________________
TATTVA-KAUMUDI
Sūtras. Madhavācārya of the 14th century A.D., quotes from the Kārikās and not Sūtras in his S. D. S. The oldest commentator on the Sūtras is Aniruddha who flourished in about 1500 A.D. Therefore, the Sūtras must have come into existence between 1380 and 1450 A.D. (See S. Y., pp. 8-9 ). Moreover, the commentator on the Sarvopakārini, a commentory on the Samāsa-Sūtra, opines that Kapila, the author of " Samkhya-Sūtras " is different from Kapıla, the author of Samasa-Sūtra (ch., s. 9., No. 246, pp. 93–94). But as the author of the S. D. S. does not quote from the Tattva-samāsa even, so the antiquity of the latter also is doublful. And if the author of the s, sū, is Kapıla, then how did he quote Pancas'ıka, etc., who were his grand-disciples and who, there. fore, must have flourished much later (See S. Sū., VI. 68–69) ?
But Udayavíra S'āstrı has tried to prove that Kapıla himself is the author of the S. Sū., in his article “ Antiquity of the Samkhya Sūtras " ( P. C. C, Lahore, II, pp. 855-882 ). He is of opinion that several sūtras have been interpolated in the original of Kapıla. For example, in the I chapter, the sūtras 20-54 are interpolated, because the 19th sūtra is literally the same as the 55th sūtra, and because the 53rd and 54th sūtras are identical with the 15th and 16th sūtras. And as we find the names of Srughna and Pataliputra in these interpolated sūtras, the interpolation must have been made when these towns were famous (from 4th century B. C., to the 5th century A.D.). The sūtras 79. 80 and 84-115 of the V chapter are also interpolations; the interpolation of these ( 84-115 ) is obvious as they discuss the principles opposed to Sāmkhya
Philosophy.
Thus Mr. S'astri thinks that 68 sūtras are interpolated. 1, on the other hand, think that the entire book was written by some later writer and therein some interpolations might have been made. Mr. S'āstri does not give any weighly or conclusive argument in support of his thesis. On the other
