{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_74250/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_74250","id":"gutenberg_74250","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/74250","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Hindu philosophy","Pata\u00f1jali","Yoga"],"text":"YOGA\n                      AS PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIONS\n\n                                   BY\n\n                         SURENDRANATH DASGUPTA\n\n                   M.A., PH.D.(CAL.), PH.D.(CANTAB.)\n\n            AUTHOR OF \u201cA HISTORY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY\u201d, ETC.\n\n        _Professor of Philosophy, Presidency College, Calcutta_\n            _Late Professor of Sanskrit, Chittagong College_\n             _Late Lecturer in the University of Cambridge_\n\n\n                                LONDON:\n\n                 KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., LTD\n                      NEW YORK: E. P. DUTTON & CO.\n\n                                  1924\n\n\n\n\n                    YOGA AS PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION\n\n\n\n\n                      Printed in Great Britain at\n      _The Mayflower Press, Plymouth_, William Brendon & Son, Ltd.\n\n\n\n\n                           AS A HUMBLE TOKEN\n\n                   OF DEEPEST REGARD AND GRATEFULNESS\n\n                                 TO THE\n\n                   MAHARAJA SIR MANINDRACHANDRA NUNDY\n\n                                K.C.I.E\n\n            WHOSE NOBLE CHARACTER AND SELF-DENYING CHARITIES\n\n               HAVE ENDEARED HIM TO THE PEOPLE OF BENGAL\n\n                                  AND\n\n               WHO SO KINDLY OFFERED ME HIS WHOLE-HEARTED\n\n                              PATRONAGE IN\n\n               ENCOURAGING MY ZEAL FOR LEARNING AT A TIME\n\n                  WHEN I WAS IN SO GREAT A NEED OF IT\n\n\n\n\n                                PREFACE\n\n\nThis little volume is an attempt at a brief exposition of the\nphilosophical and religious doctrines found in Pata\u00f1jali\u2019s _Yoga-s\u016btra_\nas explained by its successive commentaries of Vy\u0101sa, V\u0101caspati, Vij\u00f1\u0101na\nBhikshu, and others. The exact date of Pata\u00f1jali cannot be definitely\nascertained, but if his identity with the other Pata\u00f1jali, the author of\nthe Great Commentary (_Mah\u0101bh\u0101shya_) on P\u0101\u1e47ini\u2019s grammar, could be\nconclusively established, there would be some evidence in our hands that\nhe lived in 150 B.C. I have already discussed this subject in the first\nvolume of my _A History of Indian Philosophy_, where the conclusion to\nwhich I arrived was that, while there was some evidence in favour of\ntheir identity, there was nothing which could be considered as being\nconclusively against it. The term Yoga, according to Pata\u00f1jali\u2019s\ndefinition, means the final annihilation (_nirodha_) of all the mental\nstates (_cittav\u1e5btti_) involving the preparatory stages in which the mind\nhas to be habituated to being steadied into particular types of\ngraduated mental states. This was actually practised in India for a long\ntime before Pata\u00f1jali lived; and it is very probable that certain\nphilosophical, psychological, and practical doctrines associated with it\nwere also current long before Pata\u00f1jali. Pata\u00f1jali\u2019s work is, however,\nthe earliest systematic compilation on the subject that is known to us.\nIt is impossible, at this distance of time, to determine the extent to\nwhich Pata\u00f1jali may claim originality. Had it not been for the labours\nof the later commentators, much of what is found in Pata\u00f1jali\u2019s\naphorisms would have remained extremely obscure and doubtful, at least\nto all those who were not associated with such ascetics as practised\nthem, and who derived the theoretical and practical knowledge of the\nsubject from their preceptors in an upward succession of generations\nleading up to the age of Pata\u00f1jali, or even before him. It is well to\nbear in mind that Yoga is even now practised in India, and the\ncontinuity of traditional instruction handed down from teacher to pupil\nis not yet completely broken.\n\nIf anyone wishes methodically to pursue a course which may lead him\nultimately to the goal aimed at by Yoga, he must devote his entire life\nto it under the strict practical guidance of an advanced teacher. The\npresent work can in no sense be considered as a practical guide for such\npurposes. But it is also erroneous to think\u2014as many uninformed people\ndo\u2014that the only interest of Yoga lies in its practical side. The\nphilosophical, psychological, cosmological, ethical, and religious\ndoctrines, as well as its doctrines regarding matter and change, are\nextremely interesting in themselves, and have a definitely assured place\nin the history of the progress of human thought; and, for a right\nunderstanding of the essential features of the higher thoughts of India,\nas well as of the practical side of Yoga, their knowledge is\nindispensable.\n\nThe Yoga doctrines taught by Pata\u00f1jali are regarded as the highest of\nall Yogas (_R\u0101jayoga_), as distinguished from other types of Yoga\npractices, such as _Ha\u1e6dhayoga_ or _Mantrayoga_. Of these _Ha\u1e6dhayoga_\nconsists largely of a system of bodily exercises for warding off\ndiseases, and making the body fit for calmly bearing all sorts of\nphysical privations and physical strains. _Mantrayoga_ is a course of\nmeditation on certain mystical syllables which leads to the audition of\ncertain mystical sounds. This book does not deal with any of these\nmystical practices nor does it lay any stress on the performance of any\nof those miracles described by Pata\u00f1jali. The scope of this work is\nlimited to a brief exposition of the intellectual foundation\u2014or the\ntheoretical side\u2014of the Yoga practices, consisting of the philosophical,\npsychological, cosmological, ethical, religious, and other doctrines\nwhich underlie these practices. The affinity of the system of S\u0101\u1e43khya\nthought, generally ascribed to a mythical sage, Kapila, to that of Yoga\nof Pata\u00f1jali is so great on most important points of theoretical\ninterest that they may both be regarded as two different modifications\nof one common system of ideas. I have, therefore, often taken the\nliberty of explaining Yoga ideas by a reference to kindred ideas in\nS\u0101\u1e43khya. But the doctrines of Yoga could very well have been compared or\ncontrasted with great profit with the doctrines of other systems of\nIndian thought. This has purposely been omitted here as it has already\nbeen done by me in my _Yoga Philosophy in relation to other Systems of\nIndian Thought_, the publication of which has for long been unavoidably\ndelayed. All that may be expected from the present volume is that it\nwill convey to the reader the essential features of the Yoga system of\nthought. How far this expectation will be realized from this book it\nwill be for my readers to judge. It is hoped that the chapter on \u201cKapila\nand P\u0101ta\u00f1jala School of S\u0101\u1e43khya\u201d in my _A History of Indian Philosophy_\n(Vol. I. Cambridge University Press, 1922) will also prove helpful for\nthe purpose.\n\nI am deeply indebted to my friend Mr. Douglas Ainslie for the numerous\ncorrections and suggestions regarding the English style that he was\npleased to make throughout the body of the manuscript and the very warm\nencouragement that he gave me for the publication of this work. In this\nconnection I also beg to offer my best thanks for the valuable\nsuggestions which I received from the reviser of the press. Had it not\nbeen for these, the imperfections of the book would have been still\ngreater. The quaintness and inelegance of some of my expressions would,\nhowever, be explained if it were borne in mind that here, as well as in\nmy _A History of Indian Philosophy_, I have tried to resist the\ntemptation of making the English happy at the risk of sacrificing the\napproach to exactness of the philosophical sense; and many ideas of\nIndian philosophy are such that an exact English rendering of them often\nbecomes hopelessly difficult.\n\nI am grateful to my friend and colleague, Mr. D. K. Sen, M.A., for the\nkind assistance that he rendered in helping me to prepare the index.\n\nLast of all, I must express my deep sense of gratefulness to Sir\nAshutosh Mookerjee, Kt., C.S.I., etc. etc., and the University of\nCalcutta, for kindly permitting me to utilize my _A Study of Pata\u00f1j\u0101li_,\nwhich is a Calcutta University publication, for the present work.\n\n                                                         S. N. DASGUPTA.\n\n  PRESIDENCY COLLEGE, CALCUTTA,\n              _April, 1924_.\n\n\n\n\n                                CONTENTS\n\n\n                       BOOK I. YOGA METAPHYSICS:\n\n             CHAPTER                                   PAGE\n                  I. PRAK\u1e5aTI                              1\n                 II. PURUSHA                             13\n                III. THE REALITY OF THE EXTERNAL WORLD   31\n                 IV. THE PROCESS OF EVOLUTION            40\n                  V. THE EVOLUTION OF THE CATEGORIES     48\n                 VI. EVOLUTION AND CHANGE OF QUALITIES   64\n                VII. EVOLUTION AND GOD                   84\n\n\n                   BOOK II. YOGA ETHICS AND PRACTICE:\n\n               VIII. MIND AND MORAL STATES               92\n                 IX. THE THEORY OF KARMA                102\n                  X. THE ETHICAL PROBLEM                114\n                 XI. YOGA PRACTICE                      124\n                XII. THE YOG\u0100\u1e44GAS                       132\n               XIII. STAGES OF SAMADHI                  150\n                XIV. GOD IN YOGA                        159\n                 XV. MATTER AND MIND                    166\n                     APPENDIX                           179\n                     INDEX                              188\n\n\n\n\n                           YOGA AS PHILOSOPHY\n                              AND RELIGION\n\n\n\n\n                        BOOK I. YOGA METAPHYSICS\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER I\n                                PRAKRTI\n\n\nHowever dogmatic a system of philosophical enquiry may appear to us, it\nmust have been preceded by a criticism of the observed facts of\nexperience. The details of the criticism and the processes of\nself-argumentation by which the thinker arrived at his theory of the\nUniverse might indeed be suppressed, as being relatively unimportant,\nbut a thoughtful reader would detect them as lying in the background\nbehind the shadow of the general speculations, but at the same time\nsetting them off before our view. An Aristotle or a Pata\u00f1jali may not\nmake any direct mention of the arguments which led him to a dogmatic\nassertion of his theories, but for a reader who intends to understand\nthem thoroughly it is absolutely necessary that he should read them in\nthe light as far as possible of the inferred presuppositions and inner\narguments of their minds; it is in this way alone that he can put\nhimself in the same line of thinking with the thinker whom he is willing\nto follow, and can grasp him to the fullest extent. In offering this\nshort study of the P\u0101ta\u00f1jala metaphysics, I shall therefore try to\nsupplement it with such of my inferences of the presuppositions of\nPata\u00f1jali\u2019s mind, which I think will add to the clearness of the\nexposition of his views, though I am fully alive to the difficulties of\nmaking such inferences about a philosopher whose psychological, social,\nreligious and moral environments differed so widely from ours.\n\nAn enquiry into the relations of the mental phenomena to the physical\nhas sometimes given the first start to philosophy. The relation of mind\nto matter is such an important problem of philosophy that the existing\nphilosophical systems may roughly be classified according to the\nrelative importance that has been attached to mind or to matter. There\nhave been chemical, mechanical and biological conceptions which have\nignored mind as a separate entity and have dogmatically affirmed it to\nbe the product of matter only.[1] There have been theories of the other\nextreme, which have dispensed with matter altogether and have boldly\naffirmed that matter as such has no reality at all, and that thought is\nthe only thing which can be called Real in the highest sense. All matter\nas such is non-Being or M\u0101y\u0101 or Avidy\u0101. There have been Nihilists like\nthe \u015a\u016bnyav\u0101di Buddhists who have gone so far as to assert that neither\nmatter nor mind exists. Some have asserted that matter is only thought\nexternalized, some have regarded the principle of matter as the\nunknowable Thing-in-itself, some have regarded them as separate\nindependent entities held within a higher reality called God, or as two\nof his attributes only, and some have regarded their difference as being\nonly one of grades of intelligence, one merging slowly and imperceptibly\ninto the other and held together in concord with each other by\npre-established harmony.\n\nUnderlying the metaphysics of the Yoga system of thought as taught by\nPata\u00f1jali and as elaborated by his commentators we find an acute\nanalysis of matter and thought. Matter on the one hand, mind, the\nsenses, and the ego on the other are regarded as nothing more than two\ndifferent kinds of modifications of one primal cause, the Prak\u1e5bti. But\nthe self-intelligent principle called Purusha (spirit) is distinguished\nfrom them. Matter consists only of three primal qualities or rather\nsubstantive entities, which he calls the Sattva or intelligence-stuff,\nRajas or energy, and Tamas\u2014the factor of obstruction or mass or inertia.\nIt is extremely difficult truly to conceive of the nature of these three\nkinds of entities or Gu\u1e47as, as he calls them, when we consider that\nthese three elements alone are regarded as composing all phenomena,\nmental and physical. In order to comprehend them rightly it will be\nnecessary to grasp thoroughly the exact relation between the mental and\nthe physical. What are the real points of agreement between the two? How\ncan the same elements be said to behave in one case as the conceiver and\nin the other case as the conceived? Thus V\u0101caspati says:\u2014\n\n\u201cThe reals (gu\u1e47as) have two forms, viz. the determiner or the perceiver,\nand the perceived or the determined. In the aspect of the determined or\nthe perceived, the gu\u1e47as evolve themselves as the five infra-atomic\npotentials, the five gross elements and their compounds. In the aspect\nof perceiver or determiner, they form the modifications of the ego\ntogether with the senses.\u201d[2]\n\nIt is interesting to notice here the two words used by V\u0101caspati in\ncharacterising the twofold aspect of the gu\u1e47a viz. _vyavas\u0101y\u0101tmakatva_,\ntheir nature as the determiner or perceiver, and _vyavasey\u0101tmakatva_,\ntheir nature as determined or perceived. The elements which compose the\nphenomena of the objects of perception are the same as those which form\nthe phenomena of the perceiving; their only distinction is that one is\nthe determined and the other is the determiner. What we call the\npsychosis involving intellection, sensing and the ego, and what may be\ncalled the infra-atoms, atoms and their combinations, are but two\ndifferent types of modifications of the same stuff of reals. There is no\nintrinsic difference in nature between the mental and the physical.\n\nThe mode of causal transformation is explained by Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu in his\ncommentary on the system of S\u0101\u1e43khya as if its functions consisted only\nin making manifest what was already there in an unmanifested form. Thus\nhe says, \u201cjust as the image already existing in the stone is only\nmanifested by the activity of the statuary, so the causal activity also\ngenerates only that activity by which an effect is manifested as if it\nhappened or came into being at the present moment.\u201d[3] The effects are\nall always existent, but some of them are sometimes in an unmanifested\nstate. What the causal operation, viz. the energy of the agent and the\nsuitable collocating instruments and conditions, does is to set up an\nactivity by which the effect may be manifested at the present moment.\n\nWith S\u0101\u1e43khya-Yoga, sattva, rajas and tamas are substantive entities\nwhich compose the reality of the mental and the physical.[4] The mental\nand the physical represent two different orders of modifications, and\none is not in any way superior to the other. As the gu\u1e47as conjointly\nform the manifold without, by their varying combinations, as well as all\nthe diverse internal functions, faculties and phenomena, they are in\nthemselves the absolute potentiality of all things, mental and physical.\nThus Vy\u0101sa in describing the nature of the knowable, writes: \u201cThe nature\nof the knowable is now described:\u2014The knowable, consisting of the\nobjects of enjoyment and liberation, as the gross elements and\nthe perceptive senses, is characterised by three essential\ntraits\u2014illumination, energy and inertia. The sattva is of the nature of\nillumination. Rajas is of the nature of energy. Inertia (tamas) is of\nthe nature of inactivity. The gu\u1e47a entities with the above\ncharacteristics are capable of being modified by mutual influence on one\nanother, by their proximity. They are evolving. They have the\ncharacteristics of conjunction and separation. They manifest forms by\none lending support to the others by proximity. None of these loses its\ndistinct power into those of the others, even though any one of them may\nexist as the principal factor of a phenomenon with the others as\nsubsidiary thereto. The gu\u1e47as forming the three classes of substantive\nentities manifest themselves as such by their similar kinds of power.\nWhen any one of them plays the r\u00f4le of the principal factor of any\nphenomenon, the others also show their presence in close contact. Their\nexistence as subsidiary energies of the principal factor is inferred by\ntheir distinct and independent functioning, even though it be as\nsubsidiary qualities.\u201d[5] The Yoga theory does not acknowledge qualities\nas being different from substances. The ultimate substantive entities\nare called gu\u1e47as, which as we have seen are of three kinds. The gu\u1e47a\nentities are infinite in number; each has an individual existence, but\nis always acting in co-operation with others. They may be divided into\nthree classes in accordance with their similarities of behaviour (\u015b\u012bla).\nThose which behave in the way of intellection are called _sattva_, those\nwhich behave in the way of producing effort of movement are called\n_rajas_, and those which behave differently from these and obstruct\ntheir process are called _tamas_. We have spoken above of a primal cause\n_prak\u1e5bti_. But that is not a separate category independent of the gu\u1e47as.\nPrak\u1e5bti is but a name for the gu\u1e47a entities when they exist in a state\nof equilibrium. All that exists excepting the purushas are but the gu\u1e47a\nentities in different kinds of combination amongst themselves. The\neffects they produce are not different from them but it is they\nthemselves which are regarded as causes in one state and effects in\nanother. The difference of combination consists in this, that in some\ncombinations there are more of sattva entities than rajas or tamas, and\nin others more of rajas or more of tamas. These entities are continually\nuniting and separating. But though they are thus continually dividing\nand uniting in new combinations the special behaviour or feature of each\nclass of entities remains ever the same. Whatever may be the nature of\nany particular combination the sattva entities participating in it will\nretain their intellective functions, rajas their energy\nfunctions, and tamas the obstructing ones. But though they retain\ntheir special features in spite of their mutual difference\nthey hold fast to one another in any particular combination\n(_tulyaj\u0101t\u012by\u0101tulyaj\u0101t\u012bya\u015baktibhed\u0101nup\u0101tina\u1e25_, which Bhikshu explains as\n_avi\u015beshe\u1e47opash\u1e6dambhakasvabh\u0101v\u0101\u1e25_). In any particular combination it is\nthe special features of those entities which predominate that manifest\nthemselves, while the other two classes lend their force in drawing the\nminds of perceivers to it as an object as a magnet draws a piece of\niron. Their functionings at this time are undoubtedly feeble\n(_s\u016bkshmav\u1e5bttimanta\u1e25_) but still they do exist.[6]\n\nIn the three gu\u1e47as, none of them can be held as the goal of the others.\nAll of them are equally important, and the very varied nature of the\nmanifold represents only the different combinations of these gu\u1e47as as\nsubstantive entities. In any combination one of the gu\u1e47as may be more\npredominant than the others, but the other gu\u1e47as are also present there\nand perform their functions in their own way. No one of them is more\nimportant than the other, but they serve conjointly one common purpose,\nviz. the experiences and the liberation of the purusha, or spirit. They\nare always uniting, separating and re-uniting again and there is neither\nbeginning nor end of this (_anyonyamithun\u0101\u1e25 sarvve naish\u0101m\u0101disamprayogo\nviprayogo v\u0101 upalabhyate_).\n\nThey have no purpose of their own to serve, but they all are always\nevolving, as Dr. Seal says, \u201cever from a relatively less differentiated,\nless determinate, less coherent whole, to a relatively more\ndifferentiated, more determinate, more coherent whole\u201d[7] for the\nexperiences and liberation of purusha, or spirit. When in a state of\nequilibrium they cannot serve the purpose of the purusha, so that state\nof the gu\u1e47as is not for the sake of the purusha; it is its own\nindependent eternal state. All the other three stages of evolution, viz.\nthe li\u1e45ga (sign), avi\u015besha (unspecialised) and vi\u015besha (specialised)\nhave been caused for the sake of the purusha.[8] Thus Vy\u0101sa writes:\u2014[9]\n\u201cThe objects of the purusha are no cause of the original state\n(_ali\u1e45ga_). That is to say, the fulfilment of the objects of the purusha\nis not the cause which brings about the manifestation of the original\nstate of prak\u1e5bti in the beginning. The fulfilment of the objects of the\npurusha is not therefore the reason of the existence of that ultimate\nstate. Since it is not brought into existence by the need of the\nfulfilment of the purusha\u2019s objects it is said to be eternal. As to the\nthree specialised states, the fulfilment of the objects of the purusha\nbecomes the cause of their manifestation in the beginning. The\nfulfilment of the objects of the purusha is not therefore the reason for\nthe existence of the cause. Since it is not brought into existence by\nthe purusha\u2019s objects it is said to be eternal. As to the three\nspecialised states, the fulfilment of the objects of the purusha being\nthe cause of their manifestation in the beginning, they are said to be\nnon-eternal.\u201d\n\nV\u0101caspati again says:\u2014\u201cThe fulfilment of the objects of the purusha\ncould be said to be the cause of the original state, if that state could\nbring about the fulfilment of the objects of the purusha, such as the\nenjoyment of sound, etc., or manifest the discrimination of the\ndistinction between true self and other phenomena. If however it did\nthat, it could not be a state of equilibrium,\u201d (_yadyali\u1e45g\u0101vasth\u0101\n\u015babd\u0101dyupabhogam v\u0101 sattvapurush\u0101nyat\u0101khy\u0101tim v\u0101 purush\u0101rtham\nnirvarttayet tannrvarttane hi na s\u0101myavasth\u0101 sy\u0101t_). This state is\ncalled the prak\u1e5bti. It is the beginning, indeterminate, unmediated and\nundetermined. It neither exists nor does it not exist, but is the\nprincipium of almost all existence. Thus Vy\u0101sa describes it as \u201cthe\nstate which neither is nor is not; that which exists and yet does not;\nthat in which there is no non-existence; the unmanifested, the noumenon\n(lit. without any manifested indication), the background of all\u201d\n(_ni\u1e25satt\u0101sattam ni\u1e25sadasat nirasat avyaktam ali\u1e45gam pradh\u0101nam_).[10]\nV\u0101caspati explains it as follows:\u2014\u201cExistence consists in possessing the\ncapacity of effecting the fulfilment of the objects of the purusha.\nNon-existence means a mere imaginary trifle (e.g. the horn of a hare).\u201d\nIt is described as being beyond both these states of existence and\nnon-existence. The state of the equipoise of the three gu\u1e47as of\nintelligence-stuff, inertia and energy, is nowhere of use in fulfilling\nthe objects of the purusha. It therefore does not exist as such. On the\nother hand, it does not admit of being rejected as non-existent like an\nimaginary lotus of the sky. It is therefore not non-existent. But even\nallowing the force of the above arguments about the want of phenomenal\nexistence of prak\u1e5bti on the ground that it cannot serve the objects of\nthe purusha, the difficulty arises that the principles of Mahat, etc.,\nexist in the state of the unmanifested also, because nothing that exists\ncan be destroyed; and if it is destroyed, it cannot be born again,\nbecause nothing that does not exist can be born; it follows therefore\nthat since the principles of mahat, etc., exist in the state of the\nunmanifested, that state can also affect the fulfilment of the objects\nof the purusha. How then can it be said that the unmanifested is not\npossessed of existence? For this reason, he describes it as that in\nwhich it exists and does not exist. This means that the cause exists in\nthat state in a potential form but not in the form of the effect.\nAlthough the effect exists in the cause as mere potential power, yet it\nis incapable of performing the function of fulfilling the objects of the\npurusha; it is therefore said to be non-existent as such. Further he\nsays that this cause is not such, that its effect is of the nature of\nhare\u2019s horn. It is beyond the state of non-existence, that is, of the\nexistence of the effect as mere nothing. If it were like that, then it\nwould be like the lotus of the sky and no effect would follow.[11]\n\nBut as Bhikshu points out (_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, II. 18) this prak\u1e5bti is\nnot simple substance, for it is but the gu\u1e47a reals. It is simple only\nin the sense that no complex qualities are manifested in it. It is the\nname of the totality of the gu\u1e47a reals existing in a state of\nequilibrium through their mutual counter opposition. It is a\nhypothetical state of the gu\u1e47as preceding the states in which they\nwork in mutual co-operation for the creation of the cosmos for giving\nthe purushas a chance for ultimate release attained through a full\nenjoyment of experiences. Some European scholars have often asked me\nwhether the prak\u1e5bti were real or whether the gu\u1e47as were real. This\nquestion, in my opinion, can only arise as a result of confusion and\nmisapprehension, for it is the gu\u1e47as in a state of equilibrium that\nare called prak\u1e5bti. Apart from gu\u1e47as there is no prak\u1e5bti (_gu\u1e47\u0101 eva\nprak\u1e5bti\u015babdav\u0101cy\u0101 na tu tadatirikt\u0101 prak\u1e5btirasti. Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, II.\n18). In this state, the different gu\u1e47as only annul themselves and no\nchange takes place, though it must be acknowledged that the state of\nequipoise is also one of tension and action, which, however, being\nperfectly balanced does not produce any change. This is what is meant\nby evolution of similars (_ad\u1e5b\u015bapari\u1e47\u0101ma_). Prak\u1e5bti as the equilibrium\nof the three gu\u1e47as is the absolute ground of all the mental and\nphenomenal modifications\u2014pure potentiality.\n\nVe\u1e45ka\u1e6da, a later Vaish\u1e47ava writer, describes prak\u1e5bti as one ubiquitous,\nhomogeneous matter which evolves itself into all material productions by\ncondensation and rarefaction. In this view the gu\u1e47as would have to be\ntranslated as three different classes of qualities or characters, which\nare found in the evolutionary products of the prak\u1e5bti. This will of\ncourse be an altogether different view of the prak\u1e5bti from that which is\ndescribed in the _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, and the gu\u1e47as could not be considered\nas reals or as substantive entities in such an interpretation. A\nquestion arises, then, as to which of these two prak\u1e5btis is the earlier\nconception. I confess that it is difficult to answer it. For though the\nVaish\u1e47ava view is elaborated in later times, it can by no means be\nasserted that it had not quite as early a beginning as 2nd or 3rd\ncentury B.C. If _Ahirbudhnyasamhit\u0101_ is to be trusted then the\n_Shash\u1e6ditantra\u015b\u0101stra_ which is regarded as an authoritative S\u0101\u1e43khya work\nis really a Vaish\u1e47ava work. Nothing can be definitely stated about the\nnature of prak\u1e5bti in S\u0101\u1e43khya from the meagre statement of the _K\u0101rik\u0101_.\nThe statement in the _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ is, however, definitely in favour\nof the interpretation that we have adopted, and so also the\n_S\u0101\u1e43khya-s\u016btra_, which is most probably a later work. Caraka\u2019s account\nof prak\u1e5bti does not seem to be the prak\u1e5bti of _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ for here\nthe gu\u1e47as are not regarded as reals or substantive entities, but as\ncharacters, and prak\u1e5bti is regarded as containing its evolutes, mahat,\netc., as its elements (_dh\u0101tu_). If Caraka\u2019s treatment is the earliest\nview of S\u0101\u1e43khya that is available to us, then it has to be admitted that\nthe earliest S\u0101\u1e43khya view did not accept prak\u1e5bti as a state of the\ngu\u1e47as, or gu\u1e47as as substantive entities. But the _Yoga-s\u016btra_, II. 19,\nand the _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ support the interpretation that I have adopted\nhere, and it is very curious that if the S\u0101\u1e43khya view was known at the\ntime to be so different from it, no reference to it should have been\nmade. But whatever may be the original S\u0101\u1e43khya view, both the Yoga view\nand the later S\u0101\u1e43khya view are quite in consonance with my\ninterpretation.\n\nIn later Indian thinkers there had been a tendency to make a compromise\nbetween the Ved\u0101nta and S\u0101\u1e43khya doctrines and to identify prak\u1e5bti with\nthe avidy\u0101 of the Ved\u0101ntists. Thus Lok\u0101c\u0101ryya writes:\u2014\u201cIt is called\nprak\u1e5bti since it is the source of all change, it is called avidy\u0101 since\nit is opposed to knowledge, it is called m\u0101y\u0101 since it is the cause of\ndiversion creation (_prak\u1e5btirityucyate vik\u0101rotp\u0101dakatv\u0101t avidy\u0101\nj\u00f1\u0101navirodhitv\u0101t m\u0101y\u0101 vicitras\u1e5bsh\u1e6dikaratv\u0101t_).\u201d[12] But this is\ndistinctly opposed to the _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ which defines avidy\u0101 as\n_vidy\u0101vipar\u012bta\u1e43 j\u00f1\u0101n\u0101ntara\u1e43 avidy\u0101_, i.e. avidy\u0101 is that other knowledge\nwhich is opposed to right knowledge. In some of the Upanishads,\n_Svet\u0101\u015bvatara_ for example, we find that m\u0101y\u0101 and prak\u1e5bti are identified\nand the great god is said to preside over them (_m\u0101y\u0101\u1e43 tu prak\u1e5bti\u1e43\nvidy\u0101t m\u0101yina\u1e43 tumahe\u015bvara\u1e43_). There is a description also in the\n\u1e5agveda, X. 92, where it is said that (_n\u0101sad\u0101s\u012bt na sad\u0101s\u012bt tad\u0101n\u012b\u1e43_),\nin the beginning there was neither the \u201cIs\u201d nor the \u201cIs not,\u201d which\nreminds one of the description of prak\u1e5bti (_ni\u1e25satt\u0101satta\u1e43_ as that in\nwhich there is no existence or non-existence). In this way it may be\nshown from _G\u012bt\u0101_ and other Sanskrit texts that an undifferentiated,\nunindividuated cosmic matter as the first principle, was often thought\nof and discussed from the earliest times. Later on this idea was\nutilised with modifications by the different schools of Ved\u0101ntists, the\nS\u0101\u1e43khyists and those who sought to make a reconciliation between them\nunder the different names of prak\u1e5bti, avidy\u0101 and m\u0101y\u0101. What avidy\u0101\nreally means according to the P\u0101ta\u00f1jala system we shall see later on;\nbut here we see that whatever it might mean it does not mean prak\u1e5bti\naccording to the P\u0101ta\u00f1jala system. _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, IV. 13, makes\nmention of m\u0101y\u0101 also in a couplet from _Shash\u1e6ditantra\u015b\u0101stra_;\n\n         _gu\u1e47\u0101n\u0101\u1e43 parama\u1e43 r\u016bpa\u1e43 na d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dipatham\u1e5bcchati\n           yattu d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dipatha\u1e43 pr\u0101pta\u1e43 tanm\u0101yeva sutucch aka\u1e43._\n\nThe real appearance of the gu\u1e47as does not come within the line of our\nvision. That, however, which comes within the line of vision is but\npaltry delusion and V\u0101caspati Mi\u015bra explains it as follows:\u2014Prak\u1e5bti is\nlike the m\u0101y\u0101 but it is not m\u0101y\u0101. It is trifling (_sutucchaka_) in the\nsense that it is changing. Just as m\u0101y\u0101 constantly changes, so the\ntransformations of prak\u1e5bti are every moment appearing and vanishing and\nthus suffering momentary changes. Prak\u1e5bti being eternal is real and thus\ndifferent from m\u0101y\u0101.\n\nThis explanation of V\u0101caspati\u2019s makes it clear that the word m\u0101y\u0101 is\nused here only in the sense of illusion, and without reference to the\ncelebrated m\u0101y\u0101 of the Ved\u0101ntists; and V\u0101caspati clearly says that\nprak\u1e5bti can in no sense be called m\u0101y\u0101, since it is real.[13]\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER II\n                                PURUSHA\n\n\nWe shall get a more definite notion of prak\u1e5bti as we advance further\ninto the details of the later transformations of the prak\u1e5bti in\nconnection with the purushas. The most difficult point is to understand\nthe nature of its connection with the purushas. Prak\u1e5bti is a material,\nnon-intelligent, independent principle, and the souls or spirits are\nisolated, neutral, intelligent and inactive. Then how can the one come\ninto connection with the other?\n\nIn most systems of philosophy the same trouble has arisen and has caused\nthe same difficulty in comprehending it rightly. Plato fights the\ndifficulty of solving the unification of the idea and the non-being and\noffers his participation theory; even in Aristotle\u2019s attempt to avoid\nthe difficulty by his theory of form and matter, we are not fully\nsatisfied, though he has shown much ingenuity and subtlety of thought in\ndevising the \u201cexpedient in the single conception of development.\u201d\n\nThe universe is but a gradation between the two extremes of potentiality\nand actuality, matter and form. But all students of Aristotle know that\nit is very difficult to understand the true relation between form and\nmatter, and the particular nature of their interaction with each other,\nand this has created a great divergence of opinion among his\ncommentators. It was probably to avoid this difficulty that the\ndualistic appearance of the philosophy of Descartes had to be\nreconstructed in the pantheism of Spinoza. Again we find also how Kant\nfailed to bring about the relation between noumenon and phenomenon, and\ncreated two worlds absolutely unrelated to each other. He tried to\nreconcile the schism that he effected in his _Critique of Pure Reason_\nby his _Critique of Practical Reason_, and again supplemented it with\nhis _Critique of Judgment_, but met only with dubious success.\n\nIn India also this question has always been a little puzzling, and\nbefore trying to explain the Yoga point of view, I shall first give some\nof the other expedients devised for the purpose, by the different\nschools of Advaita (monistic) Ved\u0101ntism.\n\nI. The reflection theory of the Ved\u0101nta holds that the m\u0101y\u0101 is without\nbeginning, unspeakable, mother of gross matter, which comes in\nconnection with intelligence, so that by its reflection in the former we\nhave \u012a\u015bvara. The illustrations that are given to explain it both in\n_Siddh\u0101ntale\u015ba_[14] and in _Advaita-Brahmasiddhi_ are only cases of\nphysical reflection, viz. the reflection of the sun in water, or of the\nsky in water.\n\nII. The limitation theory of the Ved\u0101nta holds that the all-pervading\nintelligence must necessarily be limited by mind, etc., so of necessity\nit follows that \u201cthe soul\u201d is its limitation. This theory is illustrated\nby giving those common examples in which the \u0100k\u0101\u015ba (space) though\nunbounded in itself is often spoken of as belonging to a jug or limited\nby the jug and as such appears to fit itself to the shape and form of\nthe jug and is thus called _gha\u1e6d\u0101vacchinna \u0101k\u0101\u015ba_, i.e. space as within\nthe jug.\n\nThen we have a third school of Ved\u0101ntists, which seeks to explain it in\nanother way:\u2014The soul is neither a reflection nor a limitation, but just\nas the son of Kunt\u012b was known as the son of R\u0101dh\u0101, so the pure Brahman\nby his nescience is known as the j\u012bva, and like the prince who was\nbrought up in the family of a low caste, it is the pure Brahman who by\nhis own nescience undergoes birth and death, and by his own nescience is\nagain released.[15]\n\nThe _S\u0101\u1e43khya-s\u016btra_ also avails itself of the same story in IV. 1,\n\u201c_r\u0101japuttravattattvopade\u015b\u0101t_,\u201d which Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu explains as\nfollows:\u2014A certain king\u2019s son in consequence of his being born under the\nstar Ga\u1e47\u1e0da having been expelled from his city and reared by a certain\nforester remains under the idea: \u201cI am a forester.\u201d Having learnt that\nhe is alive, a certain minister informs him. \u201cThou art not a forester,\nthou art a king\u2019s son.\u201d As he, immediately having abandoned the idea of\nbeing an outcast, betakes himself to his true royal state, saying, \u201cI am\na king,\u201d so too the soul realises its purity in consequence of\ninstruction by some good tutor, to the effect\u2014\u201cThou, who didst originate\nfrom the first soul, which manifests itself merely as pure thought, art\na portion thereof.\u201d\n\nIn another place there are two s\u016btras:\u2014(1) _ni\u1e25sa\u1e45ge\u2019pi upar\u0101go\nvivek\u0101t_. (2) _jap\u0101spha\u1e6dikayoriva nopar\u0101ga\u1e25 kintvabhim\u0101na\u1e25_. (1) Though\nit be associated still there is a tingeing through non-discrimination.\n(2) As in the case of the hibiscus and the crystal, there is not a\ntinge, but a fancy. Now it will be seen that all these theories only\nshow that the transcendent nature of the union of the principle of pure\nintelligence is very difficult to comprehend. Neither the reflection nor\nthe limitation theory can clear the situation from vagueness and\nincomprehensibility, which is rather increased by their physical\nillustrations, for the cit or pure intelligence cannot undergo\nreflection like a physical thing, nor can it be obstructed or limited by\nit. The reflection theory adduced by the _S\u0101\u1e43khya-s\u016btra_,\n\u201c_jap\u0101sphi\u1e6dikayoriva nopar\u0101ga\u1e25 kintvabhim\u0101na\u1e25_,\u201d is not an adequate\nexplanation. For here the reflection produces only a seeming redness of\nthe colourless crystal, which was not what was meant by the Ved\u0101ntists\nof the reflection school. But here, though the metaphor is more suitable\nto express the relation of purusha with the prak\u1e5bti, the exact nature of\nthe relation is more lost sight of than comprehended. Let us now see how\nPata\u00f1jali and Vy\u0101sa seek to explain it.\n\nLet me quote a few s\u016btras of Pata\u00f1jali and some of the most important\nextracts from the _Bh\u0101shya_ and try, as far as possible, to get the\ncorrect view:\u2014\n\n  (1) _d\u1e5bgdar\u015bana\u015baktyorek\u0101tmateva asmit\u0101_ II. 6.\n\n  (2) _drash\u1e6d\u0101 d\u1e5b\u015bim\u0101tra\u1e25 \u015buddho\u2019pi pratyay\u0101nupa\u015bya\u1e25_ II. 20.\n\n  (3) _tadartha eva dr\u015byasya \u0101tm\u0101_ II. 21.\n\n  (4) _k\u1e5bt\u0101rtha\u1e43 prati nash\u1e6damapyanash\u1e6da\u1e43 tadanyas\u0101dh\u0101ra\u1e47atv\u0101t_ II. 22.\n\n  (5) _Svasv\u0101mi\u015baktyo\u1e25 svar\u016bpopalabdhihetu\u1e25 sa\u1e43yogah_ II. 22.\n\n  (6) _tadabh\u0101v\u0101t sa\u1e43yog\u0101bh\u0101vo h\u0101na\u1e43 tadd\u1e5b\u015be\u1e25 kaivalya\u1e43_ II. 25.\n\n  (7) _sattvapurushayo\u1e25 \u015buddhis\u0101mye kaivalya\u1e43_ III. 25.\n\n  (8) _citerapratisa\u1e43kram\u0101y\u0101stad\u0101k\u0101r\u0101pattau svabuddhisa\u1e43vedana\u1e43_ IV. 22.\n\n  (9) _sattvapurushayoratyant\u0101sa\u1e45k\u012br\u1e47ayo\u1e25 pratyay\u0101v\u015besho bhoga\u1e25\n        par\u0101rthatv\u0101t sv\u0101rthasa\u1e43yam\u0101t purushaj\u00f1\u0101nam_ III. 35.\n\n(1) The Ego-sense is the illusory appearance of the identity of the\npower as perceiver and the power as perceived.\n\n(2) The seer though pure as mere \u201cseeing\u201d yet perceives the forms\nassumed by the psychosis (_buddhi_).\n\n(3) It is for the sake of the purusha that the being of the knowable\nexists.\n\n(4) For the emancipated person the world-phenomena cease to exist, yet\nthey are not annihilated since they form a common field of experience\nfor other individuals.\n\n(5) The cause of the realisation of the natures of the knowable and\npurusha in consciousness is their mutual contact.\n\n(6) Cessation is the want of mutual contact arising from the destruction\nof ignorance and this is called the state of oneness.\n\n(7) This state of oneness arises out of the equality in purity of the\npurusha and buddhi or sattva.\n\n(8) Personal consciousness arises when the purusha, though in its nature\nunchangeable, is cast into the mould of the psychosis.\n\n(9) Since the mind-objects exist only for the purusha, experience\nconsists in the non-differentiation of these two which in their natures\nare absolutely distinct; the knowledge of self arises out of\nconcentration on its nature.\n\nThus in _Yoga-s\u016btra_, II. 6, d\u1e5bik or purusha the seer is spoken of as\n\u015bakti or power as much as the prak\u1e5bti itself, and we see that their\nidentity is only apparent. Vy\u0101sa in his _Bh\u0101shya_ explains _ek\u0101tmat\u0101_\n(unity of nature or identity) as _avibh\u0101gapr\u0101pt\u0101viva_, \u201cas if there is\nno difference.\u201d And Pa\u00f1ca\u015bikha, as quoted in _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, writes:\n\u201cnot knowing the purusha beyond the mind to be different therefrom, in\nnature, character and knowledge, etc., a man has the notion of self, in\nthe mind through delusion.\u201d\n\nThus we see that when the mind and purusha are known to be separated,\nthe real nature of purusha is realised. This seeming identity is again\ndescribed as that which perceives the particular form of the mind and\nthereby appears, as identical with it though it is not so\n(_pratyay\u0101nupa\u015bya\u2014pratyay\u0101ni bauddhamanupa\u015byati tamanupa\u015byannatad\u0101tm\u0101pi\ntad\u0101tmaka iva pratibh\u0101ti_, _V\u0101ysa-bh\u0101shya_, II. 20).\n\nThe purusha thus we see, cognises the phenomena of consciousness after\nthey have been formed, and though its nature is different from conscious\nstates yet it appears to be the same. Vy\u0101sa in explaining this s\u016btra\nsays that purusha is neither quite similar to the mind nor altogether\ndifferent from it. For the mind (_buddhi_) is always changeful,\naccording to the change of the objects that are offered to it; so that\nit may be said to be changeful according as it knows or does not know\nobjects; but the purusha is not such, for it always appears as the self,\nbeing reflected through the mind by which it is thus connected with the\nphenomenal form of knowledge. The notion of self that appears connected\nwith all our mental phenomena and which always illumines them is only\nduo to this reflection of purusha in the mind. All phenomenal knowledge\nwhich has the form of the object can only be transformed into conscious\nknowledge as \u201cI know this,\u201d when it becomes connected with the self or\npurusha. So the purusha may in a way be said to see again what was\nperceived by the mind and thus to impart consciousness by transferring\nits illumination into the mind. The mind suffers changes according to\nthe form of the object of cognition, and thus results a state of\nconscious cognition in the shape of \u201cI know it,\u201d when the mind, having\nassumed the shape of an object, becomes connected with the constant\nfactor purusha, through the transcendent reflection or identification of\npurusha in the mind. This is what is meant by _pratyay\u0101nupa\u015bya_\nreperception of the mind-transformations by purusha, whereby the mind\nwhich has assumed the shape of any object of consciousness becomes\nintelligent. Even when the mind is without any objective form, it is\nalways being seen by purusha. The exact nature of this reflection is\nindeed very hard to comprehend; no physical illustrations can really\nserve to make it clear. And we see that neither the _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ nor\nthe s\u016btras offer any such illustrations as S\u0101\u1e43khya did. But the\n_Bh\u0101shya_ proceeds to show the points in which the mind may be said to\ndiffer from purusha, as well as those in which it agrees with it. So\nthat though we cannot express it anyhow, we may at least make some\nadvance towards conceiving the situation.\n\nThus the _Bh\u0101shya_ says that the main difference between the mind and\npurusha is that the mind is constantly undergoing modifications, as it\ngrasps its objects one by one; for the grasping of an object, the act of\nhaving a percept is nothing but its own undergoing of different\nmodifications, and thus, since an object sometimes comes within the\ngrasp of the mind and again disappears in the subconscious as a sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra\n(potency) and again comes into the field of the understanding as sm\u1e5bti\n(memory), we see that it is pari\u1e47\u0101mi or changing. But purusha is the\nconstant seer of the mind when it has an object, as in ordinary forms of\nphenomenal knowledge, or when it has no object as in the state of\nnirodha or cessation. Purusha is unchanging. It is the light which\nremains unchanged amidst all the changing modifications of the mind, so\nthat we cannot distinguish purusha separately from the mind. This is\nwhat is meant by saying _buddhe\u1e25 pratisa\u1e43ved\u012b purusha\u1e25_, i.e. purusha\nreflects or turns into its own light the concepts of mind and thus is\nsaid to know it. Its knowing is manifested in our consciousness as the\never-persistent notion of the self, which is always a constant factor in\nall the phenomena of consciousness. Thus purusha always appears in our\nconsciousness as the knowing agent. Truly speaking, however, purusha\nonly sees himself; he is not in any way in touch with the mind. He is\nabsolutely free from all bondage, absolutely unconnected with prak\u1e5bti.\nFrom the side of appearance he seems only to be the intelligent seer\nimparting consciousness to our conscious-like conception, though in\nreality he remains the seer of himself all the while. The difference\nbetween purusha and prak\u1e5bti will be clear when we see that purusha is\naltogether independent, existing in and for himself, free from any\nbondage whatsoever; but buddhi exists on the other hand for the\nenjoyment and release of purusha. That which exists in and for itself,\nmust ever be the selfsame, unchangeable entity, suffering no\ntransformations or modifications, for it has no other end owing to which\nit will be liable to change. It is the self-centred, self-satisfied\nlight, which never seeks any other end and never leaves itself. But\nprak\u1e5bti is not such; it is always undergoing endless, complex\nmodifications and as such does not exist for itself but for purusha, and\nis dependent upon him. The mind is unconscious, while purusha is the\npure light of intelligence, for the three gu\u1e47as are all non-intelligent,\nand the mind is nothing but a modification of these three gu\u1e47as which\nare all non-intelligent.\n\nBut looked at from another point of view, prak\u1e5bti is not altogether\ndifferent from purusha; for had it been so how could purusha, which is\nabsolutely pure, reperceive the mind-modifications? Thus the _Bh\u0101shya_\n(II. 20) writes:\u2014\n\n\u201cWell then let him be dissimilar. To meet this he says: He is not quite\ndissimilar. Why? Although pure, he sees the ideas after they have come\ninto the mind. Inasmuch as purusha cognises the ideas in the form of\nmind-modification, he appears to be, by the act of cognition, the very\nself of the mind although in reality he is not.\u201d As has been said, the\npower of the enjoyer, purusha (_d\u1e5bk\u015bakti_), is certainly unchangeable\nand it does not run after every object. In connection with a changeful\nobject it appears forever as if it were being transferred to every\nobject and as if it were assimilating its modifications. And when the\nmodifications of the mind assume the form of the consciousness by which\nit is coloured, they imitate it and look as if they were manifestations\nof purusha\u2019s consciousness unqualified by the modifications of the\nnon-intelligent mind.\n\nAll our states of consciousness are analysed into two parts\u2014a permanent\nand a changing part. The changing part is the form of our consciousness,\nwhich is constantly varying according to the constant change of its\ncontents. The permanent part is that pure light of intelligence, by\nvirtue of which we have the notion of self reflected in our\nconsciousness. Now, as this self persists through all the varying\nchanges of the objects of consciousness, it is inferred that the light\nwhich thus shines in our consciousness is unchangeable. Our mind is\nconstantly suffering a thousand modifications, but the notion of self is\nthe only thing permanent amidst all this change. It is this self that\nimports consciousness to the material parts of our knowledge. All our\nconcepts originated from our perception of external material objects.\nTherefore the forms of our concepts which could exactly and clearly\nrepresent these material objects in their own terms, must be made of a\nstuff which in essence is not different from them. But with the\nreflection of purusha, the soul, the notion of self comes within the\ncontent of our consciousness, spiritualising, as it were, all our\nconcepts and making them conscious and intelligent. Thus this seeming\nidentity of purusha and the mind, by which purusha may be spoken of as\nthe seer of the concept, appears to the self, which is manifested in\nconsciousness by virtue of the seeming reflection. For this is that\nself, or personality, which remains unchanged all through our\nconsciousness. Thus our phenomenal intelligent self is partially a\nmaterial reality arising out of the seeming interaction of the spirit\nand the mind. This interaction is the only way by which matter releases\nspirit from its seeming bondage.\n\nBut the question arises, how is it that there can even be a seeming\nreflection of purusha in the mind which is altogether non-intelligent?\nHow is it possible for the mind to catch a glimpse of purusha, which\nilluminates all the concepts of consciousness, the expression\n\u201c_anupa\u015bya_\u201d meaning that he perceives by imitation (_anuk\u0101re\u1e47a\npa\u015byati_)? How can purusha, which is altogether formless, allow any\nreflection of itself to imitate the form of buddhi, by virtue of which\nit appears as the self\u2014the supreme possessor and knower of all our\nmental conceptions? There must be at least some resemblance between the\nmind and the purusha, to justify in some sense this seeming reflection.\nAnd we find that the last s\u016btra of the Vibh\u016btip\u0101da says:\n_sattvapurushayo\u1e25 \u015buddhis\u0101mye kaivalya\u1e43_\u2014which means that when the\nsattva or the preponderating mind-stuff becomes as pure as purusha,\nkaivalya or oneness is attained. This shows that the pure nature of\nsattva has a great resemblance to the pure nature of purusha. So much\nso, that the last stage preceding the state of kaivalya, is almost the\nsame as kaivalya itself, when purusha is in himself and there are no\nthoughts to reflect. In this state, we see that the mind can be so pure\nas to reflect exactly the nature of purusha, as he is in himself. This\nstate in which the mind becomes as pure as purusha and reflects him in\nhis purity, does not materially differ from the state of kaivalya, in\nwhich purusha is in himself\u2014the only difference being that the mind,\nwhen it becomes so pure as this, becomes gradually lost in prak\u1e5bti and\ncannot again serve to bind purusha.\n\nI cannot refrain here from the temptation of referring to a beautiful\nillustration from Vy\u0101sa, to explain the way in which the mind serves the\npurposes of purusha. _Cittamayask\u0101ntama\u1e47ikalpa\u1e43 sannidhim\u0101tropak\u0101ri\nd\u1e5b\u015byatvena sva\u1e43 bhavati purushasya sv\u0101mina\u1e25_ (I. 4), which is explained\nin _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_ as follows: _Tath\u0101yask\u0101ntama\u1e47i\u1e25 svasminneva\naya\u1e25sannidh\u012bkara\u1e47am\u0101tr\u0101t \u015balyarishkarsha\u1e47\u0101khyam upak\u0101ram kurvat\npurushasya sv\u0101mina\u1e25 svam bhvati bhogas\u0101dhanatv\u0101t_, i.e. just as a magnet\ndraws iron towards it, though it remains unmoved itself, so the\nmind-modifications become drawn towards purusha, and thereby become\nvisible to purusha and serve his purpose.