Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Encyclopedia of India–China Cultural Contacts v1.c7.s7.t10: Samkhya

Encyclopedia of India–China Cultural Contacts v1.c7.s7.t10

Language
English

Samkhya

v1.c7.s7.t10.1

Samkhya or *sāṃkhya* is one of the major philosophical schools of Brahminism in ancient India. With a long history in India, the earliest theories or thoughts of the school were mentioned in some of the most ancient Indian literature. It became an independent school of philosophy around 4^th century BCE. A pervasive and strong influence throughout India’s intellectual history, the theories postulated by the school had long been a subject of wide interest in the country’s philosophical community. It spread to China along with Buddhism.

v1.c7.s7.t10.2

Theoretical Evolution and Major Texts

v1.c7.s7.t10.3

The word, *Samkhya*, is based on the Sanskrit word sāmkhya, which arguably has multiple meanings. Some claimed that it had something to do with “number” or “enumeration” as the school specifies the number and nature of the ultimate constituents of the universe, around which it built its basic theoretical system. Still others contended that the word meant “search” or “reflection”. In Chinese Buddhist scriptures, in addition to being referred to as Samkhya, the school was also variously called “Jiapiluo Lun”, “Yuzhong Waidao”, or “Seng Qu”.

v1.c7.s7.t10.4

According to relevant Sanskrit records and Buddhist scriptures, the school was founded by Sage Kapila, a legendary figure whose existence was widely debated. Some scholars who believe in his existence speculate that he lived around 4^th century BCE. However, the school was determined to originate earlier than that. Some *Samkhya* theories were believed to have come from the Shvetashvatara Upanishad, which contains explicit references to the theories of early-day Samkhya school. Some *Samkhya* ideas can be traced back to the Vedic period. The Sanskrit epic, the “*Mahabharata*” (especially the “*Bhagavad Gītā*”), contains rich details of the school. In addition, “*The Caraka Saṃhitā*”, a huge treatise on ancient Indian medicine, also mentioned early Samkhya thoughts in its various chapters.

v1.c7.s7.t10.5

Many of the surviving records mentioning the main founders of the school are of a mythical proportion. For instance, *Samkhya karika* recorded in its first half, that “once upon a time, there was

v1.c7.s7.t10.7

Swami Vivekananda

v1.c7.s7.t10.8

a divine figure called Kapila, who descended into the world from the sky”. And in its second half, it went on to go through the school’s genealogy with Kapila unequivocally credited as the very first founding sage of Samkhya, and then it was passed to Asuri, Pañcaśikha Garga, Uluuka and Isvarakrsna. And among the various “founding fathers” of the school, the one who played the most important role in spreading Samkhya was Isvarakrsna (4^th century CE).

v1.c7.s7.t10.9

The earliest foundational texts of the Samkhya school never survived including one particularly important - Samkhya work, *Sastitantra*. The earliest extant work that offers a systematic exposition of the school is the *Samkhya-karika* by Isvarakrsna. Although created hardly any earlier than the foundational texts of other orthodox schools of philosophy in ancient India, due to the fact that most of the major *Samkhya* texts had been lost before the book, it had been widely considered the foundational text of the Samkhya school. Following *Samkhya-karika*, the most significant *Samkhya* works primarily comprised commentaries on the book, with the five existing ones being: *Suvarṇasaptati*, or *Treatise on the Golden Seventy* (translated into Chinese by Paramārth in 6^th century CE); *Yukti-Dipika* by unknown author (around 6^th century CE); *Gaudapada-bhasya* (around 7^th to 8^th centruries CE); “*Mathara-vrtti*” (slightly later than *Gaudapada-bhasya*); and *Tattvakaumudi* by Vacaspati Misra (9^th century CE). The major text of the later Samkhya school is Samkhya-sutra, rumoured to be authored

v1.c7.s7.t10.11

*Bhagavad Gita, Chinese edition (front cover)*

v1.c7.s7.t10.12

[Figure: The Six Paths of Metempsychosis, Dazu Rock Carvings, Chongqing]

v1.c7.s7.t10.13

by Kapila, but actually penned by some unknown author between 14th and 15th century CE. Significant commentaries on the sutra include, *Samkhya-sutra-vrtti* by Aniruddha (15th century CE) and *Samkhya-pravacana-bhasya* by Vijnana-bhiksu (16th century CE). Important works of later Samkhya school also include *Samkhya-sara* by Vijnāna-bhik su. In addition, there is also a Samkhya text by an unknown author, called *Tattvasamasa*, which is widely considered a key text of the later-day Samkhya school.

