Sāṁkhya Karika with Gauḍapāda Commentaries | Part 2


Prītyaprītivishādātmakāḥ prakāshapravṛttirniyamārthāḥ |
anyoanyābhibhavāśraya, jananamithunavrittayash ca guṇāḥ  |12|

12 The constituents are [respectively] characterised by pleasure, pain and dullness, and are adapted to manifestation, activity and restraint; [they] mutually subdue, support, and produce each other, as also consort and function together.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

For a more specific realisation of the three constituents that were described there [in verse n] as possessed by the Manifested and the Unmanifested [alike], it is [now] said as follows:—

The constitutives, goodness, foulness and darkness are [respectively] pleasant, unpleasant and stupefying. Thus, goodness is pleasant, of the essence of happiness, that is, pleasure meaning happiness; foulness is painful, pain meaning unpleasantness; darkness is dulling, dullness meaning stupefaction.

Next, are adapted to manifestation, etc. The word artha signifies competency. Goodness is adapted to manifestation, that is, is capable of it. Foulness is adapted to activity; darkness to restraint, that is, it is fit for immobility. Thus the qualities are [respectively] characterised by manifestation, action, and inertia.

Further, they mutually subdue each other, etc. They are mutually dominant, sustaining, productive, consorting, and co-existent. They mutually subdue each other, [that is], domineer over one another by means of their [respective] properties of pleasure, pain, etc.; thus, whenever goodness is paramount, it conquers foulness and darkness by its properties, and subsists in the form of light and joy; whenever foulness [predominates], it [subdues] goodness and darkness, and exists in pain and action; whenever darkness [triumphs], it [overpowers] goodness and passion, and exists in dullness and immobility. The constituents are further mutually supportive, like dyads.  They are mutually productive, as a clod of earth produces a jar. Next, mutually consorting, as the male and the female associate together, so [do] the constitutive factors; so it is said, “Goodness is the consort of foulness, foulness of goodness; and of both goodness and foulness darkness is termed the consort.”  That is, they help one another. They are reciprocally co-existent, are present together, from the text, “qualities deal with qualities.”  As, a beautiful and amiable woman, [who] is the source of all happiness, is a cause of misery to co-wives, and of stupefaction to the dissolute; thus goodness [becomes] the cause of the [concurrent] action of the other constituents. So also a king, always employed in protecting his subjects and repressing the wicked, causes happiness to the good, sorrow and mortification to the evil; thus foulness (or activity) occasions the [co-operant] action of goodness and darkness. Similarly, darkness, by its investing nature, produces the effects of the other two factors; as, clouds, by covering the atmosphere, occasion happiness to the world, while, by means of rain, [they] promote the labours of the agriculturer and, [at the same time], overwhelm with sorrow the separated lover. Thus the constituents are mutually co-existent.

Sattvaṃ laghu prakāsham, ishṭam upashṭambhakaṃ calaṃ ca rajaḥ |
guru varaṅakam eva tamaḥ, pradīpavac cārthato vṛttiḥ  |13|

13. Goodness is considered light and illuminating; passion exciting and mobile; darkness is heavy and enveloping. Their [co-operant] action, like that of a lamp, is purposive.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

What else? Goodness is light and enlightening. When goodness predominates, the limbs feel light, the intellect is luminous, and the senses exultant.

Passion is exciting and mobile. What urges is “exciting,” as, an ox displays violent excitement on seeing another ox; this is the influence of passion. Passion is also seen to be “mobile,” a passionate man is fickle.

Darkness is heavy and enveloping. When darkness triumphs, the limbs feel heavy, and the senses - are dull, incapable of performing their functions.

Here [the objector] may say, ‘if the qualities’ are mutually contrary, what [common] effect can they then produce by their united agency?’ Why thus?

Their action is purposive, like that of a lamp. Like a lamp, their operation aims at a common end; as, a lamp, [though] composed of the mutually contrary oil, fire and wick, illuminates objects, so goodness, passion and darkness, [though] reciprocally opposed, accomplish a [common] end.

