THE SACRED BOOKS OF THE HINDUS Translated by various Sanskrit Scholars EDITED BY MAJOR B. D. BASU, I.M.S. (Retired) VOL. XL r-gJAMKHYA PHILOSOPHY i PUBLISHED BY THE PAJVINI OFFICE, BHUVANE-SWARI ASRAMA, BAHADURGANJ Bllababai) PRINTED BY APURVA KRISHNA BOSE, AT THE INDIAN PRESS 1915 THE SAMKHYA PHILOSOPHY CONTAINING (i) SAMKHYA-PRAVACHANA SI)TRAM, WITH THE VRITTI OP ANIRUDDHA, AND THE BHASYA OF VIJNANA BHIKSU AND EXTRACTS FROM THE OF VRITTI-SARA MAHADEVA VEDANTIN ; (2) TATVA SAMASA/ (3) SAMKHYA (4) PANCHASIKHA TRANSLATED BY NANDALAL SINHA, M.A, B.L., P.C.S. DEPUTY MAGISTRATE, DALTONGANJ. PUBLISHED BY SUDHINDRA NATH VASU, THE PANINI OFFICE, BHUVANESWARl ASRAMA, BAHADURGANJ, Bllababat) PRINTED BY APURVA KRISHNA BOSE, AT THE INDIAN PRESS 1915 135. i <? Kris Una bha-. Calcutta. PREFACE. The present volume of the Sacred Books of the Hindus which bears The Contents of the the modest title of the Sdrnkhya-Praoacliana-Sutra,m, is, in reality, a collection of all the available original documents of the School of the Samkhyas, with the single exception of the commentary composed by Vyasa on theSdmhhya-Pravaehana-Yoga-Sutram of Patanjali. For it contains in its pages not only the Sdmkhya-Prava- efiana-Sutram of Kapila together with the Vritti of Aniruddha, the Bhdsya of Vijnana Bhiksu, and extracts of the original portions from the Vrit- tisdra of Vedantin Mahadeva, but also the Tattoa-Samasa together with the commentary of Narendra, the Samkhya- Kdrikd of t^varakrisna with profuse annotations based on the Blidsya of Gaudapada and the Tattva- Kaumudi of Vaehaspati MisVa, and a few of the Aphorisms of Pancha- rfikha with explanatory notes according to the Yoga-Bhdsya which has quoted them. An attempt, moreover, has been made to make the volume useful in many other respects by the addition, for instance, of elaborate analytical tables of contents to the Sdmkhya-Prauachana-Sutram and the Sdmhhya-Kdrikd, and of a number of important appendices. In the preparation of this volume, I have derived very material help from the excellent editions of the Vritti of Aniruddha and the Bhdsya of Vijnana Bhiksu on the Sdmkhya-Pravachana-Sutram by Dr. Richard Garbe, to whom my thanks are due. And, in general, I take this opportunity of acknowledging my indebtedness to all previous writers on the Samkhya, whose I obtained and living and dead, from writings l^ve light leading in many important matters connected with the subject. An introduction only now remains to be written. It is proposed, lowever, to write a separate monogram on the Samkhya Dar^ana, which would be historical, critical and comparative, in its scope and character. In this preface, therefore, only a very brief account is given of some of the cardinal doctrines of the Samkhya School. The first and foremost among these is the Sat-Kdrya-Siddhdvita or the Established Tenet of Existent Effect. It is the Law The La\v of the of and [Identity Cause of the Identity of Cause and Effect : what_ is called the cause is the umnanifested state of what is called the effect, and what is called the effect is only the manifested state of what PREFACE. substance is one and the same differences of is called the cause ; their ; manifestation and non-manifestation give rise to the distinctions of is Cause and Effect. The effect, therefore, never non-existent ; whether before its production, or whether after its destruction, it is always existent in the cause. For, nothing can come out of nothing, and nothing can altogether vanish out of existence. This doctrine would be better understood by a comparison with Definition of Cause and the contrary views held by other thinkers on the Effect. relation of cause and effect. But before we proceed " " " to state these views, we should define the terms cause and effect." One thing is said to be the cause of another thing, when the latter cannot be without the former. In its widest sense, the term, Cause, therefore, denotes an agent, an act, an instrument, a purpose, some* material, time, and space. In fact, whatever makes the accomplishment of the effect possible, is one of its causes. And the immediate result of the operation of these causes, is their effect. Time and Space, however, are universal causes, inasmuch as they are presupposed in each and every act of causation. The remaining causes fall under the descriptions of 5 Aristotelian Division "Material/ "Efficient," "Formal," and "Final." The further reduce them to two des- ^Th^Smkhya Divi- Samkhyas slon - criptions only, viz., Updddna, i.e., the material, which the Naiyayikas call Samavdyi or Combinative or Constitutive, and Nimitta, i. e., the efficient, formal, and final, which may be vari