# Talk:Hatha yoga

The first paragraph of the article contains an obvious error in trying to date the earliest external evidence for hatha yoga.
If "The oldest dated text so far found to describe haṭha yoga, the 11th-century Amṛtasiddhi, comes from a tantric Buddhist milieu", then mention of the much earlier Buddhist Pāli Canon is unwarranted. Evidence (from Chinese translations) suggests the Pāli canon was substantially complete in its present form by at least the 4th century CE, though it may well date back much further. Whatever it's age, it is far older than the 11th century CE work cited. The citation of "Mallinson 2011" is of a yoga writer, not of a specialist versed in understanding the Pāli canon. One might have expected a citation of where in the canon hatha yoga is found. I suggest reference to that canon should simply be omitted.
Whether the claim that hatha yoga is found in "the Hindu Sanskrit epics" is or is not safe is not something I can comment on. Silence-is-infinite (talk) 20:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts. Hatha Yoga did not exist at the time of the Pāli canon: what existed then was non-Hatha yoga. Yoga began as a purely spiritual discipline. Its transition to a practice furthered by taking up multiple physical postures is much later. The article does not say that Hatha Yoga can be found in any of the ancient documents: nor does it make any claims about their precise dates, which simply aren't relevant here: it's enough that they certainly long predate Hatha Yoga. All that the article says about them is that the earliest roots of some of the techniques go back to them, and their age is "at least...", i.e. they're definitely ancient. Hope this is clear. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)