S1E4 Yoga & Samkhya

This episode considers some basics of what can be called the most influential philosophical system in the history of India, known as Samkhya. After providing a basic summary of the tenets of the philosophy, we look at how it influenced the idea of Yoga in the Mahabharata, the Gita, and the Yoga Sutra of Patanjali.

Listen to the podcast episode, then add your comments and questions below. Matt will be glad to answer you!

Episode Transcript

The transcript is automatically generated, so please be kind.

Welcome everyone. Let's give a quick summary of the last episode so that new listeners might position themselves a little better to where we are in the development of these ideas. We talked last time about the Buddha and about the revolutionary nature of his teaching, about the fact that he denied the reality of the self or the soul, the reality of anything that persisted as constant throughout change that came to be known as something that was conceived of as having a separate self sense. And instead of So, instead of focusing on this self and its nature, supposed nature as the focus of the philosophy or the practice, the Buddha assumed instead an ethical stance with regard to an impermanent world overwhelmingly characterized by suffering. This is a powerful force in Buddhism. This ethical stance in relation to the suffering of the world. The central teaching could probably call the middle way the Madhya Marka. That's the way between World affirmation and world denial. The specifics of that way really are the four noble truths, the sort of statement about what's going on all of life is suffering. Desire is the cause of suffering. Desires can be relinquished. There is a path leading away from the suffering, and those desires, the specifics of the path that lead away are called the Noble Eightfold Path. I think we find the Buddha teaching in just about everything that follows him in some way, either as a outright rejection of or incorporation of right influences or ideas that emerge directly from his his middle way. Remember the Buddha's last words are said to be quote, listen, O monks, I admonish you by saying all composite things are subject to birth and decay. Work out your salvation with diligence. When this episode we're going to talk about the Samkhya, maybe the most influential philosophy in in philosophical history, in India. I think that's safe to say. It's a big statement, but I think it's safe to say the elements of Samkhya have probably been around since the late, middle or late Vedic Period. We see things, for instance, as we talked about the Brahmins, we talked about their tendency to to organize things in groups of five. This is very important in the Samkhya philosophy, so that stuff has been around a long time. It isn't until the third century CE that you see the first systematic presentation of Samkhya as a philosophy. This presentation is in something called the Sankhya karika, and it's written by Ishvara Krishna.

3:53

In this episode, we're looking at the relationship between Sankhya and yoga as it's expressed in the Mahabharata, the Gita and the yoga sutra. Since those texts are so important for modern practice, and since all of them seem to be influenced in some sense, by Sankhya, we need to spend just a little bit of time looking at its specifics. We're very grateful for the scholars who have made this these massive subjects, into something that we could speak about in a 30 minute session of talking. Dr Wendy Doniger gives this summary of Samkhya. Samkhya, as a philosophy, has roots that date from the time of the Upanishads and are important in the Mahabharata, especially in the Gita, but were first formally codified by Ishvara Krishna in the third century. Ce sank is dualistic, dividing the universe into a male. A Purusha and a female property. There are an infinite number of similar but separate purushas. No one superior than the other. Early sunky and philosophers believed that God may or may not exist, but is not needed in order to explain the universe. Later, Sankhya philosophers assume that God does exist. Now, there's a lot in here, as usual, let me point out three quick things that are important to remember to help give a good context for the broad territory that this philosophy eventually commands in terms of influence. First of all, it's dualistic. It's one of those basic flavors that means there's two things that compose what we would call or the real I second, there are an infinite number of similar but separate purushas. That word Purusha is translated as spirit, self or person. And so right off the bat, another category in this dualism is

6:19

a set of eternal,

6:23

infinite number of selves that already exist. Now they're separate from one another, but they're similar. And third, there have been theistic and atheistic orientations toward what we're calling Sankhya philosophy.

6:43

So let's get into some of the details.

