Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c94: Section VIII. Relation of Sāṅkhya, Yoga and Tarka to Dharmaśāstra

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c94

Language
English

Contents

Section VIII. Relation of Sāṅkhya, Yoga and Tarka to Dharmaśāstra

v7.c94.2

Dharmaśāstra and Sāṅkhya.

v7.c94.3

Sāṅkhya is one of the well-known six *darśanas* (philosophical points of view)

v7.c94.4

Śaṅkarācārya in his *bhāṣya* ²²⁰⁸ on V. S. II 2. 17 says that Manu and others who were deeply versed in the Veda took up to some extent in their works the doctrine of *pradhāna* being the cause of the world with the idea of relying on that part of its doctrine viz. the effect is (already) existent in the cause. Similarly, on V. S. I. 4. 28 he says that great effort was made by the Sūtrakāra and himself for refuting the doctrines of the Sāṅkhya system (and not for the refutation of the theory of atoms being the cause of the world), since the Sāṅkhya system is near to the Vedānta as it accepts the view of the non-difference of cause and effect and as some Dharmasūtra writers like Devala have had resort to it in their works. On V. S. II. 1. 3 Saṅkarācārya remarks that, though there are many *smṛtis* dealing with metaphysical topics, great effort was made for the refutation of Sāṅkhya and Yoga only, since the two systems are well-known in the world as means of securing the highest goal of man, as they have been accepted by *śiṣṭas* (respectable and learned people) and are supported by Vedic indications in their favour (as in Śvetāśvatara Up. 'tat-kāraṇam sānkhyayogābhipannam' VI. 13). It would be shown later on that Manu and Devala rely on and propound (some) Sāṅkhya doctrines.

v7.c94.5

²²⁰⁸ प्रधानकारणवादो वेदविद्भिरपि कैश्चिन्मन्वादिभिः सत्कार्यत्वाद्यंशोपजीवनाभिप्रायेणोपनिबद्धः । अयं तु परमाणुकारणवादो न कैश्चिदपि शिष्टैः केनचिदप्यंशेन परिगृहीत इत्यत्यन्तमेवानादरणीयो वेदवादिभिः । शङ्कर on वे सू II. 2 17 (अपरिग्रहाच्चात्यन्तमनपेक्षा); "ईक्षतेर्नाशब्दम्"-इत्यारभ्य प्रधानकारणवादः सूत्रैरेव पुनः पुनराशङ्क्य निराकृतः तस्य हि पक्षस्योपोद्वलकानि कानिचिल्लिङ्गाभासानि वेदान्तेष्वापतिन मन्दमतीन्प्रतिभान्तीति। स च कार्यकारणानन्यत्वाभ्युपगमात्प्रत्यासन्नो वेदान्तवादस्य । देवलप्रभृतिभिश्च कैश्चिद्धर्मसूत्रकारैः स्वग्रन्थेष्वाश्रितस्तेन तत्प्रतिषेधे यत्नोऽतीव कृतो नाण्वादिकारणवादप्रतिषेधे ।” शाङ्करभाष्य on वे. सू I. 4. 28.

v7.c94.6

It would not be irrelevant to say a few words about the origin and development of the Sānkhya system. This (rise of Sānkhya) is one of the most difficult problems in Indian philosophy. A good many works and papers have been written on the Sānkhya system.²¹⁰⁹ As to what the original Sānkhya teaching revised in the Sānkhyakārikā of Īśvarakṛṣṇa was, no generally accepted answer can be given. From the 5th century A. D at least the Sānkhyakārikā of Īśvarakṛṣṇa has been regarded as the foremost exponent of the Sānkhya. The Sānkhyakārikā and a commentary on it were translated into Chinese about 546 A D by Paramārtha, originally a brāhmaṇa of Bhāradvāja gotra and a śramaṇa from Ujjayinī (vide *BEFEO*, 1904, p 60). Śaṅkarācārya on V. S I. 4. 11 quotes the whole of the 3rd verse of the Sānkhyakārikā and the first quarter of it on V. S. I 4. 8. But the Sānkhya system, it appears, went through several phases. Chinese sources say that there were eighteen Sānkhya schools (p 2 of Johnston's "Early Sānkhya," quoting Takakusu in *BEFEO*, 1904, p. 58).

v7.c94.7

²¹⁰⁹ Those interested in Sānkhya may consult the following: Fitz-Edward Hall's 'Introduction to Sānkhya-pravacana-bhāṣya' (B. I. Series 1856); 'Sāṅkhya-Kārikā' exposition of the system of Kapila, translation and notes by John Davies (first published in 1881, 2nd ed in 1957, Calcutta). Richard Garbe's 'Die Sāṅkhya Philosophie', 1894, and Introduction to his edition of the Sāṅkhyapravacana-bhāṣya of Vijñānabhikṣu in the Harvard Oriental Series; 'Six systems of philosophy' by Prof Max-Muller ed. of (1903) pp. 219-330, 'the Philosophy of the Upaniṣhads' by Paul Deussen translated by A S Geden (1906) pp 239-255, Prof. A B Keith's Sāṅkhya system (1924); 'Early Sānkhya' by E. H. Johnston (Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain, 1937). Das-Gupta's 'Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, pp. 208-273 (1922). Dr. Radhakrishnan's 'Indian Philosophy'. Vol. II, pp 248-335 (1927) and 'Philosophy, Eastern and Western', Vol. I, pp. 242-257, 'Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanisads' by Prof A. B Keith, Vol. II, pp. 535-551, 'Beginning of Epic Sāṅkhya' by Dr W. Ruben in ABORI, Vol 37 (1956) pp. 174-189, 'Sāṅkhya in the Mokṣaparva' by Shri Jayadev Yogendra in J of Bom. Uni. (1957), Vol. 26, New Series, Arts number, pp. 123-141; 'Studies in Sāṅkhya, Pañcaśikha and Caraka' in ABORI Vol 38. pp. 140-147 and 'Studies in Sāṅkhya', the teaching of Pañcaśikha in the Mahābhārata' ABORI, Vol. 38, pp. 233-244, both by Shri V. M. Bedekar.

v7.c94.8

There is the Sānkhyasūtra or Sānkhyapravacanasūtra attributed to Kapila (published with two commentaries viz that of Aniruddha and parts of the *Ṭīkā* of Vedāntin Mahādeva edited by Garbe in B I. Series 1881). This is a late work composed about 1400 A. D as shown by Garbe in his Introduction and by Fitz-Edward Hall in his learned Introduction to the edition of the Sāṅkhyapravacana-bhāṣya (B. I. Series, 1856). There is an edition of 23 sūtras called Tattvasamāsa with a commentary called Kramadīpikā in the Chowkhamba Sanskrit series which has also published several other brief late works that are passed over here. Several commentaries on the Sāṅkhyakārikā have been published. The earliest appears to be the one translated into Chinese by Paramārtha about 546 A. D., which has been reconstructed into Sanskrit from the Chinese by the learned Pandit Aiyaswami Sastri and published (in 1944) in the Sri. Venkatesvara Oriental Series with a valuable Introduction; another commentary styled Māṭharavṛtti was published (in 1922) in the Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series. Dr. Belvalkar (in ABORI vol. V. pp. 133–161) contributed a long and scholarly paper on the Māṭharavṛtti in which he holds that the Māṭharavṛtti is the original of the commentary translated into Chinese by Paramārtha together with some accretions made from time to time, that Gauḍapāda's commentary is a simplified abridgment of the Māṭharavṛtti (p. 148), that the Māṭharavṛtti cannot be placed later than 450 A D. (p. 155) and that Īśvarakṛṣṇa cannot be assigned to a date later than 250 A. D (p. 168). Prof A. B. Keith in 'Sāṅkhya system' (p. 51) places Īśvarakṛṣṇa at a date not later than 325 A. D. Another early commentary is the Yuktidīpikā of an unnamed author edited from a single ms. by Shri Pulinabehari Chakravarti in Calcutta Sanskrit Series (1938). This is a very valuable commentary and has been very competently edited even from a single ms, though there are a few gaps here and there. That commentary is replete with quotations and polemical discussions, mentions several Sāṅkhya teachers who differed among themselves and whose opinions are cited on many topics. For example, vide under Vindhyavāsin below. It mentions some ācāryas that are hardly ever mentioned in any Sāṅkhya work. It frequently cites an author called Pañcādhikaraṇa (vide pp. 6, 108, 114, 132, 144, 147, 148 where two Āryās apparently of Pañcādhikaraṇa are quoted). Another hitherto unknown Sāṅkhyācārya mentioned by this com. is Paurika on p. 169 and p. 175, who holds the surprising view²²¹⁰ that there is a separate *pradhāna* for each Puruṣa. Patañjali is frequently mentioned on pp. 32 (who denied the existence of Ahaṅkāra), 108, 132 (there are 12 *karaṇas* and not 13 as S. Kārikā in verse 32 asserts), 145, 149, 175; Vārṣagaṇāḥ (in the plural) are mentioned on pp. 39, 67, 95, 102, 133, 145, 170; Vārṣagaṇa (pp. 6, 108) and Vārṣagaṇavīra (on pp. 72, 108, 175) styled bhagavān on p 72 and Vṛṣagaṇavīra (on p. 103 probably meaning 'the son of Vṛṣagaṇa'); all these refer to the views of Vārṣagaṇas Pañcaśikha (p. 31 in the plural, p. 61, p. 175) is mentioned and one passage which is quoted in the Vyāsabhāṣya (on Y. S. I 4) and ascribed to Pañcaśikha by Vācaspati is quoted by the Yuktidīpikā on p. 41 as Śāstra. From pp. 113 and 129 it appears that the author of the com. was a Vedāntin.²²¹¹ It is probable that he flourished between 500 and 700 A. D., since he quotes (on p 39) Dinnāga's definition of 'pratyakṣa' and is not cited by Vācaspati and other commentators on the Sāṅkhya

