs. For, the air named Prāna, resides inside the mouth and the nose; its circulation is the common function of all the thirteen organs. Since, the organs come into being when there is Prāna. Prāna, like a bird in a cage, gives motion to all. It is called Prāna, because of breathing. So Apāna is so called, because it takes away. Its circulation also is the common function of the organs. So, Samāna, residing in the centre (of the body), is so called because it distributes food and the rest properly. Similarly, Udāna is so called, because it carries up, or draws or lifts. It resides between the naval and the head. The circulation of Udāna is the common function of all the organs. Moreover, that which pervades the body and divides its interior is Vyāna; and it is so called because it pervades the body like space. Its circulation is the common function of all the organs. Thus, these five airs are explained as the common function of all the organs, i.e., the common function of all the organs of thirteen kinds.

Kārikā XXX

With regard to visible objects, the function of the four (the three internal organs and an organ of sense) is simultaneous and gradual. So, also, with regard to invisible objects the function of the three (internal organs) is preceded by that.

Of the four is simultaneous. Intellect, ego and mind, when united to any one of the organs become four. Of these four, there is simultaneous functioning with regard to visible objects. Intellect, ego, mind and the eye simultaneously perceive the form, that it is a post; intellect ego, mind and the tongue simultaneously apprehend taste; intellect, ego, mind and the nose simultaneously apprehend the smell; so do the skin and the ears.

And of that, is also regarded as gradual; that is, there is also the gradual functioning of the four. For example, a man walking on the path, sees something from afar, and is beset with the doubt as to whether it is a post or a man. Then he sees some mark or a bird over it. Then in his doubtful mind arises the determining intellect that it is a post. Thence (comes the) ego for making it a certainty that it is certainly a post. Thus, the gradual functioning of intellect, ego, mind and the eyes is observed. As it is in the case of form, so it is in the case of sound and the rest. Visible means the visible objects.

Moreover, so also with regard to invisible objects the function of the three is preceded by that. In the invisible, i.e. the past and future forms, the functioning of the three, viz., intellect, ego and mind, is preceded by that (of) the eye; in the touch, it is preceded by that of the skin; in smell, it is preceded by that of the nose; in taste, it is preceded by that of the tongue; in sound, it is preceded by that of the ear. With regard to future and past, the functioning of intellect, ego and mind, preceded by that (of any other organ) is gradual; with regard to present, it is simultaneous as well as gradual.

————

Moreover:—

Kārikā XXXI

The organs perform their respective functicns incited by mutual impulse. The motive (of their action) is the goal of the Spirit; an organ is not caused to function by anyone.

Svām is repeated (in the sense of respectively theirs). Intellect, ego and mind (perform) their respective functions incited by mutual impulse.

Akūta means respect or zeal. Intellect, ego, mind and the rest tend to bring about the goal of the Spirit. Intellect proceeds to its particular function after knowing the impulse of the ego.

If it be asked—what is the motive? (then we reply)—The motive is only the goal of the Spirit. The goal of the Spirit is to be achieved; for this purpose do the Attributes act. Therefore, these organs manifest the goal of the Spirit.

How do they act of their own accord when they are non-intelligent?—An organ is not caused to function by anyone. The meaning of the sentence is that only the goal of the Spirit causes them to function. The organs are not caused, i.e., actuated by any superior Being.

————

Now it is described—Of how many kinds (the organs, viz.), intellect and the rest are.

Kārikā XXXII

The organs are of thirteen kinds; their functions are seizing, retaining and manifesting. Their objects, (which are of the nature of) what is seized, retained, and manifested, are tenfold.

The organs, viz., Mahat and the rest, should be known to be of thirteen kinds. Five organs of sense, viz., the eye and the rest; five organs of action, viz., the speech and the rest; (and intellect, ego and mind);—these are the organs of thirteen kinds.

What are their functions?—It is replied:—Their functions are seizing, retaining and manifesting. Here, seizing and retaining are performed by the organs of action and manifesting by the organs of sense.

Of how many kinds are their objects? It is replied: Their objects are tenfold. The objects, i.e., the functions to be performed by these organs, are tenfold, i.e., of ten kinds. The ten kinds of objects, viz., sound, touch, form, taste, smell, speaking, taking, walking, excretion and pleasure are manifested by the organs of sense and are seized and retained by the organs of action.

