HE RITA G E O F IND IA

The Right Reverend V S A Z ARI AH . .

,

B i shop of D orn akal .

J N F AR" UHAR M A D L ITT

. .
, . .
, . .

A l r e a dy p u b l i s h e d .

Th e Heart of B u d d h is m . K I S A U NDER S , M A
. . . .

As o k a . RE V .
J . M M A C P HA IL M A M D
.
, . .
,
. .

I n d ia n P a in tin g . P r in c i p a l PERC Y B R O W N C a lc u t ta , .

Ka n a r e s e L ite r a tu r e . RE V E . . P . R ICE ,
B A . .

S u b j e c t s p r o p os e d a n d v ol u me s u nd e r p rep a ra tio n .

S A N S K R I T AND P AL I L IT E R AT U R E .

Hy m n s f r o m th e Ve d a s . P ro f A A M A CD O NE LL O xfo r d
. . .
, .

An th o lo gy of M a h ay an a L it e r a tu r e P r o f L DE LA VALL EE . . .

P ou s e G h e n t , .

S e le c ti ons f r o m th e U p a n ish a d s F J W E ST E RN M A . . .
, . D e lh i .

S ce n e s f r o m th e R am ay a n a J A M E S M O RI S O N M A . . . .
,
PH D . .
,

O xf o r d .

S e le c ti o n s f r o m th e M a h ab h ar a ta .

T HE P H IL O S O P H IE S .

Th e P h i lo s o p h y o f th e U p a n is h a d s .

Sa n k a r a s V e d an ta
’
A K S H ARM A M A . . .
,
. .
, P a tia la .

R am an u ja s V e d an ta
'
.

T h e B u d d h is t S y s t e m .

F IN E AR T AND M USIC .

I n d i a n Ar c h it e c tu r e . L E W IN G
R . .
,
B A , M a dra s
. . .

I n d ia n S c u lp tur e . P r in c i p a l W , M , Z uMBRo , M a d u r a .
 I n d ia n M u s ic . H A P O P LE Y
. .
,
B A . .
, E ro de .

Th e M in o r A r ts . P r in c i p a l PERC Y B R O W N , C a lc u tt a .

I n d i a n C o in s .

B I O G RA PHIE S O F E M I N E N T I N D I AN S .

G a u ta m a B u dd h a . K .
J . S A U NDER S , M . A .
,
Ra n go on .

R am an u j a .

Ak bar . F . V S L A C K M A C a lc u tta
.
, . .
, .

T u ls i D as . S K D U TTA B A M E
. .
,
. .
,
. .
, CH B . .
, L a h o re .

V E R N A C U L AR L I T E R AT U R E .

T h e Ku r r a l . H . A P O P LE Y , B A
. . .
,
E r o de .

Hymns of A diy ar s
th e . G . E . P H ILL I P S ,
M . A .
, and FR ANCI S
K IN R
GS B U Y , B a n ga lo r e .

H y mn s o f th e Alvar s .

T ay u m an a v a r ISAA C T A M B YA H M A B a r a t L a w P e n a n g
.
,
. .
, .
- -
, .

H y mn s o f H in d u s t an .

C h a it a n y a H y mn s O S TU RS B E RG P H D B e r h a m p or e M u rs h i d
. .
,
. .
, ,

a ba d .

M a r ath i A b h a n gs . N IC O L M A CNIC OL M A D L I TT , . .
, . .
,
P o on a .

G u j a r ati H y m n s .

H I S T O R IE S O F VE R N A C U L AR L I T E R AT U R E .

B e n gali .
J . D ANDER S O N C a m b r i d g e
.
, .

G u j a r ati .

H in d i B OW IN GRE A V E S B e n a r e s
.
, .

M a r ath i NIC O L M A CNIC O L M A D L 1 r r P o

.
, . .
, . .
,
ona .

Ta m il . FR ANCI S KIN G S B U R Y B a n ga lo r e ,
.

T e lu gu .

S i n h a le s e . H S . . PERER A ,
B A . .
,
Ka n d y .
 E D IT O R I A L P RE F A CE

F i n a lly b r e th r e n w h a ts o e ve r th in gs a r e tr u e
, , ,

w h a ts o e ve r th in gs a r e h o n ou r a b le w h a ts o e ve r th i n gs ,

a re j u st w h a t s o e v e r t h i n g s a r e p u r e w h a ts o e v e r
, ,

th in g s a r e lo ve ly w h a ts o e ve r th in gs a r e o f g o o d
,

r e p o r t ; i f th e r e b e a n y v i r t u e a n d i f th e r e b e a n y
,

p r a i s e t h i n k o n th e s e t h i n gs
,
.

No secti o n of the population of Indi a can afford to

neglect her ancient heritage In her literature philoso p hy .
, ,

art and reg ulated li fe there i s much that i s worthless much

, ,

also that i s distinctly unhealthy ; yet the treasures o f

knowledge wi sdom and beauty wh ich they contain are too
, ,

precious to be l ost Every citi zen o f Indi a needs to u se

.

them i f he i s to be a cultured modern Indi an Thi s i s a s

, .

true of the Christi an the Musli m the Z or o astri an as o f the

, ,

Hindu B ut while the heritage of Indi a h as been largely

.
,

explored by schol ars and the results of thei r toil are l ai d

,

out for u s in thei r books they cannot be s aid t o be really ,

availab l e for the ordi n ary man The volumes are in most .

cases expensive and are often techni cal and difficult

, .

Hence thi s series of cheap books h as been planned by a

group of Chri sti an men in order th at every educated ,

Indi an whether rich or p o or may be able to find hi s way

, ,

into the treasures o f Indi a s p ast Many Europea n s both ’

.
,

in Indi a and e l sewhere will doubtless be glad to u se the ,

series .

The utmost care i s being t aken by the Genera l Edit o rs

in selecting writers and in p assing manuscripts for the ,

press To every book two tests are rigidly app l ied : every
.

thing must be scholarly and everything must be symp atheti c , .

The purpos e i s to bring the best out o f the anci e nt

treasuries so that it may be known e nj o yed and us e d
, , , .
 THE HE RITA G E O F I NDIA

S AMKHYA S YS TE M
A His to ry o f the S a mkIfy a Philo so p hy

A . BE RRIE DA LE KE IT H ,
D L1TT
. .

OF TH E I N N ER T E M PLE B ARRI e R- Ar - L AW , RE OI U S P R OF E S S OR or

S A N S K RI T AN D C O M PARAT I VE P H I LOLOGY Ar TH E

UN I V ER S I T Y or E DI N BU R GH .

T RA N S LAT O R or TH E T AI TTI RI Y A S A M HITA , Erc .

CAL C UTTA : A S S O C IAT I ON P R E S S

L OND ON : O " F ORD UN IVER S ITY P RES S
NE W Y O RK T O R O N T O M E L B O U R N E
, , ,

B O M B A Y A ND M A D R A S
 C ONT E NT S

1 . S AM KHYA IN TH E U P A NI S A D S

II . S AM KHYA A ND B U DD H I SM

III . T HE P H IL O S O P HY O P TH E G RE A T E P IC AN D TH E
O RI G IN O F S AM K HYA

IV S AM KHYA A ND Y O G A

V . T HE SA S TI TAN TRA
VI . G REE K P H I LO S O P HY A N D TH E S AM KHYA

VII . T H E S AM KHYA K A RI K A

VIII . T HE L AT ER S AM KHY A

I NDE "
 T HE SA MKH Y A IN T HE UP A NI S A D S

IN all the mani fo l d character o f the content o f the

Upani sads it i s undoubtedly pos sible to trace certain
leading i deas The most important o f these doctrines is
. .

beyo n d questio n that o f the i dentity of the sel f Atman o f

, , ,

the individual wit h the B rahman whi ch i s the m o st ,

univers al expressi on fOr the abs olute i n whi c h the universe

finds i ts unity It i s p robable en ough th at t h es e two
.

expre ssions are not i ntrinsi cally rel ated and th at they ,

represent two di fferent streams of thought The B rahman .

i s the devotion of the B r ahman priest : i t i s the s acred hymn

to propiti ate the gods : i t i s also the magi c spell o f the
wonder worker : more generally it i s the holy power in the
-

universe at least as much as it i s the magi c fluid o f primitive

s avagery Religion and magic i f di ffere n t in essence and in
.
,

o rigin nevertheles s go o ften in closest alli ance and their

, ,

un i son i n the case of the co n cept B rahman may explain the

ease with which th at term came to_d e n o te the essence of the
universe or absolute bei n g The Atman on the other hand.
, ,

i n the B r ahma n a texts which lie be fore the Up ani sads ,

has very o ften the sense of the trunk o f the body as opposed ,

to the h ands a n d feet and other members and i t i s perhaps ,

from that fact at least as much as from the fact that i t h as al s o

the sense of wind that it develops into the meaning o f the
essenti al sel f of man The identi fication o f the sel f and
.

the B rahman results in one form o f the doctrine of the

Upani sads that taught under the name o f Yajfiav a l k y a in
,

S e e H O ld e n b e r g B u d dh a ( 5 th
.
, pp 3 0 -
3 3 ; P D e u ss e n
. .

( P h il os o p h y o f t h e Up a n is a d s , p 3 9 ) p r e f e rs t o t r e a t B r a h m a n a s
.

t h e c o s m i c a l a n d At m a n a s t h e p s y c h i c a l p r i n c i p le o f u n it y Max .

M il l le r ( S ix S y s t e m s o f I n d ia n P h il o s op h y , p p 6 8 9 3 ) d i s tin gu i s h e s
.
-

B r a h m a n , s p e e c h a n d B r a h m a n a s t h a t w h i c h u tte r s o r d r iv e s f o r th
,

o r m a n i f e s ts o r c r e a t e s .
6 TH E SA M KH Y A S Y STE M

the B r h adar a n y a k a Up a n isa d ( ii 4 ; iv in the conclusio n

, ,

that the Atman a s the knowing subject i s unknowable and ,

th at the world of empiric reality which seems to be in ,

co n stant change i s really a mere illusion Thi s i s the

, .

highest point reached by the thought of the Upani sads a n d ,

it i s n o t consi stently or regularly maintained Despite .

acceptance of the doctri n e o f the i dentity of the individual

self and the sel f of the universe there ofte n appears to be ,

left o ver as an i rreduci ble element something which is not

the sel f but whi ch i s essenti ally involved in the constitution
,

of reality Thi s is implici t in such stateme n ts as th at the

.

A tman completely enters into the body up to the nails even : ,

the all pervasivenes s of the A tman i s not i n compati ble with

-

the existence of something to be pervaded In order to .

remove the difficulty which i s felt in the exi ste n ce o f thi s

further element the conception o f creation whi ch w a s o f
, , ,

course famili ar from the cosmogonic legends of the

,

B r ahmanas was often resorted to

,
Thus in the C h an dogy a
.

Up a n isa d ( vi 2 ) we learn in detail how the self desired t o

,

be many and created brilli ance Tej as whe n ce arose water , ,

and food and then the self ente red into these created things
,

with the living sel f T his scheme by which a bei n g first

.
,

produces a cosmic materi al and the n enters i n to it as li fe i s ,

a common p lace in the S pecul ations of the B r ahman as and ,

it lends itself to a very d ifferent development than the theory

o f illusi o n While the latter theory i n si sts on the identity
.

o f the i n dividual self with the absolute sel f both being o n e ,

essence surp assing all cons ciousness the latter system allows ,

a certai n reality to matter and a still more definite reality

,

to the individual soul which in course o f time develops i n to

,

the d octrine of quali fied duality V iSistad v a ita in which , ,

there i s found a p l ace for the individual soul and matter

beside the supreme soul and which undoubtedly forms the
,

theme o f the B r a h m a S il tr a of B ad a r aya n a B ut while this .

system can be seen in the U pa n i s ads i t would be an error ,

to suppose that it is more p roperly the doctri n e of the

Up ani sads th an the illusion theory of S a mkara : *
neither
F o r B ad a r ay a n a s v i e w s s e e T h i b a u t , xx iv ; S u k h ta n k a r
’
,

V i e n n a O r i e n t a l J o u r n a l , x ii, 12 0 ff , ; H . J a co b i , xxx iii ,

5 1- 5 4.
 T HE SA M KH Y A IN T HE UPAN I SA D S 7

system in i ts c o mpletely sel f c o nscious form is t o be f o und-

in the Up a n isa d s but the germs of both are present

f
, ,

and both in a real sense can c l aim the authority of the

Up ani sads .

On the other hand i t is impossible to find in the ,

Upani s ads any real basi s for the S amkhy a system The .

U p a n isa d s are essenti al ly devoted to the di scovery o f an

f

absolute a n d d iv e rs e as are the forms which the absolute

, ,

may tak e they do n o t abandon the search nor do they allow

, ,

that no such absolute exi sts There are however e lements .

, ,

here and there which mark the growth of i deas whi ch later
were thrown into systemati c form in the S amkhya but it i s ,

impossible to s e e in these fragmentary hints a n y indication

that the S amkhya philosophy was then in process o f
formation It is o f course possi ble as a matter of abstract
.
, , ,

argument to i n si st that the elements in the Up ani sads which

,

suggest the later S amkhya views are really borrowings by

“

the Up ani sads o f doctrines already extant i n a S amkhya

system but in the a b s e n se of the slightest evidence for the
, ,

exi ste n ce o f such a system in the Vedi c literature i t i s ,

methodologic ally u n sou n d to take thi s hypothesi s a s

possessing a n y value in face of the natural conclusion th at
,

we h ave in t h e Up ani s ads scattered hints which were later

amalgamate d i nto o n e system J ust like the Ved an ta o f .

S a mkara or the Ved anta of B ad a r ay a n a the S amkhy a i s a

, ,

system built on the Upani sads : from both of these i t di ffers

in that it g oes radically and essenti ally beyond the teaching
of the Upani s ads .

The cosmog o ni cal form of the d o ctrine of the sel f sets at

once the absolute into conflict with the i ndivi dual sel f and ,

i t undoubtedly tend s to minimi se the imp o rtance of the

absolute since its O peration appears to h ave been exhausted
,

by the action of creation At the s ame time it i s clear th at

.
,

the opposi tion of matter to the ind ividual soul becomes

quite a sharp one for on the cosmogonic or thei sti c system
,

the primitive matter is indeed produced from the absolute ,

but equally clearly it exi sts before the indivi dual soul enters
into the sphere o f exi stence While thus the rel ation o f .

soul and n ature becomes one o f oppositio n under the aegi s

o f an absolute which tend s to become more faded at the ,
8 TH E SA M KH Y A S Y S T E M

s ame time reflecti o n is m o re bent o n the actual ch aracter o f

the re l ation of soul and nature and finds expression in such ,

an utterance as th at of the B r h a d ar a n y a k a Up a nisa d ( i 4 , ,

where it i s ex p ressly stated that food and eater make up

th e entire universe Thi s p ass age i s i n terpreted i n the late
.

M a itr ay a n i Up a nisa d as referring to the di stinction between

S pirit which i s subj ect and all the rest of nature including
, , ,

the B h utatm a n the psychi c ap p aratus p roduced from

,

n ature as the obj ect : i t i s chara cteri stic of the c o n fused

,

ch aracter o f thi s l ate w o rk that the v ery next ch apters

( v i 1 1 13 ) deal with nature a s bei n g the product of the
,
-

supreme B rahman It would be wro n g therefore to find in

.
, ,

the B r h a d ar a n y a k a Up a n isa d a n y co n scious reali zation of

a doctrine which would elimi n ate the B rahman but it is ,

clear enough that the p ath to the elimi n ation o f that element
was O p en .

The deni al in the S amkhya of the s upreme s p i rit ca rries

with it curious consequences when added to the extreme
development of th e doctrine that the spi rit i s alo n e the
subject The first p r o duct of n ature i s the i ntellect w h ich
.
,

i s called the great on e and wh ich clearly i s originally a ,

cosmic function deri v ed from nature but lighted up by

,

S pirit The natural source of thi s concep tion must be found

.

in the idea in the Upa n i sads th at the supreme S pirit r e

appears as the firstborn o i creation a fter it h as produced the
primitive matter The ultimate ori gin of the i dea can be
.

traced beyond the Up ani sads to the Rgv e d a ( x 1 2 1 ) where ,

the golden germ Hir a n y a ga r b h a i s produced fr o m the

primeval waters and in the Up ani sads we find in the
,

K a u sita ki the seer composed of the B rahm an the great

, ,

o ne in the K a th a ( i ii 10 13 ; v i the first great sp irit

, , ,

in the S v e tasv a t a r a ( i i 19 ) who is called Hir an ya ga rb h a

,

in i i i 4 ; i v 1 2 ; B rahman in v i 18 and the knower all

, , , , ,

pervading in vi 1 7 ,
Moreover i t i s thus that we should i t
, .
, ,

i s clear understand the seer K a p il a first engendered in v

, , , , ,

2. The i dea that in this verse we are to se e the first men

tion of the founder of the S amkhya as a real person i s t o o
fantasti c to be seriously upheld though it is not at all u n ,

likely that the origin o i the doctrine of K apila as the

founder of S arnk h ya i s to be traced to thi s p assage .
 TH E SA MKHYA IN TH E U PAN I SA D S 9

F urther materi al f o r the o rigin o f the series o f e v ol uti o n

i s als o to be found i n the Up ani sads In the K a th a whi ch .
,

has every claim to be regarded as an old work *

n o t indeed ,

o f the s ame antiquity a s the great prose Up ani sads l ike the
B r h a d ar a n y a k a C h an d ogy a ,
A ita r e y a Ta i ttir iy a or
, , ,

Ka u sita k i but at the head of the second stage of p o etical

,

Up ani sads representing the period o f the full development

,

of the philosophy of these texts there i s found ( i ii 10 , ,

after an exhortation to control the unruly steeds of the

senses a description of Yoga or co n ce n tration
,
In thi s i t
,
.

is expressly stated that the objects are higher th an the

senses mind than the obj ects the intellect than mind the
, , ,

great sel f than intellect the unevolved th an the great se l f

, ,

and the spiri t than the unevolved The spi rit dwells unseen .

in all bei n gs and is above all In concentration therefo re .

, ,

S peech with mind i s to be restrained in the knowledge sel f -

,

that i s intellect that again i n the great sel f and that in the
, ,

ca lm sel f that is the unev o lved

,
I n a l ater p assage ( vi .
,

7 11 ) a S im
-
ilar account i s given : here the mind sta n ds
above the sense s S attva above the mind over th at the great
, ,

sel f over that the unevolved o v er that the S p i ri t wh ich is

, ,

descri bed by terms applicable in the cl assi cal S arn kh y a as

’

all pervading and without any di stinctive mark

-
The .

highest condition o f Yoga is reached when the senses with

mind and i ntellect are brought to a standstill In the next .

lines the spiri t is descri be d as only t o be expressed by the

declaration of exi stence With thi s series may be comp ared .

the fact that according t o the C h an d ogy a ( vi 8 6 ) at death , ,

speech enters i nto mind mind into bre ath breath into , ,

brilli ance and brilli ance i nto the supreme godhead .

Further light i s thr o wn on the pos ition by the P r a sn a

Up a n isa d which though n ot a work of the s ame age as the
, ,

K a th a i s neve r theles s prob ably the earliest of the later prose

,

Up ani s ads In the fourth P r a Sn a it i s e x pl ained that i n

.

sleep in dreaming the senses enter i n to mind and i n deep ,

sleep mind also p asses into the brilli ance Tej as Then , .

follows an account of h o w all things are reso l ved int o the

S ee H O ld e n b e r g
.
,
x xx v u , S 7 if ; B u d d ha , p . 60 ;
P . D e u ss e n , P h il os op h y o f t h e U p a n isa ds , p . 24 .
10 THE S AM KHY A S Y S TEM

imperi sh able which h as no S hadow blood or body the order

, , ,

bei ng the fi v e elements each with its corresponding M atr a

, ,

wh ich appears to de n ote the correspo n ding fine element the ,

fi v e organs of perceptio n with their functio n s the fi v e organs of ,

action with thei r functions the mi n d i n tellect indi v iduatio n , , , ,

Ahamk ara thought Ci tta brilli ance and breath and their
, , , , ,

functions From the highest self there i s here di sti n gui shed
.

the V ijfi an atm an the individual self which experie n ces the
, ,

impressions o f the senses and s o forth It i s perfectl y clear ,

.

that the P r a sn a is not a n exposition of the S amkhya but the ,

elements of the S amkhya derivation are present The .

conception o f the fine elements seems to owe its origin to

the V iew ex pressed in the C h an d ogy a Up a nisa d ( v i ,

according to which the gros s elements correspo n ding to ,

fire water and earth are not in themselves pure but each
, , ,

i s compounded with some portion o f the others : the n ame ,

T a nm atr a whi ch i s l ater normal is first given expressly in

, ,

the M a itr ay a n i Up a nisa d ( i ii ,

A much more developed accou n t of S amkhy a type i s to be

fo und in the S v e t as v a t a r a Up a n isa d which is no doubt
’

older than the P r osn a but later tha n the Ka th a The ,

.

Upani sad i s defi n itely dei sti c Rudra who bears the e p ithet ,

but not the name S iva bei n g the object of devotion and
, ,

belie f but at the s ame time being regarded a s the absolute

,

and su p reme S pirit rather th a n as deri v ed from that spirit

,
.

On the other h and the Up ani sad contains a series of numbers

,

whi ch are best to be expl ained as referring to enumerations

accepted by the S amkhy a school : thus in i 4 the i n dividual , ,

self is compared to a wheel with three tyres sixteen end s , ,

fi fty sp o kes twenty counter s p okes a n d s ix sets of eight

,
-
.

These are i n terpreted as the three Gunas the s e t of sixteen ,

co n sisti n g of the ten organs mind and the five elements the , ,

fi fty psychic states of the classical S amkhya the ten senses ,

and their O bjects and the s ix sets of the fi v e elemen ts mi n d

, , ,

indivi duation and intellect ; the eight elements of the body ,

the eight p re fe c tion s the eight psychic states whi ch form in

,

the S amkhy a an alter n ative to the fi fty eight gods and ,

eight vi rtues The worth o f such ide n tifications must be

.

regarded a s uncertai n a n d no co n clusive evidence is afford

,

ed by them as plays ou numbers are much a ffected by the

,
 T HE SAM K HYA IN T HE U PAN I SAD S 11

B rahmani cal scho o ls B ut there is other a n d much more

.

convincing evidence of the exi ste n ce o f S amkhya views .

The individual sel f the V ijfi an atm a n or P u r u s a is described

, ,

a s the power of god enveloped in hi s own Gu n as which ,

shows plainly th at while the absolute is still the source of

all nevertheless a new element has been introduced in the
,

conception of the Gunas through wh ich the absolute becomes

,

the individual soul A still more di sti n ct proof of the

.

exi ste n ce of i deas aki n to S arnkh y a i s to be seen in iv 5 i n

'

, ,

which it is s aid :
T h e o n e s h e g o a t r e d w h it e a n d b la c k
-
, , , ,

P r o d u c e th m a n y y o u n g li k e f o r m e d u n t o h e r
,
-
,

T h e o n e h e go a t in lo v e e n j o y e th h e r
-
,

Th e o t h e r l e a v e th h e r w h o m h e h a th e n j o y e d .

The passage i s discussed by Sa mkara who seeks to s e e ,

in the three colours a reference to the three colours mentio n ed

in the C h an d ogy a Up a nisa d ( vi 4 ) as those of the three ,

elements there mentioned fire w ater and earth whi ch are , , , ,

produced from the absolute a n d which are present in all

that exists This view i s so far i t w o uld seem beyond doubt
.
, ,

correct : the resemblance i n p oint of the colours i s to o

striking to be an accident B ut the passage must obviously
.

also be admitted to h a v e clear traces o f what i s l ater the

S amkhya doctri n e : the imagery of the many h e goats and -

the relatio n of e n j oyment followed by relinqui shment i s , ,

precisely p arallel to the similes which are ofte n used in th e

classical 8 amkhya to illustrate the rel atio n of spi ri t and
n ature . Moreover the she goat is named Aj a which denotes
-

also the u n born a fact whi ch exactly coi n ci des wi th the

,

S amkhya conception th a t the first principle nature is not a

product The S amkhya conception of the all pervadi n g
.
-

character o f the Gu n as which in diverse measure are,

present in all the products of nature is a s well suited to ,

the description of the progen y of the goat as the view of the

C h an d ogy a It is therefore o n ly reaso n able to a ssume that
.
, ,

we h ave here a clear hint of the origin of the doctrine o f

the Gu n as in the threefold materi al of the C h and ogy a
Up a niga d a n d there i s n o thing in thi s p assage nor in the
, ,

others where the Gu n a s are me n tio n ed ( i 3 ; v 7 ; v i 3 , , , ,

11 , to suggest that the Gu n as are anything other th an

 12 TH E SAM KHYA SYSTE M

elements as in the C h and ogy a The names S attva Raj as .

,

and Tamas d o not occur u n til the M a itr ay a n i Up a n isa d

(ii 5 ; v
,
It i s not impossible that the subjecti v e side
,

o f the Gu n as which i s clearly marked i n these names a n d

,

which certai n ly prevails in the classical S amkhya was a ,

developmen t from the conception that the i n di v idual sel f was

the result of th e envelopment of the absolute i n the three
Gunas : though originally referri n g to materi al products ,

still the tendency would be to se e in them psychic states .

It i s most probable that in these traces of S amkhya

views we are not to se e the result of a c on tamination of
S amkhya with a Ved an t a phil o sophy : it i s p erfectly pl ain
that in i v 5 we are not deali n g with the co n scious expression
,

o f a view which ignores the absolute ; on the c o n trary in

i v 10 we find the deliberate description of nature as an
,

illusion and the great lord as an illusion maker emph ati c

,
-
,

de n i als of the p o ssibility of the se p arate and real exi stence

of n ature a s held by the S amkhya school It i s not n atural .

that o n e who i s O pposed s o essenti ally to the view that the

S amkhya principles are correct should appropri ate p hrases
which seem to accept them whereas all is n atural i f we ,

assume that the Upani sad represents a definite development

of the doctri n e of the Absolute based o n the older Upan i sads ,

from which in due course the s amkhya develop ed "e

With .

such a view there i s nothi n g i n co n siste n t in i v 5 : the ,

metaphor there used ap p lies perfectly properly to the

di fferen t condition of two indi v idual s ou l s the on e of which ,

does not realise its true n ature as th e absolute e n veloped in

the three Gu n as while the other recog n izes its true n ature
,

and throws aside its con n ection with nature .

It has however been argued from the occurre n ce of the

, ,

name K apila in v 2 and of S amkhya in vi 13 i n con n ection

, , , , , ,

with Yoga that the S amkhya Yoga system was defi n itely
,
-

known to the author or redactor of the Up a n i sad But thi s .

i s clearly n ot shown by the facts adduced K apila i s a s we .

,

h ave seen not a huma n personage at all and th e parallel of i 3

, , , ,

T h is is th e a m ou n t o f t r u th , in th e V i e w
of A E o u gh ( hil o
. . G P
s op h y o f t h e U p a n i s a d s , p p 2 00 . , th a t th e S amk h y a is o r ig in a lly
a n e n u m e r a ti o n o f p r i n c i p le s o f th e V e d an t a N0 s u c h S amk h y a
.

v
s y s t e m is r e c o r d e d , h o w e e r ; a s a s ys t e m S arn k h ya is a th e isti c .
14 TH E SAM K HYA SYSTEM

h a mmers only the iron not the glow per v ading it Here t oo .
, ,

we fi n d the names of the Gu n as as p sychi c states a n d bodily ,

a n d me n tal e v ils are referred to the actio n of Raj as desire , ,

a n d T amas indi fference In S ectio n V a creation myth

, .

i s s e t out according to which the highest produces the three

,

Gunas Tama s Raj as and S attva a n d from S attva S p irit

, , , , ,

consisting of pure intellect possessi n g the powers of ,

represe n tatio n j udgment and individuation as its psychi c

,

body In the hymn of Ku ts ay a n a a n otherwi se u n know n

.
,

s age wh ich precedes thi s myth we find the i den tity of all
, ,

i n the B rahman asserted and the first occurrence in

literature of the conception that rel ea se i s both for the s ake
o f spirit and of matter an idea whi ch in the S amkhya i s ,

co n verted i n to the view th at n ature stri v es as i f for her own

release for the release of another th at is spirit though else , ,

where the release of S pirit i s denied a n d the real release

attributed to n ature a contradiction arisi n g from the fact ,

th at in reality there i s and c a n be no p ain in nature whi ch , , ,

i s unconscious and the p ai n i s brought i n to exi stence by

,

the u n io n with S p irit whence arises co n sciousness I n the ,

.

Up ani sad whi ch recognizes a prius to both n ature and

,

S pi ri t the release can be and i s for both alike

, In v i 10 .
,

there i s fou n d e x pressly stated the doctrine of the di sti n ction

of spirit and the obj ective world : the psychi c body i s
p roduced from the primeval materi al and consi sts of the ,

elements from the great one th at i s i n tellect ap p arently up

“ , ,

to the gross elements unles s the re ading i s slightly altered ,

’

and the s eries brought to a close with the fi n e elemen ts It .

i s however clearly the case in the classical S amkhya th at

, ,

the subtle portions of the gr o ss eleme n ts are included i n the

psychi c app aratus and thi s may be the case here also ,
.

