Modern Hindu Intellectuals and Ancient Texts: Reforming Śaiva Yoga in Bali

Abstract This article aims at providing a fresh perspective on the modern, reformed version of ‘Balinese Hinduism’ that came to the fore on the island since the early 20th century. It describes certain important elements of doctrinal continuity and change in the light of the pre-colonial Śaiva religious discourse, on the basis of textual and historical data that have so far been neglected. It attempts to show that the Javano-Balinese theological tradition is characterized by a remarkable continuity, especially when it comes to its exegetical and text-building practices, but also by important elements of changes. To investigate the nature of such changes—in particular the treatment of Yoga in selected textual sources—and the historical and cultural dynamics behind them is the main concern of this article.

With respect to Bali, perhaps the most richly stocked lumber-room of gracious and beautiful magical beliefs and practices in Southeast Asia, [. . .] the dilemma of choosing between a quixotic cultural antiquarianism and a barren cultural materialism seems [. . .] to be an especially cruel one. In this essay, I want to suggest that this dilemma is, in all likelihood, a false one, that the continuity of Balinese civilization can be maintained though the fundamental nature of its religious life be totally transformed (C. Geertz 1973:170-71)

Introduction: Reappraising Balinese Hinduism from a Text-Historical Perspective
For the past four decades, the study of Balinese religion-particularly the reformed version of 'Hinduism' (Agama Hindu Bali) that came to the fore from the early 20th century onwards-has been dominated by anthropologists. According to the most influential theories, primarily tackling sociological issues connected with ritual, politics and hierarchy, Balinese religion emphasized orthopraxy rather than orthodoxy, lacking a fully-fledged theological and philosophical tradition as well as a set of shared beliefs carried by a body of canonized sacred scriptures. It was only after the contacts with the ideologies carried by representatives of Christian, Islamic and Indian Hindu faiths that the Balinese reformers sought to promote a shift from a kind of embedded orthopraxy to an universalistic and abstract dogmatic religion, the allegiance to a single deity and the 'scripturalization' of traditional beliefs.
In a recent article, 'A new perspective for "Balinese Hinduism" in the light of the pre-modern religious discourse; A textual-historical approach' (Acri 2011a), I have offfered a critique of several widely accepted statements advanced in the anthropological literature. My critique revolved around the fact that anthropologists have largely, and surprisingly, ignored an important source of data on the latter aspects of Balinese religion, namely the extensive corpus of Old Javanese-cum-Sanskrit Śaiva texts known as Tuturs-a body of literature reconfĳiguring materials of South Asian provenance within a Javano-Balinese doctrinal framework. Furthermore, they have refrained from embarking on a comparison of features of Balinese religion(s) and ancient South Asian religions and philosophies, which since the fĳirst millennium AD have extensively contributed to shaping the Balinese religious discourse. Upholding a synchronic approach, they have paid little attention to the historical dimension of Balinese religion, thereby failing to distinguish between features that are the result of reformist influence from those that have been inherited from the precolonial past.
Accepting the arguments advanced by anthropologist Michele Stephen in her groundbreaking study (2005), I presented further textual evidence supporting the claim that the cultural exchanges with South Asia that started at the beginning of the Common Era led to the existence on Bali of a sophisticated theological tradition predating 20th century reformism.1 The existence of a dialectic relationship between the modern and contemporary religious discourse and the past tradition is testifĳied to by the great number of translations into modern Indonesian of Sanskrit religious texts published on Bali since the advent of printing, and by the even greater number of publications on Hinduism written in Balinese or Indonesian. The same dialectic is documented in the cultural events during which Old Javanese sources are either (re)interpreted, (re)enacted and commented upon in Balinese or 'performed' in a variety of manners (e.g. shadow puppetry, theatre, dance, chanting, etc.).
Starting from the assumption that the use of data drawn from premodern Śaiva sources from both the Indonesian Archipelago and South Asia is indispensable for a better understanding of the more recent religious discourse on Bali, where reformist groups have attempted to adopt (and adapt) the canon of neo-Hinduism as part of the reformed version of Balinese (Śaiva) religion, here I argue that the modern Javano-Balinese religious discourse is characterized by a remarkable continuity with the earlier tradition, especially when it comes to its exegetical and text-building practices, but also by important elements of change (or, rather, strategies for dealing with change). To appraise the nature of such changes, single them out and explain them in the light of their context-specifĳic historical, literary and theologico-philosophical background is the concern of this article.
My analysis mainly focuses on the treatment of doctrine and yoga featuring in selected texts belonging to the premodern body of Javano-Balinese Śaiva literature (Dharma Pātañjala, Tattvajñāna and Vṛhaspatitattva) and 1 See Stephen 2005:3: 'Most Balinese continue their ritual life in many ways that are clearly continuous with ideas and practices that owe little to reformist effforts and even less to foreign influence. [. . .] In acknowledging the complexity of discourse concerning religion in present-day Bali [. . .] I think it is still possible to discern in this ferment of contestation, negotiation, and recreation elements that derive from the past but continue to shape in important ways current practice '. in textbooks of Balinese Hinduism published in the 20th century (Aji Sangkya by Ida Ketut Jelantik and Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga by Shri Rsi Anandakusuma). To provide the reader with textual evidence in a manner that can be easily grasped, I make use of some tables and charts that present some signifĳicant doctrinal themes from the above-mentioned scriptural sources. My comparison shows that independent, yet related, Javano-Balinese cultural products were shaped by analogous historical conditions and epistemic paradigms.

Premodern Tattvas
The three pre-modern sources discussed in this article belong to the corpus of Old Javanese Śaiva scriptures referred to as Tattva, forming a subgenre of the wider corpus collectively referred to as Tutur.2 While it is difffĳicult to ascertain the date of composition of Tuturs and Tattvas, the latter, on account of their intrinsic textual and doctrinal features, are likely to form an early stratum of the corpus.3 Tattvas were arguably composed in Java and/or Bali during an early phase of the classical age of the Indo-Javanese civilizations (circa 8th-12th century AD), whereas most Tuturs, except for a handful of texts that may be as old as Tattvas, were composed in the period 2 See Zoetmulder 1982Zoetmulder :1963 tattva 5: 'doctrine concerning reality, philosophy; the writings containing this doctrine ', and 1982:2084, under tutur: 'memory, recollection, consciousness; innermost recesses of the spiritual part of the human being, ''the inner mind'' (where the union with the absolute takes place); holy tradition, smṛti (as opposed to śruti, see s.v.), text containing religious doctrine, religious doctrine'. As a matter of fact, the term Tutur is used in secondary literature and among the Balinese as a general label referring to the genre of scriptures bearing either the one or the other denomination in their titles-or even none of them. Although, as I shall remark further on, there are reasons to believe that Tattvas originally formed a separate, and probably earlier, class of scriptures, it is arguable that in the course of time the denominations 'Tutur' and 'Tattva' came to largely overlap so as to be regarded as identical-a fact confĳirmed by the occurrence of the label 'Tattva' in texts that do not show features attributable to Tattvas but rather to 'Tuturs' (and vice-versa). of the East Javanese kingdoms up to late 15th century AD, and well beyond that date into the early modern period on Bali.