v1.c7.s7.t10.14

The later-day Samkhya school was heavily influenced by the Vedānta school, and also absorbed quite some elements from *Yoga Sutra*. The Samkhya school during this period differed from the early Samkhya school mainly in that the concept of “Isvara” was introduced, reflecting the school’s efforts to seek middle ground between monism and dualism.

v1.c7.s7.t10.15

An important philosophical influence in ancient India, the theories of this school received a heavy dose of scrutiny from other schools of thought. For instance, many Buddhist and *Vedanta* thinkers once actively analysed and criticised the Samkhya theories.

v1.c7.s7.t10.16

The philosophical theories of the Samkhya school also exerted some influence on the intellectual scene of contemporary India. In modern India, during religious and social reform movements, certain thinkers or philosophers, when engaging in social activities or building philosophical systems, had heavily absorbed or borrowed from *Samkhya* ideas. For example, such famous philosophers in contemporary India as Vivekananda and Aurobindo Ghosh all conducted serious analyses of Samkhya theories. Vivekananda held that dualism was the most prevalent philosophical viewpoint in India, in actuality considering the dualistic theory of the classic Samkhya school as natural. Additionally, he also extensively borrowed from *Samkhya* theories in expounding his epistemology. When studying the yoga school, Ghosh also scrutinised a key concept of the Samkhya shool —— three gunas (*tamas*, *sattva*, and *rajas*), and talked about the significance and roles of the three gunas and the interrelationship among them. Samkhya theories had long been widely regarded as a distinctive part of Indian orthodox philosophy.

v1.c7.s7.t10.17

**Main Theories** - According to the *Samkhya-karika* and commentaries thereon, the basic philosophical system of the Samkhya school can be characterised by dualism and 25 tattvas. “Dualism” refers to the two ultimate realities, Prakriti, matter and Purusha, self (spirit), advocated by the Samkhya school, while 25 tattvas are the 25 basic concepts (including Dualism) of the philosophical system of the Samkhya school. The school considered its basic concepts as “reality” and “truth”, hence the name tattvas (Sanskrit word for “reality”, “realness” and “truth”). Into this philosophical system built around dualism and 25 tattvas, the Samkhya school had also incorporated a series of important sub-theories, including Pre-existence of effect in cause theory, Three gunas theory, the *Three Pramāṇas* theory (Pratyakṣa, Anumāna, and Śabda), and the reincarnation theory.

v1.c7.s7.t10.18

*Transformation Theory (Dualism and 25 tattvas)* - The Samkhya upheld a “transformation” theory, claiming that all things, creatures or phenomena in the world are transformed from a certain kind of fundamental cause. The process of transformation concerns two “ultimate realities” and 25 basic concepts (aka Dualism and 25 tattvas), with “dualism” referring to “Prakriti” and “Purusha” and “25 tattvas” meaning Purusha (Transcendental Self), the uncreated (unmanifest) Prakriti (primordial nature), Mahat/Buddhi (intellect), Ahamkara (ego, consciousness of self), Manas (mind), the five sense-organs, the five motor-organs, the five subtle elements and the five gross elements. These Tattvas are involved throughout the process of transformation of objects.

