Contribution of Vachaspati-Mishra to Samkhya System
by Sasikumar. B | 2017 | 35,637 words
This page relates ‘Observations and Conclusion� of the research on the Sankhya [Samkhya] school of Indian philosophy with special reference to the contribution of Vachaspati-Mishra. The study includes concepts such as Epistemology (validity and worth of knowledge), Ontology (theory of being or reality), Psychology (science of behavior and mind), Phenomenology (the philosophical study of the structures of experience and consciousness) and Ethics (the removal of errors), all forming an essential part of Samkhya philosophy.
Chapter 5 - Observations and Conclusion
Observations
1. 峦貹پ Ѿś at the outset of his commentary on the first two 첹 provides a new orientation and purpose to the whole ṃkⲹ System by explicating and elaborating the suggestive hints of the kārikas. His mastery of scholarship is more vivid here, especially in delineating the different modes of sorrows and the efficacy of ṅkⲹ-śٰ alone for removing them. And it is done in a clear ū貹ṣasiddhānta mode.
2. In the course of discussion on the number of ṇa 峦貹پ’s stance is exemplary. He assertively says that there are only three ṇa ‘na nyūnam nāpyadhikam�. And refuting lokāyata and establishing the validity of ԳܳԲ ṇa he opines that the nonexistence of certain things cannot be inferred merely from the fact of its being not perceived as the super sensuous things like ʰṛt and ʳܰṣa which are obtained only through inference.
3. Out and out 峦貹پ Ѿś is an ardent advocate of svataprāmāṇya of Vedas. As the Vedas are independent of human authorship, according to him, they are free from all shortcomings. As a commentator 峦貹پ Ѿś excels in the commentary on the ninth which puts forth the ٰⲹ岹, the principle of causation in ṃkⲹ System. The examples and arguments brought in the commentary are superb.
For example, while elucidating the argument ‘asadakaraṇāt� he comments that:
“if the effect were, nonexistent before the operation of the cause, it could never be brought into existence by anybody; by even a thousand artists blue can never be made yellow�.
峦貹پ Ѿś exhibits his unparalleled scholarship in the elucidation of the other four arguments too.
4. 峦貹پ’s keenness of observation is vivid in the whole body of the text. For example, in enucleating the function of vyakta he shows the doctrinal propriety of the word �Prasavadharmi�. The form of the word to be used would have been ‘prasavadharma�, but the author has used the particular possessive affix of �nini� in order to indicate the constancy of productiveness in the Manifest.
5. Moreover the examples used to explicate the existence of ʳܰṣa, and the cooperations of the sattva, rajas and tamas, though they are mutually contradictory for the single purpose of emancipation of ʳܰṣa as well as the example of a girl to elucidate the mutually exclusive nature of ܰ徱, etc. show the argumentative capacity of 峦貹پ Ѿś as a commentator.
6. Creation is due to the ṃyDz between the ʰṛt and ʳܰṣa. ʰṛt and ʳܰṣa are absolutes. It is rather difficult to describe the nature of ṃyDz between the two absolutes. This is a vexed problem and it seems that there is no satisfactory answer in the ṃkⲹ System. But 峦貹پ Ѿś explicates the rationale behind the relation between ʳܰṣa and ʰṛt and also the inevitability of it in a convincing manner. To enunciate the points which were just suggestively mentioned in the ṅkⲹkārikā 峦貹پ borrows from other philosophical systems. For example to elucidate the four stages of 岵 and the śⲹ, aṇima etc, he is taking materials from the Yogasūtras of ʲٲñᲹ.
7. 峦貹پ in the course of discussion on ٰṇa, in a ū貹ṣa mode, questions the relevancy of Dzṇa which seems to serve no purpose. Then he answers this objection by interpreting the phrase ‘taijasādubhayam�. He says that even though there is no separate product from rajas exclusively, it plays a significant role in the process of evolution by activating sattva and tamas which are otherwise absolutely inert and incapable of performing their functions.
