·UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
DE
tia
INSTITUTE OF POST GRADU.
ATE (E) STUDIES LIBRARY

·LR
R631:9
INSTITUTE OF POST GRADUATE (E) STUDIES
LIBRARY
CI. No,
G5
Ac, No
E8582
This book should be returned on or before the last date stamped
below, An overdue charge of 5 Paise/25 Paise (Text-books) will be
collected for each day the book is kept overtime.

·No text on this page.

·Poona Oriental Series, No. 11
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE
SANKHYA SYSTEM
ON THE LINE OF THE SANKHYA-KARIKĀ.
SANKHYA-SŪTRA AND THEIR COMMENTARIES
( being the research paper submitted to the University
of Allahabad with the addition of an English and
Sanskrit introduction and the texts of the
Sankhya-Kürika and the
Sankhya Sutra.
BY
V. V. SOVANI, M.A., LL.B.,
Rajkumar College, Raipur.
POONA
ORIENTAL BOOK AGENCY
1935

·CONTENTS Pages iii . ... V ... ... Preface Association Introduction A Critical Study of the Sankhya System Sanskrit Introduction to Sänkhya Sutras Sänkya Sutras Sānkhya Kärikā . vii 1-54 18 1-28 29-36 ... | All Rights Reserved by the Publisher ] N.B.-Separate copies of Sanskrit Introduction, Sankhya Sutras E Karikas are sold af base per copy. TT : Printed by: S. R. Sardesai, B.A., LL.B., Navin Samarth Vidyalaya's 'Samarth Bharat' Press, 947, Sadashiv Peth, Poona 2. AND Published by: Dr N, G, Sardesai, L.M.S., for the Oriental Book Agency, 15 Shukrawar, Poona (India), ·PREFACE The author of a new book on the Sankhya philosophy owes an explanation to his readers. Since there are already a few books in English, exclusively devoted to the Sänkhya and some others covering the whole field of Indian Philosophy, each containing a chapter on the Sänkhya, it may be demanded, why inflict another? My answer is simple. The present work is not altogether a new attempt but the reprint of my paper on the Sãrkhya, prepared under the wisc and able guidance of Pandit (now Dr.) Umeša Miśra, and published five years ago in the Allahabad University Studies, Arts section, Volume VII, pp. 387-432, while I was a Re- .search Scholar in the Department of Sanskrit of the University of Allahabad. Then again, this booklet is not meant to replace the existing works but to supplement them, if the humble effort of a beginner, with very little .pretensions to originality, can aspire to such a claim. This reprint has afforded me an opportunity to add introductions in English and Sanskrt and the texts of the Sankhya-Sūtra and the Sankhya-Kārikā. It is not a detailed critical study of the Sankhya based on an exhaustive study of all the available original materials, but is a brief treatment of a select and compact group of facts on broad lines. I flatter myself that it will serve as a handy volume to Oriental scholars and University students; but those, who relegate the Sanskệt texts to the back-ground and want the English exposition only, will not find much in it to meet their requirements. References to sources have been given in the foot-notes in the case of important points only.

·iv A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM My thanks are due to Principal T. L. H. Smith- Pearse, 1.8.s., for kindly having gone through the manuscript of the English Introduction, to Dr. J. Sinha, M.A., Ph.D., P.R.S., Professor of Philosophy, Meerut College, for associating himself with this book and to some of my colleagues for some helpful suggestions. Raipur: April 1, 1935. V.V.S.

·ASSOCIATION I feel immense pleasure in associating myself with the valuable and scholarly work of Mr. V. V. Sovani, M.A., with whom I have been intimately connected for many years by the closest ties of affection. He is a distinguished graduate of our College and the Agra University. He was inspired with genuine love for Sanskrit literature and philosophy by his father, late Prof. V. V. Sovani, M.A., of Meerut College and Allahabad University, who was well-known in Northern India for his profound scholarship in Sanskritic studies. Mr. V. V. Sovani wrote his "A Critical Study of the Sārkkya System" as a Research Scholar of the Allahabad University, which was published in the Allahabad University Studies, Vol. VII., in 1931. He has laid us under a deep debt of gratitude by publishing the abstract in the form of a book which will be easily accessible to all interested in the subject. His work with its historical introduction and highly suggestive, critical analysis of the Sānkhya Kārikā with its commertaries and a comparative estimate of their interpretations will be a valuable guide and a useful book of reference to all students of Indian philosophy. The book, fully worked out, with English translations of the Kärikās and important portions of the commentaries, will be a valuable contribution to the literature on the subject. Jadunath Sinha. Meerut : April 1, 1935.

·INTRODUCTION A critical treatment of the Sankhya has been essayed in the body of the book. The occasion is here taken to discuss a few broad principles and to present some thought-provoking ideas, but I have attempted only to suggest, not to dilate. Religion and philosophy will always have an important place in ennobling the life of man. Science cannot replace them. It is in the nature of too many men. to crave for something that the mind cannot grasp and which is beyond the powers of exact sciences to explain. The modern increasingly scientific world has not yet been able to solve much of the riddle, and whatever comparatively few conclusions science has. reached are liable to be reversed any moment. Who could expect that many of the Newtonian theories of 1. "The tendency to-day is not to reduce everything to manifestations of matter-since matter now has only a minor place in the physical world--but to reduce it to manifestations of the operation of natural law", and concludes Dismiss the idea that natural law may swallow up religion ; it cannot even tackle the multiplication table singlehanded."-Prof. Eddington, as quoted by Ramanand Chatterji in the Malaviya Commemoration Volume. 2.“ ... The ethers and their undulations, the waves. which form the universe, are in all probability fictitious... This is not to say that they have no existence at all: they exist in our minds, or we should not be discussing them ; and something must exist outside our minds to put this on any other concept into our minds. To this something we may assign the name reality, and it is this reality which it is the object of science to study."--Sir James Jeans in Mysterious Universe. 40 ...

·IATRUDUOTIUN 3 Mathematics and Physics would be overthrown by Einstein's theory of Relativity? An apple is attracted by the earth when it falls was said by Newton. In the popular language, Einstein would probably now say, The earth moves up to receive the apple”. A molecule was regarded as unbreakable. Later on atom was supposed to be an unanalysable entity but now that too is supposed to be made of electrons and protons. In simple language, energy is supposed to be evolving matter, a statement which the scientists were not ready to accept in the past. Consider also the example of the Elements. More than 96 have been found out and he who knows the Electronic theory may some day reduce the number to Unity. Surely a start has been made by transmutation of lead into gold and Hydrogen into Helium. If it is possible to get one from the other, it may be possible some day to get All from One. The influence of the West and new scientific theories and inventions have helped to change the outward aspect of India but the inner spiritual aspect of the country has not changed much. There is no achievement in the world which can compare favourably with that of Indian speculative philosophy ranging from the half-inarticulate beginnings in the Vedas to the logical realism of Nyāya and the ethical idealism of Buddhism. An attempt has been made in the following paragraphs to show the unity and continuity of Indian thought and its close relation to life and religion from the dim dawn of history. The Aryans of the l'edic period were an energetic race, ever ready to act and to fight, taking pleasure in life and work, ready to enjoy the good things which liſe offered, manfully struggling against difficulties ·viii A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM and dangers. They seem never to have doubted that, inspite of its ills, life is, on the whole, a good thing, and they cherished the faith that after death brave and good men go to "Elysian fields" where, through the favour of the Gods, they enjoy everlasting bliss. But, gradually, the spirit and belief of the people underwent a profound change. The old simple joy in life and delight in action passed away, and the view began to be held that life is not a good thing at all, that its ills and sufferings are greater than its joys and pleasures. Death was no longer viewed as a gate to a happier state of existence, but as the transition into other states, all of which are full of sorrow. Great teachers arose, who taught that, strive as he may, man can secure no permanent happiness; that life indeed is nothing but pain; that death will begin only another round of painful existence. The old Aryans, in short, had held that life, with all its troubles, problems and perplexities, is a good thing to be enjoyed; the later Hindus were inclined to the view that, for the virtuous and sinful alike, all lives are pain and sorrow. With their minds less fixed on the needs and joys of the day, these thinkers found leisure also to ponder on the world and on human lifc. They began to think that the way to true happiness lay not in doing and enjoying, but in the bliss of inward meditation, and that such meditation could best be carried on in the solitude of forests, apart from the noisy haunts of men. When, in that little known remote period, the theory that man was crushed with the burden of threefold pain, took shape, and when the popular religion of the period failed to solve the difficulty except by showing a way to temporary escape from the pain and sorrow of existence, the great sages and thinkers turned their ·INTRODUCTION ix attention to the investigation of the origin of pain. In the actual process of investigation they were faced with perplexing anomalies and imperfections in the Creation and were painfully conscious of the limitations of their powers. They did not hold any divine agency responsible for this. The origin of pain, they said, was the effect of causes, of deeds done, either in this or in a past life. Then there arose a new question, whether it was possible for man to put an end to the seemingly unbroken and irresistible sequence of the effects of deeds, and whether the cycle of life and death must go on for ever. All action in the world is brought about by desire, which is based on innate ignorance which makes a man fail to recognise the true nature of things and ultimately causes transmigration. The darkness of such 'ignorance is dispelled by divine knowledge, which, according to every philosophical school, consists of tattva-jñāna. Universal knowledge, when attained, destroys the effect of Karma, which would otherwise result in a future existence, and thus puts an end to transmigration, or in other words, brings salvation. How can man know himself and attain tattva-jñāna to annihilate the effects of Karma? Here we arrive.at the parting of the ways. The peculiar bent of the Hindu mind, illustrated in the principal philosophical and religious systems of India, diverse though they are, has the special feature that it tends to and aims at pacification of the mind and thus hopes to get rid of the sufferings of the worldly existence. The different systems only prescribe different methods. As our present work is a critical study of the central features of the Sankhya doctrine, we shall henceforward confine our remarks mainly to the Sankhya, the pioneer ·Xii A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM wise, how could Prakſti ever hope to undertake the unparalleled philanthropic task of labouring unceasingly for the permanent release of Puruşa, if one is the negation of everything that the other stands for? Where was the necessity of supposing the ultimate plurality of Puruşa, when the reasons for such a supposition are entirely worldly, such as bondage and release of individuals ? The Puruşa is always absolutely unaffected by the influence of Prakſti. Then how can we distinguish one Absolute Puruşa from his kindred? Does not such plurality imply introducing limitations in Him? Was the plurality of Puruşa a concession to the vanity of man? Was the merging of his soul into one undifferentiated Puruşa a poor consolation? Does it make the Sānkhya more attractive? Did Satkāryavāda stand in the way of a single Puruşa, because one Prakſti is three Guņas and their varied combinations could bring the whole creation into existence, whereas one Puruşa could not boast of any such power? How could he account for the numberless individuals in the animate world? Were countless Puruşas supplied to fill the whole universe, so that, later on, no difficulty be felt to start and keep the world evolving ? 5. A concrete illustration of the enormous possibility of combinations from a very simple mechanism, lock and key :- "Each tumbler step of a large Chubb key can be given one of thirty different heights, the bolt step one of twenty. Bys merely transposing the order of the steps in a six step key it is possible to get 720 combinations. By diminishing or increasing the heights, the possible combinations may be raised to the enormous total of 7,776,000".-A. Williams in How It Works, pp 435-6.

·INTRODUCTION xiit Many are the objections raised. To mention a few : How are Puruşas many and Prakſti eternal? How can they come together? How can the evolutes combine in themselves the cosmic and the psychological? How can the original harmonious balance of Guņas be disturbed? Are the tangible things of the world no more than Guņas in conflict? Probably Prakſti alone, in the opinion of these critics, would have been more successful in explaining the scheme than Prakrti with an addition of innumerable Purusas. The absolute unattachment of Puruşas is considered a definite hindrance rather than a solution. If the problem of problems-the Puruşas' evolution starting propinquity to Prakſti-—is solved, much of the criticism can be silenced, they say. But where is the problem to necessitate a remedy? Why is it thought necessary that they are to be brought together and then a way of its accomplishment searched? Are Puruşa and Prakſti not all-pervading and are they not, then, blended everywhere with each other like warp and woof? Evolution under such circumstances will be unending. Whatever the texts may say, the released Puruşa remains where he was and what he was, with the difference that Prakſti ceases to affect him. The release brings no change in prakſti also, because, though it affects the released no more, it unceasingly continues its attractions for the unreleased, who will always be in a vast majority. In short, everything continues to be what it was and where it was. Prakſti ceases its attraction for the released this statement lays emphasis only on the discriminating knowledge which makes the Puruşa's standing aloof possible, and not on the cessation of activity in Prakſti with regard even to the released.

·xiy A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM Throughout the different periods the leaders of Indian thought never lost sight of the psychological basis of metaphysics. Rejecting phenomenalism, the Vedānta reaches the greatest heights the Indian mind has ever attained, when evolving a formula to explain the phenomenon of consciousness. The Sānkhya blundered. In attempting to solve one difficulty, it created another. It tried to reconcile the philosophical and the mundane and, in the process, miserably failed over the former. Contradictions have crept in because of this failure; the whole argument has been shaken and people have been led to think that the Sārkhya propounders were no better than blind teachers leading the blind. Shortcomings may be concealed by various kinds of special pleading, but the inconsistencies cannot escape the critic's eye. Thought-systems are contributory, and their combined message boils down to unity. Time and space are unending quantitatively but not qualitatively. Every individual thing in the world comes into being and disappears, and time and space, as applied to it, are unending; but if the world is viewed devoid of time and space, it becomes homogeneous. So the world is transitory distributively but not collectively. Prakſti contains the opposing constituents, Sattva and Tamas, yet they are reconciled by Rajas. So Guņas both create divisions and differences and maintain unity also. So the activities of the world form, as it were, one broad stream, but superficialities, caused by the predominance of one Guņa or the other, lead men to think there are several separate channels each small enough to make human knowledge of it possible. The Sänkhya for these reasons is dualistic, with Prakrti and Puruşa as co-eternal. But they are different from ·INTRODUCTION XV each other and neither of them is a cause or effect of the other. Without the help of the Sankhya, the world cannot be properly known, and as the unworldly can be studied only through the worldly, the Sāåkhya has been given an important place by most of the systems. Without the many, there is not the one, and without differences there is not the uniform; and therefore, true knowledge implies seeing one in many and many in one, and seeing uniformity in diversity and diversity in uniformity. If dualism is deficient without the acceptance of one absolute being over and above Puruşa and Prakſti, which inspite of Him persist and prove their existence by their opposing natures, monism alone is not self-sufficient also. Monism through dualism is just and proper ; but the Vedānta monism, with Māyā to explain the world, is unjust and improper. Similarly, the two ways to salvation areto retain activity but to abandon its fruit; and to abandon the fruit as well as the action. The former, that is, objectless activity, means the substitution of major for minor desires, of collective for individual good, of soul-care for bodily care. Sānkhya sanyasis who abandon the prescribed duty are in the wrong, because instead of foregoing the fruit they forego duty itself.“ Sanyāsa is self-centred, while Karma-yoga is community-centred. The latter's outlook is broad because it procures a man's own good, through that of the community. 6. "A result of the combined doctrine of transmigration and karma is that it paralyses action, drives to asceticism, and makes action self-regarding, since it becomes the aim of every man to win salvation for himself individually by ac. quiring the right knowledge":-Macdonnell in Comparative Religion.

·xvi A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM The exposition and justification of the Sankhya theories follow. So far, the reader has been prepared for the right perspective in which to judge them. Considering the interdependence of different thoughtsystems, a man concludes, that there is no reason for followers of one system to think compelled to pick quarrels with others and holes in their system. So common a practice leads them to absurd exaggeration of the importance of their own tenets and deprecation of those of others. It leads them also to claim their system as complete and flawless for all and at all times; and to deny any truth in others. But in this variegated world no one system can boast to supply the needs of all individuals. One system suits some, and another suits others. A greater and greater realisation of this truth will keep each system within its limits and promote co-operation between all. Each has some. thing to teach and something to learn.

·A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM ON THE LINE OF THE SANKHYA- KĀRIKĀ, SĀNKHYA-SOTRA AND THEIR COMMENTARIES The aim of the paper is to give a clear-cut exposition of the Sankhya in its more developed form. Such explanation is intended to reconcile the many surface irregularities, seeming incongruities and superficial inconsistencies, which usually strike the casual reader and critic. Such misconceptions are not the lot of the unwary and the uninitiated only. All have with one voice deprecated this or the other aspect of the system. In view of its general misunderstanding by all and sundry, a new treatment of the subject will not be out of place. A perfect thought-system should naturally grow out of its initial fundamental postulates, which do not require recurring subsequent reinforcements to account for all its developments. An attempt is made below to show that the Sānkhya docs satisfy these requirements and that there is really no justification for the clamour which is usually raised against it. There are two broad aspects of the Sankhya which must be clearly distinguished in the present study; one is the Sārkhya before Iśvarakļşņa's kārikā and the other is the Sankhya after kārikā. There are undoubtedly many more types of the Sänkhya besides those which we shall have occasion to touch upon in course of the brief survey of the history of the Sänkhya. This review is necessary for a fuller insight into the meaning of the kārikā terminology and the development of the kārikā conceptions. The above divisions into pre-kārikā, kārikā and post-kärikā ·2 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM Sankhya are not intended to represent water-tight compartments without overlappings. The basis of classification in the three groups will be similarity of tenets and not mere chronological sequence. The consensus of opinion is that the pre-kārikā Sānkhya marks an embryonic state and that the post-kārikā a state of deterioration from the settled form in the kārikā. The pre-kārikā Sānkhya is vague and no complete book on the subject is extant. The few references we have are to be met with in unexpected, out-of-theway contexts and these too are often found indifferently mixed up with other heterogeneous material. In dealing with this topic, therefore, emphasis will be laid only on facts that have in any way contributed to the shaping of the classical Sankhya. The Sānkhya is one of the oldest systems of thought and we find it already prominent at the threshold of philosophical enquiry. The pre-kārikā Sankhya is the characteristic product of an India newly stirred to its depths by the impulses of creative philosophical activity. In this period, the great systems of Indian thought have their fountain-heads. These springs were to remain, however, for long, mere rills and rivulets of negligible magnitude, till in the period of the Upanişads we have them swelling into a mighty boisterous current, and this in its turn was to split up and settle down finally into the six familiar channels of Indian philosophy which have watered through centuries this ancient land. The pre-kārikā 1 1 System 'in this context does not imply that the Sankhya had from the very beginning a well-planned scheme with some definite author to its credit, or that its tenets had taken their final shape.

·MEANING OF THE WORD SĀNKHYA 3 Sankhya, in the meanwhile, may be considered a notable legacy of the early thinkers. The word Sankhya first appears in the Santiparva of the Mahābhārata; and Sānkhya and Yoga in that book have been referred to as ' sanātane dve.' Sānkhya at times stands for knowledge only and in that sense it has to be distinguished from the Sankhya, which is the name for a particular system. Sankhya standing for the system should not be derived to mean 'number' because enumeration is not a characteristic feature of the Sānkhya. Other Indian systems far surpass it in this respect. The natural and traditionally accepted interpretation is from Sārkhya-buddhi or knowledge. The term Sārkhya was earmarked after a time for the particular system which believed in liberation through true knowledge of the difference of Prakſti and Puruşa. Jacobi refers to parisarkhyā and distinguishes the practice of the Sārkhyas, who, when explaining the significance of a conception, give an exhaustive enumeration of things contained, from that of the Vaiſeşikas, who give the vis'eșas or distinctive qualities, Gunaratna' holds that the Sankhya derived its name from its first founder, Sankha. The Sankhya was ignored, it is often said, on account of its atheistic tendencies. This argument as it stands is not correct. The Sānkhya was classed amongst the orthodox systems and therefore it always ranked higher than the monistic philosophy of Sankara in which everything was reduced to non-entity except Brahman, or than the deistic Vaişņavaite and Saivaite doctrines. The acceptance of the authority of the * In his commentary on Şaddarśanasamuccaya, p. 22, Bibliotheca Ed.

·4 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM scripture may have been a device on the part of the Sănkhyas, but it was successfully carried and they enjoyed all the advantages of an orthodox system without losing their own characteristic of maintaining the system purely rationalistic. To allow free thinking, they are said to have denied the existence of God, which would hamper the progress of pure reasoning in ignorant minds. But the reason was otherwise. There was no place left for Him in the system, and Indian thinkers and Indian followers were bold enough to carry their conclusions to the logical ends, however horrifying the results may be to the popular mind, or they did not remain horrifying because they were logical. Besides, the Sārkhya has not openly rejected the authority of the Vedas. It has definitely accepted the śrutipramāņa as one of the pramāņas, though śruti has a wider sense in the Sankhya, meaning correct tradition or authoritative statement. The Sankhya-Sūtra has a penchant for referring to śruti for validity. But judged otherwise, the Sankhya has relegated ānus'ravika methods in the removal of misery to a secondary place, though they are called pras'asya, in comparison to the Sānkhya method which is s'reyān. Sankara and other commentators of his type have questioned the Sānkhya interpretation of some śruti texts quoted for authenticity. The Sānkhya is traced back to as early a text as the Rgveda, thc hymns X, 221 and 129 of which give an idea of the creation of the world remotely resembl. ing the series of Sānkhya evolution. References are made also to Atharvaveda, X, 8 and 43, which mention the lotus flower of nine doors, covered with three strands, and to Satapatha and Sānkhāyana Brāhmaṇas in which Ātman is called the twenty-fifth principle. But these point to the critics' ingenuity. The Sänkhya, ·ORIGIN OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM or rather no philosophical system, can be easily traced from the Vedas. They were most likely composed when the Aryans were afraid of the natural surroundings of a newly discovered country and their thoughts were taken up in remedying the immediate evil and so they had no leisure to indulge in philosophical inquiry. But there is no denying the fact that the Sānkhya had its origin in the Upanişadic literature, from which it slowly branched off into separate existence. The crude materials from which the Sankhya grew as a well-knit system of philosophy are strewn in great abundance over the whole Upanişadic literature, though they were arranged later under the Sārkhya. For that reason it is repeatedly urged by Western scholars that the Brahma-Sūtras of Bādarāyaṇa, which are a samanvaya form of the Upanişadic philosophy, truly mean what Rāmānuja represents and not what Sankara superimposes. The crowning theory of the Upanişads is not pure dualism, but it is not unqualified monism also. It is preferably qualified dualism. They represent a period of great activity and Sankara's theory of Māyā and its later developments had no chance of finding a place in them. Kapila is considered the author of the Sănkhya- Sûtras as well as the first teacher of the Sankhya. One Kapila cannot be both, because it is generally believed that the Sārkhya-Sūtras were compiled about the 14th century A.D." He is not a historical person. His 3 Ahirbudhnya Samhitā says that his theory was Vaişnava and Vijñāna-Bhikṣu has also emphasised the theistic character of the Sankhya-Sūtra. Not later than Sarvadarśanasamgraha because one sūtra is quoted by Madhvamantrin, who is a contemporary of Mādhavārya. Sources of Vijayanagara Hist.,' p. 51 and J.O.R., Madras, 1928, p. 148.

·6 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM name occurs in various contexts and somehow it came to be associated with the Sankhya. He was known as a siddha in the literature of the Nāthas and in the rasāyanaśāstra. In the Bhagavadgitā, he is referred to as the best of siddhas. His case is classed in that of janmasiddhi. The assumption of nirmāņakāya in Vyāsa's commentary on Yoga-Sūtra, 1. 25, attributed by Vācaspati to Pañcaśikha, implies that the Master had no physical body. He appears in Svetāśvatara, 5.2, as identical with Hiranyagarbha. In the epic he is identified with Agni, with Vişnu and Siva, and all sorts of views are attributed to him, and he is the teacher of a number of sages. Sankara refutes the argument that Kapila of the Vedic texts was any great personage and identifies him with the Kapila who burnt the sons of. Sagara. Buddhist legends mention him as a predecessor of Buddha. Kārikā 70 places Āsuri next to Kapila. Āsuri and Pañcaśikha are mentioned in Mahābhārata (12. 219) as teacher and pupil, from which is picked up the statement of the Kārikā. The Sānkhya has an unbroken tradition from the time of Pancasikha? as indicated by s'işyaparamparayāgatam in Kārikā 71. He is considered to be the author of the first regular book on the subject and in that light, Bālarāma, while interpreting samākhyātam in Kärikā 69, says that the word means that Kapila only harangued and did not compile any book, the task being left to Pancasikha. In the Mahābhārata, Janaka professes himself to be a disciple of the beggar Pancasikha, belonging to the family of Parāśara. Mahābhārata and Yogabhāşya present different accounts 6 5 Vide the Introduction of Jayamangalā by Pandit Gopinātha Kaviraj. Compare Brahmajālasūtra. 7 Assigned to first century A.D.