The other Upa n i s ads of thi s period give us little for the
S amkhya doctrine I n the M u n d a k a however we find ( i
.
, , ,

1 8 9 ; i i 1 2 3 ) a de v elopment o f pri n ciples from the all

, , , , ,

k n ower to food thence to breath the n ce to the mi n d thence

, , ,

to truth the worlds a n d actio n s or from the spi rit to the

, , ,

imperishable thence to breath the n ce to mi n d and the

, ,

organs of sense an d thence to the elements Thi s exposition

,
.

D e u ss e n , S e c h z ig U p a n is a d s , p . 337 , n . 2 .
 TH E SA MK HYA IN THE UPAN I SAD S 15

c l ear l y a ccepts the absolute and f o llows the normal tri ad

,

of absolute nature and souls but it di ffers from the K a th a

, , ,

which it otherwi se somewh at closely resembles by the ,

addition of o ne principle breath in place o f the great sel f

, ,

and the in tellect of th at U pani sad It i s clear th at Pr ana .

,

breath plays a c o smi c function

,
.

A s the Up ani sad s d o not recognize the exi stence of

S pirit as indivi dual only but always admi t the exi stence of
,

a supreme S pirit the essence o f the knowledge which i s to

,

s ave men from constant rebirth i s the knowledge of the real

i dentity o f the supreme and the indivi dual Self The .

derivative ch aracter of the S amkhya c o mes i n to very clear

prominence in its retentio n of the doctri n e of knowledge as
the means o f s aving grace In the S amkhya as there .
,

i s no real co n nection between sp i ri t and n ature it seems ,

wholly impossible to understand h o w the false concepti on

o f such a connection can ari se : the S pirit i s in reality p urely
subj ective nature i s purely objective and there i s n o
, ,

intera ction whi ch can explain the exi ste n ce o f ignora n ce or

indeed o f knowledge O n the other hand i n the case of the
.
,

Up ani sads whatever degree o f reali ty be allowed to the

,

indivi dual souls o f the world i t i s esse n ti ally the ca se th at

,

there i s a source o f ignorance : the absolute either by sel f ,

illusion or in fact develop s from itsel f a world of spi rits

,

and matter and the knowledge whi ch brings s alvation i s the

,

knowledge that despite the seeming multiplici ty there is no

, ,

real di fference between the absolute and the sel f at any rate ,

in ultimate e ssence Ignorance i s admitted in the S amkhy a

.

a s a fact but i t i s a fact which h a s no e x pl anation whatever

, ,

and therefore i ts positio n i n the system must be traced to a

form of philosophy in which i t had a more j ust cl ai m t o
existence .

Another cl e a r proof o f derivative nature i s the acceptance ,

without comment o f the doctrine of transmigratio n and the

,

accompanying doctrine of pessimism The Up ani sads do .

not show the doctrine of transmigration as fully developed :

rather as might be in ferred from the fact th at transmigra
,

tion proper is n o t clearly known to any B r ahman a text ,

they show only the origi n of the system The credit of first .

enunci ating the d o ctrine a s a great m o ra l truth that o f ,

16 THE S A M KHYA S Y S TE M

retributio n according to actio n by rebi rth i s ass igned to ,

Yajfi av a l k y a who lays down the principle in the B t h a d a

,

r a ny a k a Up a ni ga d ( i i i 2 13 ; i v 4 2 though even, , , ,

this view has been q u e stione d fi The i dea however worked

"
, ,

up into an elaborate a n d confused whole in which the i deas ,

of retribution by rebi rth and the older view of puni shment

in hell and reward in heaven are thrown together i s found ,

definitely in a late portion of th at Up ani sad ( vi 2 ) and in ,

the C h an d ogy a ( v 3 The doctrine is by no means

,

necess arily accepted i n all the Up ani sads of the older type ;
thus it i s doubt ful i f it appears at all in the older portion
of the A i ta r ey a Z r a n y a k a ; on the other hand it i s clearly ,

accepted by the Ka u sit a hi and by the Ka th a and i s later ,

a commonplace assump tion Its full development and .

spread must antedate the rise of B udd hism and it may ,

fairly be argued that the doctri n e prevailed among wide

circles in I n di a in the north by 5 5 0 B C and probably h al f ,

a century earlier Efforts have even been made to find the

.

doctri n e in the Rgv e d a but so far without real success ,

.

The origin of the belief h as been attributed to borrowing

from aborigi n al tr ib e s r it being a common V iew in primitive
,
’

peoples th at the spi rits of thei r dead p ass into other forms
of li fe Traces of similar V l e W S h ave also been seen in
.

occasional hints in the Rgv e d a of the de p arture of the

elemen ts of the dead to thei r prop er abodes The real .

importance of the Indi a n doctrine however i s the m o ral tinge , ,

given to it by Yajii av a l k y a while its immedi ate precursor ,

in the B r ahma n as i s the dread of repeated death which i s ,

ex p ressed in the view th at even a fter de ath death may await

the man who i s not proficient in some ritual p e r fo r m a n ce l; .

Thi s conception of P u n a rm r tyu repeated death for a time , ,

evide n tly played a considerable place in the ideas of the

B r ahma n as as i s see n by the quite frequent occurrence of the
,

conception in the S a t a p a th a B r ah m a n a a n d by its me n tio n

i n the K a u s it a ki B r ah m a n a a n d the turning o f a ritual ,

S ee F . O S ch r a d e r
.
, l x iv , 3 3 3 - 3 3 5 .

1
‘
A E .G o u g h P h il o s o p h y o f t h e U p a n is a d s p p
.
, ,
. 2 25
0 -
.

I: S e e S L evi L a D o c t r in e d u S a c r ific e p p 9 3 ff
.
, ,
. P . O lt r a m a r e ,

L his toir e d e s I d e e s Th é o s op h i q u e s i 9 6 ff
’ ’

.
, ,
 THE S AM K HYA IN T H E U PAN I SAD S 17

conception into a mora l one was as natural as the trans fer

of the repetition o f birth i n the world beyond to the birth in
thi s world which was the one thi n g wanting to make the
,

co n ce p tion really a doctrine of transmigration Thi s step i s .

not certainly taken in any p ass age o f the S a ta p a th a

B r ah ma n a though a few p ass ages are open to thi s i nter
,

p r e t a t io n In
. making the deci sive change i t i s o f course , ,

perfectly possible that the popular i deas o f the sp iri t of the

ancestor taking up i ts abode in some beast or bi rd or other
form such a s th at o f a snake may have helped the conception
, ,

to take root and become easily a p preci ated I t i s indeed .

dou b tfu l whether without some such b a ck gr on d we could

explain the extraordin ary success o f the doctrine in winni n g
the real a nd l asting adherence o f the gre at mass o f the
people of Indi a None the less i t must remain extraordi nary
.
,

that none of the philosophical systems S houl d h a v e

attempted to ex amine the validity of the belief a fact whi ch ,

sta n ds in striking contrast with the proced ure of Pl ato who , ,

i n the P h a e do provides a philoso p hi c background for th e

,

conceptio n whi ch he probably took direct from the po p ul ar

,

Pythagorean or Orphi c co n ception o f the fate of the soul .

The pessimi sm whi ch i s assumed by the S amkhya mu st

likewi se be derivative In the Up ani sads there i s no
.

ge n eral pessimi sm vi sible in the earlier expositio n s of

doctrine ; the marked pessimi sm of the Ma itr aya n i i s a
clear i n dicati o n o f its posteri ority to the influence o f
B uddhi sm which had evi dently a very co n siderable p art
,

in spreading the doctrine The underlying vi ew o f

.

the U p ani sads i s indeed th at the A tman i n itsel f i s

, ,

perfect and th at accordingly all else i s filled with

, , ,

trouble a s the B r h a d ar a ny a k a ( i ii 4 2 ; 5 1 ; 7 2 3 )
, , , , ,

e x pressly s ays ; and with thi s expression o f opinion may be

s e t such remarks as that the k n ower of the sel f overcomes

sorrow ; nor i s there a n y lack o f re ferences to ol d age and

trouble B ut it i s one thing to admit thi s and quite another
.
,

to hold that the general tone of the Up ani sads i s pessi

misti c ; rather the j oy of the discovery o f the new knowledge
i s the ch aracteri stic of the teachers while they regard the self ,

as in itself bliss S i n ce the k n owledge o f the self i s o p en

.

t o all and since by th at knowledge bliss is to be obtained

, ,
18 THE SAM KHYA SY S TEM

the ol der Up ani sads could not be and are n o t pessimi stic .

Whi l e however the S amkhya sh ares with them the belief in

, ,

the possibility of freedom being obtai n ed in the course of

man s li fetime a n d thus h a s a less pessimi stic side it de n ies
’
, ,

th at there i s bliss in the state of the released S pirit and like ,

B uddhism dwells on the reality of human misery .

Efforts h ave been made to find re ferences to di stinctively

S amkhya doctrines in older Up a n i sads such as the ,

C h an d ogy a a n d the B r h a d ar a n y a k a In the latter text .

( iv 4 8 ) the term Li n ga appears besi de mind and the

, , ,

suggestion t o treat i t a s mea n i n g p sychi c apparatus *

presents itsel f but it i s much more likely th at the sense is

“ ,

si mply beari n g a ch aracteri stic mark In i v 4 13 a .

, , ,

verse f o u n d also in Ti a Up a nisa d 1 2 S a mkara sees a

“

reference to the S amkhya doctrine in the term As a mb h uti

which he renders as P r a k t ti but this V iew has in itsel f n o
,

probability and the comme n tator Uv a ta declares that the

, , ,

polemic against the belie v ers in As a m b h uti destruction is , ,

directed against the materi alists The stateme n t in i 4 1 5 .

, , ,

of the Up ani sad that in the begi n ning the universe w as

,

undiscrimin ated a n d was later di scrimi n ated by name an d

,

form is a repetition o f a very old concept which ha s h ad

, ,

i ts sh are in mouldi n g the S amkhya co n cept of P r a k t ti but ,

it is not speci fically S amkhya The C h a n d ogy a Up a nisa d

’

i n v ii h as the word Aha mk ara but uses it merely as a

, ,

syno n ym for the sel f A tman and in v ii 2 6 2 the term

, , , , ,

S attva h as not yet the techn ical sense o f one of the three
constituents o f nature which belo n gs to i t in the S arnk h y a
'

N o r i n i ii 19 i s there a n ythi n g speci fically S amkhya : th at

,

p aragraph is a legend of the origin of being from n on bei n g -

,

the coming into exi stence of a n egg the two hal v es o f which ,

are s k y and earth and from which the su n ari ses This
,
.

f o rm of creation myth i s of importance for the creation

legends seen in Ma n u and the Pur anas but its relation to ,

S arnk h y a is merely the vague one th at it contemplates a

‘

process of production though the idea of not bei n g as prior

,

to being is completely contrary to the developed s amkhy a

T h i s d o c t r i n e is n o t c le a r ly k n o w n to a n y U p a n i sa d
b e fo r e th e M a it r ay a n i ( v i, K a t h a ( vi , 8 ) a n d Sv e tasva t a r a
( v i, 9 ) m a y r e f e r to it .
 THE S AM K HYA IN T HE U PAN I SAD S 19

view whi ch does not regard P r a k t ti when unev o lved as n o t

, , ,

bei n g because i t i s nothing definite The conception of the

,
.

Up ani sad version with that of the cosmogo n i c hymn Rgv e d a , .

x 1 2 9 i s obvious but here also we have o n ly an i dea wh ich

, , ,

l ater i s in part adopted by the S amkhy a th at of an ,

u n formed primitive matter More i mportance attaches to a .

passage in the A th a rv a v e d a ( x , 8 4 3 ) ,

T h e lo tu s fl o w e r o f n i n e d o o r s ,

C o ve r e d w ith th r e e s t r a n d s ,

W h a t p ro d i gy th e r e is w ith in it ,

T h a t th e B r a h m a n k n o w e r s k n o w - .

The human body with its nine ori fices i s c l early meant
by the flower with nine doors but the three strand s present
“
difficulties The meaning qu ali ty i s not proved for early
.
,

Vedi c literature occurring first in the S utras and the sense

, ,

must therefore be assumed to be constituent or s o mething

similar the reference being probably to the h ai r ski n a n d
, ,

nails . I f the reference i s to be t aken a s to the constituents

in the sense of the Gunas o f the S amkhy a phil o sophy * i t i s ,

clear that the expression i s i n accurate since the three ,

co n stituents make up n ature and the p ass age would say th at ,

the body was covered wi th n at u re instead of consi sting of ,

nature An a tte mp t ] to find in the same hymn ( x 8 3 9 4 0 )

.
L
, , ,

a reference to the d oc trine o f the ages of the world there ,

being peri o di c destruction and reproductio n cannot be ,

regarded as proved th o ugh in any case it would not be of ,

a n y value as proof of the exi stence of the S amkhya since ,

the idea is common to all the systems .

In the later Up ani s ads such as the Nr s imh a t ap a n iy a , ,

G a r b h a Gali k a a n d others clear references to S amkhya

’

, , ,

doctrines occur but the d ates of these Upani sads are far
,

too u n certain and prob ably l ate to throw any light on the
, ,

questi o n of the origin o r of the doctrines of the S amkhya .

S ee W h itn e y
w ith L a n m a n s c o r r e c tion T h e G u n a
’
s no e t ’
.

th e o r y is a c c e p te d b y P O l t r a m a r e L his t oir e d e s I d é e s Th é os op h i ’
.
,

q u es i 2 40 2 4 1
, , C f b e lo w p 4 8
,
. .
,
. .

I S e e H J a c o b i G ott in g i s c h e G e l e h r t e A n z e ig e n 18 9 5 p 2 10
“ '

.
, , ,
.

F o r th e a lle ge d m e n ti o n in th e A it a r e y a B r ah m a n a s e e M a c d on e ll a n d ,

K e ith Ve d i c I n d e x ii 19 3
, , ,
.
 S AMKH Y A AND B UD D HI SM

THE essenti al fact of the atheism of the S amkhya system

in its classical form and the atheism of B uddhism naturally
raises the problem whether the view is borrowed by the one
system from the other There is of course no a p r io ri
.
, ,

reason to deny the p ossibility of s uch borrowing ; in

defini tely hi storical times there was clearly a lively inter
chan ge o f views betwee n B uddhi sm and the B rahmanical
schools : the growth o f logi c was furthered by di scoveries
or devel o pments n o w by the on e side now by the other and , ,

there is striking similarity between the doctrine of void ,

which was brought into speci al prominence by the B uddhist

Nag arju n a in the first or second century A D and its
,
. .
,

development into the V ijfi an a v ad a of A safiga probably in the ,

fourth century A D wh ich has suggested the view * that the

. .
,

illusion the o ry of the V e d an ta yw h ich has attained its classical

shape in the doctrine of S a mkara was derived fr o m B ud ,

d h is m as regards a very imp ortant p art of its content B ut .

that B uddhism i s the source of the S amkhya i s most im

probable since the divergence of the two systems suggests
,

that B uddhi sm repre sents a further advance i n the d isin te

g r a t io n of the earlier p hilosophy of the U pani s ads It is .

true that the S amkhya abandons the idea of the existence of

the absolute but it i s on the other hand careful to retai n
, , ,

the ide a of S pi rit and of nature ; the doctri n e of

B uddhism on the other h and h as in effect abandoned these
, ,

two conceptions and h a s left itself with only the fleeting

,

series of mental states as a quasi reality fr o m whi ch the ,

devel op ment of the doctrine of the void is a natural enough

step It i s impossible to prove and certainly not pl ausible
.
,

to believe that from so developed a doctrine as that o f

,

See H . Ja cobi ,
x xx iii ,
5 1 54
-
.
22 THE S AM K HYA S Y S TEM

school are nevertheless treated by it in a speci al manner

, .

The attem p t to bring this really co n clusi v e form o f argu

me t to bear has bee n made by J acobi who h as sought to
n *
,

fi n d in the series of twel v e p ri n ci p les which are used in the ,

B uddhist V iew to explai n the causation of mi sery clear ,

traces of their derivatio n from the evolution series of the

5 amkhya The elements of the e v ol ution series of the
.

S arnkh y a are n ot by any mea n s p eculi ar to th at system but ,

the order of evolution and the stress laid on the evolution

are matter s of great importance J acobi further stre n gthens.

hi s positio n by the argume n t that the reference in the

epic to the two systems of S amkhya and Yoga as two a n d
etern al i s a clear i n dicatio n that at the ti me of the epic ,

whi ch he sets n o t later than the begi n ni n g of the Christi an

era the systems were of great antiqui ty that the atmosphere
, ,

o f thought in the time of the B uddha was filled with

S amkhya ideas a n d that the B uddh a w a s influenced by
,

these i deas a n d strove in h is o w n system to produce some

,

formula of causatio n which would b e suitable to serve as an

ex p l a n atio n of the o rigi n of the misery which the S amkhya
a n d his own system so stro n gly affirmed He a lso poi n ts .

out that in A Sv a gh o s a s B u d d h a c a r it a we h ave an

’

account of a meeting betwee n the B uddh a a n d hi s former

teacher Ar ad a in which are ascribed to the latter view s
, ,

which resemble those of the S amkhya as modified by the ,

belief i n the perso n al supreme divi n ity of the V iSi S tad v a ita
Ved an ta The importan ce of this e p isode i f we are to
.
,

credit the accou n t in A Sv a gh o s a would be that ,

i t would remove the most serious di fficulty in the

attempt to connect with the S amkhya the system of B ud
d h ism . The latter h as n o trace of the doctri n e of the three
Gunas or co n stit ue n ts whi ch are prese n t in n ature a n d all
, ,

its products according to the S amkhya and therefore i f i t i s ,

to be deri v ed from the S amkhy a it must be tr aced to a

8 amkhya which did not acce p t the doctrine of the G unas .

Now the accou n t given of Ar ad a s teachi n gs does not m e n ’

tion the Gu n as a n d in it might perhaps be seen evide n ce

,

Z D M . . G
111, 1 - 15 ; N a c h r i c h t e n v a n d e n K o n ig l G e s e l ls c h a ft
.

d e r Wis s e n s c h a ft e n e u G
o tt in g e n , 18 9 6 , p p 4 3 ff
. F o r c r it ic i s m s s e e
.

b
O ld e n e r g , B u d d h a ( 3 r d pp 4 4 3
. ff ; Ii i , 6 8 1-
69 4 .
 S AM KHYA AND B UD D H I S M 23

of the exi stence of a S amk hya which d id n o t know

the Gunas It is clear however th at thi s argument
.
*
, ,

cannot s a fely be pressed : the hi stori cal accuracy o f the

views of A Sv a gh o sa i s not confirmed by the in formation we
have A r ad a i s k n ow n to the s acred books of B uddhi sm
.
,

but hi s doctrines are never s e t out in any way corresponding

to the picture of him i n A Sv a gh o sa an d we cannot ,

therefore s a y th at the account in A Sv a gh o S a h as any valu e

at all not merely for the actual teaching of Ar ad a but f o r
, ,

the exi stence at a ny time o f a school o f 5 amkhya wh ich ,

denies the exi stence o f the Gunas It may be d o ubted i f any .

such school of S amkhy a ever was known .

The c aus al series o f B uddhi sm in which the i dea o f ,

cause is only an i n accurate or popular expressi on ,

applicable in its stri ct n ess to some alo n e o f the members ,

traces the miseries o f e x i ste n ce from ignorance th rough the ,

S a ms k ar a s V ijfi an a name an d form the s ix orga n s o f

, , ,

se n se contact feeli n g desire clinging becoming bi rth t o

, , , , , , ,

old age a n d death The series is of very curious appeara n ce ;

.

i t has variously been declared to be one o f the first o f the

B uddha s di scoveries and to be a l ate conglomerate n o r i n
’
, ,

any case i s it a masterwork o f expression or thought In .

the V iew o f J acobi the whole refers but to o ne bi rth and

li fe The l ast element takes us i nto the mi ds t o f the
.

sorrow of existence which i s ex p l ained by bi rth The first

,
.

ten members serve to expl ain the origin of bi rth and are ,

deri v ed in p art from the S amkhy a and in p art from the

Yoga wh ich B uddh a well k n ew and whi ch had the 8 amkhy a
,

as the basi s of its philosophi c system Avi dy a ignorance .

, ,

is in the S amkhya and the Yoga alike the cause o f the

bindi n g o f the spirit It co n si sts in the failure to reali ze the
.

external distinction o f spi ri t a n d nature I n B uddhi sm it .

means the failure to realize the four great truths concerning

misery The S a msk ar a s are terms o f S amkhy a and Yoga
.
,

expressi n g the im p ressions made upon the intellect by such

P O ltr a m a r e ( L h is t o r ie d e s I d e e s Th e os op h i q u e s i 2 4 3 5 )
.
’ ’ ’

,
-

h o l d s th a t th e G u n a d o c t r i n e is a la t e r a c c r e ti o n t o th e S amk h y a ,

b u t w ith o u t a d e q u a t e g r o u n d s S e e a ls o O S t r a u s s Vi e n n a O r i e n t a l
. .
,

J o u r n a l xxv ii 2 5 7 ff w h o p o i n ts o u t th e a ffi n ity o f A r ada s v i e w s to

’
, , ,

t h o s e o f th e e p i c .
24 T HE S AM KHYA S Y S TEM

activities a s thinking feeling willi n g a n d actio n from , , ,

which in due course other p henome n a o f the li fe of the

soul spring forth The B uddhi st co n ceptio n of the
.

S a msk ar a s i s a varying one but it i s sometimes clearly ,

analogous in character Name a n d form are to be .

considered as really equivalent t o the p ri n ciple of individua

tion and they naturally grow out of V ijfi an a which i s
, ,

nothing el se th an the int e llect of the S amkhya whi ch has ,

V ijri an a as one of its function s Moreover the derivate

'

,
.

ch aracter o f the B uddhist system shows itself very clearly in

the fact that both for ig n orance a n d for the S a ms k ar a s an
i n tellect must be assumed whi ch i t merely admits a fter the ,

S a rn sk ar a s in the form of V ijfiana From indi v iduation

‘

the 8 amkhy a allows on the o n e hand the organs of se n se

, ,

and the fine eleme n ts from wh ich are developed the gross ,

elements to arise Thi s i s rendered plausible by the

,
.

cosmi c pri n ciple of i n dividuation for each world period but ,

in the B uddhist series from indivi duation a s n ame a n d ,

form the senses and thei r objects are derived simply a n d

,

without any j usti ficatio n as regards the derivati o n of the

gross w o rld fr om the indivi d u al The next element i n the .

B uddhist series contact is the contact of the senses and

, ,

the ir obj ects which i s recognized in the S amkhya Yoga : -

from it results the feeli n g of p leasure or the reverse which i s ,

the s ame as the feeling of the B uddhi st series From .

feeling ari ses desire according to both theories : from desire

the motive to rebirth or becoming which in the S amkhy a ,

Yoga is termed Ad r sta or D h a rm ad h a rm a u and in the , ,

B uddhi st Up ad an a cli n ging ,

.

The evi dence of depe n dence i s clearly somewhat lacking

in cogency e v en on the theory of the causal series adopted
,

by J acobi as regards certai n of the p oi n ts Moreover the

, .
,

ser ies i s i nterpreted o n the basi s of the oldest B uddhist

,

texts very differently by O l d e n b e r g fi He l ays stress on the

"

fact th at V ijfi an a i s conceived a s coming into exi ste n ce at

the time of conception as a result of the S a msk ar a s or ,

impressions wh ich have been formed in the mi n d through

,

ignorance in a former bi rth With V ijfi an a come into being .

B u d dh a ( 5 th pp 2 5 7.
- 95
2 .
 SAM KH YA A ND B U D D H I SM 25

name and form the latter being defi n itely t h e corp o real si de
,

of the future being while name hints at the personality

, .

From name and form we are led from experience o f the w o rld
through the senses to the desi re whi ch l eads to clinging t o
,

li fe and then ce to a further rebirth the series thus

, ,

illogically including a second rebirth which i s traced to ,

di fferent causes but the mai n idea being merely to S how the
,

con n ecti on of mi sery wit h li fe An attempt to s ave the

.

theory from the grave error o f bringing birth twi ce i n i s

‘
made by O l tr a m a re fi who argues that the matter i s
confined to an expl anati on of the exi stence o f misery based
‘

on the arguments th at man i s miserable because he exi sts

through being born : he i s born because he belongs to the
world o f becoming : he belongs to th at world because he
nourishes e x i stence in himsel f : thi s he doe s because he has
desires : he has desires because he h a s sens ations : he h as
sensations because he comes into cont act with the extern al
world : thi s he does because he h as senses which act : ,

the senses act because he opposes himsel f a s indivi dual to

the nonself ; thi s again he does because his c o nsci o usness i s
i mbued with the i dea of indivi duality : thi s agai n c o mes
from former experiences which in thei r turn are derived
,

from the lack of the correct knowledge Thi s i s a tempting .

suggestion but it is open to the serious objection that it

,

goe s a good deal beyond what i s recorded and introduces ,

in all probability too refined a psychology D e u s se n i goes

l
.

s o far as to hold that the system i s the conglomerati on o f

two quite di fferent elements : the l ast group o f membe rs

from desire onwards i s a formulation o f the ground of the
origin of misery : the group from the second to the seventh
explains psychol o gically the growth of the eighth des ire , ,

while the conception o f i gnorance i s borrowed from the

Ved an ta and pl aced at the head o f the series .

The only conclusion th at c a n be drawn from the evi dence

i s that some of the c o ncep tions of B uddhi sm are very closely
L a fo r m u l e b o u dd h i q u e d e s D o u z e C a u s e s ( G e n e v a ,
T Allg e m in e G e s c h ic h t e d e r P h i l os o p hi e , I , i ii, 1 6 4 16 8 -
His .

vie w is th a t V ijfian a is c o s m i c a n d p r o d u c e s a ll r e a l ity C f M . . .

W a lle s e r , D ie p h il o s o p h is c h e G r u n d la g e d e s alt e r e n IIB u d d h is m u s , p p .

4 9 ff , b u t s e e O ld e n b e r g , B u d d h a , p 2 6 3 n 1
. . . .
26 THE SA M KHYA S Y S TEM

al l ied to those of the 8 amkhya The most imp o rt ant .

correspondence i s that in the conception of the relation o f

ignora n ce and the S a msk ar a s the impressio n s thus left on ,

the mind which cause it in the V iew of the S amkhya to

,

attain ever new birth s u n til at last the true knowledge i s

,

reached and there ceases to be the pos s i bility of rebirth as

, ,

the source bei n g cut away n o more impressions can be

formed Thi s co n ce p tio n corresponds very closely with the
.

B uddhi st a n d the use of the term S a msk ar a s which i s not

, ,

a very n atural one possibly poi n ts to di rect borrowi n g

,
.

A second similarity o f great imp orta n ce i s the preci se

correspon dence o f the two ideas of the S arnkh y a that the ,

essenti al k n owledge i s to realize that a n ythi n g empiri c i s

not I and o f the B uddhist th at i t i s esse n ti al to free oneself
,

from the delusion th at there i s anythi n g w h i ch i s or belongs

to the self A further poi n t of close si mil arity i s the fact
.

th at both systems lay great stress on the co n ception of

causality and that they devote deep co n sideration to the
,

nature of the world process though there i s a great distinction

-
,

betwee n the B uddhi st resolution o f it into a series of

impressions determined causally and the S amkhya con ce p
tion of n ature Here too may be mentioned the defi n ite
.
, ,

correspondence betwee n the four truth s of the B uddhi st

system and the fourfold division of the doctrine of fi n al
release in the S amkhya Yoga The l atter falls under the -
.

heads of th at from which final release i s to be sought final ,

release the cause of th at from which release is to be sought

, ,

and the mean s to attain release whi ch are comp ared with ,

the medical heads o f disease health the cause of di sease , , ,

and healing The four B uddhist truths are misery the

.
,

origin of misery the remo v al o f misery and the mean s to

, ,

its removal whi ch i n on e B uddhist text are comp ared with

,

di sease i ts origi n its heali n g a n d the preventio n of

, ,

recurrence but the similarity i s not conclusi v e of borrowi n g

,
.

Yet a further striking parallelism with the S amkhya i s the

attitude o f B uddhism towards the end o f endeavour It i s .

perfectly plain th a t thi s is not looked upon as annihilation ,

however clear it i s th at it i s metaphysically noth ing else :

the doctrine of the B uddha i s full of the s avour o f Ni rv ana ,

and the repeated occurrence of that term in the epi c suggests

 SA M K HYA AND B UDD H I S M 7

that the expression was borr o wed from the B rahmani ca l

speculations by the B uddhi sts S imilarly i n the case o f .

the S amkhya though th e a tta in me n t o f k n owledge would

,

really be the end of all real e x i stence and n othi n gness i t i s ,

expressly recorded th at thi s i s n o t the ai m o f the seekers

a fter the true kn owledge who o n the contrary attai n
,

i sol ation as somethi n g in i tsel f e n during a n d perfect .

These poi n ts as well as the commo n possessio n o f the

,

rejection of the absolute are striki n g but at the s ame time

, ,

i t must be remembered th at in addition to the abse n ce of

,

the doctrine of the Gunas there is o n e other case o f the

,

first importa n ce in which the S amkhya i s very di fferent

from a n d more ad v a n ced tha n B uddhism
,
The S amkhya
,
.

goes to the logi cal extreme in its tre atme n t of the di fference
,

between spi rit a n d all else of attributi n g the whole o f the

,

app arent empi ri c exi sten ce to th e activity of n ature though ,

that acti v ity i s o n ly conscious by the union o f n ature with

S pirit It there fore postulates that there i s n o real u n io n o f
.

spirit a n d n ature : a n d in thi s result i t is quite logical but , ,

of course at the s ame time it brings about its own refutation

,

since i f there is n o union there can be no relea se

, , In the .

