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

This stanza may be considered partly as an illustration of the preceding, explaining the continued union of soul and body even after knowledge is attained. It is also a kind of apology for the human forms of Kapiza and other teachers of the Sankhya doctrines, who, although in possession of perfect knowledge, lived and died as men. The sage, or Yogi, is no longer susceptible of the accidents of virtue, vice, passion, dispassion, and the rest, which are the proximate causes of bodily existence ; and his continuance in the bodily form arises from the effects of virtue, &c. lasting after the cause has ceased ; like the whirl of a wheel after the impulse that set it going has been withdrawn. ‘As, when the potter's work is done, the wheel, in consequence of the impulse or momentum given to it, continues revolving, but stops when the period under such influence has expired ; so virtue and vice, incident to body initiative and mature, constitute impulse*.’ The effects of former acts of virtue and vice, then, cease when the impulse derived from them is worn out; and the possession of knowledge prevents all future acts. GaurapApa apparently suggests a difficulty with respect to acts done in the present body ; such as the observance of the Yoga, or performance of prescribed rites. These acts may be performed by a sage possessing perfect knowledge, and should therefore produce certain consequences. They lead, however, to no results; for as far as they are themselves concerned, they are but of brief duration, perishing as soon as performed; and with regard to any future effects, they are anticipated, prevented, or destroyed, by the possession of knowledge. Such seems to be the purport of the passage, but it is not very perspicuous.

fa wrouftarsaarguce deat faftad wafa | witcher 3 mraraftarét wets Pee: | 3B

p. 186

LXVIII.

Wuen separation of the informed soul from its corporeal frame at length takes place, and nature in respect of it ceases, then is absolute and final deliverance accomplished.

BHASHYA.

When bodily separation is accomplished, by destruction of the effects of virtue, vice, and the rest. Jn respect of it, having accomplished its object, nature ceases: then absolute, certain—final, unimpeded—deliverance, liberation, consequent upon the condition of singleness. Soul obtains singleness (separation), which is both absolute and final.

COMMENT.

This verse refers to the first stanza, and announces the accomplishment of what was there stated to be the object of inquiry, absolute and final liberation.

When the consequences of acts cease, and body, both gross and subtile, dissolves, nature, in respect to individual soul, no longer exists; and soul is one, single, free, kévala, or obtains the condition called kaivalyam. This, according to Vachesrati and NARAVANA, means ‘exemption from the three kinds of pain®.’ Gavrapapa gives no definition of the term, except that it is the abstract of kévalat. What the condition of pure separated soul may be in its liberated state, the Sankhya philosophy does not seem to hold it necessary to inquire.

* gewaferd gefaari || | Sas ara Saaz!

p. 187

LXIX.

Tris abstruse knowledge, adapted to the liberation of soul, wherein the origin, duration, and termination of beings are considered, has been thoroughly expounded by the mighty saint.

BHASHYA.

Soul's object is liberation : for that (purpose) this abstruse, secret, knowledge (has been expounded) by the mighty saint, by the divine sage Karina. Wherein, in which knowledge, the origin, duration, and termination, the manifestation, continuance, and disappearance, of beings, of the products (or developments) of nature, are considered, are discussed. From which investigation perfect knowledge, which is the same as knowledge of the twenty-five principles, is produced.

This is the Bhdshya of Gaurapava on the Sankhya doctrines, propounded, for the sake of liberation from migration, by the Muni Karina; in which there are these seventy stanzas.

COMMENT.

This verse specifies by whom the doctrines of the text were originally taught.

The commentary of Gaurapapa closes here in the only copy of the MSS. procurable ; and consequently omits all notice of Iswana Krisna, to whom a subsequent stanza of the text attributes the Karikd. In the Bhdshya it is said that the work commented on is the Sankhya declared by Kariza; but that the Karikd is not the work of Kapita, the other Scholiasts agree. It is also different from the Sdtras of that teacher, as given in the Sdénkhya Pravachana, although it follows their purport, and sometimes uses the same or similar expressions. Gavrapapa may therefore probably only mean to intimate that its substance is conformable to the doctrines of the Sdtras, not that it is the work of the Muni. These doctrines, he adds, are contained in seventy stanzas; of which, however, our copy has but sixty-nine. The verses of the Kérikd, as usually met with, are seventy-two; but there also reference occurs to seventy verses,

p. 188