Sūtra 1.29

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Sūtra 1.29:

ततः प्रत्यक्चेतनाधिगमोऽप्य् अन्तरायाभावश् च ॥ १.२९ ॥

tataḥ pratyakcetanādhigamo'py antarāyābhāvaś ca || 1.29 ||

tataḥ—thence. pratyak—the individual. cetana—Soul, adhigamaḥ—understanding, api—also, too antarāya—of obstacles, abhāvaḥ—absence. ca—and.

29. Thence the understanding of the individual self and the absence of obstacles too.

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 what else comes to him? “The understanding of the individual self and the absence of obstacles.” Whatever obstacles there may be—diseases, &c.—cease to be by feeling the omnipresence of the Lord; and the true nature of himself is also seen. It is known that just as Īśvara is a Puruṣa, pure, calm, free and without appendants, such is this

Puruṣa also, the self underlying the individual manifestation of the Will-to-be.

The Gloss of Vachaspati Mishra

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

What more than this? ‘Thence the understanding of the individual self, and the absence of obstacles.’ The individual self is the Pratyakcetana, the conscious principle whose cognitions are contradictory of the real, that is to say, the ignorant Puruṣa. In the case of the Wise this turns back on account of the possession of the eternal divine essence. He gets the understanding of the individual self as it really is.

The obstacle will be described and their absence too.

‘Whatever obstacles there may be These words contemplate their description. The nature of a thing is its own self. By speaking of the nature of the self, the characteristics fastened on to the self by Nescience (avidyā) are denied.

The question arises. Since Īśvara is the object of devotion, how is it that the Individual unit of consciousness will be known by feeling His omnipresence? It is evidently going beyond the mark. In reply to this, he says:—‘As is Īśvara, &c.’

Pure free from rise and fall on account of constant eternity.

Calm:—undisturbed by afflictions.

Free:—he from whom virtue and vice keep aloof. For this very reason He is without appendants. The ‘appendants’ are life-state, life-period, and life-experience.’

A similarity must necessarily mean some distinction. Therefore now he distinguishes the Individual self from iśvara. The ‘self underlying the individual manifestation of the Will-to-be.’ This explains why the word ‘Individual’ has been added.

When there are two contradictory objects, the understanding of the one does not conduce to the understanding of the other. The understanding of similars, however, conduces to the understanding of the other objects possessed of similar qualities. This happens in the same way as the understanding of one science contributes to the better understanding of an allied science. The effect of the analogy is in the understanding of one’s own self, not of the Highest self. Thus all is plain.—29.