HE RITA G E O F INDIA

. . ZARIAH The Right Reverend V S A ,

Bishop of Dornakal .

. . AR UHAR . . . ITT . J N F " , M A , D L

Alr a u lish d e dy p b e .

Th f B u h e e a r K . . M A. H o dd s m . S AU S . t i I NDER , R As ok . . D M . M P M . M . . a E V . A A HA L . J C I , , In a di n a n n . r n a Y B c l OW Ca lcu ta . P i ti g P i ip PERC R N , t Ka n r r r RE . E B . ese e a u . R a L e V . . . A it t P ICE ,

n s u n r aration S u bjects p roposed a d volu me de p rep .

A KRIT A D R R S N S N P ALI LITE AT U E .

M O ord H mns r h V d A . A . A LL O . r . y f om t e e a s . P o f CD NE , xf

n h r . ro . LA A t olo gy o f M a hayana Lite ra tu e P f . L DE VALLEE

ou e Gh e n . P s , t M A h S e le c r h h ST R . D m n a d . . W e l . ons o t e U a s s . ti f p i F J E E N , i M M . A P S cen e s r m R m n M S O SO . H D o th a a . A . . f e a ay J E RI N . , ,

Oxford . S l c n M h h e e tio s from th e a ab ara ta .

TH I E PH LO S OPHIE S .

Th h l s h f h n h e P i o op y o t e Up a is a d s . ’

K M A. l Sa n ka ra s V e dan a . A . . S HARMA . a a a . t , , P ti ' R n ama u ja s Ve dan ta . B h Th e u dd is t S ys tem .

E ART AND M I FIN U S C .

n d a n Ar ch r B A M r d . I e c u e . R L . E W G . . a a s i it t . IN , , n d i u Z M I an S c l t re . P r n c l W M o d a MBR a u ra . p u i ip , , u , B A . r . In d a n M u s c . H . A . P OPLE Y . E o d e i i , , B Ar . n O u Th M n or s r c a l Y W Ca lc a . e i t P i ip PERC R N , tt

In dian Co in s .

E M I I IA B IO GRAPHIE S O F N EN T ND N S .

h . A K . M . R n n G au a ma B u dd a . . S AU S a o o . t J NDER , , g

Raman u ja .

M A . l Ak ar . . V . S LA K . C a c u a . b F C , , tt h B . A . M E . B r D . K . . H . . L a o e . Tu lsi as . S D U TTA , , , C ,

VE RN AC ULAR LITE RAT URE .

P P E Y B r A A . l . . L . . E o d Th e Ku rra . H O , , e

M . n d f h A i r . P A mns o t e a s . E . HILL S . a A S Hy d y G P I , , FR NCI SB Y an lor K B a e . ING UR , g

h r Hymns of t e Alva s .

M - - TAM BYAH . A r . w T u m n a va ISAA . B r . n n . ay a C , , a a t La , P e a g

Hymn s o f Hin d u stan .

. BE R P . D B rh h n mn s . T R G M u rs Ch a a a H O S U S H . e a m or e d it y y , , p , i

a ba d . h A h n L M M . M a ra i a s . N O A OL . A D . L TT . o on a . t b g IC CNIC , , I , P

G u j a rati Hym ns .

ORIE O VERN AC AR ITE R T RE HIS T S F UL L A U . A l . D . S B en a i . O Ca m r d e . g J NDER N , b i g

G u j ar ati . BO V B n H n di . W A S e a re s . i IN GRE E , N L h . O D M a ra i A OL M . A . 1 M . L r r . o o n a . t IC CNIC , , , P m A K B B Ta l . S GS Y n U a a lor e . i FR NCI IN R , g

Te lu gu . B nh l . . K n se A . A . d S a e . H S a . i PERER , , y EDITO RIAL P REF ACE

n a ll re h re n wh a soe e r th n s a r e r u e Fi y , b t , t v i g t ,

wh a so e e r h n s a re h on ou r a b le h a s oe e r h n s t v t i g , w t v t i g

a r e u s ha soe e r h n s a re u r e wh a s oe e r j t, w t v t i g p , t v

h n s a re lo e l h a s o e e r h n s a r e o f o od t i g v y , w t v t i g g

r e or h e r e b e a n r u e a n d h e re b e a n p t ; if t y vi t , if t y

ra s e h n k on h e s e th n s . p i , t i t i g

No section of the population of India can afford to

In neglect her ancient heritage . her literature , philosop hy , art , and regulated life there is much that is worthless , much also that is distinctly unhealthy ; yet the treasures of knowledge , wisdom , and beauty which they contain are too

u precious to be lost . Every citizen of India needs to se them , i f he is to be a cultured modern Indian . This is as Z true of the Christi an , the Muslim , the oroastrian as of the

Hindu . But , while the heritage of India has been largely explored by scholars , and the results of their toil are laid u s out for in their books , they cannot be said to be really available for the ordinary man . The volumes are in most cases expensive , and are often technical and difficult . Hence this series of cheap books has been planned by a group of Christi an men , in order that every educated

Indian , whether rich or poor , may be able to find his way ’ n into the treasures of India s past . Many Europea s , both

u se in India and elsewhere , will doubtless be glad to the series . The utmost care is being taken by the General Editors in selecting writers , and in passing manuscripts for the press . To every book two tests are rigidly applied : every thing must be scholarly , and everything must be sympathetic . The purpos e is to bring the best out of the ancie nt treasuries , so that it may be known , enjoyed , and use d .

THE HERITAGE O F INDIA

SAMKHYA SYSTEM

A Histo ry o f the S a mkIfya Philo sop hy

IE D ITH D L1 KE TT. A . BERR A LE , .

- - O F THE IN NER TE M PLE B ARRI e R Ar LAW , REOIU S PR OF E S S OR or SAN S K RIT AN D C OM PARATI VE PHILOLOGY Ar THE

UNIVER S ITY or E DI N BU R GH .

TRAN S LATOR or THE TAITTIRIYA AM HITA E r c . S ,

CALCUTTA : ASSOCIATION PRES S

LONDON : O" FORD UN IVERS ITY PRESS NE W YO RK TORON TO M E LB O URN E , , , B OMB AY AND M AD RAS

CONTE NTS

P 1. S AM KHYA IN THE U ANISADS

S B II . AMKHYA AND UDDHISM

T HE P E P III . P HILO SO PHY O THE GREAT IC AND THE

ORIGIN O F S AMKHYA

IV S AMKHYA AND YOGA

THE A V . S STI TANTRA

I V . G REEK PHILO SOP HY AND THE S AMKHYA

V I I . THE S AMKHYA KARIKA

III THE V . LATER S AMKHYA

INDE"

THE S AMKHYA IN THE UP ANIS A D S

IN all the manifold character of the content of the Upani sads it is undoubtedly possible to trace certain i . s leading ideas The most important of these doctrines . n o f beyon d questio , that of the identity of the self , Atman , the individual with the Brahman , which is the most universal expressi on fOr the absolute in which the universe e ou e finds its unity . It is probable n gh that thes two n expressio s are not intrinsically related , and that they represent two different streams of thought . The Brahman is the devotion of the Brahman priest : it is the sacred hymn to propitiate the gods : it is also the magic spell of the wonder- worker : more generally it is the holy power in the universe at least as much as it is the magic fluid of primitive n savagery . Religion and magic , i f differe t in essence and in in origin , nevertheless go often closest alliance , and their un ison in the case of the con cept Brahman may explain the to de note ease with which that term came _ the essence of the n universe or absolute bei g . The Atman , on the other hand , a n U in the Br hma a texts which lie before the pani sads , has very often the sense of the trunk of the body , as opposed and to the hands feet and other members , and it is perhaps from that fact at least as much as from the fact that it has also the sense of wind that it develops into the meaning of the essential self of man . The identification of the self and the Brahman results in one form of the doctrine of the U Ya fi alk pani sads , that taught under the name of j av ya in

ld n r u ddh - . B h O e e 5 . D S e e H a t . 30 33 u b g, ( p p ; P e ss en d Philos o h o th e U a n is a s . 39 r e e rs to re a B ra hman ( p y f p , p ) p f t t a s the c sm l a n d m a n a s th e s c h c f M o ica At p y i a l p r in c ip le o u n ity . a x M illle r S ix S s te ms o I n dia n hilos o h - 3 d n h . 68 9 s u s e s ( y f P p y , p p ) i ti g i B ra hma n s e e ch a n d B rahman a s h a wh ch u e rs or d r es r h , p , t t i tt iv fo t r n o ma ife sts o r c re a tes . 6 THE SAMKHYA S YSTEM

B rha aran a k a U a ni ad 4 n the d y p s (ii , ; iv , in the conclusio a s that the Atman the knowing subject is unknowable , and

that the world of empiric reality , which seems to be in n co stant change , is really a mere illusion . This is the an d highest point reached by the thought of the Upani sads ,

it is not consistently or regularly maintained . Despite acceptance of the doctri n e of the identity of the individual n self and the self of the universe , there ofte appears to be left over as an irreducible element something which is not

the self , but which is essentially involved in the constitution i n of reality . This s implicit in such stateme ts as that the : Atman completely enters into the body , up to the nails even the all - pervasiveness of the Atman is not i n compatible with

the existence of something to be pervaded . In order to remove the difficulty which is felt in the existen ce of this wa s further element , the conception of creation , which , of

course , familiar from the cosmogonic legends of the in C han o a a . d Br hmanas , was often resorted to Thus the gy U a ni ad 2 to p s (vi , ) we learn in detail how the self desired n be many and created brilliance , Tej as , whe ce arose water

and food , and then the self entered into these created things T n with the living self . his scheme , by which a bei g first n n produces a cosmic material and the enters i to it as life , is a n a commonp lace in the Speculations of the Br hma as , and it lends itself to a very different development than the theory n of illusion . While the latter theory i sists on the identity n one of the i dividual self with the absolute self , both being

essence surpassing all consciousness , the latter system allows c n a ertai reality to matter , and a still more definite reality n to the individual soul , which in course of time develops i to V iSi adv aita the d octrine of qualified duality , st , in which there is found a p lace for the individual soul and matter

beside the supreme soul , and which undoubtedly forms the ra n a theme of the B rahm a S iltra of B ad a ya . But while this n system can be seen in the Upa isads , it would be an error to suppose that it is more p roperly the doctri ne of the * Up ani sads than the illusion theory of S amkara : neither

’ F o r Bad a ra a n a s e s s e e Th au S u kh ta n ka r y vi w ib t, xxiv ; ,

Vie nn a O r ie nta l J ou rn a l x ii 12 0 ff H . a co b , , , ; J i , xxxiii , - 5 1 5 4 . THE SAMKHYA IN THE UPANISAD S 7 system in its completely self- conscious form is to be found U ani fads in the p s , but the germs of both are present , and both in a real sense can claim the authority of the

Upanisads . is On the other hand , it impossible to find in the

Upani sads any real basis for the S amkhya system . The Up anisa ds f are essentially devoted to the discovery of an a nd dive rse absolute , , as are the forms which the absolute k n ot may ta e , they do abandon the search , nor do they allow e that no such absolute exists . There are , however , lements here and there which mark the growth of ideas which later in S am were thrown into systematic form the khya , but it is impossible to see in these fragmentary hints a ny indication that the S amkhya philosophy was then in process of is formation . It , of course , possible , as a matter of abstract n U argument , to i sist that the elements in the pani sads which suggest“ the later S amkhya views are really borrowings by the Upani sads of doctrines already extant in a S amkhya a b se n se system , but , in the of the slightest evidence for the n existe ce of such a system in the Vedic literature , it is methodologically un soun d to take this hypothesis a s an possessing y value , in face of the natural conclusion that we have in the Upani sads scattered hints which were later one an amalgamated into system . Just like the Ved ta of S m a Bad ara an a am a kara , or the Ved nta of y , the S khya is a system built on the Upani sads : from both of these it differs in that it goes radically and essentially beyond the teaching of the Upanisads . The cosmogonical form of the doctrine of the self sets at once the absolute into conflict with the individual self , and it undoubtedly tends to minimise the importance of the O absolute , since its peration appears to h ave been exhausted by the action of creation . At the same time , it i s clear that the opposition of matter to the individual soul becomes quite a sharp one , for on the cosmogonic or theistic system is the primitive matter indeed produced from the absolute , but equally clearly it exists before the individual soul enters into the sphere of existence . While thus the relation of soul and n ature becomes one of opposition under the aegis of an absolute which tends to become more faded , at the 8 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM same time reflection is more bent on the actual character of the relation of soul and nature , and finds expression in such B rh adaran a k a U a ni a d 4 an utterance as that of the y p s (i , , where it is exp ressly stated that food and eater make up n the entire universe . This passage is i terpreted in the late M aitr ayani Up a nisa d as referring to the distinction between

Spirit , which is subject , and all the rest of nature , including Bhutatman the , the psychic app aratus p roduced from : nature , as the object it is characteristic of the confused character of this late work that the very next chapters v i 11- 13 s n ( , ) deal with nature a bei g the product of the n supreme Brahman . It would be wro g , therefore , to find in the B rh adaranya ka Up a nisa d any con scious realization of n a doctrine which would elimi ate the Brahman , but it is clear enough that the path to the elimi n ation of that element was Op en . The denial in the S amkhya of the supreme sp irit carries with it curious consequences when added to the extreme development of the doctrine that the spirit is alone the h subject . The first product of nature is the intellect , w ich one is called the great , and which clearly is originally a cosmic function , derived from nature but lighted up by

Spirit . The natural source of this concep tion must be found in the idea in the Upan i sads that the supreme Spirit re appears as the firstborn oi creation after it has produced the primitive matter . The ultimate origin of the idea can be R v d a 12 1 traced beyond the Upani sads to the g e (x , ) where the golden germ Hiranyagarb h a is produced from the primeval waters , and in the Upani sads we find in the Ka u ita ki m s the seer , composed of the Brah an , the great Kath a 10 13 vi one in the (iii , , ; , the first great spirit veta v atara 19 i Hiran a arb h a in the S s ( ii , ) who s called y g 4 12 vi 18 in iii , ; iv , ; Brahman in , , and the knower , all 17 pervading , in vi , . Moreover , it is thus that we should , it K v is clear , understand the seer , ap ila , first engendered , in , 2 e e . The idea that in this verse we are to s the first men tion of the founder of the S amkhya as a real person is too is u n fantastic to be seriously upheld , though it not at all likely that the origin o i the doctrine of Kapila as the founder of S arnkhya is to be traced to this passage . THE SAMKHYA IN THE UPANI SAD S 9

Further material for the origin of the series of e volution Kath a is also to be found in the Upani sads . In the , which * has every claim to be regarded as an old work , not indeed of the same antiquity as the great prose Upani sads like the B rh adara n a k a C hando a Aita re a Ta ittiri a y , gy , y , y , or Ka u ita ki s , but at the head of the second stage of poetical U pani sads , representing the period of the full development 10 of the philosophy of these texts , there is found (iii , after an exhortation to control the unruly steeds of the n n senses , a description of Yoga , or co ce tration . In this it is expressly stated that the objects are higher than the senses , mind than the objects , the intellect than mind , the great self than intellect , the unevolved than the great self , and the spirit than the unevolved . The spirit dwells unseen i In n s . in all bei gs and above all concentration , therefore ,

- Speech with mind is to be restrained in the knowledge self , that is intellect , that again in the great self , and that in the In is . calm self , that the unevolved a later passage (vi , 7 - 11 ) a Similar account is given : here the mind stan ds s S above the sense , attva above the mind , over that the great S is self , over that the unevolved , over that the p irit which

’ S arnkh a described by terms applicable in the classical y , as

- all pervading and without any distinctive mark . The highest condition of Yoga is reached when the senses with mind and intellect are brought to a standstill . In the next lines the spirit is describe d as only to be expressed by the declaration of existence . With this series may be compared C hando a 8 6 the fact that according to the gy (vi , , ) at death speech enters into mind , mind into breath , breath into brilliance and brilliance into the supreme godhead . Further light is thrown on the position by the P rasna U a ni ad not p s , which , though a work of the same age as the Ka th a r , is neve theless probably the earliest of the later prose P r a n a Upani sads . In the fourth S it is explained that in n sleep in dreaming the senses enter i to mind , and in deep sleep mind also passes into the brilliance , Tej as . Then follows an account of how all things are resolved into the

S e e H. Olden e r xxxv u S 7 if B u ddha . 60 b g, , ; , p ; D hi h i d 4 . u n P lo o o th e U a n a s . 2 e sse s . P , p y f p s , p 10 THE SAMKHYA S YSTEM

S imperishable , which has no hadow , blood or body , the order fi ve a a being the elements , each with its corresponding M tr , which appears to denote the corresponding fine element , the fi ve n n organs of perceptio with their functio s , the five organs of n n n action with their functions , the mi d , i tellect , individuatio , m a Aha k ra , thought , Citta , brilliance , and breath , and their n functions . From the highest self there is here disti guished V i fianatman n the j , the individual self , which experie ces the

so . impressions of the senses , and forth It is perfectly clear P r a sn a an S am that the is not exposition of the khya , but the elements of the S amkhya derivation are present . The conception of the fine elements seems to owe its origin to in Chando a U ani ad vi the View expressed the gy p s ( , n according to which the gross elements , correspo ding to

fire , water and earth , are not in themselves pure , but each n is compounded with some portion of the others : the ame , Tanmatra , which is later normal , is first given expressly in M a itr a ani U ani ad the y p s (iii , A much more developed account of S amkhya type is to be

’ S v etasv a ta ra U a ni a d is found in the p s , which no doubt

P r osn a n Ka th a . older than the , but later tha the The U n pani sad is defi itely deistic , Rudra who bears the ep ithet S n but not the name , iva , bei g the object of devotion and a s belief , but at the same time being regarded the absolute

S n . and sup reme pirit , rather tha as derived from that spirit U On the other hand , the pani sad contains a series of numbers which are best to be explained as referring to enumerations am : 4 n accepted by the S khya school thus in i , , the i dividual is self compared to a wheel with three tyres , sixteen ends ,

- an six . fifty spokes , twenty counter sp okes d sets of eight n se t These are i terpreted as the three Gunas , the of sixteen n n co sisti g of the ten organs , mind and the five elements , the S am fifty psychic states of the classical khya , the ten senses O six n n and their bjects , and the sets of the five eleme ts , mi d ,

individuation and intellect ; the eight elements of the body , re fe ctions the eight p , the eight psychic states which form in S am n the khya an alter ative to the fifty , eight gods and n eight virtues . The worth of such ide tifications must be a s n a nd n is regarded uncertai , no co clusive evidence afford u f ed by them , as plays o numbers are much a fected by the THE SAMKHYA IN THE UPANISAD S 11

is an Brahmanical schools . But there other d much more convincing evidence of the existen ce of S amkhya views . V i fian atman P u ru s a is The individual self , the j or , described in n as the power of god enveloped his own Gu as , which shows plainly that while the absolute is still the source of all , nevertheless a new element has been introduced in the conception of the Gunas , through which the absolute becomes n the individual soul . A still more disti ct proof of the

' n arnkh a iv 5 existe ce of ideas akin to S y is to be seen in , , in which it is said :

Th e on e sh e - oa re d h e a n d la c k g t, , w it , b , Pro d u ce th m a n ou n l k e - o r m e d u n o h e r y y g , i f t , Th e on e h e - o a in lo e e n o e th h e r g t v j y ,

Th e o th e r le a ve th h e r wh om h e h a th e n j o y e d .

S m se e The passage is discussed by a kara , who seeks to in the three colours a reference to the three colours mention ed C hando a U a ni a d 4 in the gy p s ( vi , ) as those of the three elements there mentioned , fire , water , and earth , which are produced from the absolute an d which are present in all

. so that exists This view is far , it would seem , beyond doubt correct : the resemblance in p oint of the colours is too striking to be an accident . But the passage must obviously also be admitted to have clear traces of what is later the S amkhya doctrin e : the imagery of the many he - goats and n n the relatio of e joyment , followed by relinquishment , is precisely p arallel to the similes which are often used in the classical 8 amkhya to illustrate the relation of spirit and n - ature . Moreover the she goat is named Aja which denotes n n also the u born , a fact which exactly coi cides with the S amkhya conception th a t the first principle nature is not a S am - n product . The khya conception of the all pervadi g n in character of the Gu as , which diverse measure are is present in all the products of nature , as well suited to the description of the progen y of the goat as the view of the C hand a i o . s n n gy It , therefore , o ly reaso able to assume that we have here a clear hint of the origin of the doctrine of the Gun as in the threefold material of the C hand ogya U a ni ad and p g , there is nothing in this passage , nor in the n n n 3 v 7 3 others where the Gu as are me tio ed (i , ; , ; vi , , 11 , to suggest that the Gun as are anything other than 12 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

Chando a . S elements as in the gy The names attva , Raj as and Tamas do not occur un til the M aitr ayani Up a nisad 5 ( ii , ; v , It is not impossible that the subjective side n an d of the Gu as , which is clearly marked in these names n S am which certai ly prevails in the classical khya , was a developmen t from the conception that the i n dividual self was the result of the envelopment of the absolute in the three n Gunas : though originally referri g to material products , in still the tendency would be to see them psychic states . It is most probable that in these traces of S amkhya views we are not to se e the result of a con tamination of S amkhya with a Vedan ta philosophy : it is p erfectly plain in iv n n that , 5 we are not deali g with the co scious expression of a view which ignores the absolute ; on the c ontrary in 10 iv , we find the deliberate description of nature as an

- illusion , and the great lord as an illusion maker , emphatic den ials of the possibility of the sep arate and real existence n am n of ature as held by the S khya school . It is not atural that one who is Opposed so essentially to the view that the S amkhya principles are correct should appropriate p hrases is n which seem to accept them , whereas all atural i f we assume that the Upani sad represents a definite development n n of the doctri e of the Absolute based on the older Upa i sads , "e from which in due course the samkhya develop ed . With n n n n 5 : such a view there is nothi g i co siste t in iv , the metaphor there used app lies perfectly properly to the n sou ls one differe t condition of two individual , the of which does not realise its true n ature as the absolute e nveloped in n n n the three Gu as , while the other recog izes its true ature n and throws aside its con ection with nature . n It has , however , been argued from the occurre ce of the K v 2 S am 13 n name , apila , in , , and of khya in vi , , in con ection S am - n with Yoga , that the khya Yoga system was defi itely n known to the author or redactor of the Up a i sad . But this K n t . a s is clearly o shown by the facts adduced apila is , we n n the 3 have see , not a huma personage at all , and parallel of i , ,

l Th f h h f A . h hi o is is th e a m ou n o r u in t e V e o . E ou t t t , i w G g ( P s o h o h e U n is a ds 2 00 h a th e mkh a is o r i n a ll t a . S a p y f p , p p , t t y gi y h N0 s u c h S amkh a a n e nu m e ra tion o f p r in cip les o f t e Ve dan ta . y s s e m is r e cor d e d h owe e r a s a s s m S ar kh a is th c . y t , v ; y te n y a eisti

14 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

hammers only the iron not the glow pervading it . Here , too , fin d n and we the names of the Gu as as p sychic states , bodily an d n n me tal evils are referred to the actio of Rajas , desire ,

an d . S n Tamas , indifference In ectio V a creation myth se t is out , according to which the highest produces the three S an d S Gunas , Tamas , Raj as and attva , from Sattva , p irit , n consisting of pure intellect , possessi g the powers of n n represe tatio , judgment and individuation as its psychic Ku tsa an a an n n body . In the hymn of y , otherwise u know n sage , which precedes this myth , we find the ide tity of all in the Brahman asserted and the first occurrence in literature of the conception that release is both for the sake S am of spirit and of matter , an idea which in the khya is converted in to the view that n ature strives as if for her own is release for the release of another , that spirit , though else where the release of Spirit is denied an d the real release n attributed to nature , a contradiction arisi g from the fact can that in reality there is , and be , no pain in nature , which n n is unconscious , and the pai is brought i to existence by n n n In S . the u io with p irit , whence arises co sciousness the U panisad , which recognizes a prius to both nature and i 1 S . v 0 pirit , the release can be and is for both alike In , there is foun d expressly stated the doctrine of the disti n ction of spirit and the objective world : the psychic body is p roduced from the primeval material , and consists of the n elements from the great one , that is i tellect , app arently up ’“ to the gross elements , unless the reading is slightly altered n n and the s eries brought to a close with the fi e eleme ts . It S am is , however , clearly the case in the classical khya that the subtle portions of the gross elements are included in the psychic apparatus , and this may be the case here also . The other Upan isads of this period give us little for the S am In Mu n da ka khya doctrine . the , however , we find ( i , 1 8 9 1 2 3 o f n , , ; ii , , , ) a development pri ciples from the all n n n k ower to food , thence to breath , the ce to the mi d , thence n n to truth , the worlds , a d actio s , or from the spirit to the n n imperishable , thence to breath , the ce to mi d and the organs of sense , and thence to the elements . This exposition