6:47

Sankhya usually is translated as counting or enumerating. According to Edwin Bryant, Sankhya should be understood as quote dealing with calculation in the sense of reasoning, speculation philosophy, in other words, the path striving to understand the ultimate truths of reality through knowledge, typically known as Jnana yoga. So we are counting or enumerating in the sense that we're using reasoning and speculation and philosophy and all of that is aimed at understanding the ultimate truths of existence, but we're going to understand those through knowledge. The essence of the philosophy could be called substance dualism. We have two distinct categories here that are both eternal. There's purusha, the self. And remember, there's an infinite number of those. And what is that? Purusha? Here's what Bryant says, the inner, most conscious self, broadly synonymous with the notion of soul. So this is deep, the innermost conscious self. You can let those words bring a sense in you of what they might refer to, what they call to mind and feeling. In addition to purusha, there is an eternal property. Bryant says that property should be conceived of as, quote, the material world with all its variegatedness, within which the Purusha is embedded. So we see what the two categories are, one this infinite number of selves or persons that are eternal, and a material world that is also eternal, that is variegated, that means it has massive amounts of quality and difference. It also, in this case, means that it moves. In a sense, it has rhythm. It pulsates to a rhythm called Guna, a three note rhythm. And the self, each individual self, the ones that are not free, let's say that the ones that are experiencing reincarnation, or that experience those are embedded, quote, unquote, in nature. So the soul or the person needs to be freed from its ensnarement within and I want to add another sense, or and, or its association with nature via discernment, or Viveka, what we'll call true Gnosis also. So we have to discern between. We have to discern the differences between the soul and nature in order to have right knowledge, and then we have to renounce all that is not the soul,

9:56

all that is not the person.

10:06

What about Sankhya in the Mahabharata? What about yoga in the Mahabharata? Because remember, we're here to kind of talk about how the ideas of Sankhya and yoga are related, and we're going to try to get a sense of that through the Mahabharata, the Gita and the yoga sutra. So Edwin Bryant says that the word yoga is used 884 times in the Mahabharata, and in each of those times, it carries the sense of quote disciplined activity and earnest striving. By contrast, the word Sankhya is referred to about 120 times in the Mahabharata, Bryant says that it carries the sense of quote reasoning. So yoga is mentioned many more times, 884 in comparison to 120 and it means disciplined activity and earnest striving. Those as descriptions, at least, seem to me, to denote something about action, taking action in a way. Sankhya is reasoning. Now that's an action in itself. It's something that happens, but and it it may be involved in discipline, activity and earnest striving, but it has a more internal, quote, unquote,

11:46

aspect to it.

11:48

One can reason, in a sense, without taking action in the world, bodily action. So Bryant says this about the relationship between the two. Sankhya focuses on, quote, analysis of the manifold ingredients of prakriti from which the Purusha is to be extracted, and yoga more with the path of meditation, focusing on the nature of mind and consciousness and on the techniques of concentration, in order to provide a practical method. So if there's a distinction to be made between Sankhya and yoga and how they feel different and give different emphasis, part of it is that yoga wants to have a practical method. So there's a there's a sort of inference there that Sankhya might be impractical for a vast majority of people. The notice that Sankhya is is doing analysis of the manifold ingredients of property. It's a little bit like science in a certain way. What is property made of? What are its qualities? What's the rhythm, right?

13:01

What about

13:03

it's, does it have self awareness, or does it not? It's, where does that come from? So it's kind of asking these questions and speculating and reasoning and then formulating philosophical truths in a way as, at least as Bryant sees it. And yoga is is interested in the nature of mind and consciousness, for sure, but the techniques overwhelmingly push one toward concentrating and concentrating in a space of stillness which feels effortful. Feels like taking action, in a sense, I think it's safe to say that Sankhya and yoga share the same goal of liberating the soul from its ensnarement, but they differ in their emphasis and means right as they move toward this common end.

14:00

What about Sankhya and the Gita?

14:04

This idea that Sankhya and yoga are different means to the same end, which would be liberating the soul from somehow the Gita really uses that idea, takes it and run with it. In a sense, here's what chapter three. Sloka three says, quote a two fold division was established by me. That's Krishna of old, jnana yoga, the yoga of knowledge, followed by Sankhya and karma yoga, the yoga of action, followed by the yogis. So this two fold division is old, and it's established by the Creator. This two fold division is characterized as Yana knowledge. That's a yoga, and the followers of Samkhya do that kind of yoga. And then there's Karma Yoga, the yoga of action. Is followed by the yogis.

