Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
This essay will consider sCkhya dar[hana, its origins and its theoretical systems which are the basis of the Sam#khyakarika of Isvarakr#s#n#a. It will look at how the stika school of sCkhya presents methods of soteriology within both the Bhagavad Gita and Sam#khyakarika and will reflect on how the texts unravel the nature of the self through metaphysics. The essay will take in to account epistemology and how understanding sCkhya can give insight in to the uniqueness of both texts and how they reveal ways by which the soul may attain an immortal state with the cessation of the cycle of saCsra. It will also consider the idea of yoga detailed within the Bhagavad Gita, being a practical application of the sCkhya philosophy of the Sam#khyakarika.
The etymology of sCkhya is derived from the sanskrit word for number, Burley (2012 p37), asserts that it refers it to systematic enumeration and logical analysis.
Larson (2017 p3), aligns sCkhya with the term reason method and suggests an innate way to define soteriology is through the means of knowledge. Chakravati (1951), affirms this and states;
ZaCkara within his commentary on VicGu-sahasra-nma quotes a verse from the Vysa-Sm[iti which defines SCkhya to be the knowledge of the true nature of the self.
Therefore, from this scholarly reasoning, smkhya can be regarded as a system of perfect knowledge and understanding. Smkhya, is however, a tradition of philosophical speculation, there is a hybrid of opinions on its origins and much has been written by scholars suggesting it was thought to have been founded during the vedic period by the sage Kapila, as an alternative method of soteriology to the vedic brahmanic sacrifices and rituals that were prevalent at the time (Chakravati 1951 p 5).
Kapila has also been attributed with compiling the Smkhya Sktra, although, in actuality this work has been dated later (approximately 1400AD) throwing some confusion in to its authorship. In addition, Kapila is credited with teachings in The Purna-s, including the VicGu Purna, yet, there is little definitive evidence as to who he was or if he really existed at all. Andrew Nicholson (2010, P75), states; the historian of Indian philosophy can ignore Purnic SCkhya only at his or her peril.
Scholars have not always agreed on the roots of SCkhya, Richard Garbe (1895, trans 1943), maintained that an atheistic and dualistic Kapila-SCkhya was the original, true SCkhya, somewhat ignoring the dar[hanas early vedantic foundations.
Garbe also stated that the two grandest achievements of ancient India were its rational, atheistic SCkhya philosophy and its devotional, monotheistic Bhagavata (Krishnaism). religion although, Garbe does give acknowledgement that these two philosophies were connected (Dickstein 2010).
Arthur Keith (1918 p 7), evidences rudimentary elements of SCkhya within the Upanicads, however, he also says that SCkhya teachings go radically beyond them.
Keith States that the first notions of SCkhya can be found within the Chndogya Upanis#ad. (in Larson 2017 p 30 1928).
Uddlaka instructs his son Zvetaketu about the origin of the elements and of man
(Deusen Chndogya v1-1-7 P86-89). Larson (2017 Ch 2), concours and indicates that SCkhya is rooted in the vedic and upanicadic eras, although says that its construction and development took place after the oldest upanis#ads had already been composed. Burley (2012 p37), suggests SCkhya is not necessarily vedic or non-vedic or a reaction to Brahmanic hegemony. He considers that it was a system evolved from a combination of sources stemming from ascetic traditions. Burley (2012 p37), evidences strong links between yoga and SCkhya in the Zvet[vatara Upanis#ad.
The first known mention of smkhya and yoga together occurs at Zvet[vatara 6.13
Here the systems of yoga and SCkhya are described as being equally important for soteriology. It can be said that SCkhya represents the theory of the philosophy and yoga the application. However, at this point within SCkhyas history the verses of the Upanicads are strongly theistic following the philosophy of vedanta which was widespread during this pre- classical period.