D e u ss en S e c h i U a nis a ds . 33 7 n . 2 . , z g p , p , THE SAMKHYA IN THE UPANISAD S 15

clearly accepts the absolute , and follows the normal triad Ka th a of absolute , nature and souls , but it differs from the , which it otherwise somewhat closely resembles , by the in addition of one principle , breath , place of the great self a U . and the intellect of that pani sad It is clear that Pr na , breath , plays a cosmic function . As the Upani sads do not recognize the existence of

Spirit as individual only , but always admit the existence of S a supreme pirit , the essence of the knowledge which is to save men from constant rebirth is the knowledge of the real identity of the supreme and the individual Self . The derivative character of the S amkhya comes i n to very clear prominence in its retention of the doctri n e of knowledge as S am the means of saving grace . In the khya , as there n is no real co nection between spirit and nature , it seems wholly impossible to understand how the false conception of such a connection can arise : the Spirit is in reality purely subjective , nature is purely objective , and there is no interaction which can explain the existen ce of ignoran ce or n indeed of knowledge . O the other hand , in the case of the U pani sads , whatever degree of reality be allowed to the n individual souls of the world , it is esse tially the case that : there is a source of ignorance the absolute , either by self illusion or in fact , develops from itself a world of spirits and matter , and the knowledge which brings salvation is the is knowledge that , despite the seeming multiplicity , there no real difference between the absolute and the self , at any rate am in ultimate essence . Ignorance is admitted in the S khya as h a s a fact , but it is a fact which no explanation whatever , and therefore its position in the system must be traced to a form of philosophy in which it had a more just claim to existence . clea r Another proof of derivative nature is the acceptance , n without comment , of the doctrine of transmigratio and the accompanying doctrine of pessimism . The Upani sads do not show the doctrine of transmigration as fully developed : rather , as might be inferred from the fact that transmigra is a tion proper not clearly known to any Br hmana text , they show only the origin of the system . The credit of first a s f enunciating the doctrine a great moral truth , that o 16 THE S AMKHYA SYS TEM

n n retributio according to actio by rebirth , is assigned to Ya fiavalk a B t hada j y , who lays down the principle in the r an a k a U ani ad 2 13 4 2 y p g (iii , , ; iv , , though even " u e stione dfi this view has been q The idea , however , worked an d up into an elaborate confused whole , in which the ideas of retribution by rebirth and the older view of punishment in hell and reward in heaven are thrown together , is found 2 definitely in a late portion of that Upani sad (vi , ) and in C hando a 3 is the gy (v , The doctrine by no means necessarily accepted in all the Upanisads of the older type ; thus it is doubtful if it appears at all in the older portion Aita re a Zr a n a ka on of the y y ; the other hand , it is clearly Ka u ita hi Kath a accepted by the s and by the , and is later n a commonplace assump tio . Its full development and spread must antedate the rise of Buddhism , and it may fairly be argued that the doctri ne prevailed among wide n 5 50 circles in I dia in the north by B C , and probably half

a century earlier . Efforts have even been made to find the R v a n ed so . doctri e in the g , but far without real success The origin of the belief has been attributed to borrowing ’ n trib e s V from aborigi al , r it being a common iew in primitive peoples that the spirits of their dead pass into other forms V l e in of life . Traces of similar W S have also been seen occasional hints in the Rgv ed a of the dep arture of the n eleme ts of the dead to their prop er abodes . The real n importance of the India doctrine , however , is the moral tinge Ya ii av alk a given to it by j y , while its immediate precursor in a n is the Br hma as the dread of repeated death , which is exp ressed in the view that even after death death may await f r n e l the man who is not proficient in some ritual p e r o ma c . ; P una rmrt u This conception of y , repeated death , for a time evidently played a considerable place in the ideas of the a n n Br hma as , as is see by the quite frequent occurrence of the conception in the Satap a th a B r ahm an a an d by its mention Ka u s ita ki B rahman a an in the , d the turning of a ritual

h - S . r d r e e O S c a e l 333 335 . F . , xiv,

‘ - A . E . o u h hilos o h o th e U a nis a ds . 0 2 5 . 1 G g , P p y f p , p p 2

i d ra ma re : L L a o ctr n e u S a c i c e 3 . l S e e S . D O e r . 9 ff I vi , fi , p p P t , ’ ’ his oir e des I d es Th os o hi u s i 9 é e . L t e p q , , 6 ff THE S AMKHYA IN THE UPANISAD S 17 conception into a moral one was as natural as the transfer of the repetition of birth in the world beyond to the birth in n this world , which was the one thi g wanting to make the con cep tion really a doctrine of transmigration . This step is not certainly taken in any passage of the Sa tap atha B rahman a , though a few passages are open to this inter i retat on . p In making the decisive change it is , of course , perfectly possible that the popular ideas of the spirit of the ancestor taking up its abode in some beast or bird or other a s form , such that of a snake , may have helped the conception to take root and become easily ap preciated . It is indeed doubtful whether without some such b a ckgrond we could explain the extraordinary success of the doctrine in winni n g the real and lasting adherence of the great mass of the people of India . None the less , it must remain extraordinary that none of the philosophical systems Shoul d have attempted to examine the validity of the belief , a fact which n sta ds in striking contrast with the procedure of Plato , who , P ha e do in the , provides a philosop hic background for the n conceptio , which he probably took direct from the pop ular

Pythagorean or Orphic con ception of the fate of the soul . The pessimism which is assumed by the S amkhya must likewise be derivative . In the Upani sads there is no general pessimism visible in the earlier exposition s of doctrine ; the marked pessimism of the Ma itr aya n i i s a clear i n dication of its posteriority to the influence of n Buddhism , which had evidently a very co siderable part in spreading the doctrine . The underlying view of U the pani sads is , indeed , that the Atman in itself is perfect , and that , accordingly , all else is filled with as B rha dar a n a ka 4 2 5 1 7 23 trouble , the y (iii , , ; , ; , ) expressly says ; and with this expression of opinion may be se t such remarks as that the kn ower of the self overcomes sorrow ; nor is there a ny lack of references to old age and trouble . But it is one thing to admit this , and quite another to hold that the general tone of the Upani sads is pessi mistic ; rather the joy of the discovery of the new knowledge is the characteristic of the teachers , while they regard the self in S n n as itself bliss . i ce the k owledge of the self is op en i to all , and since by that knowledge bliss s to be obtained , 18 THE SAMKHYA SYS TEM

the older Upani sads could not be and are not pessimistic . S am While , however , the khya shares with them the belief in the possibility of freedom being obtai ned in the course of ’ a nd h a s n man s li fetime , thus a less pessimistic side , it de ies in that there is bliss the state of the released Spirit , and like

Buddhism dwells on the reality of human misery . Efforts have been made to find references to distinctively S am n khya doctrines in older Upa i sads , such as the C hando a and B rh adar an a k a gy the y . In the latter text 4 8 n (iv , , ) the term Li ga appears beside mind , and the * suggestion to treat it a s mean i n g p sychic apparatus is presents“itself , but it is much more likely that the sense n 4 13 simply beari g a characteristic mark . In iv , , , a “ n Ti a a ni ad 12 S m verse fou d also in Up s , a kara sees a reference to the S amkhya doctrine in the term Asambhuti P r ak t ti in n o which he renders as , but this View has itself n Uv a a probability , and the comme tator , t , declares that the in As am huti is polemic against the believers b , destruction , n 4 15 directed against the materialists . The stateme t in i , , , U in n of the pani sad , that the begi ning the universe was an d n nd undiscriminated , was later discrimi ated by name a is form , a repetition of a very old concept , which ha s had n m n Prak t ti its share in mouldi g the S a khya co cept of , but

’ i h a ndo a U a ni a d it s not specifically S amkhya . The C gy p s v ii m a in , has the word Aha k ra , but uses it merely as a n in vii 2 6 2 syno ym for the self , Atman , and , , , the term S attva has not yet the technical sense of one of the three

' constituents of nature which belongs to it in the S arnkhya . 19 n n S am : Nor in iii , is there a ythi g specifically khya that is n on - n paragraph a legend of the origin of being from bei g , an the coming into existence of egg , the two halves of which

sk su n . are y and earth , and from which the arises This form of creation myth is of importance for the creation n a legends seen in Ma u and the Pur nas , but its relation to ‘ S arnkhya is merely the vague one that it contemplates a n process of production , though the idea of not bei g as prior to being is completely contrary to the developed samkhya

This d oc t rine is n o t c le a r ly kn own to a ny Up a n isad b e ore th e Ma itra a n i v i Ka tha 8 a n d Svetasva ta ra f y ( , ( vi , ) v i 9 m a r e e r to ( , ) y f it . THE S AMKHYA IN THE UPANISAD S 19

P rak t ti view , which does not regard , when unevolved , as not

n . bei g , because it is nothing definite The conception of the R n v ed a . Up ani sad version with that of the cosmogo ic hymn , g 12 9 n x , , is obvious , but here also we have o ly an idea which am later is in part adopted by the S khya , that of an n u formed primitive matter . More importance attaches to a Ath arv a v ed a 8 43 passage in the (x , , )

Th e lo u s fl o we r o f n n e d oors t i , C o e re d h h r e e s ra n ds v wit t t , Wh a ro d h e r e is h n it t p igy t wit i , - Th a t th e B r a hm an kn o we rs kn ow . The human body with its nine orifices is clearly meant by the flower with nine doo“rs , but the three strands present difficulties . The meaning quality is not proved for early in u Vedic literature , occurring first the S tras , and the sense must therefore be assumed to be constituent or something n an d similar , the reference being probably to the hair , ski nails . If the reference is to be taken as to the constituents am * in the sense of the Gunas of the S khya philosophy , it is n clear that the expression is i accurate , since the three n co stituents make up nature , and the passage would say that u the body was covered with nat re , instead of consisting of L 4 . attem t 8 3 9 0 nature An p ] to find in the same hymn (x , , , ) c a reference to the do trine of the ages of the world , there n being periodic destruction and reproductio , cannot be regarded as proved , though in any case it would not be of an am y value as proof of the existence of the S khya , since is the idea common to all the systems . U Nrsimha ta a ni a In the later panisads , such as the p y ,

’ G a r bh a Galika and am , , others , clear references to S khya doctrines occur , but the dates of these Upani sads are far n too u certain , and probably late , to throw any light on the m question of the origin or of the doctrines of the S a khya .

’ ’ S e e Wh n e s n h n n Th it y o te wit L a ma s c orre ction . e G u na ’ h e or i s a c c e e d b . O l r am a r e L his toir e d es I dées Th os o hi t y p t y P t , é p u es 4 0 2 4 1 . f 2 C . l e o . 48 . q , i , , b w, p

“ '

S e e H . ac o G ottin is ch e G e le hrte An ei e n I 1895 . 2 10 J bi , g z g , , p F o r th e a lle e d m e n on in th e Aita re a Br ahma n a s e e M a cdon e ll n d g ti y , a Ke h Ve dic I n d e 19 x 3 . it , , ii , SAMKHYA AND BUD DHI SM

THE essential fact of the atheism of the S amkhya system in its classical form and the atheism of Buddhism naturally raises the problem whether the view is borrowed by the one i a i i . s r or system from the other There , of course , no p reason to deny the p ossibility of such borrowing ; in definitely historical times there was clearly a lively inter change of views between Buddhism and the Brahmanical schools : the growth of logic was furthered by discoveries one or developments now by the side , now by the other , and is there striking similarity between the doctrine of void , which was brought into special prominence by the Buddhist r D Na a un a A. . g j , in the first or second century , and its V i fianav ada Asafi a development into the j of g , probably in the A D * fourth century . . , which has suggested the view that the illusion theory of the V e danta ywhich has attained its classical S m shape in the doctrine of a kara , was derived from Bud i i dh sm as regards a very imp ortant part of ts content . But that Buddhism is the source of the S amkhya is most im

probable , since the divergence of the two systems suggests that Buddhism represents a further advance in the disin te i i grat on of the earlier p hilosophy of the Upanisads . It s true that the S amkhya abandons the idea of the existence of n the absolute , but it is , on the other hand , careful to retai the idea of Spirit and of nature ; the doctri ne of

Buddhism , on the other hand , has in effect abandoned these h as two conceptions , and left itself with only the fleeting

series of mental states as a quasi reality , from which the develop ment of the doctrine of the void is a natural enough step . It is impossible to prove , and certainly not plausible o to believe , that from so developed a doctrine as that f

- S e e H . a c o i x 5 1 54 J b , xxiii , .

2 2 THE S AMKHYA SYSTEM

school , are nevertheless treated by it in a special manner . The attemp t to bring this really con clusive form of argu n n * me t to bear has bee made by Jacobi , who has sought to fi n d in n in the series of twelve p ri cip les , which are used the n Buddhist View to explai the causation of misery , clear traces of their derivation from the evolution series of the m 5 a khya . The elements of the evolution series of the S arnkh a n ot n y are by any mea s p eculiar to that system , but the order of evolution and the stress laid on the evolution n are matters of great importance . J acobi further stre gthens hi s position by the argumen t that the reference in the epic to the two systems of S amkhya and Yoga as two a nd n n m eternal is a clear i dicatio that at the ti e of the epic , which he sets n ot later than the begi nni ng of the Christian era , the systems were of great antiquity , that the atmosphere of thought in the time of the Buddha was filled with S am an d wa s khya ideas , that the Buddha influenced by an d his own these ideas , strove in system to produce some formula of causation which would b e suitable to serve as an exp lan ation of the origi n of the misery which the S amkhya n a n an d his own system so stro gly affirmed . He lso poi ts ’ out that in ASvaghos a s B u ddha ca r ita we have an account of a meeting between the Buddha an d his former a in s teacher , Ar da , which are ascribed to the latter view am which resemble those of the S khya , as modified by the belief in the person al supreme divi n ity of the V iSiS tadv a ita

an . n Ved ta The importa ce of this ep isode , if we are to n in ASv a ho s a credit the accou t g , would be that it would remove the most serious difficulty in the attempt to connect with the S amkhya the system of Bud dhi m n o n s . The latter has trace of the doctri e of the three n u n n in n an d Gunas , or co stit e ts , which are prese t ature all S am its products according to the khya , and therefore if it is to be derived from the S amkhya it must be traced to a 8 am G khya which did not accep t the doctrine of the unas . ’ Now the accoun t given of Arada s teachi ngs does not men n and in n tion the Gu as , it might perhaps be seen evide ce

- ll M 1 1 N h i d i l . e h D . 11 1 a c r an e n K e c Z . 5 ch e n n G s s a t G , ; t v o g f d e r i c e e u in e n F r r ic sm W ss ens ha t n ott 189 6 . 43ff . o c s s e e f G g , , p p it i l B dd - 4 d n r u h 3 rd . i O e a 44 I i 68 1 69 . e b g, ( p p 3ff ; , S AMKHYA AND B UDDHI S M 23 of the existence of a Samk hya which did not know * is the Gunas . It clear , however , that this argument cannot safely be pressed : the historical accuracy of the views of ASv a ghosa is not confirmed by the information we

. a n n have Ar da is k ow to the sacred books of Buddhism , but his doctrines are never set out in any way corresponding A v a ho a to the picture of him in S g s , and we cannot therefore say that the account in ASv agho S a has any value a at all , not merely for the actual teaching of Ar da , but for an 5 am the existence at y time of a school of khya , which denies the existence of the Gunas . It may be doubted if any such school of S amkhya ever was known .

The causal series of Buddhism , in which the idea of is n cause only an i accurate or popular expression , its n n applicable in strict ess to some alo e of the members , n traces the miseries of existe ce from ignorance , through the S amsk ara s V i fian a six n , j , name and form , the orga s of n n se se , contact , feeli g , desire , clinging , becoming , birth , to an i n old age d death . The series s of very curious appeara ce ; it has variously been declared to be one of the first of the ’ Buddha s discoveries , and to be a late conglomerate , nor in i any case s it a masterwork of expression or thought . In the View of J acobi the whole refers but to one birth and life . The last element takes us into the midst of the sorrow of existence , which is exp lained by birth . The first ten members serve to explain the origin of birth , and are derived in part from the S amkhya and in part from the n am Yoga , which Buddha well k ew and which had the 8 khya i a ts . as the basis of philosophic system Avidy , ignorance , is in the S amkhya and the Yoga alike the cause of the n n bindi g of the spirit . It co sists in the failure to realize the an In external distinction of spirit d nature . Buddhism it means the failure to realize the four great truths concerning amsk ara s S am misery . The S are terms of khya and Yoga , expressi ng the imp ressions made upon the intellect by such

’ ’ ’ - . O l ra mar e L his tor ie d e s I d e s Th e os o hi u e s i 2 43 5 P t ( e p q , ) h o lds h a th e u n a d o c r n e is a la e r a cc r e on to th e S amkh a t t G t i t ti y , h ie nn a rie nta l b u t ou a d u a e ro n l . r u s s e u d s . S e e a s o O S a V O wit t q t g t , ’ J ou rn a l 2 5 7 ff wh o o n s ou t th e a fin o f Ara a s e ws to , xxvii , , p i t f ity d vi h o e o f th e t s e p ic . 2 4 THE S AMKHYA S YS TEM

a n an d n activities s thinking , feeling , willi g actio , from which in due course other p henomen a of the life of the n n soul spring forth . The Buddhist co ceptio of the S amsk aras is a varying one , but it is sometimes clearly an d analogous in character . Name form are to be considered as really equivalent to the p ri n ciple of individua V i fian a tion , and they naturally grow out of j , which is e S am nothing else than the int llect of the khya , which has ' i n V ria a . j as one of its functions Moreover , the derivate character of the Buddhist system shows itself very clearly in the fact that both for ign orance an d for the S amskaras an n i tellect must be assumed , which it merely admits after the

‘ arn k ara i n S s s in the form of V jfia a . From individuation 8 am one n the khya allows , on the hand , the organs of se se n and the fine eleme ts , from which are developed the gross elements , to arise . This is rendered plausible by the n n cosmic pri ciple of i dividuation for each world period , but a s a nd in the Buddhist series from individuation , name an d form , the senses and their objects are derived simply without any justification as regards the derivation of the world from u gross the individ al . The next element in the is Buddhist series , contact , the contact of the senses and the ir objects which is recognized in the S amkhya - Yoga : n from it results the feeli g of p leasure or the reverse , which is the same as the feeling of the Buddhist series . From feeling arises desire according to both theories : from desire in S am the motive to rebirth or becoming , which the khya is Adr a Dharmadha rma u Yoga termed st , or , and in the

U adana n . Buddhist p , cli ging The evidence of depen dence is clearly somewhat lacking in cogency , even on the theory of the causal series adopted n n by Jacobi , as regards certai of the p oi ts . Moreover , the r on se ies is interpreted , the basis of the oldest Buddhist " texts very differently by O ldenb e rgfi He lays stress on the fact that V ijfian a is conceived a s coming into existen ce at S amsk aras the time of conception as a result of the , or in n impressions , which have been formed the mi d through V i fian a ignorance in a former birth . With j come into being

d - B dha 5 h . u ( t p p 25 7 2 95 . SAMKHYA AND BUDD HISM 2 5

n name and form , the latter being defi itely the corporeal side of the future being , while name hints at the personality . From name and form we are led from experience of the world e through the senses to the desire , which l ads to clinging to li fe , and thence to a further rebirth , the series thus illogically including a second rebirth , which is traced to different causes , but the main idea being merely to Show the n h con ection of misery wit life . An attempt to save the theory from the grave error of bringing birth twice in is ‘ made by O ltramare fi who argues that the matter is ‘ confined to an explanation of the existence of misery , based on the arguments that man is miserable because he exists through being born : he is born because he belongs to the world of becoming : he belongs to that world because he nourishes existence in himself : this he does because he has desires : he has desires because he h as sensations : he has sensations because he comes into contact with the external world : this he does because he has senses , which act : the senses act because he opposes himself a s individual to the nonself ; this again he does because his consciousness is imbued with the idea of individuality : this agai n comes from former experiences , which in their turn are derived from the lack of the correct knowledge . This is a tempting is suggestion , but it open to the serious objection that it goes a good deal beyond what is recorded , and introduces l D u in all probability too refined a psychology . e sse n i goes so far as to hold that the system is the conglomeration of two quite different elements : the last group of membe rs from desire onwards is a formulation of the ground of the origin of misery : the group from the second to the seventh explains psychologically the growth of the eighth , desire , while the conception of ignorance i s borrowed from the an Ved ta and placed at the head of the series . The only conclusion that ca n be drawn from the evidence is that some of the conceptions of Buddhism are very closely

L a ormu le b o u ddhi u e d es D ou e a u s e s n e a f q z C ( G e v ,

All h - H e min e e s c ic hte d e r hilos o hie I iii 164 168 . is T g G P p , , ,

e w is h a i fian a is c osm a n r d c s ll r a l f M . C . vi t t V j ic d p o u e a e ity . W lle s r D h l o h a e ie i os is ch e r u n dla e d e s alte r e n B u ddhis mu s . , p p G g II , p p

49 ff . b u t e e O l e n e r B u dd s d h a 3 n . , b g , , p . 2 6 1. 26 THE SAMKHYA S YS TEM

8 am allied to those of the khya . The most important correspondence is that in the conception of the relation of n S amsk ara s n ignora ce and the , the impressio s thus left on in S am the mind , which cause it the View of the khya to n attain ever new births , u til at last the true knowledge is s reached , and there ceases to be the pos ibility of rebirth , as the source bei ng cut away n o more impressions can be n n formed . This co cep tio corresponds very closely with the a n d S amsk ara s Buddhist , the use of the term , which is not

n n n . a very atural one , possibly poi ts to direct borrowi g A second similarity of great imp ortan ce i s the precise n S arnkh a correspo dence of the two ideas , of the y that the essential kn owledge is to realize that anythi n g empiric is n not I , and of the Buddhist that it is esse tial to free oneself from the delusion that there is anythi ng which is or belongs n to the self . A further poi t of close similarity is the fact that both systems lay great stress on the con ception of n causality , and that they devote deep co sideration to the

- nature of the world process , though there is a great distinction between the Buddhist resolution of it into a series of impressions determined causally and the S amkhya concep n n tion of nature . Here , too , may be mentio ed the defi ite correspondence between the four truths of the Buddhist system and the fourfold division of the doctrine of fin al

- release in the S amkhya Yoga . The latter falls under the heads of that from which final release is to be sought , final release , the cause of that from which release is to be sought , and the means to attain release , which are compared with of the medical heads disease , health , the cause of disease ,

and healing . The four Buddhist truths are misery , the origin of misery , the removal of misery , and the means to on e its removal , which in Buddhist text are compared with n n a nd n disease , its origi , its heali g the preventio of

n . recurrence , but the similarity is not conclusive of borrowi g Yet a further striking parallelism with the S amkhya is the

attitude of Buddhism towards the end of endeavour . It is is perfectly plain tha t this not looked upon as annihilation , however clear it is that it is metaphysically nothing else : a the doctrine of the Buddha is full of the savour of Nirv na , and the repeated occurrence of that term in the epic suggests SAMKHYA AND B UDDHIS M 7 that the expression was borrowed from the Brahmanical S speculations by the Buddhists . imilarly in the case of m the a tta in ment n the S a khya , though of k owledge would n n really be the end of all real existence and othi gness , it is expressly recorded that this is n ot the aim of the seekers n on after the true k owledge , who the contrary attain i a n isolation as somethi n g n itself en during d perfect . n n n These poi ts , as well as the commo possessio of the n rejection of the absolute , are striki g , but at the same time in n it must be remembered that , addition to the abse ce of is on e the doctrine of the Gunas , there other case of the first importan ce in which the S amkhya is very different m an d n n . S a from , more adva ced tha , Buddhism The khya in its n goes to the logical extreme , treatme t of the difference an d n between spirit all else , of attributi g the whole of the n apparent empiric existe ce to the activity of n ature , though that activity is only conscious by the union of nature with no n n Spirit . It therefore postulates that there is real u io of and n : a nd in is spirit ature this result it quite logical , but , of course , at the same time it brings about its own refutation is since , if there n o union , there can be no release . In the

Buddhist View the release is regarded as a real one , not as somethi n g which is unreal and unconnected with the substitute for self in Buddhism . Nor has Buddhism any of the imagery by which nature is represented as a dancer n performi g for the benefit of spirit , or the union of spirit and n ature is regarded as the union of the lame and the n In a nd bli d . this in its elaborate series of psychological S am conceptions , it is clear that the khya as we know it is far more advanced than Buddhism .

