learned men in India. The anonymous commentator of our manuscript explains their existence by asuming the existence of two Kapilas, and Hemádri, the Chief Justice, Chief Engineer and a feudatory of the last dynasty of Hindu kings at Devagiri (Mod. Daulatābād) considers a Brahmin versed in the Samkhya as the purest of the pure Brahmins, equal in rank with the professors of all the Vedas. But the Kapila he would consider more impure than even the hog and the dog, telling us that they belong to a school worse than the Lokāyatas; so both the sets of the sutras were in vogue in his time and they are still in existence. Some consider both to be orthodox and some consider the Kāpilas as absolutely heterodox. Besides these there are some school books on Samkhya at the head of which stands Samkhyasara by Vijñānabhikṣu, which were all composed within the last eight hundred years and the dates of these can be easily ascertained. It is often said that the Vedanta system of philosophy bas a greater hold on Indian minds than any other school of thought. Yes, Vedanta is very popular with the monastic world, ninety per cent, of the Hindu monks are the followers of Sankara's system. But the Samkhya system permeates the whole life of India. Its influence on every branch of Sanskrit literature is supreme. The Purāņas know very little of other systems. The Tantras are mainly followers of Samkhya. As regards Smrti the very foundation head of it, Manu, has been declared by Sankara as adopting Samkhya ideas. The Kavya literature, when philosophical, knows little of other systems of philosophy. Kalidasa, in his immortal poems, Raghuvamsa and Kumarasambhava rises to a soaring height in his hymns to Brahma and Visņu and the hymns are, from the beginning to the end, Samkhya in spirit. It is a well-known fact that the orthodox Samkhya has two schools, Seśvara and Niriśvara. In the case of Samkhya. Pravacana the Seśvara is represented by the commentary of Vijñānabhikṣu and the Nirisvara by that of Mahadeva Vedānti. Haribhadra, the Jaina writer of the eighth century, says that Śiva is the god of the Sesvara and Nārāyaṇa is the god of the Nirisvara School of Samkhya, because Haribhadra can not think of a school of philosophy without a God. The word he uses is "Devatā" which is very vaguely translated by the word "God." To him Sugata is the God of the Bauddha Darśana. Though I may be open to the charge of repetition, I think, I should conclude this survey of the chronology of the Samkhya system by beginning at the beginning. I began from the middle and I began with the most important pieces of information and hence there may be some confusion in the minds of my hearers. I believe that Kapila wrote the 22 sūtras, giving the bare outline of his system of primitive philosophy. He wrote before the Śvetasvatara, the Katha Upanisad and other later Vedic works embodying Samkhya ideas, were composed. His ileas were accepted in the seventh and sixth centuries B.C., a century or two later than the end of the Vedic period by all classes of thinkers. But they modified his system according to their own ideas and carried them to their logical conclusion by discarding Individuality. The Jainas kept to his last conclusion by making "Kaivalya" or " individuality" at solute. The orthodox Brahmins on the other hand, wrote a body of sūtras embodying his ideas but incorporating in it such peculiar ideas of their own as the authenticity of the Vedas, efficacy of sacrifices and so cn. This body of the sutras is lost. One single sūtra only is to be found in Gaudapada's commentary of the Golden Severty. Māṭhara wrote a commentary on this body of the sutras and some one perhaps elaborated it into the form of Saṣṭitantra or the Sixty Topics. Isvarakṛṣṇa epitomized Saștitantra and followed Matharabhāṣya in the fifth century, Gauḍa pada wrote a commentary on the seventy Karikas of Isvarakṛṣṇa, but he knew of the existence of the work in the Brahmana form, for he says, in the beginning of his work, that Kapila was the son of Brahma; with him were born Jñana, Dharma, Vairagya and Aiśvaryya ; and he imparted his knowledge to a Brahmin of Asurigotra ; (so Asuri was not his brother, because Kapila belonged to Gautama gotra which contained many] eminent men known in the Vedas). The Samkhya-Pravacana was based on the previous literature on the subject bat modified by Sankara's ideas for Vijñānabhiksu, the earlier and Seśvara commentator, was a downright follower of Sankara. His disciple, Bbāvā Gaṇeśa however comments on the 22 sûtras and there were many commentaries on the same later on. This is, in fact, the history of the Samkhya System of Philosophy which has profoundly influenced not only the thought but even life in India. The modern compendiums begin with Vijñānabhikṣu's Samkhyasāra. There are six or seven works after him, but they take their cue from him. II.—Dramatic Magadhi. By Dr. A. Banerji-Sastri, M.A., Ph.D. (Oxon) Professor of Sanskrit, Muzaffarpur College. Dramaturgists mentioned by Paṇini iv. iii. 110-11 imply the existence of dramas even before Panini. But the known dramas commence from Asvaghosa1 about the second century A.C. Different characters speak different dialects, Magadhi being generally employed by those of lower classes. 3 Whether this particular convention was a simple fiction or had some substratum of truth behind it is discussed later on. For the present it may be noted that there is certainly some difference, modification or development between Asvaghosa's Māgadhi," Kalidasa's and later. It is admitted that Magadhi, even Asokan was artificial; the process of stereotyping carried on by grammarians acquired its rigidity in the dramas and finally fixed as mere custom manifestly divorced from all reality," so that a drama written to-day would not hesitate to employ Magadhi of Asvaghosa or Kalidasa. It is further admitted that even the earliest dramas being already in a highly advanced stage, this idea of deliberately producing an illusion 8 was already at work. But even then, the fact remains that there was some sort of modification from Avsaghosa and his successors. It was partly due no doubt to a copyist's error, unintentional alteration or unauthorised correction in the light 1 Sten Konow, Das Indische Drama, page 50. 6 * Cowell, Buddha-Carita, 1893, pages v, vi. Lacôte, page 75. Vide pages 9-11. * Lüders, Bruchstücke, page 37. Bloch, Le Marathe page 12. 7 Haraprasad Śāstr, Svapnayāsavadatta (Ed. Ganapati) Intro. page xvii. Giles, Manuel of Comparative Philology, sections 614-6. of his own day; partly; also, perhaps to the existence of different schools as suggested by Barnett and Grierson. But it may also be assumed that the development of the actual vernaculars 1 was not without its influence in the gradual and possibly contemporaneous development of Magadhi (as of the other Prākṛts). Texts. The characters speaking Magadhi in all the dramas known till to-day are given below. Then follows an alphabetical list of all the Magadhi words of Asvaghosa. As the same characters or the same dramas sometimes employ different forms of the same word, perhaps belonging to different periods of philological development, the number of occurrence of each word should be noted down, and checked carefully. It may insinuate, however slightly, by a calculation of percentage, the course of phonological or morphological development. Extreme caution, however, is necessary in using the texts for linguistic purposes, for most of them are very badly edited. Pischel's 2 grammar may help in correcting the texts but it has been thought advisable to leave the texts as they are, even when, e.g. Nāgānanda, Caitanyacandrodaya, Laṭakameiaka, etc., the Magadhi portions are obviously changed into Sauraseni. In the characterization of dramatic Magadhī, such dubious cases have been slightly touched upon but nowhere adduced as evidence. I.-Fragments of Asvaghosa: Dusta, i.e. the Rascal, in in Carudatta. III. Śakuntala of Kalidasa, Fisherman, two Policemen, Sarvadamana, young son of Śakuntalā. [Pischel Kiel, 1877; Isvaracandra Vidyāsāgara.] 1 Grierson, Ency. Brit. 11th Ed. Vol. 22 p. 254; Beames Gram. Vol. I p. 7. 2 Pischel, G. D. P.-S. sec. 23. |