Paitāmahasiddhānta and its sources (Abstract)

Journal of psychedelic studies, 2019

History of Science in South Asia, 2017

Latest research on one of the oldest Indian treatises on the Astral Science

If the objective is to be able to compare mythologies systematically, to classify them into related super-families, and then to make inferences about the origins of super-families, then it would be very useful, methodologically speaking, to be able to apply some external standard against which all myths could be compared. Even better would be to have an external standard derived from independent sources and one that has been independently verified, as, for example, a standard derived from current knowledge of human neurophysiology that demonstrates constraints on what human beings are capable of experiencing. My research on meditation-induced light visions suggests that this phenomena can be used to generate just such a standard, one grounded in human neurophysiology. What I’d like to do today is show you how far a neurologically-grounded analysis of clear light visions can take us, first, in achieving that goal of identifying basic similarities in the content of myths, and, second, in achieving the related goal of identifying the most likelyorigins of those myth-families. That’s not to claim that light visions can account for all or even most of the content of myths, but I think you will be surprised to find what a sizable proportion of myth content is devoted to describing clear light visions and to explaining what they mean.

2014. Journal of Bengali Studies, Vol.3 No.1. (pp. 113-27) ISSN# 2277-9426

For Bangla Version cf. http://www.academia.edu/1510167/In_Search_of_Linguistics_of_Silence_Caryapada_%E0%A6%9A%E0%A6%B0_%E0%A6%AF%E0%A6%BE-%E0%A6%9A%E0%A6%B0_%E0%A6%9A%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%AF%E0%A6%BC_%E0%A6%A8%E0%A7%80%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%AC%E0%A6%A4%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%B0_%E0%A6%AD%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%B7%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A4%E0%A6%A4_%E0%A6%A4_%E0%A6%AC_%E0%A6%B8%E0%A6%A8_%E0%A6%A7%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A8_%E0%A6%89%E0%A6%AA%E0%A6%95_%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%AE%E0%A6%A8%E0%A6%BF%E0%A6%95%E0%A6%BE English abstract The author of this paper did not bother about the (a) formal linguistic analysis (meta-speaking on speaking, i.e. formal linguistics and philology) of the text of Caryapada (approx. 9th C A.D. A Tantric Buddhist text written in a sandhyabhasa or anti-language a la Halliday); (b) retrospective (pratyabhijna) construction of genealogical fantasy or linguistic statist identity or imagiNATION, instead he was proposing a secret guide to exquisite kayasadhana (the praxis within the body within the ambit of corporal studies)by following the path of Bhartrihari and Abhinavagupta’s post-formal non-analysis. The author followed Munidatta’s Sanskrit commentary of the Caryapada-text (written in an anti-language to hide the secrets of physiological (not in the Western medical sense of the term) points that is shaped and perceived by the world views of the so-called lower caste Tantric Buddhists) and that was commented in Sanskrit by Munidutta. This reciprocal discourse-exchange bi-way traffic) in between so-called H(igh)and L(ow) was also being observed by the author. The paper ironically started with the salutation to the contemporary interpreters of the said text, though the author said that they are missing the world-views of the Tantric Buddhists as the contemporary scholar-interpreters did not link the perceptions of Tantric kayasadhana that is meant for ‘care of self’ (epimelia heatue). Only Shashibhusan Dasgupta (1969) discovered the secrets of the kaya (corporeal). Thus, the scholarship was condemned by the Caryapada-composers, who were considered to be ‘illiterate’ according the norms of literacy. Dasgupta (ibid) thus described the “illiterates’”(?) aversion to the recondite scholarship. After that the author elaborated the rhetoric-terms (utpreksa/metaphor, comparison in general, vyaja/ having only appearance of, deceitful, false, simulated..) used by Munidutta to explain the surplus meanings of the texts. Even the author supplied the architectural details of Kakhar (female-shaped shrines) temples (Orissa) to explain the boat-utpreksa as used in Caryapada. Lastly, the author had linked the cakras (so-called Hindu and Buddhist systems were amalgamated here — a case of syncretism) with different stages of speeches/non-speeches (a trajectory from parole to silenceme) and sleeping/non-sleeping to reach the point of “vakpathatia” (cf. caryapada, 37 a cordoned zone of silenceme or paravak) in a tabular form with illustration. One point must be noted: the authors selfhood as a scientist was condemned here by the author himself as he criticized (a) the recent neuro-physicists’ anatomo-bio-political intervention into in body of the sadhakas/ practitioners; (b) the gap between theory and praxis as it was found in recondite scholarship. Thus the paper was an addition to the author’s agenda of introducing two novel disciplinary technologies: Silence and Corporal studies. Keywords: Silence and Corporal studies, silenceme, utpreksa, vyaja, paravak, anatomo-bio-political intervention, Aporia/naigama

E. Poddighe and T. Pontillo (eds.), Resisting and justifying changes II. Testifying and legitimizing innovation in Indian and Ancient Greek Culture, Pisa, 89-133., 2023

Historia Scientiarum, 2015

Among the bodies of auxiliary knowledge Buddhist missionaries brought to East Asia which had a lasting impact to the local cultures was the astral science. It comprises a broad range of related subjects such as cosmology, astronomy, metrology, calendrics, astrology and the worship of astral deities. The great interest in the subject is evinced by the fact that detailed accounts of these subjects found their way into a number of key Sanskrit Mahāyāna texts, as well as their Chinese translations such as the Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, the Mahāsaṃnipātasūtra and Amoghavajra's Xiuyao jing. A comparison of the early Indian astral science and its East Asian version however reveals some key differences. In this paper, I will examine these differences and influences which may be attributed to Central Asian and other non-Indian sources.