B uddhist V iew the release i s regarded as a real one not ,

as somethi n g whi ch is unreal and unconnected with the

substitute for sel f i n B uddhism Nor h as B uddhi sm any .

of the imagery by which nature i s represe n ted as a dancer

performi n g for the benefit o f spi ri t or the union o f spi ri t ,

and n ature i s regarded as th e union o f the lame and the

b li n d . In thi s a n d i n its elaborate series o f p sychologi ca l
conception s i t is clear th at the S amkhya as we know i t i s
,

far more advanced than B uddhi sm .

It seems best therefore to draw the conclusion th at

, ,

B uddhi sm di d not draw its i n spiration from the S amkhya

in the form in whi ch it appears e v e n in the epi c for there ,

the doctri ne of the i solation of S pirit and nature a n d o f the

three Gu n as i s fully and completely e v olved We h ave .

i n deed no means to assert th at the S amkhya or its closely

rel ated Yoga may not have existed in gradually ch anging
shapes long before it assumed its epi c form and th at there ,

may not have e x i sted a variety of its development which

di re ctly affected the gr o wth o f B uddhi sm B ut w e h av e n o .
28 THE SA M KH Y A S Y S TE M

means to reconstruct thi s st age of S amkhya nor can we say ,

whether there ever was a system u n der that name without

the Gunas : the period from the Up ani sads to the epi c
S amkhya is a long one and must have been marked by much
,

intellectual activity one form o f which may have bee n

,

a doctrine which cannot definitely be named S amkhya and ,

from which both S amkhya a n d B uddhi sm are deri v ed .

Th at such an athei st doctri n e should have been evolved at

an early d ate i s not i n the slightest degree wonderful .

There is abu n dant evidence o f the plenti ful supply

o f heretical doctrines in I n di a from an early d ate and an ,

atheist philosophy can have hardly been O p en to more

*

serious objectio n tha n an idealism which placed all reality

in an incomprehe n sible absolute and insi sted that all real ,

things were a mere ill u sion t .

T h e M i m ams a is a th e i s t ic i n d e e d , b u t it a s a p h i lo s o p h y w a s
d o u b t le s s h e ld to b e s u p p le m e n t e d b y t h e V e d an ta v
N e e r t h e le s s ,
.

w v w
h o e e r , it s h o s t h a t a th e i s m w a s n o t w
h o l ly u n I n d i a n
—
Cf . .

G a n ga n a t h J h a , Th e P r a b h ak a r a S y s t e m o f i v a M i m ams a, p p
P .

85 -8 .

“
1 T h e r e is , o f c o u r s e , a b u n d a n t la t e r e v i d e n c e o f th e k n o w l e d g e
o f B u d d h i s t t e a c h e rs o f S amk h y a a s in th e c a s e o f N ag ar j u n a ( J H
,
. .

W o o d s , Yo g a S y s t e m o f P a t a ri j a li, p xv iii ) . Th a t th e S amk h y a

s y s t e m w a s k n o w n t o t h e D i g h a N i k ay a is d i s p r o v e d b y Rh y s D a v id s ,
’

A m e r i c a n L e c t u r e s o n B u d d h i s m , p p 2 5 ff .
30 TH E S A M K HYA S Y S TEM

l anguage which may h ave their source merely in the

essenti al similarity of human Assuming that the
B h a g a v a d git a i s of inde p endent Indi an origin C arbe t ,

has endeavoured to show that i t was origi n ally a thei sti c

tra ct with a ph ilosophic a l basis in the S amkhya Yoga
,
-

system and in this form belongs to the early p art of the

‘

second century B C while in its pres e nt form in whi ch i t

, ,

h as been affected by Ved antism it belongs to the seco n d ,

century A D B ut p art of h is argume n t rested on the

. .

theory that the rep uted founder o f the Yog a S ut r a P a tafij a l i , ,

was i denti cal with the grammari an an d there fore belo n ged ,

to the seco n d ce n tury B C and with the disap p eara n ce of ,

thi s d octr in e t h is earlier d ate becomes extremely imp robable .

We are therefore left to conclude that the B h a ga v a d git a a s

, ,

we have it i s probably not l ater than the second century

A D . though eve n for th at date there is no absolutely
.
,

cogent proof In any case it may be assumed that i ts

.
,

materi al i s often older a n d the same consi deratio n s a p ply

,
*

to the other philosophi cal portions of the M a h ab h a r a ta

'

The philosophy p resented by the e p i c in the form which

we h ave it i s a conglomerate of very di fferent views and , ,

what is most important of very different views re p eated in ,

immedi ate pro x imity to on e a n other without a n y a p p are n t

sense of their i ncongruity There is however o n e decided .
, ,

characteristi c which holds good for the e p i c philoso p hy ,

and that i s its thei sti c tinge whi ch co n sta n tly i n trudes a n d , ,

which i s natural in an ep ic which had a far more p opul ar

appeal th an had the more p hilosophic al speculatio n s which
are here a n d there re ferred to in it Hence we need not be .

surpri sed that the ideali sti c inter p retatio n of the U pani sads ,

which seems in all emp i ri c reality nothing but the sel f

illusion of the B rahma n i s re p resented o n ly in the feeblest
,

degree in the epi c a n d that there i s no p ass age there which

,

can fai rly be s e t besi de the bold declaratio n of the

S v e ta s v a t a r a Up a nisa d ( iv 10 ) th at n ature i s nothi n g but
' '

S e e G a r b e , I n d ie n und das C h r is t e n t u m ( T u b in ge n ,

pp . 2 5 3 -2 5 8 .

I D ie B h a g a v a d g it a ( L e i p z i g 58-64
‘'

, pp . .

I S ee H Ja co b i . xxx i ,
2 4 29 ;
-
b elo w , pp . 56, 5 7 .
 THE P H ILO S OP HY O F TH E GR EAT EP I C 31

illusion M ay a On the o ther ha n d the epi c h as often the

,
.
,

doctrine of the development o f the whole u n iverse a s

a reality from the B rahman Thus the sel f i s s ai d ( xii
.
,

2 8 5 4 0 ) to send out from i tsel f the Gu n as the constituents

, ,

o f n ature as a S pider emits a web and the same i dea o f

, ,

the p roductive activi ty of the B rahman i s fou n d i n other

/
shape s Characteri sti c o f thi s strai n of thought and ,

linki n g i t closely with the B r ahma n a tradi tio n i s the ,

st atement ( xii 3 1 1 3 ) th at from the B rahman w as crea ted

, ,

the god B rahman who sprang forth from a golden egg a n d

, ,

th at thi s forms the body for all creatures .

B ut in addition to thi s v iew in whic h we h ave st ill all ,

derived from o n e principle there ari se s to prominence the

,

view that nature i s other than the sel f which i n thi s asp e ct ,

begi ns to receive frequently the designati o n of spirit ,

P u r u sa though it i s still co n cei v ed as cosmic

,
Thus we c
.

learn that nature creates but under the co n trol o f spi r it

,

( xii 3 14
, ,
or th at S pi rit impels to activity the creative
e l ements and i s therefore akin to them ( x i i 3 1 5
,
The , ,

question of the u n i ty o f S pi rit a n d reality i s expressl y

stated and denied in the A n u git a ( xi v 4 8 and
’

, ,

elsewhere ( xi i 2 2 2 1 5 16 ) it is e x pressly stated th at all

, , ,

activi ty rests in n ature th at spi rit i s n e v er active and th at

,

i t i s merely delusion whe n spi ri t co n siders itsel f acti v e a n d ,

i t is made clear that S pi rit is n o t one only The di sti n ctio n .

of spi ri t as inactive and nature a s all productive i s -

recogni zed in the B h a g a v a d git a ( v i 3 7 19 an d i s

’

, , ,

ofte n emphasized though in other places the ide a is found

,

that while creatio n and destructi on are the work o f nature ,

still nature is really an emanation from the S piri t i n to ,

which it resolves i tself from time to time ( x ii 3 0 3 3 1 ff ) , , .

The result of the develo p ment whi ch tran s fers all

activity to nature an d denies i t to s p i rit i s to make the
l atter the subject of knowledge only th at is to make spi ri t , ,

a sy n o n ym for the abstraction o f subj ect from obj ect in

concious n ess a n i dea whi ch is of course expressed amo n g
, , , .

other co n ceptions in the B r h a d ar a ny a k a Up a ni sa d ( i i 4 , ,

14 ; i ii 4 2 ; iv 3
, , ,
In the A n u git a ( xi 5 0 8 ff )
, , ,

the di stinctio n o f n ature and o f S p i rit a s o bject an d

subject is expressed in the clearest manner a n d the ,
 32 TH E S A M K HYA SY S TEM

s u b e cf
j i s decl ared t o be free fr o m any contrasts without
m

p arts ,
eter n al and essenti,a lly u n connected with the three
constitue n ts whi ch make up n ature /In thi s p assage and .

elsewhere the S pirit i s described as the Ks e tr a jh a the -

,

knower of the pl ace as opposed to the Kse tr a th e body , ,

.
,

and the relation of the two is descri bed in terms which S how
that all activity belo n gs to the empiri c se l f while the real ,

spi ri t i s a mere spectat o r ( xi i In this a s p ect spi rit i s ,

se t over against the twenty four pr inciples of nature as the -

twenty fi f th the former being the objects o f the latter the

-
, ,
.

subject of knowledge ( xii 3 0 6 3 9

,
"
B u t the relation , , ,

o f these two principles i s not detailed : it i s a mystery

which i s therefore expressed in vague te rm s S u ch a s the /

binding of S pi rit i n n ature or again i t is s ai d in the ,

A nu git a ( xiv 5 0 1 4 ) th at S pirit uses n a tu re a s a l am p

, ,

with wh ich i t enters the d arkn ess : the two are connected
like the fly and the fig leaf the fish a n d water B ut i t i s , .

perfectly clear that final rele ase comes through the

recog n ition of the fundamental di stinction of the spirit and
n ature ; on thi s bei n g attai n ed all intermixture with n ature
ceases for spi rit ( xi i 3 0 7 , ,

On the other h a n d beside thi s enumeration of twenty ,

fi ve principles which entirely declines to recognize the

,

existence of a n y personal deity a n d recognizes a multitude

o f individual spirits there stands a view which adds a ,

twenty sixth pri n ci p le

-
When the S pirit realizes its .

di stinction from nature a n d attains enlightenment i t as free, , ,

from the Gu n as recogni zes nature as possessi n g the Gun as

,

a n d u n spiritual and it becomes one with the absolute

,
thus ,

attai n ing its o w n true sel f free from empiri c reali ty , ,

u n agei n g and i mmortal In thi s co n dition as all dual i ty

.
,

h as di sa p peared the spi rit ceases to have know l edge whi ch

, ,

is essenti ally a result of multiplicit y " From thi s p oint of

view also i t i s p ossible to give an a n swer to the i n si ste n t
problem o f the n umber o f souls and to overcome the ,

discrep ancy between the views of multiplicity and of unity .

The sou l s s o long a s they are i n union with n ature are

numerous but as soon as they realize thei r d istinction from
,

n ature they fall back i nto the t wenty S ixth principle

,
-
,

which is th e inner sel f o f al l corporeal be ings the onlo o ker , ,

 THE P H ILO S OP HY O F THE GREA T EP I C 33

f ree fr o m the Gunas which can be seen by no o ne who is

connected with the G un a s /
,

( x i i 3 5 0 2 5 2 6 ; 3 5 1 2
, , , ,

The holders o f thi s view represent the Yoga o f the epi c as ,

the maintainers of the twenty fi v e principles alone represent

-

the s amkhy a school The st atement i s several times made

.

that the two schemes lead to o n e end an d are not

fundamentally di fferent but thi s cl aim i s made only from
,

the point o f view o f the Yoga and its in accuracy i s

,
,

expressly shown by the di scussi o n i n x ii 3 0 0 where the , ,

di fferences o f the two systems a r e _ fou nd to lie i n the fact

that the S arnk h y a di sowns an I Sv a r a while the Yoga ,

accepts on e ; and the S amkhy a relies on re asoning while the ,

Yo ga relies on the di rect percepti on o f the devotee Thi s .

p assage is o f import an ce also in showing the original force

o f the terms S amkhya and Yoga : the first must re fer not
merely to the e n umeration o f principles but to reflective
reasoning while Yoga de n otes religious practi ces and in
, ,

speci al the striving a fter the ideal of freed o m by means of

th e adoption of various devices t o secure mental exaltati o n
and the severance o f mind from thi n gs of sense .

The tendency to obliterate the di stinction of 5 amkhya

and Yoga by insi sting on thei r c o mmon goal and to rem o ve ,

th e di sti n ction between them and the more orthodox

Up ani sad doctrine by attributi n g to the Yoga the B rahman
as the twenty sixth pri n ciple i s a striking illustration o f the
-
,

ten dency o f the epi c to se e in all the philosophi c doctrines

merely vari atio n s of the B rahma n doctrine of the Up ani sads .

From the religious side of the epi c the S arn k h y a system i s

‘

strangely taken up into t h e Bh agavata fai th by the

equation of the four V yuh a s of the sup reme S pi ri t Vi shnu to
four of the principles o f the S amkhya philosophy Thus .

V asudeva is equated to S pirit S a rn k a r sa n a to the individual

'

soul P r a dy u mn a to mi nd and An iru dd h a to individuation

, , .

The last th ree eman ate e ach fr o m his predecess o r and fr o m ,

An ir u dd h a comes B rahman and from hi m the cre ated world

, .

The wi se reach the unity wi th the highest by the way o f

return thr o ugh An ir u d d h a P ra d y u mn a and S a mk a r sa n a t o
,

V asudeva and i t i s expressly stated that the S amkhyas

,

as well as the B h agav a ta s hold th i s belie f In the .

B h a gav a d gita itse l f the unity o f S amkhya and Yoga i s

34 THE SA M KHYA S YSTE M

insi sted upon and the S amkhya d o ctrine is at l east i n

, ,

the p oem as i t now sta ds n * overlai d by the twofold ,

doctrine that both S pi rit a n d nature are ultimately derived

from the one a n d the same source whi ch from the poi n t of , ,

v iew of the Ved anta i s the B rahma n but from the religious
poi n t of v iew is Kr sii a
, ,

I n additio n to the expositio n of the fu n damental

rinciple of the S k h the difference between the
‘

p a n I y a ,

subject a n d the object there i s fou n d already in the epi c

,

many o f the elements whi ch make up the classical system .

Nature is repeatedly declared to consist o f three co n stituents ,

S attva Raj as and Tamas which are called Gu n as a term

, , ,

fou n d in the Upa n i s ads n o t before the late M a i tr ay a n i

(iv 3 ; v,
In the A n u gi t a stress 1 5 laid o n the fact th at
,

these three co n stitue n ts are p rese nt throughout all thi n gs ,

though in di ffere n t degree The three Gu n as are often

.

regarded as the fetters o f the souls si n ce they re p resent ,

nature and on e di v isio n of men give n in x i i 3 4 8 prese n ts us

, , ,

with the three classes o f S attv ik a s in whi ch the quality of

goodness prevails V y am iSr a s in whom the R aj as and
,

Tamas d e s ire i and indi ffere n ce eleme n ts are mixed with

, ,

goodness and the V a ik ar ik a s in whom the quality of

, ,

i n di ffere nce prevails throughout a n d who indeed with a , , ,

natural i n consi ste n ce from the n ormal doctrine are declared ,

to be de v oi d of a n y portio n of g ood n ess A doctri n e of the .

classi c S amkhy a occurs n ot rarely accordi n g to which the ,

qualiti es of goodness des i re a n d indi ffere n ce are ch aracter

,

is tic of the worlds of the gods of men and of beasts a n d ,

pl a n ts respectively an d the A n u git a ( xiv 3 6 3 8 )

’

-
, , ,

disti n gui shes three cl asses of bei n gs accordi n g a s through

good n ess they adv an ce upwards to the world of the gods ,

or through desire remai n i n the world of men or through ,

i n di fference desce n d to the world of beasts a n d plants .

From n ature in the S amkhya o f the e p ic as i n the

,

classi cal s amkhya are derived the various portio n s of the

,

empi ric world but on thi s subj ect there p revails in the e p i c
,

an abund ant pro fusion of vi ews It i s clear th at the .

An d p e rh a p s a b i n i t io , se e E . W . H o p k in s ,
19 0 5
pp . 38 4- 3 89 .
 TH E P H I L O S O P HY OF T H E GR E A T E P I C 35

reflective S p irit greatly o ccu p ied itsel f in devi sing enumera

tions o f the portions o f the self : eight wa s a favourite
number but the elements of the eight di ffer Thus in one
,
.

version they are the five senses mind intellect and the , ,

S p irit as Ks e tr a jfi a ( xii 2 4 8 1 7 in another for the spi rit

, , , ,

Citta thought i s substituted and the spi rit is reckoned as a

, , ,

ninth element ( xii 2 7 5 16 Even s uch an absurdity

, , ,

i s achieved as when a complex o f fi fteen i s made up of

spi rit nature i ntellect indivi duation in tw o forms as
, , , ,

Ahamk ara and Ab h im an a the senses a n d thei r objects a n d , ,

t h e whole complex in cl u d irig spirit i s derived from nature

, ,

In xi i 3 13 however we fi n d e n umerated as derived from

, , , ,

nature the five o rgans of perce p tion the five organs of

, ,

action mind i n di v iduation and intellect wh ich in its

, , , ,

substance corres p o n ds with the products of the cl assical

S amkhya A nearer approach
.,
’
to the l ater doctrine
i s however to be found i n the A n u g i t a ( xiv 4 0
’

, , ,

where the order of developme n t and not merely the

results i s gi v en : from the unevolved i s produced the
great self from it individuation from i t the five elements
, , ,

from them on the one h and the qualities of sound etc and
, , ,
.
,

on the other the fi v e vital ai rs wh ile from i n divi duation ,

arise the eleven organs of sen se five of perceptio n five o f , ,

action a n d mind .

I n the epi c the three entities intellect individuation anid , ,

mi n d have all often a fully cosmi c fu n ction : they are

,

natural expressio n s for the activity of a personal creator ,

whether developed or not from the B rahma n and a s we ,

have seen are adopted I n thi s sense by the B h aga v a ta s in

the series of S arnk a r sa n a P r a dyu mm a and An ir u d d h a
‘

, ,

though in th at series mind an d P r a d y u m n a rank above

indi viduation and An ir u d d h a The distinction however .
, ,

betwee n i n tellect a n d i n dividuation i s a S light one a n d i s not ,

normally made : rather it i s assumed th at intellect p e r s e involves

individuation and when both terms occur it must be held that
we have a r e s iil t of a further process of an alysi s Beside the
,

cosmic function of t hese powers they figure largely in epic

p sychology The principle of individ uation p asses for a
.

factor in will and at other times describes the function o f

,

attentio n : it is even by a false abstractio n further s u b d iv id

36 T HE SAM KH Y A S Y S TE M

ed and appears as two S pecies the o ther be ing Ab h im an a ,

( xi i 2 0 5
, The other terms are variously ex p l ained
, ,

but it i s a common i dea that d ata are given by se n se that ,

the mind ponders upon them or rai ses d ou b ts a n d that the ,

intellect decides ( xii 2 7 5 1 7 ; 2 8 5 while the S p irit i s , , ,

a mere spectator a view which corres p o n ds with the doctri n e

,

that spirit i s the subj ect without which a l l these psychic

processes would be b l in d a n d unco n sci ous On the othe r ] .
u

hand stress i s often ( xii 3 1 1 ; xi v 2 2 ) lai d o n the fact

, , ,

that the se n ses require the operation o f mind to produc e

p erceptio n s : without mi n d there is n o result but equall y , .

without the senses mind is empty It acc o rds well with thi s .

view th at to mind is attributed the fu n ction of dreams .

Mind also in xi i 3 13 i s brought di rectly i nto co n n ection

, , ,

with the orga n s of action to whi ch it must be conceived as ,

.

conveyi n g the commands arisi n g from the deci sions of

i n tellect but in x ii 2 9 9 2 0 the function o f acti n g towards
, _ , ,

the organs of actio n as the mind acts to the organs of

perception is attri buted to stre n gth B ala a concepti o n , ,

wh ich however i s not mai n tai n ed

, ,
.

The i n tellect is ofte n a s in the Ka th a Up a nisa d ,

t

compared to a charioteer whose reins are mind a n d whose ,

horses the senses The traveller i n the ch ariot i s in the .

A n u g it a ( xi v 5 1 4 ) declared to be the B h utatm a n

, ,
a ,

conception which corresponds roughly to the psychi c

app aratus o f the classical s amkhya which consi sting o f ,

mi n d individuation intellect the ten senses the fine

, , , ,

eleme n ts a n d the subtle p ortions o f the gross eleme n ts ,

accomp anies the S pirit in all its transmigratio n s There is .

,

however no trace in the epi c o f a preci sely corres p onding

,

e n umeratio n of entities as formi n g p art of the B h ut atm a n ,

for the epi c o ften does not recogn ize the fine eleme nt s at
all * Other terms for thi s migrati n g app aratus are Li n ga
.
,

which however also denotes the gross corporeal body and

, , ,

Re ta h Sarira seed body whi ch recalls the doctrine of the

-
, ,

classical S amkhya that the gross body i s producted from ,

the seed of the subtle p ortions of the gr o ss elements wh i ch ,

form p art of the psychic app aratus .

S e e 0 S tr a u ss Vi e n n a
.
,
O r ie n ta l J o u r n a l, xx v n , 2 5 7 - 2 7 5 , wh o,
h o w e v e r o v e r s t a t e s th e c a s e
,
.
38 THE SA M KHY A S Y ST E M

and free will and i s further complicated by the be l i ef in the

-
,

saving power of devotio n to God and his p ower to help ,

.

The fate of the souls on death is descri bed more or less

closely in accord with the doctrine of the Up a n i s ads : there ,

i s the way of the gods whi ch leads to the world of B rahman

,

and to freedom from tra n smigration ; there i s the way of

the fathers whi ch i s the fruit of good deeds a n d l e ads back
,

to rebirth O II e arth ; there i s the thi rd p lace rebirth as a beast ,

or a pla n t and there i s also the possibility of pu n ishme n t in

,

hell Fi n al release c a n be obtai n ed either by knowledge in

.

the form of reflectio n the S arn k h y a way which uses the

‘

means o f percep tio n i n fere n ce a n d scri p ture or by the pra o

, ,

tice of Yoga which results in an i n tuitive perceptio n of the

,

final truth The truth takes two di sti n ct forms : in the one
.
‘

c ase the end is the recognitio n of the i dentity of the

i n divi dual sel f a n d the absolute which results in the ,

possessor o f that k n owledge becomi n g the absolute ; for in

the strict se n se the indi v idual self is as in the Ved an ta the , ,

absolute sel f and not a p art of it or at least the individual

, ,

i s merged in the absolute i f as often may be the case the , , ,

feeli n g i s tha t the i n dividual i s for the time at least real a n d ,

release i s a merger rather th an an ide n ti ficatio n Thi s .

state o f identificatio n or merger i s the state of supreme

, ,

bli ss though p ast all comprehensio n and understandi n g

, ,

which is styled Ni rv an a O n the other hand there appears

.
-
,

often in the closest co n n ectio n wi th thi s v iew the more

pro p erly S amkhya view of the goal being i solatio n a n d the ,

savi n g knowledge not that of the u nity of the i n dividual a n d

the absolute but the re aliz atio n of the disti n cti on betwee n
,

sel f as spirit a n d n ature The result of thi s k n owledge is

.

the freedom of the spiri t from all i n divi duality a n d all

consciousness the S pirit bei n g freed for ever ( xiv 4 7 8 ff
, , ,
.

This i s n ot merely the aim of the followers o f S amkhya but ,

of the _followers of Yoga also who despite thei r accepta n ce , ,

of an I Sv a r a devotion to whom by meditatio n u p o n hi m i s a

,

p owerful assista n ce to final release n e v ertheless in their ,

desire for release aim at the i solation o f the souls from

nature not at u n ion with an absolute
,

Not only has the epi c the terms S amkhya and Yoga both
i n thei r more general sense a n d also a s denoting the systems
,
 T HE PH I LO S OP H Y OF T H E G REAT EP I C 39

with twenty fi ve and twenty S ix principles respectively but

- —
, ,

the names of three teachers who are given i n the l ast verse ,

of the S amk hy a K ar i k a as the h anders down of the system ,

duly ap p ear in xii 3 19 5 9 a s teachers of the doctrine with , ,

a twenty fi fth S piritual princi p le alo n g with J a igisa v ya

—
,

Asita Devala P a r aSa r a V ar s a ga n ya B h rgu Suka Gautama

, , , , , ,

A r s tis e n a Garga N arada P u l a s ty a

, S a n a tk u m ar a Sukra
, , , ,

a n d K a syapa O f the three me n tioned here a n d in the

.

K a r i k a K apila plays a great figure in the philosophy o f the

’ ’

epi c : he i s authorita tive in all philosop hi c matters and h i s ,

te n ets are of the most diverse kinds In the stri ct sense of .

the word he is indeed th e o n ly founder o f a system , ,

recog n ized in the e p ic the other perso n s being either ,

gods or h is disciples He himsel f i s i denti fied with Ag n i , ,

with S iva a n d Vi sn u : he also appears as in the Sv e t asv a tar a ,

Up a nis a d ( v as i denti cal with Hir a n y a ga rb h a ( xii 3 3 9

, , ,

68 ; 342 Moreover A suri and P afic a Sik h a appear

, ,

also in x ii 2 1 8 14 as teachers of the d o ctrine of the

i
, , ,

B rahma n The system of P a fi c a Sik h a i s develope d in great

.
*

detail in x ii 2 19 : n o t only h as it i n detail no s p eci al con

,

n e c tio n with the S amkhya but in its fundamental princi p les ,

it i s not S amkhya at all ; on the co n trary while the separate ,

existe n ce for the time being of the indivi dual soul i s asserted ,

it i s expressly made clear that i t flows a s a stream to the

ocean and th at at the end i t i s merged i n the great ocean of
,

being a n d embraced o n all si des losing then consciousness ,

.

A s the deer leaves its old horn o r the sn ake its wor n out ,
-

S kin or the bi rd the falli n g tree so the freed soul ab andons

, ,

its woe and goes on the perfect way leavi n g behind plea
, ,

sure ;an d p ain without eve n a subtle body In addition to .

this e x position o f the doctrine o f B rahman without illusio n ,

P a fi ca Sik h a di ffers in his psychology from the orthodox

S amkhya : he holds the belief i n the exi stence of power a s
the sixth organ with the organs of actio n corres p onding to ,

mind as the si xth o f the organs o f perception He also .

holds that activity i s produced by the combined result of

k n owledge heat a n d wind : the first element produces the
,

se n ses and thei r objects sep arate existence perception , ,

See E . W H o p k in s
.
,
G re at E p ic o f I n dia , pp . 149 ff .
40 THE S AM KHYA SYSTEM

and mind ; heat prod uces gall and o ther bases ; win d
pr o duces the two vital breaths Further he di scusses the .
,

question of the n ature of dee p sleep and the fact that

the senses are not then really acti v e In both these .

respects the importance attac h ed to the vital airs a n d other

,

physical bases and i n the stress lai d on the question of the

,

nature o f deep S leep P a fic a Sik h a i s tru l y Ved antic a n d ,

not an uph o lder o f the S amkhya .

The degree of faith which can be attributed to thi s

account of the views of P a fi c a Sik h a can be j udged from the
fact that in xi i 3 2 1 9 6 1 1 2 we have a di ffere n t account of
, ,
-

the views of that s age Here there are thirty pri n ciples .
,
*‘
with God superadded They are th e ten senses and mi n d .
, ,

power being ig n ored : i ntellect S attva i ndividuation the , , ,

general disposition ig n orance the source the mani festatio n , , , ,

the uni fication of doubles such as p leas antnes s a n d u n p l e a

s a n tn e s s time the fi v e gross elements bei n g and not bei n g
, , , ,

cause seed and power The source o f all these factors i s

,
.
‘

the unevolved which i s evolved by means of these pri n ciples

, ,

an d as evolved i s the individual The way of li fe to be .

sought i s renunci atio n Yet another account o f the .

principles i s given in a v ersion ascri bed i n xii 2 7 4 to A sita ,

Devala bu t the details o f thi s version devi ate m o re and

,

more from any normal s chedule the organs o f knowledge ,

b eing reckoned at eight .

The question arises whether we c an on the strength of ,

these notices attribute any serious value to the tradition

,

preserved in the S amkhy a K ar ik a The answer as regards .

Kapila and A suri can h ardly be in the affirmative in the ,

sense th at the notice o f the Kari k a r e ceives a n y sup port

from the epi c I f there was ever a s age K apila who .
, ,

expounded phil o sophy he had dis appeared i nt o a mass of ,

o bsc u re tradition at an early d ate More o ve r there i s gra v e .

,

doubt to suspect hi s real exi stence at all in view of the fact ,

th at he may owe h is name merely to the use of Kapila i n

the Sv e t as v a ta r a Up a nisa d ( v 2 ) as a descriptio n of
’
'

Hira n y a ga rb h a The li keliho o d i s that the name K apil a i s

.