————

Moreover:—

Kārikā XXXIII

The internal organs are threefold; the external (organs) are tenfold and they are the objects of the three (internal organs). The external organs function in the present, and the internal organs function in all the three times.

The internal organs, viz., intellect, ego and mind, are threefold, distinguished as Mahat and the rest.

And the external (organs) are tenfold. The five organs of sense and the five organs of action,—these are the tenfold external organs.

They are the objects of the three. That is, they are the objects of enjoyment by intellect, ego and mind.

Function in the present. The ear hears only the present sound and not the past or the future; the eye sees only the present form and not the past or the future; the skin (touches) the present touch; the tongue (tastes) the present taste; the nose (smells) the present smell. Similarly, the organs of action: the speech utters the present word and not the past or the future; the hands take the present jar and not the past or the future; the feet walk on the present road and not on the past or the future; the anus and the organs of procreation perform excretion and produce pleasure in the present and not in the past or the future. Thus, the external organs are said (to function) in the present.

The internal organs function in all the three times. Intellect, ego and mind apprehend their objects in all the three times. The intellect cognises the jar in the present past and future times. The ego is self-conscious of the present, past and future. Similarly, the mind ponders over the present:, past and future. Thus, the internal organs function in all the three times.

————

Now it is explained, which of the organs apprehend specific objects and which non-specific:—

Kārikā XXXIV

Of these, the five organs of sense apprehend specific and non-specific objects. Speech has sound (alone) for its object. The rest, on the other hand, have five objects.

The organs of sense. They apprehend specific objects (in the case of human beings). The human organs of sense apprehend specific objects, viz., sound, touch, form, taste and smell, endowed with pleasure, pain and delusion. In the case of gods (the organs of sense) manifest non-specific objects.

Again, among the organs of action, the speech has sound for its object. The speech of gods as well as of human beings, utters verses and the rest. Therefore, the organ of speech is similar in the case of gods and human beings.

The rest also, viz., with the exclusion of speech, termed as hands, feet, anus and the organs of procreation, have five for their objects. Pañcaviṣayāni means those which have five, viz., sound and the rest, as their objects. Sound, touch, form, taste and smell are present in the hands. The feet walk over the ground endowed with the five viz., sound and the rest. The anus excretes that which is endowed with the five (sound and the rest). Similarly, the organ of procreation produces pleasure by the semen endowed with the five characteristics (of sound and the rest.)

Kārikā XXXV

Since the intellect along with the internal organs apprehends all the objects, these three (internal) organs are the gate-keepers and the rest are the gates.

Intellect along with the internal organs, i.e., along with ego and mind. Since apprehends all the objects, apprehends sound and the rest in all the three times; therefore, these three (internal) organs are the gate-keepers, and the rest are the gates; . . . . . the (word) organs is understood in the sentence.

————

And further:—

Kārikā XXXVI

These (organs which are the) specific modifications of the (three) attributes, (and which are) different from one another, disclose all the objects like a lamp and present them to the intellect for the sake of the Spirit.

All the organs mentioned (above) are the specific modifications of the attributes. What is their characteristic? (They) are like a lamp; that is, they disclose all the objects like a lamp.

Different from one another, i.e., dissimilar or having different objects. That is, they have (the modifications of) the Attributes as their objects.

Specific modifications of the Attributes, i.e., born of the Attributes.

All for the sake of the Spirit. The organs of sense, the organs of action, ego and mind, having disclosed their respective objects, present them to the intellect, i.e., place them in the intellect. Because, the Spirit apprehends pleasure and the rest, arising from the objects when they are placed in the intellect.

————

And also:—

Kārikā XXXVII

As it is the intellect which brings about the entire enjoyment (of objects), so it is again that (very intellect) which discriminates the subtle difference between the Nature and the Spirit.

Entire means the objects of all the organs in all the three times. Enjoyment (means) respective enjoyment. Since, the intellect along with the internal organs brings about or effects (the enjoyment) through the organs of sense and action of gods, human beings and animals, so it is again that (very intellect) which discriminates or distinguishes between the province of the Nature and that of the Spirit; the difference between the Nature and the Spirit means diversity.

Subtle means, which cannot be grasped by people who have not practised austerities. . . . This is the Nature, the state of equilibrium of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas; this is intellect, this is ego, these are the five subtle elements, the eleven organs and the five gross elements; this another one is the Spirit different from all these; thus does the intellect explain by complying with which salvation is attained.

