Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Indian Psychology for Personality Studies: Need, Challenges, and Future Directions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Indigenous Indian Management

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Indian Management ((PAIM))

  • 348 Accesses

Abstract

Indian psychology is an emerging discipline within psychology. Self and personality have been one of its essential preoccupations. Personality studies in Indian psychology have relied on the Sāṁkhya system of thought and its idea of triguṇa. This chapter presents the need of Indian psychology for personality studies and evaluates the current state of triguṇa-based personality research. It also offers future directions regarding leveraging the Sāṁkhya system of thought for personality research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Sa ubhayapadārthapradhānatvenotkṛṣṭaḥ (Ramanuja commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita, X.33) (G. S. S. Shastri, 1936). Traditional commentaries are in agreement on this reason of superiority of dvandva samāsa: its emphasis on equal importance of the words in a compound.

  2. 2.

    ātmānaṁ dehaṁ adhikṛtya pratyagātmatayā pravṛttaṁ paramārthabrahmāvasānaṁ vastu svabhāvaḥ (Śāñkara Bhāṣya, Bhagavadgītā, VIII.3): ātmā controls the body as indweller self and in reality, is Brahma, that is svabhāva.

  3. 3.

    svabhāvaḥ Īśvarasya prkṛtiḥ triguṇātmikā māyā (Śāñkara Bhāṣya, Bhagavadgītā, XVIII.41): svabhāva is the potency of Īśvara that is māyā of the form of triguṇa.

  4. 4.

    janmāntarakṛtasaṁskāraḥ prāṇināṁ vartamānajanmani svakāryābhimukhatvena abhivyaktaḥ svabhāvaḥ (Śāñkara Bhāṣya, Bhagavadgītā, XVIII.41): as translated above.

  5. 5.

    tatrādhārāsarvasaṁskāratvāt: Moreover, it (buddhi) is the receptacle of all saṁskāra (Garbe, 1892).

  6. 6.

    The Bhagavadgītā (VIII.3) says svabhāvo ‘dhyātmaṁ ucyate. Its Ramanuja commentary defines adhyātma as anātmabhūtaṁ ātmani saṁbhdhyamānaṁ - non-self associated with self (Shastri, 1936).

  7. 7.

    sa eva karmapuruṣascikitsā ‘dhikṛtaḥ (Suśruta Saṁhitā, śārīra Sthānam, I.21): as translated above.

  8. 8.

    pañcamahābhūtaśarīrisamavāyaḥ puruṣa (Suśruta Saṁhitā, śārīra Sthānam, I.21): as translated above.

  9. 9.

    sapta prakṛtayo bhavanti - doṣaiḥ pṛthag dviśaiḥ samastaisca (Suśruta Saṁhitā, śārīra Sthānam, IV.61): there are seven kinds of prakṛti: doṣa taken separately, (three combinations of) two doṣa together, and all three doṣa together.

  10. 10.

    pravartate triguṇataḥ samudayācca (Sāṁkhya Kārikā, 16): prakṛti operates through the combination of three guṇa (Virupakshananda, 1995). Its Gauḍapāda commentary explains triguṇa as sattvarajastamoguṇāḥ yasmiṁstat triguṇam - triguṇa refers to sattva, rajas, and tamas (J. Shastri, 2010).

  11. 11.

    anyo’nyābhibhavāśrayajananamithunavṛttayaśca guṇāḥ (Sāṁkhya Kārikā, 12): triguṇa are mutually dominating, supporting, productive, and cooperative (Virupakshananda, 1995).

  12. 12.

    jñānaṁ karma ca kartā ca tridhaiva guṇabhedataḥ procyate guṇasaṁkhyāne yathāvacchṛṇu tānyapi (Bhagavadgītā, XVIII.19): Knowledge, work, and actor are verily of three kinds based on different guṇa. Listen to that as well how they are described in Sāṁkhya.

  13. 13.

    sanniveśa viśeṣa mātra abhyupagamāt: (effect) is agreed to be mere particular arrangements (of its cause).

  14. 14.

    atha trividhaduḥkhātyantanivṛttiratyantapuruṣārthaḥ: Let the eligible equire into the ultimate purpose of puruṣa viz. complete cessation of three forms of suffering.

  15. 15.

    kāraṇamastyavyaktaṁ (Sāṁkhya Kārikā, 16): The Unmanifest (prakṛti) is the cause.