v1.c7.s7.t10.19

Prakriti is a material entity, while Purusha is a spiritual one. The interplay of the two gives rise to all the phenomena in the world. When affected by Purusha, Prakriti will lose its inner balance, leading to the occurrence of all kinds of worldly phenomena. *Prakriti* gives birth to *buddhi* (rational part or judgmental part of the mind), which further cites *ahankara* (self-awareness or I-am-ness). This on the one hand, engenders *ekadasa — indriya* (11 indriya) ie sight, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, speech, hand, foot, anus, genitals and mind and on the other hand, begets five *panca — tanmatras* ie sound, touch, colour, taste, and odour or smell which further generates five Bhutas, ie space, air, fire, water and earth.

v1.c7.s7.t10.20

A typical philosophical system built around the theoretical core of “transformation”, “dualism and 25 Tattvas” theory constitute a unique philosophical perspective on the occurrence of life phenomena and the creation of the world in ancient India.

v1.c7.s7.t10.21

*A Commentary on Hetuvidya, Qing, Guangxu, Jinling Scriptural Press, 1896*

v1.c7.s7.t10.22

According to the Samkhya school, the transformation of worldly objects or life phenomena is related to both *Prakriti* and *Purusha*, though to varying degrees. Only negative *Prakriti* can directly engender objects, with the positive *Purusha* playing a collaborative role. The Samkhya school offered several arguments to prove the existence of *Prakriti* and *Purusha*.

v1.c7.s7.t10.23

Concerning the existence of *Prakriti*, the No. 15 of *Samkhya-karika* explained that “everything in the world has a limit, for which there must be a fundamental cause. Things are different, but they share a commonality that stems from the same cause. Everything that can be generated must be attributable to a relevant cause. Cause is different from effect. All the different objects in the world are the "effect", from which can be deduced a different "cause". All things must be attributable to a fundamental cause, which ultimately makes them the same thing. Thus, for all these reasons, it can be established with certainty that there exists the fundamental *Prakriti*”.

v1.c7.s7.t10.24

Concerning the existence of *Purusha*, the No. 17 of *Samkhya-karika* explained that “all things gather up for the sake of a user that differ markedly from them — *Purusha*”. The Samkhya school held that all things in the world were composed of three *gunas*: *sattva*, *rajas* and *tamas*, which need one “commander” that can impart consciousness into them, and it is Purusha. The body needs something to rely on, and it is *Purusha*; and things in the world are like food waiting to be eaten, and the eater is *Purusha*. The school claimed that the world was full of pain and suffering, and when “liberated” and delivered, one would feel something separating from him and it is “Purusha”.

v1.c7.s7.t10.25

The Samkhya school maintained that for objects to be created and life phenomena to occur, “Prakriti” and “Purusha” must be combined. To illustrate this point, No. 21 of *Samkhya-karika* analogously explained that “‘Prakriti’ is like a lame person who can see but cannot walk, while ‘Purusha’ is like a blind person who can walk but cannot see. Only by letting the lame person ride on the back of the blind person can they progress together. Likewise, only by combining *Prakriti* and *Purusha* can the 23 tattvas of Samkhya be created, thereby giving rise to all things in the world.”

v1.c7.s7.t10.26

In the Samkhya school’s “transformation” theory, three *gunas* are a key concept that plays a significant role, which concern *Prakriti*, its transformations, as well as the root cause therefor.

v1.c7.s7.t10.27

The Samkhya school held that all things in the world are composed of three *gunas* (qualities), ie sattva, rajas and tamas. Sattva is illumination, enlightening knowledge, and lightness; rajas is energy, passion and expansiveness; and, *tamas* is a binding force and darkness. The No. 12 of *Samkhya-karika* described *sattva* as something that can illuminate and enlighten; *rajas* as something that can build momentum; and *tamas* as something that can inhibit and curb.

v1.c7.s7.t10.28

The school maintained that the three gunas were subject to mutual inhibition, interdependence, mutual generation and interaction, and in different things there might be different compositions of gunas at work, with a particular guna playing a dominant role. *Prakriti* also contains three gunas: when the three gunas are balanced, *Prakriti* will remain latent, but once such a balance is upset, *Prakriti* will give rise to all kinds of worldly phenomena. The upsetting of balance among the three gunas is directly related to the impact of *Purusha* on *Prakriti*.

