Yogadrstisamuccaya and Yogavinshika

SR No.: 011128
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: K K Dixit
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Total Pages: 139
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 6 MB

Page 120

112
INTRODUCTION
epithet attributed by the traditional Jaina ethics to the person who has taken first steps in the direction of practising general self-control-so that Haribhadra is in effect telling us that a person who has taken at least first steps in the direction of practising general self-control is alone competent to properly undertake a religious observance, Haribhadra also here comes out-sharply and in so many words - against those who, under various mistaken notions, encourage an improperly undertaken religious observance, but no new point of theoretical importance seems to emerge from this part of discussion.
Thus viewed the present text is a good summary introduction to Haribhadra's remaining writings on yoga. Moreover, two circumstances have rendered it many times more useful than it would have otherwise been. We are fortunate in having -in pript-a Sanskrit commentary on it by Yasovijaya - medieval titan of Jaina logic, and a Hindi translationcum-commentary by Pandit Sukhlalji - the modern counterpart of Yasovijaya. The accompanying English translation of the text-no less than the appended explanatory notes - owe almost everything to these two eminent commentator's of Haribhadra.
The Sanskrit version of the text is being given for the convenience of those who know no Prakrit but might be conversant with Sanskrit.
We have got with us three published editions of the text, one edited by Pt. Sukhlalji and published from Bhavnagar (1922), another printed at Indore and published from Ratlam (1997), and the third edited by Prof. K. V. Abhyankar and published from Ahmedabad (1932). Prof. Abhyankar's edition also notes the variant readings found in six manuscripts. We have, however, consistently followed the reading accepted in Pt. Sukhalalji's edition, it being the reading accepted by Yašoviiaya himself. But we have had to iusert three corrections-two minor and one major - in Panditji's reading. In verse 10 evamaiyam has been changed into evamatyan, in verse 19 rūvamarūdt has been changed into tūvimarūvi, In verse 14 Panditji reads nalanbana jan sasamaemeva and conjectures that the correct reading might be elthań nalarnbana jamemeya ; but the Ratlam editionperhaps gives us the really correct reading - nalambañamittha sa emeva which we have accepted.
.