The Sānkhya Kārikā, with the Bhāshya of Gauḍapāda — trans. H. T. Colebrooke and H. H. Wilson (1837)

is one of some importance, as it regards apparently the history of the Sankhya doctrines respecting the nature of that subtile body which is the immediate vehicle of soul, as we shall have occasion to notice more particularly, when we come to verse 40. If the meaning of the text be as Prof. Lassen renders it, it furnishes reason to suppose that the author of the Kdrikdé had introduced an innovation upon the original doctrine, as will be subsequently indicated.

According to Gaurapapa and Narayana, the sorts or species intimated in this verse are different from those described in the preceding; the former calls them, as above, ‘ other varieties *;’ and the latter has, referring to ver. 38, ‘So many are the specific varieties; but these are not all, there are others.’ VAcuespati’s expression, ‘A further species of species {, might be thought to refer to the gross elements; but, from the explanation that follows, it is evident he does not intend to limit the specific differences to gross elementary bodies. Agreeably to the explanation, then, in which these writers concur, bodies in general are threefold, subtile, generated, and elementary ; and consistently with this view they consider ‘subtile,’ sikshma, as equivalent to ¢an-mdtra, ‘ rudimental :’ thus GaurapApa has, ‘ Subtile is the aggregated rudimental elements, forming a rudimento-elemental subtile body |:’ so also VAcuespati; ‘Subtile means subtile bodies ; subtile body is one specific object §: and the Chandrika ; ‘Subtile are what are called rudimental bodies 4.’ Consequently they also conceive the subtile objects spoken of in this verse to be something entirely different from the gross elementary viséshas, or ‘ species,’ of the preceding verse; not merely sub-species or varieties of the same: and it must be admitted that there is some inconsistency in the Kérikd’s speaking of subtile bodies being a species of gross bodies ; of

* sre fase: | t waren wa fave eff a farsfa aafiare! «=f fataruraarant fate || rearenrfied yet wants qe) gee: aera: oftwferm: | aed wit fata: | * ager Ceirenrchreeme

p. 126

the imperceptible being a variety of the perceptible. According to VISNANA Buiksuv, however, the text merely intends by ‘subtile,’ séshkma, a modification of gross elementary body; a corporeal frame, which is subtile only relatively, or which is more refined than the second kind of body specified in the text, that which is begotten: ‘The nature of that body which is the support of rudimental body is explained in the Kérikd, “subtile, generated,” &c.: here is meant, body aggregated of the five elements, the (product or) effect of the rudimental elements, which is subtile relatively to generated body*.’ The same notion is again intimated by expressions which will be subsequently cited; and there remains no doubt that this commentator understands by the sikshma of the text, ‘a subtile variety of gross elementary body,’ distinctorum distinctio. The other commentators understand by it, ‘ rudimental bodies,’ elementa indistincta, Either interpretation is therefore allowable: the latter agrees best with the philosophy, the former with the construction, of the original.