v7.c94.9

²²¹⁰ प्रतिपुरुषमन्यत् प्रधानं शरीराद्यर्थं करोति। तेषां च माहात्म्यशरीरप्रधानं यदा प्रवर्तते तदेतराण्यपि, तन्निवृत्तौ च तेषामपि निवृत्तिरिति पौरिकः साङ्ख्याचार्यो मन्यते। युक्ति० p. 169.

v7.c94.10

²²¹¹ सङ्कल्पमूलोऽयिउद्विधप्रसूतवृत्तो हि अयं यतिरिन्द्रियाणामन्तःकरणस्य च सवृत्तिनिरुपरोधीते। एकाग्र एकाग्रेऽमोऽविद्यापर्वणोऽतिक्रान्तः परस्य ब्रह्मण प्रत्यनन्तरो भवति p 113; सोऽय धर्मादिषु प्रत्यक्षस्त्यनिपक्षापक्रान्त. सञ्चाराशी विनिवृत्ताभिमानो ज्ञाननिष्ठ सविशुद्धयोनिराचेरेण परं ब्रह्मोपपद्यत इति। p 129

v7.c94.11

Gauḍapāda composed a commentary on the S. Kārikā but only on 69 verses published in the Ch. S. Series. The Commentary called Sāṅkhyatattvakaumudī by the famous writer Vācaspatimiśra was published in the Chowkhamba S. S in 1919. A commentary called Jayamaṅgalā ascribed to Śaṅkarācārya (in the colophon) on the S. Kārikā was published at Calcutta in 1933 by Sri H. Sarma with a brief but interesting Introduction by Principal Gopinātha Kavirāj (vide also I. H. Q. vol. V. pp. 417-431) where Sri H. Sarma tries to prove that the Jayamaṅgalā is earlier than Vācaspatimiśra. Vijñānabhikṣu composed (about 1550 A. D) a bhāṣya on the Sāṅkhyapravacanasūtra. The Sūtrakāra and Vijñānabhikṣu make efforts to establish the impossible thesis that the teachings of the Sāṅkhya system are not in irreconcilable conflict with the doctrine of a personal God or with the Advaita Vedānta The Māṭharavṛtti on S. Kārikā 71 furnishes the names of certain teachers that flourished between Pañcaśikha and Īśvarakṛṣṇa viz Bhārgava, Ulūka (Kauśika?), Vālmīki, Hārīta, Devala and others, while the Jayamaṅgalā mentions Garga and Gautama as Sāṅkhya teachers after Pañcaśikha (vide note one in Pandit Aiyaswami's edition on p 99). The Sanskrit commentary reconstructed from the Chinese version of Paramārtha (p. 98 of Pandit Aiyaswami's edition states that the line of teachers and pupils from Pañcaśikha is: Pañcaśikha-Gārgya-Ulūka-Vārṣagaṇa-Īśvarakṛṣṇa. It is clear from the above that several teachers, in any case not less than five or six, intervened between Pañcaśikha and Īśvarakṛṣṇa. From a somewhat mutilated passage²²¹² of the Yuktidīpikā (p. 175) it appears that at least ten persons intervened between Pañcaśikha and Īśvarakṛṣṇa. If this be accepted and if Īśvarakṛṣṇa be assigned to about 250 A. D., then Pañcaśikha cannot be placed later than the first century B. C. and may be much earlier still. On ‘tena ca bahudhā kṛtaṁ tantram’ (S. Kārikā 70) the Yuktidīpikā speaks of *bhagavat* Pāñcaśikha as ‘daśama-kumāra’ (tenth son of Prajāpati?) and states that he expounded the śāstra to many persons such as Janaka and Vasiṣṭha and thereby identifies Pañcaśikha with the teacher Pañcaśikha mentioned by the Śāntiparva (vide note 2186 below).

v7.c94.12

²²¹² अन्य तु शास्त्रस्य भगवतोऽग्रं प्रवृत्तत्वात् न शास्त्रान्तरवत् यज्ञा॰ द्वाभ्यां वर्षसहस्राभ्यामाख्यातुम् । संक्षेपेण तु ज्ञान ॰॰॰ (gap) हारीत-वाद्धलि-कैरात- पौरिक-ऋषभेश्वर-पञ्चाधिकरण-पतञ्जलि-वार्षगण्य-कौण्डिण्य-मूकादिकाच्छिष्यपरम्परायागत etc । युक्ति॰ p 175.

v7.c94.13

Vācaspatimiśra in his commentary on the Yogasūtrabhāṣya (II. 23) sets out eight alternative views among Sāṅkhya writers on the question of ‘darśana’ and ‘adarśana’ and remarks that the fourth out of the eight alternatives is the real doctrine of the Sāṅkhyaśāstra²²¹³ From about the 5th century A D. the Sāṅkhyakārikā has been regarded as the standard work on the Sāṅkhya system. The S. Kārikā itself states that the holy śāstra was expounded by Kapilamuni to Āsuri, who expounded²²¹⁴ it to Pañcaśikha and the latter expounded the (Sāṅkhya) system to several disciples and that it came down to Īśvarakṛṣṇa in a succession of teachers and disciples, who summarised it in Āryā verses. Kapila-muni is here said to be the first promulgator of the Sāṅkhya.

v7.c94.14

²²¹³ On ‘इत्येते शास्त्रगता विकल्पाः’ of व्यासभाष्य on योगसूत्र II. 23 वाचस्पति remarks : ‘तदेवं विकल्प्य चतुर्थं विकल्पं स्वीकर्तुमितरेषां विकल्पानां सांख्यशास्त्रगतानां सर्वपुरुषसाधारन्येन भोगवैचित्र्याभावप्रसङ्गेन दूषयति इत्येते शास्त्रगता इति ।’

v7.c94.15

²²¹⁴ एतत्पवित्रमग्र्यं मुनिरासुरयेऽनुकम्पया प्रददौ। आसुरिरपि पञ्चशिखाय तेन च बहुधा कृतं तन्त्रम्॥ शिष्यपरम्परयागतमीश्वरकृष्णेन चैतदार्याभिः। संक्षिप्तमार्यमतिना सम्यग्विज्ञाय सिद्धान्तम्॥ सां. का 70-71. It should be noticed that Gauḍapāda comments only on 69 verses and omits these two and a subsequent verse ‘सप्तत्यां किल येऽर्थास्तेऽर्थाः कृत्स्नस्य षष्टितन्त्रस्य। आख्यायिकाविरहिताः परवादविवर्जिताश्चापि॥, which means that all the matters contained in the whole Saṣṭitantra (of Pañcaśikha) are contained in the seventy verses (of the Sāṅkhyakārikā), excluding the illustrative stories and the controversies with others. The Sāṅkhyakārikā is known as Sāṅkhyasaptati and in Chinese as ‘Suvarṇasaptati.

