Page:A History of Indian Philosophy Vol 1.djvu/238

 222 The KaPila and the Piitalljala Sii1?zkhya [CH. totality of human psychosis on the other. A systematic ex plana- nation of the guryas was attempted in two different lines by Vijfiana Bhiku and the V airyava writer Venkata 1. As the Yoga philosophy compiled by Patafijali and commented on by Vyasa, Vacaspati and Vij11ana Bhiku, agree with the Sarpkhya doctrine as explained by Vacaspati and Vijfiana Bhiku in most points I have preferred to call them the Kapila and the Patafijala schools of Sarpkhya and have treated them together-a principle which was followed by Haribhadra in his $aqdarsanasamuccaya. The other important Sarpkhya teachers mentioned by Gauc;la- pada are Sanaka, Sananda, Sanatana and V oc;lhu. Nothing is I<nown about their historicity or doctrines. SaIJ1khya karika, SaIpkhya siitra, Vacaspati Misra and Vijnana Bhiku. A word of explanation is necessary as regards my inter- pretation of the Sarpkhya- Yoga system. The Siil'!lkhya kiirikii is the oldest Sarpkhya text on which we have commentaries by later writers. The Siil!lkllya Slttra was not referred to by any writer until it was commented upon by Aniruddha (fifteenth century A.D.). Even Guryaratna of the fourteenth century A.D. who made allusions to a number of Sarpkhya works, did not make any reference to the Siil!lkllya siitra, and no other writer who is known to have flourished before Guryaratna seems to have made any reference to the Siil!lkhya siitra. The natural conclusion therefore is that these su.tras were probably written some time after the fourteenth century. But there is no positive evidence to prove that it was so late a work as the fifteenth century. It is said at the end of the Siil?lkhya kiirikii of Isvarakrl).a that the karikas give an exposition of the Sarpkhya doctrine excluding the refutations of the doctrines of other people and excluding the parables attached to the original Sarpkhya works-the $a{itml- trasiistra. The Siil!/kl/ya siitras contain refutations of other doc- trines and also a number of parables. It is not improbable that these were collected from some earlier Sarpkhya work which is now lost to us. It may be that it was done from some later edition of the $a{itantrasiistra (Sa{italltroddlliira as mentioned by 1 Vei1ka!a's philosopJ- 1v will be dealt with in the second volume of the present work.