15:04

Here's what it says in chapter five, shloka two,

15:08

the renunciation of works, and that's referring to Sankhya. And their unselfish performance both lead to the soul's salvation. But of the two, the unselfish performance of works is better than their renunciation. So Sankhya has had several valences as we've gone from the Mahabharata to to the Gita. Here's another one. We know it's the yoga of knowledge. We know it involves speculation. We know it involves reasoning. We know it involves being philosophical. But here in the Gita, it's associated with, quote, the renunciation of works a kind of objectivity, or a kind of pulling back from action in the world in order to contemplate more so, meditate more so, or reason, I suppose the Gita also here is saying both of these lead to the soul salvation. But hey, the unselfish performance of works, that's the way of the yogis, in an unselfish posture, is better. Here's what chapter five slokas four and five say. Quote the ignorant speak of renunciation, which is Sankhya and practice of works which is yoga as different, not the unwise. He who applies himself well to one gets the fruit of both. The status which is attained by the men of renunciation is reached by men of action. Also. He who sees that the ways of renunciation and of action are one, he sees truly

17:04

so a strong statement

17:08

about the relationship between renunciation through reasoning and being philosophical and through the unselfish performance of performance of works, being engaged In the world and serving the things in the world, karma, yoga. The newness that comes out of this is that, let me read it again. He who applies himself well to one gets the fruit of both. I think that's an amazing statement, because it it means that we could pick one, in a sense, based on our proclivities, or our say, for instance, our lack of certain characteristics. You know, if people who are there are those who are more quote unquote intellectual and those who are more quote unquote intuitive or related to feeling. There is some sense in making those statements, but that doesn't mean that development, or the expansion that happens to someone when they begin to be serious about yoga. That doesn't mean that that expansion naturally happens just by doing your proclivities, picking things that are you know that you're inclined to do. It also means expanding and moving into areas that are different. And so those who are quote, unquote, more intellectual and who would prefer to be still and quiet and so on, might gain something by moving into the world and serving others and and acting for the maintenance and the welfare of the worlds. What the Gita Gita would say? Conversely, those who are say, for instance, more person oriented, and for whom serving and working as a great joy, they might also find space, new space, right in some kind of activity that it does look like reasoning, or does look like inference and knowledge in some sense. And I'm talking about degrees, you know, I'm not. I think those, those differences in us are very real and but I also think that the transformation that yoga beckons shows us that how we relate to these ideas, right, can be really, really varied and sophisticated. We might not just want to stick with our preferences when it comes to the transformation or the levels of transformation that we're talking about here, and we might not want to just ignore our preferences when it comes to talking about the kind of transformation that we're involved in here.

19:56

Now, what about Sankhya and classical yoga?

20:03

When I first started learning about the yoga sutra, I just immediately learned it was stated boldly by many, many, many people that Samkhya is the system that potentially is built on. I think I see many robust connections. First of all, the sutra. Sutra system is built on the the relationship, slash non relationship, of purusha, the self, or the soul and property. And it also says, it also assumes that the soul needs to be dis embedded in a way, because it says the problem that that results from this can this relationship, is that there is a relationship, there's some yoga. And that means Sam means the same, and yoga, in a sense, means conjoined. So you see some yoga translated as conjunction, close proximity, sometimes something like that. And so there's a problem with these two being conjoined. Hence the idea that somehow uncon joined or separated, dare I say is actually what the yoga sutra is about. But the yoga sutra, even though all those things are true about its relationship with Samkhya, it it has a subtle nuance that it brings to the table, and that is the yoga sutra places a lot more stress than Samkhya, strictly speaking, on ecstatic experience or Samadhi.

