Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
Introduction
61
leadstofreedomintheRV
,i.e.,creationofthecosmos,ritualactivityand
somicexaltation(Jurewicz2010).Itshouldbenoted,however,thatthissource
domainhasnotbeenwidelyelaboratedintheRVanditseemsthattheRgvedic
Composersweremoreinterestedontheaimofjourneythaninthejourney
itself.ThiscanbeseeningeneraldomainofFindingATreasure(aspecific
realisationofthegeneraldomainofFindingTheHidden)intheRVwhere
theteleologicalaimconceivedintermsoftreasureisclear.Theotherconcept
usedintermsofthisdomainintheRVistheinfluenceoftimeandthis
conceptualisationisalsoattestedinthetextsanalysedinthisstudy.Themost
importanttargetdomainconceivedintermsofthegeneraldomainofRiding
InAChariotbyearlySmṛtiphilosophersisliberatingcognition.Thescenario
ofthejourney,itsparticipants,itsdangers,theworriesduringthejourney
andthehappinesswhenonereachesthedestinationtogetherwiththeskill
neededtobesuccessfulandsooneismappedontovariousstagesofliberating
cognition.ThesuggestionisthattheRgvedicconceptualisationoftheaimof
journey,whichisfreedom,hasbeenthebasicconceptualframefortheuse
ofthisgeneraldomaintoconceiveliberatingcognition:itleadstoultimate
freedomfromsufferinganddeathbyrealizingone’simmortalselfidentical
withallreality.
Amoregeneralissue,whichisimportantfromthepointoftheDarśanas
whichintroducedualistic/pluralistictheories,doesneedtobeaddressed.As
Bronkhorst(2006b)writesthereisnoreasontosupposethatsuchtheories
weredevelopedintheearlySmṛtitimes.However,scholarswholookforthe
sourcesofthesephilosophicalschoolshavenoticedtheuseoftermswhichare
usedinDarśanas,especiallyinSāṃkhyaandYoga,andpostulatetheexistence
ofaProto-SāṃkhyaattestedalreadyintheMDhP.79Thisissuewillnotbe
analysedhereandisleftforfutureresearch.Butoneneedstopointoutthat
eachinterpretationdependsontheframeworkadoptedatthebeginningofthe
study:wefindwhatwearelookingfor.Theresearcherswhoareinterested
inhistoryofSāṃkhyaorYogawillfindit,eveninthenascentstate.
79
Forexample,Frauwallner(1925),Buitenen(1956,1957),Larson,Bhattacharya(2000).Over
time,however,manyscholarshaverecognisedthatnotonlydotheearlySmṛtitextsreflect
theprocessofformationofSāṃkhya,butthattheirauthorstaketheconceptsfromSāṃkhya
philosophy,whichisratherafar-fetchedconclusion(e.g.,Malinar2007:6:4Thecreationof
theworld,thedifferentspeciesofbeingandthecommonbasicelementsthatformabody
areexplainedbyusingconceptsdrawnfromSāṃkhyaphilosophy’).InhisanalysisofMDhP
12.194-99(Manubrhaspatisamvóda),FitzgeraldcontinuesthewayofthinkingofBakkerand
Bisschop(1999)andSchreiner(1999)whodispense(ashewrites)4fromthetyrannyofthe
ideathatallofthesetextsareeitherSāṃkhyaorproto-Sāṃkhya’andthankstothatnew
meaningsofthetextunderresearchcanbeshown(unfortunatelyonlyaccesstotheabstract
ofthatparticularstudywasavailable).
