Samkhya-Yoga-Kundalini
The Samkhya philosophy contains a theory of evolution, but unlike Darwin’s theory, material nature evolves from the most subtle level of the root Prakriti down to the levels of the natural world. The evolution can be visualized as an upside down tree. The root Prakriti is the root of the tree, with Mahat and Ahamkara forming the trunk. Below the level of Ahamkara, nature divides into two branches, one branch being the inanimate objects of the natural world and the other being the instruments of cognition and action. The evolution of Prakriti helps to explain both the Tattvas and the operation of the Gunas.
translation: Buddhi is ascertainment.
Buddhi is a synonym for Mahat tattva and ascertainment is its function. The commentator Aniruddha explained adhyavasayah as, “In this way and no other way”, that is, certainty or ascertainment. Vijnana Bhiksu explained, “this Buddhi possesses ‘greatness’ (and is called Mahat, Great)”. Mahat can be thought of as the evolutionary or macro principle, while Buddhi is its function in individuals.
translation: Virtue, etc. are its products.
translation: The (same) Mahat (gives rise to) the opposite (products) through adjacent tincture.
These sutras are quite cryptic. Fortunately, they have been explained in the Samkhya Karika.
translation: Ascertainment is Buddhi. Virtue, knowledge, dispassion, and power are its forms in which Sattva is dominant. The opposites (vice, ignorance, passion, and impotence) are its forms in which Tamas is dominant.
Note: Many scholars consider the Samkhya Karika to be older than the Samkhya Pravachana Sutram, but here we see evidence of the Karika providing a more detailed version of the same ideas contained in the Samkhya Pravachana Sutram. Following the principle that the relative age of Sanskrit documents can be determined by the development of their ideas, the Karika is relatively more developed, indicating that it is the later text. There is no dispute that the commentaries on the Samkhya Pravachana Sutram were written during medieval times, but the commentator Vijnana Bhiksu stated that he compiled it from a “sixteenth part” that remained from some older texts. He may have been working with a large body of Samkhya literature that is mentioned in the Mahabharata.
translation: Ahamkara is consciousness of self.
According to Vijnana Bhiksu, Ahamkara is “that which makes the ‘I’, just as, for instance ‘kumbhakara’, jar-maker, is one who makes the jar”. Like, Buddhi, Ahamkara has both a macro sense and an individual sense. “I-maker” conveys the evolutionary sense, while “self-assumption” conveys its effects in the individual consciousness, such as pride, arrogance, and conceit. These are qualities that are associated with Rajas, so, while it is not stated explicitly in the sutra, it seems safe to assume that Ahamkara is the product of Buddhi in which Rajas is dominant.
translation: The eleven (Indriyas) and five Tan-matras are its products.
translation: The sattvic eleventh (Manas) proceeds from the vaikrita Ahamkara.
Quoting from the commentary of Vijnana Bhiksu:
‘Ekadasakam’, the completer of the eleven (i.e., eleventh) Manas, is, among the sixteen-fold group, the ‘sattvikam’ (Sattvic or Sattva-relating). Hence it is produced ‘vaikritat ahamkarat’, from the Sattvic Ahamkara. Such is the meaning.
From this it should also be understood that the ten remaining indriyas are produced from the Rajasa Ahamkara, and the Tan-matras, from the Tamasa Ahamkara; as it is ascertained from the Smritis themselves, such as:
Vaikarika, and Taijasa, and Tamasa - thus is Ahamkara threefold. From the Vaikarika Aham-Principle, undergoing modification, was Manas; as also the Devas Vaikarika, from whom is the manifestation of objects. And from the Taijasa Ahamkara sprang the Indriyas themselves, constituted by Jnana, Cognition, and Karma, Action. Tamasa are the Bhuta-suksmas or Subtle Elements (the Tan Matras), etc., from which is Akasa, its own inferential mark. - Srimad Bhagavatam, III v.29-31
Vijnana Bhiksu also quotes Karika 25, which says essentially the same thing as the preceding quote, except that it does not include the concept of the Devas (gods or deities). In his translation of the Karika, Nandalal Sinha explains that Vaikarika is an older term conveying the same sense as Sattva, and Taijasa is an older term conveying the same meaning as Rajas.