365bet娱乐

In a theatrical account in the 惭辞办峁�o辫腻测补 5.54.3-12 鲍诲诲腻濒补办补 both self-incinerates and the pale ash of his bones are observed as if asleep on a bed of camphor (Cohen 2020). Cohen dates the text to 950 CE as the earliest known manuscript of the text that later became known as the 驰辞驳补惫腻蝉颈峁ａ弓丑补. Cohen argues that though the heavily redacted eleventh-to fourteenth-century 驰辞驳补惫腻蝉颈峁ａ弓丑补 has been commonly associated with advaita ved膩nta, the 惭辞办峁�o辫腻测补 is 鈥榲ery clearly not鈥� a ved膩ntic text (2020:1).^[1]

As Cohen glosses,

鈥榃hile his body was devoid of 辫谤腻峁嘺, the fire of 鲍诲诲腻濒补办补鈥檚 heart (丑峁沝补测腻驳苍颈岣�) completely burnt his impure body (尘补濒颈苍补峁� 惫补辫耻岣�) like a forest fire fanned by a rising wind burns a dry tree. 鲍诲诲腻濒补办补鈥檚 body was incinerated from the inside out in a kind of internal combustion, instigated by this fire of the heart (54.7)鈥� (Cohen, 2020:3).

Thus, we have an impure body immolated as if in a forest fire. The reference to the tree is not the same as the elliptical reference in the 贬补峁环补辫谤补诲墨辫颈办腻, as there the fire burnt the network of 苍腻岣嵞�s rather than the tree.

As in the 驰辞驳补产墨箩补, the image of camphor is deployed:

鈥楾he fire of 鲍诲诲腻濒补办补鈥檚 body was extinguished and the pale ash of his bones were seen as if they were asleep on a bed of camphor, white as snow. The bones were then picked up by a fierce wind and blown about, instantly covering space (54.13鈥�14)鈥� (Cohen 2020:4).

The story re-occurs in 驰辞驳补惫腻蝉颈峁ａ弓丑补 8-16. This episode brings together the burning of the body with 办耻峁囜笉补濒颈苍墨: 办耻峁囜笉补濒颈苍墨 re-animates 鲍诲诲腻濒补办补鈥檚 body, as I discuss in chapter five.

The connections between this episode and the 驰辞驳补产墨箩补鈥檚 is the baking of the body (delivered with far more theatrical narrative in the 惭辞办峁�o辫腻测补 but consistent across the sources in the basic tenets), and the description of the body as being like burnt camphor in space. In both texts 办耻峁囜笉补濒颈苍墨 has an important role but not in the precise instance of the burning or baking of the body. More broadly the 惭辞办峁�o辫腻测补鈥檚 assertion that this is not forceful yoga, on the basis that that brings suffering (惭辞办峁�o辫腻测补 5.54.8, 驰辞驳补惫腻蝉颈峁ａ弓丑补 16) is of note to scholarly work on the genealogy and meaning of the term 丑补峁环补 yoga.

Cohen suggests that we could read the mention of 办耻峁囜笉补濒颈苍墨 along with 狈腻谤腻测补峁嘺 in 鲍诲诲腻濒补办补鈥檚 story as evidence of early merging, or at the very least a co-existence, of the two historical streams outlined by Mallinson. These are the N膩th/Siddha/艢腻办迟补 (tantra) traditions (independently and as a blended unit) and the ancient non-Vedic ascetic tradition or supravedic muni/峁涐梗颈 迟补辫补蝉测腻 tradition. The tantric traditions graft their 办耻峁囜笉补濒颈苍墨-oriented laya yoga of the Siddha tradition onto the 产颈苍诲耻诲丑腻谤补峁嘺-oriented 丑补峁环补 yoga of the ascetic tradition to create the 丑补峁环补 synthesis that can be seen in texts that post-date the 贬补峁环补辫谤补诲墨辫颈办腻 (Mallinson 2016:121; Cohen 2020:5). Cohen argues that the 惭辞办峁�o辫腻测补, nuancing Mallinson, is evidence of an early merging of ascetic and Siddha traditions.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

Page numbers are those of the preprint pdf.