\n\nTo summarise: We have seen that something like a union takes place\nbetween the mind and purusha, i.e. there is a seeming reflection of\npurusha in the mind, simultaneously with its being determined\nconceptually, as a result whereof this reflection of purusha in the\nmind, which is known as the self, becomes united with these conceptual\ndeterminations of the mind and the former is said to be the perceiver of\nall these determinations. Our conscious personality or self is thus the\nseeming unity of the knowable as the mind in the shape of conceptual or\njudgmental representations with the reflections of purusha in the mind.\nThus, in the single act of cognition, we have the notion of our own\npersonality and the particular conceptual or perceptual representation\nwith which this ego identifies itself. The true seer, the pure\nintelligence, the free, the eternal, remains all the while beyond any\ntouch of impurity from the mind, though it must be remembered that it is\nits own seeming reflection in the mind that appears as the ego, the\ncogniser of all our states, pleasures and sorrows of the mind and one\nwho is the apperceiver of this unity of the seeming reflection\u2014of\npurusha and the determinations of the mind. In all our conscious states,\nthere is such a synthetic unity between the determinations of our mind\nand the self, that they cannot be distinguished one from the other\u2014a\nfact which is exemplified in all our cognitions, which are the union of\nthe knower and the known. The nature of this reflection is a\ntranscendent one and can never be explained by any physical\nillustration. Purusha is altogether different from the mind, inasmuch as\nhe is the pure intelligence and is absolutely free, while the latter is\nnon-intelligent and dependent on purusha\u2019s enjoyment and release, which\nare the sole causes of its movement. But there is some similarity\nbetween the two, for how could the mind otherwise catch a seeming\nglimpse of him? It is also said that the pure mind can adapt itself to\nthe pure form of purusha; this is followed by the state of kaivalya.\n\nWe have discussed the nature of purusha and its general relations with\nthe mind. We must now give a few more illustrations. The chief point in\nwhich purusha of the S\u0101\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala differs from the similar\nspiritual principle of Ved\u0101nta is, that it regards its soul, not as one,\nbut as many. Let us try to discuss this point, in connection with the\narguments of the S\u0101\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala doctrine in favour of a separate\nprinciple of purusha. Thus the _K\u0101rik\u0101_ says: _sa\u1e43gh\u0101tapar\u0101rthatv\u0101t\ntrigu\u1e47\u0101diviparyyay\u0101dadhishth\u0101n\u0101t purusho\u2019sti bhokt\u1e5bbh\u0101v\u0101t kaivaly\u0101rtha\u1e43\nprav\u1e5btte\u015bca_,[16] \u201cBecause an assemblage of things is for the sake of\nanother; because there must be an entity different from the three gu\u1e47as\nand the rest (their modifications); because there must be a\nsuperintending power; because there must be someone who enjoys; and\nbecause of (the existence of) active exertion for the sake of\nabstraction or isolation (from the contact with prak\u1e5bti) therefore the\nsoul exists.\u201d The first argument is from design or teleology by which it\nis inferred that there must be some other simple entity for which these\ncomplex collocations of things are intended. Thus Gau\u1e0dap\u0101da says: \u201cIn\nsuch manner as a bed, which is an assemblage of bedding, props, cotton,\ncoverlet and pillows, is for another\u2019s use, not for its own, and its\nseveral component parts render no mutual service, and it is concluded\nthat there is a man who sleeps upon the bed and for whose sake it was\nmade; so this world, which is an assemblage of the five elements, is for\nuse and there is a soul, for whose enjoyment this body, another\u2019s\nconsisting of intellect and the rest, has been produced.\u201d[17]\n\nThe _second argument_ is that all the knowable is composed of just three\nelements: first, the element of sattva, or intelligence-stuff, causing\nall manifestations; second, the element of rajas or energy, which is\never causing transformations; and third, tamas, or the mass, which\nenables rajas to actualise. Now such a prak\u1e5bti, composed of these three\nelements, cannot itself be a seer. For the seer must be always the same\nunchangeable, actionless entity, the ever present, ever constant factor\nin all stages of our consciousness.\n\n_Third argument_: There must be a supreme background of pure\nconsciousness, all our co-ordinated basis of experience. This background\nis the pure actionless purusha, reflected in which all our mental states\nbecome conscious. Davies explains this a little differently, in\naccordance with a simile in the _Tattva-Kaumud\u012b_, _yath\u0101 rath\u0101di\nyantr\u0101dibhi\u1e25_, thus: \u201cThis idea of Kapila seems to be that the power of\nself-control cannot be predicted of matter, which must be directed or\ncontrolled for the accomplishment of any purpose, and this controlling\npower must be something external to matter and diverse from it. The\nsoul, however, never acts. It only seems to act; and it is difficult to\nreconcile this part of the system with that which gives to the soul a\ncontrolling force. If the soul is a charioteer, it must be an active\nforce.\u201d But Davies here commits the mistake of carrying the simile too\nfar. The comparison of the charioteer and the chariot holds good, to the\nextent that the chariot can take a particular course only when there is\na particular purpose for the charioteer to perform. The motion of the\nchariot is fulfilled only when it is connected with the living person of\nthe charioteer, whose purpose it must fulfil.\n\n_Fourth argument_: Since prak\u1e5bti is non-intelligent, there must be one\nwho enjoys its pains and pleasures. The emotional and conceptual\ndeterminations of such feelings are aroused in consciousness by the\nseeming reflection of the light of purusha.\n\n_Fifth argument_: There is a tendency in all persons to move towards the\noneness of purusha, to be achieved by liberation; there must be one for\nwhose sake the modifications of buddhi are gradually withheld, and a\nreverse process set up, by which they return to their original cause\nprak\u1e5bti and thus liberate purusha. It is on account of this reverse\ntendency of prak\u1e5bti to release purusha that a man feels prompted to\nachieve his liberation as the highest consummation of his moral ideal.\n\nThus having proved the existence of purusha, the _K\u0101rik\u0101_ proceeds to\nprove his plurality: \u201c_janmamara\u1e47akara\u1e47\u0101n\u0101\u1e43 pratiniyam\u0101dayugapat\nprav\u1e5btte\u015bca purushabahutva\u1e43 siddha\u1e43 traigu\u1e47yaviparyyay\u0101cca_.\u201d \u201cFrom\nthe individual allotment of birth, death and the organs; from\ndiversity of occupations and from the different conditions of the\nthree gu\u1e47as, it is proved that there is a plurality of souls.\u201d In\nother words, since with the birth of one individual, all are not born;\nsince with the death of one, all do not die; and since each individual\nhas separate sense organs for himself; and since all beings do not\nwork at the same time in the same manner; and since the qualities of\nthe different gu\u1e47as are possessed differently by different\nindividuals, purushas are many. Pata\u00f1jali, though he does not infer\nthe plurality of purushas in this way, yet holds the view of the\ns\u016btra, _k\u1e5bt\u0101rtha\u1e43 prati nash\u1e6damapyanash\u1e6da\u1e43 tadanyas\u0101dh\u0101ra\u1e47atv\u0101t_.\n\u201cAlthough destroyed in relation to him whose objects have been\nachieved, it is not destroyed, being common to others.\u201d\n\nDavies, in explaining the former _K\u0101rik\u0101_, says: \u201cThere is, however, the\ndifficulty that the soul is not affected by the three gu\u1e47as. How can\ntheir various modifications prove the individuality of souls in\nopposition to the Ved\u0101ntist doctrine, that all souls are only portions\nof the one, an infinitely extended monad?\u201d\n\nThis question is the most puzzling in the S\u0101\u1e43khya doctrine. But careful\npenetration of the principles of S\u0101\u1e43khya-Yoga would make clear to us\nthat this is a necessary and consistent outcome of the S\u0101\u1e43khya view of a\ndualistic universe.\n\nFor if it is said that purusha is one and we have the notion of\ndifferent selves by his reflection into different minds, it follows that\nsuch notions as self, or personality, are false. For the only true being\nis the one, purusha. So the knower being false, the known also becomes\nfalse; the knower and the known having vanished, everything is reduced\nto that which we can in no way conceive. It may be argued that according\nto the S\u0101\u1e43khya philosophy also, the knower is false, for the pure\npurusha as such is not in any way connected with prak\u1e5bti. But even then\nit must be observed that the S\u0101\u1e43khya-Yoga view does not hold that the\nknower is false but analyses the nature of the ego and says that it is\ndue to the seeming unity of the mind and purusha, both of which are\nreals in the strictest sense of the term. Purusha is there justly called\nthe knower. He sees and simultaneously with this, there is a\nmodification of buddhi (mind); this seeing becomes joined with this\nmodification of buddhi and thus arises the ego, who perceives that\nparticular form of the modification of buddhi. Purusha always remains\nthe knower. Buddhi suffers modifications and at the same time catches a\nglimpse of the light of purusha, so that contact (_sa\u1e43yoga_) of purusha\nand prak\u1e5bti occurs at one and the same point of time, in which there is\nunity of the reflection of purusha and the particular transformation of\nbuddhi.\n\nThe knower, the ego and the knowable, are none of them false in the\nS\u0101\u1e43khya-Yoga system at the stage preceding kaivalya, when buddhi becomes\nas pure as purusha; its modification resembles the exact form of purusha\nand then purusha knows himself in his true nature in buddhi; after which\nbuddhi vanishes. The Ved\u0101nta has to admit the modifications of m\u0101y\u0101, but\nmust at the same time hold it to be unreal. The Ved\u0101nta says that m\u0101y\u0101\nis as beginningless as prak\u1e5bti yet has an ending with reference to the\nreleased person as the buddhi of the S\u0101\u1e43khyists.\n\nBut according to the Ved\u0101nta philosophy, knowledge of ego is only false\nknowledge\u2014an illusion as many imposed upon the formless Brahman. M\u0101y\u0101,\naccording to the Ved\u0101ntist, can neither be said to exist nor to\nnon-exist. It is _anirv\u0101cy\u0101_, i.e. can never be described or defined.\nSuch an unknown and unknowable m\u0101y\u0101 causes the Many of the world by\nreflection upon the Brahman. But according to the S\u0101\u1e43khya doctrine,\nprak\u1e5bti is as real as purusha himself. Prak\u1e5bti and purusha are two\nirreducible metaphysical remainders whose connection is beginningless\n(_an\u0101disa\u1e43yoga_). But this connection is not unreal in the Ved\u0101nta sense\nof the term. We see that according to the Ved\u0101nta system, all notions of\nego or personality are false and are originated by the illusive action\nof the m\u0101y\u0101, so that when they ultimately vanish there are no other\nremainders. But this is not the case with S\u0101\u1e43khya, for as purusha is the\nreal seer, his cognitions cannot be dismissed as unreal, and so purushas\nor knowers as they appear to us to be, must be held real. As prak\u1e5bti is\nnot the m\u0101y\u0101 of the Ved\u0101ntist (the nature of whose influence over the\nspiritual principle cannot be determined) we cannot account for the\nplurality of purushas by supposing that one purusha is being reflected\ninto many minds and generating the many egos. For in that case it will\nbe difficult to explain the plurality of their appearances in the minds\n(buddhis). For if there be one spiritual principle, how should we\naccount for the supposed plurality of the buddhis? For we should rather\nexpect to find one buddhi and not many to serve the supposed one\npurusha, and this will only mean that there can be only one ego, his\nenjoyment and release. Supposing for argument\u2019s sake that there are many\nbuddhis and one purusha, which reflected in them, is the cause of the\nplurality of selves, then we cannot see how prak\u1e5bti is moving for the\nenjoyment and release of one purusha; it would rather appear to be moved\nfor the sake of the enjoyment and release of the reflected or unreal\nself. For purusha is not finally released with the release of any number\nof particular individual selves. For it may be released with reference\nto one individual but remain bound to others. So prak\u1e5bti would not\nreally be moved in this hypothetical case for the sake of purusha, but\nfor the sake of the reflected selves only. If we wish to avoid the said\ndifficulties, then with the release of one purusha, all purushas will\nhave to be released. For in the supposed theory there would not really\nbe many different purushas, but the one purusha appearing as many, so\nthat with his release all the other so-called purushas must be released.\nWe see that if it is the enjoyment (_bhoga_) and salvation (_apavarga_)\nof one purusha which appear as so many different series of enjoyments\nand emancipations, then with his experiences all should have the same\nexperiences. With his birth and death, all should be born or all should\ndie at once. For, indeed, it is the experiences of one purusha which\nappear in all the seeming different purushas. And in the other\nsuppositions there is neither emancipation nor enjoyment by purusha at\nall. For there, it is only the illusory self that enjoys or releases\nhimself. By his release no purusha is really released at all. So the\nfundamental conception of prak\u1e5bti as moving for the sake of the\nenjoyment and release of purusha has to be abandoned.\n\nSo we see that from the position in which S\u0101\u1e43khya and Yoga stood, this\nplurality of the purushas was the most consistent thing that they could\nthink of. Any compromise with the Ved\u0101nta doctrine here would have\ngreatly changed the philosophical aspect and value of the S\u0101\u1e43khya\nphilosophy. As the purushas are nothing but pure intelligences they can\nas well be all-pervading though many. But there is another objection\nthat, since number is a conception of the phenomenal mind, how then can\nit be applied to the purushas which are said to be many?[18] But that\ndifficulty remains unaltered even if we regard the purusha as one. When\nwe go into the domain of metaphysics and try to represent Reality with\nthe symbols of our phenomenal conceptions we have really to commit\nalmost a violence towards it. But we must perforce do this in all our\nattempts to express in our own terms that pure, inexpressible, free\nillumination which exists in and for itself beyond the range of any\nmediation by the concepts or images of our mind. So we see that S\u0101\u1e43khya\nwas not inconsistent in holding the doctrine of the plurality of the\npurushas. Pata\u00f1jali does not say anything about it, since he is more\nanxious to discuss other things connected with the presupposition of the\nplurality of purusha. Thus he speaks of it only in one place as quoted\nabove and says that though for a released person this world disappears\naltogether, still it remains unchanged in respect to all the other\npurushas.\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER III\n                   THE REALITY OF THE EXTERNAL WORLD\n\n\nWe may now come to the attempt of Yoga to prove the reality of an\nexternal world as against the idealistic Buddhists. In s\u016btra 12 of the\nchapter on kaivalya we find: \u201cThe past and the future exist in reality,\nsince all qualities of things manifest themselves in these three\ndifferent ways. The future is the manifestation which is to be. The past\nis the appearance which has been experienced. The present is that which\nis in active operation. It is this threefold substance which is the\nobject of knowledge. If it did not exist in reality, there would not\nexist a knowledge thereof. How could there be knowledge in the absence\nof anything knowable? For this reason the past and present in reality\nexist.\u201d[19]\n\nSo we see that the present holding within itself the past and the future\nexists in reality. For the past though it has been negated has really\nbeen preserved and kept in the present, and the future also though it\nhas not made its appearance yet exists potentially in the present. So,\nas we know the past and the future worlds in the present, they both\nexist and subsist in the present. That which once existed cannot die,\nand that which never existed cannot come to be (_n\u0101styasata\u1e25 sa\u1e43bhava\u1e25\nna c\u0101sti sato vin\u0101s\u0101\u1e25_, _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, V. 12). So the past has not\nbeen destroyed but has rather shifted its position and hidden itself in\nthe body of the present, and the future that has not made its appearance\nexists in the present only in a potential form. It cannot be argued, as\nV\u0101caspati says, that because the past and the future are not present\ntherefore they do not exist, for if the past and future do not exist how\ncan there be a present also, since its existence also is only relative?\nSo all the three exist as truly as any one of them, and the only\ndifference among them is the different way or mode of their existence.\n\nHe next proceeds to refute the arguments of those idealists who hold\nthat since the external knowables never exist independently of our\nknowledge of them, their separate external existence as such may be\ndenied. Since it is by knowledge alone that the external knowables can\npresent themselves to us we may infer that there is really no knowable\nexternal reality apart from knowledge of it, just as we see that in\ndream-states knowledge can exist apart from the reality of any external\nworld.\n\nSo it may be argued that there is, indeed, no external reality as\nit appears to us. The Buddhists, for example, hold that a blue\nthing and knowledge of it as blue are identical owing to the maxim\nthat things which are invariably perceived together are one\n(_sahopalambhaniyam\u0101dabhedo n\u012blataddhiyo\u1e25_). So they say that\nexternal reality is not different from our idea of it. To this it\nmay be replied that if, as you say, external reality is identical\nwith my ideas and there is no other external reality existing as\nsuch outside my ideas, why then does it appear as existing apart,\noutside and independent of my ideas? The idealists have no basis\nfor the denial of external reality, and for their assertion that\nit is only the creation of our imagination like experiences in\ndreams. Even our ideas carry with them the notion that reality\nexists outside our mental experiences. If all our percepts and\nnotions as this and that arise only by virtue of the influence of\nthe external world, how can they deny the existence of the\nexternal world as such? The objective world is present by its own\npower. How then can this objective world be given up on the\nstrength of mere logical or speculative abstraction?\n\nThus the _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, IV. 14, says: \u201cThere is no object without the\nknowledge of it, but there is knowledge as imagined in dreams without\nany corresponding object; thus the reality of external things is like\nthat of dream-objects, mere imagination of the subject and unreal. How\ncan they who say so be believed? Since they first suppose that the\nthings which present themselves to us by their own force do so only on\naccount of the invalid and delusive imagination of the intellect, and\nthen deny the reality of the external world on the strength of such an\nimaginary supposition of their own.\u201d\n\nThe external world has generated knowledge of itself by its own\npresentative power (_arthena svak\u012byay\u0101gr\u0101hya\u015bakty\u0101 vij\u00f1\u0101namajani_), and\nhas thus caused itself to be represented in our ideas, and we have no\nright to deny it.[20] Commenting on the _Bh\u0101shya_ IV. 14, V\u0101caspati says\nthat the method of agreement applied by the Buddhists by their\n_sahopalambhaniyama_ (maxim of simultaneous revelation) may possibly be\nconfuted by an application of the method of difference. The method of\nagreement applied by the idealists when put in proper form reads thus:\n\u201cWherever there is knowledge there is external reality, or rather every\ncase of knowledge agrees with or is the same as every case of the\npresence of external reality, so knowledge is the cause of the presence\nof the external reality, i.e. the external world depends for its reality\non our knowledge or ideas and owes its origin or appearance as such to\nthem.\u201d But V\u0101caspati says that this application of the method of\nagreement is not certain, for it cannot be corroborated by the method of\ndifference. For the statement that every case of absence of knowledge is\nalso a case of absence of external reality cannot be proved, i.e. we\ncannot prove that the external reality does not exist when we have no\nknowledge of it (_sahopalambhaniyama\u015bca vedyatva\u00f1ca het\u016b\nsandigdhavyatirekatay\u0101naik\u0101ntikau_) IV. 14.\n\nDescribing the nature of grossness and externality, the attributes of\nthe external world, he says that grossness means the pervading of more\nportions of space than one, i.e. grossness means extension, and\nexternality means being related to separate space, i.e. co-existence in\nspace. Thus we see that extension and co-existence in space are the two\nfundamental qualities of the gross external world. Now an idea can never\nbe said to possess them, for it cannot be said that an idea has extended\ninto more spaces than one and yet co-existed separately in separate\nplaces. An idea cannot be said to exist with other ideas in space and to\nextend in many points of space at one and the same time. To avoid this\nit cannot be said that there may be plurality of ideas so that some may\nco-exist and others may extend in space. For co-existence and extension\ncan never be asserted of our ideas, since +hey are very fine and subtle,\nand can be known only at the time of their individual operation, at\nwhich time, however, other ideas may be quite latent and unknown.\nImagination has no power to negate their reality, for the sphere of\nimagination is quite distinct from the sphere of external reality, and\nit can never be applied to an external reality to negate it. Imagination\nis a mental function, and as such has no touch with the reality outside,\nwhich it can by no means negate.\n\nFurther it cannot be said that, because grossness and externality can\nabide neither in the external world nor in our ideas, they are therefore\nfalse. For this falsity cannot be thought as separable from our ideas,\nfor in that case our ideas would be as false as the false itself. The\nnotion of externality and grossness pervades all our ideas, and if they\nare held to be false, no true thing can be known by our ideas and they\ntherefore become equally false.\n\nAgain, knowledge and the external world can never be said to be\nidentical because they happen to be presented together. For the method\nof agreement cannot by itself prove identity. Knowledge and the knowable\nexternal world may be independently co-existing things like the notions\nof existence and non-existence. Both co-exist independently of one\nanother. It is therefore clear enough, says V\u0101caspati, that the\ncertainty arrived at by perception, which gives us a direct knowledge of\nthings, can never be rejected on the strength of mere logical\nabstraction or hair-splitting discussion.\n\nWe further see, says Pata\u00f1jali, that the thing remains the same though\nthe ideas and feelings of different men may change differently about\nit.[21] Thus A, B, C may perceive the same identical woman and may feel\npleasure, pain or hatred. We see that the same common thing generates\ndifferent feelings and ideas in different persons; external reality\ncannot be said to owe its origin to the idea or imagination of any one\nman, but exists independently of any person\u2019s imagination in and for\nitself. For if it be due to the imagination of any particular man, it is\nhis own idea which as such cannot generate the same ideas in another\nman. So it must be said that the external reality is what we perceive it\noutside.\n\nThere are, again, others who say that just as pleasure and pain\narise along with our ideas and must be said to be due to them so the\nobjective world also must be said to have come into existence along\nwith our ideas. The objective world therefore according to these\nphilosophers has no external existence either in the past or in the\nfuture, but has only a momentary existence in the present due to our\nideas about it. That much existence only are they ready to attribute\nto external objects which can be measured by the idea of the moment.\nThe moment I have an idea of a thing, the thing rises into existence\nand may be said to exist only for that moment and as soon as the\nidea disappears the object also vanishes, for when it cannot be\npresented to me in the form of ideas it can be said to exist in no\nsense. But this argument cannot hold good, for if the objective\nreality should really depend upon the idea of any individual man,\nthen the objective reality corresponding to an idea of his ought to\ncease to exist either with the change of his idea, or when he\ndirects attention to some other thing, or when he restrains his mind\nfrom all objects of thought. Now, then, if it thus ceases to exist,\nhow can it again spring into existence when the attention of the\nindividual is again directed towards it? Again, all parts of an\nobject can never be seen all at once. Thus supposing that the front\nside of a thing is visible, then the back side which cannot be seen\nat the time must not be said to exist at all. So if the back side\ndoes not exist, the front side also can as well be said not to exist\n(_ye c\u0101sy\u0101nupasthit\u0101 bh\u0101gaste c\u0101sya na syureva\u1e43 n\u0101sti p\u1e5bsh\u1e6dhamiti\nudaramapi na g\u1e5bhyeta._ _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, IV. 16). Therefore it must\nbe said that there is an independent external reality which is the\ncommon field of observation for all souls in general; and there are\nalso separate \u201cCittas\u201d for separate individual souls (_tasm\u0101t\nsvatantro\u2019rtha\u1e25 sarvapurusas\u0101dhd\u0101ra\u1e47a\u1e25 svatantr\u0101\u1e47i ca citt\u0101ni\npratipurusha\u1e43, pravarttante_, _ibid._). And all the experiences of\nthe purusha result from the connection of this \u201cCitta\u201d (mind) with\nthe external world.\n\nNow from this view of the reality of the external world we are\nconfronted with another question\u2014what is the ground which underlies the\nmanifold appearance of this external world which has been proved to be\nreal? What is that something which is thought as the vehicle of such\nqualities as produce in us the ideas? What is that self-subsistent\nsubstratum which is the basis of so many changes, actions and reactions\nthat we always meet in the external world? Locke called this substratum\nsubstance and regarded it as unknown, but said that though it did not\nfollow that it was a product of our own subjective thought yet it did\nnot at the same time exist without us. Hume, however, tried to explain\neverything from the standpoint of association of ideas and denied all\nnotions of substantiality. We know that Kant, who was much influenced by\nHume, agreed to the existence of some such unknown reality which he\ncalled the Thing-in-itself, the nature of which, however, was absolutely\nunknowable, but whose influence was a great factor in all our\nexperiences.\n\nBut the _Bh\u0101shya_ tries to penetrate deeper into the nature of this\nsubstratum or substance and says: _dharmisvar\u016bpam\u0101tro hi dharma\u1e25,\ndharmivikriy\u0101 eva esh\u0101 dharmadv\u0101r\u0101 prapa\u00f1cyate_, _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, III.\n13. The characteristic qualities form the very being itself of the\ncharacterised, and it is the change of the characterised alone that is\ndetailed by means of the characteristic. To understand thoroughly the\nexact significance of this statement it will be necessary to take a more\ndetailed review of what has already been said about the gu\u1e47as. We know\nthat all things mental or physical are formed by the different\ncollocations of sattva of the nature of illumination (_prak\u0101\u015ba_),\nrajas\u2014the energy or mutative principle of the nature of action\n(_kriy\u0101_)\u2014and tamas\u2014the obstructive principle of the nature of inertia\n(_sthiti_) which in their original and primordial state are too fine to\nbe apprehended (_gun\u0101n\u0101\u1e43parama\u1e43 r\u016bpa\u1e43 na d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dipatham\u1e5bcchati_,\n_Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, IV. 13). These different gu\u1e47as combine in various\nproportions to form the manifold universe of the knowable, and thus are\nmade the objects of our cognition. Through combining in different\nproportions they become, in the words of Dr. B. N. Seal, \u201cmore and more\ndifferentiated, determinate and coherent,\u201d and thus make themselves\ncognisable, yet they never forsake their own true nature as the gu\u1e47as.\nSo we see that they have thus got two natures, one in which they remain\nquite unchanged as gu\u1e47as, and another in which they collocate and\ncombine themselves in various ways and thus appear under the veil of a\nmultitude of qualities and states of the manifold knowable (_te\nvyaktas\u016bkshm\u0101 gu\u1e47\u0101tm\u0101na\u1e25_ [IV. 13] ... _sarvamida\u1e43 gu\u1e47\u0101n\u0101\u1e43\nsannive\u015bavi\u015besham\u0101tramiti param\u0101rthato gu\u1e47\u0101tm\u0101na\u1e25_, _Bh\u0101shya_, _ibid._).\n\nNow these gu\u1e47as take three different courses of development from the ego\nor aha\u1e43k\u0101ra according to which the ego or aha\u1e43k\u0101ra may be said to be\ns\u0101ttvika, r\u0101jasa and t\u0101masa. Thus from the s\u0101ttvika side of the ego by a\npreponderance of sattva the five knowledge-giving senses, e.g. hearing,\nsight, touch, taste and smell are derived. From the rajas side of ego by\na preponderance of rajas the five active senses of speech, etc., are\nderived. From the tamas side of ego or aha\u1e43k\u0101ra by a preponderance of\ntamas are derived the five tanm\u0101tras. From which again by a\npreponderance of tamas the atoms of the five gross elements\u2014earth,\nwater, fire, air and ether are derived.\n\nIn the derivation of these it must be remembered that all the three\ngu\u1e47as are conjointly responsible. In the derivation of a particular\nproduct one of the gu\u1e47as may indeed be predominant, and thus may bestow\nthe prominent characteristic of that product, but the other two gu\u1e47as\nare also present there and perform their functions equally well. Their\nopposition does not withhold the progress of evolution but rather helps\nit. All the three combine together in varying degrees of mutual\npreponderance and thus together help the process of evolution to produce\na single product. Thus we see that though the gu\u1e47as are three, they\ncombine to produce on the side of perception, the senses, such as those\nof hearing, sight, etc.; and on the side of the knowable, the individual\ntanm\u0101tras of gandha, rasa, r\u016bpa, spar\u015ba and \u015babda. The gu\u1e47as composing\neach tanm\u0101tra again harmoniously combine with each other with a\npreponderance of tamas to produce the atoms of each gross element. Thus\nin each combination one class of gu\u1e47as remains prominent, while the\nothers remain dependent upon it but help it indirectly in the evolution\nof that particular product.\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER IV\n                        THE PROCESS OF EVOLUTION\n\n\nThe evolution which we have spoken of above may be characterised in two\nways: (1) That arising from modifications or products of some other\ncause which are themselves capable of originating other products like\nthemselves; (2) That arising from causes which, though themselves\nderived, yet cannot themselves be the cause of the origination of other\nexistences like themselves. The former may be said to be slightly\nspecialised (_avi\u015besha_) and the latter thoroughly specialised\n(_vi\u015besha_).\n\nThus we see that from prak\u1e5bti comes mahat, from mahat comes aha\u1e43k\u0101ra,\nand from aha\u1e43k\u0101ra, as we have seen above, the evolution takes three\ndifferent courses according to the preponderance of sattva, rajas and\ntamas originating the cognitive and conative senses and manas, the\nsuperintendent of them both on one side and the tanm\u0101tras on the other.\nThese tanm\u0101tras again produce the five gross elements. Now when aha\u1e43k\u0101ra\nproduces the tanm\u0101tras or the senses, or when the tanm\u0101tras produce the\nfive gross elements, or when aha\u1e43k\u0101ra itself is produced from buddhi or\nmahat, it is called _tattv\u0101ntara-pari\u1e47\u0101ma_, i.e. the production of a\ndifferent tattva or substance.\n\nThus in the case of _tattv\u0101ntara-pari\u1e47\u0101ma_ (as for example when the\ntanm\u0101tras are produced from aha\u1e43k\u0101ra), it must be carefully noticed\nthat the state of being involved in the tanm\u0101tras is altogether\ndifferent from the state of being of aha\u1e43k\u0101ra; it is not a mere change\nof quality but a change of existence or state of being.[22] Thus\nthough the tanm\u0101tras are derived from aha\u1e43k\u0101ra the traces of aha\u1e43k\u0101ra\ncannot be easily followed in them. This derivation is not such that\nthe aha\u1e43k\u0101ra remains principally unchanged and there is only a change\nof quality in it, but it is a different existence altogether, having\nproperties which differ widely from those of aha\u1e43k\u0101ra. So it is called\ntattv\u0101ntara-pari\u1e47\u0101ma, i.e. evolution of different categories of\nexistence.\n\nNow the evolution that the senses and the five gross elements can\nundergo can never be of this nature, for they are vi\u015beshas, or\nsubstances which have been too much specialised to allow the evolution\nof any other substance of a different grade of existence from\nthemselves. With them there is an end of all emanation. So we see that\nthe avi\u015beshas or slightly specialised emanations are those which being\nthemselves but emanations can yet yield other emanations from\nthemselves. Thus we see that mahat, aha\u1e43k\u0101ra and the five tanm\u0101tras are\nthemselves emanations, as well as the source of other emanations. Mahat,\nhowever, though it is undoubtedly an avi\u015besha or slightly specialised\nemanation, is called by another technical name li\u1e45ga or sign, for from\nthe state of mahat, the prak\u1e5bti from which it must have emanated may be\ninferred. Prak\u1e5bti, however, from which no other primal state is\ninferable, is called the ali\u1e45ga or that which is not a sign for the\nexistence of any other primal and more unspecialised state. In one sense\nall the emanations can be with justice called the li\u1e45gas or states of\nexistence standing as the sign by which the causes from which they have\nemanated can be directly inferred. Thus in this sense the five gross\nelements maybe called the li\u1e45ga of the tanm\u0101tras, and they again of the\nego, and that again of the mahat, for the unspecialised ones are\ninferred from their specialised modifications or emanations. But this\ntechnical name li\u1e45ga is reserved for the mahat from which the ali\u1e45ga or\nprak\u1e5bti can be inferred. This prak\u1e5bti, however, is the eternal state\nwhich is not an emanation itself but the basis and source of all other\nemanations.\n\nThe li\u1e45ga and the ali\u1e45ga have thus been compared in the _K\u0101rik\u0101_:\n\n           \u201c_hetumadanityamavy\u0101pi sakriyamanek\u0101\u015brita\u1e43 li\u1e45ga\u1e43\n           s\u0101vayavam paratantra\u1e43 vyakta\u1e43 vipar\u012btamavyakta\u1e43_.\u201d\n\nThe li\u1e45ga has a cause, it is neither eternal nor universal, but mobile,\nmultiform, dependent, determinate, and possesses parts, whereas the\nali\u1e45ga is the reverse. The ali\u1e45ga or prak\u1e5bti, however, being the cause\nhas some characteristics in common with its li\u1e45gas as distinguished from\nthe purushas, which are altogether different from it.\n\nThus the _K\u0101rik\u0101_ says:\n\n       \u201c_trigu\u1e47amaviveki vishaya\u1e25 s\u0101m\u0101nyamacetana\u1e43 prasavadharmi\n       vyakta\u1e43 tath\u0101 pradh\u0101na\u1e43 tadvipar\u012btastath\u0101 pum\u0101n_.\u201d\n\nThe manifested and the unmanifested _pradh\u0101na_ or _prak\u1e5bti_ are both\ncomposed of the three gu\u1e47as, non-intelligent, objective, universal,\nunconscious and productive. Soul in these respects is the reverse. We\nhave seen above that prak\u1e5bti is the state of equilibrium of the gu\u1e47as,\nwhich can in no way be of any use to the purushas, and is thus held to\nbe eternal, though all other states are held to be non-eternal as they\nare produced for the sake of the purushas.\n\nThe state of prak\u1e5bti is that in which the gu\u1e47as completely overpower\neach other and the characteristics (_dharma_) and the characterised\n(_dharm\u012b_) are one and the same.\n\nEvolution is thus nothing but the manifestation of change, mutation, by\nthe energy of rajas. The rajas is the one mediating activity that breaks\nup all compounds, builds up new ones and initiates original\nmodifications. Whenever in any particular combination the proportion of\nsattva, rajas or tamas alters, as a condition of this alteration, there\nis the dominating activity of rajas by which the old equilibrium is\ndestroyed and another equilibrium established; this in its turn is again\ndisturbed and again another equilibrium is restored. Now the\nmanifestation of this latent activity of rajas is what is called change\nor evolution. In the external world the time that is taken by a param\u0101\u1e47u\nor atom to move from its place is identical with a unit of change.[23]\nNow an atom will be that quantum which is smaller or finer than that\npoint or limit at which it can in any way be perceived by the senses.\nAtoms are therefore mere points without magnitude or dimension, and the\nunit of time or moment (_ksha\u1e47a_) that is taken up in changing the\nposition of these atoms is identical with one unit of change or\nevolution. The change or evolution in the external world must therefore\nbe measured by these units of spatial motion of the atoms; i.e. an atom\nchanging its own unit of space is the measure of all physical change or\nevolution.\n\nEach unit of time (_ksha\u1e47a_) corresponding to this change of an atom of\nits own unit of space is the unit-measure of change. This instantaneous\nsuccession of time as discrete moments one following the other is the\nnotion of the series of moments or pure and simple succession. Now the\nnotion of these discrete moments is the notion of time. Even the notion\nof succession is one that does not really exist but is imagined, for a\nmoment comes into being just when the moment just before had passed so\nthat they have never taken place together. Thus Vy\u0101sa in III. 52, says:\n\u201c_ksha\u1e47atatkramayorn\u0101sti vastusam\u0101h\u0101ra\u1e25 iti buddhisam\u0101h\u0101ra\u1e25\nmuh\u016brtt\u0101hor\u0101tr\u0101tr\u0101daya\u1e25_.\u201d _Sa tvaya\u1e43 k\u0101la\u1e25 vastu\u015b\u016bnyo\u2019pi\nbuddhinirm\u0101\u1e47a\u1e25._ The moments and their succession do not belong to the\ncategory of actual things; the hour, the day and night, are all\naggregates of mental conceptions. This time which is not a substantive\nreality in itself, but is only a mental concept, represented to us\nthrough linguistic usage, appears to ordinary minds as if it were an\nobjective reality.\n\nSo the conception of time as discrete moments is the real one, whereas\nthe conception of time as successive or as continuous is unreal, being\nonly due to the imagination of our empirical and relative consciousness.\nThus V\u0101caspati further explains it. A moment is real (_vastupatita\u1e25_)\nand is the essential element of the notion of succession. Succession\ninvolves the notion of change of moments, and the moment is called time\nby those sages who know what time is. Two moments cannot happen\ntogether. There cannot be any succession of two simultaneous things.\nSuccession means the notion of change involving a preceding and a\nsucceeding moment. Thus there is only the present moment and there are\nno preceding and later moments. Therefore there cannot be any union of\nthese moments. The past and the future moments may be said to exist only\nif we speak of past and future as identical with the changes that have\nbecome latent and others that exist potentially but are not manifested.\nThus in one moment, the whole world suffers changes. All these\ncharacteristics are associated with the thing as connected with one\nparticular moment.[24]\n\nSo we find here that time is essentially discrete, being only the\nmoments of our cognitive life. As two moments never co-exist, there is\nno succession or continuous time. They exist therefore only in our\nempirical consciousness which cannot take the real moments in their\ndiscrete nature but connects the one with the other and thereby imagines\neither succession or continuous time.\n\nNow we have said before, that each unit of change or evolution is\nmeasured by this unit of time _ksha\u1e47a_ or moment; or rather the units of\nchange are expressed in terms of these moments or _ksha\u1e47as_. Of course\nin our ordinary consciousness these moments of change cannot be grasped,\nbut they can be reasonably inferred. For at the end of a certain period\nwe observe a change in a thing; now this change, though it becomes\nappreciable to us after a long while, was still going on every moment,\nso, in this way, the succession of evolution or change cannot be\ndistinguished from the moments coming one after another. Thus the\n_Yoga-s\u016btra_ says in IV. 33: \u201cSuccession involving a course of changes\nis associated with the moments.\u201d Succession as change of moments is\ngrasped only by a course of changes. A cloth which has not passed\nthrough a course of changes through a series of moments cannot be found\nold all at once at any time. Even a new cloth kept with good care\nbecomes old after a time. This is what is called the termination of a\ncourse of changes and by it the succession of a course of changes can be\ngrasped. Even before a thing is old there can be inferred a sequence of\nthe subtlest, subtler, subtle, grossest, grosser and gross changes\n(_Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, IV. 33).[25]\n\nNow as we have seen that the unit of time is indistinguishable from the\nunit of change or evolution, and as these moments are not co-existing\nbut one follows the other, we see that there is no past or future\nexisting as a continuous before or past, and after or future. It is the\npresent that really exists as the manifested moment; the past has been\nconserved as sublatent and the future as the latent. So the past and\nfuture exist in the present, the former as one which has already had its\nmanifestation and is thus conserved in the fact of the manifestation of\nthe present. For the manifestation of the present as such could not have\ntaken place until the past had already been manifested; so the\nmanifestation of the present is a concrete product involving within\nitself the manifestation of the past; in a similar way it may be said\nthat the manifestation of the present contains within itself the seed or\nthe unmanifested state of the future, for if this had not been the case,\nthe future never could have happened. So we see that the whole world\nundergoes a change at one unit point of time, and not only that but it\nconserves within itself all the past and future history of cosmic\nevolution.\n\nWe have pointed out before that the manifestation of the rajas or energy\nas action is what is called change. Now this manifestation of action can\nonly take place when equilibrium of a particular collocation of gu\u1e47as is\ndisturbed and the rajas arranges or collocates with itself the sattva\nand tamas, the whole group being made intelligible by the inherent\nsattva. So the cosmic history is only the history of the different\ncollocations of the gu\u1e47as. Now, therefore, if it is possible for a seer\nto see in one vision the possible number of combinations that the rajas\nwill have with sattva and tamas, he can in one moment perceive the past,\npresent or future of this cosmic evolutionary process; for with such\nminds all past and future are concentrated at one point of vision which\nto a person of ordinary empirical consciousness appears only in the\nseries. For the empirical consciousness, impure as it is, it is\nimpossible that all the powers and potencies of sattva and rajas should\nbecome manifested at one point of time; it has to take things only\nthrough its senses and can thus take the changes only as the senses are\naffected by them; whereas, on the other hand, if its power of knowing\nwas not restricted to the limited scope of the senses, it could have\ngrasped all the possible collocations or changes all at once. Such a\nperceiving mind whose power of knowing is not narrowed by the senses can\nperceive all the finest modifications or changes that are going on in\nthe body of a substance (see _Yoga-s\u016btra_, III. 53).\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER V\n                    THE EVOLUTION OF THE CATEGORIES\n\n\nThe Yoga analysis points to the fact that all our cognitive states are\ndistinguished from their objects by the fact of their being intelligent.\nThis intelligence is the constant factor which persists amidst all\nchanges of our cognitive states. We are passing continually from one\nstate to another without any rest, but in this varying change of these\nstates we are never divested of intelligence. This fact of intelligence\nis therefore neither the particular possession of any one of these\nstates nor that of the sum of these states; for if it is not the\npossession of any one of these states it cannot be the possession of the\nsum of these states. In the case of the released person again there is\nno mental state, but the self-shining intelligence. So Yoga regarded\nthis intelligence as quite distinct from the so-called mental states\nwhich became intelligent by coming in connection with this intelligence.\nThe actionless, absolutely pure and simple intelligence it called the\npurusha.\n\nYoga tacitly assumed a certain kind of analysis of the nature of these\nmental states which sought to find out, if possible, the nature of their\nconstituent elements or moments of existence. Now in analysing the\ndifferent states of our mind we find that a particular content of\nthought is illuminated and then passed over. The ideas rise, are\nilluminated and pass away. Thus they found that \u201cmovement\u201d was one of\nthe principal elements that constituted the substance of our thoughts.\nThought as such is always moving. This principle of movement, mutation\nor change, this energy, they called rajas.\n\nNow apart from this rajas, thought when seen as divested of its sensuous\ncontents seems to exhibit one universal mould or form of knowledge which\nassumes the form of all the sensuous contents that are presented to it.\nIt is the one universal of all our particular concepts or ideas\u2014the\nbasis or substratum of all the different shapes imposed upon itself, the\npure and simple. Sattva in which there is no particularity is that\nelement of our thought which, resembling purusha most, can attain its\nreflection within itself and thus makes the unconscious mental states\nintelligible. All the contents of our thought are but modes and\nlimitations of this universal form and are thus made intelligible. It is\nthe one principle of intelligibility of all our conscious states.\n\nNow our intellectual life consists in a series of shining ideas or\nconcepts; concepts after concepts shine forth in the light of the pure\nintelligence and pass away. But each concept is but a limitation of the\npure shining universal of our knowledge which underlies all its changing\nmodes or modifications of concepts or judgments. This is what is called\npure knowledge in which there is neither the knower nor the known. This\npure object\u2014subjectless knowledge differs from the pure intelligence or\npurusha only in this that later on it is liable to suffer various\nmodifications, as the ego, the senses, and the infinite percepts and\nconcepts, etc., connected therewith, whereas the pure intelligence\nremains ever pure and changeless and is never the substratum of any\nchange. At this stage sattva, the intelligence-stuff, is prominent and\nrajas and tamas are altogether suppressed. It is for this reason that\nthe buddhi or mind is often spoken of as the sattva. Being an absolute\npreponderance of sattva it has nothing else to manifest, but it is its\npure-shining self. Both tamas and rajas being mostly suppressed they\ncannot in any way affect the effulgent nature of this pure shining of\ncontentless knowledge in which there is neither the knower nor the\nknown.\n\nBut it must be remembered that it is holding suspended as it were within\nitself the elements of rajas and tamas which cannot manifest themselves\nowing to the preponderance of the sattva.\n\nThis notion of pure contentless consciousness is immediate and abstract\nand as such is at once mediated by other necessary phases. Thus we see\nthat this pure contentless universal consciousness is the same as the\nego-universal (_asmit\u0101m\u0101tra_). For this contentless universal\nconsciousness is only another name for the contentless unlimited,\ninfinite of the ego-universal. A quotation from Fichte may here be\nuseful as a comparison. Thus he says in the introduction to his _Science\nof Ethics_: \u201cHow an object can ever become a subject, or how a being can\never become an object of representation: this curious change will never\nbe explained by anyone who does not find a point where the objective and\nsubjective are not distinguished at all, but are altogether one. Now\nsuch a point is established by, and made the starting point of our\nsystem. This point is the Egohood, the Intelligence, Reason, or whatever\nit may be named.\u201d[26] The _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, II. 19, describes it as\n_li\u1e45gam\u0101tram mahattatva\u1e43 satt\u0101m\u0101tre mahati \u0101tmani_, and again in I. 36\nwe find it described as the waveless ocean, peaceful infinite pure\negohood. This obscure egohood is known merely as being. This mahat has\nalso been spoken of by Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu as the manas, or mind, as it has\nthe function of assimilation (_ni\u015bcaya_). Now what we have already said\nabout mahat will, we hope, make it clear that this mahat is the last\nlimit at which the subject and the object can be considered as one\nindistinguishable point which is neither the one nor the other, but the\nsource of both.\n\nThis buddhi is thus variously called _mahat_, _asmit\u0101m\u0101tra_, _manas_,\n_sattva_, _buddhi_ and _li\u1e45ga_, according to the aspects from which this\nstate is observed.\n\nThis state is called mahat as it is the most universal thing conceivable\nand the one common source from which all other things originate.\n\nNow this phase of sattva or pure shining naturally passes into the other\nphase, that of the Ego as knower or Ego as subject. The first phase as\nmahat or asmit\u0101m\u0101tra was the state in which the sattva was predominant\nand the rajas and tamas were in a suppressed condition. The next moment\nis that in which the rajas comes uppermost, and thus the ego as the\nsubject of all cognition\u2014the subject I\u2014the knower of all the mental\nstates\u2014is derived. The contentless subject-objectless \u201cI\u201d is the passive\nsattva aspect of the buddhi catching the reflection of the spirit of\npurusha.\n\nIn its active aspect, however, it feels itself one with the spirit and\nappears as the ego or subject which knows, feels and wills. Thus\nPata\u00f1jali says, in II. 6: _d\u1e5bgdar\u015bana\u015baktyorek\u0101tmateva asmit\u0101_, i.e. the\nseeming identity of the seer and the perceiving capacity is called\nasmit\u0101-ego. Again in _Bh\u0101shya_, I. 17, we have _ek\u0101tmik\u0101 sa\u1e43vidasmit\u0101_\n(knowledge as one identical is asmit\u0101) which V\u0101caspati explains as _s\u0101\nca \u0101tman\u0101 grah\u012btr\u0101 saha buddhirek\u0101tmik\u0101 sa\u1e43vid_, i.e. it is the feeling\nof identity of the buddhi (mind) with the self, the perceiver. Thus we\nfind that the mind is affected by its own rajas or activity and posits\nitself as the ego or subject as activity. By reason of this position of\nthe \u201cI\u201d as active it perceives itself in the objective, in all its\nconative and cognitive senses in its thoughts and feelings and also in\nthe external world of extension and co-existence; in the words of\nPa\u00f1ca\u015bikha (II. 5) thinking the animate and inanimate beings to be the\nself, man regards their prosperity as his own and becomes glad, and\nregards their adversity as his own and is sorry. Here the \u201cI\u201d is posited\nas the active entity which becomes conscious of itself, or in other\nwords the \u201cI\u201d becomes self-conscious. In analysing this notion of\nself-consciousness we find that here the rajas or element of activity or\nmobility has become predominant and this predominance of rajas has been\nmanifested by the inherent sattva. Thus we find that the rajas side or\n\u201cI as active\u201d has become manifested or known as such, i.e. \u201cI\u201d becomes\nconscious of itself as active. And this is just what is meant by\nself-consciousness.