How Vindhyavāsin Turned into Vedavyāsa: Vācaspati Miśra’s Case for Pātāñjala Yoga

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

  Dimitry Shevchenko

Abstract

This paper explores the role that Vācaspati Miśra – an influential Indian philosopher from the 10th century – played in the promotion and canonization of Pātāñjala Yoga in India. Vācaspati Miśra was a polymath, traditionally known by a rare sobriquet sarva-tantra-svatantra (“the one who owns all the systems”) and composed highly influential commentaries and independent treatises on nearly all major Brahmanical philosophical traditions. I argue that Vācaspati’s versatile scholarly activity within the milieu of Mithila, the reputable center of Brahmanical learning, effectively promoted two relatively inconspicuous systems in this period – that of Pātāñjala Yoga and Advaita Vedānta. In the present inquiry, I focus on the former system.

Vācaspati composed his Tattvavaiśaradī commentary on the Yogasūtrabhāṣya and identified its author with Vedavyāsa – the mythological compiler of the Vedas and the composer of the Mahābhārata and the Purāṇas. It is not a coincidence that Vācaspati also ascribed the authorship of a fundamental text of another tradition, namely, the Brahmasūtra, to Vedavyāsa. As far as I can tell, these ascriptions have no precedence in the history of the two texts and are meant to enhance their status within the orthodoxy. As the so-called Vedavyāsa’s commentary came to be regarded as the decisive canonical interpretation of the Yoga philosophical school, and as all the following commentaries rely on Vācaspati’s Tattvavaiśaradī, we may consider Vācaspati’s commentarial activity (along, perhaps, with institutional enterprises about which we know nothing) as the turning point in the history of the Yoga philosophy, after which the trio of the Yogasūtra, the Bhāṣya, and Tattvavaiśaradī assumed almost absolute authority within the tradition, with alternative lines of interpretation doomed to oblivion.

How to Cite

Shevchenko, D. (2022). How Vindhyavāsin Turned into Vedavyāsa: Vācaspati Miśra’s Case for Pātāñjala Yoga. The World of the Orient, (4 (117), 288-299. https://doi.org/10.15407/orientw2022.04.288
Article views: 113 | PDF Downloads: 104

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

Vācaspati Miśra, Indian philosophy, Pātāñjala Yoga, Advaita Vedānta, Sāṃkhya, Yogasūtra, Vedavyāsa

References

Aklujkar A. (1999), “The Prologue and Epilogue Verses of Vācaspati-Miśra-I”, Rivista degli studi orientali, Vol. 73, Fasc. ¼, pp. 105–130.

Bryant E. F. (2009), The Yoga Sūtras of Patañjali, North Point Press.

Bhakti Yoga: Tales and Teachings from the Bhāgavata Purāṇa (2018), Macmillan.

Bhāmatī – Suranarayana Sastri S. S. and Kunhan Raja C. (ed. and tr.) (1933), The Bhāmatī of Vācaspati on Śaṅkara̍s Brahmasutrabhāṣya (Catussūtrī), Adyar, Theosophical Publishing House, Madras.

Chapple C. K. (1994), “Reading Patañjali without Vyāsa: A Critique of Four Yoga Sūtra Passages”, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Vol. 62, No. 1, pp. 85–105. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/LXII.1.85

Jha G. (1896), An English Translation with the Sanskrit Text of the Tattva-Kaumudī (Sāṃkhya) of Vāchaspati Miśra, T. Tatya, Bombay.

Kataoka K. (2011), “Manu and the Buddha for Kumārila and Dharmakīrti,” in Helmut Krasser, Horst Lasic, Eli Franco and Birgit Kellner (eds), Religion and Logic in Buddhist Philosophical Analysis Proceedings of the Fourth International Dharmakīrti Conference, Vienna, August 23–27, 2005, Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, pp. 255–269.

Kessler E. G. (ed.) (2007), Voices of Wisdom: A Multicultural Philosophy Reader, Thomson Wadsworth.

Larson G. J. (2018), Classical Yoga Philosophy and the Legacy of Sāṃkhya with Sanskrit Text and English Translation of Pātañjala Yogasūtra-s, Vyāsa Bhāṣya and Tattvavaiśāradī of Vācaspatimiśra, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi.

Larson G. J. and Bhattacharya R. Sh. (eds) (1987), Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Vol. IV: Sāṃkhya, Motilal Banarsidass. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400853533

Larson G. J. and Bhattacharya R. Sh. (eds) (2008), Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Vol. XII: Yoga: India’s Philosophy of Meditation, Motilal Banarsidass.

Maas P. A. (2006), Samādhipāda. Das erste Kapitel des Pātāñjalayogaśāstra zum ersten Mal kritisch ediert. The First Chapter of the Pātāñjalayogaśāstra for the First Time Critically Edited, Shaker Verlag, Aachen.

Maas P. A. (2013), “A Concise Historiography of Classical Yoga Philosophy”, in Eli Franco (ed.), Periodization and Historiography of Indian Philosophy, Sammlung de Nobili, Institute für Südasien, Tibet und Buddhismuskunde der Universität Wien, Vienna, pp. 53–90.

Nicholson A. (2010), Unifying Hinduism: Philosophy and Identity in Indian Intellectual History, Columbia University Press.

Pines Sh. & Gelblum T. (1966), “Al-Bīrūni’s Version of Patañjali’s ‘Yogasūtra’ ”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 302–325.

Shevchenko D. (2017), “Natural Liberation in the Sāṃkhyakārikā and Its Commentaries”, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 45, No. 5, pp. 863–892. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-017-9326-2

Taber J. (2009), “Yoga and Our Epistemic Predicament”, in Eli Franco (ed.), Yogic Perception, Meditation and Altered States of Consciousness, Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, pp. 71–92.

TK – Tattvakaumudī – Jha G. (1896), An English Translation with the Sanskrit Text of the Tattva-Kaumudī (Sāṃkhya) of Vāchaspati Miśra, T. Tatya, Bombay.

TV – Tattvavaiśaradī – Pātañjalayogadarśanam Vācaspatimiśraviracita-Tattvavaiśāradī-vijñānabhikśukṛta-Yogavārttikavibhūṣita-Vyāsabhāṣyasametam (1971), Bharatiya Vidya Prakasan, Varanasi.