The very same truth is now revealed by another sutra where Patanjali says: krama
anyatvaṁ pariṇāma anyatve hetuḥ (III.15). The modifications into which prakriti casts
itself to appear as an object are really not objects of sense-experience. How prakriti
modifies itself into an object, the senses cannot conceive. They cannot understand
the process which prakriti adopts in becoming a particular object. But the sutra tells
us how this happens. The object is nothing but a modification of prakriti; that is the
parinama. Parinama anyatva means the difference that is observed among the
different objects of perception. One object is different from the other on account of a
differentia, or a peculiar specific character, that is present in each particular object.
This specification of a particular object, as distinguished from others, is caused by
the succession of the gunas. That is what is known as krama anyatvam. ‘Krama’ is a
succession, an order.
It will be very surprising to know that this sutra is telling us exactly what the
quantum theory of modern physics says. Long before Max Planck, who was the father
of the quantum theory, was born, Patanjali was describing the way in which objects
are formed. Modern physical science tells us that the nature of an object is dependent
on the succession, the velocity and the placement of the electrical particles within an
atom. Patanjali does not use such words as ‘electrical particles’, etc. He uses the word
‘gunas’. But the process that these two people describe is identical. What Patanjali
tells us in this sutra is that the solidity and the specific character of a particular
object is dependent on the intensity, the velocity and the succession of the gunas of
prakriti, which are only three. As the physicist tells us, a particular atom differs from
another on account of the successive placement of the electrons around the nucleus,
as they call it, together with the velocity which differs from one atom to another. It is
only the number, the velocity and the pattern of these electrons that distinguishes
one from the other.
This sutra is telling us same thing—that one object differs from the other object on
account of the velocity of the gunas and the particular location of these gunas in the
succession of their revolution. This means to say that the particular degree of
intensity of the three gunas in varying proportions in the formation of an object is
the cause of the difference of one object from another object. All objects are made up
of the same substance, just as science tells us that everything is made up of
subatomic particles. Whether it is cow’s milk or snake poison, it makes no
difference—they are made up of the same thing. They appear to be different on
account of this peculiar reason.
This sutra, krama anyatvaṁ pariṇāma anyatve hetuḥ (III.15), highlights the truth that it
should not be difficult for the mind to absorb itself in samyama on an object,
because of the fact that all objects are similar in their character; and because of the
similarity of the structure of objects, there should be no distraction in the mind.
What prevents the absorption of the mind in the object is the distraction that is
behind it. The distraction is caused by the feeling of the reality of other objects, to
which it gets attached. All this is due to the belief in the real diversity of things, which
is not actually there, says the sutra.
The mind which contemplates, the senses which drag this mind to the object, and the
object itself are all of a similar substance. They appear to be different on account of
the intensity of the gunas in varying proportion, either on the subject-side or on the
object-side. So, if we can actually go deep into the meaning of what these sutras tell