·THE SANKHYA TEACHERS 7 of Pañcaśikha's philosophical position. Mahābhārata itself has two separate views attributed to him in 12.321 and 96-112. His views in 12.219 do not correspond with the Sankhya. He there holds bala as the sixth organ with reference to organs of action as manas is the sixth organ in relation with the organs of perception: His views correspond more with the Vedānta, where the separate existences of the individual souls finally merge into Brahman. He is considered the author of Şaşțitantra in Chinese tradition, and Svapneśvara in Kaumudiprabhā assigns Sänkhya-Pravacana-Sūtra to him. Vācaspati identifies certain passages in Vyāsa's commentary on Yoga-Sutra as his and they reappear in his name in the Sankhya-Sūtra. From these extracts it can be said that his work must have been in prose. His views are more logical-that the souls are atomic in size, otherwise they could not be infinite in number; that the eternal connection of spirit is due to lack of discrimination and not to works or to psychic body. Buddhist texts mention a Gandhabba Pancasikha. 10 The Chinese Sānkhya-Kärikā mentions Gārgya and Ulūka as Sānkhya teachers. In Buddhacarita, Arādakalāma refers to Jaigişavya, Janaka and Parāśara as persons who obtained liberation through the Sānkhya. Compare Jayamangalā. 9 Cf. Sankhya-Sūtra, 6. 68. 10 Asuri and Pancas'ikha adhere to a theistic Sankhya that resembles the Särkhya in the Mahābhārata-Radhakrishnan. Pancaśikha agrees with Caraka. Caraka excludes Puruşa from the list of tattvas and Cakrapāņi thinks that Prakſti and Puruşa both being unmanifested have been counted as one; Tanmātrās are not mentioned and senses are bhautika.--Dasgupta, Hist. of Ind. Phil.,' Pancaśikha probably modified Kapila's work in atheistic light as shown by 'tena bahudhā krtam tantram' in Kärikā 70. 8 ·8 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM Kārikā 72 declares that the subject-matter of the Saptati is based on Şaşțitantra with the exclusion of ākhyāyikā and paravāda. The Kārikā is perhaps a later interpolation because the Saptati ended at Kārikā 69 where Gauda pādabhāşya finishes.11 Does Şaşțitantra represent a work? The commentators do not touch the point. They differently enumerate the sixty topics that cover the whole Sänkhya and that have been successfully incorporated in the body of the Saptati. Vācaspati quotes Rājavārtika, which is in anustubha metre for their enumeration while Jayamangalā repeats the same in upajāti. Paramārtha also quotes the same. The ten maulikārthas, according to others, represent the common or individual qualities of the tattvas, but Nārāyaṇa represents by them the twenty-five tattvas themselves, though their classification is strange- (1) puruşa, (2) prakrti, (3) buddhi, (4) ahankāra, (5-7) three gunas, (8) tanmātrā, (9) indriya, and (10) bhūta. Ahirbudhnya-Samhitā takes Şaşțitantra for a book having two mandalas of 32 prakſtis and 28 vikrtis. Chinese tradition refers to a Şașțitantra of 60,000 verses and this can be a misinterpretation of bahudha krtam tantram, as denoting that an extensive book was composed. There is the possibility according to Schrader of two Şaştitantras--one in prose, the other in verse, 12 12 Il See ahead, note on Kärikā 70. Vācaspati Miśra in Bhāmati attributes Şaşțitantra to Vārşaganya, which can be supported by the Chinese tradition which ascribes Vindhyavāsa who is identified with Išvarakļsņa with rewriting of Vrşagama's work; but if Vārşaganya is the teacher of Vindhyavāsa and Şaşțitantra is attributed to him, it is not probable that so late a work should have been the basis of the Kārikā. But there is a doubt as to the identification of Vindhyavāsa with Isvarakļşņa.

·THE TATTVASAMĀSA 9 Max Müller elevates the Tattvasamāsa to the pedestal of the basis of all later Sănkhya works, His arguments are that it is more popular amongst the panditas than the Kärikā; that it is a bare enumeration of principles and has many technical terms that are not met with in later works. For these very reasons Keith and Garbe assign it a later date.l3 The very name suggests that it is an abridgment of some bigger work. The mention of duhkha looks like a device for novelty; and the acceptance of devatās over indriyas and bhūtas :shows the influence of later Vedānta. The appearance of Iśvarakrsna's Kārikā'4 removes a period of uncertainty's because it provides a clear and definite exposition of the Sānkhya to this day. It has been the basis of all later Sänkhya treatises and criticisms. The date of Isvarakļşmalh is to be determined by Chinese sources. Paramārtha left India in 546 A.D. and translated a work which resembles the Kārikā and a commentary on it in his last period of literary activity which falls in 557–568 A.D. Another 18 Older than seventh century A.D., because it is referred to in Bhagavadajjukiyam and in Māmaņdur inscriptions- J. O. R., Madras, 1928, p. 145. The Manimekhalai account of the Sankhya, a Tamil work, which has been assigned a date earlier than that of the Kārikā differs in many respects from the Kärikā.-J. of Ind. Hist., Dec. 1929. Dasgupta divides the Sankhya into three strata- (a) theistic, details of which are lost, but which is kept in a modified form in Patañjaladarśana; (2) atheistic, represented by Pancaśikha; (3) atheistic modification as the orthodox Sankhya system. 16 Svapneśvara identifies him with Kālidāsa. 15 ·10 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM Chinese tradition is that Vindhyavāsa, who is sometimes identified with Iśvarakrsna, comes before Vasubandhu. The date of Vasubandhu was placed in the last three-quarters of the 5th century, but it has been pushed back by N. Peri a century earlier and further pushed by V. A. Smith to 280_360 A.D. Therefore, Isvarakļşņa cannot be placed in the 4th century as Keithis does. Dr. Belvalkar thinks that Vindhyavāsa wrote a commentary on the Karikā. He places Iśvarakrşņa in the first century A.D. or the 1st half of the 2nd century. According to him Mātharavrtti is the basis of the Chinese translation and Isvarakrsna must be at least two centuries earlier than Māthara because his Vștti is confused and it often misinterprets the Kārikā. But how can Dr. Belvalkar reach his date? He cannot utilize the date of Vasubandhu and he must depend on the translation by Paramārtha of the Kārikā and Mātharavịtti that appears in 557-568 for his evidence. Therefore, his date is entirely based on the confused nature of the Vștti and the time it must have taken to become so popular as to be picked up by Paramārtha for translation. But why allow that time? Paramārtha may not have had another recourse but utilize the Vetti which, though fresh, was essential on 17 View of Vindhyavāsa as reported in Slokavārttika, 393, 70+; Bhoja on Yogasūtra, 4, 22; Medhātithibhāșya, 1. 55; Syādvādamañjari, 117, and Gunaratna on Sarvadarśanasangraha is not always consistent with that of Isvarakſsna.-Kaviraj in Introduction Introduction to Jayamangalā. Vindhyavása accepts only two types of inference and no sūkşmas'arira. 18 Keith at another place holds that he cannot be later than 300 A.D.-'Sankhya,' p. 43.

·DATE OF IŚVARAKRŞŅA 11 account of the very brief character of the Kärikā itself. Prof. A. B. Dhruva thinks that Anuyogadvārasūtra should be assigned to the latter part of the first century A.D. because it deals with Buddhism generally and does not refer to Nāgārjuna, Aryadeva, Asanga and Buddhaghoşa; while in dealing with the Sankhya it points to three works besides the general work of Kapila; and so he places the Kārikā in first century B.C. and Māthara in the early part of first century A.D. Dr. Belvalkar does not consider that Hiranyasaptati is the same as the Kärikā. The work may have been so named hecause it brought to the author so many gold pieces, or because it treats of Hiranyagarbha. It can be a commentary on the Kārikā by Vindhyavāsa. Dr. Takakusu and Prof. Dhruva identify Hiranyasaptati and the Kārikā, and according to Prof. Dhruva it was wrongly attributed to Vindhyavāsa. There was a very early commentary appended to the Kārikā as proved by the Chinese translation. Dr. Belvalkar identifies the commentary with Mātharavștti,20 because there is a great similarity between the two and passages, which are in the Chinese translation and which are not in Gaudapădabhāșya, are to be found in Māthara. The Chinese translation is not verbatim. It has been amplified at places to make easy for the Chinese to understand and to conciliate with their views. Gaudapādabhāșya is an abridgment of the Vrtti and therefore this Gauda pāda cannot be the famous 19 Vide his paper in the proceedings of the First Oriental Conference, 20 Takakusu holds that neither Gaudapādabhāşya nor Mātharavștti can be the original of the translation, but it has some earlier commentary on which these are based.

·12 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SĂNKHYA SYSTEM teacher of the teacher of Sankara. He has been referred to by Alberuni who refers to one more commentary on the Kārikā and he ought to be earlier than Vācaspati. How then to account for the non-appearance of the last three Kārikās in the Bhāşya? Gauda pada comes later than Māthara and therefore their absence in the Bhāşya cannot prove that by the time of Gaudapāda the last three Kārikās were not interpolated; it may be an oversight of his. Jayamangalā is wrongly attributed to Sankara.31 It cannot be his on account of the slipshod style. Benediction to Lokottaravādi muni makes it a work of some Buddhist. Sarkarārya has to his credit two commentaries-on Kāmandaka's Nitisära and Vătsyāyana's Kāmasūtra, known as Jayamangalā. This very person seems to be the author of the commentary with that name on the Kārikā, A more important side of the study of the early history of the Sankhya is to see how it gradually developed into the classical form. The Sânkhya of the Upanişads is theistic and the dividing line between it and the Yoga is not clear. The Upanişads do not present a settled form of the Sānkhya. The number of the tattvas, their order and their conception remain to be made definite and uniform. The subjective side of the gunas possibly develops from the conception that the individual self was the result of the envelopment of the Absolute in the three guņas. The actual ? See Introduction to Jayamangalā by Pandit Gopinātha Kaviraj; besides Mr. Kavi identifies him with the author of Yogasūtra-hhāşyavivarana and places him about 1400 A.D.-Vide Literary Gleanings in Q. J. of the Andhra Hist. R. S., Oct. 1927.

·THE PRINCIPAL DOCTRINES 13- influence of these tendencies on the final shape of the Sānkhya cannot be ascertained on account of lack of historical data. As long as the one or two cardinal principles, e.g., svarūpa of puruşa and prakrti, were not settled, these stray currents of thought and appearances in the Upanişads and other literature may have helped in the formulation of the Sānkhya concepts; but once they were suggested and ready, the system could stand on its legs and follow unhampered and unassisted its course of development. It must have remained dependent on extraneous matter till that light did not dawn; and next it inust have rejected all unaccommodating material. Besides reservations are to be made on the subjective side. In spite of the ideas prevalent, the conception may have come in a moment of inspiration-though such flashes can also be explained as a product of the imperceptible influences of the times. The extreme disinterestedness of Puruşa and the claim of Prakſti, constituted of three ganas, to account for all the inner and outer world independently, as the Prakrti's different manifestations without any inherent change, make the Sānkhya what it is. The earliest definite Sārkhya work that has come down to posterity is the Kārikā. Another important work, though not from the viewpoint of time, but from the viewpoint of development of thought is the Sāňkhya-Sūtra. It comes much later and it softens dualism of the Kārikā. The Kārikā is a composite, short, complete work and it has the advantage, on account of its early date, of having received the attention of a mass of commentators within and beyond the Sānkhya pale. They put their own stamp on the text. They are the reflex of the then conditions and they create many new centres of

·14
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM
23
interest and activity. On account of these facilities a
textual study of the Kārikā in its necessary and con-
troversial details is attempted below. It is commonly
read with the Tattva-Kaumudi and therefore Vacas-
pati's explanations are at times left out to be supplied
by the reader.
KĀRIKĀ 1.*-All pain" is mānasa but it is divided
into three groups on the ground of its separate causes.
Mānasa (ādhyātmika) pain has been defined by Gauda?
as separation from the desired and association with the
undesired. Cessation of pain is not possible in the
Sankhya because pain being a form of guna and the
latter being eternal pain must ever exist. Pain is only
suppressed and its recurrence is not possible because
the seeds of ignorance, wherefrom pain sprouts, are all
burnt.
Vācaspati has laboured hard to show that it refers
to the concept formed of threefold pain and not to the
whole compound. But what has he gained thereby?
Bhautika according to Vācaspati includes trees and
stones and his division is based on the four classes:-(1)
born of the placenta, (2) born from eggs, (3) born from
perspiration, and (4) born by bursting open the soil.
Nārāyaṇa understands by bhūta things that are harmful
to mankind. Gauda thinks that it means the five gross
materials.
2
Yoga holds that our desire for liberation is not actuated
by any hedonistic attraction for happiness or even removal of
pain, but by an innate tendency of the mind to follow the path
of liberation. Also compare Suzuki --Mahāyāna Buddhism.'
33 Gauda stands for Gaudapāda.
दुःखत्रयाभिधाताज्जिज्ञासा तदभिधानके हेतौ ।
दृष्टे साऽपार्था चेनैकान्तात्यन्ततोऽभावात् ॥ १ ॥

·VYAKTA
15
KÄRIKĀ 2.*-Avis'uddhi means some fault in the
details of the performance of prohibited slaughter." But
how, for example, is animal sacrifice at all permitted ?
The reasons are :-- firstly, shortcomings falling, under
pidhi or nişedha do no harmºs; secondly, the minor details
help only in the fulfilment of the sacrifice and they
have no bearing on the resultsas; thirdly, himsa for man
is disallowed and as such it is harmful to man, but it
brings no blot on the sacrificet; fourthly, the prohibi-
tion of himsă applies to all cases generally, but because
nişed ha has not been specially mentioned in the chapter
on sacrifices it does harm to man alone.38 The above
attempts are to prove sacrificial slaughter as absolutely
harmless, but that is shooting above the mark because
then it would not remain avis'uddhi.
Max Müller has strained the meaning of s'reyān to
show that there is no open hostility against Vedic rituals
in the Sänkhya.
Vyakta is generally defined here by Vācaspati as
other than avyakta. Some restrict it to mahābhūtas only.
The differences are important because they create
confusion later, when the objects of the different
means of cognition are discussed. The contention of
the Sārkhya Kārikā is that everything except Purușa
and Pradhāna is an object of Pratyaksa and as such
vyakta, and, therefore, efforts are made to prove the
existence of Pradhāna and Puruşa by inference, while
no efforts are made to prove mahat, ahankūra, ctc. But
26
27
28
Candrikā.
25 Candrikā.
Balarama.
Kalpataru and Parimala on Bhāmatī.
Bālarāma.
दृष्टवदानुश्रविकः स ह्यविशुद्धिक्षयातिशययुक्तः ।
तद्विपरीतः श्रेयान् व्यक्ताव्यक्तज्ञविज्ञानात् ॥२॥

·16
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM
Vācaspati on Kārikā 6 changes and makes vyakta =
earth, etc., which even a mudstained farmer can see,
and atindriya = Pradhānapuruşādi forms the object of
inference. Adi will stand for sense-organs, etc., which
have been elsewhere explained by him as the objects
of sāmānyatodrsta form of Anumāna. Another explana-
tion of the differences in the meaning of vyakta is that
at times 8 prakſtis 24 are admitted because if the other
seven are not pure prakſtis, they are at least prakrti-
vikrtis. Vyakta may have been made equal to earth,
etc., because of the real part they play in differentiat-
ing knowledge.
KÁRIKĀ 3.*_The test of prakstitva is said to be the
capacity to produce another tattva, and tattoas are to be
judged by differences in sthūlata and indriyagrahyatā.36)
Such a definition was necessary to include mahat,
ahankāra and tanmātras and to exclude indriyas and bhūtas.
There was no necessity of accepting the transforma-
tions of bhūtas as separate tattoas because the bhūtas by
themselves were enough to bring a complete disc-
riminative knowledge.
24 Gītā 7. 4 gives the five bhūtas and the threefold
antaḥkurana as the eightfold prakſti. It may be a popular or
an earlier doctrine.
30 Some wrongly say that the test of sthūlatā applies to
mahat, ahankāra, tanmātrās and indriyas while indriya-
grūhyatā to bhūtas. Their view is based on the invisibility
of all else except bhūtas. On the other hand both tests
should apply to all cases; some being prominent in some
cases.
* मूलप्रकृतिरविकृतिर्महदाद्याः प्रकृतिविकृतयः सप्त ।
पोडशकस्तु विकारो न प्रकृतिनं विकृतिः पुरुषः ॥३॥

·THE THREE PRAMĀŅAS 17 KÄRIKĀ 4.*--Vācaspati has followed the practice of Nyāyasūtras in introducing this Kārikā when he says that general definitions of the means of cognition are given in this and the vis'eşalaksana follows. The procedure is justified there by the text itself, but here the Kārikā is devoted to enumeration only. The pramāņa table below shows how the definitions of the different pramānas are not settled and therefore they are classed under different categories by the same commentator or by different commentators taking the shade of meaning that appeals to them. Name. Pratyakşa. Anumāna. Sabda. No pramāņa. Upamāna Vācaspati Vācaspati Gauda Māthara Vāca spati Jayamangal Jayamangalā Vijñāna Arthāpatti Gauçla Vācaspati Jayamangala Abhāva Mathara Gauda Candrikā De Vāca spati Vijñāna, Jaya Sambhava Vācaspati . Vāca spati | Mlāthara Jayamargalā Gauda Candrikā Ajtihya Mathara ... Gauda Candriki Vijñāna Pratibhā Jayamangalū Jayamangalā Candrikä Jayamangalā Gauça Jayamangala दृष्टमनुमानमाप्तवचनं च, सर्वप्रमाणसिद्धत्वात् । त्रिविधं प्रमाणमिष्टं, प्रमेयसिद्धिः प्रमाणाद्धि ॥ ४ ॥ S, S. 2

·18
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM
Sarvapramānasiddhatvāt means that the three enu-
merated pramāṇas include all the remaining means of
cognition that are added by other systems. Nārāyana
distorts the sense and interprets they are the only
three means of cognition because they are accepted by
all pramātȚs and to apply this sense to all cases, he has
to make a further supposition that Vaiseșikas are no
pramātāraḥ because they do not admit s'abdapramāņa.
KĀRIKĀ 5.*–Vijñāna questions the possibility of
final cognition in buddhi for two reasons :-firstly, the
expression pauruşeyabodha will become meaningless and,
secondly, if the reflection alone of puruşa is thought to
serve the purpose, it cannot do so because it is unsub-
stantial, tuccha. The answer is that the image of a life-
less object may not be fit to cognize but the case is
different with the image of a cetana.
In Gunaratna's commentary, there appears a line-
"pratiniyatādhyavasāyaḥ s'rotrādisamuttho'dhyakşam," which
is in the same metre as the Kārikā. It can be admitted
as a reading of the Kārikā only if grave changes are
permitted in the other half of the Kārikā or if one
more kārikā is added, because the other line has no
mention of anumāna.
Vācaspati turns lingalingipūrvakam into faultless
definition by repeating lingi once more.
But Jaya-
mangalā interprets differently altogether-sometimes
the inference is lingapūrvaka and sometimes lingipūrvaka,
e. g., inferring cuckoo from her voice, or inferring her
voice from the cuckoo.
31 Vācaspati, Jayamangalā, Māthara.
31 On Şaļdarśanasamuccaya, Bibl. Ed.. p. 108.
* प्रतिविषयाध्यवसायो दृष्टं, त्रिविधमनुमानमाख्यातम् ।
तलिङ्गलिङ्गिपूर्वकं, आप्तश्रुतिरामवचनं च ॥५॥

·THE THREE-FOLD INFERENCE 19 Trividha anumăna has everywhere been made to represent pūrvavat, s'eşavat, and sāmānyatodſsta; but they have been so variously interpreted that the uniformity remains in name only. They respectively meanfirstly, an inference where the vyāpya is seen, one by the method of exclusion, and an instance of the inferred of which is not seen; secondly, that it is from cause to effect or of a future happening, that it is from effect to cause or of a past occurrence, and that there is no relation of cause and effect or of present object; thirdly, trividha is made equal to trirüpa, i. e., pakşadharmata, sapakşe sattvam and vipakşe asaltvam, which do not remain a classification of inference but denote the three essential conditions of a valid inference; fourthly, they mean kevalânvayi, kevalavyatireki, and anvaya. oyatireki. 4 The observations made on the pramäna table hold good with this analysis also. Āpta is restricted not only to Vedas but it includes all proper sources and s'ruti means the knowledge produced by sentences, and this sense can be extracted by lakşaņā or lakṣitalakşaņā. Firstly s’ruti is to be applied to any ordinary or Vedic sentence and then it is to apply to the knowledge produced by such sentences. 33 Sānkhya inference was probably from particular to particular on the ground of the seven kinds of relations mentioned in Tātparyaţika.-Dasgupta, Hist. of Ind. Phil.,' p. 269. 34 See for a detailed treatment Prof. Dhruva's Paper on Trividhamanumānam' in Proceedings and Transactions of the First Oriental Conference, pages 251-280.

·20
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM
KĀRIKĀ 6.*_The majority3 thinks that there was
no necessity of giving the objects of dệstapramāna,
because even an ordinary man knows them and there-
fore it takes the first half of the kārikā to mean :-
invisible objects are known by sāmānyatodęsta type of
inference. Candrikā interprets the same line dif-
ferently—common visible objects are known by drsta
and the invisible by inference. It has defined sāmānya-
todȚsta as an inference from other than kāryakarana rela-
tion and that may be some reason for its interpreting
the kārikā differently. Vācaspati includes s'eşavat in
$āmānyatodęsta, but his sāmānyatodȚsta alone even is of
help in most cases, whereas that of Candrikā cannot
infer Pradhana and Puruşa.
Adi in prakrtipuruṣādi of the Tattvakaumudi can only
be interpreted as tatsamyoga36 and not as mahadādi;57
otherwise it is redundant.
KĀRIKĀ 7.1-A similar kārikā appears in Patañjali's
Mahābhāşya 4. 1. 1,98 and there is every possibility that
Isvarakrsna borrowed his ideas from that kārikā. The
33
36
38
Vācaspati, Gauda, Māthara. Vamsidhara.
37 Bălarāma; compare Sărkhya-Sūtra 1. 103; also see note
on kārikā 2.
Dasgupta strangely holds that such an enumeration is
not seen in any other system of Indian Philosophy and he
therefore suggests that it is the verse of a Sankhya book
paraphrased by Iévarakļşņa.
सामान्यतस्तु दृष्टादतीन्द्रियाणां प्रसिद्धिरनुमानात् ।
तस्मादपि चासिद्धं परोक्षमाप्तागमात् सिद्धम् ॥ ६ ॥
+ अतिदूरात् सामीप्यादिन्द्रियघातान्मनोऽनवस्थानात् ।
सौष्याद् व्यवधानादभिभवात् समानामिहाराच्च ॥ ७ ॥

·THE EIGHT HINDRANCES
21
causes given in the Mahābhāşya are six and all of them
except tamasāortatvāt correspond with those given in the
Sankhya-Kārikā, and that too may be partially made to
agree with abhibhavāt. The latter has made improve-
ment over the former in number. It is not clear why
both separately mention indriyaghātāt and mano' navastha-
nāt. Manas is also an indriya. Candrikā gives scope to
add any number to the eight causes. Māthara adds
four and Vācaspati one. Jayamangalā reduces them to
four-defects of space, of sense-organs, of objects and
of other things. To be more exact they can be reduced
to two-defects of the objects and of the sense-organs.
Des'ados1 and arthāntaradoşa are no more than defects of
the objects. The eight causes of the Sankhya-Kārikā
can be similarly reduced to two.
KĀRIKĀ 8.*_-Inconsistency in Vācaspati's interpret-
ation, similar to that pointed out above in kārikās 2
and 6, again crops up here. He introduces the kārikā-
What then is the reason for the anupalabdhi of pradhāna and
others? Why does he use the plural form in Pradhānā.
dīnām ? Does he want to introduce mahat, ahankāra, etc.,
also ? But at a later stage he mentions only Puruşa and
Pradhana. These are all irregularities, which may be
due to his uncertainty on the point. The plural can be
explained if many pradhānas are admitted but the
kārikā never mentions it.
KĀRIKĀS 10 and 11 show that prakstisarūpam and
praktivirüpam are common attributes of all vyakta, but
they can be separately adjusted, the former applying
to prakrtivikstis and the latter to vikrtis.
* मौक्षम्यात्तदनुपलब्धिर्नाभावात्, कार्यतस्तदुपलब्धिः ।
महदादि तञ्च कार्य, प्रकृतिविरूपं सरूपं च ॥4॥

