Page:A History of Indian Philosophy Vol 1.djvu/228

 212 The Kap£la and the Piitanjala Sii'J!zkhya [CH. found there are also not such that we can form a distinct notion of the Sarpkhya thought as it developed in the U paniads. It is not improbable that at this stage of development it also gave some suggestions to Buddhism or J ainism, but the Sarpkhya- Yoga philosophy as we now get it is a system in which are found all the results of Buddhism and J ainism in such a manner that it unites the doctrine of permanence of the U paniads with the doctrine of momentariness of the Buddhists and the doctrine of relativism of the J ains. Sarp.khya and Yoga Literature. The main exposition of the system of Sarpkhya and Yoga in this section has been based on the Siiltzkhya kiirikii, the Sii1tz- khya sii.tras, and the Yoga szttras of Patafijali with their commen- taries and sub-commentaries. The Siiltzklzya kiirikii (about 200 A.D.) was written by IsvarakrDa. The account of Sarpkhya given by Caraka (78 A.D.) represents probably an earlier school and this has been treated separately. Vacaspati Misra (ninth century A.D.) wrote a commentary on it known as Tattvakaumudi. But before him Gau<;Japada and Raja wrote commentaries on the Siiltzkhya kiirika 1. N arayaDatlrtha wrote his Candrikii on Gau<;Ja- pada's commentary. The Smtzk1zya szltras which have been com- mented on by Vijfiana Bhiku (called Pravacanabhtiya) of the sixteenth century seems to be a work of some unknown author after the ninth century. Aniruddha of the latter half of the fifteenth century was the first man to write a commentary on the Sii1!lkhya siitras. Vijfiana Bhiku wrote also another elementary work on Sarpkhya known as Siiltlkhyasiira. Another short work of late origin is Tattvasamasa (probably fourteenth century). Two other works on Sarpkhya, viz. Simananda's Siiltlkhyatattvavivecana and BhavagaDesa's SiiltlklzyatattvayiUhiirth)ladipana (both later than Viji1anabhiku) of real philosophical value have also been freely consulted. Patal1jali's Yoga sii.tra (not earlier than 147 B.C.) was commented on by Vyasa (400 A.D.) and Vyasa's bhaya commented on by Vacaspati Misra is called T attvavaisiiradi, by Vijfiana Bhiku Yogaviirttika, by Bhoja in the tenth century Bhojavrtti, and by Nagesa (seventeenth century) Chiiyiivyliklzyii. 1 I suppose that Raja's commentary on the Aarikii was the same as Riijaviirttika quoted by Vacaspati. Raja's commcntary on the Aarikii has been referred to by J ayanta in his Nyiiya11lafijari, p. 109. This book is probably now lost.