Samkhya: Difference between revisions

{{Short description|Āstika school of Hindu philosophy}}

{{EngvarB|date=April 2015}}

{{Use dmy dates|date=April 2015}}

{{Hindu philosophy}}

 

 

''Puruṣa'' is the witness-consciousness. It is absolute, independent, free, beyond perception, above any experience by mind or senses, and impossible to describe in words.{{sfn|Sharma|1997|pages=155–7}}{{sfn|Chapple|2008|p=21}}{{sfn|Osto|2018|p=203}}

 

 

 

 

 

 

==Etymology==

 

The word ''samkhya'' means 'empirical' or 'relating to numbers'.<ref name="harvnb|Apte|1957|page=1664">{{harvnb|Apte|1957|page=1664}}</ref> Although the term had been used in the general sense of metaphysical knowledge before,<ref>{{harvnb|Bhattacharyya|1975|pages=419–20}}</ref> in technical usage it refers to the Samkhya school of thought that evolved into a cohesive philosophical system in early centuries CE.<ref>{{harvnb|Larson|1998|pages=4, 38, 288}}</ref> The Samkhya system is called so because 'it "enumerates'" twenty five ''Tattvas'' or true principles; and its chief object is to effect the final emancipation of the twenty-fifth Tattva, i.e. the puruṣa or soul'.<ref name="harvnb|Apte|1957|page=1664"/>

[[File:Purusha-Pakriti.jpg|thumb|upright=1.75|Purusha-prakriti]]

 

 

====''Prakṛti'' - cognitive processes====

* ''[[Tamas (philosophy)|Tamas]]'' – inertia, coarseness, heaviness, obstruction, and sloth.<ref name="Sharma" />{{sfn|Hiriyanna|1993|pages=270–272}}{{sfn|Chattopadhyaya|1986|pages=109–110}}

 

 

All ''Prakriti'' has these three ''guṇas'' in different proportions. Each ''guṇa'' is dominant at specific times of day. The interplay of these ''guṇa'' defines the character of someone or something, of nature and determines the progress of life.<ref name=jamesg>James G. Lochtefeld, Guna, in The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism: A-M, Vol. 1, Rosen Publishing, {{ISBN|9780823931798}}, page 265</ref><ref>T Bernard (1999), ''Hindu Philosophy'', Motilal Banarsidass, {{ISBN|978-81-208-1373-1}}, pages 74–76</ref> The Samkhya theory of ''guṇa'' was widely discussed, developed and refined by various schools of Indian philosophies. Samkhya's philosophical treatises also influenced the development of various theories of Hindu ethics.<ref name=royper/>

''Puruṣa'', the eternal pure consciousness, due to ignorance, identifies itself with products of ''Prakṛti'' such as intellect (buddhi) and ego (ahamkara). This results in endless transmigration and suffering. However, once the realization arises that ''Puruṣa'' is distinct from ''Prakṛti'', is more than empirical ego, and that puruṣa is deepest conscious self within, the [[Ātman (Hinduism)|Self]] gains isolation (''kaivalya'') and freedom (''moksha'').<ref>{{harvnb|Larson|1998|page=13}}</ref>

 

 

{{Quote|text=By seven modes nature binds herself by herself: by one, she releases (herself), for the soul's wish (Samkhya karika Verse 63) ·}}

 

 

 

=== Epistemology ===

[[File:3 Pramana Epistemology Samkhya Yoga Hindu schools.svg|thumb|The Samkhya school considers perception, inference and reliable testimony as three reliable means to knowledge.<ref name="Lpage9"/><ref name=eliottjag/>]]