Vedic Śākhās: Past, Present, Future. Proceedings of the Fifth International Vedic Workshop, Bucharest 2011. Edited by Jan E.M. Houben, Julieta Rotaru and Michael Witzel, 2016

The study concerns the reconstruction of Paiṭhīnasi’s work from the numerous fragments attributed to this author in the vast ritual and juridical literature. Such philological enterprises belong rather to the past decades or even to the last century, as it could be seen in a footnote of my introduction, yet, my subject is of great modernity. The question about the identity of Paiṭhīnasi and precisely, about the connection of his work with the Atharvaveda is addressed in very recent articles, presentations and forthcoming books (v. Alexis Sanderson in The Atharvaveda and its Paippalādaśākhā. Historical and Philological Papers on a Vedic Tradition, Griffiths, Arlo and Annette Schmiedchen (ed.). Indologica Halensis. Aachen: Shaker Verlag, also Arlo Griffiths and Key Kataoka in the same volume, Shilpa Sumant, presentation of her (joint work with Arlo Griffiths) forthcoming edition of the ritual Paippalādin manual Karmapa~njikā, and also Karmasamuccaya, which are professedly based on a “Paiṭhīnasisūtra”, at the 5th Vedic Workshop, Bucharest, 2011: http://simpozion2011.bibliotecametropolitana.ro/video-detail-en.aspx?cid=67&vid=524, etc). As it is well know, Atharvaveda tradition had only one sutra of a grhya type, Kauśikasūtra, edited by M. Bloomfield more than one century ago (a new project of edition, coordinated by Prof. S.S. Bahulkar, has been announced by Sumant and Rotaru at the 15th WSC, Delhi, January, 2012), and not entirely translated in a modern language. Besides this, the Atharvavedins had only one śrautasūtra, Vaitānasūtra, a late corpus of paralipomena called Atharvaveda Pariśiṣṭas, and a very limited number of (short) unpublished paddhatis and prayogas of the 18th-19th centuries (some of them published by myself in various articles). Only these few works give an estimation of the idiosyncratic ritual of the Atharvaveda. Or, it is recognized that this stays at the basis of later Tantric ritual, hence the subject of a Vedic ritualism, which was most of the time apart from the canonical ceremonies of the Traividya, remains in modernity. It is very important to see whether the Atharvavedins had indeed a dharma sūtra authored by “Paiṭhīnasi” (name of an author and a school of thought) and, even most important, because this “Paiṭhīnasi” is highly quoted outside Atharvavedic literature, to see what the great ritual and juridical tradition has conserved from the idiosyncratic Atharvavedic ritualistic works (Kauśikasūtra and Vaitānasūtra are but seldom mentioned, and almost never quoted outside Atharvavedic literature, the Pariśiṣṭas, especially those connected with astrology and royal rites are somehow quoted there). This is, in sum, the actual context and the state of research of the topic addressed by the present study. *********************************************** Attention has been drawn in 1885 by Bloomfield towards the existence of Paithīnasi, as the author of a composition on the ritual of the Atharvaveda (AV). It appears that this work is lost and is now traceable only through the quotations from it found in the ritualistic, juridical, and exegetical literature. Paithīnasi is apparently an ancient author and his status as an authority on the dharma can be judged from the considerable number of quotations attributed to him in this genre of literature. He is also mentioned in a number of ancillary Atharvavedic texts. The question whether Paithīnasi(s) of the AV is/are the same as the one(s) referred to in the medieval ritualistic and juridical treatises, yet awaits a satisfactory answer. Paithīnasi of the AV tradition seems to be the author of a ritual sūtra-text. Because our knowledge about the ritual of the AV is restricted to a very few texts, it seems of fundamental importance to determine whether there ever existed a ritual work by Paithīnasi. For this reason I have decided to collect and study as many evidences as possible about his opus. The first part of the study is an attempt to supply some information about the nature of the work and its date from the references to this in different sources. In the second part I have edited the passages attributed to Paithīnasi, from treatises on dharmaśāstra, from the oldest BaudhŚS to the late works of 19th century. I have not endeavored to reconstruct the Paithīnasisūtra in its original form, since such an enterprise is by its very nature unusual with the task of an editor of the sūtras from quotations (v. Bhandarkar 1926; Rocher 1954). However, this study is indebted to the works of the scholars who devoted themselves to the study of Paithīnasi, starting with the pioneering work of M. Bloomfield and W. Caland, followed by T.R. Chintamani, P.V. Kane and D. Bhattacharyya. I have added a number of Atharvavedic unedited sources, unavailable with the scholars who so far discussed about Paithīnasi, Prayogabhānu (PraBhā), a ritual text composed by a Nāgara brahmin from Gujarat towards the end of the 18th century, and other several prayogas copied and composed in the Sānglī-Māhulī school, found in Gore collection deposited in Vaidika Saṃśodhana Maṇḍala, Pune.

sh.mahidol.ac.th