Part 35 (1/2)

___________________________________________________________________

[Footnote 1: Patanjali's [email protected],_ 1. 2. 64.]

233

which Professor Woods has adduced to a.s.sign the date of the _Yoga sutra_ between 300 and 500 A.D. are not at all conclusive, as they stand on a weak basis; for firstly if the two Patanjalis cannot be identified, it does not follow that the editor of the Yoga should necessarily be made later; secondly, the supposed Buddhist [Footnote ref 1] reference is found in the fourth chapter which, as I have shown above, is a later interpolation; thirdly, even if they were written by Patanjali it cannot be inferred that because Vacaspati describes the opposite school as being of the Vijnana-vadi type, we are to infer that the sutras refer to Vasubandhu or even to Nagarjuna, for such ideas as have been refuted in the sutras had been developing long before the time of Nagarjuna.

Thus we see that though the tradition of later commentators may not be accepted as a sufficient ground to identify the two Patanjalis, we cannot discover anything from a comparative critical study of the _Yoga sutras_ and the text of the [email protected],_ which can lead us to say that the writer of the _Yoga sutras_ flourished at a later date than the other Patanjali.

Postponing our views about the time of Patanjali the Yoga editor, I regret I have to increase the confusion by introducing the other work _Kitab Patanjal_, of which Alberuni speaks, for our consideration. Alberuni considers this work as a very famous one and he translates it along with another book called _Sanka_ ([email protected]) ascribed to Kapila. This book was written in the form of dialogue between master and pupil, and it is certain that this book was not the present _Yoga sutra_ of Patanjali, though it had the same aim as the latter, namely the search for liberation and for the union of the soul with the object of its meditation.

The book was called by Alberuni _Kitab Patanjal_, which is to be translated as the book of Patanjala, because in another place, speaking of its author, he puts in a Persian phrase which when translated stands as ”the author of the book of Patanjal.” It had also an elaborate commentary from which Alberuni quotes many extracts, though he does not tell us the author's name. It treats of G.o.d, soul, bondage, karma, salvation, etc., as we find in the _Yoga sutra_, but the manner in which these are described (so

__________________________________________________________________

[Footnote 1: It is important to notice that the most important Buddhist reference _naraika-cittatantram vastu [email protected] tada kim syat_ (IV. 16) was probably a line of the [email protected], as Bhoja, who had consulted many commentaries as he says in the preface, does not count it as sutra.]

234

far as can be judged from the copious extracts supplied by Alberuni) shows that these ideas had undergone some change from what we find in the _Yoga sutra_. Following the idea of G.o.d in Alberuni we find that he retains his character as a timeless emanc.i.p.ated being, but he speaks, hands over the Vedas and shows the way to Yoga and inspires men in such a way that they could obtain by cogitation what he bestowed on them. The name of G.o.d proves his existence, for there cannot exist anything of which the name existed, but not the thing. The soul perceives him and thought comprehends his qualities. Meditation is identical with wors.h.i.+pping him exclusively, and by practising it uninterruptedly the individual comes into supreme absorption with him and beat.i.tude is obtained [Footnote ref 1].

The idea of soul is the same as we find in the _Yoga sutra._ The idea of metempsychosis is also the same. He speaks of the eight siddhis (miraculous powers) at the first stage of meditation on the unity of G.o.d. Then follow the other four stages of meditation corresponding to the four stages we have as in the _Yoga sutra._ He gives four kinds of ways for the achievement of salvation, of which the first is the _abhyasa_ (habit) of Patanjali, and the object of this abhyasa is unity with G.o.d [Footnote ref 2]. The second stands for vairagya; the third is the wors.h.i.+p of G.o.d with a view to seek his favour in the attainment of salvation (cf. _Yoga sutra,_ I. 23 and I. 29). The fourth is a new introduction, namely that of rasayana or alchemy. As regards liberation the view is almost the same as in the _Yoga sutra,_ II. 25 and IV. 34, but the liberated state is spoken of in one place as absorption in G.o.d or being one with him. The Brahman is conceived as an _urddhvamula avaks'akha as'vattha_ (a tree with roots upwards and branches below), after the [email protected] fas.h.i.+on, the upper root is pure Brahman, the trunk is Veda, the branches are the different doctrines and schools, its leaves are the different modes of interpretation. Its nourishment comes from the three forces; the

___________________________________________________________________

[Footnote 1: Cf. _Yoga sutra_ I. 23-29 and II. 1, 45. The _Yoga sutras_ speak of Is'vara (G.o.d) as an eternally emanc.i.p.ated [email protected], omniscient, and the teacher of all past teachers. By meditating on him many of the obstacles such as illness, etc., which stand in the way of Yoga practice are removed. He is regarded as one of the alternative objects of concentration. The commentator Vyasa notes that he is the best object, for being drawn towards the Yogin by his concentration. He so wills that he can easily attain concentration and through it salvation. No argument is given in the _Yoga sutras_ of the existence of G.o.d.]