v7.c94.16.1

Before proceeding further the most characteristic and fundamental conceptions of the standard Sāṅkhya must be set out. The most fundamental conception is that there are two entirely distinct essences existing from eternity, viz. *prakṛti* (i. e. nature or matter) also called *pradhāna* and *avyakta*, and *puruṣa* (soul or spirit, the knowing subject). The 2nd fundamental conception is that puruṣas are many. Another most characteristic feature of the Sāṅkhya system is the doctrine of three²²¹⁵ *guṇas* (factors) called *sattva* (light, intelligent), *rajas* (energetic, active, domineering), *tamas* (coarse, inert, enveloping, dark). Pradhāna or prakṛti or avyakta is said to be constituted by the three guṇas (triguṇātmaka) when they are in equilibrium (Sattvarajastamasām sāmyāvasthā). The Sāṅkhya analysed all physical and mental phenomena. The lowest factor is the heavy impenetrable matter and coarse foolish impulses. They are called *tamas* (described as *guru*, heavy and *varaṇaka*, enveloping). Then there is the factor of constant change in the physical world as well as in the mental. This is called *rajas* (*cala*, changing and *upaṣṭambhaka*, exciting, as the S. Kārikā puts it). The third factor or element in the world is the varied operation of consciousness that leads to knowledge and experience, which is called *Sattva* (*laghu*, light as opposed to the coarse, merely material objects and *prakāśaka*, luminous, as contrasted with *tamas*).

v7.c94.16.2

These three factors or elements combine in various proportions and make up the evolving universe. The three are called guṇas from several points of view viz they are qualities, they also bind as with a rope the Puruṣa to *saṁsāra*. The basis of the universe is to be found in the guṇas. Pradhāna is not different from the guṇas, but it is only the name of the primordial matter before evolution starts. Prakṛti being *anādi* and eternal, the Sāṅkhya system did not postulate God as creator, and held God to be a superfluity. The Sāṅkhya propounds a theory of cosmic evolution which is practically as reasonable as any modern theory of evolution. It is probably the earliest attempt to furnish an answer from reason alone to the questions about the origin of the world, about the nature of man and his relation to the physical world and man's future destiny. In the nineteenth century mind and matter were held to be entirely different and atoms were supposed to be indivisible. Modern physics has reduced matter to energy but the nature of this last also is a mystery. Under the Sāṅkhya system, *puruṣa* or *prakṛti* or both serve no religious purpose. There is no definite or convincing answer as to why puruṣa becomes entangled in the web of prakṛti. The Sāṅkhya simply says that as a result of non-discrimination puruṣa somehow becomes entangled. The Vedāntasūtra refers to *pradhāna* as smārta in I. 2. 19 and as '*ānumānika*' in I. 4. 1. From Prakṛti evolves *mahān* (i. e.

v7.c94.16.3

buddhi, consciousness) from which arises *ahaṅkāra*, from which evolve on the one hand the five tanmātras (subtle elements, viz. śabda, sparśa, gandha, rasa, rūpa) and on the other hand *manas* (mind) and the ten *indriyas* (sense organs). From the five subtle elements are evolved the five great elements, earth, water, tejas, vāyu and ākāśa (ether). These are twentyfour²²¹⁶ *tattvas* (categories) and puruṣa is 25th. Pradhāna is distinct from puruṣa and serves the purpose of puruṣa (who is passive and a *sākṣi*) who is distinct from the evolutes of prakṛti and is *bhoktṛ* (and not *kartṛ*). The Sāṅkhya²²¹⁷ does not admit God Prakṛti and puruṣa come together in order that the latter may see its working; just as a blind man and a cripple (a lame man) may come together (and the blind man may carry the lame man on his shoulder, the latter showing the way and both may reach their destination by this joint effort)²²¹⁸ When puruṣa realizes the difference between himself²²¹⁹ and the guṇas constituting Prakṛti he is liberated. Both Sāṅkhya and Yoga treat the external world as real. They both postulate plurality of souls (puruṣas), that are eternal and unchanging. This latter is one of the most crucial differences between Sāṅkhya and advaita Vedānta. It is not necessary for our purpose in this chapter to go into greater details. One more doctrine of the Sāṅkhya is called *satkāryavāda* i. e. the theory that the effect already exists in the cause and does not arise from nothing (S.

v7.c94.16.4

Kārikā, verse 9); compare Chān. Up. VI. 2. 2 (kathamasataḥ sajjāyeta) and Gītā II. 16 (nāsato vidyate bhāvo).

v7.c94.17

²²¹⁵ सत्त्वं लघु प्रकाशकमिष्टमुपष्टम्भकं चलं च रजः। गुरु वरणकमेव तमः प्रदीपवच्चार्थतो वृत्तिः॥ सां का. 13. गुणाः are so called because they multiply (गुणयतीति) and evolve objects Compare 'मोहात्मकं तमस्तेषा रज एषा प्रवर्तकम्। प्रकाशबहुलाश्च सत्त्वं ज्याय इहोच्यते॥ वनपर्व 212 4 and गीता 14. 5-18 for a discourse on the three guṇas, particularly the following 'सत्त्वं रजस्तम इति गुणाः प्रकृतिसम्भवाः। V. 5. तत्र सत्त्वं निर्मलत्वात् प्रकाशकमनामयम्। सुखसङ्गेन बध्नाति ज्ञानसङ्गेन चानघ। verse 6. रजो रागात्मकं विद्धि तृष्णासङ्गसमुद्भवम्। verse 7. On वे सू II 2 10 शङ्कराचार्य notes that the Sāṅkhya system presented contradictions in the days of the V. S 'परस्परविरुद्धश्चायं सांख्यानामभ्युपगमः। क्वचित्सप्तेन्द्रियाण्यनुक्रामन्ति क्वचिदेकादश। तथा क्वचित्महत्तत्त्वान्महत्सर्गमुपदिशन्ति क्वचिदहङ्कारात्। तथा क्वचित्त्रीण्यन्तःकरणानि वर्णयन्ति क्वचिदेकमिति।' The seven indriyas would be the skin, five karmendriyas and mind, the three antaḥkaraṇas would be buddhi, ahaṅkāra and manas. The one antaḥkaraṇa would be buddhi.

v7.c94.18

²²¹⁶ In V. S. I. 4 11 the *pūrvapakṣa* is advanced as follows.(after quoting Br. Up IV. 4. 17 'yasmin pañca pañcajanā) तथा पञ्चविंशतिसंख्यया यावन्तः संख्येया आकाशयन्ते तावन्त्येव च तत्त्वानि सांख्यैः संख्यायन्ते 'मूलप्रकृतिरविकृतिर्महदाद्याः प्रकृतिविकृतयः सप्त। षोडशकश्च विकारो न प्रकृतिर्न विकृतिः पुरुषः॥'. This last verse is सा. का 3.

