The Sāṁkhya Term Puruṣa (Self): An Analytical Assessment

Vol-3 | Issue-08 | August 2018 | Published Online: 07 August 2018    PDF ( 388 KB )
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341306
Author(s)
Nanda Gopal Biswas 1

1Research Scholar, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, IIT(ISM), Dhanbad, Jharkhand (India)

Abstract

In the Sāṁkhya, Puruṣa (self) is free, inactive and it is the nature of consciousness (cetanā). It is beyond time and space, and it has both merit and demerit, attachment and detachment. It is real form which is not bounded. All actions, pleasure and suffering, change and feeling, etc. are the distortions of the body. Puruṣa (self) is beyond the bodily and mental suffering (dukhaḥ). Puruṣa (self) is neither the cause nor the effect. Puruṣa (self) is not material, and it is also not known by direct perception. Ācharya Śaṅkara critiques the Sāṁkhya view and says, If Puruṣa (self) is inactive then how can it possibly influence the others? Śaṅkara also questions the relation of the Puruṣa (self) with the Prakṛṭi (non-self). This paper elaborates the nature and the existence of Puruṣa (self), purpose of the inactive Puruṣa (self), the subjectivity of Puruṣa (self) from the text “Sāṁkhyakārikā”. A critical analysis of Śaṅkara‟s critique of the “Sāṁkhyakārikā” is made and by providing an analytical assessment of the self (Puruṣa) and its relation with the non-self (Prakṛṭi) the paper attempts at arguing against Śaṅkara‟s logic.

Keywords
Puruṣa, Cetanā, acetana, Jñā, Kaivalya
Statistics
Article View: 1268