History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c94.23
History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c94.23
- Language
- English
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).