| 🤓 Admin Zone 🛠️ hidden to non-admins | |
Description
Moreover, since we have no documentation from that period to help us specify the exact circumstances of the composition of these works, we must consider the possibility that the Bhāvanāyogāvatāra was dictated to the translators (Prajñāvarman and Ye-ses-sde) as a lesson to be submitted to the king as a sample. The work would in that case be a private document, an "introduction" (avatāra) for the exclusive use of the king or his family. The three Bhāvanākramas could then be seen as so many personal communications, as tradition has understood them. But this explanation seems improbable since it is rare that none of the colophons makes reference to the illustrious recipient of the documents. It should be noted that the Bhāvanāyogāvatāra is not a polemical essay, although the last verses of the stanzas that conclude the work seem to allude to one of the themes of the Lhasa controversy. The short work is, as its title indicates, a practical introduction: literally, an introduction (avatāra) to the practice (yoga) through which the Buddhist ideal is made real (bhāvanā).
The work is preserved only in Tibetan; no Sanskrit version exists. Due to the circumstances described above, it is very likely that there never was a Sanskrit original. Our translation is based on the Sde-dge recension, compared with those of Cone, Peking, and Snar-than. In these last two collections the Bhāvanāyogāvatāra appears twice, in the Dbu-ma section and in the appendix called Jo-bo'i chos chun. (In Spanish. English translation by Claude.ai)
Read more here.Moreover, since we have no documentation from that period to help us specify the exact circumstances of the composition of these works, we must consider the possibility that the Bhāvanāyogāvatāra was dictated to the translators (Prajñāvarman and Ye-ses-sde) as a lesson to be submitted to the king as a sample. The work would in that case be a private document, an "introduction" (avatāra) for the exclusive use of the king or his family. The three Bhāvanākramas could then be seen as so many personal communications, as tradition has understood them. But this explanation seems improbable since it is rare that none of the colophons makes reference to the illustrious recipient of the documents. It should be noted that the Bhāvanāyogāvatāra is not a polemical essay, although the last verses of the stanzas that conclude the work seem to allude to one of the themes of the Lhasa controversy. The short work is, as its title indicates, a practical introduction: literally, an introduction (avatāra) to the practice (yoga) through which the Buddhist ideal is made real (bhāvanā).
The work is preserved only in Tibetan; no Sanskrit version exists. Due to the circumstances described above, it is very likely that there never was a Sanskrit original. Our translation is based on the Sde-dge recension, compared with those of Cone, Peking, and Snar-than. In these last two collections the Bhāvanāyogāvatāra appears twice, in the Dbu-ma section and in the appendix called Jo-bo'i chos chun. (In Spanish. English translation by Claude.ai)
Read more here.
