________________
APPENDIX I
101
Now Haribhadra tells us that the practice of adlıyātma and bhāvana on the part of a welcomer of the worldly existence is not genuine, their practice on the part of an apunārbandhaka or a samyagdīşli is practically genunine, while their practice on the part of a cârilsin is really genuine (vv. 369-70); as for dhyāna, sarnatā add viltisařkşaya he says that a practice of them is possible only on the part of a carilrin though this practice runs an uninterrupted course in the case of the comparatively niore advanced caritrins and a more or less interrupted course in the case of those less advanced (vv. 371-72 ). This scheme of classifyipg human persoalities and characterizing their conduct can be better followed by the students of the Yogađộstisam uccaya if they forget wbat is here being said about the samyagdrsti : for then the first four yoga-viewpoints of the Yogadrstisamuccaya will be found to characterize the a punarbandhaka of the Yogabindu and the last four yoga-viewpoints of the Yogadrstisamuccaya to characrerize the caritrin of the "Vogabivdu. Perhaps Haribhadra became convinced that the presence of the type Samyagdrști in the Yogabindu account of hunan.personalities was anonalous, but there can be two opininns on the question. In any case, the only vital difference between the Yogabindu and Yogadřştisamuccaya accounts of human personalities is that former recognizes the type Samyagdrsti while the latter does not.
We have just seen that dhyāna, samala and viltisaṁkşaja are the cbatacteristic activities of caritrin of the Yogabivdu äccount. Now it is because dhyāna and samatā ( or something akin to it) charàcterize also the last four yoga-viewpoints of the Yogadęstisaniuccaya account we have found it possible to justitute an almost exact parallelism between tbe caritrin of the Yogabindi and the last four yoga-viewpoints of the Vogadrstisani uccaya. But what about vstlisamkşaya ? Really speaking, vpilisaṁkşaya is 1100 a quality of human character but a concept that proves useful in giving an account of the cãritrin (or of the last four yoga-viewpoints in terms of the tenets of the Karma doctrine of the Jainas. (For all practical purposes vștlisankşaya can be eguated with Karma-ksaya ). When we say that oue of the three chief questions tackled in the Yogabindu pertains to 'a metaphysical explapation of good conduct on a man's part we are in fact referring to the question of giving an account of human conduct in terms of the tenets of the Karma doctrine of the Jainas. In the Yogabludu such au account is expressly given (in vv. 164-72) and frequently defended while in the Yogadrstisamuccaya it is simply presupposed and not elaborated for the fear of duplicatirg the Yogabindu-account but may be . also for the fear of appearing to indulge in sectarian mataphysicsmongeribg.