SCkhya theories are developed further within the Mhbarta and The Bhagavad Gita, where, in the latter K[cGa uses the concepts of sCkhya philosophy in his discourse with Arjuna. Elements of the philosophy that are evident in the Bhagavad Gita are later codified by *[vara K[cGa within the Sam#khyakarika in approximately 200 AD. (This comes at a similar time to the compilation of the Ptañjalayoga[stra). In the Sam#khyakarika metaphysical elements are broken down in to tattvas (elements of reality) and the dar[hana is developed. The objective of the philosophical teachings is to lead the aspirant toward the ultimate dissolution of puruca from prak[ti.
The SAkhyakrik is a soteriological text, concerned with the pursuit of salvation from suffering, including sin, ignorance and pain with the ultimate aim of the cessation of transmigration (Larson p155). The Bhagavad Gita also focuses on attaining salvation through divine knowledge and devotion through action. Like the Sam#khyakarika, it too considers the concept of metaphysics however, the text remains theistic, with the ultimate aim of the individual soul (j+va) being recognised and reunited with the ParamtmG or Brahman with the dissolution of the soul from prak[ti.
There is an obvious dualism here, within the Bhagavad Gita with the notion of both J+va and tman which follows similar doctrines to SCkhya, however, Johannes Bronkhorst (1983), states that
The Krik is silent about God.
Bronkhorst also considers that although The Sam#khyakarika does not speak a word about God, by its silence does it does not deny His existence (Bronkhorst 1983 p6)
It is within the second chapter of the Bhagavad Gita that K[cGa introduces the elements of sCkhya and gives Arjuna teachings on the imperishable nature of Puruca.
The self is not born, nor does it ever die (Patton, BG Ch 2 v 20).
In this chapter K[cGa considers the tattvas of prak[ti, including body, senses mind, ego and intelligence.
Both the SAkhyakrik and the Bhagavad Gita consider the tattvas and how they are affected by the gunas, the innate qualities of the material world. Although as Chakravati (1951 p59) states;
the G+t maintains the gunas are products of the prak[ti, whereas classical SCkhya holds them as its constituents
This is likely due to the theistic, soteriological G+t, with the doctrine that everything comes from God including prak[ti.
The metaphysical elements of SCkhya are many and the structure of these elements is the backbone of the philosophy. The SAkhyakrik gives a logical breakdown of this dualist system with puruca as the uncreated, unchanging indestructible principle that is conscious and eternal. Maliner (in Frazer 2011), states that it is Puruca that breathes life in to prak[ti and Frazier (2011 p85), states that creation is initiated because Puruca, although devoid of any activity misidentifies as being an energetic force.
Puruca mistakes himself as being active and full of potential when he becomes connected to the other eternal ontological principle, prak[ti.
Larson (2017 p11), concours suggesting that matter evolves when prak[ti is illuminated by Puruca, and The SCkhyakrik (verse xx) states;
The unconsciousness one appears as if characterized by consciousness. Similarly, the indifferent one appears as if characterised by activity, because of the activity of the gunas
Although both principles of puruca and prak[ti are unchanging, once puruca has shone a light on prak[ti the conditions for the emanation of the tattvas is conceived. The SAkhyakrik (XX1), likens this to the analogy of the mutual co-dependency of the blind man and the lame man, the conjunction of the two is for the purpose of seeing and realising primordial nature with the objective of the isolation and liberation (kaivalya) of the puruca from prak[ti.
Larson (p10), expounds that many of the SCkhya principles are imperceptible and suggests that within the SCkhyakrik the basis of valid knowledge (praman#a) is considered to be threefold, the dar[ana has to rely on inference (anumana) and reliable and hermeneutical testimony (adhyatmika), particularly from its own teachers. Burley (p78) states that the third means of validity is Perception (dr#s#t#a), and highlights that this concept of perception is also a means of valid cognition within The Ptañjalayoga[stra. Dr#s#t#a means seer and is synonymous with puruca within both texts. Burley continues, by stating that the purpose of the manifestation of Prak[ti is to enable purushas enjoyment or seeing Prak[ti on one hand, and its liberation on the other (YS 2.18; SK: 21).
