Sāṁkhya Karika with Nārāyaṇa Commentaries | Part-3

Category:

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.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

Out of the eleven senses, the ten external organs are next described, The eye, etc.

The intellectual organs are those by means of which sound, feel, form, flavour and smell are perceived; they are eye and the rest, supersensibles, placed in their orbits and demonstrated by reason of apprehension of form and the like.  Thus, sight, literally, ‘ that by which [anything] is seen,' that is, the eye perceives colour among that group ; hearing, literally,   that by which [anything] is heard,' that is, the ear perceives sound; smell, literally, ‘that by which [anything] is smelt,' that is, the nose perceives odour; taste, literally, ‘ that by which [anything] is tasted,' that is, the tongue perceives flavour; touch, literally, ‘that by which [anything] is touched,' that is, the skin, extending over the whole frame, perceives feel. Of these, touch and sight apprehend objects also; the rest perceive only the attribute [or sensation].  This is to be understood.

Speech and the rest are organs of action because they do work. They are [next] described. If it be asked,   how can all these be termed indriya (sense)?' this etymology is to be accepted: “ing means objects, that which runs (dravanti) thereafter.” Of eye and the rest, since they apprehend their particular percepts, these are not to be inferred to be their originators, such an inference being needless [and therefore to be looked upon with suspicion]. This is plainly implied.

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.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

Mind is the eleventh organ, the marks whereof are now specified, In this Set, etc.:

The organ called Mind is reflective, it combines (fashions) the objects roughly apprehended by the senses, contemplates them in the relation of substantive and attribute, and is thus productive of distinguishing cognition. This it has for its essence, because of the identity of cause and effect. Thus it partakes of the nature of both, of organs of intellection and of action, because it is a colleague to both, inasmuch as they perform their functions with mind for support.

‘But mind, like intellect and self-apperception, is [only] a helper of the senses and not a sense-organ itself; if that fact alone were to make it a sense, there would be an unwarranted extension of terms,' To this it is replied, a sense-organ also. Why? Because cognate. The community consists in having together with the other senses pure egoism for its immediate cause; intellect and self-apperception, [on the other hand], are not senses, because not so occasioned; such is the sense. This [also] shows that the opinion of some that Mind is not a sense, because sense-organs are perceptible and it is not, is incorrect, for, according to our definition of a sense the attribute of non-sensibility [of a product of Nature] is not intended when similitude to Nature is spoken of.  It is needless to expatiate.

But how are eleven organs produced from the one pure egoism? In reply it is said, by modification of Constituents, the specific modifications, in the form of diversity in the invisible [power of merit and demerit], etc., of goodness and the other factors; diversity of product being due to difference in the co-operant, this is the meaning. External diversities also [are mentioned] by way of illustration, the sense being as external differences so also these. The reading grāhyabhedācca is to be understood to mean that difference among sense-organs is also due to that among the objects thereof.

Śabdādiṣu pañcānām, ālocanamātram iṣyate vṛttiḥ |
vacanādānaviharaṇotsargānandāsh ca pañcānām  |28|

28. The function of five [organs] in the matter of colour and the rest, is only observation; that of [the other] five is speech, handling, walking, excretion and generation [respectively].

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

The function of the intellectual among the outward sense-organs is described, The function, etc.  Of the five organs of perception, viz., the eye, the tongue, the nose, the ear and the skin, the function in the matter of colour, flavour, smell, sound and feel is observation and that alone. The word only excludes taking and other action. The sense is that the capability of the eye is for form, of the tongue for flavour, of the nose for odour, of the ear for sound, and of the skin for touch.

The functions of the active organs are [next] enumerated, Speech, etc. The work or function of the five organs of action is speech, etc.: Speech, whereby is articulation, the work of the throat, palate, etc., is the function of the voice; seizure or manipulation of the hand; walking or locomotion of the feet; evacuation of faeces, etc. of the rectum; and delight, that which delights, that is, sexual pleasure, of the reproductive organs. This is to be understood.

