Samkhya School

Historical Development

The Sāṃkhya school is one of the six classical orthodox (āstika) schools of Hindu philosophy. It is widely regarded by historians of Indian thought as one of the oldest systematically developed philosophical systems in South Asia. Later sources attribute its founding to the sage Kapila, though reliable historical data about him are lacking. Early Sāṃkhya ideas appear in the Upaniṣads, the Mahābhārata, and especially the Bhagavad Gītā, where a form of “Sāṃkhya-yoga” is discussed.

A fully systematized Sāṃkhya is thought to have been presented in the now-lost Ṣaṣṭitantra (“Doctrine of Sixty Topics”). The earliest extant authoritative text is Īśvarakṛṣṇa’s Sāṃkhyakārikā (c. 4th–5th century CE), a concise verse treatise that became the canonical reference for classical Sāṃkhya. Later commentaries, such as those by Vijñānabhikṣu (16th century), elaborated and harmonized Sāṃkhya doctrine with Yoga and Vedānta.

Historically, Sāṃkhya existed in several versions, including theistic forms that accepted a god (Īśvara), and classical non-theistic Sāṃkhya, which does not posit a creator deity and explains the cosmos through the interaction of puruṣa and prakṛti alone. Over time, distinct institutional lineages of Sāṃkhya as a separate school declined, but its concepts deeply informed Pātañjala Yoga, various forms of Vedānta, and later Hindu theological systems.

Metaphysics and Doctrine

Sāṃkhya is best known for its dualist metaphysics and systematic enumeration (saṃkhyā) of principles (tattvas).

At its core, Sāṃkhya posits two eternal, independent realities:

1. Puruṣa – pure consciousness, the witnessing self, many in number. Puruṣa is described as inactive, contentless awareness: it does not act, desire, or change.
2. Prakṛti – primordial material nature, the unconscious ground from which all empirical phenomena arise. Prakṛti is one, eternal, and composed of three guṇas.

The three guṇas are:

• Sattva – clarity, light, harmony, associated with knowledge and happiness.
• Rajas – activity, passion, energy, associated with effort and restlessness.
• Tamas – inertia, darkness, heaviness, associated with ignorance and obstruction.

All psychological and physical states are seen as varying configurations of these three guṇas within prakṛti. When prakṛti comes into proximity with puruṣa, its equilibrium is disturbed, initiating a process of evolution (pariṇāma) that produces a sequence of tattvas.

Classical Sāṃkhya typically enumerates 25 tattvas:

1. Prakṛti (primordial nature) 2–8. Buddhi (intellect), ahaṃkāra (ego), manas (mind), and the five subtle elements (tanmātras) 9–13. Five cognitive senses (hearing, touch, sight, taste, smell) 14–18. Five active organs (speech, grasping, locomotion, excretion, procreation) 19–23. Five gross elements (space, air, fire, water, earth) 24–25. Puruṣa (as a distinct principle from prakṛti)

Some lists adjust the order or groupings but preserve the core structure: the subtle evolves into the gross, and inner instruments of cognition and agency evolve alongside the sensory and material worlds.

In Sāṃkhya epistemology, valid knowledge (pramāṇa) arises from:

• Perception (pratyakṣa)
• Inference (anumāna)
• Authoritative testimony (śabda)

Sāṃkhya argues for its dualism via inference: because unconscious matter cannot account for conscious experience, and consciousness does not exhibit the characteristics of matter, they must be distinct principles.

Unlike many other Hindu schools, classical Sāṃkhya does not posit a supreme creator god. It explains the orderliness of the cosmos through the intrinsic capacities of prakṛti and the presence of multiple puruṣas. Theistic forms of Sāṃkhya, however, reinterpret prakṛti and the guṇas under the governance of a personal deity, aligning the system more closely with devotional theologies.

Soteriology, Ethics, and Influence

The central goal of Sāṃkhya is liberation (kaivalya or mokṣa), understood as the complete cessation of suffering (duḥkha) through discriminative knowledge (vivekakhyāti) between puruṣa and prakṛti. According to Sāṃkhya, bondage arises because puruṣa mistakenly identifies with the products of prakṛti—body, mind, emotions, and actions. This misidentification (avidyā) generates karmic entanglement and repeated rebirth.

Liberation occurs when the practitioner firmly realizes that:

• Puruṣa is pure, passive witness-consciousness, not an agent.
• All experiences, pleasures, and pains belong to prakṛti and its guṇas, not to puruṣa.
• The body–mind complex continues to function as a residual process, but the liberated puruṣa is no longer inwardly bound by it.

Ethically, Sāṃkhya does not elaborate a separate, extensive code of conduct. Instead, it treats moral and psychological cultivation as preparatory conditions for knowledge. Actions that increase sattva—such as truthfulness, restraint, non-harm, and mental discipline—are regarded as supportive of clear discernment. By contrast, rajasic and tamasic tendencies foster attachment, confusion, and lethargy, which obscure insight.

Sāṃkhya has exerted a lasting influence on several traditions:

• Yoga: Pātañjali’s Yoga Sūtra adopts Sāṃkhya’s metaphysical framework almost wholesale, adding explicit theism and a stronger emphasis on meditative practice. The combined system is often labeled Sāṃkhya-Yoga.
• Vedānta: Advaita and other Vedānta schools regularly engage with Sāṃkhya, sometimes borrowing its analytical tools (e.g., guṇas, tattvas) while rejecting its dualism and non-theism.
• Hindu theology and Ayurveda: Concepts like guṇas and the layered structure of mind and matter have permeated Hindu religious, psychological, and medical thought.

Modern scholars debate the precise dating and early development of Sāṃkhya, as well as the relationship between its theistic and non-theistic strands. Proponents view it as a rigorously rational analysis of experience and causality, while critics challenge its dualist ontology and the inference of multiple puruṣas. Despite the waning of Sāṃkhya as a standalone scholastic institution, its categories remain central to understanding large portions of classical Indian philosophy and practice.