S ee E . W H op k in s G r e a t E p i c of I n d ia
.
, , p . 15 2 . F . O S ch r a d e r
.

lxv iii , 10 6 , n . 3) t
s u g ge s s in s te a d n a u re t a n d s p ir it , but
th i s s e e ms a n e r ro r .
 THE P H I L O S OP HY OF T HE G R EA T EP I C 41

mere l y th at o f a divinity w hi ch h a s fo r wh at e ver rea so n , ,

bee n ass o ci ated closely with th e 8 amkhya philos ophy in i ts

atheisti c form though it is essenti al t o n o te t h at th e
,

associ ati o n i s not epi c in which K api l a is by n o mean s ,

exclusive l y an expounder of the S amkhya and where there ,

preva ils th e vague i dea th at the S amkhya i s at b o ttom quite

consi stent with be l ief in the B rahman A suri is a mere .

name and we cannot possi bly a ccept hi m a s a hi s torica l

,

philosopher with o ut mor e pr oo f The epi c assert s th at he .

taught P a fi c a Sik h a whence n o doubt c o mes the statement in

,

the K ar ik a .

The case of P a fi c a Sik h a offe rs m o r e di fficu l ty and he

»
.
,

h a s often been treated as a n authenti c teacher : i ndeed the ,

Chinese traditi on attri butes t o h im the w o rk kn o wn as

*

S a st i t a n tr a though d o ubtless
,
by an error There h as been .

seen a certain simi l arity between the d o ctri ne s attributed t o

P a fi c a Sik h a i n the few p ass ages quoted fr o m him in th e
commentary o n the S amk hy a S utr a and doctrines expressed
in the epi c Thus h is V iew o f the i nfinitely smal l siz e o f the
.

soul may be comp ared w ith the s ame doctrine expressed i n

xi i 3 4 6 13 1 8 and h is V iew o f the unenlightened indi vi dua l
, ,
-
,

with that expres sed in xii 3 10 but these comp ari s o ns do , ,

not carry u s any further a s they do n o t b y any means , .

c o nnect even the P a ri c a Sik h a o f the epi c wi th the reputed

’

P a fi c a Sik h a o f the sch o o l traditi on The o nly c o nclusi o n .

availab l e i s that the i dentity o f the presumab l y actua l

teacher menti o ned by the c o mmentat o rs and the epi c
P a fi c a Sik h a i s n o t proved and that the l atter at l east , , ,

certai nly di d not te ach as he i s represented any S ingle

d o ctrine and certainly not a s aink h y a o ne We h ave there
, .
,

fore tw o possi bili ties open to us : either we can a ssume that

,

the name P afi c aS ikh a was that o f an ancient s age perhap s

, , ,

a s may be indi cated by B uddhi st e vidence cited bel o w ,

originally a divine personage to wh o m a s t o K apil a for , , ,

reas o ns unknown to us certai n d o ctrines were ascribed j u st

, ,

as for i nstance S a n atk u m ara cle arly a divine being i s cited

, , , ,

a s an auth o rity i n the epi c o r that the l at e epi c uses the ,

Ta k a k u s u , B u ll e tin d E c o l e F r a n ga is e d E xt r ém e
’ ’
O r ie n t, iv 5 7 ,

s q ; T u x e n , Yo g a , p 14 . .
42 THE S AM K HYA S Y S TEM

n ame of an actual teacher of high ra n k in the S amkhy a

.

Yoga school but sim p ly ascribes to hi m doctrines at ra n dom

, ,

i n differe n t to their i n n er consi stency and still more to thei r

co n sistency with the views which were actually held by the
te acher in questio n In the l atter case the questio n a rises
.

whether P a fica Sik h a can be d ated early enough to re n der

plausible hi s ap p earance in the epi c which was practically ,

complete by 5 0 0 A D even as regards the p hilosophic

. .

portions and which probably co n tained these sections much

,

earlier than th at .

The i nformation whi ch h as been preserved as to the v iews

o f P a fic a Sik h a i s fragmentary but n o t unimp orta n t a n d , ,

the d e fi n ite ne ss o f some of these O pinio n s suggests a real

personality The same impre ssion of reality is b orn e o u t
. .

by the fact that V ac a sp a tim iSr a in hi s commentary o n the ,

Yog a S utr a regul arly ide n ti fies a s hi s views certain remarks

,

quoted as from the teacher by V y as a in hi s commentary a n d ,

that views are exp ressly given as hi s i n th e S amk hy a S utr a .

He appears also i f we may _trust V y as a and V aca sp a tim iSr a

, ,

to have styled K apil a the A d iv id v an and to h ave asserted

that he taught Asuri but he does n ot hint that he himsel f
,

w a s the pupil of A suri a fact which discredits the assertio n

,

of thi s fact in verse 7 0 of the S amk hy a K ar i k a From the .

form i n which h is v iews h ave bee n preser v ed for u s i t *

would clearly seem that he wrote a work in prose S utras .

The account of th e three Gunas attributed to him in the

comment o n the S amk h y a S utr a ( i 12 7 ) i s perfectly in ,

kee p ing with the normal S amkhya Yoga view and h is -

,

doctrin e of the reason o f the eternal co n nection of spirit a n d

nature q uoted in the S utr a ( vi 6 8 ) is the obviously correct,

one th at it i s due to l ack o f discrimination a view much ,

more thorough than the reply o f the teachers generally that

it was caused by works o r th at o f S anandana who is else ,

where u n known that it was caused by the internal body or

,

p sy chi c a p p aratus s i n ce clearly the first answer merely

,

gives a pro x imate c ause and the s eco n d not even a cause
, ,

but the mere form in which the connectio n ex p resses itself .

Further i t is certainly in better agreeme n t with the view of

,

S e e Yo g a S ut r a B h as h y a i, 4 ; S amk h y a S ut r a
, ,
v ,
32 ; vi ,
68 .

See a ls o G a r b e , F e s t g r u s s a n R v a n R o t h p p
. 7 5 ff. . .
 THE P H ILO S OP HY OF T H E GR EA T EP I C 43

many spi rits in the S amkhy a that e ach should be regarded

a s atomi c a s i s expres sly recorded in the Yo g a S utr a
,
*

c ommentary ( i 3 6 ) as the V iew of P a ri c a Sik h a : failing the

' ‘

recognition th at the spi ri t must be consi dered as not i n

space whi ch is not ac h ie v ed by a n y schoo l o f In di an
,

philosophy it is clear th at with an i n fin ity o f spi rits

,

the doctrine of their infi n ite e x tent i s d i fficult a n d i t i s ,

probable enough th at in thi s v iew which is accepted ,

throughout the rest o f the hi story of the S amkhya th ere i s ,

to be seen a trace of the influenc e of the Ved anta

'

While thi s doctri ne points to the early d ate of P a fic a s rk h a

in the S amkhya school traditio n i t would be an error to ,

place hi s date u n duly high for i n the S amk hy a S ut r a

'

( v 3 2 ) he i s cited as gi v i n g a defi n itio n o f V y ap ti pervasion

, , ,

which rests on the basi s th at i n tellect etc a n d nature etc ,

.
, , .
,

stand to one a n other in the rel atio n of what i s to be

supported and the support Thi s definiti on shows th at
P a fi c a Sik h a must h ave bee n f a m il a r wi th the terminology
of the Ny aya sch o ol and without postul ati n g th at he must ,

have know n the Ny ay a D a rs a n a a s preserved to u s i t

’

i n dicates that he does not belo n g to an early period for the ,

Ny aya school i s certai n ly along with the V a iSe s ik a the , ,

latest of the orthodo x systems being barely k n ow n e v e n in ,

the latest p arts of the great epi c Thi s fact h armoni zes .

well with the fact that hi s style agrees most closely with
th at of the writer S a b a r a sv am in whose period h as been ,

fi x ed by J a c ob i i a s comp a rati v ely late perhaps the fi fth

’ ‘

ce n tury A D There i s no re ason to p lace P a fi c a Sikh a so

. .

late as thi s : it i s most probable th at he is older than

ISv a r a k r S n a who is not to be d ated after 3 0 0 A D
, The . .

date of the first ce n tury A D a scri bed conj ecturally to . .

,

P a fi c a Sik h a by may therefore be regarded as n o t .

excessively early : the evi d ence for the present h ardly

carries him beyo n d the second ce n tury A D Thi s d ate . .

would leave i t open for h is fame to become distorted and

J . H Wo o d s
.
,
Yo g a S y s t e m o f P a t a fij a l i , p . 7 4, s u gg e s s t tha t
P a fi c a Sikh a s i e
’
v w was n ot ge n e r a l . bu t re fe rre d o n ly to s o m e p a r ti
c u la r s ta g e o f th e sel f . T h i s is d o u b tfu l .

T xxx i , 24 : S a rnk h y a
II P h il o s o p h i e , p . 34
44 TH E SA M K HYA S Y STE M

for strange d o ctrines t o b e ascri bed to him i n the epic It .

i s however in keeping with hi s i n depende n t position th at the

, ,

epic should ascri be to him the older doctrine that the gross
body was composed of all five elements as agai n st the theory ,

o f the S amk hy a S utr a th at it was made up of one only the ,

other four serving merely ancillary purposes .

In the B uddhi st texts not only late but early there i s

*
, ,

mention o f a G an d h a b b a P a fi c a Sik h a as in the v ici n ity of

the B uddh a : it would probably be u n wise to see in thi s
personage a re fl e c tion of the hi storic P a fi c a Sikh a a s it would
'

b e necessary to bring d o wn the aff ected texts very l o w or to ,

s e e i n it an interp ol ation The similari ty of name is there

.

for e t o be regarded as acci dental f o r i t i s most improbable ,

th at the man should derive his n ame from the demo n .

Another teacher o f Yog a who i s me n tioned in the epi c

i s J a igisa vy a wh o according to the Kar m a P u r an a was a
, , ,

fellow pupil of P afi c a éik h a The o n e certai n piece of .

i n formati o n regarding him contai n ed in the commen tary o n

the Yoga S utr a ( i i 5 4 ) sh o ws him a s a teacher of Yo ga
,
'

doctrine Hi s reality i s therefore assured in a very di fferent

.
, ,

degree th an th at o f S ana S anaka S a n ata n a S a n a tk u m ar a

, , , ,

and S an atsu jat a wh o with V o dh u a re gi ven as teachers in

,

the epic . O f these the last o nly in whose name a degraded ,

form of B uddh a h a s been s ee n t b u t wholly without grou n d , ,

appears to h ave any hi storical reality : the list of S amkhya

teachers to whom an o blati o n of water i s d aily offered by
the o rthod o x B r ahm an includes hi s name a fter Kapil a and
A suri and before P a fi ca Sik h a while an a th a r v a P a r iSiSta ,

places him even before A suri It would be unwise to place .

any faith on these evidences of chronology but i t i s worth ,

noting that the Chinese translation of the comm entary on the

S amk hy a K a r ik at suggests a series of teachers in which
’

after P afi c a Sik h a come _Garga and Ul uka or perh aps , ,

V odh u before Var sa and I Sv a r a k t sn a

,
.

In the law book o f Manu which i s contempora n eous ,

with the main body o f the did actic epic we find the S amkhya ,

H O ld e n b e r g B u d d h a
.
, , p . 111 .

T W e b e r c ite d b y G a r b e , op . c it .
p 35. .

1 B u lle ti n d E c o l e F r a n ca is e d E x t r é m e O r ie nt ,
’ ’
iv , 59 .
46 THE SAM KHYA SYSTEM

Vi snu as supreme spirit is one not only with spirit but

, ,

with n ature a n d with time

, The M a tsy a P u r an a again .

finds that the three Gu n as in the great p ri n ciple are ,

i dentical with B rahman Vi s n u and S iva N aturally these

, .

and similar views in the Pur anas give us no information

*

o f worth as to the antiquity o f the S amkhya system or its

primitive ch aracter .

The question inevitably ari ses as to th e n ature o f the

system of S amkhya taught in the epi c The view adopted by .

Garbe r i s that the S amkhya of the epi c i s merely a popular

’

izing and contamination of the true S amkhya which he ,

co n siders i s of too i n di vidual a type to h ave been produced

exce p t a s the cre ation of some o n e mi n d A S he holds th at .

thi s i n ge n ious system was in vogue before the ri se of the

epi c or at least before the epi c took its present sh ape it i s
, ,

n atural that s o importa n t a philosophy should h ave left its

traces u n mistakeably in the epi c and equally natural that ,

the form in whi ch it appears should be o n e far removed

from the preci sio n a n d clarity o f the true sys tem /To thi s .

argument t he most serious obj ection i s the fact th at there i s

n o real e v ide n ce that the S amkhya p hiloso p hy exi sted as a

complete whole as early as the p eriod of the epic s ay 2 0 0 ,

B C to 2 0 0 A D
. . the evide n ce o f the p riority of suc h a
. .
,

system to B uddhism bei n g as h as been seen above far from , ,

-

coge n t Nor agai n is there really a n y su fficient ground to

. .

hold that the S amkhya system i s the bold and origi n al

product of a si n gle mind On the contrary the system on .
,

close e x ami n ation c a n be seen to be a somewhat illogical

reductio n of pri n ciples whi ch are expressed in the B rahma n
p hilosophy of the U p ani sads a n d i n opposition to the theory ,

Of a rapi d develo p ment must be s e t the far more p robable

theory of slow growth which c a n be traced through the
,

later U pani s ads the K a th a a n d the S v e t as v a t ar a which

‘

, '
,

h ave clear traces o f the doctri n e of evolution o f princi p les

in the S amkhya man n er Moreover i f as i s supposed the
.
, ,

P u r u sa a n d P r a k r t i a r e o t e n i d e n ti fi e d fit h th e m a le a n d w
fe m a l e p r in c ip le s : h e n c e S a k ti , a n d P r a k t t i b
e c o m e i d e n ti fi e d , a n d in

th e T a n t r a s P r a k t t i a n d S a k t i a r e o n e a n d th e s a m e t h e c r e a ti e v
fi r s t p r in c ip lew x v
h ic h is e a l te d e e n o v e r t h e s u p r e m e d u ty .

“
1 S amk h y a P h il os o p hi e , p p . 47 -52 .
 THE P H I LO S OP HY OF TH E GREAT EP I C 47

full S amkhya system was i n e xi sten ce bef o re the epic it is ,

de cidedly strange that the epi c should practically ignore

the doctrine of fine elements which that system h a s so
clearly O n the other h and the terminology applied in the
.
,

K ar i k a to these fine elements and to th e gros s element s the , ,

first being described a s V iSe sa and the latter a s Av iSe s a i s , ,

de ci dedly unn atural and curious and contr asts sharply with
the simple description of the gross elements and thei r char
ac te r is tic s V i Se s a s i n the epi c
, , .

A very d iffere n t theory of the epic S amkhy a i s presented

by D ahl m a n n * In hi s view the epi c i s not as is usually
.
,

supposed a heroic epi c into whi ch there h as been put at

,

various times vast masses o f did acti c an d unepi c materi al .

From its earliest period the epi c w a s he holds not di fferent , ,

from wh at it now i s : it was essenti ally a book o f customary

law and usage which the epic tale illustrates
,
It follows .

from this V iew that the e p i c i s held to be of great antiquity ,

and that in place o f seeing i n i t a h e terogeneous mass o f

contradictory views we must s ee i n i t the expression of one
,

single doctrine Thi s is the epi c S amkhy a wh i ch represents

.

the development o f the unsystemati c teachings of the e arly

Up ani sads It i s essenti ally a science o f the B rahman
.
,

B r a h m av i d y a but it i s at the s ame time based on logic

, ,

An v ik sik i a n d while it never abandons traditional fo u n d a

,

tions only o nce and th at on the doctrine of Ah irns a

—
, ,

which he supports against tradition i s Kapil a pronou n ced ,

the holder o f an u n orthodox view in the epi c still it freely —

uses the processes of reasoning I ts speci al aim i s the .

investigation and setting forth of the number o f p rinciples -

involved and thei r evolution from the absolute It i s a th e .

is t ic merely i n the sense that it denies any person al deity

such a s th at accepted by the Yoga but n o t i n the sen se th at ,

it denies the absolute and imperson al B rahman which o n ,

the contrary i t unquestion ably recogni zes a n d i n which the ,

individual soul finds Ni rv an a B ut be side the absolute i t .

rec o gnizes the exi stence o f a materi al n ature whi ch i s the ,

source o f the mani fold character of the empi ri c sel f S ince ,

Nir v an a ( 189 7 ) S amk h y a P h il os op h i e

and Cf A E . . .

G o u gh P hilos op h y o f
, t h e U p a n isa d s , p p 2 0 0 ff ; . S . K . B e l va r k a r
B h a n d a r ka r C omm e m o r a t io n Vo l u m e , p p 18 1 18 4 .
-
.
48 THE SAM KHYA S Y STEM

thr o ugh i t the absolute bec o mes mu l tiplied and it sets ,

itsel f to defi n e i n detail nature and i ts workings It is .

merely i n its substance a clearing up of the doctrines which

are contai n ed i n the older Up ani sads such as the ,

B r h a d ar a n y a h a and the C h an d ogy a : these texts lay great

stress on the fact that there i s o ne sel f o r absolute and that ,

all else i s not true reality and that it i s a mi stake which

,

leads to transmigration to believe th at the empiri c i s the

true re ality B ut these Upani sads do not deal di stinctly
.

with the nature o f the empiric reality : the question whether

it i s merely an illusion i s not discussed a n d the doctrine of
mere illusion i s not s e t out though no doubt the extreme
,

stress laid on the unreality of the world of experience from ,

the point of view of true reality tends to render the growth ,

of this doctrine not unn atural Ultimately the epic.

S amkhya wi th its logical theory o f the Brahman becomes on ,

the o n e hand the classical S amkhya which has learned to do

,

without the B rahman and on the other hand by the laying

, ,

of increased stress on the unreality of the world is developed

the illusion theory of Sa mkara D a hl m a n n traces the origin
.

of the theory not merely back to the older Up ani sads : he

sees in the hymn of the Rgv e d a x 1 2 9 t h e creati o n of the
, , ,

u n i v erse from a n i n definite substance descri bed as water by

an absolute already e x i sting an d he co n siders that the fact
,

that the A tman i s called the twenty fi fth in the S a ta p a th a -

and S ah k h ay a n a B r ah ma n a s i s a foreshadowing o f the

twenty four principles of the S amkhya other than the self
-
,

while the three Gu n as he finds adumbrated in the A th a r v a

v e d a where ( x 8 4 3 ) mention i s made of the nine d o ored
, , ,
-

lotus with three coverings in wh ich there i s a soul a theory ,

which has as we have seen n o probabilit y

, ,
.

It i s clear that the theory of D a h l m a n n i s extre mely

i n ge n ious and it i s of minor importance th at the efforts t o
,

trace the twe n ty fi fth principle a s A tman is probably based

-

on the m i stake n renderi n g of A tma n as sel f instead of trunk

o f the body as O p p osed to the hands feet fingers and toes
, , , ,

which are the other twenty four pri n cip l es It is a different

-
.

thing to conj ecture that thi s fondness for the number

twenty fi ve which i s often seen i n the B r ahm anas where
-
,

P raj ap ati is described as twenty fi ve fold is not o ne o f th e

-
,
 THE P H ILOS OP H Y OF THE GREAT EP I C 49

'
sources o f the d o ctrine that there are twe nty fi ve principles -
.

B ut the attempt t o hold th at the epi c i s a unity and th at i t

'

teaches a unitari an philosophy i s one which offe n d s every

canon of criti ci sm and commonsense and the main ,

doctrine that the athei sti c S amkhya i s really a doctrine

wh ich accepts the B rahman but denies the personal deity of ,

the Yoga i s a to u r d e fo r ce The epic wh i ch certainly i s

,
.
,

de v oted to the doctrine o f th e B r a h m an and to the reverence

'

of great personal deities on the other hand certainly tends to

, ,

regard the S amkhya system a s a sort of B r a h m a is m but i t ,

i s perfectly obvious from the epi th at the system i tsel f wa s

not one o f thi s kind at all he truth of the matter i s .

much better expressed b y HO p k in s * who finds in the epi c the

‘

tr a ces o f at least s ix systems Vedi c orthod o xy B r a h m a ism , , ,

i a the doctrine o f the B rahman but without the illusion

. .
,

the o ry rarely the doctrine o f the B rahman with the illusion

,

t h eory the S amkhy a the Yoga and the P aSu p a t a s and

, , , ,

B h aga v a ta s sectari an worshi p pers of S iva a n d V i snu

,

respectively who adopt i n thei r systems a good deal o f

,

S amkhy a Yoga philosophy

-
.

The rej ectio n of D a hl man n s theory of the exi stence in ’

the epi c o f a S amkhy a which acknowledged the absol ute

instead o f reduci n g all to spi ri ts and nature as being totally ,

unhist o rical leaves open the question whether such a doctrine

,

i s the basi s of the S amkhya o f the epi c i n the sense th at

that system i s a develop ment from a philosophy whi ch
re cognized the abs o lute The altern ative to thi s theory i s
.

the view th at the s amkhya i s a co n ception b ased entirely on

the v iew o f the di fference betwee n s ubject a n d obj ect and ,

that thi s conce p tion was formed independe n tly o f the

exi sting A tman B rahman p hilosophy or at least in co n scious
-
,

reaction fro m i t S tress h as been l ai d by G a r b e i on the

.

u n B rahmani c ch aracter of the S amkhy a ph ilosophy and he

-
,

h as attri bute d i t in large measure to the influence of the

K sa tr iya s The force o f thi s argument i s greatly dimi n i shed
.

by the fact t h at Garbe is also inclined to attribute the

H op k in s G r é a t E p ic of I n d ia
, , p . 81 .

I S amk hy a P h il o s op h i e p p 3 ff So J S S p e y e r , D ie in dis ch e
"

. . . .
,

Th e os op h i e , p p 6 4 , 10 7 . .
50 THE S A M KHYA S Y S TEM

B rahman doctrine in large meas ure to the s ame influence i n ,

which case it seems impossible to treat the S itrh kh y a as

markedly op p osed in its basi s to the B rahman doctrine In .

any case the argume n ts for the u n B rahma n i c character of

,
-

the S amkhya are wholly de v oi d o f weight The homel and .

of the S amkhya is placed in the eas t by Garbe on the ground ,

th at B uddhism whi ch was in h is O pinion derived from the

,

S amkhya flo u rished in the east and the east was c ertai n ly

, ,

less completely subj ected to the influence of B rah mani sm

th an the western middle cou n try The argument however .
, ,

i s s ubject t o the grave defects that the de p ende n ce o n the

s amkhya o f B uddhi sm i s n o t pro v ed and that i f i t were , ,

p roved the fact would merely S how th at the s amkhya at the

,

time of the ri se of B uddhi sm w a s of great importa n ce in the

east : i t could ne v er S how that it was first produced in the
east Nor c a n any weight be a ll o vve d to the argume n t that
’

in K a p il av a stu the birth p lace of the B uddh a we are to s e e

, ,

the name o f the town of K apila the founder of the S amkhya

p hilosophy That K a
.
p il a v a s t u really meant the tow n of
K apila a n d i s not a name d raw n from the descri p tio n o f
,
*
the place as suggested by Oldenberg i s very doubtful and
, , ,

even i f the n ame re ferre d to a K a p i la that thi s K a p il a was ,

the S amkhya s age i s a n i dea which is not hi n ted at in the

B rahmanic al traditio n whi ch s ays nothing of a tow n
,

connected with a n d n amed a fter him .

Other arguments for the u n B rahmani c character of the -

S amkhya adduced by G arbe are the facts that the S amkhy a

and Yoga P aSu p a t a a n d P afi c a r atr a and the Ved a are se t
,

si de by side as di ffere n t systems in x i i 3 4 9 6 7 and that the , , ,

.

5 amkhya and Y o ga are me n tioned ( ibid 7 6 ) as two eternal .

systems besi de all the Ved as This however merely p ro v es .

, ,

th at these systems di ffered from the Vedi c tradition n ot ,

th at they were opposed to that tradition or that the

supporters of the V iews o f these p hiloso p hies were
u n B rahmani cal
-
K a p ila as we have already seen appears
.
, ,

but once in co n flict with the Ved as when he co n demns ,

sacri fice o f animals and the text pl ainly supports the s age
,

in hi s battle for Ah irn s a Moreover the s amkhya never

' ’
-
.
,
,

B u d dha , p . 111 .
 THE P H ILO S OP HY OF T H E GR EAT EP I C 51

abandons the right to appeal for pr o o f to s cripture and i n ,

fact there are numerous appeals to scri pture i n the later

S amkhya te x ts while the brief K ari k a e x pressly recognizes
'

i t with perce p tion and i n ference as the three modes o f proof .

It i s true that the u se of scripture made by the S amkhy a i s

a more limited one than th at o f the later Ved anta but the ,

essence of the S amkhya is its rationalism a n d that ,

rationali sm could n ot de v elop i n B rahma n ical circles i s an

as serti o n for whi ch no proof either i s or can be adduced .

The e x traordinarily i n genious a nd el aborate system o f the

sacrifice as thought out by the ph ilosophers who p roduced
,

the B r ahma n as is a clear proof o f the interest in reasoni n g

,

taken by the B r ahma s n * .

While there are no argume n ts o f a n y v alue which can be

adduced for the V iew that the S amkhya is a product o f
u m B rahmanical circles there i s every evidence
-
th at the
,

system i s a n atural growth from the p hilosophy of the

Upa n i s ads We have seen that the Up a n i s ads in thei r l ater
.
,

period of development begi n n i n g with the K a th a S how ,

traces of the doctri n es which we fi n d in the S amkhya s uch ,

as the e v olutio n of principles and the drawi n g up o f classes ,

of principles The U p ani s ads howe v er differ essenti ally

.
, ,

from the S amkhy a in the fact that they defini tely accept
either the doctrine o f the abs olute in i ts pure form as does ,

the K a th a or the doctrine in a thei stic form as does the

, ,

Sv e t as v a ta r a There is in detail in the S amkhya little that

'

.
, ,

cannot be found i n the U pani s ads in some pl ace or other :

not o n ly the doctrine of the Gunas but also that o f the
T a n m atr a s can be found there a n d the work o f the S amkhya ,

in l arge measure evidently takes the form of systemati zi n g

and develo p ing o f i deas whi ch were not the creatio n of the
S amkhya but which requi red to be p u t into a definite system
, .

Indeed in one se n se the S amkhy a mus t be treated a s

, ,

o n e of th e early attempts to systematize a n d reduce to order

the somewh at co n fused mass o f speculatio n found i n the

Up a n i sads the ch aracteristic feature o f the s y s te m a t iz a
,

tio n being the attention p ai d to order and the p rinciple of

de v elopment .

S ee S . L evi L a D o c tr in e d u S a c rific e ( P a r i s
. ,
 52 THE SAM KHYA S Y S TEM

On the o ther h and there must b e recognized in the ,

S amkhya the definite rejection of the absolute and the

substitution f o r the absolute whi ch is the real basi s of the ,

individua l s o uls of a multitude of S pirits

,
These spi rits i f .

examined are clearly nothi n g but abstractions of the concept

o f subj ect and are philosophi cal absurdities S ince in the
, ,

abstract there can be but one subj ect and on e obj ect neither , ,

of course being anything without the other /I o a philo

‘

sophical absurdity the system can only have arrived by a

hi stori cal process and i n the number of spirits we must
,

recognize an attempt to reproduce the number of the finite .

souls of experience while in the abstract conception of the

,

essence of S piri t we h a v e a reflex of the abstract view taken

o f the absolute which i s represented in the B r h a d ara ny a h a
,

Up a nisa d and elsewhere a s the u n seen seer the unthought

, , ,

thinker and so forth

,
On the other h and the independent
.
,

position given t o nature i s a di stinct concessio n t o realism

nature a s objective i s not dependent on S pirit though it is ,

the obj ect o f spirit and i s unconscious wi thout spirit and ,

though intellect made conscious by S pirit rises from

— —

nature and from it other things are evolved even so in the

, ,

classi cal s amkhy a th ere i s a tendency t o regard the n o n

organi c world a s in some way in di rect co nnection with
nature /The insiste n ce on the multitude of souls an d the
.

conceding to them of quasi individual exi ste n ce and the -

allowing o f a certain reality to the world are ch aracteri sti c

fe atures o f the interpretation o f the Up ani sads as se t out
in the B r a h m a S utr a of B ad a r ay an a and in point of fact ,

the Up ani sads co n tai n clear traces o f a doctrine which

‘

a ll o ws to the wor l d o f matter and to the indivi dual souls a

"
certain reality I he purely ideali sti c attitude towards the
.

absolute which is doubtless the real interpretation of the

,

doctrine of Yajfi av a l k ya i n the B r h a d ar a n y a k a Up a nisa d ,

i s n o t so fre q uently found in the Up ani sads as the p anthe

is tic while S i de by side with these higher forms o f doctrine
,

we often find the co n ceptio n of the abs o lute producing

matter into which it enters in the form o f the soul from
, ,

which it i s but a step to the doctrine th at the individual soul

thus pr o duced has s o me sel f importance o f its own and -

stands in a quasi independent r e l ation to th e absolute se l f

—
.
 S A MKHYA A ND YO GA

THE Yoga philosop hy according to the epi c i s a system

, ,

which i s ancient like the S amkhya and this p arallel posi ,

tion belongs to the Yoga in the whole of its hi stori cal e x is

te n ce The p ractises of Yoga a s they are revealed to us in
.
,

the Yog a S utr a of P a ta fi ja l i the oldest text book o f the

,
-

school co n tain much th at i s in itsel f a relic of very primi

,

tive conceptions of the value of psychic states of profound .

e x citement Thi s tendency to attri bute importance to the

.

obtai n ing of such states i s widespread : there i s a striking

example for this form of belief i n the hi story of Greek
religio n in the se v enth and S ixth c enturies B C a nd in the . .
,

Rgv e d a itsel f ( x 13 6 ) there i s a me n tion of the mad Muni

, ,

prob ably a p redecessor of the later Yogin It i s u n n e ce s .

"
s ary therefore to s e e in the Yoga practi ce any borrowing
, ,
"

from the aborigi n al tribes though we need not doubt that

,

these tribes p racti sed similar ri tes and that their i n flue n ce
may h ave tended to maintain and de v elop Yoga to the
extraordi n ary popularity which it h as achi ev ed in Indi a .

O n the other h and it is perfectly clear that the intro

,

duction o f Yoga into the practi ce of high p hilosophy was

natural and proper in the case of a p hiloso p hy which like , ,

the A tman doctrine de n ied the p ossibility of knowledge of

,

the self as subj ect A s the K e n a Up a n is a d ( ii ) h as it

.
,

the self cannot be k n own by him who h a s k n owledge but ,

only by him who h as n o knowledge Hence comes the effort .

to subdue all the acti v ity o f senses a n d of mind to emp ty ,

the intellect a n d thus to make it ready for a new a p p re h e n

S u g ge s te d b y A E . . G o u gh ,
P h ilos op hy o f t h e Up a nis a ds , pp .

1 8 , 19 ; G a r b e , S amk h y a P h il os o p h ie p p,
. 18 5 , 18 6 .
 SAM K HYA AND YO GA 55

si on the normal aim o f the mysti c o f al l l and s and places

,
.

It i s to thi s theoretic aim th at De u ss e n ascri bes the origin

*

of the practi ce but i t i s clear th at i n adopting the Y o ga

,

practice s for this purpose the holders of the A tman faith -

were not in n ovators but were turning exi sting materi al to a

,

more refined and speculative u se .

The development of the Yog a theory i s first clearly

reve aled i n the s ame Upani sads a s deal with those doctrines
which later are adopted as p art of the s amkhy a system
th at i s o f the older Upani sads the K a th a and Sv e t aSv a t a r a ”
, ,

and later by far the M a i tr ay a n i In the conception of Yoga .

,

literally yoking there seems to be an almost n e ce ss ary t or

, ,

at least normal reference t o a fixing of the mind on God

,
.

The u se of Yoga i s however as well ad apted to the case of

, ,

the believer i n the abso l ute B rahman a s to the devotee o f an

individual deity : the former stage is presented i n the Ka th a
and M a itr ay a n i the latter in the S v e tasv a ta r a Up a nisa d
,
.

The term i n its tech nical se n se also occurs in these Up a n i

sads and when opposed to S amkhy a it denotes d o ubtless
,

the practical si de of religious concentrati o n a s O pp o sed to

the theoreti ca l investigation It fo l lows necess a ri ly from .

thi s very contrast and from the nature o f the case th at Yoga
, ,

could not primarily be a separate system o f p hilosophy and ,

hence i ts n a tural dependence on o ther systems .

In the epi c th e relation o f S amkhya and Yog a i s pre

c is e l y a s in the U a n isa d s z the two stand si de by side as
p
philosophy and religion a s theory and practice an d s o me , ,

details of the Yoga practise a s given S how h o w much the , ,

system had advanced i n the direction in wh ich i t appears

in the Yog a S utra B ut there appears a di stinct tendency
.

to ascribe to the Yoga as O pposed to the S amkhy a a twenty , ,

sixth princip l e a perfectly en l ightened S pirit with which

,

the indivi dual S pi rit is re ally i denti cal The S amkhya i s .

resolutely without an I Sv a r a but the Yog a h as an I Sv ar a , ,

A l lg e m e i n e G e s c h ic h t e d e r P h i l o s o p h ie , I , iii, 5 0 7 .

“
“
I As h e l d b y Raje n d r a lala A p h o r is m s , p x 11 ; P
M it r a Yo g a , . .

O l tr a m a r e L h is t o ir e d e s I d é e s Th é o s op h i g u e s , i, 3 0 8 - 3 10 G ar be
’
, .

d en i es th i s e x p l a n a ti o n Tu x e n ( Yo g a , p 3 2 ) a c c e p ts V y as a s r e n
’
. .

d e r in g as S a m ad h i ; C h a r p e n ti e r lx v , 4 7 ) t a k es it a s
P r a xis .
56 THE S AM KHYA SY S TEM

who i s i denti fied with B rahman who i s here a sup reme ,

spirit into whi ch the individual spi ri t i s resolved h aving ,

been i n essence a p art of the absolute S pi rit which multi

plied itsel f The end o i Yoga i s i n accordance wi th this
.

view the v ision of the one true self ( v i 3 0 10 1 2 ; x iv 19

, , , , , ,

1 7 1 9 ) but it i s also represented in more accurate agree

-

ment with the S amkhya in its athei sti c form as an i solation

o f the S p i rit from matter ( xii 3 0 6 16 1 7 ; 3 16 14 ff ) , , , ,
.

From the former point of view i t i s not difficult to s e e the

development of the meaning o f devoti o n to God which it ,

o fte n h a s in the B h a g a v a d gi t a or the further sense in th at

,

text especi ally i n ch apters three and five of action without

, ,

hope o f reward or desi re of reward .

The theory h a s often been held that Yoga was fi rst

athei sti c and that the theism o f the classical system o f the
,

Yog a S utr a and o f the epi c alike i s due t o a concession to

popul ar feeling nor i s there a n y doubt wh atever th at in the
,

S utr a the co n n ection of the divi n ity wi th the system i s really

"
a loose one B ut the theory that there was an e arlier a th e
istic Yoga as a philosophical system i s clearly not made
probable by the evi dence o f the epi c which shows the Yoga ,

a s clear l y distingui shed from the S amkhy a by its twenty

S ixth principle though it ever tries to assimilate the

,

S amkhya to the Yoga and both to the doctrine of the ,

B rahman It is therefo re per fectly possible th at the posi

.
, ,

tion of the classical Yoga i s due to its close associ ation with
the s amkhya which h as accentuated its real i n di ffere n ce to
,

the i dea of a deity which i s certainly n o t philosophically

, ,

th o ugh perh ap s hi storically essenti al to the conception of ,

Yoga .

Now great importance attaches to the d ate of the Yoga

S utr a o f P a ta fij a l i i n view of the fact that i f i t could be
,

placed in t he second century B C there would be attained a . .

,

very definite d ate for the growth of the S amkhya school

with which in all essenti als except athei sm the Yoga agrees .

U nfortu n ately thi s view rests only on the theory th at

,

P a t afi j a l i i s the s ame as the author o f the M a h ab h asy a ,

whose d ate i s now usually admitted to be the middle of th e

S e e P Tu xe n , Yo g a ( C o p e n h a ge n ,
.
pp . 5 6 ff .
 SAM KH Y A AN D YO GA 57

second century B C Thi s view h o wever cann o t stand

. .
, ,

ex aminati o n It i s clear that in hi s p h il osop h IC views as

.
‘

to the nature of substa n ce and quality the grammari an stands ,

on a lower plane of developme n t than the philosopher and on ,

the other hand the philosopher vi ol ates o ne at least o f the

grammari an s laws of grammar Further the S utra c o ntains
’
.
,

some doctrines which are pr o bably l ate borrowings : thus in

i 4 0 the theory o f atoms whi ch belongs to the V a iSe sik a is
,

clearly referred to nor less clearly in i ii 5 2 i s the doctrine

, ,

o f the B uddhi st S a u tr antik a school that ti me c o nsi sts o f

moments Ksa n a s whi ch are themselves forms o f develop
, ,

ment o f ever restless nature Thi s doctrine i s found also i n .

the V a iSe sik a school as i t accords with the Atomi c the o ry

, ,

but not until the P r a Sa s tap ad a b h asy a It i s less certain i f .

we can attri bute to the S utr a the doctrines of S p h ota whi ch ,

belonged to the school o f grammari ans and which i s s u p ,

posed by the commentator V y as a t o be referred to i n i i i 1 7 , , , ,

o r th at of the infini te size of the inner organ which i s seen ,

"‘
by him i n iv 10 and which is supp o sed by J acobi to h ave
, ,

been borr o wed fr o m the V a iSe Sik a school i n opp o sition to ,

the view that thi s organ was o f mean size which i s asserted ,

by V ijfian a b h ik su to h ave been the view o f the S amkhy a

scho o l th o ugh thi s h as been q u e stion e d t More deci sive is
, ,

perhaps the fact th at the Yoga S utr a seems to attack the

,

doctrine o f the V ijfi an a v ad in s and that theref o re i t is ,

probably not older than the third century A D and prob ably . .
,

i s younger The great supporters o f th at school V a su b a n d h u

.
,

and Asa ri ga lived in all probability ab o ut A D 3 0 0 but the

’

.
,
.
,

sch oo l itself may of course h ave existed e arlier ,so th at no

, ,

abs o lutely cert ain result can be attained It i s h o wever n o t .

, ,

at al l unlikely th at the producti o n of the Yog a S utr a wa s

more o r les s directly m o tived by the revival o f the S amkhy a
and i ts definite setting out i n the S amk hy a K ari k a o f
'

ISv a r ak r sn a who wa s an e arlier contemporary according to

, ,

Chinese evi dence o f V a su b a n d h u The attack on the i dea l

, .

is m o f V a s u b a n d h u thus found i n the Yoga S utra would be

extremely n atura l .

xxx i , 28 .

I
‘'

J C h a rp e n ti e r
.
, lxv , 8 4 8 ; T u x e n , Yo ga , p . 10 1 .
58 THE S AM KHYA SYSTEM

It may be a dded th a t no further light on the d ate of

either S amkhya or Yoga can be gained from a notice in the
Ka u tily a A r th a s as tr a *
which ra n ks as An v ik sik i logical
'

, ,

sciences the views of the Lok ayata the S amkhya and the
, ,

Yoga schools Thi s enumeration i f it could be established

.
,

that the w o rk of Ka u til y a was really a work of the beginning

of the third century B C would not indeed carry the ques
. .
,

tion much beyond the evidence aff orded by the epic but it ,

w o uld afford a more secure basi s for considering the value

of the epi c data but un fortunately the date of the A r th a
,

sas tr a is very uncertain and may be very much l ater th an

,

the suggested d a te t It might possi bly be thought th at

the combination of s amkhya and Yog a with the certainly
athei sti c Lok ayata would permit the conclusion that the Yoga
was at one period atheistic but there seems no possible ,

ground to insi st on reading such an implication i n to the

terms while it may be observed th at the Lok ayat a can only
,

be called An v ik s ik i by a stretch of the imagin ation since its ,

fi rst ch aracteristi c is its res o lute dogmati c refusal to acknow

ledge the existence o i any means of pro o f save perception .

S e e H J a c o b i S it z d e r K P r e u s s
.
,
. . . Ak a d d e r Wis s , 19 1 1, p p
. . .

7 32 7 4 3 ; f o llo w e d b y C h a r p e n ti e r
-
lx v , 8 4 4 , n 1
. .

t K e ith ,
19 1 6 , p p . 13 0 7 ;-
J o l ly ,
lxv ii i, 3 5 5 9 -
.
 TH E S A S TITA NT RA

INthe last verse of the S amk hy a K ar i k a i t is expressly

stated th at that c o mpendium o f the S amkhya system contains
the substance of the whole Sa stita ntr a omitting o nly the ,

illustrative stories and the di scussions of the views o f Other

philosophies The verse is not original it be ing agreed
.
,

that the text o f ISv a r a k t sn a terminated at verse 6 9 but ,

there i s no reason to doubt the correctness of the vers ion o f

fact given in i t It is however not clear th at the term
.
, ,
"
Sa stita n tr a represents as has been suggested by Ga rbe a
"

speci al work : on the c ontrary the context and the word ing
o f the verse suggest th at Sa s tita n tr a i s a term for the
S amkhy a philosophy a s a syste m of si xty pri nciples Thi s .
,

moreover i s the sense i n whi ch the expression w a s taken by

,

the R aj av ar tti h a as cited by V ac a sp a ti According to thi s .

account the S ixty referred to are the fi fty B h av a s of the

S amkhya system t o gether with a se t o f ten fund amental
,

pri n ci p les stated a s the reality unity and purp o sefulness

, , ,

of P r a k r ti its di fference from S pi rit and its action for the

,

s ake of spiri t the plurality of spi rits thei r distinction from

, ,

and connection with P r a k rti the ev ol ution o f the other

,

pri n ciples and the in activity o f spi rit an order o f topi cs

, ,

whi ch may h ave been rendered i ncoherent by the

exige n cies o f the verse The explan ati o n is older th an
.

the R a j a v ar ttik a for i t i s found in the Chinese version

'

of the commentary on the S amk hy a Karih a made by

'

P a r a m arth a in the sixth century A D B ut despite its . .

an ti quity the expl an ation o f the number i s O pe n to the

,

criticism that i t confounds tw o di fferent principles o f

S amk h y a P h il os op h i e , p p 5 8 , 5 9 O th e Ra j a var tt ik a See J
’

. . n .

H . W o o d s , Yo g a S y s t e m o f P a t a fi j a l i p, . xxu .
60 THE SA M KHYA SYSTEM

divi si o n : the B h av a s sh o uld be included unde r the

M al ik arth a s This seems to h ave bee n realized even in
.

the tradition of the school for Nar ay a n a tirth a in h i s ,

c o mmentary on the S amk hy a K ar i k a gives as the ten

required to make up the sixty not the fun d amental
principles but spirit P r a k rj ti intelligence individua
, , , ,

tion the three Gun as the T a n m atr a s senses and gross

, , , ,

matter an enumeration which i s clearly arbitrary an d

,

unj ustifiable .

S ome further light on the Sa stit a n tr a is thrown by the

mention of that s ystem al o n g with the system of Kapil a
i n the A n uy og a d v ar a S utra of the J ains as K av i l a m and
S a tth i ta nt a m which h as a p arallel in the mention o f the
,

s ame systems as K av il a and S a mh h a j ogi in the A u p a p ati k a

’ '

S utr a .
*
The commentator Ab h a y a d e v a on the latter , ,

p ass age explai n s the system of K apila a s t h e atheisti c

S amkhya and the S amkhya as the thei sti c S amkhya treating
, ,

Yoga a s a sep arate head but the p aralleli sm with the first ,

p ass age and the fact that only one representative of S amkh ya
Yoga is given S how that but one system is meant whic h
, ,

united the two s ides of S amkhya and Yoga .

More light on thi s system i s perhap s to be o btained

from the A h ir b u d h ny a S a mhit a a text of the P afic a r atr a ,

school o f uncertai n date but app arently with some claim

, ,

to a n ti quity In its twelfth Adh y ay a are descri bed the five

.

systems the Vedas the Yoga th e P aSu p a t a the S atva ta

, , , , ,

a n d the S amkhy a The latter is described as a Tantra

.

with sixty d ivi sions which are se t o ut i n detail in tw o , ,

series o r Man d alas the first consi sting o f thi rty tw o and
,
-

the second o f t we n ty eight Of these the first are P r a k r tis

-
.
,

while the second are V ik r tis These terms however are used .
, ,
.

in a manner whi ch differs essenti ally from th at o f the

orthodox S amkhya : in the first series are included all the
principles of the S amkhya and some other conceptions ,

while the second list contains the chief co n cepts of a

practical physiology and ethics these affections of the soul ,

being termed V ik t tis o r modi fications because they come into ,

e xi stenc e only as a result o f th e activity o f the creative

S ee F . O S ch ra d e r,
. lxviii , 10 1- 110 .
62 T HE SAM KHYA SYSTE M

presumably handled the questions alluded t o in S amk hy a

K ar i h a 2 in which the insufficiency o f empiricism and
’

Vedic practices for the removal o f misery i s expounded .

The categories of misery Siddhi and K ash aya h ave , ,

p arallels i n the S amkhya in the three fold f o rms of -

misery the Si d dhi s and the As id d h is V ip a ry a y a s ASak tis

, , ,

and T u stis The S amay a may h ave dealt with O pposing

.

views and the last he ad i s th at of Moksha fi n al release

, , .

The enumeration of topics i s enough to S how th at there

di d exist s o me system of philosophy of the nature indicated ,

o ne which must have been closely allied with the epic Yoga
system B ut there is also evidence regard ing the author o f
.

a w o rk bearing the n ame S a gtit a n tr a fr o m whi ch ,

probably enough the term as a desig n ation of the S amkhya

system may h ave been derived Th at work i s stated in .

a Chinese tradition to h ave been c o mposed in

*

Sl o kas and to h ave been written by P a fi c a Sik h a The .

s tatement seems however to lack pr o bability and its

, , ,

o rigin can easily be accounted for by the fact th at

P a fica Sik h a i s mentioned as the third in the order o f
tradition o f the d octin e s o f the sch o ol in the S amk hy a
Kari k a and i t is s aid that the doctrine was wi dely
extended by him words whi ch may h ave been unders t o od
,

in the literal sense as den o ti n g th at an e xte n siv e te xt book

w as c o mposed by him On the other h and there i s the .
,

express testimony o f the commentat o r B alar ama that the

author of the S a gtita ntr a was V ar sa ga n y a and thi s ,

testim o ny receives some supp ort from the fact th a t in hi s

c o mmentary on the Yoga S utr a ( iv 13 ) V y as a cites a p assage ,

fr o m the Sastra which i s expressly attri bute d by

V ac a sp a tim iSr a in h is co mme n tary on the B r a h m a S utr a
( ii 1 3 ) to V ar sa ga n y a and which he se e ms t to h ave
, , ,

believed to be taken from the S a t tit a n tr a Thi s evidence .

,

i n itsel f far from clear i s stro n gly supported by the further

,

Chinese tradition which ascri bes to V in d hy a v as a who i s in

, ,

T a k a k u s u , B u ll e t i n d e l E
’
c ole F r a n ga is e d E x tr é m e
’
O r ie n t ,

iv 5 9
,
.

T I n h is t
c o m m e n a ry on Yo g a S ut r a , 1 c S K . . . . B e lv a r k a r
( B h a n d a r k a r M e m o r ia l V o lu m e , pp .1 7 9 , 18 0 ) in c o r r e c t ly as cr ibe s to
V y as a th e m e n t i o n of th e S a gt i t a n t r a .
 T HE S ST
A I T ANT RA 63

all likelihood to be i denti fied with I the Sv a r a k r Sn a , *

re writing of a w o rk attributed to V r sa g a n a or V a r sa g a n a
-
.

The term re wri ti n g seems to h ave been actually j usti fied

-
,

in view o f the conte n ts of the Sa stita n tr a as sketched in the

A h ir b u d h ny a S a mh it a a n d o f the fact th at the Sa stita n t r a
,

w a s evidently a manual of the S amkhya Yoga and not of -

,

the S amkhya i n its atheisti cal f o rm and i t is a reason able ,

conjecture that the origin o f the S amk hy a K ar i k a was due

to an effort to set out i n an auth o ritative form i n order to ,

confute the doctri n e o f the B uddhists a B rahmani cal ,

system which equally dispe n sed with the conception o f God ,

but which avoided the difficulties atte ndi n g the B uddhi st

deni al of the reality both o f an externa l world and o f the
soul .

There i s noth i n g to c o ntradict thi s hypothesi s though ,

also nothing to esta bli sh it in the four or five citati on s ,

known of V ar sa ga n y a zt i t h as been s u gge ste d t on the gr o un d ,

that one of these citations i s i n verse a n d the rest i n prose ,

th at we must distingui sh tw o S a stita ntr a s of which the one ,

sets out the d o ctrine o f 8 amkhya Y o ga and the other t h at of -

the S amkhy a the former being c o mposed in verse and the

,

latter in prose In favour of thi s hyp o thesi s however

.
, ,

there is no evidence o f any kind available unless i t be ,

c o nsidered that the assumption of two di fferent texts woul d

be st explain the clai m made that the S amk hy a K ar i k a
includes the whole meaning o f the Sa stita n tr a but it i s ,

unnecessary t o press thi s p o int The cl a iin I S not made by .

ISv a r a k r sn a hi msel f a n d i t wa s Op en for a l ater h and to

,

hold that the essenti al doctrines of the S amkhya were fully

s e t o u t by ISv a r a k r sna even i f he o mitte d those portion s of

the doctrines o f the S arirkh ya Y o ga sch o ol which were d e fi

,

As p r o ve d b y Ta kak u su , 1 c C f T u x e n , Yo g a , p
. . . . 14 ; C h a r
p e n t ie r , lx v , 8 4 5 , 8 4 6 ; b e lo w , p 6 8 . .

T I n th e Yo g a S at r a B h asy a ( iii 5 3 ) h e is ,
c ite d as op in g th e
p os
t
a o m ic th e o r y of th e V a iSe s ik a s ; in V ac a s p a t im iS r a s
’
c om m e n ta r y o n
K ar i k a, 4 7 , as d eal ng i w it f f
h th e o u r o ld c h a r a c e r o f t i gn o r a n c e ; t h e
Sa st ita n t r a c it a ti o n s
in th e Yo g a B h asy a , i , 1 3 a n d in G a u da p ad a s v ’

c o m m e n t a r y o n K ar i k a 1 7 ( a n d p e r h a s o n 7 0 ) a r e n e ith e r s e c i fi c a l ly
p p
s amk h y a o r Yo ga B u t th e c ita ti on o n Kar i k a 17 look s l i k e a e r s e
. v
f r a gm e n t .

1 S ch r a d e r , lxv iii , 1 10 .
64 THE SA M KHYA S YSTEM

n ite l y
thei sti c Thi s view i s co n firmed by the fact th a t th e
.

succession o f the doctrine is asserted i n the first of the

verses added to the text to h ave been from Kapil a to A suri
*

and then to P a ii c a Sik h a for the evi dence available regarding

,

that te acher shows him as we h ave see n to h ave represented

, ,

the S amkhya Yoga not the athei stic S amkhya sch o ol r

-
,
’
.

T h e r e is n o r e a l p o s s ib ility o f d o u b t th a t th e Kar ik a o r i g in a lly

c o n s i s t e d o f 7 0 v e r s e s , o m i tti n g 7 0 7 2 o f t h e r e c o r d e d t e x t a n d p r o b a b ly
-
,

in s e r tin g a n o th e r v e r s e ( c f S a n s k r i t R e s e a r c h , I , 10 7
.

T T h is f a c t in v a li d a t e s th e t o f S K B e lv a r k a r ( B h a n d
a r gu m e n . .

a r k a r C o m m e m o r a t i o n Vo lu m e p ,
18 1) t h a t th e S a gt it a n t r a m u s t h a ve
.

a r r iv e d a t a n e g a t i ve c o n c lu s i o n o n t h e e x is t e n c e o f G o d w h i c h is
,

in its e l f w h o lly i n c o m p a t i b l e w ith t h e c o n t e n ts o f t h e t e x t I t is

.

a ls o i m p o s s i b l e t o a c c e p t h is v i e w s t h a t t h e S a st i t a n t r a r e p r e s e n ts a
s t a g e p r i o r t o t h e s e v e r a n c e o f S amk h a a n d Yo ga a n d is p r io r t o th e
,

Yo g a S ut r a o f P a t a fij a l i ( c i r c a 15 0 a d e c i s i ve p r o o f o f t h e
'

in c o r r e c tn e s s o f th i s d a ti n g o f P a t a fi j a l i is g i ve n b y J H W o o d s
. .
,

Yog a S y s t e m o f P a t a fi j a li p p xv x i x
,
.
-
.
 G R E E K P HI L O S O P HY A ND THE S A MKH Y A

F OR the age o f the S amkhya important in formati on

might be obtai n ed i f i t were possi ble to trace definite
borrowings of S amkhya i deas from the s ide o f Greek
philosophy . The a rre tp o v of An axima n der h as been
c o mp ared with the n ature o f the S amkhya a n d the doctrines ,

of the constant flow o f things an d of the innumerable

destructions and renewals o f the world found in Heracli tus
a re no doubt S imil ar to tenets o f the Indi an system .

Empedocles like the S amkhya asserts th e doctrine of the

, ,

p re ex i stence o f the product I n the cause Anaxagoras i s a

- .

dualist Democritus agrees with Empedocles i n hi s doctrine

,

o f causality and believes in the purely temporary existence

and mortality of the gods Epicurus uses i n s upport o f his
.

athei sm the argument o f the 8 amkhya that otherwi se the ,

divine nature must be accorded attri butes whi ch are in con sis
tent with its supposed character and often emph asizes the
,

doctrine of infinite possi bilities of p roduction .

Garbe * adds to these p arallels whi ch he ad mits not t o be

,

conclus ive e v i dence of borrowing the fact th at Persi a w as a

,

perfectly possible place i n which Greek thinkers o f whom ,

travels are o ften recorded should acquire knowledge o f the

,

Indi an views and supports hi s O pi n ion th at borrowing i s

,

probable by the case of Pyth agoras wh o i s supposed to h ave ,

borrowed from Indi a hi s theory of tran smigration hi s ,

co n ception o f a religious comm u n i ty hi s distinction o f a ,

fine and a gross body of the soul hi s di stin cti o n o f a ,

se nsitive organ eva de an d of the imperi shable s o ul qbp rj v

'

, , , ,

S amk hy a P h il os op h ie , pp . 8 5 - 10 5 .
66 T HE S AM K HYA SY S TEM

h is doctrine of an intermedi ate w o r l d between ear th and

Sk y filled by demons the doctri n e of five elements including
,

ether the Pythagorean problem the i rrational and other

, ,

thi n gs . Into thi s questio n of the relati on of Pyth agoras to

Greek thought and to Indi a it is u n necess ary to go a s th e ,

S amkhya elemen ts as contrasted with the elements which

—

are not speci fically S amkhya in hi s teachi n gs are —

negligible Von S chroeder * indeed invents an older form o f

.
, ,

S amkhya whi ch he understands a s denoting reckoni n g in

, ,

whi ch number p l ayed a much greater part than in the

classi cal S amkhya ; Garbe thinks that Pythagoras may have
i n v e n ted hi s doctrine of n umb er as the result of hi s mi si n ter
p e tin g the fact that the S amkhya owed its n ame to its
r

enumerati o n of prin ciples into the view that the S amkhy a,

made n umber the basi s of n ature Both theories are based .

on a complete mi sunderstanding of the nature of the views

of P y th a go r a s t and the only possi ble c o n clusion i s that we
,

h ave n o e arly Greek evide n ce for the exi stence of the

S amkhy a school .

It is further not necessary seriously to co n sider the

possibilities of borrowi n g on the p art of Plato o r of
Aristotle though the influence of the s amkhya h a s been see n
,

in the case of both More pl ausible i s the effort to find proof

.

of S amkhya doctrines in Gnostici sm an attempt to which there ,

i s not a p r i or i any reason to take exceptio n The a c tu a l .

p roofs of such influence adduced are not importa nt : the

comparison of soul o r spi rit to light which does n o t occur ,

in the oldest S amkhya authorities i s anticip ated by ,

Aristotle and is Plat o nic in essence ; the c o ntrast of S p i rit

,

and matter i s P latoni c Perhaps more value attaches to

.

such mi n or poi n ts as the Gnosti c d ivi sion of men i n to three

classes wh ich may be compared with the clas si fication of
,

men accordi n g to the predominance i n them of the th ree

Gu n as of the S amkhya and the assi gni n g of p ersonal,

existe n ce to such functio n s as intellect and will B ut such .

p arallels whatever they are worth do not help definitely as to

, ,

the d ate of a real S amkhya .

P y th a g or a s und d ie I n d e r , p p . 7 2-7 6 .

T S e e K e ith ,
19 09 , p p . 5 6 9 6 06
-
.
 G R EE K P H ILO S O P HY AND T HE S AM KH YA 6 7

O n the o ther h and the further eff o rt t o find S amkh y a

,

influences in neo Pl at o ni sm must be held to be completely

-

mistaken Plotinus ( 2 0 9 2 6 9 A D ) held that h is obj ect

.
-
. .

was to free men from misery thr o ugh h is philos o phy that ,

S pirit and matter a re e ssenti ally d i fferent th at S pi ri t is ,

re ally unaffected by mi sery whi ch i s truly the lot of matter ;

,

he c o mp ares the sou l to light and even to a mirr o r in whi ch

o bjects are reflected ; he admits th at i n sleep a s the s o ul ,

remains awake man can enj oy h appi n ess ; he insists o n the

,

realiz ation of G o d in a condition o f ecstasy br o ught

ab o ut by pr o foun d mental c oncentration Porphyry ( 2 3 2 .

3 0 4 A D ) teaches the leadership of spirit over matter the

. .
,

omnipresence of the soul when freed from matte r and the ,

doctrine that the w o rld h as n o beginning He a l s o f o rbi ds .

the S laying of animals and rejects s acrifi ce Ab ammon a .

,

later contemp o rary menti o ns the wonderful powers o btained

,

by the exerci se o f c o ntemplative ecstasy B ut there is .

nothing here that can possibly be co n si dered a s necessarily

derived fr o m Indi a The opp o sition of matter and S pirit
.
,

the removal of s pirit from the world of re ality and the V iew ,

that the o nly power to approach to i t i s thr o ugh ecstasy a re

the outcome of the Greek ende avour to grasp the problem
brought into pr o minence by Pl ato o f the c o ntrast of spirit and
matter and the views o f Pl o tinus are the logical and indeed
, ,

inevitable outc o me of that development * The pr o test

, .

agains t s acri fice i s a s old as Greek philosophy the winning ,

o f supern atural powers by ecst asy i s a popular c o ncepti o n

whi ch appears in Pyth ag o ras and beyond all others in the
B acchi c re l igi o n On the other h a n d the re a l extent o f
.
,

know l edge of Indi an philos o phy available to Plotinus and

Porphyry alike seems t o h ave been mos t severe l y limited .