Svālakṣaṇyā vṛttis, trayasya saishā bhavaty asāmānyā |
sāmānyakariaṇavṛttiḥ, prāṇādyā vāyavaḥ pañca  |29|

29. The function of the three [internal faculties] is characteristic of each and not common to all. The common function of the organs is breath and the rest of the five vital airs.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

The function of intellect, egoism and mind is next specified, The function, etc.:

The function of these is peculiar, possessing characteristics that are individual and uncommon; thus, that of intellect is ascertainment, that of egoism self-apperception, that of mind differentiating or formative power, it separates, this is the sense. Functions are two-fold, common and uncommon. These are the uncommon or specific. The common are now described, The common, etc.:        The functions of the organs that are common [are] the five vital airs, breath and the rest, because by [conducing to] life, etc., they form the ultimate cause of all organic action, [and] since their conjunction and disjunction have been authoritatively laid down, the operations of sense having been said to be concomitant with the action of the said airs. In books the difference among the several airs is assigned to difference in their seats, thus, “Prāṇa [dwells] in the heart, apāna in the anus, samāna goes down to the navel, udāna resides in. the throat, and Vyāna circulates throughout the frame.” Enough.

Yugapac catuṣṭaya sya tu, vṛttiḥ kramashash ca tasya nirdishṭā |
dṛṣṭe tathāpy adṛṣṭe, trayasya tatpūrvikā vṛttiḥ  |30|

30. The functions of the four with regard to sensible objects are described to be simultaneous as well as consecutive ; with regard to the insensible, the functions of the three [internal faculties] are preceded by the action of the fourth [sense-organ].

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

The peculiar functions are now shown to be simultaneous and consecutive, The functions, etc.:

With reference to sensible or perceptible objects the function of the four, [viz.,] an external sense, mind, egoism and intellect, is both instantaneous and gradual; as, when it thunders, or when a tiger or the like is [suddenly] met, the observing, discriminative, apperceptive, and ascertaining functions all at once come into action, and the man immediately takes to flight. Also consecutive, as, when in dim light one perceives something, then makes sure it is such and such, then realises ‘it is coming towards me,' and then determines ‘I should move away from this place ,' in this order do the [several] functions succeed.

Again, in the unseen, objects imperceptible, of the three, the external organ being excluded, the functions are instantaneous as well as gradual. Three are spoken of, because in the matter of inference and testimony, there is no application of an [external] sense-organ. With regard to their objects, since there is an absence of the indeterminate, the first function is that of mind; and this function is preceded by that, that is, the perceptive. In short, in cases of inference, perception is required for a knowledge of concomitance, [and] in those of testimony, perception cannot be dispensed with because of the necessity of the inference of power.

Svāṃ svām pratipadyante, parasparākūtahetukīṃ vṛttim |
puruṣārtha eva hetur, na kena cit kāryate karaṇam  |31|

31. The organs perform their respective functions, being incited thereto by a mutual impulse. The cause is the benefit of Soul. No organ is moved to action by anyone.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

‘But the alternative simultaneous is not probable, because the action of mind is dependent upon the operations of sense; similarly egoism is dependent upon the action of intellect, and mind upon that of egoism.' To this is replied, The organs, etc.

Ākūta means intention; that [sense] being inapplicable in the case of the irrational, the meaning here is readiness for activity. The time of the origination of activity of one [organ], there being nothing to hinder, is also the time for that of another; thus simultaneity becomes possible; in the case of gradual [action] doubt and the like obstruct; this is to be understood.

Energise towards their respective ends; this shows that though the activity is simultaneous, yet the objects being distinct, as in the case of a clubbist and a spearman, there is no commingling of functions.

Yet, who moves an organ? the reply is, The Cause, etc.: The object of Soul, which has for its marks experience and liberation, being moved by a desire for self-realisation, becomes the incentive to the activity of an organ; this is the sense. Moves, incites; for this a desiring agent is necessary; God, [however], is not such, for to [support] the assumption of Him there is want of proof.

Karaṇaṃ trayodaśavidhaṁ, tad āharaṇadhāraṇaprakāśakaram |
kāryaṃ ca tasya daśadhā, āhāryaṁ, dhāryam prakāshyaṁ ca  |32|

32. Organ is thirteen-fold, seizing, retaining and manifesting; the effect thereof is ten-fold, that which is to be seized, to be retained, and to be manifested.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

The organs are next enumerated, Organ, etc.; Thirteen-fold, intellect, self-apperception, and eleven senses. Their functions are specified, seizing, etc. Of these seizing is the function of the organs of action; retention of mind, egoism and intellect, inasmuch as body is held together, by their functions [productive of] the five vital airs; [and] manifestation of the organs of perception.