It has been mentioned above that (the five organs of sense apprehend) “specific and non-specific objects” (Kār. 34). Next is explained, which are the objects:—

Kārikā XXXVIII

The subtle elements are non-specific, from these five, the five gross elements are produced. The latter are called specific and are tranquil, violent and delusive.

The five subtle elements produced from ego are:—The subtle element of sound, the subtle element of touch the subtle element of form, the subtle element of taste, and the subtle element of smell. These are called non-specific. They are the objects of the gods (i.e., apprehended only by the gods), have the characteristic of pleasure and are devoid of pain and delusion.

From these five subtle elements, the five gross elements termed as earth, water, fire, air and ether are produced. These arc called specific. From the subtle element of smell, earth; from the subtle element of taste, water; from the subtle element of touch, wind; from the subtle element of sound, ether; . . . thus these gross elements are produced.

These specific objects are apprehended by men, and are tranquil, i.e., have the characteristic of pleasure, violent, i.e., have the characteristic of pain, and delusive, i.e., produce delusion. Just as the ethereal element is tranquil, i.e., gives pleasure to a man coming out of a closed room; (and the same becomes violent, i.e., gives pain to a man who is affected by cold, heat, wind and rain); and the same becomes delusive, i.e., produces delusion in the mind of a man who loses his way in the forest; similarly, wind is tranquil to a person oppressed by heat, violent to a person oppressed by a cold and delusive when mixed with sand and dust. The same may be said of fire and the rest.

————

The other non-specific objects are:—

Kārikā XXXIX

Subtle (elements) those born of parents and the gross elements are the threefold specific objects. Of these, the subtle are permanent, while those born of parents are perishable.

Subtle, i.e., the subtle elements; composed of which and characterised by Mahat and the rest, the subtle bodies always exist and undergo transmigration; they are subtle.

And those born of parents which aggregate (i.e., compose) the gross bodies;—they compose the gross body inside the womb by the mixture of the seminal fluids of parents, cohabiting after the menses. That subtle body is then nourished through the umbilical chord by the various saps of food and drink taken by the mother.

The body thus commenced by the three specific objects, viz., the subtle elements, those born of parents and the gross elements, becomes furnished with back, stomach, thighs, chest, head and the rest, and is enveloped in six sheaths. It is endowed with blood, flesh, tendons, semen, bones and marrow, and is composed of five gross elements;—ether provides space (for the body), wind provides growth, fire provides cooking, water provides aggregation and earth provides stability. Thus endowed with all the limbs, the body comes out of mother’s womb. Thus, these are the threefold specific objects.

Now the author states, which (of the specific objects named above) are permanent and which temporary:—The subtle ones called tanmātrās are permanent, i.e., lasting, among them. The body commenced by them and impelled by actions (performed in a previous birth), migrates into the species of animals, deer, birds, reptiles and immobile objects; impelled by virtuous actions, it migrates to the regions of Indra and others. Thus, this subtle body migrates till discriminative wisdom is not attained. After achieving this wisdom a wise man leaves the body and attains salvation. Therefore, these subtle specific objects are permanent.

Those born of parents are perishable;—(The elements which are) born of parents perish in this very world, leaving the subtle body at the time of death; At the time of death, the body born of parents is left behind and its elements are dissolved into the earth and the rest.

————

Now the author explains the way in which the subtle body migrates:—

Kārikā XL

The subtle (body) Linga, formed primevally, unimpeded, permanent, composed of intellect and the rest down to the subtle elements, incapable of enjoyment, migrates and is endowed with dispositions.

When the Universe is uncreated, then at the first creation of the Nature, the subtle body is formed.

Moreover, (it is) unimpeded; that is, it is not attached to the states of beasts, gods and men. On account of subtlety, it is not impeded anywhere. It migrates or moves, with its gait unimpeded through the mountains and the rest.

Niyatam, i.e., permanent. It migrates till the (descriminative) knowledge is not attained.

That is composed of Mahat and the rest down to subtle elements. Mahadādi means which is preceded by Mahat,i.e., intellect, ego, mind and the five subtle elements;—down to the subtle, i.e., subtle elements, it migrates or moves through the three worlds like an ant on the body of Śiva.

Incapable of enjoyment, i.e., devoid of enjoyment. That subtle body becomes capable of enjoyment, because it assumes activity through the aggregation of the external body born of parents.

