======================================================================
= Samkhyakarika =
======================================================================
Introduction
======================================================================
The Sāṅkhyakārikā (Sanskrit: साङ्ख्यकारिका, 'Sāṅkhyakārikā,' sometimes
spelled 'Sāṃkhyakārikā') is the earliest surviving text of the Sāṅkhya
(sometimes Sāṃkhya) school of Indian philosophy. The text's original
composition date is unknown, but its 'terminus ad quem' (completed
before) date has been established through its Chinese translation that
became available by 569 CE. It is attributed to Īśvarakṛṣṇa (fl. 350
CE).
In the text, the author described himself as a successor of the
disciples from the great sage Kapila, through and . His consists of
72 s written in the Ārya metre, with the last verse asserting that the
original Samkhya Karika had only 70 verses.
Commentaries
======================================================================
There are three known commentaries on the 'Samkhyakarika.' The
earliest commentary is the 'Gaudapada-bhashya', written by Gaudapada.
The 'Tattvakaumudi' is a commentary written by Vacaspati Misra. The
'Yuktidipika,' whose author is unknown, is also a notable commentary
on the 'Samkhyakarika.' Medieval era manuscript editions of the
'Yuktidipika' were discovered and published in the mid 20th-century.
The well known and widely studied medieval era reviews and
commentaries on Samkhya-karika include the 'Gaudapada Samkhya Karika
Bhasya' (unclear date, certainly before 8th-century), the Paramartha's
Chinese translation (6th-century), the 'Matharavrtti', the 'Samkhya
tattva kaumudi' (9th-century), the 'Jayamangala' (likely before
9th-century), and the more recently discovered 'Yuktidipika'.
Vacaspati Mishra's is well studied commentary, in addition to his
well-known commentary to Yoga Sutras of Patanjali.
Translations
======================================================================
The was translated into Chinese in the sixth century CE. In 1832,
Christian Lassen translated the text in Latin. H.T. Colebrooke first
translated this text into English. Windischmann and Lorinser
translated it into German, and Pautier and St. Hilaire translated it
into French.
Authorship and chronology
======================================================================
Samkhya is an important pillar of Indian philosophical tradition,
called 'shad-darshana', however, of the standard works of Samkhya only
three are available at present. These are: 'Samkhya Sutras' attributed
to the founder of Samkhya, Kapila; 'Tattva Samasa', which some authors
(Max Muller) consider prior to 'Samkhya Sutras,''The Six Systems of
Indian Philosophy'; Friedrich Max Müller, p.296, 2013, ASIN:
B00F1M1B1Y
and 'Samkhyakarika' authored by Ishvara Krishna. Ishvara Krishna
follows several earlier teachers of Samkhya and is said to come from
Kausika family. He taught before Vasubandhu and is placed following
Kapila, Asuri, Panchashikha, Vindhyavasa, Varsaganya, Jaigisavia,
Vodhu, Devala and Sanaka.
Gerald Larson notes that the 'Samkhyakarika' was composed sometime in
the Gupta Empire period, between 320-540 CE. The translation of
Paramartha into Chinese together with a commentary was composed over
557-569 CE, has survived in China, and it constitutes the oldest
surviving version of the 'Samkhyakarika'. Several manuscripts, with
slightly variant verses are known, but these do not challenge the
basic thesis or the overall meaning of the text.
While Samkhya ideas developed in the second half of the 1st millennium
BCE through the Gupta period, the analysis of evidence shows, states
Larson, that Samkhya is rooted in the speculations of the Vedic era
Brahmanas and the oldest Upanishads of Hinduism on the nature of man,
and that it is generally agreed that Samkhya's formulation took place
at the earliest after the oldest Upanishads had been composed (~800
BCE).
In terms of comparative textual chronology. Larson states that the
final redaction of Yogasutra and the writing of 'Samkhyakarika' were
probably contemporaneous. The Samkhya literature grew with later
developments such as Vacaspati Mishra's 'Tattvakaumudi.'
Number of verses
==================
The 'Samkhyakarika', wrote ancient Hindu scholars Gaudapada and
Vacaspati Misra, contains seventy two verses. However, Gaudapada
commented on the first sixty nine, leading 19th-century colonial era
scholars to suggest that the last three may have been added later.
With the discovery of 6th-century manuscripts of translations of the
Indian text into Chinese language, it became clear that by the
6th-century, the 'Samkhyakarika' had seventy two verses. The Chinese
version includes commentary on the 'Samkhyakarika', but for unknown
reasons, skips or misses the commentary on verse sixty three.
