Dear David, Just to clarify: it was taken to be Jaïna by the Tibetans. I see no reason to think that Yamanaka was specifically associated with the Jainas in India, where Yamanaka just stood for Yavanaka, which had become obscure.
best, Matthew Matthew T. Kapstein Professor emeritus Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, PSL Research University, Paris Associate The University of Chicago Divinity School Member, American Academy of Arts and Sciences https://ephe.academia.edu/MatthewKapstein https://vajrabookshop.com/product/the-life-and-work-of-auleshi/ https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501716218/tibetan-manuscripts-and-early-printed-books-volume-i/#bookTabs=1 https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501771255/tibetan-manuscripts-and-early-printed-books-volume-ii/#bookTabs=1 https://brill.com/edcollbook/title/60949 Sent from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for iOS. -------- Original Message -------- On Saturday, 12/13/25 at 22:30 David and Nancy Reigle <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Matthew, > > Thank you very much for following out drang srong rgyal ba dam pa with a > search at BDRC. I did not think of doing this. As you say, it clearly shows > that this phrase was understood as referring to the founder of Jainism. You > have suggested how yamanaka could have been understood as one who restrains, > and then paraphrased as a naked ascetic. There is now no doubt that the > Yamanaka jyotiṣa siddhānta was understood as a Jaina jyotiṣa siddhānta. > > The only question that now remains is whether Yamanaka jyotiṣa siddhānta, > despite being taken as a Jaina text, refers to the Yavana-jātaka or to some > actual Jaina jyotiṣa text. There is one fact that may have some bearing on > determining this. The studies by Edward Henning (Kālacakra and the Tibetan > Calendar, 2007), and especially by Yukio Ohashi ("Remarks on the Origin of > Indo-Tibetan Astronomy," published in Astronomy across Cultures, 2000, pp. > 341-369), show that the Kālacakra astronomy closely follows that of the "old" > Sūrya-siddhānta; i.e., the one summarized in the Pañcasiddhāntika. The > Kālacakra texts purport to correct the jyotiṣa siddhāntas of their time. The > author of the Vimalaprabhā was clearly widely read in the subjects he wrote > about. > > Since the Vimalaprabhā appeared in India between 1025 and circa 1040 CE, this > was probably in the period when the old Sūrya-siddhānta was being replaced by > the new Sūrya-siddhānta, as is now available. The Vimalaprabhā, then, would > have been restoring the old Sūrya-siddhānta values for the astronomical > constants. As indicated by Bill Mak, the last chapter of the Yavana-jātaka > includes information on planetary motions (see verses 35 ff.). It could be > relevant to know if there is any indication as to whether these agree with > the old or new Sūrya-siddhānta. To determine this would require someone more > knowledgeable about astronomy than me. > > Best regards, > > David Reigle > Colorado, U.S.A. > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 2:24 PM Matthew Kapstein <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Dear David, >> >> Drang srong rgyal ba dam pa is a very common way of referring to the Jina in >> Tibetan as a very quick etext search shows: >> [https://library.bdrc.io/osearch/search?q=drang%20srong%20rgyal%20ba%20dam%20pa&etext_search%5B0%5D=true&page=2](https://library.bdrc.io/osearch/search?q=drang+srong+rgyal+ba+dam+pa&etext_search%5B0%5D=true&page=2) >> >> dam pa can represent sat-, as well as -uttama and -agra. In any case, I >> don't see any reason to take it as anything besides a reference to the >> founder of Jainism. And as I suggested earlier, the Tibetans may have picked >> up an explanation of yamanaka from yamana, a restraint, thus meaning an >> ascetic, one who practices restraint. Rather than coining a new term to >> accommodate this, gcer bu pa, "gymnosophist," may have been adopted as a >> paraphrase. There are other examples of this sort of preference for a >> well-known term over a less favored or obscure synonym. Thus we sometimes >> see brgya byin for Indra, even though the lexically exact translation would >> be dbang po and brgya byin should be reserved for Śakra. >> >> So, all in all, I would guess that in some milieux yavana as "GreeK" was no >> longer understood and so was rationalized as yamana and this was explained >> to the Tibetans in such a way that they associated it with naked Jain >> anchorites .... A nice game of Chinese whispers... >> >> best, >> Matthew >> >> Matthew T. Kapstein >> Professor emeritus >> Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, PSL