v7.c94.19

²²¹⁷ The Sāṅkhya-pravacana-sūtra (I. 92-93) states 'ईश्वरासिद्धेः, मुक्तबद्धयोरन्यतराभावान्न तत्सिद्धिः।'

v7.c94.20

²²¹⁸ पुरुषस्य दर्शनार्थं कैवल्यार्थं तथा प्रधानस्य। पङ्ग्वन्धवदुभयोरपि संयोगस्तत्कृतः सर्गः। सां का 21 The sixty topics dealt with in the Ṣaṣṭitantra, according (*Continued from last page*) to the युक्तिदीपिका p 2 verses 10-12 and the राजवार्त्तिक quoted by Vācaspati in his commentary साङ्ख्यतत्त्वकौमुदी, were: प्रधानास्तित्वमेकत्वमर्थवत्त्वमथान्यता। पाराथ्र्यं च तथाऽनैक्यं वियोगो योग एव च। शेषवृत्तिरकॢप्तत्वं मौलिकाथीः स्मृता दश। विपर्यय पञ्चविधस्तथोक्ता नव तुष्टयः। करणानामसामर्थ्यमष्टाविंशतिधा मतम्। इति षष्टि पदार्थानामष्टाभि सह सिद्धिभिः॥ साङ्ख्यतत्त्वकौमुदी ed by Ganganatha Jha, Bombay, 1896) Vide सा का. 47 for the enumeration of 50 topics (in addition to the ten basic ones in the verse प्रधानास्ति०) The अहिर्बुध्न्यसंहिता in chap XII 20-29 sets out the sixty topics of Sāṅkhya-tantra, but they differ from those enumerated in the Rājawārtika quoted by Vācaspati

v7.c94.21

²²¹⁹ धर्मेण गमनमूर्ध्व गमनमधस्ताद्भवत्यधर्मेण। ज्ञानेन चापवर्गो विपर्ययादिष्यते बन्धः॥ सां कारिका 44, compare गीता 14 18 'ऊर्ध्वं गच्छन्ति &c.' शङ्कराचार्य on वे सू. I. 4. 4 states 'ईषरेण च सांरुये. प्रधाने प्रवर्त्यते गुणपुरुषान्तरज्ञानात्कैवल्यमिति वदद्भिः ।'.

v7.c94.22

It is difficult to assign a definite date to the Sāṅkhya-kārikā. As Paramārtha translated the Kārikā as well as commentary on it into Chinese in about 546 A. D. the Kārikā cannot in any case be placed later than about 250-300 A. D. It may be earlier by a few centuries. Umbeka in his commentary on the Ślokavārtika of Kumārila mentions an author called Mādhava as ‘Sāṅkhyanāyaka’ and Yuan Chwang also refers to a Sāṅkhya teacher called Mādhava. Dr. Raghavan in ‘Sarūpa-Bhāratī’ (pp 162-164) shows that Mādhava was really a destructive critic of Sāṅkhya, that the proper reading is ‘Sāṅkhyanāśaka-Mādhava’ and that he was probably earlier than even Dinnāga and Dharmakīrti (i. e. earlier than 500 A. D.).

v7.c94.23.1

Śaṅkarācārya in the passage quoted in n. 2208 remarks that certain Upaniṣad passages may be relied upon as apparently supporting the Sāṅkhya system. Some of the Upaniṣad passages that either foreshadow Sāṅkhya doctrines or employ words that have technical meanings in the Sāṅkhya system would be cited.²²²⁰ But one passage from the Atharvaveda X. 8. 43 deserves notice, viz. 'the knowers of Brahma know that *yakṣa* endowed with ātman which abides in the lotus with nine gates (the physical body) covered by three guṇas.' With this may be compared Śv. Up. III. 18 and Gītā V. 13 (navadvāre pure dehī). The Muṇḍaka Up. states 'From Him are born prāṇa, mind, all indriyas, the five elements, and sky, wind, jyotis (tejas), waters and the earth.' The Kaṭha Up refers to indriyas, the objects of senses, mind, buddhi, mahān, avyakta, puruṣa as a rising series, similar to that of the Sāṅkhya with one exception viz the Up. does not mention *ahaṅkāra* and holds that *buddhi* and *mahān* are different, while the official Sāṅkhya identifies them. It is, therefore, clear that the evolution in these two Upaniṣads is very similar to the theory of evolution stated by the classical Sāṅkhya, the only difference being that the Upaniṣads postulate a supreme Creator (that produces the cosmos) while Sāṅkhya drops the creator and accepts the evolutionary series only. On V. S I. 2. 12 Śaṅkarācārya cites the verse 'dvā suparṇā sayujā' (which is Muṇḍaka Up. III 1. 1, Śv Up III. 1 and also Ṛg. I. 164.

v7.c94.23.2

20) and explains it, as referring to the individual self (jīva) and the Highest Spirit (paramātman) The ācārya then mentions the argument of a predecessor who relies upon Paiṅgirahasya-brāhmaṇa where the latter half of the verse is explained as mentioning *sattva* (buddhi) and *kṣetrajña* (i. e. the individual self). This indicates that some took that verse as putting forward Sāṅkhya ideas. The Kaṭha Up III. 4 states that the description of the individual soul as the enjoyer (bhoktṛ) results from the union of the ātman with organs of sense and the mind. The Śvetāśvataropaniṣad expressly ²²²¹ refers to Sāṅkhya and Yoga (in VI. 13) and says that 'on realizing that cause which can be apprehended by means of the study of Sāṅkhya and Yoga he is released from all bonds'. That Upaniṣad is full of words that are frequently employed in the Sāṅkhya system such as 'avyakta' (I. 8), guṇa (V. 7 'sa viśvarūpas-triguṇaḥ' and VI. 2, 4 and 16), jña (v. 2, VI 17), prakṛti ('māyāṁ tu prakṛtiṁ vidyāt' IV. 10), puruṣa (I 2, III. 12, 13, IV. 7), pradhāna (I. 10, VI. 10 and 16), liṅga (I 13, VI. 9). The Śv. Up. (VI. 11) describes the one God as 'sākṣī cetā kevalo nirguṇaś-ca'. The Sāṅkhya denies God and transfers these epithets to the Puruṣa, who in his true essence is, according to the Sāṅkhya, merely a passive witness, pure intelligence, unaffected by guṇas. The Praśna Up.

v7.c94.23.3

(IV 8) speaks of the five elements and their mātrās (pṛthivī ca pṛthivīmātrā ca &c), the ten *indriyas* and their objects, manas, buddhi, ahaṅkāra &c. The Sāṅkhyas rely on the verse 'ajāmekām' (Śv. Up. IV. 5)²²²² for Upaniṣadic support to their theory about prakṛti and its three guṇas (vide bhāṣya of Śaṅkara on V. S. I. 4. 8). That verse means: there is one unborn (female), constituted by red, white and black, but producing manifold progeny resembling each other, there is one unborn being (a male) who resorts to her (loves her) and lies by her; there is another, who leaves her after having experienced enjoyment. Similarly, Sāṅkhyas argue that Kapila, the founder of the Sāṅkhya system, is mentioned in the Śv. Up. (V. 2) 'it is he who, in the beginning, bears (nourishes) by thoughts Kapila sage when born and looks on while he is being born.' If one looks to various passages of the Śv. Up. such as III. 4, IV 12, VI. 18 one must hold that ṛṣi Kapila,²²²³ the reddish sage, is Hiraṇyagarbha (the golden child), the first creation ('Hiraṇyagarbhaḥ samavartatāgre,' Ṛg X. 121. 1). Śaṅkarācārya (on V. S. II. 1. 1) replies that from the mere occurrence of the word 'Kapila' one cannot at once jump to the conclusion that he must be the founder of the Sāṅkhya, since another Kapila, called Vāsudeva, who reduced to ashes the sons of Sagara by his angry look, is well-known.²²²⁴ Śaṅkarācārya concedes on V S. II 1.

v7.c94.23.4

3 that both Sāṅkhya and Yoga are within the pale of Vedic orthodoxy as regards those portions of them that are not in conflict with the Veda. The five elements (mahābhūtāni) are mentioned in the Ait. Up. (III. 3), Praśna VI. 4 and the five special qualities of these five in Katha Up. (III. 15).

