365bet娱乐

[Full title: (A) Philosophical aspects; (IV) The yoga philosophy; (2) Auxiliaries of Yoga].

PRANAYAMA (BREATH-CONTROL) : Devala explains the breath-control to be of three kinds kumbha, recana & purana (2395-2399). The extant Yogasutra & the commentator Vyasa do not mention these terms, while explaining the concept of pranayama. The terms svasa, pravasa & gativiccheda 鈥� * are employed in the Yogasutra 59 (2/49) & three kinds of pranayama is indicated in the phrase bahyabhyantarastambhavrttih in the Yogasutra (2/50). The Yogasutra (1/34) mentions the terms pracchardana & vidharana. The Sankhyasutra (3/33) 62 also uses 60 61 similar terms but the terms, kumbha, recana, purana etc. used by Devala are not found in the above works. Devala does not follow any of these works. He has borrowed these terms from the ancient i but lost works of Sankhya-Yoga. The Visnu purana³ (V/10/14), the Brhadyogiyajnavalkya smrti (8/9-10 & 19-21) & Vacaspati (on Yogasutra II.50) mention above three terms 鈽� 7 1 3 na $

857 Further divisions of the pranayama into mrdu (soft or mild), manda (slow) & tiksna (swift) are mentioned by Devala, in accordance with the number of udvatas, (breaths), one, two & three respectively (2400). The Yogasutra 642/50) seems to indicate twofold division dirgha (prolonged) & suksma (short), based upon space, time & number. But Vyasa 65 refers like Devala to the three varieties, based on number -viz. mrdu, madhya, & tivra.. 66 66 The term udvata is found in the Devala-sutra & it is also explained by the author (2400-2401). But in the com. of Vyasa (Yogasutra 2/50) & the Rajamartanda the term udghata is employed. Mm. P.V.Kane suggests the reading 'Udghata' for the Devala-sutra also. He also suggests the reading ahatya for ahrtya. The term 'udvata' only is retained in the present reconstructed text, as it is the reading, that is found, in the Krtyakalpataru, one of the earliest authorities that might have had the original text of Devala. It can suggest the proper sense (Ud=upwards, vata breath) viz. the process in which the breath is taken upwards, upto the head. The term ahatya would suggest the sense of dashing against the head, while ahrtya can mean that breath is forcibly brought towards the head. It suggests the yogin's control upon the breath. It is presumable that Devala's reading can be traced to the ancient Sankhya works. The conditions under which the pranayama is not to be performed are enumerated in the text (2407). They are as follows when one is, (1) tired, (2) desirous of knowing, (3) desirous of sleeping, (4) perturbed, (5) hungry, (6) suffering from disease; 1 + * The slam

kong 858 (7) troubled by heat & cold, (8) having speedy impulse of excretion. Such circumstances are not found in the extant Yogasutras or Sankhyasutras. PRATYAHARA : The mind is atomic, restless, light & forceful & hence it is very difficult to control it. It may swerve or fail in the practice of Yoga. The pratyahara, according to Devala, is the repeated attempt of bringing back & establishing mind upon the intended object (namely the self) (2408). Here also Devala emphasizes upon the turning away & controlling of the mind. He does not refer to the control of senses from the sense-objects. The latter can naturally be achieved, when the mind has been properly restrained. Patanjali's explanation is different in this respect. When senses, not coming in contact with their respective senseobjects, follow or flow towards as it were the mind' (citta) - that stage is known as pratyahara, according to Yogasutra (2/54). Devala does not employ the technical term 'citta' like Patanjali. 67 The term 'artha' in the text means 'atman' as explained by Laksmidhara (K.K.M.p.173). Pratyahara is an attempt of yoking mind to the self. The term 'artha' also occurs in the sutra (2207), defining Yoga. The word 'atman' is actually used in the sutra (2409), explaining dharana. Thus Devala's procedure of Yoga is more akin to the Upanisadic concept than with that of the extant Yogasutras. E * }

859 While pointing out the peculiar qualities of the mind, Devala refers to the atomic nature of it. The Sankhyasutra (3/14) 68 also seems to endorse the same view. While the commentator Vyasa 1 (on Yogasutra 4/10) points out the view of Acaryas 69 (celebrated 70 teachers of that school) that they believed in the pervasive nature of the citta. The Nyaya & Vaisesika systems believe in the atomic nature of mind while the Mimams akas maintain the view of 71 all-pervading nature of mind. Devala might be influenced by the Nyaya-Vaisesika schools in this respect. DHARANA : Devala explains dharana as a process of holding body, senses, mind, intellect & the self (all directed towards one & one objective only) (2409). Apararka (p.1025) explains the word Atman as ahankara here. But it seems to be improper as (1) the author himself could have used the word ahankara in the text, instead of Atman, (2) secondly, the mention of a ahankara after mind & intellect, would be improper. DHYANA: The nature & procedure of dhyana are described elaborately in a long sutra (2410). The definitions of dhyana, found in the Yogasutra (3/2) & the Sankhyasutras (3/30 & 6/25) refer merely 72 to some aspect of it, while Devala's explanation is a more detailed one, dealing with all the practical aspects of it. Devala is evidently not influenced by the above sutras. The dhyana is a process of contemplation upon 'That' (tat). 11 ny

.73 860 This 'tat' may be interpreted as standing for the Upanisadic Brahman, which is sometimes indicated by the use of word 'that' (tat). This suggests the vedantic influence on the text. Devala clearly refers to the two kinds of postures, namely Svastika & bhadraka. The extant Yogasutra does not mention any kind of posture, technically known as asana. Acc. to Yogasutra (2/46)74 asana is that which is stable & comfortable. This indicates that any posture, which is of this nature, is to be followed for the practice of Yoga. This does not mean that the various asanas (postures) were not prevalent in those days. because Devala has mentioned asanas here, while explaining dhyana, on the authority of ancient works of Sankhya-yoga. 75 The commentators Vyasa (Yogasutra 2/46) etc. mention many asanas. Kalidasa refers to Virasana in the Kumarasambhava (3/45 & 59) & Yajnavalkya (1/278,280) to bhadrasana. The Daksamrti 76 - 78 77 (VIII.5) mentions padmasana & Yajnavalkya (3/198) also seems to refer to it. These references would definitely suggest that the as anas were quite well-known in the early centuries of christian era & might be prevalent even before it, as the ancient SankhyaYoga Tantras, from which Devala has borrowed his explanation of dhyana, might be referring to the asanas.