How many are the objects? In reply it is said, the effects, etc. Among the thirteen, of the organs of action the object, [that is], the seizable, is ten-fold, according to the distinction of human and divine, [similarly] of mind, egoism and intellect the object, [that is], the maintainable (e. g., body and the like), is ten-fold, according to the distinction of gross elements, human and divine; and of the organs of perception the object, [that is], the to- be-manifested, (viz., sound, touch, form, flavour and smell) is also ten-fold, because human and divine.

Antaḥkaraṇaṃ trividhaṃ, dashadhā bāhyaṃ trayasya viṣayākhyam |
sāmpratakālam bāhyaṃ, trikālam ābhyantaraṃ karaṇaṃ  |33|

33. Internal organs are three, external ten, making known objects to the three. The external are confined to time present, the internal embrace past and future as well.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

The divisions of the thirteen organs are next specified, Internal, etc.:

The internal are three-fold, through the distinction of Intellect, Egoism, and Mind; the external organism is ten-fold, through the distinction of the five organs of perception and the five of action. Objectifying furnishing objects to the three fold internal set; to the functioning of Mind, Egoism, and Intellect the operations of the intellectual organs are suited; so also are those of the active organs through the former organs; in objects produced by the operation of the organs of action the activity of the organs of perception is antecedent to that of the internal [instruments].

What like are the external organs? In reply it is said, confined to the present, having their objects only in the present. The external, sc., organs; the organs of action are to be understood indirectly [through those of perception]. The three times, having objects in time present, past and future; the internal organs, named mind, self-apperception, and consciousness objectify time past and future by means of inference and testimony, and time present by means of perception.

Buddhīndriyāṇi teshām, pañca visheshiviśeṣaviṣayīṇi |
vāg bhavati śabdaviṣayā, sheshāṇy tu pañcaviṣayāni  |34|

34. Among these, the five organs of perception concern objects, both specific and non-specific.  The voice has for its object sound. The rest concern all the five objects [of sense].

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

[The author] now discusses the objects of external organs, Among these, etc.:

Among the ten sense-organs, those of perception have for their objects specific, apprehensible, and non-specific, non-sensible, things; of these, the organs of ascetics apprehend both kinds of object, ours only the specific.

Similarly among the organs of action, voice has sound for its object, since it produces that, [but articulated] sound is not rudimental, for this comes from egoism. The rest, hands, feet and the organs of excretion and generation, have five objects, because pot and the like, which may be seized by hand, etc., have for their essence sound and the rest of the five.

Sāntaḥkaraṇā buddhiḥ, sarvaṃ viṣayaṁ avagāhate yasmāt |
tasmāt tividhaṃ kāraṇam, dvāri dvārāṇi śeṣāṇi.  |35|

35. Since Intellect with the [other] internal organs dives into all objects, therefore those three organs are the gate-keepers, and the rest are gates.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

To indicate the subordinate character of external organs it is said, Since Intellect, etc.:

Since Intellect with the internals, Mind and Egoism, dives into or ascertains all objects brought by the senses [and] beneficial to soul, therefore the internal three are the gate-keepers, and the remaining ten sense-organs are- the gates. The reason is that it is by the gate-way of the senses that directly or indirectly the internal instruments ascertain objects. To be a door is to be a source of benefit, which is [accomplished] by observation in the manner indicated above.

Ete pradīpakapāḥ, parasparavilakṣaṇā guṇaviśeṣāḥ |
kṛtsnam puruṣasyārtham, prakāśya buddhau prayacchati  |36|

36. These [organs], different from one another in characteristics, and variously modified by the constituent powers, present to- Intellect the whole object of Soul, making it manifest, like a lamp.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

In order to indicate the superiority of Intellect among the internal instruments, it is said, These, etc.

These, that is, the ten sense-organs, mind and egoism, which are modifications of the constituents, [inasmuch as] in them inhere goodness and the other varieties thereof, having made manifest the whole object of self, present it to consciousness, that is, exhibit it there, as a lamp shows a jar to a person by illuminating it.

Sarvam pratyupabhogaṃ, yasmāt puruṣasya sādhayati buddhiḥ |
saiva ca vishinashṭi punaḥ, pradhānapuruṣāntaraṃ sūkṣmam  |37|

37. As it is Intellect which accomplishes for Self fruition of all that is to be experienced, so it is that, again, which discriminates the subtle difference between Nature and Soul.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

Intellect has for its object the end of Soul and not its own, this is next explained, As it is, etc.:

Since it accomplishes for self experience of all objects, sound and the rest, though supreme, it works for another’s purpose and not its own, this is the sense.