Tattvas can be distinguished from Tuturs on account of their peculiarities of style, textual features and contents. Whereas Tuturs are markedly esoteric, often unsystematic and mystically minded, Tattvas reveal Śaiva doctrines in a systematic and coherent manner, and share a core of fundamental tenets through the corpus. Like the early Tuturs, but to a much greater extent, Tattvas appear to have inherited their main doctrinal elements from the once pan-South Asian Śaiva Saiddhāntika literature in Sanskrit (circa 6th-11th century AD), which seemingly constitutes the scriptural canon through which Śaivism was transmitted to the Indonesian Archipelago in the premodern period (see Acri 2006).
1a. Dharma Pātañjala Our fĳirst source, the Dharma Pātañjala, is written in Old Javanese prose interspersed with a handful of Sanskrit verses. It has been preserved uniquely through a 15th-century palm-leaf manuscript of West Javanese provenance, but allegedly found in the Central Javanese Merapi-Merbabu collection and now kept in the Berlin Staatsbibliothek. It has not been handed down in Bali. First transliterated by Prof. Jacob Ensink from Groningen University in the 1960s, the text has now been edited and translated into English by the present writer.4 The Dharma Pātañjala, arranged in the form of a dialogue between the Lord and his son Kumāra, is remarkable in that it provides what is as yet the most complete, coherent and detailed exposition of Śaiva doctrine to be found in an Old Javanese text. It also constitutes the unique testimony for the existence of (theoretical knowledge of ) the yoga of Patañjali in the Archipelago. Nearly a third of it is based on parts of the Sanskrit Yogasūtra and a commentary that is related, albeit by no means identical, to the one, popularly referred to as Bhāṣya, embedding the Yogasūtra. The Dharma Pātañjala appears to be the work of a single author or mastermind, who carried out a conscious operation of doctrinal innovation insofar as he tried to incorporate intelligently Pātañjala yoga into a predominantly Śaiva theological framework.

1b. Tattvajñāna
The Tattvajñāna is written entirely in Old Javanese prose; unlike the other two Tattvas discussed here, it is not arranged in the form of a dialogue but expounds its arguments in the form of a lesson given by an anonymous teacher. This scripture is remarkable in the Tattva and Tutur genres insofar as it has been preserved not only in Balinese manuscripts, but also in a complete palm-leaf manuscript (lontar) from the Central Javanese collection of Merapi-Merbabu, as well as in a short fragment of palm-leaf manuscript (nipah) from the West Javanese collection of Ciburuy (see Acri 2011d). The text was edited on the basis of the Balinese manuscripts, and translated into Hindi, by Sudarshana Devi(-Singhal) (1962). Besides being characterized by a less sophisticated argumentative style, the Tattvajñāna features a somewhat more 'localised' approach to religious experience as it mixes the speculative themes found in the Dharma Pātañjala and Vṛhaspatitattva with the kind of esoteric and mystical themes thriving in Tuturs.

1c. Vṛhaspatitattva
The Vṛhaspatitattva consists of seventy-three Sanskrit verses provided with an Old Javanese exegesis. It opens with a rather long prose introduction. The text owes its title to the name of Śiva's interlocutor and questioner, Vṛhaspati,5 a divine character who in Vedic and Purāṇic mythology is attributed the role of teacher of the Gods. Judging from the signifĳicant number of extant palm-leaf manuscripts containing copies of the text, the Vṛhaspatitattva appears to have enjoyed a prominent and authoritative position in Bali, where it has remained popular up to and including the present day. Apart from being acknowledged as the primary prototypical source of many 20th-century Balinese textbooks of Hinduism, the Vṛhaspatitattva has been translated a number of times, fĳirst into German by Zieseniss,6 then into English by Sudarshana Devi (1957, along with a critical edition), into modern Indonesian by Mirsha (1995), and into Japanese by Ando.7 The Vṛhaspatitattva is a composite and complex text integrating materials belonging to various Sanskritic doctrinal traditions, such as Pāśupata Śaivism and Sāṅkhya, within a Śaiva Saiddhāntika framework.8 The Sanskrit-Old Javanese translation dyads 53-59 feature a detailed description of the variety of (non-Pātañjala) Śaiva yoga that became paradigmatic in Javano-Balinese Tuturs, as will become clear from the discussion below.

Modern Textbooks of Hinduism
A plethora of mimeographed pamphlets and printed booklets, written in either Balinese or Malay-Indonesian, sprang up on Bali soon after the introduction of modern stenciling and printing techniques in the early 20th century. These publications, aiming at those Balinese-the majoritywho could not read the scriptures in their original languages and scripts, quickly superseded, yet never entirely replaced, lontar as the favourite medium of dissemination of the religious lore on the island.9 The main reason to study such literature is that it documents a crucial phase in the (re)formation of what is now called Agama Hindu Bali, during which the Balinese intellectuals and religious leaders were intent upon (re)creating a textual canon that, through the incorporation of elements of Indian Hinduism, would have sanctioned recognition of Balinese religion as a fullyfledged, and pan-Indonesian, 'World Religion'.

2a. Aji Sangkya
The Aji Sangkya 'Textbook of the Sāṅkhya Philosophy'10 is a short theologicophilosophical treatise (57 pp.), composed in Balinese by the intellectual Ida 7 Prof. Mitsuru Ando is currently preparing an edition and Japanese translation of the text (p.c. June 2009).
8 See Nihom 1995 (on the Sāṅkhya and Pāśupata parallels) and Acri 2006, 2011c (on the early Śaiva Saiddhāntika parallels). 9 A discussion of this phenomenon and a list of texts published up to the early sixties may be found in Hooykaas 1963. 10 Curiously, an aji sāṅkhya-meaning either 'the Sāṅkhya doctrine(s)' or 'the Sāṅkhya Scripture(s)'-is mentioned in Sarga 25, stanza 21 of the Old Javanese Kakawin Rāmāyaṇa (probably 9th century AD). Regrettably, the exact meaning and purport of that difffĳicult passage is still obscure.
Ketut Jelantik (d. 1961) of Banjar, Singaraja. First published, as a mimeographed pamphlet, in 1947, the work circulated in Bali through a number of printed editions, the last dating from 1979,11 as well as in lontar manuscripts.12 Not long after the publication of the original work, a Dutch translation by Hooykaas (1951) appeared as 'Çāngkhya-leer van Bali' in the Tijdschrift voor Indische Taal-, Land-en Volkenkunde. The Aji Sangkya was subsequently 'rediscovered' among the lontar of the late Jelantik's library in 1972 by Gede Sandhi, who translated it into modern Indonesian and republished it.13 As far as I know, the only subsequent reprint of the work has appeared in 2012 by Paramita Press (Surabaya and Denpasar).14 In the foreword to his work, Jelantik explains that he wished to produce a small booklet describing the Śaiva religion (Igama Siwa) in low-level Balinese (bahasa Bali kapara), and not in the Old Javanese and Sanskrit used in the available body of sacred texts, in order that his work be read and understood by a larger public. The author declares that he has taken as his basis a body of foundational sacred texts preserved in lontar manuscripts, which he chose according to their contents and which he thought to be more important for the edifĳication of his readers. The listed sources are the following (spelling standardized): Bhuvanakośa, Vṛhaspatitattva, Tattvajñāna,11 This is a printed edition published (and prefaced) by I Ketut Repet and Dewa Puji in Tabanan. 12 Itself bearing witness to the fact that, even after the advent of modern printing, traditional palm-leaf manuscripts remained an important medium for propagating religious lore (this still holds true nowadays; see my note 4 above). The lontar containing a text titled Tutur Aji Sangkya, which is in fact identical to the published Aji Sankya, are in Pusat Dokumentasi Budaya Bali (T/I/12 = K31, 60 folios), and in a private collection in Kasimpar, Abang, Karangasem (a typewritten transcript is available at the Leiden University Library and at the Menzies Library of the Australian National University as respectively HKS 5575 and Sydney Bundle 221.11). It is likely that one of the lontar editions preceded the fĳirst printed edition (possibly an autograph).
