Sūtra 1.42

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Sūtra 1.42:

तत्र शब्दार्थज्ञानविकल्पैः संकीर्णा सवितर्का समापत्तिः ॥ १.४२ ॥

tatra śabdārthajñānavikalpaiḥ saṃkīrṇā savitarkā samāpattiḥ || 1.42 ||

tatra—there, śabda—of words. artha—of meaning jñāna—of idea, vīkalpaiḥ—with options. saṅkīrṇa—mixed up. savitarkā—indistinct, samāpattiḥ—the thought transformation.

42. There, the thought-transformation in which the options of word, meaning and idea are mixed up, is called Indistinct, (verbal).

The Sankhya-pravachana commentary of Vyasa

[English translation of the 7th century commentary by Vyāsa called the Sāṅkhya-pravacana, Vyāsabhāṣya or Yogabhāṣya]

[Sanskrit text for commentary available]

And that as follows:—The cow as a word, the cow as an object and the cow as an idea, although different from one another, are cognized as indistinct. Being analyzed, the characteristics of the word are different; and the characteristics of an idea are different; and the characteristics of an object too are different. Thus their lines of existence are distinct. ‘There,’ among the various descriptions of thought-transformation, if an object such as a cow, is present in the trance-consciousness of the Yogi, who has reached this state of thought-transformation, being pierced through by the indeterminate notions of word, meaning and idea, then the thought-transformation is mixed up and is called Indistinct.

When, however, the mind becomes free from the memories of verbal convention, and the trance-consciousness is devoid of the options of inferential and verbal cognitions, the object makes its appearance in the mind in its own distinct nature (unmixed up with word and meaning), the thought-transformation is called Distinct (nirvitarka). This is Higher Perception. This further becomes the seed of verbal and inferential knowledge. Verbal and inferential knowledge are born therefrom. It does not go along with verbal and inferential knowledge. Hence the knowledge obtained by a Yogī through the stage of trance, called Distinct thought-transformation, is not confused by any other cognition.—42.

The Gloss of Vachaspati Mishra

[English translation of the 9th century Tattvavaiśāradī by Vācaspatimiśra]

Thought-transformation in general has been described. By subsidiary classification it is four-fold. Thus: Indistinct or verbal, Distinct or wordless, Meditative and Ultra-meditative. Out of these the description of the Indistinct thought-transformation is given:—‘There, &c.’ Out of these thought-transformations the Indistinct thoughttransformation is to be known. How? The notion of word, meaning and idea consists in this. The faculty of imagination (vikalpa) raises distinctions in the same thing and shows sameness in different things. Thus the word, meaning and idea are confused together, although in reality they are different from one another. Therefore is this thought-transformation confused, i.e., mixed up with the notions of word, meaning and idea:—‘And that as follows. The word cow, &c.’ The first phrase, ‘the word cow’ shows the unreal cognition of the word being fancied as confused with meaning and idea.

The second phrase, ‘the meaning cow,’ shows the notion of indistinctness from the meaning, when word and idea are taken in.

The third phrase, ‘the cow as an idea’ shows the notion of indistinctness from the idea when word and meaning are taken in. It is in this way that the world is seen taking in these three without making any distinction among them, although in reality they are all distinct from one another.

Well, but if they are taken in as not distinct from one another, whence does the distinction come in? For this reason, the commentator says:—“Analyzed, &c.” Being examined by philosophers in accordance with the canons of agreement and difference, the characteristics of a word are found to be, that it is a modification of sound only, and that it possesses the qualifications of intensity, Ac. The characteristics of the object are different, being absence of intelligence and form, &c. The characteristics of an idea are different, such as illumination and the absence of fixity in form, Ac. Therefore their lines of existence are different, the lines, that is to say, along which their natural distinctions show themselves.

When the Yogī is in the state of thought-transformation with reference to ‘this cow, &c., taken in optionally, &c.’ This describes the Yogī’s lower perception (the ordinary perception). The rest is easy. To connect this with the next aphorism he first describes the Distinct Thought-transformation:—‘When however, &c.’

Freedom from memories, &c., means their absence. Verbal and inferential cognitions become possible only when preceded by the memory of verbal conventions. Convention consists in the mutual super-imposition of word, meaning and idea, in the phrase, ‘This is a cow.’ By these become possible the real and imaginative cognitions, traditional teaching and inference. For this reason the trance consciousness preceded by these is Indistinct.

When, however, the mind is full of the object only and favouring the object only, constantly habituates itself to the cognition of the object alone, the memory of the convention does no longer interfere and is therefore given up. Further the options of verbal and inferential cognitions too, in which it has its origin, are also given up. Then in the trance-consciousness, void of these descriptions of knowledge, the object takes its place in its own distinct nature, and the mind is confined to the manifestation of the nature, of the object alone. It does not show any of the mixed up percepts of the word and the idea. This is the Distinct Thought-transformation. That is the Higher Perception of the Yogīs, because there is not in this, even a trace of untrue knowledge, the unreal fastening thereupon of other notions.

Well let this be. The Yogīs lay down and teach the truths which they have learnt by Higher Perception. And how do they do that, but by promulgating and teaching the truths by means of the processes of verbal and inferential knowledge resorted to for the sake of others. Hence verbal and inferential knowledge have the Higher Perceptive knowledge for their object. And verbal and inferential knowledge are subject to the interference of imagination (vikalpa). For this reason the Higher Perception also is but a modification of imagination.

Therefore he says:—‘That is the seed of verbal and inferential knowledge.’ If Higher Perception went along with verbal and inferential knowledge in the same way as is the case with Indistinct thought-transformation, i.e., if the perception were confused on account of the percepts being mixed up, then it would be a modification of imagination only. This, however, is their seed. Verbal and inferential knowledge are born therefrom; and it is not possible that the cause of a thing may also be the sphere of its manifestation and be co-extensive with it. It is not that the fire lives in smoke, because the knowledge of the existence of smoke becomes the cause of the knowledge of the existence of fire. Therefore, the Yogīs take in objects by non-fictitious (real and distinct) perception, and only teach it and promulgate it by means subject to fiction (mixing up, confusion).

Summarizes:—‘For this reason, &c.’