capacity to stir the senses into activity, that would have been a different thing
altogether. But the objects are not such inert, faultless, innocuous things. They are
themselves capable of stimulating the senses into action in a particular manner. Each
object has a particular capacity of its own, so the senses will react in a corresponding
manner to the respective objects outside. This activity is made worse by the peculiar
notions that are already present in the mind in respect of the entire atmosphere in
which the individual lives. The mind’s action in respect of the objects, and the
influence of the objects in respect of the mind, are correlated. We cannot say which is
first and which is second. Whether the mind is influenced by the objects and thinks
in terms of the objects, or whether the objects are first evaluated by the mind and
then consequences follow—we cannot say how this happens. There is a reciprocal
action between the mind and the objects which takes place through the medium of
the senses.
This is a very interesting picture which the sutra presents before us—interesting in
the sense that it is very complicated and we cannot actually know what to do with it.
The very fact that we cannot actually understand the nature of this complex is the
strength of this complex. Anything that we cannot understand has sway over us. The
moment we try to understand it and know it very well, the strength it has upon us is
weakened. But here, it is something which cannot be understood, because the
person, or the individual, who tries to understand is himself a part in this complex.
There is a reciprocal action of the subjective side as well as the objective side, which
makes the whole thing very difficult to understand. Therefore, an indeterminable,
unforeseen effect follows which is entirely out of control. We cannot determine the
nature of the effect that is produced by an action because we cannot properly
visualise the various aspects of this process that is called action. We have a very
limited notion of the way in which the karma works. The various sides of this process
are not visible to us. As a matter of fact, this peculiar action which is engendered in
respect of the individual is many-sided.
Thus, causes are contributed bit by bit, as it were, from different quarters or corners
of this wide atmosphere in which the individual is placed. Hetu phala āśraya
ālambanaiḥ saṅgṛhītavāt (IV.11), says the sutra. The complex, or the samgrihita of this
psychophysical organism, is an involvement in these factors called hetu, phala,
asraya and alambana. We have to remember these words, once again, because they
have a great significance: the objects on one side, the mind on the other side, the ego
as the basis of the action of the mind which itself is based on avidya or ignorance—
the nature of which we have discussed just now—and the mysterious result that
follows. Karma is not merely the action that we do. It is also not merely a fruit that
we reap in the form of experience. It is many things put together. It is not the
dictionary meaning of karma that is signified by this definition. If we look into a
dictionary we will find that karma means action. This definition is not complete. We
have to explain what action is.
There are various meanings for this process which is called action. It is some event
that is released into the atmosphere of space-time due to the operation of causes
which are outside the purview of the individual consciousness. Therefore, it is
impossible for any individual to understand all the factors that are contributory to
the production of a particular result as the fruit of action. This phala, or the fruit of
action that is mentioned here, is also threefold, which has been referred to in an