Kartik Mathur Kartik Mathur

Both the Sankhya school of philosophy and the Yoga school of philosophy have been credited with having similar views on their metaphysics, their theory of knowledge, their theory of liberation etc. Thus these two schools have often been addressed together as the Sankhya-Yogas. Even though both these schools have similar views on the theory of liberation, there are still a few differences that separate these two schools in that area. In this essay, I will attempt to compare and contrast the views of these two schools on liberation in order to find out and properly frame the similarities and the differences that exist. I would also be taking into account the views put forth by Satishchandra Chatterjee and Dhereendramohan Datta, Andrew Nicholson, and Christopher Bartley and their relevant texts.

For both the Sankhya and the Yoga school of philosophy, liberation can only be achieved by the cessation of all pain and suffering. Liberation can be compared to detachment, which is said to be “self-mastery on the part of one who no longer thirsts for perceptible objects or any of the transitory goals promised by the Scriptures.” (Bartley 2011,  p. 88) According to the Sankhya philosophy, we are victims to three kind of pain- adhyatmika, adhibhautika, and adhidaivika. Adhyatmika is due to intra-organic causes such as bodily disorders and mental affections. Adhibhautika is the pain that is caused by nature such as men, animals etc. Adhidaivika is the pain that is caused by extra-organic supernatural causes such as ghosts and demons.  On the other hand, for the Yoga philosophy, “ So long as the mind or the intellect of a man is impure and unsettled, he cannot properly understand anything of philosophy and religion. ( Datta and Chatterjee 1948, p. 337). Thus for the Sankhya, the cause of the pain can arise from both the body and mind while for the Yogas, pain can only arise from the mind.

Both the Sankhyas and the Yogas agree that for attaining moksha or liberation the separation of the self from the body is needed and a clear distinction is needed to be made between self and the body, intellect and the mind. This argument is supported by Datta and Chatterjee, who informs us that “ It holds, like the Sankhya and some other Indian systems, that liberation is to be attained through the direct knowledge of the self’s distinction from the physical world including our body, mind and the ego ( vivekajnana). ( Datta and Chatterjee 1948, p.337)

According to the Sankhyas, the reason that we have to suffer pain is that we do not have the right knowledge of reality and that every reality has a plurality of selves. The self is an “ intelligent principle which does not pose any quality or activity but is a pure consciousness free form the limitations of space, time and causality.” ( Datta and Chatterjee 1948, p. 324) Even the Yoga’s share a similar view of the self as even they think that it is above the physical reality with its spatio-temporal and its cause-effect order.

A claim that is put forth by Andrew Nicholson is that the followers of the Sankhya philosophy will have to endure the long duration of jivanmukti, while Yoga philosophers, on the other hand, will not have to endure it and can just bypass it.  He has claimed that “The path of knowledge ( jñāna ), offered by the Sāmkhya and Vedānta systems, can lead to meditation with objects and can be efficacious for enlightenment. But the follower of Sāmkhya or Vedānta will have to endure the state of jīvanmukti,  as suggested by  BS  4.1.15 and  Ch. Up.  6.14.2. However, Vis ˙. Pu.  6.7.35 suggests that Yoga can cause immediate release, destroying prārabdha acts and bypassing jīvanmukti altogether. Yoga, according to Vijñānabhiks ˙ u, is the fast track to complete liberation. Although Sāmkhya, Vedānta, and Yoga can all lead to liberation, Yoga is the best of the three solely in terms of its efficiency.” ( Nicholson 2010, p. 116)  While Nicholson claims that Yoga is the most efficient way to attaining liberation, Datta and Chatterjee have an opposing view as they claim that “ It requires a long and arduous endeavor to maintain oneself in the state of samadhi and destroy the effects of the different kinds of karma, past, and present. For this, it is necessary to practice yoga with care and devotion for a sufficiently long time” ( Datta and Chatterjee 1948, p. 347). Thus for them, it will take years to attain liberation. Thus we can see that the theory of liberation itself has contradicting views in Indian philosophy.

Thus, as a conclusion, we can say that the Sankhya lays greater stress on discriminative knowledge as the means of attaining liberation while on the other hand, the Yoga lays greater stress on practical methods for self-purification and concentration in order to attain moksa.

REFERENCES-

Chatterjee, Satishchandra and Dheerendramohan Datta. 1948. An Introduction to Indian Philosophy. University of Calcutta: Calcutta

Bartley, Christopher. 2011. An Introduction to Indian Philosophy. Continuum International Publishing Group: London

Nicholson, J. Andrew.  2010. Unifying Hinduism. Colombia University Press: New York.

 

 

Kartik Mathur

Kartik Mathur Creator

(No description available)

Suggested Creators

Kartik Mathur