Avivekyādi hi siddhaṃ, traiguṇyāt tadviparyayebhāvāt |
kāraṇaguṇātmakatvāt, kāryasyāvyaktam api siddham  |14|

14. Want of discrimination and the rest are an inference from the [presence of the] three constituents and the absence thereof in the reverse. The Unmanifested is also demonstrated [to possess them] by the effect having the same properties as the cause.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

 The [last] question implies another. Nature and the Manifested have been described as possessing three ‘qualities,’ indiscriminative, objective, etc. [verse 11]. But how is it ascertained that Nature and the perceptible [evolutes], Intellect and the rest, are so characterised?  Therefore it is said: [want of discrimination, etc.]

The attribute of indiscriminative, etc., is established to be in [the discrete principles], Intellect and the rest, from [the presence of] the three constituents [in them].  [But] this is not proved of the indiscrete. It is therefore said, from the absence of contrariety, there being no contrary relation between [the discrete and the indiscrete], the Unmanifested is established. As, where there is yarn, there is cloth, yarn is not one thing and cloth another; why? Because there is no contrariety. Thus the Manifested and the Unmanifested are demonstrated.  Nature is remote, the Manifested near; he who perceives the latter perceives also the former, for there is nothing contrary between the two.

From this also is the Unmanifested demonstrated: from the effect possessing the properties of the Cause. In the world such as is the nature of the cause, such also is that of the effect; as, of black threads a black cloth is made. Now, Intellect and the rest are characterised as indiscriminative, objective, common, irrational and productive; and as the modes are, so the unmanifested is demonstrated to be.

Bhedānāṃ parimāṇāt, samanvayāt śaktitaḥ pravrittesh ca |
kāraṇakāryavibhāgād, avibhāgād vaiśvarūpyasya. |15|

15. Because of the finite nature of specific objects, because of homogeneity, because of production being from energy , because of discreteness between cause and effect, and because of unity in the universe.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

 It should not be argued that [the proposition, “as from the] three constituents the property of wanting in discrimination, etc., is demonstrated in the case of the Manifested, so from there being no opposition, and from the essential identity of the nature of the effect and of the cause the Unmanifested is demonstrated,” is false, because what may not be apprehended in the world does not exist. For as there is smell in stone but unapprehended, so Nature also exists though unperceived. Hence it is said, Because, etc.:

‘There is a cause, the Unmanifested,’ thus is the subject and the predicate connected. From the finitude of specific objects; in the world wherever there is an agent limitations are perceived, as, a potter makes pot only of a certain size and with limited portions of clay. So Intellect also ; Intellect and the other modes are limited 'because [they are] specific evolutes of Nature; intellect is one, self-consciousness is one, the subtle principles are five, the organs of sense eleven and the gross elements five; because of the limitations of these objects, Nature exists as their cause, producing the limited manifested principles. If Nature were not, then unlimited the discrete modes also would not exist; from the limitations of the evolutes, then, Nature exists, whence the manifested principles spring.

Next, from homogeneity. In this world we observe what is well-known; as, from seeing a boy observing the vow of a religious student, we infer his parents were certainly Brahmans; so, noticing that consciousness and the other modes possess the three constituents, we conclude as to what their cause may be. Thus, from homogeneity Nature is [seen to exist].

Again, from production through energy. Here each tries to compass that only for which he it competent; as, a potter, capable of making a pot, makes a pot only and not a piece of cloth or a chariot.

So, Nature exists as cause. Why? From the cause and the effect being separate. That which makes is the cause, that which is made is the effect.

Cause and effect are distinct, as, a jar is competent to hold curds, honey, water, and milk, not so the material cause, [viz.,] the clod of earth; whereas it is the clod of earth which makes the pot, and not vice versa. Similarly, observing intellect and the other modes we infer there is a separate cause, whose discrete evolutes these manifested principles are.

Moreover, from the universe being undivided. The “universe” is the abstract [total] of the manifest cosmic forms; from its being undivided, Nature exists, — since there is no mutual separation between the universe and the five gross elements, earth and the rest, that is, the three worlds are comprised in the gross elements. Earth, water, fire, air and ether, these five gross elements will at the time of general dissolution attain in the order of creation to a state of non-separation, being converted into the subtle principles; these latter with the eleven sense-organs will become one with self-apperception; self-apperception with intellect; intellect with Nature. Thus at the period of general dissolution the three worlds will become one with Nature. From which reunion of the Manifested and the Unmanifested principles, like that of curds and milk, Nature is [demonstrated to be] cause.