\n\nThis ego or self-consciousness then appears as the modification of the\ncontentless pure consciousness of the mind (_buddhi_); it is for this\nreason that we see that this self-consciousness is but a modification of\nthe universal mind. The absolute identity of subject and object as the\negohood is not A part of our natural consciousness, for in all stages of\nour actual consciousness, even in that of self-consciousness, there is\nan element of the preponderance of rajas or activity which directs this\nunity as the knower and the known and then unites them as it were. Only\nso far as I distinguish myself as the conscious, from myself as the\nobject of consciousness, am I at all conscious of myself.\n\nWhen we see that the buddhi transforms itself into the ego, the subject,\nor the knower, at this its first phase there is no other content which\nit can know, it therefore knows itself in a very abstract way as the\n\u201cI,\u201d or in other words, the ego becomes self-conscious; but at this\nmoment the ego has no content; the tamas being quite under suppression,\nit is evolved by a preponderance of the rajas; and thus its nature as\nrajas is manifested by the sattva and thus the ego now essentially knows\nitself to be active, and holds itself as the permanent energising\nactivity which connects with itself all the phenomena of our life.\n\nBut now when the ego first directs itself towards itself and becomes\nconscious of itself, one question which naturally comes to our mind is,\n\u201cCan the ego direct itself towards itself and thus divide itself into a\npart that sees and one that is seen?\u201d To meet this question it is\nassumed that the gu\u1e47as contain within themselves the germs of both\nsubjectivity and objectivity (_gu\u1e47\u0101n\u0101\u1e43 hi dvair\u016bpya\u1e43 vyavas\u0101y\u0101tmkatvam\nvyavasey\u0101tmakatva\u1e43 ca. Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, III. 47); the gu\u1e47as have two\nforms, the perceiver and the perceived. Thus we find that in the ego the\nquality of the gu\u1e47as as the perceiver comes to be first manifested and\nthe ego turns back upon itself and makes itself its own object. It is at\nthis stage that we are reminded of the twofold nature of the gu\u1e47as.\n\nIt is by virtue of this twofold nature that the subject can make itself\nits own object; but as these two sides have not yet developed they are\nstill only abstract and exist but in an implicit way in this state of\nthe ego (_aha\u1e43k\u0101ra_).\n\nEnquiring further into the nature of the relation of this ego and the\nbuddhi, we find that the ego is only another phase or modification of\nthe buddhi; however different it might appear from buddhi it is only\nan appearance or phase of it; its reality is the reality of the\nbuddhi. Thus we see that when the knower is affected in his different\nmodes of concepts and judgments, this too is to be ascribed to the\nbuddhi. Thus Vy\u0101sa writes (II. 18) that perception, memory,\ndifferentiation, reasoning, right knowledge, decision belong properly\nto mind (buddhi) and are only illusorily imposed on the purusha\n(_graha\u1e47adh\u0101ra\u1e47oh\u0101pohatattvaj\u00f1\u0101n\u0101bhinive\u015b\u0101 buddhau varttam\u0101n\u0101 purushe\nadhy\u0101ropitasadbh\u0101v\u0101\u1e25_).\n\nNow from this ego we find that three developments take place in three\ndistinct directions according to the preponderance of sattva, rajas or\ntamas.\n\nBy the preponderance of rajas, the ego develops itself into the five\nconative senses, v\u0101k (speech), p\u0101\u1e47i (hands), p\u0101da (feet), p\u0101yu (organ of\npassing the excreta) and upastha (generative organ). By the\npreponderance of sattva, the ego develops itself into the five cognitive\nsenses\u2014hearing, touch, sight, taste and smell; and by a preponderance of\ntamas it stands as the bh\u016bt\u0101di and produces the five tanm\u0101tras, and\nthese again by further preponderance of tamas develops into the\nparticles of the five gross elements of earth, water, light, heat, air\nand ether.\n\nNow it is clear that when the self becomes conscious of itself as object\nwe see that there are three phases in it: (i) that in which the self\nbecomes an object to itself; (ii) when it directs itself or turns as the\nsubject upon itself as the object, this moment of activity which can\neffect an aspect of change in itself; (iii) the aspect of the\nconsciousness of the self, the moment in which it perceives itself in\nits object, the moment of the union of itself as the subject and itself\nas the object in one luminosity of self-consciousness. Now that phase of\nself in which it is merely an object to itself is the phase of its union\nwith prak\u1e5bti which further develops the prak\u1e5bti in moments of\nmateriality by a preponderance of the inert tamas of the bh\u016bt\u0101di into\ntanm\u0101tras and these again into the five grosser elements which are then\ncalled the _gr\u0101hya_ or perceptible.\n\nThe sattva side of this ego or self-consciousness which was hitherto\nundifferentiated becomes further differentiated, specialised and\nmodified into the five cognitive senses with their respective functions\nof hearing, touch, sight, taste and smell, synchronising with the\nevolution of the prak\u1e5bti on the tanm\u0101tric side of evolution. These again\nindividually suffer infinite modifications themselves and thus cause an\ninfinite variety of sensations in their respective spheres in our\nconscious life. The rajas side of the ego becomes specialised as the\nactive faculties of the five different conative organs.\n\nThere is another specialisation of the ego as the manas which is its\ndirect instrument for connecting itself with the five cognitive and\nconative senses. What is perceived as mere sensations by the senses is\nconnected and generalised and formed into concepts by the manas; it is\ntherefore spoken of as partaking of both the conative and the cognitive\naspects in the _S\u0101\u1e43khya-k\u0101rik\u0101_, 27.\n\nNow though the modifications of the ego are formed successively by the\npreponderance of sattva, rajas and tamas, yet the rajas is always the\naccessory cause (_sahak\u0101ri_) of all these varied collocations of the\ngu\u1e47as; it is the supreme principle of energy and supplies even\nintelligence with the energy which it requires for its own conscious\nactivity. Thus Lok\u0101c\u0101ryya says in his _Tattvatraya_: \u201cthe t\u0101masa ego\ndeveloping into the material world and the s\u0101ttvika ego developing into\nthe eleven senses, both require the help of the r\u0101jasa ego for the\nproduction of this development\u201d (_any\u0101bhy\u0101\u1e43 aha\u1e43k\u0101r\u0101bhy\u0101m\nsvak\u0101ryyopajanane r\u0101jas\u0101ha\u1e43k\u016bra\u1e25 sahak\u0101r\u012b bhavati_); and Barabara in his\n_Bh\u0101shya_ writes: \u201cjust as a seed-sprout requires for its growth the\nhelp of water as instrumental cause, so the r\u0101jasa aha\u1e43k\u0101ra (ego) works\nas the accessory cause (_sahak\u0101ri_) for the transformations of s\u0101ttvika\nand t\u0101masa aha\u1e43k\u0101ra into their evolutionary products.\u201d The mode of\nworking of this instrumental cause is described as \u201crajas is the mover.\u201d\nThe r\u0101jasa ego thus moves the sattva part to generate the senses; the\ntamas part generating the gross and subtle matter is also moved by the\nrajas, agent of movement. The r\u0101jasa ego is thus called the common cause\nof the movement of the s\u0101ttvika and the t\u0101masa ego. V\u0101caspati also says:\n\u201cthough rajas has no separate work by itself yet since sattva and tamas\n(which though capable of undergoing modification, do not do their work)\nare actionless in themselves, the agency of rajas lies in this that it\nmoves them both for the production of the effect.\u201d[27] And according as\nthe modifications are s\u0101ttvika, t\u0101masa or r\u0101jasika, the ego which is the\ncause of these different modifications is also called vaik\u0101rika, bh\u016bt\u0101di\nand taijasa. The mahat also as the source of the vaik\u0101rika, taijasa and\nbh\u016bt\u0101di ego may be said to have three aspects.\n\nNow speaking of the relation of the sense faculties with the sense\norgans, we see that the latter, which are made up of the grosser\nelements are the vehicle of the former, for if the latter are injured in\nany way, the former are also necessarily affected.[28]\n\nTo take for example the specific case of the faculty of hearing and its\norgan, we see that the faculty of hearing is seated in the ether\n(_\u0101k\u0101\u015ba_) within our ear-hole. It is here that the power of hearing is\nlocated. When soundness or defect is noticed therein, soundness or\ndefect is noticed in the power of hearing also. When the sounds of\nsolids, etc., are heard, then the power of hearing located in the hollow\nof the ear stands in need of the resonance produced in the \u0101k\u0101\u015ba of the\near.\n\nThis sense of hearing, then, having its origin in the principle of\naha\u1e43k\u0101ra, behaves like iron, and is drawn by the sounds originated and\nlocated in the mouth of the speaker acting as loadstone, and transforms\nthem into its own successive modifications (_v\u1e5btti_) and thus senses the\nsounds of the speaker. And it is for this reason that for every living\ncreature, the perception of sound in external space in the absence of\ndefects is never void of authority. Thus Pancasikha also says, as quoted\nin _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, III. 41:\n\n\u201cTo all those whose organs of hearing are situated in the same place (at\ndifferent times) the \u0101k\u0101\u015ba sustaining the sense of hearing is the same.\u201d\nThe \u0101k\u0101\u015ba, again, in which the power of hearing is seated, is born out\nof the soniferous tanm\u0101tra, and has therefore the quality of sound\ninherent in itself. It is by this sound acting in unison that it takes\nthe sounds of external solids, etc. This then proves that the \u0101k\u0101\u015ba is\nthe substratum of the power of hearing, and also possesses the quality\nof sound. And this sameness of the situation of sound is an indication\nof the existence of \u0101k\u0101\u015ba as that which is the substratum of the\nauditory power (_\u015bruti_) which manifests the sounds of the same class in\n\u0101k\u0101\u015ba. Such a manifestation of sound cannot be without such an auditory\nsense-power. Nor is such an auditory power a quality of p\u1e5bthiv\u012b (earth),\netc., because it cannot be in its own self both the manifestor and the\nmanifested (_vyah\u1e45gya_ and _vya\u00f1jaka_), _Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, III. 41. It\nis the auditory power which manifests all sounds with the help of the\n\u0101k\u0101\u015ba of the sense organ.\n\nThe theory of the gu\u1e47as was accepted by many others outside the\nS\u0101\u1e43khya-Yoga circle and they also offered their opinions on the nature\nof the categories.\n\nThere are thus other views prevalent about the genesis of the senses, to\nwhich it may be worth our while to pay some attention as we pass by.\n\nThe s\u0101ttvika ego in generating the cognitive senses with limited powers\nfor certain specified objects of sense only accounted for their\ndevelopments from itself in accompaniment with the specific tanm\u0101tras.\nThus\n\ns\u0101ttvika ego + sound potential (\u015babda-tanm\u0101tra) = sense of hearing.\n\ns\u0101ttvika ego + touch potential (\u015bpar\u015b-tanm\u0101tra) = sense of touch.\n\ns\u0101ttvika ego + sight potential (\u015br\u016bpa-tanm\u0101tra) = sense of vision.\n\ns\u0101ttvika ego + taste potential (vasa-tanm\u0101tra) = sense of taste.\n\ns\u0101ttvika ego + smell potential (gandha-tanm\u0101tra) = sense of smell.\n\nThe conative sense of speech is developed in association with the sense\nof hearing; that of hand in association with the sense of touch; that of\nfeet in association with the sense of vision; that of upastha in\nassociation with the sense of taste; that of p\u0101yu in association with\nthe sense of smell.\n\nLast of all, the manas is developed from the ego without any\nco-operating or accompanying cause.\n\nThe Naiy\u0101yikas, however, think that the senses are generated by the\ngross elements, the ear for example by \u0101k\u0101\u015ba, the touch by air and so\nforth. But Lok\u0101c\u0101ryya in his _Tattvatraya_ holds that the senses are not\ngenerated by gross matter but are rather sustained and strengthened by\nit.\n\nThere are others who think that the ego is the instrumental and that the\ngross elements are the material causes in the production of the senses.\n\nThe view of the _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ is, I believe, now quite clear since we\nsee that the mahat through the asmit\u0101 generates from the latter (as\ndifferentiations from it, though it itself exists as integrated in the\nmahat), the senses, and their corresponding gross elements.\n\nBefore proceeding further to trace the development of the bh\u016bt\u0101di on the\ntanm\u0101tric side, I think it is best to refer to the views about the\nsupposed difference between the Yoga and the views of the S\u0101\u1e43khya works\nabout the evolution of the categories. Now according to the Yoga view\ntwo parallel lines of evolution start from mahat, one of which develops\ninto the ego, manas, the five cognitive and the five conative senses,\nwhile on the other side it develops into the five grosser elements\nthrough the five tanm\u0101tras which are directly produced from mahat\nthrough the medium aha\u1e43k\u0101ra.\n\nThus the view as found in the Yoga works may be tabulated thus:\u2014\n\n                                   Prak\u1e5bti\n                                      |\n                             Mahat or Asmit\u0101m\u0101tra\n                                      |\n                           +----------+---------+\n                           |                    |\n                        Asmit\u0101             Tanm\u0101tras--5\n                           |                    |\n                        ---+---        ---------+--------\n                       11 senses        5 gross elements\n\nThe view of the \u015aa\u1e43khya works may be tabulated thus:--\n\n                                   Prak\u1e5bti\n                                      |\n                                    Mahat\n                                      |\n                                     Ego\n                                      |\n                          +-----------+--------+\n                          |                    |\n                     11 senses            5 Tanm\u0101tras\n                                               |\n                                       5 gross elements\n\nThe place in the _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ which refers to this genesis is that\nunder _vi\u015besh\u0101vi\u015beshali\u1e45gam\u0101tr\u0101li\u1e45g\u0101ni gu\u1e47aparv\u0101\u1e47i_, II. 19. There it\nsays that the four bh\u016btas are ether, air, fire, water and earth. These\nare the vi\u015beshas (specialised modifications) of the unspecialised\nmodifications the tanm\u0101tras of sound, touch, colour, taste and smell. So\nalso are the cognitive senses of hearing, touch, eye, tongue, and nose\nand the conative senses of speech, hand, feet, anus and the generative\norgan. The eleventh one manas (the co-ordinating organ) has for its\nobject the objects of all the above ten senses. So these are the\nspecialised modifications (_vi\u015beshas_) of the unspecialised (avi\u015besha)\nasmit\u0101. The gu\u1e47as have these sixteen kinds of specialised modifications\n(_vi\u015beshapari\u1e47\u0101ma_). The six unspecialised modifications are the sound\ntanm\u0101tra, touch tanm\u0101tra, colour tanm\u0101tra, taste tanm\u0101tra and smell\ntanm\u0101tra. These tanm\u0101tras respectively contain one, two, three, four,\nand five special characteristics. The sixth unspecialised modification\nis asmit\u0101m\u0101tra. These are the six avi\u015besha evolutions of the pure being,\nthe mahat. The category of mahat is merely a sign beyond the avi\u015beshas\nand it is there that these exist and develop.\n\nIn this _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ the fully specialised ones, vi\u015beshas, the\ngrosser elements are said to have been derived from the tanm\u0101tras and\nthe senses and manas, the faculty of reflection are said to have been\nspecialised from the ego or asmit\u0101. The tanm\u0101tras, however, have not\nbeen derived from the ego or asmit\u0101 here. But they together with asmit\u0101\nare spoken of as the six slightly specialised ones, the five being the\nfive tanm\u0101tras and the sixth one being the ego. These six avi\u015beshas are\nthe specialisations of the mahat, the great egohood of pure Be-ness. It\ntherefore appears that the six avi\u015beshas are directly derived from the\nmahat, after which the ego develops into the eleven senses and the\ntanm\u0101tras into the five gross elements in three different lines.\n\nBut let us see how _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_ explains the point here:\u2014\n\n\u201cBut like the senses the tanm\u0101tras are also special modifications of the\naha\u1e43k\u0101ra having specially modified characteristics such as sound, touch,\netc., why, therefore, are they not mentioned as special modifications\n(_vi\u015beshas_)? The answer is that those only are mentioned as special\nmodification which are ultimate special modifications. The tanm\u0101tras are\nindeed the special modifications of the ego, but they themselves produce\nfurther special modifications, the bh\u016btas. The avi\u015beshas are explained\nas the six avi\u015beshas. The tanm\u0101tras are generated from the t\u0101masa\naha\u1e43k\u0101ra gradually through sound, etc. The category of mahat which is\nthe ground of all modifications, called also the buddhi, has six\nevolutionary products called the avi\u015beshas. Though the mahat and the\nprak\u1e5bti may also be regarded as the root-causes out of which the\ntanm\u0101tras have evolved, yet the word avi\u015besha is used as a technical\nterm having a special application to the six avi\u015beshas only.\u201d The\nmodifications of these are from the buddhi through the intermediate\nstage of the aha\u1e43k\u0101ra, as has been explained in the _Bh\u0101shya_, I. 45.\n\nThus we see that the _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_ says that the _Bh\u0101shya_ is here\ndescribing the modifications of buddhi in two distinct classes, the\navi\u015beshas and the vi\u015beshas; and that the mahat has been spoken of as the\nsource of all the avi\u015beshas, the five tanm\u0101tras and the ego; strictly\nspeaking, however, the genesis of the tanm\u0101tras from mahat takes place\nthrough the ego and in association with the ego, for it has been so\ndescribed in the _Bh\u0101shya_, I. 45.\n\nN\u0101ge\u015ba in explaining this _Bh\u0101shya_ only repeats the view of\n_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_.\n\nNow let us refer to the _Bh\u0101shya_ of I. 45, alluded to by the\n_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_: \u201cThe gradual series of subtler causes proceeds up to\nthe ali\u1e45ga or the prak\u1e5bti. The earth atom has the smell tanm\u0101tra as its\nsubtle cause; the water atom has the taste tanm\u0101tra; the air atom the\ntouch tanm\u0101tra; the \u0101k\u0101\u015ba atom the sound tanm\u0101tra; and of these aha\u1e43k\u0101ra\nis the subtle cause; and of this the mahat is the subtle cause.\u201d Here by\nsubtle cause (_s\u016bkshma_) it is up\u0101d\u0101nak\u0101ra\u1e47a or material cause which is\nmeant; so the _Bh\u0101shya_ further says: \u201cIt is true that purusha is the\nsubtlest of all. But yet as prak\u1e5bti is subtler than the mahat, it is not\nin that sense that purusha is subtler than prak\u1e5bti for purusha is only\nan instrumental cause of the evolution of mahat, but not its material\ncause.\u201d I believe it is quite clear that aha\u1e43k\u0101ra is spoken of here as\nthe _s\u016bkshma anvayik\u0101rana_ of the tanm\u0101tras. This anvayik\u0101ra\u1e47a is the\nsame as up\u0101d\u0101na (material cause) as V\u0101caspati calls it. Now again in the\n_Bh\u0101shya_ of the same _s\u016btra_ II. 19 later on we see the li\u1e45ga or the\nmahat is the stage next to prak\u1e5bti, it is differentiated from it though\nstill remaining integrated in the regular order of evolution. The six\navi\u015beshas are again differentiated while still remaining integrated in\nthe mahat in the order of evolution (_pari\u1e47\u0101makramaniyama_).\n\nThe mahat tattva (li\u1e45ga) is associated with the prak\u1e5bti (ali\u1e45ga). Its\ndevelopment is thus to be considered as the production of a\ndifferentiation as integrated within the prak\u1e5bti. The six avi\u015beshas are\nalso to be considered as the production of successive differentiations\nas integrated within the mahat.\n\nThe words _sa\u1e43s\u1e5bsh\u1e6da vivicyante_ are the most important here for they\nshow us the real nature of the transformations. \u201c_Sa\u1e43s\u1e5bsht\u0101_\u201d means\nintegrated and \u201c_vivicyante_\u201d means differentiated. This shows that the\norder of evolution as found in the S\u0101\u1e43khya works (viz. mahat from\nprak\u1e5bti, aha\u1e43k\u0101ra from mahat and the eleven senses and the tanm\u0101tras\nfrom aha\u1e43k\u0101ra) is true only in this sense that these modifications of\naha\u1e43k\u0101ra take place directly as differentiations of characters in the\nbody of mahat. As these differentiations take place through aha\u1e43k\u0101ra as\nthe first moment in the series of transformations it is said that the\ntransformations take place directly from aha\u1e43k\u0101ra; whereas when stress\nis laid on the other aspect it appears that the transformations are but\ndifferentiations as integrated in the body of the mahat, and thus it is\nalso said that from mahat the six avi\u015beshas\u2014namely, aha\u1e43k\u0101ra and the\nfive tanm\u0101tras\u2014come out. This conception of evolution as differentiation\nwithin integration bridges the gulf between the views of Yoga and the\nSa\u1e43khya works. We know that the tanm\u0101tras are produced from the t\u0101masa\naha\u1e43k\u0101ra. This aha\u1e43k\u0101ra is nothing but the t\u0101masa side of mahat roused\ninto creative activity by rajas. The s\u0101ttvika aha\u1e43k\u0101ra is given as a\nseparate category producing the senses, whereas the tamas as bh\u016bt\u0101di\nproduces the tanm\u0101tras from its disturbance while held up within the\nmahat.[29]\n\nN\u0101ge\u015ba in the _Ch\u0101y\u0101-vy\u0101khy\u0101_ of II. 19, however, follows the S\u0101\u1e43khya\nexplanation. He says: \u201cThe five tanm\u0101tras having in order one, two,\nthree, four and five characteristics are such that the preceding ones\nare the causes of the succeeding ones. The \u015babdatanm\u0101tra has only the\ncharacteristic of sound, the spar\u015batanm\u0101tra of sound and touch and so\non.... All these tanm\u0101tras are produced from the t\u0101masa aha\u1e43k\u0101ra in the\norder of \u015babda, spar\u015ba, etc.\u201d This ignores the interpretation of the\n_Vy\u0101s\u0101-bh\u0101shya_ that the tanm\u0101tras are differentiations within the\nintegrated whole of mahat through the intermediary stage of the t\u0101masa\naha\u1e43k\u0101ra.\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER VI\n                   EVOLUTION AND CHANGE OF QUALITIES\n\n\nThe order of the evolution of the tanm\u0101tras as here referred to is as\nfollows:\u2014\n\n                        Bh\u016bt\u0101di (t\u0101masa aha\u1e43k\u0101ra)\n                            |\n                          \u015aabdatanm\u0101tra\n                              |\n                            Spar\u015batanm\u0101tra\n                                |\n                              R\u016bpatanm\u0101tra\n                                  |\n                                Rasatanm\u0101tra\n                                    |\n                                  Gandhatanm\u0101tra\n\nThe evolution of the tanm\u0101tras has been variously described in the\nPur\u0101\u1e47as and the Sm\u1e5bti literature. These divergent views can briefly be\nbrought under two headings: those which derive the tanm\u0101tras from the\nbh\u00fbtas and those which derive them from the aha\u1e43k\u0101ra and the bh\u00fbtas from\nthem. Some of these schools have been spoken of in the Barabara Muni\u2019s\ncommentary on the _Tattvatraya_\u2014a treatise on the R\u0101m\u0101nuja\nPhilosophy\u2014and have been already explained in a systematic way by Dr. B.\nN. Seal. I therefore refrain from repeating them needlessly. About the\nderivation of the tanm\u0101tras all the other S\u0101\u1e43khya treatises, the\n_K\u0101rik\u0101_, the _Kaumud\u012b_, the _Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, the _S\u016btra_ and\n_Pravacana-bh\u0101shya_, the _Siddh\u0101ntacandrik\u0101_, _S\u016btr\u0101rthabodhin\u012b_, the\n_Rajam\u0101rta\u1e47\u1e0da_ and the _Ma\u1e47iprabh\u0101_ seem to be silent. Further speaking\nof the tanm\u0101tras, Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu says that the tanm\u0101tras exist only in\nunspecialised forms; they therefore can be neither felt nor perceived in\nany way by the senses of ordinary men. This is that indeterminate state\nof matter in which they can never be distinguished one from the other,\nand they cannot be perceived to be possessed of different qualities or\nspecialised in any way. It is for this that they are called tanm\u0101tras,\ni.e. their only specialization is a mere thatness. The Yogins alone\nperceive them.\n\nNow turning towards the further evolution of the grosser elements from\nthe tanm\u0101tras, we see that there are great divergences of view here\nalso, some of which are shown below. Thus V\u0101caspati says: \u201cThe earth\natom is produced from the five tanm\u0101tras with a predominance of the\nsmell tanm\u0101tra, the water atom from the four tanm\u0101tras excepting the\nsmell tanm\u0101tra with a preponderance of the taste tanm\u0101tra, and so on\u201d\n(I. 44).\n\nThus here we find that the \u0101k\u0101\u015ba atom (a\u1e47u) has been generated simply by\nthe \u0101k\u0101\u015ba tanm\u0101tra; the v\u0101yu atom has been generated by two tanm\u0101tras,\n\u015babda and spar\u015ba, of which the spar\u015ba appears there as the chief. The\ntejas atom has been developed from the \u015babda, spar\u015ba and r\u00fbpa tanm\u0101tras,\nthough the r\u00fbpa is predominant in the group. The ap atom has been\ndeveloped from the four tanm\u0101tras, \u015babda, spar\u015ba, r\u00fbpa and rasa, though\nrasa is predominant in the group, and the earth or kshiti atom has been\ndeveloped from the five tanm\u0101tras, though the gandha tanm\u0101tra is\npredominant in the group.\n\nNow the _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_ agrees with V\u0101caspati in all these details, but\ndiffers from him only in maintaining that the \u0101k\u0101\u015ba atom has been\ngenerated from the \u015babda tanm\u0101tra with an accretion from bh\u016bt\u0101di,\nwhereas V\u0101caspati says that the \u0101k\u0101\u015ba atom is generated simply by the\n\u0101k\u0101\u015ba tanm\u0101tra.[30]\n\nN\u0101ge\u015ba, however, takes a slightly different view and says that to\nproduce the gross atoms from the tanm\u0101tras, an accretion of bh\u016bt\u0101di as\nan accompanying agent is necessary at every step; so that we see that\nthe v\u0101yu atom is produced from these three: \u015babda + spar\u015ba + accretion\nfrom bh\u016bt\u0101di. Tejas atom = \u015babda + \u015bpar\u015ba + r\u016bpa + accretion from\nbh\u016bt\u0101di. Ap atom = \u015babda + \u015bpar\u015ba + r\u016bpa + rasa + accretion from\nbh\u016bt\u0101di. Kshiti atom = \u015babda + \u015bpar\u015ba + r\u016bpa + rasa + gandha + accretion\nfrom bh\u016bt\u0101di.\n\nI refrain from giving the _Vish\u1e47u Pur\u0101\u1e47a_ view which has also been\nquoted in the _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, and the view of a certain school of\nVed\u0101ntists mentioned in the _Tattva-nir\u016bpa\u1e47a_ and referred to and\ndescribed in the _Tattvatraya_, as Dr. B. N. Seal has already described\nthem in his article.\n\nWe see thus that from bh\u016bt\u0101di come the five tanm\u0101tras which can be\ncompared to the Vai\u015beshika atoms as they have no parts and neither\ngrossness nor visible differentiation.[31] Some differentiation has of\ncourse already begun in the tanm\u0101tras, as they are called \u015babda, \u015bpar\u015ba,\nr\u016bpa, rasa and gandha, which therefore may be said to belong to a class\nakin to the grosser elements of \u0101k\u0101\u015ba, v\u0101yu, tejas, ap and kshiti.[32]\n\nThe next one, the param\u0101\u1e47u (atom), which is gross in its nature and is\ngenerated from the tanm\u0101tras which exist in it as parts\n(_tanm\u0101tr\u0101vayava_) may be compared with the trasare\u1e47u of the\nVai\u015beshikas. Thus the _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_ says: \u201cthis is called param\u0101\u1e47u by\nthe Vai\u015beshikas. We however call the subtlest part of the visible earth,\nearth atoms\u201d (IV. 14). The doctrine of atoms is recognised both in the\n_Yoga-s\u016btr\u0101s_ (I. 46) and the _Bh\u0101shya_ (III. 52, IV. 14, etc.).\n\nWhether S\u0101\u1e43khya admitted the param\u0101\u1e47us (atoms) or not cannot be\ndefinitely settled. The _S\u0101\u1e43khya-k\u0101rik\u0101_ does not mention the param\u0101\u1e47us,\nbut Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu thinks that the word \u201c_s\u016bkshma_\u201d in _K\u0101rik\u0101_, 39,\nmeans param\u0101\u1e47us (_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, IV. 14). Though the word param\u0101\u1e47u is\nnot mentioned in the _K\u0101rik\u0101_, I can hardly suppose that S\u0101\u1e43khya did not\nadmit it in the sense in which Yoga did. For it does not seem probable\nthat S\u0101\u1e43khya should think that by the combination of the subtle\ntanm\u0101tras we could all at once have the bigger lumps of bh\u016bta without\nthere being any particles. Moreover, since the Yoga param\u0101\u1e47us are the\nfinest visible particles of matter it could not have been denied by\nS\u0101\u1e43khya. The supposition of some German scholars that S\u0101\u1e43khya did not\nadmit the param\u0101\u1e47us does not seem very plausible. Bhikshu in\n_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, III. 52, says that the gu\u1e47as are in reality Vai\u015beshika\natoms.\n\nThe third form is gross air, fire, water, etc., which is said to belong\nto the mahat (gross) class. I cannot express it better than by quoting a\npassage from _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, IV. 4: \u201cThe _Bh\u0101shya_ holds that in the\ntanm\u0101tras there exists the specific differentiation that constitutes the\nfive tanm\u0101tras, the kshiti atom is generated and by the conglomeration\nof these gross atoms gross earth is formed. So again by the combination\nof the four tanm\u0101tras the water atom is formed and the conglomeration of\nthese water atoms makes gross water.\u201d\n\n\u201cIt should be noted here: since the _Bh\u0101shya_ holds that the tanm\u0101tras\nof sound, etc., are of the same class as the corresponding gross\nelements it may be assumed that the combining tanm\u0101tras possess the\nclass characteristics which are made manifest in gross elements by\nhardness, smoothness, etc.\u201d Bhikshu holds that since S\u0101\u1e43khya and Yoga\nare similar (_sam\u0101natantra_) this is to be regarded as being also the\nS\u0101\u1e43khya view.\n\nThere is, however, another measure which is called the measure of parama\nmahat, which belongs to \u0101k\u0101\u015ba for example.\n\nNow these param\u0101\u1e47us or atoms are not merely atoms of matter but they\ncontain within themselves those particular qualities by virtue of which\nthey appear, as pleasant, unpleasant or passive to us. If we have\nexpressed ourselves clearly, I believe it has been shown that when the\ninner and the outer proceed from one source, the ego and the external\nworld do not altogether differ in nature from the inner; both have been\nformed by the collocation of the gu\u1e47as (_sarvamida\u1e43 gu\u1e47\u0101n\u0101\u1e43\nsannive\u015bavisesham\u0101tram_). The same book which in the inner microcosm is\nwritten in the language of ideas has been in the external world written\nin the language of matter. So in the external world we have all the\ngrounds of our inner experience, cognitive as well as emotional,\npleasurable as well as painful. The modifications of the external world\nare only translated into ideas and feelings; therefore these param\u0101\u1e47us\nare spoken of as endowed with feelings.\n\nThere is another difference between the tanm\u0101tras and the param\u0101\u1e47us. The\nformer cannot be perceived to be endowed with the feeling elements as\nthe latter. Some say, however, that it is not true that the tanm\u0101tras\nare not endowed with the feeling elements, but they cannot be perceived\nby any save the Yogins; thus it is said: _tanm\u0101tr\u0101\u1e47\u0101mapi\nparasparavy\u0101v\u1e5bttasvabh\u0101vatvamastyeva tacca yogim\u0101tragamyam_. The\ntanm\u0101tras also possess differentiated characters, but they can be\nperceived only by the Yogins; but this is not universally admitted.\n\nNow these param\u0101\u1e47us cannot further be evolved into any other different\nkind of existence or tattv\u0101ntara.[33] We see that the param\u0101\u1e47us though\nthey have been formed from the tanm\u0101tras resemble them only in a very\nremote way and are therefore placed in a separate stage of evolution.\n\nWith the bh\u016btas we have the last stage of evolution of the gu\u1e47as. The\ncourse of evolution, however, does not cease here, but continues\nceaselessly, though by its process no new stage of existence is\ngenerated, but the product of the evolution is such that in it the\nproperties of the gross elements which compose its constitution can be\nfound directly. This is what is called _dharmapari\u1e47\u0101ma_, as\ndistinguished from the _tattv\u0101ntara-pari\u1e47\u0101ma_ spoken above. The\nevolution of the vi\u015beshas from the avi\u015beshas is always styled\ntattv\u0101ntara-pari\u1e47\u0101ma, as opposed to the evolution that takes place among\nthe vi\u015beshas themselves, which is called _dharmapari\u1e47\u0101ma_ or evolution\nby change of qualities. Now these atoms or param\u0101\u1e47us of kshiti, ap,\ntejas, marut or \u0101k\u0101\u015ba conglomerate together and form all sentient or\nnon-sentient bodies in the world. The different atoms of earth, air,\nfire, water, etc., conglomerate together and form the different animate\nbodies such as cow, etc., or inanimate bodies such as jug, etc., and\nvegetables like the tree, etc. These bodies are built up by the\nconglomerated units of the atoms in such a way that they are almost in a\nstate of combination which has been styled _ayutasiddh\u0101vayava_. In such\na combination the parts do not stand independently, but only hide\nthemselves as it were in order to manifest the whole body, so that by\nthe conglomeration of the particles we have what may be called a body,\nwhich is regarded as quite a different thing from the atoms of which it\nis composed. These bodies change with the different sorts of change or\narrangement of the particles, according to which the body may be spoken\nof as \u201cone,\u201d \u201clarge,\u201d \u201csmall,\u201d \u201ctangible\u201d or \u201cpossessing\u201d the quality of\naction. Some philosophers hold the view that a body is really nothing\nbut the conglomeration of the atoms; but they must be altogether wrong\nhere since they have no right to ignore the \u201cbody,\u201d which appears before\nthem with all its specific qualities and attributes; moreover, if they\nignore the body they have to ignore almost everything, for the atoms\nthemselves are not visible.\n\nAgain, these atoms, though so much unlike the Vai\u015beshika atoms since\nthey contain tanm\u0101tras of a different nature as their constituents and\nthus differ from the simpler atoms of the Vai\u015beshikas, compose the\nconstituents of all inorganic, organic or animal bodies in such a way\nthat there is no break of harmony\u2014no opposition between them;\u2014but, on\nthe contrary, when any one of the gu\u1e47as existing in the atoms and their\nconglomerations becomes prominent, the other gu\u1e47as though their\nfunctions are different from it, yet do not run counter to the prominent\ngu\u1e47as, but conjointly with them, help to form the specific modification\nfor the experiences of the purusha. In the production of a thing, the\ndifferent gu\u1e47as do not choose different independent courses for their\nevolution, but join together and effectuate themselves in the evolution\nof a single product. Thus we see also that when the atoms of different\ngross elements possessing different properties and attributes coalesce,\ntheir difference of attributes does not produce confusion, but they\nunite in the production of the particular substances by a common\nteleological purpose (see _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, IV. 14).\n\nWe thus see that the bodies or things composed by the collocation of the\natoms in one sense differ from the atoms themselves and in another are\nidentical with the atoms themselves. We see therefore that the\nappearance of the atoms as bodies or things differs with the change of\nposition of the atoms amongst themselves. So we can say that the change\nof the appearance of things and bodies only shows the change of the\ncollocation of the atoms, there being always a change of appearance in\nthe bodies consequent on every change in the position of the atoms. The\nformer therefore is only an explicit appearance of the change that takes\nplace in the substance itself; for the appearance of a thing is only an\nexplicit aspect of the very selfsame thing\u2014the atoms; thus the _Bh\u0101shya_\nsays: _dharmisvar\u016bpam\u0101tro hi dharma\u1e25, dharmivrikriy\u0101 eva esh\u0101\ndharmadv\u0101r\u0101 prapa\u00f1cyate_, i.e. a dharma (quality) is merely the nature\nof the dharmin (substance), and it is the changes of the dharmin that\nare made explicit by the dharmas.[34] Often it happens that the change\nof appearance of a thing or a body, a tree or a piece of cloth, for\nexample, can be marked only after a long interval. This, however, only\nshows that the atoms of the body had been continually changing and\nconsequently the appearance of the body or the thing also had been\ncontinually changing; for otherwise we can in no way account for the\nsudden change of appearance. All bodies are continually changing the\nconstituent collocation of atoms and their appearances. In the smallest\nparticle of time or ksha\u1e47a the whole universe undergoes a change. Each\nmoment or the smallest particle of time is only the manifestation of\nthat particular change. Time therefore has not a separate existence in\nthis philosophy as in the Vai\u015beshika, but it is only identical with the\nsmallest amount of change\u2014viz. that of an atom of its own amount of\nspace. Now here the appearance is called the dharma, and that particular\narrangement of atoms or gu\u1e47as which is the basis of the particular\nappearance is called the dharmin. The change of appearance is therefore\ncalled the dharma-pari\u1e47\u0101ma.[35]\n\nAgain this change of appearance can be looked at from two other aspects\nwhich though not intrinsically different from the change of appearance\nhave their own special points of view which make them remarkable. These\nare _laksha\u1e47a-pari\u1e47\u0101ma_ and _avasth\u0101-pari\u1e47\u0101ma_. Taking the particular\ncollocation of atoms in a body for review, we see that all the\nsubsequent changes that take place in it exist in it only in a latent\nway in it which will be manifested in future. All the previous changes\nof the collocating atoms are not also lost but exist only in a sublatent\nway in the particular collocation of atoms present before us. For the\npast changes are by no means destroyed but are preserved in the peculiar\nand particular collocation of atoms of the present moment. For had not\nthe past changes taken place, the present could not appear. The present\nhad held itself hidden in the past just as the future is hidden within\nthe present. It therefore only comes into being with the unfolding of\nthe past, which therefore exists only in a sublatent form in it.\n\nIt is on account of this that we see that a body comes into being and\ndies away. Though this birth or death is really subsumed the change of\nappearance yet it has its own special aspect, on account of which it has\nbeen given a separate name as laksha\u1e47a-pari\u1e47\u0101ma. It considers the three\nstages of an appearance\u2014the unmanifested when it exists in the future,\nthe manifested moment of the present, and the past when it has been\nmanifested\u2014lost to view but preserved and retained in all the onward\nstages of the evolution. Thus when we say that a thing has not yet come\ninto being, that it has just come into being, and that it is no longer,\nwe refer to this laksha\u1e47a-pari\u1e47\u0101ma which records the history of the\nthing in future, present and past, which are only the three different\nmoments of the same thing according to its different characters, as\nunmanifested, manifested and manifested in the past but conserved.\n\nNow it often happens that though the appearance of a thing is constantly\nchanging owing to the continual change of the atoms that compose it, yet\nthe changes are so fine and infinitesimal that they cannot be marked by\nanyone except the Yogins; for though structural changes may be going on\ntending towards the final passing away of that structure and body into\nanother structure and body, which greatly differs from it, yet they may\nnot be noticed by us, who can take note of the bigger changes alone.\nTaking therefore two remarkable stages of things, the difference between\nwhich may be so notable as to justify us in calling the later the\ndissolution or destruction of the former, we assert that the thing has\nsuffered growth and decay in the interval, during which the actual was\npassing into the sublatent and the potential was tending towards\nactualization. This is what is called the avasth\u0101-pari\u1e47\u0101ma, or change of\ncondition, which, however, does not materially differ from the\nlaksha\u1e47a-pari\u1e47\u0101ma and can thus be held to be a mode of it. It is on\naccount of this that a substance is called new or old, grown or decayed.\nThus in explaining the illustration given in the _Bh\u0101shya_, III. 13:\n\u201cthere is avasth\u0101-pari\u1e47\u0101ma. At the moments of cessation the potencies of\ncessation become stronger and those of ordinary experience weaker.\u201d The\n_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_ says: \u201cThe strength and weakness of the two potencies is\nlike the newness or oldness of a jug; growth and decay being the same as\norigination and decease, there is no difference here from\n_laksha\u1e47a-pari\u1e47\u0101ma_.\u201d\n\nIt is now time for us to examine once more the relation of dharmin,\nsubstance, and dharma, its quality or appearance.\n\nDharmin, or substance, is that which remains common to the latent (as\nhaving passed over or _\u015b\u0101nta_), the rising (the present or _udita_) and\nthe unpredicable (future or _avyapade\u015bya_) characteristic qualities of\nthe substance.\n\nSubstance (take for example, earth) has the power of existing in the\nform of particles of dust, a lump or a jug by which water may be\ncarried. Now taking the stage of lump for examination we may think of\nits previous stage, that of particles of dust, as being latent, and its\nfuture stage as jug as the unpredicable. The earth we see here to be\ncommon to all these three stages which have come into being by its own\nactivity and consequent changes. Earth here is the common quality which\nremains unchanged in all these stages, and so relatively constant among\nits changes as particles, lump and jug. This earth therefore is regarded\nas the dharmin, characterised one, the substance; and its stages as its\ndharma or qualities. When this dharmin, or substance, undergoes a change\nfrom a stage of lump to a stage of jug, it undergoes what is called\n_dharma-pari\u1e47\u0101ma_ or change of quality.\n\nBut its dharma, as the shape of the jug may be thought to have itself\nundergone a change\u2014inasmuch as it has now come into being, from a state\nof relative non-being, latency or unpredicability. This is called the\nlaksha\u1e47a-pari\u1e47\u0101ma of the dharma or qualities as constituting a jug. This\njug is again suffering another change as new or old according as it is\njust produced or is gradually running towards its dissolution, and this\nis called the avasth\u0101-pari\u1e47\u0101ma or change of condition. These three,\nhowever, are not separate from the dharma-pari\u1e47\u0101ma, but are only aspects\nof it; so it may be said that the dharmin or substance directly suffers\nthe dharma-pari\u1e47\u0101ma and indirectly the laksha\u1e47a and the\navasth\u0101-pari\u1e47\u0101ma. The dharma, however, changes and the laksha\u1e47a-pari\u1e47\u0101ma\ncan be looked at from another point of view, that of change of state,\nviz. growth and decay. Thus we see that though the atoms of kshiti, ap,\netc., remain unchanged, they are constantly suffering changes from the\ninorganic to plants and animals, and from thence again back to the\ninorganic. There is thus a constant circulation of changes in which the\ndifferent atoms of kshiti, ap, tejas, v\u0101yu and \u0101k\u0101\u015ba remaining\nthemselves unchanged are suffering dharma-pari\u1e47\u0101ma as they are changed\nfrom the inorganic to plants and animals and back again to the\ninorganic. These different states or dharmas (as inorganic, etc.),\nagain, according as they are not yet, now, or no longer or passed over,\nare suffering the laksha\u1e47a-pari\u1e47\u0101ma. There is also the avasth\u0101-pari\u1e47\u0101ma\nof these states according as any one of them (the plant state for\nexample) is growing or suffering decay towards its dissolution.\n\nThis circulation of cosmic matter in general applies also to all\nparticular things, such as the jug, the cloth, etc.; the order of\nevolution here will be that of powdered particles of earth, lump of\nearth, the earthen jug, the broken halves of the jug, and again the\npowdered earth. As the whole substance has only one identical evolution,\nthese different states only happen in order of succession, the\noccurrence of one characteristic being displaced by another\ncharacteristic which comes after it immediately. We thus see that one\nsubstance may undergo endless changes of characteristic in order of\nsuccession; and along with the change of characteristic or dharma we\nhave the laksha\u1e47a-pari\u1e47\u0101ma and the avasth\u0101-pari\u1e47\u0101ma as old or new, which\nis evidently one of infinitesimal changes of growth and decay. Thus\nV\u0101caspati gives the following beautiful example: \u201cEven the most\ncarefully preserved rice in the granary becomes after long years so\nbrittle that it crumbles into atoms. This change cannot happen to new\nrice all on a sudden. Therefore we have to admit an order of successive\nchanges\u201d (_Tattvavaiv\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, III. 15).\n\nWe now see that substance has neither past nor future; appearances or\nqualities only are manifested in time, by virtue of which substance is\nalso spoken of as varying and changing temporally, just as a line\nremains unchanged in itself but acquires different significances\naccording as one or two zeros are placed on its right side.\nSubstance\u2014the atoms of kshiti, ap, tejas, marut, vyoman, etc., by\nvarious changes of quality appear as the manifold varieties of cosmical\nexistence. There is no intrinsic difference between one thing and\nanother, but only changes of character of one and the same thing; thus\nthe gross elemental atoms like water and earth particles acquire various\nqualities and appear as the various juices of all fruits and herbs. Now\nin analogy with the arguments stated above, it will seem that even a\nqualified thing or appearance may be relatively regarded as substance,\nwhen it is seen to remain common to various other modifications of that\nappearance itself. Thus a jug, which may remain common in all its\nmodifications of colour, may be regarded relatively as the dharmin or\nsubstance of all these special appearances or modifications of the same\nappearance.\n\nWe remember that the gu\u1e47as, which are the final substratum of all the\ngrosser particles, are always in a state of commotion and always\nevolving in the manner previously stated, for the sake of the experience\nand final realisation of the parusha, the only object or end of the\nprak\u1e5bti. Thus the _Bh\u0101shya_, III. 13, says: \u201cSo it is the nature of the\ngu\u1e47as that there cannot remain even a moment without the evolutionary\nchanges of dharma, laksha\u1e47a and avasth\u0101; movement is the characteristic\nof the gu\u1e47as. The nature of the gu\u1e47as is the cause of their constant\nmovement.\u201d\n\nAlthough the pioneers of modern scientific evolution have tried to\nobserve scientifically some of the stages of the growth of the inorganic\nand of the animal worlds into the man, yet they do not give any reason\nfor it. Theirs is more an experimental assertion of facts than a\nmetaphysical account of evolution. According to Darwin the general form\nof the evolutionary process is that which is accomplished by \u201cvery\nslight variations which are accumulated by the effect of natural\nselection.\u201d And according to a later theory, we see that a new species\nis constituted all at once by the simultaneous appearance of several new\ncharacteristics very different from the old. But why this accidental\nvariation, this seeming departure from the causal chain, comes into\nbeing, the evolutionists cannot explain. But the S\u0101\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala\ndoctrine explains it from the standpoint of teleology or the final goal\ninherent in all matter, so that it may be serviceable to the purusha. To\nbe serviceable to the purusha is the one moral purpose in all prak\u1e5bti\nand its manifestations in the whole material world, which guide the\ncourse and direction of the smallest particle of matter. From the\nscientific point of view, the S\u0101\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala doctrine is very much in\nthe same position as modern science, for it does not explain the cause\nof the accidental variation noticed in all the stages of evolutionary\nprocess from any physical point of view based on the observation of\nfacts.\n\nBut it does much credit to the P\u0101ta\u00f1jala doctrines that they explain\nthis accidental variation, this _avyapade\u015byatva_ or unpredicability of\nthe onward course of evolution from a moral point of view, that of\nteleology, the serviceability of the purusha. They found, however, that\nthis teleology should not be used to usurp the whole nature and function\nof matter. We find that the atoms are always moving by virtue of the\nrajas or energy, and it is to this movement of the atoms in space that\nall the products of evolution are due. We have found that the difference\nbetween the juices of Coco-nut, Palm, Bel, Tinduka (Diospyros\nEmbryopteries), \u0100malaka (Emblic Myrobalan) can be accounted for by the\nparticular and peculiar arrangement of the atoms of earth and water\nalone, by their stress and strain; and we see also that the evolution of\nthe organic from the inorganic is due to this change of position of the\natoms themselves; for the unit of change is the change in an atom of its\nown dimension of spatial position. There is always the transformation of\nenergy from the inorganic to the organic and back again from the\norganic. Thus the differences among things are solely due to the\ndifferent stages which they occupy in the scale of evolution, as\ndifferent expressions of the transformation of energy; but virtually\nthere is no intrinsic difference among things _sarva\u1e43 sarv\u0101tmaka\u1e43_; the\nchange of the collocation of atoms only changes potentiality into\nactuality, for there is potentiality of everything for every thing\neverywhere throughout this changing world. Thus V\u0101caspati writes: \u201cThe\nwater possessing taste, colour, touch and sound and the earth possessing\nsmell, taste, colour, touch, and sound suffer an infinite variety of\nchanges as roots, flowers, fruits, leaves and their specific tastes and\nother qualities. The water and the earth which do not possess these\nqualities cannot have them, for we have proved that what is non-existent\ncannot come into being. The trees and plants produce the varied tastes\nand colours in animals, for it is by eating these that they acquire such\nrichness of colour, etc. Animal products can again produce changes in\nplant bodies. By sprinkling blood on it a pomegranate may be made as big\nas a palm\u201d (_Tattvavai\u015barad\u012b_, III. 14).\n\nLooked at from the point of view of the gu\u1e47as, there is no intrinsic\ndifference between things, though there are a thousand manifestations of\ndifferences, according to time, place, form and causality. The\nexpressions of the gu\u1e47as, and the manifestations of the transformations\nof energy differ according to time, place, shape, or causality\u2014these are\nthe determining circumstances and environments which determine the modes\nof the evolutionary process; surrounding environments are also involved\nin determining this change, and it is said that two \u0100malaka fruits\nplaced in two different places undergo two different sorts of changes in\nconnection with the particular spots in which they are placed, and that\nif anybody interchanges them a Yogin can recognise and distinguish the\none from the other by seeing the changes that the fruits have undergone\nin connection with their particular points of space. Thus the _Bh\u0101shya_\nsays: \u201cTwo \u0100malaka fruits having the same characteristic genus and\nspecies, their situation in two different points of space contributes to\ntheir specific distinction of development, so that they may be\nidentified as this and that. When an \u0100malaka is brought from a distance\nto a man previously inattentive to it, he naturally cannot distinguish\nthis \u0100malaka as being the distant one which has been brought before him\nwithout his knowledge. But right knowledge should be competent to\ndiscern the distinction; and the s\u016btra says that the place associated\nwith one \u0100malaka fruit is different from the place associated with\nanother \u0100malaka at another point of space; and the Yogin can perceive\nthe difference of their specific evolution in association with their\npoints of space; similarly the atoms also suffer different modifications\nat different points of space which can be perceived by \u012a\u015bvara and the\nYogins\u201d (_Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, III. 53).