·22 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM KÄRIKĀ 9.*_Keith correctly observes' that "the last four arguments which are in effect but two, rest on the perception that in the product the original material is contained, though under change of appearance, and that definite materials give definite and distinct results; the first argument, on the other hand, rests not merely on the fact that the coming into being of any object save from a definite material is not observed, but also on the argument that if a thing does not exist there can be no possibility of its doing anything". He must have grouped together in the first instance upādānagrahaņāt and s'aktasya s'akyakaraṇāt, and in the other sarvasambhavābhāvāt and kāranabhāvāt. Vācaspati and Jayamangalā mean by grahaņāt = samband hāt; but Gauda, Candrikā and Māthara take it in the literal sense of procuring. KÄRIKĀ 10.1-The explanation of Vācaspati and Candrikā that vyakta is many because buddhi, etc., are different with each Puruşa, seems more correct because the opposite suits to one Pradhāna which is common to all Puruşas. Gauda, Māthara and Jayamangalā hold vyakta many because mahadadi are twenty-three. Vijñāna introduces a farfetched sense-vyakta is many because it is different with different periods of creation, sarga. In his opinion, if the word is interpreted otherwise, Pradhāna will also become many on account of the three guņas. Bālarāma points out the fallacy in * 39 In 'Sänkhya System,' p. 73. असदकरणादुपादानग्रहणात्, सर्वसम्भवाभावात्। शक्तस्य शक्यकरणात्, कारणभावाच, सत्कार्यम् ॥ ९ ॥ + हेतुमदनित्यमव्यापि सक्रियमनेकमाश्रितं लिङ्गम् । सावयवं परतन्त्रं व्यक्तं विपरीतमव्यकम् ।। १०॥

·ATTRIBUTES OF VYAKTA 23 Vijñāna's argument-Prakſti is not divided separate entities by the guņas. The best explanation of savayavam is that in which parts and wholes are mixed up.40 It is also described as one in which sound, touch, etc., are found."! But all vyakta has not the qualities of sound etc. Some take it to mean that which has guņas, ** others one which has the two aspects of adhyātmika and bahya.** These explanations also do not cover all the cases of vyakta. Candrika says that avyakta is niskriya because it does not suffer s'āntādikriya; but then tanmātras will fall out from the manifest, vyakta. Jayamangalā says that kriyā means sansarana and therefore, though Pradhāna creates the universe, yet it does not move because it pervades the three worlds. Vijñāna removes the difficulty by explaining kriya as some definite action like adhyavasāya, etc. Hetumat means one that has a causc. Māthara makes hetu=kāraka and jñāpaka, and according to him Pradhāna is also kāraka. But how then will these attributes be restricted to vyakta alone. As'rita means existence in its causes or in its It means orttimat according to Candrikā. Jayamangalā explains the purpose in separately mentioning hetumat and as'rita when they approximately mean the same :--the former means that a thing is produced and the latter means that that thing finds shelter in another. Mahat, etc., also pervade the world. Why are they then called avyāpi ? They pervade only in a 46 parts, * Vacaspati, Gauda. 41 Gauda, Jayamangalā. 41 Candrikā, Māthara. Jayamangalā. Vācaspati. Vācaspati, Aniruddha. 46 Vijñāna. 43 45

·24
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM
secondary sense because they cannot pervade their own
cause.
mean
KĀRIKĀ 11.* --Bālarāma says that Pradhāna is three
gunas itself and therefore it cannot be their adhāra. To
remove this difficulty he gives two explanations-
firstly, that gunas here should be taken to
pleasure, etc., which are the qualities of sattva and
others; secondly, they should be applied to Pradhana
in the manner trees in a forest.
Vamsidhara says
that gunas are in the form of kāraña in mahat, etc., and
in the form of samūha in Pradhāna. Do these com-
mentators, then, mean that mahat, etc., have something
more than the three guņas and that guņas are not in the
form of kāraņa in Pradhāna ? These are unnecessary
differences pointed out.
How the tanmātrās will be
triguna ? They do not possess the qualities of pleasure
and pain. They are triguna because they are the pro-
duct of ahankāra and because they produce the bhūtas,
both of which possess pleasure, etc.
Samanya means common to all like a mūlyadāsi. **
Candrikā gives an optional interpretation—alike on
account of possessing gunas. Vācaspati thinks that
sāmānya and vişaya have been purposely used to refute
the principles of Vijñānavādins that objects have no
external existence; they are vijñānamaya.
Puruşa is opposite of the qualities mentioned in
this and the previous kārikā. But is then Puruşa one ?
Gauda and Māthara say that he is one, which is a con-
48
47 Vams'idhara.
Gauda, Māthara, Jayamangalā, Candrika,
* त्रिगुणमविवेकि विषयः सामान्यमचेतनं प्रसवधर्मि।
व्यक्तं तथा प्रधान, तद्विपरीतस्तथा च पुमान् ॥११॥

·THE THREE GUŅAS
25
tradiction; but Jayamangalā uscs a device to avoid it.
It interprets tadviparitaḥ as different from vyaktāvyakta
in some qualities only. Vācaspati is clear that one of
the differences with Nyāya is that in the Sankhya, the
Atman or Puruşa does not possess sukha, etc. Jaya-
mangalā is wrong when it says that Puruşa is cetang
because he experiences pleasure, etc. He is cetana
because he is all light and because his approximity
moves Pradhāna to action.
KĀRIFA 12.* _Gunas are not the qualities of Nyāya.
They are Parārthāh, i.e., they execute enjoyment and
renunciation for Puruşa.
Artha means capacity and therefore, though in
the state of dissolution, there is no prakās'a, etc., their
possibility persists.5"
Anyonyās'rayāh-gunās are all-pervading and there-
fore ās'raya is used in the restricted sense that one guna
is as'raya of the other, with regard to which it acts.”
Balarāma points out the difference between anyonyā.
s'raya-víttayaḥ and anyonyajananavrtta yah the previous
applies to dissimilar effects and the latter to similar
effects ; but then the statements cannot individually
cover the whole field of vyaktīvyakta, the former will
53
w
Gauda.
Balarama.
5. According to Bhāsya on 1. 127, each guna cannot be
vibhu, e.g., sattva represents many sattua entities classed
under one group; otherwise, firstly there cannot be incal-
culable differences in the effects and secondly sādharmyam
in the next sūtra will be meaningless.
Vācaspati, Māthara.
* प्रीत्यप्रीतिविषादात्मकाः प्रकाशप्रवृत्तिनियमार्थाः ।
अन्योऽन्याभिभवाश्रयजननमिथुनवृत्तयश्च गुणाः ॥१२॥

·26
'A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM
apply to vyakta and the latter to avyakta. This is in
conflict with the meaning of Candrikā also, according
to which 'ca' shows that all the processes go on
simultaneously and not partially. Vācas pati and
Candrikākāra have taken anyonya and vịtti with each of
the remaining words of the compound; but Gauda and
Māțbara take výtti separately to mean one additional
process.
The gunas may be regarded as representing the
different stages of evolution of any particular product.
Sattva signifies the pure and perfect stage that is to be
reached, tamas the obstacles or the meanest stage, and
rajas the force by which obstacles are overcome and
the products become more defined and definite.
KÄRIKĀ 13.*_Gauda and Māthara give some exam-
ples of the effects of cala' quality in rajas :-a bull
becomes intoxicated, or it makes one quarrelsome or
one wishes to go to a village, or one begins to love some
women, etc.
Vācaspati has given the example of vātapittas'leşma
in addition to that of a lamp in the Kärikā to elucidate
the harmonious working of opposite qualities and
Bālarāma thinks that the additional example is more
appropriate because they are more opposed to one
another than oil, wick and flame.
Vācaspati says that like sukhaduḥkhamohāḥ, sukha-
prakās'alaghavaḥ do not create more varieties. This
statement is doubtful and groundless except that the
latter represent the different phases of the one quality
pleasure and not different gunas. How do the conflicting
gunas combine? Yogabhāsya explains that alis'ayas only
* सत्वं लघु प्रकाशकमिष्टमुपष्टम्भकं चलं च रजः ।
गुरुवरणकमेव तमः प्रदीपवञ्चार्थतो वृत्तिः ॥ १३॥

·AVIVEKA
27
are in conflict but they combine with sāmānyas. Why
then do they not flood the perceiver all at once ?
The answer is that though the conflicting gunas exist
everywhere yet only one at a time comes to prominence
in accordance with the corresponding environments,
nimittas. But dharmādyāḥ also exist everywhere and at
all times without distinction. No, they cannot, because
they are momentary.
KĀRIKĀ 14.*_The predominant opinion is that the
first half of the kārikā is to prove that Pradhāna is
indiscriminative, etc., which is clear in the case of
vyakta. Vācaspati takes the other option also in which
both vyakta aud avyakta are to be proved indiscrimina-
tive, etc., by the avita form of reasoning. Gauda
accepts the optional meaning of Vācaspati. Candrikā
holds it proved that Prakſti 'is indiscriminative, etc.,
and proceeds to prove the same in mahadūdi. Introduc-
ing the second half of the kārikā, it says that it mahat,
etc., had no prime cause, there would be nu liberation
because mahat, ctc., would become ever-existing.
KĀRIKÃ 15.1--Samanvayāt means similarity in the
different evolutes.53 Gauda gives a loosc meaning-as
one infers from the sight of a Brahmacāri that his
parents must be Brāhmaṇas. The cxplanation of
Vijñānas does not directly fit in thc kārikā."
6
He says
53
55
Vācaspati, Candrikā.
54 Vijñāna stands for Vijñānabhikṣu.
On Sānkhya-Sūtra 1. 131.
* अविवेक्यादिः सिन्दः त्रैगुण्यात्तद्विपर्ययाभावात् ।
कारणगुणात्मकत्वात् कार्यस्याव्यक्तमपि मिद्धम् ॥ १४ ॥
+ भेदानां परिमाणात् , समन्वयात् , शक्तितः प्रवृत्तेश्च ।
कारणकार्यविभागात् , अविभागाद्वैश्वरूप्यस्य ॥१५॥

·28
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM
that the emaciated buddhi, etc., on account of fasting,
again grow strong after taking food; this shows that they
are effects. But the kārikā is about the existence of
avyakta.
KĀRIKĀ 16.*__The second part of the first half of
the kārikā has been interpreted differently. Vācaspati
keeps trigunataḥ to indicate the activity of Prakſti in the
state of dissolution which is of the type of similar
effects and samudayāt is to denote its activity in the state
of creation which is in the form of prominence and
subordination of gunas; but Gauda, Candrikā and Mathara
apply both the words to the movement of Prakſti in the
state of creation only. According to Gauda, the former
is used to express that the three ganas in Prakſti are
utilized in the effects; and according to Candrikā, it is
used to account for the manifoldness of effects.
To refute the objections that there would be always
movement or no movement, the Sănkhya-Sūtra-'samya-
vaişamyabhyām kāryadva yam,' and the Pañcaśikha-Sutra
_'ubhayathā cāsya pravrttik pradhānavyavahāram labhate
nānyathā' are worth remembering.
KÄRIKĀ 17.-It is strange coincidence that the
existence of Puruşa, Prakſti, and satkāryatā have been
all proved by five arguments.
Aniruddha on sūtra 1.140 has said, or dravakathinatā
is samhatatvam; but this is not proper because it does not
56
Sarala Sãrkhya denies (similar) effects in the state
of equilibrium.
* कारणमस्त्यव्यक्तं प्रवर्तते त्रिगुगतः समुदयाच्च ।
परिणामतः सलिलवत् प्रतिप्रतिगुणाश्रयविशेषात् ।। १६.॥
+ संवात्तपरार्थत्वात् त्रिगुणादिविपर्ययादधिष्ठानात् ।
पुरुषोऽस्ति भोकृभावात् कैवल्यार्थ प्रवृत्तेश्च ॥ १७ ॥

·PLURALITY OF PURUŞA
29
contribute towards the necessity of accepting Puruşa;
the word must carry the sense of enjoyability in some
aspect to need someone else to enjoy.
Puruşa is adhisthātā only by nearness to Pradhāna
and its effects, or he dominates as a king does and
therefore his superintendence should not be objected
on the ground that he has no attributes or that he has
no activity.
KĀRIKA 18.-Order in birth is ordinarily meant to
convey that when one is born, everybody is not born and
order in death means that when one is dead, everybody
is not dead. But Māțhara gives one more meaning
to the expressions :.some are born low and some high;
accordingly there is order in death when we say that
my brother is dead or my father is dead.5
Puruşas must be many.59 One Puruşa cannot be
divided into many by mere adjuncts, upādhis, because--
(1) then hands and feet will also represent separate
Puruşas, (2) the distinction between the released and
the bound will disappear because the portion of space
that falls vacant by the ruin of a pot can be filled in by
procuring another pot.
58
58
59
57 See Sänkhya-Sūtra 1. 96.
Radhakrishnan objects to the argument because then
birth and death will apply to the eternal Puruşa who is asangu.
The plurality is not so much a reaction against some
philosophical principle as a survival of primitive animism.-
Carpenter, 'Theism in Mediaeval Ind.' Oldenberg suggests
the appropriateness of the grammatical interpretation of
Puruşa - dwells in the body (locative), which it can leave.
Fathurrai sfafagareyagesgela
पुरुषबहुत्वं सिद्धं त्रैगुण्यविपर्ययाचैव ॥ १८ ॥

·30
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SĀNKHYA SYSTEM
65
KĀRIKĀ 19.* _Puruşa is drastā because he is cetana,
or because he is madhyastha. He is akarta because he is
viveki and aprasavadharmi, or because he is the latter 63
or because he is madhyastha.64 This shows how differ-
ently the attributes of Puruşa in this kārikā are derived
from the attributes given in kārikā 11. Vijñāna justi.
fies the mention of two like words, sākşitua and drastrtva
by pointing an imaginary difference that Puruşa is sākşi
with reference to buddhi and drastā in relation to others.
KĀRIKĀ 21.4-The prime cause of creation is the
nature of Pradhāna to move for the enjoyment and re-
lease of Puruşa and not their union alone as emphasized
in kārikā 66 also. This to some extent reduces the force
of the objection generally raised against the examples
of the lame and the blind--Praksti is jada and Purusa is
akartā and therefore, they cannot express their intention
to combine like the lame and the blind.
Vācaspati takes dars'anārtham with pradhānasya and
kaivalyārtham with puruşasya. Gauda and Māthara take
otherwise. This makes a paltry difference in their
interpretation, because both processes proceed from
Pradhana in the interest of Puruşa.
ro
61 Gauda.
62
f3
64
*
Vācaspati, Jayamangalā.
Vācaspati.
Jayamangalā. Gauda.
fou On Sūtra 1. 161.
तस्माञ्च विपर्यासात् सिद्धं साक्षित्वमस्य पुरुषस्य ।
कैवल्यं माध्यस्थ्यं द्रष्टत्वमकर्तृभावश्च ॥ १९॥
तस्मात्तत्सयोगादचेतनं चेतनावदिव लिङ्गम् ।
गुणकर्तृत्वे च तथा कर्तव भवत्युदासीनः ॥२० ।।
† gorra za TE 4 TANTRI
पझ्वन्धवदुभयोरपि संयोगस्तत्कृतः सर्गः ॥२१॥

·EVOLUTION
31
KĀRIKA 22.* _Vācaspati, Māthara, Jayamangalā and
Candrikā hold that one tanmātrā combines with one, two,
three, or four to produce the more complex bhūtas with
the corresponding number of qualities. Gauda says
that they can singly produce the bhūtas. As regards
they themselves, according to Vyasabhāşya, tanmātrū of
sound accompanied by ahankāra produces the tanmätrā
of touch and so on. A meaningless question is raised
by Vijñāna—how then ether gross and fine is to be
contrasted; and the question raised has been answered
thus--gross ether takes the help of bhūtādi. The differ-
ence is there simply because gross ether is a further
stage in evolution.
A fictitious etymology is given to ahankāra, when it
is said that the word was coined by taking the first and
the last letter from the list of 64 letters to represent
all objects that can be denoted by the combinations of
those letters.
KĀRIKĀ 23.4-The determination of objects by
baddhi is compared to the forthcoming sprout in a seed
by Gauda, but this has no meaning.
Gauda has divided knowledge, jñāna, into external,
bahya, and internal, ābhyantara The external know-
ledge gives worldly pleasures and the internal causes
liberation. There is no room for such classification
because jñāna in the kārikā means nothing else than the
i
* प्रकृतेर्महान् , ततोऽहङ्कारः तस्माद्णश्च पोडशकः ।
तस्मादपि पोडशकात् पञ्चभ्यः पञ्च भूतानि ॥२२॥
+ अध्यवसायो बुद्धिर्धर्मों ज्ञानं विराग ऐश्चर्यम् ।
साविकमेतद्रूपं तामसमस्माद्विपर्यस्तम् ॥ २३ ॥
अभिमानोऽहङ्कारस्तस्माद्विविधः प्रवर्तते सर्गः ।
एकादशकश्च गणस्तन्मात्रः पञ्चकश्चैव ॥२४॥

·32 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM final knowledge of the distinction of Pradhāna and Puruşa. Vimoca yatyekarūpena and siddheḥ purpo' nkus'astrividhaḥ in kärikā 63 and 51 respectively establish the same meaning. Gauda has continued the craze for division in vairāgya also and he has become ridiculous in explaining internal vairāgyam-Pradhāna also is here like drcam or magic representation. Vairāgya is only helpful in true knowledge which is differentiation of attributeless soul from Pradhāna and its creation. These must not be any more owned by Puruşa, Garimā is one of the ais' varyas according to Vācaspati. Gauda, and Jayamargalā place kāmāvasãyitvam in its place; and Māthara mentions both, raising the number to nine. Bālarāma's edition does not give garima in the text of the Tattvakaumudi, while Vamsidhara's edition counts kāmāvasāyitvam as the eighth variety instead of is'itva. KĀRIKĀ 25.* -Vijñāna is of the opinion that only manas emanates from the sāttvikāhankāra. The sense cannot be extracted from the kārikā without grave distortions. Rajoguņa is not considered to have separate effects. It only makes possible the working of the other two gunas by imparting movement to them. The masculine in ekādas'akaḥ also cannot point to manas alone. The sūtrasāttvikamekādas'akam, relevant to the matter in hand, is confusing, but ekādas'akam is fixed down to mcan cleven in a latter sūtram-karmendriyabuddhindriyairåntaramekā. das'akam. There is no difficulty in deriving karmendriyas from vaikārika, because if that question is raised, the & AF Contrast Sankhya-Sūtra 1. 45. साविक एकादशकः प्रवर्तते वैकृतादहङ्कारात् । भूतादेस्तन्मात्रः स तामसः, तैजसादुभयम् ॥ २५॥ > ·FUNCTICNS OF THE INDRITIS 33 division of Vijñāna also cannot stand on its merits-How can buddhindriyas be derived fronı taijust. Bălarāma dirides the sattva into utkata, madhyama and nikrsta to acıount for manas, buddhindriyas and karmendriyas respectively. The last support is awkwardly removed by Vamsidhara. who maintains that organs only in a body hare been called taijasa in Smộtis and not individual organs. Vijñāna thinks that separation of whankara and evolution of tanmūtras take place in muhat and this has becn brought in line with the kārikā conception by Dasgupta by using the Yoga capression, Sumarstah piviczante-the two conceptions take the two aspects of the matter in hand. KÄRIKA 26 * -Indras yātmuns'cihnatcam is not d satisfactory and exclusive definition of indri van because it applics to other tattv.is than indriyus also. Candrika and Māthara give another meaning-in padena cişayah tūr prati druvanti. This excludes manas. KÄRIKÅ 27.––The second half of the kāriki should refer to the eleven indriyas; nūnūtrum should stand for urttiniyama and bāhyabhedāḥ for des'aniyamer, i.e., how the organs are differently situated in the body. But Vācaspati and Candrikā take bāhyabhedaḥ as an example showing that there is similar multiplicity in tanmitras that are products of one bhūtādi. Candrikā and Jathara " While Sānkhya Sangraha says that the godlike indriyas of svayambhū are produced from vaikārika and individual organs from taijasa, ** Vācaspati. Jayamangalā. बुद्धीन्द्रियाणि चक्षुःश्रोत्रघाणरसनपर्शनकानि । वाक्पाणिपादपायपस्थान कर्मेन्द्रियाण्याहुः ॥ २६ ॥ + उभयात्मकमत्र मनः संकल्पकमिन्द्रियं च साधम्यात् । गुगपरिणामविशेषान्नानात्वं बाह्यभेदाश्च ॥ २७ ॥ * s, s. 3

·34
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SĀNKHYA SYSTEY
give grāhyabhedācca as an optional reading and then it
becomes one more argument for numerousness of organs
besides gunaparināmavis'eşāt. Vamsidhara has expressed
a foreign idea that manas also becomes many as it conies
in contact with the different indriyas. The first half of
the kārikā is not well-arranged and well-worded; at the
first reading sankalpakam and indriyam seem to express
the meaning of ubha yāt makam, but then sādharm yüt is left
alone and therefore at second thought the line has to be
differently construed.
KĀRIKĀ 28.* _The word mātra stands to show that
buddhindriyas have only indeterminate knowledge, while
Vijñāna thinks that they have determinate knowledge,
which conception will relegate manas to a very subordi-
nate position, and it will remain no more than a scat of
desire, doubt and imagination, while only the previous
kārikā has called manas as sunkalpakam.
as sunkalpakam. Gauda and
Māthara think that mātra is to indicate that one sense-
organ has one's own field and that it does not ercroach
over another's, e. g., eyes only perceive objects and do
not taste. Candrikā thinks it limits the sense to seeing,
hearing, etc., and it excludes fetching, etc., which are
the functions of karmendriyas,
Bālarāma thinks that the sense of vrttaynh has to be
strained to apply to karmendriyas,
KĪRIKĀ 29.t-Gauda is preferable because he gives
a homogeneous division. He takes the previous kārikā
and this together, and transfers both uncommon and
Compare Kumārila and Pras'astapāda.
* शब्दादिषु पञ्चानामालोचनमामिप्यते वृत्तिः ।
वचनादानविहरणोत्सर्गानन्दाश्च पञ्चानाम् ॥ २८ ॥
+ स्वालक्षण्यं वृत्तिस्त्रयस्य सैषा भवत्यसामान्या ।
सामान्यकरणवृत्तिः प्राणाद्या वायवः पञ्च ॥ २९ ॥

·THE WORKING OF INDRIYAS 35 to common orttis to bāhyendriyas and antahkaruņa jointly.?! The objection that prāṇas continue to function even in deep sleep when indriyas disappear remains be answered. Nobody advocates the disappearance of indriyas in deep sleep. 'They stop functioning only. The consensus of opinion is with Gauda. Sänkhya- Sūtra 3. 113 is of opinion that prūnas are from indriyas'akti and the Pancarātras hold the rajas element in mahat as prūna. Each of the five prāṇas is not always similarly located by the different commentators. Their tunctions are also differently given and Mathara secms 10 connect them with the three gunas. KĪRIKI 30.* Catuştaya according to Gauda means buddhi, ahankāra, manas and some one indriya, but then it will exclude the casc, say that ot dirghas'uşkuli, in which tuo or more sensc-organs* work siniultaneously The latter case is also possible because the majority of Sānkhya authors admit manas to be oi madhyama purimāņa. 'The objection that such manas will be transitory cannot arise in the Sanhhya. 'Tat' docs stand for drșla, but that meaning cannot bc naturally cytracicd from the construction in the kārikā. Gauda holds kramas'ah jñānam in udrsta only as arbitrary. It he had to make an arbitrary supposition in spite of what the kārikā purports, he sluild lave dong other ise, because kramas'uh jñāna is possible under 73 il When the uncommon orttı of both intahkarunu und indriy's has been related, why should common urttı apply to the former only stardiki Vitti en 2. 31. Vaidiki Vrtti on Sankhyd-Sūtra 2. 31. Sūtra 2. 31 mentions indriyas only. युगाचतुष्टयस्य तु वृत्तिः क्रमशश्व तस्य निर्दिक दृष्टे तथाऽप्यदृष्टे त्रयस्य तत्पूर्विका वृत्ति । 73

·36
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM
the following circumstances:-in dim light according to
Vācaspati and Candrikā, or when at a distance according
to Māthara and Gauda, which means that external limit-
ing factors account for kramas'ah jñāna. They are absent
in adrsta. To be consistent with the kārikā kramas'ah
jñāna in aursta may be explained by the mental state
that at times hastens and at times lingers the process.
KĀRIKĀ 31.*-Gauda incorrectly applies the kārikā
only to the threefold antahkarana. Candrikā maintains
the observations made in the previous kārikā—when
there is no obstruction like that of doubt, etc., the
action is simultaneous otherwise it is kramas'ah, and
svām svām pratipadyante is to emphasize that even in
simultancous action each organ keeps to its function.
Māthara says that karanas act after getting a signal
from buddhi but to be more correct the process in the
case of perception, etc., begins with the bah yendriyas
and in the casc of speaking, etc., it begins with buddhi
downwards.
KARIKĀ 32.tm-Thc functions have been differently
attributed and their results differently enumerated.
The functions are so classified :-
Name.
Gauda.
Māthara.
Vācaspati,
Candrika.
Aharanam
Karnendriyas.
...
karmendriyas. Indriyas
Ahankūra
Dhīranam
Threcfold
antahkarana.
Prakāša karanam
...
Buddhindriyas. Buddhi
Buddhindriyas.
* स्वां स्वां प्रतिपद्यन्ते परस्पराकूतहेतुकां वृत्तिम् ।
पुरुषार्थ एव हेतुन केनचित्कार्यते करणम् ॥३१॥
+ करणं त्रयोदशविधं तदाहरणधारणप्रकाशकरम् ।
कार्य च तस्य दशधाऽऽहायं धार्य प्रकाश्यं च ॥ ३२॥

·THE TENFOLD FUNCTIONS 37 The explanation of Gauda ignores antahkarana. According to Vācaspati, antahkarana preserves lite by means of prāņas.14 Gauda, Māthara, and Jayamangalā do not take ten with ahāryam. dhāryam and prakās'yam separately, and, therefore, the ten effects according to them are the objects of buddhindriyas and karmendriyass'abda, etc., and vacana, etc. Tācaspati and Candrika take ten with each and their ten ahūryas are divyādivya dacana, etc.; ten dhāryas arc prāņādilaksanayū vittyä s'ariram, tacca pirthivadi pāñcabhautıkam, s'abdādinām pancānāí samūhah prthivi, teşām divyādivyataya, and the same are ten prakās'yas. Alystery attaches to the meaning of this kārikā cven after the extensive explanation. The kāryas are not clear, but the interpretation of Vācaspati and Candrikā has an advantage over others because the former have been able to justify the occurrence of das'adhã with each. Vidha is used according to l'aisidhara to show that though the karanas are numberless on account of numberless Puruşas, yet they can be grouped under 13 heads. KARIKÁ 33.*Gauda strangely joins sūmpratakilam with viṣayākhyam. Vācaspati takes it to mean those periods of past and future also that are near the present so as to avoid avyipti in the cirth of vāk. llou can karmendriyns hc doäri to antahkaruna! Candrikā answers that they can also be of use in the function of antohkaraņa through thc buddhindrı vas. This statement cannot stand according to Gauda, etc.; sce notes on kâriha 29. अन्तःकरणं त्रिविधं दशधा बाह्यं त्रयस्य विषयाख्यम् । Fligată argi fare a acute 11 14.07.

