Sūtra 1.8

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Sūtra 1.8:

विपर्ययो मिथ्याज्ञानम् अतद्रूपप्रतिष्ठम् ॥ १.८ ॥

viparyayo mithyājñānam atadrūpapratiṣṭham || 1.8 ||

viparyayaḥ—unreal cognition. mithyā—of the unreal. jñānam—knowing. atad—not its own. rūpa—form, pratiṣṭham—occupying, standing, possessing.

8. Unreal Cognition is the knowing of the unreal, possessing a form not its own.

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]

Unreal Cognition is the knowing of the unreal, possessed of a form not its own. Why is it not the knowing of the real? Because the knowledge of the real removes it, inasmuch as Real Cognition has for its object a thing as it exists. Therein is seen the removal of the wrong knowledge by the right one; as for example, the visual knowledge of two moons is removed by the perception which has for its object the thing as it really exists, the one moon.

This it is that is the five-fold Nescience. As it is said Nescience, Egoism, Attachment, Aversion, and Love of life are the five afflictions.—3.2. The same are technically called respectively, darkness (tamas), forgetfulness (moha), extreme forgetfulness (mahāmoha), Excessive darkness (tāmisra) and blind darkness (andhatāmisra).

These will be described in the context of the impurities of the mind,

The Gloss of Vachaspati Mishra

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

Unreal cognition is the knowing of the unreal, possessed of a form not its own.

Unreal congnition:—This is a statement of the thing to be defined. The knowing of the unreal, &c., is the definition. It means that it has a form which shines out as if it were real knowledge.

The words, ‘possessed of a form not its own,’ are equivalent to ‘not possessed of the form which is its own.’ As for example, the words, ‘eating what is not dedicated to the Pitṛs,’ mean ‘not eating what is dedicated to the Pitṛs.’

Doubt also is included in this. There is, however, this much difference. In this, the unstability of the form of the notion exists in the notion itself, whereas in the case of the perception of two moons, &c., the unstability is brought home by the notion of the removal thereof.

The question arises that if it be so, then on consideration, unreal cognition shows itself in imagination also, because there also, the real object is not perceived as such. For this reason says, it is “the knowing of the unreal.” This means that this cognition is contradicted by the common knowledge of all mankind. This contradiction exists in the case of unreal cognition, but not in the case of Imagination. Forms of cognition due to Imagination are in common use with mankind, and it is only to those who show the capacities of a learned man and think thereupon that the knowledge of contradiction appeals in this case.

Thus the question is raised, ‘why is not that real cognition?’ The meaning is that the former knowledge is not the one that is removed by the opposite knowledge acquired thereafter; but that it is the knowledge acquired thereafter that is removed by the former, which has been acquired before and nothing contrary to which has appeared.

Refutes:—‘Because it is removed by right knowledge.’

It might bo real cognition if the birth of the latter depended upon the former. Here, however, either cognition is given birth to by its own cause, and is not dependent upon the other knowledge. The latter knowledge thus does not take its rise by the destruction of the former and its appearance and therefore, does not consist in the removal of the former. Nor does the appearance of the former knowledge mean the removal of the latter, because this does not exist at that time. For this reason, the cause of the existence of removability is the absence of the close appearance of contrariety: and the cause of the power to remove is the close appearance of contrariety. Therefore, that which is not right knowledge, is removed by right knowledge, inasmuch as the latter has for its object, something which exists as such.

He gives an example:—‘Therein is seen the removal of the wrong knowledge by the right one.’

He shows the evil nature of this unreal cognition for the purpose of removal;—‘This It Is that is the five-fold Nescience.’ The meaning is that ‘Nescience is the generic quality of all the five, Nescience, Egoism, &c.’ The mistaking of the Unmanifested (avyakta), the Manifested objective existence (mahat), the Principle of Individuality (ahaṅkāra), and the five atom-builders (tanmātras)—the eight forms of the not-self, for the self, is nescience, darkness (tamas). Similarly, the mistaking by the Yogis of the eight attainments of Aṇimā, &c., which are inauspicious, for the auspicious, is the eight-fold forgetfulness (moha) which comes after the former. And this is called Egoism (asmitā).

Similarly the idea, ‘I shall enjoy sound, &c., the ten enjoyments both as seen and heard, when I have acquired by Yoga the eight attainments of Aṇimā, &c., and have thereby become a powerful man (siddha),’ is the greater forgetfulness, attachment (rāga).

Similarly, when led by such a judgment, one sets about to obtain these enjoyments, but finds that the attainments of Aṇimā, &c., are not born on account of obstacles caused by some one and that the enjoyment of the pleasures of both kinds, seen or heard about traditionally, which depend upon the attainments, is not thus obtained, anger against the cause of obstacles appears. This is aversion (dveṣa), called utter darkness.

Similarly, when the powers of Aṇimā, &c., have been attained, and the visible and heard-of objects of enjoyment have been obtained, then the fear that in the end of the Kalpa all this will be destroyed, is the love of sentient life, blind darkness (andhatāmisra or abhiniveśa).

This has been said:—

“Eight-fold is the division of darkness and so of forgetfulness; ten-fold of the greater forgetfulness. Utter darkness is eighteen-fold and so also is blind darkness.”