Commentary on Sāṁkhyakārikā
Yuktidīpikā (Devanagari: ; transl. Light on Argumentation) is a commentary on the Sāṁkhya Kārikā written in Sanskrit between 600 and 700 . It is often regarded as the most detailed and polemical commentary on the Sāṁkhya Kārikā as it responds to objections coming from Buddhists, Vedantins and Naiyayikas through the lens of Samkhya school of Hindu philosophy.
The text is classified into 4 "prākaraṇa" and 11 "ahnikas".
Authorship.
The authorship of Yuktidīpikā is uncertain.
Vāchaspati Misra.
Some manuscripts mention Vachaspati Mishra ("Skt"., ), although it is questionable for the following reasons:
Raja or Rajan.
Some sources hint towards the name "Raja" or "Rajan" who is generally believed to be its original author. Nothing more is known about him though.
Manuscripts.
The different editions of manuscripts of the commentary are kept at:
Insights.
Samkhya's opponents.
Yuktidīpikā regards the non-dualists (puruṣavādin), the theists (īśvaravādin), the atomists (aṇuvādin), the Buddhists (vaināśika i.e., nihilists), the Charvakas (prakṛtivādin i.e., materialists) as well as the immoral people as main opponents of Samkhya.
Īśvara (god).
In addition to atoms (paramāṇu), consciousness (puruṣa), action (karma), fate (daiva), time (kāla), chance (yadṛcchā), and absence (abhāva), Yuktidīpikā opposes the notion of a creator god as the cause of world. Instead, Īśvara or god is defined as 'pure-consciousness' much like Puruṣa.
The author of the commentary clarifies the idea of Īśvara in response to an opponent who worships Śiva and falsely claims that Sāṃkhya denies Īśvara entirely:{
For the author, Īśvara doesn't exist outside of the dualism of Prakṛti and Puruṣa. Being pure consciousness, Īśvara lacks any permanent material accessories but often assumes them such as a "majestic body" (māhātmyaśarīra) yet remaining untouched by passion, doubt and sees beyond what can be seen through ordinary senses. This notion of Īśvara appears to be consistent with Yogasūtras, another major work in the Samkhya tradition. While never claiming that Īśvara is the creator of the world, Patanjali also describes Īśvara as a "special-Puruṣa, untouched by afflictions".
The "Vedas".
The text asserts that the Vedas are authorless but non-eternal. In the commentary on the fifth verse of the Sāṃkhyakārikā, it states that the Vedas are “not preceded by the intellect of a puruṣa” in elucidating Īśvarakṛṣṇa's concept of verbal testimony (āptavacana). It refers to the Vedas being 'independent' (svatantra), “leading to the highest good of a man” and “pramāṇa which cannot be put into doubt”. According to Łucyszyna, this view of the Vedas points to a possible influence of Mīmāṃsā. 
The text also acknowledges that the Vedas comprise not only rituals but also the path to liberation via knowledge in the Upanishads, which is the same as Samkhya teachings.
Critique of Buddhism.
The commentary contains critique of the Buddhist philosophy especially Vasubandhu's works such as Abhidharmakośa, Viṃśatikā, Triṃśikā. Vasubandhu's refutation of the Self (atman) are criticized in the commentary on Samkhya Karika 17 while a long polemic against Vijñānavāda doctrine can be found under commentary on Samkhya karika 37.
References.
Citations.
 ;templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" / ;
Sources.
 ;templatestyles src="Refbegin/styles.css" / ;