Mircea Eliade YOGA IMMORTALITY AND ... - Brihaspati.net

Note I, 2: Patanjali and texts delYoga cldsico
The identification of the two-author Patanjali Yoga-Sutra of Patanjali and the philologist,
has been accepted by Leibich, Garbe and Dasgupta, and rejected by Woods (The Yoga-
System of Patanjali, Harvard Oriental Series, 1914, p. 13 27), Jacobi (The Dates of the
Philosophical Sutras of the Brahmans, Joun the American Oriental Society, vol. XXXI,
1901, p. 1-29, esp. 26-27; id. Ueber das urspriingliche Yogasystem, Preuschichten
Akademie der SHzungsberichte der Wissenchaft, vol. XXVI, 1929, p. 581-624 esp. 583-
584, id. Ueber das Alter der Yoga-sastra, Iranistik und Zettschrtftfiir Indology, 111, 1931,
p. 80-88) and A. B. Keith (Samkhya System, p. 65-66; Some Problems of Indian
Philosophy, Indian Historical Quarterly, vol. VIII, 1932, p. 425-441, esp. P. 433).
Dasgupta Woods denies the assertion, according to which the concept of substantia
(dravya) 'differed from each other Patanjali. By contrast, Dasgupta find numer-ous
similarities between Yoga and Mahabhasya-Strfra for example, in the two works is the
doctrine! sphota, although it is little known, the two texts begin the same way (Yoga.-Su
* ra: atha yoganusasanam and Mahabhasya: atha cabdanusasanam). Dasgupta (op. cit, p.
230) believes that the first three chapters of the Yoga-Sutra was composed by Patanjali
the
philologist and does date from the second century BC. With regard to the last chapter (the
fourth), Dasgupta sees in this a late addition. On the one hand, terminc-lodge is different
from the first three chapters, and otherwise repeating things that had already been said. A.
B. Keith does not accept the interpretation of Dasgupta: The Yoga-Sutra would be the
work of one author, that in any ma-nera, is the author of Mahabhasya. Jacobi (Ueber das
Alter der Yoga-Sastra), comparing the vocabulary of the Yoga-Sutra of Mahabhasya, had
come to the conclusion that no couxadian. Based on these results, and Keith Jacobi
discovered in the Fourth Book of Yoga-Sutra, anti-Buddhist polemics evident traces of it
would prove that the date of Patan jal i can be in any way prior to the fifth century Jacobi
had established a long time that if an Indian philosophical text refers to Vijnanavada, is
after the v century (The dates of the Philosophical Sutras, p. 2, 25). However, Yoga-Sutra
IV. 16, seems to refer. Vijnanavada. Keith (Some Problems of Indian Philosophy, p. 433)
and Hauer (Das Buch des Yogasutra IV. Erkldrung Ein Beitrag zu seiner und
Zeitbestimmung, p. 132-33) points out that this is not a Vijnanavada indeterminate, but
the doctrines of Asanga and Vasubandhu. In opposition to these criticisms, Jvala Prasad
(The Date of the Yoga-Sutra, Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, 1930, p. 365-375) tries to
prove that the sutra IV, 16 do not belong to the text of Patanjali, returning a given row of
the commentary of Vyasa (vii-vjn centuries) in which he was holding a controversy with
the Vijnanavadin. Much earlier, Raja Bhoj surra had observed that this was an
interpolation of Vyasa, which led him to not comment. You Prasad Dasgupta and note
that, although the authors referred to the Yoga-Sutra are the Vijnanavadin, there raz6n to
believe that this is Vasubhandu or Asanga. The text could also refer to a more idealistic
old school, like those found in the early Upanishads. "For example, the philosophy of a
text as old as Aitareya-Aranuaka contains everything you need to be considered
Vijnanavada: in all things are presented as knowledge (prajnanam) taking existence only
in and for knowledge (op. cit, p. 371). However, L. de la Vallee-Poussin had demonstrated
repeatedly dependence of the Yoga-Sutra about scholastic Buddhism: Notes