In mid 20th-century, the first manuscript of 'Yuktidipika' was
discovered in India, which is a review and commentary on the 'Karika'.
'Yuktidipika', for unknown reasons, skipped commenting on verses sixty
through sixty three, verse sixty five and sixty six, but reviews and
analyzes the remaining 66 of 72 verses.
The medieval era 'Matharavrtti' text states that the 'Karika' has
seventy three verses. In contrast, verse seventy two of the surviving
6th-century CE 'Karika' declares that its original had just seventy
verses, implying that a more ancient version of 'Samkhyakarika' once
existed. Scholars have attempted to produce a critical edition, by
identifying the most ancient original set of seventy verses, but this
effort has not produced a consensus among scholars. In terms of
content, importance and meaning, the text is essentially the same
regardless of which version of the manuscript is referred to.
Meter
=======
Each verse of the philosophical 'Samkhyakarika' text is composed in a
precise mathematical meter, that repeats in a musical rhythm of an
Arya meter (also called the Gatha, or song, meter). Every verse is set
in two half stanza with the following rule: both halves have exactly
repeating total instants and repeating sub-total pattern in the manner
of many ancient Sanskrit compositions. The stanza is divided into
feet, each feet has four instants, with its short syllable counting as
one instant (matra), while the long syllable prosodically counts are
two instants.
Each verse of the 'Samkhyakarika' is presented in four quarters (two
quarters making one half). The first quarter has exactly three feet
(12 beats), the second quarter four and half feet (18 beats), the
third quarter of every verse has three feet (12 beats again), while
the fourth quarter has three and a half plus an extra short syllable
at its end (15 beats). Thus, metrically, the first half stanza of
every verse of this philosophical text has thirty instants, the second
has twenty seven.
Contents
======================================================================
Samkhya emerged in the Vedic tradition, states Gerald Larson, and the
'Samkhyakarika' is an important text that was the fruit of those
efforts.
Goal of the text: verses 1 to 3
=================================
The 'Samkhyakarika' opens by stating that the pursuit of happiness is
a basic need of all human beings. Yet, one is afflicted by three forms
of suffering, a truth that motivates this text to study means of
counteracting suffering:
The three causes of unhappiness (or the problem of suffering, evil in
life) are 'adhyatmika' that is caused by self; 'adhibhautika' that is
caused by others and external influences; and, 'adhidaivika' that is
caused by nature and supernatural agencies. The suffering are two
types, of body and of mind. The perceptible means of treatment include
physicians, remedies, magic, incantations, expert knowledge of moral
and political science, while avoidance through residence in safe
places are also perceptible means available. These obvious means,
state scholars, are considered by Samkhyakarika, as temporary as they
do not provide absolute or final removal of suffering.
Verse 2 asserts that scriptures, too, are visible means available, yet
they, too, are ultimately ineffective in relieving sorrow and giving
spiritual contentment, because scriptures deal with impurity, decay
and inequality.Original Sanskrit: दृष्टवदानुश्रविकः स
ह्यविशुद्धिक्षयातिशययुक्तः । तद्विपरीतः श्रेयान्
व्यक्ताव्यक्तज्ञविज्ञानात् ॥ २ ॥
[
http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_major_works/IshvarakRiShNasAnkyakArikA.pdf
Source] The verse then posits its thesis, states Larson, that "a
superior method different from both" exists, and this is the path of
knowledge and understanding. More specifically, liberation from
suffering comes from discriminative knowledge of 'Vyakta' (evolving,
manifest world), 'Avyakta' (unevolving, unmanifest empirical world,
Prakrti), and 'Jna' (knower, self, Purusha).
Verse 3 introduces the ontology of the tradition, nothing that that
'Mulaprakrti' (primordial nature) is uncreated, seven 'tattvas'
(elements), starting with 'mahat' (intellect), are both created and
creative, sixteen 'tattvas' are created and evolve (but are not
creative), whilst 'Purusha' is neither created nor creative and does
not evolve. It simply exists. Thus, altogether, there are twenty five
'tattvas'.