S e e E C a i r d , E v o lu ti o n o f Th e ol o g y in t h e G r e e k P hilos op h e r s
.

w h o d e ve lo p s in d e t a i l th e d e d u c ti o n o f P lo ti n u s v i e w f r o m
’

P la t o n i s m . T h e s a m e v i e w is t a k e n b y P D e u s s e n , A llg e m e in e
.

G e s c h i c h t e d e r P h i l os o p h ie I iii 6 16
, , , .
 T HE S A MKHY A KA RI KA

W ITH the S amk hy a K ar i h a we emerge from the region of

conjecture and doubt a n d arrive at the classic statemen t of
,

the doctri n e of the S amkhy a philosophy It i s admittedly .

by far the most bri lli a n t accou n t o f the system a n d its ,

cl aim to be the oldest e x posi tio n of the doctri n e in systemati c

form i s challe n ged o n ly by Max M iil l e r s suggestion that* ’

the oldest te x t book of the 8 amkhya is the Ta ttv a s a m as a a

-
,

work of wholly unk n ow n d ate and authorship The clai m .

runs cou n ter to the title o f the work whi ch shows i t to be , ,

like the Kar ik as themselves nothing more than a compen di um

,

o f the doctri n e o f the Scho o l : the i n troduction i s modern in

appearance a n d the tech n i cal terms which make up the
,

greater portio n of the co n tent o f the short tract are mor e

n umerous and more elaborate th an a n ything fo un d in the

S amk hy a K ari k a There i s therefore the probability th at

.
, ,

the Ta ttv a s a m as a represents a later period o f the school

than the K ar i k a : certai n ty i n the absence of a n y source of
,

information as to the Ta ttv a s a m as a i s not to be attai ned , .

The d ate o f the work i s ap p ro x imately know n It .

appears t o have bee n amo n g the works which the B uddhi st

monk P a r a m ar th a took with him to Chi n a in 5 4 6 A D and
, ,
. .
,

it i s recorded that he made a tra n slation o f it and of a

commentary on i t duri n g the last peri od of hi s literary
activi ty whi ch falls in the years from 5 5 7 5 6 8 the d ate of
,
-
,

hi s d e a th T This translatio n h as fortunately been preserved

.
,

and proves the authentici ty of the S anskrit text a s i t n o w

S ix S y s t e m s o f I n d i a n P h i l os op h y , p p 3 18 , 3 19 ; s e e b e lo w , p 8 9
. . .

TS e e T a k a k u s u , B u l l e t i n d e l E c o l e F r a n ga is e d E x t r é m e O r ie n t ,
’ ’

iv .
. lfi .
70 T HE SAM KH Y A S Y S TE M

researches of T a k a k u s u h ave definitely established the fact

th at thi s commentary di ffers too greatly from that of
G a u da p ad a to h ave bee n derived from it and that both it ,

and the c omme n tary of G a u dap ad a must go back ultimately

to a common source Thi s co n clusi o n i s incidentally con
.

“
firmed by the evide n ce o f the very full accou n t of the Karik a
given by Al b ir u n i ( 10 3 0 who actually mentions a
Gau d a a s authority Hi s statements however cannot be
.
, ,

derived entirely from the work o f G au da p ad a and it i s

*
,

cle ar that he used two di ffere n t authorities Who the .

author of thi s older commentary was i s uncertain : there i s a

Chi n ese traditio n th at it was V a su b an d h u himself but thi s ,

suggestion is supported by n o evi de n ce and can easily be ,

e x plained away a s a misunderstandi n g of the fact th at

V a su b a n dh u wrote a work to refute the K ar i k a There i s .

t herefore plausibility i n the s u gge s tion } th at the author was

I Sv a r ak r sn a himsel f especi ally as the nature of the K ar i k a

“

i s such as urge n tly to require a n interpretatio n I f however .

, ,

thi s w as the case before the work was taken to China there
,

h ad already been ap p e n ded to it the last verses which ,

are not recogn ized by G a u dap ad a but which are given and ,

e x pl ained in the Chinese commentary It i s probable that .

G a u da p ad a s commentary was di sti n ctly l ater than the origi n

’

a l o f the Chinese version : a terminus a d q u e m i s given by the

use of G a u da p ad a by Al b iru n i in the eleventh century A D . .

,

and by his pri ority to V ac a sp a timiSr a whose commentary ,

on the K ar i k a the S amkhy a t a ttv a k a u m u d i written in the ,

ni n th century A D t ranks high among the auth o rities on the

. .
,

S amkhya philosophy and has been made the subj ect of ,

S everal su p er comme n taries Later i s the commentary of

-
.

N ar ay a n a tir th a wh ich i s of little value

, .

Accordi n g to the K ari k a the end of the S amkhya

philosophy i s to discover the means o f removing th e three

A s h e ld b y G a r b e , S amk h y a P h il o s op h i e , p p 6 2 - 6 8 . .

I T a k a k u s u , o p c it p 5 8 S K B e lva r k a r ( B h a n d a r k a r C o m
‘’
. . . . . .

m e m o r a t i o n Vo l u m e , p p 1 7 1ff ) a r gu e s th a t t h e o r i g i n a l o f th e C h i n e s e
.

ve r s i o n w a s th e M at h a r a - V r tti, w h i ch h e is e d itin g , b u t th is c a nn o t b e
p r ov e d , a s d e r iva ti o n f r o m a c o mm o n s o u r c e is s ti ll e q u a l ly p r o b a b le .

1 K e ith ,
19 14 , p . 10 9 8 .
 TH E SAM K HYA KAR I KA 71

fold misery o f the wor l d th at i s the commentat o rs explain

, , ,

the sorr o ws brought on us by ourse l ves th o se brought by ,

others and those inflicted by fate The removal o f mi sery

,
.

cannot b e achi eved either empi rically or by devotion to

religious practi ses Good f o rt une on earth i s peri sh abl e
.
,

a n d moreover it i s not p o sitive pleasure but freedom from

misery th at the wi se man seeks The practi ce o f religion

’

.
,

agai n i s in su fficient ; the performance of s acri fice not only

,

i n volves the S l aying o f vi ctims wh ich off ends against the

rule of non inj ury but the r ewards o f such actions are
-
,

transitory and the performer must fall b ack again a fter the
, ,

e n j oyment of the fruit of h i s deeds in yonder world i n to an ,

earthly exi stence : m o reover the result of such action s l ead s

,

to positive not to the freedom from p ain which

is th e i deal of th e sage .

The statement o f the object o f the system i s o f

importance in that i t brings out clearly the fundamental
pre s uppositions on whi ch the S ei rh k h y a like the other
-
,

philosophi cal systems rests It i s assumed a s sel f evi dent

,
.
-

th at the world i s a co n diti o n o f mi sery th at the soul is ,

subj ect to transmigration an d th at there is some degree o f

,

truth at least i n the Vedic tradition Wh ate v er the origi n .

of the doctrines i n quest i on the first two assumption s are o f

,

universal validity for all schools of Indi an th o ught with the ,

exception o f athei sti c and m ateri ali st C arv ak a s a n d the ,

S amkhya makes no effort to establi sh their validity The .

thi rd assumption i s of much les s imp o rt ance from the

phil o sophical V iew for unlike the first two it h as no real
,

e ffect o n the substance of the S amkhya philos o phy but for ,

the adherents of the system it had the great advant age of

making the school rank as orthodox and so on a higher ,

plane not merely than the B uddhi sts or J ains but eve n th an ,

the sectari an worshi p pers of Vi snu and Siva .

The real mode o f freedom fr o m the mi sery o f exi stence

lies in the knowledge of the principles o f the S amkhya the ,

evo l ved the unevolved and the knower but the preliminary
, , ,

S o P D e u s s e n , A l lg e m e in e G e s c hic h t e d e r P h il os op h i e , I iii
.
. .

4 15 . T h e c o m m e n t a t ors h o l d th a t e n v y is p r o d u c e d b y th e s i gh t o f
t
o h e rs g r e a
’
te r b l i s s .
 72 THE SAM KHYA SYSTEM

questi o n of the mode in whi ch truth i s to be a ttained is not

ignored in the K ar i k a The three means of proo f are exp ressly
”

asserted to be p erce p tion i n fe re n ce and correct traditio n

, ,

which are sufficient o n the o n e h a n d to establi sh every prin

, ,

c ip l e and all o f which o n the other h and are esse n ti al to

, , ,

accou n t for e x iste n ce as known to us Perception i s defined .

to be men tal apprehen sio n of a present object inference i s ,

declared to be threefold and di sti n guished by the presence of

a mark a n d the bearer of a mark while correct tra diti on i s ,

equated with the holy scripture Sruti rightly understo o d , ,

.

The u se of scripture however is restri cted to those cases o n ly

, ,

which ca n not be dealt with by the use of the other modes of

proof a n d the i n stan ces in whi ch i t h as to be resorted to a re
,

reduced to such as are beyond perception by the sense and

beyond infere n ce by a n alogy : such cases are the Vedi c gods ,

Mou n t Meru a n d the U ttara Kurus a l l things who s e truth

, ,

i s v o uch e d for i n scripture but whi ch ca n n ot be known by

,

a n y other means The three forms o f in fere n ce are n ot

.

described in the K ar ik a a n d the commentaries di ffer but, ,

the comme n tary on the Ny ay a S utr a ( i 1 5 ) explai n s them a s , ,

in ference from cause to effect a s from the prese nce of cloud s ,

to rai n from the e ffect to the cause as from the swelli n g of

, ,

the streams in the valleys to rain in the hills and by analogy , ,

as whe n we in fer from the fact th at a man al ters hi s place

when he moves th at the stars si n ce they a p pear in differe n t ,

places must move also

,
*
In these cases i n the Ind i an
.

co n ception of logi c the clouds the swollen streams the , ,

ch ange of p la ce of the stars are the mark and the rain to ,

come the rain in the hills and the movement of the stars
, ,

are the bearers o f the mark .

The abse n ce of a n y attempt to examine more closely the

nature of percepti o n and of in ference and thei r mutual
relations i s striking and indicates how firmly fixed was the
,

view of the system that percepti on gave immedi ate knowledge

of reality and that infere n ce gave medi ate knowledge The
, .
,

S e e D e u s s e n A l lg e m e in e G e s c h i c h t e d e r P hil os op h i e , I , i ii
,
.

367 -3 7 0 T h e t h i r d ty p e is t a k e n m o r e g e n e r a lly a s i n d u c tive b y

.

V ac a s p a t im iSr a a n d V ijfian a b h ik su , s e e G a r b e S amkh y a P h i l os op h ie , ,

pp . 1 5 3 -
15 4 ; J a c o b i G at t i n g i s c h e G e l e h r t e A n z e ig e n , 18 9 5 , p 2 0 4
, . .

C f A B iir k , Vie n n a O r i e n t a l J o u r n a l , " V , 2 5 1- 2 6 4

. .
 TH E SAM KHYA KAR I KA 73

admission by the side of these tw o principles which alone ,

were allowed by the V a iSe sik a school of the conception o f

,

authority h armo n ises wi th the uncritical attitude of the

,

school to the problem of k n owledge and with its essenti ally

,

practical end the removal of mi sery

,
The belief in the
.

Vedic tradition from the poi n t of view of pure l y scienti fic

interest could n o t be accepted without ex amination : to the
supporters of a system with a definite me a n s o f s alvation
the presence i n the midst o f their tenets o f o n e wh i ch might
not bear close examination was indi fferent since i t di d n o t ,

vitally affect the main structure o f the system .

The essenti ally in ferior position a s a means o f pr oo f ,

a l lotted to tradition i s attested by the s amkhy a doctrine o f

,

causality : despite the n umerous p assages i n the s acred

scriptures which might be adduced for the doctrine that n on
exi stence was the source o i being the S amkhy a asserts the
,

doctrine that the result really exi sts be foreh and i n its cause ,

j ust a s the clay serves to form a p ot or the thread s form a

,

p iece of cloth For this theory fi v e grounds are adduced :

.

the n o n exi stent cannot be the subj ect o f an activity ; the

-

p roduct i s really nothing else than the materi al o f whi ch i t

is co mposed ; the product exi sts before its coming i nto being
in the shape o f its materi al ; only a definite product can be
pr o duced from each materi al ; a n d only a specific materi al
can yield a speci fic result The l ast four arguments which
.
,

a re i n effect but two rest on the perception that in the

,

product the original materi a l i s con tained though under ,

ch ange o f appearance and that defi n ite materi a l s give

,

definite and distinct results ; the first argument on the o ther ,

hand rests n ot merely on the fact th at the coming into being

,

of any obj ect s ave from a definite materi al i s not observed ,

but also o n the argument th at i f a thing does not exi st there

c an be no possibility o f its doing anything Hence i t .

f ol lows th at i n its ultimate essence caus ality i s reduced to

ch ange of appearance i n a n abiding entity a c o nception o f ,

great importance for the system .

From the principle o f caus ali ty i s deduced the fact th at the

u l timate basis o f the empirical universe is the unevolved ,

Av y a k ta
. Indivi dual things are all limited i n magni tude .

and thi s is inco mpatible with the n ature o f the source of the
74 THE S A M K HYA S Y S TEM

universe All individual things are analogous one to another

.
,

and therefore n o on e can be regarded as the final source o f

the other Moreover as they all come into being from a source
.
, ,

they cannot constitute that source Fu rther an e ffect must .

,

d iffer from i ts cause though i t must co n sist of the cause

, ,

a n d there fore the empiri c universe can n ot i tsel f be the fi n al

cause but must be the product o f some ultimate cause

, .

The obvious difficulty th at the unevol v ed cannot be p e r ce iv

ed i s met with the argu ment that its fine nature renders it
imperceptible j ust as other things o f whose existence there
, ,

i s no doubt cannot be perceived ; either because of thei r too

,

great distance or p roximity through the interve n tion of a ,

thi rd obj ect through admixture with similar matter through

, ,

the presence of some more powerful sensation or the blind ,

ness or other defect of the senses or the mind of the

O bserver .

From the nature of the fin al cause follow the essenti al

di fferences between the unevolved and the evolved The .

pr od ucts have a cause on which they depend a n d to which

, ,

they are related : the source i s uncaused and independent .

They are many in number and limited in spa c e and name : ,

the source i s one etern al and all pervasive They have

,
-
.

activities and p arts : the source i s immanent in all but h as

,

neither activities nor p arts They are the mark : the source .

i s distingui shed by them .

The pr o cess of development of the unevolved is through

the activity o f three constituents out of which it is made
up S attva Raj as and Tamas The first of these consti
, , .

tu e n ts or fact o rs i s th at in nature which i s light which

, , ,

reveals which causes pleasure to man : the second is what

,

i s impel li n g and moves wh at produces activity in man : ,

the third i s what i s heavy and restrains what pr o duces ,

the state of indiff erence o r inactivity in man The three .

co n stituents act essen ti ally i n close relation : they overpower

and support one another prod uce one another and i n ter ,

m in gl e with o n e another They are compared in a homely

.

S imile to the constituents of a lamp that i s it seems to the , , ,

flame oil and wick respectively

, , The origin of the
, .

conception seems t o be in the main psychol o gi c but even in ,

the K ari k a it i s imp o ssible not to realize the materi al n ature

 T HE SA M KHYA KAR I KA 75

a l s o acc o rded to the Gun as N o proof o f their exi stence is

.

offered : i t is t o be i n ferred that they were held to be

established by observation bo th of nature a n d of man .

From the p o ssession of the three co n stituents whi ch i s ,

common to b o th the evolved a n d the une v olved follow ,

certain further characteri stics of these entities which form ,

the di scriminati o n between them and the other great

principle of the S amkhy a P urusha or S p i rit Un like S pirit
, , .
,

the evolved and the unevolved are without the power o f

di scriminating between themsel ves and S pi rit : i n deed
without S pi rit they are wholly u n c o nsci ous ; they are
objective o n ly while spirit is the subject ; they are common
to a l l S pirits whereas e ach spirit is uni que ; they are either
creative created or b o th creative and created while S pi rit
, ,

is neither created nor creative While however i t i s

.
, ,

expressly s ai d that these di stinctio n s ari se from the

possessi o n by the unevol v ed of the three co n stituents wh ich
are likewise present in the evolved the mode o f the ,

derivation of the ch aracteristi cs i s n o t given Nor i s thi s .

defect remedied in the accou n t given o f the argum e n ts for

the existence of the S pirit as these arguments essenti ally
assume that the nature o f the u n evolved and the evolved i s
something independently ascertained .

The arguments put forward f o r the exi stence of S pi rit

are that the aggregate of nature must exi st for the s ake o f
something that there must be something to be the p resi ding
,

power for which the evoluti on of the universe takes place ,

that there must be a subj ect to experience the three consti tuents
of the universe that the de v elopment of the world proceeds
,

for the s ake of the emancip ation o f somethi n g a n d that ,

something must exi st with qualities opposed to those of the

universe . Further it i s deduced that there must be many
,

S pirits si n ce experie n ce shows us separate bi rth a n d death

, ,

separate organs and di ff erent actions and further S pi rit , , ,

must be the re v erse of nature whi ch i s essenti ally one a n d

,

the same to all S imilarly by reason o f the s ame contrast

.
, ,

S pirit i s the s ubject not the object i t reaches a n d possesses

, ,

freedom because of i ts power of di scerning the di fference

betw e en itsel f and nature : i t i s conscious as against ,

unconscious nature ; it i s without particip ati o n in acti v ity

76 THE SAM KHYA SYSTEM

i n any form and unlike nature produces nothing Never

, , , .

th e l e ss the empi ri c sel f is e x plai n ed only by the u n io n of

,

spi rit with nature : through thi s uni o n the fi n e body which
is a product of n ature becomes though i tsel f without ,

co n scious n ess conscious O n the other ha n d though the

, .
,

co n stituents alo n e possess activity by reaso n of the u n iting

with S pirit S p irit really indiff ere n t a p p e a r s a s an actor
'

, , , .

B ut the co n j u n cti o n of the two i s esse n ti ally not inte n ded

to be permanent : i t is in fact like the u n io n of a bli n d man
, ,

with a lame ma n : S pi rit j oi n s forces with n ature in order

th at nature may be revealed to S pi r it a n d that S pirit may ,

obtai n freedom from its connection with n ature .

This conception is the fu n dame n tal poi n t of the whole

S amkhy a system a n d its difficulties are obvious There i s
, .

n o possibility of medi ation betwee n the spi rit which is

removed from all actio n and the acti v e b u t unconscious ,

nature The famous S imile of the bli n d m a n who carries

.

on hi s back the l ame man and thus places h i s activity u n d e r

,

the control of the directing power o f the other suffers from ,

the fund amental difficulty that the two m e n with whi ch it

deals are both possessed o f activity and s o c a n co o p erate -
.

S pirit can n ot act a n d o n the other hand n ature bei n g

, ,

unconscious i s not cap able of receivi n g directio n s from the

,

co n scious S pi rit S till more seri ous i s the difficulty th at

.
,

while the aim of the union of the lame a n d the bli n d i s

ob v iously the ser v i n g o f a useful purpose n o such pur p ose ,

can be co n ceived for the u n io n o f spirit and n ature .

U nco n scious nature ca n n ot e x p erie n ce mi sery : spirit in

itself does not experience misery a n d the unio n of the two , ,

which results in the app arent e x perie n ce of misery by spi rit ,

which wro n gly thi n ks th at the misery which it bri n gs to

light i n nature i s misery whi ch it itsel f e n dures thus creates ,

the v ery mi sery which it is the obj ect of the u n io n to abolish .

It i s impossible to i magi n e that s o comp li cated a system

could h a v e arise n from i n depe n dent S p eculatio n o n the nature
of e x istence The conception o f spiri t in the S amkhya i s
.

clearly nothing more than the carryi n g to a further limit of

the co n ception of the sel f in the teachi n g of the B r h a d ar a ny a h a
Up a nisa d The distinctio n of the subj ective and the objective
.
,

and the rec o gnition o f the fact that the subject i s in a sense
78 T HE SA MKHYA S YSTEM

cati o n o f this abstract conception as the S amkhya asserts .

The exi stence o f numerous individuals who are co n scious i s a

totally d ifi e re n t thi n g for their number and individuality
,

are conditio n ed by the possession of a different objective

content in co n sciousness and when thi s i s removed there ,

w o uld remai n nothing at all or at the most the abstract ,

conception of subject which could not be a multitude of

,

i n dividual S pirits Had the S amkhy a co n ception been th at

.

of a number of souls as O pposed to spi rits n o logical ,

objection could be rai sed to the theory of multiplicity but ,

the sharp di sti n ction o f spi rit and nature and the assertion ,

th at there i s no real connectio n between them deprive S pi rit ,

of any poss ible reality .

These difficulties c o me out in great prominence i n the

effort to deduce the evolution of nature for the sake of spirit .

From n ature ari ses the great one often called intellect , ,

B uddhi ; then ari ses individuation Ah amk ara ; thence come ,

the five organs of perception B u d d h in d riy a ; the five organs ,

of actio n Ka rme n d r iy a and the five fine elements T a n m atr a s ;

, , ,

from the five eleme n ts ari se the fi v e gross elements -

,

M a h ab h uta s and from them the world

,
The series up to .

the five gross elements includi n g nature itsel f number , ,

twenty four and with spirit as twe n ty fi fth make up the

-
,
-

princi p les of the system The first n ature is evolve n t .

, ,

only : the rest s ave the gr o ss elements are evolved a n d

, ,

evolvent the gross elemen ts are evolved and S pi rit is n either

, ,

evolvent or evolved but thi s d istinction i s of no weight for

,

the system The series i s in all probability of histori cal

.

origi n as i t finds as we have seen an analogue in th e

, , ,

K a th a Up a nisa d and perh aps for this reason its deduction

,

i s full o f difficulty .

The essenti al conception i s that from unc o nscious n ature

there i s developed for the sake of spi rit a whole uni verse ,

that the develop ment tak es place for each individual S pirit
separately but yet at the s ame time in such a manner that
,

nature a n d i ts evolutes are common to all S pi rits The .

question how n ature consi sting of the equilibrium of the

, ,

three constituents S attva Raj as a n d Tamas can be brought

, , ,

into activity at all remains unsolved : it is illustrated by the

S imile of the unc o nscious milk which flow s t o nourish the .
 THE SAM KHYA KA R I KA 79

ca l f ye t nature is s aid t o proceed f o r the free d o m o f

,

S pirit as men pr o ceed t o bring t o cess ati o n thei r desi res .

B ut nature i s essenti ally other than S pi rit : i t is n o t as in ,

the Ved anta a production of i gnorance but i s as real as

, ,

S pirit itself th o ugh it i s o nly under the influence of uni on

,

with S pi rit that i t evolves itself B ut for th at uni o n the

.

constituents though credited with the powe r o f action

, ,

w o uld not alter from their condition o f equilibri um .

The concepti o n of intellect a s the first ev o lute fr o m nature

i s doubtles s to be traced t o the derivation from the Avy a k t a
o f the gre at soul in the Ka th a Up a niga d ( i i i Thi s ,

fact and its position in the series o f evol utes be fore the
,

principle o f individuati o n suggest that the primary sense

,

o f the express ion i s cosmi c but the exact force of a cosmi c

,

intellect in a system which h as not a creator or w o r l d soul -

i s difficult to appreci ate though i n the Ved ant a i t is easy to

,

understand how fr o m the i mpers o n al B rahman can be

derived the pers o nal Hir a n y a ga rb h a wh o can be regarded
a s the world soul At most the concepti o n aimed at may
-
.

be that the influence o f spirit i s to convert the wholly

i n determinate n ature into a consciousness whi ch f o r lack ,

of principle o f individuation can o nly be c o nceived as

a potenti al consciousness B ut thi s cosmi c position o f
.

intellect is feebly grasped in the K ar i k a in which on the ,

contrary stress i s l aid on the intellect a s psychologi cal .

It is defined as the power o f decision by wh ich i t seems ,

to be distinguished from mind as the power which ,

form ulates the p o ssible courses and carries out the deci sion ,

while on the intellect u al side m ind brings up the materi a l

for concepts whi ch the intellect formulates *
Viewed in .

this light intellect whi ch like all the products of n ature

, ,

consi sts o f three constituents in its S attva aspect i s

,

di stingui shed by the performance of duty knowledge , ,

freedom from desire and divine powers : in its aspect as

,

Tamas i t is disti n gui shed by the reverse of these qualities or ,

more correctly i t is the Raj as aspect whi ch pro duces desi re .

It is clear that c o nsi dered thus intellect cannot be pri or to

C f D e u ss e n , A llg e m e in e G e s c hic h t e d e r P h i l os op h i e I , iii,
.
.

43 6 , 4 3 9. G a r b e ( S amk h y a P h il os op h i e , p p 2 5 2 , 2 5 3 ) r e s t r i c ts m in d
.

t o w i s h a n d d o u b t a n d t o its c o n n e cti o n w ith th e o r ga n s .

80 THE SAM KHYA SYSTEM

mind o r individuation and that i t p e rf o rms a tw o fol d

,

and i nconsistent p art i n the scheme .

The princi p le o f i n divi duation can only be underst oo d

as the principle through the action of which the severa l
S pirits become endowed each with a sep arate substratum ,

which results in the appearance of h uman indivi duals It is .

i mpossible to interpret the principle of indivi duation in

any real cosmic sense as i f thi s is done we w o uld find ,

o ursel v es faced with the conception o f a really conscious

w o rld S pi rit which i s not accepted in the K ari k a P sycho
,
.

l ogically the principle stands midway between intellect and

mind : the sensa tions communicated through mind a re
referred to the self and result in a perfect concept ; the
suggestions of action sent up by mind are referred to the
self by the action of indivi duatio n a n d resu l t in the decisi o n ,

O f i ntellect and the derivation of mind and the senses fr o m

,

individ uation l ike that o f individuati o n fr o m intel l ect is

, ,

again logically impossible .

The p y s ch ol ogic a l character o f the princip l e o f in

d iv id u a tion is emphasized by the derivati o n from it in its
S attv a aspect of the mind and the fi v e organs of perception
and the five organs o f actio n and fro m it i n its Tamas ,

aspect o f the five fi n e eleme n ts thus developing a further ,

p arallelism of the s ubjective a n d the o bj ective elements .

In e ach derivation the Raj as aspect pl ays i ts p art both a s ,

servi n g to se t the other constituents in action and as

actually present i n the resul ts The five organs of .

perceptio n are those of S ight heari n g smell taste and to u ch ; , , ,

the five orga n s o f acti on are the tongue feet h an ds a n d the , , ,

organs of e v acuatio n a n d reproductio n Mind is like these .

,

ten an organ through whi ch e x tern al reality i s a p p rehen ded

, ,

but it h as the imp ortant fu n ctio n of arrangi n g the sense

impressions i n to precepts of suggesti n g alter n atives and of , ,

c a r y in g out the decisio n s o f the will by mea n s of the organs

o f action The functio n o f the orga n s of perception is

.

merely obser v atio n in contrast with the action of the organs

,

o f action Mind with the o rgans appears to be c o nsi dered

.
" "

So Sa rnk a r a and tly G a u da p ad a V aca s p a tim iSr a

’

, a p p aren . at
t r i b u te s th e ac tivity to m in d ,
in d ivi du a ti on a n d i n te lle c t .
 TH E SA MK HYA KAR I KA 81

as pr o ducing by thei r action the five vita l ai rs which in the ,

Ved anta system are given an independe n t place a s the sup

p o rters o f the li fe of nutrition as opposed to the consciou s
li fe. The distinction of ten se n ses i s not ex p l ained s ave ,

by a re ference to the div e rse development o f the constituents .

Mind shares with intellect and indi v iduation the

peculi arity th at there i s no distinction between organ and
function as there i s i n the case of the other ten senses
,
In .

p erception all four functions the senses mind individuation

, , , ,

and intellect are active : i n o ther cases only the l atter three
are employed but thei r activity must rest upon the result o f
,

previous perception a memory p icture or an i dea The

,
,
.

acti o n in both cases may be si multaneous or step by step but , ,

in the former case the real sense i s i t seems that the proces s , ,

is t oo swi ft for the steps to be observed : thus an o bj ect i s

se e n by the senses the sense impression i s developed i nto a
,

percept by mind related to the self by i ndivi duation and

, ,

made into a concept by inte ll ect or suggested decisions are

’

formed by mind br o ught into i n d i v i duation and the deci sion

, ,

is given by intellect whereupon mind sees to thei r executi o n

, .

Thus i n its widest sense the organ can be descri bed a s

thi rteen fold : the three functions intellect individuation
-
, , ,

and mind form the inner o rgan the ten senses the outer ,

o rgan through which alone c a n the i nner organ be se t in

,

activity either directly in perception or through the influence

,

o f a former percepti o n The outer organ i s thus bound to

.

the present in time the inner can deal with p ast an d future
,
.

T he o rgans are mutually help ful but thei r ultimate ai m is ,

for the s ake o f S pirit The sen ses are the door while the
.
,

inner organ i s c o mp ared to the doorkeeper Between th e .

o rgans of perception and o f action there i s a distinction i n

the n ature of their obj ects ; the former c o ntempl ate both the
fine and the gross elements including all the w o rl d under
,

the latter head ; s p eech h a s sound as i ts o bj ect while the ,

o ther four organs deal wi th all the fi v e gros s elements and

the world derived fr o m them .

