Return to Question

In any case, the Samkhya school was founded by someone named Kapila. This name is highly significant, because Hindu scripture speaks of a Rishi named Kapila, who was an incarnation of Vishnu and the son of Brahma's son Kardama and his wife Devahuti. This Kapila taught his mother Devahuti about philosophy, and he burnt the sons of Sagara to ashes, which ultimately led to the descent of the Ganga river as I discuss here. Yet when we examine the teachings of Kapila to his mother Devahuti, in the third Skandha of the Srimad Bhagavatam, we see that they're very different from the doctrines of the Samkhya school; not only does Kapila acknowledge the existence of a supreme being, he also teaches his mother about the importance of Bhakti Yoga or devotional service to Vishnu.

Now I wrote this fictional dialogue to try to reconcile how the Samkhya school could reject the existence of a supreme being despite being founded by Vishnu's incarnation Kapila. But others reconcile things in a different way, namely by arguing that there are two Kapilas, one Kapila who was an incarnation of Vishnu and burnt the sons of Sagaras to ashes, and another Kapila who founded the atheistic Samkhya school. There's evidence on both sides:

In any case, the Samkhya school was founded by someone named Kapila. This name is highly significant, because Hindu scripture speaks of a Rishi named Kapila, who was an incarnation of Vishnu and the son of Brahma's son Kardama and his wife Devahuti. This Kapila taught his mother Devahuti about philosophy, and he burnt the sons of king Sagara to ashes, which ultimately led to the descent of the Ganga river as I discuss here. Yet when we examine the teachings of Kapila to his mother Devahuti, in the third Skandha of the Srimad Bhagavatam, we see that they're very different from the doctrines of the Samkhya school; not only does Kapila acknowledge the existence of a supreme being, he also teaches his mother about the importance of Bhakti Yoga or devotional service to Vishnu.

Now I wrote this fictional dialogue to try to reconcile how the Samkhya school could reject the existence of a supreme being despite being founded by an incarnation of Vishnu. But others reconcile things in a different way, namely by arguing that there are two Kapilas, one Kapila who was an incarnation of Vishnu and burnt the sons of Sagaras to ashes, and another Kapila who founded the atheistic Samkhya school. There's evidence on both sides:

As I discuss in this question, by far the most popular school of Hindu philosophy is the Vedanta school. But there are five other Astika or orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy: Purva Mimamsa, Samkhya, Yoga, Vaisheshika, and Nyaya. My question is about Samkhya. The Samkhya school believed that there were two kinds of entities in the Universe, Purushas or souls and Prakriti or matter/energy, and that Prakriti takes on a variety of forms in the presence of Purushas. And it rejected the existence of a supreme being.

As I discuss in this question, by far the most popular school of Hindu philosophy is the Vedanta school. But there are five other Astika or orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy: Purva Mimamsa, Samkhya, Yoga, Vaisheshika, and Nyaya. My question is about Samkhya school, which believed that there were two kinds of entities in the Universe, Purushas or souls and Prakriti or matter/energy, and that Prakriti takes on a variety of forms in the presence of Purushas. And they rejected the existence of a supreme being.

But my question is, which Acharyas believe in the two-Kapilas theory, and which Acharyas believe in the one-Kapila? So far I've found two supporters of the two-Kapilas theory: the Advaita philosopher Adi Shankaracharya, who in this section of his Brahma Sutra Bhashya that the two Kapilas are different; and the Gaudiya Vaishnava commentator Baladeva, who says in this section of his Govinda Bhashya that Kapila the founder of the Samkhya school is the descendant of Angiras I mentioned above, rather than Vishnu's incarnation Kapila.

This sacred and supreme (Knowledge), the sage (Kapila) gave to Āsuri out of compassion. Āsuri (gave it) to Pañcaśikha, who elaborated the doctrine.

But my question is, which Acharyas believe in the two-Kapilas theory, and which Acharyas believe in the one-Kapila? So far I've found two supporters of the two-Kapilas theory: the Advaita philosopher Adi Shankaracharya, who in this section of his Brahma Sutra Bhashya that the two Kapilas are different; and the Gaudiya Vaishnava commentator Baladeva Vidyabhushana, who says in this section of his Govinda Bhashya that Kapila the founder of the Samkhya school is the descendant of Angiras I mentioned above, rather than Vishnu's incarnation Kapila.