8. 峦貹پ often exhibits the keenness of observation while interpreting the subtle points which were indirectly suggested in the 첹. While dealing with the question whether the mind is a sense organ or not that becomes vivid. 峦貹پ answers this problem in an inimitable way. He provides a subtle interpretation to the term ‘Sādharmyāt� in the and arrives at the conclusion that mind is a sense organ because it has properties common to sense organs.
9. The real nature of emancipation in ṅkⲹ is a long standing matter of dispute among the commentators on the 첹. Anticipating some objections in the context of emancipation 峦貹پ attempts to answer them. The moot question is creation is done by whom? If it is done by ʰṛt it is difficult to say how creation can be withdrawn? ʰṛt is ever tending towards ṛtپ. Then, how can there be emancipation at all? 峦貹پ’s answer to this question is that the function of ʰṛt is as much for the emancipation of ʳܰṣa as for the bondage of ʳܰṣa. 峦貹پ elucidates the point by taking the example of cooking of food by a person who is desirous of food.
Another objection raised in this context is the function of ʰṛt which is inert. When it is said that the ʰṛt acts for another one’s purpose as if it for her own purpose, it implies that ʰṛt should have intelligence. But ʰṛt in the system is originally �Ჹḍa�, i.e. the one which has no intelligence. While answering the objection 峦貹پ does not adduce any additional corroborative evidence to substantiate his point, but just follows the example given in the . In the commentary 峦貹پ assertively opines that bondage, transmigration and emancipation are superimposed on the ʳܰṣa and this is like attributing the success and failures of the servant to the master.
10. 峦貹پ explains all the 첹 in pāṭhakrama. But he explains fourth in arthakrama.
"seyamāryā'rthakramānurodhena pāṭhakramamanādṛtyaiva vyākhyātā ||"
I.e.,
“The explanation of the follows the sense, not the order of words.�
Conclusion
Indian philosophy which has spread all over the world as the one filled with the fragrance of exotic culture and glorious tradition. The system of philosophy which is the landmark of India is divided into six streams. These systems agree on certain essential ideas. Philosophy is such an arena where, without a thorough insight and realization one cannot dare to enter into it.
Many scholars and seers have tried their hands in coordinating these systems. There are numerous writings, commentaries, interpretations, etc. in this field. These systems are also named as Brāḥmanical systems as they have their footage on the authority of the Vedas. All these systems have a blend of logic, psychology, metaphysics and religion. The ṅkⲹ philosophy is the one which explains the experience of bold speculative ventures.
The ṅkⲹ system expounded by Kapila is the oldest of these systems. The authoritative book on this system is the ṅkⲹkārikā of Īśvarakṛṣṇa. Many scholars have delved deep into this subject and brought out many commentaries and interpretations. To mention some of them are 峦貹پ Ѿś, Ҳḍa岹, Vijñānabhikṣu etc.
As said earlier, numerous philosophers, scholars and seers have written many books on the ṅkⲹ System. Among all these 峦貹پ Ѿś’s work stands on a high pedestal. He is the ever glowing light in the lineage of Indian philosophy. Nothing much is revealed about his past. He was a native of Mithila and has been accepted by many that he belonged to 9th century C.E. This agreement has been reached on the date that has been seen in his works. 峦貹پ has to his credit nine treatises belong to six systems of Indian philosophy. The realm of philosophy has been enriched by his scholarly works.
The scholarliness and skill of diction of 峦貹پ Ѿś can be clearly understood by the manner in which he has clubbed the compound expressions and terminology in his works. This falls into three phases. The first phase is related to the ṭṭ Mīmaṃsā treatise, the second to the ⲹ, ṅkⲹ and Yoga and the third to ձԳٲ. Being a man of impartial temperament, he gave due importance to all the systems of philosophy. A peculiarity of 峦貹پ Ѿś is that while writing on a particular system, he adheres to its pros and cons, strictly. He never beats about the bush to stress his points on any system, instead sticks only to the doctrinal standards of that system. But he is always prompt to stamp his personal seal in all the systems which he has commented on. His study of ṅkⲹ has shown the depth of his knowledge, narrative skill and scholastic ability.