13 This edition is titled Aji Sangkhya; Alih Bahasa oleh Gede Sandhi, B.A. Jakarta, 8 Agustus 1972. Although the xeroxed booklet in my possession carries no details about the publisher, Dharma Palguna (2009) mentions an Indonesian translation of the Aji Sangkya published by the Direktorat Jenderal Bimbingan Masyarakat Hindu dan Buddha in Jakarta in 1973, which indeed may be the same edition as Gede Sandhi's. As the translator writes in his preface, his intention was to make the text more popular and disseminate its universal teachings so as to make them accessible not only through Bahasa Daerah (Balinese) but also Bahasa Indonesia.
14 Kitab Aji Sangkya 1947, edited  While the Aji Sangkya constitutes a synthesis and restyling of materials drawn from Sanskrit-Old Javanese sources, it displays unmistakable traces of originality. Jelantik, himself a profĳicient theologian and eclectic intellectual, should not be regarded as a mere synthesizer and systematizer but rather as an author in his own right, aiming at implementing a well-defĳined doctrinal and moralistic agenda. To study his treatise is therefore interesting in order to establish where the boundaries between originality and adherence to a canon lie in the Javano-Balinese tradition.
Jelantik's main intention is to describe the characteristics of Ida Sang Hyang Widhi, who created the world and everything living there, especially human beings; and to characterize the basic dichotomy described in Tattvas, namely between the metaphysical principles of Sentience (cetana) and Insentience (acetana), which accounts for the entire creation. This dichotomy reflects the one espoused by the Sāṅkhya school of Indian philosophy, which names the two principles Spirit (puruṣa) and Nature (prakṛti). The treatise unfolds through ten chapters, each dedicated to a particular (set of ) constitutive principle(s) of the universe (tattva), beginning from the uppermost, that is the Lord in His various aspects (paramaśivatattva, sadāśivatattva, śivatattva), the Soul, the lower twenty-fĳive tattva of Sāṅkhya from Spirit down to the fĳive gross elements, and Man. Besides dealing with ontology, Jelantik provides his readers with directions to the worship of God and the practice of yoga.
The Aji Sangkya has been appraised by various Balinese authors as a document of great importance for the study of Balinese religion.15 Hooykaas (1951:434-35) regarded it as groundbreaking since it benefĳited from the advantages of printing technology, which enabled the work to have a farreaching impact among the common Balinese. Hooykaas further remarked that, unlike contemporary manuscripts, the Aji Sangkya was reproduced free of copying mistakes, therefore any mistakes in the exposition could be attributed to the author himself rather than to sloppy anonymous copyists. More importantly, Jelantik may be regarded to be among the fĳirst Balinese reformers to have looked at India as the cradle of Hinduism (see Bakker 1993:302).

2b. Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga
Our last source is the theologico-philosophical treatise Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga (68 pp.), written in Bahasa Indonesia and published in Klungkung in 1973. The author, Shri Rsi Anandakusuma (for the record Gusti Ngoerah Sidemen, 1912Sidemen, -1992, was a polymath with ninety books to his name.16 He was a respected religious personality of the reform movement. Bearing the prestigious tile of Rsi ('seer'), he served as the head of the Satya Hindu Dharma Pusat from 1959 to his death. In an interview he gave in 1989 Anandakusuma stated that through his work he wished to spread 'true Hinduism' among the Balinese so that they would gain 'greater knowledge of the philosophical background and more emphasis on the mystical side of the religion'.17 He was influenced by Hindu philosophers and religious leaders such as Swami Vivekānanda (1863-1902), Swami Śivānanda (1887-1963), and Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (1888-1975. Like his predecessor Jelantik, Anandakusuma composed his textbook by making use of existing sources, which he listed in a bibliography; these are, following the original order, Rsi Shasana, Wrehaspati Tattwa, Swatika Sutra (sic, read Swastika Sutra) by Anandakusuma himself, and Kundalini Yoga by Swami Śivānanda. His treatise is divided into three parts, titled respectively Rsi Yadnya, Sankya, and Yoga. Part I, Rsi Yadnya, forms an extended introduction in which the author explains the background and aims of his literary and edifying endeavour. He embarks on a semantic analysis of the words guru and sattwam; declares that in the Veda the Lord (tuhan yang maha esa) is Sat-Chit-Ananda; explains the prerogatives of a Rsi or Bhagawan; narrates the story of the Rsi Vyasa; lists the moral duties of human beings; defĳines the supreme principle of Brahman as Atman Aikyam ('one with the Self '); and describes the characteristics of an Acharya or Wiku.
16 A comprehensive list of Anandakusuma's publications may be found in Bakker 1993:335-9. Part II, Sankya, starts with the introductory remarks about the meaning of Sankya philosophy and its sharing the same aim (mempunyai satu tujuan) with Yoga. Anandakusuma's declared aim is to improve spirituality (kerokhanian, kejiwaan), which is a part of philosophy (tattwa), by clarifying or disentangling (menguraikan) the teaching of the Lord (Ishwara), so that that after death one may become one with Him. He then very briefly introduces the frame story of Ishwara teaching the gods on the peak of the Kelasa, who are joined by Wrehaspati. From this point onwards the text closely follows the Vṛhaspatitattva, except for a few additions as well as doctrinal divergences, most notably the description of Pātañjala yoga in part III (Yoga). Although Anandakusuma is likely to have been familiar with Jelantik's Aji Sangkya, his Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga does not bear any specifĳic influence traceable to the latter work and must therefore be regarded as a largely independent endeavor in the panorama of Balinese reformism.

The Javano-Balinese Tutur/Tattva Corpus as the Scriptural Basis of Śaiva Orthodoxy from the Premodern through the Modern Period
Before embarking on an intertextual investigation of our sources, aimed at showing how modern Balinese Hindu writers have appropriated the preexisting scriptural corpus of Old Javanese Śaiva texts, I should like to argue that such a corpus does indeed exist, and that it constitutes the basis of what may be regarded as a 'Balinese Śaiva Theology'.