[Footnote 2: Cf. Yoga II. 1.]

235

object of the wors.h.i.+pper is to leave the tree and go back to the roots.

The difference of this system from that of the _Yoga sutra_ is: (1) the conception of G.o.d has risen here to such an importance that he has become the only object of meditation, and absorption in him is the goal; (2) the importance of the yama [Footnote ref 1] and the niyama has been reduced to the minimum; (3) the value of the Yoga discipline as a separate means of salvation apart from any connection with G.o.d as we find in the _Yoga sutra_ has been lost sight of; (4) liberation and Yoga are defined as absorption in G.o.d; (5) the introduction of Brahman; (6) the very significance of Yoga as control of mental states ([email protected]_) is lost sight of, and (7) rasayana (alchemy) is introduced as one of the means of salvation.

From this we can fairly a.s.sume that this was a new modification of the Yoga doctrine on the basis of Patanjali's _Yoga sutra_ in the direction of Vedanta and Tantra, and as such it probably stands as the transition link through which the Yoga doctrine of the sutras entered into a new channel in such a way that it could be easily a.s.similated from there by later developments of Vedanta, Tantra and S'aiva doctrines [Footnote ref 2]. As the author mentions rasayana as a means of salvation, it is very probable that he flourished after Nagarjuna and was probably the same person who wrote _Patanjala tantra_, who has been quoted by S'ivadasa in connection with alchemical matters and spoken of by Nages'a as ”_Carake_ [email protected]” We can also a.s.sume with some degree of probability that it is with reference to this man that [email protected] and Bhoja made the confusion of identifying him with the writer of the [email protected] It is also very probable that [email protected] by his line ”[email protected]@[email protected]@h_”

refers to this work which was called ”Patanjala.” The commentator of this work gives some description of the lokas, dvipas and the sagaras, which runs counter to the descriptions given in the [email protected]_, III. 26, and from this we can infer that it was probably written at a time when the [email protected]_ was not written or had not attained any great sanct.i.ty or authority. Alberuni

___________________________________________________________________

[Footnote 1: Alberuni, in his account of the book of [email protected], gives a list of commandments which practically is the same as yama and niyama, but it is said that through them one cannot attain salvation.]

[Footnote 2: Cf. the account of _Pas'upatadars'ana_ in [email protected]_.]

236

also described the book as being very famous at the time, and Bhoja and [email protected] also probably confused him with Patanjali the grammarian; from this we can fairly a.s.sume that this book of Patanjali was probably written by some other Patanjali within the first 300 or 400 years of the Christian era; and it may not be improbable that when [email protected]_ quotes in III. 44 as ”_iti_ [email protected],” he refers to this Patanjali.

The conception of Yoga as we meet it in the [email protected] [email protected] consisted of six [email protected] or accessories, namely [email protected], pratyahara, dhyana, [email protected], tarka and samadhi [Footnote ref 1].

Comparing this list with that of the list in the _Yoga sutras_ we find that two new elements have been added, and tarka has been replaced by asana. Now from the account of the sixty-two heresies given in the _Brahmajala sutta_ we know that there were people who either from meditation of three degrees or through logic and reasoning had come to believe that both the external world as a whole and individual souls were eternal. From the a.s.sociation of this last mentioned logical school with the Samadhi or Dhyana school as belonging to one cla.s.s of thinkers called s'as'vatavada, and from the inclusion of tarka as an [email protected] in samadhi, we can fairly a.s.sume that the last of the [email protected] given in [email protected] [email protected] represents the oldest list of the Yoga doctrine, when the [email protected] and the Yoga were in a process of being grafted on each other, and when the [email protected] method of discussion did not stand as a method independent of the Yoga. The subst.i.tution of asana for tarka in the list of Patanjali shows that the Yoga had developed a method separate from the [email protected]