Means of knowledge: verses 4 to 8
===================================
Verse 4 introduces the epistemology of Samkhya school of Hindu
philosophy, and states that there are three 'pramana', that is
reliable paths to reliable knowledge: perception, inference and the
testimony of reliable person. All other paths to knowing anything is
derived from these three, states the 'Samkhyakarika'. It then adds
that these three paths can enable one to know twenty five 'Tattvas'
that exist.Original Sanskrit: दृष्टमनुमानमाप्तवचनञ्च
सर्वप्रमाणसिद्धत्वात् । त्रिविधं प्रमाणमिष्टं प्रमेयसिद्धिः
प्रमाणाद्धि ॥ ४ ॥
[
http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_major_works/IshvarakRiShNasAnkyakArikA.pdf
Source] Verse 5 of 'Samkhyakarika' defines perception as the immediate
knowledge one gains by the interaction of sense organ with anything;
inference, it defines as the knowledge one gains based on meditation
on one's perception; and testimony as that knowledge one gains from
the efforts of those one considers as a reliable source; it then
succinctly asserts that there are three types of inferences for the
epistemic quest of man, without explaining what these three types of
inferences are.Original Sanskrit: प्रतिविषयाध्यवसायो दृष्टं
त्रिविधमनुमानमाख्यातम् । तल्लिङ्गलिङ्गिपूर्वकमाप्तश्रुतिराप्तवचनन्तु ॥
५ ॥
[
http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_major_works/IshvarakRiShNasAnkyakArikA.pdf
Source]
Verse 6 asserts that objects can be known either through sensory
organs or through super-sense (inner derivation from
observations).Original Sanskrit: सामान्यतस्तु दृष्टादतीन्द्रियाणां
प्रतीतिरनुमानात् । तस्मादपि चासिद्धं परोक्षमाप्तागमात्सिद्धम् ॥ ६ ॥
[
http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_major_works/IshvarakRiShNasAnkyakArikA.pdf
Source] Verse 7 of the 'Samkhyakarika' states that perception alone is
not sufficient means to know objects and principles behind observed
reality, certain existent things are not perceived and are derived.
The text in verse 8 asserts that the existence of Prakriti (empirical
nature, substances) is proven by perception but its subtle principles
are non-perceptible. The text notes that the human mind, among others,
emerge from Prakriti but are not directly perceptible, rather inferred
and self derived. The reality of mind and such differ and resemble
Prakriti in different aspects.Original Sanskrit:
सौक्ष्म्यात्तदनुपलब्धिर्नाभावात्कार्यतस्तदुपलब्धिः । महदादि तच्च
कार्यं प्रकृतिविरूपं सरूपञ्च ॥ ८ ॥
[
http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_major_works/IshvarakRiShNasAnkyakArikA.pdf
Source]
The theory of causation and the doctrine of Gunas: verses 9 to 14
===================================================================
'Samkhyakarika', in verse 9 introduces its theory of 'satkaryavada'
(causation), asserting that "the effect is pre-existent in the cause".
That which exists, states the 'Samkhyakarika', has a cause; that which
exists not, lacks a cause; and when there exists a cause, in it is the
seed and longing for the effect; that, a potent cause produces that
which it is capable of.Original Sanskrit:
असदकरणादुपादानग्रहणात्सर्वसम्भवाभावात् । शक्तस्य शक्यग्रहणात्
कारणभावाच्च सत्कार्यम् ॥ ९ ॥
[
http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_major_works/IshvarakRiShNasAnkyakArikA.pdf
Source] Hence, it is nature of existence that "perceptible principles
exist in nature", and effects are manifestation of the perceptible
principles. The Samkhya theory of causation, 'satkāryavāda', is also
referred to as the theory of existent effect.
Verse 10 asserts that there are two kinds of principles operating in
the universe: discrete, un-discrete. The discrete is inconstant,
isolated and unpervading, mutable, supporting, mergent, conjunct and
with an agent. The un-discrete is constant, field-like, pervasive,
immutable, non-supporting, non-mergent, separable and independent of
an agent. Both discrete and un-discrete, describes the 'Samkhyakarika'
in verse 11, are simultaneously imbued with three qualities, and these
qualities (Guṇa) are objective, common, prolific, do not discriminate
and are innate. It is in these respects, asserts the 'Samkhyakarika',
that they are the reverse of the nature of the self because the self
is devoid of these qualities.Original Sanskrit: त्रिगुणमविवेकि विषयः
सामान्यमचेतनं प्रसवधर्मि । व्यक्तं तथा प्रधानं तद्विपरीतस्तथा च पुमान्
॥ ११ ॥
[
http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_major_works/IshvarakRiShNasAnkyakArikA.pdf
Source]
The text in verse 12 states that the three guṇa (qualities), that is
sattva, tamas and rajas, respectively correspond to pleasure, pain and
dulness, mutually domineer, produce each other, rest on each other,
always reciprocally present and work together. This Samkhya theory of
qualities have been widely adopted by various schools of Hinduism for
categorizing behavior and natural phenomena.