Most anthropologists have not recognized Balinese religion a proper theological and speculative tradition, let alone a body of sacred canonical scriptures carrying the foundation of its 'orthodoxy'. The sanctioned views, fĳirst advanced by Cliffford Geertz in his influential essay ' "Internal Conversion" in Contemporary Bali ' (1973) and then further developed by subsequent anthropologists,18 may be summarized as follows: (pre-reformed) Balinese religion is characterized by a localized and embedded character; it does not owe signifĳicantly to South Asian religions; it lacks doctrinal unity; or it lacks doctrine altogether. Further, whereas most anthropologists have ignored altogether the corpus of Śaiva Tuturs and Tattvas, the few ones who have acknowledged its existence have made rather disparaging remarks about its nature and relevance for the study of Balinese religion, arguing against its coherence and meaningfulness on the one hand, and its link with Sanskrit scriptures from South Asia one the other.19 Since I have already reviewed and challenged such views in detail, and since my space here is limited, I address the reader to my previous contribution (Acri 2011a). Sufffĳice it to say here that, as I have tried to argue, the above statements may be dispelled by serious text-historical research on the Javano-Balinese Tutur/Tattva corpus, to say nothing of more textgrounded anthropological research conducted in present-day Bali.20 My conclusions may be summarized as follows: 1) the reformed 'rationalized theology' and (allegedly) ensuing 'scripturalization' of Balinese religion is no new phenomenon, but has its root in the sophisticated Old Javano-Balinese corpus of speculative Śaiva scriptures; 2) the 'Tattva' corpus was not an uniquely local, embedded and place-and-person-specifĳic Balinese product, but partook of a complex translocal cultural phenomenon that flourished along the networks of intra-Asian contacts within the geographical and cultural entity called by Pollock (1996) 'Sanskrit Cosmopolis'; 3) Tattvas present a shared 'minimum common denominator' of Śaiva (monotheistic) theology, which constituted the basis for what we may call an 'orthodoxy' of religion; and, 4) Tattvas share a similar agenda of 'translation' of Sanskrit doctrinal elements into a local linguistic and intellectual framework, displaying a similar degree of faithfulness to the common and prototypical Sanskrit canon-the corpus of South Asian Siddhāntatantras.21 What is important to stress is that both Tuturs and Tattvas constituted, to a great extent, the very object of debate among the various factions of the Balinese intelligentsia who sought to reform their religion:22 the 19 See Boon (1990:xiii, 158-64), Barth (1993:216-17), Guermonprez (2001:277). 20 Such as that carried out by anthropologists like A. Hobart, Rubinstein, Lovric, and Stephen. Stephen's work (2005,2010) in particular stands out as an example of how ethnological fĳieldwork combined with textual studies could lead to a much deeper understanding of many aspects of Balinese belief and ritual.
22 It is interesting to note that the Balinese reformers themselves, including our two authors, never claimed to add anything new to their religion but only to fĳind its 'true' meaning, which was 'hidden' in the body of Old Javanese scriptures.  Bhuvanakośa, Vṛhaspatitattva, Tattvajñāna and Sārasamuccaya are listed among the sources used by Jelantik in his Aji Sangkya; the Vṛhaspatitattva, which is in all respects the most systematic and speculation-oriented treatise to have survived on Bali, constituted the main prototypical source for both Jelantik and Anandakusuma, among other authors.23 It is those texts 23 Anandakusuma in his Pergolakan Hindu Dharma (1966) too resorted to the Vṛhaspatitattva whenever he sought to explain philosophical and theological concepts. The author's reliance on that Old Javanese text also results from his interview published by Bakker (1993:62-4). that, supplemented with Indonesian translation, have been published again and again on the island since the early 20th century; it is those texts that fĳind a widespread difffusion in the form of palm-leaf manuscripts in several traditional griya on Bali. It seems thus hardly deniable that those texts formed a sort of canon, to which those in search of Balinese 'Śaiva orthodoxy' must turn.

Continuities: Jelantik and Anandakusuma's Works vis-à-vis the Premodern Old Javanese Tradition
A mere glance at the table Gambar keterangan oendang-oendangan reproduced by Jelantik at the end of his Aji Sangkya (see fĳig. 1) sufffĳices to reveal the intellectual and formal indebtedness of that work to the Tattva tradition, most notably the Vṛhaspatitattva (see fĳig. 2). Jelantik composed his textbook following the exposition of realities according to the same philosophical and ontological organization implemented in the Vṛhaspatitattva and, independently, in other Tattvas too. Jelantik begins his exposition from the fĳinest, and hierarchically higher, divine principle and proceeds down to the coarsest elements forming the material reality. Besides ontology, he fully espouses the perspective of the Tattva with regard to the origin of the universe and human beings as arising from the basic dichotomy of Sentience and Insentience.
Analogous considerations can be made with respect to Anandakusuma's Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga. Anandakusuma may be regarded as even more traditional than Jelantik in his approach, for he empowers and authorized his textbook through the reenactment of the sacred dialogue between the divine interlocutors Śiva and Vṛhaspati on Kailāsa that forms the frame story of the Vṛhaspatitattva.24 After the original introductory part I 24 The presence of a frame-story through which doctrine is presented in the form of a divinely transmitted truth is a common internal textual strategy of authorization and empowerment in both Sanskrit and Old Javanese literature. The frame-story is usually a dialogue between divine interlocutors such as the Lord Śiva and his son Kumāra, the god Bṛhaspati, the Goddess Devī or a Ṛṣi. The dialogue takes place on the summit of the mount Kailāsa, a locus detached from the human temporal dimension, so as to lend it the authoritativeness of eternal truth directly revealed by God. A discussion of similar textual strategies of meta-narration, power-claims and performative prescriptions in connection with the issues of textual authority and 'true' or 'orthodox' discourse in the Sanskrit tradition may (Rsi Yadnya), part II (Sankya) immediately immerses itself in the narrative fĳiction, without acknowledging that what follows is basically a paraphrase of the Vṛhaspatitattva. Indeed throughout parts II and III Anandakusuma adheres to the Vṛhaspatitattva with a remarkable degree of fĳidelity. In adding an original introduction plus a fĳinal corollary, and occasionally restyling some points of his core treatise, the Balinese author followed a text-building strategy documented in several Javano-Balinese scriptures, such as the Gaṇapatitattva and the Tutur Ādhyātmika/Jñānasiddhānta, both of which add an introduction and fĳinal corollary to a core of Sanskrit-Old Javanese translation dyads circulating on Bali under the title of Tutur Kamokṣan. 25 Anandakusuma paraphrased the Vṛhaspatitattva by interpreting its doctrinal items according to his own 'traditional' understanding of Sanskrit and Old Javanese. This modus operandi at times gives rise to what from an etic perspective may be regarded as 'misunderstandings' and incorrect linguistic analyses, or, from an emic perspective, as traditional interpretations resorting to 'folk-semantic analyses' and analogies of sound and meaning rather than strictly etymological derivations. He reconfĳigured, or added to, the Vṛhaspatitattva when he perceived certain gaps or inadequacies, especially when his source presented obvious textual problems such as the omission of certain elements due to corruption in transmission. Since these textual problems obviously gave rise to doctrinal inconsistencies, Anandakusuma implemented certain solutions to overcome them. A comparison with the Aji Sangkya shows that Jelantik proceeded in a largely similar fashion, devising his own solutions in an independent way. An example of this methodology is depicted in the diagram below, which shows how both authors changed the list of items collectively called the 'nine contentments' (navatuṣṭi) detailed in Sanskrit sources, in the Dharma Pātañjala, and in the Vṛhaspatitattva-where one item is missing because of textual corruption-into the 'eight contentments' (aṣṭatuṣṭi).
In order to make sense of the incomplete list of 'nine contentments' mentioned in the Vṛhaspatitattva, both Jelantik and Anandakusuma transformed it into a list of 'eight contentments', thereby eliminating any internal doctrinal inconsistency. In this case it can be observed that the same be found in Taylor 2008a (with regard to the Śivapurāṇa) and 2008b (with regard to the Viṣṇupurāṇa and other texts).