To show that it is so also because it produces the knowledge which brings liberation, it is said that it again, in a state of discriminative knowledge, discriminates, objectifies, the otherness, subtle or cognisable with difficulty, between Nature and Soul. Intellect is so because it ascertains; such is the meaning.

Tanmātrāṇy avisheshās, tebhyo bhūtāni pañca pañcabhyaḥ |
ete smritā visheshāḥ, shāntā ghorāsh ca mūdhāsh ca  |38|

38. The rudimentary principles are nonspecific; from these five proceed the five gross elements, which are known as specific, [since they are] soothing, terrific and dulling.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

Objects specific and non-specific have been spoken of. What they are is now specified, The rudimentary, etc.

The subtle principles, rudimental sound, etc., are unspecific, because non-apprehensible [by ordinary sense]. From these rudiments the five gross elements earth and the rest, [proceed] ; these latter are specific because apprehensible. Why? Since Soothing, etc. One cha denotes cause, the other conjoins. Since some among ether and the rest are soothing, [that is], pleasant, tranquil and light on account of the predominance of goodness; others are terrific, [that is], painful on account of the predominance of passion; and others, again, are dulling, [that is], stupefying and heavy on account of the predominance of darkness ; it has been demonstrated before that such variations occur in [the effects of] the constituents as one or another happens to prevail.

Sūkṣmā mātāpitrijāḥ, saha prabhūtais tridhā visheshāḥ syuḥ |
sūkṣmās teshāṃ niyatā, mātāpitrijā nivartante  |39|

39. Subtle [bodies] and such as spring from father and mother, together with the great [existences] form the three varieties of specific objects. Of these, the subtle are everlasting, [while] those born of parents.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

These are not the only specific objects but there are others. So it is said, Subtle, etc.:

The subtle, the rudimental body; the parent-generated, the gross body; the great existences, rocks, trees, etc.; these are specific, because being specific effects. Thus, the rudimental body originates from the subtle elements; the parent-generated from the blood and semen produced by the food taken by the couple, and the great existences spring from causes of a different and diverse character. Among these, the rudimental body is permanent, and will stay till liberation, the parent-generated perishes, is dissolved at the time of death. The same [also] is the character of the great existences, they too perish, this is to be understood. The use of “specific’’ is to be taken to imply subordinate being.

Pūrvotpannam asaktaṃ, niyatam mahadādi sūkṣmaparyantam |
saṃsarati nirūpabhogaṃ, bhāvair adhivisitaṃ liṅgam  |40|

40. The subtle body, [which is] primeval, unconfined, permanent [and composed of] intellect and the rest down to the elemental rudiments, migrates, enjoys not, and is invested with affections.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

The characteristics of a rudimental body are next specified, The subtle, etc.:

Before, that is, in the first creation, it Sprang or was produced from Nature.

Unconfined, unobstructed, [it] enters even into a rock.

Fixed, distinct in different persons.

Intellect etc., formed of the aggregate of intellect, egoism, mind, the ten sense-organs and the subtle principles.

Migrates, assumes new and [ever] new gross bodies, and forsakes previous ones.

Unenjoying, incapable of experience [when] un-associated with a gross frame.

Invested with affections, endowed with internal dispositions [like faith and the like], or made the receptacle of impressions by sacrificial ceremonies, etc. The effect due to performance of ceremonies, etc., is the invisible [power of merit and demerit].

Citraṃ yathāśrayam rite, sthāṇvādibhyo vinā yathā chāyā |
tadvad vināviśeṣair, na tishṭhati nirāśrayaṃ liṅgam  |41|

41. As a painting rests not without a frame, nor a shadow without a stake, et cetera, so the rudimental substance subsists not unsupported, without specific [forms].

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

But experience may be by means of intellect accompanied by egoism and the sense-organs, [what then] is effected by the subtle body, undemonstrated as it is? In reply it is said, As a painting, etc.:

As a painting does not rest without a support, but stands when supported, similarly without the specific, that is, the very subtle frame, the ‘mark,’ that is, intellect and the rest (so called because they mark out or indicate), having for form the assemblage of the rudiments, etc. with being, subsist not unsupported, but supported by the subtle body. Therefore this body, as their receptacle, is necessary. [This also follows] from the following authority, “Yama drew out with force from the body of some truthful person the thumb-like Soul, bound and subdued.”