v7.c94.24

²²²⁰ पुण्डरीकं नवद्वारं त्रिभिर्गुणेभिरावृतम्। तस्मिन्त्यद्यक्षमात्मन्वत् तद्वै ब्रह्मविदो विदुः ॥ अथर्व० X. 8. 43 It is difficult to say what यक्ष here means That word also occurs in Ṛg IV. 3 13, V. 10. 4, VII 61 5, where सायण gives different meanings एतस्माज्जायते प्राणो मन सर्वेन्द्रियाणि च । खं वायुर्ज्योतिरापः पृथिवी विश्वस्य धारिणी ॥ मुण्डकोप० II 1 3. इन्द्रियेभ्यः परा ह्यर्था अर्थेभ्यश्च परं मनः। मनसस्तु परा बुद्धिर्बुद्धेरात्मा महान्पर ॥ महतः परमव्यक्तमव्यक्तात्पुरुषः पर. । पुरुषात्न परं किंचित्सा काष्ठा सा परा गतिः । कठोप III. (valli) 10-11. These occur with slight variations in बृहद्योगियाज्ञवल्क्यस्मृति IX. 184-186. On V. S I. 4. 1 the Sāṅkhya objector relies upon this Kaṭha text as providing evidence of the Sāṅkhya doctrines being based on the Veda, compare भगवद्गीता III. 42-43 Then शाङ्करभाष्य on वे सू I 2 12 cites द्वा सुपर्णा सयुजा सखाया समानं वृक्षं परिषस्वजाते। तयोरन्यः पिप्पलं स्वाद्वत्यनश्नन्नन्योऽभिचाकशीति ॥ मुण्डक III 1.1, श्वेताश्वतरोप० IV. 6 and ऋ. I. 164.20) and states 'अपर आह। द्वा सुपर्णा-इति ॥ नेयमृगस्याधिकरणस्य सिद्धान्तं भजते पैङ्गिरहस्यब्राह्मणेनान्यथा व्याख्यातत्वात्। तयोरन्यः पिप्पलं स्वाद्वत्तीति सत्त्वम्, अनश्नन्नन्यो ऽभि-पश्यति ज्ञस्तावेतौ सत्त्वक्षेत्रज्ञौ।' This verse (द्वा सुपर्णा) is the subject of V S III. 3 34 also.

v7.c94.25

²²²¹ नित्यो नित्यानां चेतनश्चेतनानामेको बहूनां यो विदधाति कामान् । तत्कारणं साङ्ख्ययोगाधिगम्यं ज्ञात्वा देवं मुच्यते सर्वपाशैः ॥ श्वेताश्व० VI 13. The first half occurs in कठोप V 130. शङ्कराचार्य on वे. सू II 1.3 remarks 'यत्तु दर्शनमुक्तं तत्कारणं साङ्ख्ययोगाभिपन्नम् इति, वैदिकमेव तत्त्वज्ञानं ध्यानं च साङ्ख्ययोगशब्दाभ्यामभिलप्यते प्रत्यासत्तेरित्यवगन्तव्यम्'. Compare गीता 13. 19 and 21 प्रकृतिं पुरुषं चैव etc. for the relation of पुरुष, प्रकृति and गुण; साक्षी is explained by Pāṇini as 'साक्षाद् द्रष्टरि संज्ञायाम्' V 2 9 The word कैवल्य, the *summum bonum* of the Sāṅkhya, is derived from केवल (which word occurs in Śv Up I. 11 and VI. 11) and means केवलस्य भाव.

v7.c94.26

²²²² अजामेकां लोहितशुक्लकृष्णां बह्वीं प्रजाः सृजमानां सरूपा । अजो ह्येको जुषमाणोऽनुशेते जहात्येनां भुक्तभोगामजोऽन्यः ॥ श्वेताश्व० उप 4 5 This verse metaphorically speaks of Prakṛti, Puruṣa and Guṇas acc. to the Sāṅkhya objector. अजा and अज ordinarily mean 'she-goat' and 'he-goat'. The words also mean 'unborn'. Therefore, *ajā* stands for Prakṛti and *aja* for Puruṣa, both of which are eternal acc to the Sāṅkhya system. Lohitā (red) stands for the guṇa *rajas*, śuklā (white) for *sattvaguṇa* (which is *prakāśaka*) and kṛṣṇā (dark) for *tamas* From Prakṛti are evolved numerous objects The latter half refers to a soul that is enveloped in ignorance and therefore lives in bondage, but one who has realised the distinction between guṇas and Puruṣa abandons *prakṛti* i e is liberated The relations of the numerous puruṣas (poetically represented as he-goats) to the one Prakṛti (represented as a she-goat) are mentioned in this verse These three colours really stand for three elements viz tejas, waters and food (i e. earth). Vide Chān. Up VI. 3 1 'यद्ग्ने रोहितं रूपं तेजसस्तद्रूपं यच्छुक्लं तदपां यत्कृष्णं तदन्नस्य '

v7.c94.27

²²²³ या तु श्रुति कपिलस्य ज्ञानातिशयं प्रदर्शयन्ती प्रदर्शिता न तया श्रुतिविरुद्धमपि का पिलं मतं श्रद्धांतुं शक्यं कपिलमिति श्रुतिसामान्यमात्रत्वात्। अन्यस्य च कपिलस्य सगरपुत्राणां प्रतप्तुर्वासुदेवनाम्न. स्मरणात्। भाष्य on वे सू II. 1. 1, येन त्वंशेन न विरुध्येते तेनेष्टमेव सांख्ययोगस्मृत्योः सावकाशत्वम्। शङ्कराचार्य on वे सू II. 1 3.

v7.c94.28

²²²⁴ In the Viṣṇupurāṇa IV 4 12 Kapila is said to be a part of bhagavān Puruṣottama, who reduced to ashes the 60 thousand sons of Sagara, that suspected that the Aśvamedha horse grazing near that sage must have been stolen by him (IV. 4 16-23) For Vāsudeva Kapila, vide Vanaparva 107. 31-33, where we read (in Chitraśālā ed.) 'ततः क्रुद्धो महाराज कपिलो मुनिसत्तमः। वासुदेवेति यं प्राहुः कपिलं मुनिपुङ्गवम्। ... ददाह सुमहातेजा मन्दबुद्धीन् स सागरान्।'. The story is also mentioned in Vanaparva 47 (7-18)

v7.c94.29

In view of the fact that the word 'Sāṅkhya' occurs in the Śv. Up. and that the Katha and Muṇḍaka have some doctrines similar to the Sāṅkhya system and the Śvetāśvatara employs many words that occur frequently in the works on Sāṅkhya, the question arises—what is the relation of the Sāṅkhya to the Upaniṣads. There are three possible views, (1) that Upaniṣad thought and Sāṅkhya made parallel progress, (2) that Sāṅkhya adopted and expanded some of the germinal ideas of the Upanisads, (3) that some Upanisads borrowed from the Sāṅkhya. It is not possible to discuss these questions here for reasons of space and relevance The present author holds that it is the Sāṅkhya that based itself on the thoughts of the Upanisads, particularly when the older Upanisads like the Br. Up and Chāndogya hardly exhibit any traces of Sāṅkhya doctrines or technique, when Sāṅkhya reference are found only in Katha, Mundaka, Śvetāśvatara, Praśna (which are held to be later than Chān. Up. and Br. Up by modern scholarship) and when there is hardly any work or writer of purely Sāṅkhya doctrines that can be assigned to a period even a few centuries earlier than the Christian era and when no one can place the principal Upanisads (about twelve, including the Śvetāśvatara) later than 300 B C, since even the Śv. Up. is referred to as ‘Śruti’ in V. S I. 4. 8, II. 3 22 Garbe (in ‘Die Sāṅkhya Philosophie’ pp 3 ff) denies that Sāṅkhya underwent any essential modifications in its long history. Jacobi does not agree, holding that Sāṅkhya originated out of a common cultural and philosophical heritage and Oldenberg sees the origin of Sāṅkhya in the Katha and Śv Up. and holds that epic Sāṅkhya is an independent development (‘Die Lehre der Upanishaden und die Anfänge des Buddhismus’, 1915, pp. 206 ff) Sāṅkhya and Yoga were known to Kautilya (Sāṅkhyam Yogo Lokāyatam cetyānvīkṣikī’ Arthaśāstrā I 2. p 6.). Therefore, we may say that Sāṅkhya as a philosophical school started at least before the 4th century B C.

v7.c94.30

We should now turn to Sanskrit works other than the Upanisads for seeing the origins of the Sāṅkhya system. First comes the Mahābhārata.