25 A detailed discussion of the relationship between these texts may be found in Hooykaas 1962. textual and doctrinal problem prompted both authors to devise analogous solutions in a seemingly independent manner.27 Now, I argue, it is precisely such examples of textual 'problem-solving' that belie what has been previously (mis)labeled as a reform-driven 'rationalization' of Balinese religion. Generally speaking, both the Aji Sangkya and the Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga do not appear to be any more 'rationalized' and 'universalized' than their prototypical source, the Vṛhaspatitattva, and other related specimens of the Tattva corpus. There is little hard evidence of paradigm-shift induced by foreign (most notably Western or Islamic) values. Improvements are most of the times superfĳicial and connected to specifĳic textual or doctrinal issues, which never alter the fundamentals of the underlying theology. The impact of modernity seems small: for instance, no attempt is made to authorize the Śaiva revelation through rational or scientifĳic justifĳications. Rather, our authors resorted to Indian Hinduism in order to (further) authorize their religion. As I will show in the following section, Jelantik's attempt at validating the Balinese Śaiva tradition consists almost uniquely in the introduction of Pātañjala yoga. On the other hand, Anandakusuma (in his introduction) tries to link the Balinese and 26 Here the (a) represents the Old Javanese adjectival prefĳix and not the Sanskrit alpha privans.
27 Witness the small divergences in the lists of eight items given by Jelantik and Anandakusuma. the Hindu traditions through the authority of the Vedas, but at the same time (in the rest of his textbook) he maintains the validity of the Śaiva revelation through the reenactment of the sacred dialogue between the Lord and Vṛhaspati, through which the divine revelation is transmitted. My conclusion is that Jelantik and Anandakusuma may be regarded as 'creative' transmitters and preservers of the premodern Javano-Balinese Śaiva epistemic paradigm. In as much as they actively pursued the role of religious innovators and reformers, they largely acted along the lines of the premodern Balinese tradition of textual (re)production and exegesis.28 In this respect, the Aji Sangkya and Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga may be regarded as representing the apex of a centuries-long tradition of Balinese religious speculation, involving the reconfĳiguration and mediation of external elements (Sanskrit, Old Javanese, et cetera).

Changes: Śaiva Yoga vs. Pātañjala Yoga
My comparative investigation now focuses on one specifĳic and highly signifĳicant feature, namely our sources' treatment of yoga. My main concern here is to pinpoint our sources' adherence to either one or the other main tradition of yoga imported into the Archipelago from the Indian Subcontinent, and then try to unravel the epistemic forces that led our premodern and modern authors to introduce, in a largely independent manner, analogous doctrinal innovations.
The commonest form of yoga known in Javano-Balinese literature, including Tuturs and Tattvas, is the (more or less markedly) Tantric variety of yoga of the six ancillaries (ṣaḍaṅgayoga), as opposed to the Pātañjala or 'classical' yoga of the eight ancillaries (aṣṭāṅgayoga). First described in South Asian Sanskrit texts, both varieties may be regarded as the two main distinct systems of yoga in Sanskritic culture. The ṣaḍaṅgayoga, of uncertain chronological origin, fĳinds its earliest attestation in the corpus 28 Note, however, that both authors seems to put themselves in a position of radical discontinuity with the past in one important respect, namely their radical aim to make what had hitherto been esoteric knowledge accessible to a wider audience. But since the matter is complex and still controversial-witness Rubinstein's claims (2000:13-38) that literacy and access to sacred texts on Bali was much more widespread than previously assumedfurther research is required in order to better understand the position of the reformers with respect to the existing situation.
of Śaiva and Bauddha scriptures stemming from the early medieval period (ca. 5th-8th century AD), and especially thrives in Tantric scriptures of various persuasions (namely Śaiva, Vaiṣṇava, and Bauddha) written throughout the medieval and early modern period (16th century AD). Pātañjala yoga is attested for the fĳirst time in the treatise of Patañjali, the Yogasūtra with an appended commentary (Bhāṣya), collectively referred to as Pātañjalayogaśāstra (probably 4th-early 5th century AD).29 In the course of time Patañjali came to be recognized as the ultimate authority on yoga in the mainstream Brahmanical tradition, and his text assumed the contours of the 'classical' or 'orthodox' formulation of yoga in the Hindu Episteme through the centuries until the present. Pātañjala yoga fĳigured among the classical systems (darśana) of Brahmanical philosophy, closely related-and yet distinct-from Sāṅkhya, with which it shared many basic ontological, epistemological and philosophical tenets.
Śaiva yoga and Pātañjala yoga are distinct from each other insofar as they admit diffferent lists of ancillaries (aṅga, often less correctly translated as 'limbs') or meditative techniques by means of which the adept should carry out his yogic practice. According to Pātañjala yoga these are eight, namely: the two sets of rules of conduct known as general commandments (yama) and particular commandments (niyama), postures (āsana), breathcontrol (prāṇāyāma), withdrawal (pratyāhāra), fĳixation (dhāraṇā), visualization (dhyāna) and absorption (samādhi). The Śaiva yoga admits only six, namely withdrawal, breath-control, fĳixation, visualization, reflection (tarka) and absorption. Thus, besides the omission of postures, general commandments and particular commandments from the list of the ancillaries, ṣaḍaṅgayoga difffers from aṣṭāṅgayoga in that it includes reflection (tarka or ūha).30 Further, it sometimes attributes a role of primary importance to that ancillary-in contrast with Pātañjala yoga, which values samādhi above all the others. Ṣaḍaṅgayoga is, moreover, characterized by a fundamentally theistic nature, having as ultimate goal the unity with one's own elected deity (iṣṭadevatā) rather than the cessation or restraining of 29 As convincingly argued by Maas (2006:viii-xvi), the attribution of the commentary to Vyāsa clearly represents a spurious tradition, for the Bhāṣya is likely to have been written by the same author, named Patañjali, who also brought the (probably already existing) sūtra together in the form we know them.
30 Grönbold (1983) distinguished a 'tarka-based' (ṣaḍaṅga) yoga from an 'āsana-based' (aṣṭāṅga) yoga. This distinction may be visually appreciated in Table 2.  the activities of mind (cittavṛtti) and isolation (kaivalya) of Spirit (puruṣa) from mind (citta), which is the goal to be striven after in aṣṭāṅgayoga. Insofar as the Javano-Balinese Śaiva literature had as its prototypical scriptural basis the canon of medieval Śaiva (Tantric) Sanskrit texts, it is only natural that the standard form of yoga widespread in Old Javanese sources is ṣaḍaṅgayoga rather than aṣṭāṅgayoga. It is therefore of interest that three of our textual sources, namely the Dharma Pātañjala, the Aji Sangkya and the Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga, constitute exceptions insofar as they adhere to the aṣṭāṅgayoga tradition.
The synchronicity in matters of yoga between the Dharma Pātañjala and the Aji Sangkya was already noted by Ensink in 1974. When discussing the Śaiva and Bauddha varieties of yoga described in the 14th-century Old Javanese Kakawin of Buddhist persuasion Sutasoma,32 Ensink (1974:198) made the following observations: We may note, as Mrs. Soebadio (1971:30) has done, that the yoga course of eight stages (aṣṭāṅga-yoga) as taught in Patañjali's Yogasūtra's (YS 2.29-3.5) is hardly known in Javano-Balinese literature. So far only one text discussing it is known.* This is the Dharma Pātañjala (Dh.Pāt. 68R-76V, where the order of prāṇāyāma and pratyāhāra has been inverted). It has been handed down only in Java. Although a minor detail in Ensink's statement must be revised-the edition and English translation of the Yogasūtra used by Jelantik was not the one by Woods but an earlier one by Manilal Nabhubhai Dvivedi33 (1890)-the 32 Which explicitly regards the ṣaḍaṅgayoga as Śaiva in nature, as opposed to the Buddhist yoga of non-duality (advayayoga); see Ensink 1974. 33 Hooykaas (1951  late scholar rightly marked out the independent adoption of analogous, and apparently 'exotic', systems of yoga by two authors whose milieus were geographically set apart, and separated by at least fĳive centuries. The signifĳicance of Jelantik's doctrinal innovation was independently noticed at a later date by Bakker.34 According to Bakker (1993:302), the most striking feature of the Aji Sankya is precisely the introduction into Bali of Pātañjala yoga; it is because of this very fact that '1947 can be given as the date when for the fĳirst time the contribution of India begins to be seen in Balinese thought'. Even though this statement as it stands is unwarranted, for India's contribution to Balinese thought goes back well into premodern times, it is true that Jelantik must be acknowledged as the fĳirst exponent of the Balinese religious elite of the modern period to have made use of an Indian Hindu source. Jelantik is to be regarded as a pioneer in religious reform as he explicitly encouraged his fellow believers to look at India in order to integrate their faith and practices with elements of Indian Hinduism in order to recover the 'purity' of Balinese Hinduism. As foreseen by Hooykaas (1951:435), Jelantik's adoption of Pātañjala yoga and his attitude towards contemporary Indian Hindu authors was bound to have far-reaching consequences on Bali, impacting on many of the manuals of Hinduism written on the island in subsequent years.
