Vyasa’s Standpoint. The Buddhist Influence upon Yoga

Having set forth my interpretation of the few latest slokas of Yoga Sutras I cannot help but consider the following issue: why and where from there occurred the opinion (that I so much subject to criticizing) about the existence of asamprajnya samadhi as the “superior” samadhi that eliminates contemplations and so on.

No matter how strange it may seem, but the roots of this position, them been deep, go back to one of the earliest “classical” commentaries to this text, the “Vyasa-Bhashya” of Vyasa that (according to Ostrovskaya and Rudoi) is dated to ca. 4th -5th cent. AD. It is this very commentary that was used as a basis by some later medieval commentators such as Vacaspati Mishra and Vijnana Bhikshu. Besides, this text has another undeniable advantage – its availability, for it has been more than once translated into English (and even into Russian – thanks to Ostrovskaya and Rudoi).

The Relevance of New Translation and Commentaries on Yoga Sutra

It’s been ca. two thousand years since Yoga Sutras was written. Within this period the work has been translated into a good number of various languages, while the number of commentaries on it is countless. It was India alone – ancient and medieval – that provided for at least a dozen of very detailed (to say the least of them) and thorough commentaries on Yoga Sutras: Yoga-Bhashya of Vyasa (ca. 450 AD), Tattva-Vaisharadi of Vacaspati Mishra (ca. 850 AD), Raja-Martanda of Bhojaraja (ca. 1019-1054 AD), Yoga-Bhashya-Vivarana of Shankara Bhagavatpada (ca. 1350 AD), Yoga-Siddhanta-Candrika of Narayana Tirtha (ca. 1350 AD), Yoga-Varttika of Vijnana Bhikshu (ca. 1550 AD). And there must be a lot of other commentaries that are not known to me.

Yoga Sutras was analyzed by philosophers and systematicians of Indian philosophy, like Mueller and Radhakrishnan.

In scope of European tradition Yoga Sutras (in addition to professional Indologists) was studied by such big heads as Mircea Eliade.

Beyond the scope of scientific community they were the mystics of various European Traditions, including Annie Bezant, Alice Bailey and Aleister Crowley [1], who were trying to understand it.

I know about ca. a hundred of this text translations into English. So one would think – is it possible to add something conceptually new and do we really need a new translation and commentary? So I shall take the liberty of stating that not only it is relevant, but it is also necessary. And it is right now that it’s become feasible.