\n\nV\u0101caspati again says: \u201cThough all cause is essentially all effects yet a\nparticular cause takes effect in a particular place, thus though the\ncause is the same, yet saffron grows in K\u0101\u015bm\u012bra and not in P\u0101\u00f1c\u0101la. So,\nthe rains do not come in summer, the vicious do not enjoy happiness.\nThus in accordance with the obstructions of place, time, animal form,\nand instrumental accessories, the same cause does not produce the same\neffect. Though as cause everything is essentially everything else, yet\nthere is a particular country for a particular effect, such as K\u0101\u015bm\u012bra\nis for saffron. Even though the causes may be in other countries such as\nP\u0101\u00f1c\u0101la, yet the effect will not happen there, and for this reason\nsaffron does not manifest itself in P\u0101\u00f1c\u0101la. So in summer there are no\nrains and so no paddy grows then\u201d (_Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, III. 14).\n\nWe see therefore that time, space, etc., are the limitations which\nregulate, modify and determine to a certain extent the varying\ntransformations and changes and the seeming differences of things,\nthough in reality they are all ultimately reducible to the three gu\u1e47as;\nthus K\u0101\u015bm\u012bra being the country of saffron, it will not grow in the\nP\u0101\u00f1c\u0101la country, even though the other causes of its growth should all\nbe present there;\u2014here the operation of cause is limited by space.\n\nAfter considering the inorganic, vegetable and animal kingdoms as three\nstages in the evolutionary process, our attention is at once drawn to\ntheir conception of the nature of relation of plant life to animal life.\nThough I do not find any special reference in the _Bh\u0101shya_ to this\npoint, yet I am reminded of a few passages in the _Mah\u0101bh\u0101rata_, which I\nthink may be added as a supplement to the general doctrine of evolution\naccording to the S\u0101\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala philosophy as stated here. Thus the\n_Mah\u0101bh\u0101rata_ says: \u201cEven the solid trees have ether (\u0101k\u0101\u015ba) in them\nwhich justifies the regular appearance of flowers and fruits. By heat\nthe leaves, the bark, flowers and fruits become withered, and since\nthere is withering and decay in them, there is in them the sensation of\ntouch. Since by the sound of air, fire and thunder the fruits and\nflowers fall away, there must be the sense of hearing in them. The\ncreepers encircle the trees and they go in all directions, and since\nwithout sight there could not be any choice of direction, the trees have\nthe power of vision. By various holy and unholy smells and incenses of\nvarious kinds the trees are cured of their diseases and blossom forth,\ntherefore the trees can smell. Since they drink by their roots, and\nsince they get diseases, and since their diseases can be cured, there is\nthe sense of taste in the trees. Since they enjoy pleasure and suffer\npain, and since their parts which are cut grow, I see life everywhere in\ntrees and not want of life\u201d (_S\u0101ntiparva_, 184).\n\nN\u012blaka\u1e47\u1e6dha in his commentary goes still further and says that a hard\nsubstance called vajrama\u1e47i also may be called living. Here we see that\nthe ancients had to a certain extent forestalled the discovery of Sir J.\nC. Bose that the life functions differed only in degree between the\nthree classes, the inorganic, plants and animals.\n\nThese are all, however, only illustrations of dharma-pari\u1e47\u0101ma, for here\nthere is no radical change in the elements themselves, the appearance of\nqualities being due only to the different arrangement of the atoms of\nthe five gross elements. This change applies to the vi\u015beshas only\u2014the\nfive gross elements externally and the eleven senses internally. How the\ninner microcosm, the manas and the senses are affected by\ndharma-pari\u1e47\u0101ma we shall see hereafter, when we deal with the psychology\nof the S\u0101\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala doctrine. For the present it will suffice to\nsay that the citta or mind also suffers this change and is modified in a\ntwofold mode; the patent in the form of the ideas and the latent, as the\nsubstance itself, in the form of sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras of subconscious impressions.\nThus the _Bh\u0101shya_ says: \u201cThe mind has two kinds of characteristics,\nperceived and unperceived. Those of the nature of ideas are perceived\nand those inherent in the integral nature of it are unperceived. The\nlatter are of seven kinds and may be ascertained by inference. These are\ncessation of mental states by sam\u0101dhi, virtue and vice, subconscious\nimpressions, change, life-functioning, power of movement, and energy\u201d\n(III. 15).\n\nThis dharma-pari\u1e47\u0101ma as we have shown it, is essentially different from\nthe satk\u0101ra\u1e47av\u0101da of the avi\u015beshas described above. We cannot close this\ndiscussion about evolution without noticing the S\u0101\u1e43khya view of\ncausation.\n\nWe have seen that the S\u0101\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala view holds that the effect is\nalready existent in the cause, but only in a potential form. \u201cThe\ngrouping or collocation alone changes, and this brings out the\nmanifestation of the latent powers of the gu\u1e47as, but without creation of\nanything absolutely new or non-existent.\u201d This is the true satk\u0101ryyav\u0101da\ntheory as distinguished from the so-called satk\u0101ryyav\u0101da theory of the\nVed\u0101ntists, which ought more properly to be called the satk\u0101ra\u1e47av\u0101da\ntheory, for with them the cause alone is true, and all effects are\nillusory, being only impositions on the cause. For with them the\nmaterial cause alone is true, whilst all its forms and shapes are merely\nillusory, whereas according to the S\u0101\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala doctrine all the\nappearances or effects are true and are due to the power which the\nsubstance has of transforming itself into those various appearances and\neffects _yogyat\u0101vacchinn\u0101 dharmi\u1e47a\u1e25 \u015baktireva dharma\u1e25_ (III. 14). The\noperation of the concomitant condition or efficient cause serves only to\neffect the passage of a thing from potency to actualisation.\n\nEverything in the phenomenal world is but a special collocation of the\ngu\u1e47as; so that the change of collocation explains the diversity of\nthings. Considered from the point of view of the gu\u1e47as, things are all\nthe same, so excluding that, the cause of the diversity in things is the\npower which the gu\u1e47as have of changing their particular collocations and\nthus assuming various shapes. We have seen that the prak\u1e5bti unfolds\nitself through various stages\u2014the mahat called the great being\u2014the\naha\u1e43k\u0101ra, the tanm\u0101tras called the avi\u015beshas. Now the li\u1e45ga at once\nresolves itself into the aha\u1e43k\u0101ra and through it again into the\ntanm\u0101tras. The aha\u1e43k\u0101ra and the tanm\u0101tras again resolve themselves into\nthe senses and the gross elements, and these again are constantly\nsuffering thousands of modifications called the dharma, laksha\u1e47a, and\navasth\u0101-pari\u1e47\u0101ma according to the definite law of evolution\n(_pari\u1e47\u0101makramaniyama_).\n\nNow according to the Sa\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala doctrine, the \u015bakti\u2014power,\nforce\u2014and the \u015baktim\u0101n\u2014the possessor of power or force\u2014are not different\nbut identical. So the prak\u1e5bti and all its emanations and modifications\nare of the nature of substantive entities as well as power or force.\nTheir appearances as substantive entities and as power or force are but\ntwo aspects, and so it will be erroneous to make any such distinction as\nthe substantive entity and its power or force. That which is the\nsubstantive entity is the force, and that which is the force is the\nsubstantive entity. Of course for all practical purposes we can indeed\nmake some distinction, but that distinction is only relatively true.\nThus when we say that earth is the substantive entity and the power\nwhich it has of transforming itself into the produced form, lump, or jug\nas its attribute, we see on the one hand that no distinction is really\nmade between the appearance of the earth as jug and its power of\ntransforming itself into the jug. As this power of transforming itself\ninto lump or jug, etc., always abides in the earth we say that the jug,\netc., are also abiding in the earth; when the power is in the potential\nstate, we say that the jug is in the potential state, and when it is\nactualised, we say that the jug has been actualised. Looked at from the\ntanm\u0101tric side, the earth and all the other gross elements must be said\nto be mere modifications, and as such identical with the power which the\ntanm\u0101tras have of changing themselves into them. The potentiality or\nactuality of any state is the mere potentiality or actuality of the\npower which its antecedent cause has of transforming itself into it.\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER VII\n                   EVOLUTION AND CHANGE OF QUALITIES\n\n\nPrak\u1e5bti, though a substantive entity is yet a potential power, being\nactualised as its various modifications, the avi\u015beshas and the vi\u015beshas.\nBeing of the nature of power, the movement by which it actualises itself\nis immanent within itself and not caused from without. The operation of\nthe concomitant conditions is only manifested in the removal of the\nnegative barriers by which the power was stopped or prevented from\nactualising itself. Being of the nature of power, its potentiality means\nthat it is kept in equilibrium by virtue of the opposing tendencies\ninherent within it, which serve to obstruct one another and are\ntherefore called the \u0101vara\u1e47a \u015bakti. Of course it is evident that there\nis no real or absolute distinction between the opposing force (_\u0101vara\u1e47a\n\u015bakti_) and the energising force (_k\u0101ryyakar\u012b \u015bakti_); they may be\ncalled so only relatively, for the same tendency which may appear as the\n_\u0101vara\u1e47a \u015bakti_ of some tendencies may appear as the _k\u0101ryyakar\u012b \u015bakti_\nelsewhere. The example chosen to explain the nature of prak\u1e5bti and its\nmodifications conceived as power tending towards actuality from\npotentiality in the _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ is that of a sheet of water enclosed\nby temporary walls within a field, but always tending to run out of it.\nAs soon as the temporary wall is broken in some direction, the water\nrushes out of itself, and what one has to do is to break the wall at a\nparticular place. Prak\u1e5bti is also the potential for all the infinite\ndiversity of things in the phenomenal world, but the potential tendency\nof all these mutually opposed and diverse things cannot be actualised\ntogether. Owing to the concomitant conditions when the barrier of a\ncertain tendency is removed, it at once actualises itself in its effect\nand so on.\n\nWe can only expect to get any effect from any cause if the necessary\nbarriers can be removed, for everything is everything potentially and it\nis only necessary to remove the particular barrier which is obstructing\nthe power from actualising itself in that particular effect towards\nwhich it is always potentially tending. Thus Nand\u012b who was a man is at\nonce turned into a god for his particular merit, which served to break\nall the barriers of the potential tendency of his body towards becoming\ndivine, so that the barriers being removed the potential power of the\nprak\u1e5bti of his body at once actualises itself in the divine body.\n\nThe _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ (III. 14) mentions four sorts of concomitant\nconditions which can serve to break the barrier in a particular way and\nthus determine the mode or form of the actualisations of the potential.\nThese are (1) \u0101k\u0101ra, form and constitution of a thing; de\u015ba, place, (3)\nk\u0101la, time; thus from a piece of stone, the shoot of a plant cannot\nproceed, for the arrangement of the particles in stone is such that it\nwill oppose and stand as a bar to its potential tendencies to develop\ninto the shoot of a plant; of course if these barriers could be removed,\nsay by the will of God, as Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu says, then it is not\nimpossible that the shoot of a plant might grow from a stone. By the\nwill of God poison may be turned into nectar and nectar into poison, and\nthere is no absolute certainty of the course of the evolutionary\nprocess, for God\u2019s will can make any change in the direction of its\nprocess (_avyavasthit\u0101khilapari\u1e47\u0101mo bhavatyeva_, III. 14).\n\nAccording to the S\u0101\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala theory dharma, merit, can only be\nsaid to accrue from those actions which lead to a man\u2019s salvation, and\nadharma from just the opposite course of conduct. When it is said that\nthese can remove the barriers of the prak\u1e5bti and thus determine its\nmodifications, it amounts almost to saying that the modifications of the\nprak\u1e5bti are being regulated by the moral conditions of man. According to\nthe different stages of man\u2019s moral evolution, different kinds of merit,\ndharma or adharma, accrue, and these again regulate the various physical\nand mental phenomena according to which a man may be affected either\npleasurably or painfully. It must, however, be always remembered that\nthe dharma and adharma are also the productions of prak\u1e5bti, and as such\ncannot affect it except by behaving as the cause for the removal of the\nopposite obstructions\u2014the dharma for removing the obstructions of\nadharma and adharma for those of dharma. Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu and N\u0101ge\u015ba\nagree here in saying that the modifications due to dharma and adharma\nare those which affect the bodies and senses. What they mean is possibly\nthis, that it is dharma or adharma alone which guides the\ntransformations of the bodies and senses of all living beings in general\nand the Yogins.\n\nThe body of a person and his senses are continually decaying and being\nreconstructed by refilling from the gross elements and from aha\u1e43k\u0101ra\nrespectively. These refillings proceed automatically and naturally; but\nthey follow the teleological purpose as chalked out by the law of karma\nin accordance with the virtues or vices of a man. Thus the gross insult\nto which the sages were subjected by Nahusha[36] was so effective a sin\nthat by its influence the refilling of Nahusha\u2019s body and the senses was\nstopped and the body and senses of a snake were directly produced by a\nprocess of refilling from the gross elements and aha\u1e43k\u0101ra, for providing\nhim with a body in which he could undergo the sufferings which were his\ndue owing to the enormity of his vice. Thus by his vicious action the\nwhole machinery of prak\u1e5bti was set in operation so that he at once died\nand was immediately reborn as a snake. In another place V\u0101caspati \u201cthe\nvirtuous enjoys happiness\u201d as an illustration of the cause of dharma and\nadharma as controlling the course of the development of prak\u1e5bti. We\ntherefore see that the sphere of merit and demerit lies in the helping\nof the formation of the particular bodies and senses (from the gross\nelements and aha\u1e43k\u0101ra respectively) suited to all living beings\naccording to their stages of evolution and their growth, decay, or other\nsorts of their modifications as pleasure, pain, and also as illness or\nhealth. Thus it is by his particular merit that the Yogin can get his\nspecial body or men or animals can get their new bodies after leaving\nthe old ones at death. Thus _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_ says: \u201cMerit by removing the\nobstructions of demerit causes the development of the body and the\nsenses.\u201d\n\nAs for \u012a\u015bvara I do not remember that the _Bh\u0101shya_ or the s\u016btras ever\nmention Him as having anything to do with the controlling of the\nmodifications of the prak\u1e5bti by removing the barriers, but all the later\ncommentators agree in holding him responsible for the removal of all\nbarriers in the way of prak\u1e5btis development. So that \u012a\u015bvara is the root\ncause of all the removal of barriers, including those that are affected\nby merit and demerit. Thus V\u0101caspati says (IV. 3): _\u012a\u015bvarasy\u0101pi\ndharm\u0101dhish\u1e6dh\u0101n\u0101rtha\u1e43 pratibandh\u0101panaya eva vy\u0101p\u0101ro_, i.e. God stands as\nthe cause of the removal of such obstacles in the prak\u1e5bti as may lead to\nthe fruition of merit or demerit.\n\n_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_ and N\u0101ge\u015ba agree in holding \u012a\u015bvara responsible for the\nremoval of all obstacles in the way of the evolution of prak\u1e5bti. Thus\nBhikshu says that God rouses prak\u1e5bti by breaking the opposing forces of\nthe state of equilibrium and also of the course of evolution (IV. 3).\n\nIt is on account of God that we can do good or bad actions and thus\nacquire merit or demerit. Of course God is not active and cannot cause\nany motion in prak\u1e5bti. But He by His very presence causes the obstacles,\nas the barriers in the way of prak\u1e5bti\u2019s development, to be removed, in\nsuch a way that He stands ultimately responsible for the removal of all\nobstacles in the way of prak\u1e5bti\u2019s development and thus also of all\nobstacles in the way of men\u2019s performance of good or bad deeds. Man\u2019s\ngood or bad deeds \u201cpu\u1e47yakarma,\u201d apu\u1e47yakarma, dharma or adharma serve to\nremove the obstacles of prak\u1e5bti in such a way as to result in\npleasurable or painful effects; but it is by God\u2019s help that the\nbarriers of prak\u1e5bti are removed and it yields itself in such a way that\na man may perform good or bad deeds according to his desire. N\u012blaka\u1e47\u1e6dha,\nhowever, by his quotations in explanation of 300/2, _\u015a\u0101ntiparva_, leads\nus to suppose that he regards God\u2019s will as wholly responsible for the\nperformance of our good or bad actions. For if we lay stress on his\nquotation \u201cHe makes him do good deeds whom He wants to raise, and He\nmakes him commit bad deeds whom He wants to throw down,\u201d it appears that\nhe whom God wants to raise is made to perform good actions and he whom\nGod wants to throw downwards is made to commit bad actions. But this\nseems to be a very bold idea, as it will altogether nullify the least\nvestige of freedom in and responsibility for our actions and is\nunsupported by the evidence of other commentators. Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu also\nsays with reference to this \u015bruti in his _Vij\u00f1\u0101nam\u1e5bta-bh\u0101shya_, III. 33:\n\u201cAs there is an infinite _regressus_ between the causal connection of\nseed and shoot, so one karma is being determined by the previous karma\nand so on; there is no beginning to this chain.\u201d So we take the\nsuperintendence of merits and demerits (_dharm\u0101dhisp\u1e6dh\u0101nat\u0101_) by \u012a\u015bvara\nto mean only in a general way the help that is offered by Him in\nremoving the obstructions of the external world in such a manner that it\nmay be possible for a man to perform practically meritorious acts in the\nexternal world.\n\nN\u012blaka\u1e47\u1e6dha commenting on the Yoga view says that \u201clike a piece of\nmagnet, God though inactive, may by His very presence stir up prak\u1e5bti\nand help His devotees. So the Yoga holds that for the granting of\nemancipation God has to be admitted\u201d (_\u015a\u0101ntiparva_, 300/2).\n\nIn support of our view we also find that it is by God\u2019s influence that\nthe unalterable nature of the external world is held fast and a limit\nimposed on the powers of man in producing changes in the external world.\nThus V\u0101caspati in explaining the Bh\u0101shya (III. 45) says: \u201cThough capable\nof doing it, yet he does not change the order of things, because another\nearlier omnipotent being had wished the things to be such as they were.\nThey would not disobey the orders of the omnipotent God.\u201d\n\nMen may indeed acquire unlimited powers of producing any changes they\nlike, for the powers of objects as they change according to the\ndifference of class, space, time and condition, are not permanent, and\nso it is proper that they should act in accordance with the desire of\nthe Yogin; but there is a limit to men\u2019s will by the command of God\u2014thus\nfar and no further.\n\nAnother point in our favour is that the Yoga philosophy differs from the\nS\u0101\u1e43khya mainly in this that the purush\u0101rtha or serviceability to the\npurusha is only the aim or end of the evolution of prak\u1e5bti and not\nactually the agent which removes the obstacles of the prak\u1e5bti in such a\nway as to determine its course as this cosmical process of evolution.\nPurush\u0101rtha is indeed the aim for which the process of evolution exists;\nfor this manifold evolution in its entirety affects the interests of the\npurusha alone; but that does not prove that its teleology can really\nguide the evolution on its particular lines so as to ensure the best\npossible mode of serving all the interests of the purusha, for this\nteleology being immanent in the prak\u1e5bti is essentially non-intelligent.\nThus V\u0101caspati says: \u201cThe fulfilment of the purpose of the purusha is\nnot also the prime mover. God has the fulfilment of the purpose of the\npurusha as His own purpose, for which He behaves as the prime mover. The\nfulfilment of the purpose of the purusha may be regarded as cause only\nin the sense that it is the object in view of God, the prime mover.\u201d[37]\n\nThe S\u0101\u1e43khya, however, hopes that this immanent purpose in prak\u1e5bti acts\nlike a blind instinct and is able to guide the course of its evolution\nin all its manifold lines in accordance with the best possible service\nof the purusha.\n\nThe P\u0101ta\u00f1jala view, as we have seen, maintains that \u012a\u015bvara removes all\nobstacles of prak\u1e5bti in such a way that this purpose may find scope for\nits realisation. Thus _S\u016btr\u0101rthabodhin\u012b_, IV. 3, of N\u0101r\u0101ya\u1e47a T\u012brtha\nsays: \u201cAccording to atheistic S\u0101\u1e43khya the future serviceability of\npurusha alone is the mover of prak\u1e5bti. But with us theists the\nserviceability of purusha is the object for which prak\u1e5bti moves. It is\nmerely as an object that the serviceability of the purusha may be said\nto be the mover of the prak\u1e5bti.\u201d\n\nAs regards the connection of prak\u1e5bti and purusha, however, both S\u0101\u1e43khya\nand P\u0101ta\u00f1jala agree according to Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu in denying the\ninterference of \u012a\u015bvara; it is the movement of prak\u1e5bti by virtue of\nimmanent purpose that connects itself naturally with the purusha.\nVij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu\u2019s own view, however, is that this union is brought about\nby God (_Vij\u00f1\u0101n\u0101m\u1e5bta-bh\u0101shya_, p. 34).\n\nTo recapitulate, we see that there is an immanent purpose in prak\u1e5bti\nwhich connects it with the purushas. This purpose is, however, blind and\ncannot choose the suitable lines of development and cause the movement\nof Prak\u1e5bti along them for its fullest realisation. Prak\u1e5bti itself,\nthough a substantial entity, is also essentially of the nature of\nconserved energy existing in the potential form but always ready to flow\nout and actualise itself, if only its own immanent obstructions are\nremoved. Its teleological purpose is powerless to remove its own\nobstruction. God by His very presence removes the obstacles, by which,\nprak\u1e5bti of itself moves in the evolutionary process, and thus the\npurpose is realised; for the removal of obstacles by the influence of\nGod takes place in such a way that the purpose may realise its fullest\nscope. Realisation of the teleology means that the interests of purusha\nare seemingly affected and purusha appears to see and feel in a manifold\nway, and after a long series of such experiences it comes to understand\nitself in its own nature, and this being the last and final realisation\nof the purpose of prak\u1e5bti with reference to that purusha all connections\nof prak\u1e5bti with such a purusha at once cease; the purusha is then said\nto be liberated and the world ceases for him to exist, though it exists\nfor the other unliberated purushas, the purpose of the prak\u1e5bti with\nreference to whom has not been realised. So the world is both eternal\nand non-eternal, i.e. its eternality is only relative and not absolute.\nThus the _Bh\u0101shya_ says the question \u201cwhether the world will have an end\nor not cannot be directly answered. The world-process gradually ceases\nfor the wise and not for others, so no one-sided decision can be true\u201d\n(IV. 33).\n\n\n\n\n                      BOOK II. ETHICS AND PRACTICE\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER VIII\n                         MIND AND MORAL STATES\n\n\nThe Yoga philosophy has essentially a practical tone and its object\nconsists mainly in demonstrating the means of attaining salvation,\noneness, the liberation of the purusha. The metaphysical theory which we\nhave discussed at some length, though it is the basis which justifies\nits ethical goal, is not itself the principal subject of Yoga\ndiscussion, and is only dealt with to the extent that it can aid in\ndemonstrating the ethical view. We must now direct our attention to\nthese ethical theories. Citta or mind always exists in the form of its\nstates which are called v\u1e5bttis.[38] These comprehend all the manifold\nstates of consciousness of our phenomenal existence. We cannot\ndistinguish states of consciousness from consciousness itself, for the\nconsciousness is not something separate from its states; it exists in\nthem, passes away with their passing and submerges when they are\nsubmerged. It differs from the senses in this, that they represent the\nfunctions and faculties, whereas citta stands as the entity containing\nthe conscious states with which we are directly concerned. But the citta\nwhich we have thus described as existing only in its states is called\nthe k\u0101ryyacitta or citta as effect as distinguished from the k\u0101ra\u1e47acitta\nor citta as cause. These k\u0101ra\u1e47acittas or cittas as cause are\nall-pervading like the \u0101k\u0101\u015ba and are infinite in number, each being\nconnected with each of the numberless purushas or souls (_Ch\u0101y\u0101vy\u0101khy\u0101_,\nIV. 10). The reason assigned for acknowledging such a k\u0101ra\u1e47acitta which\nmust be all-pervading, as is evident from the quotation, is that the\nYogin may have knowledge of all things at once.\n\nV\u0101caspati says that this citta being essentially of the nature of\naha\u1e43k\u0101ra is as all-pervading as the ego itself (IV. 10).\n\nThis k\u0101ra\u1e47acitta contracts or expands and appears as our individual\ncittas in our various bodies at successive rebirths. The k\u0101ra\u1e47acitta is\nalways connected with the purusha and appears contracted when the\npurusha presides over animal bodies, and as relatively expanded when he\npresides over human bodies, and more expanded when he presides over the\nbodies of gods, etc. This contracted or expanded citta appears as our\nk\u0101ryyacitta which always manifests itself as our states of\nconsciousness. After death the k\u0101ra\u1e47acitta, which is always connected\nwith the purusha, manifests itself in the new body which is formed by\nthe \u0101p\u016bra (filling in of prak\u1e5bti on account of effective merit or\ndemerit that the purusha had apparently acquired). The formation of the\nbody as well as the contraction or expansion of the k\u0101ra\u1e47acitta as the\ncorresponding k\u0101ryyacitta to suit it is due to this \u0101p\u016bra. The Yoga does\nnot hold that the citta has got a separate fine astral body within which\nit may remain encased and be transferred along with it to another body\non rebirth. The citta being all-pervading, it appears both to contract\nor expand to suit the particular body destined for it owing to its merit\nor demerit, but there is no separate astral body (_Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, IV.\n10). In reality the kara\u1e47acitta as such always remains vibhu or\nall-pervading; it is only its k\u0101ryyacitta or v\u1e5btti that appears in a\ncontracted or expanded form, according to the particular body which it\nmay be said to occupy.\n\nThe S\u0101\u1e43khya view, however, does not regard the citta to be essentially\nall-pervading, but small or great according as the body it has to\noccupy. Thus Bhikshu and N\u0101ge\u015ba in explaining the _Bh\u0101shya_, \u201cothers\nthink that the citta expands or contracts according as it is in a bigger\nor smaller body, just as light rays do according as they are placed in\nthe jug or in a room,\u201d attributes this view to the S\u0101\u1e43khya\n(_Vy\u0101sabh\u0101shya_, IV. 10, and the commentaries by Bhikshu and N\u0101ge\u015ba on\nit).[39]\n\nIt is this citta which appears as the particular states of consciousness\nin which both the knower and the known are reflected, and it comprehends\nthem both in one state of consciousness. It must, however, be remembered\nthat this citta is essentially a modification of prak\u1e5bti, and as such is\nnon-intelligent; but by the seeming reflection of the purusha it appears\nas the knower knowing a certain object, and we therefore see that in the\nstates themselves are comprehended both the knower and the known. This\ncitta is not, however, a separate tattva, but is the sum or unity of the\neleven senses and the ego and also of the five pr\u0101\u1e47as or biomotor forces\n(_N\u0101ge\u015ba_, IV. 10). It thus stands for all that is psychical in man: his\nstates of consciousness including the living principle in man\nrepresented by the activity of the five pr\u0101\u1e47as.\n\nIt is the object of Yoga gradually to restrain the citta from its\nvarious states and thus cause it to turn back to its original cause, the\nk\u0101ra\u1e47acitta, which is all-pervading. The modifications of the\nk\u0101ra\u1e47acitta into such states as the k\u0101ryyacitta is due to its being\novercome by its inherent tamas and rajas; so when the transformations of\nthe citta into the passing states are arrested by concentration, there\ntakes place a backward movement and the all-pervading state of the citta\nbeing restored to itself and all tamas being overcome, the Yogin\nacquires omniscience, and finally when this citta becomes as pure as the\nform of purusha itself, the purusha becomes conscious of himself and is\nliberated from the bonds of prak\u1e5bti.\n\nThe Yoga philosophy in the first chapter describes the Yoga for him\nwhose mind is inclined towards trance-cognition. In the second chapter\nis described the means by which one with an ordinary worldly mind\n(_vyutth\u0101na citta_) may also acquire Yoga. In the third chapter are\ndescribed those phenomena which strengthen the faith of the Yogin on the\nmeans of attaining Yoga described in the second chapter. In the fourth\nchapter is described kaivalya, absolute independence or oneness, which\nis the end of all the Yoga practices.\n\nThe _Bh\u0101shya_ describes the five classes of cittas and comments upon\ntheir fitness for the Yoga leading to kaivalya. Those are I. _kshipta_\n(wandering), II. _m\u016b\u1e0dha_ (forgetful), III. _vikshipta_ (occasionally\nsteady), IV. _ek\u0101gra_ (one-pointed), _niruddha_ (restrained).\n\nI. The _kshiptacitta_ is characterised as wandering, because it is being\nalways moved by the rajas. This is that citta which is always moved to\nand fro by the rise of passions, the excess of which may indeed for the\ntime overpower the mind and thus generate a temporary concentration, but\nit has nothing to do with the contemplative concentration required for\nattaining absolute independence. The man moved by rajas, far from\nattaining any mastery of himself, is rather a slave to his own passions\nand is always being moved to and fro and shaken by them (see\n_Siddh\u0101nta-candrik\u0101_, I. 2, _Bhojav\u1e5btti_, I. 2).\n\nII. The m\u016b\u1e0dhacitta is that which is overpowered by tamas, or passions,\nlike that of anger, etc., by which it loses its senses and always\nchooses the wrong course. Sv\u0101min Harihar\u0101ra\u1e47ya suggests a beautiful\nexample of such concentration as similar to that of certain snakes which\nbecome completely absorbed in the prey upon which they are about to\npounce.\n\nIII. The vikshiptacitta, or distracted or occasionally steady citta, is\nthat mind which rationally avoids the painful actions and chooses the\npleasurable ones. Now none of these three kinds of mind can hope to\nattain that contemplative concentration called Yoga. This last type of\nmind represents ordinary people, who sometimes tend towards good but\nrelapse back to evil.\n\nIV. The one-pointed (ek\u0101gra) is that kind of mind in which true\nknowledge of the nature of reality is present and the afflictions due to\nnescience or false knowledge are thus attenuated and the mind better\nadapted to attain the nirodha or restrained state. All these come under\nthe sa\u1e43praj\u00f1\u0101ta (concentration on an object of knowledge) type.\n\nV. The nirodha or restrained mind is that in which all mental states are\narrested. This leads to kaivalya.\n\nOrdinarily our minds are engaged only in perception, inference,\netc.\u2014those mental states which we all naturally possess. These ordinary\nmental states are full of rajas and tamas. When these are arrested, the\nmind flows with an abundance of sattva in the sa\u1e43praj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi;\nlastly when even the sa\u1e43praj\u00f1\u0101ta state is arrested, all possible states\nbecome arrested.\n\nAnother important fact which must be noted is the relation of the actual\nstates of mind called the v\u1e5bttis with the latent states called the\nsa\u1e43sk\u0101ras\u2014the potency. When a particular mental state passes away into\nanother, it is not altogether lost, but is preserved in the mind in a\nlatent form as a sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra, which is always trying to manifest itself in\nactuality. The v\u1e5bttis or actual states are thus both generating the\nsa\u1e43sk\u0101ras and are also always tending to manifest themselves and\nactually generating similar v\u1e5bttis or actual states. There is a\ncirculation from v\u1e5bttis to sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras and from them again to v\u1e5bttis\n(_sa\u1e43sk\u0101r\u0101\u1e25 v\u1e5bttibhi\u1e25 kriyante, sa\u1e43sk\u0101rai\u015bca v\u1e5bttaya\u1e25 eva\u1e43\nv\u1e5bttisa\u1e43sk\u0101racakramani\u015bam\u0101varttate_). So the formation of sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras and\ntheir conservation are gradually being strengthened by the habit of\nsimilar v\u1e5bttis or actual states, and their continuity is again\nguaranteed by the strength and continuity of these sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras. The\nsa\u1e43sk\u0101ras are like roots striking deep into the soil and growing with\nthe growth of the plant above, but even when the plant above the soil is\ndestroyed, the roots remain undisturbed and may again shoot forth as\nplants whenever they obtain a favourable season. Thus it is not enough\nfor a Yogin to arrest any particular class of mental states; he must\nattain such a habit of restraint that the sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra thus generated is\nable to overcome, weaken and destroy the sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra of those actual states\nwhich he has arrested by his contemplation. Unless restrained by such a\nhabit, the sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra of cessation (_nirodhaja sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra_) which is opposed\nto the previously acquired mental states become powerful and destroy the\nlatter, these are sure to shoot forth again in favourable season into\ntheir corresponding actual states.\n\nThe conception of avidy\u0101 or nescience is here not negative but has a\ndefinite positive aspect. It means that kind of knowledge which is\nopposed to true knowledge (_vidy\u0101vipar\u012bta\u1e43 j\u00f1\u0101n\u0101ntaramavidy\u0101_). This is\nof four kinds: (1) The thinking of the non-eternal world, which is\nmerely an effect, as eternal. (2) The thinking of the impure as the\npure, as for example the attraction that a woman\u2019s body may have for a\nman leading him to think the impure body pure. (3) The thinking of vice\nas virtue, of the undesirable as the desirable, of pain as pleasure. We\nknow that for a Yogin every phenomenal state of existence is painful\n(II. 15). A Yogin knows that attachment (_r\u0101ga_) to sensual and other\nobjects can only give temporary pleasure, for it is sure to be soon\nturned into pain. Enjoyment can never bring satisfaction, but only\ninvolves a man further and further in sorrows. (4) Considering the\nnon-self, e.g. the body as the self. This causes a feeling of being\ninjured on the injury of the body.\n\nAt the moment of enjoyment there is always present suffering from pain\nin the form of aversion to pain; for the tendency to aversion from pain\ncan only result from the incipient memory of previous sufferings. Of\ncourse this is also a case of pleasure turned into pain\n(_pari\u1e47\u0101madu\u1e25khat\u0101_), but it differs from it in this that in the case of\npari\u1e47\u0101madu\u1e25kha pleasure is turned into pain as a result of change or\npari\u1e47\u0101ma in the future, whereas in this case the anxiety as to pain is a\nthing of the present, happening at one and the same time that a man is\nenjoying pleasure.\n\nEnjoyment of pleasure or suffering from pain causes those impressions\ncalled sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra or potencies, and these again when aided by association\nnaturally create their memory and thence comes attachment or aversion,\nthen again action, and again pleasure and pain and hence impressions,\nmemory, attachment or aversion, and again action and so forth.\n\nAll states are modifications of the three gu\u1e47as; in each one of them the\nfunctions of all the three gu\u1e47as are seen, contrary to one another.\nThese contraries are observable in their developed forms, for the gu\u1e47as\nare seen to abide in various proportions and compose all our mental\nstates. Thus a Yogin who wishes to be released from pain once for all is\nvery sensitive and anxious to avoid even our so-called pleasures. The\nwise are like the eye-ball. As a thread of wool thrown into the eye\npains by merely touching it, but not when it comes into contact with any\nother organ, so the Yogin is as tender as the eye-ball, when others are\ninsensible of pain. Ordinary persons, however, who have again and again\nsuffered pains as the consequence of their own karma, and who again seek\nthem after having given them up, are all round pierced through as it\nwere by nescience, their minds become full of afflictions, variegated by\nthe eternal residua of the passions. They follow in the wake of the \u201cI\u201d\nand the \u201cMine\u201d in relation to things that should be left apart, pursuing\nthreefold pain in repeated births, due to external and internal causes.\nThe Yogin seeing himself and the world of living beings surrounded by\nthe eternal flow of pain, turns for refuge to right knowledge, cause of\nthe destruction of all pains (_Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, II. 15).\n\nThinking of the mind and body and the objects of the external world as\nthe true self and feeling affected by their change is avidy\u0101 (false\nknowledge).\n\nThe modifications that this avidy\u0101 suffers may be summarised under four\nheads.\n\nI. The ego, which, as described above, springs from the identification\nof the buddhi with the purusha.\n\nII. From this ego springs attachment (_r\u0101ga_) which is the inclination\ntowards pleasure and consequently towards the means necessary for\nattaining it in a person who has previously experienced pleasures and\nremembers them.\n\nII. Repulsion from pain also springs from the ego and is of the nature\nof anxiety for its removal; anger at pain and the means which produces\npain, remains in the mind in consequence of the feeling of pain, in the\ncase of him who has felt and remembers pain.\n\nIV. Love of life also springs from the ego. This feeling exists in all\npersons and appears in a positive aspect in the form \u201cwould that I were\nnever to cease.\u201d This is due to the painful experience of death in some\nprevious existence, which abides in us as a residual potency (_v\u0101san\u0101_)\nand causes the instincts of self-preservation, fear of death and love of\nlife. These modifications including avidy\u0101 are called the five kle\u015bas or\nafflictions.\n\nWe are now in a position to see the far-reaching effects of the\nidentification of the purusha with the buddhi. We have already seen how\nit has generated the macrocosm or external world on the one hand, and\nmanas and the senses on the other. Now we see that from it also spring\nattachment to pleasure, aversion from pain and love of life, motives\nobservable in most of our states of consciousness, which are therefore\ncalled the _klish\u1e6da v\u1e5btti_ or afflicted states. The five afflictions\n(false knowledge and its four modifications spoken above) just mentioned\nare all comprehended in avidy\u0101, since avidy\u0101 or false knowledge is at\nthe root of all worldly experiences. The sphere of avidy\u0101 is all false\nknowledge generally, and that of asmit\u0101 is also inseparably connected\nwith all our experiences which consist in the identification of the\nintelligent self with the sensual objects of the world, the attainment\nof which seems to please us and the loss of which is so painful to us.\nIt must, however, be remembered that these five afflictions are only\ndifferent aspects of avidy\u0101 and cannot be conceived separately from\navidy\u0101. These always lead us into the meshes of the world, far from our\nfinal goal\u2014the realisation of our own self\u2014emancipation of the purusha.\n\nOpposed to it are the v\u1e5bttis or states which are called unafflicted,\naklish\u1e6da, the habit of steadiness (_abhy\u0101sa_) and non-attachment to\npleasures (_vair\u0101gya_) which being antagonistic to the afflicted states,\nare helpful towards achieving true knowledge. These represent such\nthoughts as tend towards emancipation and are produced from our attempts\nto conceive rationally our final state of emancipation, or to adopt\nsuitable means for this. They must not, however, be confused with\npu\u1e47yakarma (virtuous action), for both pu\u1e47ya and p\u0101pa karma are said to\nhave sprung from the kle\u015bas. There is no hard and fast rule with regard\nto the appearance of these klish\u1e6da and aklish\u1e6da states, so that in the\nstream of the klish\u1e6da states or in the intervals thereof, aklish\u1e6da\nstates may also appear\u2014as practice and desirelessness born from the\nstudy of the Veda-reasoning and precepts\u2014and remain quite distinct in\nitself, unmixed with the klish\u1e6da states. A Brahman being in a village\nwhich is full of the Kir\u0101tas, does not himself become a Kir\u0101ta (a forest\ntribe) for that reason.\n\nEach aklish\u1e6da state produces its own potency or sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra, and with the\nfrequency of the states their sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra is strengthened which in due\ncourse suppresses the aklish\u1e6da states.\n\nThese klish\u1e6da and aklish\u1e6da modifications are of five descriptions:\npram\u0101\u1e47a (real cognition), viparyyaya (unreal cognition), vikalpa\n(logical abstraction and imagination), nidr\u0101 (sleep), sm\u1e5bti (memory).\nThese v\u1e5bttis or states, however, must be distinguished from the six\nkinds of mental activity mentioned in _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, II. 18: graha\u1e47a\n(reception or presentative ideation), dh\u0101ra\u1e47a (retention), \u016bha\n(assimilation), apoha (differentiation), tattvaj\u00f1\u0101na (right knowledge),\nabhinive\u015ba (decision and determination), of which these states are the\nproducts.\n\nWe have seen that from avidy\u0101 spring all the kle\u015bas or afflictions,\nwhich are therefore seen to be the source of the klish\u1e6da v\u1e5bttis as well.\nAbhy\u0101sa and vair\u0101gya\u2014the aklish\u1e6da v\u1e5bttis, which spring from precepts,\netc., lead to right knowledge, and as such are antagonistic to the\nmodification of the gu\u1e47as on the avidy\u0101 side.\n\nWe know also that both these sets of v\u1e5bttis\u2014the klish\u1e6da and the\naklish\u1e6da\u2014produce their own kinds of sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras, the klish\u1e6da sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra and\nthe aklish\u1e6da or praj\u00f1\u0101 sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra. All these modifications of citta as\nv\u1e5btti and sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra are the dharmas of citta, considered as the dharmin\nor substance.\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER IX\n                          THE THEORY OF KARMA\n\n\nThe v\u1e5bttis are called the m\u0101nasa karmas (mental work) as different from\nthe b\u0101hya karmas (external work) achieved in the exterior world by the\nfive motor or active senses. These may be divided into four classes: (1)\nk\u1e5bsh\u1e47a (black), (2) \u015bukla (white), (3) \u015buklak\u1e5bsh\u1e47a (white and black),\n(4) a\u015bukl\u0101k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a (neither white nor black). (1) The k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a karmas are\nthose committed by the wicked and, as such, are wicked actions called\nalso adharma (demerit). These are of two kinds, viz. b\u0101hya and m\u0101nasa,\nthe former being of the nature of speaking ill of others, stealing\nothers\u2019 property, etc., and the latter of the nature of such states as\nare opposed to \u015braddh\u0101, v\u012brya, etc., which are called the \u015bukla karma.\n(2) The \u015bukla karmas are virtuous or meritorious deeds. These can only\noccur in the form of mental states, and as such can take place only in\nthe m\u0101nasa karma. These are \u015braddh\u0101 (faith), v\u012brya (strength), sm\u1e5bti\n(meditation), sam\u0101dhi (absorption), and praj\u00f1\u0101 (wisdom), which are\ninfinitely superior to actions achieved in the external world by the\nmotor or active senses. The \u015bukla karma belongs to those who resort to\nstudy and meditation. (3) The \u015buklak\u1e5bsh\u1e47a karma are the actions achieved\nin the external world by the motor or active senses. These are called\nwhite and black, because actions achieved in the external world, however\ngood (\u015bukla) they might be, cannot be altogether devoid of wickedness\n(k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a), since all external actions entail some harm to other living\nbeings.\n\nEven the Vedic duties, though meritorious, are associated with sins, for\nthey entail the sacrificing of animals.[40]\n\nThe white side of these actions, viz.: that of helping others and doing\ngood is therefore called dharma, as it is the cause of the enjoyment of\npleasure and happiness for the doer. The k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a or black side of these\nactions, viz. that of doing injury to others is called adharma, as it is\nthe cause of the suffering of pain to the doer. In all our ordinary\nstates of existence we are always under the influence of dharma and\nadharma, which are therefore called vehicles of actions (_\u0101\u015berate\ns\u0101\u1e43s\u0101rik\u0101 purush\u0101 asmin niti \u0101\u015baya\u1e25_). That in which some thing lives is\nits vehicle. Here the purushas in evolution are to be understood as\nliving in the sheath of actions (which is for that reason called a\nvehicle or \u0101\u015baya). Merit or virtue, and sin or demerit are the vehicles\nof actions. All \u015bukla karma, therefore, either mental or external, is\ncalled merit or virtue and is productive of happiness; all k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a karma,\neither mental or external, is called demerit, sin or vice and is\nproductive of pain.\n\n(4) The karma called a\u015buklak\u1e5bsh\u1e47a (neither black nor white) is of those\nwho have renounced everything, whose afflictions have been destroyed and\nwhose present body is the last one they will have. Those who have\nrenounced actions, the karma-sanny\u0101sis (and not those who belong to the\nsanny\u0101s\u0101\u015brama merely), are nowhere found performing actions which depend\nupon external means. They have not got the black vehicle of actions,\nbecause they do not perform such actions. Nor do they possess the white\nvehicle of actions, because they dedicate to \u012a\u015bvara the fruits of all\nvehicles of action, brought about by the practice of Yoga.\n\nReturning to the question of karm\u0101\u015baya again for review, we see that\nbeing produced from desire (_k\u0101ma_), avarice (_lobha_), ignorance\n(_moha_), and anger (_krodha_) it has really got at its root the kle\u015bas\n(afflictions) such as avidy\u0101 (ignorance), asmit\u0101 (egoism), r\u0101ga\n(attachment), dvesha (antipathy), abhinive\u015ba (love of life). It will be\neasily seen that the passions named above, desire, lust, etc., are not\nin any way different from the kle\u015bas or afflictions previously\nmentioned; and as all actions, virtuous or sinful, have their springs in\nthe said sentiments of desire, anger, covetousness, and infatuation, it\nis quite enough that all these virtuous or sinful actions spring from\nthe kle\u015bas.\n\nNow this karm\u0101\u015baya ripens into life-state, life-experience and\nlife-time, if the roots\u2014the afflictions\u2014exist. Not only is it true that\nwhen the afflictions are rooted out, no karm\u0101\u015baya can accumulate, but\neven when many karm\u0101\u015bayas of many lives are accumulated, they are rooted\nout when the afflictions are destroyed. Otherwise, it is difficult to\nconceive that the karm\u0101\u015baya accumulated for an infinite number of years,\nwhose time of ripeness is uncertain, will be rooted out! So even if\nthere be no fresh karm\u0101\u015baya after the rise of true knowledge, the\npurusha cannot be liberated but will be required to suffer an endless\ncycle of births and rebirths to exhaust the already accumulated\nkarm\u0101\u015bayas of endless lives. For this reason, the mental plane becomes a\nfield for the production of the fruits of action only, when it is\nwatered by the stream of afflictions. Hence the afflictions help the\nvehicle of actions (karm\u0101\u015baya) in the production of their fruits also.\nIt is for this reason that when the afflictions are destroyed the power\nwhich helps to bring about the manifestation also disappears; and on\nthat account the vehicles of actions although existing in innumerable\nquantities have no time for their fruition and do not possess the power\nof producing fruit, because their seed-powers are destroyed by\nintellection.\n\nKarm\u0101\u015baya is of two kinds. (1) Ripening in the same life\n_d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya_. (2) Ripening in another unknown life. That pu\u1e47ya\nkarm\u0101\u015baya, which is generated by intense purificatory action, trance and\nrepetition of mantras, and that p\u0101pa karm\u0101\u015baya, which is generated by\nrepeated evil done either to men who are suffering the extreme misery of\nfear, disease and helplessness, or to those who place confidence in them\nor to those who are high-minded and perform tapas, ripen into fruit in\nthe very same life, whereas other kinds of karm\u0101\u015bayas ripen in some\nunknown life.\n\nLiving beings in hell have no d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanma karm\u0101\u015baya, for this life is\nintended for suffering only and their bodies are called the\nbhoga-\u015bar\u012bras intended for suffering alone and not for the accumulation\nof any karm\u0101\u015baya which could take effect in that very life.\n\nThere are others whose afflictions have been spent and exhausted and\nthus they have no such karm\u0101\u015baya, the effect of which they will have\nto reap in some other life. They are thus said to have no\nad\u1e5bsh\u1e6da-janmavedan\u012bya karma.