v1.c7.s7.t10.29

The “three gunas” theory adopted by the Samkhya school, which uses conflict and interaction between different constituents of an object to explain the creation and development of object, serve a uniquely distinctive philosophical approach in ancient India.

v1.c7.s7.t10.30

A large number of philosophical sub-theories fall within the theoretical framework of “dualism and 25 tattvas”, with the most representative ones being the “pre-existence of effect in cause” (Satkaryavada) theory, the pramāṇa (means of valid knowledge) theory and the reincarnation theory.

v1.c7.s7.t10.31

*“Pre-existence of Effect in Cause” Theory (Satkaryavada)* - The Samkhya school upheld a “transformation” theory with regard to the creation of the world, claiming that all things and phenomena in the world can be attributed to a fundamental cause. And accordingly, in terms of causation, it espoused a “pre-existence of effect in cause” theory (*Satkaryavada*), which posits that all things in the world bear the quality of “effect”, with all “effects” being merely the transformations of “causes”. The effect has already existed in the cause, with cause and effect being the explicit and implicit states of the same substance. To illustrate this with a revealing analogy: as fruit comes from seed, seed shall be the “cause” and fruit the “effect”. According to the Samkhya school, however, they are actually the same thing, with seed being only the latent condition of fruit and fruit the patent condition of seed. Seed, before it geminates and grows and develops into fruit, already contains fruit (pre-existence of effect in cause). By extension, it may be postulated that all things in the world are some kind of "effect" as transformed from a fundamental "cause", in which all phenomena have already existed long before they actually occur.

v1.c7.s7.t10.32

The Samkhya school also made persuasive arguments for the "pre-existence of effect in cause" theory (*Satkaryavada*). For instance, the No. nine of *Samkhya-karika* lists five basic arguments for this premise: the first argument, asadakaranat, states that the effect exists in its material cause before its production because no one can produce an effect from a material cause in which that effect does not exist. For example, no one can press oil without sesame. The second argument is upadanagrahanat, which states that because there is an invariable relationship between cause and effect, material cause can produce only that effect with which it is causally related. Only milk can produce yogurt because milk alone is materially related to yogurt. The third argument, *sarvasambhavabhavat*, which states that there is a fixed rule for the production or manifestation of things. A certain thing can be produced only by a certain other thing; it cannot be produced from just anything or anywhere. For example, it is impossible to produce gold and silver from grass. The fourth argument, *saktasya-sakya-karanat*, states that an effect exists in its cause in an unmanifested form before it is produced. For example, potters can manufacture a bottle from clay. The fifth argument, *karanabhavat*, states that if the effect does not exist in the cause, then that which was non-existent would be coming into existence out of nothing. For example, malt is generated from seed.

v1.c7.s7.t10.33

With a heavy emphasis on the inner relationships of object during its development process, this particular causation theory as espoused by the Samkhya school neglects to address the differences between cause and effect, thus making it a frequent target of criticism by other schools of philosophy in ancient India, including Buddhism, which had made a continuous effort to repudiate *Satkaryavada*.

v1.c7.s7.t10.34

*"Three Pramāṇas Theory"* - The Samkhya school attached great importance to means of obtaining knowledge, which was called *Pramāṇa* in ancient Indian philosophy. According to the school, there are three *Pramāṇas*, ie *Pratyakṣa*, *Anumāna*, and *Śabda*.

v1.c7.s7.t10.35

*Pratyakṣa* means direct sense perception; *Anumāna* means logical inference and can be further divided into three kinds. *Purvavat anumāna* (subsequent inference) – is that which has an antecedent, a cause, just as, on account of the dark clouds, you infer rain. *śeṣvat anumāna* (antecedent inference) – when you see muddy water flowing down a river, you infer a torrential rain upstream. *Sāmānyato dṛṣṭa* (analogous inference) – when you see a tree blooming in one place, you infer another such tree is flowering in another place.

