Prakriti and Gunas

[Guest guest]

I've been reading SAmkhya theory and there's something that I couldn't

understand. Was wondering if somebody could throw light on my confusion.

 

My question is with the theory of prAkritI and the three gunAs. PrAkritI

is the primal matter or nature. VyAsA in his bhAshyam on Patanjala Yoga

Sutra defines prAkritI similar to the way brahman is defined in the

shruti - literally indefinable. The gross world (physical objects and

the manas) is said to be the manifestation of prAkritI.

 

So how does prAkritI evolve into the empirical world?

 

IshvarakrishnA in his SAmkhyakArikA says this is due to the three gunAs

- sattvam, rajas and tamas.

 

So what are the three gunAs?

 

Are they part of the prAkritI? Or are they apart from the prAkritI?

 

I think VijnAnabhikshu defines the three gunAs as representing different

stages of evolution of prAkritI. So if they represent different stages

of prAkritI, then they're nothing but prAkritI itself. If they're

prAkritI itself, they how can it be nailed down that they're one

substance - ie prAkritI. Why can't the three gunAs be three different

elements? If they be different elements then the world is but a

combination of the coming together of the three elements, which is but a

variation of the atomic theory of the VaishesikAs, who use the five

elements - earth, water, fire, air and ether.

 

It's like saying "tall building". There's nothing substantial in "tall".

It's the building which is the truth and which is tall. The word "tall"

is just a mental mode of describing the building.

 

If it be said that the three gunAs are elements acting on prakriti, then

my question is then what's the point in postulating a distinct entity

called prAkritI? The evolution of the world can be put down to the

coming together of the three gunAs themselves, which anyway have an

identity of their own, which would again liken the theory to that of the

VaishesikAs.

 

PS : VijnAnabhikshu is a reputed SAmkhya and Yoga exponent. It is

interesting to note that he considers only the theistic VedAnta as the

genuine VedAnta. He puts down Advaitam as a modern falsification! And he

has written commentaries on the prAsthana trAyi from the Yoga

standpoint.

[Guest guest]

"nanda chandran" <vpcnk

 

* PS : VijnAnabhikshu is a reputed SAmkhya and Yoga

* exponent. It is interesting to note that he considers

* only the theistic VedAnta as the genuine VedAnta.

* ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

Sri Nanda Chandran,

 

Would you explain how one distinguishes

_theistic Vedanta_ from _non theistic Vedanta_ ?

 

Thanks & Regards,

 

Hari Krishna

[Guest guest]

Nanda,

It sounds like PrAkrirl is vibration and the gunas are frequencies. Can

that be?

Tamra

[Guest guest]

nanda chandran wrote:

>

> "nanda chandran" <vpcnk

>

> I've been reading SAmkhya theory and there's something that I couldn't

> understand. Was wondering if somebody could throw light on my

confusion.

>

> My question is with the theory of prAkritI and the three gunAs.

PrAkritI

> is the primal matter or nature. VyAsA in his bhAshyam on Patanjala

Yoga

> Sutra defines prAkritI similar to the way brahman is defined in the

> shruti - literally indefinable. The gross world (physical objects and

> the manas) is said to be the manifestation of prAkritI..............

 

Greetings Nanda:

 

The Patanjali Yoga Sutra's assertion that prAkritI is undefinable is

quite

correct. In Chapter 13 of Gita, Arjuna asks Lord Krishna to distinguish

 

between praKritI and purusa (the field and the knower of the field). The

 

entire chapter discusses the field and the knower of the field in

greater detail. I find Shri Radakrishnan's commentory quite informative

 

and less confusing. I suggest that if you read chapter 13, you may be

able appreciate the context for the distinction praKritI and purusa

(soul). Radhakrishnan rightly asserts: "Gita does not look upon

prakriti and and purusa as two independent elements as the Samkhya does

but looks upon them as the inferior and the superior forms of one and

the same Supreme." The introduction of modes (gunas) were further

explanations to distinguish between praKritI (inferior) and Brahman

(superior).

 

Essentially these are intellectual explanations to describe Brahman for

better understanding. However, such explanations have great potential

for confusion because it contradicts the basic premise of Vedanta - that

Brahman is unexplainable!

 

 

 

--

Ram Chandran

Burke, VA