Nāgeśa, however, takes a slightly different view and says that to produce the gross atoms from the tanmātras, an accretion of bhūtādi as an accompanying agent is necessary at every step; so that we see that the vāyu atom is produced from these three: śabda + sparśa + accretion from bhūtādi. Tejas atom = śabda + śparśa + rūpa + accretion from bhūtādi. Ap atom = śabda + śparśa + rūpa + rasa + accretion from bhūtādi. Kshiti atom = śabda + śparśa + rūpa + rasa + gandha + accretion from bhūtādi. I refrain from giving the _Vishṇu Purāṇa_ view which has also been quoted in the _Yoga-vārttika_, and the view of a certain school of Vedāntists mentioned in the _Tattva-nirūpaṇa_ and referred to and described in the _Tattvatraya_, as Dr. B. N. Seal has already described them in his article. We see thus that from bhūtādi come the five tanmātras which can be compared to the Vaiśeshika atoms as they have no parts and neither grossness nor visible differentiation.[31] Some differentiation has of course already begun in the tanmātras, as they are called śabda, śparśa, rūpa, rasa and gandha, which therefore may be said to belong to a class akin to the grosser elements of ākāśa, vāyu, tejas, ap and kshiti.[32] The next one, the paramāṇu (atom), which is gross in its nature and is generated from the tanmātras which exist in it as parts (_tanmātrāvayava_) may be compared with the trasareṇu of the Vaiśeshikas. Thus the _Yoga-vārttika_ says: “this is called paramāṇu by the Vaiśeshikas. We however call the subtlest part of the visible earth, earth atoms” (IV. 14). The doctrine of atoms is recognised both in the _Yoga-sūtrās_ (I. 46) and the _Bhāshya_ (III. 52, IV. 14, etc.). Whether Sāṃkhya admitted the paramāṇus (atoms) or not cannot be definitely settled. The _Sāṃkhya-kārikā_ does not mention the paramāṇus, but Vijñāna Bhikshu thinks that the word “_sūkshma_” in _Kārikā_, 39, means paramāṇus (_Yoga-vārttika_, IV. 14). Though the word paramāṇu is not mentioned in the _Kārikā_, I can hardly suppose that Sāṃkhya did not admit it in the sense in which Yoga did. For it does not seem probable that Sāṃkhya should think that by the combination of the subtle tanmātras we could all at once have the bigger lumps of bhūta without there being any particles. Moreover, since the Yoga paramāṇus are the finest visible particles of matter it could not have been denied by Sāṃkhya. The supposition of some German scholars that Sāṃkhya did not admit the paramāṇus does not seem very plausible. Bhikshu in _Yoga-vārttika_, III. 52, says that the guṇas are in reality Vaiśeshika atoms.