It seems best , therefore , to draw the conclusion that Buddhism did not draw its i n spiration from the S amkhya in n in in the form which it appears eve the epic , for there the doctrine of the isolation of Spirit and nature a n d of the n three Gu as is fully and completely evolved . We have i n deed no means to assert that the S amkhya or its closely related Yoga may not have existed in gradually changing shapes long before it assumed its epic form , and that there may not have existed a variety of its development which e w e dir ctly affected the growth of Buddhism . But e hav no 2 8 THE SAMKHYA S YSTEM

S am means to reconstruct this stage of khya , nor can we say whether there ever was a system un der that name without the Gunas : the period from the Up ani sads to the epic S am is khya a long one , and must have been marked by much n intellectual activity , one form of which may have bee S am a doctrine which cannot definitely be named khya , and n from which both S amkhya a d Buddhism are derived . That such an atheist doctri ne should have been evolved at an early date is not in the slightest degree wonderful . There is abun dant evidence of the plentiful supply in n of heretical doctrines I dia from an early date , and an atheist philosophy * can have hardly been Op en to more serious objection than an idealism which placed all reality in n an incomprehe sible absolute , and insisted that all real things were a mere illu sion . t

Th e Mimamsa is a h e s ic n d e e d b u t a s a h los o h wa s t i t i , it p i p y h r h l s s d o u b le ss h e ld to b e s u le m e n e d b t e Ve dan a . N e e e e t p p t y t v t ,

— h o e e r s h o s ha a h e s m w a s n o t h o ll u n In d a n . C f . w v , it w t t t i w y i

G an an h h Th P a b h ka ra S s te m o i v a Mimamsa . g a t J a , e r a y f P , p p - 85 8 . “ Th e r e is o f c ou rs e a u n d a n la e r e d e n ce o f th e k n o le d e 1 , , b t t vi w g o f B u d dh s e a ch e rs o f S amkh a a s in th e c a s e o f Na ar u n a ( . H . i t t y , g j J d m P li h th S amkh a Woo s Yo a S s t e o a ta ri a . T a e , g y f j , p xviii ) t y ’ s s te m w a s k n th e Di h a Nika a is d s r o e d b Rh s D a id s y n ow to g y i p v y y v , Am e ic B dd i r n e c e n u h sm ff . a L tu r s o , p p 2 5

3 0 THE SAMKHYA S YS TEM language which may have their source merely in the essential similarity of human Assuming that the B a av a d ita C h g g is of indep endent Indian origin , arbe t has endeavoured to show that it was origi n ally a theistic a S am - tract , with a philosophic l basis in the khya Yoga ‘

system , and in this form belongs to the early part of the B C e second century , while in its pres nt form , in which it a n has been affected by Ved ntism , it belongs to the seco d D his n on century A. . But part of argume t rested the Yo a S utra P atafi ali theory that the reputed founder of the g , j , n was identical with the grammarian , and therefore belo ged n n B C n to the seco d ce tury , and with the disapp eara ce of rine hi this doct t s earlier date becomes extremely imp robable . B h a av a d ita as We are , therefore , left to conclude that the g g we have it is probably not later than the second century n i A . s . D , though eve for that date there no absolutely In cogent proof . any case , it may be assumed that its an d * n material is often older , the same consideratio s ap ply

' to the other philosophical portions of the M ah abh a r a ta . The philosophy p resented by the ep ic in the form which is we have it a conglomerate of very different views , and , is what most important , of very different views rep eated in immediate proximity to one another without any ap p arent i n . s o e sense of their incongruity There , however , decided characteristic which holds good for the ep ic philosop hy , n n n a n d and that is its theistic tinge , which co sta tly i trudes , which is natural in an ep ic which had a far more p opular appeal than had the more p hilosophical speculation s which an d are here there referred to in it . Hence we need not be n U surprised that the idealistic interp retatio of the pani sads , which seems in all emp iric reality nothing but the sel f n n in illusion of the Brahma , is rep resented o ly the feeblest a n d degree in the epic , that there is no p assage there which can fairly be se t beside the bold declaration of the

' ' Svetasvata ra U a ni a d 1 n n p s ( iv , 0 ) that ature is nothi g but

S e e a r e I ndie n u n d d a s C hris te ntu m Tu n e n G b , ( bi g , - 3 2 58 . p p . 25

‘ ' D ie B ha d t L e - a v a i a . 5 8 64 . I g g ( ip zig , p p

- S e e H . a c o 2 9 4 2 elo . 5 6 5 7 . I J bi xxxi , ; b w , p p , THE PHILO S OPHY O F THE GREAT EPIC 3 1

a a. n illusion , M y On the other ha d , the epic has often the doctrine of the development of the whole un iverse as a reality from the Brahman . Thus the self is said (xii , 2 8 5 40 n , ) to send out from itself the Gu as , the constituents o f of nature , as a Spider emits a web , and the same idea the productive activity of the Brahman is foun d in other s / shape Characteristic of this strain of thought , and n a n n linki g it closely with the Br hma a traditio , is the 3 11 3 statement (xii , , ) that from the Brahman was created a n d the god Brahman , who sprang forth from a golden egg , that this forms the body for all creatures . in i But in addition to this view , which we have st ll all n e derived from o principle , there arises to prominence the e view that nature is other than the self , which in this asp ct n begi ns to receive frequently the designatio of spirit ,

P u ru a n . s , though it is still co ceived as Thus we c cosmic n r learn that nature creates , but under the co trol of spi it 3 14 (xii , , or that Spirit impels to activity the creative 3 15 elements , and is therefore akin to them ( xii , , The question of the un ity of Spirit a n d reality is expressly

’ A nu ita 4 8 stated and denied in the g (xiv , , and 2 2 2 15 16 is elsewhere (xii , , , ) it expressly stated that all n activity rests in nature , that spirit is ever active and that n n a nd it is merely delusion whe spirit co siders itself active , it is made clear that Spirit is n ot one only . The disti nction of spirit as inactive and nature a s all - productive is

’ B ha av a d ita 3 7 19 recognized in the g g (vi , , , and is n is ofte emphasized , though in other places the idea found n that while creatio and destruction are the work of nature , is S n still nature really an emanation from the pirit , i to 3 1ff 03 3 . which it resolves itself from time to time ( xii , , ) The result of the develop ment which transfers all activity to nature and denies it to s p irit is to make the is latter the subject of knowledge only , that , to make spirit a sy n onym for the abstraction of subject from object in n a n is n concious ess , idea which , of course , expressed amo g . n B rha dar a n a k a U a ni a d 4 other co ceptions in the y p s ( ii , , 14 4 2 3 Anu ita 50 ff ; iii , , ; iv , , In the g (xi , , 8 ) the distinction of nature and of Sp irit a s object and is in and subject expressed the clearest manner , the 3 2 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

m sub e cf is j declared to be free from any contrasts , without n n p arts , eter al , and essentially u connected with the three n /In constitue ts which make up nature . this passage and S Kse tra - h a elsewhere the pirit is described as the j , the

K etra . the knower of the place , as opposed to the s , body , and the relation of the two is described in terms which Show n that all activity belo gs to the empiric self , while the real spirit is a mere spectator (xii , In this asp ect spirit is se t over against the twenty - four principles of nature as the

- fi fth . twenty , the former being the objects of , the latter the 3 06 3 9 " B ut subject of , knowledge (xii , , , the relation of these two principles is not detailed : it is a mystery which is therefore expressed in vague te rms / S uch as the S is binding of pirit in nature , or again it said in the A nu ita 50 14 S n atu re as g (xiv , , ) that pirit uses a lamp with which it enters the darkn ess : the two are connected

a nd . like the fly and the fig leaf , the fish water But it is perfectly clear that final release comes through the recogn ition of the fundamental distinction of the spirit and nature ; on this bei n g attained all intermixture with nature 3 0 7 ceases for spirit (xii , , n On the other ha d , beside this enumeration of twenty five principles , which entirely declines to recognize the existence of any personal deity an d recognizes a multitude of individual spirits , there stands a view which adds a - it twenty sixth pri n cip le . When the Spirit realizes s an d distinction from nature , attains enlightenment , it , as free n n from the Gu as , recognizes nature as possessi g the Gunas and n u spiritual , and it becomes one with the absolute , thus n its own attai ing true self , free from empiric reality , n n n u agei g and immortal . In this co dition , as all duality l has disap peared , the spirit ceases to have know edge , which is essentially a result of multiplicity " From this p oint of view also it is p ossible to give an an swer to the i n sisten t n problem of the umber of souls , and to overcome the discrepancy between the views of multiplicity and of unity . The souls so long as they are in union with nature are numerous , but as soon as they realize their distinction from w - S nature , they fall back into the t enty ixth principle , w is the e hich inner self of all corporeal b ings , the onlooker , THE PHILOSOPHY O F THE GREAT EP IC 33 f is ree from the Gunas , which can be seen by no one who G un a s /xii 3 50 2 5 2 6 3 5 1 2 connected with the ( , , , ; ,

The holders of this view represent the Yoga of the epic , as the maintainers of the twenty - five principles alone represent the samkhya school . The statement is several times made that the two schemes lead to one end and are not f fundamentally dif erent , but this claim is made only from

the point of view of the , Yoga , and its inaccuracy i s n xii 3 0 0 expressly shown by the discussio in , , where the a re fou nd differences of the two systems _ to lie in the fact S arnkh a ISv a ra that the y disowns an , while the Yoga one S am accepts ; and the khya relies on reasoning , while the on Yoga relies the direct perception of the devotee . This passage is of import ance also in showing the original force of the terms S amkhya and Yoga : the first must refer not merely to the en umeration of principles but to reflective n reasoning , while Yoga de otes religious practices , and in speci al the striving after the ideal of freedom by means of the adoption of various devices to secure mental exaltation n and the severance of mind from thi gs of sense . The tendency to obliterate the distinction of 5 amkhya and Yoga by insisting on their common goal , and to remove the disti n ction between them and the more orthodox Upani sad doctrine by attributi n g to the Yoga the Brahman - n as the twenty sixth pri ciple , is a striking illustration of the tendency of the epic to se e in all the philosophic doctrines n n merely variatio s of the Brahma doctrine of the Upani sads . ‘ S arnkh a From the religious side of the epic , the y system is strangely taken up into t h e Bh agavata faith by the equation of the four Vyuh as of the supreme Spirit Vishnu to am four of the principles of the S khya philosophy . Thus

' a is S arnk ar an a V sudeva equated to Spirit , s to the individual P ra d u mn a Aniru ddh a soul , y to mind , and to individuation .

The last three emanate each from his predecessor , and from Aniru ddh a comes Brahman , and from him the created world . The wise reach the unity with the highest by the way of An iru d h a P ra d umna S amk return through d , y and arsan a to a V sudeva , and it is expressly stated that the S amkhyas Bha avata s as well as the g hold this belief . In the Bhagav adgita itself the unity of S amkhya and Yoga is 3 4 THE SAMKHYA S YSTEM

S am is insisted upon , and the khya doctrine , at least in n * the p oem as it now sta ds , overlaid by the twofold doctrine that both Spirit an d nature are ultimately derived a n d n from the one the same source , which , from the poi t of a n view of the Ved nta , is the Brahma , but from the religious i poi n t of view s Kr sii a . In addition to the exposition of the fundamental

‘ S anIkh a p rinciple of the y , the difference between the a n d t e n subject h object , there is fou d already in the epic

many of the elements which make up the classical system . is n Nature repeatedly declared to consist of three co stituents , S n attva , Raj as and Tamas , which are called Gu as , a term foun d in the Upan isads n ot before the late M a itr aya ni 3 In A n u ita 15 on (iv , ; v , the g stress laid the fact that n n n n these three co stitue ts are p rese t throughout all thi gs , i n though n differen t degree . The three Gu as are often the n regarded as fetters of the souls , si ce they rep resent on e n n 3 48 n nature , and divisio of men give in xii , , prese ts us with the three classes of S attvik as in which the quality of V amiSra s goodness prevails , y in whom the Raj as and de sire f n n Tamas , i and indi fere ce , eleme ts are mixed with V a ik arik a s goodness , and the , in whom the quality of n a nd i differe nce prevails throughout , who , indeed , with a n n n natural i consiste ce from the ormal doctrine , are declared n n n to be de void of any portio of good ess . A doctri e of the S am not n classic khya occurs rarely , accordi g to which the i a nd n qualities of goodness , des re indiffere ce are character istic a nd of the worlds of the gods , of men and of beasts

’ n an d A n u ita 3 6 - 3 8 pla ts , respectively , the g (xiv , ) disti n guishes three classes of bei n gs accordi n g a s through n an good ess they adv ce upwards to the world of the gods , n or through desire remai in the world of men , or through n n n i difference desce d to the world of beasts a d plants . n in S am o f From ature , the khya the ep ic as in the sam n classical khya , are derived the various portio s of the in empiric world , but on this subject there p revails the ep ic n a abundant profusion of views . It is clear that the

An rh o k ns 1905 e a b it s e e . o i d s a in E . W H p p i , p , 38 4 - 3 9 p p . 8 . THE PHILOSOPHY O F THE GREAT EPIC 3 5 reflective Sp irit greatly occup ied itself in devising enumera tions of the portions of the self : eight was a favourite number , but the elements of the eight differ . Thus in one version they are the five senses , mind , intellect and the i Kse tra fia 2 48 17 in Sp rit , as j (xii , , another for the spirit , is Citta , thought , is substituted , and the spirit reckoned as a 2 7 5 16 ninth element (xii , , , Even such an absurdity is achieved as when a complex of fifteen is made up of spirit , nature , intellect , individuation in two forms , as m a Abhiman a an d an d Aha k ra , and , the senses , their objects , in l i the whole complex c u d rig spirit is derived from nature . xi i 3 13 fi n d n In , , however , we e umerated , as derived from o nature , the five rgans of percep tion , the five organs of n action , mind , i dividuation , and intellect , which in its substance corresp onds with the products of the classical S am ’ A khya . , nearer approach to the later doctrine

’ Anu ita 40 is , however , to be found in the g (xiv , where the order of developmen t and not merely the results is given : from the unevolved is produced the great self , from it individuation , from it the five elements , from them , on the one hand , the qualities of sound , etc . , and fi ve n on the other the vital airs , while from i dividuation n n arise the eleven organs of se se , five of perceptio , five of and action mind . In i i the epic the three entities , intellect , ndividuation and n n mi d , have all often a fully cosmic fu ction : they are n natural expressio s for the activity of a personal creator , n whether developed or not from the Brahma , and as we have seen are adopted In this sense by the Bhagavata s in ‘ S arnk a r an a P ra d u mma Aniruddh a the series of s , y and , though in that series mind an d P radyu mna rank above iru h An dd a . individuation and The distinction , however , n n and n an d betwee i tellect i dividuation is a Slight one , is not normally made : rather it is assumed that intellect p er se involves individuation , and when both terms occur it must be held that re siilt we have a of a further process of analysis . Beside the cosmic function of these powers they figure largely in epic

psychology . The principle of individuation passes for a

factor in will , and at other times describes the function of attention : it is even by a false abstraction further su b divid 36 THE SAMKHYA SYS TEM

S e Abhimana ed and appears as two pecies , the other b ing 2 0 5 (xii , , The other terms are variously exp lained , n but it is a common idea that data are given by se se , that u ts an d the mind ponders upon them or raises do b , that the 2 7 17 2 8 intellect decides (xii , 5 , ; 5 , while the Sp irit is n n a mere spectator , a view which corresp o ds with the doctri e l that spirit is the subject without which a l these psychic] blin d a n n r processes would be d unco scious . On the othe u 3 11 2 2 on hand , stress is often (xii , ; xiv , ) laid the fact that the senses require the operation of mind to produce p n : n is n o y erceptio s without mi d there result , but equall . without the senses mind is empty . It accords well with this view that to mind is attributed the function of dreams . 3 13 nn Mind also , in xii , , is brought directly into co ection

n . with the orga s of action , to which it must be conceived as conveyi ng the commands arisi n g from the decisions of n in xii 2 9 9 2 0 n i tellect , but _ , , the function of acti g towards the organs of action as the mind acts to the organs of is n perception attributed to stre gth , Bala , a conception n n which , however , is not mai tai ed .

n n in t Kath a U a ni ad The i tellect is ofte , as the p s , a an d compared to charioteer , whose reins are mind whose in horses the senses . The traveller the chariot is in the A nu ita 5 1 4 Bhutatman g (xiv , , ) declared to be the , a conception which corresponds roughly to the psychic sam apparatus of the classical khya which , consisting of n mi d , individuation , intellect , the ten senses , the fine n n n eleme ts a d the subtle p ortions of the gross eleme ts , i i n . s accompanies the Spirit in all ts transmigratio s There , however , no trace in the epic of a precisely corresp onding n n n Bhutatman e umeratio of entities as formi g part of the , for the epic often does not recogn ize the fine elements at * n n all . Other terms for this migrati g apparatus are Li ga , which , however , also denotes the gross corporeal body , and Re ta - S h arira , seed body , which recalls the doctrine of the S am classical khya , that the gross body is producted from the seed of the subtle p ortions of the gross elements , which form part of the psychic apparatus .

l r na l xx n 2 5 7 - 2 7 5 who S e e 0 . S r au ss Vie nn a O r ien ta ou v t , J , , , , h o e e r o e rs a e s th e ca s e . w v , v t t

38 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

- e i and free will , and is further complicated by the b l ef in the n saving power of devotio to God , and his p ower to help . The fate of the souls on death is described more or less in U n : closely accord with the doctrine , of the p a isads there is the way of the gods , which leads to the world of Brahman and to freedom from tran smigration ; there is the way of a nd e the fathers , which is the fruit of good deeds l ads back O II to rebirth earth ; there is the third p lace , rebirth as a beast n n n in or a pla t , and there is also the possibility of pu ishme t n can n in hell . Fi al release be obtai ed either by knowledge

‘ n S arnkh a the form of reflectio , the y way which uses the n n n a n d o means of percep tio , i fere ce scrip ture , or by the pra in n n tice of Yoga , which results an i tuitive perceptio of the n : in ‘ final truth . The truth takes two disti ct forms the one case the end is the recognition of the identity of the n an d i dividual self the absolute , which results in the possessor of that kn owledge becomi ng the absolute ; for in n is in an the strict se se the individual self , as the Ved ta , the absolute self , and not a part of it , or at least the individual is merged in the absolute , if , as often may be the case , the n a n and feeli g is th t the i dividual is for the time at least real , n release is a merger rather than an identificatio . This n state of identificatio , or merger , is the state of supreme n n bliss , though past all comprehensio and understandi g , i an - n s . O which styled Nirv a the other hand , there appears often in the closest connection with this view the more S am n a nd prop erly khya view of the goal being isolatio , the savi ng knowledge not that of the unity of the i n dividual and n n n n the absolute , but the re alizatio of the disti ctio betwee an n n is self as spirit d ature . The result of this k owledge the freedom of the spirit from all i n dividuality a nd all ff S n 4 7 8 . consciousness , the pirit bei g freed for ever (xiv , , not S am This is merely the aim of the followers of khya , but n of the of Yoga also , who , despite their accepta ce _followers ISv a ra n n of an , devotion to whom by meditatio up o him is a n n p owerful assista ce to final release , evertheless in their desire for release aim at the isolation of the souls from n nature , not at u ion with an absolute Not only has the epic the terms S amkhya and Yoga both and a s in their more general sense , also denoting the systems THE PHILOS OPHY OF THE GREAT EP IC 39

- fi — S with twenty ve and twenty ix principles , respectively , but the names of three teachers , who are given in the last verse S amkh a K rika of the y a as the handers down of the system , 3 19 59 a s duly app ear in xii , , teachers of the doctrine with — fi fth n ai i av a a twenty Spiritual princip le alo g with J g s y , P a ra ara V ars a an a Bhr u S Asita Devala , S , g y , g , uka , Gautama , Ars ise n a a P ula st a S an atk u mara S t , Garga , N rada , y , , ukra a nd K s n an d a yapa . Of the three me tioned here in the

’ ’ K a rika K , apila plays a great figure in the philosophy of the : a in epic he is authorit tive all philosop hic matters , and his n te ets are of the most diverse kinds . In the strict sense of is the n the word he , indeed , o ly founder of a system ni in n recog zed the ep ic , the other perso s being either his n gods or disciples , He himself is identified with Ag i , S a nd n : Sv etasv atar a with iva Vi s u he also appears , as in the U a n s a d Hiran a arb h a 3 3 9 p i (v , as identical with y g ( xii , , 6 8 3 4 2 P aficaSikh a ; , Moreover , Asuri and appear in i xii 2 18 14 also , , , as teachers of the doctrine of the * n i Brahma . The system of P afica S kh a is develope d in great in 2 19 n o detail xii , : t only has it in detail no sp ecial con ne ction S am with the khya , but in its fundamental princip les S am n it is not khya at all ; on the co trary , while the separate n existe ce for the time being of the individual soul is asserted , it is expressly made clear that it flows a s a stream to the ocean , and that at the end it is merged in the great ocean of

and on . being embraced all sides , losing then consciousness n - As the deer leaves its old horn , or the snake its wor out S n kin , or the bird the falli g tree , so the freed soul abandons n its woe , and goes on the perfect way , leavi g behind plea and n sure ; pain without eve a subtle body . In addition to n this exposition of the doctrine of Brahman without illusio , P aficaSikh a differs in his psychology from the orthodox S amkhya : he holds the belief in the existence of power as n the sixth organ with the organs of actio , corresp onding to n mind as the sixth of the organs of perceptio . He also holds that activity is produced by the combined result of n a n d k owledge , heat wind : the first element produces the n se ses and their objects , separate existence , perception

k d 149 ff e e E . I S W . H o n s r e a t E ic o n ia . . p i , G p f , p p 40 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

and mind ; heat prod uces gall and other bases ; wind

produces the two vital breaths . Further , he discusses the question of the n ature of deep sleep and the fact that

the senses are not then really active . In both these an d respects , the importance attached to the vital airs other

physical bases , and in the stress laid on the question of the P afica ikh a a an d nature of deep Sleep , S is truly Ved ntic am not an upholder of the S khya . The degree of faith which can be attributed to this account of the views of P afica Sikh a can be judged from the 3 2 1 96 - 112 n fact that in xii , , we have a differe t account of n the views of that sage . Here there are thirty pri ciples , *‘ . the n with God superadded They are , ten senses and mi d , n : S power being ig ored intellect , attva , individuation , the n n general disposition , ig orance , the source , the manifestatio , the unification of doubles such as p leasantness an d u np le a santne ss five n n , time , the gross elements , bei g and not bei g ,

‘ cause , seed and power . The source of all these factors is n the unevolved , which is evolved by means of these pri ciples ,

and as evolved is the individual . The way of life to be n sought is renunciatio . Yet another account of the 2 7 4 principles is given in a version ascribed in xii , to Asita

Devala , but the details of this version deviate more and s more from any normal chedule , the organs of knowledge b eing reckoned at eight .

