Have you checked an English translation of Paṭala II by Prof. Vesna Wallace?
The Kālacakratantra : the chapter on the individual together with the Vimalaprabhā On Tue, 23 Sept 2025 at 12:33, Paul Thomas via INDOLOGY < [email protected]> wrote: > Hello Colleagues, > > I'm currently working on a translation of the *Vimalaprabhā *for the > 84000 translation project. The *Vimalaprabhā* is the most extensive > Indian commentary on the Buddhist *Laghukālacakratantra*, composed in the > earlier part of the eleventh century. > > There, I’ve come across the title of a text, or, more likely, a term for a > genre of texts that was current in medieval India at the time that the > *Vimalaprabhā* was composed. The term comes in the commentary on > *Laghukālacakratantra* 2.96 that lists out false sources of knowledge ( > *vidyā*), listing the Vedas with their ancillaries, the Smārta doctrines, > logic (Pramāṇa), the Śaiva Siddhānta, and the works (*śāstram*) composed > by Vyāsa (the *Mahābhārata*) and Vaiśvānara. It is the last on this > list, the work(s) composed by Vaiśvānara that I can’t identify: > > *Laghukālacakratantra* 2.96ab: > > *vedaḥ sāṅgo na vidyā smṛtimatasahitas tarkasiddhāntayuktaḥ**śāstrañ > cānyad dhi loke kṛtam api kavibhir vyāsavaiśvānarādyaiḥ* | > > The commentary defines the works of Vaiśvānara, who, as I understand it, > is the god Agni, as the *bhāvanādharmaḥ*, using a construction parallel > to that used to describe the “teachings of the Purāṇas,” composed by > Mārtaṇḍeya (*mārtaṇḍeyakāvyaṃ* *purāṇadharmādayaḥ*). Therefore I think > *bhāvanādharmaḥ* here is not a title strictly speaking, but rather should > be interpreted to mean “the teachings of *bhāvanā,*” whatever that may > mean: > > *Vimalaprabhā* v. 1, p. 221: > *evaṃ śāstraṃ cānyad dhi loke kṛtam api kavibhir vyāsavaiśvānarādyair iti > vyāsakāvyaṃ bhārataṃ vaiśvānarakāvyaṃ bhāvanādharmaḥ | ādiśabdena > vālmīkikāvyaṃ rāmāyaṇaṃ mārkaṇḍeyakāvyaṃ purāṇadharmādayaḥ saṃgṛhītāḥ kṛtaṃ > kavibhir ebhir na vidyā* |. > > Some sources say that Vaiśvānara composed some of the hymns of the Ṛgveda, > but this doesn’t seem to be what is referred to here. The Tibetan > translations are of no help, simply translating *bsgom pa’i chos* if I > recall, and neither does the Tibetan scholar mKhas grub rje (1385–1438) > identify > what this is. > Any ideas? > > _______________________________________________ > INDOLOGY mailing list > [email protected] > https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology >
_______________________________________________ INDOLOGY mailing list [email protected] https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
