A History of Sanskrit Literature c33.s6.9

c33.s6.9

The *Sāṁkhya Sūtra*¹ is a late text; it is not used in the *Sarvadarçanasaṁgraha* and is commented on by Aniruddha (*c.* 1450). It may contain older matter, but the Sūtras given by Siddharṣi in the *Upamitibhavaprapañcā kathā* are not in it, and we do not know if he did not invent them, though that is not very likely. The system here is fully developed and scripture is invoked in support of it. Interesting is book iv in which we find brief references to illustrative stories; the comment explains these allusions; recognition of the distinction between spirit and matter comes by instruction as in the case of the king's son who, brought up by a Çabara, has the truth of his origin revealed to him and at once assumes the princely bearing and mien. So the forgetting of truth brings sorrow as in the case of the frog-maiden, who was married by a king on his promise never to let her see water; one day, unluckily, he forgot and let her have some when tired, with the result that he had to bear the pain of her return to her frog shape. In addition to Aniruddha's comment,² we have the curious work of Vijñānabhikṣu³ in which, anticipating much modern opinion, he seeks to deal with the Sāṁkhya not as opposed to the Vedānta but as representing one aspect of the truth of that system. He also wrote the *Sāṁkhyasāra*,⁴ a brief introduction to the topic, and his date is *c.* 1650. Before 1600 was written the catechism *Tattvasamāsa*,⁵ which has been held to be an old text, but which at any rate is not of much philosophic importance.