ously, though somewhat imperfectly, translated as the instrumental, efficient, occasional, or conditional, because it includes the instruments with which, the agent by which, the occasion on which, and the conditions under which, the act is performed. Obviously, there is a real distinction between the Updddna and the Nimiwa : the Updddna enters into the consti tution of the effect, and the power of taking the form of, in other the of the resides in it words, potentiality being re-produced as, effect, ; while the Nimitta, by the exercise of an extraneous influence only, co operates with the power inherent in the material, in its re-production in the form of the effect, and its causality ceases with such re-production. To take the case of a coin, for example : the material causality was in a of it made the modification of the into lump gold ; possible gold the form of the coin, it will remain operative as long as the coin will last as a coin, and after its it will into the state destruction, pass potential again ; but the operation of the Nimittas came to an end as soon as the coin was minted. PREFACE. Similarly, the Samkhyas distinguish the Effect under the twofold aspect of simple manifestation and of re-production. Thus, the coin is an instance of causation by re-production, while the production of cream from milk is an instance of causation by simple manifestation. Now, as to the origin of the world, there is a divergence of opinion among thinkers of different Schools : Some uphold the Theory of Creation, others maintain the Theory of Evolution. Among the Creationists are counted the Nastikas or the and the and Nihilists, Buddhists, Naiyayikas ; among the Evolutionists, the Vedantins and the Samkhyas. The Nas tikas- hold that the world is non-existent, that is, unreal, and that it came out of what was not the Buddhists hold that the world is ; existent, that and that it came out of what was not the is, real, ; Naiyayikas hold that the world is non-existent, that is, non-eternal, perishable, and it that that came out of the existent, is, what is eternal, imperishable; the Vedantins hold that the world is non-existent, that is, unreal, and that it came out of what was that existent, is, real, namely, Brahman ; and the Samkhyas hold that the world is existent, that is, real, and that it came out of what was existent, that is, real, namely, the Pradhdna. Thus, there are the A-Sat-Kdrya-Vdda of the Nastikas that a non-existent world has been produced from a non-existent cause, and of the Buddhists that an existent world has been produced from a non-existent cause, the Abhdva-Utpatti-Vdda of the Naiyayikas that a non-eternal world has been produced from an eternal cause, the Vivarta-Vada of the Vedantins that the world is a re an of the eternal volution, illusory appearance, one reality, viz., Brahman, and the Sat-Kdrya-Vada of the Samkhyas that an existent world has been produced from an existent cause. Against the theories of A-Sat-Kdrw, Abhdva-Utpatti, and Vivarta, d in 8UPP 0rt f their theory f the esfawirhThe^la^hya *? ^-^ya, the Theory. Samkhyas advance following arguments : I. There can be no production of what is absolutely non-existent e.g., a man s born. TI. There must be some determinate material cause for every pro duct. Cream, for instance, can form on milk only, and never on water. Were it as absolutely non-existent in milk as it is in there water, would be no reason why it should form on milk, and not equally on water. III. The relation of cause and effect is that of the producer and the and the produced, simplest conception of the cause as the pro- that it the of the ducer_is possesses potentiality becoming effect, iv PREFACE. and this potentiality is nothing but the unrealised state of the effect. IV. The effect is seen to possess the nature of the cause, e.g., a coin still possesses the properties of the gold of which it is made. u " destruction V. Matter is indestructible ; means disappearance into the cause. It follows, therefore, that cause and effect are neither absolutely dissimilar nor similar to each other. The World possesses absolutely They phenomenal reality. possess essential similarities and formal dissimilari ties. Such being the relation between cause and effect, the world cannot possibly have come out of something in which it had been absolutely non in relation to existent, and which accordingly was, it, as good as non-existent. For the world is neither absolutely unreal nor absolutely real. The test of objective reality is its opposition to consciousness. It is distinguished as Prcitibhdsilta or apparent, Vyavalidrika or practical or phenomenal, and Pdramarthika or transcendental.