The theory of Brahman being the universal cause has to be accepted not
only because it is itself free from objections, but also because the
pradhâna theory is open to objections, and hence must be abandoned. For
on this latter theory the origination of the world cannot be accounted
for. The Sânkhyas hold that owing to the soul's approximation to
Prakriti the attributes of the latter are fictitiously superimposed upon
the soul which in itself consists entirely of pure intelligence free
from all change, and that thereon depends the origination of the
empirical world. Now here we must raise the question as to the nature of
that approximation or nearness of Prakriti which causes the
superimposition on the changeless soul of the attributes of Prakriti.
Does that nearness mean merely the existence of Prakriti or some change
in Prakriti? or does it mean some change in the soul?--Not the latter;
for the soul is assumed to be incapable of change.--Nor again a change
in Prakriti; for changes in Prakriti are supposed, in the system, to be
the effects of superimposition, and cannot therefore be its cause. And
if, finally, the nearness of Prakriti means no more than its existence,
it follows that even the released soul would be liable to that
superimposition (for Prakriti exists always).--The Sânkhya is thus
unable to give a rational account of the origination of the world. This
same point will be treated of fully in connexion with the special
refutation of the Sânkhya theory. (II, 2, 6.)