The Contribution of 峦貹پ Ѿś to ṅkⲹ philosophy has made far reaching effects in the later development of ṅkⲹ System. The impact was multifaceted and multifarious. For a rational understanding of his essential contribution to ṅkⲹ System, the major topics are classified under five heads as Epistemology, Ontology, Psychology, Phenomenology and Ethics.
The validity and worth of knowledge is the main concern of Epistemology. The three main steps of the foundation on which ṅkⲹ holds strong are cognition, conclusion and conclusive evidence. If knowledge is to be considered as authentic, it should be perceived and cognized. This, says 峦貹پ, is the primary and basic need to acquire knowledge. Among the ṇa, this stands out because this gives the knowledge pertained to the reality of an object. The sense organs, merely helps in sensing the objects, but there is no cognition or characterization. The mind on the other hand takes up the responsibility arraying the sensed object according to its verbal orders. 峦貹پ views inference into īٲ and aīٲ. Vīta has its footage on the affirmative accompaniment or overall agreement in the presence. On the other hand aīٲ is the negative accompaniment and absence of agreement.
The positive īٲ is divided into ū which is uniform happening and sāmānyatodṛsṭa which does not have any uniformity. The aīٲ inference of śṣa or pariśeṣa, that is, it is inference by exclusion or elimination. On the ṇa of Vedic testimony 峦貹پ views, that is free from the clutches of doubts and discrepancy. This is not pertained to any personal origin. 峦貹پ is so broad minded as to accept the three ṇa of ṅkⲹkārikā viz. cognition, conclusion and conclusive evidence and also the five ṇa put forward by other philosophers as ܱ貹Բ, ٳ貹ٳپ, 屹, sambhava and aitiḥya. He attaches or tags these five ṇa to the already stated three ṇa.
The dualism of ʰṛt and ʳܰṣa can also be explicated on the ontological perspective of the ṅkⲹ philosophy. According to ṅkⲹ, ʰṛt is pre-supposed to be the final worldly existence. It maintains a balance between the three ṇa: sattva, rajas and tamas. They dress up to perform the majestic act of manifestation, activity and restraint. The result of this act is pleasure, pain and delusion. Sattva which is light is urged by rajas and its action is restraining the force of tamas. The three ṇa are a far cry from each other, but at the time of need they unite together to cause the effects.One peculiarity of the philosophy of ṅkⲹ is that the effect is inherent in the cause. This particular specialty is called ٰⲹ岹 or 貹ṇām岹, stressing on cause and effect. All the other theories based on causation are dismissed by 峦貹پ.
Of the principal concepts, one among them is ʳܰṣa in ṅkⲹ System. The ʳܰṣa is static, stable and eternal. ʳܰṣa is bound at times and is caused by aviveka between Prkaṛti and its evolutes and to ʳܰṣa itself. At the stage of Kaivalya ʳܰṣa is let free from ʰṛt and is relieved from all sorrows. 峦貹پ favours two types of liberation i.e., the īԳܰپ and the Videhamukti.
The acquiring of discriminative knowledge is a must for liberation. This knowledge is called the siddhi in ṅkⲹ. In the Tattvakaumudī, the creation is described in its fullest form and it is of opinion that buddhi takes along with it the virtue, wisdom, dispassion and power and also the reverse of these qualities. These are categorized again as viparyaya, śپ, ٳṣṭ and siddhi. The success is hindered by viparyaya, śپ and ٳṣṭ. With regard to siddhi, it has eight phases like adhyayana, ś岹, ūha, suhṛtپ, Բ etc.