Verses 13-14 state that sattva is good, enlightening and illuminating,
rajas is urgent, motion and restless, whilst tamas is darkness,
obscuring and distressing; these work together in observed nature just
like oil, wick and fire together in a lamp. Nature merely undergoes
modification, transformation, or change in appearance, but this is
innate effect that already was in the cause, because asserts the
'Samkhyakarika', nothing cannot produce something.
Nature of Prakrti: verses 15 to 16
====================================
The 'Samkhyakarika' defines Prakriti as "that nature which evolves",
and asserts to be the material cause of the empirically observed
world. Prakriti, according to the text, both physical and psychical,
is that which is manifested as the matrix of all modifications.
Prakriti is not primal matter, nor the metaphysical universal, rather
it is the basis of all objective existence, matter, life and mind.
Prakriti has two dimensions, that which is 'vyakta' (manifest), and
that which is 'avyakta' (unmanifest). Both have the three 'guṇas'
that, states the text, is in continual tension with one another, and
it is their mutual interaction on Prakriti that causes the emergence
of the world as we know it. When the three 'guṇas' are in equilibrium,
no modification occurs; when one of three innate qualities is more
active, the process of evolution is in action, change emerges
('gunaparinama'). These two verses are significant, states Larson, in
aphoristically presenting Samkhya's doctrines of causation,
relationship between 'vyakta' and 'avyakta', and its doctrine of what
drives evolution.
Nature of Purusha: verses 17 to 19
====================================
'Samkhyakarika' asserts, states Larson, that apart from Prakriti and
the emergent creation, of equilibrium and evolution, exists 'Purusha'
(or self, soul). Purusha is pure consciousness, is itself inactive yet
whose presence disrupts the equilibrium of the three Guṇas in their
unmanifest condition. The disruption triggers the emergence of the
manifested condition of empirical reality we experience, states the
text.
More specifically, verse 17 offers a proof that soul exists, as
follows:
Verse 18 of the 'Samkhyakarika' asserts that many souls must exist
because numerous living beings are born, die and exist; because
'guṇas' are operating and affect everyone differently; and because
everyone is endowed with instruments of cognition and action. Verse 19
states that the soul is the conscious "witness, separate, neutral,
seer and inactive".
The connection between Prakriti and Purusha: verses 20 to 21
==============================================================
A living being is a union of Prakriti and Purusha, posits
Samkhya-karika in verses 20-21. The Prakriti as the insentient
evolute, joins with Purusha which is sentient consciousness.
The Karika states that the purpose of this union of Prakriti and
Purusha, creating the reality of the observed universe, is to
actualize a two-fold symbiosis. One, it empowers the individual to
enjoy and contemplate on Prakriti and Purusha through self-awareness;
and second, the conjunction of Prakriti and Purusha empowers the path
of Kaivalya and Moksha (liberation, freedom).
The verse 21 aphoristically mention the example of "the blind and the
lame", referring to the Indian legend of a blind and a lame person
left in the forest, who find each other, inspire mutual trust and
confidence, agree to share the duties with the blind doing the walking
and the lame doing the seeing, the lame sits on blind's shoulder, and
thus explore and travel through the forest. Soul (Purusha), in this
allegory, is similarly symbiotically joined with body and nature
(Prakriti) in the journey of life. Soul desires freedom, meaning and
liberation, and this it can achieve through contemplation and
abstraction.
These verses present a peculiar form of dualism, states Gerald Larson,
because they assert unconscious primordial "stuff" on one hand, and
pure consciousness on the other. This contrasts with dualism presented
in other schools of Hindu philosophy where dualism focuses on the
nature of individual soul and Brahman (universal reality).
The theory of emergence of principles: verses 22 to 38
========================================================
These verses, states Larson, provide a detailed discussion of the
theory of emergence, that is what emerges, how and the functioning of
the different emergents. The discussion includes the emergence of
'buddhi' (intelligence), the 'ahamkara' (ego), the 'manas' (mind), the
five 'buddhindriyas' (sensory organs), the five 'karmendriyas' (action
organs), the five 'tanmantras' (subtle elements), the five mahabhutas
(gross elements), and thereafter the text proceeds to detailing its
theory of knowledge process.