The position of i ntellect however i s one o f speci al , ,

importan ce : all the action of the other organs i s carried out

for the intellect and it w o rks d irectly for S pirit p roduci n g
, ,

its experienc e of all exi stence on the o ne hand and on the

82 THE SAM KHYA SY S TEM

other securing the d iscernment of the subtle distinction

be tween spirit and nature .

The fine elements are descri bed as without d ifference i n

them wh ile the gross elements which ari se from them are
,

expressly described as possessing this quality from whi ch i t ,

w o uld seem that the gross elements are considered as in the ,

C h an d ogy a Up a niga d where h o wever there are but , ,

three elements in questio n to be produced by the inte rm ingl ,

ing of the fine eleme n ts the elements receiving thei r speci al

,

names from the presence i n them of the greater amount of

the specific element in accordance with the V iew of the
,

Ved anta in which each element co nsists o f a half of one

,

element and o ne eighth each of the other four The alter

-
.

native view suggested by the Ta ztti riy a Up a n isa d ( ii 1 )

’

under which the gross elements would arise from the

compo unding of the fi n e elements by the process of
accumulation wind for example ha v ing bot h th e qualities
, , ,

of audibility and ta c tib ility i s ado p ted by G a u da p ad a and ,

V ac a sp a tim iSr a but seems to h ave les s probability since i n

, ,

it ether would have but one quality a udibility an d s o could , ,

not be contrasted as a gross eleme n t with the c o rrespo nding

fine element .

Togethe r with the organs the fine elements form p art of

th e L ifi ga the psychic ap p aratus which p asses from li fe to
, ,

li fe The L ifiga howeve r include s as a necessary p art of it

.
, ,

the subtle p arts of the gross elements which serve a s the ,

seed whence the p hy si cal body springs These subtle .

portions are as n ecess ary to the psychic app aratus as the

canvas to a pictu re or by a less appropri ate S imile a p illar
, ,

to a S h a dow This psychi c apparatus which is incorporeal

.
,
-
,

and is prior to the concep ti on of time accomp anies the souls ,

throughout transmigratio n fr o m body to body i n accordance , ,

with the rule of causality pl aying like an act o r various ,

p arts a power which it p ossesses since i t S hares i n the

,

property of all pervadingness which bel o ngs to nature .

Thi s conj unction o f spi ri t with the psychi c app aratus i s the
cause o f mi sery and lasts until the attainment of true
,

insight .

The gros s el ements h o wever h ave a further character, ,

istic .T hey consist of two further p o rtions th o se des cri b e d ,

 THE S AM K HYA K AR I KA 83

as bor n of father a n d mother which go to make the body o f ,

the psychi c apparatus growing out of the seed i n the form

,

of the subtle portions o f the gross eleme n ts a n d the ,

P r a b h uta s which form the mass o f inorga n i c n ature These

,
.

two elements grow out from the subtle portions and thus ,

each indi v i dual spi rit i s pro v i ded with a complete world of
i ts own ari sing from it sel f At the s ame time however it i s .
, ,

ex p ressly i ndi cated that these la st two portio n s of the gross

elements fall back at death i n to the body o f n ature an d i t ,

i s cle ar th at the conceptio n of the soul s as monads i s not

carried out to its full extent The reason for the .

breach in the u n ity of the i dea is obvious it i s .

i n tended to meet the case of the difficulty which

arises as to the existence i n the empiri c world o f
other souls in human and other bodies and o f inorganic ,

nature . To co n si der all these a s developed from the fine

elements sep arately for each spiri t would seem un n atural ,

and though therefore the gross elements are expressly deri v ed

, ,

from the fine elements and though these are derived from ,

the p ri n ciple o f individuatio n which cannot be cosmi c none , ,

the less these two portions of the gross elements are treated
a s being the s ame for all not merely S imilar and therefore as , , ,

cosmic This fact reveals a realistic basi s at the bottom of

.

the S amkhy a conception and suggests that nature i s to some ,

degree at least directly resp o nsible for i n orga n i c thi n gs and ,

even for the corporeal p arts of orga n i c things O f the .

latter fourteen classes are enumerated eight divine given , ,

variously by G a u da p ad a as B rahman P raj ap ati S oma

, , , ,

I n dra Gandharv as Ya k sa s P i sacas a n d Ra k sa se s five o f

, , , , ,

beasts given by the s ame scholi ast as wild a n imals d om e s ti

, ,

c a te d animals birds re p tiles and p lants and one of men

, , , ,
.

In the worlds of the gods the constitue n t Sattva prevails i n ,

th at of me n Raj as in the rest Tamas O f i norgani c n ature

, .

not a hint i s given a fact which suggests that the difficulties

,

of its position were decidedly felt by the author .

C f v v 2 2 , 3 9 a n d 4 1 o f th e Kar ika : t h e s u b t le p o r ti o n s s e e m
. .

t o p i c k f r o m n a t u r e th e m a t e r i a l fo r t h e M atap it g j a s S e e D e u ss en ,
'

A ll g e m e i n e G e s c hi c h t e d e r P h il os op hi e I , iii 4 4 7 , 4 4 8 , 4 9 7 ; b e lo w ,
, ,

p 97 . T h e o bj e c ti o n s o f O S t r a u s s , Vi e n n a O r ie n t a l J o u r n a l , xxv ii ,
.

2 6 2 , a r e n o t c o n v in c i n g .
84 THE SAM KHYA SYSTEM

In its p ass age through the world from b o dy t o b o dy in , ,

th e course of ti me e ach soul or spirit with its psychi c body , ,

is subject t o determin ation which cannot be deduced from ,

its own nature as spirit nor from the p sychi c body but must ,

be derived directly from n ature Thi s determination is .

afforded by the B h av a s psychi c states whi ch a re in se p a r

, ,

ably b o und up with the psychic app aratus : the two go

together s o long a s the spirit i s not finally freed from the
psychi c app aratus Each individual li fe starts with a
.

definite equipment of states and i t adds others i n its li fe ,

a pp arently those with which it starts exhaust themselves in

the course of its li fe and when i t p asses a way and i n due

,

course a new li fe begi n s the new li fe carries with i t the

states accumulated in the last existence .

The direct connection o f the states with nature is sh o wn

by the f a ct that the eight enumerated are those which h ave
a lready been given as the characteristi cs of the S attva and
T amas aspects o f intellect They are perf o rmance o f duty .

and the reverse which lead respective l y to a higher pl ace i n

,

the next li fe and to degradation ; knowledge which leads t o ,

fina l release ; ig n orance which entails co n tinued bondage ;

,

indi fference t o desire which helps to l oosen the bond between

,

S pirit and desi re whi ch leads t o rebi rth ; divin e ,

p o wer w hich l eads to freedom fr o m obstac l es and th e posses

, ,

s i o n o f the Siddhi s perfections ; and lack of divine power

,

w hich has the reverse effect .

The K ari k a howe v er gives beside thi s eight fo l d divi sion

, , ,

w hich is frequently referred t o another division of fi ft y ,

s tates ,
divided under f our heads These are the fi ve .

V ip a ry ay a s err o neous views the twenty eight ASak tis l ack

, ,
-
,

o f p o wer ; the nine T u sh tis s atis factio n s ; and the eight ,

Siddhi s perfecti ons,

The fi v e V ip a ry a ya s which are com
.
,

p arable with th e fi ve Kl e Sa s of the Yoga system Avidy a , ,

A sm ita Raga D ve sh a and Ab h in iv e Sa are Tamas darkness ;

, , , , ,

Moha confusi o n ; M a h am oh a deep c o nfusion ; T am is r a

, , ,

gloo m ; and An d h a tam isra dark gloom There are ei ght ,

.

kinds o f Tamas explained by the commentat o rs a s the err o r

,

S e e D e u s s e n A llg e m e in e G e s c h i c h t e d e r P hi los op h ie , I , in 4 5 1
, , .

Ab s o r p ti on in n a tu r e is th e r e n d e r i n g o f th e c o m m e n t a tor s .
86 THE S AM KHYA S Y S TEM

the psychi c apparatus must wander from birth to birth ,

gatheri n g from nature at each birth the portio n s of the gross

elements described as born of father and mother in order to
assume a physi cal body All thi s time nature by evolving
.

for spi rit in the hope of en abling i t to attain final release

i s like a d ancer who displ ays herself o n the stage and t h en
retires agai n her task un accomplished B ut in the e n d
, .

n ature succeeds in her object and like a bash ful maide n ,

seen in d és h a b il l é who withdraws for ever from the S i ght of

,

the man who has seen her nature h avi n g fulfilled her , ,

obj ect withdraws from spirit for ever whe n spi ri t has
, ,

realized its essenti al di sti n ction from nature Then comes .

to an end the p aradox by which spi rit which h as really no ,

co n nection with nature and i s u n affected by the mi sery inhe re n t

in nature cons iders itself bou n d and suffers transmigration
, ,

while n ature undertakes the cha n ges of evolution for the

s ake of spirit since in hersel f s h e i s not conscious of
,

misery In truth the spirit i s not bound does not undergo

.
,

transmigration and is not released but these processes are

, ,

applicable to nature but only for the sake of S pirit

, .

There i s only one means by which nature can succeed in

freeing spirit from fancied dependence o n her though sh e ,

makes efforts in diverse ways : of the eight psychic states

which are see n in intellect seven merely keep S pirit fast in
its bonds ; with the eighth knowledge however release i s
, , ,

achieved The knowledge which results in liberation i s the

.

realiz atio n that the spirit i s not on e or all of the principles ,

th at i t has no empi ric e x iste n ce th at n othi n g belongs to ,

it and that it does n ot exi st as an emp iri c i n di v i dual

,
.

The attai n ment of thi s k n owledge through co n sideratio n

of the facts of exi sten ce results in the cessatio n of the
creati v e activity of n ature : the other seve n psychi c
states come to an end for e v er and s p irit in co n te n tment , , ,

gazes as a mere s p ectator u p o n nature which n o longer

binds it Recog n izi n g that nature i s n o t co n n ected
.

with it S p irit i s indiffere n t to her n ature recog n izing

, ,

th at her true character i s u n derstood ceases her activity ,

a n d though the union of the two remai n s in existe n ce even

,

a fter the attainme n t of true kn owledge there i s no p ossi bility

‘

of further p r o duction B ut a s the potter s wheel co n ti n ues

.
’
 T HE SAM KHYA KAR I K A 7

to rev o lve f o r a time after he ceases t o maintain its moti o n

, ,

by reas o n o f the acquired velocity s o the psychi c states ,

which result from the previous li fe h ave to be finally

e xhausted and n o t until t he impres sion s S amsk ar a s thus
, , ,

existing in the min d have been removed can the complete ,

release be attained in death when spi rit obtains the con ,

dition o f complete isolation which is unending an d which , ,

i s free from any other ch aracteri stic .

Nothing i s more convi n cing p r o of o f the close derivation

of the S amkh y a from the orthodox doctrine o f the Up a n i
s ads than the terms i n whi ch the attai n ment of release i s
described In the system itsel f the doctrine of the b o nd age
.

o f spirit i n nature is essenti al to expl ain the misery o f

exi stence but at the s ame time it is admitted th at there i s no
,

real b o ndage No reason is given for the belief of spirit

.

that i t i s bound yet as the bond age is unreal it i s clear th at

, , ,

it must be produced by ignorance si nce i t i s removed by ,

knowledge but thi s doctrine i s n o t se t out i n the K arik a

, ,

which on the contrary consi stently treats the union of spirit

and nature a s a union for the final release of spi ri t There .

is n o conception o f a development o f S pi rit by its union

with its op p os ite r e su l tin g i n a synthesi s whi ch i s far more
, ,

rich in content th an the two factors involved : o n the c o n

t r a ry the connecti o n of S pi rit with matter terminates wi th
,

the withdrawa l of spi ri t into a condi tion o f abs o lute

free dom whi ch must however a t the same time be absolute
, , ,

nonentity In fol l owing the doctrine o f the Up ani sads

.

th at true know l edge i n volves the de n i al o f indivi duality ,

the S amkhya system leads i tsel f into the difficult position

that it thus really denies the reality of its system O f many ‘

spirits since there can be no multiplicity without in d iv i

,

duality to distinguish the several members o f the gr o up o f

S pirits In the Upani sads on the contrary the i dea i s
.
, ,

j ustifiable since the deni al o f individua l ity is due t o the

,

fact that all seeming indivi duals are really merely one si ngle
self In the Up an isa d s more ove r there i s a real possibility
.
, ,

of the bi nding o f the sel f ; whether the bonds be real or

merely illusory still in th e first case they can be destroyed
,

in the appropri ate manner and i n the sec o nd the false ,

belief can be removed by know l edge but the S amkhya ,

88 TH E SAM KHYA SYSTEM

denies any rea l c o nnection whatev er and while it therefore , ,

leaves i t to be assumed that the apparent connection i s

caused by i gn or ance i t does not li ke the Ved anta elevate
, , ,

that ignora n ce i n to a meta p hysi cal e n tity thus lea v ing its ,

existence even on the basi s of the system u n ex p lained .

In the case of any individual sel f the con n ection of ,

S piri t and n ature rests indeed on the lack of di scrimi n ation

in a previous exi ste n ce whi ch leaves its impressi on on the
,

mind and in the next exi stence leaves the S p irit b ound but
, ,

thi s d o es not meet the objection to a n infinite regress which

“
in other cases the S amkhy a system s h arply refuses to all o w .

The S piri t not bei n g really connected with n ature there is ,

no ground on which there can b e produced the lack of d is

crimin atio n of S pi rit from n ature which causes bondage .

In the Ved anta of Sa mkara the finite a n d the infinite S pi rit

are indeed in reality o ne and the di stinctio n between them
,

is due t o an il l usi o n but a n i l lusi o n i s s o mething which can

,

be rem o ve d by kn o w l ed ge : a non exi sting c o nnecti on -

cannot create a lack of di stincti o n whi ch pr o duces a c o n

n e c tio n
. Or i f th at view of the Upani sads be accepted i n ,

which the existence o f individua l souls and of the o uter world

“

is in some way believed t o be real then freed o m may be won,

by the rec o gnition o f the true connecti on between the ind iv i

dua l soul s an d the absolute through meditation up o n and ,

dev o tion to the absolute or through grace as in the Ka th a

, , ,

Up a n i sa d ( ii 2 3 ) and elsewhere
,
* Equally here i s a
.

connection reali zed between S pirit and n ature the absence ,

of whi ch S huts off the S amkhya from any possibility o f

logi cal explanation o f its mai n pri n ciples .

S ee a ls o K a u sit a k i Up a n isa d iii 8 ; M a n d a k a iii 2 3

, , , , ,
.
 T HE L AT E R S A MKH Y A
S PE C I AL attention h as been drawn t o the sh o rt tract ,

called the Ta ttv a s a m as a by reason o f the fact th at Max

,

Miil l e r considered th at i t was the real text book o f the

* -

S amkhya system anteri o r t o the S amk hy a K ari k a The .

argument i n i ts favour i s that wher e it agrees with the

,

Kari k a i t appears t o be the older : this view is n o t ho wever , ,

s upp o rted by any detai l ed argument and certainly d o es n o t

,

seem c o nclusive Al l th at can be s ai d of it with certainty

.

is that V ijfi an a b h ik su in h is c o mmentary on the S utra

a ttributed i t apparently t o the s ame auth o r as the S utr a ,

b e ing a brief exposition o f wh at is s ai d at l ength i n the

S fi tr a and th at the text h a s i n comparatively recent times
, , ,

at l east in some p arts o f In di a , as at B enares att ained a ,

p o pul arity which is much greater than t h at o f the Kar i k a .

The l anguage is not marked by any S peci al S ign of d ate ,

a n d Max M iil l e r thought that the di fferent order o f categor ies

and the numerous names not el sewhere used were rather
a S ign of primitive and o r gin a l ch aracter than o f l ateness .

On the other hand i t must be s ai d that the relegation to the

,

end of the category of p ain i s certai n ly curiou s an d arti

fi c ial in appeara nce as contrasted with the p o sition which
,

p ain occupies at the begin n ing of the K ar ik a a s giving th e

tone to the whole system and the fact th at the term
,

Ta ttv a s a m as a shows th at the work is a compendium is

surely evidence against the text representing the o rigina l
S utras o f the school .

S ix S y s t e m s o f I n dia n P hi l os op hy , p p 3 18 ff
. . T h e la t e r d a te ,
a f te r 14 00 A D is p r e f e r r e d b y G a r b e , S amkh y a P h il os op hi e , p p
.

68 - 7 0 ,
90 THE SAM KH Y A SYSTEM

After an enumeration and explanati o n of the twenty fi ve -

princi p les arranged as the eight e v ol ve nts nature intellect

, , , ,

individuati o n and the five fine elements ; the sixtee n

,

ev o lutes arranged as the five organs of perception the fi v e

, ,

organs of action mind and the five gross elements ; and

,

S pirit the tract proceeds to enumerate the three Gu n as a n d

,

to explain thei r nature Then come brief expl anati o ns of the

.

pr o cess of evolution and the resoluti o n of the evolved going

fr o m nature to the materi al elements an d from the materi al ,

elements back to nature Thereafter the intellect indivi dua

.
,

ti o n mind and the ten senses are se t out as psychica l

,

and subjective over against the objects of their activity

and the presiding deities a c o nce p t which i s decidedly more ,

at home in the Ved anta than in the S amkhya Then come .

the five Ab h ib u d d his which are forms of the activity of

,

intellect ascertainment self re ference desire will to act a n d

, ,
-
, ,

action terms of somewhat doubtful sense and import Then

, .

come the five Ka rm ayon is sources of action enumerated as , ,

energy faith desire o f bli ss carelessness and desi re of know

, , ,

ledge but also di fferently explained The next topi c i s the

, .

five winds o r vital ai rs Pr ana expirati o n c o nnected with the

, ,

mouth and nose ; Ap an a connected with the n avel which ,

draws downwards ; S am an a connected with the heart which ,

m o ves equally about and which h a s been compared though

, ,

doubtlessly erroneously with the circulation of the blood ; ,

U d ana is connected with the throat and g o es up w ard

'

Vy ana is the all pervader The presence of these five as a

-
.

“
S peci al t opic i s in contrast with the view of the K arik a which ,

does not accept the vital airs as anything more th an the

j oint working of mind and the organs A fter the vital airs .

come the five K a rm atm a n s whi ch are descriptions o f the ,

activity o f the sel f : they are V a ik arik a the doer of g oo d ,

works ; T a ija s a the doer o f bad w o rks ; B h utad i d oer o f

, ,

h idden works ; S an u m an a the doer of what i s reas o nable ; ,

and Nir a n u m an a the doer o f what is not reas o nable

, .

The next t o pics discussed are the five Av idy as the ,

twenty eight ASak tis including the seventeen Atu s tis and
-

Asid d h is the nine T u stis and the eight S iddhis

, Then ,
.

come the eight cardinal facts Mulik ar th a s which are the , ,

e xi stence unity purpose and dev o tion to the interest o f

, , ,
 THE LAT ER SAM K HYA 91

an o ther of nature the otherness fr o m n ature the non agency

, ,
-
,

and multiplicity of S pirit a n d the temporary u n ion and ,

separation of spirit and n ature The next two topics are .

the creation of be n evolence the production of the gross from ,

the fine elements a n d the B h fi ta s a rga the divine creation i n

, ,

eight divisio n s the a n imal and the vegetable creation i n five

, ,

and the human creation i n one B o n dage i s then descri bed .

as threefold according as i t is connected with belief in any

,

of the e vol ve n ts a s the highest reality or with belie f in a ,

similar position as to the evolutes such as i s S hown in ,

devoti o n to O bjects O f sense and bond age by sacri fici al gi fts , .

Thi s curious form of b o ndage arises when men through m is

conception give gi fts to the priests and is a di stinct S i gn o f ,

hostility to the s acri fice which i s not seen in the K arik a

, .

Then come the three kinds of M ok sa release ari sing from , ,

the increase of knowledge the quieting of the senses and , ,

lastly as the outcome of the destruction of merit and demerit

,

by these means the destruction of the whole producing the

, ,

detachment of spirit from nature and co n centrati o n o f spiri t ,

u p on itsel f Then come three forms of proof a nd finally

.
,

the doctrine of mi sery subdivided i n to three according a s i t

,

i s concerned with and ari si n g from the body or mind caused ,

by others or produced by fate From thi s mi sery release

, .

can be obtained by the study o f the Ta ttv a s a m a s a

’

Thi s summary of the contents of the Ta ttv a s a m as a does

not s uggest that it h as a n y speci al claim to antiquity : it
probably represents o n e of several forms of arranging the
S amkhya principles of whi ch another form i s preserved in
,

the Sa stita n tr a list of In any case however a s the , ,

tre atise itself i s far to o brief to give valuable in formati o n

regarding the system the value o f the work i s much in ferior
,

to that of the S amk hy a K ar ik a on the one h and or the ,

S amk hy a S atr a on the o ther .

It i s probably of importance for the l ater d ate o f the

Ta ttv a s a m as a that i t i s n o t cit e d by M adh a v a in h is account
’

written ab out 13 8 0 A D of the S amkhy a in the S a r v a d a r

. .
,

sa n a s a mg r a h a where he uses as the basi s o f hi s expositi o n

,

of the system the Kar ik a He also ign o res the S amkhy a .

A b ov e , C h a p . V .
92 THE SAM KHYA SYSTEM

S fi tra itsel f which thus appears to be l ater than hi s period

, .

On the other hand it cannot be much later for i t i s c o m

, ,

me n te d on by An ir u d d h a who wrote about 1 5 0 0 A D

, and
by V ijfi an a b h ik su in the second h alf of the sixteenth century
AD. . The work h as also been commented on by V e d an tin
Mah adeva at the end of the seventeenth century and Nage Sa ,

B hat ta at the beginning o f the eighteenth ; the former i n h is

comment o n the l ast five bo o ks foll o ws An ir u d dh a faith fully ,

in the first c o pies V ijfian a b h ik su but h as indepe ndent ,

value ; the l atter is a mere imitation o f V ijfi an a bh ik su .

Despite h o wever the m o dern d ate th e S fitr a is a s o urce o f

, , ,

consi derable importanc e a n d may c o ntai n a good dea l o f

,

o ld matter though in its present form i t is ce rtain l y not so

,

pure an exp o siti o n o f the system a s the Kari k a .

Thi s is o bviously i n some me a sure at l east the c a se as

, ,

regards the criti ci sms of other phi lo sophies whi ch make ,

up an essenti a l part Of every I ndi an as o f other phi l os o phi c , ,

sys tems The a p pended verses t o the Kar ik a expressly s ay

.

that these criti ques a re omitted a nd much of the o mission ,

may be supplied in the S atr a On the o ther h and we can .

,

not s ay h o w much the S atr a which freely uses the Karik a

als o uses phrases bo rrowed f r o m Samkara and theref o re ,

must be treated as a work the comp o sers o f whi ch w ere quite

cap ab l e of adding much o f thei r o wn As the te xt s tand s .
,

practically all the l eading phi lo sophica l s ystems receive

their S hare of di sapprova l The materi alism of the C arv ak as
.

is met by the refutation o f thei r deni al o f the validity o f

reaso n ing by the reference to its self destructive n ature since -
,

no am o unt of perce p tion will giv e a doctri n e any validity ,

and by the reply to the favourite argument of the produc

tion of intelligence from u n in te l l ige n t things o n the an alogy
, ,

o f intoxicating power from an aggregate of herbs that the .

,

intoxi cating p owe r is latent in the i n gredients but t h ere is

l ,

no trace o f souls in the p sychic organs The J ain doctrine .

o f the co extensi o n o f soul with b o dy is refuted by the

-

a rgument th at as all th at i s limited is temporary

,
s o ul s ,

would be temp o rary also Obj ections are rai sed to the .

B uddhist deni al of the soul t o its assertion of the moment ,

a ry character o f the w o rld and to its belief in the ,

a n nihi l ati o n o f per s on a l ity a s fina l re l ea s e T h e speci a l .

94 TH E S AM KHYA S YSTEM

view that the released soul has enj oyment as i ts

characteri stic a view which con tradi cts the whol e theo ry of
,

the s amkhy a that i solation alone i s the end The S amkhya .

als o rejects in i ts S ister sy stem of Y o ga the d oc trine o f a

, ,

personal deity and of the eterni ty o f the S p h ota the ,

concept expressed in the complex o f le tters of the alphabet

which make up a word *
B ut in rejecting many of the
.

th e ories of the o ther schoo l s the S amk hy a S atr a shows i tsel f

not u n in fl ue nce d by on e at least of them : the work makes
remarkable eff o rt s to prove that its views are in full accord
with scripture t o which it attributes conclusive va l ue and
, ,

endeavours t o S how a s accordant w ith the S amkhya itsel f

the statements in scripture regarding the pe rs o nality of
G od the unity in the absolute the j oy which is asserted to
, ,

be part of the nature o f the absolute and the heavenly ,

bli ss acknowledged in the Ved anta as a step on the way to

final release Indeed the text goes s o far a s to h o ld that
.
,

O bedience to the traditional rules of acti o n h as a go o d effect

towards securing fin al release and to talk o f the attainment ,

of the nature o f the absolute .

In the main doctrines of the system the later texts throw

little new o r valuable light Peculi ar to them is the .

doctri ne that the spirit throws light on the i nner organ o r ,

th at the spirit serves as a mirr o r in which the inner org an

'

i s refle cted The import ance o f thi s doctrine lies in the

.

fact that i t is held t o explain the mode i n which spi ri t is

appr e hended All perception i s due to the inner organ
.

f o rm ing in itsel f a picture of the thing to be perceived ,

which is reflected in spiri t ; similarly it forms such a

picture of the S pirit an d when the spirit reflects i tsel f in
,

the inner organ i t brings its reflex and there fore its self to , ,

consci o us kn ow l edge A n o ther S imi l e us ed t o expre ss the

.

relation o f spi rit and na ture which i s in itse l f p urely

unconsci o us is th at of the reflection o f the red Hibi scus
,

sh oo ts in a crysta l near which the flower lies : the crystal

remains unaffect ed by the reflecti o n Ingenious a s all .

these c o mpari s o n s are i t cannot be s ai d that they le nd

,

S ee E . A b e gg, F es ts c h r ift E . Win d is c h ( B e r lin , pp .

18 8 - 19 5
.
 THE L A TE R S A M KHYA 9S

much clea rness t o the subjec t m atter with which they d e a l -

.

B ut they warn us o f the d anger of treating the e v olutes o f

n ature as be ing essenti ally materi al and as made i nt o
psychic states by the i nfluence o f spirit The concepti o n .

o f the inner o rgan consi sting of intellect i ndi v iduati o n

, ,

and mind cannot be conceived as equivalent as suggested

, ,
*
by G arbe to the nervous system to whi ch psychic
, ,

meani n g i s given by the r eflection in spiri t or the light

thrown by spirit Rather the co n ception i s th at everything
.

including the psychic states of experience in an unco n scious

c o ndition i s present in the inne r org an waiting to become
, ,

actual by the addition of the element of consciousness given

by S pi ri t With thi s view accords best the fact th at the
.

s y stem of the S atr a regards a s p ersi sting in unco n scious n ess

in the intellect the impressions of experience which give
ri se to psychi c disposition s S a rh sk ar a s , .

A fu rther de v elopment of d o ctrine and not a happy ,

one may be seen i n the treatment of intellect and i ndividua

,

tion . The on l y tolerable theory i s th at in some way

n ature i s con verted i n to i n tellect or conscio u s n ess by the
i nfluence of spirit a n d that the result of i n di v iduation i s
,

to split up thi s conscio usness which must be regarded ,

as not h aving attained to consciousness of itself ,

into defi n ite i n dividuals possessed o f definite selves .

These i n dividuals would essenti ally possess al so i ndividual

co n sciousnesses as the pri n ciple o f i n di v iduation would carry
,

wi th it a s a n essenti al presupp ositio n con sciousness in order

to become self co n scious : thi s fact explains why i n the
-

S il tr a ( i ii 9 ) the constituents of the in n er organ fine body

, ,

or psychi c apparatus are reckoned at seventeen i n place o f

,

eightee n i n tellect a n d individuation falli n g unde r one head

, .

From the indi v idual principle n aturally can be derived the

senses with mi n d a n d as suggested in the Ka u si ta k i
,

Up a n isa d ( i i i ) the objects of the senses in the sh ape of

the fine elements from which the gross elements pr oceed
, ,

and this i s clearly the main view of the K ar i k a On the other .

S amk h y a P hil os o p h i e , p 2 5 5 . . Th e d o c tr i n e is p r o b a b ly d e r ive d

f ro m Sa mk a r a s s ys te m C f A
'
. . . E G ou gh , P h il o s o p hy of t h e
.

U p a n is a d s , p 3 9 . .
96 THE SA M K H YA S Y S TEM

h and th e S fi tr a evidently regards the whole process a s being

,

a cosmic one the principle of individuation producing

,

cosmic organs and elements and the indivi dual correspond

, ,

ing principles being derived from the c o smic It i s .

characteristi c o f the difficulty of the doctrine and of its ,

absurdity that the explanation of the derivati on i s nowhere

,

given : the S utra ( i ii 10 ) merely s ay s th at from the one

,

psychic app aratus many were pr o duced by reason of the

di fference of the works an ex p lanation which i s subject to
,

the di sadvantage that it begs the question since the d is tin c ,

tion of w o rks presupposes individuals and indivi d uals ,

presuppose separate psychic apparatuses with which t o

perform works The probable explanation of the effort to
.

fill up the system i s to be seen in the fact that the K ari k a

i tsel f evidently all o ws inorganic nature to be in some way
directly con n ected wi th nature and not merely as i t should , ,

consistently be derived for each i n divi dual from the fine

,

eleme n ts which form p art of h is p s ychic apparatus .