\n\nThe karm\u0101\u015baya of both kinds described above ripens into life-state,\nlife-time and life-experience. These are called the three ripenings or\nvip\u0101kas of the karm\u0101\u015baya; and they are conducive to pleasure or pain,\naccording as they are products of pu\u1e47yakarm\u0101\u015baya (virtue) or p\u0101pa\nkarm\u0101\u015baya (vice or demerit). Many karm\u0101\u015bayas combine to produce one\nlife-state; for it is not possible that each karma should produce one or\nmany life-states, for then there would be no possibility of experiencing\nthe effects of the karmas, because if for each one of the karmas we had\none or more lives, karmas, being endless, space for obtaining lives in\nwhich to experience effects would not be available, for it would take\nendless time to exhaust the karmas already accumulated. It is therefore\nheld that many karmas unite to produce one life-state or birth (j\u0101ti)\nand to determine also its particular duration (\u0101yush) and experience\n(bhoga). The virtuous and sinful karm\u0101\u015bayas accumulated in one life, in\norder to produce their effects, cause the death of the individual and\nmanifest themselves in producing his rebirth, his duration of life and\nparticular experiences, pleasurable or painful. The order of undergoing\nthe experiences is the order in which the karmas manifest themselves as\neffects, the principal ones being manifested earlier in life. The\nprincipal karmas here refer to those which are quite ready to generate\ntheir effects. Thus it is said that those karmas which produce their\neffects immediately are called primary, whereas those which produce\neffects after some delay are called secondary. Thus we see that there is\ncontinuity of existence throughout; when the karmas of this life ripen\njointly they tend to fructify by causing another birth as a means to\nwhich death is caused, and along with it life is manifested in another\nbody (according to the dharma and adharma of the karm\u0101\u015baya) formed by\nthe prak\u1e5bty\u0101p\u016bra (cf. the citta theory described above); and the same\nkarm\u0101\u015baya regulates the life-period and experiences of that life, the\nkarm\u0101\u015bayas of which again take a similar course and manifest themselves\nin the production of another life and so on.\n\nWe have seen that the karm\u0101\u015baya has three fructifications, viz. j\u0101ti,\n\u0101yush and bhoga. Now generally the karm\u0101\u015baya is regarded as ekabhavika\nor unigenital, i.e. it accumulates in one life. Ekabhava means one life\nand ekabhavika means the product of one life, or accumulated in one\nlife. Regarded from this point of view, it may be contrasted with the\nv\u0101san\u0101s which remain accumulated from thousands of previous lives since\neternity, the mind, being pervaded all over with them, as a fishing-net\nis covered all over with knots. This v\u0101san\u0101 results from memory of the\nexperiences of a life generated by the fructification of the karm\u0101\u015baya\nand kept in the citta in the form of potency or impressions (sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra).\nNow we have previously seen that the citta remains constant in all the\nbirths and rebirths that an individual has undergone from eternity; it\ntherefore keeps the memory of those various experiences of thousands of\nlives in the form of sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra or potency and is therefore compared with\na fishing-net pervaded all over with knots. The v\u0101san\u0101s therefore are\nnot the results of the accumulation of experiences or their memory in\none life but in many lives, and are therefore called anekabhavika as\ncontrasted with the karm\u0101\u015baya representing virtuous and vicious actions\nwhich are accumulated in one life and which produce another life, its\nexperiences and its life-duration as a result of fructification\n(vip\u0101ka). This v\u0101san\u0101 is the cause of the instinctive tendencies, or\nhabits of deriving pleasures and pains peculiar to different animal\nlives.\n\nThus the habits of a dog-life and its peculiar modes of taking its\nexperiences and of deriving pleasures and pains are very different in\nnature from those of a man-life; they must therefore be explained on the\nbasis of an incipient memory in the form of potency, or impressions\n(sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra) of the experiences that an individual must have undergone in\na previous dog-life.\n\nNow when by the fructification of the karm\u0101\u015baya a dog-life is settled\nfor a person, his corresponding v\u0101san\u0101s of a previous dog-life are at\nonce revived and he begins to take interest in his dog-life in the\nmanner of a dog; the same principle applies to the virtue of individuals\nas men or as gods (IV. 8).\n\nIf there was not this law of v\u0101san\u0101s, then any v\u0101san\u0101 would be revived\nin any life, and with the manifestation of the v\u0101san\u0101 of animal life a\nman would take interest in eating grass and derive pleasure from it.\nThus N\u0101ge\u015ba says: \u201cNow if those karmas which produce a man-life should\nmanifest the v\u0101san\u0101s of animal lives, then one might be inclined to eat\ngrass as a man, and it is therefore said that only the v\u0101san\u0101s\ncorresponding to the karmas are revived.\u201d\n\nNow as the v\u0101san\u0101s are of the nature of sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras or impressions, they\nlie ingrained in the citta and nothing can prevent their being revived.\nThe intervention of other births has no effect. For this reason, the\nv\u0101san\u0101s of a dog-life are at once revived in another dog-life, though\nbetween the first dog-life and the second dog-life, the individual may\nhave passed through many other lives, as a man, a bull, etc., though the\nsecond dog-life may take place many hundreds of years after the first\ndog-life and in quite different countries. The difference between\nsa\u1e43sk\u0101ras, impressions, and sm\u1e5bti or memory is simply this that the\nformer is the latent state whereas the latter is the manifested state;\nso we see that the memory and the impressions are identical in nature,\nso that whenever a sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra is revived, it means nothing but the\nmanifestation of the memory of the same experiences conserved in the\nsa\u1e43sk\u0101ra in a latent state. Experiences, when they take place, keep\ntheir impressions in the mind, though thousands of other experiences,\nlapse of time, etc., may intervene. They are revived in one moment with\nthe proper cause of their revival, and the other intervening experiences\ncan in no way hinder this revival. So it is with the v\u0101san\u0101s, which are\nrevived at once according to the particular fructification of the\nkarm\u0101\u015baya, in the form of a particular life, as a man, a dog, or\nanything else.\n\nIt is now clear that the karm\u0101\u015baya tending towards fructification is the\ncause of the manifestation of the v\u0101san\u0101s already existing in the mind\nin a latent form. Thus the S\u016btra says:\u2014\u201cWhen two similar lives are\nseparated by many births, long lapses of time and remoteness of space,\neven then for the purpose of the revival of the v\u0101san\u0101s, they may be\nregarded as immediately following each other, for the memories and\nimpressions are the same\u201d (_Yoga-s\u016btra_, IV. 9). The _Bh\u0101shya_ says:\n\u201cthe v\u0101san\u0101 is like the memory (sm\u1e5bti), and so there can be memory from\nthe impressions of past lives separated by many lives and by remote\ntracts of country. From these memories the impressions (sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras) are\nderived, and the memories are revived by manifestation of the\nkarm\u0101\u015bayas, and though memories from past impressions may have many\nlives intervening, these interventions do not destroy the causal\nantecedence of those past lives\u201d (IV. 9).\n\nThese v\u0101san\u0101s are, however, beginningless, for a baby just after birth\nis seen to feel the fear of death instinctively, and it could not have\nderived it from its experience in this life. Again, if a small baby is\nthrown upwards, it is seen to shake and cry like a grown-up man, and\nfrom this it may be inferred that it is afraid of falling down on the\nground and is therefore shaking through fear. Now this baby has never\nlearnt in this life from experience that a fall on the ground will cause\npain, for it has never fallen on the ground and suffered pain therefrom;\nso the cause of this fear cannot be sought in the experiences of this\nlife, but in the memory of past experiences of fall and pain arising\ntherefrom, which is innate in this life as v\u0101san\u0101 and causes this\ninstinctive fear. So this innate memory which causes instinctive fear of\ndeath from the very time of birth, has not its origin in this life but\nis the memory of the experience of some previous life, and in that life,\ntoo, it existed as innate memory of some other previous life, and in\nthat again as the innate memory of some other life and so on to\nbeginningless time. This goes to show that the v\u0101san\u0101s are without\nbeginning.\n\nWe come now to the question of unigenitality\u2014ekabhavikatva\u2014of the\nkarm\u0101\u015baya and its exceptions. We find that great confusion has occurred\namong the commentators about the following passage in the _Bh\u0101shya_\nwhich refers to this subject: The _Bh\u0101shya_ according to V\u0101caspati in\nII. 13 reads: _tatra d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012byasya niyatavip\u0101kasya_, etc. Here\nBhikshu and N\u0101ge\u015ba read _tatr\u0101d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012byasya niyatavip\u0101kasya_,\netc. There is thus a divergence of meaning on this point between\n_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_ and his follower N\u0101ge\u015ba, on one side, and V\u0101caspati on\nthe other.\n\nV\u0101caspati says that the d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya (to be fructified in the\nsame visible life) karma is the only true karma where the karm\u0101\u015baya is\nekabhavika, unigenital, for here these effects are positively not due to\nthe karma of any other previous lives, but to the karma of that very\nlife. Thus these are the only true causes of ekabhavika karm\u0101\u015baya.\n\nThus according to V\u0101caspati we see that the ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya karma\n(to be fructified in another life) of unappointed fruition is never an\nideal of ekabhavikatva or unigenital character; for it may have three\ndifferent courses: (1) It may be destroyed without fruition. (2) It may\nbecome merged in the ruling action. (3) It may exist for a long time\noverpowered by the ruling action whose fruition has been appointed.\n\nVij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu and his follower N\u0101ge\u015ba, however, say that the\nd\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya karma (to be fructified in the same visible life)\ncan never be ekabhavika or unigenital for there is no bhava, or previous\nbirth there, whose product is being fructified in that life, for this\nkarma is of that same visible life and not of some other previous bhava\nor life; and they agree in holding that it is for that reason that the\n_Bh\u0101shya_ makes no mention of this d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya karma; it is\nclear that the karm\u0101\u015baya in no other bhava is being fructified here.\nThus we see that about d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya karma, V\u0101caspati holds that\nit is the typical case of ekabhavika karma (karma of the same birth),\nwhereas Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu holds just the opposite view, viz. that the\nd\u1e5bh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya karma should by no means be considered as ekabhavika\nsince there is here no bhava or birth, it being fructified in the same\nlife.\n\nThe ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya karma (works to be fructified in another life)\nof unfixed fruition has three different courses: (I) As we have observed\nbefore, by the rise of _a\u015bukl\u0101k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a_ (neither black nor white) karma,\nthe other karmas\u2014_\u015bukla_ (black), _k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a_ (white) and _\u015buklak\u1e5bsh\u1e47a_\n(both black and white)\u2014are rooted out. The \u015bukla karm\u0101\u015baya again arising\nfrom study and asceticism destroys the k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a karmas without their being\nable to generate their effects. These therefore can never be styled\nekabhavika, since they are destroyed without producing any effect. (II)\nWhen the effects of minor actions are merged in the effects of the major\nand ruling action. The sins originating from the sacrifice of animals at\na holy sacrifice are sure to produce bad effects, though they may be\nminor and small in comparison with the good effects arising from the\nperformance of the sacrifice in which they are merged. Thus it is said\nthat the experts being immersed in floods of happiness brought about by\ntheir sacrifices bear gladly particles of the fire of sorrow brought\nabout by the sin of killing animals at sacrifice. So we see that here\nalso the minor actions having been performed with the major do not\nproduce their effects independently, and so all their effects are not\nfully manifested, and hence these secondary karm\u0101\u015bayas cannot be\nregarded as ekabhavika. (III) Again the ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya karma (to\nbe fructified in another life) of unfixed fruition (_aniyata vip\u0101ka_)\nremains overcome for a long time by another ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya karma\nof fixed fruition. A man may for example do some good actions and some\nextremely vicious ones, so that at the time of death, the karm\u0101\u015baya of\nthose vicious actions becoming ripe and fit for appointed fruition,\ngenerates an animal life. His good action, whose benefits are such as\nmay be reaped only in a man-life, will remain overcome until the man is\nborn again as a man: so this also cannot be said to be ekabhavika (to be\nreaped in one life). We may summarise the classification of karmas\naccording to V\u0101caspati in a table as follows:\u2014\n\n                              Karm\u0101\u015baya\n                                  |\n              +-------------------+--------------------+\n              |                                        |\n          Ekabhavika                              Anekabhavika\n              |                                        |\n        Niyata Vip\u0101ka                            Aniyatavip\u0101ka\n     (of fixed fruition).                              |\n              |                              Ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya\n       +------+--------------------+                   |\n       |                           |                   |\n D\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya    Ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya           |\n                                                       |\n                           +----------------+----------+-----+\n                           |                |                |\n                     (Destruction)    (Merged in the     (To remain\n                                       effect of the      overcome by\n                                       major action.)     the influence\n                                                          of some other\n                                                          action.)\n\nThus the karm\u0101\u015baya may be viewed from two sides, one being that of fixed\nfruition and the other unfixed fruition, and the other that of\nd\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya and ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya. Now the theory is that the\nniyatavip\u0101ka (of fixed fruition) karm\u0101\u015baya is always ekabhavika, i.e. it\ndoes not remain separated by other lives, but directly produces its\neffects in the succeeding life.\n\nEkabhavika means that which is produced from the accumulation of karmas\nin one life in the life which succeeds it. V\u0101caspati, however, takes it\nalso to mean that action which attains fruition in the same life in\nwhich it is performed, whereas what Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu understands by\nekabhavika is that action alone which is produced in the life\nimmediately succeeding the life in which it was accumulated. So\naccording to Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu, the niyata vip\u0101ka (of fixed fruition)\nd\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya (to be fructified in the same life) action is not\nekabhavika, since it has no bhava, i.e. it is not the production of a\npreceding life. Neither can it be anekabhavika; thus this\nniyatavip\u0101kad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya action is neither ekabhavika nor\nanekbhavika. Whereas V\u0101caspati is inclined to call this also ekabhavika.\nAbout the niyatavip\u0101ka-ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya action being called\nekabhavika (unigenital) there seems to be no dispute. The\naniyatavip\u0101ka-ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya action cannot be called ekabhavika as\nit undergoes three different courses described above.\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER X\n                          THE ETHICAL PROBLEM\n\n\nWe have described avidy\u0101 and its special forms as the kle\u015bas, from which\nalso proceed the actions virtuous and vicious, which in their turn again\nproduce as a result of their fruition, birth, life and experiences of\npleasure and pain and the v\u0101san\u0101s or residues of the memory of these\nexperiences. Again every new life or birth is produced from the\nfructification of actions of a previous life; a man is made to perform\nactions good or bad by the kle\u015bas which are rooted in him, and these\nactions, as a result of their fructification, produce another life and\nits experiences, in which life again new actions are earned by virtue of\nthe kle\u015bas, and thus the cycle is continued. When there is pralaya or\ninvolution of the cosmical world-process the individual cittas of the\nseparate purushas return back to the prak\u1e5bti and lie within it, together\nwith their own avidy\u0101s, and at the time of each new creation or\nevolution these are created anew with such changes as are due according\nto their individual avidy\u0101s, with which they had to return back to their\noriginal cause, the prak\u1e5bti, and spend an indivisible inseparable\nexistence with it. The avidy\u0101s of some other creation, being merged in\nthe prak\u1e5bti along with the cittas, remain in the prak\u1e5bti as v\u0101san\u0101s, and\nprak\u1e5bti being under the influence of these avidy\u0101s as v\u0101san\u0101s creates as\nmodifications of itself the corresponding minds for the individual\npurushas, connected with them before the last pralaya dissolution. So we\nsee that though the cittas had returned to their original causes with\ntheir individual nescience (_avidy\u0101_), the avidy\u0101 was not lost but was\nrevived at the time of the new creation and created such minds as should\nbe suitable receptacles for it. These minds (buddhi) are found to be\nmodified further into their specific cittas or mental planes by the same\navidy\u0101 which is manifested in them as the kle\u015bas, and these again in the\nkarm\u0101\u015baya, j\u0101ti, \u0101yush and bhoga, and so on; the individual, however, is\njust in the same position as he was or would have been before the\ninvolution of pralaya. The avidy\u0101s of the cittas which had returned to\nthe prak\u1e5bti at the time of the creation being revived, create their own\nbuddhis of the previous creation, and by their connection with the\nindividual purushas are the causes of the sa\u1e43s\u0101ra or cosmic\nevolution\u2014the evolution of the microcosm, the cittas, and the macrocosm\nor the exterior world.\n\nIn this new creation, the creative agencies of God and avidy\u0101 are thus\ndistinguished in that the latter represents the end or purpose of the\nprak\u1e5bti\u2014the ever-evolving energy transforming itself into its\nmodifications as the mental and the material world; whereas the former\nrepresents that intelligent power which abides outside the pale of\nprak\u1e5bti, but removes obstructions offered by the prak\u1e5bti. Though\nunintelligent and not knowing how and where to yield so as to form the\nactual modifications necessary for the realisation of the particular and\nspecific objects of the numberless purushas, these avidy\u0101s hold within\nthemselves the serviceability of the purushas, and are the cause of the\nconnection of the purusha and the prak\u1e5bti, so that when these avidy\u0101s\nare rooted out it is said that the purush\u0101rthat\u0101 or serviceability of\nthe purusha is at an end and the purusha becomes liberated from the\nbonds of prak\u1e5bti, and this is called the final goal of the purusha.\n\nThe ethical problem of the P\u0101ta\u00f1jala philosophy is the uprooting of this\navidy\u0101 by the attainment of true knowledge of the nature of the purusha,\nwhich will be succeeded by the liberation of the purusha and his\nabsolute freedom or independence\u2014kaivalya\u2014the last realisation of the\npurusha\u2014the ultimate goal of all the movements of the prak\u1e5bti.\n\nThis final uprooting of the avidy\u0101 with its v\u0101san\u0101s directly follows the\nattainment of true knowledge called praj\u00f1\u0101, in which state the seed of\nfalse knowledge is altogether burnt and cannot be revived again. Before\nthis state, the discriminative knowledge which arises as the recognition\nof the distinct natures of purusha and buddhi remains shaky; but when by\ncontinual practice this discriminative knowledge becomes strengthened in\nthe mind, its potency gradually grows stronger and stronger, and roots\nout the potency of the ordinary states of mental activity, and thus the\nseed of false knowledge becomes burnt up and incapable of fruition, and\nthe impurity of the energy of rajas being removed, the sattva as the\nmanifesting entity becomes of the highest purity, and in that state\nflows on the stream of the notion of discrimination\u2014the recognition of\nthe distinct natures of purusha and buddhi\u2014free from impurity. Thus when\nthe state of buddhi becomes almost as pure as the purusha itself, all\nself-enquiry subsides, the vision of the real form of the purusha\narises, and false knowledge, together with the kle\u015bas and the consequent\nfruition of actions, ceases once for all. This is that state of citta\nwhich, far from tending towards the objective world, tends towards the\nkaivalya of the purusha.\n\nIn the first stages, when the mind attains discriminative knowledge, the\npraj\u00f1\u0101 is not deeply seated, and occasionally phenomenal states of\nconsciousness are seen to intervene in the form of \u201cI am,\u201d \u201cMine,\u201d \u201cI\nknow,\u201d \u201cI do not know,\u201d because the old potencies, though becoming\nweaker and weaker are not finally destroyed, and consequently\noccasionally produce their corresponding conscious manifestation as\nstates which impede the flow of discriminative knowledge. But constant\npractice in rooting out the potency of this state destroys the potencies\nof the outgoing activity, and finally no intervention occurs in the flow\nof the stream of praj\u00f1\u0101 through the destructive influence of phenomenal\nstates of consciousness. In this higher state when the mind is in its\nnatural, passive, and objectless stream of flowing praj\u00f1\u0101, it is called\nthe dharmamegha-sa\u1e41\u0101dhi. When nothing is desired even from dhy\u0101na arises\nthe true knowledge which distinguishes prak\u1e5bti from purusha and is\ncalled the dharmamegha-sam\u0101dhi (_Yoga-s\u016btra_, IV. 29). The potency,\nhowever, of this state of consciousness lasts until the purusha is\nfinally liberated from the bonds of prak\u1e5bti and is absolutely free\n(keval\u012b). Now this is the state when the citta becomes infinite, and all\nits tamas being finally overcome, it shines forth like the sun, which\ncan reflect all, and in comparison to which the crippled insignificant\nlight of objective knowledge shrinks altogether, and thus an infinitude\nis acquired, which has absorbed within itself all finitude, which cannot\nhave any separate existence or manifestation through this infinite\nknowledge. All finite states of knowledge are only a limitation of true\ninfinite knowledge, in which there is no limitation of this and that. It\nabsorbs within itself all these limitations.\n\nThe purusha in this state may be called the emancipated being,\nj\u012bvanmukta. N\u0101ge\u015ba in explaining _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, IV. 31, describing the\nemancipated life says: \u201cIn this j\u012bvanmukta stage, being freed from all\nimpure afflictions and karmas, the consciousness shines in its\ninfirmity. The infiniteness of consciousness is different from the\ninfiniteness of materiality veiled by tamas. In those stages there could\nbe consciousness only with reference to certain things with reference to\nwhich the veil of tamas was raised by rajas. When all veils and\nimpurities are removed, then little is left which is not known. If there\nwere other categories besides the 25 categories, these also would then\nhave been known\u201d (_Ch\u0101y\u0101vy\u0101khy\u0101_, IV. 31).\n\nNow with the rise of such dharmamegha the succession of the changes of\nthe qualities is over, inasmuch as they have fulfilled their object by\nhaving achieved experience and emancipation, and their succession having\nended, they cannot stay even for a moment. And now comes absolute\nfreedom, when the gu\u1e47as return back to the pradh\u0101na their primal cause,\nafter performing their service for the purusha by providing his\nexperience and his salvation, so that they lose all their hold on\npurusha and purusha remains as he is in himself, and never again has any\nconnection with the buddhi. The purusha remains always in himself in\nabsolute freedom.\n\nThe order of the return of the gu\u1e47as for a keval\u012b purusha is described\nbelow in the words of V\u0101caspati: The gu\u1e47as as cause and effect involving\nordinary experiences sam\u0101dhi and nirodha, become submerged in the manas;\nthe manas becomes submerged in the asmit\u0101, the asmit\u0101 in the li\u1e45ga, and\nthe li\u1e45ga in the ali\u1e45ga.\n\nThis state of kaivalya must be distinguished from the state of\nmah\u0101pralaya in which also the gu\u1e47as return back to prak\u1e5bti, for that\nstate is again succeeded by later connections of prak\u1e5bti with purushas\nthrough the buddhis, but the state of kaivalya is an eternal state which\nis never again disturbed by any connection with prak\u1e5bti, for now the\nseparation of prak\u1e5bti from purusha is eternal, whereas that in the\nmah\u0101pralaya state was only temporary.\n\nWe shall conclude this section by noting two kinds of eternity of\npurusha and of prak\u1e5bti, and by offering a criticism of the praj\u00f1\u0101 state.\nThe former is said to be perfectly and unchangeably eternal (_k\u016b\u1e6dastha\nnitya_), and the latter is only eternal in an evolutionary form. The\npermanent or eternal reality is that which remains unchanged amid its\nchanging appearances; and from this point of view both purusha and\nprak\u1e5bti are eternal. It is indeed true, as we have seen just now, that\nthe succession of changes of qualities with regard to buddhi, etc.,\ncomes to an end when kaivalya is attained, but this is with reference to\npurusha, for the changes of qualities in the gu\u1e47as themselves never come\nto an end. So the gu\u1e47as in themselves are eternal in their changing or\nevolutionary character, and are therefore said to possess evolutionary\neternity (_pari\u1e47\u0101minityat\u0101_). Our phenomenal conception cannot be free\nfrom change, and therefore it is that in our conception of the released\npurushas we affirm their existence, as for example when we say that the\nreleased purushas exist eternally. But it must be carefully noted that\nthis is due to the limited character of our thoughts and expressions,\nnot to the real nature of the released purushas, which remain for ever\nunqualified by any changes or modifications, pure and colourless as the\nvery self of shining intelligence (see _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, IV. 33).\n\nWe shall conclude this section by giving a short analysis of the praj\u00f1\u0101\nstate from its first appearance to the final release of purusha from the\nbondage of prak\u1e5bti. Pata\u00f1jali says that this praj\u00f1\u0101 state being final in\neach stage is sevenfold. Of these the first four stages are due to our\nconscious endeavour, and when these conscious states of praj\u00f1\u0101\n(supernatural wisdom) flow in a stream and are not hindered or\ninterfered with in any way by other phenomenal conscious states of\npratyayas the purusha becomes finally liberated through the natural\nbackward movement of the citta to its own primal cause, and this\nbackward movement is represented by the other three stages.\n\nThe seven praj\u00f1\u0101 stages may be thus enumerated:\u2014\n\nI. The pain to be removed is known. Nothing further remains to be known\nof it.\n\nThis is the first aspect of the praj\u00f1\u0101, in which the person willing to\nbe released knows that he has exhausted all that is knowable of the\npains.\n\nII. The cause of the pains has been removed and nothing further remains\nto be removed of it. This is the second stage or aspect of the rise of\npraj\u00f1\u0101.\n\nIII. The nature of the extinction of pain has already been perceived by\nme in the state of sam\u0101dhi, so that I have come to learn that the final\nextinction of my pain will be something like it.\n\nIV. The final discrimination of prak\u1e5bti and purusha, the true and\nimmediate means of the extinction of pain, has been realised.\n\nAfter this stage, nothing remains to be done by the purusha himself. For\nthis is the attainment of final true knowledge. It is also called the\npara vair\u0101gya. It is the highest consummation, in which the purusha has\nno further duties to perform. This is therefore called the k\u0101rya vimukti\n(or salvation depending on the endeavour of the purusha) or j\u012bvanmukti.\n\nAfter this follows the citta vimukti or the process of release of the\npurusha from the citta, in three stages.\n\nV. The aspect of the buddhi, which has finally finished its services to\npurusha by providing scope for purusha\u2019s experiences and release; so\nthat it has nothing else to perform for purusha. This is the first stage\nof the retirement of the citta.\n\nVI. As soon as this state is attained, like the falling of stones thrown\nfrom the summit of a hill, the gu\u1e47as cannot remain even for a moment to\nbind the purusha, but at once return back to their primal cause, the\nprak\u1e5bti; for the avidy\u0101 being rooted out, there is no tie or bond which\ncan keep it connected with purusha and make it suffer changes for the\nservice of purusha. All the purush\u0101rthat\u0101 being ended, the gu\u1e47as\ndisappear of themselves.\n\nVII. The seventh and last aspect of the gu\u1e47as is that they never return\nback to bind purusha again, their teleological purpose being fulfilled\nor realised. It is of course easy to see that, in these last three\nstages, purusha has nothing to do; but the gu\u1e47as of their own nature\nsuffer these backward modifications and return back to their own primal\ncause and leave the purusha keval\u012b (for ever solitary). _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_,\nII. 15.\n\nVy\u0101sa says that as the science of medicine has four divisions: (1)\ndisease, (2) the cause of disease, (3) recovery, (4) medicines; so this\nYoga philosophy has also four divisions, viz.: (I) Sa\u1e43s\u0101ra (the\nevolution of the prak\u1e5bti in connection with the purusha). (II) The cause\nof sa\u1e43s\u0101ra. (III) Release. (IV) The means of release.\n\nOf these the first three have been described at some length above. We\nnow direct our attention to the fourth. We have shown above that the\nethical goal, the ideal to be realised, is absolute freedom or kaivalya,\nand we shall now consider the line of action that must be adopted to\nattain this goal\u2014the _summum bonum_. All actions which tend towards the\napproximate realisation of this goal for man are called ku\u015bala, and the\nman who achieves this goal is called ku\u015bal\u012b. It is in the inherent\npurpose of prak\u1e5bti that man should undergo pains which include all\nphenomenal experiences of pleasures as well, and ultimately adopt such a\ncourse of conduct as to avoid them altogether and finally achieve the\ntrue goal, the realisation of which will extinguish all pains for him\nfor ever. The motive therefore which prompts a person towards this\nethico-metaphysical goal is the avoidance of pain. An ordinary man feels\npain only in actual pain, but a Yogin who is as highly sensitive as the\neye-ball, feels pain in pleasure as well, and therefore is determined to\navoid all experiences, painful or so-called pleasurable. The\nextinguishing of all experiences, however, is not the true ethical goal,\nbeing only a means to the realisation of kaivalya or the true self and\nnature of the purusha. But this means represents the highest end of a\nperson, the goal beyond which all his duties cease; for after this comes\nkaivalya which naturally manifests itself on the necessary retirement of\nthe prak\u1e5bti. Purusha has nothing to do in effectuating this state, which\ncomes of itself. The duties of the purusha cease with the thorough\nextinguishing of all his experiences. This therefore is the means of\nextinguishing all his pains, which are the highest end of all his\nduties; but the complete extinguishing of all pains is identical with\nthe extinguishing of all experiences, the states or v\u1e5bttis of\nconsciousness, and this again is identical with the rise of praj\u00f1\u0101 or\ntrue discriminative knowledge of the difference in nature of prak\u1e5bti and\nits effects from the purusha\u2014the unchangeable. These three sides are\nonly the three aspects of the same state which immediately precede\nkaivalya. The praj\u00f1\u0101 aspect is the aspect of the highest knowledge, the\nsuppression of the states of consciousness or experiences, and it is the\naspect of the cessation of all conscious activity and of painlessness or\nthe extinguishing of all pains as the feeling aspect of the same\nnirv\u012bja\u2014sam\u0101dhi state. But when the student directs his attention to\nthis goal in his ordinary states of experience, he looks at it from the\nside of the feeling aspect, viz. that of acquiring a state of\npainlessness, and as a means thereto he tries to purify the mind and be\nmoral in all his actions, and begins to restrain and suppress his mental\nstates, in order to acquire this nirv\u012bja or seedless state. This is the\nsphere of conduct which is called Yog\u0101\u1e45ga.\n\nOf course there is a division of duties according to the advancement of\nthe individual, as we shall have occasion to show hereafter. This\nsuppression of mental states which has been described as the means of\nattaining final release, the ultimate ethical goal of life, is called\nYoga. We have said before that of the five kinds of mind\u2014kshipta, m\u016b\u1e0dha,\nvikshipta, ek\u0101gra, niruddha\u2014only the last two are fit for the process of\nYoga and ultimately acquire absolute freedom. In the other three, though\nconcentration may occasionally happen, yet there is no extrication of\nthe mind from the afflictions of avidy\u0101 and consequently there is no\nfinal release.\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER XI\n                             YOGA PRACTICE\n\n\nThe Yoga which, after weakening the hold of the afflictions and causing\nthe real truth to dawn upon our mental vision, gradually leads us\ntowards the attainment of our final goal, is only possible for the last\ntwo kinds of minds and is of two kinds: (1) sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta (cognitive) and\n(2) asampraj\u00f1\u0101ta (ultra-cognitive). The sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta Yoga is that in\nwhich the mind is concentrated upon some object, external or internal,\nin such a way that it does not oscillate or move from one object to\nanother, but remains fixed and settled in the object that it holds\nbefore itself. At first, the Yogin holds a gross material object before\nhis view, but when he can make himself steady in doing this, he tries\nwith the subtle tanm\u0101tras, the five causes of the grosser elements, and\nwhen he is successful in this he takes his internal senses as his object\nand last of all, when he has fully succeeded in these attempts, he takes\nthe great egohood as his object, in which stage his object gradually\nloses all its determinate character and he is said to be in a state of\nsuppression in himself, although devoid of any object. This state, like\nthe other previous states of the sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta type, is a positive state\nof the mind and not a mere state of vacuity of objects or negativity. In\nthis state, all determinate character of the states disappears and their\npotencies only remain alive. In the first stages of a Yogin practising\nsam\u0101dhi conscious states of the lower stages often intervene, but\ngradually, as the mind becomes fixed, the potencies of the lower stages\nare overcome by the potencies of this stage, so that the mind flows in a\ncalm current and at last the higher praj\u00f1\u0101 dawns, whereupon the\npotencies of this state also are burnt and extinguished, the citta\nreturns back to its own primal cause, prak\u1e5bti, and purusha attains\nabsolute freedom.\n\nThe first four stages of the sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta state are called _madhumat\u012b_,\n_madhuprat\u012bka_, _vi\u015boka_ and the _sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra\u015besha_ and also\n_vitark\u0101nugata_, _vic\u0101r\u0101nugata_, _\u0101nand\u0101nugata_ and _asmit\u0101nugata_. True\nknowledge begins to dawn from the first stage of this sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta state,\nand when the Yogin reaches the last stage the knowledge reaches its\nculminating point, but still so long as the potencies of the lower\nstages of relative knowledge remain, the knowledge cannot obtain\nabsolute certainty and permanency, as it will always be threatened with\na possible encroachment by the other states of the past phenomenal\nactivity now existing as the subconscious. But the last stage of\nasampraj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi represents the stage in which the ordinary\nconsciousness has been altogether surpassed and the mind is in its own\ntrue infinite aspect, and the potencies of the stages in which the mind\nwas full of finite knowledge are also burnt, so that with the return of\nthe citta to its primal cause, final emancipation is effected. The last\nstate of sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi is called sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra\u015besha, only because here\nthe residua of the potencies of subconscious thought only remain and the\nactual states of consciousness become all extinct. It is now easy to see\nthat no mind which is not in the ek\u0101gra or one-pointed state can be fit\nfor the asampraj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi in which it has to settle itself on one\nobject and that alone. So also no mind which has not risen to the state\nof highest suppression is fit for the asampraj\u00f1\u0101ta or nirv\u012bja state.\n\nIt is now necessary to come down to a lower level and examine the\nobstructions, on account of which a mind cannot easily become\none-pointed or ek\u0101gra. These, nine in number, are the following:\u2014\n\nDisease, languor, indecision, want of the mental requirements necessary\nfor sam\u0101dhi, idleness of body and mind, attachment to objects of sense,\nfalse and illusory knowledge, non-attainment of the state of\nconcentrated contemplation, unsteadiness and unstability of the mind in\na sam\u0101dhi state even if it can somehow attain it. These are again seen\nto be accompanied with pain and despair owing to the non-fulfilment of\ndesire, physical shakiness or unsteadiness of the limbs, taking in of\nbreath and giving out of it, which are seen to follow the nine\ndistractions of a distracted mind described above.\n\nTo prevent these distractions and their accompaniments it is necessary\nthat we should practise concentration on one truth. V\u0101caspati says that\nthis one truth on which the mind should be settled and fixed is \u012a\u015bvara,\nand R\u0101m\u0101nanda Sarasvat\u012b and N\u0101r\u0101ya\u1e47a T\u012brtha agree with him. Vij\u00f1\u0101na\nBhikshu, however, says that one truth means any object, gross or fine,\nand Bhoja supports Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu, staying that here \u201cone truth\u201d might\nmean any desirable object.\n\nAbhy\u0101sa means the steadiness of the mind in one state and not complete\nabsence of any state; for the Bh\u0101shyak\u0101ra himself has said in the\nsam\u0101pattis\u016btra, that sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta trance comes after this steadiness. As\nwe shall see later, it means nothing but the application of the five\nmeans, \u015braddh\u0101, v\u012brya, sm\u1e5bti, sam\u0101dhi and praj\u00f1\u0101; it is an endeavour to\nsettle the mind on one state, and as such does not differ from the\napplication of the five means of Yoga with a view to settle and steady\nthe mind (_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, I. 13). This effort becomes firmly rooted,\nbeing well attended to for a long time without interruption and with\ndevotion.\n\nNow it does not matter very much whether this one truth is \u012a\u015bvara or any\nother object; for the true principle of Yoga is the setting of the mind\non one truth, principle or object. But for an ordinary man this is no\neasy matter; for in order to be successful the mind must be equipped\nwith \u015braddh\u0101 or faith\u2014the firm conviction of the Yogin in the course\nthat he adopts. This keeps the mind steady, pleased, calm and free from\ndoubts of any kind, so that the Yogin may proceed to the realisation of\nhis object without any vacillation. Unless a man has a firm hold on the\ncourse that he pursues, all the steadiness that he may acquire will\nconstantly be threatened with the danger of a sudden collapse. It will\nbe seen that vair\u0101gya or desirelessness is only the negative aspect of\nthis \u015braddh\u0101. For by it the mind is restrained from the objects of\nsense, with an aversion or dislike towards the objects of sensual\npleasure and worldly desires; this aversion towards worldly joys is only\nthe other aspect of the faith of the mind and the calmness of its\ncurrents (_cittapras\u0101da_) towards right knowledge and absolute freedom.\nSo it is said that the vair\u0101gya is the effect of \u015braddh\u0101 and its product\n(_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, I. 20). In order to make a person suitable for Yoga,\nvair\u0101gya represents the cessation of the mind from the objects of sense\nand their so-called pleasures, and \u015braddh\u0101 means the positive faith of\nthe mind in the path of Yoga that one adopts, and the right aspiration\ntowards attaining the highest goal of absolute freedom.\n\nIn its negative aspect, vair\u0101gya is of two kinds, apara and para. The\napara is that of a mind free from attachment to worldly enjoyments, such\nas women, food, drinks and power, as also from thirst for heavenly\npleasures attainable by practising the vedic rituals and sacrifices.\nThose who are actuated by apara vair\u0101gya do not desire to remain in a\nbodiless state (_videha_) merged in the senses or merged in the prak\u1e5bti\n(_prak\u1e5btil\u012bna_). It is a state in which the mind is indifferent to all\nkinds of pleasures and pains. This vair\u0101gya may be said to have four\nstages: (1) Yatam\u0101na\u2014in which sensual objects are discovered to be\ndefective and the mind recoils from them. (2) Vyatireka\u2014in which the\nsenses to be conquered are noted. (3) Ekendriya\u2014in which attachment\ntowards internal pleasures and aversion towards external pains, being\nremoved, the mind sets before it the task of removing attachment and\naversion towards mental passions for obtaining honour or avoiding\ndishonour, etc. (4) The fourth and last stage of vair\u0101gya called\nva\u015b\u012bk\u0101ra is that in which the mind has perceived the futility of all\nattractions towards external objects of sense and towards the pleasures\nof heaven, and having suppressed them altogether feels no attachment,\neven should it come into connection with them.\n\nWith the consummation of this last stage of apara vair\u0101gya, comes the\npara vair\u0101gya which is identical with the rise of the final praj\u00f1\u0101\nleading to absolute independence. This vair\u0101gya, \u015braddh\u0101 and the abhy\u0101sa\nrepresent the unafflicted states (aklish\u1e6dav\u1e5btti) which suppress\ngradually the klish\u1e6da or afflicted mental states. These lead the Yogin\nfrom one stage to another, and thus he proceeds higher and higher until\nthe final state is attained.\n\nAs vair\u0101gya advances, \u015braddh\u0101 also advances; from \u015braddh\u0101 comes v\u012brya,\nenergy, or power of concentration (_dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101_); and from it again springs\nsm\u1e5bti\u2014or continuity of one object of thought; and from it comes sam\u0101dhi\nor cognitive and ultra-cognitive trance; after which follows praj\u00f1\u0101,\ncognitive and ultra-cognitive trance; after which follows praj\u00f1\u0101 and\nfinal release. Thus by the inclusion of \u015braddh\u0101 within vair\u0101gya, its\neffect, and the other products of \u015braddh\u0101 with abhy\u0101sa, we see that the\nabhy\u0101sa and vair\u0101gya are the two internal means for achieving the final\ngoal of the Yogin, the supreme suppression and extinction of all states\nof consciousness, of all afflictions and the avidy\u0101\u2014the last state of\nsupreme knowledge or praj\u00f1\u0101.\n\nAs \u015braddh\u0101, v\u012brya, sm\u1e5bti, sam\u0101dhi which are not different from vair\u0101gya\nand abhy\u0101sa (they being only their other aspects or simultaneous\nproducts), are the means of attaining Yoga, it is possible to make a\nclassification of the Yogins according to the strength of these with\neach, and the strength of the quickness (_sa\u1e43vega_) with which they may\nbe applied towards attaining the goal of the Yogin. Thus Yogins are of\nnine kinds:\u2014\n\n(1) mildly energetic, (2) of medium energy, (3) of intense energy.\n\nEach of these may vary in a threefold way according to the mildness,\nmedium state, or intensity of quickness or readiness with which the\nYogin may apply the means of attaining Yoga. There are nine kinds of\nYogins. Of these the best is he whose mind is most intensely engaged and\nwhose practice is also the strongest.\n\nThere is a difference of opinion here about the meaning of the word\nsa\u1e43vega, between V\u0101caspati and Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu. The former says that\nsa\u1e43vega means vair\u0101gya here, but the latter holds that sa\u1e43vega cannot\nmean vair\u0101gya, and vair\u0101gya being the effect of \u015braddh\u0101 cannot be taken\nseparately from it. \u201cSa\u1e43vega\u201d means quickness in the performance of the\nmeans of attaining Yoga; some say that it means \u201cvair\u0101gya.\u201d But that is\nnot true, for if vair\u0101gya is an effect of the due performance of the\nmeans of Yoga, there cannot be the separate ninefold classification of\nYoga apart from the various degrees of intensity of the means of Yoga\npractice. Further, the word \u201csa\u1e43vega\u201d does not mean \u201cvair\u0101gya\u201d\netymologically (_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, I. 20).\n\nWe have just seen that \u015braddh\u0101, etc., are the means of attaining Yoga,\nbut we have not discussed what purificatory actions an ordinary man must\nperform in order to attain \u015braddh\u0101, from which the other requisites are\nderived. Of course these purificatory actions are not the same for all,\nsince they must necessarily depend upon the conditions of purity or\nimpurity of each mind; thus a person already in an advanced state, may\nnot need to perform those purificatory actions necessary for a man in a\nlower state. We have just said that Yogins are of nine kinds, according\nto the strength of their mental acquirements\u2014\u015braddh\u0101, etc.\u2014the requisite\nmeans of Yoga and the degree of rapidity with which they may be applied.\nNeglecting division by strength or quickness of application along with\nthese mental requirements, we may again divide Yogins again into three\nkinds: (1) Those who have the best mental equipment. (2) Those who are\nmediocres. (3) Those who have low mental equipment.\n\nIn the first chapter of Yoga aphorisms, it has been stated that abhy\u0101sa,\nthe application of the mental acquirements of \u015braddh\u0101, etc., and\nvair\u0101gya, the consequent cessation of the mind from objects of\ndistraction, lead to the extinction of all our mental states and to\nfinal release. When a man is well developed, he may rest content with\nhis mental actions alone, in his abhy\u0101sa and vair\u0101gya, in his dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101\n(concentration), dhy\u0101na (meditation), and sam\u0101dhi (trance), which may be\ncalled the j\u00f1\u0101nayoga. But it is easy to see that this j\u00f1\u0101nayoga requires\nvery high mental powers and thus is not within easy reach of ordinary\npersons. Ordinary persons whose minds are full of impurities, must pass\nthrough a certain course of purificatory actions before they can hope to\nobtain those mental acquirements by which they can hope to follow the\ncourse of j\u00f1\u0101nayoga with facility.\n\nThese actions, which remove the impurities of the mind, and thus\ngradually increase the lustre of knowledge, until the final state of\nsupreme knowledge is acquired, are called kriy\u0101yoga. They are also\ncalled yog\u0101\u1e45gas, as they help the maturity of the Yoga process by\ngradually increasing the lustre of knowledge. They represent the means\nby which even an ordinary mind (_vikshiptacitta_) may gradually purify\nitself and become fit for the highest ideals of Yoga. Thus the _Bh\u0101shya_\nsays: \u201cBy the sustained practice of these yog\u0101\u1e45gas or accessories of\nYoga is destroyed the fivefold unreal cognition (_avidy\u0101_), which is of\nthe nature of impurity.\u201d Destruction means here disappearance; thus when\nthat is destroyed, real knowledge is manifested. As the means of\nachievement are practised more and more, so is the impurity more and\nmore attenuated. And as more and more of it is destroyed, so does the\nlight of wisdom go on increasing more and more. This process reaches its\nculmination in discriminative knowledge, which is knowledge of the\nnature of purusha and the gu\u1e47as.\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER XII\n                              THE YOG\u0100\u1e44GAS\n\n\nNow the assertion that these actions are the causes of the attainment of\nsalvation brings up the question of the exact natures of their operation\nwith regard to this supreme attainment. Bh\u0101shyakara says with respect to\nthis that they are the causes of the separation of the impurities of the\nmind just as an axe is the cause of the splitting of a piece of wood;\nand again they are the causes of the attainment of the supreme knowledge\njust as dha\u1e5bma is the cause of happiness. It must be remembered that\naccording to the Yoga theory causation is viewed as mere transformation\nof energy; the operation of concomitant causes only removes obstacles\nimpeding the progress of these transformations in a particular\ndirection; no cause can of itself produce any effect, and the only way\nin which it can help the production of an effect into which the causal\nstate passes out of its own immanent energy by the principles of\nconservation and transformation of energy, is by removing the\nintervening obstacles. Thus just as the passage of citta into a happy\nstate is helped by dharma removing the intervening obstacles, so also\nthe passage of the citta into the state of attainment of true knowledge\nis helped by the removal of obstructions due to the performance of the\nyog\u0101\u1e45gas; the necessary obstructions being removed, the citta passes\nnaturally of itself into this infinite state of attainment of true\nknowledge, in which all finitude is merged.\n\nIn connection with this, Vy\u0101sa mentions nine kinds of operation of\ncauses: (1) cause of birth; (2) of preservation; (3) of manifestation;\n(4) of modification; (5) knowledge of a premise leading to a deduction;\n(6) of otherness; (7) of separation; (8) of attainment; (9) of upholding\n(_Vy\u0101sabh\u0101shya_, II. 28.)\n\nThe principle of conservation of energy and transformation of energy\nbeing the root idea of causation in this system, these different aspects\nrepresent the different points of view in which the word causation is\ngenerally used.\n\nThus, the first aspect as the cause of birth or production is seen when\nknowledge springs from manas which renders indefinite cognition definite\nso that mind is called the cause of the birth of knowledge. Here mind is\nthe material cause (_up\u0101d\u0101na k\u0101ra\u1e47a_) of the production of knowledge,\nfor knowledge is nothing but manas with its particular modifications as\nstates (_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, II. 18). The difference of these positive cause\nfrom _\u0101ptik\u0101ra\u1e47a_, which operates only in a negative way and helps\nproduction, in an indirect way by the removal of obstacles, is quite\nmanifest. The _sthitik\u0101ra\u1e47a_ or cause through which things are preserved\nas they are, is the end they serve; thus the serviceability of purusha\nis the cause of the existence and preservation of the mind as it is, and\nnot only of mind but of all our phenomenal experiences.\n\nThe third cause of the _abhivyaktik\u0101ra\u1e47a_ or manifestation which is\ncompared to a lamp which manifests things before our view is an\nepistemological cause, and as such includes all sense activity in\nconnection with material objects which produce cognition.