Among these manuals there is the third source discussed in this article, namely Anandakusuma's Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga, a work that displays some evident Indian Hindu influences insofar as it adheres to Pātañjala aṣṭāṅgayoga. In this respect, unlike Jelantik, Anandakusuma chose to follow a more eclectic and non-exclusive approach, adopting aṣṭāṅgayoga alongside the ṣaḍaṅgayoga featuring in his prototypical source-the Vṛhaspatitattva.
The somewhat syncretic adoption of aṣṭāṅgayoga on the top of ṣaḍaṅgayoga is one of the very few points where Anandakusuma deviates from, or rather adds to, his prototypical Sanskrit-Old Javanese source. Having explained the ancillaries of ṣaḍaṅgayoga as per Vṛhaspatitattva (dyads 53-59), after a few paragraphs he mentions aṣṭāṅgayoga, stating that it is 'fĳitting to be known by everyone wishing to obtain the awareness of Surakarta (no date). The printed Javanese version is titled Sirat Yogasūtra Pātañjali, and the English translator is referred to as Maṇi Laṇa Bhuhe Dwiwedi.
34 It is apparent that Bakker did not consult Ensink's article as he nowhere refers to it in his book. his Soul' (patut diketahui oleh setiap orang yang ingin mencapai kesadaran jiwanya). He goes on explaining only the three ancillaries missing in the list given in the Vṛhaspatitattva, namely yama, niyama and āsana. He then concludes his treatise with the explanation of the places for performing yoga and the food and drink permitted to the yogin-topics which do not feature in the Vṛhaspatitattva.
Jelantik's influence on the thought and work of Anandakusuma is undeniable, yet it is unlikely that the latter author drew directly upon the Aji Sangkya to introduce this doctrinal variation in his Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga. The former Balinese text does not appear among the sources listed in Anandakusuma's bibliography, and the treatment of aṣṭāṅgayoga indeed does not conform to that of Jelantik. When introducing aṣṭāṅgayoga (incoherently spelled asthangga yoga), Anandakusuma explicitly refers to the book Kundalini Yoga by Swami Śivānanda. Now, Śivānanda therein describes a variety of Haṭhayoga that, even though eclectic in its approach, owes little to Patañjali's formulation of yoga. Śivānanda only fleetingly mentions aṣṭāṅgayoga and its ancillaries in the introduction (p. xxv);35 elsewhere, he merely pays lip service to Patañjali, focusing instead on the description of a complex system of subtle centres (cakra) and subtle bodily tubes (nāḍī), a wide array of postures (āsana), and yogic techniques aiming at awakening the power of the 'coiled serpent' (kuṇḍalinī). It is obvious that the Pātañjala yoga referred to by Śivānanda is mediated through Haṭhayogic texts such as Gheraṇḍasaṃhitā and Gorakṣaśataka.36 It is certainly through Śivānanda's surrogate that Anandakusuma introduced Patañjali's ancillaries in his work. That this is the case is also suggested by Anandakusuma's reference to the 840000 postures taught by Śiva,37 of which 84 are the best and 32 are useful, details that can be found neither in the original scriptures of Pātañjala yoga nor in Jelantik, but feature in Śivānanda's Kundalini Yoga (p. 110). It must be stressed, however, that these details constitute the only signifĳicant influence of Śivānanda's 35 The only other (fleeting) mention of the word aṣṭāṅgayoga is found in p. 134. 36 On these texts, and on the relationship between Patañjali and Haṭhayoga, see Larson 2009 andMallinson 2007. 37 Śivānanda actually speaks of 84 lakhs of postures, hence 84 × 100000 = 8400000. Anandakusuma appears to have misunderstood the meaning of 'lakh' (taking it to be 10000 instead of 100000). work on the Rsi Yadnya Sankya dan Yoga, which otherwise closely follows the Vṛhaspatitattva.
On the other hand, Anandakusuma creatively elaborated on certain doctrinal elements by drawing from other sources of the Balinese tradition. For example, besides the series of ten moral rules (daśaśīla) borrowed from the Old Javanese exegesis to śloka 60-61 of the Vṛhaspatitattva, listing the fĳive general commandments ( yama) and the fĳive particular commandments (niyama), Anandakusuma presents an alternative series that is found neither in the Yogasūtra nor in Kundalini Yoga. The series of ten yama and ten niyama he describes is attested only in his own Swastika Sutra 23-25, which apparently borrowed it from Sārasamuccaya 259-260 (see Bakker 1993:87).38 One wonders why Anandakusuma chose to follow the series listed in the Sārasamuccaya, thereby deviating from the authority of the Vṛhaspatitattva, Patañjali, as well as Śivānanda. Perhaps he considered a list of twenty items to be more complete and comprehensive than one of ten-all the more so since such an expanded list was attested in an authoritative source of the Javano-Balinese textual tradition, thereby making it useless to recur to an Indian source. Now, it is clear that similar operations of doctrinal innovation were carried out by the authors of the three sources discussed above in a largely independent way. These operations have produced similar outcomes, resulting in comparable structural reconfĳigurations of doctrinal elements pertaining to the domain of yoga. Certainly, this status quo is of interest from a text-historical and cultural point of view as it strengthens the main hypothesis underlying this article, namely that a thread of continuity can be detected in premodern and modern Śaiva (or 'Hindu') sources belonging to the Javano-Balinese textual tradition. But then we should ask ourselves why such synchronous reconfĳigurations have come to exist, that is to say why our authors felt the need to either reject or integrate the familiar Śaiva yoga featuring in their own textual tradition and introduce Pātañjala yoga, which was no doubt fĳirmly associated-at least in the minds of our modern Balinese authors-with the Indian Hindu tradition. 38 The only close parallel in Sanskrit literature that I have been able to fĳind is in the Vaikhānasadharmasūtra (02.04, 124.9-12). It is very unlikely that Anandakusuma had access to this text, so I presume that he borrowed the list of ten yama and niyama from the Sārasamuccaya.  Given the lack of chronological and other historical information around the cultural context of the Dharma Pātañjala, we can only speculate on the motivations of its author. First of all, it is itself signifĳicant that his syncretic adoption of Pātañjala yoga remained a doctrinal unicum in the panorama of Old Javanese Śaiva literature. The author's idiosyncratic stance reflecting an attempt at merging the Pātañjala yoga tradition into a Śaiva doctrinal background does not seem to have travelled beyond his own milieu-a fact that is indirectly suggested by the survival of the Dharma Pātañjala in a single manuscript.