* '''''Pratyakṣa''''' (प्रत्यक्ष) means perception. It is of two types in Hindu texts: external and internal. External perception is described as that arising from the interaction of five senses and worldly objects, while internal perception is described by this school as that of inner sense, the mind.<ref name=kamal>MM Kamal (1998), The Epistemology of the Carvaka Philosophy, Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies, 46(2): 13-16</ref><ref>B Matilal (1992), Perception: An Essay in Indian Theories of Knowledge, Oxford University Press, {{ISBN|978-0198239765}}</ref> The ancient and medieval Indian texts identify four requirements for correct perception:<ref name=kpmat/> ''Indriyarthasannikarsa'' (direct experience by one's sensory organ(s) with the object, whatever is being studied), ''Avyapadesya'' (non-verbal; correct perception is not through [[hearsay]], according to ancient Indian scholars, where one's sensory organ relies on accepting or rejecting someone else's perception), ''Avyabhicara'' (does not wander; correct perception does not change, nor is it the result of deception because one's sensory organ or means of observation is drifting, defective, suspect) and ''Vyavasayatmaka'' (definite; correct perception excludes judgments of doubt, either because of one's failure to observe all the details, or because one is mixing inference with observation and observing what one wants to observe, or not observing what one does not want to observe).<ref name=kpmat>Karl Potter (1977), Meaning and Truth, in Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Volume 2, Princeton University Press, Reprinted in 1995 by Motilal Banarsidass, {{ISBN|81-208-0309-4}}, pages 160-168</ref> Some ancient scholars proposed "unusual perception" as ''pramana'' and called it internal perception, a proposal contested by other Indian scholars. The internal perception concepts included ''pratibha'' (intuition), ''samanyalaksanapratyaksa'' (a form of induction from perceived specifics to a universal), and ''jnanalaksanapratyaksa'' (a form of perception of prior processes and previous states of a 'topic of study' by observing its current state).<ref>Karl Potter (1977), Meaning and Truth, in Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Volume 2, Princeton University Press, Reprinted in 1995 by Motilal Banarsidass, {{ISBN|81-208-0309-4}}, pages 168-169</ref> Further, some schools considered and refined rules of accepting uncertain knowledge from ''Pratyakṣa-pranama'', so as to contrast ''nirnaya'' (definite judgment, conclusion) from ''anadhyavasaya'' (indefinite judgment).<ref>Karl Potter (1977), Meaning and Truth, in Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Volume 2, Princeton University Press, Reprinted in 1995 by Motilal Banarsidass, {{ISBN|81-208-0309-4}}, pages 170-172</ref>

* '''''Anumāna''''' (अनुमान) means inference. It is described as reaching a new conclusion and truth from one or more observations and previous truths by applying reason.<ref>W Halbfass (1991), Tradition and Reflection, State University of New York Press, {{ISBN|0-7914-0362-9}}, page 26-27</ref> Observing smoke and inferring fire is an example of ''Anumana''.<ref name=kamal/> In all except one Hindu philosophies,<ref>Carvaka school is the exception</ref> this is a valid and useful means to knowledge. The method of inference is explained by Indian texts as consisting of three parts: ''pratijna'' (hypothesis), ''hetu'' (a reason), and ''drshtanta'' (examples).<ref name=jl4647>James Lochtefeld, "Anumana" in The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism, Vol. 1: A-M, Rosen Publishing. {{ISBN|0-8239-2287-1}}, page 46-47</ref> The hypothesis must further be broken down into two parts, state the ancient Indian scholars: ''sadhya'' (that idea which needs to proven or disproven) and ''paksha'' (the object on which the ''sadhya'' is predicated). The inference is conditionally true if ''sapaksha'' (positive examples as evidence) are present, and if ''vipaksha'' (negative examples as counter-evidence) are absent. For rigor, the Indian philosophies also state further epistemic steps. For example, they demand ''Vyapti'' - the requirement that the ''hetu'' (reason) must necessarily and separately account for the inference in "all" cases, in both ''sapaksha'' and ''vipaksha''.<ref name=jl4647/><ref>Karl Potter (2002), Presuppositions of India's Philosophies, Motilal Banarsidass, {{ISBN|81-208-0779-0}}</ref> A conditionally proven hypothesis is called a ''nigamana'' (conclusion).<ref>Monier Williams (1893), Indian Wisdom - Religious, Philosophical and Ethical Doctrines of the Hindus, Luzac & Co, London, page 61</ref>

 

=== Causality ===

 

== Historical development ==

# 8/9th c. BCE - 5th c. BCE: "ancient speculations," including speculative Vedic hymns and the oldest prose Upanishads

# 4th.c. BCE-1st c. CE: proto-Samkhya speculations, as found in the middle Upanishads, the [[Buddhacarita]], the Bhagavad Gita, and the Mahabharata

# 15th-17th c.: renaissance of later Samkhya

 