Some explain this [verse] as indicating the necessity of a gross body; in which case [construe], liṅgam, that is, the subtle body, embracing the essence of all, does not subsist unsupported without the specific or gross frame, but subsists with it for its support. Hence there is no incompatibility demonstrated in [the co-ordinate existences of] the subtle and the gross frames; this is the sense. The rest is [to be construed] as in the previous case.

Puruṣārthahetukam idaṃ, nimittanaimittikaprasangena |
prakṛter vibhutvayogān, naṭavad vyavatishṭhate liṅgam  |42|

42. The ‘rudiment,’ formed for the sake of Soul, through relation of means and consequence, [and] by conjunction with the presiding influence of Nature, plays its part like a dramatic actor.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

Thus having established the existence of the subtle frame, its mode of migration and the cause thereof are next described, The ‘rudiment’ etc.:

Means, virtue and the rest; consequence, the gross frame etc., which have virtue and the rest for their cause; through the relation or connection of these two, the liṅgam, [that is], the subtle frame acts like a player ; as a player acts assuming various forms, so this also acts endowed with celestial and other frames.

What for? The reply is, for the sake of Soul; having for its cause or end the object of Self. It uses these [bodies] for its purposes of experience, because the invisible power [of merit and demerit] makes it so to enjoy.

To what does it owe this power (or greatness)? It is replied, through conjunction, etc. So it is said in the Purāṇa, “since Nature has for its form the universe, these are the modifications thereof.” Mahat and the rest are evolved in order that Nature may receive her satisfaction or quittance; such is the sense.

Sāṃsiddhikāsh ca bhāvāḥ, prakṛtikā vaikṛtāsh ca dharmādyāḥ |
dṛṣṭāḥ karaṇāśrayiṇaḥ, kāryāśrayiṇash ca kalalādyāḥ  |43|

43. Conditions are either transcendental or natural or modified.  [They are] virtue and the like. [These are] considered to be appurtenant to the cause, while the uterine germ and the rest are appurtenant to the effect.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

It not being well known what natural and modified [conditions] are, these are next explained, Conditions, etc.:

Conditions, virtue and the rest; those which are innate are natural, and will last till objects remain, as intellect, egoism, etc. The modified are temporary, and among this virtue and the rest have been considered by the Sānkhya teachers to be dependent upon the cause, [viz.,] intellect.

Appurtenant to the effect, [that is], dependent upon the body are the uterine germ etc., [which], in the case of a foetus [are] the embryo, the bubble, the flesh, the muscle, the liver, and limbs major and minor; in the case of the born [are] childhood, boyhood, youth and old age ; this is the gist.

Dharmeṇa gamanam ūrdhvaṃ, gamanam adhastād bhavaty adharmeṇa |
jñānena cāpavargo, viparyayād ishyate bandhaḥ  |44|

44. By virtue is ascent upwards, by vice descent below; by knowledge is liberation, and by the reverse bondage.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

The necessity of virtue etc., which reside in intellect, is now explained, By virtue, etc.

By means of virtue that is pure or untainted by harmfulness [for instance, prayer], and virtue that is mixed or so tainted [for instance, sacrifices], one ascends to the region of Brahmā, Prajāpati, Indra, the Gandharvas, the Yakṣas and the Pitris. By means of vice, conduct forbidden by holy texts, [for instance], injury to others and the like, one descends to the hells [called] Raurava, Mahāraurava, Vahni, Vaitaraṇi, Kumbhipāka, Tāmiśra, Aṅdhatāmiśra, etc. By knowledge or intimate apprehension of Soul, there comes liberation or salvation. By the reverse, [viz.,] ignorance, there comes bondage, which is three-fold according to the distinction of natural, modified, or personal. Of these, natural bondage is caused by a worship of Nature in the belief that it is soul, so [it is said], “the meditators on the unmanifested principle remain (or migrate) for ten thousand years.” Modified bondage springs from a worship of the sense-organs as Soul; for “the meditators on the organs stay for ten aeons.”  Personal bondage arises from the performance, out of desire, of the scriptural rites by one who knows not the soul; so, [we hear] “these are works instituted by those who know not the soul and desire heaven, etc.; their bondage is personal.” The name is to be understood as due to the connection with presents [given to Brāhmaṇs at the conclusion of the rites]; this is the substance.

Vairāgyāt prakṛtilayaḥ, saṃsāro bhavati rājasād rāgāt |
aishvaryād avighāto, viparyayāt tadviparyāsaḥ  |45|

45. From dispassion [follows] absorption into Nature; from foul passion birth into the world; from power removal of obstruction; from the contrary, the reverse.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

Since the Śruti, “from knowing thee alone one transcends death, there is no other path to liberation”, assigns salvation only to a knower of Soul and ascribes it not to one devoid of such knowledge, in the latter case there is no liberation even when there is dispassion. This is now explained, From dispassion, etc.