The question arises whether we can , on the strength of

these notices , attribute any serious value to the tradition mkh a rik preserved in the S a y Ka a. The answer as regards K apila and Asuri can hardly be in the affirmative , in the sense that the notice of the Karika receives any sup port K from the epic . If there was ever a sage , apila , who

expounded philosophy , he had disappeared into a mass of u obsc re tradition at an early date . Moreover, there is grave

doubt to suspect his real existence at all , in view of the fact that he may owe his name merely to the use of Kapila in

’ ' Sve tasv ata ra U a ni a d v 2 n the p s ( , ) as a descriptio of Hira n a a K yag rb h . The likelihood is that the name apila is

e e E . k ns i d O ch ra d r E c I n i . 2 . . . S e S W . H o re a t o a 15 p i , G p f , p F l i 106 n 3 su e s s ins e a d n u re and s ir b u t xv ii , , . ) gg t t at p it, h s s ms n r r t i ee a e or . THE PHILO S OPHY OF THE GR EAT EP I C 4 1

a w h as f e s merely that of divinity hich , or what ver rea on , bee n associated closely with the 8 amkhya philosophy in its i is atheistic form , though t essential to note that the K is association is not epic , in which apila by no means am exclusively an expounder of the S khya , and where there prevails th e vague idea that the S amkhya is at bottom quite s is consistent with belief in the Brahman . A uri a mere a as name , and we cannot possibly ccept him a historical philosopher without more proo f . The epic asserts th at he P afica ik a taught S h , whence no doubt comes the statement in Karik the a.

» P fica ikh a . ffe rs e The case of a S o mor difficulty , and he h as an : often been treated as authentic teacher indeed , the Chinese tradition * attributes to him the work known as tita ntr a a . S s , though doubtless by an error There has been seen a certain similarity between the doctrines attributed to P aficaSikh a in the few passages quoted from him in the commentary on the S amkhy a S utra and doctrines expressed hi in the epic . Thus s View of the infinitely small size of the soul may be compared with the same doctrine expressed in 3 46 13 - 18 his xii , , , and View of the unenlightened individual 3 10 with that expressed in xii , , but these comparisons do u s as b not carry any further , they do not y. any means ’ connect even the P ari ca Sikh a of the epic with the reputed P afica ikh S a of the school tradition . The only conclusion available is that the identity of the presumably actual teacher mentioned by the commentators and the epic P aficaSikh a is not proved , and that the latter , at least , certainly did not teach as he is represented any Single k sain h a . doctrine , and certainly not a y one We have , there fore , two possibilities open to us : either we can assume that P aficaS ikh a the name , , was that of an ancient sage , perhaps as may be indicated by Buddhist evidence cited below , a s K originally a divine personage , to whom , to apila , for u reasons unknown to us , certain doctrines were ascribed , j st S an atk u m ra e as , for instance , a , cl arly a divine being , i s cited as e an authority in the epic , or that the lat epic uses the

’ ’ Ta kaku su B u lle tin d c le F an ai d E r me O ien t iv 5 7 , E o r g se xt é r , , s T x n o a 4 q ; u e , Y g , p . 1 . 4 2 THE SAMKHYA S YS TEM n n in a ame . of an actual teacher of high ra k the S mkhya n Yoga school , but simp ly ascribes to him doctrines at ra dom , i n differen t to their i nner consistency and still more to their con sistency with the views which were actually held by the n teacher in questio . In the latter case the question a rises whether P aficaSikh a can be dated early enough to ren der plausible his appearance in the epic , which was practically

5 00 A D . complete by . even as regards the p hilosophic n portions , and which probably co tained these sections much earlier than that . The information which has been preserved as to the views P afica Sikha n ot n a n d of is fragmentary , but unimp orta t , the de fi nite ne ss of some of these Opinion s suggests a real personality . The same impression of reality is b orne . ou t V aca s atimiSr a on by the fact that p , in his commentary the Yo a S utra n a s g , regularly ide tifies his views certain remarks V asa a n d quoted as from the teacher by y in his commentary , that views are exp ressly given as his in the S amkhya S utra . V asa V aca s atimiSr a He appears also , if we may _trust y and p , to have styled Kapila the Adividv an and to have asserted n ot that he taught Asuri , but he does hint that he himself wa s n the pupil of Asuri , a fact which discredits the assertio 7 k a i of this fact in verse 0 of the S am hya K r ka. From the * form in which his v iews have been preserved for u s it would clearly seem that he wrote a work in prose Sutras . The account of the three Gunas attributed to him in the on S amkh a S utra 12 7 in comment the y (i , ) is perfectly

S am - his keep ing with the normal khya Yoga view , and doctrine of the reason of the eternal con nection of spirit a n d S utra 6 8 is nature quoted in the (vi , ) the obviously correct one that it is due to lack of discrimination , a view much more thorough than the reply of the teachers generally that S it was caused by works or that of anandana , who is else n it where u known , that was caused by the internal body or n p sychic ap paratus , si ce clearly the first answer merely s n gives a proximate cause , and the eco d not even a cause , but the mere form in which the connection exp resses itself . is n Further , it certainly in better agreeme t with the view of

Yo B 4 32 S e e a S utra has h a i S amkh a S utra 68 . g y , , ; y , v, ; vi, S e e a l F R s o r ff . e e s t r s a n R . v a o h . . 5 G a b , g u s n t p p 7 THE PHILO S OPHY OF THE GREAT EP IC 43 many spirits in the S amkhya that each should be regarded * a s Yo a S utra as atomic , is expressly recorded in the g ' ‘ 3 6 P ari ca Sikh a : commentary (i , ) as the View of failing the recognition that the spi rit must be considered as not in is a n space , which not achieved by y school of Indian is n philosophy , it clear that with an i finity of spirits n is f an d the doctrine of their infi ite extent di ficult , it is in v is probable enough that this iew , which accepted S am throughout the rest of the history of the khya , there is ' c a to be seen a trace of the influen e of the Ved nta . While this doctrine points to the early date of P afic a srkh a m n in the S a khya school traditio , it would be an error to

' n S amkh a S utr a place his date u duly high , for in the y 3 2 n n n V a ti (v , ) he is cited as givi g a defi itio of y p , pervasion ,

n a nd . which rests on the basis that i tellect , etc . , nature , etc , stand to one another in the relation of what is to be supported and the support This definition shows that P afica Sikh a must have been famil a r with the terminology a o n of the Ny ya sch ol and , without postulati g that he must

’ n N a a D a rs a n a a s u s have know the y y preserved to , it n n i dicates that he does not belo g to an early period , for the a n V a iSe s ik a Ny ya school is certai ly , along with the , the n n n latest of the orthodox systems , being barely k ow eve in the latest parts of the great epic . This fact harmonizes well with the fact that his style agrees most closely with S ab arasv amin that of the writer , whose period has been

’ ‘ acob i a s a fixed by J i comp ratively late , perhaps the fifth A n D . a ikh ce tury . There is no reason to p lace P afic S a so late as this : it is most probable that he is older than kr na i ISv a ra S s A . D . , who not to be dated after 3 0 0 The

n A . D date of the first ce tury . , ascribed conjecturally to ik P afica S ha by may therefore be . regarded as not excessively early : the evidence for the present hardly

n n A D . carries him beyo d the second ce tury . This date would leave it open for his fame to become distorted and

. H . Wo d s Yo a S s t e m o P a ta li 4 h o fi a . 7 s u e s s a J , g y f j , p , gg t t t ’ P a fica Sikh a s e w a s n o t e n e r a l b u t r e e rre n l to s m r vi w g . f d o y o e p a ti l h c u a r s a e o f th s e l . T t g e f is is d ou btf u l . 2 4 : S kh l 4 I arn a hi os o hie . 3 T xxxi , I y P p , p 44 THE SAMKHYA S YSTEM

e be for strang doctrines to ascribed to him in the epic . It n n is , however , in keeping with his i depende t position that the epic should ascribe to him the older doctrine that the gross n body was composed of all five elements , as agai st the theory S amkh a S utra of the y that it was made up of one only , the other four serving merely ancillary purposes . * In the Buddhist texts , not only late but early , there is mention of a G andhabb a P afica Sikh a as in the vicin ity of the Buddha : it would probably be unwise to see in this

' a re flection P afica ikh a a s personage of the historic S , it would be f necessary to bring down the af ected texts very low , or to i see in it an interpolation . The similarity of name s there

for e to be regarded as accidental , for it is most improbable n that the man should derive his name from the demo . Another teacher of Yoga who is men tioned in the epic a i i av a Karma P u r an a is J g s y , who , according to the , was a fi a ik on n fellow pupil of P a c é ha . The e certai piece of information regarding him contai ned in the commen tary on Yo a S utra 5 4 a s the g ( ii , ) shows him a teacher of Yoga '

doctrine . His reality is , therefore , assured in a very different S S S an atana S an atk u mara degree than that of ana , anaka , , , u ata V o h u are and S an ats j , who with d given as teachers in in the epic . Of these the last only , whose name a degraded has seen b u n form of Buddha been , t t wholly without grou d , appears to have any historical reality : the list of S amkhya teachers to whom an oblation of water is daily offered by the orthodox Brahm an includes his name after Kapila and P afica Sikh a ath arva P a ri i a Asuri and before , while an S St

places him even before Asuri . It would be unwise to place

any faith on these evidences of chronology , but it is worth noting that the Chinese translation of the commentary on the

’ S amkhya Karikat suggests a series of teachers in which P afica Sikh a U u after come _Garga , and l ka , or perhaps

u ISva rak t n a . V odh , before Varsa and s n In the law book of Manu , which is contempora eous am with the main body of the didactic epic , we find the S khya

1 dh 11 . H O b r B u d a . . ld e n e g , , p

b e r c e d b G a rb e o . c it. . 35 . T W e it y , p p ’ ’ i d E x m i l e ti n d E cole F ran a s e tré e O r e nt 59 . 1 B u l c , iv,

46 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

is Vi snu , as supreme spirit , one not only with spirit but n M a ts P r n a d . a u a a with nature , with time The y again finds that the three Gun as in the great p ri n ciple are ,

n S . identical with Brahman , Vis u and iva Naturally these and similar views * in the Puranas give us no information of worth as to the antiquity of the S amkhya system or its primitive character . The question inevitably arises as to the nature of the S am system of khya taught in the epic . The view adopted by ’ Garbe r is that the S amkhya of the epic is merely a popular S am izing and contamination of the true khya , which he con siders is of too i n dividual a type to have been produced a s a on e n AS excep t the cre tion of some mi d . he holds that this i ngen ious system was in vogue before the rise of the epic , or at least before the epic took its present shape , it is n atural that so importan t a philosophy should have left its n traces u mistakeably in the epic , and equally natural that the form in which it appears should be one far removed n a n from the precisio d clarity of the true system . /To this argument the most serious objection is the fact that there is n o real eviden ce that the S amkhya p hilosop hy existed as a 2 00 complete whole as early as the p eriod of the epic , say B n 2 A D . h . C . 00 . to , the evide ce of the p riority of suc a

n - system to Buddhism bei g , as has been seen above , far from n i n f n . s a coge t Nor agai there really y su ficient ground to . hold that the S amkhya system is the bold and origi n al n product of a si gle mind . On the contrary , the system on close exami n ation c an be seen to be a somewhat illogical reduction of pri n ciples which are expressed in the Brahman U a nd in p hilosophy of the p ani sads , opposition to the theory Of a rapid develop ment must be set the far more p robable c a n theory of slow growth , which be traced through the ‘ U Ka th a a nd Sv e tasva tara later panisads , the the , which ' have clear traces of the doctri n e of evolution o f princip les

in am n . the S khya man er Moreover if , as is supposed , the

P u ru sa a n d P r a k r ti a r e o fte n id e n tifi e d with th e m a le a n d e m a le r in c i le s : h en c e S a k a n d P r a k t ti e com e d e n fi e d a n d in f p p ti , b i ti , th e Ta n tr a s P r a k t ti a n d S a kti a r e o n e a n d th e s a m e th e cr e a tive h h l n r m t fi rs t p r in c ip le w ic is e xa te d e ve o v e r th e su p e e d u y . “ h hilo o hie - S k a s . . 1 am y P p , p p 4 7 5 2 THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE GREAT EP IC 4 7

m is full Sa khya system was in existence before the epic , it decidedly strange that the epic should practically ignore the doctrine of fine elements which that system ha s so n clearly . O the other hand , the terminology applied in the ka Kari to these fine elements , and to the gross elements , the a s V iSe a a s AviSe s a first being described s , and the latter , is decidedly unnatural and curious and contrasts sharply with the simple description of the gross elements and their char i te risti s V e s as . ac c , S , in the epic A very different theory of the epic S amkhya is presented n * i D hlman . s by a In hi s view the epic is not , as usually supposed , a heroic epic into which there has been put at various times vast masses of didactic and unepic material . wa s From its earliest period the epic , he holds , not different from what it now is : it was essentially a book of customary law and usage , which the epic tale illustrates . It follows from this View that the ep ic is held to be of great antiquity , and that in place of seeing in it a heterogeneous mass of see contradictory views , we must in it the expression of one is S am single doctrine . This the epic khya which represents the development of the unsystematic teachings of the early

U . pani sads It is essentially a science of the Brahman , B rahmavid a y , but it is at the same time based on logic , An vik iki and founda s , while it never abandons traditional — Ahirnsa tions only once , and that on the doctrine of , K n which he supports against tradition , is apila pronou ced the holder of an un orthodox view in the epic— still it freely Its uses the processes of reasoning . special aim is the investigation and setting - forth of the number of principles involved and their evolution from the absolute . It is athe istic merely in the sense that it denies any personal deity a s not such that accepted by the Yoga , but in the sense that on it denies the absolute and impersonal Brahman , which an d the contrary it unquestionably recognizes , in which the n individual soul finds Nirva a . But beside the absolute it is recognizes the existence of a material nature , which the S source of the manifold character of the empiric self , ince

Ni vana 189 7 a n d kh hil s o hie f A r S am a o C . . ( ) y P p E . h h 0 ou hilos o h i ds . 0 ff B o t e a n a 2 . K . l k G g , P p y f Up s , p p ; S e va r ar Bh nda r mme m o o 1 - a ka r C o a ti n Volu m e 8 1 184 . r , p p . 48 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

through it the absolute becomes multiplied , and it sets n is itself to defi e in detail nature and its workings . It merely in its substance a clearing up of the doctrines which n U are contai ed in the older p ani sads , such as the B rhadaranya ha and the Ch andogy a : these texts lay great

stress on the fact that there is one self or absolute , and that

all else is not true reality , and that it is a mistake which leads to transmigration to believe that the empiric is the U true reality . But these pani sads do not deal distinctly with the nature of the empiric reality : the question whether it is merely an illusion is not discussed an d the doctrine of set mere illusion is not 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 am i o f S khya w th its logical theory the Brahman becomes , on one S am the hand , the classical khya which has learned to do

without the Brahman , and on the other hand , by the laying of increased stress on the unreality of the world is developed m D ahlmann the illusion theory of Sa kara . traces the origin of the theory not merely back to the older Upani sads : he in v e d a 12 9 sees the hymn of the Rg , x , , the creation of the un i v erse from an i n definite substance described as water by n an absolute already existing , and he co siders that the fact that the Atman is called the twenty - fi fth in the Satap atha and Sahkhaya n a B r ahman a s is a foreshadowing of the - S am twenty four principles of the khya other than the self , while the three Gun as he finds adumbrated in the Ath arv a v d a 8 43 - e , where (x , , ) mention is made of the nine doored

lotus with three coverings in which there is a soul , a theory t which has , as we have seen , no probabili y . It is clear that the theory of D ahlmann is extremely n n i ge ious , and it is of minor importance that the efforts to trace the twenty - fi fth principle as Atman is probably based on the mi staken renderi ng of Atman as self instead of trunk o f O the body , as p p osed to the hands , feet , fingers and toes , - n l i which are the other twenty four pri cip es . It s a different thing to conjecture that this fondness for the number - five m twenty which is often seen in the Brah anas , where is - fi e i on he Praj apati described as twenty v fold , s not e of t THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE GREAT EP I C 49

- sources of the doctrine that there are twenty fi ve principles . ' But the attempt to hold ' that the epic is a unity and that it teaches a unitarian philosophy is one which offen ds every canon of criticism and commonsense , and the main doctrine that the atheistic S amkhya is really a doctrine which accepts the Brahman , but denies the personal deity of

tour d e orce . the Yoga , is a f The epic , which certainly is

' devoted to the doctrine of th e B rahm an and to the reverence of great personal deities , on the other hand , certainly tends to am B rahmaism regard the S khya system as a sort of , but it is perfectly obvious from the epi that the system itself was not one of this kind at all . he truth of the matter is ‘ b HO kin s * much better expressed y p , who finds in the epic the a six B rahm aism tr ces of at least systems , Vedic orthodoxy , , i a. . , the doctrine of the Brahman but without the illusion theory , rarely the doctrine of the Brahman with the illusion h S am P aSu ata s t eory , the khya , the Yoga , and the p and , Bha a vata s an d i g , sectarian worship pers of S iva V snu o f respectively , who adopt in their systems a good deal m - Sa khya Yoga philosophy . ’ The rejection of D ahlmann s theory of the existence in the epic of a S amkhya which acknowledged the absolute n instead of reduci g all to spirits and nature , as being totally unhistorical , leaves open the question whether such a doctrine is the basis of the S amkhya of the epic in the sense that that system is a development from a philosophy which recognized the absolute . The alternative to this theory is the view that the samkhya is a con ception based entirely on v n an the iew of the difference betwee subject d object , and that this concep tion was formed independen tly of the - in n existing Atman Brahman p hilosophy , or at least co scious S r e reaction from it . tress has been laid by G a b i on the un- S am Brahmanic character of the khya philosophy , and he has attributed it in large measure to the influence of the K ri n sat ya s . The force of this argument is greatly dimi ished by the fact t hat Garbe is also inclined to attribute the

o k ns G i 1 H r a t E c o I n di . é a 8 . p i , p f , p

" S amkh a Philos o hie 3 I . ff . S o . S . S e e r Die indis ch e y p , p p J p y , Th e os o hie 6 4 10 p , p p . , 7 . 50 THE SAMKHYA S YS TEM

Brahman doctrine in large measure to the same influence , in which case it seems impossible to treat the S itrh khya as markedly opp osed in its basis to the Brahman doctrine . In n un - n any case , the argume ts for the Brahma ic character of the S amkhya are wholly devoid of weight . The homeland S am is in of the khya placed the east by Garbe , on the ground his O that Buddhism , which was in pinion derived from the S am u in n khya , flo rished the east , and the east was certai ly less completely subjected to the influence of Brahmanism

n n . than the wester middle cou try The argument , however , is subject to the grave defects that the dep enden ce on the sam n ot khya of Buddhism is proved , and that , if it were S sam p roved , the fact would merely how that the khya at the time of the rise of Buddhism w a s of great importan ce in the east : it could never Show that it was first produced in the

’ an a llo e d n east . Nor c any weight be vv to the argume t that Ka il av a stu se e in p , the birthp lace of the Buddha , we are to the name of the town of Kapila the founder of the S amkhya Ka il a v astu n p hilosophy . That p really meant the tow of K a nd n n apila , is not a name draw from the descrip tio of * the place , as suggested by Oldenberg , is very doubtful , and n K K even if the ame referred to a ap ila , that this ap ila was the S amkhya sage is a n idea which is not hi n ted at in the c n n Brahmani al traditio , which says nothing of a tow n n connected with a d amed after him . Other arguments for the u n - Brahmanic character of the S amkhya adduced by Garbe are the facts that the S amkhya PaSu ata a n d P afi caratra se t and Yoga , p and the Veda are n in 4 3 9 6 7 . side by side as differe t systems xii , , , and that the n 7 6 5 amkhya and Yoga are me tioned (ibid . ) as two eternal systems beside all the Vedas . This , however , merely p roves n ot that these systems differed from the Vedic tradition , that they were opposed to that tradition or that the supporters of the V iews of these p hilosop hies were - K u n . Brahmanical ap ila , as we have already seen , appears in n n but once co flict with the Vedas , when he co demns sacrifice of animals , and the text plainly supports the sage

' ’ i - Ah rnsa. am in his battle for Moreover , the s khya never ,

1 u ddh a . 1 1 B , p . THE PHILOS OPHY OF THE GREAT EP I C 5 1

abandons the right to appeal for proof to scripture , and in fact there are numerous appeals to scripture in the later

' am Karik a S khya texts , while the brief expressly recognizes it with percep tion and i n ference as the three modes of proof . It is true that the u se of scripture made by the S amkhya is a a more limited one than that of the later Ved nta , but the S am is its an d essence of the khya rationalism , that rationalism could n ot develop in Brahman ical circles is an assertion for which no proof either is or can be adduced . The extraordinarily i ngenious a nd elaborate system of the sacrifice , as thought out by the philosophers who p roduced a n is n the Br hma as , a clear proof of the interest in reasoni g n * taken by the Brahma s . While there are no argumen ts of any value which can be adduced for the View that the S amkhya is a product o f u m- Brahmanical circles , there is every evidence that the system is a n atural growth from the p hilosophy of the n U n in Upa isads . We have seen that the pa i sads , their later nn n K a th a S period of development begi i g with the , how n fi nd S am traces of the doctri es which we in the khya , such n n as the evolutio of principles , and the drawi g up of classes U f of principles . The panisads , however , dif er essentially from the S amkhya in the fact that they definitely accept s in either the doctrine of the ab olute its pure form , as does Ka th a the , or the doctrine in a theistic form , as does the

' i in Sv e tasv a ta ra . s S am There , in detail , the khya little that cannot be found in the Upanisads in some place or other : not only the doctrine of the Gunas but also that of the T anmatra s a n d S am can be found there , the work of the khya in large measure evidently takes the form of systematizi n g and develop ing of ideas which were not the creation of the S am u t khya , but which required to be p into a definite system . in n S am Indeed , one se se , the khya must be treated as one of the early attempts to systematize and reduce to order the somewhat con fused mass of speculation found in the U n e ma iz pa i sads , the characteristic feature of the syst t a tion being the attention paid to order and the p rinciple of

development .

S e e S . Le L a D o ctrin e du S a cri ce a r s vi . fi ( P i , 5 2 THE SAMKHYA S YS TEM

On the other hand , there must b e recognized in the S amkhya the definite rejection of the absolute and the is substitution for the absolute , which the real basis of the individual souls , of a multitude of Spirits . These spirits if examined are clearly nothi n g but abstractions of the concept of subject , and are philosophical absurdities , Since in the one abstract there can be but one subject and object , neither , ‘ /I o of course , being anything without the other a philo sophical absurdity the system can only have arrived by a historical process , and in 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 Spirit we have a reflex of the abstract view taken in B rhadaran a ha of the absolute , which is represented the y U a ni ad e a s n p s , and elsewher , the u seen seer , the unthought thinker , and so forth . On the other hand , the independent position given to nature is a distinct concession to realism as i nature objective is not dependent on Spirit , though it s the object of spirit and is unconscious without spirit , and though intellect— made conscious by Spirit— rises from so nature , and from it other things are evolved , even in the classical samkhya there is a tendency to regard the non organic world a s in some way in direct connection with n m nature . /The insiste ce on the ultitude of souls and the conceding to them of quasi - individual existen ce and the allowing of a certain reality to the world are characteristic features of the interpretation of the Upani sads as se t out B ra hma S utra B ad ar a an a in the of y , and in point of fact

‘ the Upani sads contain clear traces of a doctrine which a llows to the world of matter and to the individual souls a " certain reality . I he purely idealistic attitude towards the is absolute , which doubtless the real interpretation of the Ya fi avalk a B r h adar a n ak a U a ni ad doctrine of j y in the y p s , is not so frequently found in the Upani sads as the panthe i ic st , while Side by side with these higher forms of doctrine we often find the con ception of the absolute producing matter , into which it enters in the form of the soul , from which it is but a step to the doctrine that the individual soul thus produced has some self- importance of its own and — h stands in a quasi independent relation to t e absolute self .

