________________
292 OUTLINES OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY to be inconsistent with the fundamental postulates of the doctrine. This later Sankhya view of error, we shall see, is very much like the explanation given by Kumārila (viparitakhyāti), while the earlier one resembles that given by Prabhākara (akhyāti).
The pramāņas accepted here are only three: perception, inference and verbal testimony. The system, being derivative, has not developed these details separately and seems to have borrowed them from the Nyāya-Vaišeşika, so far as they are not inconsistent with its metaphysical view-point. In perception alone is there any difference which is worth mentioning; and that difference is mainly due to the view taken of the process of knowing as already explained. In the case of inference and verbal testimony, the agreement with the Nyāya-Vaiseșika is almost complete. As regards validity (prāmānya), the Sankhya-Yoga represents a position which is the exact opposite of the Nyāya-Vaišeşika. Validity and invalidity are both stated to be normal aspects of jñāna,3 since according to the sat-kārya-vāda the potential alone can become the actual, and whatever manifests itself at any time should be regarded as already there. Both are therefore regarded as inherent in jñāna; and which of them shows itself at any time is determined by the circumstances that explain the genesis or apprehension of the jñāna in question. This is a statement which seems self-contradictory; but it is not out of keeping with the Sānkhya-Yoga principle that the phase of reality which reveals itself to us is always relative to our standpoint.
IV
The Sänkhya-Yoga, like the other systems, believes in karma and transmigration. What transmigrates, however, is not the self, which because it is all-pervading does not admit of change of place, but the subtle body (linga-sarira) consisting of the eleven organs of sense together with buddhi,
See for a further discussion of this point Indian Philosophical Quarterly (1929), pp. 99-105. * SK. st. 4: YS. i. 7. See also STK. st. 5. 3 SD. p. 20; SDS. p. 129.
