08-02-2004, 02:11 AM
sAMkhya sUtra says: 'Ishvara asiddheH', which means 'God is unproven' (therefore we don't talk about it. In that sense sAMkhya doesn't affirm or deny God. Although it has been accused by others of being nirIshvaravaadI.
Yoga of pata~njali which is closely associated with sAMkhya, accepts God as a special puruSha (puruSha visheShaH ) who is the tecaher of even the earliest teachers.
In gItA shrI kR^ishNa says he is the puruSha amongst all the puruShas. He also mentions in chapter 13 that bodies are called kshetra (field) and knower of the field (kshetraj~na) is same as the puruSha. And he is the is 'knower of the field' in all the fields that there are. In that sense gItA is firmly in the vedAntic side although it accepts the sAMkhya basics.
The biggest contribution of sAMkhya to the field of philosophy is the positing of the witness/self, the puruSha as separate from the ahaMkAra (ego). This is very subtle point and also quite counterintuitive when first encountered. Recall that western philosophers hardly could move beyond mind when describing the self. Descartes said 'I think therefore I am". The thought is very much part of the mind and the thinker is the ego. In that sense even Descatrtes couldn't conceive of a self beyond thinking ego. But it is a common and important element of Indian meditative thought systems that the light of 'vjn~nana' dawns when 'mind dies' or falls completely silent. Yoga sUtra of pata~njali also mention at the very beginning that the purpose of the yoga is to still the mind of all its deformations or vR^ittis (yogaH chitta vR^itti nirodhaH ). GorakshanAtha calls this state the 'death of mind'. People can make a gory image out of it if they wish to. But the point is that this 'mindless' state is not complete darkness or unconscious, rather it is described as a very luminous state with a higher kind of consciousness. Norml mental knowledge is jn~na. But the knowledge when the mind falls completely silent is called vijn~nana, and is compared as the light of the sun. Sri Aurobindo calls that state the supramental state above the mind. Vijn~na knowledge is described as knowing a thing as it is, holistically, and not through symbols and categories as is the case with the normal knowledge.
Anyway, this positing of witness self, puruSha as different from the ego (ahamkAra) is in my opinion the biggest contribution of sAMkhya to philosophy. And all Indian meditative thought systems affirm this truth, hindus, budhists, jainas included.
Yoga of pata~njali which is closely associated with sAMkhya, accepts God as a special puruSha (puruSha visheShaH ) who is the tecaher of even the earliest teachers.
In gItA shrI kR^ishNa says he is the puruSha amongst all the puruShas. He also mentions in chapter 13 that bodies are called kshetra (field) and knower of the field (kshetraj~na) is same as the puruSha. And he is the is 'knower of the field' in all the fields that there are. In that sense gItA is firmly in the vedAntic side although it accepts the sAMkhya basics.
The biggest contribution of sAMkhya to the field of philosophy is the positing of the witness/self, the puruSha as separate from the ahaMkAra (ego). This is very subtle point and also quite counterintuitive when first encountered. Recall that western philosophers hardly could move beyond mind when describing the self. Descartes said 'I think therefore I am". The thought is very much part of the mind and the thinker is the ego. In that sense even Descatrtes couldn't conceive of a self beyond thinking ego. But it is a common and important element of Indian meditative thought systems that the light of 'vjn~nana' dawns when 'mind dies' or falls completely silent. Yoga sUtra of pata~njali also mention at the very beginning that the purpose of the yoga is to still the mind of all its deformations or vR^ittis (yogaH chitta vR^itti nirodhaH ). GorakshanAtha calls this state the 'death of mind'. People can make a gory image out of it if they wish to. But the point is that this 'mindless' state is not complete darkness or unconscious, rather it is described as a very luminous state with a higher kind of consciousness. Norml mental knowledge is jn~na. But the knowledge when the mind falls completely silent is called vijn~nana, and is compared as the light of the sun. Sri Aurobindo calls that state the supramental state above the mind. Vijn~na knowledge is described as knowing a thing as it is, holistically, and not through symbols and categories as is the case with the normal knowledge.
Anyway, this positing of witness self, puruSha as different from the ego (ahamkAra) is in my opinion the biggest contribution of sAMkhya to philosophy. And all Indian meditative thought systems affirm this truth, hindus, budhists, jainas included.