\n\nThen come the fourth and the fifth causes, vik\u0101ra (change) and pratyaya\n(inseparable connection); thus the cause of change (_vik\u0101ra_) is\nexemplified as that which causes a change; thus the manas suffers a\nchange by the objects presented to it, just as bile changes and digests\nthe food that is eaten; the cause of pratyaya[41] is that in which from\ninseparable connection, with the knowledge of the premise (e.g. there is\nsmoke in the hill) we can also have inferential knowledge of the other\n(e.g. there is fire in the hill). The sixth cause as otherness\n(_anyatva_) is that which effects changes of form as that brought about\nby a goldsmith in gold when he makes a bangle from it, and then again a\nnecklace, is regarded as differing from the change spoken of as vik\u0101ra.\nNow the difference between the gold being turned into bangles or\nnecklaces and the raw rice being turned into soft rice is this, that in\nthe former case when bangles are made out of gold, the gold remains the\nsame in each case, whereas in the case of the production of cooked rice\nfrom raw by fire, the case is different, for heat changes paddy in a far\nmore definite way; goldsmith and heat are both indeed efficient causes,\nbut the former only effects mechanical changes of shape and form,\nwhereas the latter is the cause of structural and chemical changes. Of\ncourse these are only examples from the physical world, their causal\noperations in the mental sphere varying in a corresponding manner; thus\nthe change produced in the mind by the presentation of different\nobjects, follows a law which is the same as is found in the physical\nworld, when the same object causes different kinds of feelings in\ndifferent persons; when ignorance causes forgetfulness in a thing, anger\nmakes it painful and desire makes it pleasurable, but knowledge of its\ntrue reality produces indifference; there is thus the same kind of\ncausal change as is found in the external world. Next for consideration\nis the cause of separation (_viyoga_) which is only a negative aspect of\nthe positive side of the causes of transformations, as in the gradual\nextinction of impurities, consequent upon the transformation of the\ncitta towards the attainment of the supreme state of absolute\nindependence through discriminative knowledge. The last cause for\nconsideration is that of upholding (_dh\u1e5bti_); thus the body upholds the\nsenses and supports them for the actualisation of their activities in\nthe body, just as the five gross elements are the upholding causes of\norganic bodies; the bodies of animals, men, etc., also employ one\nanother for mutual support. Thus the human body lives by eating the\nbodies of many animals; the bodies of tigers, etc., live on the bodies\nof men and other animals; many animals live on the bodies of plants,\netc. (_Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, II. 28). The four kinds of causes mentioned in\n\u015aa\u1e45kara\u2019s works and grammatical commentaries like that of Sushe\u1e47a, viz.:\nutp\u0101dya, vik\u0101ryya, \u0101pya and sa\u1e43sk\u0101ryya, are all included within the nine\ncauses contained mentioned by Vy\u0101sa.\n\nThe yog\u0101\u1e45gas not only remove the impurities of the mind but help it\nfurther by removing obstacles in the way of attaining the highest\nperfection of discriminative knowledge. Thus they are the causes in a\ndouble sense (1) of the dissociation of impurities (_viyogak\u0101ra\u1e47a_); (2)\nof removing obstacles which impede the course of the mind in attaining\nthe highest development (_\u0101ptik\u0101ra\u1e47a_).\n\nComing now to the yog\u0101\u1e45gas, we enumerate them thus:\u2014restraint,\nobservance, posture, regulation of breath, abstraction, concentration,\nmeditation and trance: these are the eight accessories of Yoga.\n\nIt must be remembered that abhy\u0101sa and vair\u0101gya and also the five means\nof attaining Yoga, viz.: \u015braddh\u0101, v\u012bryya, etc., which are not different\nfrom abhy\u0101sa and vair\u0101gya, are by their very nature included within the\nyog\u0101\u1e45gas mentioned above, and are not to be considered as independent\nmeans different from them. The parikarmas or embellishments of the mind\nspoken of in the first chapter, with which we shall deal later on, are\nalso included under the three yog\u0101\u1e45gas dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101, dhy\u0101na and sam\u0101dhi. The\nfive means \u015braddh\u0101, v\u012bryya, sm\u1e5bti, sam\u0101dhi and praj\u00f1\u0101 are said to be\nincluded under asceticism (_tapa\u1e25_) studies (_sv\u0101dhy\u0101ya_) and devotion\nto God of the niyamas and vair\u0101gya in contentment.\n\nIn order to understand these better, we will first give the definitions\nof the yog\u0101\u1e45gas and then discuss them and ascertain their relative\nvalues for a man striving to attain the highest perfection of Yoga.\n\nI. Yama (restraint). These yama restraints are: abstinence from injury\n(ahi\u1e43s\u0101); veracity; abstinence from theft; continence; abstinence from\navarice.\n\nII. Niyama (observances). These observances are cleanliness,\ncontentment, purificatory action, study and the making of God the motive\nof all action.\n\nIII. \u0100sanas (posture). Steady posture and easy position are regarded as\nan aid to breath control.\n\nIV. Regulation of breath (pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma) is the stoppage of the inspiratory\nand expiratory movements (of breath) which may be practised when\nsteadiness of posture has been secured.\n\nV. Praty\u0101h\u0101ra (abstraction). With the control of the mind all the senses\nbecome controlled and the senses imitate as it were the vacant state of\nthe mind. Abstraction is that by which the senses do not come in contact\nwith their objects and follow as it were the nature of the mind.\n\nVI. Dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101 (concentration). Concentration is the steadfastness of the\nmind applied to a particular object.\n\nVII. Dhy\u0101na (mediation). The continuation there of the mental effort by\ncontinually repeating the object is meditation (dhy\u0101na).\n\nVIII. Sam\u0101dhi (trance contemplation). The same as above when shining\nwith the light of the object alone, and devoid as it were of itself, is\ntrance. In this state the mind becomes one with its object and there is\nno difference between the knower and the known.\n\nThese are the eight yog\u0101\u1e45gas which a Yogin must adopt for his higher\nrealisation. Of these again we see that some have the mental side more\npredominant, while others are mostly to be actualised in exterior\naction. Dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101, dhy\u0101na and sam\u0101dhi, which are purely of the sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta\ntype, and also the pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma and praty\u0101h\u0101ra, which are accessories to\nthem, serve to cleanse the mind of impurities and make it steady, and\ncan therefore be assimilated with the parikarmas mentioned in Book I.\nS\u016btras 34\u201339. These sam\u0101dhis of the sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta type, of course, only\nserve to steady the mind and to assist attaining discriminative\nknowledge.\n\nIn this connection, it will be well to mention the remaining aids for\ncleansing the mind as mentioned in _Yoga-s\u016btra_ I., viz. the cultivation\nof the habits of friendliness, compassion, complacency and indifference\ntowards happiness, misery, virtue and vice.\n\nThis means that we are to cultivate the habit of friendliness towards\nthose who are happy, which will remove all jealous feelings and purify\nthe mind. We must cultivate the habit of compassion towards those who\nare suffering pain; when the mind shows compassion (which means that it\nwishes to remove the miseries of others as if they were his own) it\nbecomes cleansed of the stain of desire to do injury to others, for\ncompassion is only another name for sympathy which naturally identifies\nthe compassionate one with the objects of his sympathy. Next comes the\nhabit of complacency, which one should diligently cultivate, for it\nleads to pleasure in virtuous deeds. This removes the stain of envy from\nthe mind. Next comes the habit of indifference, which we should acquire\ntowards vice in vicious persons. We should acquire the habit of\nremaining indifferent where we cannot sympathise; we should not on any\naccount get angry with the wicked or with those with whom sympathy is\nnot possible. This will remove the stain of anger. It will be clearly\nseen here that ma\u012btr\u012b, karu\u1e47\u0101, mudit\u0101 and upeksh\u0101 are only different\naspects of universal sympathy, which should remove all perversities in\nour nature and unite us with our fellow-beings. This is the positive\naspect of the mind with reference to abstinence from injuring ahi\u1e43s\u0101\n(mentioned under yamas), which will cleanse the mind and make it fit for\nthe application of means of \u015braddh\u0101, etc. For unless the mind is pure,\nthere is no scope for the application of the means of making it steady.\nThese are the mental endeavours to cleanse the mind and to make it fit\nfor the proper manifestation of \u015braddh\u0101, etc., and for steadying it with\na view to attaining true discriminative knowledge.\n\nAgain of the parikarmas by dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101, dhy\u0101na, and sa\u1e43praj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi and\nthe habit of sympathy as manifested in maitr\u012b, karu\u1e47\u0101, etc., the former\nis a more advanced state of the extinction of impurities than the\nlatter.\n\nBut it is easy to see that ordinary minds can never commence with these\npractices. They are naturally so impure that the positive universal\nsympathy as manifested in maitr\u012b, etc., by which turbidity of mind is\nremoved, is too difficult. It is also difficult for them to keep the\nmind steady on an object as in dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101, dhy\u0101na, and sam\u0101dhi, for only\nthose in advanced stages can succeed in this. For ordinary people,\ntherefore, some course of conduct must be discovered by which they can\npurify their minds and elevate them to such an extent that they may be\nin a position to avail themselves of the mental parikarmas or\npurifications just mentioned. Our minds become steady in proportion as\ntheir impurities are cleansed. The cleansing of impurities only\nrepresents the negative aspect of the positive side of making the mind\nsteady. The grosser impurities being removed, finer ones remain, and\nthese are removed by the mental parikarmas, supplemented by abhy\u0101sa or\nby \u015braddh\u0101, etc. As the impurities are gradually more and more\nattenuated, the last germs of impurity are destroyed by the force of\ndhy\u0101na or the habit of nirodha sam\u0101dhi, and kaivalya is attained.\n\nWe now deal with yamas, by which the gross impurities of ordinary minds\nare removed. They are, as we have said before, non-injury, truthfulness,\nnon-stealing, continence, and non-covetousness; of these non-injury is\ngiven such a high place that it is regarded as the root of the other\nyamas; truthfulness, non-stealing, continence, non-covetousness and the\nother niyamas mentioned previously only serve to make the non-injury\nperfect. We have seen before that maitr\u012b, karu\u1e47a, mudit\u0101 and upeksh\u0101\nserve to strengthen the non-injury since they are only its positive\naspects, but we see now that not only they but other yamas and also the\nother niyamas, purity, contentment, asceticism, studies and devotion to\nGod, only serve to make non-injury more and more perfect. This\nnon-injury when it is performed without being limited or restricted in\nany way by caste, country, time and circumstances, and is always adhered\nto, is called mah\u0101vrata or the great duty of abstinence from injury. It\nis sometimes limited to castes, as for example injury inflicted by a\nfisherman, and in this case it is called anuvrata or restricted ahi\u1e43s\u0101\nof ordinary men as opposed to universal ahi\u1e43s\u0101 of the Yogins called\nmah\u0101vrata; the same non-injury is limited by locality, as in the case of\na man who says to himself, \u201cI shall not cause injury at a sacred place\u201d;\nor by time, when a person says to himself, \u201cI shall not cause injury on\nthe sacred day of Caturda\u015b\u012b\u201d; or by circumstances, as when a man says to\nhimself, \u201cI shall cause injury for the sake of gods and Brahmans only\u201d;\nor when injury is caused by warriors in the battle-field alone and\nnowhere else. This restricted ahi\u1e43s\u0101 is only for ordinary men who cannot\nfollow the Yogin\u2019s universal law of ahi\u1e43s\u0101.\n\nAhi\u1e43s\u0101 is a great universal duty which a man should impose on himself in\nall conditions of life, everywhere, and at all times without restricting\nor qualifying it with any limitation whatsoever. In _Mah\u0101bh\u0101rata\nMokshadharm\u0101dhy\u0101ya_ it is said that the S\u0101\u1e43khya lays stress upon\nnon-injury, whereas the Yoga lays stress upon sam\u0101dhi; but here we see\nthat Yoga also holds that ahi\u1e43s\u0101 should be the greatest ethical motive\nfor all our conduct. It is by ahi\u1e43s\u0101 alone that we can make ourselves\nfit for the higher type of sam\u0101dhi. All other virtues of truthfulness,\nnon-stealing only serve to make non-injury more and more perfect. It is\nnot, however, easy to say whether the S\u0101\u1e43khyists attached so much\nimportance to non-injury that they believed it to lead to sam\u0101dhi\ndirectly without the intermediate stages of sam\u0101dhi. We see, however,\nthat the Yoga also attaches great importance to it and holds that a man\nshould refrain from all external acts; for however good they may be they\ncannot be such as not to lead to some kind of injury or hi\u1e43s\u0101 towards\nbeings, for external actions can never be performed without doing some\nharm to others. We have seen that from this point of view Yoga holds\nthat the only pure works (\u015buklakarma) are those mental works of good\nthoughts in which perfection of ahi\u1e43s\u0101 is attained. With the growth of\ngood works (\u015buklakarma) and the perfect realisation of non-injury the\nmind naturally passes into the state in which its actions are neither\ngood (\u015bukla) nor bad (a\u015bukla); and this state is immediately followed by\nthat of kaivalya.\n\nVeracity consists in word and thought being in accordance with facts.\nSpeech and mind correspond to what has been seen, heard and inferred.\nSpeech is for the purpose of transferring knowledge to another. It is\nalways to be employed for the good of others and not for their injury;\nfor it should not be defective as in the case of Yudhish\u1e6dhira, where his\nmotive was bad.[42] If it prove to be injurious to living beings, even\nthough uttered as truth, it is not truth; it is sin only. Though\noutwardly such a truthful course may be considered virtuous, yet since\nby his truth he has caused injury to another person, he has in reality\nviolated the true standard of non-injury (_ahi\u1e43s\u0101_). Therefore let\neveryone first examine well and then utter truth for the benefit of all\nliving beings. All truths should be tested by the canon of non-injury\n(_ahi\u1e43s\u0101_).\n\nAsteya is the virtue of abstaining from stealing. Theft is making one\u2019s\nown unlawfully things that belong to others. Abstinence from theft\nconsists in the absence of the desire thereof.\n\nBrahmacaryya (continence) is the restraint of the generative organ and\nthe thorough control of sexual tendencies.\n\nAparigraha is want of avariciousness, the non-appropriation of things\nnot one\u2019s own; this is attained on seeing the defects of attachment and\nof the injury caused by the obtaining, preservation and destruction of\nobjects of sense.\n\nIf, in performing the great duty of non-injury and the other virtues\nauxiliary to it, a man be troubled by thoughts of sin, he should try to\nremove sinful ideas by habituating himself to those which are contrary\nto them. Thus if the old habit of sins opposed to virtues tend to drive\nhim along the wrong path, he should in order to banish them entertain\nideas such as the following:\u2014\u201cBeing burnt up as I am in the fires of the\nworld, I have taken refuge in the practice of Yoga which gives\nprotection to all living beings. Were I to resume the sins which I have\nabandoned, I should certainly be behaving like a dog, which eats its own\nvomit. As the dog takes up his own vomit, so should I be acting if I\nwere to take up again what I have once given up.\u201d This is called the\npractice of _pratipaksha bh\u0101v\u0101n_, meditating on the opposites of the\ntemptations.\n\nA classification of sins of non-injury, etc., may be made according as\nthey are actually done, or caused to be done, or permitted to be done;\nand these again may be further divided according as they are preceded by\ndesire, anger or ignorance; these are again mild, middling or intense.\nThus we see that there may be twenty-seven kinds of such sins. Mild,\nmiddling and intense are each again threefold, mild-mild, mild-middling\nand mild-intense; middling-mild, middling-middling and middling-intense;\nalso intense-mild, intense-middling and intense-intense. Thus there are\neighty-one kinds of sins. But they become infinite on account of rules\nof restriction, option and conjunction.\n\nThe contrary tendency consists in the notion that these immoral\ntendencies cause an infinity of pains and untrue knowledge. Pain and\nunwisdom are the unending fruits of these immoral tendencies, and in\nthis idea lies the power which produces the habit of giving a contrary\ntrend to our thoughts.\n\nThese yamas, together with the niyamas about to be described, are called\nkriy\u0101yoga, by the performance of which men become fit to rise gradually\nto the state of j\u00f1\u0101nayoga by sam\u0101dhi and to attain kaivalya. This course\nthus represents the first stage with which ordinary people should begin\ntheir Yoga work.\n\nThose more advanced, who naturally possess the virtues mentioned in\nYama, have no need of beginning here.\n\nThus it is said that some may begin with the niyamas, asceticism,\nsv\u0101dhy\u0101ya and devotion to God; it is for this reason that, though\nmentioned under the niyamas, they are also specially selected and spoken\nof as the kriy\u0101yoga in the very first rule of the second Book.\nAsceticism means the strength of remaining unchanged in changes like\nthat of heat and cold, hunger and thirst, standing and sitting, absence\nof speech and absence of all indications by gesture, etc.\n\nSv\u0101dhy\u0101ya means the study of philosophy and repetition of the syllable\n\u201cAum.\u201d\n\nThis \u012a\u015bvarapra\u1e47idh\u0101na (devotion to God) is different from the\n\u012a\u015bvarapra\u1e47idh\u0101na mentioned in _Yoga-s\u016btra_, I. 23, where it meant love,\nhomage and adoration of God, by virtue of which God by His grace makes\nsam\u0101dhi easy for the Yogin.\n\nHere it is a kind of kriy\u0101yoga, and hence it means the bestowal of all\nour actions upon the Great Teacher, God, i.e. to work, not for one\u2019s own\nself but for God, so that a man desists from all desires for fruit\ntherefrom.\n\nWhen these are duly performed, the afflictions become gradually\nattenuated and trance is brought about. The afflictions thus attenuated\nbecome characterised by unproductiveness, and when their seed-power has,\nas it were, been burnt up by the fire of high intellection and the mind\nuntouched by afflictions realises the distinct natures of purusha and\nsattva, it naturally returns to its own primal cause prak\u1e5bti and\nkaivalya is attained.\n\nThose who are already far advanced do not require even this kriy\u0101yoga,\nas their afflictions are already in an attenuated state and their minds\nin a fit condition to adapt themselves to sam\u0101dhi; they can therefore\nbegin at once with j\u00f1\u0101nayoga. So in the first chapter it is with respect\nto these advanced men that it is said that kaivalya can be attained by\nabhy\u0101sa and vair\u0101gya, without adopting the kriy\u0101yoga (_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_,\nII. 2) kriy\u0101yogas. Only \u015bauca and santosha now remain to be spoken of.\n\u015aauca means cleanliness of body and mind. Cleanliness of body is brought\nabout by water, cleanliness of mind by removal of the mental impurities\nof pride, jealousy and vanity.\n\nSantosha (contentment) is the absence of desire to possess more than is\nnecessary for the preservation of one\u2019s life. It should be added that\nthis is the natural result of ceasing to desire to appropriate the\nproperty of others.\n\nAt the close of this section on the yamas and niyamas, it is best to\nnote their difference, which lies principally in this that the former\nare the negative virtues, whereas the latter are positive. The former\ncan, and therefore must, be practised at all stages of Yoga, whereas the\nlatter being positive are attainable only by distinct growth of mind\nthrough Yoga. The virtues of non-injury, truthfulness, sex restraint,\netc., should be adhered to at all stages of the Yoga practice. They are\nindispensable for steadying the mind.\n\nIt is said that in the presence of a person who has acquired steadiness\nin ahi\u1e43s\u0101 all animals give up their habits of enmity; when a person\nbecomes steady in truthfulness, whatever he says becomes fulfilled. When\na person becomes steady in asteya (absence of theft) all jewels from all\nquarters approach him.\n\nContinence being confirmed, vigour is obtained. Non-covetousness being\nconfirmed, knowledge of the causes of births is attained. By steadiness\nof cleanliness, disinclination to this body and cessation of desire for\nother bodies is obtained.\n\nWhen the mind attains internal \u015bauca, or cleanliness of mind, his sattva\nbecomes pure, and he acquires highmindedness, one-pointedness, control\nof the senses and fitness for the knowledge of self. By the steadiness\nof contentment comes the acquisition of extreme happiness. By steadiness\nof asceticism the impurities of this body are removed, and from that\ncome miraculous powers of endurance of the body and also miraculous\npowers of the sense, viz. clairaudience and thought-reading from a\ndistance. By steadiness of studies the gods, the \u1e5bshis and the siddhas\nbecome visible. When \u012a\u015bvara is made the motive of all actions, trance is\nattained. By this the Yogin knows all that he wants to know, just as it\nis in reality, whether in another place, another body or another time.\nHis intellect knows everything as it is.\n\nIt should not, however, be said, says V\u0101caspati, that inasmuch as the\nsa\u1e43praj\u00f1\u0101ta is attained by making \u012a\u015bvara the motive of all actions, the\nremaining seven yog\u0101\u1e45gas are useless. For the yog\u0101\u1e45gas are useful in the\nattainment of that mental mood which devotes all actions to the purposes\nof \u012a\u015bvara. They are also useful in the attainment of sa\u1e43praj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi\nby separate kinds of collocations, and sam\u0101dhi also leads to the\nfruition of sa\u1e43praj\u00f1\u0101ta, but though this meditation on \u012a\u015bvara is itself\na species of \u012a\u015bvarapra\u1e47idh\u0101na, sa\u1e43praj\u00f1\u0101ta Yoga is a yet more direct\nmeans. As to the relation of \u012a\u015bvarapra\u1e47idh\u0101na with the other a\u1e45gas of\nYoga, Bhikshu writes:\u2014It cannot be asked what is the use of the other\ndisciplinary practices of the Yoga since Yoga can be attained by\nmeditation on \u012a\u015bvara, for meditation on \u012a\u015bvara only removes ignorance.\nThe other accessories bring about sam\u0101dhi by their own specific modes of\noperation. Moreover, it is by help of meditation on \u012a\u015bvara that one\nsucceeds in bringing about sam\u0101dhi, through the performance of all the\naccessories of Yoga; so the accessories of Yoga cannot be regarded as\nunnecessary; for it is the accessories which produce dh\u0101ra\u1e47a, dhy\u0101na and\nsam\u0101dhi, through meditation on God, and thereby salvation; devotion to\nGod brings in His grace and through it the yog\u0101\u1e45gas can be duly\nperformed. So though devotion to God may be considered as the direct\ncause, it cannot be denied that the due performance of the yog\u0101\u1e45gas is\nto be considered as the indirect cause.\n\n\u0100sanas are secured when the natural involuntary movements cease, and\nthis may be effected by concentrating the mind on the mythological snake\nwhich quietly bears the burden of the earth on its head. Thus posture\nbecomes perfect and effort to that end ceases, so that there is no\nmovement of the body; or the mind is transformed into the infinite,\nwhich makes the idea of infinity its own and then brings about the\nperfection of posture. When posture has once been mastered there is no\ndisturbance through the contraries of heat and cold, etc.\n\nAfter having secured stability in the \u0100sanas the pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101mas should be\nattempted. The pause that comes after a deep inhalation and that after a\ndeep exhalation are each called a pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma; the first is external, the\nsecond internal. There is, however, a third mode, by means of which,\nsince the lungs are neither too much dilated nor too much contracted,\ntotal restraint is obtained; cessation of both these motions takes place\nby a single effort, just as water thrown on a heated stone shrivels up\non all sides.\n\nThese can be regulated by calculating the strength of inhalation and\nexhalation through space, time or number. Thus as the breathing becomes\nslower, the space that it occupies also becomes smaller and smaller.\nSpace again is of two kinds, internal and external. At the time of\ninhalation, the breath occupies internal space, which can be felt even\nin the soles of hand and feet, like the slight touch of an ant. To try\nto feel this touch along with deep inhalation serves to lengthen the\nperiod of cessation of breathing. External space is the distance from\nthe tip of the nose to the remotest point at which breath when inhaled\ncan be felt, by the palm of the hand, or by the movement of any light\nsubstance like cotton, etc., placed there. Just as the breathing becomes\nslower and slower, the distances traversed by it also becomes smaller\nand smaller. Regulations by time is seen when the attention is fixed\nupon the time taken up in breathing by moments, a moment (_ksha\u1e47a_) is\nthe fourth part of the twinkling of the eye. Regulation by time thus\nmeans the fact of our calculating the strength of the pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma the\nmoments or ksha\u1e47as spent in the acts of inspiration, pause and\nrespiration. These pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101mas can also be measured by the number of\nmoments in the normal duration of breaths. The time taken by the\nrespiration and expiration of a healthy man is the same as that measured\nby snapping the fingers after turning the hand thrice over the knee and\nis the measure of duration of normal breath; the first attempt or\nudgh\u0101ta called mild is measured by thirty-six such m\u0101tr\u0101s or measures;\nwhen doubled it is the second udgh\u0101ta called middling; when trebled it\nis the third udgh\u0101ta called intense. Gradually the Yogin acquires the\npractice of pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma of long duration, by daily practice increasing in\nsuccession from a day, a fortnight, a month, etc. Of course he proceeds\nfirst by mastering the first udgh\u0101ta, then the second, and so on until\nthe duration increases up to a day, a fortnight, a month as stated.\nThere is also a fourth kind of pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma transcending all these stages\nof unsteady practice, when the Yogin is steady in his cessation of\nbreath. It must be remembered, however, that while the pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101mas are\nbeing practised, the mind must be fixed by dhy\u0101na and dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101 to some\nobject external or internal, without which these will be of no avail for\nthe true object of Yoga. By the practice of pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma, mind becomes fit\nfor concentration as described in the _s\u016btra_ I. 34, where it is said\nthat steadiness is acquired by pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma in the same way as\nconcentration, as we also find in the _s\u016btra_ II. 53.\n\nWhen the senses are restrained from their external objects by praty\u0101h\u0101ra\nwe have what is called praty\u0101h\u0101ra, by which the mind remains as if in\nits own nature, being altogether identified with the object of inner\nconcentration or contemplation; and thus when the citta is again\nsuppressed, the senses, which have already ceased coming into contact\nwith other objects and become submerged in the citta, also cease along\nwith it. Dhara\u1e47a is the concentration of citta on a particular place,\nwhich is so very necessary at the time of pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101mas mentioned before.\nThe mind may thus be held steadfast in such places as the sphere of the\nnavel, the lotus of the heart, the light in the brain, the forepart of\nthe nose, the forepart of the tongue, and such like parts of the body.\n\nDhy\u0101na is the continuance or changing flow of the mental effort in the\nobject of dhara\u1e47a unmediated by any other break of conscious states.\n\nSam\u0101dhi, or trance contemplation, results when by deep concentration\nmind becomes transformed into the shape of the object of contemplation.\nBy praty\u0101h\u0101ra or power of abstraction, mind desists from all other\nobjects, except the one on which it is intended that it should be\ncentred; the Yogin, as he thus abstracts his mind, should also try to\nfix it upon some internal or external object, which is called dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101;\nit must also be noticed that to acquire the habit of dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101 and in\norder to inhibit the abstraction arising from shakiness and unsteadiness\nof the body, it is necessary to practise steadfast posture and to\ncultivate the pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma. So too for the purpose of inhibiting\ndistractions arising from breathing. Again, before a man can hope to\nattain steadfastness in these, he must desist from any conduct opposed\nto the yamas, and also acquire the mental virtues stated in the niyamas,\nand thus secure himself against any intrusion of distractions arising\nfrom his mental passions. These are the indirect and remote conditions\nwhich qualify a person for attaining dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101, dhy\u0101na, and sam\u0101dhi. A man\nwho through his good deeds or by the grace of God is already so much\nadvanced that he is naturally above all such distractions, for the\nremoval of which it is necessary to practise the yamas, the niyamas, the\n\u0101sanas, the pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma and praty\u0101hara, may at once begin with dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101;\ndh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101 we have seen means concentration, with the advancement of which\nthe mind becomes steady in repeating the object of its concentration,\ni.e. thinking of that thing alone and no other thing; thus we see that\nwith the practice of this state called dhy\u0101na, or meditation, in which\nthe mind flows steadily in that one state without any interruption,\ngradually even the conscious flow of this activity ceases and the mind,\ntransformed into the shape of the object under concentration, becomes\nsteady therein. We see therefore that sam\u0101dhi is the consummation of\nthat process which begins in dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101 or concentration. These three,\ndh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101, dhy\u0101na and sam\u0101dhi, represent the three stages of the same\nprocess of which the last one is the perfection; and these three are\ntogether technically called sa\u1e43yama, which directly leads to and is\nimmediately followed by the sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta state, whereas the other five\nyog\u0101\u1e45gas are only its indirect or remote causes. These three are,\nhowever, not essential for the asampraj\u00f1\u0101ta state, for a person who is\nvery far advanced, or one who is the special object of God\u2019s grace, may\npass at once by intense vair\u0101gya and abhy\u0101sa into the nirodha state or\nstate of suppression.\n\nAs the knowledge of sam\u0101dhi gradually dawns through the possession of\nsa\u1e43yama, so is the sa\u1e43yama gradually strengthened. For this sa\u1e43yama also\nrises higher and higher with the dawning of praj\u00f1\u0101loka or light of\nsam\u0101dhi knowledge. This is the beginning, for here the mind can hold\nsa\u1e43yama or concentrate and become one with a gross object together with\nits name, etc., which is called the savitarka state; the next plane or\nstage of sa\u1e43yama is that where the mind becomes one with the object of\nits meditation, without any consciousness of its name, etc. Next come\nthe other two stages called savic\u0101ra and nirvic\u0101ra when the mind is\nfixed on subtle substances, as we shall see later on.\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER XIII\n                           STAGES OF SAM\u0100DHI\n\n\nSa\u1e43praj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi (absorptive concentration in an object) may be\ndivided into four classes, savitarka, nirvitarka, savic\u0101ra and\nnirvic\u0101ra.\n\nTo comprehend its scope we must first of all understand the relation\nbetween a thing, its concept, and the particular name with which the\nconcept or thing is associated. It is easy to see that the thing\n(_artha_), the concept (_j\u00f1\u0101na_), and the name (_\u015babda_) are quite\ndistinct. But still, by force of association, the word or name stands\nboth for the thing and its concept; the function of mind, by virtue of\nwhich despite this unreality or want of their having any real identity\nof connection they seem to be so much associated that the name cannot be\ndifferentiated from the thing or its idea, is called vikalpa.\n\nNow that state of sam\u0101dhi in which the mind seems to become one with the\nthing, together with its name and concept, is the lowest stage of\nsam\u0101dhi called savitarka; it is the lowest stage, because here the gross\nobject does not appear to the mind in its true reality, but only in the\nfalse illusory way in which it appears associated with the concept and\nthe name in ordinary life. This state does not differ from ordinary\nconceptual states, in which the particular thing is not only associated\nwith the concepts and their names, but also with other concepts and\ntheir various relations; thus a cow will not only appear before the mind\nwith its concept and name, but also along with other relations and\nthoughts associated with cows, as for example\u2014\u201cThis is a cow, it belongs\nto so and so, it has so many hairs on its body, and so forth.\u201d This\nstate is therefore the first stage of sam\u0101dhi, in which the mind has not\nbecome steady and is not as yet beyond the range of our ordinary\nconsciousness.\n\nThe nirvitarka stage arises from this when the mind by its steadiness\ncan become one with its object, divested of all other associations of\nname and concept, so that it is in direct touch with the reality of the\nthing, uncontaminated by associations. The thing in this state does not\nappear to be an object of my consciousness, but my consciousness\nbecoming divested of all \u201cI\u201d or \u201cmine,\u201d becomes one with the object\nitself; so that there is no such notion here as \u201cI know this,\u201d but the\nmind becomes one with the thing, so that the notion of subject and\nobject drops off and the result is the one steady transformation of the\nmind into the object of its contemplation. This state brings home to us\nreal knowledge of the thing, divested from other false and illusory\nassociations, which far from explaining the real nature of the object,\nserves only to hide it. This sam\u0101dhi knowledge or praj\u00f1\u0101 is called\nnirvitarka. The objects of this state may be the gross material objects\nand the senses.\n\nNow this state is followed by the state of savic\u0101r\u0101 praj\u00f1\u0101, which dawns\nwhen the mind neglecting the grossness of the object sinks deeper and\ndeeper into its finer constituents; the appearance of the thing in its\ngrosser aspects drops off and the mind having sunk deep, centres in and\nidentifies itself with the subtle tanm\u0101tras, which are the constituents\nof the atoms, as a conglomeration of which the object appeared before\nour eyes in the nirvitarka state. Thus when the mind, after identifying\nitself with the sun in its true aspect as pure light, tends to settle on\na still finer state of it, either by making the senses so steady that\nthe outward appearance vanishes, or by seeking finer and finer stages\nthan the grosser manifestation of light as such, it apprehends the\ntanm\u0101tric state of the light and knows it as such, and we have what is\ncalled the savic\u0101ra stage. It has great similarities with the savitarka\nstage, while its differences from that stage spring from the fact that\nhere the object is the tanm\u0101tra and not the gross bh\u016bta. The mind in\nthis stage holding communion with the r\u016bpa tanm\u0101tra, for example, is not\ncoloured variously as red, blue, etc., as in the savitarka communion\nwith gross light, for the tanm\u0101tric light or light potential has no such\nvarieties as different kinds of colour, etc., so that there are also no\nsuch different kinds of feeling of pleasure or pain as arise from the\nmanifold varieties of ordinary light. This is a state of feelingless\nrepresentation of one uniform tanm\u0101tric state, when the object appears\nas a conglomeration of tanm\u0101tras of r\u016bpa, rasa or gandha, as the case\nmight be. This state, however, is not indeterminate, as the nirvitarka\nstage, for this tanm\u0101tric conception is associated with the notions of\ntime, space and causality, for the mind here feels that it sees those\ntanm\u0101tras which are in such a subtle state that they are not associated\nwith pleasures and pains. They are also endowed with causality in such a\nway that from them and their particular collocations originate the\natoms.\n\nIt must be noted here that the subtle objects of concentration in this\nstage are not the tanm\u0101tras alone, but also other subtle substances\nincluding the ego, the buddhi and the prak\u1e5bti.\n\nBut when the mind acquires the complete habit of this state in which it\nbecomes identified with these fine objects\u2014the tanm\u0101tras\u2014etc., then all\nconceptual notions of the associations of time, space, causality, etc.,\nspoken of in the savic\u0101ra and the savitarka state vanish away and it\nbecomes one with the fine object of its communion. These two kinds of\npraj\u00f1\u0101, savic\u0101ra and nirvic\u0101ra, arising from communion with the fine\ntanm\u0101tras, have been collocated under one name as vic\u0101r\u0101nugata. But when\nthe object of communion is the senses, the sam\u0101dhi is called\n\u0101nand\u0101nugata, and when the object of communion is the subtle cause the\nego (_asmit\u0101_), the sam\u0101dhi is known as asmit\u0101nugata.\n\nThere is a difference of opinion regarding the object of the last two\nvarieties of sam\u0101dhi, viz. \u0101nand\u0101nugata and asmit\u0101nugata, and also about\nthe general scheme of division of the sam\u0101dhis. V\u0101caspati thinks that\n_Yoga-s\u016btra_ I. 41 suggests the interpretation that the sa\u1e43praj\u00f1\u0101ta\nsam\u0101dhis may be divided into three different classes according as their\nobjects of concentration belong to one or other of the three different\nplanes of gr\u0101hya (external objects), graha\u1e47a (the senses) and grah\u012bt\u1e5b\n(the ego). So he refers vitarka and vic\u0101ra to the plane of gr\u0101hya\n(physical objects and tanm\u0101tras), \u0101nand\u0101nugata to the plane of graha\u1e47a\n(the senses) and asmit\u0101nugata to the plane of grah\u012bt\u1e5b. Bhikshu, however,\ndisapproves of such an interpretation. He holds that in \u0101nand\u0101nugata the\nobject of concentration is bliss (\u0101nanda) and not the senses. When the\nYogin rises to the vic\u0101r\u0101nugata stage there is a great flow of sattva\nwhich produces bliss, and at this the mind becomes one with this \u0101nanda\nor bliss, and this sam\u0101dhi is therefore called \u0101nand\u0101nugata. Bhikshu\ndoes not think that in asmit\u0101nugata sam\u0101dhi the object of concentration\nis the ego. He thinks that in this stage the object of concentration is\nthe concept of self (_kevalapurush\u0101k\u0101r\u0101 sa\u1e43vit_) which has only the form\nof ego or \u201cI\u201d (_asm\u012btyet\u0101vanm\u0101tr\u0101k\u0101ratv\u0101dasmit\u0101_).\n\nAgain according to V\u0101caspati in addition to the four varieties of\nsavitarka, nirvitarka, savic\u0101ra and nirvic\u0101ra there are two varieties of\n\u0101nandanugata as s\u0101nanda and nir\u0101nanda and two varieties of asmit\u0101nugata\nas s\u0101smita and nirasmita. This gives us eight different kinds of\nsam\u0101dhi. With Bhikshu there are only six kinds of sam\u0101dhi, for he admits\nonly one variety as \u0101nand\u0101nugata and one variety as asmit\u0101nugata.\nBhikshu\u2019s classification of sam\u0101dhis is given below in a tabular form\n(see V\u0101caspati\u2019s _Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_ and _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, I. 17, 41, 42,\n43, 44).\n\n                        sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi\n                                 |\n           +---------------------+----------------------+\n           |                                            |\n     sth\u016blavishayaka                             s\u016bkshma vishayaka\n    (vitark\u0101nugata)                                          |\n       sam\u0101dhi +--------+-----+--------------+\n         +-------------------+ | | |\n         | | | \u0101nanda asmit\u0101\n  1. savitarka 2. nirvitarka | or purusha\n (with associations    (without association   |\n of name and concept of name) | 5. (\u0101nand\u0101nugata) 6. (asmit\u0101nugata)\n of the object)                               |\n                                              |\n                                           tanm\u0101tra\n                                        vic\u0101r\u0101nugata\n                                           sam\u0101dhi\n                                              |\n                              +---------------+--------------+\n                              |                              |\n                        3. savic\u0101ra                   4. nirvic\u0101ra\n                    (with association of          (without association\n                      name and concept               of name, etc. )\n                      of the tanm\u0101tras)\n\nThrough the nirvic\u0101ra state our minds become altogether purified and\nthere springs the praj\u00f1\u0101 or knowledge called \u1e5btambhar\u0101 or true; this\ntrue knowledge is altogether different from the knowledge which is\nderived from the Vedas or from inferences or from ordinary perceptions;\nfor the knowledge that it can give of Reality can never be had by any\nother means, by perception, inference or testimony, for their\ncommunication is only by the conceptual process of generalisations and\nabstractions and these can never help us to affirm anything about things\nas they are in themselves, which are altogether different from their\nillusory demonstrations in conceptual terms which only prevent us from\nknowing the true reality. The potency of this praj\u00f1\u0101 arrests the potency\nof ordinary states of consciousness and thus attains stability. When,\nhowever, this praj\u00f1\u0101 is also suppressed, we have what is called the\nstate of nirv\u012bja sam\u0101dhi, at the end of which comes final praj\u00f1\u0101 leading\nto the dissolution of the citta and the absolute freedom of the purusha.\n\nSam\u0101dhi we have seen is the mind\u2019s becoming one with an object by a\nprocess of acute concentration upon it and a continuous repetition of it\nwith the exclusion of all other thoughts of all kinds. We have indeed\ndescribed the principal stages of the advancement of sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta Yoga,\nbut it is impossible to give an exact picture of it with the symbolical\nexpressions of our concepts; for the stages only become clear to the\nmental vision of the Yogin as he gradually acquires firmness in his\npractice. The Yogin who is practising at once comes to know them as the\nhigher stages gradually dawn in his mind and he distinguishes them from\neach other; it is thus a matter of personal experience, so that no\nteacher can tell him whether a certain stage which follows is higher or\nlower, for Yoga itself is its own teacher.\n\nEven when the mind is in the sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta state it is said to be in\nvyutth\u0101na (phenomenal) in comparison with the nirodha state, just as the\nordinary conscious states are called vyutth\u0101na in comparison with the\nsampraj\u00f1\u0101ta state; the potencies of the sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta state become weaker\nand weaker, while the potencies of the nirodha state become stronger and\nstronger until finally the mind comes to the nirodha state and becomes\nstable therein; of course this contains within itself a long mental\nhistory, for the potency of the nirodha state can become stronger only\nwhen the mind practises it and remains in this suppressed condition for\nlong intervals of time. This shows that the mind, being made up of the\nthree gu\u1e47as, is always suffering transformations and changes. Thus from\nthe ordinary state of phenomenal consciousness it gradually becomes\none-pointed and then gradually becomes transformed into the state of an\nobject (internal or external), when it is said to be undergoing the\nsam\u0101dhi pari\u1e47\u0101ma or sam\u0101dhi change of the sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta type; next comes\nthe change, when the mind passes from the sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta stage to the state\nof suppression (_nirodha_). Here also, therefore, we see that the same\ndharma, laksh\u1e47a, avasth\u0101pari\u1e47\u0101ma which we have already described at some\nlength with regard to sensible objects apply also to the mental states.\nThus the change from the vyutth\u0101na (ordinary experience) to the nirodha\nstate is the dharmapari\u1e47\u0101ma, the change as manifested in time, so that\nwe can say that the change of vyutth\u0101na into nirodha has not yet come,\nor has just come, or that the vyutth\u0101na state (ordinary experience)\nexists no longer, the mind having transformed itself into the nirodha\nstate. There is also here the third change of condition, when we see\nthat the potencies of the sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta state become weaker and weaker,\nwhile that of the nirodha state becomes stronger and stronger. These are\nthe three kinds of change which the mind undergoes called the dharma,\nlaksha\u1e47a and avasth\u0101 change. But there is one difference between this\nchange thus described from the changes observed in sensible objects that\nhere the changes are not visible but are only to be inferred by the\npassage of the mind from one state to another.\n\nIt has been said that there are two different kinds of qualities of the\nmind, visible and invisible. The visible qualities whose changes can be\nnoticed are conscious states, or thought-products, or percepts, etc. The\ninvisible ones are seven in number and cannot be directly seen, but\ntheir existence and changes or modifications may be established by\ninference. These are suppression, characterisation, subconscious\nmaintenance of experience, constant change, life, movement and power or\nenergy.\n\nIn connection with sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi some miraculous attainments are\ndescribed, which are said to strengthen the faith or belief of the Yogin\nin the processes of Yoga as the path of salvation. These are like the\nproducts or the mental experiments in the Yoga method, by which people\nmay become convinced of the method of Yoga as being the true one. No\nreasons are offered as to the reason for these attainments, but they are\nsaid to happen as a result of mental union with different objects. It is\nbest to note them here in a tabular form.\n\n \u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u252c\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u252c\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\n        Object of Sa\u1e43yama.        \u2502Sa\u1e43yama.\u2502        Attainment.\n \u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u253c\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u253c\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\n  (1) Threefold change of things  \u2502Sa\u1e43yama.\u2502\n        as dharma, laksha\u1e47a and   \u2502        \u2502\n        avasth\u0101pari\u1e47\u0101ma.          \u2502        \u2502\n  (2) The distinctions of name,   \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Knowledge of the sounds of\n        external object and the   \u2502        \u2502  all living beings.\n        concept which ordinarily  \u2502        \u2502\n        appears united as one.    \u2502        \u2502\n  (3) Residual potencies sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Knowledge of previous life.\n        of the nature of dharma   \u2502        \u2502\n        and adharma.              \u2502        \u2502\n  (4) Concepts alone (separated   \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Knowledge of other minds.\n        from the objects).        \u2502        \u2502\n  (5) Over the form of body.      \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Disappearance (by virtue of\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  perceptibility being\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  checked).\n  (6) Karma of fast or slow       \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Knowledge of death.\n        fruition.                 \u2502        \u2502\n  (7) Friendliness, sympathy, and \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Power.\n        compassion.               \u2502        \u2502\n  (8) Powers of elephant.         \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Power of elephant.\n  (9) Sun.                        \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Knowledge of the world (the\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  geographical position of\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  countries, etc.).\n (10) Heavens.                    \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Knowledge of the heavenly\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  systems.\n (11) Pole star.                  \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Knowledge of its movements.\n (12) Plenus of the navel.        \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Knowledge of the system of\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  the body.\n (13) Base of the throat.         \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Subdual of hunger and\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  thirst.\n (14) Tortoise tube.              \u2502Sa\u1e43yama.\u2502Steadiness.\n (15) Coronal light.              \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Vision of the perfected\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  ones\u2014the knowledge of the\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  seer, or all knowledge by\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  prescience.\n (16) Heat.                       \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Knowledge of the mind.\n (17) Purusha.                    \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Knowledge of purusha.\n (18) Gross nature subtle         \u2502   \u201e    \u2502Control over the element\n        pervasiveness and         \u2502        \u2502  from which follows\n        purposefulness.           \u2502        \u2502  attenuation, perfection of\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  the body and\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  non-resistance by their\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  characteristics.\n (19) Act, substantive appearance,\u2502   \u201e    \u2502Mastery over the senses;\n        egoism, pervasiveness and \u2502        \u2502  thence quickness of mind,\n        purposefulness of         \u2502        \u2502  unaided mental perception\n        sensation.                \u2502        \u2502  and mastery over the\n                                  \u2502        \u2502  pradh\u0101na.\n \u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2534\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2534\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\n\nThese vibh\u016btis, as they rise with the performance of the processes of\nYoga, gradually deepen the faith _\u015braddha_ of the Yogin in the\nperformance of his deeds and thus help towards his main goal or ideal by\nalways pushing or drawing him forward towards it by the greater and\ngreater strengthening of his faith. Divested from the ideal, they have\nno value.\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER XIV\n                              GOD IN YOGA\n\n\nAfter describing the nature of karmayoga, and the way in which it leads\nto j\u00f1\u0101nayoga, we must now describe the third and easiest means of\nattaining salvation, the bhaktiyoga and the position of \u012a\u015bvara in the\nYoga system, with reference to a person who seeks deliverance from the\nbonds and shackles of avidy\u0101.