v1.c7.s7.t10.36

*Śabda* means opinions from reliable people, luminary and scriptures. In Samkhya school, *Śabda* means precept or opinions from the founder of the school and philosophers of previous generation in fact.

v1.c7.s7.t10.37

The Samkhya Pramāṇas Theory and the Pramāṇas Theory espoused by Buddhism, *Nyāya* and Jainism have both noticeable similarities and distinct differences. For instance, the Samkhya school's analysis of Anumāna is not as nearly as complicated as that by Buddhism and *Nyāya*, while in categorising Pramāṇa, Samkhya's theory is rather similar to that of Jainism.

v1.c7.s7.t10.38

*Reincarnation and Liberation* - Like the majority of Indian philosophical schools, the Samkhya school also espoused the theory of "reincarnation and liberation". According to *samkhya* philosophy, the universe is full of pain and misery. It divided the state of reincarnation into three realms: demi-god realm, animal realm, and human realm. The school believed that things stuck in reincarnation cannot rid themselves of pain and misery, and life has three kinds of pain: Adhatmika; Adibhoutika; and Adhidaivika.

v1.c7.s7.t10.39

*Adhatmika*: pain due to intra-organic psychophysical which includes all mental and physical suffering. For example, bodily suffering due to wind-heat discomfort and mental suffering due to love and hate.

v1.c7.s7.t10.40

*Adibhoutika*: extra-organic natural causes like human suffering due to hurt from beasts or landslide.

v1.c7.s7.t10.41

*Adhidaivika*: supernatural causes like human suffering due to cold, hot, windy, rainy and stormy weather.

v1.c7.s7.t10.42

According to Samkhya school, liberation means complete cessation of all suffering. Supposedly there are numerous ways to achieve liberation, but some are far from effective or even downright ineffective. Samkhya states that true liberation can be achieved only through the correct discriminative knowledge of reality. Samkhyans believe the key to mokṣa is differentiating from *Puruṣha* and *Prakṛiti* using vivek (discrimination) by gaining a thorough insight into the theory of "dualism and 25 tattvas", which in turn would lead to renunciation and indifference to material creation, thus ending the cycle of reincarnation and obliterating the possibilities for pain and thereby, achieving true liberation. Therefore, it can be said that the Samkhyan literation theory is wisdom-based, as in Samkhya, the highest wisdom is "dualism and 25 tattvas", and *Vijnapti-matrata-siddhi-sastra*

v1.c7.s7.t10.44

only by acquiring this kind of wisdom can liberation be finally attained.

v1.c7.s7.t10.45

There is an intimate relationship between the Samkhya school and Yoga school. Many Samkhya practices are heavily yogic, while the Yoga school draws upon the Samkhya theory of “dualism and 25 tattvas” in establishing its own philosophical system. The main differences between the two schools lie in that Samkhya put an emphasis on the transformation theory, while the Yoga school attached importance to a religious way of practice. In addition, the Yoga school also enshrines Shiva as the Supreme Lord, while the early Samkhya school didn’t have a creator-god concept at all.

v1.c7.s7.t10.46

**Spread and Influence in China -** The theories of the Samkhya school were spread to China along with Buddhism and exerted some influence on the intellectual scene of ancient China. It’s worth noting that the spread of the school in China was mostly related to Buddhism. The school had been violently criticised by Buddhism in its native India, with Samkhya thoughts widely cited in Indian Buddhist scriptures. These Indian Buddhist records were later translated into Chinese and introduced to China. Some of the major Samkhya texts were also brought to China by Buddhist monks and translated into Chinese, including the *Samkhya-karika* and the *Suvarṇasaptati* (translated by Master Zhen Di), the latter of which had also been incorporated into the Chinese Buddhist Canon, a phenomenon rarely seen among Indian philosophical literature, allowing Chinese people to gain a systematic understanding of the theoretical framework and characteristics of the Samkhya school.