S AMKHYA AND YOGA

THE Yoga philosophy , according to the epic , is a system S am which is ancient like the khya , and this parallel posi tion belongs to the Yoga in the whole of its historical e xis in n . a s te ce The p ractises of Yoga , they are revealed to us Yo a S utra P atafi ali - the g of j , the oldest text book of the n in school , co tain much that is itself a relic of very primi tive conceptions of the value of psychic . states of profound excitement . This tendency to attribute importance to the obtai ning of such states is widespread : there is a striking example for this form of belief in the history of Greek in e n c B . C . and h religio in the seventh and Sixth enturies , t R v e d a 13 6 n g itself ( x , ) there is a me tion of the mad Muni , u nne ce s probably a p redecessor of the later Yogin . It is "" se e sary , therefore , to in the Yoga practice any borrowing n from the aborigi al tribes , though we need not doubt that these tribes p ractised similar rites and that their i n fluen ce may have tended to maintain and develop Yoga to the n in extraordi ary popularity which it has achieved India . ‘ O n is the other hand , it perfectly clear that the intro duction of Yoga into the practice of high p hilosophy was in natural and proper the case of a p hilosop hy , which , like n the Atman doctrine , de ied the p ossibility of knowledge of Ke na U a ni ad . s the self as subject As the p (ii ) has it , n h as n the self cannot be k own by him who k owledge , but only by him who has n o knowledge . Hence comes the effort an d to subdue all the activity of senses of mind , to emp ty the intellect a nd thus to make it ready for a new ap p re h e n

S u A hil o h o h e i d e s e d b . E . u h t U G o os a n sa s . gg t y g , P p y f p , p p 1 1 l 8 9 r h hi os e 1 . a e S amk a o hi . 85 18 6 , ; G b , y P p , p p , SAMKHYA AND YOGA 5 5

sion , the normal aim of the mystic of all lands and places . It is to this theoretic aim that De u sse n * ascribes the origin of the practice , but it is clear that in adopting the Yoga practices for this purpose - the holders of the Atman faith n were not in ovators , but were turning existing material to a u e more refined and speculative s . The development of the Yoga theory is first clearly revealed in the same Upani sads a s deal with those doctrines which later are adopted as part of the samkhya system Ka tha Sv e taSv atara that is , of the older Upani sads , the and ” i Ma itra a n . and later by far the y In the conception of Yoga , ne ce ssar literally yoking , there seems to be an almost y , t or at least normal , reference to a fixing of the mind on God . u se The of Yoga is , however , as well adapted to the case of the believer in the absolute Brahman as to the devotee of an individual deity : the former stage is presented in the Ka th a M it t r a ni a ra a ni Sv e tasva a a U ad . and y , the latter in the p s The term in its technical sen se also occurs in these Up an i am sads , and when opposed to S khya it denotes doubtless the practical side of religious concentration a s O pposed to the theoretical investigation . It follows necessarily from this very contrast , and from the nature of the case , that Yoga could not primarily be a separate system of p hilosophy , and hence its natural dependence on other systems . In the epic th e relation of S amkhya and Yoga is pre cisely as in the Up anisads z the two stand side by side as and philosophy and religion , as theory and practice , some a s S details of the Yoga practise , given , how how much the system had advanced in the direction in which it appears in Yo a S utra the g . But there appears a distinct tendency O S am to ascribe to the Yoga , as pposed to the khya , a twenty sixth principle , a perfectly enlightened Spirit with which i S am the individual Spirit s really identical . The khya is ISvara h as ISvara resolutely without an , but the Yoga an ,

All e m eine G e s chichte d e r hil o hi I os e i 5 . g P p , , ii , 07 ““ I As h e ld b Ra e n d ra lala M ra Yo a A horis m s x . 11 y j it , g p , p ; P . ’ O l r a ma r e L his toir e de s I dées Th os o hi u e 30 - 1 é s i 8 3 0 . G a r t , p g , , b e d en i e h l ’ s i s e a n a on . Tu x 2 en Yo a . 3 a t xp ti ( g , p ) cc e p ts V yas a s r e n d e r n g as S a madh Ch r en e r lxv 4 7 k i i ; a p ti , ) ta es it as Pr a s xi . 56 THE S AMKHYA SYSTEM

who is identified with Brahman , who is here a sup reme spirit into which the individual spirit is resolved , having been in essence a part of the absolute Spirit which multi o i plied itself . The end Yoga is in accordance with this vi 3 0 10 12 xiv 19 view , the vision of the one true self ( , , , ; , , 17 - 19 ) but it is also represented in more accurate agree ment with the S amkhya in its atheistic form as an isolation ff 3 06 16 17 3 16 14 . of the Spirit from matter (xii , , , ; , ) From the former point of view it is not difficult to see the development of the meaning of devotion to God , which it n h as Bh a a v a d ita ofte in the g g , or the further sense in that text , especially in chapters three and five , of action without hope of reward or desire of reward . The theory h a s often been held that Yoga was first atheistic , and that the theism of the classical system of the Yoga S utra and of the epic alike is due to a concession to an popular feeling , nor is there y doubt whatever that in the S utr a the connection of the divi n ity with the system is really " a loose one But the theory that there was an earlier ath e istic Yoga as a philosophical system is clearly not made probable by the evidence of the epic , which shows the Yoga as clearly distinguished from the S amkhya by its twenty

Sixth principle , though it ever tries to assimilate the S am khya to the Yoga , and both to the doctrine of the is r Brahman . It , therefo e , perfectly possible that the posi tion of the classical Yoga is due to its close association with sam i n n the khya , which has accentuated ts real i differe ce to the idea of a deity , which is certainly not philosophically , though perhaps historically , essential to the conception of

Yoga . Now great importance attaches to the date of the Yoga S utra P atafi ali of j , in view of the fact that if it could be B . C . placed in the second century , there would be attained a very definite date for the growth of the S amkhya school with which in all essentials except atheism the Yoga agrees . U n nfortu ately , this view rests only on the theory that P a tafi ali is M a habha a j the same as the author of the sy , whose date is now usually admitted to be the middle of th e

h P . Tu xe n Yo a n n e e Co a e . 5 S , g ( p e g , p p 6ff . SAMKHYA AND YOGA 5 7

B . C . second century This view , however , cannot stand hil oso hIC‘ examination . It is clear that in his p p views as n to the nature of substa ce and quality , the grammarian stands n on a lower plane of developme t than the philosopher , and on the other hand the philosopher violates one at least of the ’ u grammarian s laws of grammar . Further , the S tra contains some doctrines which are probably late borrowings : thus in 40 V ai e ik a is i , the theory of atoms which belongs to the S s 5 2 clearly referred to , nor less clearly in iii , is the doctrine of the Buddhist S a u trantik a school that time consists of K anas moments , s , which are themselves forms of develop ment of ever restless nature . This doctrine is found also in V a iSe ik a the s school , as it accords with the Atomic theory , P a sta a but not until the r Sa p ad bhasya . It is less certain i f S utra S h o a we can attribute to the the doctrines of p t , which su belonged to the school of grammarians , and which is p V asa 17 posed by the commentator , y , to be referred to in iii , , or that of the infinite size of the inner organ , which is seen "‘ 10 is by him in iv , , and which supposed by J acobi to have ai e ik a been borrowed from the V S S school , in opposition to the view that this organ was of mean size , which is asserted by Vijfian ab hik su to have been the view of the S amkhya u ione d is school , though this has been q e st t More decisive , Yo a S utra perhaps , the fact that the g seems to attack the V i fianavadins is doctrine of the j , and that therefore it

A D . probably not older than the third century . , and probably b andh u . V a su is younger The great supporters of that school , ’ Asari i D 3 0 a n A . 0 and g , lived all probability about . , but the so school itself may , of course , have existed earlier, that no absolutely certain result can be attained . It is , however , not at all unlikely that the production of the Yoga S utra was more or less directly motived by the revival of the S amkhya

' and its definite setting out i n the S amkhya Karik a of ISvarak r n a s , who was an earlier contemporary , according to V a b n hu Chinese evidence , of su a d . The attack on the ideal ism of V asu b andhu thus found in the Yoga S utra would be extremely natural .

2 8 . xxxi ,

‘' I . Ch a r e n e r lxv 848 Tu xen Yo a . 10 1. J p ti , , ; , g , p 5 8 THE S AMKHYA SYSTEM

It may be a dded th at no further light on the date of either Samkhya or Yoga can be gained from a notice in the ' * Ka u til a Arth as astra n Anvik iki y , which ra ks as s , logical a S am sciences , the views of the Lok yata , the khya and the

Yoga schools . This enumeration , i f it could be established that the work of Kautilya was really a work of the beginning B C . of the third century . , would not indeed carry the ques f tion much beyond the evidence af orded by the epic , but it would afford a more secure basis for considering the value Arth a of the epic data , but unfortunately the date of the sastra is very uncertain , and may be very much later than the suggested date t It might possibly be thought that the combination of samkhya and Yoga with the certainly atheistic Lokayata would permit the conclusion that the Yoga was at one period atheistic , but there seems no possible ground to insist on reading such an implication i n to the a terms , while it may be observed that the Lok yata can only Anvik siki be called by a stretch of the imagination , since its first characteristic is its resolute dogmatic refusal to acknow ledge the existence o i any means of proof save perception .

d d de r iss . 19 11 . i e K . r e u ss . Aka . S e e H . a c o S t . r W J bi , z P , , p p - 32 4 h 4 n . 1 7 7 3 ollo e d b C a r e n e r lxv 84 . ; f w y p ti , ,

- - 130 l l i 355 9 . Ke h 19 16 . 7 o l t it , , p p ; J y , xvii , THE S AS TITANTRA

IN the last verse of the S amkhya Karika it is expressly stated that that compendium of the Samkhya system contains a ita ntra the substance of the whole S st , omitting only the illustrative stories and the discussions of the views of Other i e philosophies . The verse s not original , it b ing agreed rak t n 6 9 that the text of ISva s a terminated at verse , but there is no reason to doubt the correctness of the version o f i . s fact given in it It , however , not clear that the term "" a itantra S st represents , as has been suggested by Garbe a special work : on the c ontrary the context and the wording of the verse suggest that Sas titantra is a term for the

S am a . khya philosophy s a system of sixty principles This , was moreover , is the sense in which the expression taken by Ra av arttiha s i the j as cited by V aca p at . According to this account the Sixty referred to are the fifty Bhavas of the S am se t khya system , together with a of ten fundamental n as pri cip les , stated the reality , unity , and purposefulness P rak rti its of , difference from Spirit and its action for the sake of spirit , the plurality of spirits , their distinction from P rak ti and connection with r , the evolution of the other n pri ciples , and the inactivity of spirit , an order of topics which may have been rendered incoherent by the n i exige cies of the verse . The explanation s older than

' Ra av arttik a the j , for it is found in the Chinese version

' of the commentary on the S amkhya Kariha made by P a r a marth a A D . i in the sixth century . But despite ts O an tiquity , the explanation of the number is pe n to the criticism that it confounds two different principles of

’ S amkh hil hie a os o . 58 5 9 . O n th e Ra a varttika S e e y P p , p p , j J .

H . W oo d s Yo a S st e m o P fi li x x a ta a . . , g y f j , p u 60 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM division : the Bhavas should be included unde r the Malik r ha n a t s . This seems to have bee realized even in Nara anatirth a the tradition of the school , for y in his commentary on the S amkhya Karika gives as the ten required to make up the sixty not the fundamental P rak rti principles , but spirit , j , intelligence , individua T anmatra s tion , the three Gunas , the , senses , and gross matter , an enumeration which is clearly arbitrary and unjustifiable . Some further light on the Sa stitantra is thrown by the mention of that s ystem alon g with the system of Kapila in the An uyoga dv ar a S utra of the J ains as Kavilam and S atthita nta m , which has a parallel in the mention of the

’ ' same systems as Kavil a and S a mhh ajogi in the Aup ap atik a * S utra b h a a de a . A v The commentator , y , on the latter passage explai n s the system of Kapila as the atheistic S am am S am khya , and the S khya as the theistic khya , treating as Yoga a separate head , but the parallelism with the first passage and the fact that only one representative of S amkhya is is Yoga given , Show that but one system meant , which m united the two sides of S a khya and Yoga . More light on this system is perhaps to be obtained Ahirb u hn a a mhita P aficaratra from the d y S , a text of the school , of uncertain date , but apparently with some claim n Adh a a to a tiquity . In its twelfth y y are described the five the P aSu ata S atvata systems , the Vedas , the Yoga , p , the , an d am is the S khya . The latter described as a Tantra set with sixty divisions , which are out in detail , in two

- series or Mandalas , the first consisting of thirty two and f - r k rtis o ent . P a the second t w y eight Of these the first are ,

ik r i . V t s . while the second are These terms , however , are used in a manner which differs essentially from that of 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 con cepts of a practical physiology and ethics , these affections of the soul ik t i being termed V t s or modifications , because they come into e xistence only as a result of the activity of the creative

- S e O . S chra de r l 10 1 110 . e F . , xviii,

6 2 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

presumably handled the questions alluded to in S amkhya

’ Kariha 2 , in which the insufficiency of empiricism and

Vedic practices for the removal of misery is expounded . K a The categories of misery , Siddhi and ash ya , have parallels in the S amkhya in the three - fold forms of Asiddhis V i a r a as ASaktis misery , the Siddhis and the , p y y , i O and Tu st s . The Samaya may have dealt with pposing n views , and the last head is that of Moksha , fi al release . The enumeration of topics is enough to Show that there

did exist some system of philosophy of the nature indicated , one which must have been closely allied with the epic Yoga

system . But there is also evidence regarding the author of a tita ntra a work bearing the name S g , from which probably enough the term as a design ation of the S amkhya

system may have been derived . That work is stated in a Chinese tradition * to have been composed in ik Slokas and to have been written by P aficaS h a . The

statement seems , however , to lack probability , and its origin can easily be accounted for by the fact that P aficaSikh a is mentioned as the third in the order of tradition of the doctine s of the school in the S amkhya Karika and it is said that the doctrine was widely

extended by him , words which may have been understood in the literal sense as denoting that an e xtensive te xt book

was composed by him . On the other hand , there is the express testimony of the commentator B alarama that the a tita ntr a V ar a an a author of the S g was s g y , and this testimony receives some support from the fact th at in his Yo a S utra 13 V asa commentary on the g (iv , ) y cites a passage from the Sastra which is expressly attribute d by V acasp atimiSra in his commentary on the B r ahma S utra 1 3 V ar a an a e s ( ii , , ) to s g y , and which he se m t to have it n a t a tra . believed to be taken from the S t This evidence , n in itself far from clear , is stro gly supported by the further in h a vasa Chinese tradition , which ascribes to V d y , who is in

’ ’ Takakusu B u lle tin d e l E c ole F r n i d E me O r ie n t , a ga s e xtré , 59 iv . ,

In h i m n r n Y B r s co me a o o a . K . S utra 1. c . S e lv a ka r T t y g , B h n d k M e m i l l m a a r a r or a V o u e . 17 9 180 in c rr e c l as c r e s to ( , p p , ) o t y ib s a h m n n f h S i nt V ya t e e tio o t e a gt ta ra . THE SASTITANTRA 6 3

ISva rak r na * all likelihood to be identified with S , the

- re writing of a work attributed to V r sagan a or V arsagan a . re - n The term writi g seems to have been actually justified , in view of the conte nts of the Sa stitantra as sketched in the Ahirb udh n a S a mhita and a itantra y , of the fact that the S st am - wa s evidently a manual of the S khya Yoga , and not of am its is the S khya in atheistical form , and it a reasonable conjecture that the origin of the S amkhya Karika was due to an effort to set out in an authoritative form , in order to n confute the doctri e of the Buddhists , a Brahmanical n system which equally dispe sed with the conception of God , but which avoided the difficulties attendi n g the B uddhist denial of the reality both of an external world and of the soul . n There is nothi g to c ontradict this hypothesis , though also nothing to establish it , in the four or five citations V ar a an a z su e ste d known of s g y t it has been gg , t on the ground a n d that one of these citations is in verse the rest in prose , a tita ntr as that we must distinguish two S s , of which the one sets out the doctrine of 8 amkhya - Yoga and the other that of S am the khya , the former being composed in verse and the latter in prose . In favour of this hypothesis , however , is there no evidence of any kind available , unless it be considered that the assumption of two different texts would be st explain the claim made that the S amkhy a Karika a ita ntra includes the whole meaning of the S st , but it is c aiin IS unnecessary to press this point . The l not made by ISvarak r n a and wa s O s himself , it p en for a later hand to hold that the essential doctrines of the S amkhya were fully se t ou t ISvarak r a d by sn , even i f he omitte those portions of the doctrines of the S arirkhya Yoga school which were de fi

As ro e d b Ta kak u su 1 f T x n Yo 4 h a r c . . u e a . 1 C p v y , . C , g , p ; e ntie r lx 4 b v 8 84 l w . p , , 5 , 6 ; e o , p . 6 8

T In th e Yo a S atr a Bha a 53 h e is c e d a s o os n th e g sy ( iii , ) it p p i g ’ a tomic th e ory o f th e V a iSe sik as ; in V ac a s p a tim iSra s c omm en ta r y o n Kar ka 4 7 a s d e a l n h th e u r ld h r c e r o f n r a n c th e i , , i g wit fo fo c a a t ig o e ; ’ a titan tra c a on s in th e Yo a B ha a 13 a nd in G a u a ad a s S s it ti g sy , iv, d p c o mmen ta ry on Kar ika 17 ( an d p e r h ap s on 7 0 ) a re n e ith e r s p e c ifi ca lly s amkh a o r Y B h y o ga . u t t e c ita tion on Kar ika 17 looks like a ve rs e r f a gm en t .

S chra d er l 110 1 , xviii , . 6 4 THE SAMKHYA S YSTEM

i l n a he n te y theistic . This view is co firmed by the fact th t t succession of the doctrine is asserted in the first of the verses added to the text * to have been from Kapila to Asuri P aiic a Sikh a and then to , for the evidence available regarding n that teacher shows him , as we have see , to have represented ’ m - ol a am ho . the S khya Yoga , not the atheistic S khya sc r

Th e r e is n o re a l p os s ibility o f d o u bt th a t th e Kar ika or igin a lly c on s s e d o f 7 0 e rs e s o m t n 7 0 - 7 2 o f th e r e c or d e d e a n d ro a l i t v , i ti g t xt , p b b y in s r n a n o h e r r n i R e a r c h I 10 7 e e s e c f . S a s kr t es ti g t v ( , , h f B B h n d K . l rk r a T T is fa c t inva lid a te s th e a r gu m e n t o S . e v a a ( a r ka r C o mm e m o a ti n V lu m 1 1 h a th e it n r a u s h a r o o e . 8 a t a t m e , p ) t t S g t v a rr i e d a t a n e a t e c on c lu s on on th e e is e n c e o f G o d h ch is v g iv i x t , w i in s e l h l n h h n e n s f h is it f w o l y i comp a tible wit t e co t t o t e te xt . It a ls o im p oss ible to a cc e p t h is vie ws th a t th e S a stita n tra r e p r e s en ts a s a e r or to th e s e e r a n c e o f S amkh a a n d Yo a a n d is r ior t o th e t g p i v g , p ' Yoga S utr a o f P a ta fija li ( c i r ca 15 0 a d e c is ive p ro of o f th e in c rr d s e c n s f h n . W o o o e s o t s d a o f Pa ta fi a li is e n b . H t i ti g j giv y J , Y - o a S ste m o P a fi li . a t a . g y f j , p p xv xix GR E EK P HIL O S O PHY A ND THE S AMKHYA

F O R the age of the S amkhya important information might be obtai ned i f it were possible to trace definite borrowings of S amkhya ideas from the side of Greek

a rre t o v n philosophy . The p of Anaxima der has been n S am an d compared with the ature of the khya , the doctrines of the constant flow of things and of the innumerable destructions and renewals of the world found in Heraclitus are no doubt Similar to tenets of the Indian system . am the Empedocles , like the S khya , asserts doctrine of the

- pre existence of the product In the cause . Anaxagoras is a dualist , Democritus agrees with Empedocles in his doctrine of causality and believes in the purely temporary existence and mortality of the gods . Epicurus uses in support of his 8 am atheism the argument of the khya , that otherwise the divine nature must be accorded attributes which are in con sis tent with its supposed character , and often emphasizes the doctrine of infinite possibilities of production . * Garbe adds to these parallels , which he admits not to be conclusive evidence of borrowing , the fact that Persia was a perfectly possible place in which Greek thinkers , of whom travels are often recorded , should acquire knowledge of the O n Indian views , and supports his pi ion that borrowing is probable by the case of Pythagoras , who is supposed to have borrowed from India his theory of transmigration , his n m n co ception of a religious com u ity , his distinction of a

fine and a gross body of the soul , his distinction of a ' se ev de of r nsitive organ , a , and the imperishable soul , qbp j v,

S amkh a Philos o hie 5 - 10 y p , p p . 8 5 . 6 6 THE S AMKHYA SYS TEM his doctrine of an intermediate world between ear th and Sk n y filled by demons , the doctri e of five elements including ether , the Pythagorean problem , the irrational and other n thi gs . Into this question of the relation of Pythagoras to is n a s Greek thought and to India it u necessary to go , the S amkhya elemen ts— as contrasted with the elements which are not specifically S amkhya in his teachi ngs— are * . S negligible Von chroeder , indeed , invents an older form of S am a s n in khya , which he understands denoting reckoni g , which number p layed a much greater part than in the classical S amkhya ; Garbe thinks that Pythagoras may have i n ven ted his doctrine of n umb er as the result of his misinter p re tin g the fact that the S amkhya owed its n ame to its n S am enumeratio of principles , into the view that the khya n n made umber the basis of ature . Both theories are based on a complete misunderstanding of the nature of the views P th a ora s n of y g , t and the only possible c o clusion is that we have n o early Greek eviden ce for the existence of the S m a khya school . It is further not necessary seriously to con sider the possibilities of borrowi n g on the part of Plato or of sam h a s n Aristotle , though the influence of the khya been see in the case of both . More plausible is the effort to find proof S am in of khya doctrines Gnosticism , an attempt to which there i n actu al is not a p r ori any reason to take exceptio . The p roofs of such influence adduced are not important : the n ot comparison of soul or spirit to light , which does occur S am in the oldest khya authorities , is anticipated by is Aristotle , and Platonic in essence ; the contrast of Sp irit and matter is Platonic . Perhaps more value attaches to such mi nor poi nts as the Gnostic division of men i nto three classes , which may be compared with the classification of men accordi ng to the predominance in them of the three n S am n Gu as of the khya , and the assigni g of p ersonal existen ce to such function s as intellect and will . But such parallels , whatever they are worth , do not help definitely as to the date of a real S amkhya .

- th ora s u n d die I n d e r . 7 2 7 6 . Py ag , p p

- S e Ke h 1909 . 569 606 . T e it , , p p GREEK PHILOSOPHY AND THE SAMKHYA 67

am h a On the other hand , the further effort to find S k y influences in neo - Platonism must be held to be completely - D his 209 26 9 A . . mistaken . Plotinus ( ) held that object his was to free men from misery through philosophy , that is Spirit and matter are essentially different , that Spirit really unaffected by misery , which is truly the lot of matter ; he compares the soul to light and even to a mirror in which objects are reflected ; he admits that in sleep , as the soul n remains awake , man can enjoy happi ess ; he insists on the realization of God in a condition of ecstasy brought n 23 2 about by profou d mental concentration . Porphyry ( D 4 A . 3 0 . ) teaches the leadership of spirit over matter , the omnipresence of the soul when freed from matter , and the doctrine that the w orld has no beginning . He also forbids m n . Ab am o the Slaying of animals and rejects sacrifice , a later contemporary , mentions the wonderful powers obtained t is by the exercise of contemplative ecstasy . B ut here nothing here that can possibly be con sidered as necessarily derived from India . The opposition of matter and Spirit , s the removal of pirit from the world of reality , and the View that the only power to approach to it is through ecstasy are the outcome of the Greek endeavour to grasp the problem brought into prominence by Plato of the contrast of spirit and matter , and the views of Plotinus are the logical , and indeed * inevitable , outcome of that development . The protest a s against sacrifice is old as Greek philosophy , the winning of supernatural powers by ecstasy is a popular conception which appears in Pythagoras and beyond all others in the n B acchic religion . On the other ha d , the real extent of knowledge of Indian philosophy available to Plotinus and

Porphyry alike seems to have been most severely limited .