One may argue that the Pātañjala yoga tradition was uncommon or altogether unknown in Java, as much as it was seemingly unknown in early 20th century Bali. If this is the case, it is conceivable that our anonymous Javanese author fortuitously came in possession of a Sanskrit manuscript containing a commented version of the Yogasūtra, which was regarded by him as an exotic rarity as well as a philosophically impressive treatise, and that he deemed worthwhile of being introduced in his Śaiva milieu. On the contrary, one may hypothesize that our author carried out his innovative doctrinal operation in order to appropriate, and thereby domesticate, a tradition that was perceived as 'foreign' and rival. Whether by his time Pātañjala yoga was known in Java, or was at least by then starting to gain ground, cannot be established with certainty; however, my previous remarks on the uniqueness of the Dharma Pātañjala with regard to its physical support and doctrinal agenda go against the latter hypothesis. If one accepts the former hypothesis as the most probable, one may speculate about the circumstances around the introduction of Patañjali's yoga system into the Indonesian Archipelago. Returning to the formulation of a historical parallelism with 20th century Bali, I want to advance the hypothesis that the travelling of (whatever version of ) the Yogasūtra into the hands of the Javanese author, however fortuitous, was favoured by the fact that Pātañjala yoga achieved a prominent status among contemporary Śaiva circles in the Indian Subcontinent, and that this development promptly reached Java. In order to test this hypothesis, I should like to make an excursion beyond the literatures of the Archipelago and cast a look at the fortunes enjoyed by the Yogasūtra in South Asia. For reasons of space and opportunity, I will focus on its reception among Śaiva authors, whether anonymous or historically known, who might have been chronologically not far removed from our Javanese author.
Insofar as its primary focus is not on philosophy but on practice, the Pātañjala yoga as formulated in the Yogaśāstra (that is, the Yogasūtra-cum-Bhāṣya) was prone to transcend the boundaries of distinct philosophical schools, lending itself to integration into the scriptures of rival systems. This seminal text has been described by Larson (1999) as a 'tradition text' of 'non-sectarian' nature, which, conflating Sāṅkhya and Buddhist formulations, was itself characterized by a somewhat hybrid character. The Yogaśāstra appealed even to certain Śaiva exegetes, who tended to pay lip service to Patañjali as an authority in matters of yoga.40 However, cases of authors who programmatically attempted to absorb elements of the Yogaśāstra toward a higher synthesis are rare, and most Śaiva exegetes adopted a more critical stance toward Pātañjala yoga. Thus, the majority of historical authors, as well as the 'divinely transmitted' scriptures like Siddhāntatantras, adhered to the Śaiva ṣaḍaṅgayoga and sometimes explicitly contrasted it to Pātañjala views.
But a few notable exceptions exist. Syncretistic attempts at merging Pātañjala yoga, especially with respect to the number and order of the ancillaries, into a Śaiva framework are attested in Saiddhāntika scriptures. As noted by Brunner (1994:439-440), this is especially, if not uniquely, true in the case of relatively late (that is, post 12th century), and often South Indian, Saiddhāntika sources; see, for instance, Suprabhedāgama (Yogapāda 3.53-56), Īśānaśiva's Īśānaśivagurudevapaddhati (ch. 2), Ajitāgama (2.29), Makuṭāgama (11.1-21), and the Kashmirian Netratantra (8.9, 21). To this list could be added the South Indian (Devakōṭṭai) edition of the Kiraṇatantra (58.2c-3), which is notable in that it substitutes tarka with āsana,41 and the yoga sections of the Mṛgendratantra and the Sarvajñānottara, which teach a variety of aṣṭāṅgayoga representing an intermediary position of six ancillaries without tarka (see Vasudeva 2004:370, note 5).
The tendency towards the adoption of aṣṭāṅgayoga documented in the above sources, most of which are relatively late and of South Indian 40 For example, post 10th-century Saiddhāntika commentators such as Śrī Kumāra or Nārāyaṇakaṇṭha often quote Patañjali with approval.
41 Since the Nepalese manuscripts retain tarka, Vasudeva (2004:377) has regarded this substitution 'as an attempt [by a modern editor] to approximate the yoga of the Kiraṇa to the classical system of Patañjali'; Goodall (2004:351-2 note 735), however, has shown that the South Indian palm-leaf manuscripts on which the Devakōṭṭai edition was based already read āsana.
provenance, is signifĳicant. This is especially evident in the cases of such sources as the Kiraṇa and the Sarvajñānottara, which are preserved in both (earlier) Nepalese and (later) South Indian manuscripts: whereas the versions recorded in the Nepalese manuscripts retain the ancillaries of ṣaḍaṅgayoga, the versions recorded in the South Indian ones substitute them with those of aṣṭāṅgayoga. This remarkable substitution arguably amounts to an attempt by late transmitters to interpolate certain relevant passages in order to make them compliant with Pātañjala yoga, which by then enjoyed a prominent status in their milieu. The fact that Pātañjala yoga exerted a greater appeal on post-11th century Śaiva authors and/or transmitters cannot be dismissed as a mere coincidence but has to be regarded as being connected to the rise to prominence, and consequent 'canonicization', of Pātañjala yoga and the Yogasūtra in the contemporary Brahmanical Episteme. The rise and 'canonicization' of Pātañjala yoga into Classical Yoga seems to have occurred in parallel to the rise and 'canonicization' of the philosophical system of Vedānta within Hinduism. The Vedānta indeed elected Pātañjala yoga as one of the valid means to achieve liberation. The rise of Vedānta influenced also Śaivism, which in South India witnessed the flourishing of a non-dualist Tamil variety of Śaivasiddhānta from the 11th century onwards.42 This process of 'Vedānticization' of Indian religions appears to have continued through the colonial period into the modern and contemporary periods. Now, it is possible that the author of the Dharma Pātañjala was exposed to the developments going on within contemporary Śaiva circles in South India, where the Śaiva scriptural canon was witnessing a 'syncretistic' adoption of Pātañjala yoga.43 Just as the South Indian transmitters of the Saiddhāntika canon selectively and intelligently interpolated certain scriptures, or composed others anew, by substituting the six ancillaries of Śaiva yoga with the eight of Pātañjala yoga, our Javanese author implemented an innovative doctrinal agenda by adopting Pātañjala yoga within a Śaiva matrix, yet clearly distinguishing the practical side of that system from the otherwise Śaiva theological and philosophical nature of his treatise.
It is entirely plausible that the introduction of Pātañjala yoga into the Balinese Śaiva Episteme in the early 20th century followed similar lines. The historical process of 'canonicization' and 'classicization' of Pātañjala yoga in Vedānticized Hindu circles of 19th-and 20th-century India reached the Archipelago through texts and religious or cultural personalities. By the early 20th century many Balinese intellectuals, among whom Jelantik fĳigured notably, learned about the preeminent status of Pātañjala yoga in contemporary Hindu circles through their direct contacts with Indian (neo-) Hindus and their readings of Hindu authors. Balinese reformers were in fact eager to establish an authoritative canon for their 'Hindu' religion, a canon that would be sanctioned through the comparison with the Hindu scriptural corpus in Sanskrit from which the Balinese tradition was recognized to have originated in a remote past. This agenda by the mid 20th Century was promoted by Balinese intellectuals in order to restore the supposedly lost purity of their religion on the one hand, and to get the recognition of their status as Hindu, and hence adherents of a true 'World Religion', in the eyes of the central government of the recently constituted Republic of Indonesia on the other.
