Samayasara

Author(s): A Chakravarti
Publisher: Bharatiya Gyanpith

Page 74

56
SAMAYASĀRA
cive of the distinction of Arya and Dravida. The Vaisnava tradition is confirmed even by Ramānuja's teachings though by a strange irony of fate his followers at present represent the most bigoted form of orthodoxy.
Samkhya Philosophy—The term Samkhya according to European scholars is derived from Samkh yā or number, because Kapila enumerates a number of Tattvas as constituting elements of reality. The term is supposed to be related to number. But according to Indian thinker the term is synonymous with discrimination. This is the meaning in which the term is used in the Mahabharata. Vijñānabhikṣu a famous writer of the Sámkhya school also explains the term as discrimination or setting forth the distinction between spirit or atman on the one hand and matter or Praksti on the other. Samkara also adopts the same interpretation. Hence the traditional meaning may be accepted as more correct and the other one suggested by European scholars has to be rejected as far-fetched. Some of them even go to the length of connecting the Samkhya system with the Pythagorean school. Pythagoreanism is also connected with the mystric doctrine of numbers. Reality is some how constituted numbers according to Pythagores. It is scarcely necessary to point out how unfounded such a suggestion is. It is a sample of that method which very often builds up fantastic theories merely on the strength of verbal analogy.
Samkhya Method–The philosophical method adopted by the Sāmkhya school is just the method of discrimination or vivekajñana. This method of discrimination is expounded as a means of salvation from Samsāra. By the way, we may point out that this is the motive of all the Indian systems of thought-how to obtain liberation from the Samsăric cycle of births and deaths. Such a freedom according to Samkhya philosophy is to be obtained by "discrimination" or knowledge of the distinction between the spiritual principle or Purușa and the environmental existence or Praksti.
The Sources of Samkhya-The existing works through which we can have an idea of the Sámkhya system are mainly the following: Some of these are in the sūtra form and the others in the form of commentaries. (1) Sāmkhya sütras or otherwise known as Sāmkhya-pravacanasūtras is traditionally ascribed to Kapila himself. But this belief is quite unfounded. There is clear evidence to show that this is quite a modern work. Samkara and Vacaspati Miśra the great philosophical commentators never refer to this work at all. Gunaranta, the commentator on Şaddarśanasamuccaya while mentioning several other works on Samkhya does not refer to this work even by name. Hence this is considered neither important nor an authoritative work on the Samkhya school of thought.
(2) Tattvasamasa: This work also is erroneously attributed to Kapila. Max Müller elaborately argues that this work is a genuine work of Kapila. His arguments are far from convincing and hence his view is not accepted by