S e e E . Ca r d E v olu tion o Th e olo in th e r e e k hilos o h ers i , f gy G P p ’ wh o d eve lop s in d e ta il th e d e d u ction o f P lotinu s vie w from

la on sm . Th e s a me e s k n D l mein e P w i a e b P . e u ssen Al e t i vi t y , g G e s chichte d e r hilos o hi I 6 1 e 6 . P p , , iii , THE S AMKHYA KA RIKA

WITH the S amkhya Kariha we emerge from the region of a n d conjecture and doubt , arrive at the classic statemen t of n m the doctri e of the S a khya philosophy . It is admittedly n n an by far the most brillia t accou t of the system , d its claim to be the oldest exposition of the doctri n e in systematic ’ form is challenged only by Max Miille r s suggestion * that - 8 am is Ta ttv as amas a the oldest text book of the khya the , a n n work of wholly unk ow date and authorship . The claim n runs cou ter to the title of the work , which shows it to be , Karik as n like the themselves , nothing more than a compe dium of the doctri n e of the School : the in troduction is modern in a n d n appearance , the tech ical terms which make up the greater portion of the con tent of the short tract are more n umerous and more elaborate than an ything foun d in the S amkh a Karika y . There is , therefore , the probability that the Ta ttv a s a masa represents a later period of the school Karika : n a n than the certai ty , in the absence of y source of Ta ttv a s a mas a information as to the , is not to be attai ned . n The date of the work is app roximately know . It appears to have been amon g the works which the Buddhist 4 m rth a n 5 6 A . D P a r a a . monk , , took with him to Chi a in , and it is recorded that he made a tran slation of it and of a commentary on it duri n g the last period of his literary in 5 5 7 - 56 8 activity , which falls the years from , the date of h n de at . his T This translatio has fortunately been preserved , and proves the authenticity of the S anskrit text as it now

19 e e l S i m n di n hilos o h . 3 18 3 s b e ow x S ys te s of I a P p y , p p , ; , p . 89 .

’ ’ S Ta k k u s u B u lle tin d e l E c ole F r a n a is e d E xtr ém e Or ie n t T e e a , g ,

. l fi . iv .

7 0 THE SAMKHYA SYS TEM researches of T ak ak u su have definitely established the fact that this commentary di ffers too greatly from that of G au a ad a n d d p to have bee derive from it , and that both it and the c ommen tary of G a u dap ada must go back ultimately n to a common source . This co clusion is incidentally con “ firmed by the evidence o f the very full account of the Karika given by Alb iruni ( 103 0 who actually mentions a

a s . Gauda authority His statements , however , cannot be * au a ada derived entirely from the work of G d p , and it is

clear that he used two different authorities . Who the author of this older commentary was is uncertain : there is a n n su b n hu Chi ese traditio that it was V a a d himself , but this n suggestion is supported by no evide ce , and can easily be explained away as a misunderstandi ng of the fact that a su a Karika V b ndh u wrote a work to refute the . There is L therefore plausibility in the sugge stion} that the author was “ ISva rak r n a Karika s himself , especially as the nature of the

n an n . is such as urge tly to require interpretatio If , however , was this the case , before the work was taken to China there n e had already been app e d d to it the last verses , which n G au a ad a are not recog ized by d p , but which are given and

explained in the Chinese commentary . It is probable that ’ G au dap ad a s commentary was disti n ctly later than the origi n al of the Chinese version : a terminus a d qu em is given by the

D . a u a ad a Albiru ni in A . use of G d p by the eleventh century , V acas atimiSra and by his priority to p , whose commentary Karika S amkh atattv a ka u mu di on the the y , written in the n A D . ni th century . , t ranks high among the authorities on the am S khya philosophy , and has been made the subject of - n Several sup er comme taries . Later is the commentary of ir ara an at tha . N y , which is of little value Accordi n g to the Karika the end of the S amkhya philosophy is to discover the means of removing the three

l h - 2 . As h e ld b a r e S amkh a Phi os o ie . 6 68 y G b , y p , p p ‘’ B d k . 58 . S . K . B l rk r h n a r a r om T k k su o . c it . e va a a I a a u , p p ( C m m t n V m e 1 1ff a r u e s h a the o r n a l f th e Ch ne se e or a io olu . 7 o , p p ) g t t igi i e rs on w a s th e Matha r a - Vr tti h ch h e is e d i n b u t th s cann o b e v i , w i ti g , i t mm e a ll r l ro e d a s d r a on rom a co on s ou rce is s ll u o b e . p v , e iv ti f ti q y p ba

Ke h 19 14 . 1098 . 1 it , , p THE SAMKHYA KARIKA 7 1

fold misery of the world , that is , the commentators explain , the sorrows brought on us by ourselves , those brought by others , and those inflicted by fate . The removal of misery cannot be achieved either empirically or by devotion to religious practises . Good fortune on earth is perishable , a nd moreover it is not positive pleasure but freedom from

’ misery that the wise man seeks . The practice of religion , n f agai , is insu ficient ; the performance of sacrifice not only i n volves the Slaying of victims which offends against the - e rule of non injury , but the r wards of such actions are transitory , and the performer must fall back again , after the n n e joyment of the fruit of his deeds in yonder world , i to an : earthly existence moreover , the result of such actions leads to positive not to the freedom from pain which i s the ideal of th e sage . The statement of the object of the system is of importance in that it brings out clearly the fundamental - S ei rh kh a pre suppositions on which the y , like the other

- . as philosophical systems , rests It is assumed self evident n is that the world is a co dition of misery , that the soul is subject to transmigration , and that there some degree of truth at least in the Vedic tradition . Whatever the origin of the doctrines in question , the first two assumptions are of universal validity for all schools of Indian thought , with the Carvak a s a n d exception of atheistic and materialist , the S am khya makes no effort to establish their validity . The third assumption is of much less importance from the philosophical View , for unlike the first two it has no real am effect on the substance of the S khya philosophy , but for the adherents of the system it had the great advantage of so making the school rank as orthodox , and on a higher n plane not merely than the Buddhists or J ains , but eve than the sectarian worship pers of Vi snu and Siva . The real mode of freedom from the misery of existence S m lies in the knowledge of the principles of the a khya , the evolved , the unevolved , and the knower , but the preliminary

S o P . D e u ssen All em ein e e s chich e d er Philo e I iii , g G t s ophi , . . 4 1 5 . Th e c omme n ta tors h old th a t e nvy is p ro du ce d b y th e s igh t o f ’ o h e r r t s g e a te r bliss . 7 2 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM question of the mode in which truth is to be attained is not ” r ignored in the Ka ik a . The three means of proof are exp ressly n r n n asserted to be p ercep tion , i fe e ce and correct traditio , on o ne n which are sufficient , the ha d , to establish every prin ci le on n p , and all of which , the other hand , are esse tial to n n accou t for existe ce as known to us . Perception is defined n n n to be me tal apprehe sio of a present object , inference is declared to be threefold and disti nguished by the presence of an d a a mark the bearer of a mark , while correct tr dition is

Sr . equated with the holy scripture , uti , rightly understood u se is n The of scripture , however , restricted to those cases o ly which can not be dealt with by the use of the other modes of an d n n in a re proof , the i sta ces which it has to be resorted to reduced to such as are beyond perception by the sense and n n : beyond infere ce by a alogy such cases are the Vedic gods , n and U K a ll s Mou t Meru , the ttara urus , things who e truth i s e nn vouch d for in scripture , but which ca ot be known by n n n a y other means . The three forms of infere ce are ot in Karika an d described the , the commentaries differ , but n on N a a S utr a 1 5 n as the comme tary the y y (i , , ) explai s them n s inference from cause to effect , as from the prese ce of cloud n ff n to rai , from the e ect to the cause , as from the swelli g of in the streams the valleys to rain in the hills , and by analogy , as when we infer from the fact that a man al ters his place n n when he moves that the stars , si ce they ap pear in differe t * places , must move also . In these cases in the Indian n n co ception of logic the clouds , the swolle streams , the change of p lace of the stars are the mark , and the rain to in come , the rain the hills , and the movement of the stars are the bearers of the mark . The absen ce of an y attempt to examine more closely the nature of perception and of inference and their mutual relations is striking , and indicates how firmly fixed was the view of the system that perception gave immediate knowledge n of reality , and that infere ce gave medi ate knowledge . The ,

S e e D e u ss e n All e m e in e es chichte d e r hilos o hie I iii. , g G P p , , 3 - 3 0 Th h r d is a k e n m r e 6 7 7 . e t i typ e t o ge n e ra lly a s in d u c tive b y V aca s a tim iSra a n d V i fian a b h ik u s e e G a r e S amkh a hilos o hie p j s , b , y P p , 3 - 1 4 in i e le h . 15 5 a c o t s ch r te n 4 G a t e G A e i en 1895 . 2 0 . p p ; J bi , g z g , , p - Cf . A B rk Vie n n O i nta l o " 2 ii a r e J ur n l 1 2 64 . , a , V , 5 THE SAMKHYA KARIKA 7 3

admission by the side of these two principles , which alone V a iSe ik a were allowed by the s school , of the conception of n authority , harmo ises with the uncritical attitude of the n school to the problem of k owledge , and with its essentially

practical end , the removal of misery . The belief in the Vedic tradition from the poi n t of view of purely scientific interest could not be accepted without examination : to the supporters of a system with a definite mean s of salvation the presence in the midst of their tenets of on e which might

not bear close examination was indifferent , since it did not

vitally affect the main structure of the system . as The essentially inferior position a means of proof , sam allotted to tradition , is attested by the khya doctrine of causality : despite the n umerous passages in the sacred scriptures which might be adduced for the doctrine that non o i S am existence was the source being , the khya asserts the

doctrine that the result really exists beforehand in its cause , as ot just the clay serves to form a p , or the threads form a fi ve piece of cloth . For this theory grounds are adduced : the non - existent cannot be the subject of an activity ; the product is really nothing else than the materi al of which it is co mposed ; the product exists before its coming into being in the shape of its materi al ; only a definite product can be produced from each material ; and only a specific material

can yield a specific result . The last four arguments , which

are in effect but two , rest on the perception that in the n product the original material is co tained , though under n change of appearance , and that defi ite materials give

definite and distinct results ; the first argument , on the other not hand , rests merely on the fact that the coming into being

of any object save from a definite material is not observed , but also on the argument that i f a thing does not exist there i can be no possibility of ts doing anything . Hence it follows that in its ultimate essence causality is reduced to an a change of appearance in abiding entity , conception of great importance for the system . From the principle of causality is deduced the fact that the is ultimate basis of the empirical universe the unevolved , Av ak a . y t . Individual things are all limited in magni tude and this is incompatible with the nature of the source of the 7 4 THE S AMKHYA S YSTEM

universe . All individual things are analogous one to another , and therefore n o one can be regarded as the final source of the other . Moreover , as they all come into being from a source ,

. r they cannot constitute that source Fu ther , an effect must n differ from its cause , though it must co sist of the cause , and therefore the empiric universe cannot itself be the fin al cause , but must be the product of some ultimate cause . The obvious difficulty that the unevolved cannot be p e rce iv ed is met with the argu ment that its fine nature renders it imperceptible , just as other things , of whose existence there is no doubt , cannot be perceived ; either because of their too n great distance or p roximity , through the interve tion of a third object , 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 final cause follow the essenti al differences between the unevolved and the evolved . The an d to products have a cause , on which they depend , which they are related : the source is uncaused and independent . : They are many in number , and limited in spa ce and name

- the source is one , eternal and all pervasive . They have : activities , and parts the source is immanent in all but has neither activities nor parts . They are the mark : the source is distinguished by them . The process of development of the unevolved is through the activity of three constituents out of which it is made

S . up , attva , Raj as and Tamas The first of these consti ue nts t , or factors , is that in nature which is light , which : is reveals , which causes pleasure to man the second what n is impelli g and moves , what produces activity in man : the third is what is heavy and restrains , what produces f the state of indif erence or inactivity in man . The three con stituents act essen tially in close relation : they overpower and support one another , produce one another and i nter i h n e mingle w t o another . They are compared in a homely

Simile to the constituents of a lamp , that is , it seems , to the

flame , oil , and wick , respectively . The origin of the conception seems to be in the main psychologic , but even in the Karika it is impossible not to realize the material nature THE SAMKHYA KARIKA 7 5

is also accorded to the Gunas . No proof of their existence offered : it is to be i n ferred that they were held to be established by observation bo th of nature and of man . n From the possession of the three co stituents , which is a nd v common to both the evolved the une olved , follow certain further characteristics of these entities , which form the discrimination between them and the other great Un am . principle of the S khya , Purusha , or Sp irit like Spirit , the evolved and the unevolved are without the power of discriminating between themsel ves and Spirit : i ndeed without Spirit they are wholly un conscious ; they are objective only while spirit is the subject ; they are common to all Spirits whereas each spirit is unique ; they are either S creative , created or both creative and created , while pirit

i . s neither created nor creative While , however , it is expressly said that these distinction s arise from the possession by the unevolved of the three con stituents which are likewise present in the evolved , the mode of the n derivation of the characteristics is ot given . Nor is this defect remedied in the account given o f the argum en ts for the existence of the Spirit as these arguments essentially assume that the nature of the un evolved and the evolved is something independently ascertained . The arguments put forward for the existence of Spirit are that the aggregate of nature must exist for the sake of something , that there must be something to be the p residing power for which the evolution of the universe takes place , that there must be a subject to experience the three constituents of the universe , that the development of the world proceeds n an d for the sake of the emancipation of somethi g , that something must exist with qualities opposed to those of the universe . Further , it is deduced that there must be many S n n and pirits , si ce experie ce shows us separate birth death , f separate organs and dif erent actions , and , further , Spirit an must be the reverse of nature , which is essenti ally one d

. S the same to all imilarly , by reason of the same contrast , S a n pirit is the subject , not the object , it reaches d possesses freedom because of its power of discerning the difference e : betw en itself and nature it is conscious , as against unconscious nature ; it is without participati on in activity 7 6 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

in any form , and , unlike nature , produces nothing . Never the le ss is n n , the empiric self explai ed only by the u ion of spirit with nature : through this union the fine body which i s a product of nature becomes , though itself without

n n . O n n co scious ess , conscious the other ha d , though the con stituents alone possess activity by reason of the un iting

' S f n a a e rs a s . with Spirit , p irit , really indif ere t , p p an actor But the conjun ction of the two is essen tially not inten ded : is n n n to be permanent it , in fact , like the u io of a bli d man with a lame man : Spirit joi n s forces with n ature in order S r and S that nature may be revealed to pi it , that pirit may n obtai freedom from its connection with nature . This conception is the fun damental point of the whole am an d its fi is S khya system , dif culties are obvious . There n o possibility of mediation between the spirit which is n b u removed from all actio , and the active t unconscious S n man nature . The famous imile of the bli d who carries n e on his back the lame man , and thus places his activity u d r the control of the directing power of the other , suffers from the fundamental difficulty that the two men with which it

- deals are both possessed of activity and so c an co op erate . S n an d on n pirit can ot act , the other hand nature , bei g n n unconscious , is not capable of receivi g directio s from the n S co scious Spirit . till more serious is the difficulty that , while the aim of the union of the lame a n d the bli nd is n no obviously the servi g of a useful purpose , such purp ose n n n can be co ceived for the u io of spirit and nature . Uncon scious nature cann ot exp erien ce misery : spirit in a n d n itself does not experience misery , the unio of the two , n which results in the apparent experie ce of misery by spirit , which wron gly thi n ks that the misery which it bri n gs to n light in nature is misery which it itself e dures , thus creates the very misery which it is the object of the un ion to abolish . It is impossible to imagi n e that so comp licated a system could have arisen from i n depen dent Sp eculation on the nature in S am of existence . The conception of spirit the khya is clearly nothing more than the carryi n g to a further limit of the con ception of the self in the teachi ng of the B r h a dar a nya ha n Up a nisad . The distinctio of the subjective and the objective , and the recognition of the fact that the subject is in a sense

7 8 THE SAMKHYA S YSTEM

cation of this abstract conception as the S amkhya asserts . The existence of numerous individuals who are con scious is a difi e re nt n totally thi g , for their number and individuality are conditioned by the possession of a different objective n content in co sciousness , and when this is removed there n would remai nothing at all , or at the most the abstract conception of subject , which could not be a multitude of n am n i dividual Spirits . Had the S khya co ception been that O of a number of souls as pposed to spirits , no logical o bjection could be raised to the theory of multiplicity , but n the sharp disti ction of spirit and nature , and the assertion n that there is no real connectio between them , deprive Spirit of any possible reality . These difficulties come out in great prominence in the effort to deduce the evolution of nature for the sake of spirit .

From nature arises the great one , often called intellect , m a Buddhi ; then arises individuation , Aha k ra ; thence come B u ddhindri a the five organs of perception , y ; the five organs n Ka rmendri a T an matra s of actio , y , and the five fine elements , ;

n - five from the five eleme ts arise the gross elements , h ta M ahab u s . , and from them the world The series up to n the five gross elements , includi g nature itself , number - n - fi f h twenty four , and with spirit as twe ty t make up the

. is n princip les of the system The first , nature , evolve t an d only : the rest , save the gross elements , are evolved n i n evolvent , the gross eleme ts are evolved , and Spirit s either evolvent or evolved , but this distinction is of no weight for the system . The series is in all probability of historical n origi , as it finds , as we have seen , an analogue in the Ka th a U a ni ad p s , and perhaps for this reason its deduction is full of difficulty . The essential conception is that from unconscious nature there is developed for the sake of spirit a whole universe , that the develop ment tak es place for each individual Spirit separately , but yet at the same time in such a manner that n nature a d its evolutes are common to all Spirits . The n question , how ature , consisting of the equilibrium of the and three constituents , Sattva , Raj as Tamas , can be brought into activity at all remains unsolved : it is illustrated by the

Simile of the unconscious milk which flows to nourish the . THE SAMKHYA KAR IKA 7 9

e is he e calf , y t nature said to proceed for t fre dom of S pirit as men proceed to bring to cessation their desires . is i But nature is essentially other than Spirit : it not , as n a the Ved nta , a production of ignorance , but is as real as

Spirit itself , though it is only under the influence of union with Spirit that it evolves itself . But for that union the constituents , though credited with the power of action , would not alter from their condition of equilibrium . The conception of intellect as the first evolute from nature is doubtless to be traced to the derivation from the Avyakta Kath a U a ni a d of the great soul in the p g (iii , This it fact , and s position in the series of evolutes before the principle of individuation , suggest that the primary sense s of the expres ion is cosmic , but the exact force of a cosmic intellect in a system which has not a creator or world - soul a is is difficult to appreciate , though in the Ved nta it easy to understand how from the impersonal Brahman can be derived the personal Hiranyagarb h a who can be regarded

- as the world soul . At most the conception aimed at may be that the influence of spirit is to convert the wholly n i determinate nature into a consciousness , which for lack of principle of individuation can only be conceived as a potential consciousness . But this cosmic position of is Karika intellect feebly grasped in the , in which on the a contrary stress is laid on the intellect s psychological . is It defined as the power of decision , by which it seems to be distinguished from mind , as the power which m for ulates the possible courses and carries out the decision , while on the intellectu al side mind brings up the material * for concepts which the intellect formulates . Viewed in this light , intellect , which like all the products of nature S consists of three constituents , in its attva aspect is distinguished by the performance of duty , knowledge , freedom from desire , and divine powers : in its aspect as is n Tamas it disti guished by the reverse of these qualities , or r is more cor ectly it the Raj as aspect which produces desire . It is clear that considered thus intellect cannot be prior to

Cf . D e u ss en All em ein e G e s chichte d e r hilos o hie I iii , g P p . , ,

436 439 . G a r e S hil o hie 5 r r amkh a s o . 2 52 2 3 e s c s m n , b ( y P p , p p , ) t i t i d to w sh an d d ou an d t ts c onn n w h r n i bt o i e ctio ith t e o ga s . 80 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

e a mind or individuation , and that it p rforms twofold

and inconsistent part in the scheme . The princip le of i n dividuation can only be understood as the principle through the action of which the several

Spirits become endowed each with a separate substratum , is which results in the appearance of human individuals . It impossible to interpret the principle of individuation in is any real cosmic sense , as if this done we would find ourselves faced with the conception of a really conscious ik Kar a. world Spirit , which is not accepted in the Psycho logically the principle stands midway between intellect and mind : the sensations communicated through mind are referred to the self and result in a perfect concept ; the suggestions of action sent up by mind are referred to the n an d self by the action of individuatio , result in the decision O f m intellect , and the derivation of mind and the senses fro is individuation , like that of individuation from intellect ,

again logically impossible . The p yschological character of the principle of in dividu a tion is emphasized by the derivation from it in its Sattva aspect of the mind and the five organs of perception n o its and the five organs of actio , and fr m it in Tamas fine n a aspect of the five eleme ts , thus developing further

parallelism of the s ubjective an d the objective elements . a s In each derivation the Raj as aspect plays its part , both servi n g to set the other constituents in action and as

actually present in the results . The five organs of n S n u perceptio are those of ight , heari g , smell , taste and to ch ; n n an d the five orga s of action are the tongue , feet , ha ds , the n a n d n is organs of evacuatio reproductio . Mind , like these n n ten , an orga through which external reality is ap p rehe ded , but it has the imp ortant fun ction of arrangi ng the sense n n n impressions i to precepts , of suggesti g alter atives , and of ca rying out the decision s of the will by mean s of the organs n n is of action . The functio of the orga s of perception n merely observatio , in contrast with the action of the organs "" of action . Mind with the organs appears to be considered

’ r im i r S o Sarnka a a n d a ar e n l G a u a ada . V aca s a t S a a t , p p t y d p p

r bu e s th e a c to m n d n d du on a n d in e lle c . t i t tivity i , i ivi ati t t THE SAMKHYA KAR IKA 8 1

as producing by their action the five vital airs , which in the Vedanta system are given an independen t place as the sup porters of the life of nutrition as opposed to the conscious n life . The distinction of ten se ses is not exp lained , save by a reference to the dive rse development of the constituents . Mind shares with intellect and individuation the peculiarity that there is no distinction between organ and function , as there is in the case of the other ten senses . In perception all four functions , the senses , mind , individuation , and intellect are active : in other cases only the latter three are employed , but their activity must rest upon the result of

, previous perception , a memory picture or an idea . The action in both cases may be simultaneous , or step by step , but in the former case the real sense is , it seems , that the process is too swift for the steps to be observed : thus an object is e s en by the senses , the sense impression is developed into a percept by mind , related to the self by individuation , and

’ made into a concept by intellect , or suggested decisions are n formed by mind , brought into i dividuation , and the decision is o given by intellect , whereupon mind sees to their executi n . Thus in its widest sense the organ can be described a s - : thirteen fold the three functions , intellect , individuation , and mind form the inner organ , the ten senses the outer can se t organ , through which alone the inner organ be in activity , either directly in perception or through the influence of a former perception . The outer organ is thus bound to the present in time , the inner can deal with past and future . is The organs are mutually helpful , but their ultimate aim S for the sake of pirit . The senses are the door , while the th inner organ is compared to the doorkeeper . Between e organs of perception and of action there is a distinction in the nature of their objects ; the former contemplate both the

fine and the gross elements , including all the world under h as the latter head ; sp eech sound as its object , while the other four organs deal with all the five gross elements and the world derived from them .

