Two Technical Terms of Indian Theories of Consciousness – Vitarka and Vicāra
Andrey V. Paribok
Voprosy Filosofii January 21, 2026 DOI: 10.21146/0042-8744-2026-1-137-147 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that Buddhist Abhidharma historically preceded Sāṅkhya-yoga in analyzing vitarka and vicāra as functions of consciousness, treating them both in everyday activity and in contemplation, whereas Patañjali's tradition discusses them only in contemplation. The author contends that later Yoga commentators' redefinition of the terms along Sāṅkhya ontological lines is unconvincing and reflects a focus on verbal reasoning rather than yogic practice. |
Abstract
This article examines vitarka and vicāra, an important pair of technical terms for the functions of consciousness in two practical-phenomenological, i.e., yogic, traditions of Indian philosophy, namely, Buddhist Abhidharma and Sāṅkhya-yoga. It is shown that in their consideration the Buddhists have a historical priority and retained a phenomenological approach in their texts. In Patañjali’s Sāṅkhya-yoga these functions are discussed only in the context of contemplation (dhyāna), whereas in Abhidharma it is as well done in relation to the everyday activity of consciousness. They are functions manifested in acts of speech,both external and internal (in contemplation). They are the event of supplying the mind with a topic/theme (vitarka) and unfolding it into a rhema (vicāra). After the loss of contact by the representatives of Sāṅkhya-yoga with their Buddhist opponents, the Buddhist texts were no longer read. That is why later commentators of the Yoga school redefined the terms, considering them not as denoting different functions, but as having different object areas according to the Sāṅkhya ontology. This is not convincing. The authors of such interpretations seem to be poor yoga practitioners being focused on verbal reasoning only. On the other hand, Buddhists began to deny the previously recognized contemplation with and without vicāra, wherease Vyāsa, the commentator of Sāṅkhya-yoga, recognizes it.