Endowed with disposition. The dispositions, viz., Dharma and the rest, we shall explain hereafter; ‘endowed with them’(means ) ‘affected by them.’

Lingam—At the time of dissolution, the Mahat and the rest down to the subtle elements, along with the organs, merge in the Nature; when not migrating they remain intact in Nature till creation; that is, tied down by the bonds of delusion in the Nature, they are incapable of actions of migration and rest. Therefore, the subtle linga (i.e., mergent) migrates again at the time of creation.

————

If it be asked,—why do the thirteen organs migrate,—the author replies.—

Kārikā XLI

Just as a picture does not exist without a substrate, or a shadow without a post and the like, so the linga does not subsist supportless, without the non-specific (i.e., subtle body).

Just as a picture does not subsist without a substrate of the wall; just as a shadow does not subsist, i.e., cannot exist without a post and the like, i.e., a stake and the like. The word ādi comprises (of other illustrations also), viz., just as there can be no coolness without water, or water without coolness; fire without heat; wind without touch; ether without space; earth without smell; similarly, (it is so).

According to this illustration, without the non-specific, i.e., without the non-specific subtle elements, (the linga) does not subsist. Here, the gross elements, i.e., the body formed of five gross elements, are the specific. For, where can the linga (the subtle body) exist, if there be specific (i.e., gross body)? How can it renounce one body and take another?

Supportless, viz., the supportless linga, i.e., the thirteen organs.

————

For what purpose is the linga embodied is further explained:—

Kārikā XLII

For the purpose of the Spirit, the linga, through its connection with the means and their results, and with the aid of the might of Nature, acts like an actor.

The Nature functions because the aim of the Spirit is to be achieved. That (aim) is twofold:—The apprehension of sound and the rest; and the attainment of discrimination between the Spirit and the Attributes. The apprehension of sound and the rest is the attainment of enjoyment of sound and the rest in the regions of Brahman and the like. The attainment of discrimination between the Spirit and the Attributes is salvation. Therefore, it is said that this subtle body is active for the purpose of the Spirit.

Through its connection with the means and their results. The means are Virtue and the rest, the results are ascending the heaven and so forth;—they will be explained further. Prasangena means through its connection.

With the aid of the might of Nature, i.e., Pradhāna. Just as a king, being mighty in his kingdom, does what ever he likes, similarly, on account of the supreme authority of Nature over everything (the linga) acts through its connection with the means and their results. (That is, the Nature) determines (the conditions of) linga in assuming the different bodies.

Lingam—The subtle body composed of minute particles, i.e., the subtle elements, and endowed with thirteen-fold organs, acts in the bodies of gods, men and beasts. How?—Like an actor, just as an actor entering behind the scenes comes out as a god, then as a man, and afterwards as a buffoon, so the subtle body, through its connection with the means and their results, enters the womb and comes out as an elephant, a woman or a man.

————

It was stated that endowed with dispositions, the linga migrates: now the author explains the dispositions:—

Kārikā XLIII

The dispositions, viz., virtue and the rest, are connate, natural and acquired. They subsist in the instrument (i.e., intellect). The embryo and the rest subsist in the effect (i.e., the body).

The dispositions are considered to be of three kinds: . . . Connate, natural and acquired. The connate dispositions are virtue, knowledge, non-attachment and power, and they were born along with the revered Kapila at the first creation. The natural ones are described:—Sanaka, Sanandana, Sanātana and Sanatkumāra were the four sons of Brahman. These dispositions were produced with them, who were invested with bodies of sixteen years of age, and whose (disposition) were a result of the relation of cause and effect (i.e., as a result of the merits performed in previous birth); therefore, these dispositions are called natural. The acquired dispositions (are to be found in men) like us, to whom the knowledge comes from the corporeal frame of a teacher; from knowledge, non-attachment is produced; from non-attachment, virtue arises; and from virtue, power is attained. As the corporeal frame of a teacher is a product of Nature, so these dispositions are called acquired.—Endowed with these (dispositions), the subtle body migrates. These four dispositions are Sāttvika; the Tāmasa ones are the reverse; they have been explained in:—“This is the Sāttvika form and the Tāmasa is its reverse. (Kār. 28). Thus, the dispositions are eight:—Virtue, knowledge, non-attachment, power, vice, ignorance, attachment and absence of power.

