Samkhya Karika 5

Kārikā 5

प्रतिविषयाध्यवसायो दृष्टं, त्रिविधमनुमानमाख्यातम् ।
तल्लिङ्गलिङ्गिपूर्वकम्, आप्तश्रुतिराप्तवचनं च ॥ ५ ॥

prativiṣayādhyavasāyo dṛṣṭaṁ, trividhamanumānamākhyātam ।
talliṅgaliṅgipūrvakam, āptaśrutirāptavacanaṁ ca ॥ 5 ॥

Prati=every; viṣaya=object of the senses; adhyavasāyo=ascertainment; dṛṣṭaṁ=perceived (thru senses); trividham=three-fold; anumānam=inference; ākhyātam=is mentioned as; tat=that; liṅga=mark, pointer; liṅgi=what is being pointed to; pūrvakam=preceded by; āptaśrutiḥ=trustworthy person and the Vedas; āptavacanaṁ=trustworthy testimony; ca=and

Direct perception is the ascertainment of objects by their respective senses. Inference is mentioned as being of three kinds and is the result of the knowledge of linga (the characteristic mark) and the lingi (possessor of this mark). Valid testimony is the statement of a trustworthy person and the Vedas.

In Karika #4, we saw that the means of right knowledge (pramāṇa) are direct perception, inference, and valid testimony. In Karika #5 we are presented with more details related to these three means of pramāṇa.

Direct perception (dṛṣṭaṁ)

Direct perception (dṛṣṭaṁ) is the ascertainment of objects perceived through their respective senses. Objects are composed of the five great elements – earth, water, fire, air, and ether. These objects create an impression on the respective sense organs – nose, tongue, eyes, skin, and ears. These organs create the five corresponding sense perceptions – smell, taste, sight, touch, and hearing. These perceptions are presented to the “inner instrument” comprising of the mind (manas), ego (ahamkara), and the intellect (buddhi). It is the buddhi that finally makes the determination as to the nature of the object perceived and the action to be taken in response. Of course, everything that the buddhi perceives is being witnessed by the Purusha. Mind (manas) and the intellect (buddhi), with no consciousness of their own, need the reflected consciousness from the Purusha to perform any of their functions including processing of perception through the five senses.

Direct perception provides specific information about the object. If you see a man, you know that it is “John”. All the five senses must experience the object the same way all the time. At a deeper level, in their deep states of meditation, the advanced yogis can get a “direct perception” of their own true Self. This realization is usually referred to as “self-realization”.

As you may recall, in the Yoga Sutras, Patanjali also presents the same three types of pramāṇa. However, he uses the term “pratyaksha” instead of dṛṣṭaṁ, the term used in the karika.

Inference (anumāna)

In a situation when direct perception is not available, the second type of right knowledge called anumāna (inference) is used. Inference provides generic information about what is perceived. If you hear footsteps, you may infer that a man is walking. As per the Nyaya system of philosophy, there are five steps of inferential logic: 

• Establish the thesis (pratijñā): there is fire at the mountain
• State the cause (hetu): because I see smoke there
• State the universal rule (udāharaṇa): wherever there is smoke, there is fire (in the kitchen, for example)
• Applies in this case (upnayana): there is smoke on the mountain
• Conclusion (nigamana): therefore, the mountain has fire

Inference (anumāna) is dependent on something that has been experienced in the past based on direct perception. The Karika simply states that there are three types of inference without listing them. The assumption is that the reader is familiar with these three which are enumerated in the Nyaya philosophy as follows:

• Pūrvavat – when an inference is made from a perceived cause about an effect that is yet to come. For example, future rain is inferred by seeing thick, dark clouds.
• Sheshavat – when an inference is made about the cause of something perceived at the present moment as the effect. For example, recent rain is inferred by the sight of fast flowing, muddy river water.
• Samanyato-drishtam – when inference is made from something that is commonly known. Inference of fire by seeing smoke on a distant hill is a common example of this category.

The karika also mentions that inference is “liṅga-liṅgi-pūrvakam”; i.e., inference is preceded or established by a characteristic mark (liṅga) and the possessor of this mark (liṅgi). In the classical example of “smoke on the hill indicates fire there”, smoke is the liṅga, fire is the liṅgi and the hill, where the observation is being made is called the “paksha”. The common example of this is the kitchen where we see this liṅga-liṅgi connection between fire and smoke all the time.

Valid testimony (āpta-vachanam)

Usually, the word of the Vedas (shruti), the most ancient scriptures, is considered valid testimony . The wisdom contained in the Vedas is considered “apaurusheya” (not created by human mind) as it was “revealed” to the rishis (sages) in their deep states of meditation. These revelations are thus considered as trustworthy. Similarly, words of other texts, such as Upanishads, Puranas etc., are also trustworthy as they have Vedas as their source. Valid testimony could also represent words by a trustworthy person.

In the Yoga Sutras (sutra 1.7), Patanjali uses the term “āgamāḥ” in place of āpta-vachanam or āpta-shruti.