  16. 16.

    prītyaprītiviṣādātmakāḥ: as translated above.

  17. 17.

    prītyaprītiviṣādātmakāḥ prakāśapravṛttiniyamārthāḥ.

    anyo’nyābhibhavāśrayajananamithunavṛttayaśca guṇāḥ: as explained above.

  18. 18.

    sāmānyāni tvatiśayaiḥ saha vartante (Yuktidīpikā on Sāṁkhya Kārikā, 13): general can co-exist with particular.

  19. 19.

    kiṁtarhi mahatī svabhāvātivṛttiḥ prakṛtitaḥ (Yuktidīpikā on Sāṁkhya Kārikā, 43): as traslated above.

  20. 20.

    na tadasti pṛthivyāṁ vā divi deveṣu vā punaḥ sattvaṁ prakṛtijair muktaṁ yadebhiḥ syāt tribhirguṇaiḥ: There exists nothing on earth or in heaven among the gods that is free from triguṇa.

  21. 21.

    prakṛtaiḥ kriyamāṇāni guṇaiḥ karmāṇi sarvaśaḥ: all actions in their entirety are performed by the guṇa of prakṛti.

  22. 22.

    netaretarābhāvāḥ sukhādayaḥ, api tu bhāvāḥ, ātmaśabdasya bhāvavacanattvāt: “Pleasure and pain are not merely mutual negations, but they are positive entities and the term ātma connotes this positive reality.” (Virupakshananda, 1995, p. 43).

  23. 23.

    sarvabhūtānāṁ kāraṇamakāraṇaṁ sattvarajastamolakṣaṇamaṣṭarūpamakhilasya jagataḥsambhavaheturavyaktaṁ nāma (Suśruta Saṁhitā, Śārīra Sthāna, I.3): The uncaused cause of all created things, connotes sattva, rajas, and tamas, expresses eight forms, the material cause of the entire world is called Avyakta or the Unmanifest.

  24. 24.

    tatra sattvabahulāmākāśaṁ, rajobahulo vāyuḥ, sattvarajobahulo agniḥ, sattvatamobahulā āpa, tamobahulā pṛthvīti (Suśruta Saṁhitā, Śārīra Sthāna, I.27): The ākāṣa (space) mahābhūta comprises predominant sattva, the vāyu (air) mahābhūta comprises predominant rajas, the agni (fire) mahābhūta comprises predominant sattva and rajas, the āpa (water) mahābhūta comprises predominant sattva and tamas, and the pṛthvī (earth) mahābhūta comprises predominant tamas.

  25. 25.

    vāyuḥ pittaṁ kaphaścoktaḥ śārīro doṣasaṁgrahaḥ mānasaḥ punuruddiṣṭo rajaśca tama eva ca (Charaka Saṁhitā, Sūtra Sthāna, I.57): Vāta, pitta, and kapha are called causes of all physical diseases in brief. Rajas and tamas are causes of mental diseases.

  26. 26.

    adhyavasāyo buddhiḥ: buddhi is ascertainment (Wezler & Motegi, 1998).

References

  • Agashe, K. S. (Ed.). (1904). Pātañjalayogasūtrāṇi (Vol. 47). Anandashrama Mudranalaya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agniveśa. (1948). Caraka Saṁhitā (A. Gupta, Trans.). In (2 ed., Vol. 1). Bhargava Pustakalaya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alok, K. (2014). The rāga bhāva in the Sāṁkhya Kārikā: Rectifying an age-old mistake. Asian Philosophy: An International Journal of the Philosophical Traditions of the East, 24(2), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2014.917831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alok, K. (2017). Sāttvika leadership: An Indian model of positive leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 142(1), 117–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2790-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Āraṇya, S. H. (1983). Yoga philosophy of Patañjali (P. N. Mukerji, Trans.). State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banaji, M. R., & Prentice, D. A. (1994). The self in social contexts. Annual Review of Psychology, 45(1), 297–332. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.45.020194.001501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2(1), 21–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (2002). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhal, K. T., & Debnath, N. (2006). Conceptualising and measuring Gunas: Predictor of workplace ethics of Indian professionals. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 6(2), 169–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, R. S. (2010). Sāṃkhya Tattva Kaumudī. Motilal Banarsidass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2010). Methodology for building psychological models from scriptures: Contributions of Indian psychology to indigenous and universal Psychologies. Psychology & Developing Societies, 22(1), 49–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/097133360902200103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2011). Spirituality and Indian psychology: Lessons from the Bhagavad-Gita. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Biswas, M. (2010). In search of personality inventory for Indian managers: An application of structured equation modelling. Journal of Services Research, 10(1), 101–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolle, K. W. (1979). The Bhagavadgītā: A new translation. University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brockington, J. (1998). The Sanskrit epics. Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrow, T. (2001). The Sanskrit language. Motilal Banarsidass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caprara, G. V., & Cervone, D. (2000). Personality: Determinants, dynamics, and potentials. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, S. K. (1987). Managerial effectiveness and quality of work life: Indian insights. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, F. M., van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leong, F. T. L. (2011). Toward a new approach to the study of personality in culture. American Psychologist, 66(7), 593–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clatterbaugh, K. C. (1999). The causation debate in modern philosophy, 1637–1739. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalal, A. K., & Misra, G. (2010). The core and context of Indian psychology. Psychology & Developing Societies, 22(1), 121–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/097133360902200105