Kāraṇam asty avyaktaṃ, pravartate triguṇataḥ samudayāt ca
pariṇāmataḥ salilavat, pratiprattiguṇāśrayaviśeṣāt  |16|

16. There is a [general] cause, Nature, [which] operates by means of the three constituent powers, by conjunction and by modification, [varying] like water with the particular receptacle of the several powers.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

NOW, the unmanifested is well known as the cause, whence intellect and the other modes proceed.

By the three constituents. That in which the factors of goodness, passion and darkness subsist is the aggregate of the three constituents. What then is that? The equipoised condition of the three constitutives is the Prime Cause.

Next, bymixture. As the waters of the Ganges falling from the three heads of Rudra form but one current, so Nature, the aggregate of the three constitutives, produces one Manifested [Cosmos]; or as [many] threads combining together produce one piece of cloth, so the

Unmanifested, by the blending of the component powers, produces Intellect and the rest. [Thus] from the three factors and by conjunction the world of sense springs.

Because the Manifested proceeds out of Nature which is one, therefore it should be one (or uniform)/ There is no such defect. [Because] by modification’, like water, through the diversity of the receptacles of the several factors, the three worlds, [though] produced from one Nature, are not alike; [e.g.,] the gods are happy, men miserable, and animals insensible. The Manifested principles proceeding out of one Nature, are modified, like water, by the particular sup-’ ports with which particular constituents are associated [for the moment]. The repetition of prati signifies successive action. The speciality of the receptacle of the' qualities; by modification therefrom the Manifested is produced. As the unflavoured water falling from the’ atmosphere is diversified as various liquids according to various combinations, even so the three worlds produced from the [same] one Nature are different in character: among the divinities, goodness triumphs, passion and darkness retire, they are therefore pre-eminently blessed; among men, passion predominates, goodness and darkness are inactive, they are therefore pre-eminently miserable; among animals, darkness prevails, goodness and passion are inert, they are therefore pre-eminently stupid.

In these two Ārya stanzas the existence of Nature Has been determined. In the next place, in order to demonstrate the existence of Soul, it is said: [Since the assemblage, etc.]

Saṃghātaparārthatvāt, triguṇādiviparyayād adhishṭhānāt |
puruṣo asti bhoktribhāvāt, kaivalyārtha pravrittesh ca  |17|

17. Since the assemblage [of sensible things] is for the sake of another, since there is a converse of the three constituents and the rest, since there must be superintendence, since there must be an experiencer, and since there is a striving for isolation,  the Soul exists.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

Since it is said, “From a discriminative knowledge of the Manifested, the Unmanifested and the Knowing, salvation proceeds,” and of these, after the Manifested, the Unmanifested, like it, has been [shown to be] determined by five arguments [verse 15],  the inferred existence of Soul, which too is subtle, is next demonstrated.

Soul exists. Why? Because the assemblage [of things] is for another’s use. The concourse of intellect and the rest is for the use of Soul; this is inferred from the irrationality thereof, like that of a bed. As a bed, which is composed of bedding,  props, cord,  cotton, coverlet and pillows, is for another’s use, not for its own—[any benefit] of the bed—none of these [members] serve any mutual purpose; hence it is inferred that there is a person who sleeps on the bed, for whose use the bed is ; thus for the sake of another this body, consisting of an aggregate of the five gross elements, exists,—there is a self, for whose enjoyment the enjoyable body, comprising a collocation of intellect and the rest, has been produced.

Again, soul exists, because of the existence of the converse of the three constituents, etc. As was said in a previous verse [11], “[the Manifested] has three constituents, and is indiscriminative, objective,” etc., the converse of that, of which it is stated, “the opposite thereof etc. is soul,” [exists].

Because [of the necessity] of superintendence. As a chariot drawn by horses, capable of curvetting, prancing and galloping, proceeds guided by a charioteer, so is the frame directed by self. To that effect it is said in the Shashthitantra, “Nature, guided by Soul, proceeds.”

Further, soul exists, because there must be an enjoyer. As there must be one to partake of food flavoured with the six flavours sweet, sour, salt, pungent, bitter, and astringent, so, on account of incapability of enjoyment in intellect and the other modes, Soul exists, whom the body serves for enjoyment.