It is through the aforementioned gunas (the three strands or qualities of matter), that the material world is formulated through the manifestation of Prak[ti. The gunas are said to be constituents that are present in all materiality. Burley (p74), suggests that it is due to the proximity of puruca to prak[ti that the gunas become disturbed and this presence can be regarded as a catalyst for the development of materiality. The gunas are considered as threefold, sattva, rajas and tamas. In the SCkhyakrik V:13 sattva is said to be buoyant, shining, light and illuminating. Rajas is considered to be stimulating and moving and tamas heavy and enveloping (tra Larson 2017 and Burley 2012).
Within the Zvet[vatara Upanicad (Ch 4; V 1-4), the notion of prak[ti and puruca (here puruca as the vedantic Brahman) are considered by attributing colours to them. Brahman is devoid of colour, however, specific aspects of matter are defined as red white or black. Gordon White (p76) attaches red to rajas, black to tamas and white to sattva.
Burley (2012 p101), states that G. Feuerstein considers that the gunas appear to denote material particles, however Burley disagrees and suggests that they are more akin to the properties of nature and have emotive qualities including gladness, perturbation and stupefaction as depicted within the SCkhyakrik (V: x11).
In the fourteenth chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, K[cGa teaches Arjuna about the aspects of these three gunas and states that;
They bind the embodied, imperishable one within the body (BG 14:5).
K[cGa in his advisory role to Arjuna deconstructs the qualities of the gunas, which later, clearly provide Isvarakr#s#n#a with some of the foundations to codify SCkhya dar[hana. K[cGa tells Arjuna that rajas, has the nature of passion, lust and action. Tamas is ignorance laziness and confusion and sattva, stainless, light and connected to joy and wisdom. K[cGa, then informs Arjuna that salvation is attained through a sattvic state.
When sattva has grown strong, the embodied one goes to dissolution; then enters the stainless realms of those who know the highest (Patton BG 14 14 p 158)
K[cGa continues with his soteriological discourse and informs Arjuna that on transcending the three gunas one reaches eternity and is free from sorrow, old age, death and birth, (BG 14 v 20). Arjuna is keen to know what he needs to do to attain immortality, K[cGa advises him to practice Bhakti yoga (Sargeant, BG 9 v 34), the yoga of devotion to God. Yoga being a practical application of SCkhya philosophy.
Within the Bhagavad Gita the supreme element is God (26th tattva), and it is through the unification with the divine that salvation is found (BG 9:32). within the Sam#khyakarika God is not part of the methodology. The tattvas form a metaphysical template for the creation and constitution of visible bodies as depicted within The Sam#khyakarika, consisting of a set of twenty- five tattvas, 23 are non-eternal, however, puruca and prakriti as discussed above are eternal and changeless.
Bronkhorst (1994 p7), states Sam#khya views the world as a continuous series of modifications of substrates which do not lose their essence.
These modifications or changes (pariGma), of the 23 tattvas are apparent within the ontological order in which the structure of reality evolves. The primary substrate is the unconscious, engaged principle of prak[ti. From prak[ti, the mind complex evolves, consisting of Buddhi (intelligence), followed by ahaCkra (ego) and then manas the mundane mind. Out of this arises four specific tattva groups, the five sense capacities or tanmtras, consisting of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. The action capacities (karmendriyas) which are speaking, clasping, walking, excreting, and reproduction. The subtle elements or Jñanendrias comprising of sound, tactile feeling, visible form, flavour and odour. The gross elements or mhabhktas, are, earth, water, fire, air and space. This doctrine of emanation depicts progression and a logical reasoning on the nature and configuration of reality, it can be understood as an account of cosmic evolution or as a transcendental analysis of factors involved in experience, or as an examination of the tangible human constitution. Sam#khya is presenting the engagement of materiality at the grossest levels, with the soteriological aim of involution, working back through the evoloutes until prak[ti itself is reached. It is only at this point that there can be a dissolution of the material self from puruca.
