A History of Indian Philosophy Part 35

___________________________________________________________________

[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]

The introduction of [email protected] (non-injury), satya (truthfulness), asteya (want of stealing), brahmacaryya (s.e.x-control), aparigraha (want of greed) as yama and s'auca (purity), [email protected] (contentment) as niyama, as a system of morality without which Yoga is deemed impossible (for the first time in the sutras), probably marks the period when the disputes between the Hindus and the Buddhists had not become so keen. The introduction of maitri, [email protected], mudita, [email protected] is also equally significant, as we do not find them mentioned in such a prominent form in any other literature of the Hindus dealing with the subject of emanc.i.p.ation.

Beginning from the [email protected], Uttaradhyayanasutra_,

[Footnote 1: [email protected] pratyaharah dhyanam [email protected] tarkah samadhih [email protected]@nga ityucyate yoga_ (Maitr. 6 8).]

237

the [email protected]@ngasutra,_ etc., and pa.s.sing through Umasvati's _Tattvarthadhigamasutra_ to Hemacandra's _Yogas'astra_ we find that the Jains had been founding their Yoga discipline mainly on the basis of a system of morality indicated by the yamas, and the opinion expressed in Alberuni's _Patanjal_ that these cannot give salvation marks the divergence of the Hindus in later days from the Jains. Another important characteristic of Yoga is its thoroughly pessimistic tone. Its treatment of sorrow in connection with the statement of the scope and ideal of Yoga is the same as that of the four sacred truths of the Buddhists, namely suffering, origin of suffering, the removal of suffering, and of the path to the removal of suffering [Footnote ref 1]. Again, the metaphysics of the [email protected] (rebirth) cycle in connection with sorrow, origination, decease, rebirth, etc. is described with a remarkable degree of similarity with the cycle of causes as described in early Buddhism.

Avidya is placed at the head of the group; yet this avidya should not be confused with the Vedanta avidya of [email protected], as it is an avidya of the Buddhist type; it is not a cosmic power of illusion nor anything like a mysterious original sin, but it is within the range of earthly tangible reality. Yoga avidya is the ignorance of the four sacred truths, as we have in the sutra "[email protected] [email protected]_" (II. 5).

The ground of our existing is our will to live (_abhinives'a_).

"This is our besetting sin that we will to be, that we will to be ourselves, that we fondly will our being to blend with other kinds of existence and extend. The negation of the will to be, cuts off being for us at least [Footnote ref 2]." This is true as much of Buddhism as of the Yoga abhinives'a, which is a term coined and used in the Yoga for the first time to suit the Buddhist idea, and which has never been accepted, so far as I know, in any other Hindu literature in this sense. My sole aim in pointing out these things in this section is to show that the _Yoga sutras_ proper (first three chapters) were composed at a time when the later forms of Buddhism had not developed, and when the quarrels between the Hindus and the Buddhists and Jains had not reached such

[Footnote 1: _Yoga sutra,_ II. 15, 16. 17. [email protected] [email protected] rogo rogahetuh [email protected] bhais'ajyamiti evamidamapi s'astram caturvyuhameva; tadyatha [email protected]@h, [email protected]@h [email protected]@h [email protected]@h; [email protected] [email protected] [email protected], [email protected]@h [email protected] [email protected], [email protected] [email protected]@m [email protected] samyagdar'sanam, [email protected]_, II. 15]

[Footnote 2: Oldenberg's _Buddhism_ [Footnote ref 1].]

238

a stage that they would not like to borrow from one another.

As this can only be held true of earlier Buddhism I am disposed to think that the date of the first three chapters of the _Yoga sutras_ must be placed about the second century B.C. Since there is no evidence which can stand in the way of identifying the grammarian Patanjali with the Yoga writer, I believe we may take them as being identical [Footnote ref 1].

The [email protected] and the Yoga Doctrine of Soul or [email protected]

The [email protected] philosophy as we have it now admits two principles, souls and [email protected]_, the root principle of matter. Souls are many, like the Jaina souls, but they are without parts and qualities.

They do not contract or expand according as they occupy a smaller or a larger body, but are always all-pervasive, and are not contained in the bodies in which they are manifested. But the relation between body or rather the mind a.s.sociated with it and soul is such that whatever mental phenomena happen in the mind are interpreted as the experience of its soul. The souls are many, and had it not been so (the [email protected] argues) with the birth of one all would have been born and with the death of one all would have died [Footnote ref 2].

The exact nature of soul is however very difficult of comprehension, and yet it is exactly this which one must thoroughly grasp in order to understand the [email protected] philosophy. Unlike the Jaina soul possessing _anantajnana, anantadars'ana, anantasukha_, and _anantaviryya_, the [email protected] soul is described as being devoid of any and every characteristic; but its nature is absolute pure consciousness (_cit_). The [email protected] view differs from the Vedanta, firstly in this that it does not consider the soul to be of the nature of pure intelligence and bliss (_ananda_) [Footnote ref 3]. Bliss with [email protected] is but another name for pleasure and as such it belongs to [email protected] and does not const.i.tute the nature of soul; secondly, according to Vedanta the individual souls (_Jiva_) are

___________________________________________________________________

[Footnote 1: See S.N. Das Gupta, _Yoga Philosophy in relation to other Indian systems of thought,_ ch. II. The most important point in favour of this identification seems to be that both the Patanjalis as against the other Indian systems admitted the doctrine of [email protected]_ which was denied even by [email protected] On the doctrine of [email protected] see my _Study of Patanjali_, Appendix I.]

[Footnote 2: _Karika_, 18.]

[Footnote 3: See Citsukha's _Tattvapradipika,_ IV.]

239

but illusory manifestations of one soul or pure consciousness the Brahman, but according to [email protected] they are all real and many.

The most interesting feature of [email protected] as of Vedanta is the a.n.a.lysis of knowledge. [email protected] holds that our knowledge of things are mere ideational pictures or images. External things are indeed material, but the sense data and images of the mind, the coming and going of which is called knowledge, are also in some sense matter-stuff, since they are limited in their nature like the external things. The sense-data and images come and go, they are often the prototypes, or photographs of external things, and as such ought to be considered as in some sense material, but the matter of which these are composed is the subtlest.

These images of the mind could not have appeared as conscious, if there were no separate principles of consciousness in connection with which the whole conscious plane could be interpreted as the experience of a person [Footnote ref 1]. We know that the [email protected] consider the soul or atman as pure and infinite consciousness, distinct from the forms of knowledge, the ideas, and the images. In our ordinary ways of mental a.n.a.lysis we do not detect that beneath the forms of knowledge there is some other principle which has no change, no form, but which is like a light which illumines the mute, pictorial forms which the mind a.s.sumes.

The self is nothing but this light. We all speak of our "self"