21:48

Here's what Georg Feuerstein says,

21:53

rational knowledge alone, and that's a reference to Samkhya, is not deemed sufficient for exposing the false identity that is the ego sense. So the so the sutra is definitely interested in the true identity of the soul, the true nature of the soul, and in its quote, unquote, non conjunction. It's disjunction, it's V yoga, it's separation from what is false. But it it assumes that being absorbed in Samadhi is is a more necessary component actually, than the way of knowledge. So true Gnosis, true Vidya, or true knowledge, flows from ecstatic revelation

22:45

in the sutra,

22:47

that's the only kind of thing that is strong enough to uncover the roots of our habitual misidentifications. The sutra is an example, again, of this, this perennial idea that it's possible for us to be identified was with or as something we're not, and for our action then to flow from that, and then for our action to actually create, quote, unquote, a character, an impression, car axle, and then a repetition, and then endless rebirth and So on, still in that place, right in the yoga sutra. I think the last thing we could say about the relation between the Sankhya and the yoga sutra is another subtle distinction for most in the history that the yoga sutra has probably been seen as a theistic text that's according to Edwin Bryant, and he tries to make the case that it was likely Vaishnavite, meaning Vishnu, meaning the the kind of quote, unquote, flavor of of Indian society that is about Vishnu, about preservation. It's, it's sometimes said to be the more conservative side, and that the Shaivite side, the Shiva side, is the less conservative side, the more renegade side, because of, because you can see those two tendencies about Shiva kind of being the outcast as he develops throughout history, from the late VEDA especially onward and and how Vishnu is, is the sort of the end person, the end flavor. But not everybody has considered Sankhya or the yoga sutra, right? A theistic text. Some have assumed that the Ishvara that is spoken of in the yoga sutra, which is a really old word for something like God, is more like an archetypal idea and not really like a personal God. And Sankhya itself is. Is basically considered to be atheist in orientation, although some I think Wendy Doniger said earlier on in our summary, the later sunkens Probably caved in to the generally theistic attitude of the culture.

25:22

Let's give a summary.

25:25

So when we are speaking of Sankhya, we are speaking possibly of the most influential philosophical system in Indian history. It's adopted outright by many. It's rebelled against by many. It's used as the basis for larger systems that incorporate it but add to its structure so that its strict dualism is altered or overcome. Tantra in particular, does that in the Gita Sankhya is considered to be a yoga in a legitimate way. It has the sense of renunciation of works of that ascetic, a little bit of an ascetic flavor, and also basically it is synonymous with Yana yoga, or the yoga of knowledge

26:13

sank is considered to be the basis of the yoga sutra,

26:18

which seeks the same end as the philosophy itself, that is the abstraction of pure spirit or Purusha from its quote, conjunction with property or nature. But the sutra emphasizes that that project, right of dis embedding the self or the soul is going to be more successful if Samadhi is the basis of the endeavor, and so that means the sutra places more emphasis on ecstatic absorption, in addition to this Yana aspect, because we've been talking about Sankhya because it has that, that real, systematic, rational presentation. It there are not a lot of images to leave you with, like we like to do in these episodes by telling a story or something like that. But I have something here from the Sankhya karika of Ishvara Krishna. This is from ADIA three quote, primordial nature is uncreated, and yet creates.

27:30

Awareness is neither so

27:36

primordial nature is property and awareness here is Purusha when we think of Samkhya, and therefore, when we think of the yoga sutra, and when we think of the Gita, we think of the Mahabharata. This idea is woven through the mall and has subtly distinct flavors.

27:58

The Universe wasn't created

28:01

by an external force, according to the sank it has always been here. It's eternal. Remember, it has two parts. Here we have awareness and primordial nature. They have two distinct and different characteristics. Primordial nature is eternal, but creates. That means changes, pulses in a rhythm and so on. Primordial nature does not have awareness in the strictest sense. Awareness itself, or purusha, is neither created nor uncreated, neither does it create nor not create, then neither covers both. It is eternal, and this gives it a passive sense. And so you can see the sunken dualism as this self that doesn't really do anything, but is awareness is like the light right of awareness, and this eternal nature just very close by that is constantly moving and roiling and creating that is eternal and won't go and doesn't go anywhere. It's just the changing changing, and it doesn't have an awareness of itself. The conjunction of the two, right is the problem. The distinction between the two is the way. We really thank you for listening. We appreciate any participation you know, of any kind.

29:38

God bless you, and we'll see you next time.