according to him, does not
depend on the overt act alone. Both depend on the mind. Hence the
injunction against even mentally harming others.

599. The sense seems to be that if one succeeds in ascertaining the
ordinances about virtue or piety, but if the mind be sinful, no associate
can be of any help. The mind alone is the cause of virtue and piety.

600. Adhyatma is anything that depends on the mind. Here it is, as
explained by the commentator, used for yoga-dharma as depending upon or
as an attribute of the mind. Generally speaking, all speculations on the
character of the mind and its relations with external objects are
included in the word Adhyatma.

601. After Bhrigu's discourse to Bharadwaja this question may seem to be
a repetition. The commentator explains that it arises from the
declaration of Bhishma that Righteousness is a property of the mind, and
is, besides, the root of everything. (V 31, sec. 193, ante). Hence the
enquiry about Adhyatma as also about the origin of all things.

602. The word rendering 'perceptions' is Vijnanani. 'Cognitions' would
perhaps, be better.

603. Generally, in Hindu philosophy, particularly of the Vedanta school,
a distinction is conceived between the mind, the understanding, and the
soul. The mind is the seat or source of all feelings and emotions as also
all our perceptions, or those which are called cognitions in the Kantian
school, including Comparison which (in the Kantian school) is called the
Vernuft or Reason. This last is called the Understanding or buddhi. The
soul is regarded as something distinct from both the body and the mind.
It is the Being to whom the body and the mind belong. It is represented
as inactive, and as the all-seeing witness within the physical frame. It
is a portion of the Supreme Soul.

604. Goodness includes all the higher moral qualities of man. Passion
means love, affection, and other emotions that appertain to worldly
objects. Darkness means anger, lust, and such other mischievous
propensities.

605. I follow Nilakantha in his grammatical exposition of this verse. The
meaning, however, is scarcely clear. The identity of the Understanding or
intelligence with the senses and the mind may be allowed so far as the
action of the three qualities in leading all of them to worldly
attachments is concerned. But what is meant by the identity of the
Understanding with all the objects it comprehends? Does Bhishma preach
Idealism here? If nothing e