The Samkhya System: A History of the Samkhya Philosophy c5.23

c5.23

Another clear proof of derivative nature is the acceptance, without comment, of the doctrine of transmigration and the accompanying doctrine of pessimism. The Upaniṣads do not show the doctrine of transmigration as fully developed: rather, as might be inferred from the fact that transmigration proper is not clearly known to any Brāhmaṇa text, they show only the origin of the system. The credit of first enunciating the doctrine as a great moral truth, that of retribution according to action by rebirth, is assigned to Yājñavalkya, who lays down the principle in the *Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad* (iii, 2, 13; iv, 4, 2-6), though even this view has been questioned.* The idea, however, worked up into an elaborate and confused whole, in which the ideas of retribution by rebirth and the older view of punishment in hell and reward in heaven are thrown together, is found definitely in a late portion of that Upaniṣad (vi, 2) and in the *Chāndogya* (v, 3-10). The doctrine is by no means necessarily accepted in all the Upaniṣads of the older type; thus it is doubtful if it appears at all in the older portion of the *Aitareya Āraṇyaka*; on the other hand, it is clearly accepted by the *Kauṣītaki* and by the *Katha*, and is later a commonplace assumption. Its full development and spread must antedate the rise of Buddhism, and it may fairly be argued that the doctrine prevailed among wide circles in India in the north by 550 B.C., and probably half a century earlier. Efforts have been made to find the doctrine in the *Ṛgveda*, but so far without real success.