·38 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEN 17 KARIKI 34.*_Why tanmätras are avis'eşa ? The different opinions are-(1) mātra only excludes the specialities of s'ānta, etc., and does not exclude the qualities that have come from previous stages"; (2) they have not been called vis'eșa like the indriyas, though both are produced from ahankūra because they further produce bhūtas; (3) they are pleasure-giving to the gods, sattva is predominant in them and, therefore, they are called avis'eşāh." KĀRIKĀ 35.+--Sarvum has been interpreted by Gauda and Māthara to mean past, present and future objects. hut the kārikā can only be indirectly applied to past and future objects because in their cognition, the deposited results only, of the use of bāhyendriyas at some previous occasion, are utilized; and, therefore, there is no sense in calling antahkarana, dvāri, in such adrsta cognitions. KĀRIKĀ 36.5—Prudipakalpāh means that they illuminate the objects like a lamp and so it can be construed with prukās'ya; but Vācaspati interprets it is wick, oil and flame to elucidate parasparavilaksanāḥ. KĀRIKĀ 37.1-The kārikā is to prove the supreme position that buddhi occupies. Vācaspati takes the to * Vācaspati; Yogavārttika; justified by kārikā 38. Yogavārttika. Māthara; Gauda on kärikā 38. बुद्धीन्द्रियाणि तेपां पञ्च विशेषाविशेषविपयाणि । वाग्भवति शब्दविषया शेपाणि तु पञ्चविषयाणि ॥ ३४ ॥ + सान्तःकरणा बुद्धिः सर्व विषयमवगाहते यस्मात् । तस्मात् विविधं करणं द्वारि द्वाराणि शेषाणि ॥ ३५॥ एते प्रदीपकल्पाः परस्परविलक्षणा गुणविशेषाः । कृत्स्नं पुरुपस्यार्थ प्रकाश्य बुद्धौ प्रयच्छन्ति ॥ ३६॥ सर्व प्रत्युपभोगं यस्मात् पुरुषस्य साधयति बुद्धिः । सैव च विशिनष्टि पुनः प्रधानपुरुपान्तरं सूक्ष्मम् ।। ३७ ॥

·BUDDIIC IND PURUSA
39
halvcs of the kārikā as two arguments but Gauda and
Alāthara introduce the first and second halses with
yasmīt and tusmāt, respectively, i. e., introduce causal
relation between the two statements, Candrikā intro-
duces the karikā thus-bu fdhi though supreme does not
work for herself, but for Purusa.
Vis'inasti pradhūnapuruşūntarum is interpreted by
Vācaspati as 'makes known the already existing minute
difference between Pradhāna and Puruşa.'
KĪRIKA 38.*_ Vācaspati and Candrikā say that one
ca' is to denote hetu and the other to denote samuccaya.
This is superfluous but it is characteristic of Indian
commentators who try to attach significance to cery
word in the text.
Vanisidhara illustrates pleasure, etc., by the
cxamples-the touch of air, fire and poison, but there
cannot be separatc evamples for individual gunas Fach
object represents all the three gunas and it becomes
pleasurable, painful or indifferent as they come to
prominence.
KRIKA 39.1 --Candrikā ingeniously makes the state-
ment in the kūrikā--mūtāpatrjāh nivartante, to include
prabhūtuh also and it says that the former have been
specially mentioned to show the gaunalva of jiva.
KIRIKA +0.3_'The kārikā uses such attributes as
could have been differently interpreted but there is
..
* तन्मात्रायविशेषाः तेभ्यो भूतानि पञ्च पञ्चभ्यः ।
एते स्मृता विशेपाः शान्ता घोराश्च मूढाश्च ॥ ३८ ॥
| मूक्ष्मा मातापितृजाः मह प्रभूतस्बिधा विशेषाः स्युः ।
सूक्ष्मास्तेषां नियता मातापितृजा निवर्तन्ते ॥ ३९ ॥
ई पूर्वोत्पन्नमसक्तं नियतं महदादिसूक्ष्मपर्यन्तम् ।
समरति निरुपभोग भावरधिवासित लिङ्गम् ॥ ४०॥

·.40 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SĀNKHYA SYSTEM not much difference amongst the commentators which may be due to their meaning having behind it a continuous tradition. Niyatam means which persists from the first creation to the great dissolution 78 or which persists as long as true knowledge does not arise. 19 But Candrikā interprets it as different for every soul. Gauda does not include būhyendriyas in the sūksmus'urira. Sānkhya-Sūtra enumerates buddhindriya, prīņas, buddhi and manas. A modern writersh has suggested that the non-inclusion at times of ahankūra in the con- 'stituents is because in the beginning there was only one sūkşmas'arira. 81 This would be at once contradicted by Vācaspati who says that in thc beginning, Pradhāna created scparate lingas for cach Puruşa. Others say that ahankūra is not mentioned because it is included in buddhi. Vijñāna on sūtra 3. 11 says that there are three types of bodies and they are sometimes said to be two because lingus'arira and adhisthānus'arira are confused into one for two reasons---firstly, because cach depends on the other, and, secondly, hecause they are subtle. KĀRIKĀ 41.* _-Thc explanation of Gauda scems more appropriate because he means the subtle body by lingu. Linga has been used in the previous and the next karikās to mcan sūksmas'arira and, therefore, that is the meaning that spontaneously strikes the reader. It has SI Vācaspati. Gauda, Jayamangalā. "' Ghosh : Sārkhya System and Modern Thought.' Hiranyagarbhopīd hirūpa, Bhāşya on 3. 10. * चित्रं यथाश्रयमृते स्थाण्वादिभ्यो यथा विना छाया । तद्विनाऽविशेपैः न तिष्ठति निराश्रयं लिङ्गम् ॥ ४१ ।।

·ILGA SARĪRA +1 an been used in kārikā 10 (or buddhyāda yaḥ and Vācaspati takes that sense and makes vis'esaih = sūksmaih s'ariraih on the basis of kārikā 39, but this means a repetition of baddhyūdayah except the mahābhūtas, which are absent in sūkşmas'arira. Linga in kārikā 10 qualifics and covers the whole field of vyakta. Gauda has been wise in making nirüs'rayama qualify lingam, so that, tanmītras are excluded, and he joins vincivis'esaih and takes out of it nut vis'eşaiḥ like Vācaspati, Jathara and Candrika, hut avis'eşaih which has been used in kārika 38 for tanmatras. Māthara also takes out avis'eşaih but interprets it like Vācaspati-tanmātrāni tairārabdham sūksmas'ariram. Candrikā adopts the meaning of Vācaspati, and as optional meaning gives that linga =samudayitmakam lingus'ariram cannot exist without the support of gross body. KĀRIKĀ 42.*-Prasungena has been rendered by prasaktids but it can be better rendered—'on account ot.' Vibhutva has been correctly explained by Vācaspati and Candrikā as vais'oarūpyūt ; but Gauda and Jathara interpret it,' as a king is surpreme in his dominions.' KÄRIKÄ 43.7--Thc kārikā has been made ambiguous by the commentators. Vācas pati thinks that this kārikā gives the division in nimitta and naimittika, while the next tells as to what naimittikas proceed from what nimittas. In the previous kārikā all had agreed to render naimittika as sthaladehādi and the other dharmādı. But here vaikrtāh is cquated to naimittikūh JS 52 Vācaspalı makes it modity na tişthatı. “Pūcaspati. पुरुषार्थहेतुकमिदं निमित्तनैमित्तिकप्रसङ्गेन । प्रकृतेर्विभुत्वयोगात् नटवद्वयवतिष्ठते लिाम् ॥ २॥ | मांसिद्धिकाश्च भावाः प्राकृतिका वैकृतिका प्रमोद दृष्याः करणाश्रयिणः कार्याश्रयणश्च कललायो।

·42
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTENI
which are dharmūdyāḥ according to the kārikā. Jayaman-
galā introduces kārikā 46- the 16 nimittanaimittikas
related before are here briefly stated as of four kinds.
Vācaspati, Candrikā and Jayamangalā divide the bhīvas
in two types only but Māthara and Gauda divide them
in three-(1) sūřsiddhikāḥ as of Kapila ; (2) prākrtikāḥ as
of the sons of Brahman; (3) vaikrtikāḥ as ours.
To Vācaspati and Gauda, karaña = buddhi, but to
Alãtnara it is equal to buddhikarmāntah karaṇabhedāḥ tra yo-
das'a. ire prākrtikābhāvāḥ limited to karaņas only?
The question rises in reading Jayamangalā and Vamśī-
dhara. If prākrtikābhāvaḥ were only in Kapila, the
question is decided, otherwisc both types of bhāvuḥ can
have their as'ra ya in karana and kūrya.
An odd opinion appears in Candrikā—prūkrtikah are
those that stay as long as the thing itself, c.g.,
ahankūra, etc., from mahat, and vaikſtikāḥ, that stay by
fits and starts.
KÄRIKA H.* Inclusion of dakşiņābandha in the
bandhūh has been used as an evidence of the jealousy
of the Sankhva towards Vedic rituals. Prakrtibandha
is when one worships Prakrti thinking it Puruşa."
Nāthara includes in it the eight prakệtis. Vaikrtikūh are
when one worships bhūtendrivahankārubuddhih taking then
for Purusa. Māthara considers them due to ais'varya
or due to believing brahmādisthāna as the final goal.
Adhustät is sutaladilokas or tiryagyoni.87
* Vācaspati.
86
Vacaspati, Jayamangală. Why should Vacaspati not
equate this bandha with his ustavidhāvidya in karikā 45
Vācaspati, Candrikā.
Jayamangalā, Gauda, Māțhara.
* धर्मेण गमनमूध्वं गमनमधस्ताद भवत्यधर्मेण ।
ज्ञानेन चापवर्गा विपर्ययादिप्यते बन्धः ॥ ४४ ॥

·PRATYAYASARGA 43 Dharma is not an important conception in the Sāåkhya and therefore it is loosely interpreted. KÄRIKĀ 45.* -Prakſti is explained as mahadahankūrabhūtendriyūņi by Vācaspati and bhūtendrivāni are replaced by tanmātrūņi by Gauda, Māthara and Jayamangalā. It is strange how bhūtendriyani have heen included in Prakſti. Why should Vācaspati differ from what he has said in the previous kārikā about prakrtibandha? All have qualified vairīgiya in the hārikā hy jñānasinnya, and that is necessary because vairīgya coupled with jñāna alone is a mcans to liberation as mentioned in the Sankhya Sūtra. KĀRIKĀ 46.1-Keith" thinks that the kārikās to to 51 are possibly later interpolations. The reason given is that they uselessly reclassify the prat yayasarga in a different inanner from what has been done in the previous two kārikās and kārikā 23. The argument is not correct because there appear other such unimportant kārikās in the body of the work and their presence should be accounted for by the further erreka, distinctive knowledge, they give. The kārikās, if this procedure is admitted, will also lose their importance oi determining the character of the Sastitantra. Gauda and Māthara have become crude in trying to become simple and illustratiic about the divisions :-as akti as after properly secing the post, one is not able to remove doubt; tuști, he is not anyious to know the post because In 'The Sankhya System, p. 85. वैराग्यान प्रकृतिलयः संमारो भवति गजमादागान । एश्वर्यादविघातो विपर्ययातु तद्विपर्यासः ॥ ४५ ॥ [ Te istrarii aiagrace: गुणवैषम्यविमहेंन तस्य वास्तुपाक्षम्या १६ ॥

·A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEMI
of what use is that knowledge to him; siddhi, he sees the
creeper that runs along the post and he has the know-
ledge of the post.
Siddhi alone is regarded capable of bringing salva-
tion, and Gauda says that tuşti is the tāmasa knowledge
and siddhi the sättvika knowledge of persons on the path
of liberation.
KÄRIKĀ +7.*-How can asmitā, rūga, dueşa and abhini-
ucs'a be vipuryayas? The answer is that though they do
not proceed froni vipuryaya still they are of the nature
of viparyayi. Candrikā says that the propriety of say-
ing karanwaikulyat is in debarring many more as'aktis
caused by discases, and in limiting the number to
twenty-eight.
KÄRIKĀ 48.t-Vācaspati suggests, as if, leaving
avidyi, the remaining viparyayas affcct only devāḥ, gods.
It secins that avidyī alone matters for common people;
and the rest, hecause they include diūrādivya and
animadayah, affcct yogins.
KÄRIKI 19.5Indriyavadha cannot be pratyayasarga ;
it may be partially chankārasarga ; and therefore it can
be called pratyayasarga only indirectly because it pro-
cccds from chunkīra which is in pratyayasarga."
54
89
Jayamangalā.
पञ्च विपर्ययभेदा भवन्त्यशक्तिश्च करणवकल्यात् ।
अष्टाविंशति भेदाः तुष्टिनवधाऽष्टधा सिद्धिः ॥ १७ ॥
+ भदम्तमसोऽष्टविधो मोहस्य च, दशविधो महामोहः ।
तामिम्रोऽष्टादशधा, तथा भवत्यन्धतामिस्रः ॥ ४८॥
६ एकादशेन्द्रियवधाः सह बुद्धिवधैरशक्तिरुद्दिष्टा ।
सप्तदश वधा बुद्धविपर्ययात् तुष्टिसिद्धीनाम् ॥ ४९ ॥

·TL'ŞTIS 45 KÄRIKĀ 50,*-Vācaspati and Jathara say that visayas are five and uparamas are also five. If the similarity is only in number, the expression is harmless, but if it denotes causal relation, the statement cannot be justified becausc each uporama dncs not proceed from one vişaya separately but it proceeds from the collective restraint of the five objects. Candrikā and Gauda avoid such ambiguity. Rāmāyatāra Sarmā realized the difficulty and, therefore, he divided uparamas into two kinds-firstly, the five vairāgyas arising from seeing the futility of the five enjoyable objects, and, secondly, from seeing the dark side of arjanarakşara, etc. Prakrtyākhya" is when one feels that the realization of true knowledge is a natural phase of Prakſti and therefore it needs no meditation, etc., or when onc knows the Prakſti, its sayunanirguratta and its similar products and is satisfied with that,.? or when one knows the Prakſti but not its sasuņunirgunatvu, etc. Candrikā names megha, the adhyātmika tusti that lãcaspati calls ogha. Rāmāyatāra Śarmā thinks that salila is actually s'arira and it has been formed by suffixing iran to the root sar. R has been replaced by L because they are the same. Ogha and vrsti harc been so called because they resemble rain in uncertainty. The names of the five bahyah tuştayuh are vari. ously given :-pāram, supīram, pārāpāram, anuttumambhah, uttamāmbhaḥ (Vācaspati, Candrikā), sutamah, pāram, • These four are differently given in Sankhya Sangraha as paramātmatva in Prakſti, buddhı, ahankūru and tanmätras. SI Vācaspati, Candrikā, Jayamangalā. u Mathara. * TIEZTAT: lurrarent: I बाह्या विषयोपरमात् पर, नव Startet u 40 41 y2 Gauda.

·46 A CRITICIL STUDY OF THE SÃÝKHYA SYSTEMI . some sunetram, rūrīkum, anuttamāmbhasikam (Gauda), tāram, sutāram, sunctram, sumiricam, uttamāmbhasikam ( Māțhara), sutāram, supáram, , anuttamāmbham, uttamāmbham ( Jayamangalā). This shows the uncertainty about their names. Rāmāyatāra Sarmā has forced interpretation into the names given by Vācaspatithe first is called pāra because it carries one hevond the pains of earning; the second is called supăra because one may be tempted to enjoy even when one has realized the troubles of carning, hut it is practically impossible for one to think of enjoying when one sees the troubles of protecting ; the third is called pīrīvīra because one who observes depreciation is at times tempted, and at others not tempted; the fourth is anuttamīnbhah because it arises from a selfish desire, j.e., on account of the fear of diseases in enjoyment; and the fifth is uttamāmbhah because it is prompted by mercy. KĪRIKI 51.*_lacaspati has explained the fue siddhis in two ways and the other commentators have adhered to onc method or the other, or they have drawn material from both the sets. The first meaning given by Vācaspati looks artificial. He has distorted the ineanings to class the eight siddhis into hetu, hetuhetumuti and helumatí. lle could not have remained satisfied without introducing regularity where it was wanting. The other meaning sounds more correct and natural because in it there is ncither the necessity of twisting the sense of words, nor of changing their order. This meaning has been picked up by Jayamangalā and there is every possibility that lācaspati borrowcu il 33: 721squitinatarat: gara: 1 दानं च सिद्वयोऽटो सिद्धेः पूर्वोऽशस्विविधः ·SIDDHIS 47 Cha, etc., from Jayamangalā, or that there were two concurrent traditions. Vācaspati thinks that unkus'a is used in the sense of distractive, nivāraka, and therefore, for him the threefold ankus'a is ciparyaya, as'akti and tuşti. Vijñāna says that it means attractive, ākarşaka, and therefore the threefold ankus'a is ūha, s'abda and adhyayanu ; suhrtprīpti and dāna being of lesser importance. The objection that tuşti and atusţi cannot be both averse to siddhi is answered thus that they represent two independent dharmas and not the absence of each other. are theinselves siddhis and therefore they should not he counted as ankus'a. Vācaspati is therefore correct and the confusion arises because ankus'a bears a double mcaning. The atustis and asiddhis can be settled with great difficulty. Gauda and Māthara have given thoin opposite names hecause thcy represent opposite ideas -unambhah, asaliluḥ, etc.; but Jayamangalā gives to the asiddhis the names moșamuşnamīnoparamit yūdyāḥ. KÄRIKA 52.* --Naturally bhāva mcans pratya yasarga and linga, sūksmas'arīra. They have been used in previous kārikās in this sense but in this kārikā their sense has been slightly strained. Vācaspati makes lingn = word, ctc., and the twofold body, and bhūra = the thirteen karanas which are not possible without charnia, etc., hecause these two surgas are essential for the enjoyment and release of Purusa. According to Gjuda, linga is tanınātrasarge up to the fourteen bhūtus; according to Candrikā it is the non-visible group of mahat, etc., * न विना भावलिङ्गं न विना लिनेन मावनिर्वति। लिङ्गाख्यो भावाख्यस्तस्माद् द्विविधा Marina

·48
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SĀŠKHYA SYSTEM
.
and according to Māthara, it is sūkşmas'arira and the
thirteen karanas. Vijñāna regards the two kinds more
closely to a creation of intellect, regarding linga as
buddhi itself and bhāva as its conditions.
KARIKĀ 53.*-There is no harm in calling the bhau.
tikasarga as a phase of the lirgasarga ; Jayamangalā and
Māthara hint it as a third sarga. Aniruddha on sūtra
3. 46 divides the whole creation into six-sura, asura,
nara, pretu, nāraka and tiryak, and sthāvara are included
into nāraka. Candrikā has two alternative devices for
the case of pot, etc.-(1) they are not included because
bhautika means bodily, or (2) they are to be included in
sthāvara. The latter view is held by Vācaspati.
KÄRIKĀ 55.t-Lingas yūvinivriteņ is dissolved in two
ways by Vācaspati-(1) lingasya avinivrtteh, (2) lingasya d
vini ortteh. The latter device is resorted to by Gauda,
Candrikā, Māthara, and Jayamangalā. Māthara reads
samāsena = sanksepena in the kārikā instead of svabhūvena.
Jayamangalā thinks that jarā and maraņa include sarbha
and janma also. Linga should mean sūkşmas'arīra because
that will suit the belief that linga disappears after viveku
only.
KĀRIKĀ 56.5-Vāțhara and Gauda have given a world-
ly example of svārtha;-as one does his friend's work as
* अपविकल्पा देवस्तैर्यग्योनश्च पञ्चधा भवति ।
मानुप्यश्चैकविधः समासतोऽयं त्रिधा सर्गः ॥५३ ॥
ऊर्ध्व सत्त्वविशालस्तमोविशालश्च मूलतः सर्गः।
मध्ये रजोविशालो ब्रह्मादिस्तम्बपर्यन्तः ॥ ५४ ॥
। तत्र जरामरणकृतं दुःखं प्राप्नोति चेतनः पुरुषः ।
लिङ्गस्याविनिवृत्तेः, तस्माद् दुःखं स्वभावेन ॥ ५५ ॥
६ इत्येप प्रकृतिकृती महदादिविशेषभूनपर्यन्तः ।
प्रतिपुरुषविमोक्षार्थ स्वार्थ इव परार्थ आरम्भः ॥ ५६ ॥

·LIBERATION OF PURUSA 49 if it is for himself. Candrikā extracts another shade of meaning. It says—as others work for their own interest, so the movement of Prakſti for the sake of Puruşa is also possible because movement requires some sort of purpose. Vimokşārtham according to Vācaspati is to indicate that the ever-active Prakſti does stop for some particular Puruşa, who has gained knowledge; and according to Candrikā it is to indicate that the world may cease for one but continue for the rest. KARIKĀ 57.*_Gauda, Māthara and Jayamangalā apply the example to nivstti also-as the cow stops giving milk when the calf is nourished. Rāmāvatāra Sarmà says that a cow does not give milk as long as she does not give birth to a calf, though she takes her regular food; this is the force of vatsavivrddhaye. KARIKĀ 59.t-Prakas'ya cannot mean after giving direct knowledge of Pradhāna because it is always to be inferred. Therefore ātmānam in the kārikā means s'abdadyatmanā. The same can be further elucidated by what Abhyankara" says on the necessity of postulating bhūtas and indriyas—the formula is that liberation is caused by the knowledge of the difference in Purusa and Prakrti but Prakſti is too subtle to be known and it can be known through its effects only; prakrti- 94 In commenting on Sarvadars'anasangraha, Bhandarkar O. R. I. Publication, p. 319. * वत्सविवृद्धिनिमित्त क्षीरस्य यथा प्रवृत्तिरज्ञस्य । पुरुपविमोक्षनिमित्तं तथा प्रवृत्तिः प्रधानस्य ॥ ५७ ॥ औत्सुक्यनिवृत्यर्थं यथा क्रियासु प्रवर्तते लोकः । पुरुषस्य विमोक्षार्थ प्रवर्तते तद्वदव्यक्तम् ॥ ५८ ॥ + रङ्गस्य दर्शयित्वा निवर्तते नर्तकी प्रथा नृत्यातू । पुरुषस्य तथाऽऽस्मानं प्रकाश्य विनिवर्तते प्रकृतिः- .

