Samkhya
The Samkhya school is one of the six orthodox schools of Indian philosophy. It is famous for its analysis of experience as involving twenty-five principles (tattvas), divided into two fundamentally different categories. The first of these is purusha, which is conceived as a pure, immaterial, awareness. It is inactive and has no causal power. There are a plurality of purushas, which are individual selves. The second category is prakriti, which is the unmanifest material stuff that contains the potentiality to evolve from within itself a series of twenty-three evolutes, which are different grades of mind and body. These tattvas have causal power, but in themselves they are unable to know or be aware of anything. Purushas can act only if they take themselves to be embodied (first in a mental body, then in a body constituted of the elements, subtle and gross), while the mental and physical bodies are sentient and possess the power to know only when they are not distinguished from a purusha. The self is said to be in bondage insofar as it identifies itself with any of these evolutes of prakriti. Through the practice of discrimination, the self can gradually disidentify with the body and the mind. As it does so, each evolute resolves back into its prior tattva, in the reverse sequence of causal evolution, until the purusha is liberated in a state of isolation from prakriti and, simultaneously, prakriti ceases to be manifest for that purusha, although for the other purushas still in bondage, it remains manifest.
Text items highlighted in yellow below are links into the archive for the topics, keywords, and search methods being discussed. Use them as a starting point to explore the archive, and as a shortcut to doing the searches.
Why Damiani Was Interested in Samkhya
Damiani was interested in Samkhya for several reasons. First, it offers a detailed analysis of mind as substance and function, presented as a hierarchy of principles, each principle having one or more distinctive functions. This lends itself to comparisons with analyses of mind or soul in other thinkers and traditions, as well as with correlations with various divisions of the metaphysical chart (houses) and the essential dignities in those houses.
Second, it makes a clear distinction between the soul and its vehicles, and emphasizes the importance of discriminating between the self and its vehicles. From Damiani’s reading of Plato, Plotinus, PB, Advaita Vedanta, and Buddhism, this is a crucial aspect of the path to spiritual liberation.
Third, it offers a rich account of matter and its tendencies to function in certain ways, which is an ancient problem in philosophy, discussed by Plato, Plotinus, Advaita Vedanta, Alchemy, Kabbalah, etc.
Fourth, its critics point out the challenge in having an ultimate dualism in one’s metaphysics: how can two fundamentally disparate principles ever be related?
Krishnachandra Bhattacharyya (KCB)
Damiani thought highly of the twentieth-century Indian philosopher Krishnachandra Bhattacharyya, often referred to as “KCB.” In the classes on Samkhya, he often used Bhattacharyya’s terse essays “Studies in Samkhya Philosophy” and “Studies in Yoga Philosophy” to explain the Samkhya system. And in many of these classes he tried to correlate the Samkhya tattvas with various divisions of the metaphysical chart, usually with the dignities in the last three houses (the fourth quadrant). There are transcripts of some of these classes, but for others we have only audio files that haven’t yet been transcribed or scans of student summaries that haven’t been digitized.
There is one class series on Samkhya; see “Samkhya and Ethers” in the list of class series.
You can find other extant transcripts on Samkhya by searching under the keyword “Samkhya” in the document archive.
There are also many diagrams in the sketchbooks that show various correlations between the Samkhya tattvas and the dignities and houses of the metaphysical chart. Select “Samkhya” in the drop-down topic menu or use “Samkhya” in a keyword search to find them.
There are some classes that focus on Bhattacharyya’s other articles, which often espouse his uniquely modern take on the Advaita Vedanta. Damiani was particularly interested in KCB’s discussion of three levels of subjectivity (bodily, psychic, and spiritual), and his analysis of the three functions of knowing, willing, and feeling. Many of these classes discussed KCB’s views in relation to astrology theory. Although there are transcripts of some of these classes, there are many more classes for which we have audio files that have not been transcribed. If and when these audio files are transcribed, some will, no doubt, form new class series.
To find transcripts of classes where KCB’s views are discussed and applied, search on “Bhattacharyya” in the document archive.