On Quadruple Division Of Yogasastra

SR No.: 269542
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: A Wezler
Publisher: A Wezler
Total Pages: 25
Language: English
Classification: Article
File Size: 5 MB

Page 23

332
A. Wexler
On the Quadruple Division of the Yogasastra
333
in pain and also in alleged pleasure is ultimately the same in that both, pleasure and pain, are brought about by one's own karman 1. Next, pain and suffering (duḥkha) have to be properly understood so as to be able to keep them present to one's mind. When one has come to realize that each and everything, from God Brahma down to a grass-blade, is permeated by pain and suffering, one does not take interest in it any longer. And when, finally, liberation (apavarga) is recognized to be the unsurpassed, endless and altogether pure means for the ceasing of all pain and suffering, one strives for that goal only.
Bhasarvajña concludes this passage by stating tad evamt dvddasa. prahdreşv api tartvajanabhavand copayujyata ity ato 'pi dvadasadhd prameyam uktam / sarksepabhavanarthat ca tasya caturvidhyam ucyate : Hence, true knowledge is also realized in all these twelve ways; it is for this reason, too, that the "object of valid cognition" is taught (in the NS) as twelvefold; and that it is (on the other hand) of four kinds (only), this is taught for the sake of keeping (true knowledge] present to one's mind in a concise form.
That is to say, Bhasarvaja first demonstrates the true knowledge
as to develop with respect to the twelve prameyas, following their order of enumeration as given in NS 1.1.9, and states thereafter by way of summarizing his exposition, that they have been taught by the Satra. kāra not only in order to refute the theory of the quadruple division of the doctrines of salvation as expounded by other schools, but also to intimate that all twelve of them should be reflected upon in the manner outlined by Bhäsarvajnia himself. His very last remark is particularly interesting, and that in two respects: it determines more precisely the relation between the two alternative divisions of the prameya, the twelve fold and the quadruple; and the characterization of the latter as being introduced sanksepabhavanartha niakes one wonder whether this is another instance of the well-known tendency, so important in the history of Indian religions down to the present day, to replace complicated and time-consuming religious acts by « abridgements. But it is by no means clear that what Bhasarvajña has in mind is such a substitution; he might have equally thought of a real alternative only, or even regarded the choice of the sainksepa as a means to intensifying the bhavand of true knowledge which ultimately leads to liberation.
Yet, such theoretical deliberations are of little use here, at least as long as the apparent contradiction is not discussed in which these remarks of Bhasarvajnia's seem to stand to what had been said by him earlier on the relation between the two divisions. Had he not claimed that it is the quadruple division only that leads to liberation and does he not clearly contradict himself in asserting now that true knowledge is also realized in all these twelve ways ? I think that the two relevant passages appear contradictory only at first sight. For what Bhasarvajña
actually had said, and, to wit, also with respect to the particular proce dure of the Satrakāra, was that liberation as an absolute freeing oneself from Suffering by means of stopping egotism and by creating (in oneself) the state of indifference with respect to "objects of valid cognition ") like the body and so forth is not possible if (these objects] are not ascertained as having the form of that which has to be avoided, etc.; and what he shows in the second passage is precisely the cognitive and spiritual development of a Naiyāyika who reflects upon the twelve
objects of valid cognition on the basis of the more important division of heyam, etc. Therefore, not only his earlier statement that
the object of valid cognition) even if twelvefold is subsumedin the four groups (of that which is to be avoided, etc.), but also what he says here, viz. that the fourfold division is taught samksepa. bhavandriham, are fully intelligible in that, understood thus, the fourfold division in fact comprises in itself the twelve prameyas and for this very reason forms the quintessence of their bhavand. In the light of these deliberations it is hence more probable that what Bhasar. vajña wants to intimate by his final remark is but the superior impor. tance of the caturvidhya as emphasized by him already at the very outset.
Space being limited it is not possible to deal here with the same extensiveness as hitherto with what Bhasarvaja says in the subsequent paragraphs of his Bhusana. The gist of his exposition, however, may be briefly outlined, following mainly the Nyayasara: in order to define the concept of heyam he quotes YS 2.16 1 and adds that suffering is of twenty-one kinds, i.e. that it comprises the body, the six senses (manas is included), their six objects, the corresponding) six (types) of cognition, pleasure and pain in that all - except for the body which is the seat of pain and except for pleasure which is nothing but pain because it does not occur without pain and, of course, except for pain itself which is dulkha par excellence as it consists in badha, pida and san. 1dpa of them lead to suffering. That which brings about the heyam (tasya nirvartakam), i.e. its specific cause, is stated to be nescience (avidya) and thirst (trend), on the one hand, and merit and demerit (dharmadharmau), on the other; nescience is then defined as false know. ledge of that which has been shown by true adhydrmavids, and it is made clear that it includes the mental impression left by nescience
132. See above p. 295. 133. NBhus 444.5-19; cf. also 441.9-15 and 445.24 ff.
134. Of the two Slokas quoted by Bhasarvajna to give an example of what true knowers of the man and those blind with passion. say (NBhus 444.27-20), not identified by the editor, the first one is from Mbh. (Poona) 12.316.42 and 43; the second one seems to belong to the vast stock of floating stanzas one finds so often quoted in anthologies and Indian narrative literature; it is included in 0. BÖHTLINGK'S. Indische Sprüche, I, repr. Osnabrück, 1966, p. 98 (no. 3565); for further references sce L. STERNBACH, Supplement to O. Böhrlingk's Indische Sprüche (AKM XOXVII.1). Wiesbaden, 1965, p. 9.
135. C. NBhoş 444.23-30 and 445.4-7. Note that by duh khastre (which is mee with also NBhus 443.22, 445.20, 446.14 and 584.16) Bhasarvajha refers to NS 1.1.2 dealt with in detail NBhds 72.15 t.
130. CE. NBhd$ 441.2-7 and 9-15 to which Bhisarvaja refers back. 131. NBhos 443.14-15. Read 'bhavanopayujyale or 'bhdvanaivopa'!