The position of intellect , however , is one of special importan ce : all the action of the other organs is carried out n for the intellect , and it works directly for Spirit , p roduci g its experience of all existence on the one hand and on the 8 2 THE SAMKHYA SYS TEM other securing the discernment of the subtle distinction e b tween spirit and nature . The fine elements are described as without difference in them , while the gross elements which arise from them are expressly described as possessing this quality , from which it in would seem that the gross elements are considered , as the Ch ando a U a ni ad gy p g where , however , there are but n in e rmin l three elements in questio , to be produced by the t g n ing of the fine eleme ts , the elements receiving their special names from the presence in them of the greater amount of the specific element , in accordance with the View of the a Ved nta , in which each element co nsists of a half of one

- element and one eighth each of the other four . The alter ’ Ta zttiri a U a ni ad 1 native view suggested by the y p s (ii , ) under which the gross elements would arise from the compo unding of the fi ne elements by the process of accumulation , wind , for example , having both the qualities tactibilit G au a a a of audibility and y , is adop ted by d p d and V acas atimiSra p , but seems to have less probability , since in it ether would have but one quality , audibility , and so could not be contrasted as a gross element with the correspo nding

fine element . Together with the organs the fine elements form part of the Lifi a g , the psychic ap paratus , which passes from life to Lifi a life . The g , howeve r , includes as a necessary part of it a s the subtle parts of the gross elements, which serve the seed whence the p hysical body springs . These subtle portions are as n ecessary to the psychic apparatus as the canvas to a picture or , by a less appropriate Simile , a p illar -i S a . s to a h dow This psychic apparatus , which incorporeal , i and s prior to the concep tion of time , accompanies the souls n throughout transmigratio , from body to body , in accordance with the rule of causality , playing like an actor various parts , a power which it p ossesses since it Shares in the property of all pervadingness which belongs to nature . This conjunction of spirit with the psychic apparatus is the cause of misery , and lasts until the attainment of true insight .

The gross elements , however , have a further character i e ist c . They consist of two further portions , those describ d THE S AMKHYA KARIKA 83

n a nd as bor of father mother , which go to make the body of the psychic apparatus , growing out of the seed in the form n an d of the subtle portions of the gross eleme ts , the

P r ab huta s n n . , which form the mass of inorga ic ature These two elements grow out from the subtle portions , and thus each individual spirit is provided with a complete world of its own arising from it self . At the same time , however , it is exp ressly indicated that these last two portion s of the gross n an d elements fall back at death i to the body of n ature , it is clear that the conception of the souls as monads is not carried out to its full extent . The reason for the in n is breach the u ity of the idea obvious . it is i ntended to meet the case of the difficulty which arises as to the existence in the empiric world of other souls in human and other bodies , and of inorganic n nature . To co sider all these as developed from the fine n elements separately for each spirit would seem un atural , and though , therefore , the gross elements are expressly derived from the fine elements , and though these are derived from n n the p ri ciple of individuatio , which cannot be cosmic , none the less these two portions of the gross elements are treated a s S being the same for all , not merely imilar and , therefore , as cosmic . This fact reveals a realistic basis at the bottom of S am the khya conception , and suggests that nature is to some n n n degree at least directly responsible for i orga ic thi gs , and n even for the corporeal parts of orga ic things . Of the latter fourteen classes are enumerated , eight divine , given G au a ada a S variously , by d p as Brahman , Praj pati , oma , n Yak a s sa an d Rak a se s I dra , Gandharvas , s , Pi cas , s , five of n dome sti beasts , given by the same scholiast as wild a imals ,

cate d . animals , birds , rep tiles , and p lants , and one of men n In the worlds of the gods the constitue t Sattva prevails , in me n that of Raj as , in the rest Tamas . Of inorganic nature not a hint is given , a fact which suggests that the difficulties of its position were decidedly felt by the author .

C f . v v . 2 2 39 a n d 4 1 o f th e Kar ik : u l or on s se e m , a th e s bt e p ti

' t o ck r om n tu r h m f r th M i D u ss e n a e t e a e r a l o e ata tg a s . S e e e p i f t i p j , All e m e in e G e s chicht e d e r hilos o hie I ii 447 448 49 7 e lo g P p , , i , , , ; b w , h 9 7 . T e o e c n s f i n i t l o u n a l i o o O . S ra u s s V e n a O r e n a J r p bj ti t , , xxv i, 2 62 r a e n o t con n c n . , vi i g 84 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

d In its passage through the world , from bo y to body , in the course of time each soul , or spirit with its psychic body , is subject to determination , which cannot be deduced from its own nature as spirit nor from the psychic body , but must is be derived directly from nature . This determination Bh av a s are inse ar afforded by the , psychic states , which p ably bound up with the psychic apparatus : the two go together so long as the spirit is not finally freed from the psychic apparatus . Each individual life starts with a definite equipment of states , and it adds others in its life apparently those with which it starts exhaust themselves in the course of its life , and when it passes a way and in due course a new life begi n s the new life carries with it the states accumulated in the last existence . The direct connection of the states with nature is shown by the fa ct that the eight enumerated are those which have already been given as the characteristics of the S attva and

Tamas aspects of intellect . They are performance of duty and the reverse , which lead respectively to a higher place in the next life and to degradation ; knowledge , which leads to n n final release ; ig orance , which entails co tinued bondage ; indi fference to desire , which helps to loosen the bond between e Spirit and desire , which leads to rebirth ; divin w the power , hich leads to freedom from obstacles , and posses sion of the Siddhis , perfections ; and lack of divine power which has the reverse effect . Karika f The , however , gives , beside this eight old division w i hich s frequently referred to , another division of fifty fi s f . ve tates , divided under our heads These are the Vi ar a as - ASaktis p y y , erroneous views , the twenty eight , lack Tu sh is n of p ower ; the nine t , satisfactio s ; and the eight five V i ar a a s Siddhis , perfections . The p y y , which are com h fi e Kle a s a parable with t e v S of the Yoga system , Avidy , Asmit a D ve sh a Ab hinive Sa a, R ga , , and , are Tamas , darkness ; Mahamoh a Tamisra Moha , confusion ; , deep confusion ; , i o Andh atam ra . glo m ; and s , dark gloom There are eight kinds of Tamas , explained by the commentators a s the error

D u s n All e mein e G e s chichte d e r Philos o hie I in 45 1 S e e e s e , g p , , , . h n f h m e n rs Absorp tion in n atu re is t e r en der i g o t e co m ta to .

86 THE SAMKHYA S YS TEM

the psychic apparatus must wander from birth to birth , gatheri ng from nature at each birth the portion s of the gross elements described as born of father and mother in order to

assume a physical body . All this time nature by evolving for spirit in the hope of enabling it to attain final release is like a dancer who displays herself on the stage and then n in e nd retires agai , her task unaccomplished . But the n nature succeeds in her object , and like a bashful maide désh a billé S seen in , who withdraws for ever from the ight of n the man who has seen her , nature , havi g fulfilled her n object , withdraws from spirit for ever , whe spirit has n realized its essential disti ction from nature . Then comes

to an end the p aradox by which spirit , which has really no connection with nature and is un affected by the misery inhe ren t i n n in nature , cons ders itself bou d and suffers transmigratio , while nature undertakes the changes of evolution for the in she sake of spirit , since herself is not conscious of

misery . In truth the spirit is not bound , does not undergo is transmigration , and not released , but these processes are

applicable to nature , but only for the sake of Spirit . There is only one means by which nature can succeed in on she freeing spirit from fancied dependence her , though makes efforts in diverse ways : of the eight psychic states which are seen in intellect seven merely keep Spirit fast in

its bonds ; with the eighth , knowledge , however , release is in achieved . The knowledge which results liberation is the n n e realizatio that the spirit is not o or all of the principles , n n n that it has no empiric existe ce , that othi g belongs to

n ot n . it , and that it does exist as an emp iric i dividual The attai nment of this kn owledge through con sideration of the facts of existen ce results in the cessation of the creative activity of nature : the other seven psychic in n n states come to an end for ever , and sp irit , co te tment , gazes as a mere sp ectator up on nature which n o longer n n n ot n n binds it . Recog izi g that nature is co ected S n n n with it , p irit is indiffere t to her , ature recog izing n that her true character is u derstood ceases her activity , an d n in n , though the union of the two remai s existe ce even

‘ n o after the attainme t of true kn wledge , there is no p ossibility ’ n n of further p roduction . But a s the potter s wheel co ti ues THE SAMKHYA KARIKA 7

to revolve for a time , after he ceases to maintain its motion , so by reason of the acquired velocity , the psychic states which result from the previous life have to be finally x S amskara s e hausted , and not until the impres sions , , thus existing in the mind have been removed , can the complete release be attained in death , when spirit obtains the con is dition of complete isolation , which unending , and which is free from any other characteristic . Nothing is more convi n cing p roof of the close derivation of the S amkhya from the orthodox doctrine of the Up an i sads than the terms in which the attai nment of release is In described . the system itself the doctrine of the bondage of spirit in nature is essential to explain the misery of is existence , but at the same time it admitted that there is no i real bondage . No reason s given for the belief of spirit is that it is bound , yet , as the bondage unreal , it is clear that it must be produced by ignorance , since it is removed by se t Karika knowledge , but this doctrine is not out in the , which on the contrary consistently treats the union of spirit and nature a s a union for the final release of spirit . There is no conception of a development of Spirit by its union its o osite re su ltin with p p , , g in a synthesis which is far more rich in content than the two factors involved : on the con trar y , the connection of Spirit with matter terminates with the withdrawal of spirit into a condition of absolute e fre dom , which must , however , at the same time be absolute nonentity . In following the doctrine of the Upani sads n n that true knowledge i volves the de ial of individuality , the S amkhya system leads itself into the difficult position that it thus really denies the reality of its system ‘ O f many indiv i spirits , since there can be no multiplicity without duality to distinguish the several members of the group of

Spirits . In the Upani sads , on the contrary , the idea is i justifiable , since the denial of individuality s due to the fact that all seeming individuals are really merely one single

. U ani a more ove r self In the p s ds , , there is a real possibility of the binding of the self ; whether the bonds be real or h merely illusory , still in t e first case they can be destroyed in the appropriate manner , and in the second the false am belief can be removed by knowledge , but the S khya 88 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

denies any real connection whatever , and , while it therefore leaves it to be assumed that the apparent connection is a caused by ignorance , it does not , like the Ved nta , elevate n n n its that ignora ce i to a metap hysical e tity , thus leaving n existence even on the basis of the system u exp lained . n In the case of any individual self , the con ection of Spirit and nature rests indeed on the lack of discrimin ation n c in a previous existe ce , whi h leaves its impression on the S b mind , and in the next existence leaves the p irit ound , but this does not meet the objection to an infinite regress which “ in other cases the S amkhya system s harply refuses to allow . n is The Spirit not bei g really connected with nature , there no ground on which there can be produced the lack of dis n criminatio of Spirit from nature which causes bondage . In the Ved anta of Samkara the finite and the infinite Spirit n are indeed in reality one , and the distinctio between them is an due to an illusion , but illusion is something which can be removed by knowledge : a non - existing connection cannot create a lack of distinction which produces a con i ne ct on . Or i f that view of the Upani sads be accepted , in which the existence of individual souls and “of the outer world is in some way believed to be real , then freedom may be won by the recognition of the true connection between the indivi dual souls and the absolute through meditation upon , and Katha devotion to , the absolute , or through grace , as in the U a ni ad 23 * p s (ii , ) and elsewhere . Equally here is a r S connection ealized between pirit and nature , the absence of which Shuts off the S amkhya from any possibility of its i logical explanation of ma n principles .

S e e a ls o Ka u ita ki U a ni a d iii 8 M a n da ka iii 2 3 . s p s , , ; , , , THE LATE R S AMKHYA

PE CIAL S attention has been drawn to the short tract , Ta ttva s amas a called the , by reason of the fact that Max * Miille r considered that it was the real text- book of the am h a K rika S khya system anterior to the S amk y a . The

argument in its favour is , that where it agrees with the Karika is it appears to be the older : this view not , however , s upported by any detailed argument , and certainly does not seem conclusive . All that can be said of it with certainty is that V ijfianabhiksu in his commentary on the S utra a as u a ttributed it apparently to the same author the S tr , be ing a brief exposition of what is said at length in the Sfitra has s , and that the text , in comparatively recent time , f as a at least in some parts o India , at Benares , att ained arik popularity which is much greater than that of the K a. i The language s not marked by any Special Sign of date , and Max Miille r thought that the different order of categories and the numerous names not elsewhere used were rather r in a Sign of primitive and o g al character than of lateness .

On the other hand , it must be said that the relegation to the end of the category of pain is certai n ly curious and arti fi cial a in appear nce , as contrasted with the position which pain occupies at the begin n ing of the Karik a as giving the m tone to the whole syste , and the fact that the term Ta ttv a sa masa shows that the work is a compendium is surely evidence against the text representing the original S u tras of the school .

i m l h h la r da e S x S ste s o I n dia n hi os o . 3 18 T e e ff . y f P p y , p p t t , a e r 1400 AD is r e e rre d b G ar e S amkh a hilos o hie . ft p f y b , y P p , p p 68 - 7 0 , 90 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

After an enumeration and explanation of the twenty - five e volvents princip les , arranged as the eight , nature , intellect , e individuation , and the five fine elements ; the sixte n five evolutes , arranged as the five organs of perception , the

organs of action , mind and the five gross elements ; and S n an d pirit , the tract proceeds to enumerate the three Gu as to explain their nature . Then come brief explanations of the process of evolution and the resolution of the evolved going

from nature to the material elements , and from the material elements back to nature . Thereafter the intellect , individua set tion , mind and the ten senses are out as psychical and subjective over against the objects of their activity

and the presiding deities , a concep t which is decidedly more a am at home in the Ved nta than in the S khya . Then come Abhib u ddhis the five , which are forms of the activity of - an d intellect , ascertainment , self reference , desire , will to act

action , terms of somewhat doubtful sense and import . Then Karma onis come the five y , sources of action , enumerated as

energy , faith , desire of bliss , carelessness and desire of know

ledge , but also differently explained . The next topic is the a five winds or vital airs , Pr na , expiration connected with the a mouth and nose ; Ap na , connected with the navel which S a draws downwards ; am na , connected with the heart which h as moves equally about , and which been compared , though e doubtlessly erroneously , with the circulation of th blood ; ' Udana is connected with the throat and goes upward is - Vyana the all pervader . The presence of these five as a “ Karika Special topic is in contrast with the view of the , which does not accept the vital airs as anything more than the a joint working of mind and the organs . After the vital irs Karmatmans come the five , which are descriptions of the : V a ik arik a activity o f the self they are , the doer of good T ai asa Bhuta i works ; j , the doer of bad works ; d , doer of S anumana hidden works ; , the doer of what is reasonable ; Niranumana i and , the doer of what s not reasonable . A i s The next topics discussed are the five v dya , the twenty - eight ASaktis including the seventeen Atu stis and A i his Tu i s dd s S . , the nine st , and the eight iddhis Then Mulikarth a come the eight cardinal facts , s , which are the e f xistence , unity , purpose , and devotion to the interest o THE LATER SAMKHYA 9 1

- another of nature , the otherness from nature , the non agency , a n d n and multiplicity of Spirit , the temporary u ion and separation of spirit and nature . The next two topics are n the creation of be evolence , the production of the gross from and Bhfitas ar a the fine elements , the g , the divine creation in n n eight divisio s , the a imal and the vegetable creation in five , n and the human creation in one . Bo dage is then described is as threefold , according as it connected with belief in any ol e n s a s of the e v v t the highest reality , or with belief in a similar position as to the evolutes , such as is Shown in O O f devotion to bjects sense , and bondage by sacrificial gifts . This curious form of bondage arises when men through mis is conception give gifts to the priests , and a distinct Sign of Karika hostility to the sacrifice , which is not seen in the . Mok a Then come the three kinds of s , release , arising 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 n detachment of spirit from nature , and co centration of spirit up on itself . Then come three forms of proof , and finally n a the doctrine of misery , subdivided i to three according s it n is concerned with and arisi g from the body or mind , caused by others , or produced by fate . From this misery release

’ Tattv a s a ma sa can be obtained by the study of the . This summary of the contents of the Ta ttva sa masa does not suggest that it has any special claim to antiquity : it probably represents one of several forms of arranging the S am khya principles , of which another form is preserved in a itantra a s the S st list of In any case , however , the treatise itself is far too brief to give valuable information regarding the system , the value of the work is much inferior S amkh a Karik a the to that of the y on the one hand , or S amkh a S atra y on the other . It is probably of importance for the later date of the

’ Ta ttv asa masa o Madh av a his that it is n t cite d by in account , o 1 A D m S arv ad ar 3 8 . . f written ab ut 0 , o the Sa khya in the sa na sa m r a h a g , where he uses as the basis of his exposition Karika S amkh a of the system the . He also ignores the y

h A o e C a . V . b v , p 9 2 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

fitra S itself , which thus appears to be later than his period .

On the other hand , it cannot be much later , for it is com mente d Aniru ddha 1 A on by , who wrote about 500 D and by V ijfian abh iksu in the second half of the sixteenth century i A D . nt n . The work has also been commented on by V e da a Na e Sa Mah deva at the end of the seventeenth century , and g Bhatta at the beginning of the eighteenth ; the former in his Anirud h comment on the last five books follows d a faithfully , Vi fiana hik u in the first copies j b s , but has indepe ndent is a i value ; the latter mere imitation of Vijfianabh ksu . the fitra i a f Despite , however , the modern date , S s source o c and a f considerable importan e , may contain good deal o is old matter , though in its present form it certainly not so as rik pure an exposition of the system the Ka a. is a a This obviously , in some me sure at least , the c se as e regards the criticisms of other philosophies , which mak Of I s f up an essential part every ndian , a o other , philosophic arik s a sys tems . The appended verses to the K a expressly y are and that these critiques omitted , much of the omission S at a a r . may be supplied in the On the other h nd , we can not say how much the S atra which freely uses the Karika o f S m also uses phrases b rrowed rom a kara , and therefore must be treated as a work the composers of which were quite s x s capable of adding much of their own . A the te t stand , practically all the leading philosophical systems receive Carv ak as their Share of disapproval . The materialism of the is met by the refutation of their denial of the validity of n - reaso ing by the reference to its self destructive nature , since e n no amount of percep tion will giv a doctri e any validity , and by the reply to the favourite argument of the produc from u ninte lli ent on n tion of intelligence , g things , the a alogy

of intoxicating power from an aggregate . of herbs , that the owe r is n is intoxicating p latent in the i gredients , but there l in no trace of souls the psychic organs . The Jain doctrine of the co- extension of soul with body is refuted by the a is rgument that , as all that is limited temporary , souls

would be temporary also . Objections are raised to the

Buddhist denial of the soul , to its assertion of the moment r a y character of the world , and to its belief in the n s as s The a a nihilation of per onality final relea e . speci l

9 4 THE S AMKHYA SYSTEM view that the released soul has enjoyment as its t l characteristic , a view which con radicts the who e theory of am the s khya that isolation alone is the end . The Samkhya also rejects , in its Sister system of Yoga , the doctrine of a S ho a personal deity and of the eternity of the p t , the concept expressed in the complex of letters of the alphabet * which make up a word . But in rejecting many of the theories of the other schools the S amkhya S atra shows itself not u ninfl ue nce d by one at least of them : the work makes remarkable efforts to prove that its views are in full accord with scripture , to which it attributes conclusive value , and endeavours to Show as accordant with the Samkhya itself the statements in scripture regarding the pe rsonality of G od is , the unity in the absolute , the joy which asserted to be part of the nature of the absolute , and the heavenly bliss acknowledged in the Vedanta as a step on the way to so as final release . Indeed , the text goes far to hold that Obedience to the traditional rules of action h as a good effect towards securing final release , and to talk of the attainment of the nature of the absolute . In the main doctrines of the system the later texts throw is little new or valuable light . Peculiar to them the

doctrine that the spirit throws light on the inner organ , or

' that the spirit serves as a mirror in which the inner organ e t is refl cted . The impor ance of this doctrine lies in the fact that it is held to explain the mode in which spirit is

apprehended . All perception is due to the inner organ

forming in itself a picture of the thing to be perceived , which is reflected in spirit ; similarly it forms such a an picture of the Spirit , d when the spirit reflects itself in f the inner organ it brings its reflex, and there ore its self , to n s e conscious k owledge . Another Simile u ed to expr ss the relation of spirit and nature which is in itself purely i unconscious , s that of the reflection of the red Hibiscus shoots in a crystal near which the flower lies : the crystal as remains unaffected by the reflection . Ingenious all be e these comparisons are , it cannot said that they l nd

S ee E Abe F ests chri t E . Windis ch B e rl n . . gg, f ( i , p p - 188 195 . THE LATER S AMKHYA 9 S

r - a ea much clea ness to the subject m tter with which they d l . But they warn us of the danger of treating the evolutes of n ature as be ing essenti ally material and as made into psychic states by the influence of spirit . The conception of the inner organ , consisting of intellect , individuation and mind , cannot be conceived as equivalent , as suggested * by Garbe , to the nervous system , to which psychic meani ng is given by the r eflection in spirit or the light n thrown by spirit . Rather the co ception is that everything including the psychic states of experience in an uncon scious an condition , is present in the inner org , waiting to become actual by the addition of the element of consciousness given S by pirit . With this view accords best the fact that the system of the S atra regards as p ersisting in uncon sciousn ess in the intellect the impressions of experience which give k ara S arh s s . rise to psychic dispositions , r A fu ther development of doctrine , and not a happy one , may be seen in the treatment of intellect and individua tion . The only tolerable theory is that in some way nature is converted i n to i n tellect or consciou s n ess by the an d n influence of spirit , that the result of i dividuation is to split up this consciousness , which must be regarded as not having attained to consciousness of itself , n n into defi ite i dividuals possessed of definite selves . These i n dividuals would essentially possess also individual n n n co sciousnesses , as the pri ciple of i dividuation would carry with it as a n essential presupposition consciousness in order to become self- con scious : this fact explains why in the S il tr a 9 n (iii , ) the constituents of the in er organ , fine body or psychic apparatus , are reckoned at seventeen in place of n n a n d n e . eightee , i tellect individuation falli g und r one head From the individual principle n aturally can be derived the n an d Ka u ita ki senses with mi d , as suggested in the s Up a nisad (iii ) the objects of the senses in the shape of o the fine elements , from which the gross elements pr ceed , Kar k and this is clearly the main view of the i a. On the other

S kh l h m hi i . a a P os o e 2 55 . Th e d oc r n e is ro a l d e r i e d y p , p t i p b b y v ' rom a f mka a . l S r s s s m . . h hi s o h e C . A E G ou o o the f y t g , P p y f n i d U a s a s . 39 . p , p 9 6 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

h S fitra as hand , t e evidently regards the whole process being

a cosmic one , the principle of individuation producing

cosmic organs , and elements , and the individual correspond

ing principles being derived from the cosmic . It is

characteristi c of the difficulty of the doctrine , and of its

absurdity , that the explanation of the derivation is nowhere : Su 10 given the tra (iii , ) merely says that from the one psychic apparatus many were produced by reason of the

difference of the works , an exp lanation which is subject to distinc the disadvantage that it begs the question , since the

tion of works presupposes individuals , and individuals presuppose separate psychic apparatuses with which to

perform works . The probable explanation of the effort to fill up the system is to be seen in the fact that the Karika itself evidently allows inorganic nature to be in some way n directly con ected with nature , and not merely , as it should n consistently be , derived for each i dividual from the fine

elemen ts which form part of his ps ychic apparatus . S atra In the third place , the developes in detail the doctrine of the process O f the creation an d the destruction

of the world , which presents in a more philosophic shap e the doctrine of the ages of the world found in the epic and S common to the philosop hies . Nature an d pirit are ever ready for creation : the former seeks to develop for the n an d n enjoyme t fi al release of Spirit , and the latter is ready its o is to play part of onlo ker , but , of course , it impossible to

' time for find any beginning in the process . Each creation follows on a period of destruction in which everything has n in been resolved back i to a state of inactivity , the sense n in that the three Gunas , instead of i termingling their

n it . consta t activity , merely p roduce each s self Nevertheless , as soon as the result of the work done before has foun d the

correct time , the process commences afresh , all spirits having their psychic apparatuses evolved according to the impressions left up on them by the acts done in their last