The origin, according to ṅkⲹ is of two stages viz. buddhisarga and bhautikasarga. The buddhisarga is accompanied with buddhi, ṃk and eleven organs. The bhautikasarga, on the other hand has five ٲԳٰ, the five ūٲ and their products.
Buddhi is the receiver of discriminative knowledge and so it has the power to decide. It can be explained thus: when it is entirely dark, a ray of light which enters through a small hole brightens up the dark room, so also the ignorant or dark mind is lighted up by the ray of knowledge. This knowledge makes its entry into the mind through the sense organs. The knowledge is enhanced by the conjoining of the known and unknown. The first to the origin is the buddhi from the mother principle, ūṛt. The effect of buddhi is knowledge, 峦貹پ proclaims that buddhi is the determiner of the things and it identifies the things, bearing in mind, the action is similar to that of the active agent.
峦貹پ has given a deep insight into the misapprehension of five subjects, namely tamas, moha, 峾dz, tāmiśra and Ի峾ś. These subjects can also be seen in ʲٲñᲹ’s Yogsūtra as five afflictions viz. , asmitā, 岵, 屹ṣa and abiniveśa. Avidyā or tamas is the natural qualities of buddhi, a bi-product of ūṛt. The tamas belong to eight types and this is on the basis of identifying the self with intellect, individuation, the mind and five subtle elements.
Asmitā is the mixing of power of consciousness and cognition. Asmitā has with it eight additions which is characterized by love, such as ṇi, , , , پ, 峾ⲹ, śٱ and kāmāvasāyitā. The attachment to the object of senses is 岵 and this is of ten kinds, five 徱 and five a徱. This leads to 屹ṣa called tāmiśra. This tāmiśra in turn has eighteen tags containing ten objects and eight attainments. The infirmity is the second subjective evolution; it injures eleven organs by hurting the intellect too. The impairment of buddhi is numbered as seventeen due to the failure of nine contentment and eight attainments.
The object of ethics is to overcome evils or errors. The ethics in the ṅkⲹ philosophy are to attain discriminative knowledge which is the stepping stone to Apavarga. The viparyaya, śپ and ٳṣṭ are the objects which urge the evils and wrong doings. These are obstacles to Apavarga. The erasing of these evils and wrong doings is the ethical side of this system. Finally, the ethical goal of ṅkⲹ is to discriminate the presence of a transcendent consciousness distinct from primordial materiality and its three ṇa, and thereby to attain a radical isolation (Kaivalya) from experience of frustration. While dealing with the ethics of ṅkⲹ System 峦貹پ attempts to correlate ṅkⲹ meditational techniques with the ձԳٲ triad viz. śṇa, manana and nididhyāsana.
ṅkⲹ has its footage on the duality of ʳܰṣa and ʰṛt and goes to the extent of upholding the duality of ʳܰṣa silencing the God. The ṅkⲹ opines that the material world sprouts out from the heart of ʰṛt at the time of creation and at the time of dissolution it goes back to ʰṛt. So nothing new is produced nor destructed. Here production takes the meaning of development and evolution and destruction is envelopment and involution.
The deep study of 峦貹پ Ѿś on ṅkⲹ is the supreme one, in the long array of interpretations and commentaries. The theoretical ṅkⲹ if it is followed sincerely, and strictly will lead the aspirant to the highest goal of life i.e., self realization or liberation. The work of 峦貹پ Ѿś has opened up new avenues for the better understanding of this philosophy. Here the proverb “All roads lead to Rome� is very apt because whatever be the system of philosophy, the end is self realization. This is made clear by the quill driving of the great scholastic personality 峦貹پ Ѿś.
In fact, the ṅkⲹtattvakaumudī of 峦貹پ Ѿś is an eye opener into the philosophy of ṅkⲹ. 峦貹پ Ѿś has elaborated and detailed every minute concept with the crystalline clarity. It is so simple and lucid in style and diction which is acceptable by one and all.