كابيلا
التعليم المنسوب إليه يفصل الوعي الخالص عن الطبيعة الفاعلة: ينتهي الألم حين ندرك أن الذات ليست الجسد ولا العقل.
التموضع
المؤسس الأسطوري للسانكهيا، أقدم نسق ثنائي في الهند: الوعي الخالص (بوروشا) منفصل عن الطبيعة الفاعلة (براكريتي)؛ وأقدم نص منهجي فيها «سانكهيا كاريكا» لإيشفاراكريشنا (نحو القرن 4–5 م).
الأفكار الرئيسة
- بوروشا وبراكريتي
- الغونات الثلاث
- الأثر كامن في علّته (ساتكاريافادا)
التأثير
أثّر في 3
باتانجالي
أثّر في
Patanjali’s Yoga Sutra takes over the Samkhya ascribed to Kapila, the dualism of conscious self (purusha) and nature (prakriti) with its three gunas, adding a special self, Ishvara. Patanjali, Yoga Sutra; G. J. Larson, Classical Samkhya (1969); E. F. Bryant, The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali (2009)
التوثيق: مسودة بالذكاء الاصطناعي
باتانجالي › نحو 325–400
البيروني
أثّر في
Al-Biruni translated into Arabic a Samkhya book that he ascribed to Kapila (Kitab Sank, lost) and drew on it throughout his India (c. 1030) for the Indian doctrines of soul, matter and liberation. al-Biruni, Tahqiq ma li-l-Hind (c. 1030), preface, chs. VII and XII, tr. E. Sachau, Alberuni’s India (1888), vol. I
التوثيق: مسودة بالذكاء الاصطناعي
البيروني › 973–1048
ك. سي. بهاتاتشاريا
أثّر في
K. C. Bhattacharya’s Studies in Samkhya Philosophy reinterpreted the Samkhya ascribed to Kapila, with its distinction of conscious self and nature, as a living philosophical option. K. C. Bhattacharya, “Studies in Sankhya Philosophy”, in Studies in Philosophy I (1956)
التوثيق: مسودة بالذكاء الاصطناعي
ك. سي. بهاتاتشاريا › 1875–1949
النقد
انتقده 2
آدي شانكارا
انتقده
Shankara argued that the Samkhya ‘nature’ (pradhana), being unconscious, cannot produce an ordered world without an intelligent cause (Brahmasutrabhashya II.2.1–10). Śaṅkara, Brahmasūtrabhāṣya I.1.5–11, II.2.1–10
التوثيق: مسودة بالذكاء الاصطناعي
آدي شانكارا › نحو 700–750 · يُؤرَّخ عرفًا 788–820
جورج فيلهلم فريدريش هيغل
انتقده
Hegel discussed Kapila’s Samkhya after Colebrooke’s essays in his Lectures on the History of Philosophy and judged that in Indian philosophy the Idea never becomes objective: the subject is lost in abstract substance instead of reaching freedom. Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie (ed. Michelet 1833), “Indian Philosophy”; H. T. Colebrooke, “On the Philosophy of the Hindus”, Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society 1 (1827)
التوثيق: مسودة بالذكاء الاصطناعي
جورج فيلهلم فريدريش هيغل › 1770–1831
الموقف
Samkhya (“enumeration”) counts out the constituents of reality and traces them to two utterly different principles. Purusha is pure consciousness – many, inactive, a mere witness. Prakriti is unconscious primal nature, woven of three strands (gunas): sattva (clarity), rajas (activity) and tamas (inertia). When their balance is disturbed, nature unfolds into intellect, ego-sense, mind, senses and elements – twenty-five principles in all. Effects pre-exist in their causes (satkaryavada). Suffering comes from confusing consciousness with the workings of nature; liberation (kaivalya) is the insight that tells them apart. Classical Samkhya needs no creator God. It shaped Patanjali’s Yoga, the Bhagavad Gita and Indian medicine; Shankara attacked its unconscious first cause.
الحياة والسياق
Kapila is a figure of legend rather than history. The Mahabharata and the Puranas celebrate him as a great sage, sometimes as an incarnation of Vishnu, and Buddhist tradition links the town of Kapilavastu with his name. Later Samkhya authors trace their teaching back to him through Asuri and Panchashikha. Any dating, including the 7th century BCE given here, is conjecture; no work by him survives.
الأعمال الرئيسة
- Samkhya Sutra (attributed to Kapila; probably 14th–15th century CE)
- Samkhyakarika of Ishvarakrishna (c. 4th–5th century CE; the earliest systematic Samkhya text)
بحسب الوضع في نوفمبر 2026 · المصادر · حسّن هذه الصفحة · كيف صُنع Agora