·50 A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM vikstis are also difficult to know and therefore bhūtas and intriyas are admitted as tattva; and there is no necessity of multiplying the tattvas by further accepting' cow, pot, etc., separately. How can Prakrti, which is vibhu, turn aside? The trouble could be simplified, if it was held that the Prakrti did not turn aside but that it was only recognized in its true colour and so the samsāra ceased for the individual Purusa. This explanation would have been faultless, but the Sankhya bases all movement in Prakſti on its samyoga with Purusa without which it will remain always inactive. The meaning of samyoga nnot be restricted to sympathetic response because Puruşa is quality-less. Some say that after the release of Puruşa, Prakſti keeps aloof, assuming the form of some god. Different tattvas having different superintending deities, adhidaiva, is a conception of the later Sankhya. KÄRIKĀ 60.* _Vācaspati and Candrikā have used the kārikā to strengthen the pre-mentioned idea of selflessness in Prakſti, but Māthara and Gauda wrongly think 96 95 But in kārikā 66, samyoga is left of no importance creation is due to ignorance and it ceases when Prakſti has accomplished the enjoyment and release of Puruşa because then there remains nothing more for it to do, even if there is saṁyoga. Pancarktras add one more principle, kāla. Vijñāna holds a real contact and differentiates between contact and change; therefore contact does not bring change in Puruşa. नानाविधैरुपायैरुपकारिण्यनुपकारिणः पुंसः । गुणवत्यगुणस्य सतस्तस्यार्थमपार्थकं चरति ॥ ६॥ 97 ·THE DELICATE PRAKRTI 51 1 that the kārikā gives some clue to the cause of cessation of activity in Prakști. Māthara has well characterized the relation of it and Puruşa as-- like the feather of a peacock he is painted only on one side. KÄRIKĀ 61.*-Gauda has a quaint explanation in store---Prakrti has no further cause and therefore it does not again come in view of the released Puruşa ; for that reason it is sukumāratara, i.e., it has no better lord over it like is'vara, etc., as its cause. While Jayamangalā says that before knowledge Prakrti shows itself only in vyakta form and when knowledge is attained, it feels that it has no subtlerº form than avyakta. It should plainly mean sensitiveness.100 Vamsidhara uselessly tries to justify on all fours the example of kalavadhū by saying that it refers to the jada body and buddhi that looks cetana on account of the approximity of Puruşa ; but he has not noted a greater disharmony when Vācaspati and Gauda say that she does not see other persons.101 The case is opposite with Prakſti ; it ceases for the Purusa who has the discriminative knowledge, and continues to charm the remaining lot. 99 100 101 98 Here =subhogyatara. Here=sūksmatara. Nyāyamañjari objects to the delicacy of Praksti which is enjoyed by infinite number of Puruşas; and Hall in translation of Gore : Hindu Phil. Systems', objects because it is insentient. They could have safely said that she does not see again the same person. प्रकृतेः सुकुमारतरं न किञ्चिदस्तीति मे मतिर्भवति । या दृष्टास्मीति पुनर्न दर्शनमुपैति पुरुषस्य ॥ ६ ॥ नस्मान बध्यते नापि मुच्यते नापि संसरति कश्चित् । forte arah geud wat sala: lll 7* ·52 à CRITICAL STUDY OF THE. SANKHYA SYSTEM KÄRIKĀ 63.* -Candrikā wrongly says that ātmana = buddhirūpena and ātmānam=puruşam, Prakſti binds itself by itself, no blot stains the Purusa.103 How is acetana Prakſti either bound or released ? Bhoga will mean avastha, laksana, and parināmabhedas that are visible in Prakſti. KĀRIKĀ 64.t-Kevalam = not mixed with viparyaya but Candrikā strangely equates it with what is visible to Puruşa only, which is not a sound expression because of the disinterestedness of Puruşa. KÄRIKA 65.5_Svasthaḥ-ātmani sthito na prakrtisthaḥ, tataḥ prakrieủ nivíttatvāt according to Jayamangalā; but Vācaspati reads susthaḥ and strains its meaning to suit the context-he still has a slight mixture of sāttviki buddhi,los otherwise he cannot see Prakſti. Vācaspati admits this mixture only in Jivanmukta state ; but what is the harm if it continues in moksa state also ? It will then facilitate the understanding of the multiplicity of Puruşas even when they are released. in3 Strengthened by saiva in the second half of the kārikā. 103 Vācaspati, Gauda. 104 Tilak in Gitärahasya thinks it a device to avoid increasing the number of guņas by accepting one more finer state. * रूपैः सप्तभिरेव तु बनात्यात्मानमात्मना प्रकृतिः । सैव च पुरुषार्थ प्रति विमोचयत्येकरूपेण ॥ ६३ ॥ + एवं तत्वाभ्यासानास्मिन मे नाहमित्यपरिशेपम् । अविपर्ययाद्विशुद्धं केवलमुत्पद्यते ज्ञानम् ॥ ६४ ॥ $ तेन निवृत्तप्रसवामर्थक्शात् सप्तरूपविनिवृत्ताम् । प्रकृतिं पश्यति पुरुषः प्रेक्षकवदवस्थितः स्वस्थः ।। ६५ ॥

·THE LAST THREE KĀRIKĀS 53 KARIKA 66.*-Gauda and Mathara have given two worldly examples to illustrate the cessation of all activity in Pradhāna—(1) when debts are cleared, and (2) as no progeny from cohabitation of the old. KARIKA 67.1-Jivanmukta statels is not possible because when indiscrimination is destroyed there can remain no body. Vijñānal surmounts the difficulty by saying that indiscrimination and actions work only through samyoga and this janmākhyasamyoga is not destroyed without the fruition of prārabdha. KĀRIKĀ 70.8--Rāmāvatāra Śarmā has pointed out patibhanga in “ Pancas'ıkhaya tena.' The last three kārikās are missing in Gaudapāda-Bhāșya. Wilson was the first man to point out that the Sankhya-Kārikā had only 69 verses and one verse was lost. Mr. Tilak reconstructed the missing verse from bhāsya on kārikā 61 and thought that it was 105 106 Yogavārttika thinks that asamprajñātayoga is superior to knowledge because it overcomes brārabdhakarma. On Sūtra 1. 24. रङ्गस्थ इत्युपेक्षक एको दृष्टाहमित्युपरमत्येका । सति संयोगेऽपि तयोः प्रयोजनं नाम्ति सर्गस्य ॥ ६६ ॥ + सम्यग्ज्ञानाधिगमाद्धर्मादीनामकारणप्राप्तौ। तिष्ठति संस्कारवशाचक्रभ्रमवद्धतशरीरः ॥ ६७ ॥ प्राले शरीरभेदे चरितार्थत्वात् प्रधानविनिवृत्तौ। ऐकान्तिकमात्यन्तिकमुभयं कैवल्यमानोति ॥ ६८ ॥ पुरुषार्थज्ञानमिदं गुह्यं परमर्षिणा समाख्यातम् । स्थित्युत्पत्तिप्रलयाश्चिन्त्यन्ते यत्र भूतानाम् ॥ ६९ ॥ ६ एतत्पवित्रमग्यं मुनिरासुरयेऽनुकम्पया प्रददौ । आसुरिरपि पञ्चशिखाय तेन च बहुधा कृतं तम्बम् : 00

·54
A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE SANKHYA SYSTEM
dropped because it was very atheistic. But it is not
clear on what ground the loss of one kārikā is manifest.
If the already existing 70th verse is to be rejected as
not forming an essential part of the Saptati, the 69th
verse can also be rejected on the same ground. Dis-
quisition of the principles of the Sankhya is over at the
68th kārikā and if the 69th kārikā is necessary to impress
the authenticity of the work, the 70th is needed to give
the line of succession of the old teachers, and the un-
interrupted tradition of the system.
शिष्यपरम्परयाऽऽगतमीश्वरकृष्णेन चैतदायर्याभिः ।
संक्षिप्तमार्यमतिना सम्यग्विज्ञाय सिद्धान्तम् ॥ ७१ ॥
समस्यां किल येऽस्तेिऽर्थाः कृत्स्नस्य षष्टितन्त्रस्य ।
आख्यायिकाविरहिताः परवादविवर्जिताश्चापि ॥ २ ॥

·श्रीकपिलमहामुनिप्रणीतानि
सांख्यसूत्राणि
तथा च
श्रीमदीश्वरकृष्णप्रणीताः
सांख्यकारिकाः
मेधाकरशास्त्रिणां प्रस्तावना महिताश्र
विद्वद्वर
विष्णु वेङ्कटेश सोवनी, एम्.ए., एलएल.बी.
इत्येतः संशोधिताः
पुण्यपत्तने
ओरिएन्टल बुक एजन्सी
१९३५

·प्रस्तावना आत्मानात्मपदार्थवर्णनायप्रवृत्तानि शास्त्राणि हि दर्शनशास्त्राणीति निगद्यन्ते । तानि पुनः कपिलाक्षपाद (गौतम) कणाद (उलक) जैमिनि पतञ्जलि कृष्णद्वैपायन ( ज्याम) महर्षिभिः संपादितानि क्रमेण मारयन्याय- चैशेषिकमीमांसायोगोत्तरमीमांसानामभिर्यवाहियन्ते च । ज्ञानकापडापरपर्याय- वाचीन्युपनिषदविद्यामूलकानिं शास्त्राण्येतानि मोक्षविषयिणी धिषणां विस्तार- यितुमलन्तरां मुमुक्षूणामित्यलमतिगिरा । अनस्तंगमितमहिमान्यलोकिक- ज्ञानाधिकरणानि चामूनि लोकोत्तरचमत्कारव्याप्तिमब्रह्मविद्यापपर्यायोपनिप- स्प्रादुर्भूतिसमकाल मेव लोके प्राकाशन्त । तदक्षराधिगतिहेतुतयाऽविरतं विप- विद्भिराद्रियमाणानि परमोपकारीणि तान्यधुनापि सूत्रवृत्तिभाष्यरूपशरीरैः मुर्ता- नीवास्मसकाशे समुलसितानि वरीवर्तन्ते । परमप्रतिपञ्चमनीपावन्तो वयं तान्यु- पेक्षामहेऽन्वहमिति सुतरामसमञ्जसो विषयः ।' दर्शिनं हि परापरतया विद्यानां द्वैविध्यम्। तत्र ऋगादिरपरा प्राणिनां भोगभूतये प्रवृत्ता परा च निःश्रेयसायेति । न जातु कश्चित् जीवातु गति कैवल्यं वा उपेक्षेतेति भगवती श्रुतिः समाह आत्मावारे द्रष्टव्यः श्रोतव्यो मन्तव्यो निदिध्यासितव्यश्च" इति । एतदेवाभि- ध्याय महर्पयः शमदमादिपटूसंपत्तिपरकालं,ब्रह्म जिज्ञासितव्यमिति शासतो दर्शनानि प्रादुरदधुः। तदेतदन्तःपातिविपयेषु तावजगत्समालोचयितुमर्हम्-किमिदं जगदिति' प्रकृतिपरिणाममयं विंशतितत्वात्मकं तदिति कापिलं मनम् । योगदर्शनकारो- प्येवमेव समर्थयति सांख्यमतवत् । परमाण्वारब्धसंयोगवियोगजन्याकृति- विशेषस्तदिति न्यायसिद्धान्तः । तत्सहायो वैशेषिकोऽपि तद्वन्मन्यते । स्वरूप- तोऽनायनन्तप्रवाहरूपसंयोगवियोगवज्जगदवधारयति जैमिनिः । नानारूप- क्रियात्मकं मायापरिणामः चेतनविवर्त एवेति मायावादिनः । तबीजं त्रिगुणात्मकप्रकृतिरिति सांख्याः। कर्मानुयोगं प्रकृतिस्तनियामक ईश्वरश्चेति पतञ्जलिः । ईश्वरादिनवपरमाणव इति नैय्यायिकाः वैशेषिकाश्च । जीवादृष्टपरमाणव इति जैमिनिः । अभिन्ननिमित्तोपादानमीश्वर इति बेदान्तिनः। २ ·प्रस्तावना। ३ ईश्वरो नित्येच्छाज्ञानादिगुणवान् विभुः कर्तृविशेष इत्यास्तिकः। सांग्योऽना- स्तिकश्वेश्वरस्थाने पुरुषविशेपो नानाव्यक्तिरनेकसंख्य इति यावद ब्रूते । क्लेशकर्म- विपाकाशयैरपरामृष्टः पुरुषविशेष ईश्वर इति पतञ्जलिः। नित्येच्छाज्ञानादिगुण- वान् विभुः कर्तेति न्यायवैशेषिकी। शून्यमेवेति जैमिनिः । मायाविशिष्ट- श्रेतन इति मायावादिनः । जीवस्वरूपे निर्णयेऽसंगश्वेतनो विभु ना भोक्ता च स इति सांख्या योगश्च । ज्ञानादिचतुर्दशगुणवान् कर्ता भोक्ता जडः विभुर्नाना चेति न्यायवैशेपिको। जडचेतनात्मको विभुः नाना कर्ता भोक्तेति मीमामकाः । अविद्याविशिष्टश्चेतन इति अद्वैतिनः । केन हेतुना बध्यते इति बन्धहेतुं निर्णयन्ति-अविवेको बन्धहेतुरिति सांख्ययोगौ। अज्ञानमिति न्यायवैशेपिकौ। निषिद्धकर्माणाति जैमिनिः । अविथैवेत्यद्वैती। बन्धशब्दस्य परिभाषानिर्णयः- अध्यात्मादित्रिविधदुःखानि बन्ध इति सांख्यो वदति । प्रकृतिपुरुषसंयोगजन्याविद्यादिक्केशपंचकं बन्ध इति पत- अलिः । एकविंशतिदुःखानीति न्यायवैशेषिके । नरकादिदुःखसम्बन्ध इति मीमांसकः । अविद्या तत्कार्याणीति मायावादिनः । मोक्षपदार्थः क इत्यत्र त्रिविधदुःखध्वंसा मोक्ष इति सांख्यः । प्रकृतिपुरुष- संयोगाभावपूर्वकाविद्यादिपंचक्केशात्यन्तविरहः इति योगः। एकविंशति- दुःखध्वंस इति न्यायवैशेषिकौ । म्वर्गप्राप्तिरिति मीमांसकः । अविद्यातत्कार्य- हानपूर्वकपरमानन्दविन्दमिति वेदान्तिनः । मोक्षसाधनानि जिज्ञासितव्यानीत्युच्यते---प्रकृतिपुरुषविवेको मोक्ष- साधनमिति सांख्यः। निर्विकल्पकसमाधिपूर्वको विवेक इति पातालाः । इतरभिन्मान्मज्ञानमिति गौतमकणादी। वेदविहितकर्मति जैमिनिः । ब्रह्मा- स्मेक्यबोध इति वेदान्तिनः । उहिष्टं संक्षेपेण पड्दर्शनस्थविपयजातम् । इदानीं सांख्यशास्त्रं मीमांसमान- यदनुभूतं तन्निवेद्यते-नास्तिककपिलेन स्वयं पूर्वमुपास संज्ञकस्य तत्वसमासाख्यस्य द्वाविंशतिसंख्यकस्य षडध्यायात्मकोऽथ विविधदुःखात्यन्तनिवृत्तिरस्यन्ता ·४ सांख्यसूत्राणि । । तहा तदुच्छित्तिरित्येतावत्पर्यन्तः सूत्रोपनिबद्धः ग्रन्थो व्यरचि। तदनुपादेयन्वं चापि महाभारतादौ कथितम् । कर्दमाद्देवहूत्यामभिजातस्य सेश्वरसांस्य- वादिनः कपिलस्योपदेशसूत्राणि विदानी नोपलभ्यन्त इत्यनुसन्धायकानां परामर्शः । संभाव्यते चैतन्त्रास्तिकसांख्यवादसमृद्धयां नानाविधप्रसमरमिथ्या- तर्कवितर्कसंघर्षप्रकर्षरूपान्धतमसि विलुसानि समभूवन् , इति कर्णाकर्णिकाऽपि निरूढातराम् । आस्तिककपिलस्य भगवदवतारता-"सिद्धानां कपिलो मुनिः' इति भगवद्वाक्येन व्यक्तैव । श्रुत्या च "ऋषि प्रसूतं कपिलं यस्तमने ज्ञानविभ- ति जायमानं च पश्येत्" इति, अनया सिद्धा। सत्येवमपि चर्षेः कपिलस्य परिचयमवातुं भूमा प्रयासोऽपेक्षितः । इदानी वैशेषिकाक्षरैः सांख्यमतं स्मर्यम्-सत्वरजस्तमसां साम्यावस्था प्रकृतिः । साचैकैव । पुरुषास्तु परं भियन्ते। ते च नित्याः । अपरिणामिनी नित्यचैतन्यस्वभावाः । ते च पंगवोऽपरिणामित्वात् । प्रकृतिस्त्वन्धा जडत्वात् । यथा विषयभोगेच्छा प्रकृतिपुरुषभेददिक्षा च प्रकृतेर्भवति तदास्य पुरुषोपरागवशात् परिणमते । तस्याश्चाद्यः परिणामो बुद्धिरन्तः- करणविशेषः । बुद्धिरेव महत्तत्त्वम् । सा च बुद्धिर्दर्पणवनिर्मला । तस्याश्च बहिरि- न्द्रियप्रणाडिकया विषयाकारो यः परिणतिभेदो घट इति पट इति-आकारकस्त- ज्ज्ञानं वृत्तिरिति चाख्यायते । स्वच्छायां बुद्धौ वर्तमानेन ज्ञानेन चैतन्यस्य पुरुषस्य भेदाग्रहात् अहं जानामीति योऽभिमानविशेषः सैवोपलब्धिः । स्नक्- चन्दनादिविषयसनिकर्षात् इन्द्रियप्रणाडिकयैव सुखदुःखाद्याकारो बुद्धेरेव यः परिणामविशेषः स प्रत्ययः। अत एव ज्ञानसुखदुःखेच्छाहेषप्रयत्नसंस्कार- धर्माधर्माः सर्व एव बुद्धः परिणामविशेषाः सूक्ष्ममात्रतया प्रकृतावेव वर्त- मानाः अवस्थाभेदादाविर्भवन्ति तिरोभवन्तीति च। पुरुषस्तु पुष्करपलाशवलि- लेपः प्रतिबिंबते बुद्धौ । तन्मते तत्वानि पंचविंशतिः । मूलप्रकृतिः महत्तत्वम- हङ्कारः शब्दस्पर्शरूपरसगन्धाः पञ्चतन्मात्राणि पंचभूतानि पंचज्ञानेन्द्रियाणि पंचकर्मेन्द्रियाणि मनः पुरुषश्च परिणामवादः । केवला प्रकृतिः केवला विकृतिः प्रकृतिविकृत्युभयमनुभयं च। तथाच-"मूलप्रकृतिरविकृतिः महदाद्याः प्रकृतिविकृतयः सत । षोडशकस्तु विकारो न प्रकृतिन विकृतिः पुरुषः"-इतिन्यायकोशतोऽध्याहृतम् । (पृष्ठ ९०५) ·प्रस्तावना। स्फुटतराकररिदमपि ज्ञेयम् द्वैताद्वैतपरेषु दर्शनग्रन्थेषु पूर्वमीमांसाऽदृष्टवादि- जी,वेदान्तडिडिमोऽद्वैतपरः द्वैतपराणि चेतराणि शिष्टानि दर्शनानि केवलमेकमे- वाद्वितीयं ब्रोति स्वानुभूत्येकमानस्यात्मनो विशुद्धगुणातीतत्वनिर्णयाय तावद वेदान्तशास्त्र प्रवृत्तं तद्वत् प्रकृतेः परः परः पुरुष इति सेश्वरसांख्यैरक्षरःस्थिरीकृ- तः । “विज्ञातारमरे केन विजानीयात् ' इति संभाव्य कापिलं शास्त्रं काः प्रकृतेः समालोचकं पुरुषतत्त्वमपरं प्रकृतेः परं निरणैषीत् अयं च सत्कार्यवादः । अन्यथा कथमसतः मजायतेति विप्रतिपत्तिरापद्येत सुतराम् । अचेतना वेतनोत्पत्ति विवक्षन्तः सांख्यसत्कार्यवादेन द्वारा परास्ताः। स्वयं स्वस्कन्धा- रोहणवदसंगतं काः प्रकृतेः स्वज्ञात्रीत्वमिति सांख्यीया युक्तिः । अद्वतवादे प्रकृतिपुरुषतत्वे एकरूपत्वेन गृहीते मायया च पिण्ड ब्रह्माण्डं च प्रकल्प्य स्वाभिमतं मतं स्थापितम् । यथा चोक्तं- 'कर्तृतन्त्रं भवेत् कर्म कर्मतन्त्रं शुभाशुभम् । प्रमाणतन्त्र विज्ञानं मायातन्त्रमिदं जगदिति । सांख्यरपि प्रकृति विविच्य तद्विकृतिरूपमनोबुद्धयहंकारपदार्थाः प्रकृतेर- वयवा गुणा वा वर्तन्ते इति तेभ्यः परः पुरुषोऽस्तीति स्वमतं स्थापितम् । उक्तं चापि तैः- कार्यकारणकर्तृत्वे हेतुः प्रकृतिरुच्यते । पुरुषः सुखदुःखानां भोक्तृत्वे हेतुरुध्यते" इति। गी० १३, २० बौद्धाः काणादाश्च परमाणुभ्यो जगदेतन्मन्वानाः परमाणुसंयोजयित्री शक्ति ख्यापयितुं न पारयन्ति इति तेपामारंभवादं स्थगयितुं सांख्यशास्त्रं प्रवृ- त्तम्। सांख्यास्तु परमाणुरूपावयवभेदाभाववती प्रकृतिः, प्रधाना, गुणक्षोभिणी, बहुधानका, प्रसन्नधर्मिणी चास्तीति समाध्याय सर्गरचनकनिसगां तां सिद्धा- न्तयन्ति । अद्वैतिनां सगुणसृष्टिं यावदेवतस्य सत्कार्यवादस्योपयोगो मतः । निर्गुणात् सगुणोत्पत्तौ तु तैः अघटनघटनापीयसी माया शरणीकृता। एवमेकस्यैव मूलपदार्थस्य विकासाद् विविधजगदविकामोऽपीति अर्थात् एकस्या एवाव्यक्तप्रकृतर्विविधवक्तसों जायत इति सांस्यैः चारुतरो विषयः समुपन्यस्तः।