Larson (1987) discerns three phases of development of the term ''samkhya'', relating to three different meanings:{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=3}}

# 8th/7th c. BCE - first centuries CE:{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=4}} as a masculine noun, referring to "someone who calculates, enumerates, or discriminates properly or correctly."{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=3}} Proto-samkhya,{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=9}} related to the early ascetic traditions,reflected in the ''Moksadharma'' section of the Mahabharata, the Bhagavad Gita, and the cosmological speculations of the Puranas.{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=4}} The notion of ''samkhya'' becomes related to methods of reasoning that result in liberating knowledge (''vidya'', ''jnana'', ''viveka'') that end the cycle of ''dukkha'' and rebirth.{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=4-5}} During this period, ''samkhya'' becomes explicitly related to meditation, spiritual practices, and religious cosmology,{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=5}} and is "primarily a methodology for attaining liberation and appears to allow for a great variety of philosophical formulations."{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=5}} According to Larson, "Samkhya means in the Upanishads and the Epic simply the way of salvation by knowledge."{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=5}} As such, it contains "psychological analyses of experience" that "become dominant motifs in Jain and Buddhist meditation contexts."{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=6}} Typical Samkhya terminology and issues develop.{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=6}} While yoga emphasizes ''asanas'' breathing, and ascetic practices, ''samkhya'' is concerned with intellectual analyses and proper discernment,{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=6}} but ''samkhya''-reasonong is not really differentiated from yoga.{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=9}} According to Van Buitenen, these ideas developed in the interaction between various ''sramanas'' and ascetic groups.{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=6-7}} Numerous ancient teachers are named in the various texts, including Kapila and Pancasikha.{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=7}}

 

{{Quote box |width=20em | bgcolor=#c6dbf7 |align=right |quote=In the beginning this was Self alone, in the shape of a person (puruṣa). He looking around saw nothing but his Self ([[Atman (Hinduism)|Atman]]). He first said, "This is I", therefore he became I by name.|salign = right

|source =—Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.1<ref>Max Muller, [https://archive.org/details/SacredBooksEastVariousOrientalScholarsWithIndex.50VolsMaxMuller Brihadaranyaka Upanishad], Oxford University Press, page 85</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Radhakrishnan|1953|page=163}}</ref>}}

 

The early, speculative phase took place in the first half of the first millennium BCE,{{sfn|Larson|1998|p=75}} when ascetic spirituality and monastic (''sramana'' and ''yati'') traditions came into vogue in India, and ancient scholars combined "enumerated set[s] of principles" with "a methodology of reasoning that results in spiritual knowledge (''vidya, jnana, viveka'')."{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=4-5}} These early non-Samkhya speculations and proto-Samkhya ideas are visible in earlier Hindu scriptures such as the Vedas,{{refn|group=note|Early speculations such as Rg Veda 1.164, 10.90 and 10.129; see {{harvtxt|Larson|2014|p=5}}.}} early [[Upanishads]] such as the [[Chandogya Upanishad]],{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=4-5}}<!-- **START OF NOTE** -->{{refn|group=note|name="Upanishads"|Older authors have noted the references to ''samkhya'' in the Upanishads. [[Surendranath Dasgupta]] stated in 1922 that Samkhya can be traced to Upanishads such as [[Katha Upanishad]], [[Shvetashvatara Upanishad]] and [[Maitrayaniya Upanishad]], and that the 'extant Samkhya' is a system that unites the doctrine of permanence of the Upanishads with the doctrine of momentariness of Buddhism and the doctrine of relativism of Jainism.<ref name="Dasgupta1975">{{cite book|author=Surendranath Dasgupta|title=A History of Indian Philosophy|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PoaMFmS1_lEC|year=1975|publisher=Motilal Banarsidass|isbn=978-81-208-0412-8|page = 212}}</ref> Arthur Keith in 1925 said, '[That] Samkhya owes its origin to the Vedic-Upanisadic-epic heritage is quite evident',<ref>Gerald Larson (2011), Classical Sāṃkhya: An Interpretation of Its History and Meaning, Motilal Banarsidass, {{ISBN|978-8120805033}}, pages 31-32</ref> and 'Samkhya is most naturally derived out of the speculations in the Vedas, Brahmanas and the Upanishads'.<ref>Gerald Larson (2011), Classical Sāṃkhya: An Interpretation of Its History and Meaning, Motilal Banarsidass, {{ISBN|978-8120805033}}, page 29</ref> Johnston in 1937 analyzed then available Hindu and Buddhist texts for the origins of Samkhya and wrote, '[T]he origin lay in the analysis of the individual undertaken in the [[Brahmanas]] and earliest Upanishads, at first with a view to assuring the efficacy of the sacrificial rites and later in order to discover the meaning of salvation in the religious sense and the methods of attaining it. Here – in [[Kaushitaki Upanishad]] and [[Chandogya Upanishad]] – the germs are to be found (of) two of the main ideas of classical Samkhya'.<ref>EH Johnston (1937), Early Samkhya: An Essay on its Historical Development according to the Texts, The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Volume XV, pages 80-81</ref>}}<!-- **END OF NOTE** --> and the ''[[Bhagavad Gita]]''.{{sfn|Burley|2006|pp=15–16}}{{sfn|Larson|1998|p=75}} However, these early speculations and proto-Samkhya ideas had not distilled and congealed into a distinct, complete philosophy.{{sfn|Larson|2014|p=3-4}}

