________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.org
Acharya Shri Kailashsagarsuri Gyanmandir
386
Atman and Moksa
whereas in reality the "I", or Puruşa, cannot act, and what acts, i.e., buddhi, cannot think."1 The Sankhya adopts the reflection-theory to explain the contact between the Purusas and the Praksti and avoids direct contact between the two, which would contradict the immutability of the soul and at the same time it secures illumination of dull matter. It seeks to maintain the grandeur and purity of the Puruşa by completely keeping it away from the everchanging Prakṣti. The reconciliation is a clever attempt but it fails to convince rationally. The relation between the Purusa and the buddhi is further interpreted by Vijñānabhiksu as one like that of a crystal to a rose reflected in it; there is no actual transference (uparāga), but only the assumption of such transference (abhimana). Though the Purusas are many and are universal and infinite, they do not illumine all things at all times. They reflect only those modifications belonging to their respective buddhis and not those of others.
The arguments that the Sāṁkhya has forwarded for establishing the plurality of the Purusas go to establish the plurality of the individual souls or Jīvas and not of the transcendental selves which have been described by the Sámkhya as those without attributes, without parts, imperishable, motionless, absolutely inactive and impassive, unaffected by pleasure or pain or any other emotion. Max Müller writes – “.... Purusa is without beginning, it is subtle, omnipresent, perceptive, without qualities,
1 Radhakrishnan S.: Indian Philosophy, Vol. II, p. 295,
For Private And Personal