From dispassion alone, which consists in a disinclination from objects seen and heard, there follows absorption into Nature, which is being worshipped as Soul; the term “Nature’’ includes intellect, egoism, etc.; such is the meaning.

From passion (lust, anger, etc.,) which is the product of [the constituent of] foulness, proceeds migration; when it is connected with sacrifices etc., there is heaven and the like; when it is associated with women etc., there is worldly enjoyment; it is thus to be understood.

From power, characterised by minuteness etc., comes non-obstruction, absence of impediment to motion; from the contrary, weakness, the reverse, stoppage of motion everywhere,—as a weak person is repulsed from the house of another.

Eṣa pratyayasargo, viparyayāshaktitushṭisiddhyākhyaḥ |
guṇavaiṣamyavimardāt, tasya ca bhedās tu pañcāśat  |46|

46. This forms an intellectual creation, described as obstruction, disability, contentment and perfection; by the hostile influence of inequalities among constituents, the varieties thereof are fifty.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

We hear of obstruction etc. from the Sānkhya; are they different principles, and how many are there of them? It is replied, This forms, etc.:

The set, [consisting of] obstruction, disability, contentment and perfection by name, is the creation or product of Intellect; these are [to be understood as] included in Intellect, and not being different principles because of the identity of cause and effect. The varieties thereof are said to be fifty.

But how can so many effects proceed from [the same] one cause? It is replied, by the hostile influence etc. : from the hostile influence of the constituents, defeat of one or more [by others or other], due to inequalities among them, that is, greater or less strength, disparity from defect, evenness or excess; this is the sense.

Thus, since cause and effect are not different, obstruction is to be understood as ignorance, weakness as impiety, contentment as virtue, and perfection as knowledge. Ignorance and the rest spring from Intellect, hence obstruction, etc., are not [to be considered] different principles. Enough.

Pañca viparyayabhedā, bhavanty aśaktish ca karaṇavaikalyāt |
ashṭāviṃshatibhedā, tushṭir navadhāshṭadhā siddhiḥ  |47|

47. Five are the varieties of obstruction; twenty-eight of disability, through organic imperfection; nine varieties there are of contentment, and eight of perfection.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

The varieties were collectively spoken of as fifty; the number of the kinds of each is now specified, Five are the varieties, etc.:

Obstruction, the source of migration, has five kinds, by name obscurity, illusion, extreme illusion, gloom and utter darkness, according to the five afflictions, ignorance, egotism, desire, hatred and dread.

Since disability proceeds from disease, the variations of the former should be as numerous as those of the latter; how can they then be twenty-eight? The answer is, through organic imperfection. The disability that arises from imperfection or defect in the instruments (intellect and the eleven sense-organs) is twenty-eight-fold.

The rest is easy.

Bhedas tamaso ashṭavidho, mohasya ca dashavidho mahāmohaḥ |
tāmishro ashṭāḥdashadhā, tathā bhavaty andhatāmishro  |48|

48. The sub-divisions of obscurity are eight, so also of illusion; extreme illusion is of ten kinds, gloom of eighteen, as also utter darkness.

Nārāyaṇa Bhāṣya

The sub-divisions of the five obstructions are next enumerated, The subdivisions, etc.:

Ignorance is the taking of the eight—Nature, intellect, egoism and the five elemental rudiments—for soul; this is also called obscurity; it is eight-fold from its eight objects.

Egoism is a self-conceit founded upon the idea that T am perfect,’ consequent upon the attainment of the eight-fold powers; the powers of atomicity, etc., being eight, it has also eight varieties; this is also called illusion. The cha (also) connects “illusion” with “of eight kinds.”

Greed is an appreciation of the five objects of sense, sound etc.,— which become ten because human and divine, — as fit to be taken by me. This is extreme illusion, ten-fold through ten objects.

Envy at seeing others enjoying the ten objects of sense, sound etc., and the eight kinds of powers, atomicity etc., is called gloom, [which is] eighteen-fold because of eighteen objects.

Fear is termed extreme gloom; the apprehension is that somebody else will get the ten sense-objects and attain the eight powers; this [also] is eighteen-fold through eighteen objects.

Thus the sub-divisions of obstruction are sixty-two [in number].