·६ मांख्यसूत्राणि । वैशेषिकोक्तं कारणे ये गुणा न सन्ति ते कार्ये स्वातन्त्र्येणोद्भवन्तीति सांख्यानांनेष्टम् । अन्यथा नीराद् दध्युद्भवः किं न स्यादिति समाधातुं दुःशकं स्यात् । यन्मूले नास्ति न तत्कायेंऽपीति सांख्यवादः । इदमेवाद्वैतवादिनामिष्टम्। अष्टमकारिकायां प्रकृतियद्यपीन्द्रियप्रत्यक्षगोचरा न भवति तथापि तस्याः आस्तित्वं मौक्ष्म्येण नूनं इष्टम् । अनेकव्यक्तपदार्थावलोकनं प्रकृतेरम्नित्वमव- धारयति । सांख्यैः प्रकृतिनिरवयवा ममुद्दिष्टा । काणादैः प्रत्येकपरमाणुस्वतन्त्र- व्यक्त्याऽवयविता निर्धारिता परमाणूनां तत्र परमाणुद्वयमध्ये केन पदार्थेन स्थीयतामिति शिष्यते प्रश्नः । उक्तं तावदतिवचनेन । प्रकृतिपुरुषयोरुभयभेदज्ञानं कैवल्यमिति सांख्याना- मन्तिमःसिद्धान्तः । सत्त्वगुणस्यात्यन्तोत्कर्षात् त्रिगुणातीतावस्था पुरुषेण लभ्यते इयं च कैवल्यायोपयुज्यत इति दिक् । राजकुमारकॉलेज सोवनीनिर्दिष्टानुवादकः फाल्गुनवदि १३ शककाल १८५६ ) मेधाकरशास्त्री ·अथ सांख्यसूत्राणि अथ त्रिविधदुःखात्यन्तनिवृत्तिरत्यन्नपुरुषार्थः १ न दृष्टात् तसिद्धिनिवृत्तेऽप्यनुवृत्तिदर्शनात् । २ प्रात्यहिकाप्रतीकारवत् तत्प्रतीकारचेष्टनात् पुरुषार्थत्वम् । ३ सर्वासंभवात् मेम्भवेऽपि सत्त्वासम्भवाद्धेयः प्रमाणकुशलैः ४ उत्कर्षादपि मोक्षस्य सर्वोत्कर्पश्रुतेः ५ अविशेषश्चोभयोः ६ न स्वभावतो बद्धस्य मोक्षसाधनोपदेशविधिः ७ स्वभावस्यानपायित्वादननुष्ठानलक्षणमप्रामाण्यम् ८ नाशयोपदेशविधिरुपदिष्टेज्यनुपदेशः ९ शुक्लपटवद् बीजवचेत् १० १. भूयस्त्वादत्यन्तनिरूढानि सांख्यप्रवचनसूत्राणि सपाठान्तरभेदं तावद् विज्ञाप्य विश्वतोमुखी सारवतीमार्षा वाचमप्याहत्याथानतितरां प्रसिद्धान्यपि संक्षितानि कापिलसांख्यसूत्रत्वनोपनिबद्धानि कतिपयानि सूत्राण्युपलभ्यन्ते तानि यथा निवेदयामः- अथातस्तत्वे समासः १. कथयामि अष्टौ प्रकृतयः २. पोडशस्तु विकार: ३. पुरुषः ४. त्रैगुण्यम् ५. सञ्चरः प्रतिसञ्चरः ६. अध्यात्ममधिभूतमधि- दैवञ्च ७. पञ्चाभिबुद्धयः ८. पञ्च कमयोनयः १. पञ्च वायवः १०.पत्रकर्मा- स्मानः ११. पञ्चपर्वा अविद्याः १२. अष्टाविशतिधा अशक्तिः १३.नवधा तुष्टिः १४. अष्टधा सिद्धिः १५. दश मलिकार्थाः १६. अनुग्रहः सर्गः १७. चतुर्दश- विधो भूतसर्गः १८. विविधो बन्धः १९. त्रिविधो मोक्षः २०. विविध प्रमाणलक्षणम् २१. एतत्सम्यग्ज्ञात्वा कृतकृत्यः स्थान पुननिविधेन दुःखेना- नुभूयते २२. शम् ॥ २. निवृत्तेरपि. ३. प्रास्याहिक. ४. तत्पुरुषार्थत्वम्, ५. 'तत्सम्भवेऽप्यत्यन्तासम्भवावेयः' समवेऽपि सत्तासम्भवादेयः' वा. सर्वाता, सर्वत्र वा ६. अनपायवाद ... हायेको ·२ सांख्यसूत्राणि [अ. १ स. ११- शक्त्युद्भवानुद्भवाभ्यां नाशक्योपदेशः ११ न कालयोगतो व्यापिनो नित्यस्य सर्वसम्बन्धात् १२ न देशयोगतोऽप्यस्मात् १३ नावस्थातो देहधर्मत्वात् तस्याः १४ असङ्गोऽयं पुरुष इति १५ न कर्मणान्यधर्मवादतिप्रसक्तेश्च १६ विचित्रभोगानुपपत्तिरन्यधर्मत्वे १७ प्रकृतिनिबन्धनाचेन्न तस्या अपि पारतन्त्र्यम् १८ नै नित्यशुद्धबुद्धमुक्तस्वभावस्य तद्योगस्तद्योगाहते १९ नाविद्यातोऽप्यवस्तुना बन्धायोगात् २० वस्तुत्वे सिद्धान्तहानिः २१ विजातीयद्वैतापत्तिश्च २२ विरुद्धोभयरूपा चेत् २३ न तादृक्पदार्थाप्रतीतेः २४ न वयं षट्पदार्थवादिनो वैशेषिकादिवत् २५ 'अनियतत्वेऽपि नायौक्तिकस्य संग्रहोऽन्यथा बालोन्मत्तादिसमत्वम् २६ नानादिविषयोपरगनिमित्तकोऽप्यस्य २७ न बाह्याभ्यन्तरयोरुपरज्योपरञ्जकभावोजप देशव्यवधानात् सुनम्थ- पाटलिपुत्रस्थयोरिव २८ द्वयोरेकदेशलब्धोपरागान व्यवस्था २९ १ शक्युद्भवामिभवाभ्यां. २. इदं सूत्रं वचिनास्ति. ३. ' श्रुतिरस्ति सा बाधिता स्यात् ' इत्यपि योजयन्ति. ४. कर्मणो. ५. 'च' रहितोऽपि प्रकृतिनिबन्धना चेन. ७. 'नित्य ' रहितोऽपि पाठः ८. विजातीये; 'च' विरहितोऽपि. ९. कचित् ' बालोन्मत्तादिसमत्वम्' इत्येव सूत्रं. १०. निमि- 'निमित्तः ' वा. ११. उपरज्य. १२. 'देशभेदात् ':

·सांख्यसूत्राणि
३
अदृष्ट्वशाचेत् ३०
न द्वयोरेककालायोगादुपकार्योपकारकभावः ३१
पुत्रकर्मवदिति चेत् ३२
नास्ति हि' तत्र स्थिर एकामा यो गर्भाधानादिना संस्क्रियते ३३
स्थिरकार्यासिद्धः क्षणिकत्त्वम् ३४
ने प्रत्यभिज्ञावाधान् ३५
श्रुतिन्यायविरोधाच्च ३६
दृष्टान्तासिद्धेश्च ३७
युगपज्जायमानयोर्न कार्यकारणभावः ३८
पूर्वापाये उत्तरायोगात् ३९
तद्भावे तदयोगादुभयव्यभिचारादपि न ४०
पूर्वभावमात्रे न नियमः ४१
न विज्ञानमात्र बाह्यप्रतीतेः ४२
तदभावे तदभावाच्छून्यं तर्हि ४३
शून्यं तत्त्वं भावो विनश्यति वस्तुधर्मत्वाद्विनाशस्य ४४
अपवादमात्रमबुद्धानाम् ४५
उभयपक्षसमानक्षेमत्वादयमपि ४६
अपुरुषार्थत्वमुभयथा ४७
न गतिविशेषात् ४८
निष्क्रियस्य तदसंभवात ४९
मूर्तत्वाद् घटादिवत् समानधर्मापत्तावपसिद्धान्तः ५०
गतिश्रुतिरप्युपाधियोगादाकाशवन् ५१
1. 'हि' शब्दरहितोऽपि पाठः. २. एक-सामानोपासादिकर्मणा.
१. क्षणिकत्वे सत्वमर्थ क्रियाकारित्वं. ५.
७. पूर्वभावित्वमात्रेन, पूर्वभाविमात्रेण वा.

·सांख्यसूत्राणि
[अ. १ सू. ५२-
न कर्मणाप्यतद्धर्मत्वात् ५२
अतिप्रसक्तिरन्यधर्मत्वे ५३
निर्गुणादिश्रुतिविरोधश्चेति ५४
तद्योगोऽप्यविवेकान्न समानत्वम् ५५
नियतकारणात्तदुच्छित्तिर्ध्वान्तवत् ५६
प्रधानाविवेकादन्याविवेकस्य तद्धाने हानम् ५७
वाङ्मात्रं न तु तत्त्वं चित्तस्थितेः ५८
युक्तितोऽपि न बाध्यते दिङ्मूढवदपरोक्षाहते ५९
अचाक्षुषाणामनुमानेन बोधो धूमादिभिरिव वढेः ६०
सत्त्वरजस्तमसां साम्यावस्था प्रकृतिः प्रकृतेर्महान्
महतोऽहङ्कारोऽहकारात् पञ्चतन्मात्राण्युभयमिन्द्रियं
तन्मात्रेभ्यः स्थूलभूतानि पुरुष इति पञ्चविंशतिर्गणः ६१
स्थूलान् पञ्चतन्मात्रस्य ६२
बाह्याभ्यन्तराभ्यां तैश्वीहङ्कारस्य ६३
तेनान्त:करणस्य ६४
ततः प्रकृतेः ६५
संहतपरार्थत्वान् पुरुषस्य ६६
मूले मूलामावादमूलं मूलम् ६७
पारम्पर्येऽप्येकत्र परिनिष्ठेति संज्ञामात्रम् ६८
समानः प्रकृतेर्द्वयोः ६९
अधिकारित्रैविध्यान्न नियमः ७०
,
१. प्येत° २. अग्रिमसूत्रादनन्तरमपि पाठः. ३. विरुद्धः, ४. ' इति
शून्योऽपि पाठः, ५. तयोगे. ६. प्रथमाविवेकरहितोऽपि पाठः. ७. कचित्
तुकारो नकारात् पूर्व. ८. ' तन्मात्रेभ्यः' रहितोऽपि. ९. पञ्चतन्मात्रा.
१०. 'च' रहितोऽपि पाठः. ११. संघातपरार्थत्वात्.

·सांख्यसूत्राणि
महदांख्यमाद्यं कार्य तन्मनः ७१
चरमोऽहङ्कारः ७२
तत्कार्यत्वमुत्तरेषाम् ७३
आद्यहेतुता तद्वारा पारम्पर्येऽप्यणुवन् ७४
पूर्वभावित्वे द्वयोरेकतरम्य हानेऽन्यतरयोगः ७५
परिच्छिन्नं ने सर्वोपादानम् ७६
तदुत्पत्तिश्रुतेच ७७
नावस्तुनो वस्तुसिद्धिः ७८
अबाधाददुष्टकारणजन्यत्त्वाच नावस्तुत्वम् ७९
भावे तद्योगेन तत्सिद्धिरभावे तदभावान् कुतस्तरां तत्सिद्धिः ८०
न 'कर्मण उपादानत्वायोगात् ८१
नानुश्रविकोदपि तसिद्धिः साध्यत्वेनावृत्तियोगादपुरुषार्थत्वम् ८२
तत्र प्राप्तविवेकस्यानावृत्तिश्रुतिः ८३
दुःखाददुःखं जलाभिषेकवन्न जाडयविमोकः ८४
काम्येऽकाम्येऽपि साध्यत्वाविशेषान् ८५
निजमुक्तस्य बन्धध्वंसमात्रं परं न समानत्वम् ८६
द्वयोरेकतरस्य वाप्यसन्निकृष्टार्थपरिच्छित्तिः प्रमा तत्साधकं यत्तत्
त्रिविध प्रमाणम् ८७
तसिद्धौ सर्वसिद्धेनाधिक्यसिद्धिः ८८
1. आख्यारहितः पाठः. २. अन्येषाम्. ३. आद्यहेतुद्वारा ४. पारम्पयेणा-
शुवत्. ५. पूर्वाभावित्वे. ६. द्वयोरेकतरहानेनान्यतरयोगः. ७. 'न' इति
आदौ अपि; परिच्छिन्नत्वान वा. ८. 'च' रहितोऽपि. ९. 'तरां' इनि वर्जितः..
१०. कर्मणा. ११. उपादानायोगात . १२. श्रा. १३. विमोक्षः १४. काम्या-
काम्ये. १५. मात्र परं. १६.समत्वम्, १७. चाप्य, वासं वा. १८.साधकतमं.
१९. 'त्रिविधं' रहितः पाठः, 'त्रिविध प्रमाणं. रहितो बा. २०. आदी
विविध प्रमाणं, इति संयोज्य.
५९
..

·सांख्यसूत्राणि
[अ. १ सू. ८९-
यत्सम्बद्धं सत् तदाकारोल्लेखि विज्ञानं तत्प्रत्यक्षम् ८९
योगिनामबाह्यप्रत्यक्षत्वान्न दोषः ९०
लीनवस्तुलब्धातिशयसम्बन्धाद्वाऽदोष: ९१
ईश्वरासिद्धेः ९२
मुक्तवद्धयोरन्यतराभावान्न तत्सिद्धिः ९३
उभयथाप्यसत्करत्वम् ९४
मुक्तात्मनः प्रशंसा उपासो सिद्धस्य वा ९५
तत्सनिधानादधिष्ठातृत्वं मणिवत् ९६
विशेषकार्येष्वपि जीवानाम् ९७
सिद्धरूपबोद्धृत्वाद्वाक्यार्थोपदेशः ९८
अन्तःकरणस्य तज्ज्वलितत्वालोहवदधिष्ठातृत्वम् ९९
प्रेतिबन्धसदृशः प्रतिबद्धज्ञानमनुमानम् १००
आप्तोपदेशः शब्दः १०१
उभयसिद्धिः प्रमाणात् तदुपदेशः १०२
सामान्यतो दृष्टादुभयसिद्धिः १०३
चिदवसानो भोगः १०४
अकर्तुरपि फलोपभोगोऽन्नाद्यवत् १०५
अविवेकाद्वा तसिद्धेः कर्तुः फलावर्गम. १०६
नोभयं च तत्वाख्याने १०७
१
६. 'सत्' इत्यस्य स्थाने सिद्धं वा पाठः, 'यत्सम्बन्धसिद्धं वा. २. न
दोषः' इति वा-संबन्धात्र दोषः. ३. 'मुन्नाऽमुक्तयोः' इति वा.
१. 'प्रशंसोपासा' वा; 'विधि वाक्योत्तम्भनाया' इति विशेषो वा. ५. उपा-
सना, उपास्या. ६. वेति. ७. विशेषकार्येपि. ८. 'उपज्वलित' इति वा.
९. 'प्रतिबन्धदृशः ''प्रतिबद्धदृशः ' इति वा. १०. अनादिवत्', वा. ११.
अविवेकाहा तसिद्धिः' इत्येनावान् एव पाठ:. १२. 'गतः.
.

·-१२६] सांख्यसूत्राणि विषयोऽविषयोऽप्यतिदूरादेहींनोपादानाभ्यामिन्द्रियस्य १०८ सौक्षयात्तदनुपलब्धिः १०९ कार्यदर्शनात्तदुपलब्धेः ११० वादिविप्रतिपत्तेस्तदसिद्धिरिति चेन् १११ तथाप्येकतरदृष्टया एकतरसिद्ध पलापः ११२ त्रिविधविरोधापत्तेश्च ११३ नासदुत्पादो नृशंगवत् ११४ उपादाननियमान् ११५ सर्वत्र सर्वदा सर्वासम्भवात् ११६ शक्तस्र्व शक्यकरणाने ११७ कारणभावाच्च ११८ न भावे भावयोगश्चेत् ११९ नाभिव्यक्तिनिबन्धनौ व्यवहाराव्यवहारौ १२० नाशः कारणलयः १२१ पारम्पर्यतोऽन्वेषणों बीजाश्रवन १२२ उत्पत्तिवद्वाऽदोषः १२३ हेतुमदनित्यमव्यापि सक्रियमनेकमाश्रितं लिङ्गम् १२४ आञ्जस्यादभेदतो वा गुणसामान्यादेस्तसिद्धिः प्रधानव्यपदेशाद्वा १२५ त्रिगुणाचेतनत्वादि द्वयोः १२६ १. अविषयो रहितः. २. 'तत्' इत्यनेन विरहितः पाठः. ३. प्रथमान्तो वा पाठः. ४. 'चेत्' इति वर्जितं. ५, अथा'. ६. दृष्टयान्तर'. ७. 'चे' तिनावश्यं ८. शक्यस्य. ९. कारणात्. १०. 'च' रहितः. ११. 'नाभावा' इति वा; भावे भावयांगश्चेन्न वाच्यम् वा वाक्यं वा. १२. ऽन्वेषणाद्वी १३. 'वा' रहितो वा पाठः. १४. 'लिङ्गं' इत्येव वा सूत्र; अव्यापि रहितः वा. १५. सक्रियकम, १६. 'तथा प्रधानशब्दात् ' इत्यधिकं सूत्रं. १७. 'त्रिगुणचेतनत्वानि मला . -

·सांख्यसूत्राणि
[अ. १ सू. १२७-
प्रीत्यप्रीतिविषादाद्यैर्गुणानामन्योन्यं वैधर्म्यम् १२७
लघ्वादिधर्मैः साधयं वैधयं च गुणानाम् १२८
उभयान्यत्वात् कार्यत्वं महदादेर्घटादिवत् १२९
परिमाणात् १३०
समन्वयात् १३१
शक्तितश्चेति १३२
तद्धाने प्रकृतिः पुरुषो वा १३३
तयोरन्यत्वे तुच्छत्वम् १३४
कार्याम् कारणानुमानं तत्साहित्यात् १३५
अव्यक्तं त्रिगुणालिङ्गात १३६
तत्कार्यतस्तत्सिद्धेापलापः १३७
सामान्येन विवादाभावाद्धर्मवन्न साधनम् १३८
शरीरादिव्यतिरिक्तः पुमान् १३९
संहतपरार्थत्वात् १४०
त्रिगुणादिविपर्ययात् १४१
अधिष्ठानाचेति १४२
भोक्तभावान् १४३
कैवल्यार्थं प्रवृत्तेश्च १४४
जडप्रकाशायोगात् प्रकाशः १४५
निर्गुणत्वान्न चिद्धर्मा १४६
श्रुत्या सिद्धस्य नापलापस्तत्प्रत्यक्षबाधात् १४७
.
१. 'अन्योन्यवैधयं ' इति समासान्तः पाठः. २. लघ्वादिधर्मरन्योऽन्यं
साधम्यं वैधम्यं गुणानाम् . ३. परिणामात्. ४. उभयोरपि. ५. तुच्छता.
.६. तत्साधनम्, ७. संहतपदार्थत्वात् ८. अधिष्ठातृत्वाच्चेति. ९. समस्तं सूत्र;
कवल्यार्थे वा: प्रकृतेः वा; 'च' रहितः वा. १०. निर्गुणत्वाच्च न.

·सांख्यसूत्राणि
९
सुषुप्त्याद्यसाक्षित्वम्' १४८
जन्मादिव्यवस्थातः पुरुषबहुत्वम् १४९
उपाधिभेदेऽप्येकस्य नानायोग आकाशस्येवं घटादिभिः १५०
उपाधिर्मियते न तु तद्वान् १५१
एवमेकत्वेन परिवर्तमानस्य न विरुद्धधर्माध्यासः १५२
अन्यधर्मत्वेऽपि नारोपान् तसिद्धिरकत्वात् १५३
नाद्वैतश्रुतिविरोधो जातिपरत्वात् १५४
विदितबन्धकारणस्य दृष्ट्याऽतद्रूपम् १५५
नान्धादृष्ट्या चक्षुष्मतामनुपलम्भः १५६
वामदेवादिमुक्तो नाद्वैतम् १५७
अनादावद्य यावदभावाद्भविष्यदप्येवम् १५८
इदानीमिव सर्वत्र नात्यन्तोच्छेदः १५९
व्यावृत्तोभयरूपः १६०
साक्षात्सम्बन्धात् साक्षित्वम् १६१
नित्यमुक्तत्वम् १६२
औदासीन्यं चेति १६३
उपरागात् कर्तृत्वं चित्सान्निध्याञ्चित्सान्निध्यान् १६४
इति प्रथमोऽध्यायः ।
--
१. सुषुष्यादिसाक्षिवं. २. पुरुषस्य बहुत्वम्. ३. इवाथ 'व' शब्दो वा.
४. 'एकमेकत्वेन ' वा, परमेकत्वेब वा. ५. तद्रूपं' वा. ६. 'नान्धदृष्टया ' वा
.. दिमुके. 6. 'भयं रूपः. ९. अक्षसम्मान नित्यमुकत्वमा
दासीन्यं चेती' ति एकं सूत्रं वा.

·सांख्यसूत्राणि [अ. १ सू. २०- अथ द्वितीयोऽध्यायः विमुक्तमोक्षार्थ स्वार्थ वा प्रधानस्य १ विरक्तस्य तसिद्धेः २ न श्रवणमात्रात् तसिद्धिरनादिवासनाया बलवत्त्वात् ३ बहुभृत्यवद्वा प्रत्येकस् ४ प्रकृतिवास्तवे च पुरुषस्याध्याससिद्धिः ५ कार्यतस्तत्सिद्धेः६ चेतनोद्देशानियमः कण्टकमोक्षवत् ७ अन्ययोगेऽपि तत्सिद्धिर्नाञ्जस्येनायोदाहवत् ८ रागविरागयोर्योगः सृष्टिः ९ महदादिक्रमेण पंचभूतानाम् १० आत्मार्थत्वात् सृष्टेनैषामात्मार्थ आरम्भः ११ दिकालावाकाशादिभ्यः १२ अध्यवसायो बुद्धिः १३ तत्कार्य धर्मादि १४ महदुपरागाद्विपरीतम् १५ अभिमानोऽहङ्कारः । १६ एकादशपंचतन्मात्रं यत्कार्यम् १७ सात्त्विकमेकादशकं प्रवर्तते वैकृतादहङ्कारात् १८ कर्मेन्द्रियबुद्धीन्द्रियैरान्तरमेकादशकम् १९ आहङ्कारिकत्वश्रुतेन भौतिकानि २० १. विमोक्षार्थ. २. तसिद्धिः. ३. न वाड्मात्रासिद्धिर.. ४. अनादिवास- नापटुत्वात. ५. प्रथमान्तः पाठः, ६, रागविरागयोगः सृष्टेः. ७. च सहितः पाठः, पञ्चस्थाने च वा. ८.मात्मायं. ९. धर्मादिः. १०. एकादशं. ११. तत्कायं. १२. अहङ्कारिकत्वं.

·F18]
सांख्य सूत्रामि।
११
देवतालयश्रुति रम्भकस्य २१
तदुत्पत्तिश्रुतेर्विनाशदर्शनाच २२
अतीन्द्रियमिन्द्रियं भ्रान्तानामधिष्ठाने २३
शक्तिभेदेऽपि भेदसिद्धौ नैकत्वम् २४
न कल्पनाविरोधः प्रमाणदृष्टस्य २५
उभयात्मकं मनः २६
गुणपरिणामभेदान्नानात्वमवस्थावत् २७
रूपादिरसमलान्त उभयोः २८
द्रष्टुत्वादिरात्मनः करणत्वमिन्द्रियाणाम् २९
त्रयाणां स्वालक्षण्यम् ३०
सामान्यकरणवृत्तिः प्राणाद्या वायवः पञ्च ३१
क्रमशोऽक्रमशश्चेन्द्रियवृत्तिः ३२
वृत्तयः पञ्चतय्यः क्लिष्टाक्लिष्टाः ३३
तन्निवृत्तावुपशान्तोपरांग: स्वस्थः ३४
कुसुमवच्च मणिः ३५
पुरुषार्थ करणाद्भवोऽप्यदृष्टोल्लामात् ३६
धेनुवद्वत्साय ३७
करणं त्रयोदशविधमवान्तरभंदात् ३८
इन्द्रियेपु साँधकतमत्वगुणयोगात् कुठारवत् ३९
१. श्रुतेः. २. तदुत्पत्तिः श्रूयते. ३. 'इन्द्रियं' रहितः. ४. "धिष्ठानं.
"५. शनिभेदमिद्धौ. ६. उभयात्मकं च मनः. ७. वर्गान्त. ८. 'रात्मनां.
९. सूत्रान्ते 'महदहङ्कारमनसां; स्वलक्षण्यं वा. १०. सामान्या. ११. 'मामा-
न्यकरणवृत्तिः' इत्येतावदेव सूत्रं. १२. वृत्तयः. १३. सूत्रान्ते 'प्रमाणवि-
पर्ययविकल्पनिद्रास्मृतयः'; च वा. १४. वुपशान्तोपलेशन
त्रयोदशम'; बाह्यान्तरभेदात्. १६. साधकतमत्वं; गुण शकि
s.s.5

·१२
सांख्यसूत्राणि
[अ. २ सू. ४.-
द्वयोः प्रधानं मनो लोकवद् भृत्यवर्गेषु ४०
अव्यभिचारोत् ४१
तथाऽशेषसंस्काराधारत्वान् ४२
स्मृत्यानुमानाञ्च ४३
सम्भवेन्न स्वतः ४४
आपेक्षिको गुणप्रधानभावः क्रियाविशेषात् ४५
तत्कार्जितत्वात् तदर्थमभिचेष्टा लोकवत् ४६
समानकर्मयोगे बुद्धेः प्राधान्यं लोकवल्लोकवत् ४७
इति द्वितीयोऽध्यायः।
अथ तृतीयोऽध्यायः
अविशेषाद्विशेषारम्भः १
तस्माच्छरीरस्य २
तद्वीजासंसृतिः ३
आ विवेकाच प्रवर्तनमाविशेषाणाम् ४
उपभोगादितरस्य ५
संप्रति परिमुक्तो द्वाभ्याम् ६
मातापितृ स्थूलं प्रायश इतरन्न तथा ७
पूर्वोत्पत्तेस्तत्कार्यत्वं भोगादेकस्य नेतरस्य ८
सप्रदशैकं लिङ्गम् ९
व्यक्तिभेदः कर्मविशेषात् १०
तदेधिष्ठानाश्रये देहे तद्वादात् तद्वादः ११
१, बुद्धिः. २. अन्यभिचारी. ३. यथा. ४. गुणप्रवाहभावः. ५.
अपि
चेष्टा. ६. 'लोकवत् ' इत्यस्य आनंडितत्वं. ७. त्यक्तमिदं सूत्रं. ८. इदं च
स्यक्तं. ९. अविवेकाच. १०. इदमपि व्यक्तं; यदुपभोगा. ११. परिप्वक्तो.
१२. तदधिष्ठाना-श्रयदेहे.