  • Datar, S., & Murthy, C. G. V. (2012). Development and standardization of Mysore Triguna scale. Sage Open, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244012436564

  • De Raad, B., Barelds, D. P. H., Levert, E., Ostendorf, F., Mlačić, B., Di Blas, L., . . . Perugini, M. (2010). Only three factors of personality description are fully replicable across languages: A comparison of 14 trait taxonomies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(1), 160–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dvivedin, V. P. (Ed.). (1918). Sāṁkhya Saṅgrahaḥ (Vol. 246). Chowkhambā sanskrit series office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwivedi, C. B. (2002). Ayurvedic concepts of the purusha, dehaprakriti and sattvaprakriti. In G. Misra & A. K. Mohanty (Eds.), Perspectives on indegenous psychology (pp. 305–325). Concept Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esbec, E., & Echeburúa, E. (2011). New criteria for personality disorders in DSM-V. Actas Españolas De Psiquiatría, 39(1), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro, F., Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2005). Economics language and assumptions: How theories can become self-fulfilling. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 8–24. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2005.15281412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garbe, R. (Ed.). (1888). The Sāṁkhya Sūtra Vṛtti: Or Aniruddha’s commentary and the original parts of Vedantin Mahadeva’s commentary to the Sāṁkhya Sūtras (1888). Kessinger Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garbe, R. (Ed.). (1892). Anirudhha’s commentary and the original parts of Vedāntin Mahādeva’s commentary on the Sāṁkhya Sūtras. Baptist Mission Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jha, A. K. (2008). Personality in Indian psychology. In K. R. Rao, A. C. Paranjpe, & A. K. Dalal (Eds.), Handbook of Indian psychology (pp. 348–360). Cambridge University Press/Foundation Books.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A. (2009). The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral science. Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, U., Yang, K.-S., & Hwang, K.-K. (Eds.). (2006). Indigenous and cultural psychology: Understanding people in context. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolution. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, G. J. (1998). Classical Saṁkhya: An interpretation of its history and meaning (2nd ed.). Motilal Banarsidass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, G. J., & Bhattacharya, R. S. (Eds.). (2012). Sāṁkhya: A dualist tradition of Indian philosophy (Vol. 4). Motilal Banarsidass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leahey, T. H. (2001). A history of modern psychology (3rd ed.). Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leary, M. R., & Hoyle, R. H. (Eds.). (2009). Handbook of individual differences in social behavior. Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linzey, A. (2003). Animal rights. In J. W. V. V. Huyssteen (Ed.), Encyclopedia of science and religion (pp. 10–12). Macmillan Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathew, V. G. (2001). Models of consciousness and its transformation. In M. Cornelissen (Ed.), Consciousness and its transformation. SAICE.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2008). The five-factor theory of personality. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 159–181). Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Terracciano, A. (2005). Personality profiles of cultures: Aggregate personality traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(3), 407–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Misra, G., & Paranjpe, A. C. (2012). Psychology in modern India. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the history of psychological theories (pp. 881–892). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murthy, P. K., & Salagame, K. K. (2007). Concept triguna: A critical analysis and synthesis. Psychological Studies, 52(2), 103–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pandeya, J. S. (Ed.). (1989). Maharṣi Kapilapraṇītaṁ Sāṁkhyadarśanaṁ: Vyākhyācatuṣṭayopetaṁ. Motilal Banarsidass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paranjpe, A. C. (1988). A personality theory according to Vedānta. In A. C. Paranjpe, D. Y. F. Ho, & R. W. Rieber (Eds.), Asian contributions to psychology (pp. 185–214). Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paranjpe, A. C. (2002). Self and identity in modern psychology and Indian thought. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paranjpe, A. C. (2011). Indian psychology and the international context. Psychology and Developing Societies, 23(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulingandla, R. (1994). Fundamentals of Indian philosophy. D. K. Printworld.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radhakrishnan, S. (1996). Indian philosophy (Vol. 2). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, K. B. R. (1963). The Gunas of Prakrti according to the Samkhya philosophy. Philosophy East and West, 13(1), 61–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, K. R., & Paranjpe, A. C. (2015). Psychology in the Indian tradition. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salagame, K. K. (2011). Indian indigenous concepts and perspectives: Developments and future possibilities. In G. Mishra (Ed.), Psychology in India: Theoretical and methodological developments (Vol. 4, pp. 93–172). Dorling Kindersley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salagame, K. K., Archana, R., Murthy, P. K., Parimala, Rekha, & Gaur, S. (2005). Concept ahamkara: Theoretical and empirical analysis. In K. R. Rao & S. B. Marwaha (Eds.), Towards a spiritual psychology: Essays in Indian psychology (pp. 97–122). Samvad India Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saraswati, S. N. (2008). Samkhya Darshan: Yogic perspective on theories of realism. Yoga Publications Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shastri, G. S. S. (Ed.). (1936). The Bhagavadgītā with eleven commentaries: First collection (2nd ed., Vol. 2). Gujarati Printing Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shastri, J. (2010). Sāṁkhya Kārikāḥ (J. Shashtri, Trans.). Motilal Banarsidass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shastri, U. (1950). Samkhya darshan ka itihas. Virajanand Vaidika Sansthan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shilpa, S., & Murthy, C. G. V. (2012). Interrelatedness of Tridoshas and Trigunas in personality: An empirical investigation. Indian Social and Psychological Studies, 5(1), 32–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, J. K., Misra, G., & De Raad, B. (2013). Personality structure in the trait lexicon of Hindi, a major language spoken in India. European Journal of Personality, 27(6), 605–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, K. (2012). Concept of personality: Indian perspective. Industrial Psychiatry Journal, 21(2), 89–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suśruta. (1954). Suśruta Saṁhitā (A. Shastri, Trans.). In Kashi Sanskrita Granthamala (1st ed.). Chowkhamba.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varma, S. (2011). Integral psychology: A new science of self, personality, and psychology. In R. M. M. Cornelissen, G. Misra, & S. Varma (Eds.), Foundations of Indian psychology: Concepts and theories (Vol. 1, pp. 170–197). Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virupakshananda, S. (1995). Sāṁkhya Kārikā of Īśvarakṛṣṇa (1st ed.). Ramkrishna Math.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vivekananda, S. (1915). The science and philosophy of religion: A comparative study of Sankhya, Vedanta and other systems of thought (2nd ed.). Ramkrishna Math.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner, K. (1996). Indian conceptions of human personality. Asian Philosophy: An International Journal of the Philosophical Traditions of the East, 6(2), 93–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/09552369608575432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wezler, A. (1999). On the origin(s) of the Guna-theory: Struggling for a new approach (I): Wrestling with Frauwallner. Asiatische Studien: Études Asiatiques, 53(3), 537–551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wezler, A., & Motegi, S. (Eds.). (1998). Yuktidīpikā: The most significant commentary on the Sāṁkhya Kārikā (Critical ed. Vol. 1). Steiner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, D. (1999). A psychometric analysis of the three Gunas. Psychological Reports, 84, 1379–1390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. XLRI Xavier School of Management, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand, India

    Kumar Alok

Authors
  1. Kumar Alok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kumar Alok .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Shailesh J. Mehta School of Management, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India

    Ashish Pandey

  2. Aston Business School, Aston University, Birmingham, UK

    Pawan Budhwar

  3. Shidler College of Business, University of Hawai’i at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI, USA

    Dharm P. S. Bhawuk

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Alok, K. (2022). Indian Psychology for Personality Studies: Need, Challenges, and Future Directions. In: Pandey, A., Budhwar, P., Bhawuk, D.P.S. (eds) Indigenous Indian Management. Palgrave Studies in Indian Management. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87906-8_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation