Introduction to the Samkhya-sutra of Kapila

Both the authorship and date of the Samkhya-Sutra are uncertain. Jacobi and other European scholars do not accept Kapila as the founder of the system. They also doubt the traditional date, 300-550 B. C. because the development out of it of the Buddhist doctrine is not admitted, both the doctrines being ascribed to some Upanishads. The Katha Upanishad is regarded as a preliminary stage in the development of the Simkhya system. But the Samkhya system does not adopt the authority of the Veda. The Absolute of the Upanishads tends to become meaningless with the Sakhya. It postulates only an infinite number of

spirits; it similarly divorces matter from the absclute, ascribing to it the power of evolution; consciousness is explained by some form of contact between spirit and matter; and release (moksha) is attained when the unreality of any connexion between the two is apprecited. This is "undoubtedly an illogical and confused system, for in it spirit is meaningless, and its connexion with nature, being non existent, cannot serve as the motive for bondage." On the basis of the Upanishads where water, fire, and earth appear as the three fundamental elements derived from the Creator or perva led by him, the Sankhya admits the conception of three principles or properties (gunas) which are constituents rather than qualities, as pervading nature and man alike, iz. Sattva (germ of creation), Rajas (desire for creation) and Tamas (ignorance of the effect of creation) Prakriti and Purusha are the two primary agencies of creation. But the eternal and unchangeable Purusha, comprising countless souls of individuals, is without qualities and properties, and inactive until combined with Prakriti. The extant Simkhya-sutra is considered to be a later text, because it is not used in the Sarva-darsanasamgraha and is commented on by Aniruddha (1450). The Sutras given by Siddharshi in the Upamitibhava-prapancha-katha are not in it. The system here is fully developed and scripture is invoked in support of it. Recognition of the distinction between spirit and matter comes by instruction as in case of the king's son brought up by a hunter (Sabara) when the truth cf his origin was disclosed to him at once assumed the princely bearing and mien. That the forgetting of truth brings sorrow is similarly illustrated by the story of the king who married a frogmaiden who turned into frog at the sight of water. In addition to Aniruddha's comment, the work of Vijnana-bhikshu seeks to deal with Samkhya, not as opposed to the Vedanta but as representing one aspect of the truth of that system. He also wrote the Samkhyasara (1650). The Tattva-samasa of not much philosophic interest is ascribed before 1600. The Sankhya-karika of Isvara Krishna (320) is the first definito text on Samkhya. Varshaganya according to Paramartha, wrote a Shashtitantra on the Sankhya whose views were corrected by his pupil Vindhyavasa in a set of Golden Seventy verses which were criticized

by Vasubandhu (320) in his Parmartha-saptati. Vindhyavasa is identifiel by some with Isvara Krishna whose Kiriki with a commentary was translated into Chinese by Paramartha in 357-569. The Samkhya-tattva-kaumudi of Vachaspati Misra, who cites a Raja-Vartika of Rana-rangamalla or Bhoja shows traces of the distinctive feature of Samkhya exposition.