who is Eternal and Indestructible instead of remaining in her own nature due to destructibility.[1652] When Purusha, through ignorance, repeatedly becomes associated with attributes, he fails to understand his own real nature and therefore he fails to attain to Emancipation.  In consequence Purusha’s lordship over the principles that flow from Prakriti, he is said to partake of the nature of those principles.  In consequence also of his agency in the matter of creation, he is said to possess the attribute of creation.  In consequence of his agency in the matter of Yoga, he is said to possess the attribute of Yoga.  For his lordship over those particular principles known by the name of Prakriti, he is said to possess the nature of Prakriti.[1653] For his agency in the matter of creating the seeds (of all immobile objects), he is said to partake of the nature of those seeds.  And because he causes the several principles or attributes to start into life, he is, therefore, said to be subject to decay and destruction (for those principles themselves are subject thereto).  In consequence, again, of his being the witness of everything, and in consequence also of there being nothing else than he, as also for his consciousness of identity with Prakriti, Yatis crowned with ascetic success, conversant with Adhyatma, and freed from fever of every kind, regard him as existing by himself without a second, immutable, unmanifest (in the form of Cause), unstable, and manifest (in the form of effects).  This is what has been heard by us.  Those Sankhyas, however, that depend upon Knowledge only (for their Emancipation) and the practice of compassion for all creatures, say that it is Prakriti which is One but Purushas are many.[1654] As a matter of fact, Purusha is different from Prakriti which though unstable, still appears as stable.  As a blade of reed is different from its outer cover, even so is Purusha different from Prakriti.  Indeed, the worm that is ensconced within the Udumvara should be known as different from the Udumvara.  Though existing with the Udumvara, the worm is not to be regarded as forming a portion of the Udumvara.  The fish is distinct from the water in which it lives, and the water is distinct from the fish that lives in it.  Though the fish and water exist together, yet it is never drenched by water.  The fire that is contained in an earthen sauce pan is distinct from the earthen sauce pan, and the sauce pan is distinct from the fire it contains.  Although the fire exists in and with the sauce pan, yet it is not to be regarded as forming any part of it.  The lotus-leaf that floats on a piece of water is distinct from the piece of water on which it floats.  Its co-existence with water does not make it a portion of the water.  The perennial existence of those objects in and with those mentioned, is never correctly understood by ordinary people.  They who behold Prakriti and Purusha in any other light are said to possess a vision that is incorrect.  It is certain that they have