\n\n\u012a\u015bvara in the Yoga system is that purusha who is distinguished from all\nothers by the fact of his being untouched by the afflictions or the\nfruits of karma. Other purushas are also in reality untouched by the\nafflictions, but they, seemingly at least, have to undergo the\nafflictions and consequently birth and rebirth, etc., until they are\nagain finally released; but \u012a\u015bvara, though he is a purusha, yet does not\nsuffer in any way any sort of bondage. He is always free and ever the\nLord. He never had nor will have any relation to these bonds. He is also\nthe teacher of the ancient teachers beyond the range of conditioning\ntime.\n\nThis nature of \u012a\u015bvara has been affirmed in the scriptures and is\ntherefore taken as true on their authority. The authority of the\nscriptures is again acknowledged only because they have proceeded from\nGod or \u012a\u015bvara. The objection that this is an argument in a circle has no\nplace here, since the connection of the scriptures with \u012a\u015bvara is\nbeginningless.\n\nThere is no other divinity equal to \u012a\u015bvara, because in the case of such\nequality there might be opposition between rival \u012a\u015bvaras, which might\nresult in the lowering in degree of any of them. He is omniscient in the\nhighest degree, for in him is the furthest limit of omniscience, beyond\nwhich there is nothing.\n\nThis \u012a\u015bvara is all-merciful, and though he has no desires to satisfy,\nyet for the sake of his devotees he dictates the Vedas at each evolution\nof the world after dissolution. But he does not release all persons,\nbecause he helps only so far as each deserves; he does not nullify the\nlaw of karma, just as a king, though quite free to act in any way he\nlikes, punishes or rewards people as they deserve.\n\nAt the end of each kalpa, he adopts pure body from his sattva, which is\ndevoid of any karm\u0101\u015baya, and thus communicates through it to all his\ndevotees and dictates the Vedas. Again at the time of dissolution this\nbody of pure sattva becomes submerged in prak\u1e5bti; and at the time of its\nsubmersion, \u012a\u015bvara wishes that it might come forth again at the\nbeginning of the new creation; thus for ever at each new creation the\npure sattva body springs forth and is submerged again into prak\u1e5bti at\nthe time of the dissolution of the universe.\n\nIn accepting this body he has no personal desires to satisfy, as we have\nsaid before. He adopts it only for the purpose of saving mankind by\ninstructing them as to knowledge and piety, which is not possible\nwithout a pure sattvamaya body; so he adopts it, but is not affected in\nany way by it. One who is under the control of nescience cannot\ndistinguish his real nature from nescience, and thus is always led by\nit, but such is not the case with \u012a\u015bvara, for he is not in any way under\nits control, but only adopts it as a means of communicating knowledge to\nmankind.\n\nA Yogin also who has attained absolute independence may similarly accept\none or more pure sattvamaya nirm\u0101\u1e47a cittas from asmit\u0101m\u0101tra and may\nproduce one citta as the superintendent of all these. Such a citta\nadopted by a true Yogin by the force of his meditation is not under the\ncontrol of the vehicles of action as is the case with the other four\nkinds of citta from birth, oshadhi, mantra and tapas.\n\nThe pra\u1e47ava or o\u1e43k\u0101ra is his name; though at the time of dissolution,\nthe word of pra\u1e47ava together with its denotative power becomes submerged\nin the prak\u1e5bti, to reappear with the new creation, just as roots shoot\nforth from the ground in the rainy season. This pra\u1e47ava is also called\nsv\u0101dhy\u0101ya. By concentration of this sv\u0101dhy\u0101ya or pra\u1e47ava, the mind\nbecomes one-pointed and fit for Yoga.\n\nNow one of the means of attaining Yoga is \u012a\u015bvarapra\u1e47idh\u0101na, or worship\nof God. This word, according to the commentators, is used in two senses\nin the first and the second books of the P\u0101ta\u00f1jala Yoga aphorisms. In\nthe first book it means love or devotion to God as the one centre of\nmeditation, in the second it is used to mean the abnegation of all\ndesires of the fruits of action to \u012a\u015bvara, and thus \u012a\u015bvarapra\u1e47idh\u0101na in\nthis sense is included under kriy\u0101yoga. This dedication of all fruits of\naction to \u012a\u015bvara, purifies the mind and makes it fit for Yoga and is\ndistinguished from the \u012a\u015bvarapra\u1e47idh\u0101na of the first book as the bh\u0101van\u0101\nof pra\u1e47ava and \u012a\u015bvara in this that it is connected with actions and the\nabnegation of their fruits, whereas the latter consists only in keeping\nthe mind in a worshipful state towards \u012a\u015bvara and his word or name\npra\u1e47ava.\n\nBy devotion (bhakti) \u012a\u015bvara is drawn towards the devotee through his\nnirm\u0101\u1e47a citta of pure sattva and by his grace he removes all\nobstructions of illness, etc., described in I. 30, 31, and at once\nprepares his mind for the highest realisation of his own absolute\nindependence. So for a person who can love and adore \u012a\u015bvara, this is the\neasiest course of attaining sam\u0101dhi. We can make our minds pure most\neasily by abandoning all our actions to \u012a\u015bvara and attaining salvation\nby firm and steady devotion to Him. This is the sphere of bhaktiyoga by\nwhich the tedious complexity of the Yoga process may be avoided and\nsalvation speedily acquired by the supreme grace of \u012a\u015bvara.\n\nThis means is not, however, distinct from the general means of Yoga,\nviz. abhy\u0101sa and vair\u0101gya, which applies to all stages. For here also\nabhy\u0101sa applies to the devotion of \u012a\u015bvara as one supreme truth and\nvair\u0101gya is necessarily associated with all true devotion and adoration\nof \u012a\u015bvara.\n\nThis conception of \u012a\u015bvara differs from the conception of \u012a\u015bvara in the\nR\u0101m\u0101nuja system in this that there prak\u1e5bti and purusha, acit and cit,\nform the body of \u012a\u015bvara, whereas here \u012a\u015bvara is considered as being only\na special purusha with the aforesaid powers.\n\nIn this system \u012a\u015bvara is not the superintendent of prak\u1e5bti in the sense\nof the latter\u2019s remaining in him in an undifferentiated way, but is\nregarded as the superintendent of dharma and adharma, and his agency is\nactive only in the removal of obstacles, thereby helping the\nevolutionary process of prak\u1e5bti.\n\nThus \u012a\u015bvara is distinguished from the \u012a\u015bvara of Sa\u1e45kara Ved\u0101nta in this\nthat there true existence is ascribed only to \u012a\u015bvara, whereas all other\nforms and modes of Being are only regarded as illusory.\n\nFrom what we have seen above it is clear that the main stress of the\nYoga philosophy is on the method of sam\u0101dhi. The knowledge that can be\nacquired by it differs from all other kinds of knowledge, ordinary\nperception, inference, etc., in this that it alone can bring objects\nbefore our mental eye with the clearest and most unerring light of\ncomprehensibility in which the true nature of the thing is at once\nobserved. Inferences and the words of scriptures are based on concepts\nor general notions of things. For the teaching of the Vedas is\nmanifested in words; and words are but names, terms or concepts formed\nby noting the general similarities of certain things and binding them\ndown by a symbol. All deductive inferences are also based upon major\npropositions arrived at by inductive generalisations; so it is easy to\nsee that all knowledge that can be acquired by them is only generalised\nconceptions. Their process only represents the method by which the mind\ncan pass from one generalised conception to another; so the mind can in\nno way attain the knowledge of real things, absolute species, which are\nnot the genus of any other thing; so inference and scripture can only\ncommunicate to us the nature of the agreement or similarity of things\nand not the real things as they are. Ordinary perception also is not of\nmuch avail here, since it cannot bring within its scope subtle and fine\nthings and things that are obstructed from the view of the senses. But\nsam\u0101dhi has no such limitations and the knowledge that can be attained\nby it is absolutely unobstructed, true and real in the strictest sense\nof the terms.\n\nOf all the points of difference between Yoga and S\u0101\u1e43khya the admission\nof \u012a\u015bvara by the former and the emphasis given by it to the Yoga\npractice are the most important in distinguishing it from the latter. It\nseems probable that \u012a\u015bvara was traditionally believed in the Yoga school\nto be a protector of the Yogins proceeding in their arduous course of\ncomplete self-control and absorptive concentration. The chances of a\nperson adopting the course of Yoga practice for the attainment of\nsuccess in this field does not depend only on the exertions of the\nYogin, but upon the concurrence of many convenient circumstances such as\nphysical fitness, freedom from illnesses and other obstacles. Faith in\nthe patronage of God in favour of honest workers and believers served to\npacify their minds and fill them with the cheerful hope and confidence\nwhich were so necessary for the success of Yoga practice. The\nmetaphysical functions which are ascribed to \u012a\u015bvara seem to be later\nadditions for the sake of rendering his position more in harmony with\nthe system. Mere faith in \u012a\u015bvara for the practical benefit of the Yogins\nis thus interpreted by a reference to his superintendence of the\ndevelopment of cosmic evolution. S\u0101\u1e43khya relied largely on philosophical\nthinking leading to proper discrimination as to the difference between\nprakrti and purusha which is the stage immediately antecedent to\nemancipation. There being thus no practical need for the admission of\n\u012a\u015bvara, the theoretical need was also ignored and it was held that the\ninherent teleological purpose (_purush\u0101rthat\u0101_) of prak\u1e5bti was\nsufficient to explain all the stages of cosmic evolution as well as its\nfinal separation from the purushas.\n\nWe have just seen that S\u0101\u1e43khya does not admit the existence of God, and\nconsiders that salvation can be obtained only by a steady perseverance\nin philosophical thinking, and does not put emphasis on the practical\nexercises which are regarded as essential by the Yoga. One other point\nof difference ought to be noted with regard to the conception of avidy\u0101.\nAccording to Yoga, avidy\u0101, as we have already explained it, means\npositive untrue beliefs such as believing the impure, uneternal, sorrow,\nand non-self to be the pure eternal, pleasure and the self respectively.\nWith S\u0101\u1e43khya, however, avidy\u0101 is only the non-distinction of the\ndifference between prak\u1e5bti and purusha. Both S\u0101\u1e43khya and Yoga admit that\nour bondage to prak\u1e5bti is due to an illusion or ignorance (avidy\u0101), but\nS\u0101\u1e43khya holds the akhy\u0101ti theory which regards non-distinction of the\ndifference as the cause of illusion whereas the Yoga holds the\nanyath\u0101khy\u0101ti theory which regards positive misapprehension of the one\nas the other to be the cause of illusion. We have already referred to\nthe difference in the course of the evolution of the categories as held\nby S\u0101\u1e43khya and Yoga. This also accounts for the difference between the\ntechnical terms of prak\u1e5bti, vik\u1e5bti and prak\u1e5bti-vik\u1e5bti of S\u0101\u1e43khya and the\nvi\u015besha and avi\u015besha of the Yoga. The doctrine of dharma, laksha\u1e47a and\navasth\u0101pari\u1e47\u0101ma, though not in any way antagonistic to S\u0101\u1e43khya, is not\nso definitely described as in the Yoga. Some scholars think that S\u0101\u1e43khya\ndid not believe in atoms as Yoga did. But though the word param\u0101\u1e47u has\nnot been mentioned in the _K\u0101rik\u0101_, it does not seem that S\u0101\u1e43khya did\nnot believe in atoms; and we have already noticed that Bhikshu considers\nthe word s\u016bkshma in _K\u0101rik\u0101_ 39 as referring to the atoms. There are\nalso slight differences with regard to the process involved in\nperception and this has been dealt with in my _Yoga philosophy in\nrelation to other Indian systems of thought_.[43] On almost all other\nfundamental points S\u0101\u1e43khya and Yoga are in complete agreement.\n\n\n\n\n                               CHAPTER XV\n                            MATTER AND MIND\n\n\nIn conclusion it may be worth while saying a few words as to theories of\nthe physical world supplementary to the views that have already been\nstated above.\n\nGross matter, as the possibility of sensation, has been divided into\nfive classes, according to their relative grossness, corresponding to\nthe relative grossness of the senses. Some modern investigators have\ntried to understand the five bh\u016btas, viz. \u0101k\u0101\u015ba, marut, tejas, ap and\nkshiti as ether, gaseous heat and light, liquids and solids. But I\ncannot venture to agree when I reflect that solidity, liquidity and\ngaseousness represent only an impermanent aspect of matter. The division\nof matter from the standpoint of the possibility of our sensations, has\na firm root in our nature as cognising beings and has therefore a better\nrational footing than the modern chemical division into elements and\ncompounds, which are being daily threatened by the gradual advance of\nscientific culture. This carries with it no fixed and consistent\nrational conception as do the definitions of the ancients, but is a mere\nmakeshift for understanding or representing certain chemical changes of\nmatter and has therefore a merely relative value.\n\nThere are five aspects from which gross matter can be viewed. These are\n(1) sth\u016bla (gross), (2) svar\u016bpa (substantive), (3) s\u016bkshma (subtle), (4)\nanvaya (conjunction), (5) arthavattva (purpose for use). The sth\u016bla or\ngross physical characteristics of the bh\u016btas are described as follows:\u2014\n\nQualities of Earth\u2014Form, heaviness, roughness, obstruction, stability,\nmanifestation (v\u1e5btti), difference, support, turbidity, hardness and\nenjoyability.\n\nAp\u2014Smoothness, subtlety, clearness, whiteness, softness, heaviness,\ncoolness, conservation, purity, cementation.\n\nTejas\u2014Going upwards, cooking, burning, light, shining, dissipating,\nenergising.\n\nV\u0101yu\u2014Transverse motion, purity, throwing, pushing, strength, movability,\nwant of shadow.\n\n\u0100k\u0101\u015ba\u2014Motion in all directions, non-agglomeration, non-obstruction.\n\nThese physical characteristics are distinguished from the aspects by\nwhich they appeal to the senses, which are called their svar\u016bpas. Earth\nis characterised by gandha or smell, ap by rasa or taste, tejas by r\u016bpa,\netc. Looked at from this point of view, we see that smell arises by the\ncontact of the nasal organ with the hard particles of matter; so this\nhardness or solidity which can so generate the sensibility of gandha, is\nsaid to be the svar\u016bpa of kshiti. Taste can originate only in connection\nwith liquidity, so this liquidity or sneha is the svar\u016bpa or nature of\nap. Light\u2014the quality of visibility\u2014manifests itself in connection with\nheat, so heat is the svar\u016bpa of fire. The sensibility of touch is\ngenerated in connection with the vibration of air on the epidermal\nsurface; so this vibratory nature is the svar\u016bpa of air.\n\nThe sensibility to sound proceeds from the nature of\nobstructionlessness, which belongs to \u0101k\u0101\u015ba, so this obstructionlessness\nis the svar\u016bpa of \u0101k\u0101\u015ba.\n\nThe third aspect is the aspect of tanm\u0101tras, which are the causes of the\natoms or param\u0101\u1e47us. Their fourth aspect is their aspect of gu\u1e47as or\nqualities of illumination, action, inertia. Their fifth aspect is that\nby which they are serviceable to purusha, by causing his pleasurable or\npainful experiences and finally his liberation.\n\nSpeaking of aggregation with regard to the structure of matter, we see\nthat this is of two kinds (1) when the parts are in intimate union and\nfusion, e.g. any vegetable or animal body, the parts of which can never\nbe considered separately. (2) When there are such mechanical aggregates\nor collocations of distinct and independent parts _yutasiddh\u0101vayava_ as\nthe trees in a forest.\n\nA dravya or substance is an aggregate of the former type, and is the\ngrouping of generic or specific qualities and is not a separate\nentity\u2014the abode of generic and specific qualities like the dravya of\nthe Vai\u015beshika conception. The aspect of an unification of generic and\nspecific qualities seen in parts united in intimate union and fusion is\ncalled the dravya aspect. The aggregation of parts is the structural\naspect of which the side of appearance is the unification of generic and\nspecific qualities called the dravya.\n\nThe other aggregation of yutasiddh\u0101vayava, i.e. the collocation of the\ndistinct and independent parts, is again of two kinds, (1) in which\nstress may be laid on the distinction of parts, and (2) that in which\nstress is laid on their unity rather than on their distinctness. Thus in\nthe expression mango-grove, we see that many mangoes make a grove, but\nthe mangoes are not different from the grove. Here stress is laid on the\naspect that mangoes are the same as the grove, which, however, is not\nthe case when we say that here is a grove of mangoes, for the expression\n\u201cgrove of mangoes\u201d clearly brings home to our minds the side of the\ndistinct mango-trees which form a grove.\n\nOf the gross elements, \u0101k\u0101\u015ba seems especially to require a word of\nexplanation. There are according to Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu and N\u0101ge\u015ba two kinds\nof \u0101k\u0101\u015ba\u2014k\u0101ra\u1e47a (or primal) and k\u0101rya (atomic). The first or original is\nthe undifferentiated formless tamas, for in that stage it has not the\nquality of manifesting itself in sounds. This k\u0101ra\u1e47a later on develops\ninto the atomic \u0101k\u0101\u015ba, which has the property of sound. According to the\nconception of the pur\u0101\u1e47as, this kary\u0101k\u0101\u015ba evolves from the ego as the\nfirst envelope of v\u0101yu or air. The k\u0101ra\u1e47ak\u0101\u015ba or non-atomic \u0101k\u0101\u015ba should\nnot be considered as a mere vacuum, but must be conceived as a positive,\nall-pervasive entity, something like the ether of modern physicists.\n\nFrom this \u0101k\u0101\u015ba springs the atomic \u0101k\u0101\u015ba or k\u0101ry\u0101k\u0101\u015ba, which is the\ncause of the manifestation of sound. All powers of hearing, even though\nthey have their origin in the principle of egoism, reside in the \u0101k\u0101\u015ba\nplaced in the hollow of the ear. When soundness or defect is noticed\ntherein, soundness or defect is also noticed in the power of hearing.\nFurther, when of the sounds working in unison with the power of hearing,\nthe sounds of solids, etc., are to be apprehended, then the power of\nhearing located in the hollow of the ear requires the capacity of\nresonance residing in the substratum of the \u0101k\u0101\u015ba of the ear. This sense\nof hearing, then, operates when it is attracted by the sound originated\nand located in the mouth of the speaker, which acts as a loadstone. It\nis this \u0101k\u0101\u015ba which gives penetrability to all bodies; in the absence of\nthis, all bodies would be so compact that it would be difficult to\npierce them even with a needle. In the _S\u0101\u1e43khya-s\u016btra_ II. 12, it is\nsaid that eternal time and space are of the nature of \u0101k\u0101\u015ba. So this\nso-called eternal time and space do not differ from the one\nundifferentiated formless tamas of which we have just spoken. Relative\nand infinite time arise from the motion of atoms in space\u2014the cause of\nall change and transformation; and space as relative position cannot be\nbetter expressed than in the words of Dr. B. N. Seal, as \u201ctotality of\npositions as an order of co-existent points, and as such it is wholly\nrelative to the understanding like order in time, being constructed on\nthe basis of relations of position intuited by our empirical or relative\nconsciousness. But there is this difference between space order and time\norder:\u2014there is no unit of space as position (_dik_) though we may\nconceive time, as the moment (_ksha\u1e47a_) regarded as the unit of change\nin the causal series. Spatial position (_dik_) results only from the\ndifferent relations in which the all-pervasive \u0101k\u0101\u015ba stands to the\nvarious finite objects. On the other hand, space as extension or locus\nof a finite body, or de\u015ba, has an ultimate unit, being analysable into\nthe infinitesimal extension quality inherent in the gu\u1e47as of\nprak\u1e5bti.\u201d[44]\n\nCitta or mind has two degrees: (1) the form of states such as real\ncognition, including perception, inference, competent evidence, unreal\ncognition, imagination, sleep and memory. (2) In the form in which all\nthose states are suppressed. Between the stage of complete outgoing\nactivity of ordinary experience (_vyutth\u0101na_) and complete suppression\nof all states, there are thousands of states of infinite variety,\nthrough which a man\u2019s experiences have to pass, from the vyutth\u0101na state\nto the nirodha. In addition to the five states spoken of above, there is\nanother kind of real knowledge and intuition, called praj\u00f1\u0101, which dawns\nwhen by concentration the citta is fixed upon any one state and that\nalone. This praj\u00f1\u0101 is superior to all other means of knowledge, whether\nperception, inference or competent evidence of the Vedas, in this, that\nit is altogether unerring, unrestricted and unlimited in its scope.\n\nPram\u0101\u1e47a, we have seen, includes perception, inference and competent\nevidence. Perception originates when the mind or citta, through the\nsenses (ear, skin, eye, taste and nose) is modified by external objects\nand passes to them, generating a kind of knowledge about them in which\ntheir specific characters become more predominant.\n\nMind is all-pervasive and can come in touch with the external world, by\nwhich we have the perception of the thing. Like light, which emits rays\nand pervades all, though it remains in one place, the citta by its\nv\u1e5bttis comes in contact with the external world, is changed into the\nform of the object of perception and thus becomes the cause of\nperception; as the citta has to pass through the senses, it becomes\ncoloured by them, which explains the fact that perception is impossible\nwithout the help of the senses. As it has to pass through the senses, it\nundergoes the limitations of the senses, which it can avoid, if it can\ndirectly concentrate itself upon any object without the help of the\nsenses; from this originates the praj\u00f1\u0101, through which dawns absolute\nreal knowledge of the thing; unhampered by the limitations of the senses\nwhich can act only within a certain area or distance and cannot cognize\nsubtler objects.\n\nWe see that in ordinary perception our minds are drawn towards the\nobject, as iron is attracted by magnets. Thus Bhikshu says in explaining\n_Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ IV. 17:\u2014\n\n\u201cThe objects of knowledge, though inactive in themselves, may yet draw\nthe everchanging cittas towards them like a magnet and change them in\naccordance with their own forms, just as a piece of cloth is turned red\nby coming into contact with red lac.\u201d So it is that the cittas attain\nthe form of anything with which they come in touch and there is then the\nperception that that thing is known. Perception (_pratyaksha_) is\ndistinguished from inference, etc., in this, that here the knowledge\narrived at is predominantly of the specific and special characters\n(_vi\u015besha_) of the thing and not of its generic qualities us in\ninference, etc.\n\nInference proceeds from inference, and depends upon the fact that\ncertain common qualities are found in all the members of a class, as\ndistinguished from the members of a different class. Thus the qualities\naffirmed of a class will be found to exist in all the individual members\nof that class; this attribution of the generic characters of a class to\nthe individual members that come under it is the essence of inference.\n\nAn object perceived or inferred by a competent man is described by him\nin words with the intention of transferring his knowledge to another;\nand the mental modification, which has for its sphere the meaning of\nsuch words, is the verbal cognition of the hearer. When the speaker has\nneither perceived nor inferred the object, and speaks of things which\ncannot be believed, the authority of verbal cognition fails. But it does\nnot fail in the original speaker, God or \u012a\u015bvara, and his dictates the\n\u015a\u0101stras with reference either to the object of perception or of\ninference.\n\nViparyyaya or unreal cognition is the knowledge of the unreal as in\ndoubt\u2014a knowledge which possesses a form that does not tally with the\nreal nature of the thing either as doubt or as false knowledge. Doubt\nmay be illustrated by taking the case of a man who sees something in dim\nlight and doubts its nature. \u201cIs it a wooden post or a man?\u201d In nature\nthere is either the wooden post or the man, but there is no such fact or\nentity which corresponds with doubt: \u201cIs it a wooden post or a man?\u201d\nKnowledge as doubt is not cognition of a fact or entity. The illusion of\nseeing all things yellow through a defect of the eye (as in jaundice)\ncan only be corrected when the objects are seen in their true colours.\nIn doubt, however, their defective nature is at once manifest. Thus when\nwe cannot be sure whether a certain thing is a post or a man, we know\nthat our knowledge is not definite. So we have not to wait till the\nillusoriness of the previous knowledge is demonstrated by the advent of\nright knowledge. The evil nature of viparyyaya is exemplified in avidy\u0101\nnescience, asmit\u0101, r\u0101ga, etc.[45]\n\nViparyyaya is distinguished from vikalpa\u2014imagination\u2014in this, that\nthough the latter is also unreal knowledge its nature as such is not\ndemonstrated by any knowledge that follows, but is on the contrary\nadmitted on all sides by the common consent of mankind. But it is only\nthe learned who can demonstrate by arguments the illusoriness of vikalpa\nor imagination.\n\nAll class notions and concepts are formed by taking note only of the\ngeneral characters of things and associating them with a symbol called\n\u201cname.\u201d Things themselves, however, do not exist in the nature of these\nsymbols or names or concepts; it is only an aspect of them that is\ndiagrammatically represented by the intellect in the form of concepts.\nWhen concepts are united or separated in our thought and language, they\nconsequently represent only an imaginary plane of knowledge, for the\nthings are not as the concepts represent them. Thus when we say\n\u201cCaitra\u2019s cow,\u201d it is only an imaginary relation for, strictly speaking,\nno such thing exists as the cow of Caitra. Caitra has no connection in\nreality with the cow. When we say purusha is of the nature of\nconsciousness, there is the same illusory relation. Now what is here\npredicated of what? Purusha is consciousness itself, but in predication\nthere must always be a statement of the relation of one to another. Thus\nit sometimes breaks a concept into two parts and predicates the one of\nthe other, and sometimes predicates the unity of two concepts which are\ndifferent. Thus its sphere has a wide latitude in all thought-process\nconducted through language and involves an element of abstraction and\nconstruction which is called vikalpa. This represents the faculty by\nwhich our concepts are arranged in an analytical or synthetical\nproposition. It is said to be _\u015babdaj\u00f1\u0101n\u0101nup\u0101ti vastu\u015b\u016bnyo vikalpa\u1e25_,\ni.e. the knowledge that springs from relating concepts or names, which\nrelating does not actually exist in the objective world as it is\nrepresented in propositional forms.\n\nSleep is that mental state which has for its objective substratum the\nfeeling of emptiness. It is called a state or notion of mind, for it is\ncalled back on awakening; when we feel that we have slept well our minds\nare clear, when we have slept badly our minds are listless, wandering\nand unsteady. For a person who seeks to attain communion or sam\u0101dhi,\nthese desires of sleep are to be suppressed, like all other desires.\nMemory is the retaining in the mind of objects perceived when perception\noccurs by the union of the cittas with external objects, according to\nthe forms of which the cittas are transformed; it retains these\nperceptions, as impressions or sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras by means of its inherent tamas.\nThese sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras generate memory, when such events occur as can manifest\nthem by virtue of associations.\n\nThus memory comes when the percepts already known and acquired are kept\nin the mind in the form of impressions and are manifested by the\nudbodhakas or associative manifestors. It differs from perceptions in\nthis that the latter are of the nature of perceiving the unknown and\nunperceived, whereas the former serves to bring before the mind percepts\nthat have already been acquired. Memory is therefore of percepts already\nacquired by real cognition, unreal cognition, imagination, sleep and\nmemory. It manifests itself in dreams as well as in waking states.\n\nThe relation between these states of mind and the sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras is this that\ntheir frequency and repetition strengthens the sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras and thus\nensures the revival of these states.\n\nThey are all endowed with sukha (pleasure), du\u1e25kha (pain) and moha\n(ignorance). These feelings cannot be treated separately from the states\nthemselves, for their manifestations are not different from the\nmanifestation of the states themselves. Knowledge and feeling are but\ntwo different aspects of the modifications of cittas derived from\nprak\u1e5bti; hence neither can be thought separately from the other. The\nfusion of feeling with knowledge is therefore here more fundamental than\nin the modern tripartite division of mind.\n\nIn connection with this we are to consider the senses whose action on\nthe external world is known as \u201cperceiving,\u201d \u201cgraha\u1e47a,\u201d which is\ndistinguished from \u201cpratyaksha,\u201d which means the effect of \u201cperceiving,\u201d\nviz. perception. Each sense has got its special sphere of work, e.g.\nsight is of the eye, and this is called their second aspect, viz.\nsvar\u016bpa. Their third aspect is of \u201casmit\u0101\u201d or ego, which manifests\nitself through the senses. Their fourth aspect is their characteristic\nof gu\u1e47as, viz. that of manifestation (_prak\u0101\u015ba_), action (_kriy\u0101_) and\nretention (_sthiti_). Their fifth aspect is that they are set in motion\nfor purusha, his experiences and liberation.\n\nIt is indeed difficult to find the relation of manas with the senses and\nthe cittas. In more than one place manas is identified with cittas, and,\non the other hand, it is described as a sense organ. There is another\naspect in which manas is said to be the king of the cognitive and motor\nsenses. Looked at in this aspect, manas is possibly the directive side\nof the ego by which it guides the cognitive and conative senses in the\nexternal world and is the cause of their harmonious activity for the\nexperience of purusha. As a necessary attribute of this directive\ncharacter of manas, the power of concentration, which is developed by\npr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma, is said to belong to manas. This is the rajas side of manas.\n\nThere is another aspect of manas which is called the anuvyavas\u0101ya or\nreflection, by which the sensations (\u0101locana) are associated,\ndifferentiated, integrated, assimilated into percepts and concepts. This\nis possibly the s\u0101ttvika side of manas.\n\nThere is another aspect by which the percepts and concepts are retained\n(_dh\u0101ra\u1e47a_) in the mind as sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras, to be repeated or revealed again\nin the mind as actual states. This is the tamas side of manas.\n\nIn connection with this we may mention \u016bha (positive argumentation),\napoha (negative argumentation) and tattvaj\u00f1\u0101na (logical conclusion)\nwhich are the modes of different anuvyavas\u0101yas of the manas. Will, etc.,\nare to be included with these (_Yoga-varttik\u0101_, II. 18). Looked at from\nthe point of view of cittas, these may equally be regarded as the\nmodifications of cittas.\n\nThe motives which sustain this process of outgoing activity are false\nknowledge, and such other emotional elements as egoism, attachment,\naversion, and love of life. These emotional elements remain in the mind\nin the germinal state as power alone; or they exist in a fully operative\nstate when a man is under the influence of any one of them; or they\nalternate with others, such as attachment or aversion; or they may\nbecome attenuated by meditation upon opposites. Accordingly they are\ncalled respectively prasupta, ud\u0101ra, vicchinna or tanu. Man\u2019s minds or\ncittas may follow these outgoing states or experiences, or gradually\nremove those emotions which are commonly called afflictions, thus\nnarrowing their sphere and proceeding towards final release.\n\nAll the psychic states described above, viz. pram\u0101\u1e47a, viparyyaya, etc.,\nare called either afflicted or unafflicted according as they are moved\ntowards outgoing activity or are actuated by the higher motive of\nemancipation by narrowing the field of experiences gradually to a\nsmaller and smaller sphere and afterwards to suppress them altogether.\nThese two kinds of motives, one of afflictions that lead towards\nexternal objects of attachment and aversion or love of life, and the\nother which leads to striving for kaivalya, are the sole motives which\nguide all human actions and psychic states.\n\nThey influence us whenever suitable opportunities occur, so that by the\nstudy of the Vedas, self-criticism or right argumentation, or from the\ninstruction of good men, abhy\u0101sa and vair\u0101gya may be roused by vidy\u0101.\nRight knowledge and a tendency towards kaivalya may appear in the mind\neven when a man is immersed in the afflicted states of outgoing\nactivity. So also afflicted states may appear when a man is bent upon or\nfar advanced in those actions which are roused by vidy\u0101 or the tendency\ntowards kaivalya.\n\nIt seems that the Yoga view of actions, or karma, does not deprive man\nof his freedom of will. The habit of performing particular types of\naction only strengthens the corresponding subconscious impressions or\nsa\u1e43sk\u0101ras of those actual states, and thus makes it more and more\ndifficult to overcome their propensity to generate their corresponding\nactual states, and thus obstructs the adoption of an unhampered and free\ncourse of action. The other limitation to the scope of the activity of\nhis free will is the v\u0101san\u0101 aspect of the sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras by which he\nnaturally feels himself attached by pleasurable ties to certain\nexperiences and by painful ones to others. But these only represent the\ndifficulties and impediments which come to a man, when he has to adopt\nthe Yoga course of life, the contrary of which he might have been\npractising for a very long period, extending over many life-states.\n\nThe free will is not curbed in any way, for it follows directly from the\nteleological purpose of prak\u1e5bti, which moves for the experience and\nliberation of purusha. So this motive of liberation, which is the basis\nof all good conduct, can never be subordinated to the other impulse,\nwhich goads man towards outgoing experiences. But, on the other hand,\nthis original impulse which attracts man towards these ordinary\nexperiences, as it is due to the false knowledge which identifies\nprak\u1e5bti with purusha, becomes itself subordinate and loses its influence\nand power, when such events occur, which nullify false knowledge by\ntending to produce a vision of the true knowledge of the relation of\nprak\u1e5bti with purusha. Thus, for example, if by the grace of God false\nknowledge (avidy\u0101) is removed, true knowledge at once dawns upon the\nmind and all the afflictions lose their power.\n\nFree will and responsibility for action cease in those life-states which\nare intended for suffering from actions only, e.g. life-states of\ninsects, etc.\n\n\n\n\n                                APPENDIX\n                               SPHO\u1e6cAV\u0100DA\n\n\nAnother point to be noted in connection with the main metaphysical\ntheories of Pata\u00f1jali is the Spho\u1e6da theory which considers the relation\nof words with their ideas and the things which they signify. Generally\nthese three are not differentiated one from the other, and we are not\naccustomed to distinguish them from one another. Though distinct yet\nthey are often identified or taken in one act of thought, by a sort of\nillusion. The nature of this illusory process comes to our view when we\nconsider the process of auditory perception of words. Thus if we follow\nthe _Bh\u0101shya_ as explained by Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu we find that by an effect\nof our organs of speech, the letters are pronounced. This vocal sound is\nproduced in the mouth of the speaker from which place the sound moves in\naerial waves until it reaches the ear drum of the hearer, by coming in\ncontact with which it produces the audible sound called dhvani\n(_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, III. 17). The special modifications of this dhvani are\nseen to be generated in the form of letters (_var\u1e47a_) and the general\nname for these modifications is n\u0101da. This sound as it exists in the\nstage of var\u1e47as or letters is also called var\u1e47a. If we apply the word\n\u015babda or sound in the most general sense, then we can say that this is\nthe second stage of sound moving towards word-cognition, the first stage\nbeing that of its utterance in the mouth of the speaker. The third stage\nof \u015babda is that in which the letters, for example, g, au, and \u1e25, of the\nword \u201cgau\u1e25\u201d are taken together and the complete word-form \u201cgau\u1e25\u201d comes\nbefore our view. The comprehension of this complete word-form is an\nattribute of the mind and not of the sense of hearing. For the sense of\nhearing senses the letter-forms of the sound one by one as the\nparticular letters are pronounced by the speaker and as they approach\nthe ear one by one in air-waves. But each letter-form sound vanishes as\nit is generated, for the sense of hearing has no power to hold them\ntogether and comprehend the letter-forms as forming a complete\nword-form. The ideation of this complete word-form in the mind is called\nspho\u1e6da. It differs from the letter-form in this that it is a complete,\ninseparable, and unified whole, devoid of any past, and thus is quite\nunlike the letter-forms which die the next moment after they originate.\nAccording to the system of Pata\u00f1jali as explained by the commentators,\nall significance belongs to this spho\u1e6da-form and never to the letters\npronounced or heard. Letters when they are pronounced and heard in a\nparticular order serve to give rise to such complete ideational\nword-images which possess some denotation and connotation of meaning and\nare thus called \u201cspho\u1e6das,\u201d or that which illuminates. These are\nessentially different in nature from the sounds in letter-forms\ngenerated in the senses of hearing which are momentary and evanescent\nand can never be brought together to form one whole, have no meaning,\nand have the sense of hearing as their seat.\n\n_The Vai\u015beshika view._\u2014Sa\u1e45kara Mi\u015bra, however, holds that this \u201cspho\u1e6da\u201d\ntheory is absolutely unnecessary, for even the supporters of spho\u1e6da\nagree that the spho\u1e6da stands conventionally for the thing that it\nsignifies; now if that be the case what is the good of admitting spho\u1e6da\nat all? It is better to say that the conventionality of names belongs to\nthe letters themselves, which by virtue of that can conjointly signify a\nthing; and it is when you look at the letters from this aspect\u2014their\nunity with reference to their denotation of one thing\u2014that you call them\na pada or name (_Upask\u0101ra_, II. 2, 21). So according to this view we\nfind that there is no existence of a different entity called \u201cname\u201d or\n\u201cspho\u1e6da\u201d which can be distinguished from the letters coming in a\ndefinite order within the range of the sense of hearing. The letters\npronounced and heard in a definite order are jointly called a name when\nthey denote a particular meaning or object.\n\n_Kum\u0101rila\u2019s view_:\u2014Kum\u0101rila, the celebrated scholar of the M\u012bm\u0101\u1e43sa\nschool, also denies the spho\u1e6da theory and asserts like the Vai\u015beshika\nthat the significance belongs to the letters themselves and not to any\nspecial spho\u1e6da or name. To prove this he first proves that the\nletter-forms are stable and eternal and suffer no change on account of\nthe differences in their modes of accent and pronunciation. He then goes\non to show that the spho\u1e6da view only serves to increase the complexity\nwithout any attendant advantage. Thus the objection that applies to the\nso-called defect of the letter-denotation theory that the letters cannot\ntogether denote a thing since they do not do it individually, applies to\nthe name-denotation of the spho\u1e6da theory, since there also it is said\nthat though there is no spho\u1e6da or name corresponding to each letter yet\nthe letters conjointly give rise to a spho\u1e6da or complete name\n(_\u015alokav\u0101rttika_, Spho\u1e6dav\u0101da, \u015bl. 91\u201393).\n\nThe letters, however, are helped by their potencies (sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras) in\ndenoting the object, or the meaning. The spho\u1e6da theory has, according to\nKum\u0101rila and P\u0101rthas\u0101rathi, also to admit this sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra of the letters\nin the manifestation of the name or the \u015babda-spho\u1e6da, whereas they only\nadmit it as the operating power of the letters in denoting the object or\nthe thing signified. Sa\u1e43sk\u0101ras according to Kum\u0101rila are thus admitted\nboth by the spho\u1e6da theorists and the Kum\u0101rila school of M\u012bm\u0101\u1e43sa, only\nwith this difference that the latter with its help can directly denote\nthe object of the signified, whereas the former have only to go a step\nbackwards in thinking their sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra to give rise to the name or the\n\u015babda-spho\u1e6da alone (_Ny\u0101yaratn\u0101kara_, Spho\u1e6dav\u0101da, \u015bl. 104).\n\nKum\u0101rila says that he takes great pains to prove the nullity of the\nspho\u1e6da theory only because if the spho\u1e6da view be accepted then it comes\nto the same thing as saying that words and letters have no validity, so\nthat all actions depending on them also come to lose their validity\n(_\u015alokav\u0101rttika_, Spho\u1e6dav\u0101da, \u015bl. 137).\n\n_Prabh\u0101kara._\u2014Prabh\u0101kara also holds the same view; for according to him\nalso the letters are pronounced in a definite order; though when\nindividually considered they are momentary and evanescent, yet they\nmaintain themselves by their potency in the form of a p\u0101da or name, and\nthus signify an object. Thus \u015a\u0101likn\u0101tha Mi\u015bra says in his _Prakara\u1e47a\nPa\u00f1cik\u0101_, p. 89: \u201cIt is reasonable to suppose that since the later\nletters in a word are dependent upon the perception of a preceding one\nsome special change is wrought in the letters themselves which leads to\nthe comprehension of the meaning of a word.... It cannot be proved\neither by perception or by inference that there is any word apart from\nthe letters; the word has thus for its constituents the letters.\u201d\n\n_\u015aabara._\u2014The views of Kam\u0101rila and Prahh\u0101kara thus explicated are but\nelaborate explanations of the view of \u015aabara who states the whole theory\nin a single line\u2014_p\u016brvavar\u1e47ajanitasa\u1e43sk\u0101rasahito\u2019ntyo var\u1e47a\u1e25\npraty\u0101yaka\u1e25_.\n\n\u201cThe last letter together with the potency generated by the preceding\nletters is the cause of significance.\u201d\n\n_Mah\u0101bh\u0101shya and Kaiya\u1e6da._\u2014After describing the view of those who are\nantagonistic to the spho\u1e6da theory it is necessary to mention the\nVai\u0101kara\u1e47a school which is in favour of it; thus we find that in\nexplaining the following passage of Mah\u0101bh\u0101shya,\n\n\u201cWhat is then a word? It is that which being pronounced one can\nunderstand specific objects such as those (cows) which have tail, hoofs,\nhorns, etc.\u201d\n\nKaiyata says: \u201cThe grammarians think that denotation belongs to words,\nas distinct from letters which are pronounced, for if each of the\nletters should denote the object, there would be no need of pronouncing\nthe succeeding letters....\u201d\n\nThe vaiyakara\u1e47as admit the significant force of names as distinguished\nfrom letters. For if the significant force be attributed to letters\nindividually, then the first letter being quite sufficient to signify\nthe object, the utterance of other letters becomes unnecessary; and\naccording to this view if it is held that each letter has the generating\npower, then also they cannot do it simultaneously, since they are\nuttered one after another. On the view of manifestation, also, since the\nletters are manifested one after another, they cannot be collected\ntogether in due order; if their existence in memory is sufficient, then\nwe should expect no difference of signification or meaning by the change\nof order in the utterance of the letters; that is \u201c_sara_\u201d ought to have\nthe same meaning as \u201c_rasa_.\u201d So it must be admitted that the power of\nsignification belongs to the spho\u1e6da as manifested by the n\u0101das as has\nbeen described in detail in _V\u0101kyapad\u012bya_.\n\nAs the relation between the perceiving capacity and the object of\nperception is a constant one so also is the relation between the spho\u1e6da\nand the n\u0101da as the manifested and the manifestor (_V\u0101kyapad\u012bya_ 98).\nJust as the image varies corresponding to the variation of the\nreflector, as oil, water, etc., so also the reflected or manifested\nimage differs according to the difference of the manifestor (_V\u0101k._\n100). Though the manifestation of letters, propositions and names occurs\nat one and the same time yet there seems to be a \u201cbefore and after\u201d\naccording to the \u201cbefore and after\u201d of the n\u0101da utterances (_V\u0101k._ 102).\nThat which is produced through the union and disunion (of n\u0101das or\ndhvanis) is called spho\u1e6da, whereas other sound-perceptions arising from\nsounds are called dhvanis (_V\u0101k._ 103). As by the movement of water the\nimage of a thing situated elsewhere also appears to adopt the movement\nof the water and thus seems to move, so also the spho\u1e6da, though\nunchanging in itself, yet appears to suffer change in accordance with\nthe change of n\u0101da which manifests it (_V\u0101k._ 49). As there are no parts\nof the letters themselves so the letters also do not exist as parts of\nthe name. There is again no ultimate or real difference between names\nand propositions (_V\u0101k._ 73). It is only in popular usage that they are\nregarded as different. That which others regard as the most important\nthing is regarded as false here, for propositions only are here regarded\nas valid (_V\u0101k._ 74). Though the letters which manifest names and\npropositions are altogether different from them, yet their powers often\nappear as quite undifferentiated from them (_V\u0101k._ 89). Thus when\npropositions are manifested by the cause of the manifestation of\npropositions they appear to consist of parts when they first appear\nbefore the mind. Thus, though the pada-spho\u1e6da or the v\u0101kya-spho\u1e6da does\nnot really consist of parts, yet, as the powers of letters cannot often\nbe differentiated from them, they also appear frequently to be made up\nof parts (_V\u0101k._ 91).\n\n_The Yoga View._\u2014As to the relation of the letters to the spho\u1e6da,\nV\u0101caspati says, in explaining the _Bh\u0101shya_, that each of the letters\nhas the potentiality of manifesting endless meanings, but none of them\ncan do so individually; it is only when the letter-form sounds are\npronounced in succession by one effort of speech that the individual\nletters by their own particular contiguity or distance from one another\ncan manifest a complete word called the spho\u1e6da. Thus owing to the\nvariation of contiguity of distance by intervention from other\nletter-form sounds any letter-form sound may manifest any meaning or\nword; for the particular order and the association of letter-form sounds\ndepend upon the particular output of energy required in uttering them.\nThe spho\u1e6da is thus a particular modification of buddhi, whereas the\nletter-form sounds have their origin in the organ of speech when they\nare uttered, and the sense of hearing when they are heard. It is well to\nnote here that the theory that the letters themselves have endless\npotentiality and can manifest any word-spho\u1e6das, according to their\nparticular combinations and recombinations, is quite in keeping with the\nmain metaphysical doctrine of the P\u0101ta\u00f1jala theory.\n\n_V\u0101kya-spho\u1e6da._\u2014What is said here of the letter-form sounds and the\n\u015babda-spho\u1e6das also applies to the relation that the \u015babda-spho\u1e6das bear\nto propositions or sentences. A word or name does not stand alone; it\nalways exists as combined with other words in the form of a proposition.\nThus the word \u201ctree\u201d whenever it is pronounced carries with it the\nnotion of a verb \u201casti\u201d or \u201cexists,\u201d and thereby demonstrates its\nmeaning. The single word \u201ctree\u201d without any reference to any other word\nwhich can give it a propositional form has no meaning. Knowledge of\nwords always comes in propositional forms; just as different letter-form\nsounds demonstrate by their mutual collocation a single word or\n\u015babda-spho\u1e6da, so the words also by their mutual combination or\ncollocation demonstrate judgmental or propositional significance or\nmeaning. As the letters themselves have no meaning so the words\nthemselves have also no meaning; it is only by placing them side by side\nin a particular order that a meaning dawns in the mind. When single\nwords are pronounced they associate other words with themselves and thus\nappear to signify a meaning. But though a single word is sufficient by\nassociation with other words to carry a meaning, yet sentences or\npropositions should not be deemed unnecessary for they serve to\nspecialise that meaning (_niyam\u0101rthe anuv\u0101da\u1e25_). Thus \u201ccooks\u201d means that\nany subject makes something the object of his cooking. The mention of\nthe subject \u201cDevadatta\u201d and the object \u201crice\u201d only specialises the\nsubject and the object. Though the analysis of a sentence into the words\nof which it is constituted is as imaginary as the analysis of a word\ninto the letter-form sounds, it is generally done in order to get an\nanalytical view of the meaning of a sentence\u2014an imaginary division of it\nas into cases, verbs, etc.\n\n_Abhihit\u0101nvayavada and Anvit\u0101bhidh\u0101nav\u0101da._\u2014This reminds us of the two\nvery famous theories about the relation of sentences to words, viz. the\n\u201cAbhihit\u0101nvayav\u0101da\u201d and the \u201cAnvit\u0101bhidh\u0101nav\u0101da.\u201d The former means that\nwords themselves can express their separate meanings by the function\nabhidh\u0101 or denotation; these are subsequently combined into a sentence\nexpressing one connected idea. The latter means that words only express\na meaning as parts of a sentence, and as grammatically connected with\neach other; they only express an action or something connected with\naction; in \u201cs\u0101m\u0101naya\u201d, \u201cbring the cow\u201d\u2014\u201cg\u0101m\u201d does not properly mean\n\u201cgotva\u201d but \u201c\u0101nayan\u0101nvitagotva,\u201d that is, the bovine genus as connected\nwith bringing. We cannot have a case of a noun without some governing\nverb and vice versa\u2014(Sarvadar\u015bana-sa\u1e43graha, Cowell).\n\n_The Yoga point of view._\u2014It will be seen that strictly speaking the\nYoga view does not agree with any one of these views though it\napproaches nearer to the Anvit\u0101bhidh\u0101na view than to the Abhihit\u0101nvaya\nview. For according to the Yoga view the idea of the sentence is the\nonly true thing; words only serve to manifest this idea but have\nthemselves no meaning. The division of a sentence into the component\nword-conceptions is only an imaginary analysis\u2014an afterthought.\n\n_Confusion the cause of verbal cognition._\u2014According to Pata\u00f1jali\u2019s view\nverbal cognition proceeds only from a confusion of the letter-form\nsounds (which are perceived in the sense of hearing), the \u015babda-spho\u1e6da\nwhich is manifested in the buddhi, and the object which exists in the\nexternal world. These three though altogether distinct from one another\nyet appear to be unified on account of the sa\u1e45keta or sign, so that the\nletter-form sounds, the \u015babda-spho\u1e6da, and the thing, can never be\ndistinguished from one another. Of course knowledge can arise even in\nthose cases where there is no actual external object, simply by virtue\nof the manifesting power of the letter-form sounds. This sa\u1e45keta is\nagain defined as the confusion of words and their meanings through\nmemory, so that it appears that what a word is, so is its denoted\nobject, and what a denoted word is, so is its object. Convention is a\nmanifestation of memory of the nature of mutual confusion of words and\ntheir meanings. This object is the same as this word, and this word is\nthe same as this object. Thus there is no actual unity of words and\ntheir objects: such unity is imaginary and due to beginningless\ntradition. This view may well be contrasted with Ny\u0101ya, according to\nwhich the convention of works as signifying objects is due to the will\nof God.