________________
Samkhya-Yoga and Jain-A Comparison
above, about the original Sakhya being theistic or atheistic, monistic or dualistic,
181
Under the circumstances, the only proper way seems to be to rely upon the tradition of Isvarakrṣṇa for the history of his darsana and explain the occurrence of Samkhya ideas in the Upanisads and the Mbh. on that basis. It is possible to do so in the following way.
Even though all the darśanas claim to be complete systems, yet each one of them is known to the Indian tradition for its particular contribution. Thus, Pūrvamīmāmsā's contribution lies in its rules of interpretation and the doctrine of Karma, while Vedanta is known for its Adhyatma-vidya. One goes to the Vaigesika darśana for the theory of atomism and the theory of causation involving agency of God. Nyaya darśana's main object is to teach the means of valid knowledge. The Yoga-school teaches ethical psychology.
Viewed thus, the Samkhya darśana is more or less synonymous with its doctrine of the Gunas, and its doctrine of Utpatti, Sthiti and Laya of the world i.e. its cosmology. These ideas of the Samkhya school appealed most to the thinkers of India and so whenever cosmological ideas are alluded to in the Upanisads, the Mbh., the Smṛtis and the Purāņas, they bear the impress of this Samkhya thought. They are sometimes specifically called Samkhya and sometimes merely incorporated as common property.
As noted above the Upanisadic monism explained the world-phenomena in two ways; the one adopted by Yajñavalkya which regarded the world-phenomena as chimerical and the other which regarded them as real and explained it in such Upanisads as the Sve. by having recourse to Samkhya ideas expressed in such words as Aja, Mäyä, Prakṛti, Pradhana etc. However, the Upanisadic thought being monistic, this Pradhana, Prakṛti, etc,, would be looked upon as the creative aspect of the first principle. Thus, the Upanisadic thought which is developed
