Is Samkhya Atheistic?

[anveshan]

The study of Indian philosophy and Metaphysics is incomplete without the study of Darshana Sastras.

 

Sanatana Dharma is so said because it seeks to realize. The paths are many, but the end is one and one only.There is nothing divine or infallible in paths.. only the goal is infallible and divine. Various paths have resulted in because of the human spirit of inquiry.

 

The Sastras, esp. the Samkhya, Nyaya and Vaisheshika, does not negate the Entity but sometimes questions statements that are found contradictory in the vedas.

 

Some say that Samkhya is ‘nirishwara’ sastra. It is not.

 

Originally the philosophies of both Sankhya and Vedanta stayed clear of religion proper, leaving such matters in the hands of the Brahmins or priests. Out of six classical systems, Samkhya forms one of the most important philosophical currents. It is based on two distinct principles, namely 1) Purusha, and 2) Prakriti. This dualism forms the basis of this philosophy. Secondly, Samkhya is precise, rational, and logical, and therefore does not deem it necessary to invoke the concept of God for explaining the manifest and non-manifest multifarious nature: the individual self and the objective universe. Samkhya nicely propounds the theory of the possibility and the need to realize our true Self so that the bondage of ignorance is broken and the individual self may attain liberation. Patanjali in his system of Yoga further elucidates the method and means to unite our lower self with the true Self.

 

The Origins

 

The ambiguous origins of Samkhya could be traced to the creation hymns of Rk Veda ( R.V. 10-129-1-2, 1-1:1, 10-129-1:51-163-1-5 etc etc)

The fore-runner of Samkhya is said to be Atreya Tantra. A teacher of great fame at the University of Takshashila,

The son of Atri(referred to as Jivaka also) is listed in a line of eminent teachers in the Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad.

Mahabharata says ayurveda was developed by the ‘dark complexioned son of Atri’. Hence he is referred to as Krishnatreya. This very obvious reference to his skin colour, seems to mark Atreya out, as being non-Aryan, perhaps bringing into the tradition secret sources of knowledge from older, more powerful origins.

 

The proponent of Samkhya proper is said to be Kapila, adopted son of Kaipila(fem.) a brahmani, wife of certain

Asuri. Rishi Kapila’s original name was Panchashikha.

 

Is Samkhya Agnostic?

 

The Sâmkhya philosophers dealt with the notion of pain under three categories.

 

i. The intrinsic (âdhyâtmika)

ii. The extrinsic (âdhibhautika)

iii.The divine or superhuman (âdhidaivika).

 

So, that which deals with adhyatmika and adhidaivika cannot be wholly materialistic or agnostic. The entire Samkhyan philosophy revolves around Prakruti, the insentient and Purusha, the sentient being. Samkhya is precise, rational, and logical, and therefore does not deem it necessary to invoke the concept of God for explaining the manifest and non-manifest multifarious nature: the individual self and the objective universe. Samkhya nicely propounds the theory of the possibility and the need to realize our true Self so that the bondage of ignorance is broken and the individual self may attain liberation. Patanjali in his Yoga Sutra further elucidates the method and means to unite our lower self with the true Self.

 

Under the inscrutable influence of Purusha, which is inactive and passive, but sentient (and also infinite and eternal), Prakriti loses its equilibrium. As a consequence of this, the equilibrium is disturbed and the whole universe of unlimited permutations and combinations comes into existence. The first modification of primordial nature is called Mahat or Cosmic Intelligence. It further evolves into two forces, 1) Akasha, the primal matter, and 2) Prana, the primal energy. Akasha forms the material basis and prana the energy basis of creation. Out of the interaction of akasha and prana are formed five subtle elements, crudely translated as ether, fire, air, water, and earth. These are the constituents of all the material existence in the universe. As can be seen, even mahat is material consisting of three gunas, and so also the prana.

 

The Gunas

Nothing can exist without the combination of these three gunas. Mind, intellect, ego, sense organs, sense objects, trees, plants, animal world, in short everything evolves from the various combination of these three gunas. In some of these the sattva predominates, in others the rajas or the tamas. Depending upon the preponderance of a particular guna in such a combination, the object acquires its peculiarities. Fir instance, while the mind and intellect have predominance of sattva, a clod of earth is full of tamas! Sattva is helpful in illumining the true nature of the thing, tamas in its extreme obscures the reality, rajas acts at the intermediate level, and it causes distorted perception and gives false perception of it. Sattva is pure and shining, rajas is active and passionate, while tamas is dull and lazy.

