Introduction

There are two works on Indian philosophy which are known under the name Paramārthasāra. The earlier one among them is an ancient work by Ādiśeṣa. Patañjali is generally known by such name because it is believed that he was an incarnation of Śeṣanāga, the famous thousand headed serpent god. Such belief can have risen out of the fact of his having been the master writer who did multifarious and extensive academic work as if he had one thousand heads to think and mouths to speak; or it is just possible that he may have originally belonged to some Nāga-worshippers’ sect and may have consequently been called a Nāga. Yogarāja the commentator of the later Paramārthasāra of Abhi- navagupta committed a mistake in taking the Paramārthasāra of Śeṣa as a work belonging to Sāṁkhya system. Writers have since then been following that view and not even any research scholars of the present age have bothered to correct the mistake. There is no doubt in the fact that some elements of Sāṁkhya philosophy are present in the work of Śeṣa, but the elements of Vaiṣṇavite theism shine more brilliantly in it. Besides, some elements of Sāṁkhya principles can be found in many other schools of Indian philosophy which are definitely different from the Sāṁkhya school. In fact the Paramārthasāra of Śeṣa is a work of that ancient age in which the ancient theistic Sāṁkhya of sage Kapila, the ancient Vaiṣṇavism of Mahābhārata and the theistic Vedānta philosophy of Upaniṣads were studied as one and single integrated school of thought with all such elements supporting one another. Such elements of philosophy had yet to bifurcate and to evolve as some distinctly separate schools of thought. But, in spite of their such integration, the Vaiṣṇavite character of the work is distinctly predominant. The Vaiṣṇavism of Patañjali, unlike the philosophy of later Vaiṣṇavas, is of monistic view and has absolutism as its metaphysical and ontological character. The later Vaiṣṇavism leans towards Vaiṣṇavite mythology but the Vaiṣṇavism of Patañ- jali maintains its philosophic character. Vallabha advocates a