12.295
Vasiṣṭha said.
O best of kings, I have explained the Sāṅkhya philosophy to you thus far. Now, listen as I sequentially explain knowledge and ignorance to you.
Ignorance is called the unmanifest, which is subject to creation and dissolution. Knowledge, on the other hand, is the twenty-fifth principle, free from creation and dissolution.
Understand the mutual ignorance in succession, as explained by the sages, O dear one; this is the illustration of Sāṅkhya.
It is said that among all the organs of action, knowledge is regarded as the organ of intellect; and likewise, we have heard about the distinctions among the organs of intellect.
The wise say that among distinctions, the mind is considered knowledge; and that for the mind, the five elements are considered knowledge.
O lord of men, there is no doubt here that ego is indeed of the five beings; likewise, intellect and knowledge are of the ego.
The unmanifest is said to be the nature of intellect; the Supreme Lord is the essence of all principles. O best of men, knowledge is what should be known, and the supreme rite is so regarded.
O king, it is said that the supreme knowledge of the unmanifest is the twenty-fifth. It is declared that all is to be known as the entirety of knowledge.
It is said that knowledge is unmanifest, and what is to be known is indeed the twenty-fifth principle. Likewise, knowledge is unmanifest, and the knower is the twenty-fifth principle.
I have explained to you, in detail, the principle of knowledge and ignorance; now understand from me what is called the imperishable and the perishable.
Both these are described as perishable, yet both are not truly perishable. I will explain the cause, as they are truly known.
These two, who are without beginning and end, are both regarded as lords. Those who contemplate knowledge declare these two as 'tattva'.
Because it possesses the property of creation and dissolution, the unmanifest is called the imperishable. That (unmanifest), for the creation of qualities, keeps modifying itself again and again.
They say that this field, arising mutually from the guṇas beginning with Mahat, is the twenty-fifth (principle) from the substratum.
But when the net of guṇas is contracted into the unmanifest self, then the twenty-fifth principle (puruṣa), along with those guṇas, merges (is dissolved).
When the qualities merge into the qualities, then only primordial nature remains. O dear one, when the knower of the field also completely merges into that field.
That which is called imperishable is the primordial nature, known as guṇa. O Vaideha, the state of being without guṇa arises from the cessation of involvement with the guṇas.
Thus, we have heard that the knower of the field, at the end of the knowledge of the field, is by nature without qualities.
When this perishable (being) becomes endowed with qualities, then it recognizes nature; likewise, it recognizes the qualitylessness of the self.
Then, by avoiding the influence of nature, one becomes purified. When the wise person realizes, 'I am different, this is different,' (he attains wisdom).
Then, O king, this becomes distinct and does not become mixed; by its very nature, it is seen as unmixed and different.
When one develops aversion to the natural web of guṇas and perceives another while observing, then, even while seeing, one should not be disturbed.
What have I done, that I, in this lifetime, have become such? Like the fish, I have followed the net out of ignorance.
Indeed, it was I who, out of delusion, followed one person after another, just as a fish follows water, here.
Just as a fish, due to ignorance, does not perceive itself as separate from water, so too, due to ignorance, I perceive the self as distinct; this I know.
Let my intellect be condemned, for I, once again deluded, have blindly followed one person after another.
This person here may be a relative; with him, liberation is attained together. Equality and oneness have arisen; as he is, so am I.
Here I see equality; I am indeed similar to him. This person is manifestly pure; I am also of such a kind.
I, who formerly acted out of the delusion of ignorance and with attachment, now remain detached through this time.
Overpowered by this woman, I did not realize the passage of time. How shall I, among people of high, middle, and low status, live with her?
How can I continue to live here in cohabitation by the same vehicle? Because of ignorance, may this now become steady.
I will not go to live together; this time is truly due to deception. I have been deceived by her, for the unchanging has been deceived by the changeful.
This is not her offense; indeed, this offense is mine, for I, being here, became attached and was present while turned away.
Then, I exist in many forms, being formless among forms; and even as the formless, I am perceived as having form, overpowered by the sense of 'mine'.
By the unrighteousness of nature, in these various wombs here, what has been done by one who is free from possessiveness, by the sense of 'mine', in those, in those also? In the wombs, with a mind existing with lost consciousness.
This is not my duty here, done by this self made of great ego. The self, having assumed many forms, again joins me. Now I am awakened, without mine-ness, without ego.
Having abandoned this constant sense of mineness, which is of the nature produced by ego, I shall leave it and take refuge in that which is free from affliction.
By this I will attain equality, not by this unconscious mind. My endurance is with this; there is no unity with this (woman) together. Thus, from the supreme awakening, the twenty-fifth realized.
Imperishability should be restrained by abandoning the perishable and that which is free from disease. The unmanifest, possessing the qualities of the manifest, is both with qualities and without qualities. By first perceiving the qualityless, one becomes like that, O Maithila.
This has been stated as your example regarding the two imperishable ones. Here, I, endowed with knowledge, have given it as an example from the śruti (scripture).
I will now explain to you again, in a manner that is free from doubt, subtle, well understood, and pure; understand that as it was heard.
I have explained Sāṅkhya and Yoga based on the demonstration of both treatises. Whatever treatise is taught by Sāṅkhya, that is indeed the doctrine of Yoga.
O king, the knowledge that awakens, belonging to the Sāṅkhyas, is clearly explained there for the benefit of the disciples, out of the desire for their welfare.
Skilled people indeed call that treatise great. In this treatise, among the unions, there is again mention of curd and again of the arrow.
O king, the principle beyond the twenty-five is not perceived; but among the Sāṅkhyas, the supreme principle there has been properly explained as it truly is.
That which is awakened, not awakened, and being awakened in essence; being awakened and awakened, is called the demonstration of yoga.