The Karika's verse 22 asserts that 'Mahat' (the Great Principle,
intellect) is the first evolute of nature (Prakriti, human body), from
it emerges ego ('Ahamkara', I-principle), from which interface the
"set of sixteen" (discussed in later verses). Verses 23-25 describes
Sattva, as the quality of seeking goodness, wisdom, virtue,
non-attachment. The reverse of Sattva, asserts Karika is Tamasa.
Sattva is the characteristic of intellect, states the text.
The 'Karika' lists the sensory organs to be the eyes, ears, nose,
tongue and skin, while action organs as those of voice, hands, feet,
excretory organs and that of procreation. Mind, states the text, is
both a sensory organ in some aspects, and an organ of action in other
aspects. Mind ponders, it is cognate, it integrates information and
then interacts with the organs of action, it is also modified by the
three innate qualities and diverse manifestations of it, asserts the
text. Ego (Ahamkara), states the text, is self-assertion. Sattva
influenced sensory organs and action organs create the 'Vaikrita' form
of Ahamkara, while Tamasa influence creates the 'Bhutadi' Ahamkara or
the Tanmatras.
Verses 29-30 of the text assert that all the organs depend on 'prana'
(breath or life), and that it is prana that connects them to the
unseen one, the soul. The three internal emergent faculties
('Trayasya'), states Karika in verse 29, are mind, ego and the ability
to reason. The sensory and action organs perform their respective
function, by cooperating with each other, fueled by the life-force,
while the soul is the independent observer. The organs manifest the
object and the purpose of one's soul, not the purpose of anything
outside of oneself, states verse 31 of the text. Verses 32 through 35
of Karika present its theory how the various sensory organs operate
and cooperate to gain information, how action organs apprehend and
manifest driven by mind, ego and three innate qualities (Gunas).
Verses 36 and 37 assert that all sensory organs cooperate to present
information to the mind, and it is the mind that presents knowledge
and feelings to one's soul (Purusha within).
The theory of reality: verses 39 to 59
========================================
The Samkhya-karika in these verses, states Larson, discusses its
theory of reality and how one experiences it. The text includes the
discussion of impulses and 'bhavas' (dispositions, desires) that
produce human experience and determine subjective reality. The Karika
asserts that there is twofold emergence of reality, one which is
objective, elemental and external; another which is subjective,
formulating in mind and internal. It interfaces these with its
epistemic theory of knowledge, that is perception, inference and the
testimony of reliable person, then presenting its theory of error,
theory of complacency, theory of virtue and necessary conditions for
suffering, happiness and release.
Verse 39 begins with three specific evolutes of Prakrti: subtle
bodies, bodies received from parents, and gross elements. The bodies
received from our parents are our tangible bodies, which the
'Samkhyakarika' asserts are perishable. Verse 40 goes on to explain
that the subtle bodies are permanent, created during the creation of
the universe. Verse 41, through an analogy of the non-existence of
paintings and shadows without their substratum, asserts that the
'buddhi' etc. require the subtle body in order to exist. Verse 42 goes
on to state that the subtle body operates as Purusha requires it to.
The theory of understanding and freedom: verses 60 to 69
==========================================================
The verses 60-69 begin by stating the duality theory of the Samkhya
school, which asserts that Prakriti (nature) and Purusha (soul) are
absolutely separate.
The Karika, in verse 63, asserts that human nature variously binds
itself by a combination of seven means: weakness, vice, ignorance,
power, passion, dispassion and virtue. That same nature, once aware of
soul's object, liberates by one means: knowledge. Verse 64 of the text
states that this knowledge is obtained from the study of principles,
that there is a difference between inert nature and conscious soul,
nature is not consciousness, consciousness is not enslaved to nature
and that consciousness is "complete, free from error, pure and
'kevala' (solitary)". Man's deepest selfhood in these verses of
Karika, states Larson, is not his empirical ego or his intelligence,
rather it is his consciousness, and "this knowledge of the absolute
otherness of consciousness frees man from the illusion of bondage and
brings man's deepest selfhood into absolute freedom ('kaivalya')".