Research University, Paris >> >> Associate >> The University of Chicago Divinity School >> >> Member, American Academy of Arts and Sciences >> >> https://ephe.academia.edu/MatthewKapstein >> >> https://vajrabookshop.com/product/the-life-and-work-of-auleshi/ >> >> https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501716218/tibetan-manuscripts-and-early-printed-books-volume-i/#bookTabs=1 >> >> https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501771255/tibetan-manuscripts-and-early-printed-books-volume-ii/#bookTabs=1 >> >> https://brill.com/edcollbook/title/60949 >> >> Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) secure email. >> >> On Friday, December 12th, 2025 at 9:18 PM, David and Nancy Reigle via >> INDOLOGY <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Thank you, Bill, for your very helpful reply. The fact that no Yamana is >>> found in the traditional list of the names of the eighteen jyotiṣa sages, >>> occurring in the Nāradasaṃhitā, is significant. The fact that the last >>> chapter of the Yavanajātaka could count as a siddhānta because of its >>> astronomical content is equally significant. Thank you also to Matthew >>> Kapstein for replying off-list, agreeing that Yamanaka is most likely just >>> a variant for Yavanaka. This does make the most sense. Even so, before >>> concluding that this is most likely the case, I would like to exhaust all >>> other possibilities. >>> >>> The oldest available dated manuscript of the Vimalaprabhā, from 1112 CE, >>> was scribed less than a hundred years after the Vimalaprabhā appeared in >>> India. All known manuscripts have yamanaka, and in two different places >>> (1.26 and 1.86). The Tibetan translations go back even further. The first >>> one to be made was by Gyi jo, working with the Indian teacher Bhadrabodhi. >>> From what we can gather from the lineage lists, Bhadrabodhi was one of the >>> very first disciples of the person who wrote the Vimalaprabhā. The Shong >>> ston and Jonang Tibetan translations are revisions of the initial one made >>> by 'Bro lotsawa, working with the Indian teacher Somanātha. Somanātha, too, >>> was in the first generation of disciples of the originator of the >>> Vimalaprabhā in India. The Sanskrit manuscripts, then, would indicate that >>> if Yamanaka is a corruption of Yavanaka, the variant form Yamanaka was in >>> vogue in eleventh century India; and the Tibetan translations would >>> indicate that Yamanaka was understood to mean a "naked one" rather than a >>> Greek or foreigner. >>> >>> There is one more possible piece of evidence, which I did not cite earlier, >>> because later Tibetan sources are indeed suspect. While Tibetan gcer bu pa >>> for yamanaka likely derives from the very early Indian teachers Bhadrabodhi >>> and Somanātha, we do not know the source for annotations by Jonang Phyogs >>> las rNam rgyal, written in Tibet about three centuries after the >>> Vimalaprabhā appeared in India. The Tibetan teacher Bu ston does not have >>> any annotations on these names, but Phyogs las rNam rgyal does. The >>> Sanskrit at 1.26 from the Sarnath edition of the Vimalaprabhāṭīkā, vol. 1, >>> 1986, p. 77, is: >>> >>> siddhāntānāṃ vināśa iti | siddhāntaṃ(nto) brahma2 sauraṃ yama(va)nakaṃ >>> romakamiti3, . . . >>> >>> The footnote thereon is: >>> >>> 2-3. atra bhoṭānuvāde catvāraḥ siddhāntāḥ 'brahmadevavādinaḥ, >>> sūryadevavādinaḥ, acelakāḥ (śaivāḥ), rāhudevavādinaḥ' iti likhitam—gCer Bu >>> Pa Daṅ sGra Can | >>> >>> We note that, although the Sarnath editors suggested yavanaka for yamanaka >>> by the "(va)" they added for "ma" in the name, yet in their footnote they >>> suggested śaivāḥ for the naked ones, which they retranslated from Tibetan >>> as acelakāḥ. As with the Jaina, I do not know of a Śaiva jyotiṣa siddhānta. >>> >>> The Jonang translation of this line from Vimalaprabhā 1.26, with the >>> annotations in parentheses by Phyogs las rNam rgyal (Jonang Publication >>> Series, vol. 18, p. 199), is: >>> >>> grub pa'i mtha' rnams rnam par nyams pa zhes pa ni (tshangs pa la ltar >>> 'dzin pa'i) tshangs pa ba dang (nyi ma la ltar 'dzin pa'i) nyi ma pa dang >>> (drang srong rgyal ba dam pa la ltar 'dzin pa'i) gcer bu pa dang (dbang >>> phyug la ltar 'dzin pa'i) skra can gyi (byed rtsis kyi) grub pa'i mtha' ste >>> . . . >>> >>> We see that for brahma and saura, he annotates tshangs pa and nyi ma, >>> respectively, the same as the Tibetan translations in the text of the >>> Vimalaprabhā. For yamanaka, gcer bu pa, he annotates drang srong rgyal ba >>> dam pa. Of these words, drang srong normally translates ṛṣi, rgyal ba >>> normally translates jina, and dam pa can translate vara or parama, etc. I >>> cite this annotation in case something like ṛṣi-jina-vara may ring a bell >>> as the epithet of any jyotiṣa teacher. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> David Reigle >>> >>> Colorado, U.S.A. >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 4:15 AM Bill Mak <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi David, >>>> >>>> There are various lists of authors of jyotiḥśāstra in the jyotiṣa >>>> literature. Pingree in his Jyotiḥśāstra (1981) mentioned in his >>>> intoduction names of the eighteen sages according to “medieval muhūrta >>>> treatises,” which he did not identify. Among them are Brahm(ācarya), >>>> Romaśa [sic], Yavana, Sūrya, etc. Weber was among the first to identify >>>> these eighteen sages in the Nāradasaṃhitā in his Verzeichniss der >>>> Sanskrit-Handschriften der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin (1853), and >>>> noticed the different kinds of authors in possibly two layers, earlier >>>> ones like Garga and Parāśara, and later ones Yavana, Romaka, etc with >>>> Hellenistic elements. >>>> >>>> Since the larger subsets usually include the smaller ones, an unattested >>>> Yamanaka-siddhānta in a small set of four siddhānta-s does sound >>>> suspicious. The Tibetan translation doesn’t mean much unless one could >>>> identify a text with such name, or find an explanation of the name, which >>>> does look a corruption of Yavana(jāta)ka. Although no yavana siddhānta >>>> survived, the last chapter of the Yavanajātaka would count as one because >>>> of its astronomical content, which is indeed comprable to Romakasiddhānta, >>>> and to some extent, Brahmasiddhānta and Sūryasiddhānta in Varāhamihira’s >>>> Pañcasiddhānta in terms of astronomical concepts. All these four texts >>>> were in circulation in India. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Bill M. Mak, PhD >>>> >>>> Professor of History of Science >>>> >>>> University of Science and Technology of China >>>> Room A304, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, East Campus, >>>> University of Science and Technology of China, >>>> 96 Jinzhai Road, Baohe District, Hefei, Anhui, >>>> China CN-230026 >>>> >>>> Tel.: +86 183 5614 9163 / +852 9466 6472 >>>> E-Mail: [email protected] >>>> >>>> Research Associate >>>> Needham Research Institute >>>> 8 Sylvester Road >>>> Cambridge, CB3 9AF >>>> United Kingdom >>>> >>>> Tel:+44-1223768229 >>>> Email: [email protected] >>>> >>>> Copies of my publications may be found at: >>>> [http://www.billmak.com](http://www.billmak.com/) >>>> https://needham.academia.edu/BillMak >>>> >>>>> On 12 Dec 2025, at 04:01, David and Nancy Reigle via INDOLOGY >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> When the Kālacakra-tantra introduces its own astronomical calculations in >>>>> chapter 1, verse 26, the Vimalaprabhā commentary thereon refers to four >>>>> existing siddhāntas:1. Brahma; 2. Saura; 3. Yamanaka; and 4. Romaka. The >>>>> Vimalaprabhā again names these same four at 1.86, only saying Sūrya >>>>> instead of Saura. Three of these siddhāntas are of course well known: >>>>> Brahma, Saura/Sūrya, and Romaka. I have not been able to determine what >>>>> the Yamanaka siddhānta is. >>>>> >>>>> The editors of the Vimalaprabhā suggest emending Yamanaka to Yavanaka, a >>>>> reasonable assumption. However, the two very old palm-leaf manuscripts of >>>>> the Vimalaprabhā confirm the spelling yamanaka. Moreover, the Tibetan >>>>> translations of yamanaka do not support yavanaka. The Shong ston and >>>>> Jonang Tibetan translations take yamanaka as gcer bu pa, "naked ones." >>>>> Elsewhere in the Kālacakra-tantra, at 3.169 and 4.217, Tibetan gcer bu >>>>> translates Sanskrit nagna, confirming the meaning, "naked." The early Gyi >>>>> jo Tibetan translation also takes yamanaka as gcer bu. This may suggest a >>>>> Jaina jyotiṣa siddhānta. >>>>> >>>>> However, I do not know of a Jaina jyotiṣa siddhānta, in the full sense of >>>>> a jyotiṣa siddhānta; meaning giving the movements of the planets, and not >>>>> just the movements of the sun and moon, as does the Sūryaprajñapti and >>>>> works following it such as the Jyotiṣkaraṇḍakam. I have considered the >>>>> Bhadrabāhu-saṃhitā, but at least in the form we have it, this text seems >>>>> to be ruled out. >>>>> >>>>> Any suggestions would be appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, >>>>> >>>>> David Reigle >>>>> Colorado, U.S.A. >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> INDOLOGY mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
_______________________________________________ INDOLOGY mailing list [email protected] https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