Moreover, because of the striving for isolation. “ Isolation ” is the state of being alone ; from the striving for that state it is inferred that soul exists,— because all, whether wise or unwise, desire permanent release from the cycle of mundane existence.

By these arguments the existence of a soul apart from the body [is established].

Janmaraṇakaraṇānāṃ, pratiniyamād ayugapat pravittesh ca |
puruṣabahutvaṃ siddhaṃ, triguṇāviparyayāc caiva  |18|

18. Because birth, death and the organs are severally allotted, and because activity is not simultaneous, and also because the factors are found unequally, the multiplicity of souls is established.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

Now, is soul one, presiding over all bodies, like a thread uniting a string of gems? or is it many, each directing a separate frame? To this it is replied, [Because, etc.J

Birth and death and the vital instruments, by the several allotment of these. If soul had been one, then at the birth of one all would have been born, at the death of one all would have died, at the occurrence of a deformity in the organs of one, for instance, at the deafness, blindness, dumbness, mutilation or lameness of one, all would have become deaf, blind, dumb, maimed or lame; [but] this does not happen, therefore the separate allotment of birth, death and the organs proves the multiplicity of souls.

Again, because activity is not simultaneous, not [the same] at the same time. Since occupations, virtuous or otherwise, are seen to be non-contemporaneous, [for instance,] one applies himself to virtue, another to vice, one cultivates indifference [to the world], another wisdom; hence from the non-universality of occupations multiplicity [of souls] is proved.

What else? Also from diverse conditions of the three constituents, from the contrariety of their affections the multiplicity of souls is demonstrated. For instance, in birth in general, one endowed with goodness is happy, another possessed of passion is miserable, and a third invested with darkness is stupid. Thus, from the inequality of the constituents multiplicity is proved.

Tasmāc ca viparyāsāt, siddhaṃ sākshitvam asya puruṣasya |
kaivalyam mādhyasthyaṃ, drashṭitvam akartribhāvac ca  |19|

19. And from that contrariety [before specified] Soul is proved to be a witness, solitary, neutral, perceiving, and inactive.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

 Soul is not an agent. This is now said. And because of that contrast, the contrary character of the three constituents before indicated, soul is devoid of them, [and is] discriminative, experiencing and so forth. The contrast is that described in regard to these attributes of soul. From the activity of goodness, passion and darkness, Soul is proved to be a witness. This is grammatically connected with [what was said about] multiplicity [above]. The constituent powers, being agents, act; a witness neither acts nor desists from action.

What else Isolation, the quality of being Separate, [that is], distinct from the three constituents.

Neutrality, the quality of being a middle-man (or looker-on). Soul is a bystander, like a wandering mendicant. As such an ascetic simply looks on while the villagers are employed in cultivation; in like manner soul does not act while the constituents operate.

Hence also [proceed] perceptiveness and inactivity. Because neutral, Soul is a spectator and not the agent of the acts [it contemplates]. The three constitutives, goodness, passion, and darkness engage in action in the relation of agent and act,—not soul. Thus the existence of soul is proved.

Tasmāt tatsaṃyogād, acetanaṃ cetanāvad iva liṅgaṃ |
guṇahkartritve ca tathā, karteva bhavatīty udāsīna  |20|

20. Therefore, through union therewith, the insensible products seem intelligent; [and Soul, though] indifferent appears like an agent, though the activity is of the cosmic factors.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

 If Soul is inactive, how does it exercise volition,—[for instance,] determines ‘I shall practise virtue, avoid vice’? Thus, it seems to be an agent but it [really] is not. Both suppositions then are faulty; this [the author] now proceeds to explain.

Here Soul [alone] is sentient, [and it is] owing to union therewith that intellect and the other evolutes, invested with an appearance of intelligence, seem sentient. As, in the world a jar through the conjunction of cold feels cold, through that of warmth feels warm, so intellect and the other modes, through conjunction with Soul, appear as intelligent. Therefore [it is] the constituents [which] exercise volition, not Soul.

Though in the world Soul is spoken of as an agent, as moving, etc., yet it does not act. How is this? While the constituents operate, Soul, though indifferent, appears as the agent, which it is not. Here is an illustration: as a person who is not a thief, when taken up along with thieves, is suspected to be one of them, so through union with the three constituents, which are active, even Soul, which is non-active, looks like an agent.