Wherein do the eight dispositions subsist? . . . They are seen to subsist in the instrument. Intellect is the instrument; they subsist in that. This has been explained in:—“intellect is determination, virtue, knowledge,” etc. (Kār. 23).

The effect is body, subsisting in that are embryo and the rest, which have been referred to before as born of mother. With the union of sperm and ovum, are produced embryo and the rest, viz., bubble, flesh, muscles etc., which cause the growth of the body; and the state of infancy, youth and old age are produced as a result of the saps of food and drink Therefore, they are called as subsisting in the effect, and are caused by the enjoyment of objects like food and the rest.

————

Next is explained what has been said before, viz., “Through its connection with the means and their results”. (Kār. 42 ).

Kārikā XLIV

Through virtue (comes about) going upwards, and through vice, going downwards; through knowledge salvation (is acquired), and through the reverse (i.e., ignorance) the bondage.

Through virtue going upwards. A man goes upwards through the instrumentality of virtue. Upwards stands for the eight regions, viz., of Brahman, of Prajāpati, of Soma, of Indra, of the Gandharvas, of the Yaksas, of the Rakṣasas and of the Piśācas. There the subtle body goes. For migrating to the bodies of animals, deer, birds, reptiles and immobile objects, the instrument is vice.

And again, through knowledge salvation is acquired: Salvation is the knowledge of the twenty-five principles. By this instrument (of knowledge), salvation is brought about. Then the subtle body ceases and (the Spirit) is called the Supreme Spirit.

Through the reverse the bondage. Ignorance is the instrument; the effect is the bondage called prākṛta (connate). Vaikṛta (natural) and dākṣiṇa (personal); this will be explained further. It is also said—“He who is bound by the connate, natural and personal bondages, is not liberated by anything else (except the knowledge).”

————

And there are other instruments also: . . . .

Kārikā XLV

Through non-attachment (comes about) the absorption into nature; through passionate attachment, migration; through power, unimpediment; and through the reverse, its contrary.

Suppose, one is possessed of non-attachment, but has no knowledge of the principles. Then, through that non-attachment preceded by ignorance, comes about the absorption into Nature. After his death, such a person is absorbed into the eight evolvents, viz., the Nature, intellect, ego and the five subtle elements, and gets no liberation. He migrates again.

And, even as regards this Rājas (passionate) attachment, e.g., ‘I perform the sacrifice, and give gifts so that I may enjoy divine and human happiness in Heaven and on this earth’ . . . from this passionate attachment, results migration.

And through power, unimpediment. The power is eightfold, and comprises of animā and the rest. From the instrumentality of power, results unimpediment, i.e., there is no obstacle to power in the regions of Brahman and the rest.

And lastly, through the reverse, contrary: The contrary of that unimpediment, i.e., impediment, results. On account of absence of power, obstacles come in every-where.

————

Thus sixteen effects along with their means have been explained. Now, what is their nature, is next explained:—

Kārikā XLVI

This is a creation of intellect, and is distinguished as ignorance, incapacity, contentment and attainment. On account of the conflict among the inequalities of the attributes, this (creation) has fifty varieties.

This sixteen-fold aggregate of the means and effects, which has been explained before, is called a creation of intellect. Pratyaya stands for intellect, (which has been explained in) . . . “Intellect is determination, virtue, knowledge,” etc. (Kār. 23).

This creation of intellect is divided into four closses:—Ignorance, incapacity, contentment, and attainment. Ignorance is doubt as when a man after seeing a post is in doubt whether it is a post or a man. Incapacity; e.g., even after observing that post well, he cannot remove his doubt. The third is called contentment: e.g., when a person does not want to know or to be in doubt about the same post, thinking, what have I to do with this. The fourth is called attainment; e.g., when a person with delighted senses, sees that post surmounted by a creeper or a bird, he attains (the knowledge) that it is a post.

Thus, on account of the conflict among the inequalities of the Attributes, there are fifty varieties of that creation of intellect. This conflict endowed with (i.e., among) the inequalities of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas—from this, there arise fifty varieties of intellect. Somewhere Sattva predominates and Rajas and Tamas are subordinate, somewhere Rajas predominates and somewhere Tamas.

————

The varieties are described:—

Kārikā XLVII

Five are the varieties of ignorance; due to defect in organs, there are twenty-eight varieties of incapacity; contentment is of nine kinds and attainment is eightfold.