v7.c94.31

In many passages of the Sāntiparva¹²²⁵ references to some of the doctrines, technical words and persons connected with the mature Sāṅkhya system occur. The references are so many that the present writer will have to select only a few passages by way of sample In chap 203 there is a dialogue between a clever pupil and his guru It begins by stating (in verse 8) that Vāsudeva is all this (Vāsudevah sarvam-idam), then it proceeds ‘Just as from one lamp thousands of lamps can proceed, so prakṛti creates endless things, but does not become reduced (in size) thereby; buddhi springs from the activity of avyakta (i.e. prakṛti) and ahaṅkāra is produced (from buddhi) and from ahaṅkāra is evolved *ākāśa* from which *vāyu* arises and then *tejas*, water and the earth arise each from its predecessor; these eight are the mūlaprakṛtis²²²⁶ and the whole world is centred in them (verses 24–26). Then the chap. mentions five organs of knowledge (ear, skin, eye, tongue, sense of smell) and five senses of activity (hands &c) and then there are the five objects of sense (viz. śabda, sparśa &c) and the mind is all-pervading and the 16th (verses 27–31). Then the chapter speaks of puruṣa (the soul) that resides in the city with nine²²²⁷ gates and is undecaying and immortal, which shines in all beings just as a lamp, whether big or small, does. In chapter 204 the same dialogue is pursued and the first verse says all *bhūtas* spring from *avyakta* and are merged (die) in *avyakta*, it refers to *kṣetra* (the body) and *kṣetrajña* (in verse 14) and winds up by saying that, just as seeds burnt by fire do not grow, the soul is not again connected with *kleśas*²²²⁸ when they are burnt by the fire of (correct) knowledge In chap. 205, verses 22–23 speak of the characteristics of the three *guṇas*; chap. 206 says that when a person brings under control anger, avarice,²²²⁹ fear, pride and becomes pure he merges into the highest self that is Viṣṇu in *avyakta* form and chap 207 deals with the measures for reaching the highest goal and puts forward brahmacarya (sexual purity) as the first measure. In these chapters, though some doctrines peculiar to the standard Sāṅkhya of the Kārikā appear, they are all brought in line with the Vedānta of one supreme Being, which is negatived in the official Sāṅkhya.

v7.c94.32

¹²²⁵ For the Sāntiparva only the critical edition of the Mahābhārata issued by the BORI is cited in this section on Sāṅkhya from this paragraph onwards The quotations from other parvans are taken from the Citraśālā Press edition

v7.c94.33

²²²⁶ मूलप्रकृतयोऽष्टौ ता जगदेतास्ववस्थितम् ॥ ज्ञानेन्द्रियाण्यतः पञ्च पञ्च कर्मेन्द्रियाण्यपि । विषयाः पञ्च चैकं च विकारे षोडशं मन ॥ verses 26–27. Compare सांख्यकारिका 3 q above in n 2216 for षोडशकश्च विकार etc.

v7.c94.34

²²²⁷ नवद्वारं पुरं पुण्यमेतैर्भावैः समन्वितम् । व्याप्य शेते महानात्मा तस्मात्पुरुष उच्यते ॥ शान्ति 203 35 Compare also भगवद्गीता 'नवद्वारे पुरे देही नैव कुर्वन् न कारयन्' The word पुरुष is generally derived as पुरि शेते इति पुरुषः. Vide निरुक्त I 13 यथा चापि प्रतीनार्थानि स्युस्तथैतान्याचक्षीरन् पुरुष पुरिशय इत्याचक्षीरन्, but in II. 3 it gives three derivations of 'पुरुष• पुरिषादः पुरिशय• पूरयतेर्वा, (the first being पुरि+ष from सद् to sit) The derivation of the word from पुरि शेते occurs ever in the बृह उप. II. 4 18 'स वा अय पुरुष• सर्वासु पूर्षु पुरिशयः' The words नवद्वारे पुरे देही occur in श्वेताश्व• III 18.

v7.c94.35

²²²⁸ क्लेश is a technical term in the Yogasūtra where it occurs frequently as in I 24, II. 2 and 3, II. 12, IV 28 and 30. Yogasūtra II 3 enumerates the five *kleśas* as अविद्या-अस्मिता-राग-द्वेष-अभिनिवेशाः क्लेशा' । They are so called because they harass man (क्लिश्यन्ति पुरुषम्).

v7.c94.36

²²²⁹ क्रोधलोभौ भयं दर्प एतेषां साधनाच्छुचि. ॥ परम परमात्मान देवमक्षयमव्ययम् । विष्णुमव्यक्तसंस्थानं विशन्ते देवसत्तमम्' chap 206. 1–2.

v7.c94.37

That there were philosophers, who adopted some of the Sāṅkhya and Yoga doctrines, postulated Parameśvara (Supreme Deity) and held that the three, viz Pradhāna, Puruṣa and Īśvara were different from each other, is expressly stated by Śaṅkarācārya²²³⁰ in his bhāṣya on V. S II. 2 37. Therefore, the Mahābhārata references to Sāṅkhya probably relate to philosophical doctrines in which all three viz Prakṛti, Puruṣas and Supreme Self were recognized, from which arose the later official Sāṅkhya that discarded any supreme Ruler of the Universe. In the Nārāyaṇīya section of the Śāntiparva (quoted in note 1544 p. 954 above) 'Sāṅkhya, Yoga, Pāñcarātra, Vedas and Pāśupata are said to be knowledges (jñānāni) and 'nānāmatāni' (different points of view) and Kapila, a paramarṣi, is said to be propounder of Sāṅkhya. Chapter 294 (in verses 26-49) deals with the twenty-five tattvas of the Sāṅkhya from Prakṛti or Avyakta, mahat, ahaṅkāra, the five elements from ahaṅkāra (these eight being called prakṛtis) and then 16 *vikāras* (verse 29). These are called *kṣetra*, the soul is the 25th (v 35) and is called kṣetrajña and Puruṣa (v 37 'avyaktake pure śete puruṣaś-ceti kathyate', and Īśvara or *brahma* is not brought in anywhere in that chapter

v7.c94.38

²²³⁰ तस्मात् प्रकृतेरधिष्ठाता केवलं निमित्तकारणमीश्वर इत्येष पक्षो वेदान्तविहितब्रह्मैकत्वप्रतिपक्षत्वात्त्वेनान प्रतिषिध्यते। सा चेयं वेदबाह्येश्वरकल्पनानेकप्रकारा। केचित्तावत्सांख्ययोगव्यपाश्रयाः कल्पयन्ति प्रधानपुरुषयोरधिष्ठाता केवलं निमित्तकारणमीश्वर इतरेतरविलक्षणाः प्रधानपुरुषेश्वरा इति। शाङ्करभाष्य on वे सू II 2 37 (पत्युरसामञ्जस्यात्).

v7.c94.39

Chapters 211-212 (containing in all 100 verses) of Śāntiparva deal with what Janaka, called Janadeva,²²³¹ king of Mithilā, learnt from Pañcaśikha, when the latter, after wandering over the whole earth, visited Mithilā and who is described as the first (or foremost) pupil of Āsuri and who is said to have performed a sattra for a thousand years on Pañcasrotas²²³² (verse 10). He was the son of a brāhmaṇa woman called Kapilā and was therefore known as Kāpileya (verses 13–15). Janaka had a hundred ācāryas in his palace who propounded the different views of different sects. Verse 9 says that Pañcaśikha made people wonder when he appeared like Kapila, the great sage (paramarṣi) and Prajāpati, that he confounded the hundred ācāryas by his arguments (v. 17). Later Janaka abandoned those ācāryas and followed Pañcaśikha (verse 18) He, after creating disgust in Janaka about his caste or about rites and about everything, expounded to Janaka the highest *mokṣa* which is declared as Sāṅkhya. In chāp. 212 Pañcaśikha expounds five elements, five jñānendriyas, five karmendriyas, mind (verses 7–22) and the signs (*liṅgas*) of sāttvika, rājasa and tāmasa bhāvas (verses 25–28) and describes how a person who seeks the Self is freed from the fetters of pleasure and pain and being beyond the fear of old age and death reaches immortality. In the first place, these two chapters are not sometimes very clear, offer no consistent clear-cut system and employ words that are difficult to construe and are not completely identical with the scheme of the 25 tattvas of the official Sāṅkhya of the Kārikā, since chap. 211 verse 13 speaks of 'ekākṣara brahma assuming many forms'. For example, it is difficult to say what is meant by 'puruṣāvastham-avyaktam'. The meaning that can be drawn out of the words seems to be 'he (Pañcaśikha) conveyed knowledge (to Janaka) about Avyakta (i. e. Pradhāna) that depends upon Puruṣa (i. e that becomes active through union of Puruṣa with it), which is the highest truth. It further says that Pañcaśikha became perfect (in knowledge) by the performance of *iṣṭis* and *sattras*, again by abounding tapas, had a vision of the deity (God) and he realized the distinction between kṣetra and kṣetrajña and also realized brahma symbolized²²³³ by om. Therefore, the doctrine of Pañcaśikha in these chapters of Śāntiparva is really *advaita* (monism) on which are grafted some doctrines similar to the later official Sāṅkhya for explaining creation and so forth.²²³⁴ In Śāntiparva 306. 56-66 (= Chitra ed. 318 58-62) Viśvāvasu tells Yājñavalkya that he has heard about the 25th tattva (i. e. Puruṣa) from Jaigīṣavya, Asita-Devala, Vārṣagaṇya (of Parāśara gotra), Bhṛgu Pañcaśikha, Kapila, Śuka, Gotama Ārṣṭiṣeṇa, Garga, Nārada, Āsuri, Pulastya, Sanatkumāra, Śukra and Kaśyapa (father of Viśvāvasu) and 336. 65 (Chitra. ed 318. 67) states that Yājñavalkya had mastered completely both Sāṅkhya and Yoga. Śāntiparva 304 4 (=316. 4 of Citra. ed.) states that Sāṅkhya and Yoga are one ²²³⁵

