Talk:Hatha Yoga Pradipika

Secret of the Hatha Yoga Pradipika

In most of the ancient Yoga scriptures the litteral translation is incomprehensive. The reason is that a symbolic language is used, called Sandhya Bhasa (twilight language). Only people having reached an awakened state can understand this language. The Hatha Yoga Pradipika is an example of one of these scriptures. Suddenly it becomes clear. The message of that book is a revolution in health care and aging control. It can help mankind not only to overcome many modern problems, but also to uplift consciousness to the highest levels and reach Raja Yoga. You can find a free and complete translation of the book to download in www.raja-yoga.org

Shri Yogacharya Ajita 10:01, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. There is an article The Twilight Language that describes sāṃdhyābhāṣā in tantra, very similar to this description. It mentions the "secret language, that great convention of the yoginis, which the Śrāvakas and others cannot unriddle". It is also mentioned in the articles Vajrayana, Vaishnava-Sahajiya and Yantra. Wakari07 (talk) 12:25, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

haṭhayogapradīpikā

IAST spelling of हठयोगप्रदीपिका
suggest lemma (or Haṭhayogapradīpikā ?) Wakari07 (talk) 14:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Comprehensive Edits

While i think the link is more than sensible, maybe it needs re-work for comprehensibility (the faculty of being understandable). Wakari07 (talk) 14:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Howdy, editors. I've noticed a few things on this page that I'd like to improve. I think this article could use some additional information and expansion. The Hatha yoga pradipika is a text, but this article doesn't have very much on the text itself. I think that if possible, a more in depth description or summary of the text should be included. I also find the recent research section to be lacking. The quotes are a bit lengthy, and there's not much of an explanation to aid in their understanding. I think this should be revised in some way so that this article is more inclusive of everyone, including those whose knowledge of ancient yoga is limited. I will begin with these changes shortly if there are no objections. Laurasimmons (talk) 19:21, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

The quotes are difficult to understand

This quote:

In its classical formulation as found in Svātmārāma’s Haṭhapradīpikā, haṭhayoga is a Śaiva appropriation of an older extra-Vedic soteriological method. But this appropriation was not accompanied by an imposition of Śaiva philosophy. In general, the texts of haṭhayoga reveal, if not a disdain for, at least an insouciance towards metaphysics. Yoga is a soteriology that works regardless of the yogin’s philosophy. But the various texts that were used to compile the Haṭhapradīpikā [...] were not composed in metaphysical vacua. Analysis of their allusions to doctrine shows that the texts from which Svātmārāma borrowed most were products of a Vedantic milieu—bearing testament to Vedānta’s newfound interest in yoga as a complement to jñāna—but that many others were Śaiva non-dual works. Because of the lack of importance given to the niceties of philosophy in haṭhayogic works, these two non-dualities were able to combine happily and thus the Śaiva tenets incorporated within haṭhayoga survived the demise of Śaivism as part of what was to become in the medieval period the dominant soteriological method in scholarly religious discourse in India.

was under the "recent research" section following information about Mallinson. However, I noticed that this quote (which is taken directly from his research abstract) is very convoluted. It's difficult for the average person (someone without an extensive knowledge of hatha yoga) to follow. I removed it because I didn't understand it enough to put it in layman's terms, but if anybody does and would like to take a shot at it, that'd be much appreciated? In the meantime, I went ahead and replaced the quote with a basic overview of Mallinson's research with a reference to the modernyogaresearch page. I did the same with Birch's quote (also hard to follow) except with his quote, I was able to rephrase it a way that was more accessible to the average reader. I went ahead and kept one sentence (the main point) of the original Birch quote (which I've included below for anyone who may want to work with it):

In compiling the Hathapradīpikā it is clear that Svātmārāma drew material from many different sources on various systems of Yoga such as Yajñavalkya's and Vasistha's Aṣṭāngayoga, the Amanaskayoga's Rājayoga, the Vivekamārtaṇḍa's Ṣaḍdaṅgayoga, Ādināth's Khecarīvidyā, the Virūpākṣanātha's Amṛtasiddhi, and so on. He assembled it under the name of Haṭhayoga and, judging from the vast number of manuscripts of the Haṭhapradīpikā, its numerous commentaries, and the many references to it in late medieval Yoga texts, his Haṭhayoga grew in prominence and eclipsed many of the former Yogas. As a label for the diverse Yoga of the Haṭhapradīpikā, Haṭhayoga became a generic term. However, a more specific meaning of the term is seen in the tenth- to eleventh-century Buddhist tantric commentaries, and this meaning is confirmed by an examination of the adverbial uses of the word haṭha in the medieval Yoga texts predating the Haṭhapradīpikā. Rather than the metaphysical explanation of uniting the sun (ha) and moon (ṭha), it is more likely that the name Haṭhayoga was inspired by the meaning 'force'. The descriptions of force fully moving kundalinī, apāna, or bindu upwards through the central channel suggest that the "force" of Haṭhayoga qualifies the effects of its techniques, rather than the effort required to perform them.[6]Laurasimmons (talk) 23:35, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Summary is lacking

I went ahead and added a section dedicated to a summary of the text, given as the hatha yoga pradipika is a text first and foremost. It was initially difficult to see this because while typical wiki articles of a book offer summaries and chapter guides, this one does not. I don't have extensive knowledge of the hatha yoga pradipika, but if anybody does and would like to contribute to this, that'd be great! I think it would help a lot for those who are visiting this article for a basic understanding of the text.Laurasimmons (talk) 16:59, 7 March 2017 (UTC)