·.अ. ३२. ३२]
सांख्यसूत्राणि।
न स्वातन्त्र्यात् तहते छायावञ्चित्रक्च १२
मूर्तत्वेऽपि नै सङ्घातयोगात् तरणिवत् १३
अणुपरिमाणं तस्कृतिश्रुते: १४
तदन्नमयत्वश्रुतेश्च १५
पुरुषार्थ संसृतिर्लिङ्गानां सूपकारवद्राज्ञ: १६
पाश्चभौतिको देहः १७
चातुौतिकमित्येके १८
ऐकभौतिकमित्यपरे १९
न सांसिद्धिकं चैतन्यं प्रत्येकादृष्टेः २०
प्रपञ्चमरणाद्यभावश्च २१
मदशक्तिवचेत् प्रत्येकपरिदृष्टे सांहत्ये तदुद्भवः २२
ज्ञानान्मुक्ति : ०३
बन्धो विपर्ययात् २४
नियतकारणत्वान्न समुच्चयविकल्पो २५
स्वपजागराभ्यामिव मायिकाभ्यां नोभयोर्मुक्ति : पुरुषस्य २६
इतरस्यापि नात्यन्तिकम् २७
सङ्कल्पितेऽप्येवम् २८
भावनोपचयाच्छुद्धस्ये सर्व प्रकृतिवन २९
रागोपहतिया॑नम् ३०
वृत्तिनिरोधात् तत्सिद्धिः ३१
धारणासनम्वकर्मणा तसिद्धिः ३२
१. 'न संगात् योगात', 'न संघातः योगात्' २. तद्दतिश्रुतेः. ३. च
रहितः, ४. संमृतिलिङ्गानां' 'प्रवृत्तिलिङ्गानां' वा.
६. मित्यन्ये. ७. अपरः; 'कमपरे. ८. प्रत्येकाले
१०. चैतत्. ११. सौक्ष्म्यात्साहत्ये. १२.नियतकारणों
इति विशेषः. १४. नात्यन्तिकत्वम्' १५. बुद्धस्वाथ
५. "कारवद्वा.

·२४
साख्वसूत्राणि
[अ.३ सू. ३३-
निरोधश्छर्दिविधारणाभ्याम् ३३ :'
स्थिरमुखमासनम् ३४
स्वकर्मस्वाश्रमविहितकर्मानुष्ठानम् ३५
वैराग्यादभ्यासाच ३६
विपर्ययभेदाः पञ्च ३७
अशक्तिरष्टाविंशतिधा तु ३८
तुष्टिर्नवधा ३९
सिद्धिरष्टधा ४०
अवान्तरभेदाः पूर्ववत् ४१
एवमितरस्याः ४२
आध्यात्मिकादिभेदानवधा तुष्टिः ४३
उहादिभिः सिद्धिः ४४
नेतरादितरहानेन विना ४५
देवादिप्रभेदा ४६
आब्रह्मस्तम्भपर्यन्तं तत्कृते सृष्टिगविवेकान ४७
ऊवं सत्त्वविशाला ४८
तमोविशाला
मूलतः ४९
मध्ये रजोविशाला ५०
कर्मवैचित्र्यात् प्रधानचेष्टा गर्भदासवत् ५१
आवृत्तिस्तत्राप्युत्तरोत्तरयोनियोगाद्धेयः ५२
समान जरामरणादिजं दुःखम् ५३
न कारणलयात् कृतकृत्यता मनवदुत्त्थानात् ५४
१. अग्रिमसूत्रादनन्तरमपि पाठः. २. विहितं. ३. 'तु' रहितः.
१. भेदात्. ५. 'अष्टधा' इति अधिकं. ६. देवादिप्रभेदाः, ७. तत्कृता
सृष्टिः ८. सत्य. ९. समान; सर्वत्र. १०. स्नानवद.

·-७४.]
सांख्यसूत्राणि ।
अकार्यत्वेऽपि तद्योग: पारवश्यात् ५५
स हि सर्ववित् सर्वकर्ता ५६
ईदृशेश्वरसिद्धिः सिद्धा ५७
प्रधानसृष्टिः परार्थं स्वतोप्यभोक्तृत्वादुष्ट्रकुङ्कुमवहनवन् ५८
अचेतनत्वेऽपि क्षीरवञ्चेष्टितं प्रधानस्य ५९
कर्मवद्दष्टेवा कालादेः ६०
स्वभावाचेष्टितमनभिसन्धानाद भृत्यवत् ६१
कर्माकृष्टवानादितः ६२
विविक्तबोधान् सृष्टिनिवृत्तिः प्रधानस्य सूदवत् पाके ६३
इतर इतरवन तद्दोषात् ६४
द्वयोरेकतरस्य वौदासीन्यमपवर्गः ६५
अन्यसृष्टयुपरागेऽपि न विरज्यंते प्रबुद्धरज्जुतत्त्वस्येवोरगः ६६
कर्मनिमित्तयोगाच्च ६७
नैरपेक्ष्येऽपि प्रकृत्युपकारेऽ' विवेको निमित्तम् ६८
नर्तकीवत प्रवृत्तस्यापि" निवृत्तिश्चारितार्थ्यात् ६९
दोषबोधेऽपि नोपसर्पणं प्रधानस्य कुलवधूवन् ७०
नैकान्ततो बन्धमोक्षौ पुरुषस्याविवेकाहते ७१
प्रकृतेराञ्जम्यान् संसङ्गत्वान् पशुवन् ७२
रूपैः सप्तमिरात्मानं बध्नाति प्रधान कोशकारवद्विमोचयत्येकरूपेण ७३
निमित्तत्वमविवेकस्य न दृष्टहानिः ७४
१. उष्ट्रकुङ्कुमवत्. २. कर्मकरकृष्टं वा; कर्मकरकृतवद्वा. ३. वायना
४. इतरज्जहाति; इतरत्. ५. द्वयोरितरस्य ६. वाप्यौदासीन्यं. ७.' तत्वस्ये-
वोपरागः' च परिवर्तितं; "स्यै ,अन्यसृष्टयुपरागान. ८. विरमते अ०, 'निवर्ततेऽ
९. नैरपेक्षे. १०. प्य'. ११. प्रवर्तकस्यापि. १२
विवेकारते. १४. संसर्गत्वात्. १-.कोष. ..
रूपेण. १८. कस्येति. १८. दृष्टान्तहानि:,

·सांख्यसूत्राणि। [अ. ३ सू. ७५- तत्त्वाभ्यासान्नेति नेतीति त्यागाद् विवेकसिद्धिः ७५ अधिकारिप्रभेदान्न नियमः ७६ बाधितानुवृत्त्या मध्यविवेकतोऽप्युपभोगः ७७ जीवन्मुक्तच ७८ उपदेश्योपदेष्ट्रत्वान् तसिद्धिः ७९ श्रुतिश्च ८० इतरथान्धपरंपरा ८१ चक्रभ्रमणवद् धृतशरीरः ८२ संस्कारलेशतस्तत्सिद्धिः ८३ विवेकानिःशेषदुःखनिवृत्तौ कृतकृत्यता नेतरानेतरात् ८४ इति तृतीयोऽध्यायः। २ अथ चतुर्थोऽध्यायः राजपुत्रवत् तत्त्वोपदेशोत् १ पिशाचवदन्यार्थोपदेशेऽपि" आवृत्तिरसकृदुपदेशात् ३ पितापुत्रवदुभयोईष्टत्वात् ४ श्येनवेत् सुखदुःखी त्यागवियोगाभ्याम् ५ अहिनिवयिनीवत् ६ छिन्त्रहस्तवद्वा ७ असाधनानुचिन्तनं बन्धाय भरतवत् ८ १. अन्तिमेतिशब्दवर्ज. २. अधिकार'. ३. बाधितानुवृत्तेः. ४. मध्यविवे- कता. ५. अपभोगः ६. 'च' रहितः. ७. उपदेशो . ८. 'पदेशत्वात्. ९. हत- शरीर:. १०. संस्कारलोपस्त'; संस्कारालेशतस्त'. ११. कृतकृत्यो. १२ राज- पुत्रस्तत्वो . १३. उपदेशोऽपि. १४. श्वानवत्. १५. श्येनवरसुखदुःखभो- गाभ्यां. १६. निल्वयनीवत्, निल्वियिनीवत्. १७. चिन्तनवधाय बन्धवत.

·अ. ४ सू. २८]
सांख्यसूत्राणि।
.
बहुभिर्योगे विरोधो रोगादिभिः कुमारीशङ्खचत् ९
द्वाभ्यामपि तथैवे १०
निराशः सुखी पिङ्गलावत् ११
अनारंभेऽपि परगृहे सुखी सर्पवत् १२
बहुशास्त्रगुरुपासनेऽपि सारादानं षट्पदवत् १३
इषुकारवन्नैकचित्तस्य समाधिहानिः १४
कृतनियमलङ्घनादानर्थक्यं लोकवन् १५
तद्विस्मरणेऽपि भेकीवत् १६
नोपदेशश्रवणेऽपि कृतकृत्यता परामर्शाहते विरोचनवत् १७
दृष्टस्तयोरिन्द्रस्य १८
प्रणतिब्रह्मचर्योपसर्पणानि कृत्वां सिद्धिर्बहुकालान् तद्वत् १९
न कालनियमो वामदेववत् २०
अध्यस्तरूपोपामनात् पारंपर्येण यज्ञोपासकानामिव २१
इतरलाभप्यावृत्तिः"पश्चाग्नियोगतो जन्मश्रुतेः २२
विरक्तस्य हेयहानमुपादेयोपादानं हंसक्षीरवत् २३
लब्धातिशययोगाद्वा तद्वत् २४
ने कामचारित्वं रागोपहते शुकवत् २५
गुणयोगाद् बद्धः शुकवत् २६
न भोगाद्रागशान्तिर्मुनिवत् २७
दोषदर्शनादुभयोः २८
१. 'र्योगविगेधो. २. कुमारीकङ्कगशजवत्. ३. सूत्रान्ते चकारोऽपि.
४. पिङ्गलादिवत. ५. अपिस्त्यक्तः. ६. व्रतनियमोलधनात, वृत; वृत्त
क. अपिस्त्यक्तः. ८. नोपदेशे. ९. कृतकृत्यः. १०. सूर्पणान्कृत्वा. ".
ज्यावृत्तिः. १२. लब्धातिशये योगाद्वा; वा रहिता,
इत्युक्वा पठितं. १४. कामविचारित्वं कामिचासिक

·१८
सांख्यसूत्राणि।
[अ.'४ सू. २९-
न मलिनचेतस्युपदेशबीजप्ररोहोऽजवत् २९
नाभासमात्रमपि मलिनदर्पणवत् ३०
न तज्जस्यापि तद्रूपता पङ्कजवत् ३१
न भूतियोगेऽपि कृतकृत्यतोपास्यसिद्धिवदुपास्ससिद्धिवन् ३२
इति चतुर्थोऽध्यायः
अथ पञ्चमोऽध्यायः
मङ्गलाचरणं शिष्टाचारात् फलदर्शनाच्छ्रुतितश्चेति १
नेश्वराधिष्ठिते फलनिष्पत्तिः कर्मणा तसिद्धेः २
स्वोपकारादधिष्ठानं लोकवत् ३
लौकिकेश्वरवदितरथा ४
पारिभाषिको वा ५
न रागाहते तत्सिद्धिः प्रतिनियतकारणत्वात् ६
तद्योगेऽपि न नित्यमुक्तः ७
प्रधानशाक्तयोगाचेत् सङ्गापत्तिः ८
सत्तामात्राञ्चेत् सर्वैश्वर्यम् ५
प्रमाणाभावान्न तसिद्धिः १०
सम्बन्धाभावान्नानुमानम् ११
श्रुतिरपि प्रधानकार्यत्वस्य १२
नाविद्याशक्तियोगो निःसङ्गस्य १३
तद्योगे तत्सिद्धावन्योन्याश्रयत्वम् १४
न बीजाङ्कुरवत् सादिसंसारश्रुतेः १५
१. मलिने. २. तजन्यस्यापि. ३. पङ्कजादिवत्. ४. अपि रहितः. ५
'भूतितश्चेति. ६. धिष्ठितैव; धिष्ठित; धिष्ठितः. ७. फलसंपत्तिः, संपत्:
सदाफलसंपत्तिः ८. जगत्सिद्धिः, ९. कार्यस्य. १०. सादिश्रुतेः.

·#.५ सू. ३६]
सांख्यसूत्राणि।
१५
:
विद्यातोऽन्यत्वे ब्रह्मबाधप्रसंगः १६
अबाधे नैष्फल्यम् १७
विद्याबाध्यत्वे जगतोऽप्येवम् १८
तद्रपत्वे सादित्वम् १९
न धर्मापलापः प्रकृतिकार्यवैचिच्यान २०
श्रुतिलिङ्गादिभिस्तत्सिद्धिः २१
न नियमः प्रमाणान्तरावकाशात् २२
उभयत्राप्येवम् २३
अर्थान् सिद्धिश्चेत् समानमुभयोः २४
अन्तःकरणधर्मत्वं धर्मादीनाम् २५
गुणादीनाश्च नात्यन्तबाध : २६
पञ्चावयवयोगान् सुखसंवित्ति : २७
न सकृद्रहणात् मम्बन्धसिद्धि:०८
नियतधर्मसाहित्यमुभयोरेकतरस्य वाव्याप्तिः २९
न तत्त्वान्तरं वस्तुकल्पनाप्रमक्ते: ३०
निजशक्त्युद्भवमित्याचार्याः ३१
आधेयशक्तियोगे इति पञ्चशिखः ३२
न स्वरूपशक्तिनियमः पुनर्वादप्रसक्ते: ३३
विशेषणानर्थक्यप्रसक्तेः ३४
पल्लवादिष्वनुपपत्तेश्च ३५
आधेयशक्तिसिद्धी निजशक्तियोगः समानन्यायात् ३६
१. ब्रह्मबाधप्रसक्तेः. २. नैफल्यं नैकल्यं. ३. च रहितः, ४. संयोगात् .
५. सुखादिसंवित्तिः ६. सूत्रान्ते ' स्वप्रतीतिविरोधात इत्यापि निवेशनीवं
७. नियतं. ८ साहित्य उभयो. ९. योग इति.
११. चकारो रहयितः.

·सांख्यसूत्राणि। [अ. ५ . ३७- वाच्यवाचकभावः सम्बन्धः शब्दार्थयोः ३७ त्रिभिः सम्बन्धसिद्धिः ३८ न कार्ये नियम उभयथा दर्शनात् ३९ लोके व्युत्पन्नस्य वेदार्थप्रतीति: ४० न त्रिभिरपौरुषेयत्वाद्वेदस्य तदर्थस्याऽप्यतीन्द्रियत्वात् ४१ न यज्ञादेः स्वरूपतो धर्मत्वं वैशिष्टया ४२ निजशक्तिर्युत्पत्या व्यवच्छिद्यते ४३ योग्यायोग्येषु प्रतीतिजनकत्वात् तात्सद्धिः" ४४ न नित्यत्वं वेदानां कार्यत्वश्रुतेः” ४५ न पौरुषेयत्वं तत्कर्तुः पुरुषस्याभावात् ४६ ने मुक्तामुक्तयोरयोग्यत्वात् ४७ नापौरुषेयत्वान्नित्यत्वमङ्कुरादिवत् ४८ तेषामपि तद्योगे दृष्ट्वाधादिप्रसक्तिः ४९ यस्मिन्नदृष्टेऽपि कृतबुद्धिरुपजायते तत् पौरुषेयम् ५० निजशक्त्यभिव्यक्तेः स्वतः प्रामाण्यम् ५१ नासतः ख्यानं नृशृङ्गवन् ५२ न सतो बाधदर्शनात् ५३ नानिर्वचनीयस्य तदभावात् ५४ नान्यथाख्यातिः स्ववचोव्याघातान् ५५ सदसत्ख्यातिर्बाधाबांधात् ५६ प्रतीत्यप्रतीतिभ्यां न स्फोटात्मकः शब्दः ५७ १. वाच्यवाचकसम्बन्धः; शब्दाथयोः' इति तु न विवक्षितं. ३. सम्बन्धसिद्धेः. ४. लोकव्यु. ५, कार्यप्रतीतेः. ६. प्रतीतेः.७. अपिस्त्यक्तः. १. वैशेज्यात् . ९. विच्छिद्यते. १०. तत्सिद्धेः. ११. कार्यश्रुतेः. १२. 'न' वर्जितः १३. निजशक्याभिव्यक्त. १४. सदसल्यातिबाधावाधात् सदस- याप्ति. १५. बाधाबाधाभ्यां.

·१५६.]
सांख्यसूत्राणि।
न शब्दनित्यत्वं कार्यताप्रतीते: ५८
पूर्वसिद्धसत्त्वस्वाभिव्यक्तिीपेनेव घटस्य ५९
सत्कार्यसिद्धान्तश्चेत् सिद्धसाधनम् ६०
नाद्वैतमात्मनो लिङ्गात् तद्भेदप्रतीते : ६१
नानात्मनापि प्रत्यक्षबाधात् ६२
नोभाभ्यां तेनैव ६३
अन्यपरत्वमविवेकानां तत्र ६४
नोत्माविद्या नोभयं जगदुपादानकारणं निःसङ्गत्वात् ६५
नैकस्यानन्दचिद्रूपत्वे द्वयोर्मेदान् ६६
दुःखनिवृत्तेौणः ६७
विमुक्तिप्रशंसा मन्दानाम् ६८
न व्यापकत्वं मनसः करणत्वादिन्द्रियत्वाद्वा वास्यादिवञ्चक्षुरादिवत् ६९
सक्रियत्वाद्गतिश्रुतेः ७०
न निर्भागत्वं तद्योगाद् घटवत् ७१
प्रकृतिपुरुषयोरन्यत् सर्वमनित्यम् ७२
न भागलाभो भोगिनो निर्भागत्वश्रुतेः" ७३
नानन्दाभिव्यक्तिर्मुक्तिर्निर्धर्मत्वात् ७४
न विशेषगुणच्छित्तिस्तद्वन् ७५
न विशेषगतिनिष्क्रियस्य ७६
१. 'सिद्ध ' वर्जमपि पाठः. ०. व्यक्तिः प्रदीपेनेव, ३. नाद्वैतमात्मना
४. लिलाच भेदप्रतीतेः.५. नात्मा नाविद्या; नात्मानाथविद्या; नात्मनाविद्या.
६. कुत्रचित् त्यतं. ७. कुत्रचित् त्यक्तोऽयमंशः कुत्रचित् तदाशुसंचारि-
स्वात्' परितोऽयम्. ८. सूत्रान्ते चकारोऽपि निवेशितः. ९. घटादिवत्,
१०. भागिनो वा पाठः ११. निर्भागित्व. १२. निर्भमाझा पाव १३.
गुणोच्छित्तिर्वा पाठः. १४. निष्क्रियस्येति नापेक्षितमपि

·२२
सांख्यसूत्राणि । [अ. ५ सू, ७७-
नाकारोपरागोच्छित्तिः क्षणिकत्त्वादिदोषात् ७७
न सर्वोच्छित्तिरपुरुषार्थत्वादिदोषात् ७८
एवं शून्यमपि ७९
संयोगाश्च वियोगान्ता इति न देशादिलामोऽपि ८०
नै भागियोगो भागस्य ८१
नाणिमादियोगोऽप्यवश्यंभावित्वात्तदुच्छित्तेरितरयोगवत् ८२
नेन्द्रादिपदयोगोऽपि तद्वत् ८३
न भूताप्रकृतित्वमिन्द्रियाणार्माहङ्कारिकत्वश्रुतेः ८४
न षटपदार्थनियमस्तबोधान्मुक्तिः ८५
षोडशादिष्वप्येवम् ८६
नाणुनित्यता तत्कार्यश्रुतेः ८७
न निर्भागत्वं कार्यत्वात् ८८
न रूपनिबन्धनान् प्रत्यक्षनियमः ८९
न परिमाणचातुर्विध्यं द्वाभ्यां तद्योगात् ९०
अनित्यत्वेऽपि स्थिरतायोगात् प्रत्यभिज्ञानं सामान्यस्य ९१
न तदपलापस्तस्मात् ९२
नान्यनिवृत्तिरूपत्वं भावप्रतीते: ९३
न तत्त्वान्तरं सादृश्यं प्रत्यक्षोपलब्धेः ९४
निशक्त्यभिव्यक्तिर्वा वैशिष्ठयात्तदुपलब्धेः ९५
न संज्ञासंज्ञिसम्बन्धोऽपि ९६
१. पुरुषार्थत्वादि २. इति वर्जितः ३. न भागयोगोऽभागस्य १. भावि-
तत्वात् . ५. त्ति ६. रितरवियोगवत्. ७. भूतप्रकृतित्वं. ८. अहंकारत्व';
अहंकारिकत्व'; अहंकारकत्व'. ९. मुक्तिश्चेतिपाठः, १०. प्राचीनपुस्तके
नोवृतम् ; न तनिर्भाग त्वं. ११. रूपनिबन्धनः १२. प्रत्यक्षत्वनियमः;
प्रत्यक्षस्वमिति नियमः
१३. परिमाणे.
१४. निजधर्माभिव्यक्तिः
१५. संज्ञामंजिनीः

·-- ११६] सांख्यसूत्राणि। २३ । - न सम्बन्धनित्योभयानित्यत्वात् ९७ नातः सम्बन्धो धर्मिग्राहकप्रमाणबाधात् ९८ न समवायोऽस्तिप्रमाणभावात् ९९ उभयथाप्यन्यथासिद्धेर्न प्रत्यक्षमनुमानं वा १०० नानुमेयत्वमेव क्रियाया नेदिष्ठस्य तत्तद्वतोरेवापरोक्षप्रतीतेः १०१ न पाश्चभौतिकं शरीरं बहूनामुपादानायोगात् १०२ न स्थूलमिति नियमोऽतिवाहिकस्यापि विद्यमानत्वात् १०३ नाप्राप्तप्रकाशकत्वमिन्द्रियाणामप्राप्तः सर्वप्राप्तेर्वा १०४ न तेजोऽपसर्पणात्तैजसं चक्षुर्वृत्तितस्तत्सिद्धेः १०५ प्राप्तार्थप्रकाशलिङ्गात् वृत्तिसिद्धिः १०६ भागगुणाभ्यां तत्त्वान्तरं वृत्तिः सम्बन्धार्थं सर्पतीति १०७ न द्रव्येनियमस्तद्योगात् १०८ ने देशभेदेऽप्यन्योपादानताऽस्मदादिवन्नियमः १०९ निमित्तव्यपदेशात्तव्यपदेशः ११० उष्मजाण्डजजरायुजोदिजसाङ्कल्पिकसांसिद्धिकं चेति न नियमः १११ सर्वेषु पृथिव्युपादानमसाधारण्यात् तद्व्यपदेशः पूर्ववत् ११२ न देहारंभकस्य प्राणत्वमिन्द्रियशक्तितस्तैत्सिद्धेः ११३ भोक्तरधिष्ठानाद्भोगायतननिर्माणमन्यथा पूतिभावप्रसंगान ११४ भृत्यद्वारी स्वाम्यधिष्ठिति कान्तोन् ११५ समाधिसुपुप्तिमोक्षेपु ब्रह्मरूपता ११६ १.नाजः.२. मानबाधात्. ३. तत्राप्यस्ति. ४. उभयत्राग्यन्यथेति. ५. नर- हितः, सिद्धिर्न ६. प्रत्यक्षानुमाने ७. both एव ormitted. ८. सर्पयतीति ९. द्रव्ये. १०.देशभेदोऽपि ११. स्मदादाविव नियमः. १२. जरायुज उद्विज' १३. संकल्पज साङ्कल्पिकं, १५. नकारो नापेक्षितः. १५. तन्सिद्धो वा पाठः. १६.भूतिभावप्रसक्तः सिक्ति, प्रसंगः. १८. 'भृत्यवद धिष्टानं' इत्येव सत्रं. १९. मृत्यवहारकादिति वा पाठः. २१. सुषुप्त' ·सांख्यसूत्राणि [अ. ५ सू. १३७ द्वयोः सबीजमन्यत्र तद्धतिः ११७ द्वयोरिव त्रयस्यापि वान तु द्वौ ११८ वासनयानर्थख्यापनं दोषयोगेऽपि न निमित्तस्य प्रधानबाधकत्वम् ११९ एकः संसारः क्रियानिर्वतको न तु प्रतिक्रिय संस्कारमेदा बहुकल्पना- प्रसक्ते: १२०० नं वाह्यबुद्भिनियमो वृक्षगुल्मलतौषधिवनस्पतितृणवीरुधादीनामपि भोक्तृमोगमयतनत्वं पूर्ववत् १२१ स्मृतेश्च १२२. . न देहमात्रतः कर्माधिकारित्वं वैशिष्टयश्रुतेः १२३ त्रिधा त्रयाणां व्यवस्था कर्मदेहोपभोगदेहोभयदेहाः १२४ न किञ्चिदप्यनुशंयितः १२५ न बुद्धयादिनित्यत्वमाश्रयविशेषेऽपि वन्हिवत् १२६ आश्रयासिद्धेश्च १२७ योगसिद्धयोऽप्यौषधादिसिद्धिवन्नापलपनीयाः १२८ न भूतचैतन्यं प्रत्येकादृष्टेः" सांहत्ये ऽपि च सांहत्येऽपि च १२९ इति पञ्चमोऽध्यायः अथ षष्ठोऽध्यायः अस्त्यात्मा नास्तित्वसाधनाभावात् १ देहादिव्यतिरिक्तोऽसौ वैचित्र्यान २ १. द्वयोः सबीजत्वमन्यस्य तद्धानिः. २. अपि रहितः ३. 'तु' रहितः पाठोऽपि. ४. वासनया न स्वार्थख्यापनं न वासनाया आनर्थक्यख्या- पनं ५. निवर्तको; 'नुवर्तको ६. संस्कारभेदा रहितः. ७. ७. नेत्यारभ्य नियमान्तं वृक्षेत्यारभ्य पूर्ववदित्यन्तं च योगविभागात् सूत्रद्वयं कल्पितं. ८. वीरुदादीनां वा पाठः ९. "नुशायिनः १०. 'च' रहितः पाठः क्वापि ११. कानुपलब्धेः १२. स्वसाहत्ये १३. अपि रहितः १४. नास्तित्वे. १५. ऽसौ रहितः. .

