Classical Sāṁkhya on the Relationship between the Vedic Revelation (śruti) and Its Own Doctrine

Ołena Łucyszyna

Abstrakt

The aim of this research is to clarify the view of classical Sāṁkhya on the relationship between the Vedas and its own teaching. Sāṁkhya is regarded by the Hindu tradition as a school of philosophy which recognizes the authority of the Vedas (āstika), but what is the real Sāṁkhya attitude towards the Vedas? My study is based on all the extant texts of classical Sāṁkhya. The textual analysis allowed me to distinguish four different tendencies (lines of thought) that constitute the classical Sāṁkhya view on the status of the Vedic revelation (śruti) in relation to its own doctrine: 1) the Vedas are an authoritative source of knowledge, but they do not play an important role in the grounding of the Sāṁkhya doctrine; 2) Sāṁkhya is authoritative because it is based on śruti; 3) Sāṁkhya is śruti, that is, it is identical to the quintessence (i.e., the highest teaching) of the Vedas set forth in the Upaniṣads; 4) Sāṁkhya is higher than the Vedas. Taking into account the results of my analysis, it is possible to say that the Sāṁkhya view on the status of the Vedas is no less ambiguous than the general Hindu attitude to them.

Słowa kluczowe: Sāṁkhya, the Vedas, the Vedic revelation (śruti), the Hindu tradition, a school of philosophy which recognizes the authority of the Vedas (āstika) , sankhja, Wedy, objawienie wedyjskie (śruti), tradycja hinduska, szkoła filozoficzna uznająca autorytet Wed (āstika)
References
Sāṁkhya Sanskrit Texts and Abbreviations
 
GB = Sāṁkhyakārikābhāṣya, or Gauḍapādabhāṣya: The Sāṅkhya Kārikā with an Exposition Called Candrikā by Nārāyaṇa Tīrtha, and Gauḍapādācārya’s Commentary, Becanarāma Tripāṭhī (ed.), Benares 1883.
 
JM = Jayamaṅgalā: Sāṁkhyakārikā of Śrīmad Īśvarakṛṣṇa with the Māṭharavṛtti of Māṭharācārya and the Jayamaṅgalā of Śrī Śaṅkara, Viṣṇuprasāda Śarmā [MV], Satkāriśarmā Vaṅgīya [JM] (eds.), Varanasi 1970.
 
MV = Māṭharavṛtti – see JM.
 
P = The commentary translated into Chinese by Paramārtha: (1) La Sāṁkhyakārikā étudiée à la lumière de sa version chinoise (II). Traité sur les «Septante d’or» (Suvarṇasaptati) ou Traité sur la philosophie Sāṁkhya (Sāṁkhyaśāstra) traduit par Paramārtha, J. Takakusu (trans.), “Bulletin de l’Ecole Française d’Extrême-Orient” 1904, no. 4, pp. 978–1064; (2) Suvarṇasaptati Śāstra. Sāṅkhya-Kārikā-Saptati of Īśvara-Kṛṣṇa with a Commentary, N.A. Sastri (reconstruction into Sanskrit from Chinese), Tirupati 1944.
 
SK = Sāṁkhyakārikā: Īśvarakṛṣṇa, Sāṁkhyakārikā, F. Ruzsa (ed.), 1998, http://gretil.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil/1_sanskr/6_sastra/3_phil/samkhya/isvskaru.htm [access: 5.12.2011].
 
SSVṛ = Sāṁkhyasaptativṛtti: Sāṁkhya-Saptati-Vṛtti (V1), E.A. Solomon (ed.), Ahmedabad 1973.
 
SVṛ = Sāṁkhyavṛtti: Sāṁkhya-Vṛtti (V2), E.A. Solomon (ed.), Ahmedabad 1973.
 
TK = Sāṁkhyatattvakaumudī: Sankhyatatwa Koumudi by Bachaspati Misra, Taranatha Tarkavachaspati (ed.), Calcutta 1871.
 
YD = Yuktidīpikā: Yuktidīpikā. The Most Significant Commentary on the Sāṁkhyakārikā, A. Wezler, S. Motegi (eds.), vol. I, Stuttgart 1998.
 
Studies
 
Acharya D., Vācaspati’s Dates and His Contemporaries [in:] D. Acharya, Vācaspatimiśra’s Tattvasamīkṣā: The Earliest Commentary on Maṇḍanamiśra’s Brahmasiddhi, Stuttgart 2006, pp. XVIII–XXX.
 
Bronkhorst J., Epic Sāṁkhya: Texts, Teachers, Terminology, “Asiatische Studien” 1999, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 473–490.
 
Chakravarti P., Origin and Development of the Sāṁkhya System of Thought, Calcutta 1951, pp. 4–110.
 
Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, vol. 4: Sāṁkhya. A Dualist Tradition in Indian Philosophy, G.J. Larson, R.S. Bhattacharya (eds.), Delhi 1987.
 
Halbfass W., India and Europe. An Essay in Philosophical Understanding, Delhi 1990.
 
Halbfass W., Tradition and Reflection. Explorations in Indian Thought, Delhi 1992.
 
Ham H.S., Inclusivism: the Enduring Vedic Vision in the Ever-Renewing Cosmos, “Critical Review for Buddhist Studies” 2013, no. 13, pp. 9–53.
 
Johnston E.H., Early Sāṁkhya, London 1937.
 
Kanō K., Avyakta and Prakṛtivādin: A Monistic and Theistic Sāṁkhya, “Studies in the History of Indian Thought” 2000, vol. 12, pp. 60–81.
 
Kudelska M., Karman i dharma. Wizja świata w filozoficznej myśli Indii, Kraków 2003.
 
Larson G.J., The History and Literature of Sāṁkhya [in:] Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, vol. 4: Sāṁkhya. A Dualist Tradition in Indian Philosophy, G.J. Larson, R.S. Bhattacharya (eds.), Delhi 1987, pp. 3–41.
 
Lutsyshyna O., Classical Sāṁkhya on the Authorship of the Vedas, “Journal of Indian Philosophy” 2012, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 453–467 [Open Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10781-012-9161-4, access: 16.03.2017].
 
Łucyszyna O., Classical Sāṁkhya on the Relationship between a Word and Its Meaning, “Journal of Indian Philosophy” 2016, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 303–323 [Open Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10781-014-9264-1, access: 16.03.2017].
 
Łucyszyna O., Przedmiot autorytatywnej wypowiedzi (āpta-vacana) w klasycznej sankhji (na podstawie komentarzy do karik 4–7 Sankhjakariki), “Studia Indologiczne” 2010, vol. 17, pp. 68–97.
 
Mejor M., Some Observations on the Date of the Yuktidīpikā (A Propos of the New Edition) [in:] Essays in Indian Philosophy, Religion and Literature, P. Balcerowicz, M. Mejor (eds.), Delhi 2004, pp. 399–433.
 
Nicholson A.I., Affirmers (āstikas) and Deniers (nāstikas) in Indian History [in:] A.I. Nicholson, Unifying Hinduism: Philosophy and Identity in Indian Intellectual History, New York 2014, pp. 166–184.
 
Renou L., Le destin du Veda dans l’Inde, Études védiques et pāṇinéennes, vol. 6, Paris 1960 [trans. into English: Renou L., The Destiny of the Veda in India, Delhi 1965].

Kwartalnik "Studia Religiologica" ukazuje się w sposób ciągły on-line.

Pierwotną wersją czasopisma jest wersja elektroniczna publikowana w Internecie.