Verse 3.7.20-21

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.7.20-21:

गुणक्रियाणां कर्तारः कर्त्रा न्यक्कृतशक्तयः ।
न्यक्तायामपि सम्पूर्णैः स्वैर्व्यापारैः समन्विताः ॥ २० ॥
करणत्वादिभिर्ज्ञाताः क्रियाभेदानुपातिभिः ।
स्वातन्त्र्यमुत्तरं लब्ध्वा प्रधाने यान्ति कर्तृताम् ॥ २१ ॥

guṇakriyāṇāṃ kartāraḥ kartrā nyakkṛtaśaktayaḥ |
nyaktāyāmapi sampūrṇaiḥ svairvyāpāraiḥ samanvitāḥ || 20 ||
karaṇatvādibhirjñātāḥ kriyābhedānupātibhiḥ |
svātantryamuttaraṃ labdhvā pradhāne yānti kartṛtām || 21 ||

20-21. The agents of the minor actions subordinate their functions to the Agent (of the main action). Even in the state of subordination, they retain fully their activities. According to the differences in these activities, they are known as instrument (karaṇa) etc. After having attained independence (in regard to their own activities) they become agents of the main action.

Commentary

The author now elucidates the Bhāṣya passage about the main action and the subordinate actions.

[Read verse 20-21 above]

[So far, it has been shown that one and the same thing can be kartā (kāraka) in a general sense in regard to the main action and karaṇa etc. in a special sense. As Kaiyaṭa puts it: sarveṣām kārakāṇām sādhyatvena sādhāraṇī kriyā tatasca sarveṣām tasyām kartṛtvam. Avāntaravyāpāravivakṣāyām tu karaṇādirūpatvam (Kaiyata on P. 1.4.23). It is now stated that a thing may be dependent in regard to the main action, but independent in regard to its own minor action. There is no contradiction between the two. This is another way of understanding the M. Bhā. statement:. sāmānyabhūtā kriyā vartate (M. Bhā. I, p. 326, 1. 15). The accessories other than the Agent are independent in regard to the minor actions such as the burning of the wood. In regard to the main action they are under the agent who employs them. That is why they are said to be ‘nyakkṛtaśaktayaḥ’. But they do not lose their independence as far as their own minor action is concerned. Nor can anything be considered to be the cause of an action if it does nothing, that is, if it has not some kind of independence. So, by each one doing its own minor action, all become accessories of the main action. Even though they are under the agent, they are independent as far as their own minor action is concerned.

So they acquire special names such as ‘karaṇa’ according to the nature of their own minor acts. While retaining this character or rather because of that, they participate in the accomplishment of the main action, that is, they are kāraka in addition to being ‘karaṇa’ etc. Under the direction of the agent (kartā) they perform their own minor actions and thus become karaṇa etc. as well as kāraka. It is only when they become kāraṇa etc. that the agent attains his ‘kartṛtva’. Thus, there is no contradiction between their independence, in regard to their own minor action and dependence in regard to the main action. In fact, what is independence in regard to one’s own minor action is the same thing as dependence in regard to the main action. In fact, the former materialises only after the accessories have been employed by the agent. Till then, it was only a potential state. Thus, every accessory is a do-er (kāraka, kartā). That is why we can sometimes say sthālī pacati, edhāṃsi pacanti, odanaḥ pacyate. It has been shown in the M. Bhā. that one can even say: valāhako vidyotate instead of valahakād vidyotate, that is, the starting-point (apādāna) has become the agent (kartā). But ordinarily, the root is not in a position to express the activity of the apādāna or the sampradāna. One cannot say ‘vrkṣaḥ patati’ for vṛkṣāt patati nor rāmo dadāti for rāmāya dadāti. Thus, karaṇa, adhikaraṇa and karaṇa can also be called kartā. And yet they are not so called, because their independence is only relative. It is mixed up with dependence. Only the Agent (kartā) has independence unmixed with dependence. So the name has been reserved for that.]

An illustration is now given.