 

Spirit or Purusha is the principle for the sake of which nature evolves. Experience is explained on the basis of a certain association of spirit with nature. Matter is merely the medium for spirit to manifest itself; matter is not the source of consciousness. Mind intellect complex (or internal organ, the Antahkarana) is refined, subtle matter predominantly consisting of sattva guna that acts as the main locus of union between Prakriti and Purusha resulting in possibility of an experience, and thereby knowledge.

 

The Purpose

 

But what is the purpose of all these changes in the nature! Is there any? How and why this evolution from gross to subtle and back, and these changes can be interpreted in relation to the goal? The question comes to mind: Is the cosmic revolution purposeful?

 

Anyway, coming to our point of answering the question of purpose, aim or goal, of the changes in the nature, Samkhya maintains that changes are for the 'benefit' of the soul. The Purusha gradually realizes that changes in the nature do not affect it; and a day comes when it becomes free from all the bondages of identification with the and mind. It realizes that it is eternal Free and omniscient. This freedom of soul is the aim and destiny of every human endeavor.

 

The Process

“satvarajastamasa samyavasta prakruti: prukrute`n mahat

Mahato ahamkara, ahamkarat panchatanmatranumayamidriyam

Tanmatrbhya: sthoolabhootani, purusha iti panchavisatam”

(Samkhya 1-64)

According to the Samkhya philosophy, Prakriti is the unmanifest, primal resource, the sum total of the universal energy that manifests itself in various material forms in different planes. The creative process (Shristi) begins, when Purusha, the individual soul enters and becomes established in it. Out of this process evolve 24 principles, which are:

Mahat: the great principle (1) (Cosmic Dust?)

Buddhi:the discriminating, reasoning and causative intelligence (2)

Ahamkara:the ego-principle (3) - Electrons, Protons and neutrons (3)

Manas:the mind or the sixth sense (4)

Panchendiryas:the five sense organs (9)

Five karmendriyas: the five organs of action (14)

Five tanmantras: the five subtle elements (19)

Five Mahabhutas:the five gross elements (earth, water, air, fire and ether)(24)

The Mahat (the Great One), is the first to emerge in this process of evolution. The Mahat is Prakriti or the primordial nature in its dynamic aspect. From the Mahat evolves buddhi and Manas. Buddhi is the principle of intelligence or the discriminating awareness and Manas is the mind stuff consisting of pure consciousness. From Buddhi evolve ahmkara or the feeling of individuality and separation and the five tanmantras of sound, touch smell, form or color and taste.

The rest of the principles arise from from Manas, which are the five senses, the five organs of actions and the five gross elements. These are the 24 evolutes (tatra sarva eva achetanam)and together with the Purusha (individual soul) who joins with Prakriti to initiate this process, the number becomes 25.

 

The greatness of Samkyha lies in the fact that the evolution of life on earth is depicted not as miracle work of God, but as a creative process passing through different phases of change and transformation.

The individual soul or Purusha is the eternal principle which joins with Prakriti, another eternal principle to establish its presence in the material world. The individual soul is immortal. It exists prior to the emergence of other principles and will continue to exist even after the rest disappear.

 

Gita & Samkhya

 

Srimad Bhagavad Gita picks up the basic aspects of Samkhya, but adds the principle of Supreme Self or Universal Purusha as the cause of all creation.

According to the Bhagavad Gita, the Purusha enters the Prakriti and manifests the entire creation. At the human level, the purusha is compared symbolically with a man and the Prakriti with a woman. At the microcosmic level a union between the two indeed leads to the creation of a new being, which can be compared to the Hiranyagarbha (the golden embryo) at the microcosmic level. According to the Samkhya philosophy, Prakriti is the unmanifest, primal resource, the sum total of the universal energy that manifests itself in various material forms in different planes. The creative process (Shristi) begins, when Purusha, the individual soul enters and becomes established in it.

 

“Samkhya philosophy of dualism: Purusa is Consciousness and Supreme Unparalleled Intelligence, and Prakrti [Pra (before) krti (creation)] is matter, unconscious, indiscriminate, and insentient. If PRAKRTI sounds similar to PROCREATE, it is so in meaning too. Prakrti indicates an urgency to produce, as Prasavam (parturition) has the imminence to deliver a baby”

=(Bhagwan Shri Ramana Maharishi).

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Friends:

 

What is the role of the Samkhya philosophy in the Bhagavad Gita? What are some good books and articles to read on the subject? I'd be grateful for any help on this, as I just started studying Indian philosophy.

 

Thank you,

 

Peter Fettner

Temple University

Department of Philosophy

pfettner@verizon.net

[Guest guest]

 

 

<font color="blue"> </font color> Teachings of Lord Kapila <click

Description: Lord Kapila (an incarnation of Lord Krishna) explains the science of Sankhya yoga to His mother Devahuti. This wonderful book is a combination of lectures from Srila Prabhupada and excerpts from the Third Canto which contains the teachings of Lord Kapila.

