associated with the suppression of all the "modifications,"[407] and were also accompanied by that discriminative knowledge of the soul and the quality of goodness [which is found in the _sásmita_ meditation]. Now it is said [in the Yoga Sútras, ii. 4], "Ignorance is the field [or place of origin, _i.e._, source] of the others, whether they be dormant, extenuated, intercepted, or simple." They are said to be "dormant" when they are not manifested for want of something to wake them up; they are called "extenuated" when, through one's meditating on something that is opposed to them, they are rendered inert; they are called "intercepted" when they are overpowered by some other strong "affliction;" they are called "simple" when they produce their several effects in the direct vicinity of what co-operates with them. This has been expressed by Váchaspati Miśra, in his Gloss on Vyása's Commentary, in the following memorial stanza:-- "The dormant 'afflictions' are found in those souls which are absorbed in the _tattvas_ [_i.e._, not embodied, but existing in an interval of mundane destruction]; the 'extenuated'[408] are found in _yogins_; but the 'intercepted' and the 'simple' in those who are in contact with worldly objects." "No one proposes the fourth solution of the compound _avidyá_ as a _dvandva_ compound,[409] where both portions are equally predominant, because we cannot recognise here two equally independent subjects. Therefore under any one of these three admissible alternatives[410] the common notion of ignorance as being the cause of the 'afflictions' would be overthrown." [We do not, however, concede this objector's view], because we may have recourse to the other kind of negation called _paryudása_ [where the affirmative part is emphatic], and maintain that _avidyá_ means a contradictory [or _wrong_] kind of knowledge, the reverse of _vidyá_; and so it has been accepted by ancient writers. Thus it has been said-- "The particle implying 'negation' does not signify 'absence' [or 'non-existence'] when connected with a noun or a root; thus the words _abráhmaṇa_ and _adharma_ respectively signify, 'what is other than a Bráhman' and 'what is contrary to justice.'" And again-- "We are to learn all the uses of words from the custom of the ancient writers; therefore a word must not be wrested from the use in which it has been already employed."