Thus has the difference between the Manifested, the Unmanifested and the Knowing principles been described, from the discrimination of which liberation is obtained.

Puruṣasya darshanārthaḥ, kaivalyārthas tathā pradhānasya |
pangvandhavad ubhayor api, saṃyogas tatkṛtaḥ sargaḥ  |21|

21. In order that Soul may contemplate Nature and be separate, the union of the two, like that of the lame and the blind, lakes place; [and] thence creation springs.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

Now the reason why Nature and Soul, come together is explained.

The union of Soul with the Prime Cause is for the purpose of experience; Soul contemplates Nature and its products to the gross elements inclusive. For this end also does Nature unite with Soul.

The said union is, moreover, with a view to isolation, like that of the lame and the blind. As a lame man and a blind man, deserted by their friends (who, while journeying with great difficulty through a forest, had been dispersed by robbers), and by accident wandering about, happen to encounter one another, and inspiring mutual confidence by conversation, enter into a compact for the purposes of walking and seeing, the blind man takes up the lame man upon his shoulders, and thus they both move on, the former directed by the latter and the latter carried by the former; so Soul, like the lame man, can see but not move, [and] Nature, like the blind man, can move but not see. Moreover, as the lame man and the blind man after accomplishing their object and reaching their destination, part, so Nature also ceases to act after effecting the liberation of Soul, and Soul too attains isolation by contemplating Nature; thus with the fruition of their [respective] objects they separate.

What else? Thence creation proceeds, from that union, [that is]. As the union of the sexes leads to the birth of offspring, so that of Nature and Soul gives rise to creation.

Prakṛter mahāms, tato ahaṃ, kāras, tasmād gaṇash ca shodashakaḥ |
tasmād api shodashakāt, pañcabhyaḥ pañca bhūtāni  |22|

22. From the Prime Evolvent [proceeds] intellect, thence self-apperception, thence the sixteen-fold set; from five out of those sixteen [proceed] the five elements.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

Next the divisions of creation for purposes of contemplation are detailed.

Nature has for its synonyms 'the Chief One,' ' the Supreme One,’ ‘the unmanifested,’ ' the many-comprising,’ and ‘illusion.' From inchoate (uncharacterised) Nature the Great One is produced, which is also termed ‘intellect,’ ‘the demoniac,’ ' understanding,'  fame,' 'knowledge,' and 'wisdom’. 'From intellect springs self-apperception, which is also called ‘the origin of the elements, ‘the modified,' ‘the effulgent,' and 'egoism.' Thence, from self-consciousness, spring the sixteen-fold set, which comprises the five subtle principles, viz., the archetypes of sound, touch, form, taste and odour, (all words denoting subtle are synonyms for the rudiments); the eleven organs, viz., the five organs of perception,—the ear, the skin, the eye, the tongue and the nose,—the five organs of action,— the voice, the hand, the foot, and the organs of excretion and generation,—and eleventh, the mind, which partakes of the nature of both [kinds of organs] ; this series of sixteen is produced from self-apperception.

What else? Five elements from five, that is, from the five subtle principles, out of the class of sixteen, proceed the five gross elements. As has been said, “ether from archetypal sound, air from archetypal touch, light from archetypal colour, water from archetypal flavour, earth from archetypal smell, thus from the five rudiments the five gross elements spring.”

Since it is said, “liberation proceeds from a discriminative knowledge of the Manifest, the Unmanifest and the Knowing principles,” the twenty-three categories from intellect and the rest to the gross elements have been described; the Unmanifest has also been described [in verses 15 and 16] (as “because of the finite nature of specific objects” etc.,) and soul [in verses 18 and 19] (as “since the assemblage is for the sake of another,” etc.). These are the twenty-five principles, and of him who knows these abstract entities as pervading the universe, it is said, “One who knows the twenty-five principles,” etc.  They are Nature, Soul, intellect, self-consciousness, the five rudiments, the eleven organs, and the five gross elements.

Adhyavasāyo buddhir, dharmo jñānaṃ virāga aiśvaryam |
sāttvikam etadrūpaṃ, tāmasam asmād viparyastam  |23|

23. Intellect is determination. When affected by goodness its modes are virtue, knowledge, dispassion and power; when affected by darkness they are the reverse.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

 It was said, “from Nature Intellect proceeds.” The characteristics of Intellect are now specified:—Intellect is characterised by determination. This is identification, as of the seed with the future germinating shoot. Intellect, which determines ‘this is a jar,’ ‘this is a cloth,' with reference to an existent object, is so defined.

