After class on Wednesday I had a chance to look at some of the history of the commentaries for the yoga sutras. Actually, much of the information I'm presenting here is straight from Bryant's Preface, and I'm focusing mainly around pages xxxv-xliii. I found some very interesting facts:
- There is no agreed upon date for the authorship of Patanjali's text, but some place it approximately around 200 B.C.E., while others suggest dates ranging from 500 B.C.E.-100 B.C.E.
- Though there was a movement in the late 19th century that suggested Patanjali's text was actually a compilation of many different authors, Bryant believes that "[m]ore recent scholarship has tended to find internal consistency in most of the text." (pg. xxxvi)
- Bryant regards the Yoga Sutras as a compilation of two distinct yoga traditions, and that Patanjali was the compiler.
I also tried to find a little bit about each commentator, referencing Bryant and other sources:
- Vyasa - his commentary is dated by most scholars to the fourth or fifth century, and his commentary is considered "almost as canonical as the primary text by Patanjali himself" (pg. xxxix). Vyasa had immeasurable impact on how Patanjali's text was interpreted by scholars and later commentators, and it is essentially the starting point for all the following commentators.
- Vacaspati Misra - a ninth century commentator, and possibly the second most important commentator. Oddly enough, he wrote commentaries for many other (and often conflicting) traditional texts, a fact that makes Bryant wonder whether or not Misra was actually a practicing yogi.
- Bhoja Raja - an eleventh century commentator who was also a poet, scholar, and patron of the arts and sciences. An important political power in his day, his commentary often follows Vyasa's, though it does occasionally present some interesting insight.
- Vijnanabhiksu - a fifteenth century commentator who often emphasizes a devotional aspect of yoga. He was a practicing yogi, and comments in other writings that his commentary on yoga stems from his personal experience.
- Ramananda Sarasvati - a sixteenth century commentator who essentially follows previous commentators, and adds little new insight.
- Hariharananda - the most recent commentator in our book (1869-1947), Hariharananda was a dedicated ascetic and yogi. Bryant believes his commentary is important because even though he is well acquainted with modern Western thought, his commentary is still grounded in Premodern tradition. His commentary serves as a good bridge for modern readers like us.
Hopefully these details will help provide some context for our reading. Let me know if you find anything else concerning authorship or commentary history that you think would be interesting. Better yet, post it as a comment!
Do the different commentators belong to certain schools of Hindu thought? Do the commentators themselves talk about sectarianism at all?
ReplyDeleteSome of this knowledge comes from a genreic resovoir I have from reading stuff, but much ot it comes from Wikipedia.
ReplyDeleteSankara is a hardcore non-dual (advaita) monist. He nearly defined the beliefs of that school.
Vacaspati is also an advaita Vedantin although he also influenced what was to become the Nyaya school (one of the six schools which are vedanta, mimamsa; yoga, sankhya; nyaya, vaisesika). Nyaya developed a complex theory of logic and mental categories, similar to Aristotle in our tradition.
Wikipedia says that Bhoja Raja was a polymath/genius. He wrote books and commentaries on poetry, math, language, religion, histroy, archery, civil enginieering,and chemistry just to name a few. I didn't see anything about a philosophical viewpoint.
Vijnanabhiksu started a new sect which combined vedanta, Yoga, and samkhya and called it avibhagadvaita (indestinguishable non-dualism). Apperantly it was a theistic sect.
Ramananda Sarasvati seems to be some sort of non-dualist, but I am not really sure.
As far as I have ever read, once the British colonization begins, and you hit the nineteenth century, the only schools that are left are Yoga and vedanta, both of which have adopted pieces of all the other schools. For example modern Vedantins will take the psychology of Yoga, the physics of the Vaisesika schools, the logic of the Nyaya school and unify all of them under their vedantin metaphysics. At that point it becomes really hard to establish which sect they come from. Although having said that, Hariharananda, who is the most modern of our commentators, seems to be firmly established within the Yoga tradition.
If you are interested, there is this guy Swami Vivekananda with whom I am fasicanted; he calls himself a vedantin but says that one shuld pracice Bhakti yoga, Karma yoga, Jnana yoga, and do Patanjali style meditation yoga. He emphasizes that all of the orthodox schools have the same goal. Here is his wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Vivekananda#Teachings_and_philosophy
He seems to be a good example of a typical modern hindu who does not fall squarely in one sect. But who knows, its very possible that these people just dumb it down so we can understand it. Hope that helps.