In the third place the S at r a developes in detail the

,

doctrine o f the pr ocess O f the creation a n d the destructi on

o f the world which presents in a more philosophi c sh a p e
,

the doctrine of the ages of the world found in the epic an d

c o mmon to the philoso p hies N ature a n d S pirit are e v er .

ready for creation : the former seeks to de v elop for the

enj oyme n t a n d fi n al release of S pi rit and the l atter i s ready ,

to play its part o f onloo ker but of course i t is impossible to

, , ,

find any beginning in tim e fo r the process Each cre ation

'

follows on a peri od of destructio n in which everything h as

been resolved back i n to a state of inactivity in the sense ,

th at the three Gunas instead of i n termingli ng in their

,

consta n t activity merely p roduce each its self Nevertheless

, .
,

a s s o o n as the result of the work done before h as fou n d the

correct time the process commences afresh all spirits
, ,

having thei r psychi c app aratuses evolved according to the

impressions le ft up on them by the acts done in thei r last
exi stences whi ch have left them with a defi n ite moral
'

character and wi th the di sposition prod uced by thei r

,

failure to recogni ze the separation of spi rit a n d n ature .

D uring the period o f the c o nti nuance o f the world in a

stat e of d e structi o n a s the psychi c apparatuses of the
,
 98 THE SAM KHYA S Y S TEM

the body : water sustains the blood fire the heat o f the ,

b o dy ai r the breath and ether the wi ndpipe The breath

, , .

which i n the K ar i k a pl ays a very restricted pa rt here ,

appears under the influence of the Ved anta as the principle

controlling the growth of the body under the guidance o f
S pirit with which indeed it seems to be conceived a s united
, , ,

eve n before the production o f the embryo The kind of .

b o dy i s determined by the power of former actio n but not ,

th e building up o f the body a p oint in which the S amkhy a ,

differs from the Ny aya a n d V a iSe sik a doctrine The other .

organic bei n gs those of station superior to man beasts and

, ,

pla n ts are similarly composed but plants are though , ,

endowed with bodies deprived according to the later te x ts

, ,

but not according to the epic of outer senses so that S pirits in, ,

them can n ot act but merely undergo penance f o r previous

,

a c tiOn S .

The unio n o f spirit wi th the i n ner organ the senses , ,

the fine elements an d the body produces the empi ric

soul J i v a a term which i s mai n ly Ved anti c while the inner
, , ,

orga n and the other eleme n ts which produce from spi rit the ,

soul are styled Up ad h is again a term proper to the

, ,

Ved anta The individual soul h a s however no real existence

.
, ,

at all : i t i s n o t an entity ; all that exists on the o n e h and i s

the body and the psychic apparatus and on the other hand ,

pure spi rit whi ch i s really unaffected by the Up ad h is

, ,

but which by its light causes them to emerge i n t o

c o nscious n ess Release consi s ts in the realiz ation that spirit
.

i s not bound by the Up ad h is and cannot be s o bou n d , .

The p arallelism of this view with that o f the Ved anta i s

too marked to be accidental a n d doubtless the i nfluence o f ,

that school must here be recognized The con nection of .

S pirit and its psychical apparatus i s absolutely continuous

and without beginning in time though it c a n be e n ded : ,

i t arises from the failure to discriminate be tween S piri t a n d

n ature and thi s failure i n each li fe is a co n sequence o f
,

a failure in the p receding li fe whi ch leaves in the empirical ,

soul an impression whi ch bec o mes real in its next e x iste n ce .

The result of the attai n ment of discrimi n ati on i s made v ery

much more clear i n the S fl tr a than i n the K ari k a : the fate
of S pi rit i s existence but enti rely without consciousness as
, ,
 THE L ATER S AM KHYA 99

follows i nevitably from the fact th at there i s now no O bject

for the subject to become united wi th Moreover the idea .
,

that such a state i s o ne o f bli ss is p roperly and logically i n

accordance with the K ar i k a e x pressly rej ected as against ,

the Ved anta theory .

On the means o f proof the later text gives little new

light : the appeal to the evi dence o f scripture i s far more
frequent than might be expected i n a system which l ay s
such great stress on reason i n g but thi s appeal i s accep ted
,

i n the K ar ik a and there is not the slightest reason to

,

assume that the term Ap ta v a c a n a whi ch i s the normal

*
,

designatio n of thi s branch of proof e v er mea n t merely ,

skilled instruction B ut a r eal advance i s made on the

.

K ar ik a i n the assigning of a definite character to S p ace and

time which are made to be qualities o f n ature regarded
,

a s a unity and to be eter n al and all present In the

,
-
.

empiric world both appear as limited and a r e expl ained in ,

a quite inconsi sten t way by origin ation from the ether

through i ts condi ti oni n g by the masses of corporeal nature ,

o n the one h and i n the case of S p ace and by th e movement

, ,

of the heavenly bodies i n the case of ti me The first .

co n ception i s n o doubt superior to th at of the Ved anta ,

which produces sp ace from the A tman but i t i s not much ,

superior to the view o f the Ny ay a and V a iSe Sik a which ,

call S p ace and ti me su b s ta n c e s t nor in any of the cases is

,

the real problem of ei ther sp ace or time seriously faced or

reali zed.

The S utr a als o i n cludes many poi n ts which the K ari k a

le aves out as u n essenti al It deals doubtfully with the O l d
.

question of works a s O pposed to knowledge and is

inconsistent in one pl ace allowing them value wh ile i n
,

others the more consi stent vi ew o f thei r total v aluelessness

comes out a fact whi ch accords wi th the lack o f any ethical
,

si de to the s amkhy a system The necessity o f a teacher i s

.

l ai d down a n d the o n ly true teacher i s on e who has attained

,

the s aving di scrimi n ation in the period before h is final

rele ase in death : the winning of such a teacher i s the result

S e e G a r b e , S amk h y a P h il os op h ie , pp . 5 9, 60 .

T Cf . Fra ze r , I n dia n Th o u g h t , p p 9 7 , 9 8
. .
10 0 T HE S AM K HYA S Y S TEM

o f good deeds in previous lives A real furtheranc e but .

,

n o t a me a n s to secure release i s indifference V a ir agya

, , ,

whi ch again is a motive for refrai n ing fr o m d o ing good

, ,

deeds with which i t i s incompatible : moreo ver the s ame

, ,

quality i s definitely opposed to a man s associ ation with ’

other m e n which i s a hin dra n ce to the desi red end

, .

Indiffere n ce i s divi ded into the higher which arises only

after the attainment of discriminatio n a n d the lower which ,

precedes i t : i f the latter i s carried to i ts fu r thest limit the ,

result i s birth as a god in the n ext w o rld period pending ,

which the person is merged in n ature Mere heari n g of .

the teaching o f the truth i s not enough : it must be

acc o mpanied by reflection and meditation and in a marked ,

degree in contrast t o the earlier K arik a the S fi tr a adopts

, ,

large masses of the Yoga techni que as a means o f pr o ducing

the desired isolation o f S pirit and nature Moreover th e .
,

S atr a also accepts from the Yoga the doctri n e of the high
value o f asceticism and the Y o gin s power to s e e all things ’

future and p ast a power whi ch i s consistent with the

,

S amkhya doctri n e of the re ality of the product in the cause .

It is ch aracteristi c of the S amkhy a that it does not

restrict like the Ved anta the s aving knowledge to the three
, ,

upper classes o f the A ry an commu n ity to the exclusion of

the S udras Thi s generosity of outlook i s seen already in
.

the great epi c ( xiv where the result of Yoga l s

,

di stinctly declared to be open even to women a n d to Sudras ,

and the s ame sentime n t can doubtless legitimately be

recog n ized in the fact that the system de spite its fo n dness ,

for sub divisio n s actually classes i n its t h eory o f the kinds

-
,

of livi n g creatures men in one di v i sio n only while divine ,

beings fall under no less than eight The motive for the .

difference o f treatment doubtless li es in the fact that the

s amkhya like the Yoga does n o t build on th e Ved a as an
, ,

e xclusive found ation and theref o re u n l ik e th e Ved anta they

, , ’
,

d o not fall u n der the rule which e x cludes S udras fr o m even

hearing the Veda recited The fact that the Ved a formed
.

one o f the sources of p roof of the system was not any m o re

inc o nsistent with the system being made available to all ,

th an the fact that the epic whi ch c o ntains Vedic quotati o ns

,

was equa l ly o pen t o S ii d ras to hear .

10 2 THE S AM K HYA SY S TEM

whi ch i s se t out with a r gu me n tS i n the very text ( v 2 1 1 ) ’

,
-

which he pro fesses to e x p ound .

The attitude ad opted by V ijfi an a b h ik su i s si gn ificant of

the thei sti c S pi rit of hi s age : in hi s e x positio n the s ix systems
present themsel v es as nothing but a thei sti c exposition o f
the uni v erse presented less di rectly in the four systems of
,

the Ny aya and V a iSe sik a S amkhya a n d Yoga and brough t

, ,

o ut i n the clea r est man n er in the Ved anta By thi s device .

the S amkhya philosophy is brought i n to the main current o f

Indi an thought a n d relieved from the dis ad v a n tages of its
atheism whi ch doubtless accou n ts for the comp arative
,

dis fa v our i n whi ch the S amkhya system had lo n g falle n in

Indi a a n d to which V ijfi an a b h ik su h im se l f bears emph ati c
,

testimon y .

While the attempt of V ijfian a b h ik su could n ot expect t o

result in the establi shmen t o f the authority of the S amkhya
as a system the influe n ce of that p h ilosophy may doubtless
,

be traced directly in the free admi ssi o n o f elements of the

S amkhya i n to the texts o f the l ater Ved an ta Thi s inter .

fusio n of Ved an ta a n d S amkhya elements is see n in the

B h a g a v a d git ah b u t the doctri n e of Gu n as was distinctly
repudi ated by S a mkara and its reappeara n ce in te x ts which
, ,

accept h is ge n eral p rinci p les and believe in the illuso ry

character of the world i s a clear proof that the reaso n i n g o f
,

the S amkhy a was felt to h ave great weight O f th i s .

sy n cretist tendency whi ch i s seen clearly in the P a fi c a d a si

,

of M adha y a in the fourteenth ce n tury A D the classi cal . .

,

example i s to be found in the Ve d an t a s ar a o f S a d an a n d a a

’

w o rk written before 1 5 0 0 A D S a d an a n d a identifies as in

. .
,

the S v e t d s v a t a r a Up a ni sa d the M ay a or Avi dy a o f the

’

, , ,

Ved anta with the P r a k r ti of the S amk hy a a n d by acce p ting ,

the v ie w that P r a k r ti is composed of three elements O btains

the mea n s o f fitting much o f the S amkhya system into the '

Ved anta . From B rahman who i s regarded by h im as ,

esse n ti ally C a ita ny a or S p i ri t i s produced through envelop

, ,

men t with ignorance i n i ts constituent o f S attva the world

S pirit ISV a r a whose causal body out of whi ch he creates all
, ,

things is composed by the whole of ignorance O n the .

o ther h and from the C a ita ny a through envelopment with

,

Sattva in a n i mpure form that i s mixed with the c o n ,

 THE LATER S AM KHYA 10 3

s titu e n ts , R aj as and T amas ari ses the indivi dual spirit , ,

P r ajfi a which h as a s its causal body out o f which i t

'

creates ind ividuati on etc and i s comp o sed o f o nly a p art o f

,
.
,

ignorance A further result of envelopme nt is the creati o n o f

.

the world sou l S utr atm a n and the ind ividual soul T a ija sa
'

, , , ,

fr o m the world spiri t and the indivi dual S pi ri t by the

-
,

producti o n through the e ffect o f the constituent Tamas of

, ,

the fine b od y F rom the C a itany a enveloped by ign o ranc e

.

through the predominance of Tamas ari ses the ether fr o m ,

the ether wind ; from wind fire ; fr o m fire water ; an d fr o m

, , ,

water e arth In each o f these elements however which are

, .
, ,

o nly in a fine state there i s a portion o f the constituents,

R aj as and S attv a as well as of Tamas Fr o m these fi ve .

T a nm atr as arise the fine b o dy consi sting o f fi v e o rgans o f ,

percepti o n produced from the S attva p o rtions o f the

corresponding fi v e elements of fi v e organs of action ari sing ,

fr o m the Raj as portions of the elements o f intelligen ce and ,

mind consi sting o f united porti ons o f Sattva from the

e lements and o f the fi ve breath s consi sting o f united
, ,

p o rtions o f Raj as from the fi v e elements In i nte l ligence .

and mind spirit Citta and i ndivi duation are held to be

, ,

included and i n thi s respe ct as in the giving of an

, ,

independent position to the fi v e breath s the S amkhy a ,

doctri ne i s abandoned Si mil arly in the view of the .

,

pr od uction of the elements from each other i n a series ,

S a d an a n d a follows the Ta ittir iy a Up a n i sa d ( 11 1 ) and n o t ,

the S amkhya On the other h and the development of the

.
,

gross world body and the indivi dual body V a i Sv an a r a and ,

V i SV a takes pl ace according to the S amkhya rule o f fi ve

,

elements n o t according to the Ved anta rule o f three

, .

At the same time i t must be noted that the influence o f

the S amkhy a is clearly limited i n exte n t : the whole system
of four states B rahman I Sv a r a and P r ajfi a S utr atm a n and
, , ,

T a ij a sa V a i Sv an a r a and Vi 3va i s based o n the Ved anta

, ,

view of the four conditions o f the sel f i n i ts con diti o ns o f ,

freedom from bond age deep s l eep dre aming and w aki ng , , , ,

respectively a s se t out in the B r h a d ar a ny a k a Up a ni s a d

,

(iv 3, the M an d fi ky a Up a ni sa d ( 3 and i n a de

v e IO p e d f o rm i n the Nr s i i nh o tt a r a t a a n iy a Up a n i sa d It i
p s .
,

h o w e ver p o ssi ble th at in the care taken t o insi st on the

,
104 T HE SA M KHYA SY S TEM
”

cosmic character of the pr oce ss which i n the earlier ,

Upani sads i s expressly res tricted to the states of the

i ndivi dual souls there may be seen the influence of the
,

S amkhya wi th its insistence on the cosmic character of the

,

devel o pmen t of P r a k rti and despite the constant vari ati o n

, ,

o f detail the importan c e of the Guna s in the system i s

,

obvi o us .

While the interaction of Ved anta and S amkhya i s thus

marked there are few traces of cl o se connection with the
,

Ny aya scho o l The most important i s the exposition of the

.

d o ctrine of inference found in V aca sp a tim iSra S commentary ’

on S amk hy a Kari k a 5 which appears to mark an in d e p e n

,

d ent development by the S amkhya o f principles adopted ,

more or less uncritically in the first instance from the Ny aya ,

rather than to contain a record of a doctrine presupposed by

the e arly form of s amkhya * In thi s V iew inference i s
.

d ivi ded int o direct ( v ita ) and indirect ( a v it a ) ; the latter

c ategory coincides with se sa v a t and means proof by the
,

elimin ation of alte rn ative explanations ; the former includes

p fi rv a v a t and S am an y a t o d r st a which differ
,
in that the
result o f the former i s a j udgment dealing with realities
which can be perceived while the latter gives knowledge of
,

s uch i mperceptible entities a s the senses o r the soul .

As t
s u gge s e d b y A B u r k , V ie n n a O ri e n t a l J o u r n a l, " V , 259, 2 6 1 .
10 6 T HE S AM KH YA S Y S TEM

AHL M ANN , I n d iff e r e n ce

D D e iti e s
J. 4 7 -49
p r e s i d i n g o ve r
10 0
I n d iv i d u a ti o n , s e e A h a mk ar a .

senses 90 I n f e r e n c e 7 1, 7 2 10 4 ,

D e u ss e n , P . S n , 9 n , 13 72 , 2 5 I n fi n it e s i z e , o f i n n e r o r g a n 5 7
7 l , 7 9n o f s p ir it 4 3
D h a rm a 6 1 I n n e r o r g a n S 7 , 8 1, 9 4 , 9 5
D h a r m ad h a r m a u 2 4 I n te lle c t , s e e B u d d h i
D reams 3 6 I sa U p a n is a d 18

D r st i 6 1 I Sv a r a 3 3 , 3 8 , 5 6 , 1 0 2
D ve sa 8 5 I Sv a r a k r sn a 4 3 , 5 7 , 6 3

A C O B I , H 6 n , 19 n , 2 2 , 3 0 n 4 3
E GG c o s m ic
18 , 3 1, 4 5
E 1gh t, s e ts o f 3 5
.

J a igi sa v y a 3 9 , 4 4
.

E le m e n s , s e e M a h ab h fi ta
t and J a in s 9 2
T a n m at r a J e vo n s , F B 7 7 n
. .

E s c h a t o lo g y 3 8 , 8 6 , 9 8 , 9 9 J iva 3 7 , 9 8
E th e r 6 7
E th i c s 3 7 3 8 , 9 9 , 1 0 0
. A P ILA 8 , 12 , 42 , 4 7 , 5 0
K a p ila v a s tu 5 0
I N E e le m e n ts , s e e Ta n m atr a K a r m e n d r iy a s 3 6 , 7 8 , 80
F lo w e r , w ith n in e d o o r s 19 , 4 8 K a r tr 6 1
Form 2 3, 2 4, 2 5 K a say a 6 0
F o u r s ta g e s o f s e l f 1 0 3 K a t h a U p a n is a d
5 1, 5 5 , 7 8 , 9 8 n
A R B E , R 3 0 h , 4 3 , 4 6 , 4 9 , 5 41i ,
. K a u s it a k i (o r S an k h a y a n a ) B r a h
m ana
G a r b h a Up a n is a d 19 K a u s i t a k i U p a n i s a d 8 16 , 8 8 n , ,

G a r ga 3 9 , 4 4 95
G a u d a p ad a 6 7 , 8 2 , 8 3 K a u t ily a A r t h a sas t r a 5 8
G n o s ti c i s m 6 6 K av i la 6 0
G ods p r o o f o f e x is t e n c e K h y at i 6 1
o f 7 2 ; a n d s e e I Sva r a K le Sa 6 1
G ou gh , A E 12 n , 16 n , 5 4 n , 9 5 n
. . Kn o w le d g e , a s s o u r c e o f r e le a s e
G r e e k P h i lo s o p h y 6 5 6 7 -
15 , 2 3 - 2 5 , 8 7 , 8 8 , 9 8
G r o s s b o d y 4 4 , 9 7 , 9 8 ; e le m e n t s , K r sn a 3 4
s e e M a h ab h fi ta s K r t y a Kan da 6 1
G u na 61 K sa tr iy a s , a n d p h i lo s o p h y 4 9 , 5 0
G u n a s 10 . 1 1, 13 , 19 , 3 4 4 5 , 4 6 , ,
K s e tr a j fi a 3 2 , 3 5
K a r m a P u r an a 4 4
Ku ts ay a n a 14
E LL 3 8
Hir a n y a g a r b h a 8 , 3 9 , 7 9 A NM A N , C R . . 19 11
.

Ho p h in s , E W 3 4 n , 3 7 n , 4 9
. . vi
Le , S l 6n .

z
H y p os ta t i a ti o n o f o n e a s p e c t of L ifi g a 18 , 3 6 , 8 2
c on s c i o u s n e s s 7 6 7 7 ,
t
L o k ay a a 6 8

G N O R AN C E 2 3 -2 5 ; 42, 87 , AD HA V A 9 1 10 2
I 8 8, 9 8 M ad h y a m i k a s
,

93
I llu s ion , d o c tr i n e of 6, 7 , 2 0, 2 8, M a h ab har a t a , a n d S amk h y a 2 9
53
 IND E " 10 7

Ma h ab h ij ta s 13 7 8 8 1 8 3 , ,
-
, 95, 9 7 P a fi c a é ik h a 3 9 , 4 1, 4 2 , 6 2 , 9 7
M a h am o h a 8 4 P a r a m ar th a 5 9
M a h an s e e B u d d h i
,
P aSu p a t a 4 5 , 4 9 , 5 0 , 6 0
M a i t r ay a n i U p a n is a d 8 , 12 , 13 , P a ta fi j a l i 3 0 , 5 4 , 5 6 , 5 7
14 . 1 7 , 18 11 , 5 5 P e rc e p ti o n 7 1

M a n d fi ky a U p a n is a d 103
'

P e ss im is m 13 , 15 , 16 , 1 7 , 7 1, 9 1
M a n n 14 , 4 4 , 4 5 P la n ts 3 4 9 8 ,

Matap itr j a s 8 3 P la t o 1 7 , 6 7
M a e r a l s ts 18 , 7 1, 9 2
t i i P ra d yu m n a 3 3 , 3 5
M at h a r a - V r t t i 6 8 n , 7 0 n P j
ra ap a ti 8 3

M a r a 10 , a n d s e e Ta n m atr a
t P r ajfia 10 3
M a ts y a u ran a 4 6P P r a k r t i 18 , 4 6 , 5 9 , 7 7 , 10 2 , a n d
M a e r 6 8 , 18 3 ,
tt - 1 7 7 -7 9
.
see N a tu r e
Ma x M iille r , F
S n , 13 71, 6 8 , 7 7 , . P r a m an a s 4 5 , 6 1, 7 1, 7 2 , 9 9
89 P r an a 1 5 3 7 , 6 1, 8 0 , 9 0 , 9 8 , 10 3
,

M ay a 6 7 , 2 0 , 3 1, 4 8 , 10 1, 10 2
.
F r a s n o Up a n is a d 9
‘

M e m or y 8 1 P r i e s ts h o s ti lity to s a c r i fi c i a l 7 1
,

M nd 3 6 7 9, 80
i .
P u n a r m r ty u 16 1 7 ,

M rr or , m e a p h o r o f 9 4
i t P u ran a s 18 4 5 , 4 6 ,

M o sa
k 2 7 ,
3 8, 6 2 , 8 5 -
8 7 , 9 1 ,
9 6 98
- P u r u sa l l , 3 1 3 2 , 6 1 7 4 , 7 5 - 8 8 ,
. ,

M o k sa dh a r m a 2 9 9 8 - 10 0
M o n a d , n d d u a l a s 83
i iv i P fi r v a M im ams a 2 8
M fi l ik ar th a s 6 0 , 9 1 P y th a go r a s 1 7 , 6 6
M u l p l c y , o f s o u ls 5 2 . 7 7 , 7 8 ,
ti i it
AG A 8 5
8 7 , 10 1
M u n da k a U p a n is a d 14 , 15 , 8 8 n R R aje n d r a lala M itr a 5 5 n
Mun , ma d 54i R a k sa s e s 8 3
M ys c sm 5 5
ti i Raj a v ar tt i k a 5 9
'

j
R a a s 12 , 14 , 3 4 , 7 4 , 7 8 , 7 9 , 8 0 ,

N AG AR J UN A 2 0
Nag e Sa B h a tt a 9 2
10 3
b
R e i r th 3 8 a n d s e e T r a n s m i g r a
.

Na me 2 3 2 4 2 5 , , ti o n .

N ar ay a n a ti r th a 6 0 7 0 ,
R e le a s e , f r o m t r a n s m i g r a ti o n , se e
N a tu r e 3 1 4 3 4 7 5 2 7 7 7 9
, , . ,
-
M o k sa
N e o p la to n is m a n d S amk h y a 6 7 ,
R e ta h Sa r i r a 3 6
N e r vo u s s y s t e m 9 5 R g v e d a 8 16 , 19 , 4 8 , 5 4
,

N ih i li s m 2 0 R u d r a 10
N ira n u m an a 9 0
N i r van a AB AR A S V AM I N 4 3
Nr s zm h a ta p a n i y a Up a n i s a d 19 S S a d an a n d a 102
N y ay a s c h o o l 9 3
, , Sa k ti 4 3 , 6 1
Ny a y a D a r s a n a 9 3 S a m a v ay a 9 3
é a rii k a r a 6 , 7 , 18 2 0 , 4 8 , 88 , 9 2 ,
,

LD E N B ERG H S n
O 2 4, 25
, .
,
9n, 2 2 , 9 3 9 4 , 9 5 n , 10 2
,

O lt r a m a r e , P l 6 n 19 n , 2 5
O r g a n s , o f a c ti o n 3 6 7 8 , 8 0
A D M A P UR l
P A 10 1
P afi c a r atr a 5 0 , 6 0
S a mk a r sa n a 3 3 , 3 5
.
, S a i ii k h aj o g i 6 0
, S amk h y a K ar ik a 2 1, 4 1, 5 1, 6 2 ,
68-7 8
S amk h y a S il t r a 4 1, 4 4 9 2 - 100
S a ms k ara s 2 3 , 2 4 , 8 6 , 9 5
.
10 8 THE S A M K HYA S Y S TEM

S an a 44 T a k a k u s u 6 3 n, 6 9
S an a k a 4 4 Ta m a s 12 , 1 4 , 3 4 , 7 4 , 7 8 , 8 0 , 10 3
S an an d an a 4 2 T am is r a 8 4
S a h at a n a 44 Ta n m atr a 1 0 , 13 , 3 7 , 7 8 , 8 1, 9 5 ,
S a n a t k u m ar a 3 9 , 4 1, 4 4
S a n a ts u jata 4 4 Ta t t v a s a m as a 6 1, 6 8 , 8 9 - 9 2
S a n a t s u j at iy a 2 9 T e a c h e r , n e c e s s ity o f a 9 9 , 10 0
S an u m an a 9 0 j
Te a s 6
S a r v a d a r sa n a s a rizg r a h a 9 2 Th e i s m 7 8 , 3 0 , 3 1 , 4 7 . 5 6 6 1
, .

S a s t i t a n t r a 4 1, 5 9 6 4 b
Th i a u t , G .6n
S a t ap a t h a B r ah m a n a 16 , T i m e 5 7 , 6 1, 9 9
S a t tv a 7 4, 7 8 , 7 9 T r a d iti o n a l r u le s , v a lu e o f 9 4
8 0 , 1 0 2 , 10 3 Tr a n s m i g r a ti o n 15 , 16 , 3 8 , 7 1 ,
S at tv ik a 3 4 8 3, 8 4
S atv a t a 6 0 T u sti 6 2 , 8 4 , 8 5 , 9 0
S a u t r an t ik a s c h o o l 5 7 Tu xe n , P .5 5n, 5 6 n , 5 7 n , 63n
S ch r a d e r F O l 6 n , 40n
,
. . w
T e n t y - fi v e p r i n c ip le s 3 2 , 4 8 , 7 8
S ch roe d e r, L v 6 6 . . T w e n ty - s ix p r i n c i p l e s 3 2 . 5 5
S c r ip t u r e a s m e a n s o f p r o o f 5 1
,

L U KA
7 2 , 99
S e l f con s c i o u s n e s s 9 4 , 9 5
U 44
U p ad an a 2 4
S e n se s 8 0 9 7 . U p ad h i 9 8
S i dd h i , 6 2 , 8 4 , 9 0 U p a n isa d s 5 - 19 8 7 ,

S i m i le o f b l in d a n d la m e 7 6 ; O f U v a t a 14
d a n c e r 8 5 , 8 6 ; o f la m p 7 4 ; o f
‘
m ir r o r 9 4 , o f s h e - goa t 1 1 AC A S P AT I 42 , 59, 62 , 70
Siv a 10 , 4 6 8 0n
S o u l, ac tiv ity o f d e n i e d 9 3 , a n d V a ik ar ik a 3 4 , 9 0
s e e A t m a n , J iva , P u r u sa V a ir agy a 6 1 , 10 0
S ou n d , s e e S p h ota t
V a iSe s ik a s y s e m 5 7 , 9 3 , 9 7 , 99 ,
S p a ce 43 99 . 10 1
S p eye r, J S 49n
. . V a isn a v a 4 6
i t
S p ri , 2 3, 3 , 1 3 2 ,
3 8 , 6 1,
7 4 -
88, V a ié v an a r a 10 3
9 8 - 100 V a r sa g a n a , o r V r sa ga n a 6 3
S p h o ta 5 7 , V ar sa g a n y a 3 9 , 6 2 , 6 3
S r u ti , s e e S c r i p tu r e V a su b a n dhu 5 7 , 6 8
S v aya mb h u 4 5 v
V as u d e a 3 3
S v e t a sv a t a r a Up a n is a d V e d an t a 2 0 , 3 7 4 3 , 4 5 , 7 8 , 8 0 , 8 2 ,
,

12 , 13 , l 8 n , 46, 10 2 8 7 , 9 0 , 9 7 , 9 8 , 1 0 0 1 0 1 , 10 2
,

S tra u s s , O 3 6 n . V ijfi an a 2 3 - 2 5 8 9 ,

S u b t le p o r t i o n s , o f gr os s e le m e n ts V ijfi an a b h ik su 5 7 , 7 2 7 2 , 10 1
82,
Su d r a s 1 0 0 V ijfi an a v ad a 2 8 5 7 , 9 3 ,

S u k h ta n k a r 6 V ik r t i 6 1
S fi tr atm a n 16 3 V in d h y a v as a 6 2 , 6 8
S vam in 6 1 V ip a r y a y a 6 2 , 8 4
V iSe sa 3 7 , 4 7
AI J AS A 9 0 V iSistad v a ita 6 , 2 2
T H

Ta i t t i r i y a ,
'

Up a n is a d V i sn u , 4 6
03 Vis n u P u r an a 4 6