1595. Although I make use of the word ‘perceive’ yet remembering that the mind is included among the senses and regarded as the sixth sense, the functions of recollection, representation, etc., are also implied by the word pasyati. The Burdwan translator gives a ridiculously erroneous version of this verse.
1596. The commentator explains that the simile of the froth is introduced in consequence of its disappearance with the disappearance of water. K. P. Singha is incorrect in taking the instance of froth as illustrative of the quickness of the destruction.
1597. Sarvatra does not mean ‘through every part of the sleeper’s body’ as. K. P. Singha takes it, but sarvavishaye as the commentator correctly explains it.
1598. Iha is sapne Anisah is nasti isah or pravartaah yasya.
1599. For the Soul, in dreams, sees and hears and touches and smells etc., precisely as it does while awake.
1600. The sense seems to be that a person who becomes emancipate in this life becomes so in Samadhi. When the state of Samadhi is over, his mind and senses return; and returning they do the bidding of the Supreme, i.e., bring about both happiness and misery, which, of course, are the consequences of the acts of past lives though that happiness and misery are not felt. In the next verse is said that these men very soon leave their bodies and become freed from rebirth.
1601. There are two kinds of Emancipation: one is attainable here, in this body, it is Jivan-mukti; the other is Videha-kaivalya or that which becomes one’s when one is bodiless. In 98, Jivan-mukti has been spoken of. In this verse, the observations apply to Videha-kaivalya.
1602. Vadanti is stuvanti. Such men hymn its praises by regarding it as Supreme Deity possessed of attributes. Those attributes, of course, are the result of illusion, for in its real nature there can be no attributes in Brahma.
1603. Brahma is knowledge without duality i.e., knowledge without the consciousness of knower and known. The knowledge or cognition of an object, when object is annihilated, assumes the form of that knowledge which is called Brahma.
1604. The commentator explains that the object of this verse is to show that among mobile creatures those endued with knowledge are superior, and among all kinds of knowledge, the knowledge occurring in the Sankhya system is the highest.
1605. i.e., if in consequence of any defect of practice or Sadhana, the Sankhyas fail to attain to Emancipation, they at least become translated into gods.
1606. i.e., it is everything.
1607. That Narayana who does all this is the embodiment of the Sankhya system.
1608. The commentator explains the compound Adhyatmagatinischayam differently.
1609. Both the vernacular translator render this verse wrongly.
1610. Vasyante is explained by the commentator as implying Brahmanah ante and not ‘at the end of that night’. The line occurs in Mann (Chap 1. 74) where ante refers to Brahmana’s day and night. Vasishtha here refers to Mohapralaya and not any intermediate Pralaya.
1611. In the creation of Mahan or Prajapati or Virat, and of Consciousness, the element of Tamas or ignorance predominates.
1612. This is a very abstruse verse. I am not sure that I have understood it correctly, What is said here seems to be this from Akshara arose Hiranyagarbha: from Hiranyagarbha arose Virat. This, that or the other is worshipped by ordinary men, while persons possessed of real insight do not invest any of them with attributes worthy of worship. The speaker says that the ascription of attributes, called Ignorance, and the non-ascription for destruction of that ascriptions called Knowledge, (with respect to Virat or Hiranyagarbha or Akshara) then arose. It might be asked that when there were no men as yet to worship or to condemn such worship, how could the two arise? The answer is that the two, in their subtile forms, came into existence and were after-wards availed of by men when men come into being.
1613. From Akshara or the Indestructible is Hiranyagarbha. From Hiranyagarbha is Mahan or Virat and Consciousness. From the last are the subtile elements.
1614. The meanings of such verses depend upon the grammatical significations of certain words that are used. They can scarcely be rendered accurately into any other language not derived from Sanskrit. What is said here is that it is Prakriti which must be said to be the Adhishthatri of the universe. Vishnu is not so. Vishnu, Brahma, Akshara, or the Indestructible, however, is said to cover or _pervade_ the universe (vyapnoti). Vishnu is Vyapka but not Adhishthatri.
1615. In the previous section it has been said that through Tamas he takes birth among the intermediate orders, through Rajas among human beings, and through Sattwa among gods. The root kshi in Gunakshayat means aisarvya or puissance.
1616. The soul weaves a cocoon with attributes (or, acts which result from attributes), and though free deprives himself of freedom.
1617. Made of Chit and Not-Chit combined.
1618. The sense seems to be that the obligation to explain a treatise in the midst of a conclave always stimulates the best faculties, and if it is a conclave of the learned the friction of intellects is sure to bring out the correct sense.
1619. For enables them to conquer Ignorance.
1620. When Pranayama is performed with the aid of mantras or yapa, it is said to be saguna or sagarbha or endued with substance. Concentration of mind, however, is made without the aid of such yapa.
1621. The two and twenty sanchodans of Preranas are the two and twenty modes of transmitting the Prana breath from the toe of the foot to the crown of the head. That which transcends Prakriti is the Supreme Soul.
1622. The reading I adopt is na-kathyate.
1623. Atmanah is Iswarat parah.
1624. Parisankhyadarsanam is explained by the commentator thus: Parisankhyanam, is parivarianam, i.e., the gradual pravilapam of errors; Lena darsanam or sakshatkaram.
1625. The commentator explains that nistattwah means nirgatam tattwam aparoksham yasmat.
1626. Param Aparam, and Avyayam are theirs in consequence of Ajksharabhavatwa. Aparam means satyakamatwa, satyasamkalpatwa, etc.’ i.e., puissance. Param is the indescribable felicity of Samadhi. The Srutis declare that knower of Brahma becomes Brahma.
1627. Hence, as the commentator explains, by knowing what is called the Unmanifest one is capable of attaining to omniscience.
1628. What is stated here is this, the Unmanifest or Prakriti, by modification, produces Mahat and the other principles. But the agency of Purusha also is necessary for such production, for Prakriti can do nothing without Purusha, and Purusha also can do nothing without Prakriti. The principles of Mahat and the rest, therefore, may be said to have their origin as much in Purusha as in Prakriti. Beside, the two being naturally dependent on each other, if Prakriti be called Kshara, Purusha also may be so called.
