Introduction

There is a great affinity between Sgmkhya and Yoga. The twenty-five principles of Samkhya have been accepted in Yoga. The theory of creation propounded in Yoga also corresponds more or less to that found in Samkhya. The speciality of Yoga, however, is that it clearly accepts the existence of ISvara or God. Accordingly, Yoga is generally known as Sesvara Sam* khya or Theistic Samkhya. Thus, according to Yoga, there are twenty-six principles of reality : Kvara, purusa, and the twenty-four principles of prakrti and its evolutes. Of them,. purusa is what is known as the individual self.

Nature of the Self

According to Yoga, as to Sgmkhya, the purusa or self is a spiritual entity and is distinct from prakrti, the material cause of the world. It is neutral ; it has neither any attachment for nor any aversion to anything. It is inactive, as distinct from prakrti which is active. It is of the nature of consciousness, and hence is different from prakrti which is non-conscious¹. It is selfsame and unchangeable, as opposed to prakrti which is of the nature of eternal change. The self remains unchan­ged amidst all the modifications of the elements of individua­lity. It exists by itself and for itself, and hence it has no other end for which is should undergo changes². The purusa is self-luminous, self-complete and self-satisfied. It is free from.

The Self In Yoga ( Patafijala-Yoga )

bondage and liberation ; it is only because of its false identi­fication with buddhi that it seems to be undergoing bondage and attaining liberation. The purusa is all-pervasive ; it is neither atomic nor intermediary in magnitude³.

Though the purusa in its real nature is distinct from the physical body, the senses, the mind and the intellect, in the empirical state, it is neither quite similar to these elements nor quite distinct from them. Thus, the Vy&sa-bhfts.ya says that the purusa is not quite dissimilar to the elements of prakfti, because, had it been so, it could not perceive the ideas in the form of mental modification⁴. In other words, in the empirical state, the purusa identifies itself, as it were, with the mind. PaTicasikha, as quoted in the Vyasa-bhSsya, says "Not knowing the purusa beyond the mind to be different therefrom in nature, character knowledge etc., a man has the notion of self in the mind through delusion"⁵. The purusa is described by Vyasa as dfk or seer and as §akti or power like prakfti itself⁶.

The nature of puru§a found in Yoga, as in Samkhya, is very much similar to that found in Advaita Vedanta. The most remarkable point of difference, however, is that according to Samkhya-Yoga, the self is not one but many, while accor­ding to Advaitism, it is one. Patanjali does not say anything on this point; he has presumed the plurality of the self, as propounded by the Samkhyists⁷. There is no controversy among philosophers about the plurality of the selves in their empirical state. But the Samkhya-Yoga philosophers add that in the transcendental level also, the selves are many. Accor­dingly, in liberation also, the selves remain distinct from one another as well as from ISvara or God. Liberation, in this system, does> not mean merger of the self in God ; nor does it mean the establishment of some relation with Him. Liberation here means the realisation of the real nature of the self⁸.

The Self and God

In Yoga, ISvara or God is regarded as a particular self or

Illllllllliiiiltllllillllliilllilliliilllllllllililiilltllltllllllllllllil

IIHIIIIIIMiliilli'lllllllilillllllllllllll! IIIIIIIIIIHiilllllllllllflllllllllllllll

57

56

The Self in Indian Philosophy

purusa-viie$a⁹. He is not immanent in the selves but trans­cends them. God in Yoga is, thus, not the inner-self of the selves. The relation between God and the puru§a is, therefore, not inseparable or organic one. The puru§is are eternally existing and all-pervading realities and, hence, are not subject to origination and destruction. They do not come out of Isvara, like the sparks of a blazing fire ; nor are they dissolved into him in liberation. The puru$as are quite distinct from Isvara g they are not identical with him ; nor are they related to him as his parts. The selves are not governed by IsVara, nor are they dependent upon hi? grace for getting the fruits of their actions. It is the adfstas or merits and demerits of the selves that give forth the requisite results by bringing about necessary changes in prakrti¹⁰. IsVara is not the moral governor of the/Mj. He does not reward or punish theyivas for their actions; nor does he grant liberation to them. A spiritual aspirant attains liberation by the acquisition of mental equili­brium. And meditation on IsVara or devotion to him is simply one of the means of attaining this mental equilibrium. Bhik§u says that, of all kinds of conscious msditation, meditation on the Supreme Lord is the highest. Of course, Igvara in Yoga is said to help the devotees indirectly by removing the obstacles standing in the way of their spiritual progress. That means, ISvara does not directly grant liberation ; he only facilitates its attainment¹¹.

According to Vacaspati Mis"ra ( 9th century A. D.) and Vijnana Bhiksu, merits and demerits of the jlva<>can remove the barriers of prakfti, but they cannot put prakTti into action. It is Isvara they say, who activises and guides prakfti for the fulfilment of the ends of the purusas i.e. for their enjoyment and liberation. Thus, Isvara helps the purusas attain their ends, by guiding prqkrti in the suitable direction¹². But, as Isvara is not immanent in the selves, he does not inspire them from within; he only helps them from without. Accord ingly, the self is not required to aspire for union with Isvara.

The Self in Yoga ( Pataftjala-Yoga ) REFERENCES

1. drajfa drsi-matrah.—YS, 2.20 ; drsi-rmtra iti drk-saktir eva—YSB, j'Wrfciti-saktir eva keval.i—ibid, 4.34.

2. apaririamitvam—YSB, 2.20 ; puru$o'parinam7—TV on ibid.

3. See T'/on YS, 1.4, 4.31 and S. N. Dasgupta, Yoga as Philosophy and Religion, pp. 19-20.

4. sa buddher na sarnpo natyanta r. virupah— YSB, 2.20.

5. bhoktr-bhogya-saktyor atyanta-vibhaktayor atyantasankinruyoh— buddhitafi param puru$am— ipasyan kuryat tatratmabuddhim mohena -YSB, 2.6.

6. puruso drk-saktih — KSB, 2.6 ; drsi-matra iti drk-saktir c\a—Ibid, 2.20.

7. Dasgupta, op cit, p. 30.

8. svarupa-pratilambhs tu tayo'i kaivalyam—YSB, 2.6 ; kaivalyam sva- rupa-pratijtha va citi-saktir iti—YS, 4.34 ; tada dras^uh svarape'vas- thinam—YS, 4.3.

9. tasmad yasya sjmyatisayair vinirmuktam aisvaryam sa evesvarah sa purusa-vise§a iti—YSB, 1.24 ; kleja-karma-vipakasayair aparfimrs(;ah puru$a-vise$a Isvarah—YS, 1.24.

10. dharmah prakrtlnam avaraijaih bhinatti-7,5B, 4.3 ; Bhoja-vr.tti on YS, 4.3 ; Dasgupta, op cit, p. 87.

11. Isvara-pranidhanad va—YS, 1.23 ; pranidhanad bhakti-visesad avar- jita isvaras tam anugrhriati—YSB on ibid.

12. na ca purusartfio'pi pravartakah kith tu tadusenesvarah—TV, 4.3 ; isvaras tu simya-parinamadi-rupakhilavarana-bhangena udbodho-kah—YF on ibid.

CHAPTER

10

THE SELF IN VIJNANA BHIK§U'S PHILOSOPHY