Atheism in Samkhyakarika
==========================
The Karika is silent about God, states Johannes Bronkhorst,
neither denying nor affirming the existence of God. The text discusses
existence and consciousness, how the world came into existence and
what is the relationship between nature and soul. The numerous
Sanskrit commentaries on Samkhya-karika from 1st millennium CE through
the 2nd millennium, states Bronkhorst, extensively use the Karika to
discuss the question whether or not God is the cause of the
world.
Vācaspati Mishra’s 'Tattvakaumudi' , for example, states that the
creation could not have been supervised by God, since God is without
activity and has no need for activity. Further, citing Karika's verses
56-57 and others, that another reason why God cannot be
considered the creator of the world, is that God has no desires
and no purpose is served for God by creating the universe. The
text asserts that there is suffering and evil experienced by living
beings, but God who is considered to be free from the three Gunas
(qualities) could not be creating Guna in living beings and the
vicissitudes of living beings, therefore God is neither the cause of
suffering and evil nor the cause of the world.
The commentary that was translated into Chinese in 6th-century CE
by Paramārtha, states in its review and analysis of Samkhya-karika:
The 11th-century Buddhist commentator Jnanasribhadra, frequently cites
various Hindu schools of philosophies in his 'Arya-Lankavatara
Vritti', of which Samkhya school and Samkhya-karika is the most
common. Jnanasribhadra states, citing Samkhya-karika, that Samkhyans
believe in the existence of the soul and the world, in contrast to
teachings in the Buddhist text 'Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra', adding that many
Samkhyans are atheistic.
Samkhya is an atheistic philosophy according to Paul Deussen and other
scholars.
Liberation and freedom from suffering
=======================================
Jnanasribhadra, the 11th-century Buddhist scholar, quotes
Samkhya-karika, Gaudapada-bhasya, and Mathara-Vritti on the Karika, to
summarize Samkhya school's position on the path to liberation:
See also
======================================================================
* Samkhyakarika darshan
Further reading
======================================================================
* Mikel Burley (2012), Classical Samkhya and Yoga - An Indian
Metaphysics of Experience, Routledge, (Appendix A: Translation of
Samkhyakarika)
* Digambarji, Sahai and Gharote (1989), Glossary of Sankhyakarika,
Kaivalyadhama Samiti,
* Daniel P. Sheridan, ', in 'Great Thinkers of the Eastern World', Ian
McGreal, ed., New York: Harper Collins, 1995, pp. 194-197.
* Jens Lauschke (2023). SAMKHYA YOGA: An Interpretation of Iswara
Krishna's Samkhya Karika. Taxila Publications
External links
======================================================================
Texts
*
[
https://archive.org/stream/thesaankhyakaari00alasuoft#page/n3/mode/2up
Samkhyakarika of Iswara Krishna] Henry Colebrook (Translator), Oxford
University Press, Oxford
* [
https://archive.org/stream/hinduphilosophys00davi#page/12/mode/2up
Samkhyakarika of Iswara Krishna] John Davis (Translator), Trubner,
London, University of Toronto Archives
*
[
http://www.universaltheosophy.com/legacy/movements/ancient-east/sankhya/samkhya-karika/
Samkhya Karika with Gaudapada's commentary (html format), trans. by
Dr. Har Dutt Sharma (1933)]
* [
https://archive.org/details/samkhyakarikasof00weldrich Samkhya
Karika (E.A. Welden translation) at the Internet Archive]
*
[
http://www.sanskritdocuments.org/all_pdf/IshvarakRiShNasAnkyakArikA.pdf
Samkhya Karika in PDF]
*
[
https://archive.org/stream/SamkhyaKarikaGaudapada/sankhya_karika_gaudapada#page/n0/mode/2up
Samkhya karika with Gaudapada Bhasya], Sanskrit Original
*
[
http://theosnet.net/dzyan/hindu/samkhya_karika_and_yukti-dipika_1938.pdf
Yuktidipika - a medieval era text that reviews and comments on
Samkhyakarika], Sanskrit Original (one of two editions published)
Papers
* Knut Jacobsen (2006),
[
https://www.proquest.com/openview/c592f05b090b76c702bf2d3a7ded7732/1?pq-origsite=gscholar
What similes in Samkhya do: a comparison of the similes in the Samkhya
texts in the Mahabharata, the Samkhyakarika' and the Samkhyasutra],
Journal of Indian philosophy, 34(6), pages 587-605
License
=========
All content on Gopherpedia comes from Wikipedia, and is licensed under CC-BY-SA
License URL:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
Original Article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samkhyakarika