\n\n\n\n\n                                 INDEX\n\n\n _abhihit\u0101nvayav\u0101da_, 186\n\n abhinive\u015ba, 101, 104\n\n _abhivyaktik\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 133\n\n abhy\u0101sa, 100, 101, 126, 128, 129, 130, 138, 143, 149, 162, 177\n\n Absorption, 102\n\n Abstraction, 135, 136, 148, 154, 174\n\n Accessories, 135, 137, 145\n\n Accidental variation, 77\n\n _acit_, 162\n\n Actual, 73\n\n Actuality, 83\n\n adharma, 85, 86, 88, 102, 106, 162\n\n adhik\u0101rin, 123\n\n ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya, 112\n\n _ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6da-janmavedan\u012bya karma_, 105, 110, 111\n\n advaita, 14\n\n _Advaita-Brahmasiddhi_, 14\n\n Afflictions, 100, 103, 104, 105, 123, 124, 128, 143, 173 n., 176, 177,\n    178\n\n Agent, 4\n\n Aggregation, 168\n\n Agreement, 33\n\n aha\u1e43k\u0101ra, 38, 40, 41, 53, 56, 58, 61, 82, 86, 87, 93\n\n aha\u1e43k\u0101ra-s\u0101ttvika, r\u0101jasa, t\u0101masa, 55\n\n ahi\u1e43s\u0101, 136, 138, 139, 144\n\n _Ahirbudhnyasa\u1e43hit\u0101_, 10\n\n akhy\u0101ti, 164\n\n aklish\u1e6da, 101\n\n aklish\u1e6dav\u1e5btti, 128\n\n _ali\u1e47ga_, 7, 41, 42, 62, 118\n\n _an\u0101disa\u1e43yoga_, 28\n\n _an\u0101\u015brita_, 29 n.\n\n anekabhavika, 107, 112, 113\n\n Anger, 141\n\n _anirv\u0101cy\u0101_, 28\n\n aniyatavip\u0101ka, 112\n\n aniyatavip\u0101ka-ad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya, 113\n\n anta\u1e25kara\u1e47a, 43 n.\n\n _anuk\u0101re\u1e47a pa\u015byati_, 21\n\n anupa\u015bya, 21\n\n anuvrata, 139\n\n anuvyavas\u0101ya, 176\n\n anvaya, 166, 167\n\n anvayik\u0101ra\u1e47a, 61\n\n _anvit\u0101bhidh\u0101nav\u0101da_, 186\n\n anvit\u0101bhidh\u0101nav\u0101da, Yoga view, near to, 186\n\n _any\u0101bhy\u0101\u1e43 aha\u1e43k\u0101r\u0101bhy\u0101m svak\u0101ryyopajanane r\u0101jas\u0101ha\u1e43k\u0101ra\u1e25\n    sahak\u0101r\u012bbhavati_, 55\n\n anyath\u0101khy\u0101ti, 164, 173 n.\n\n _anyatvak\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 134\n\n _anyonyamithun\u0101\u1e25 sarvve naish\u0101m\u0101disamprayogo viprayogo v\u0101 \u00fapalabhyate_,\n    7\n\n a\u1e45ga, 145\n\n a\u1e47u, 43 n., 65\n\n ap, 74, 75, 166, 167\n\n ap atom, 65, 66\n\n apara vair\u0101gya, 127, 128\n\n aparigraha, 141\n\n _apavarga_, 29\n\n apoha, 101, 176\n\n Appearance, 36\n\n apu\u1e47ya karma, 88\n\n Aristotle, 1, 13\n\n _artha_, 150\n\n arthavattva, 166, 167\n\n _arthena svak\u012byay\u0101 gr\u0101hya\u015bakty\u0101 vij\u00f1\u0101namajani_, 33\n\n asampraj\u00f1\u0101ta, 124, 149\n\n asampraj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi, 125\n\n Asceticism, 136, 139, 142, 144\n\n asmit\u0101, 51, 59, 100, 104, 118, 153, 154, 172, 175\n\n asmit\u0101-ego, 51\n\n _asmit\u0101m\u0101tra_, 50, 51, 59, 160\n\n _asmit\u0101nugata_, 125, 153, 154\n\n _asm\u012btyet\u0101vanm\u0101tr\u0101k\u0101ratv\u0101dasmit\u0101_, 153\n\n Assimilation, 101\n\n Association of ideas, 37\n\n asteya, 141, 144\n\n Astral body, 93\n\n a\u015bukla, 140\n\n a\u015bukl\u0101k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a, 102, 103, 111\n\n Atheistic, 90\n\n Atomic change as unit of time, 43\n\n Atoms, 4, 38, 39, 43, 65, 72, 74, 77, 81, 152, 167;\n   continual change, 71\n\n Attachment, 99, 100, 176, 177\n\n Avariciousness, 136, 141\n\n avasth\u0101, 76\n\n avasth\u0101pari\u1e47\u0101ma, 71, 73, 82, 156, 165\n\n Aversion, 98, 176, 177\n\n _avibh\u0101gapr\u0101pt\u0101viva_, 17\n\n avidy\u0101, 2, 11, 12, 97, 99, 100, 101, 104, 114, 115, 116, 120, 123, 128,\n    131, 159, 172, 173 n., 178;\n   its definition, 11;\n   uprooting of, 115, 116\n\n avidy\u0101 of yoga and S\u0101\u1e43khya, 164\n\n avi\u015besha, 7, 7 n., 40, 41, 60, 61, 62, 81, 82, 84, 165\n\n _avi\u015beshe\u1e47opash\u1e6dambhakasvabh\u0101v\u0101\u1e25_, 6\n\n aviveka, 173 n.\n\n _avyapade\u015byatva_, 77\n\n _avyavasthit\u0101khilapari\u1e47amo bhavatyeva_, 85\n\n _ayutasiddh\u0101vayava_, 69\n\n _\u0101disamprayoga_, 7\n\n \u0101k\u0101ra, 85\n\n \u0101k\u0101\u015ba, 14, 43 n., 56, 57, 58, 68, 80, 93, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170\n\n \u0101k\u0101\u015ba, two kinds of, 168\n\n \u0101k\u0101\u015ba atom, 65, 66;\n   Bhikshu and V\u0101caspati on, 65\n\n \u0101k\u0101\u015ba tanm\u0101tra, 66\n\n \u0101locana, 176\n\n \u0101malaka, 77, 78, 79\n\n \u0101nanda, 153,154\n\n \u0101nand\u0101nugata, 125, 153, 154\n\n _\u0101ptik\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 133, 135\n\n \u0101p\u016bra, 93\n\n _\u0101pyak\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 135\n\n \u0101sana, 136, 145\n\n \u0101\u015baya, 103\n\n _\u0101\u015berate s\u0101\u1e43s\u0101rik\u0101 purush\u0101 asminniti \u0101\u015baya\u1e25_, 103\n\n \u0101vara\u1e47a \u015bakti, 84\n\n \u0101yush, 105, 106, 115\n\n\n Barabara muni, 64\n\n b\u0101hya karma, 102\n\n Beginningless, 28\n\n Behaviour, 6\n\n Bel, 77\n\n Benares, 11 n.\n\n bhakti, 161\n\n bhaktiyoga, 159, 161\n\n bhava, 110\n\n _bhavishyadvyaktikaman\u0101gata\u1e43anudbh\u016btavyaktikamat\u012btam svavy\u0101p\u0101rop\u0101r\u016b\u1e0dha\u1e43\n    varttam\u0101na\u1e43 traya\u1e43 caitadvastu j\u00f1\u0101nasya j\u00f1eyam yadi caitat svar\u016bpato\n    n\u0101bhavishyanneda\u1e43 nirvishaya\u1e43 j\u00f1\u0101namudapatsyata tasm\u0101dat\u012btaman\u0101gata\u1e43\n    svar\u016bpato\u2019st\u012bti_, 31 n.\n\n _Bh\u0101shya_, 16, 17, 18, 19, 33, 61, 62, 67, 71, 76, 78, 80, 91, 95, 99,\n    109, 110, 131\n\n bh\u0101van\u0101, 161\n\n Bhikshu, 6, 9, 12 n., 43 n., 45 n., 46 n., 50, 65, 67, 85, 86, 88, 90,\n    94, 109, 110, 112, 126, 129, 145, 153, 168\n\n _bhoga_, 29, 105, 106, 115\n\n bhoga-\u015bar\u012bra, 105\n\n Bhoja, 126\n\n Bhojav\u1e5btti, 95\n\n bhrama, 173 n.\n\n bh\u016bta, 60, 69, 166\n\n bh\u016bt\u0101di, 54, 56, 58, 63, 64;\n   accretion from, 65, 66\n\n Biological, 2\n\n Birth, 133, 161\n\n Body, sattvamaya, 160\n\n Bondage, 19\n\n Brahmacaryya, 141\n\n Brahman, 27, 28, 139\n\n Breath, 146, 147\n\n Breath regulation, 135, 136\n\n _buddhe\u1e25 pratisa\u1e43vedi purusha\u1e25_, 19\n\n _buddhi_, 16, 18, 21, 27, 28, 40, 51, 52, 61, 115, 116, 118, 152, 173\n    n.\n\n Buddhist, 33, 45 n.\n\n Buddhists, their theory of _sahopalambhaniyama_ refuted, 33\n\n\n Caitra, 173\n\n Caraka, 11\n\n Caste, 139\n\n Categories of existence, 41\n\n Category, 6, 117\n\n Caturda\u015b\u012b, 139\n\n Causal activity, 4\n\n Causal operation, 4\n\n Causal transformation, 4\n\n Causality, 152\n\n Causation, 132, 133;\n   S\u0101\u1e43khya view of, 81\n\n Cause, 79, 81, 85, 133, 134;\n   nine kinds of, 133\n\n Cessation, 19\n\n Change, 43, 44;\n   Buddhist and Yoga idea contrasted, 45 n.;\n   units of, 45, 46\n\n Changeful, 18\n\n Characterised, 37\n\n Characteristic, 37\n\n _Ch\u0101y\u0101-vy\u0101khy\u0101_, 63, 93\n\n Chemical, 2\n\n Chowkhamba, 11 n.\n\n Circumstance, 139\n\n cit, 15, 162\n\n citta, 36, 81, 92, 93, 94, 96, 101, 114, 115, 116, 117, 119, 125, 132,\n    147, 154, 161, 175;\n   different forms of, 92, 93;\n   different states of, 170;\n   its nature, 94\n\n _cittamayask\u0101ntama\u1e47ikalpa\u1e43 sannidhim\u0101tropak\u0101ri d\u1e5b\u015byatvena sva\u1e43 bhavati\n    purushasya sv\u0101mina\u1e25_, 22\n\n _cittapras\u0101da_, 127\n\n Clairaudience, 144\n\n Class-characteristics, 4 n.\n\n Cleanliness, 136, 143, 144\n\n Coco-nut, 77\n\n Co-existence, 34\n\n Cognitive states, 48\n\n Coherent, 7, 37\n\n Collocation, 37\n\n Commentary, 4\n\n Compassion, 137\n\n Complacency, 137\n\n Compounds, 3, 166\n\n Conceived, 3\n\n Conceiver, 3\n\n Concentration, 17, 94, 95, 96, 123, 126, 128, 135, 136, 147, 148, 150,\n    152, 153, 155, 163, 170\n\n Concept, 150, 162, 173\n\n Conceptual, 23, 25\n\n Concomitant causes, 85\n\n Condensation, 10\n\n Conscious-like, 19\n\n Consciousness, 17, 18, 20, 21, 25, 45, 92, 93, 122, 149, 151, 154, 173\n\n Consciousness contentless, 50\n\n Conscious states, 17\n\n Conservation, 132, 133\n\n Contact, 27, 29 n.\n\n Contemplation, 97\n\n Contentment, 136, 139, 144\n\n Continence, 136, 139, 141, 144\n\n Contrary, 141\n\n Co-operation, 5\n\n Cosmic evolution, 47\n\n Cosmic matter, 74\n\n Country, 139\n\n Creation, 114, 115, 160, 161\n\n _Critique of Judgment_, 14\n\n _Critique of Practical Reason_, 14\n\n _Critique of Pure Reason_, 14\n\n\n Davies, 25\n\n Decision, 53\n\n Demerit, 86, 87, 88, 93, 102, 103\n\n Denotation, 7 n.\n\n de\u015ba, 85, 170\n\n Descartes, 13\n\n Desire, 141\n\n Determinate, 7\n\n Determined, 3, 37\n\n Determiner, 3\n\n Devotion, 139, 142, 145, 161\n\n dh\u0101ra\u1e47\u0101, 101, 128, 130, 135, 136, 137, 138, 145, 147, 148, 176\n\n dharma, 42, 71, 82, 85, 86, 87, 88, 101, 103, 106, 162\n\n dharmamegha-sam\u0101dhi, 117\n\n _dharmapari\u1e47\u0101ma_, 69, 71, 74, 80, 81, 156, 165\n\n dharmin, 71, 73, 74, 76\n\n _dharmisvar\u016bpam\u0101tro hi dharma\u1e25, dharmivikriy\u0101 eva esh\u0101 dharmadv\u0101r\u0101\n    propa\u00f1cyate_, 37, 71\n\n dharm\u012b, 42\n\n _dh\u0101tu_, 11\n\n _dh\u1e5btik\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 135\n\n dhy\u0101na, 117, 130, 135, 136, 138, 139, 145, 147, 148\n\n Difference, 33\n\n Differentiated, 7, 37, 62\n\n Differentiation, 53, 66, 101\n\n dik, 170\n\n Discrimination, 8, 116, 120, 164\n\n Distractions, 126, 148\n\n Doubt, 172\n\n _drash\u1e6d\u0101 d\u1e5b\u015bi\u1e43\u0101tra\u1e25 \u015buddho\u2019pi pratyay\u0101nupa\u015bya\u1e25_, 16\n\n dravya, 4 n., 29 n., 168\n\n Dro\u1e47a, 140 n.\n\n _d\u1e5bgdar\u015bana\u015baktyorek\u0101tmateva asmit\u0101_, 16, 51\n\n d\u1e5bk, 17\n\n _d\u1e5bk\u015bakti_, 20\n\n d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanma karm\u0101\u015baya, 105\n\n _d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya_, 105, 110, 112\n\n du\u1e25kha, 175\n\n dvesha, 104\n\n\n Earth, 167\n\n Effect, 81, 82, 85, 132\n\n Efficient cause, 82\n\n Ego, 3, 4, 27, 28, 38, 42, 51, 52, 53, 60, 61, 99, 152, 153, 175;\n   a modification of buddhi, 53;\n   evolution in three lines from, 54;\n   three kinds of, 55\n\n Egohood, 50, 124\n\n Ego-universal, 50\n\n ekabhavika, 105, 110, 111, 112\n\n ekabhavikatva, 109\n\n _ek\u0101gra_, 95, 96, 123, 126\n\n ek\u0101tmat\u0101, 17\n\n _ek\u0101tmik\u0101 sa\u1e43vidasmit\u0101_, 51\n\n ekendriya, 128\n\n Elements, 3, 166\n\n Emancipation, 164\n\n Energy, 3, 5, 8, 132\n\n Enjoyment, 28, 29\n\n Equilibrium, 6, 7, 8, 9, 42, 43, 87\n\n Error, 173 n.\n\n Eternal, 8, 91\n\n Eternity, two kinds of, 118\n\n Ethics, 92\n\n European, 10\n\n Evolutes, 11\n\n Evolution, 7, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 46, 47, 62, 65, 69, 72, 76, 81, 84,\n    87, 89, 114;\n   as change, 43;\n   as change of qualities and as derivation of categories, 69;\n   definite law of, 82;\n   its limitations by time and space, 79;\n   measured by units of spatial motion, 44;\n   of manas, 55;\n   of the senses, 54;\n   of categories, difference between S\u0101\u1e43khya and Yoga view, 58\u201362;\n   of similars, 10\n\n Evolutionary process, 77, 85, 91\n\n Exhalation, 146\n\n Existence as capacity of effecting, 8\n\n Expiratory, 136\n\n Extension, 34\n\n Externality, 34\n\n External reality, 34;\n   Buddhist objection to, 32;\n   has more than a momentary existence, 36;\n   its ground, 36;\n   not due to imagination, 35;\n   not identical with our ideas, 35\n\n External world, 31;\n   refutation of Buddhist objections, 33\n\n\n Faith, 102\n\n Fichte, 50\n\n Fisherman, 139\n\n Force, 82\n\n Freedom, 123, 125, 127;\n   of will, 177\n\n Friendliness, 137\n\n Future, 31, 32, 46, 72\n\n\n Ga\u1e47\u1e0da, 15\n\n gandha, 38, 152, 167\n\n gandha-tanm\u0101tra, 58, 64\n\n Gau\u1e0dap\u0101da, 24\n\n Generalisation, 154\n\n Generic, 168\n\n _gha\u1e6d\u0101vacchinna \u0101k\u0101\u015ba_, 14\n\n _G\u012bt\u0101_, 12\n\n _G\u012bt\u0101bh\u0101shya_, 4 n.\n\n Goal, 115, 121, 124, 127, 129\n\n God, 2, 85, 87, 88, 90, 91, 115, 136, 139, 142, 143, 145, 148, 149,\n    161, 163, 164, 172, 178, 187\n\n Gold, 134\n\n graha\u1e47a, 101, 153, 175\n\n _graha\u1e47adh\u0101ra\u1e47oh\u0101pohatattvaj\u00f1\u0101n\u0101bhinive\u015b\u0101 buddhau varttam\u0101n\u0101 purushe\n    adhy\u0101ropitasadbh\u0101v\u0101\u1e25_, 53\n\n grah\u012bt\u1e5b, 153\n\n gr\u0101hya, 54, 153\n\n Gross elements, derivation of, 65 _et seq._\n\n Grossness, 34\n\n _gu\u1e47\u0101 eva prak\u1e5bti\u015babdav\u0101cy\u0101 na tu tadatirikt\u0101 prak\u1e5btirasti_, 10\n\n _gu\u1e47\u0101n\u0101\u1e43 hi dvair\u016bpya\u1e43 vyavas\u0101y\u0101tmkatvam vyavasey\u0101tmakatva\u1e43ca_, 53\n\n _gu\u1e47\u0101n\u0101\u1e43 parama\u1e43 r\u016bpa\u1e43 na d\u1e5bsh\u1e6dipatham\u1e5bcchati, yattu drsh\u1e6dipatha\u1e43\n    pr\u0101ptam tanm\u0101yeva sutucchaka\u1e43_, 12, 37\n\n gu\u1e47as, 3, 4 n., 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 24, 26, 37, 38, 39, 42, 53, 76, 78,\n    81, 82, 98, 101, 118, 120, 121, 131, 155, 167, 170\n\n gu\u1e47as, three classes, 5;\n   as causal effect, 6;\n   evolution of the cognitive and conative senses and tanm\u0101tras, 38;\n   identity of qualities and substances, 5;\n   relative preponderance of, 7;\n   special affinity of each class, 6;\n   special behaviour of each class of, 6;\n   their atomic qualities consistent with their all-pervasiveness, 43\n      n.;\n   their common purpose, 7;\n   their co-operation, 38;\n   their mode of combination, 6;\n   their mode of mutual operation, 5;\n   their mode of evolution, 7;\n   their nature as feelings, 68;\n   their twofold nature, 53;\n   their threefold course of development, 38;\n   their want of purpose in the state of equilibrium, 7;\n   two classes of their evolution, _avi\u015besha_ and _vi\u015besha_, 40\n\n\n Harihar\u0101ra\u1e47ya, 96\n\n Heaven, 86 n.\n\n _hetumadanityamavy\u0101pi sakriyamanek\u0101\u015brita\u1e43 li\u1e45ga\u1e43 s\u0101vayavamparatantra\u1e43\n    vyakta\u1e43 vipar\u012btamavyakta\u1e43_, 42\n\n Hibiscus, 15 n.\n\n hi\u1e43s\u0101, 140, 141\n\n _History of Hindu Chemistry_, 7 n., 63 n., 170 n.\n\n Horn of a hare, 8\n\n Hume, 37\n\n\n Idealistic Buddhists, 31\n\n Ignorance, 141, 145\n\n Illumination, 5\n\n Illusion, 173 n.;\n   of Yoga and S\u0101\u1e43khya, 164\n\n Illusive, 28\n\n Imagination, 34\n\n Immanent purpose, 90\n\n Independence, 95, 128, 134\n\n Indeterminate, 8\n\n India, 14\n\n Indra, 86 n.\n\n Inertia, 3, 5, 8, 37, 167\n\n Inference, 1, 2, 81, 96, 154, 156, 162, 163, 170, 171\n\n Infra-atomic, 3\n\n Infra-atoms, 4\n\n Inhalation, 146\n\n Injury, 139\n\n Inorganic, 74\n\n Inspiratory, 136\n\n Intellection, 6\n\n Intelligence, 2, 48\n\n Intelligence-stuff, 3, 8, 49\n\n Iron, 6\n\n \u012a\u015bvara, 14, 79, 87, 88, 90, 103, 126, 144, 145, 159, 160, 161, 162,\n    164, 172;\n   removal of barriers, 87\n\n \u012a\u015bvarak\u1e5bsh\u1e47a, 7 n.\n\n \u012a\u015bvarapra\u1e47idh\u0101na, 142, 145, 161\n\n _\u012a\u015bvarasy\u0101pi dharm\u0101dhis\u1e6dh\u0101n\u0101rtha\u1e43 pratibandh\u0101panaya eva vy\u0101p\u0101ro_, 87\n\n\n _janmamara\u1e47akara\u1e47\u0101n\u0101\u1e43 pratiniyam\u0101dayugapat prav\u1e5btte\u015bca purushabahutvam\n    siddha\u1e43 traigu\u1e47yaviparyyay\u0101cca_, 26\n\n _jap\u0101spha\u1e6dikayoriva nopar\u0101ga\u1e25 kintvabhim\u0101na\u1e25_, 15\n\n _j\u0101ti_, 105, 106, 115\n\n Jealousy, 143\n\n j\u012bva, 14\n\n j\u012bvanmukta, 117\n\n j\u012bvanmukti, 120\n\n j\u00f1\u0101na, 150\n\n j\u00f1\u0101nayoga, 130, 142, 143, 159\n\n Judgmental, 23\n\n\n kaivalya, 22, 23, 27, 31, 95, 96, 116, 118, 121, 122, 139, 140, 142,\n    143, 177\n\n kalpa, 160\n\n Kant, 14, 37\n\n Kapila, 25\n\n karma, 86, 98, 117, 159, 160, 177;\n   its classification and divergence of views, 109\u2013113\n\n karma-sanny\u0101sin, 103\n\n karm\u0101\u015baya, 103, 104, 105, 107, 109, 110, 111, 112, 115, 160\n\n karmayoga, 159\n\n karu\u1e47\u0101, 137, 138, 139\n\n Kaumud\u012b, 64\n\n k\u0101la, 85\n\n k\u0101ma, 104\n\n k\u0101ra\u1e47a, 168\n\n k\u0101ra\u1e47acitta, 93\n\n _k\u0101rik\u0101_, 7 n., 11, 24, 26, 42, 64, 165\n\n K\u0101rya, 168\n\n k\u0101rya vimukti, 120\n\n k\u0101ryya citta, 92\n\n k\u0101ryyakar\u012b \u015bakti, 84\n\n K\u0101\u015bm\u012bra, 79\n\n _kevalapurush\u0101k\u0101r\u0101 sa\u1e43vit_, 153\n\n keval\u012b, 117, 118\n\n kir\u0101t\u0101, 101\n\n kle\u015ba, 99, 100, 104, 114\n\n klish\u1e6da, 128\n\n klish\u1e6dav\u1e5btti, 100\n\n Knowable, 5, 27, 32, 38\n\n Knower, 27, 50\n\n Knowledge, different kinds of, differentiated, 163\n\n Known, 27\n\n _kriy\u0101_, 37, 175\n\n kriy\u0101yoga, 129, 130, 142, 143, 161\n\n krodha, 104\n\n k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a, 102, 103, 111\n\n k\u1e5bsh\u1e47a karma, 103, 111\n\n _k\u1e5bt\u0101rtha\u1e43 prati nash\u1e6damapyanash\u1e6da\u1e43 tadanyas\u0101dh\u0101ra\u1e47atv\u0101t_, 26\n\n _ksha\u1e47a_, 43, 44, 45, 46 n., 146, 170\n\n _ksha\u1e47abha\u1e45guram_, 12 n.\n\n _ksha\u1e47apracay\u0101\u015braya_, 46 n.\n\n _ksha\u1e47apratiyogi_, 46 n.\n\n _ksha\u1e47atatkramayorn\u0101sti vastusam\u0101h\u0101ra\u1e25 iti buddhisam\u0101h\u0101ra\u1e25\n    muh\u016brtt\u0101hor\u0101tr\u0101tr\u0101daya\u1e25. sa tvaya\u1e43 k\u0101la\u1e25 vastu\u015b\u016bnyo\u2019pi\n    buddhinirm\u0101\u1e47ah_, 44\n\n _kshipta_, 95, 122\n\n kshiti, 74, 75, 166\n\n kshiti atom, 66\n\n kunt\u012b, 14, 15 n.\n\n ku\u015bala, 121\n\n ku\u015bal\u012b, 121\n\n k\u016b\u1e6dastha nitya, 118\n\n\n laksha\u1e47a, 76, 82\n\n laksha\u1e47a-pari\u1e47\u0101ma, 71, 72, 73, 74, 156, 165\n\n Latent, 46, 73, 81, 96, 108\n\n _laukikam\u0101yeva_, 12 n.\n\n liberation, 7, 25, 167, 175, 177\n\n Light, 167\n\n Limitation theory, 14, 15\n\n li\u1e45ga, 7, 41, 42, 51, 62, 118\n\n _li\u1e45gam\u0101tram mahattatva\u1e43 satt\u0101m\u0101tre mahati \u0101tmani_, 50\n\n _lobha_, 104\n\n Locke, 37\n\n Lok\u0101c\u0101ryya, 11, 55, 58\n\n Lotus, 9\n\n\n _madhumat\u012b_, 125\n\n _madhuprat\u012bka_, 125\n\n Magnet, 6, 89, 171\n\n mahat, 9, 11, 40, 41, 42, 51, 56, 58, 59, 61, 82;\n   its potential existence in prak\u1e5bti, 9\n\n _Mah\u0101bh\u0101rata_, 15 n., 80, 140\n\n mah\u0101pralaya, 118\n\n mah\u0101vrata, 139\n\n maitr\u012b, 137, 138, 139\n\n manas, 40, 51, 55, 60, 81, 100, 118, 133, 175, 176\n\n Manifested, 72\n\n mantra, 161\n\n Many, 27, 28\n\n _Ma\u1e47iprabh\u0101_, 65\n\n marut, 75, 166\n\n Mass, 3\n\n Material cause, 61, 81\n\n Matter, 2, 3, 166\n\n m\u0101nasa karma, 102\n\n m\u0101tr\u0101, 146\n\n m\u0101y\u0101, 2, 11, 12, 14, 27, 28\n\n _m\u0101y\u0101\u1e43 tu prak\u1e5bti\u1e43 vidy\u0101t m\u0101yina\u1e43 tu mahe\u015bvara\u1e43_, 11\n\n _m\u0101yeva_, 12 n.\n\n Mechanical, 2\n\n Meditation, 102, 135, 136, 145, 148, 149, 161, 176\n\n Memory, 53, 98\n\n Mental, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 37, 48\n\n Mental states, analysis of, 48\n\n Merit, 85, 86, 87, 88, 93, 103\n\n Metaphysics, 30\n\n Method of agreement, 33, 35;\n   of difference, 33\n\n Mind, 2, 3, 18, 19, 81;\n   its seven qualities, 156\n\n Mind-modification, 20, 22;\n   -transformations, 18\n\n _moha_, 104, 175\n\n _Mokshadharm\u0101dhy\u0101ya_, 140\n\n Moment, 44, 45\n\n Momentary, 12, 35\n\n Moral, 2\n\n Moral ideal, 26\n\n Movement, 48\n\n mudit\u0101, 137, 139\n\n _m\u016b\u1e0dha_, 95, 122\n\n\n Nahusha, 86\n\n Naiy\u0101yika, 58\n\n Name, 150, 173;\n   and thing, 173\n\n Nand\u012b, 85\n\n _na tu ksha\u1e47\u0101tirikta\u1e25 ksha\u1e47ika\u1e25 pad\u0101rtha\u1e25 ka\u015bcidishyate taistu\n    ksha\u1e47am\u0101trasth\u0101yyeva pad\u0101rtha\u1e25 ishyate_, 45 n.\n\n _Naturalism and agnosticism_, 2 n.\n\n Natural selection, 76\n\n N\u0101ge\u015ba, 61, 63, 66, 86, 87, 94, 107, 109, 117, 168\n\n N\u0101r\u0101ya\u1e47a T\u012brtha, 90, 126\n\n _n\u0101sad\u0101s\u012bt na sad\u0101s\u012bt tad\u0101n\u012bm_, 12\n\n _n\u0101styasata\u1e25 sa\u1e43bhava\u1e25 na c\u0101sti sato vin\u0101\u015b\u0101\u1e25_, 31\n\n Nectar, 85\n\n Nescience, 14, 15, 97, 99;\n   its different forms, 172 n.\n\n nidr\u0101, 101\n\n Nihilists, 2\n\n _ni\u1e25sa\u1e45ge\u2019pi upar\u0101go vivek\u0101t_, 15\n\n _ni\u1e25satt\u0101sattam ni\u1e25sadasat nirasat avyaktam ali\u1e45gam pradh\u0101nam_, 8\n\n ni\u1e25satt\u0101satta\u1e43, 12\n\n nirasmit\u0101, 153\n\n nirm\u0101\u1e47a citta, 160, 161\n\n nir\u0101nanda, 153\n\n nirodha, 19, 96, 118, 149, 155, 156, 170\n\n _nirodhaja sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra_, 97\n\n nirodha sam\u0101dhi, 139\n\n _niruddha_, 95, 123\n\n nirvic\u0101ra, 149, 153, 154\n\n nirv\u012bja, 122, 125\n\n nirv\u012bja sam\u0101dhi, 154\n\n nirvitarka, 150, 151, 153, 154\n\n ni\u015bcaya, 50\n\n niyama, 136, 139, 142, 143, 148\n\n niyata vip\u0101ka, 112\n\n niyatavip\u0101kad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012bya, 113\n\n N\u012blaka\u1e47\u1e6dha, 80, 88, 89\n\n Non-being, 2\n\n Non-covetousness, 139, 144\n\n Non-discrimination, 15\n\n Non-distinction, 173 n.\n\n Non-existence, 8, 12\n\n Non-injury, 139, 140, 144;\n   its classification, 141\n\n Non-stealing, 139\n\n Noumenon, 8, 14\n\n\n Observance, 135, 136\n\n o\u1e43k\u0101ra, 161\n\n Omniscience, 95\n\n oshadhi, 161\n\n\n Pain, 98, 121, 122, 126, 137, 142\n\n Palm, 77\n\n Pantheism, 13\n\n Pa\u00f1ca\u015bikha, 17, 52, 103 n.\n\n parama mahat, 68\n\n param\u0101\u1e47u in S\u0101\u1e43khya and Yoga, 43 n., 66, 67, 165, 167\n\n para vair\u0101gya, 120, 127, 128\n\n parikarma, 129, 130, 135, 137\n\n pari\u1e47\u0101ma, 98\n\n _pari\u1e47\u0101madu\u1e25khat\u0101_, 98\n\n _pari\u1e47\u0101makramaniyama_, 62, 82\n\n pari\u1e47\u0101mi, 19\n\n pari\u1e47\u0101minityat\u0101, 119\n\n Past, 31, 32, 46, 72\n\n Pata\u00f1jali, 1, 2, 5 n., 16, 26, 30, 35, 51, 119\n\n Patent, 81\n\n p\u0101da, 54\n\n P\u0101\u00f1c\u0101la, 79\n\n p\u0101\u1e47i, 54\n\n p\u0101pa karma, 100\n\n p\u0101pakarm\u0101\u015baya, 105\n\n P\u0101ta\u00f1jala, 1, 12, 90, 115\n\n p\u0101yu, 54, 58\n\n Perceived, 3\n\n Perceiver, 3\n\n Percept, 19\n\n Perception, 3, 53, 96, 154, 162, 170, 171, 175\n\n Permanent, 21\n\n Phenomena, 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 14, 17, 18, 19, 95\n\n Phenomenal, 29, 84, 125, 155\n\n Philosopher, 2\n\n Philosophical, 2\n\n Physical, 2, 3, 4, 5, 37, 166\n\n _Physical, Chemical and Mechanical Theories of the Ancient Hindus_, 63\n    n.\n\n Plant: its possession of life and senses, 80\n\n Plato, 13\n\n Pleasure, 98\n\n Plurality, 26\u201329, 30\n\n Poison, 85\n\n Posture, 135, 136, 145\n\n Potency, 19, 82, 96, 98, 101, 106, 116, 124, 125, 154, 155;\n   destroying other potencies, 117\n\n Potential, 9, 32, 73, 77, 83, 84, 85\n\n Potentiality, 5, 83, 84\n\n Potentials, 3\n\n Power, 82\n\n pradh\u0101na, 118\n\n praj\u00f1\u0101, 102, 116, 117, 120, 122, 125, 126, 128, 136, 151, 154, 170,\n    171;\n   its seven stages, 119\u2013120\n\n praj\u00f1\u0101sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra, 101\n\n praj\u00f1\u0101loka, 149\n\n prak\u0101\u015ba, 37, 175\n\n prak\u1e5bti, 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 16, 17, 22, 25, 27, 28, 29, 40, 41,\n    42, 54, 59, 62, 77, 82, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 93, 94, 95, 114,\n    115, 117, 118, 120, 122, 125, 143, 152, 160, 161, 162, 164, 165,\n    170, 173 n., 175, 177, 178;\n   as undifferentiated cosmic matter, 12;\n   as equilibrium of dharma and dharm\u012b, 42;\n   avidy\u0101 and v\u0101san\u0101 lie merged in it, 114;\n   different views of, 10, 11;\n   different from avidy\u0101, 12;\n   evolution of the second category of asmit\u0101, 51;\n   its difference from m\u0101y\u0101, 12;\n   its difference from purusha, 20;\n   its first evolutionary product, mahat, 50, 51;\n   its goal, 116;\n   its identity with gu\u1e47a reals, 9;\n   its relation with gu\u1e47as, 6;\n   its similarity with purusha, 20;\n   Lok\u0101c\u0101ryya\u2019s view of, 11;\n   nature in the state of equilibrium, 8;\n   refilling from, 86;\n   roused by God, 87;\n   Venka\u1e6da\u2019s view of, 10\n\n prak\u1e5btil\u012bna, 127\n\n _prak\u1e5btivik\u1e5bti_, 7 n.\n\n _prak\u1e5bti\u1e5bityucyate vik\u0101rotp\u0101dakatv\u0101t avidy\u0101 j\u00f1\u0101navirodhitv\u0101t m\u0101y\u0101\n    vicitras\u1e5bsh\u1e6dikaratv\u0101t_, 11\n\n prak\u1e5bty\u0101p\u016bra, 106\n\n pralaya, 114\n\n pram\u0101\u1e47a, 101, 170, 176\n\n pra\u1e47ava, 161\n\n pr\u0101\u1e47\u0101y\u0101ma, 136, 137, 145, 146, 147, 148, 175\n\n prasupta, 176\n\n _pratipaksha bh\u0101van\u0101_, 141\n\n _pratisambandh\u012b_, 46 n.\n\n pratiyog\u012b, 46 n.\n\n praty\u0101h\u0101ra, 136, 137, 147, 148\n\n pratyaksha, 171, 175\n\n pratyaya, 119, 134\n\n _pratyayak\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 133\n\n _pratyaya\u1e43 bauddhamanupa\u015byati tamanupa\u015byannatad\u0101tm\u0101pi tad\u0101tmaka iva\n    pratibh\u0101ti_, 17\n\n _pratyay\u0101nupa\u015bya_, 17, 18\n\n _Pravacana-bh\u0101shya_, 64\n\n _pr\u0101m\u0101\u1e47yani\u015bcaya_, 134 n.\n\n Pre-established harmony, 2\n\n Present, 31, 32, 46, 72\n\n Presentative ideation, 101\n\n Presentative power, 33\n\n Pride, 143\n\n Primal, 3\n\n Primal cause, 3, 6\n\n p\u1e5bthiv\u012b, 57\n\n Psychological, 2\n\n Psychology, 81\n\n Psychosis, 3, 16\n\n pu\u1e47ya, 100\n\n pu\u1e47ya karma, 88, 100\n\n pu\u1e47ya karm\u0101\u015baya, 105\n\n Pur\u0101\u1e47a, 64\n\n Purification, 138\n\n Purificatory, 129, 130, 136\n\n Purity, 139\n\n purusha, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 16, 17, 19, 23, 28, 29, 42, 48, 53, 61, 76,\n    89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 100, 104, 116, 117, 118, 119, 121, 122, 125,\n    131, 133, 143, 154, 159, 162, 164, 173, 173 n., 175, 177, 178;\n   arguments in favour of its separate existence, 24;\n   contrast with vedantic Brahman, 26;\n   different from the mental states, 17;\n   fulfilment of its objects, 7, 8;\n   its connection with prak\u1e5bti real, 28;\n   its final separation from prak\u1e5bti, 118;\n   its permanence, 21;\n   its plurality, 26\u201330;\n   its reflection in the mind, 18;\n   its relation with concepts and ideas, 49;\n   its similarity with sattva, 49;\n   meaning determined from the s\u016btras, 16, 17;\n   nature of its reflection in buddhi, 21, 22\n\n purush\u0101rtha, 89\n\n purush\u0101rthat\u0101, 120, 164;\n   its relation with avidy\u0101, 115\n\n p\u016brvade\u015ba, 43 n.\n\n\n rajas, 3, 4, 5, 6, 24, 37, 40, 43, 47, 49, 50, 51, 54, 55, 62, 95, 96,\n    116, 175\n\n Rarefaction, 10\n\n rasa, 38, 152\n\n rasa-tanm\u0101tra, 58, 64\n\n Ray, P. C., 7 n., 63 n., 170 n.\n\n R\u0101dh\u0101, 14, 15 n.\n\n r\u0101ga, 97, 99, 104, 172\n\n _R\u0101jam\u0101rta\u1e47da_, 65\n\n _r\u0101japuttravattattvopade\u015b\u0101t_, 15\n\n r\u0101jasa, 38\n\n R\u0101m\u0101nuja, 64, 162\n\n Realisation, 137\n\n Reality, 2, 4, 30, 118, 154\n\n Reals, 2, 3, 4, 10, 11, 28\n\n Reason, 50\n\n Reasoning, 53\n\n Rebirth, 93, 107\n\n Reflection, 18, 28\n\n Reflection theory, 14, 15\n\n Release, 28, 29, 123, 128\n\n Religious, 2\n\n Reperception, 18\n\n Restraint, 135, 136\n\n Retention, 101\n\n Right knowledge, 53\n\n r\u016bpa, 38, 65, 152, 167\n\n r\u016bpa tanm\u0101tra, 57, 64\n\n \u1e5agveda, 11\n\n \u1e5bshi, 144\n\n \u1e5btambhar\u0101, 154\n\n\n _sad\u1e5b\u015bapari\u1e47\u0101m\u0101_, 10\n\n sahak\u0101ri, 55\n\n _sahopalambhaniyama_, 33\n\n _sahopalambhaniyama\u015b ca vedyatva\u00f1ca het\u016b\n    sandigdhavyatirekatay\u0101naik\u0101ntikau_, 34\n\n _sahopalambhaniyam\u0101dabhedo nilataddhiyo\u1e25_, 32\n\n Salvation, 145, 159, 162\n\n sam\u0101dhi, 81, 96, 102, 118, 122, 124, 126, 128, 130, 135, 136, 137, 140,\n    142, 143, 145, 147, 148, 149, 151, 153, 155, 161, 162;\n   classification of, 153, 154\n\n sam\u0101dhipari\u1e47\u0101ma, 155\n\n sam\u0101na tantra, 67\n\n sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta, 96, 124, 125, 126, 137, 144, 149, 153, 155, 156\n\n sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta sam\u0101dhi, 138, 145, 150, 154\n\n _sampratyaya_, 134 n.\n\n _sa\u1e43gh\u0101tapar\u0101rthatv\u0101t trigu\u1e47\u0101diviparyyay\u0101dadhish\u1e6dh\u0101n\u0101t purusho\u2019sti\n    bhokt\u1e5bbh\u0101v\u0101t kaivaly\u0101rtha\u1e43 prav\u1e5btte\u015bca_, 24\n\n sa\u1e43s\u0101ra, 115, 121\n\n sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra, 19, 81, 96, 98, 101, 108, 109, 125, 174, 176, 177\n\n _sa\u1e43sk\u0101r\u0101\u1e25 v\u1e5bttibhi\u1e25 kriyante sa\u1e43sk\u0101rai\u015bca v\u1e5bttaya\u1e25 eva\u1e43\n    v\u1e5bttisa\u1e43sk\u0101racakram ani\u015bam\u0101varttate_, 97\n\n sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra\u015besha, 125\n\n _sa\u1e43sk\u0101ryyak\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 135\n\n _sa\u1e43s\u1e5bsh\u1e6d\u0101 vivicyante_, 62\n\n _sa\u1e43vega_, 129\n\n sa\u1e43yama, 149, 157\n\n _sa\u1e43yoga_, 27, 29 n.\n\n sanny\u0101s\u0101\u015brama, 103\n\n santosha, 143\n\n sa\u1e45keta, 187\n\n Sarasvat\u012b R\u0101m\u0101nanda, 126\n\n _sarva\u1e43 sarv\u0101tmaka\u1e43_, 77\n\n satk\u0101ra\u1e47av\u0101da, 81\n\n satk\u0101ryyav\u0101da, 81\n\n sattva, 3, 4, 5, 6, 22, 24, 37, 38, 40, 43, 47, 49, 50, 51, 53, 54, 55,\n    56, 96, 116, 143, 144, 153, 160, 161\n\n _sattvapurushayo\u1e25 \u015buddhis\u0101mye kaivalya\u1e43_, 16, 22\n\n _sattvapurushayoratyant\u0101sa\u1e45k\u012br\u1e47ayo\u1e25 pratyay\u0101vi\u015besho bhoga\u1e25 par\u0101rthatv\u0101t\n    sv\u0101rthasamyam\u0101t purushaj\u00f1\u0101, nam_, 16\n\n savic\u0101ra, 149, 150, 152, 153, 154;\n   praj\u00f1\u0101, 151\n\n savitarka, 149, 150, 152, 153, 154\n\n _s\u0101 ca \u0101tman\u0101 grah\u012btr\u0101 saha buddhirek\u0101tmik\u0101 sa\u1e43vid_, 51\n\n _s\u0101m\u0101nya gu\u1e47a_, 29 n.\n\n S\u0101\u1e43khya, 4, 7 n., 10, 11, 18, 26, 27, 28, 29, 29 n., 30, 58, 62, 67,\n    89, 90, 94, 140, 164, 165;\n   Jaina influence on, 94 n.\n\n _S\u0101\u1e43khya-k\u0101rik\u0101_, 55, 56 n., 67\n\n S\u0101\u1e43khya-P\u0101ta\u00f1jala, 24, 76, 77, 80, 81, 82, 85\n\n S\u0101\u1e43khya philosophy, 4 n.\n\n _S\u0101\u1e43khyapravacanabh\u0101shya_, 4 n.\n\n _S\u0101\u1e43khya-s\u016btra_, 11, 15, 169\n\n _S\u0101\u1e43khya-Yoga_, 4, 26, 27, 50 n., 57\n\n S\u0101\u1e43khyists, 12\n\n s\u0101nanda, 153\n\n s\u0101ttvika, 38, 56\n\n s\u0101ttvikaaha\u1e43k\u0101ra, 63\n\n _Science of Ethics_, 50\n\n Seal, Dr. B. N., 7, 37, 63 n., 66\u2013169\n\n Seeming reflection, 22, 23\n\n Seer, 17, 19, 23, 24, 28, 47, 51\n\n Self, 8, 18, 21, 26, 49, 51, 54\n\n Self-consciousness, 52, 54\n\n Self-control, 24\n\n Self-intelligent, 3\n\n Self-subsistent, 36\n\n Sensation, 166\n\n Sense, 141\n\n Sense faculties, 56\n\n Sense organs, 56\n\n Senses, 3, 40, 41, 47, 54, 60, 86, 87, 100, 102, 135, 147, 167, 171;\n   divergent views about their evolution, 57\n\n Separation, 29 n.\n\n Sex restraint, 144\n\n _Shash\u1e6ditantra\u015b\u0101stra_, 10, 12\n\n siddha, 144\n\n _Siddh\u0101nta-candrik\u0101_, 65, 95\n\n _Siddh\u0101ntale\u015ba_, 14\n\n Sign, 7, 41\n\n Simultaneous revelation, 33\n\n Sins, 103\n\n Sleep, 174\n\n sm\u1e5bti, 19, 64, 101, 102, 108, 126, 128, 136\n\n Social, 2\n\n Soul, 13, 14, 24, 25\n\n Sound, 169\n\n Space, 79, 146, 152;\n   as relative position, 169\n\n Space order, 170\n\n spar\u015ba, 38, 65\n\n spar\u015b\u00e2tanm\u0101tra, 57, 64\n\n Specialised, 7, 8\n\n Specific, 168\n\n spho\u1e6dav\u0101da, 178\u2013187;\n   _Kum\u0101ril\u2019s view_, 181;\n   Mah\u0101bh\u0101shya and Kaiya\u1e6da, 182;\n   Prabh\u0101kara, 182;\n   \u015aabara\u2019s view, 182;\n   _Vai\u015beshika view_, 180;\n   V\u0101kya-spho\u1e6da, 185;\n   _Yoga view_, 184\n\n Spinoza, 13\n\n Spirits, 7, 13\n\n Spiritual principle, 24, 28\n\n _sthiti_, 37, 175\n\n _sthitik\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 133\n\n sth\u016bla, 166\n\n sth\u016blavishayaka, 154\n\n Strength, 102\n\n Studies, 136, 139\n\n Subconscious, 81\n\n Sub-latent, 46, 73\n\n Substance, 4 n., 29 n., 40, 47, 73, 74, 76, 81, 168;\n   its nature, 37\n\n Substantive entities, 3, 4, 7, 10, 11, 82, 84\n\n Substratum, 36, 37, 49\n\n Succession, 44, 45\n\n _summum bonum_, 121\n\n Sushe\u1e47a, 135\n\n _sutucchaka_, 12\n\n _s\u016bkshma_, 61, 67, 166, 167\n\n s\u016bkshmavishayaka, 154\n\n _s\u016bkshmav\u1e5bttimanta\u1e25_, 6\n\n S\u016btra, 15, 17, 22, 26, 31, 62, 64, 108, 137, 147\n\n _S\u016btr\u0101rthabodhin\u012b_, 65, 90\n\n svar\u016bpa, 166, 167, 175\n\n sv\u0101dhy\u0101ya, 136, 142, 161\n\n _Svet\u0101\u015bvatara_, 11\n\n Sympathy, 137, 138\n\n \u015babda, 38, 65, 150\n\n _\u015babdaj\u00f1\u0101n\u0101nup\u0101t\u012b vastu\u015b\u016bnyo vikalpa\u1e25_, 174\n\n \u015babda-tanm\u0101tra, 57, 64\n\n _\u015babd\u0101d\u012bn\u0101m m\u016brttisam\u0101naj\u0101t\u012by\u0101n\u0101m_, 66 n.\n\n \u015bakti, 17, 82, 83\n\n \u015baktim\u0101n, 82, 83\n\n \u015aa\u1e45kara, 4 n., 135, 162\n\n \u015b\u0101nta, 73\n\n _S\u0101nti-parva_, 80, 88, 89\n\n \u015b\u0101stra, 172\n\n \u015bauca, 143, 144\n\n \u015b\u012bla, 6\n\n \u015braddh\u0101, 102, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 135, 138, 158\n\n \u015bruti, 57\n\n \u015bukla, 102, 111, 140, 175\n\n \u015bukla karma, 103, 140\n\n \u015bukla karm\u0101\u015baya, 111\n\n \u015buklak\u1e5bsh\u1e47a, 102, 111\n\n \u015a\u016bnyav\u0101di Buddhists, 2\n\n _svalpasa\u1e45kara\u1e25 saparih\u0101ra\u1e25 sapratyavamarsha\u1e25_, 103 n.\n\n _svasv\u0101mi\u015baktyo\u1e25 svar\u016bpopalabdhihetu\u1e25 sa\u1e43yoga\u1e25_, 16\n\n\n _tadartha eva dr\u015byasya \u0101tm\u0101_, 16\n\n _tadabh\u0101v\u0101t sa\u1e43yog\u0101bh\u0101vo h\u0101na\u1e43 tadd\u1e5b\u015be\u1e25 kaivalya\u1e43_, 16\n\n taijasa, 56\n\n tamas, 3, 4, 5, 6, 37, 39, 40, 43, 47, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55, 56, 94, 95,\n    117, 169, 176\n\n tanm\u0101tra, 38, 40, 42, 54, 59, 61, 65, 66, 67, 70, 82, 83, 124, 151, 167\n\n tanm\u0101tras, evolution of grosser elements from, 65;\n   their difference from param\u0101nus, 68;\n   their evolution, _et seq._, 64;\n   their relation to aha\u1e43k\u0101ra, 40, 41\n\n tanm\u0101tr\u0101vayava, 66\n\n _tanm\u0101tr\u0101\u1e47\u0101mapi parasparavy\u0101rv\u1e5bttasvabh\u0101vatvamastyeva tacca\n    yogim\u0101tragamyam_, 68\n\n tanu, 176\n\n _tapa\u1e25_, 136\n\n tapas, 161\n\n _tasm\u0101t svatantro\u2019rtha\u1e25 sarvapurushas\u0101dh\u0101ra\u1e47a\u1e25 svatantr\u0101\u1e47i ca citt\u0101ni\n    pratipurusha\u1e43, pravarttante_, 36\n\n Taste, 167\n\n _tatrad\u1e5bsh\u1e6dajanmavedan\u012byasya niyatavip\u0101kasya_, 109\n\n tattva, 40, 94\n\n tattvaj\u00f1\u0101na, 101, 176\n\n _Tattva-kaumud\u012b_, 25, 56 n., 103 n.\n\n _Tattva-nir\u016bpa\u1e47a_, 66\n\n _Tattvatraya_, 11 n., 55, 58, 64, 66\n\n _Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, 3 n., 5 n., 9 n., 33 n., 46, 53, 56 n., 64, 75, 78,\n    79, 93, 135, 154\n\n tattv\u0101ntara, 68\n\n _tattv\u0101ntara-pari\u1e47\u0101ma_, 40, 41, 69\n\n t\u0101masa, 38, 56\n\n t\u0101masa aha\u1e43k\u0101ra, 60, 62\n\n _te vyaktas\u016bkshm\u0101 gu\u1e47\u0101tm\u0101na\u1e25 ... sarvamida\u1e43 gu\u1e47\u0101n\u0101\u1e43\n    Sannive\u015bavi\u015besham\u0101tramiti param\u0101rthato gu\u1e47\u0101tm\u0101na\u1e25_, 38\n\n tejas, 65, 75, 166, 167\n\n tejas atom, 66\n\n Teleological, 86, 121\n\n Teleology, 24, 76, 77, 89\n\n Temptation, 141\n\n Theft, 136, 141\n\n Theists, 90\n\n Theories, 2\n\n Thing, 150\n\n Thing-in-itself, 2, 37\n\n Thought, 2\n\n Time, 79, 139, 152, 169;\n   as discrete moments, 44;\n   as unit of change, 43;\n   element of imagination in, 44;\n   unit of, 46;\n   order, 170\n\n Tinduka, 77\n\n Trance, 135, 136, 143;\n   Trance-cognition, 95\n\n Transcendent, 18\n\n Transformations, 20, 24\n\n trasare\u1e47u, 66\n\n _trigu\u1e47amaviveki vishaya\u1e25 s\u0101m\u0101nyamacetana\u1e43 prasavadharmi vyakta\u1e43 tath\u0101\n    pradh\u0101na\u1e43, tadvipar\u012btastath\u0101 pum\u0101n_, 42\n\n Truth, 141\n\n Truthfulness, 139, 140, 144\n\n _Tulyaj\u0101t\u012by\u0101tulyaj\u0101t\u012bya\u015baktibhed\u0101nup\u0101tina\u1e25_, 6\n\n\n ud\u0101ra, 176\n\n udbodhaka, 174\n\n udgh\u0101ta, 146, 147\n\n udita, 73\n\n Ultimate state, 7\n\n Unafflicted, 176\n\n Understanding, 19\n\n Undetermined, 8\n\n Undifferentiated, 12, 162\n\n Unindividuated, 12\n\n Universe, 1, 13;\n   a product of gu\u1e47a combinations, 37\n\n Unknowable, 2, 37\n\n Unmanifested, 4, 8, 72\n\n Unmediated, 8\n\n Unpredicable, 73\n\n Unreal, 28\n\n Unspecialised, 7\n\n Unwisdom, 142\n\n Upanishads, 11\n\n upastha, 54, 58\n\n up\u0101d\u0101na, 61\n\n up\u0101d\u0101na k\u0101ra\u1e47a, 61, 133\n\n upeksh\u0101, 137, 139\n\n _utp\u0101dyak\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 135\n\n uttarade\u015ba, 43 n.\n\n \u016bha, 101, 176\n\n\n vaik\u0101rika, 56\n\n vair\u0101gya, 100, 101, 127, 129, 130, 135, 136, 143, 149, 162, 177\n\n Vai\u015beshika, 43 n., 71, 168\n\n Vai\u015beshika atoms, 70\n\n vaish\u1e47ava, 10\n\n Vanity, 143\n\n va\u015b\u012bk\u0101ra, 128\n\n _vastupatita\u1e25_, 44\n\n _vastus\u0101mye cittabhed\u0101t tayor vibhakta\u1e25 panth\u0101\u1e25_, 35 n.\n\n V\u0101caspati, 3, 5 n., 8, 12, 32, 33, 35, 44, 46 n., 51, 55, 62, 65, 66,\n    67, 75, 78, 87, 89, 93, 109, 110, 112, 118, 126, 129, 144, 153, 154\n\n v\u0101k, 54\n\n _V\u0101kyapad\u012bya_, 183\n\n v\u0101san\u0101, 99, 106, 108, 114, 116, 177;\n   contrasted with karm\u0101\u015baya, 107\n\n V\u0101yu, 167\n\n V\u0101yu atom, 65\n\n Vedas, 154, 160, 162, 170, 177\n\n Ved\u0101nta, 11, 14, 24, 27, 28, 29, 162\n\n Ved\u0101ntism, 14\n\n Ved\u0101ntists, 12, 26, 66, 81\n\n Vedic, 103\n\n Vehicles of actions, 103\n\n Venka\u1e6da, 10\n\n Veracity, 136, 140\n\n Verbal cognition, cause of, 186;\n   view of Ny\u0101ya, 187\n\n vibhu, 43 n.\n\n _vibhu parim\u0101\u1e47a_, 29 n.\n\n vibh\u016bti, 158\n\n Vibh\u016btip\u0101da, 22\n\n vic\u0101ra, 153\n\n vic\u0101r\u0101nugata, 125, 153\n\n vicchinna, 176\n\n Vice, 86, 87\n\n _videha_, 127\n\n vidy\u0101, 177\n\n _vidy\u0101vipar\u012btam j\u00f1\u0101n\u0101ntara\u1e43 avidy\u0101_, 11, 97\n\n _Vij\u00f1an\u0101m\u1e5bta-bh\u0101shya_, 88, 90\n\n Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu, 4, 15\n\n vikalpa, 101, 150, 173, 174\n\n _vik\u0101rak\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 133\n\n _vik\u0101ryyak\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 135\n\n _vik\u1e5bti_, 7 n., 165\n\n _vikshipta_, 95, 123\n\n vikshiptacitta, 96, 130\n\n vip\u0101ka, 105, 107\n\n viparyyaya, 101, 172, 173, 176\n\n _viprayoga_, 7\n\n Virtue, 86\n\n _Vish\u1e47u Pur\u0101\u1e47a_, 66\n\n vi\u015besha, 7, 7 n., 40, 59, 81, 84, 165, 171\n\n _vi\u015beshapari\u1e47\u0101ma_, 60\n\n _vi\u015besh\u0101vi\u015beshali\u1e45gam\u0101tr\u0101li\u1e45g\u0101nigu\u1e47aparv\u0101\u1e47i_, 59\n\n visok\u0101, 125\n\n vitarka, 153\n\n vitark\u0101nugata, 125, 154\n\n _viyoga_, 29 n.\n\n _viyogak\u0101ra\u1e47a_, 134, 135\n\n v\u012bryya, 102, 126, 128, 135, 136\n\n Vomit, 141\n\n _V\u1e5btti_, 56, 92, 96, 97, 101, 102, 122, 171\n\n vya\u1e47gya, 57\n\n vya\u1e45jaka, 57\n\n vyatireka, 128\n\n _vyavas\u0101y\u0101tmakatva_, 3\n\n _vyavasey\u0101tmakatva_, 3\n\n Vy\u0101sa, 5, 7, 8, 8 n., 22, 53, 121, 133, 135\n\n _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, 3 n., 5 n., 7 n., 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 33, 36, 37,\n    43 n., 50, 56, 58, 59, 60, 66 n., 68 n., 70, 71 n., 79, 84, 85, 94,\n    99, 101, 117, 119, 121, 133, 171\n\n vyoman, 75\n\n vyutth\u0101na, 155, 156, 170\n\n _vyutth\u0101na citta_, 95\n\n\n Ward, 2 n.\n\n Wicked, 102\n\n World-phenomena, 16\n\n World-process, 91\n\n\n _yadyali\u1e45g\u0101vasth\u0101 \u015babd\u0101dyupabhoga\u1e43 v\u0101 sattvapurush\u0101nyat\u0101khy\u0101tim v\u0101\n    purush\u0101rtham nirvarttayet tannrvarttane hi na s\u0101my\u0101vasth\u0101 sy\u0101t_, 8\n\n Yama, 136, 138, 139, 142, 143, 148\n\n Yatam\u0101na, 127\n\n _yath\u0101 rath\u0101di yantradibhi\u1e25_, 25\n\n _yath\u0101yask\u0101ntama\u1e47i\u1e25 svasminneva aya\u1e25sannidh\u012bkara\u1e47am\u0101tr\u0101t\n    \u015balyanishkarsha\u1e47\u0101khyam upak\u0101ram kurvat purushasya sv\u0101mina\u1e25 svam\n    bhavati bhogas\u0101dhanatv\u0101t_, 22\n\n _ye c\u0101sy\u0101nupasthit\u0101 bh\u0101gaste c\u0101sya na syureva\u1e43 n\u0101sti p\u1e5bsh\u1e6dhamiti\n    udaramapi na g\u1e5bhyeta_, 36\n\n Yoga, 14, 29, 48, 62, 89, 96, 122, 123, 124, 129, 130, 131, 140, 144,\n    147, 155, 162, 177;\n   its points of difference with S\u0101\u1e43khya, 163\u2013165\n\n Yoga metaphysics, 1\n\n _Yoga philosophy in relation to other Indian systems of thought_, 165\n\n Yoga system, 2\n\n Yoga theory, 5\n\n yog\u0101\u1e45ga, 122, 130, 131, 132, 135, 136, 144, 145, 149\n\n _Yoga-s\u016btra_, 5 n., 11, 17, 35 n., 43 n., 45, 47, 108, 117, 142, 153\n\n _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, 4 n., 6 n., 9, 10, 12 n., 22, 29 n., 43 n., 45 n., 60,\n    61, 65, 66, 67, 87, 110, 126, 127, 129, 134 n., 143, 154, 176\n\n Yogins, 79, 87, 95, 97, 98, 121, 125, 127, 128, 129, 136, 139, 143,\n    147, 153, 155, 156, 158, 160;\n   nine kinds of, 129\n\n _yogyat\u0101vacchinn\u0101 dharmi\u1e47a\u1e25 \u015baktireva dharma\u1e25_, 82\n\n Yudhish\u1e6dhira, 140\n\n _yutasiddh\u0101vayaba_, 168\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 1:\n\n  See Ward\u2019s _Naturalism and Agnosticism_.\n\nFootnote 2:\n\n  V\u0101caspati\u2019s _Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_ on the _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, III. 47.\n\nFootnote 3:\n\n  _S\u0101\u1e43khyapravacanabh\u0101shya_, I. 120.\n\nFootnote 4:\n\n  It is indeed difficult to say what was the earliest conception of the\n  gu\u1e47as. But there is reason to believe, as I have said elsewhere, that\n  gu\u1e47a in its earliest acceptance meant qualities. It is very probable\n  that as the S\u0101\u1e43khya philosophy became more and more systematised it\n  was realised that there was no ultimate distinction between substance\n  and qualities. In consequence of such a view the gu\u1e47as which were\n  originally regarded as qualities began to be regarded as substantive\n  entities and no contradiction was felt. Bhikshu in many places\n  describes the gu\u1e47as as substantive entities (_dravya_) and their\n  division into three classes as being due to the presence of three\n  kinds of class-characteristics. This would naturally mean that within\n  the same class there were many other differences which have not been\n  taken into account (_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, II. 18). But it cannot be said\n  that the view that the gu\u1e47as are substantive entities and that there\n  is no difference between qualities and substances is regarded as a\n  genuine S\u0101\u1e43khya view even as early as \u015aa\u1e45kara. See _Gh\u0101bh\u0101shya_, XIV.\n  5.\n\nFootnote 5:\n\n  See _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_ on Pata\u00f1jali\u2019s _Yoga-s\u016btras_, II. 18, and\n  V\u0101caspati\u2019s _Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_ on it.\n\nFootnote 6:\n\n  See Bhikshu\u2019s _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, II. 18.\n\nFootnote 7:\n\n  _History of Hindu Chemistry_, Vol. II, by P. C. Ray, p. 66.\n\nFootnote 8:\n\n  The usual S\u0101\u1e43khya terms as found in I\u015bvarak\u1e5bsh\u1e47a\u2019s _K\u0101rik\u0101_, having\n  the same denotation as avi\u015besha and vi\u015besha, are _prak\u1e5btivik\u1e5bti_ and\n  _vik\u1e5bti_.\n\nFootnote 9:\n\n  _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, II. 19.\n\nFootnote 10:\n\n  _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, II. 19.\n\nFootnote 11:\n\n  _Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, II. 19.\n\nFootnote 12:\n\n  _Tattvatraya_, p. 48 (Chowkhamba edition), Benares.\n\nFootnote 13:\n\n  Bhikshu in his _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_ explains \u201c_m\u0101yeva_\u201d as \u201c_laukikam\u0101yeva\n  ksha\u1e47abha\u1e47guram_\u201d evanescent like the illusions of worldly experience.\n\nFootnote 14:\n\n  _Siddh\u0101ntalle\u015ba_ (J\u012bve\u015bvara nir\u016bpai\u1e47a).\n\nFootnote 15:\n\n  Princess Kunt\u012b of the Mah\u0101bh\u0101rata had a son born to her by means of a\n  charm when she was still a virgin. Being afraid of a public scandal\n  she floated the child in a stream; the child was picked up by the wife\n  of a carpenter (R\u0101dh\u0101). The boy grew up to be the great hero Kar\u1e47a and\n  he thought that he was the son of a carpenter until the fact of his\n  royal lineage was disclosed to him later in life.\n\nFootnote 16:\n\n  _K\u0101rik\u0101_ 17.\n\nFootnote 17:\n\n  Gau\u1e0dap\u0101da\u2019s commentary on _K\u0101rik\u0101_ 17.\n\nFootnote 18:\n\n  Purusha is a substance (_dravya_) because it has independent existence\n  (_an\u0101\u015brita_) and has a measure (_vibhu parim\u0101\u1e47a_) of its own. So it\n  always possesses the common characteristics (_s\u0101m\u0101nya gu\u1e47a_) of\n  substances, contact (_sa\u1e43yoga_), separation (_viyoga_) and number\n  (_sa\u1e43khy\u0101_). Purusha cannot be considered to be suffering change or\n  impure on account of the possession of the above common\n  characteristics of all substances. _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, II. 17.\n\nFootnote 19:\n\n  Thus the _Bh\u0101shya_ says:\n  _bhavishyadvyaktikaman\u0101gata\u1e43anudbh\u016btavyaktikamat\u012bta\u1e43\n  svavy\u0101p\u0101rop\u0101r\u016b\u1e0dha\u1e43 varttam\u0101na\u1e43 traya\u1e43, caitadvastu j\u00f1\u0101nasya j\u00f1eya\u1e43\n  yadi caitat svar\u016bpato n\u0101bhavishyanneda\u1e43 nirvishaya\u1e43 j\u00f1\u0101namudapatsyata\n  tasm\u0101dat\u012btaman\u0101gata\u1e43 svar\u016bpato\u2019 st\u012bti_.\n\nFootnote 20:\n\n  _Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, IV. 14.\n\nFootnote 21:\n\n  _Vastus\u0101mye cittabhed\u0101t tayor vibhakta\u1e25 panth\u0101\u1e25._ _Yoga-s\u016btra_, IV.\n  15.\n\nFootnote 22:\n\n  \u201c_Tattv\u0101ntara-pari\u1e47\u0101ma_\u201d means the evolution of a wholly new category\n  of existence. Thus the tanm\u0101tras are wholly different from the ego\n  from which they are produced. So the atoms are wholly different from\n  the tanm\u0101tras from which they are produced, for the latter, unlike the\n  former, have no sense-properties. In all combinations of atoms, there\n  would arise thousands of new qualities, but none of the products of\n  the combination of atoms can be called a tattv\u0101ntara, or a new\n  category of existence since all these qualities are the direct\n  manifestations of the specific properties of the atoms.\n\nFootnote 23:\n\n  _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, III. 52, says that the smallest indivisible part of a\n  thing is called a param\u0101\u1e47u. Vij\u00f1\u0101na Bhikshu in explaining it says that\n  param\u0101\u1e47u here means gu\u1e47a, for if a thing say a stone is divided, then\n  the furthest limit of division is reached when we come to the\n  indivisible gu\u1e47as. But if the prak\u1e5bti is all-pervading (_vibhu_) how\n  can the gu\u1e47as be atomic? Bhikshu says (_Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, III. 52) in\n  reply that there are some classes of gu\u1e47as (e.g. those which produce\n  mind _anta\u1e25kara\u1e47a_ and _\u0101k\u0101\u015ba_) which are all-pervading, while the\n  others are all atomic. In Bhikshu\u2019s interpretation a moment is to be\n  defined as the time which a gu\u1e47a entity takes to change its own unit\n  of space. Gu\u1e47as are thus equivalent to the Vai\u015beshika param\u0101\u1e47us.\n  Bhikshu, however, does not deny that there are no atoms of earth,\n  water, etc., but he says that where reference is not made to these\n  atoms but to gu\u1e47a atoms for the partless units of time can only be\n  compared with the partless gu\u1e47as. But V\u0101caspati does not make any\n  comment here to indicate that the smallest indivisible unit of matter\n  should mean gu\u1e47as. Moreover, _Yoga-s\u016btra_, I. 40, and _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_,\n  I. 45, speak of _param\u0101\u1e47u_ and _a\u1e47u_ in the sense of earth-atoms, etc.\n  Even Bhikshu does not maintain that param\u0101\u1e47u is used there in the\n  sense of atomic gu\u1e47a entities. I could not therefore accept Bhikshu\u2019s\n  interpretation that param\u0101\u1e47u here refers to gu\u1e47a. Param\u0101\u1e47u may here be\n  taken in the sense of material atoms of earth, water, etc. The atoms\n  (param\u0101\u1e47u) here cannot be absolutely partless, for it has two sides,\n  prior (_p\u016brvade\u015ba_) and posterior (_uttarade\u015ba_).\n\nFootnote 24:\n\n  Bhikshu regards the movement of a gu\u1e47a of its own unit of space as the\n  ultimate unit of time (_ksha\u1e47a_). The whole world is nothing else but\n  a series of _ksha\u1e47as_. This view differs from the Buddhist view that\n  everything is momentary in this that it does not admit of any other\n  thing but the _ksha\u1e47as_ (_na tu kska\u1e47\u0101tirikta\u1e25 ksha\u1e47ika\u1e25 pad\u0101rtha\u1e25\n  ka\u015bcidishyate taistu kska\u1e47am\u0101trasth\u0101yyeva pad\u0101rtha\u1e25 ishyate_.\n  _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, III. 52).\n\nFootnote 25:\n\n  There is a difference of opinion as regards the meaning of the word\n  \u201c_ksha\u1e47apratiyogi_\u201d in IV. 33. V\u0101caspati says that it means the\n  growth associated with a particular _ksha\u1e47a_ or moment\n  (_ksha\u1e47apracay\u0101\u015braya_). The word _pratiyog\u012b_ is interpreted by\n  V\u0101caspati as related (_pratisambandh\u012b_). Bhikshu, however, gives a\n  quite different meaning. He interprets _ksha\u1e47a_ as \u201cinterval\u201d and\n  pratiyog\u012b as \u201copposite of\u201d (_virodh\u012b_). So \u201c_ksha\u1e47apratiyog\u012b_\u201d means\n  with him \u201cwithout any interval\u201d or \u201ccontinuous.\u201d He holds that the\n  s\u016btra means that all change is continuous and not in succession.\n  There is according to his interpretation no interval between the\n  cessation of a previous character and the rise of a new one.\n\nFootnote 26:\n\n  Nothing more than a superficial comparison with Fichte is here\n  intended. A large majority of the texts and the commentary literature\n  would oppose the attempts of all those who would like to interpret\n  S\u0101\u1e43khya-yoga on Fichtean lines.\n\nFootnote 27:\n\n  _Tattvakaumud\u012b_ on _S\u0101\u1e43khya-k\u0101rik\u0101_, 25.\n\nFootnote 28:\n\n  _Tattvavai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, III. 41.\n\nFootnote 29:\n\n  This was first pointed out by Dr. B. N. Seal in his _Physical,\n  Chemical and Mechanical Theories of the Ancient Hindus_ in Dr. P. C.\n  Ray\u2019s _Hindu Chemistry_, Vol. II.\n\nFootnote 30:\n\n  _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, I. 45.\n\nFootnote 31:\n\n  I have already said before that Bhikshu thinks that the gu\u1e47as (except\n  the all-pervading ones) may be compared to the Vai\u015beshika atoms. See\n  _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, III. 52.\n\nFootnote 32:\n\n  Cf. _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_\u2014\u201c_sabd\u0101d\u012bn\u0101\u1e43 m\u016brttisam\u0101naj\u00e1t\u012by\u0101n\u0101\u1e43_,\u201d IV. 14.\n\nFootnote 33:\n\n  _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, II. 19.\n\nFootnote 34:\n\n  _Vy\u0101sa-bh\u0101shya_, III. 13.\n\nFootnote 35:\n\n  _Ibid._\n\nFootnote 36:\n\n  Nahusha an earthly king became Indra the king of the gods by the\n  fruition of his virtues, but on account of gross misdeeds fell from\n  Heaven and was turned into a snake.\n\nFootnote 37:\n\n  _Tattravai\u015b\u0101rad\u012b_, IV, 3.\n\nFootnote 38:\n\n  I have translated both citta and buddhi as mind. The word buddhi is\n  used when emphasis is laid on the intellective and cosmical functions\n  of the mind. The word citta is used when emphasis is laid on the\n  conservative side of mind as the repository of all experiences,\n  memory, etc.\n\nFootnote 39:\n\n  If this is a S\u0101\u1e43khya doctrine, it seems clearly to be a case of Jaina\n  influence.\n\nFootnote 40:\n\n  Compare Pa\u00f1ca\u015bikha, _svalpasa\u1e47kara\u1e25 saparih\u0101ra\u1e25 sapratyavamarsha\u1e25_,\n  _Tattvakaumud\u012b_, 2.\n\nFootnote 41:\n\n  Pratyaya is explained in _Yoga-v\u0101rttika_, II. 28, as _sampratyaya_ or\n  _pr\u0101m\u0101\u1e47yani\u015bcaya_.\n\nFootnote 42:\n\n  Yudhish\u1e6dhira led falsely Dro\u1e47a to believe that the latter\u2019s son was\n  dead by inaudibly muttering that it was only an elephant having the\n  same name as that of his son that had died.\n\nFootnote 43:\n\n  This book has, however, not yet been published.\n\nFootnote 44:\n\n  Dr. Ray\u2019s _Hindu Chemistry_, Vol. II, p. 81.\n\nFootnote 45:\n\n  Avidy\u0101 manifests itself in different forms: (1) as the afflictions\n  (_kle\u015ba_) of asmit\u0101 (egoism), r\u0101ga (attachment), dvesha (antipathy)\n  and abhinive\u015ba (self-love); (2) as doubt and intellectual error; (3)\n  as error of sense. All these manifestations of avidy\u0101 are also the\n  different forms of viparyyaya or bhrama (error, illusion, mistake).\n  This bhrama in Yoga is the thinking of something as that which it is\n  not (_anyath\u0101khy\u0101ti_). Thus we think the miserable worldly existence\n  as pleasurable and attribute the characteristics of prak\u1e5bti to purusha\n  and vice versa. All afflictions are due to this confusion and\n  misjudgment, the roots of which stay in the buddhis in all their\n  transmigrations from one life to another. S\u0101\u1e43khya, however, differs\n  from Yoga and thinks that all error (_avidy\u0101_ or _bhrama_) is due only\n  to non-distinction between the true and the untrue. Thus\n  non-distinction (_aviveka_) between prak\u1e5bti and purusha is the cause\n  of all our miserable mundane existence. Avidy\u0101 and aviveka are thus\n  synonymous with S\u0101\u1e43khya.\n\n------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n                          TRANSCRIBER\u2019S NOTES\n\n\n \u25cf Typos fixed; non-standard spelling and dialect retained.\n \u25cf Used numbers for footnotes, placing them all at the end of the last\n     chapter.\n \u25cf Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.","title":"Yoga as philosophy and religion","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":63048}