Document Type
Article
Publication Date
4-1-2025
Abstract
The Sāṃkhyakārikā repeatedly emphasizes that prakṛti (material nature) and her constituents exist solely for the sake of the puruṣa (the self). And yet, since she is blind, she needs puruṣa to see her full glory, and he needs to witness her actions to become liberated (21). Gauḍapāda explains their connection in terms of a pitcher filled with hot or cold liquid, which takes on that property, temporarily, through association. This article looks closely at commentarial passages to explore both the nature of their conjunction and codependence (saṃyoga), which leads to mistaken identification, as well as the method given in the Sāṃkhyakārikā for their ultimate separation and independence (kaivalya) through the practice of negation of the twenty-five true principles (tattvābhyāsa), which evolve from this association of puruṣa and prakṛti, comparing this with similar ideas in the Pātañjalayogaśāstra. While these concepts have been examined before, it has generally been from a rationalistic, masculine, and linear viewpoint that reduces prakṛti to mere matter or one that goes to the other extreme, reading later concepts backward and glorifying her as a Tantric goddess. In a world of shifting gender paradigms, this article seeks to re-examine their entanglement through the perspective of prakṛti, to understand how this intimate union is of benefit to her too, and, in turn, what we can learn through understanding the world from this angle.
Original Publication Citation
Slatoff, Z. What’s in it for Her?: Codependence (saṃyoga) and Independence (kaivalya) from the Perspective of prakṛti. J Indian Philos 53, 389–408 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-025-09603-0
Digital Commons @ LMU & LLS Citation
Slatoff, Zoë, "What’s in it for Her?: Codependence (saṃyoga) and Independence (kaivalya) from the Perspective of prakṛti" (2025). Yoga Studies Faculty Works. 1.
https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/yoga_fac/1