This Intellect is eight-fold, according to the [double] affection of goodness and passion. Affected by goodness, intellect is of four kinds, viz., virtue, knowledge, dispassion and power. Of these virtue comprises compassion, charity, restraint, and duty. The acts of restraint and duty have been specified by Patañjali. “The restraints are of abstention from harm, truth, honesty,  continence, and renunciation,” “ the duties are of purification, contentment, religious austerity, sacred study, and offering of self to God.” Knowledge has for its synonyms ‘manifestation’, ‘perception’ and ‘flashing of light’ and is two-fold, external and internal. The former comprises [a knowledge of] the Vedas, with the six auxiliary sciences of pronunciation, ritual, grammar, philology prosody and astronomy, [of] the Puranas, and [of] logic, theology and law. The latter comprises the knowledge of Nature and Soul, [as], ‘this is Nature, the equipoised condition of goodness, passion and darkness,' ‘this is Soul, perfect (emancipated), uncomposed of the constituents, pervading and sentient.’ By external knowledge worldly fame or admiration is gained; by internal salvation. Dispassion is also of two kinds, external and internal. ‘External’ is the indifference of one who is disgusted with sensible things by observation of the defects attendant upon their acquisition, preservation, and destruction, and upon association with and mischief due to them. ‘Internal’ is the indifference of one who aspires after liberation and conceives even Nature to be no better than magic or illusion. Power (or mastery) is eight-fold, [m., capacity for] atomicity, magnitude, lightness, attainment, free will, supremacy, subjugation, and irresistible purpose. ‘Atomicity,' minuteness, [power] to traverse the world in minute forms. Magnitude,' [power] to traverse in a colossal form. ‘Lightness’ [power] to assume limbs finer than a lotus-fibre or cotton, and to rest on the tops of the filaments of flowers. ‘Attainment,' [power] to obtain a desired object while staying wherever one may be. ‘Free will’ [power] to effect whatever is desired.

‘Supremacy’ [power] to govern the three worlds like a sovereign, ‘Subjugation’ [power] to subdue everything.  ‘Irresistible purpose’ [power] to compel the site, rest and motion of all things from Brahmā to a block, agreeably to one’s wish.

These are the four forms of Intellect when affected by goodness. Virtue and the rest of these forms are attained by a person when passion and darkness are conquered by the superior factor.

What else? When affected by darkness they are the reverse, the forms of Intellect in this case are the opposites of virtue and the rest, that is, [they are] impiety, ignorance, passion and weakness. Thus Intellect of the eight forms, according to the affections of goodness and darkness, springs from the unmanifested agent with the three constituents.

Abhimāno ahaṃkāras, tasmād dvividhaḥ pravartate sargaḥ |
ekādashakash ca gaṇas, tanmātra pañcakañ caiva  |24|

24. Self-apperception is egoism. Thence proceeds only a two-fold creation, [namely,] the eleven-fold set of sense, and the fivefold set of elemental rudiments.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

 The characteristics of Intellect have above been described. Those of Self-consciousness are next defined.

The eleven-fold set, [that is], the eleven organs. And the five-fold set of subtle elements, [that is], the five rudiments of sound, touch, colour, flavour, and smell.

Sāttvika ekādashakaḥ, pravartate vaikṛtād ahaṃkārāt |
bhūtādes tānmātraḥ, sa tāmasas taijasād ubhayaṃ  |25|

25. From self-apperception, when modified [by goodness], proceeds the good eleven-fold set; from it, as the source of the elements issue the rudimentary particles, [and] these are dark; [while] both [emanations] follow from it when affected by activity.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

'What kind of creation proceeds from [Egoism] so defined?’ In reply it is said:

When within self-consciousness goodness triumphs over passion and darkness, the egoism is pure. This has been termed “the modified’’ by ancient teachers. From this modified self-apperception the set of eleven organs is produced. Thence the good set, that is, pure, adequate to its functions; therefore is the eleven-fold set called good.