·• 21 अ. ६ सू. २२] सांख्यसूत्राणि । २५. षष्ठीव्यपदेशादपि ३ न शिलापुत्रवद्धर्मिग्राहकमानबाधात् ४ अत्यन्तदुःखनिवृत्त्या कृतकृत्यता ५ यथा दुःखात् क्लेशेः पुरुषस्य न तथा सुखादभिलाषः ६ कुत्रापि कोऽपि सुखीति ७ तदपि दुःखशबलमिति दुःखपक्षे निःक्षिपन्ते विवेचकाः ८ सुखलाभाभावादपुरुषार्थत्वमिति चेत् न वैविध्यान्' ९ निर्गुणत्वमात्मनोऽसङ्गत्वादिश्रुतेः १० परधर्मत्वेऽपि तत्सिद्धिविवेकात् ११ अनादिरविवेकोऽन्यथा दोषद्वयप्रसक्तेः १२ ने नित्यः स्यादात्मवदन्यथानुच्छित्तिः° १३ प्रतिनियतकारणनाश्यत्वमस्य ध्वान्तवत् १४ अत्रापि प्रतिनियमोऽन्वयव्यतिरेकात् १५ प्रकारान्तरासंभवादविवेक एवं बन्धः १६ न मुक्तस्य पुनर्बन्धयोगोऽप्यनावृत्तिश्रुतेः १७ अपुरुषार्थत्वमन्यथा १८ अविशेषापत्तिरुभयोः १९ मुक्तिरन्तरायध्वस्तेर्न पर: २० तत्राप्यविरोधः २१ अधिकारित्रैविध्यान्न नियमः २२ १. शिलापुत्रकव. २. द्वेषः.३. 'नकुत्रापि इत्यादिः. ४.निक्षिपन्ते; निक्षि- पन्नि. ५. पुरुषार्थमिति. ६. 'चेन्नैवं'. ७. वैचित्र्यात् . ८. असङ्गादिश्रुतेः, ऽसङ्गत्वश्रुनेः. ९. कूटस्थपरिणामि. १०. स्यादात्मवदुच्छित्तेः. ११. प्रकारान्तरा- भावाद. १२..सत्रान्त पुनर्बन्धकत्वं' इत्यपि योजितं; अन्यथापुरुषार्थत्वं; अन्यथा रहित नापरः' वा; °ध्वंसो न परः; "ध्वस्तेः पर्वपर, पर ल्यथा कौटस्थ्यहानिः'. १४

·सांख्षासूत्राणि
[अ. ६ सू. २३
दाढर्यार्थमुत्तरेषाम् २३
स्थिरसुखमासनमिति न नियमः २४
ध्यानं निर्विषयं मनः २५
उभयथाऽप्यविशेषश्वेनैवमुपरागनिरोधाद्विशेषः २६
निःसङ्गेऽप्युपरागोऽविवेकात् २७
जपास्फटिकयोरिव नोपरागः कित्त्वभिमानः २८
ध्यानधारणाभ्यासवैराग्यादिभिस्तनिरोधः २९
लयविक्षेपयोावृत्त्येत्याचार्याः ३०
न स्थाननियमश्चित्तप्रसादात् ३१
प्रकृतेराद्योपादानतान्येषां कार्यत्वश्नुतेः ३२
नित्यत्वेऽपि नात्मनो योगत्वाभावात् ३३
श्रुतिीविरोधान्न कुतर्कापसदस्पात्मलाभः ३४
पारम्पर्येऽपि प्रधानानुवृत्तिरणुवत् ३५
सर्वत्र कार्यदर्शनाद्विभुत्त्वम् ३६
गतियोगेऽप्याद्यकारणताहानिरणुवत् ३७
प्रसिद्धाधिक्यं प्रधानस्य न नियमः ३८
सत्त्वादीनामतद्धर्मत्वं तद्रूपत्वात् ३९
अनुपभोगेऽपि पुमर्थ मृतिः प्रधानस्योष्ट्रकुङ्कुमवहनवन् ४०
कर्मवैचित्र्यान् सृष्टिवैचित्र्यम् ४१
साम्यवैषम्याभ्यां कार्यद्वयम् ४२
विमुक्तबोधान्न सृष्टिः प्रधानस्य लोकवत् ४३
नान्योपसर्पणेऽपि मुक्तोपभोगों निमित्ताभावात् ४४
१. स्थिरं.
२. अप्यविशे. ३. विरोधात्. ४. जवास्फटिकयोरिव.
५. चित्तप्रसादाभावात् . ६. अयोग्यत्वाभावात् योग्यत्वाभावात् चेति
पाठद्वयं. ७. आस्मविरोधान. 6. विमुको.° ५. विमुक्तभोगो भवति.

·-४५] सांख्यसूत्राणि। २७ पुरुषबहुत्वं व्यवस्थातः ४५ उपाधिश्चेत् तसिद्धौ पुनद्वैतम् ४६ द्वाभ्यामपि प्रमाणविरोधः ४७ द्वाभ्यामप्यविरोधान्न पूर्वमुत्तरं च साधकाभावात् ४८ प्रकाशतस्तसिद्धौ कर्मकर्तृविरोधः ४९ जव्यावृत्तों जडं प्रकाशयति चिद्रूपः ५० न श्रुतिविरोधो रागिणां वैराग्याय तत्सिद्धेः ५१ जगत्सत्यत्वमदुष्प्रकारणजन्यत्वाद् बाधकाभावात् ५२ प्रकारान्तरासम्भवान् संदुत्त्पत्ति: ५३ अहङ्कारः कर्ता न पुरुषः ५४ चिदवसाना मुक्तिस्तत्कार्जितत्वात् ५५ चन्द्रादिलोकेऽप्यावृत्तिर्निमित्तसद्भावात् ५६ लोकस्य नोपदेशात् सिद्भिः पूर्ववत् ५७ 'पारम्पर्येण तत्सिद्धौ विमुक्तिश्रुति: ५८ गतिश्रुतेश्च व्यापकत्वेऽप्युपाधियोगाद्भोगदेशकाललाभो व्योमवत् ५९ अनधिष्ठितस्य पूतिभावप्रसंगान्न तसिद्धिः ६० अष्टद्वारा चेदसम्बद्धस्य तदसम्भवाज्जलादिवदकुरे ६१ निर्गुणत्वात् तदसंभवादहङ्कारधर्मा ह्येते ६२ विशिष्ठम्य जीवत्वमन्वयव्यतिरेकात् ६३ अहङ्कारकर्बधीना कार्यसिद्भिर्नेश्वराधीना प्रमाणाभावात् ६४ अदृष्टोदभूतिवन्' ममानत्वम् ६५ १. उपाधिसिद्धिश्चेत्तस्मिद्धौ. २. द्वाभ्यामयं. ३. कर्मकर्तृत्वविरोधः कर्तृकर्म- विरोधः ४. . व्यावृत्ती ५. तदुत्पत्तिः ६. निमित्तसंभवात् ७. तसिद्धिः ८.विमुकति भोगदेशकालादिलाभो १०. पृतिभावयोगात् ११. "अंदृष्टोभूने

·२८
सांख्यसूत्राणि।
[अ॰ ६ सू. ६६
महतोऽन्यत् ६६
कर्मनिमित्तः प्रकृतेः स्वस्वामिभावोऽप्यनादिर्बीजाकुरवत् ६७
'अविवेकनिमित्तो वा पञ्चशिखः ६८
लिङ्गशरीरनिमित्तक इति सनन्दनाचार्यः ६९
यद्वातद्वा तदुच्छित्तिः पुरुषार्थस्तदुच्छित्तिः पुरुषार्थः ७० ।। ॐ॥
इति शम्
इति सांख्यसूत्राणि समाप्तानि ।
१.
अविवेकनिमित्त
अविवेकनिमित्तको' वा

·श्रीमदीश्वरकृष्णप्रीताः
सांख्यकारिकाः
दुःखन्नयाभिघाताजिज्ञासा तदभिघातके हेती।
दृष्टे साऽपार्था चेनैकान्तात्यन्ततोऽभावात् ॥ १ ॥
दृष्टवदानुश्रविकः स विशुद्धिक्षयातिशययुकः ।
तद्विपरीतः श्रेयान् ब्यक्ताव्यक्तज्ञविज्ञानात् ॥२॥
मूलप्रकृतिरविकृतिर्महदाद्याः प्रकृतिविकृतयः सप्त।
षोडशकस्तु विकारो न प्रकृतिर्न विकृतिः पुरुषः ॥ ३ ॥
दृष्टमनुमानमाप्तवचनं च, सर्वप्रमाणसिद्धत्वात् ।
त्रिविधं प्रमाणमिष्ट, प्रमेयसिद्धिः प्रमाणादि ॥४॥
प्रतिविषयाध्यवसायो दृष्टं, त्रिविधमनुमानमाख्यातम् ।
तलिङ्गालिङ्गिापूर्वक, माप्तश्रुनिराप्तवचनं च ॥५॥
मामान्यतस्तु दृष्टादतीन्द्रियाणां प्रसिद्धिरनुमानात ।
तम्मादपि चासिद्धं परोक्षमासागमात् सिद्धम् ॥ ६ ॥
अतिदुरात् सामीप्यादिन्द्रियघातान्मनोऽनवम्थानान ।
मोक्षयाद् व्यवधानादभिभवान समानाभिहाराञ्च ॥ ७॥
मोक्षयात्तदनुपलब्धिर्नाभावात्. कार्यतस्तदुपलब्धिः ।
महदादि तच्च कार्य, प्रकृतिविरूपं सरूपं च ॥ ८॥
असदकरणादुपादानग्रहणात् , सर्वसम्भवाभावात् ।
शक्तस्य शक्यकरणात् , कारणभावाच. सत्कार्यम् ॥ ९ ॥
हेतुमदनित्यमव्यापि सक्रियमनेकमाश्रितं लिङ्गम् ।
मावयवं परतन्त्रं व्यक्तं विपरीतमव्यक्तम् ॥१०॥
त्रिगुणमविवेकि विपयः सामान्यमचेतनं प्रसवधर्मि।
व्यकं तथा प्रधानं. तद्विपरीतस्तथा च पुमान् ।।११॥
प्रीस्यप्रीतिविषादात्मकाः प्रकाशप्रवृत्तिनियमार्थाः।
न्यजननमिथुमवृत्तयश्च गुणाः ॥१२॥
मकं चलं च रजः ।
तो वृत्तिः ॥१३॥

·३०
सांख्यकारिकाः।
अविवेक्यादिः सिद्धः त्रैगुण्यासद्विपर्ययाभावात् ।
कारणगुणात्मकत्वात् कार्यस्यान्यक्तमपि सिद्धम् ॥१४॥
भेदानां परिमाणात्, समन्वयात्, शक्तितः प्रवृत्तेश्च ।
कारणकार्यविभागात् , अविभागाद्वैश्वरूप्यस्य ॥१५॥
कारणमस्त्यव्यक्तं अवर्तते त्रिगुणतः समुदयाच ।
परिणामतः सलिलवत् प्रतिप्रतिगुणाश्रयविशेषात् ।। १६ ।।
संघातपरार्थत्वात् त्रिगुणादिविपर्ययादधिष्ठानात् ।
पुरुषोऽस्ति भोकभावात् कैवल्या प्रवृत्तेश्च ॥ १७ ॥
जननमरणकरणानां प्रतिनियमादयुगपत्प्रवृत्तेश्च ।
पुरुषबहुत्वं सिद्धं त्रैगुण्यविपर्ययाचैव ॥ १८ ॥
तस्माञ्च विपर्यासात् सिद्धं साक्षित्वमस्य पुरुषस्य ।
कैवल्यं माध्यस्थ्यं द्रष्टत्वमकर्तृभावश्च ॥ १९ ॥
तस्मात्तत्संयोगादचेतनं चेतनावदिव लिङ्गम् ।
गुणकर्तृत्वे च तथा कतैव भवत्युदासीनः ॥२०॥
पुरुषस्य दर्शनार्थ कैवल्यार्थ तथा प्रधानस्य ।
पग्वन्धवदुभयोरपि संयोगस्तत्कृतः सर्गः ॥२१॥
प्रकृतेर्महान् , ततोऽहकारः तस्माद्गणश्च षोडशकः ।
तस्मादपि षोडशकात् पञ्चभ्यः पञ्च भूतानि ॥२२॥
अध्यवसायो बुद्धिधर्मो ज्ञानं विराग ऐश्वर्यम् ।
साविकमेतद्रूपं तामसमस्माद्विपर्यस्तम् ॥ २३ ॥
अभिमानोऽहङ्कारस्तस्माद्विविधः प्रवर्तते सर्गः ।
एकादशकश्च गणस्तन्मात्रः पञ्चकश्चैव ॥२४॥
सात्विक एकादशकः प्रवर्तते वैकृतादहकारात्।
सालेक
भूतादेस्तन्मात्रः स तामसः, तैजसादुभयम् ॥ २५॥
२१
बुद्धीन्द्रियाणि चक्षुःश्रोत्रधाणरसनस्पर्शनकानि ।
वाक्पाणिपादपायूपस्थान् कर्मेन्द्रियाण्याहुः ॥ २६ ॥
उभयात्मकमत्र मनः संकल्पकमिन्द्रियं च साधर्म्यात् ।
गुणपरिणामविशेषानानात्वं बाह्यभेदाच ॥ २७ ॥

·सांख्यकारिकाः।
शब्दादिषु पञ्जानामालोचनमात्रमिष्यते वृत्तिः।
वचनादानविहरणोत्सर्गानन्दाच पञ्जानाम् ॥२८॥
म्वालक्षण्यं वृत्तिस्त्रयस्य मैषा भवत्यसामान्या।
सामान्यकरणवृत्ति प्राणाद्या वायवः पञ्ज॥९॥
युगपञ्चतुष्टयस्य तु वृत्तिः क्रमशच नस्य निर्दिश ।
दृष्टं तथाऽप्यदृष्टे त्रयम्य नस्पर्विका वृत्तिः ॥ ३०॥
म्वां स्वां प्रतिपद्यन्ते परम्पराकृतहेनुकां वृत्तिम् ।
पुरुषार्थ एव हेतुन केनचित्कार्यने करणम् ॥1॥
करणं प्रयोदशविधं तदाहरणधारणप्रकाशकाम् ।
कार्य च तस्य दशधाऽऽहाय धायं प्रकाश्यं च ॥३॥
अन्तःकरणं त्रिविधं दशधा बाखं त्रयम्य विषयाव्यम् ।
माम्प्रतकालं बाह्यं त्रिकालमाभ्यन्तरं करणम् ॥३३॥
बुद्धीन्द्रियाणि तेषां पञ्च विशेषाविशेषविषयाणि ।
वाग्भवति शब्दविषया शेषाणि नु पञ्चविषयाणि ॥३१॥
मान्तःकरणा बुद्धिः सर्व विषयमवगाहते यस्मान ।
नस्मान त्रिविधं करणं हारि द्वाराणि शेषाणि ॥ ३ ॥
एने प्रदीपकल्पाः परस्परविलक्षणा गुणविशेषाः ।
कृत्स्नं पुरुषस्यार्थ प्रकाश्य बुद्धी प्रयच्छन्ति ॥ ३६॥
सर्व प्रत्युपभोगं यम्मान पुरुषम्य माधयति बुद्धिः ।
मेव च विशिष्टि पुनः प्रधानपुरुपान्तरं मूक्ष्मम् ।।३७॥
नन्मात्राण्यविशेषाः नेभ्यो भूतानि पक्ष पञ्चभ्यः ।
एते म्मृता विशेषाः शान्ता घांगश्च मृताश्च ॥३०॥
मूक्ष्मा मातापितृजाः मह प्रभुबिधा विशेपाः स्युः ।
मूक्ष्मान्तण नियता मातापितृजा निवर्तन्ते ।। ३९ ॥
पृवात्यसमम्म नियनं महनादिमुक्ष्मपर्यन्तम् ।
समरति निम्पभोग भावधियाम्मिन लिकम् ॥ ४०॥
चित्रं यथाश्रयमुन म्याबानियों यथा विना छाया।
महाद्विमाविशेषःन तिनि निराश्रयं लिसम् ॥ ४॥

·३ सांख्यकारिकाः। पुरुषार्थहेतुकमिदं निमित्तनैमित्तिकप्रसङ्गेन । प्रकृतेर्विभुत्वयोगात् नटवद्वयवतिष्ठते लिङ्गम् ॥ ४२ ॥ मासिद्धिकाच भावाः प्राकृतिका वैकृतिकाश्च धर्माद्याः । दृष्टाः करणाश्रयिणः कार्यायिणश्च कललाधाः ॥ १३ ॥ धर्मेण गमनमूध्वं गमनमधस्ताद भवत्यधर्मेण । ज्ञानेन चापवर्गो विपर्ययादिष्यते बन्धः ॥ १४ ॥ वैराग्यात् प्रकृतिलयः संसारो भवति राजसादागात् । ऐश्वर्यादविधातो विपर्ययात् तद्विपर्यासः ॥ ४५ ॥ एष प्रत्ययसगों विपर्ययाशक्तितुष्टिसिद्धथाल्यः । गुणवैषम्यविमर्हेन तस्य भेदास्तु पञ्चाशत् ॥ ४६ ॥ पञ्च विपर्ययभेदा भवन्त्यशक्तिश्च करणवैकल्यात् । अष्टाविंशति भेदाः तुष्टिर्नवधाऽष्टधा सिद्धिः ॥ ४७ ॥ भेदम्तमसोऽष्टविधो मोहस्य च, दशविधो महामोहः । तामिस्रोऽष्टादशधा, तथा भवत्यन्धतामिस्रः ॥ १८ ॥ एकादशेन्द्रियवधाः सह बुद्धिवधैरशक्तिरुद्दिष्टा । सप्तदश वधा बुद्धविपर्ययात् तुष्टिमिद्धीनाम् ॥ १९ ॥ आध्यात्मिकाश्चतस्रः प्रकृत्युपादानकालभाग्याख्याः । बाह्या विषयोपरमात् पञ्च, नव तुष्टयोऽभिहिताः ॥५०॥ ऊहः शब्दोऽध्ययनं दुःखविधातास्त्रयः सुहृत्प्राप्तिः । दानं च सिद्धयोऽष्टौ सिद्धेः पूर्वोऽङ्कुशास्त्रिविधः ॥५१ ॥ न विना भावैलिङ्गं न विना लिङ्गेन भावनिवृत्तिः । लिङ्गाख्यो भावाग्थ्यस्तस्माद द्विविधः प्रवर्तते सर्गः ॥ ५२ ।। अष्टविकल्पो देवस्तैर्यग्योनश्च पञ्चधा भवति । मानुष्यश्चकविधः समासतोऽयं त्रिधा मर्गः ॥५३ ॥ ऊर्ध्व सत्त्वविशालस्तमोविशालश्च मूलतः सर्गः । मध्ये ग्जोविशालो ब्रह्मादिस्तम्बपर्यन्तः ॥ ५४ ॥ तत्र जरामरणकृतं दुःखं प्रामोति चेतनः पुरुषः। लिङ्गस्याविनिवृत्तेः, तस्माद् दुःखं स्वभावेन ॥ ५५॥ . .

·मांख्यकारिका। ३३ .. इत्येष प्रकृतिकृती महदादिविशेषभूतपर्यन्तः । प्रतिपुरुषविमोक्षार्थ म्वार्थ इव परार्थ आरम्भः ॥ ५६ ॥ वल्पविवृद्धिनिमित्त क्षीरस्य यथा प्रवृत्तिरज्ञस्य । पुरुपविमोक्षनिमित्तं तथा प्रवृत्तिः प्रधानस्य ॥ ७ ॥ औत्सुक्यनिवृत्यर्थं यथा क्रियासु प्रवर्तते लोकः । पुरुषस्य विमोक्षार्थ प्रवर्तते तद्वदव्यक्तम् ॥ ५८ ॥ रङ्गस्य दर्शयित्वा निवर्तते नर्तकी यथा नृत्यात । पुरुषस्य तथाऽऽत्मानं प्रकाश्य विनिवर्तते प्रकृतिः ॥ ५९ ॥ नानाविधैरुपायैरुपकारिण्यनुपकारिणः पुंसः । गुणवत्यगुणस्य सतस्तस्यार्थमपार्थकं चरति ॥ ६ ॥ प्रकृतेः सुकुमारतरं न किञ्चिदस्तीति मे मतिर्भवति । या दृष्टास्मीति पुनर्न दर्शनमुपति पुरुषस्य ॥ ६१ ॥ तस्माच बध्यते नापि मुच्यते नापि संसरति कश्चित् । मंसरति बध्यते मुच्यते च नानाश्रया प्रकृतिः ॥ १२ ॥ रूपः सप्तभिरेव तु बनात्यात्मानमात्मना प्रकृतिः । मैव च पुरुषार्थ प्रति विमोचयत्येकरूपेण ॥ ६३ ॥ एव तत्वाभ्यासानास्मि न मे नाहमित्यपरिशेषम् । अविपर्ययाद्विशुद्धं केवलमुत्पद्यते ज्ञानम् ॥ ६४ ॥ तेन निवृत्तप्रसवामर्थवशात सप्तरूपविनिवृत्ताम् । प्रकृति पश्यति पुरुषः प्रेक्षकवटवस्थितः म्बन्थः ॥ ६५ ।। रङ्गस्थ इत्युपेक्षक एका दृष्टाहमित्युपरमत्येका। सति संयोगेऽपि तयोः प्रयोजनं नाम्नि सर्गस्य ॥६६॥ सम्यग्ज्ञानाधिगमाद्धांटीनामकारणप्राप्ती। तिष्ठति संस्कारवशाच्चभ्रमवद्धतशरीरः ॥ ६ ॥ प्राप्त शरीरभेदे चरितार्थत्वात् प्रधानविनिवृत्ती। ऐकान्तिकमात्यन्तिकमुभयं कैवल्यमामोति ॥ ६८ ॥ पुरुषार्थज्ञानमिदं गुह्यं परमर्षिणा समाख्यातम् । स्थित्युत्पत्तिप्रलयाश्चिन्स्यन्ते यत्र ·मांख्यकारिका पजावित्रमय मुनिरासुरयेऽनुकम्पया प्रददी । आसुरिरपि पाशिवाय तेन च बहुधा कृतं तन्त्रम् ॥ ७० ॥ शिष्यपरम्परयाऽऽगतमीश्वरकृष्णेन चैतहाभिः । मंक्षितमार्यमतिना सम्यग्विज्ञाय सिद्धान्तम् ॥७१ ॥ मलयां किल येऽस्तेिऽर्थाः रस्मस्य पष्टितन्त्रस्य । आख्यायिकाविरहिताः परवादविवर्जिताश्चापि ॥ ७२ ॥ इनि श्रीमदीचरकृतीप्रणीताः सांख्यकारिकाः ममाताः। ( All Rights Reserved by the Publisher 1 -- Printed by: S. R.Sardesai, B.A., LL.B., Navin Samarth Vidyalaya's 'Samarth Bharat ' Press,947, Sadashiv Peth, Poona 2. AND Published by: Dr. N. G. Sardesai, L.M.S., for the Oriental Book Agency, 15 Shukrawar, Poona (India ).

·No text on this page.