Is There An Inner Conflict Of Tradition

Author(s): Johannes Bronkhorst
Publisher: Johannes Bronkhorst

Page 10

IS THERE AN INNER CONFLICT OF TRADITION?
51
JOHANNES BRONKHORST
I can only mention here the passage in the Mahabharata (12.260-262) which records a discussion between Kapila, the supematural "founder" of Samkhya, and the Vedic si Syümarasmi. Syümarasmi rejects the possibility of liberation and exhorts to action; Kapila preaches liberation through restraint and abstention from activity.40
Note that in the discussion of the development of Indian philosophy it becomes more and more difficult to assign the different positions to different segments of the population. In this period ideas begin to cross over from one segment of the population to another. Even if certain Upanişadic passages appear to have been influenced by non-Vedic ideas, they remain Vedic texts. belonging primarily to Vedic Brahmins. And if, as I think is the case, Vaiseșika originated under the influence of certain developments within Buddhism, this school of thought yet appears to have been Brahmanical from the beginning. In other words, lines of descent are less and less limited to! single segments of the population.
Yet it appears that during the late-Vedic period such a division still did exist in Indian society. This division appears to be behind the fundamental
1926., 268). The other current is characterized by the acceptance of a multitude of individual souls, and by a strong natural philosophical orientation (Frauwallner, 1953: 268). It is this current which gave rise to the natural philosophy underlying classical Vaiseșika. These two currents later influenced cach other to the extent that the original scientific spirit of the second current got lost, and ideas about God and liberation entered into it.
FRAUWALLNER has correctly been criticized for his overall vision of the development of Indian philosophy. His idea of a period of strong natural philosophical orientation in early Vaiseșika, for example, does not appear to stand the test of historical research. The earliest form of this philosophy reachable to us has already a number of features that do not fit in well with FRAUWALLNER's natural philosophical orientation, such as yogic perception, and an omnipresent soul.97 Moreover, there are reasons to think that this school of thought arose under the influence of, and in opposition to, certain developments within Buddhism. Seen in this way, Vaišeșika continues right from the beginning the rationalistic tendency which makes its appearance in Buddhist scholastic literature, without abandoning the search for liberation which would seem to be central to it. Samkhya has not been so profoundly touched by this rationalistic virus, but Samkhya, too, is centred on the quest for liberation. Samkhya and Yoga have always constituted a natural pair, even though these terms meant something different in the Mahabharata than in the period of the philosophical systems.
Seen in this light, all important schools of Indian philosophy have one common origin. They all derive, ultimately, from those parts of the population where karma and rebirth held sway, i.e., from the non-Vedic population. We have already seen that even the Upanişadic passages that show acquaintance with these ideas appear to have been influenced by these same nonVedic portions of the population. This does not mean that the history of Indian philosophy is free from oppositions. There is, for example, the ongoing battle between Buddhism and the schools of thought that came to be looked upon as Brahmanical. More important for our present purposes is the incorporation of currents such as Sāmkhya into the Brahmanical fold. The opposition between these two has left a number of traces in early literature.
hand, turning away from the Veda which is rich in violence, proclaim the self." (vdrdnasydm tesami pracuryam/ bahavo mdsopavdsika brahmand arcirmdrga. viruddhadhamamdrganugaminah/samkhyds tv arcimärganugdh / tata eva brduna. nd wedapriyd yajramdrganugah / samkhyas tu hisadhyavedaviraid adhydima.
Madinah) 40. Compare the discussion on "Kapila, Samkhya, and the Asramas" in OLIVELLE 1993:
98-99. Surprisingly, Wilhelm HALBFASS expresses the following opinion with regard to Samkhya (1995: 85): "Historisch geschen dürfen wir wohl davon ausgehen, dass die Lehre vom Karma gar nicht Teil des altesten Samkhya war und erst nachträglich im Laufe späterer Entwicklungen cingeführt wurde; dies geschah dann zuweilen in der Form, dass es als Auslöser für das Strömen und scheinbar bewusste Agieren der Urmateric (prakrti) ausgelegt wurde. Voll integriert wurde das Karma, was das klassische Samkhya betrifft, freilich nicht, das war wohl auch angesichts der Tatsache, dass es sich hier um eine in fundamentalem Sinne auf Transzendenz und Quictismus ausgerichtete Weise des Denkens handelt, nicht zu erwarten. Im Yoga ist die Rolle des Karma allerdings - möglicherweise unter buddhistischem Einfluss - relevanter und erheblich deutlicher ausgeprägt." This statement is utterly surprising, and not based on any textual evidence that I know of. Most probably HALBFASS is here a victim of the linear approach to Indian intellectual history, which assumes that all post-Vedic
developments must somehow derive from Vedic thought and religion. 41. Here one could draw attention to the proof in the Vaisesika Sotra of the existence of
secrs (rsi) responsible for the composition of the Veda (VS 6.1.1-2, ed. Jambuvijaya: WEZLER 1985), as well as to the occurrence, still in Prasastapada's Padanthadharmasangraha, of Vedic cosmographical concepts (varunaloka 'the world of Varuna'. ddityaloka 'the world of Aditya', marutom loka 'the world of the Maruts': see WI under these expressions). These or related terms occur in the Vedic Brahmanas (see KIRPEL 1920: 5-6), a few times in the Mahabharata (SORENSEN 1904: s.v. Varunaloka, Váyuloka), but apparently only rarely, some of them perhaps not at all, in the later Puranic literature. The Padarthadharmasangraha docs use Puranic, 1.c. non Vedic, material in the context of God's creation of the world, but this appears to be new material brought into the school by Prasastapada himself (BRONKHORST 1996).
37. ISAACSON 1993; BRONKHORST 1993a: 87 ; 1993b; HOUBEN 1995. Cp, also MIYA
MOTO 1996: 19-33 ("Dimension of soul). 38. BRONKHORST 1992. 39. Not only in early literature. The Tattvasamāsa, for example, refers - according to the
commentary Sarvopakärini - to "bondage by sacrificial gift" (däksina bandha), KEITH (1924: 103) comments: "This curious form of bondage arises when men through misconception give gifts to the priests, and is a distinct sign of hostility to the sacrifice, which is not seen in the Kárika". And Gunaratnasüri's Tarkarahasyadipikä on Haribhadra's Saddarsanasamuccaya (14th cent.) says the following about the Samkhyas (Mahendra Kumar JAIN 1969: 141): "They are numerous in Vārānasi. Many Brahmins, fasting for a month, follow the way of smoke which is opposed to the way of light. But the Samkhyas follow the way of light. For that very reason the Brahmins. to whom the Veda is dear, follow the way of sacrifice. The Samkhyas, on the other