Unlike the non-theistic Sam#khyakarika, within the Bhagavad Gita K[cGa tells Arjuna that eight prak[tis are attributes of God; (BG 7.4)
My prak[tis are eightfold: earth, water, fire, wind, space, manas, buddhi, ahamkara
K[cGa describes the physical body and tman, he states that the physical Body consists of mahabhutas, ahaCkra buddhi, avyakta, eleven organs, and the objects of organs. (BG 13:5) Although there are clearly similarities here between the Bhagavad Gita and the Sam#khyakarika the inclusion of God, highlights the differences in the metaphysics and values within the two texts.
As considered above, The Sam#khyakarika details the soteriological purpose of sam#khya dar[hana as the ultimate liberation of mankind from du%kha, which as Larson (2017 p155), states are threefold, external, (dhibhautika) personal (dhytmika) and supernatural (dhidaivka) This release from that which clouds the mind, and binds the mortal body is salvation.
Intuitive discrimination of the knower is the only method of achieving this end.
(Larson p 156 SK:11)
Like the Sam#khyakarika, release from suffering to attain salvation and thus immortality are also prevalent teachings within in the Bhagavad Gita. It is here, that K[cGa teaches Arjuna that attaining salvation through SCkhya is inseparable from the practice of yoga. K[cGa informs Arjuna that without yoga renunciation is hard to achieve (Patton BG 5:6).
K[cGa also states that
Those, who practise yoga, reach the place attained by those who practise SCkhya (Patton BG 5.5).
K[cGa teaches Arjuna that for those who follow the SCkhya path they can attain salvation through knowledge and for those who practice yoga, soteriology is attained via action.
(Patton BG 2.3).
It is clearly evident that K[cGa holds both SCkhya and yoga in very high esteem, and that the two work in conjunction with each other.
He who sees that SCkhya and yoga are one, he truly sees (BhG 5.4-5).
K[cGa continues his explanations to Arjuna and sates that it is through bhakti yoga or devotional knowledge, that one can, by winning the grace of God, attain salvation, release from rebirth and enjoy liberation and eternal bliss (BG Ch 12).
This clear affiliation between SCkhya and yoga is also apparent in the Santiparvan, the twelfth book of the Mahbhrata.
There is no knowledge equal to Sam#khya, there is no power equal to Yoga; both of them are the same path (12.304.12-13).
It is an important consideration here not to separate the two philosophies of sCkhya and yoga, as it is not until the classical period that they are regarded as two different schools of philosophical thought. It is at this point, that the focus for Smkhya is metaphysical enumeration, providing the psycho-physical map for a corresponding means of practice. This corresponding means of practice including meditation on specific, object, idea or principle is yoga.
In conclusion we are informed that the Bhagavad Gita attests that Sam#khya and yoga are the same and it is through the practice of the yoga-s of the Bhagavad Gita that salvation can be achieved. Within both sam#khya and yoga, the removal of ignorance (avidya) is the catalyst of liberation from the cycle of birth and re-birth, with sam#khya being the theoretical concept and yoga the methodology.
The Sam#khyakarika teaches that a God of any type is not essential for soteriology, the achievement of moks#a or kaivalya, can be ultimately achieved through absolute knowledge and once puruca recognises prak[ti, there can be a dissolution between the two.
As a dancer ceases from the dance after having been seen by the audience; so also, prak[ti ceases after having manifested herself to the Puruca
(Larson SK V 61)
Chakravati (p324) states that puruca comes to realise that
nothing in the world of prakriti belongs to him and he is distinct from prak[ti
This realisation gives rise to an illuminated state where good and bad karma cease to operate. However, even when this knowledge and dissolution has been attained the physical body and prak[ti can still function for a period of time so that the person can be a guide to those in his wake.
such a state is necessary for imparting perfect wisdom to the seeking disciple. The person who has attained this state is really fit to be a spiritual guide (Chakravati p325)
Chakravati (p325) states that when no traces of karma are left upon the Buddhi, it is only at that point release from transmigration is reached and salvation is attained.
Both the Bhagavad Gita and the Sam#khyakarika are soteriological texts, one being theistic the other non- theistic, yet for both the aim is to remove the human condition of suffering and to guide the aspirant towards the soteriological aim of the final cessation of and liberation from the cycle of saCsra.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.