Re: [INDOLOGY] query on Sāṃkhya

[Nagaraj Paturi]

'Evolution' in saankhya is not evolution in time , particularly not
evolution in historical time.

'Evolution' here, is just a (metaphorical) expression for the hierarchy of
sources and results, causes and effects, controlling and controlled,
primary and secondary aspects of reality.

On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:08 PM alakendu das via INDOLOGY <
indology at list.indology.info> wrote:

> Dr.Kapstein,
> As I have understood Samkhya,This school of our philosophy begins with
> Prakriti or "Mulprakriti " which is the primordial element from which the
> Evolution sets off.Then we have Purusha,which may be equated with
> "Atmana".,..the omnipresent omnipotent Existence..Its the desperate
> endeavour on the part of
> Purusha to disentangle itself from the clutches of Prakriti ,with a view
> to attaining the Final Emancipation at the transcendental
> level(Paramarthika).The Samkhya flow chart ,perhaps,goes something as
> follows:-
> Prakriti-Purusha-Ahamkar -.Buddhi-Manas-5 Gyanendriyas(5 sense organs),5
> Karmendriyas,5 gross elements,and 5 subtle elements.A total of 25 elements
> constitutes the Samkhya evolutionary flow chart from the initial
> fundamental concept (Prakriti) at the bottom to the final Transcendence of
> the Purusha at the Top.It traces our entire journey from the mundane to the
> supra-mundane.
> Alakendu Das.
> Sent from RediffmailNG on Android
>
>
>
>
> From: Matthew Kapstein via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info>
> Sent: Tue, 28 May 2019 03:50:51 GMT+0530
> To: Indology <INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
> Subject: [INDOLOGY] query on Sāṃkhya
>
> Dear Indological colleagues,
>
>
> One of the peculiarities of Sāṃkhya thought is its unusual theory of
> "evolution" (though it might better be termed "emanation") which proceeds
> from the subtle modifications of the *mūlaprakṛti* to those that are
> increasingly coarse, namely the organs of sense and of action, and finally
> to their physical objects. This seems a very odd evolutionary path when we
> first encounter it and I am wondering if there has been any work that seeks
> to explain just why Sāṃkhya adopted what to us may seem a remarkably
> counter-intuitive framework. I do have my own theory about this, but I
> would not want to publish it if someone else has already come up with a
> similar idea. I would therefore be grateful for any suggestions you may
> have concerning scholarship that seeks to explain just why it is that
> Sāṃkhya proceeds from top to bottom, as it were, rather than the other
> way around.
>
>
> with thanks in advance for your advice about this,
>
> Matthew
>
>
> Matthew Kapstein
> Directeur d'études,
> Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes
>
> Numata Visiting Professor of Buddhist Studies,
> The University of Chicago
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
> committee)
> http://listinfo.indology.info <http://listinfo.indology.info==> (where
> you can change your list options or unsubscribe)
>
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
> committee)
> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or
> unsubscribe)
>


-- 
Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.


Director,  Inter-Gurukula-University Centre for Indic Knowledge Systems.
BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20190528/7b190353/attachment.htm>