v1.c7.s7.t10.47

Chinese Buddhist scriptures also contain extensive references to the founders of the Samkhya school and their theories. For instance, in his “*Great Commentary on the Nyayapravesa*”, Kuiji gave a genealogical account of the Samkhya school, with its “founding fathers” listed one by one, starting with Kapila, who, according to the book, “is a divine figure with yellow-reddish skin”.

v1.c7.s7.t10.48

“His disciple, a leader in the 18 groups of disciples, is named Varsya, which means”rain” because he was born in the rainy season, with the followers called “rain congregation.” Tianzhu Sanskrit is “Monk Qu She Sa Tan Luo”, called “Shulun” in Chinese (meaning: number theory), namely “wisdom number theory” also known as “wisdom number”; as “numbers” create everything in the world, with “theory” developed from and creating the “numbers”, it is also known as “number theory.”

v1.c7.s7.t10.49

Buddhist Master Puguang also offered a brief overview of the Samkhya theories in volume 11 of his “Commentary on Abhidharma-kosa”, with focus placed on the school’s 25 tattvas. “The Samkhya clan developed a “25 tattvas”. The first tattva, I (ie Sanskrit), also known as “normal me” with thinking as the body, instinct is just a bear rather than initiator. The other 24 tattvas talk about those bears or used by me (ie Sanskrit).

v1.c7.s7.t10.50

The “*Vijñāptimātratāsiddhi*” translated by Hsüan-tsang also contains parts repudiating the theories of the Samkhya school, in which Yogacara thinkers declared Samkhya theories invalid. For instance, chapter one of the book states that “if 23 tattvas are composed of three gunas, then they shall have no “prakriti” whatsoever, just like woods, as composed of many trees, or armies, as composed of many soldiers, have no prakriti”. In addition, the book also reasoned that “if the 23 tattvas are substantial, they shall be independent of each other, just like the three gunas; and if the three gunas are 23 tattvas, they shall be composed of three gunas too. According to this logic, both the 23 tattvas and the three gunas are made of multiple elements, and according to commonly held philosophical views, things composed of multiple elements have no prakriti”. The book also challenged Samkhya’s “three gunas” theory as unreasonable or invalid, with volume one arguing that “if things are all made of three gunas according to Samkhyans, then there shall not be differences between objects, there shall not be differences between karma, cognitive object, cognitive way, material elements and various organs, with one single cognitive organ sufficient enough to understand everything, and there shall be no differences between sattva and tamas, cleanness and dirtiness, and Pratyakṣa and Anumāna”. According to “*Vijñāptimātratāsiddhi*”, the viewpoint from Samkhya is absurd, the so-called substance is a product of false ponder and it should be refuted.

v1.c7.s7.t10.51

These dedicated parts in Chinese Buddhist scriptures, either recounting or repudiating Samkhya theories, along with the Suvarṇasaptati translated by Master Zhen Di, have allowed Chinese people some important insights into the Indian Samkhya school.

v1.c7.s7.t10.52

The Samkhya theories also received a lot of scholarly attention in modern China, with the Samkhya-karika translated entirely into Chinese and the *Samkhya-sutra* partially translated into Chinese. Many modern Chinese scholars focus on the study of the Samkhya school, with some dealing specifically with the philosophical system of the school, others concentrating on a particular theory of the school and still others studying the relationship between Samkhya theories and Buddhist theories. Relevant papers have been frequently published in Chinese scholarly journals or included in professional proceedings. There are also chapters dedicated to the Samkhya school in Chinese books about oriental philosophy.

v1.c7.s7.t10.53

In Indian philosophy courses offered in Chinese universities or research institutions, the theories of the Samkhya school are also extensively mentioned. Some courses specially deal with Samkhya classics, while others focus on particular Samkhya subjects. In addition, some masters’ theses focussed on the samkhya philosophy, and in some professional conferences or symposiums held in China, and the theories of the school or papers published on the school were also discussed with great interest.

v1.c7.s7.t10.54

(*Yao Weiqun*)

Cites (12)