v7.c94.40

²²³¹ Janadeva may be a proper name of Janaka and may mean 'Lord of men' (i e same as 'Janādhipa')' In the Bṛhan-Nāradīya-purāṇa I. chap 45 the same story about Janaka and Pañcaśikha is narrated often in the words of the Śāntiparva.

v7.c94.41

²²³² Pañcasrotas probably means 'Pañcanada' (the five rivers of the Punjab). Vide H. of Dh. vol IV p 787. The cr ed of the Śāntiparva (*Continued from last page*) omits one verse in chap. 211 (corresponding to chap. 218 of the Citraśālā Press ed.), which is पञ्चस्रोतसि निष्णातः पञ्चरात्रविशारद । पञ्चज्ञः पञ्चकृत्पञ्चगुणः पञ्चशिखः स्मृतः ॥ which is 11–12 in that chap Here पञ्चशिख is said to have been profoundly learned in पञ्चरात्र (वैष्णव) doctrines As he was called कापिलेय, it was probably imagined that his mother was Kapilā.

v7.c94.42

²²³³ तं समासीनमागम्य मण्डलं कापिलं महत् । पुरुषावस्थमव्यक्तं परमाथै व्यबोधयत् ॥ इष्टिसत्रेण संसिद्धो भूयश्च तपसा मुनिः । क्षेत्रक्षेत्रज्ञयोर्व्यक्तिं बुबुधे देवदर्शनः ॥ यत्तदेकाक्षरं ब्रह्म नानारूप महश्यते । शान्ति 211. 11–13, पुरुषावस्थं must be dissolved (in order that some sense can be made out of it) as पुरुषे अवस्था (अस्थानं यस्य) or 'पुरुषे अवतिष्ठते इति', The meaning of मण्डलं कापिलं महत् is not at all clear, (Continued from last page) but from the passages in the Ahirbudhnya-saṁhitā, chap XII. 18-29 it follows that the doctrines of Kapila's Sāṅkhya-tantra were divided into two maṇḍalas called Prākṛta and Vaikṛta and the two had 32 and 28 topics respectively. 'सांख्यरुपेण सङ्कल्पो वैष्णवः कपिलाह्वये.। उदितो यादृशः पूर्वं तादृशं श‍ृणु मेऽखिलम्। षष्टिभेदं स्मृतं तन्त्रं सांख्यं नाम महामुने। प्राकृतं वैकृतं चेति मण्डले द्वे समासतः॥'. The com. Arjunamiśra appears to take it as 'the great doctrine of Kapila came to him (Pañcaśikha) in the form of an aura of light and expounded to him the highest truth' etc This is extremely far-fetched. There is a doubt about the agent of 'nyabodhayat and as to whom 'samāsīnam' refers. To me it appears that the meaning is that 'Pañcaśikha came to him (i e to Janaka) and imparted to him the great Kāpila maṇḍala, the highest truth, the avyakta etc' According to the usual sanskrit construction the agent of 'āgamya' and 'nyabodhayat' must be the same (i e Pañcaśikha). समासीनं refers to जनक Compare 'एकाक्षरं परं ब्रह्म,' मनु II 83 and 'ओमित्येकाक्षरं ब्रह्म व्याहरन् मामनुस्मरन्' गीता VIII 13. Verse 13 of chap. 211 is आसुरिमण्डले तस्मिन् प्रतिपेदे तदव्ययम्। (अव्ययं refers to एकाक्षर-ब्रह्म) Therefore, मण्डल should be taken to mean 'the circle of the doctrines first propounded by Kapila'

v7.c94.43

²²³⁴ The position reached by Janaka on Pañcaśikha's teaching is stated in Śānti 212. 50-51 'न खलु मम सुखोऽपि दह्यतेऽत्र स्वयमिदमाह किल स्म भूमपालः। इदममृतपद विदेहराज स्वयमिह पश्यतिरेण भाष्यमाण॥ Compare शान्ति 171. 56 अनन्तं बत मे वित्तं यस्य मे नास्ति किंचन॥ मिथिलायां प्रदीप्तायां न मे दह्यति किंचन॥ धम्मपद 200, उत्तराध्ययनसूत्र 9.14 सुहं वसानो जीवामो जेसिं मो पत्थि किंचण। मिहिलाए डज्झमाणीए न मे डज्झइ किंचण॥ 'इमां तु यो वेद विमोक्षबुद्धिमात्मानमन्विच्छति चाप्रमत्तः। न लिप्यते कर्मफलेनिनिष्ट पत्रं बिसस्येव जलेन सिक्कम्॥ शान्ति 212-44, vide note 1640, pp 1005-6 above for the figure of a lotus leaf and water falling thereon

v7.c94.44

²²³⁵ यदेव योगाः पश्यन्ति तत्सांख्यैरपि दृश्यते। एकं सांख्यं च योगं च यः पश्यति स पश्यति।

v7.c94.45

Pañcaśikha figures frequently in the Mahābhārata. In Śāntiparva, chap. 307 (containing only 14 verses) Yudhiṣṭhira asks Bhīṣma how one can rise superior to old age and death, whether by very great tapas²²³⁶ or by rites or by Vedic learning or by the use of *rasāyanas* (elixirs of life or alchemist's prescriptions). Bhīṣma speaks of an ancient dialogue between Janaka and Bhikṣu Pañcaśikha, where the same question was put by Janaka and Pañcaśikha replied that none can escape these two and that union with wife and relatives is like meeting persons when on a journey (i. e. the company of these is not durable or permanent), nobody has seen heaven or hell, that one's duty is not to violate the ordinances of Vedas, and to make gifts and to offer sacrifices. In this chapter there is hardly anything which approaches the special doctrines of the Sāṅkhya, though Pañcaśikha's views are here set forth Chap. 308 (191 verses out of which less than 30 have anything to do with Pañcaśikha's teachings directly) begins with the question of Yudhiṣṭhira 'who secured *mokṣa* without giving up the stage of householder.' Then Bhīṣma narrates to him the dialogue between Janaka called Dharmadhvaja²²³⁷ and Sulabhā, a nun Janaka was learned in the Veda, in mokṣaśāstra and in his own śāstra (*rājadharma*), he had controlled his senses and ruled the earth. She heard from ascetics about Janaka's righteous conduct and she desired to find out the truth. She gave up her form as a nun by her yogic powers and became a woman, a paragon of beauty, and met Janaka. The latter informed her that he was the pupil of old bhikṣu²²³⁸ Pañcaśikha of the Pārāśarya gotra who stayed with him during the four months of the rainy season and who expounded to him the threefold mokṣa (viz. Sāṅkhya, Yoga and the science of government) and yet who did not ask him to give up rulership. Janaka said "I, giving up all attachment, though occupying the highest position (as ruler), follow the three paths of *mokṣa*, the highest rule of this mokṣa is 'freedom from attachment, the absence of attachment is due to correct knowledge whereby one is freed from bondage (of saṁsāra)". Janaka further avows that²²³⁹ on account of the knowledge imparted to him by the bhikṣu who is called after his top-knot, he is free from all attachment, though looking after the kingdom and that he is different from other sannyāsins. Then Janaka gives in verses (308. 38-41) another meaning²²⁴⁰ of the threefold Mokṣa propounded by Pañcaśikha to him viz. (1) highest knowledge and renunciation of actions, (2) strict adherence to the path of *karma* (duties prescribed by Śāstra) and (3) combination of knowledge and actions, and it is said that those who follow this third path resemble householders in several respects. Janaka asserts his view 'wearing ochre-coloured²²⁴¹ garments, shaving the head, carrying a water-vessel placed on three staves-these are merely outward signs and do not lead to *mokṣa* and that *mokṣa* does not consist in non-possession of wealth and bondage does not follow possession of some wealth, but it is *jñāna* by which a person secures deliverance, whether there is possession or non-possession of wealth'. It appears from verse 40 that Pañcaśikha emphasized the third kind of Mokṣaniṣṭhā (Jñānakarmasamuccaya) and Janaka followed that teaching. The rest of the chapter (308) is concerned with Janaka's charges against Sulabhā and Sulabhā's scathing remarks against Janaka.²²⁴² She says at the end 'you have indeed heard from Pañcaśikha the whole (doctrine) about mokṣa together with the means (for attaining it), `with the Upaniṣad passages expounding it or with the auxiliaries (of meditation) and with definite conclusions.'

