The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hindusim vol 2
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Samkhya<br />
588<br />
sattva tends toward the good, rajas<br />
towards activity or passion, and tamas<br />
towards darkness and decay. In the primal<br />
prakrti these three forces are in perfect<br />
equilibrium, each perfectly balancing<br />
the others. <strong>The</strong> two principles <strong>of</strong><br />
purusha and prakrti are distinct, separate,<br />
and alone.<br />
When prakrti’s initial equilibrium is<br />
disturbed, it sets in motion a pattern <strong>of</strong><br />
e<strong>vol</strong>ution that creates both the exterior<br />
physical world and the interior psychological<br />
world. From prakrti emerges<br />
mahat (“the great one”), which has as its<br />
psychological counterpart the subtlest<br />
form <strong>of</strong> mental activity (buddhi). From<br />
buddhi e<strong>vol</strong>ves ahamkar, which contains<br />
the first real ideas <strong>of</strong> individual<br />
identity. From ahamkar e<strong>vol</strong>ves the<br />
mind (manas), the sense organs (jnanendriyas),<br />
the organs <strong>of</strong> action (karmendriyas),<br />
and the subtle elements<br />
(tanmatras); from the last e<strong>vol</strong>ve the<br />
gross elements that actually make up<br />
the material world. All <strong>of</strong> these e<strong>vol</strong>utes—material<br />
or psychic—have a differing<br />
balance <strong>of</strong> the three gunas, which<br />
ultimately determines their character as<br />
wholesome, active, or unwholesome.<br />
Throughout this process <strong>of</strong> e<strong>vol</strong>ution,<br />
purusha remains unchanged, a mere<br />
witness to prakrti’s unceasing transformations.<br />
<strong>The</strong>ir mutual functioning is<br />
described using the metaphor <strong>of</strong> the<br />
lame man (purusha) being carried by<br />
the blind man (prakrti).<br />
<strong>The</strong> ultimate source <strong>of</strong> bondage,<br />
according to the Samkhya school,<br />
comes because people do not recognize<br />
the difference between these two principles.<br />
Through this lack <strong>of</strong> discrimination<br />
between the two, the Self (purusha)<br />
appears as if it is an agent, and the e<strong>vol</strong>utes<br />
(from prakrti) as if they are conscious.<br />
<strong>The</strong> Samkhyas illustrate this misunderstanding<br />
using the example <strong>of</strong> the<br />
rose behind the crystal, in which the latter<br />
appears to be colored but is in fact<br />
unchanged. Although for the Samkhyas<br />
prakrti undergoes real transformations,<br />
the primary problem is epistemological—that<br />
is, how one comes to know<br />
things—rather than ontological, or rooted<br />
in the nature <strong>of</strong> things themselves. Since<br />
the purusha never changes, there is no<br />
question <strong>of</strong> making it into anything else<br />
or regaining the way that it used to be;<br />
the real problem is making the distinction<br />
between the differing realities <strong>of</strong><br />
these two principles. Once this has been<br />
done, the e<strong>vol</strong>ution <strong>of</strong> prakrti is said to<br />
reverse, leaving the purusha again in its<br />
state <strong>of</strong> magnificent isolation (kaivalya).<br />
Of course, once one has a developed (if<br />
erroneous) idea <strong>of</strong> (conventional) personality,<br />
this discrimination becomes all<br />
the more difficult. This mistaken idea<br />
becomes the basis for one’s <strong>vol</strong>itional<br />
actions (karma) and one’s emotional<br />
dispositions. One’s actions and dispositions<br />
reinforce each other, and both <strong>of</strong><br />
these are undergirded by the notion <strong>of</strong> a<br />
Self.<br />
<strong>The</strong> Samkhya metaphysics were<br />
adopted wholesale by the yoga philosophical<br />
school, and the two schools are<br />
usually mentioned together—Samkhya<br />
as the theoretical foundation, and Yoga<br />
as the practical component. One <strong>of</strong><br />
Samkhya’s lasting contributions to<br />
Indian thought is the idea <strong>of</strong> the gunas, a<br />
basic concept running through Hindu<br />
culture. Another influential but less pervasive<br />
idea is their model <strong>of</strong> e<strong>vol</strong>ution,<br />
which has been adapted by other<br />
schools but <strong>of</strong>ten subsumed under theistic<br />
assumptions in which God is the<br />
source <strong>of</strong> both consciousness and the<br />
material world. <strong>The</strong> one philosophical<br />
problem that the Samkhya could never<br />
surmount was to explain the source <strong>of</strong><br />
bondage, given their starting assumptions.<br />
If purusha and prakrti are completely<br />
separate, how could the two <strong>of</strong><br />
them interact—much less mistake one<br />
for the other—and how did the process<br />
<strong>of</strong> e<strong>vol</strong>ution begin? Although their contributions<br />
remain significant, they were<br />
largely eclipsed by Vedanta, which<br />
claimed that the problem is ignorance <strong>of</strong><br />
the Self and not-Self, and that the world<br />
around us is not an actual e<strong>vol</strong>ution, but<br />
only an illusory transformation (vivarta).<br />
This philosophical model is called<br />
Vivartavada. For further information<br />
see Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan and