I appreciate your reply although I still see from a slightly different perspective.
Your books will add to my collection of books on Samkhya as I am trying to get to the truth whatever it may be. As far as I understand it most Samkhya texts are agreeing that the Purusha is neither created nor creative, it is witness only.
I have been disagreeing with many Advaita school people in favour of the duality of Samkhya.
Their philosophy is not making sense in that they say Brahman is unchanging but then creates maya etc. Also if there is Brahman only then it would mean that liberation would be meaningless, everything would be a meaningless cycle as even the Brahman/goal is still forever creating ignorance/maya, desires and suffering.
According to my study Samkhya is a bit more like Jainism in many ways.
I have also being debating against the materialists/physicalists. They believe that the consciousness is dependent on and being generated by the physical brain. They confuse the actual consciousness/pure witness with the mental faculties and desires etc. If we look within we can see that the unchanging aspect in our experience is the pure witness.
Some people say that atheistic Samkhya was original and others say that theistic Samkhya was original. I aim to view both sides objectively.
From what you have said above it seems that you mixing the Mahat/Buddhi with the Purusha.
The Purusha is pure witness but the Mahat is Prakriti but the most illumined subtle Prakriti and free from ego.
That Mahat is the virtues and wise approver, maybe this dissolves or maybe it stays as the highest possible body of the individual Purusha
As for God, even in so called atheistic Samkhya please consider this: The Purushas free from Prakriti are omniscient. Consider an infinite number of omniscient eternal Purushas. They also transcend space etc. So in a sense they are at One. This goes along with the idea that our true nature is beyond both mere individuality and beyond mere oneness: it transcends both categories.
Then with the highest beings who still have some Prakriti, they could be classed as gods and creator etc.
So even in so called atheistic Samkhya I see gods of various classes and also the ‘One’ divine with the infinite eyes/ Purushas.
Where I question the so called theistic Samkhya is what is the nature of their God? Are they claiming that it creates the Purushas and Prakriti? For me that does not make logical sense as the whole point of the Purusha and Prakriti is that they are not created. They are the 2 fundamental aspects of Reality.
From that we can see that any ‘God’ which is conscious must be a Purusha and if not pure witness must also have some Prakriti.
It is not a case of a Purusha and then the physical body. In between the Purusha and the physical body are several subtle bodies.