526 Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

purusa, the enjoyer, is without transformation, whereas material nature is always
subject to transformation. But although material nature is inert, it is the cause of
enjoyment and salvation for many living creatures. Its activities are beyond the con-
ception of sense perception, but still one may guess at them by superior intelligence.
Material nature is one, but because of the interaction of the three qualities, it can
produce the total energy and the wonderful cosmic manifestation. Such transforma-
tions divide material nature into two features, namely the efficient and material
causes. The purusa, the enjoyer, is inactive and without material qualities, although
at the same time He is the master, existing separately in each and every body as the
emblem of knowledge. By understanding the material cause, one can guess that the
purusa, the enjoyer, being without activity, is aloof from all kinds of enjoyment or
superintendence. Sankhya philosophy, after describing the nature of prakrti (material
nature) and purusa (the enjoyer), asserts that the creation is only a product of their
unification or proximity to one another. With such unification the living symptoms
are visible in material nature, but one can guess that in the person of the enjoyer,
purusa, there are powers of control and enjoyment. When the purusa is illusioned
for want of sufficient knowledge, He feels Himself to be the enjoyer, and when He
is in full knowledge He is liberated. In the Sankhya philosophy the purusa is
described to be always indifferent to the activities of prakrti.

“The Sankhya philosopher accepts three kinds of evidences, namely direct per-
ception, hypothesis and traditional authority. When such evidence is complete,
everything is perfect. The process of comparison is within such perfection. Beyond
such evidence there is no proof. There is not much controversy regarding direct
perceptional evidence or authorized traditional evidence. The Sankhya system of
philosophy identifies three kinds of procedures—namely, parimdnat (transformation),
samanvayat (adjustment) and saktitah (performance of energies)—as the causes of
the cosmic manifestation.”’

Srila Baladeva Vidyabhdsana, in his commentary on the Vedénta-siitra, has tried
to nullify this conclusion because he thinks that discrediting these so-called causes
of the cosmic manifestation will nullify the entire Samkhya philosophy. Materialistic
philosophers accept matter to be the material and efficient cause of creation; for
them, matter is the cause of every type of manifestation. Generally they give the
example of a water pot and clay. Clay is the cause of the water pot, but the clay
can be found as both cause and effect. The water pot is the effect and clay itself is
the cause, but clay is visible everywhere. A tree is matter, but a tree produces fruit.
Water is matter, but water flows. In this way, say the Sarikhyites, matter is the
cause of movements and production. As such, matter can be considered the material
and efficient cause of everything in the cosmic manifestation. Srila Baladeva
Vidyabhdsana has therefore enunciated the nature of pradha@na as follows:

“Material nature is inert, and as such it cannot be the cause of matter, neither as
the material nor as the efficient cause. Seeing the wonderful arrangement and
management of the cosmic manifestation generally suggests that a living brain is
behind this arrangement, for without a living brain such an arrangement could not
exist. One should not imagine that such an arrangement can exist without conscious