 

[[A. K. Warder|Anthony Warder]] (1994; first ed. 1967) writes that the Samkhya and [[Mīmāṃsā]] schools appear to have been established before the Sramana traditions in India (~500 BCE), and he finds that "Samkhya represents a relatively free development of speculation among the Brahmans, independent of the Vedic revelation."{{sfn|Warder|2009|p=63}} Warder writes, '[Samkhya] has indeed been suggested to be non-Brahmanical and even anti-Vedic in origin, but there is no tangible evidence for that except that it is very different than most Vedic speculation – but that is (itself) quite inconclusive. Speculations in the direction of the Samkhya can be found in the early Upanishads."{{sfn|Warder|2009|pp=63–65}}

 

====Rig Vedic speculations====

 

<!-- **START OF QUOTEBOX** -->{{Quote box |width=26em | bgcolor=#FFE0BB |align=right |salign = right

* '''Translation 3''': {{cite book|author=David Christian|title=Maps of Time: An Introduction to Big History|url=https://archive.org/details/mapstimeintroduc00chri_515|url-access=limited|date=2011|publisher=University of California Press|isbn=978-0-520-95067-2|pages=[https://archive.org/details/mapstimeintroduc00chri_515/page/n45 17]–18}}</ref><br /><br />The hymn, as [[Mandala 10]] in general, is late within the Rigveda Samhita, and expresses thought more typical of later [[Satkaryavada|Vedantic philosophy]].<ref>"Although, no doubt, of high antiquity, the hymn appears to be less of a primary than of a secondary origin, being in fact a controversial composition levelled especially against the ''{{IAST|Sāṃkhya}}'' theory." Ravi Prakash Arya and K. L. Joshi. ''{{IAST|Ṛgveda Saṃhitā}}: Sanskrit Text, English Translation, Notes & Index of Verses''. (Parimal Publications: Delhi, 2001) {{Listed Invalid ISBN|81-7110-138-7}} (Set of four volumes). Parimal Sanskrit Series No. 45; 2003 reprint: 81-7020-070-9, Volume 4, p. 519.</ref>}}<!-- **END OF QUOTEBOX** -->

 

 

The Riddle hymns of the Rigveda, famous for their numerous enumerations, structural language symmetry within the verses and the chapter, enigmatic word play with [[anagram]]s that symbolically portray parallelism in rituals and the cosmos, nature and the inner life of man.<ref name=jamison1164>Stephanie Jamison and Joel Brereton (2014), The Rigveda, Oxford University Press, {{ISBN|978-0199370184}}, pages 349-359</ref> This hymn includes enumeration (counting) as well as a series of dual concepts cited by early Upanishads . For example, the hymns 1.164.2 - 1.164-3 mention "seven" multiple times, which in the context of other chapters of Rigveda have been interpreted as referring to both seven priests at a ritual and seven constellations in the sky, the entire hymn is a riddle that paints a ritual as well as the sun, moon, earth, three seasons, the transitory nature of living beings, the passage of time and spirit.<ref name=jamison1164/><ref>William Mahony (1997), The Artful Universe: An Introduction to the Vedic Religious Imagination, State University of New York Press, {{ISBN|978-0791435809}}, pages 245-250</ref>

