The main exposition of the system of Samkhya and Yoga in this section has been based on the Samkhya karika, the Samkhya sutras, and the Yoga sutras of Patanjali with their commentaries and sub-commentaries. The Samkhya karika (about 200 A.D.) was written by Ishvarakrishna.

The account of Samkhya given by Caraka (78 A.D.) represents probably an earlier school and this has been treated separately. Vacaspati Mishra (ninth century A.D.) wrote a commentary on it known as Tattvakaumudi. But before him Gaudapada and Raja wrote commentaries on the Samkhya karika (1).

Narayanatirtha wrote his Candrika on Gaudapada’s commentary. The Samkhya sutras which have been commented on by Vijnana Bhikshu (called Pravacanabhashya) of the sixteenth century seems to be a work of some unknown author after the ninth century. Aniruddha of the latter half of the fifteenth century was the first man to write a commentary on the Samkhya sutras. Vijnana Bhiksu wrote also another elementary work on Samkhya known as Samkhyasara. Another short work of late origin is Tattvasamasa (probably fourteenth century). Two other works on Samkhya, viz Simananda’s Samkhyatattvavivecana and Bhavaganesha’s Samkhyatattvayatharthyadipana (both later than Vijnanabhikshu) of real philosophical value have also been freely consulted. Patanjali’s Yoga sutra (not earlier than 147 B.C.) was commented on by Vaysa (400 A.D.) and Vyasa’s bhasya commented on by Vacaspati Mishra is called Tattvavaisharadi, by Vijnana Bhikshu Yogavarttika, by Bhoja in the tenth century Bhojavritti, and by Nagesha (seventeenth century) Chayavyakhya.

Amongst the modern works to which I owe an obligation I may mention the two treatises Mechanical, physical and chemical theories of the Ancient Hindus and the Positive Sciences of the Ancient Hindus by Dr B.N. Seal and my two works on Yoga Study of Patanjali published by the Calcutta University, and Yoga Philosophy in relation to other Indian Systems of Thought which is shortly to be published, and my Natural Philosophy of the Ancient Hindus, awaiting publication with the Calcutta University.

Gunaratna mentions two other authoritative Samkhya works, viz. Matharabhashya and Atreyatantra. Of these the second is probably the same as Caraka’s treatment of Samkhya, for we know that the sage Atri is the speaker in Caraka’s work and for that it was called Atreyasamhita or Atreyatantra. Nothing is known of the Matharabhasya (2).

1: I suppose that Raja’s commentary on the Karika was the same as Rajavarttika quoted by Vacaspati. Raja’s commentary on the Karika has been referred to by Jayanta in his Nyayamanjari, p. 109. This book is probably now lost.
2: Readers unacquainted with Samkhya-Yoga may omit the following three sections at the time of first reading.

commentaries, hindus, philosophical value, yoga philosophy, yoga sutras of patanjali