Page:A History of Indian Philosophy Vol 1.djvu/251

 VII] Pataiijal£ of Kitiib Piitanjal 235 object of the worshipper is to leave the tree and go back to the roots. The difference of this system from that of the Yoga szUra is : (I) the conception of God has risen here to such an importance that he has become the only object of meditation, and absorption in him is the goal; (2) the importance of the yama l and the niyama has been reduced to the minimum; (3) the value of the Yoga discipline as a separate means of salvation apart from any connection with God as we find in the Yoga szltra has been lost sight of; (4) liberation and Yoga are defined as absorption in God; (5) the introduction of Brahman; (6) the very significance of Yoga as control of mental states (cittavrttinirodlla) is lost sight of, and (7) rasayana (alchemy) is introduced as one of the means of salvation. From this we can fairly assume that this was a new modi- fication of the Yoga doctrine on the basis of Patafijali's Yoga szUra in the direction of Vedanta and Tantra, and as such it probably stands as the transition link through which the Yoga doctrine of the siitras entered into a new channel in such a way that it could be easily assimilated from there by later develop- ments of Vedanta, Tantra and Saiva doctrines:!. As the author mentions rasayana as a means of salvation, it is very probable that he flourished after Nagarjuna and was probably the same person who wrote Pii.taiiJala ta1ltra, who has been quoted by Sivadasa in connection with alchemical matters and spoken of by Nagesa as uCarake PatanjaliJ:l." Ve can also assume with some degree of probability that it is with reference to this man that Cakrapal)i and Bhoja made the confusion of identifying him with the writer of the Mahii.bhii..fya. It is also very probable that Cakra- pal)i by his line "piitaiiJala1Jlahiiblziiyacarakapratism!lSkrtai(l" refers to this work which was called" Pataiijala." The commen- tator of this work gives some description of the lokas, dvlpas and the sagaras, which runs counter to the descriptions given in the Vyiisabhiiya, III. 26, and from this we can infer that it was pro- bably written at a time when the Vj.1tlsabllii.fya was not written or had not attained any great sanctity or authority. Alberuni I Alberuni, in his account of the hook of Saf!lkhya, gives a list of commandments which practically is the same as yama and niyama, but it is said that through them one cannot attain salvation. 2 Cf. the account of PiifupatadarJalla in Sarvadarla1Zasa,!lgraha.