The emphasis of duality between existence (sat) and non-existence (asat) in the [[Nasadiya Sukta]] of the ''Rigveda'' is similar to the vyakta–[[avyakta]] (manifest–unmanifest) polarity in Samkhya. The hymns about Puruṣa may also have had some influence on Samkhya.{{sfn|Larson|1998|pp=59, 79–81}} The Samkhya notion of buddhi or mahat is similar to the notion of [[hiranyagarbha]], which appears in both the ''Rigveda'' and the ''[[Shvetashvatara Upanishad]]''.{{sfn|Larson|1998|p=82}}

 

{{Quote box |width=20em | bgcolor=#c6dbf7 |align=right |quote=Higher than the senses, stand the objects of senses. Higher than objects of senses, stands mind. Higher than mind, stands intellect. Higher than intellect, stands the great self. Higher than the great self, stands ''Avyaktam''(unmenifested or indistinctive). Higher than ''Avyaktam'', stands Purusha. Higher than this, there is nothing. He is the final goal and the highest point. In all beings, dwells this Purusha, as Atman (essence), invisible, concealed. He is only seen by the keenest thought, by the sublest of those thinkers who see into the subtle.|salign = right

|source =—Katha Upanishad 3.10-13<ref>[[Paul Deussen]], Sixty Upanishads of the Veda, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, {{ISBN|978-8120814684}}, pages 288-289</ref><ref>Michele Marie Desmarais (2008), Changing minds: Mind, Consciousness and Identity in Patanjali's Yoga Sutra, Motilal Banarsidass, {{ISBN|978-8120833364}}, page 25</ref>}}

The oldest of the [[Mukhya Upanishads|major Upanishads]] (c. 900–600 BCE) contain speculations along the lines of classical Samkhya philosophy.{{sfn|Burley|2006|pp=15–16}} The concept of [[ahamkara]] was traced back by Van Buitenen to chapters 1.2 and 1.4 of the [[Brihadaranyaka Upanishad]] and chapter 7.25 of the ''[[Chāndogya Upaniṣad]]'', where it is a "cosmic entity," and not a psychological notion.{{sfn|Burley|2006|pp=15–16}}{{sfn|Larson|1998|p=82}} Satkaryavada, the theory of causation in Samkhya, may in part be traced to the verses in sixth chapter which emphasize the primacy of sat (being) and describe creation from it. The idea that the three gunas or attributes influence creation is found in both Chandogya and [[Shvetashvatara Upanishad]]s.{{sfn|Larson|1998|pages=82–84}}

 

 

 

====Buddhist and Jainist influences====

[[Buddhism]] and [[Jainism]] had developed in eastern India by the 5th century BCE. It is probable that these schools of thought and the earliest schools of Samkhya influenced each other.<ref name=larson9193/> According to Burely, there is no evidence that a systematic samkhya-philosophy existed prior to the founding of Buddhism and Jainism, sometime in the 5th or 4th century BCE.{{sfn|Burley|2006|pp=16}} A prominent similarity between Buddhism and Samkhya is the greater emphasis on suffering ([[dukkha]]) as the foundation for their respective [[soteriological]] theories, than other Indian philosophies.<ref name=larson9193/> However, suffering appears central to Samkhya in its later literature, which likely suggests a Buddhist influence. [[Eliade]], however, presents the alternate theory that Samkhya and Buddhism developed their soteriological theories over time, benefiting from their mutual influence.<ref name=larson9193/>

 

Larson, Bhattacharya and Potter state it to be likely that early Samkhya doctrines found in oldest Upanishads (~700-800 BCE) provided the contextual foundations and influenced Buddhist and Jaina doctrines, and these became contemporaneous, sibling intellectual movements with Samkhya and other schools of Hindu philosophy.<ref>GJ Larson, RS Bhattacharya and K Potter (2014), The Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Volume 4, Princeton University Press, {{ISBN|978-0691604411}}, pages 2-8, 114-116</ref> This is evidenced, for example, by the references to Samkhya in ancient and medieval era Jaina literature.<ref>GJ Larson, RS Bhattacharya and K Potter (2014), The Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Volume 4, Princeton University Press, {{ISBN|978-0691604411}}, pages 6-7, 74-88, 113-122, 315-318</ref>