Five varieties of ignorance, are Tamas (obscurity), Moha (delusion), Mahāmoha (extreme delusion), Tāmisra (gloom) and Andkatāmisra (utter darkness). Their varieties will be presently explained.

Of the incapacity there are twenty-eight varieties, due to defect in organs. They also will be explained.

Contentment is of nine kinds, viz., the kinds of knowledge characterised by Rajas in an ascetic.

Attainment is eightfold, viz., the kinds of knowledge characterised by Sattva in an ascetic. All this will be explained in order.

————

Now the varieties of ignorance are described:—

Kārikā XLVIII

The varieties of obscurity and delusion are eight, extreme delusion is of ten kinds, gloom and utter darkness are eighteen-fold.

Obscurity is of eight kinds. Final dissolution is differentiated by ignorance, A man merges into the eight evolvents, viz., the Nature, intellect, ego and the five subtle elements. When merged in these if he thinks, ‘I am liberated’ (then) this is called (the variety of) obscurity.

The varieties of the eight-fold delusion are also eight. The gods like Indra and the rest do not obtain liberation on account of attachment to eight-fold power; but after the destruction of this (power) they again migrate. This is eight-fold delusion.

The extreme delusion is of ten kinds. Sound, touch, form, taste and smell.—these five are the objects of enjoyment for the gods; these five, viz., sound and the rest, are the objects of enjoyment for men also. Thus extreme delusion arises with regard to these ten.

The gloom is eighteen-fold. Eight-fold power and the ten objects of human and divine enjoyment,—they make up eighteen. When people approve of their increase and disapprove of their decrease, then arise the states of eighteen-fold gloom.

Again, as the eight-fold power and the ten-fold human and divine objects go to make up gloom, similarly the utter darkness is also eighteen-fold. But (the difference is that) when a person dies at the moment of enjoying the abundance of sensual pleasures or falls from the eight-fold power, then profound grief comes to him. This is utter gloom. Thus the five varieties of ignorance, viz., obscurity and the rest, are severally divided and go to make up the sixty-two varieties.

————

The varieties of incapacity are explained:—

Kārikā XLIX

Injuries of the eleven organs along with those of intellect are termed as incapacity. The seventeen injuries of intellect result from the inversion of contentment and attainment.

“There are twenty-eight varieties of incapacity due to the defect of organs,”—this has been said above (in Kār. 47). The injuries of the eleven organs are—deafness, blindness, paralysis, loss of taste, loss of smell, dumbness, mutilation (of arm), lameness, constipation, impotence and insanity.

Along with those of intellect are termed as incapacity. Along with the injuries of intellect, the varieties of incapacity are twenty-eight.

Seventeen are the injuries of intellect. These seventeen injuries result from the inversion of contentment and attainment. The varieties of contentment are nine, and those of attainment are eight; along with the inversion of these, the injuries of the eleven organs go to make up the twenty-eight-fold incapacity.

————

The order of the varieties is to be observed as laid down in, “From the inversion of contentment and. Attainment.” (Kār. 49). The nine-fold contentment is now described:—

Kārikā L

Contentment is said to be of nine kinds; four internal, viz., prakṛti (Nature), upādāna (Means), kāla (Time), and bhāgya (Luck) and five external, viz., those due to aversion from the objects of senses.

There are four kinds of internal contentment. The word adhyātma means residing in the self. They are Nature, Means, Time and Luck. Now, what is termed as Nature (is explained):—for example, a man knows about the Nature and about its having the Attributes or otherwise; if he remains content with the knowledge of the Nature and its effects, then he cannot get liberation; this is called the Nature-contentment. That what is called the Means (is explained);—e.g., when a man without understanding the (twenty-five) principles, gets hold of the means (of asceticism) and thinks that salvation is attained by a triple staff, a pot and vividikā (?) then he also does not obtain liberation; this is called the Means-contentment. Now the Time-contentment (is explained); e.g., (when a man thinks), well, I shall get salvation in time; what is the use of practising (the knowledge of) the principles—; such contentment is called Time-contentment and such a person gets no liberation. Similarly, the Luck-contentment is:—when a person thinks that salvation will be attained by luck; this is Luck-contentment. Thus, (this) contentment is four-fold.

The five external, due to aversion from the objects of senses. The external contentment arises from the aversion to the five objects of senses. A person feels aversion to