Kapila as seen from the viewpoint of Kunda-Kunda

In this scholarly essay Pradyumna Kumar Jain compares the dualistic metaphysics of the Sāṃkhya system, traditionally attributed to the sage Kapila, with the doctrines of the Digambara Jain philosopher Kundakunda. Sāṃkhya posits two eternal and independent realities: **puruṣa**, the multitude of conscious selves, and **prakṛti**, inert matter which evolves into the world. Kapila claims that puruṣa is changeless, passive and plural, while prakṛti undergoes transformation to fulfil the experience of the various selves. Jain notes that Kundakunda accepts a form of dualism but criticises Sāṃkhya for treating the self as completely inactive. Kundakunda argues that if the puruṣa were totally unchanging it could not experience pleasure or pain; knowledge and enjoyment require some kind of interaction with matter. He introduces the doctrine of **naya**, suggesting that entities can be viewed from different standpoints: from the standpoint of substance the self is eternal and changeless, but from the standpoint of mode it undergoes qualitative changes. The essay contrasts Sāṃkhya’s notion of a single uncaused prakṛti with Jain cosmology, which recognises infinite kinds of matter. Kundakunda contends that matter and soul are beginningless and without an absolute first cause, whereas Sāṃkhya posits periodic creation and dissolution. Jain emphasises that both systems share certain features – acceptance of multiple selves and liberation through discriminative knowledge – but they diverge on the nature of causality and agency. The Jaina criticises Sāṃkhya’s claim that prakṛti evolves solely to provide experience for the self; instead, Jainism holds that karma binds soul and matter together, and liberation occurs when karmic particles are shed through right conduct, knowledge and perception. The essay further discusses Kundakunda’s concept of **syādvāda**, or conditional predication, and his insistence that reality can be approached from seven standpoints, none of which provides an absolute description. This pluralistic epistemology undercuts Sāṃkhya’s search for a single ultimate cause. Jain concludes that while both Kapila and Kundakunda advocate asceticism and discrimination between spirit and matter, Kundakunda offers a more dynamic and comprehensive account of the universe. He integrates metaphysics with ethics, emphasising that liberation demands not only knowledge but also non‑violence, self‑restraint and multifaceted insight.

Summary reviewed by a volunteer editor.