Version: 1.0 Filesize: 179.69 Kb

 

 

Home

 

 

[maadhav]

<< What is the role of the Samkhya philosophy in the Bhagavad Gita? >>

 

that is one way, among others, to realize god.

 

What are some good books and articles to read on the subject?

 

in srimad bhagavatam, please read kapila incarnation.

that is theistic samkhya.

 

some time later anothe kapil prson cane and gave an atheistic samkhya. we hindus have no interest in it.

 

the vedic literature has six different philosophies.

sankhya is one. gita gives short summary of samkhya.

please read it.

 

i have one request.

 

if you teach anything learned from the vedic literature, please learn it well from a vedic authority.

please do not make your own understanding based on just bookish knowledge. just as no one can not become a doctor just by reading medical book in a library, no one becomes a well versed in vedic philosophy just by reading the vedic books. it woud be a great favor to the 1B hindus of the world if you could do this.

 

thanks.

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Maadhav:

 

Thanks for your recommendations and advice. I am not prepared to teach any Indian philosophy or sacred texts, only Western materiels. In Indian philosophy I'm a beginner. However, I do speak to Professor J. N. Mohanty, who is an important authority in our university on both Indian and Western materials, and who does communicate with religious authorities.

 

So thank you for your good advice, bless you.

 

Peter,

Temple University,

Department of Philosophy

[Guest guest]

WHERE IS THE BOOK I ORDERED FROM YOU, FETTNER!!! WHY HAVEN'T YOU RETURNED MY E-MAILS ON THE MATTER? ARE YOU A THIEF FETTNER?? WHERE'S MY REFUND???

[ajit12]

The roots of Yoga are buried deep in the Samkhya (pronounced song-khya) tradition, and the roots of the Samkhya tradition is buried deep in the Shasti-Tantra, an ancient tantrik text long since lost to antiquity.

At that time the word ‘yoga’ was not associated with the physical exercises we normally think of when we hear the word today, but the word ‘yoga’ instead referred to a specific meditation method based on sensory isolation. Yoga in Samkhya terms means the temporary suspension or arrest of all sensory activity done knowingly and willingly, and at this point we have the formal basis of the Samkhya Yoga tradition and what will in time become the cornerstone of the Raja Yoga tradition some two millennia later.

From a Samkhya-Shastra (Science of Discrimination) viewpoint, people have both a physical body and a soul. First the physical body is born, and the soul is left to experience life vicariously via the proxy of the physical. After practicing the daily-prescribed method of meditation, the soul is then granted its own Life and Life Experiences to augment the physical life experiences. The metamorphosis of the human soul from that of being dependent on the physical body for its existence to being solely dependent on the Cosmic Core of Life is Yoga.

This newly found independent existence for the soul constitutes a second-birth {Samadhi]to complement the physical birth, a birth into spirit per se, and once the second birth occurs it continues with or without the continued practice of the meditation that produced it. Thus the second birth establishes a permanent state of Emancipation or Kaivalya for said persona. Moreover, if the soul undergoes the second birth of Kaivalya, and is thus no longer dependent solely upon physicality, when the physical body does eventually succumb to its inevitable end then the soul lives on via its spiritual body.

 

Early man recognised that a woman and man need to unite in order to produce that is why copulation in a freshly ploughed field was considered to be good for a bountiful harvest.They also knew that a man is needed for production of progeny but apart from copulation they could not see any role for a man .Hence the concept of 'PURUSH-PRAKRITI' . The Samkhya-Karika describes the spiritual body of the persona or purusha, a In essence the purusha-persona is a mere witness to creation, a creation whose sole purpose for existence is to serve said persona.The purush is nirguna & passive,Prakriti carries out all the activity.This shows Tantric origin of Samkhya philisophy.In vedantic terms Adi shakaracharya converted the same concept to elusive ,female MAYA and Male, eternal,passive BRAMHA.

 

The second manuscript is the Yoga Sutras, which is a detailed instruction manual for the unique meditation method utilized by Samkhya Yoga and is generously interlaced with legalese from the Manu-Smriti (Laws of Manu). The Yoga Sutras even go so far as to state that it is a ‘deed and legal document’ which today’s culture would recognize as a patent. Although the term ‘legal document’ was undoubtedly meant to be taken figuratively, the instructions are so specific and the concepts so conclusive

 

For almost thousand years Samkhya reigned unimpeded before they encountered their first disaster, so to speak. Adi Shankara accused Samkhya of abandoning its religious roots because the Samkhya-Karika is also an abridgement of the more expansive fore mentioned Shasti-Tantra, it is also plausible that Shankaracharya suspected Samkya to be Tantric,which he was trying to stamp out with it's sex worship.He therefore tried to stamp out Samkhya Yoga as well. Others of that period stated that the Shasti-Tantra was in fact a treatise on yoga, but the word ‘yoga’ was nowhere to be found .

