________________
CHAPTER VII.
SECTION (C).
The Sankhya doctrine of the Soul' (Spirit).
COMMENTARY
The Text proceeds now to refute tile Soul' A9 postulated by the Sānideluja
TEXTS (285-286).
OTHERS HOLD Chaitanya SENTENCE' TO BE DISTINCT FROM THE FORM OF Buddhi, INTELLECT (COGNITION). THEY POSTULATE SENTIENCE AS THE SPIRIT'S' OWN TORM ; HE ONLY ENJOYS THE FRUITS PRESENTED TO HIM BY PRIMORDIAL MATTER; HE IS NOT THE 'DOER'; THE CHARAOTER OF DOER' IS TELD TO BELONG TO PRIMORDIAL MATTER
ALONE.—(285-286)
COMMENTARY.
Othere'-the Sānkhyas. They postulate the Spirit's own form as consist. ing of Chaitanya, sentience', -which is something different from Buddhi (of the Sankhyas, which is Cosmic Intellect); as their doctrine is that Buddhi is of the nature of Primordial Matter, while Chaitanya is the form of the Spirit alone.--This Spirit' is the enjoyer of the fruit of good and bad deeds, presented by Primordial Matter,-but he is not the doer of the deeds; as the character of the doer is held to belong to Primordial Matter alone, which contains within itself the evolution of the whole world. In support of this doctrine they adduce the following proof :- Whatever is of the nature of an aggregate is found to be for another's purpose, -e.g. Beds and such things; the eye and the rest are of the nature of aggregates; hence this is a reason based on the nature of things and this another is, by implication, the Spirit (or onl). This is what the other party means.-(285-286)
With the following Text proceeds the refutation of the said doctrine (of the Sankhyas)