v7.c94.46

²²³⁶ तपसा वा सुमहता कर्मणा वा श्रुतेन वा। रसायनप्रयोगैर्वा केनैनौति जरान्तकौ॥ ... केन वृत्तेन भगवन्नतिक्रामेज्जरान्तकौ। तपसा नाथ बुद्ध्या वा कर्मणा वा श्रुतेन वा॥ शान्ति 307. 2 and 5.

v7.c94.47

²²³⁷ 'Dharmadhvaja' may be a proper name here; if not, it means 'one who has raised aloft the banner of dharma' i. e. who proclaims to the world that he follows dharma in all matters.

v7.c94.48

²²³⁸ पाराशर्यसगोत्रस्य वृद्धस्य सुमहात्मनः। भिक्षोः पञ्चशिखस्याहं शिष्यः परम-संमतः॥ सांख्यज्ञाने तथा योगे महीपालविधौ तथा। त्रिविधे मोक्षधर्मेऽस्मिन् गताध्वा छिन्नसंशयः॥ तेनाहं सांख्यमुख्येन सुदृष्टार्थेन तत्त्वतः। आश्रितस्त्रिविधं मोक्षं न च राज्याद्विचालितः॥ सोहं ता निरित्वा वृत्तिं त्रिविधां मोक्षसंहिताम्। मुक्तरागश्चराम्येकः पदे परसके स्थितः॥ वैराग्यं पुनरे-तस्य मोक्षस्य परमो विधिः। ज्ञानादेव च वैराग्यं जायते येन मुच्यते॥ शान्ति 308. 24-29. A conjecture may be hazarded that this Pañcaśikha is entirely different from the Pañcaśikha who was one of the founders of the Sāṅkhya and that he is probably the same as the Pārāśarya who is credited by Pāṇini as having composed a 'bhikṣusūtra', 'पाराशर्यशिलालिभ्यां भिक्षुनटसूत्रयोः' पा IV. 3. 110. Vide note 1901 p. 1169 above.

v7.c94.49

²²³⁹ तद्वद्भगवता तेन शिखाप्रोक्तेन भिक्षुणा । ज्ञानं कृतमदीनं मे विषयेषु न जायते ॥... युक्तसङ्गः स्थितो राज्ये विशिष्टोऽन्यैस्त्रिदण्डिभि ॥ Chap. 308. 34-37. पञ्चशिख literally means 'one having five śikhās (locks of hair on the head)'. Therefore, he is referred to as शिखाप्रोक्त (lit declared by his śikhās).

v7.c94.50

²²⁴⁰ लोके हि त्रिविधा निष्ठा दृष्टा पूर्वैर्महर्षिभिः । ज्ञानं लोकोत्तरं यच्च सर्वत्यागश्च कर्मणाम् ॥ ज्ञाननिष्ठां वदन्त्येके मोक्षशास्त्रविदो जनाः । कर्मनिष्ठां तथैवान्ये यतयः सूक्ष्मदर्शिनः ॥ महायोषमप्येतत् ज्ञानं कर्म च केवलम् । तृतीयेयं समाख्याता निष्ठा तेन महात्मना ॥ 308. 38-40.

v7.c94.51

²²⁴¹ काषायधारणं मौण्ड्यं त्रिविष्टब्धः कमण्डलुः । लिङ्गान्यव्यर्थमेतानि न मोक्षायेति मे मति ॥ ... आकिञ्चन्ये न मोक्षोऽस्ति केषाञ्चे नास्ति बन्धनम् । कैश्चन्ये चेतरे चैव जन्तु-र्ज्ञानेन मुच्यते ॥ Chap 308 47 and 50 अकिञ्चन means one who possesses nothing and अकिञ्चन्य means 'the state of being अकिञ्चन'. Should we read अज्ञार्थम् or अर्थार्थम् for अप्यर्थम् as some mss. do ? The verses are chap. 320 47 ff of चित्रः ed.

v7.c94.52

²²⁴² Some of her telling retorts are set out here. 'यद्यात्मनि परस्मिंश्च ममाप्यपरमप्यस्ति ॥ अथ मां कासि कस्येति किमर्थमनुपृच्छसि । ... मये रो न्ये गृहे राजा सर्वं *(Continued from last page)* स्वे स्वे गृहे गृही। विग्रहानुग्रहौ कुर्वंस्तुल्यो जनक राजभिः ॥ 308. 126-27, 147. ननु नाम त्वया मोक्ष. कृत्स्नः पञ्चशिखाच्छ्रुतः । सोपायः सोपनिषदः सोपासङ्गः सनिश्चय.॥ chap 308. 163. The Com. Nīlakaṇṭha explains: उपासङ्गो ध्यानाङ्गानि यमादीनि.

v7.c94.53

This passage expressly refers to Upaniṣads in connection with mokṣa and the preceding verses emphasize the freedom from attachment on the part of Janaka (in 308. 37 'mukta-saṅga'). The Bṛ. Up in III. 1 refers to the sacrifice performed by Janaka, king of Videha, who set apart a thousand cows to be given to him from among the brāhmaṇas assembled at it, that would be the most profound in learning and be *brahmiṣṭha* (most learned in or devoted to brahma). Yājñavalkya asked his disciple to take the cows away; thereupon followed a learned disquisition by questions (of angry brāhmaṇas including a woman) and answers by Yājñavalkya;²²⁴² the questioners were Aśvala (the holy priest of Janaka), Jāratkārava Ārtabhāga, Bhujyu Lāhyāyani, Uṣasta Cākrāyaṇa, Kahola Kauṣītakeya, Gārgī Vācaknavī, Uddālaka, Āruṇi, Vidagdha Śākalya (III. 1-9 ending with 'vijñānam-ānandam brahma)'. In Bṛ. Up. IV. 2 it is said that Janaka Vaideha approached Yājñavalkya, did obeisance to him and said 'instruct me' and that then the sage spoke to him 'you have studied the Veda and the Upaniṣads have been expounded to you by ācāryas, but, when you will be leaving this body, where will yo go'? Janaka replied that he did not know it and requested the sage to enlighten him on that point. Then a long disquition follows (Bṛ. Up. IV. 2 ff) in which occurs the famous passage ('sa eṣa neti netyātmā, agṛhyo na hi gṛhyate ...... asaṅgo na hi sajjate ...... abhayam vai Janaka prāptosi' (IV. 2. 4). It appears to the present writer that some one desirous of boosting Sāṅkhya teachings inserted the chapters about Sāṅkhya in which Pañcaśikha is substituted in place of Yājñavalkya as the teacher of Janaka.

First 58 of 425 passages. Read on

Linked texts (71)