 

 

According to Ruzsa, about 2,000 years ago "Sāṅkhya became the representative philosophy of Hindu thought in Hindu circles",{{sfn|Ruzsa|2006}} influencing all strands of the Hindu tradition and Hindu texts.{{sfn|Ruzsa|2006}}

 

 

{{Main|Samkhyakarika}}

 

 

The most popular commentary on the Samkhyakarika was the Gauḍapāda Bhāṣya attributed to [[Gaudapada|Gauḍapāda]], the proponent of [[Advaita Vedanta]] school of philosophy. Other important commentaries on the karika were ''Yuktidīpīka'' (c. 6th century CE) and [[Vachaspati Misra|''Vācaspati''’s]] ''Sāṁkhyatattvakaumudī'' (c. 10th century CE).<ref>{{harvnb|King|1999|page=64}}</ref>

 

===Samkhya revival===

 

 

The ''[[Samkhyapravachana Sutra|Sāṁkhyapravacana Sūtra]]'' (c. 14th century CE) renewed interest in Samkhya in the medieval era. It is considered the second most important work of Samkhya after the karika.<ref>{{harvnb|Eliade|Trask|White|2009|page=370}}</ref> Commentaries on this text were written by Anirruddha (''Sāṁkhyasūtravṛtti'', c. 15th century CE), Vijñānabhikṣu (''Sāṁkhyapravacanabhāṣya'', c. 16th century CE), Mahādeva (vṛttisāra, c. 17th century CE) and Nāgeśa (''Laghusāṁkhyasūtravṛtti'').<ref>{{harvnb|Radhakrishnan|1923|pages=253–56}}</ref> In his introduction, the commentator Vijnana Bhiksu stated that only a sixteenth part of the original Samkhya Sastra remained, and that the rest had been lost to time. <ref>{{cite book |last1=Sinha |first1=Nandalal |title=The Samkhya Philosophy |date=1915 |publisher=Mushiram Manoharlal |location=New Delhi |isbn=81-215-1097-X |page=3 |edition=2003}}</ref> While the commentary itself is no doubt medieval, the age of the underlying sutras is unknown and perhaps much older. According to [[Surendranath Dasgupta]], scholar of Indian philosophy, [[Charaka Samhita]], an ancient Indian medical treatise, also contains thoughts from an early Samkhya school.<ref>{{harvnb|Dasgupta|1922|pages=213–7}}</ref>

The dualistic metaphysics of various [[Tantra|Tantric]] traditions illustrates the strong influence of Samkhya on Tantra. [[Shaiva Siddhanta]] was identical to Samkhya in its philosophical approach, barring the addition of a transcendent theistic reality.<ref>{{harvnb|Flood|2006|page=69}}</ref> Knut A. Jacobsen, Professor of Religious Studies, notes the influence of Samkhya on [[Srivaishnavism]]. According to him, this Tantric system borrows the abstract dualism of Samkhya and modifies it into a personified male–female dualism of [[Vishnu]] and [[Sri Lakshmi]].<ref>{{harvnb|Jacobsen|2008|pages=129–130}}</ref> Dasgupta speculates that the Tantric image of a wild [[Kali]] standing on a slumbering [[Shiva]] was inspired from the Samkhyan conception of prakṛti as a dynamic agent and Purusha as a passive witness. However, Samkhya and Tantra differed in their view on liberation. While Tantra sought to unite the male and female ontological realities, Samkhya held a withdrawal of consciousness from matter as the ultimate goal.<ref>{{harvnb|Kripal|1998|pages=148–149}}</ref>

 

 

===Advaita Vedanta===

* {{citation |last = Sinha |first = Nandlal |year = 2012 | title = The Samkhya Philosophy |publisher = Hard Press |location = New Delhi |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=6l-CtwAACAAJ&q=The+samkhya+philosophy+by+Nandlal+Sinha |isbn = 978-1407698915 }}

<!-- W -->

<!-- Z -->

* {{Citation | last =Zimmer | first =Heinrich | author-link=Heinrich Zimmer | year =1951 | title =Philosophies of India (reprint 1989) | publisher =Princeton University Press}}