It is therefore only natural that, when the rare Javanese translation of the Yogasūtra came into his hands, Jelantik used it as a basis to introduce Pātañjala yoga into Bali.44 Yet Jelantik and other contemporary as well as later Balinese intellectuals, including Anandakusuma, did not reject in toto their own Śaiva theological and yogic tradition but intelligently implemented specifĳic interpolations whenever they felt their tradition to be 'inadequate'. Such perceived 'inadequacy' was not due, as modern theorists have stressed, to the lack of theological and speculative constructions-for the Balinese tradition was more than adequate to provide the doctrinal and practical (yogic) means to salvation-but rather to the lack of compliance of certain elements with the newly-established (or rather re-established) criteria of orthodoxy and canonicity, that is harmony with the mainstream canon of Indian (neo-)Hinduism.45 For instance, Balinese reformers must 44 It would be interesting to know under which circumstances a copy of a fourth-hand translation of the Yogasūtra printed in the Central Javanese town of Surakarta (now Solo) fortuitously reached Jelantik. 45 I fully endorse Bakker's conclusion (1993:302) that 'India's contribution can be seen in their thoughts on modern science, the relationship with other religions and family planning, but as regards their thinking on God, man and the cosmos the influence of India is small'. have felt disparaged by the fact that their tradition of Śaiva ṣaḍaṅgayoga was neither featured in the Sanskrit texts that were accessible to them, nor taught by the Hindu leaders and masters who were being taken as models in Balinese reformist circles. Thus, it is not surprising that the popularity of Patañjali among those leaders exerted its fascination on Balinese intellectuals.
What needs stressing here is that most Balinese reformist authors never rejected altogether the fundamental tenets and deeply Śaiva persuasion of their traditional theology, but simply sought to reconfĳigure and integrate it in order to ensure compliance with certain trends of neo-Hindu orthodoxy. In adopting Pātañjala yoga both Jelantik (through the translation of the Sanskrit primary text) and Anandakusuma (through the 'distorting lens' of Swami Śivānanda) pursued an operation of doctrinal synthesis, which attuned the more practical part within the system of Patañjali-that is, the yoga of the eight ancillaries-to their Śaiva theistic tradition, whose principal aim was the union with the Lord. This is radically diffferent from the goal of samādhi in Pātañjala yoga, which rather strives after isolation of the spirit from the mind. In this respect, both Jelantik and Anandakusuma may be regarded as merely paying lip service to Patañjali's system by adopting such external means as the ancillaries while maintaining the internals of Śaiva yoga, namely the conception of samādhi as union with God rather than isolation.
An analogous operation of intelligent selection and reconfĳiguration, rather than wholesale adoption, of Patañjali's metaphysics, cosmology and salvationist philosophy was carried out by the Javanese author of the Dharma Pātañjala several centuries before. Although he closely followed the Sanskrit prototypical text, no doubt thanks to his superior knowledge of that system, profĳiciency in Sanskrit and chronological proximity to the Sanskrit Episteme, this author nonetheless strove after the implementation of a high doctrinal synthesis that adopted certain practical means and philosophical perspectives of Pātañjala yoga while attuning them to his Śaiva theistic stance (see Acri 2011b).
Balinese reformers were keen to supplement their Balinese Śaiva (Tantric) canon with elements borrowed from the canon of (neo-)Hinduism. Indeed the Sanskrit Śaiva (Tantric) canon was unknown to these Balinese intellectuals, as much as it was unknown to, or ignored by, the fĳirst philologists who studied Sanskrit texts in India and Old Javanese texts in Bali. As a matter of fact, the vast canon of Sanskrit Tantric scriptures preserved in manuscripts from Nepal and South India is a relatively recent discovery, and 'Tantrism'-in its Śaiva, Śākta, Bauddha and Vaiṣṇava varieties-has been made object of serious philological and interpretative work only in the past two or three decades.46 During most of the 19th and 20th century this Tantric corpus has been neglected, if not made object of outright contempt, by Western Indologists, who have generally regarded the Tantras as leaning towards extravagant, antinomian and demonic practices requiring the use of magic, sex and blood. The phenomenon of 'Tantrism' was regarded as peripheral and 'sectarian', as opposed to the 'orthodox', and representative, mainstream Brahmanical Hinduism.47 This puritan attitude appears to have been interiorized by the majority of the early modern and modern Indian Hindu elites, who sanctioned mainstream Brahmanical religiosity as the 'real' and 'pure' form of Hinduism, and constructed their canon accordingly.48 This trend is detectable in present-day India, and also in Bali.

Conclusion
The (inter)textual and historical analysis of selected sources presented in this article is but a preliminary step towards the reconstruction of a 'Balinese theology' in its historical dimension, leading to a deeper understanding of the cultural dynamics that characterized the Javano-Balinese religious discourse from the premodern through the modern period. The main assumption underlying my study is that early modern and contemporary Balinese literary and exegetical practices show a remarkable continuity with the earlier tradition as they continue to engage with Old Javanese and Sanskrit textual materials.
My conclusion is that the premodern (Śaiva) Javanese author of the Dharma Pātañjala and two modern Balinese (Hindu-Śaiva) reformist 46 See Goodall andIsaacson 2011. 47 See Goudriaan, Gupta andHoens 1979:3-5. 48 However, it now appears that what is often referred to as 'Tantrism' indeed constituted the mainstream mode of religiosity (including ritualism) in South Asia from at least the 7th century AD to the early modern period and beyond, crossing the boundaries of distinct religious currents (for instance theistic schools, such as Śaiva and Vaiṣṇava, or non-theistic schools, such as Buddhism and Jainism); see Goodall and Isaacson 2011:122. The same holds true for Java and Bali (see Stephen 2005:81-97). authors carried out structurally similar operations of doctrinal innovation and reconfĳiguration in a largely independent way. What our sources appear to document is thus a mainly orthogenetic49 model of adaptation and innovative displacement of Sanskritic elements into a Javano-Balinese framework. Besides the doctrinal sphere, driven by an agenda aiming at incorporating exogenous (and exotic) elements from Indian Sanskrit texts, the continuities and analogies may be detected also with respect to text-building strategies, discourse-empowerment, and legitimization of religious authority.50 Since the fĳirst printed textbooks of Hinduism, written in either Balinese or Indonesian, were largely compendia on matters of doctrine found in Tattva, which they often followed with a remarkable degree of faithfulness, it is arguable that the process of re-negotiation experienced by modern Balinese religious discourse developed along the lines characterizing the Javano-Balinese Śaiva episteme long before the impact of Western colonialism and modernity. Rather than reflecting the influence of modernist, Western-driven ideologies or Semitic religions, this process may be regarded as representing the outcome of a centuries-long translocal tradition. It is the Old Javanese Śaiva corpus that provided the 'mental mapping' through which modern Balinese authors coped with the new priorities and challenges of the present.
50 It is relevant here to point out that analogous conclusions have been reached by Taylor (2008b:324) with respect to the textual strategies and meta-discourse implemented in the Sanskrit Purāṇas: 'How can we test my supposition that these themes enable the Purāṇas to function as "true" discourse? The episteme in which these texts function is not bounded by chronological constraints, nor did it suddenly come to an end with "modernity." On the contrary, it extends into the present. That is to say, there still exists a community of "consumers" of Purāṇic discourse for whom it is undoubtedly true'.