These possible explanations are made more plausible given that Shankara will go on to found a separate tradition and school of thought called ‘Advaita-Vedanta’, whose philosophy is in fact Samkhya philosophy with some of the legalese replaced with vocabulary from Upanishadic sources, waters from which the Samkhya Yoga tradition had originally emerged and may have even actually helped author.

 

Many of the Samkhya tradition appear to have converted to Shankara’s Advaita-Vedanta viewpoint, perhaps because it was little more than an updated Samkhya Yoga philosophy that had restated its Upanishadic roots. That at least some advocates of Samkhya took his criticisms to heart is evidenced some time later, when the abridged text of Samkya -karika that caused the controversy was reformatted and expanded to include the yoga part

 

A few centuries later came the second disaster. From about the 12th century C.E. onwards Islam was making military and political inroads into the Indian subcontinent. The conquering Muslims were more than adamant about their religious doctrines centered on Allah, the Supreme Creator. Neither Samkhya nor Buddhism accepted the doctrine of a Supreme Creator, and go to great lengths to discredit such beliefs. What the Muslims considered the sacred and unquestionable revelation in the form of the Koran, both Samkhya and Buddhism would regard as philosophy and fair game in public debate. Moreover, both Buddhism and Samkhya were major cohesive forces in the political-military landscape, and more so than any religious reasons, it was probably this that led to their ultimate demise.

 

Over the next three hundred years almost everything associated with either Samkhya or Buddhism will have disappeared from India’s soil, beginning in 1199 C.E. with the destruction of a major Buddhist University. The only traditions that survived to practice their traditions openly also remade themselves into an image that was politically correct for the new regime, in that the surviving philosophies were reformatted to support a belief in either monotheism or qualified polytheism rooted in monotheism.

 

Non-theist systems such as the Samkhya-Shastra or even Advaita-Vedanta that existed prior to the 15th century C.E. were reinterpreted by the surviving traditions, and non-theist doctrines that were too explicit to be reinterpreted were censured as errors. Some followers of the reformed Vedanta will go so far as to denounce even Shankara and his teachings as Samkhya in disguise, and to make these denunciations even though Shankara was in fact Vedanta’s founder .

 

Buddhism was a missionary movement with established centers in Thailand, Tibet and even China; hence their traditions and lineages continued to survive. Regrettably Samkhya was never a missionary movement, and the only surviving remnants we have are those preserved ironically by it's opponents .

Much as the newly created Raja Yoga tradition is based on the same text as its Samkhya predecessor however, the version of the Yoga Sutras that was utilized in its nurturing was edited to be in accordance with established beliefs of nineteenth century mainstream religious traditions.

 

[ajit12]

How come every one is so quiet,I expected a lot of reactions.Guest2,barney,Maadhav,Sephiroth,Jay74, where are you all?

[jay74]

ajit12,

 

Thanks for the informative post. It is just that I donot have the knowledge to either critic or accept your post, so I was basically lurking in the background.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

{How come every one is so quiet,I expected a lot of reactions.Guest2,barney,Maadhav,Sephiroth,Jay74, where are you all?}

 

ajit you seem to have your own personal ideas of India's history. I'm not sure where you get these ideas from but alot of it seems far-fetched. So I can say I take it with a pinch of salt.

 

The Samkya school was non-theistic in that it didn't take God into account. This is different from atheistic that say a definate No to the question of God's existence. Nyaya before Yoga and Vedanta, developed the concept of Ishwar and used it as an argument over buddhists who were at that time fiercly atheistic. Yoga built on the concept of Ishwar.

Ajit you seem too anti-shankara for me to take what you say seriously. There is no records or proof that sankara did the thing you say, rather history would say that the Buddhists were the champions in Indian philosophy for a long time and those schools died out as Buddhism grew. Shankara may have adopted startegies from these schools and put them together to debate against the Buddhism and as history shown he was successful.

[ajit12]

Guest 2,

I am not antiShankara ,in fact I am always amazed by his towering intellect.When I am reading his Shakarbhashya I am just overwhelmed by his arguments.His mastery over the rhetoric is astounding.Also when I read Pantanjali yogsutra with commentery by Vedvysa and critic by Shankara I understood the sutras for the first time as sutras by themselves are very cryptic.

However I do not look at history as for anyone or anti any one .I try to study history in an impartial way.Even greats made mistakes at times or we may not understand the resoning behind their actions.Regarding supports for my arguments I will post list of references soon.