Moreover, from it as the source, etc. When within self-consciousness darkness preponderates over goodness and passion, the egoism is of the dark kind, and has been termed “the origin of elements” by ancient teachers. From this element-engendering egoism the five-fold set of rudiments springs. The originant of the elements is surcharged with darkness, thence it is called dark; from that element-generator, therefore, the set of five rudiments proceeds.

Further, both from the active. When within self-consciousness passion prevails over goodness and darkness, the egoism is called active; from this both emanate, [viz.,] the eleven-fold set and five-fold rudiments. When the pure apperception as the modified produces the eleven organs, it takes the assistance of the active, [for] the pure egoism is non-active and becomes competent to produce the organs [only] in union with the active form. Again, the dark apperception, termed the origin of elements, is inert, and combined with the active form produces the rudiments. Therefore it is said, “from the active [issue] both,” by its means are the eleven organs and the five rudiments thus created.

Buddhīndriyāṇi cakṣuḥ, śrotraghrāṇarasanatvagākhyāni |
vākpāṇipādapāyū, upasthāḥ karmendriyāny āhuḥ  |26|

26. The eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue and the skin have been called the organs of intellection; the voice, hands, feet, the excretory organ and the generative, the organs of action.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

The “good eleven” which proceed from modified self-apperception have been spoken of. They are [now] particularised.

The organs from the eye to the skin are called intellectual. Touched by it, the organ of touch, which is the skin; thus is formed the word sparśana used in the text. Sound, feel, colour, flavour and smell, these five objects are perceived or apprehended by the five organs of intellect.

The voice, hands, feet, etc. The organs of action are operative. Thus the voice articulates, the hands variously manipulate, the feet effect motion, the excretory organs evacuation, and the reproductive organs pleasure by generation of offspring.

Ubhayātmakam atra manaḥ, saṃkalpakam indriyaṃ ca sādharmyāt |
guṇapariṇāmavisheshān, nānātvam bāhyabhedāsh ca  |27|

27. In this set the mind partakes of the nature of both. It combines, and is a sense-organ because cognate with the rest. Their multifariousness, as also the diversity of external objects is due to specific modifications of constituents.

Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya

Thus the ten organs of intellection and action have been described; the constitution and character of the mind, which is the eleventh, are next explained.

Here, in the set of organs, the mind combines attributes of both. Among the organs of intellection, it seems one of intellection, among those of action, it seems one of action. Why? [Because] it performs (or determines) the functions of the organs of intellection as well as those of action, therefore mind partakes of the character of both.

It is determinative. What else? It is a sense- organ because cognate, having a common nature. The organs of sense and intellect, having sprung from pure apperception together with mind, have this [that is, origin] in common with mind. Therefore owing to cognate functions, mind is also an organ. Thus from self-consciousness modified by goodness eleven organs are produced.

What, then, is the function of mind? Its function is reflection. The functions of the organs of intellection are sound and the rest, those of the organs of sense, speech and the rest. Now, are these organs, various and with different functions, so created by God or by self-differentiation? For Nature, intellect and self-apperception are unconscious, while soul is non-active. According to the Sānkhya doctrine there is a cause, spontaneity. Therefore it is said, Multifariousness as well as external diversity is due to specific modifications of the constituents.  That is, the several objects of the eleven organs, [viz.] sound, touch, colour, flavour and smell of five, speech, manipulation, motion, excretion and generation of [another] five, and determination, of mind, these different objects are owing to the particularity of the modifications of the constituents. Thence the multifariousness of the organs as also the external diversities. Now, this numerousness was not created by God or egoism or intellect or Nature or Soul, but by modification of the constituents acting spontaneously. This does not proceed designedly, because the constitutives are insentient. How then? As will be explained hereafter, like the secretion of milk, which is unintelligent, for the nourishment of a calf is the action of Nature for the liberation of Soul. Thus the insentient constitutive           powers are   changed into the eleven organs, and their peculiarities are also thus derived. Whence the eye is placed in  its elevated orbit for the purpose of vision; similarly the nose, the ear, the tongue are conveniently situated for the apprehension of their respective objects. In like manner, the organs of action [are] also placed in the proper positions for the discharge of the special functions they are competent to, by the modification of the constituents acting spontaneously, but not so their objects.  For it is said elsewhere, “constituents abide in constituents,” the functions of the constituents have the constituents themselves for their objects.  The sense is that external objects are to be considered as produced by the constituents, the cause whereof is Nature.