' n existences , which have left them with a defi ite moral

character , and with the disposition produced by their

failure to recognize the separation of spirit an d nature . During the period of the continuance of the world in a e as state of d struction , the psychic apparatuses of the

98 THE SAMKHYA S YSTEM

: the body water sustains the blood , fire the heat of the body , air the breath , and ether the windpipe . The breath Karika which in the plays a very restricted pa rt , here appears under the influence of the Vedanta as the principle controlling the growth of the body under the guidance of S pirit , with which , indeed , it seems to be conceived as united even before the production of the embryo . The kind of n body is determined by the power of former actio , but not in th e building up of the body , a p oint which the S amkhya a an d V aiSe ik a differs from the Ny ya s doctrine . The other n organic bei gs , those of station superior to man , beasts and n pla ts are similarly composed , but plants are , though endowed with bodies , deprived according to the later texts , so S but not according to the epic , of outer senses , that pirits in n them can ot act , but merely undergo penance for previous

actiOnS . n n The unio of spirit with the i ner organ , the senses , the fine elements an d the body produces the empiric n a soul , Jiva , a term which is mai ly Ved ntic , while the inner n organ and the other eleme ts , which produce from spirit the U adhis soul , are styled p , again a term proper to the h a s Vedanta . The individual soul , however , no real existence at all : it is not an entity ; all that exists on the on e hand is on the body and the psychic apparatus , and the other hand U adhis pure spirit , which is really unaffected by the p , but which by its light causes them to emerge i nto n t conscious ess . Release consis s in the realization that spirit U adhis o n s . is not bound by the p , and cannot be bou d The parallelism of this view with that of the Vedanta is an d too marked to be accidental , doubtless the influence of n that school must here be recognized . The co nection of Spirit and its psychical apparatus is absolutely continuous in can n and without beginning time , though it be e ded : it arises from the failure to discriminate be tween Spirit and is n nature , and this failure in each life a co sequence of a failure in the preceding life , which leaves in the empirical i soul an impression which becomes real n its next existen ce . The result of the attai n ment of discrimin ation is made very much more clear in the S fl tra than in the Karika : the fate of Spirit is existence , but entirely without consciousness , as THE LATER S AMKHYA 9 9 follows inevitably from the fact that there is now no O bject for the subject to become united with . Moreover , the idea that such a state is one of bliss is properly and logically in Kar ika accordance with the expressly rejected , as against the Vedanta theory . On the means o f proof the later text gives little new light : the appeal to the evidence of scripture is far more frequent than might be expected in a system which lays n such great stress on reasoni g , but this appeal is accep ted Karika is in the , and there not the slightest reason to * A tav acan a c assume that the term p , whi h is the normal n n designatio of this branch of proof , ever mea t merely r skilled instruction . But a eal advance is made on the Karika in the assigning of a definite character to Space and time , which are made to be qualities of n ature regarded

- as n . a unity , and to be eter al and all present In the a re empiric world both appear as limited , and explained in a quite inconsistent way by origination from the ether n through its conditioni g by the masses of corporeal nature , on S the one hand , in the case of pace , and by the movement of the heavenly bodies in the case of time . The first n n o a co ception is doubt superior to that of the Ved nta , which produces space from the Atman , but it is not much a V ai e ik a superior to the view of the Ny ya and S S , which S su b stan ce s i call pace and time , t nor in any of the cases s the real problem of either space or time seriously faced or realized . The S utr a also i n cludes many poi n ts which the Karika n Ol leaves out as u essential . It deals doubtfully with the d question of works as O pposed to knowledge and is inconsistent , in one place allowing them value while in others the more consistent view of their total valuelessness comes out , a fact which accords with the lack of any ethical am side to the s khya system . The necessity of a teacher is an d n on e laid down , the o ly true teacher is who has attained the saving discrimi n ation in the period before h is final release in death : the winning of such a teacher is the result

S e e G a r e S amkh a h ilo o hie 5 0 . s . 9 6 b , y P p , p p ,

f r di n Th C . a r I n a o h e u t . 9 7 9 T F z , g , p p , 8 . 100 THE SAMKHYA S YS TEM

in e of good deeds previous lives . A real furtheranc , but n V a ira a not a mea s to secure release , is indifference , gy , is n which , again , a motive for refrai ing from doing good : deeds , with which it is incompatible moreover , the same quality is definitely opposed to a man ’ s association with me n n . other , which is a hindra ce to the desired end Indifferen ce is divided into the higher which arises only n and after the attainment of discriminatio , the lower which : r precedes it if the latter is carried to its fu thest limit , the n result is birth as a god in the ext world period , pending n which the person is merged in nature . Mere heari g of the teaching of the truth is not enough : it must be in accompanied by reflection and meditation , and a marked Karika S fitra degree , in contrast to the earlier , the adopts large masses of the Yoga technique as a means of producing

. th e the desired isolation of Spirit and nature Moreover , S atra also accepts from the Yoga the doctri ne of the high ’ value of asceticism and the Yogin s power to se e all things future and past , a power which is consistent with the am n in S khya doctri e of the reality of the product the cause . It is characteristic of the S amkhya that it does not a restrict , like the Ved nta , the saving knowledge to the three upper classes of the Aryan commun ity to the exclusion of in the S udras . This generosity of outlook is seen already l s the great epic (xiv , where the result of Yoga an d Su distinctly declared to be open even to women to dras , and the same sentimen t can doubtless legitimately be n in s n recog ized the fact that the system , de pite its fo dness - n h for sub divisio s , actually classes in its t eory of the kinds n n of livi g creatures men in one divisio only , while divine beings fall under no less than eight . The motive for the difference of treatment doubtless lies in the fact that the am not th e s khya , like the Yoga , does build on Veda as an un like the a exclusive foundation , and therefore , Ved nta , they ’ do not fall under the rule which excludes S udras from even hearing the Veda recited . The fact that the Veda formed one of the sources of proof of the system was not any more inconsistent with the system being made available to all , than the fact that the epic which contains Vedic quotations , was equally open to S iid ras to hear .

10 2 THE SAMKHYA SYS TEM

’ se t a r u me n tS i n 2 - 11 which is out with g the very text ( v , ) h whic he professes to exp ound . The attitude adopted by V ijfianabhik su is sign ificant of the theistic Spirit of his age : in his exposition the six systems present themselves as nothing but a theistic exposition of the universe , presented less directly in the four systems of a V a iSe ik a S am an d the Ny ya and s , khya Yoga , and brough t r n in out in the clea est man er the Vedanta . By this device the S amkhya philosophy is brought i nto the main current of Indian thought and relieved from the disadvan tages of its n atheism , which doubtless accou ts for the comp arative disfavour in which the S amkhya system had lon g fallen in a nd V i fian ab hik u imself India , to which j s h bears emphatic n testimo y . While the attempt of Vijfian ab hiksu could not expect to result in the establishmen t of the authority of the S amkhya n as a system , the influe ce of that p hilosophy may doubtless be traced directly in the free admission of elements of the am n an S khya i to the texts of the later Ved ta . This inter fusion of Vedanta a n d S amkhya elements is seen in the B h a a v a d ita b u t n n g g h the doctri e of Gu as was distinctly S m n in repudiated by a kara , and its reappeara ce texts , which accept his general p rincip les and believe in the illusory n n character of the world , is a clear proof that the reaso i g of S am the khya was felt to have great weight . Of this n P a fica d asi sy cretist tendency , which is seen clearly in the in n a y A . D . of M dha a the fourteenth ce tury , the classical

’ Ve d anta s ar a S a d an an da example is to be found in the of , a

D . a an n a o 1500 A . S d a d w rk written before identifies , as in

’ S v etdsv a ta ra U a ni a d a a a o f the p s , the M y , or Avidy , the a P ra k rti S am a nd Ved nta with the of the khya , by accep ting the view that P rak r ti is composed of three elements O btains the mean s of fitting much of the S amkhya system into the '

a . Ved nta From Brahman , who is regarded by him as n C a ita n a S esse tially y , or p irit , i s produced through envelop ment with ignorance in i ts constituent of S attva the world ISV a ra Spirit , , whose causal body out of which he creates all O n things is composed by the whole of ignorance . the C a itan a other hand , from the y through envelopment with in Sattva an impure form , that i s mixed with the con THE LATER S AMKHYA 103

ti s tuents , Raj as and Tamas , arises the individual spirit ,

' Pr fia a s its aj , which has causal body out of which it and creates individuation , etc . , is composed of only a part of e is ignorance . A further result of envelopm nt the creation of ' oul S utratman Tai asa the world s , , and the individual soul , j ,

- from the world spirit and the individual Spirit , by the f production , through the e fect of the constituent Tamas , of C aitan a e the fine body . From the y enveloped by ignoranc

through the predominance of Tamas arises the ether , from nd the ether , wind ; from wind , fire ; from fire , water ; a from

water , earth . In each of these elements , however , which are

only in a fine state , there is a portion of the constituents v fi ve Raj as and Satt a as well as of Tamas . From these Tanmatras fi ve arise the fine body , consisting of organs of perception produced from the S attva portions of the fi v fi ve corresponding e elements , of organs of action arising

from the Rajas portions of the elements , of intelligence and mind consisting of united portions of Sattva from the e fi ve lements , and of the breaths , consisting of united five portions of Raj as from the elements . In intelligence

and mind spirit , Citta , and individuation are held to be e in included , and in this resp ct , as the giving of an fi ve S am independent position to the breaths , the khya

doctrine is abandoned . Similarly , in the view of the d pro uction of the elements from each other in a series , S adan and a Taittiri a U a ni a d 11 1 follows the y p s ( , ) and not am the S khya . On the other hand , the development of the V a i v ana ra gross world body and the individual body , S and V iSV a am fi ve , takes place according to the S khya rule of

a . elements , not according to the Ved nta rule of three At the same time it must be noted that the influence of the S amkhya is clearly limited in exten t : the whole system ISva ra P ra fi a Sutr atman of four states , Brahman , and j , and T ai asa V a iSv an ara 3 a j , and Vi va , i s based on the Ved nta view of the four conditions of the self , in its conditions of freedom from bondage , deep sleep , dreaming , and waking , as se t B rh a ra ka a nis a d respectively , out in the da nya Up 3 M n dfi ni (iv , the a kya Up a sa d ( 3 and in a de veIO e d rsi n tta r i n is N i ho ata an a a i ad . p form in the p y Up s It , h e ow ver , possible that in the care taken to insist on the 104 THE SAMKHYA SYSTEM

” ce cosmic character of the pro ss , which in the earlier Upani sads is expressly restricted to the states of the

individual souls , there may be seen the influence of the am S khya , with its insistence on the cosmic character of the P rak rti development of , and , despite the constant variation o f c detail , the importan e of the Gunas in the system is obvious . While the interaction of Vedanta and S amkhya is thus the marked , there are few traces of close connection with a Ny ya school . The most important is the exposition of the ’ doctrine of inference found in V aca sp atimiSra S commentary S amkh a Karik a 5 in de e n on y , which appears to mark an p d ent development by the S amkhya of principles adopted , a more or less uncritically in the first instance , from the Ny ya rather than to contain a record of a doctrine presupposed by m * is the early form of sa khya . In this View inference divided into direct ( vita ) and indirect ( avita ) ; the latter se av at category coincides with s , and means proof by the elimination of alternative explanations ; the former includes fi rv av at S aman a to dr ta p and y s , which differ in that the result of the former is a judgment dealing with realities

which can be perceived , while the latter gives knowledge of s uch imperceptible entities as the senses or the soul .

As s u es e d b A B u r k Vienn a O rie nta l J ou r n a l " V 2 59 2 6 1 . gg t y , , , ,

106 THE SAMKHYA S YS TEM

H M ANN - A L . 4 7 49 In d i f e r e n ce 100 D , J f D e e s r e s d n o e r In d d u a on s e e Ah a mkara . iti p i i g v ivi ti , s e n s e s 90 I n e r en c e 1 2 104 f 7 , 7 , D e u ss e n . Sn 9 n 1372 2 5 In fin e s e o f nn e r or an 5 7 , P , , , it iz , i g 7 l 7 9 n o f s ir 43 , p it D h a rm a 6 1 I nn e r r an S 7 8 1 94 9 5 o g , , , Dh armadh a rm a u 2 4 I n e lle c s e e B u ddh t t, i D r e a m s 36 Isa Up a nis a d 18 D r ti 6 1 r a 3 5 102 s I Sva 33 , 8 , 6 , D ve a 85 ra kr n a 43 5 7 6 3 s ISva s , ,

G c mic 3 1 4 B n 1 n 2 2 30 4 G o s 18 5 AC O I H . 6 9 n 3 E , , , , , , . E 1 h t s e ts o f 3 5 a i av a 39 44 g , J gis y , E le m e n s s e e Ma h ab hfita a n d a in s 92 t , J T n a matr a e on s . B . 7 7 n J v , F E s ch a o lo 38 86 98 9 9 i a 3 7 98 t gy , , , J v , E th e r 6 7 E h cs 3 7 3 8 99 100 A I LA 8 12 42 4 7 50 t i . , , P , , , , Ka p ila va s tu 50 INE e le m en s s e e Ta n matra K a rm e n d r i a s 36 7 8 80 t , y , , lo e r w h n in e d oors 19 48 Ka r tr 6 1 F w , it , o r m 2 3 2 4 2 5 Ka a a 60 F , , s y Fou r s ta ges o f s e lf 103 Ka th a Up a nis a d 5 1 5 8 8n , 5 , 7 , 9 RB R 4 ki or kh na Bra h A E . 30 h 43 4 6 9 5 41i Ka u s ita San a a , , , , , , ( y ) m a n a

bh i u ki U n is a d 8 1 88n G a r a Up a n s a d 19 K a s ita p a , 6 , , a r a 3 9 44 95 G g , u d a 7 2 a u il a A th a s t ra 5 8 G a p ad a 6 , 8 , 8 3 K t y r sa G n os tic is m 6 6 Kavila 6 0 G od s p r o o f o f e xis te n ce Khyati 6 1 o f 7 2 ; a nd se e ISva ra Kle Sa 6 1 u h A E n 4n 9 n Kn le d e a s sou r c e o f r e le ase o . 12 n 16 5 5 o G g , . , , , w g , G r e ek h l s h 6 5 - 6 7 15 2 3 - 2 5 8 7 8 8 98 P i o op y , , , , G ross o d 44 9 7 98 e le m en s Kr na 34 b y , , ; t , s s e e M a hab hfi tas Krtya Kan da 6 1 u n 6 1 K tr i a s a n d h los o h 49 50 G a sa y , p i p y , G u n a s 10 11 13 19 3 4 45 4 6 K tra fia 3 2 35 . , , , , , , se j , Karm a P u rana 44 Ku tsayan a 14 E LL 3 8

R 11. N . 19 rb h a 8 39 7 9 ANM A C . Hira nya ga , , ,

n 4 L S . l 6 n h E . 34n 3 7 9 e in s . W Hop , , , vi , H s a i n o f on e a s e c o f Lifi a 18 36 8 2 yp o t t za tio p t g , , c n s c o u sn e s s 7 6 7 7 L oka a a 6 8 o i , y t

GN ORAN CE 2 3 -2 5 4 2 8 7 ADHAV A 9 1 102 I ; , , , 8 9 8 Madh a m k a s 9 3 8 , y i Illu s ion doc r n e o f 6 7 2 0 2 8 M a hab hara ta a n d S amkh a 2 9 , t i , , , , , y 5 3 INDE" 10 7

h h ij ta s 13 7 8 8 1-83 95 9 7 P a fic a é ikha 39 4 1 42 62 9 7 Ma ab , , , , , , , , M a ham oha 8 4 P a ra mar tha 5 9 M a h an s e e B u ddh PaSu a ta 4 5 49 5 0 60 , i p , , , U a n is a d 8 12 13 P a ta fi a li 30 5 4 5 6 5 7 M a itraya ni p , , , j , , , e rc e on 7 1 14 . 17 1811 55 P p , , ti

' k a U a nis a d 103 P e ss m s m 13 15 16 17 7 1 9 1 Ma ndfi y p i i , , , , ,

M nn 14 44 45 P la n s 34 , 9 8 a , , t la o 17 6 7 Matap itrja s 8 3 P t , M a e r a l s ts 18 7 1 9 2 P ra d u m n a 3 3 3 5 t i i , , y , h - tti 6 8 n 7 0n ra a a 8 3 M at a ra V r , P j p ti M a ra 10 a n d s e e Ta n matra P ra fia 103 t , j M a ts a u ran a 46 P ra k r ti 18 4 6 5 9 7 7 102 n y P , , , , , a d M a e r 6 - 8 18 3 1 7 7 - 7 9 s e e N a u r e tt , . , t 7 7 P ra man a s 4 6 1 7 Ma x Miille r . S n 13 71 68 5 1 7 2 99 , F , , , , , , , , 89 rana 15 3 7 6 1 8 0 9 0 9 10 P , , , , , 8 , 3 ‘ M 6 7 2 0 3 1 48 10 1 102 F r a s n o U a n is a d 9 aya . , , , , , p M e m or 8 1 r e s s h os l to s y P i t , ti ity a cr i fic ia l 7 1 M n d 3 6 7 9 80 P u n a rm r t u 16 17 i . , y , M rr or m e a h o r o f 9 4 u ran as 18 45 46 i , t p P , , - - P u r u - M ok a 2 7 38 6 2 85 8 7 9 1 9 6 98 sa l l 3 1 . 32 6 1 7 4 7 5 8 s , , , , , , , , , 8 , M oksa dh a rma 2 9 9 8 - 100 M on a d n d d u a l a s 83 Pfi r va Mimamsa 2 8 , i ivi M likar th a s 60 9 1 h a ora s 17 6 6 fi , Pyt g , M u l l c o f s ou ls 52 7 7 7 8 tip i ity , . , , 87 10 1 AG A 85 , R M u n a ka U a nis a d 14 15 88 n Ra e n d ra lala M r n d p , , j it a 5 5 M u n m a d 5 4 Ra k a s e s 83 i , s ' Mys tic ism 5 5 Rajavar ttika 59 Ra a s 12 14 3 4 7 4 7 8 7 9 0 j , , , , , , 8 , NAG ARJ UNA 2 0 10 3 Na eSa B h a a 92 Re r h 3 8 a n d s e T g tt bi t . e r a nsmigra

N a m e 2 3 2 4 2 5 on . , , ti Nar a a n a ti r th a 60 7 0 Re le a se r om ra ns m ra on y , , f t ig ti , se e N a u re 3 1 43 4 7 5 2 7 7 - 7 9 M ok a t , , . , s N e o la ton ism a n d S amkh a 6 7 Re ta h Sa rira 3 6 p y , N e r ou s s s e m 95 R v e d a 8 16 19 4 8 5 4 v y t g , , , , N ih ilism 2 0 Ru d ra 10 Nira n u man a 9 0 N irvan a S AB ARAS V AM IN 43 Nrs zm h a ta p a n i y a Up a n i s a d 19 S a dan a n d a 102 N a a s ch oo l 93 a k 43 6 1 y y , , S ti , Nya ya D a r s a n a 9 3 S a ma vay a 9 3 é a rii ka ra 6 7 18 2 0 48 88 92 , , , , , , , E B R 4 LD N E G H . S n 9 n 2 2 9 3 9 95 n 102 O , , , , , , , 2 4 2 5 mk a r a n a 33 3 5 , S a s ,

O l ra m a r e . l 6 n 19 n 2 5 S a iii kha o i 60 t , P , , j g O r a ns o f a c o n 36 7 8 80 S amkh a Karika 2 1 4 1 1 g , ti , , y , , 5 , 62 , 68 - 7 8

A MA P R h - D U l A 10 1 S amk y a S il tr a 4 1 44 . 92 100 P , P afic a ratra 5 0 60 S a ms kara s 2 3 2 4 9 , , , 8 6 , 5 10 8 THE SAMKHYA S YS TEM

S an a 44 Ta ka ku su 63 n 69 , S an a ka 44 Ta m a s 12 14 34 7 4 0 0 , , , , 7 8 , 8 , 1 3 S an an d an a 4 2 Tam is r a 8 4 S ah ata n a 44 Ta n matr a 10 13 3 7 8 8 1 95 , , , 7 , , , k m r 9 4 1 44 S an a t u a a 3 , , S an a tsu ata 44 Ta ttvas a mas a 6 1 6 8 9 - 92 j , , 8 S a na ts u ati a 2 9 Te a ch e r n e c e ss o f a 99 100 j y , ity , S anu man a 9 0 Te j a s 6 S a r v a d a r sa n a s a riz r a h a 9 2 Th e s m 7 8 30 3 1 4 7 5 6 6 1 g i , , , , . . s tita n tr a 4 1 5 9 6 4 Th a u a . 6 n S , ib t , G a ta a th a B rahma na 16 T m e 5 7 6 1 99 S p , i , , S a t a 7 4 7 8 7 9 Tr a d on a l r u le s va lu e o f 94 t v , , iti , 80 102 103 Tr a n s m ra on 15 16 3 8 7 1 , , ig ti , , , , k 3 4 8 3 4 S attv i a , 8 atva ta 60 Tu 62 84 85 9 0 S sti , , , ika s ch o l 5 7 Tu xe n n u tran t o . 55 n 5 6 n 5 7 n 63 S a , P , , , - ch r a d e r . O . l 6 n 40 n T e n t five r n ci le s 32 48 7 8 S , F , w y p i p , , - ch ro e d e r L . . 6 6 Twe n s ix r n c le s 32 55 S , v ty p i ip . r i u re a s m e an s o f ro o 5 1 S c p t , p f 7 2 99 L UKA 44 , U l cons c o u s n e ss 9 4 95 U adan a 2 4 S e f i , p dh i 9 S e n se s 80 . 9 7 Up a 8 S ddh 6 2 8 4 90 U a n i a d s 5 - 19 8 7 i i , , , p s , S imile o f blin d a n d la m e 7 6 ; O f Uv ata 14 n r 5 86 o f la m 7 4 o f d a ce 8 , ; p ; ‘ r r o r 9 4 o f s h e - oa t 11 AC AS PATI 4 2 59 62 7 0 m i , g , , , a 10 46 8 0n Siv , S ou l c o f d e n e d 93 a n d V a ikar ik a 34 90 , a tivity i , , m a n i a P u ru a V a ira a 6 1 100 se e At , J v , s gy , ou n d s e e S h ota V a iSe ika s s e m 5 7 93 9 7 99 S , p s y t , , , , 43 9 9 10 1 S p a c e .

S e e r . S . 49 n V a i n av a 46 p y , J s r i 2 3 3 1 32 3 8 6 1 7 4 - 88 V a iévan a ra 103 S p i t, , , , , , , - r a a n a o r V r a an a 6 3 98 100 V a s g , s g h o ta 5 7 V ar a a n a 39 62 6 3 Sp , s g y , , ru s e e S c r u r e V a su b a n dh u 5 7 6 8 S ti , ip t , S v a ya mb h u 4 5 Vas u d eva 33 a n is a d Ve d an ta 2 0 3 7 4 3 45 7 8 80 82 Sv eta sva ta r a Up , , , , , , ,

2 13 l 8 n 4 6 102 8 7 9 0 9 7 9 8 100 , 10 1 102 1 , , , , , , , , , n V i fian a 2 3 - 2 5 89 ra u s s O . 3 6 S t , j , le o r t ns o f ross e le m e n s V i fian a b h ik u 5 7 7 2 72 10 1 S u bt p io , g t j s , ,

82 , n 2 93 Su d ra s 100 V ijfia a v ad a 8 , 5 7 , S u kh tan k a r 6 V ikr ti 6 1 n h a Sfi tratm an 16 3 V i d ya vas 6 2 , 6 8 n 6 1 V i a r a a 6 2 8 4 Svami p y y , V iSe a 3 7 4 7 s , A 9 V iSi t d v a ita 6 2 2 AI J AS 0 s a , T H ' i a nis a d Vi n u 4 Ta i tt ri y , Up a s , 6 03 Vis n u P u rana 4 6