70. Yogloka
Volume I: Part II pp. 598–599
Our primary understanding of Yogloka stems exclusively from the textual references found in the works of later, eminent legal commentators, specifically Jīmūtavāhana and Raghunandana. Jīmūtavāhana, in particular, rarely found himself in agreement with Yogloka's interpretations. Instead, his approach was largely critical, often characterising Yogloka's methodology as that of a mere logician, a taunt implying a perceived lack of true jurisprudential insight or traditional adherence. From the surviving mentions, it is evident that Yogloka authored at least two distinct treatises, which are referred to as Bṛhad Yogloka and Svalpa Yogloka. These works, or at least parts thereof, demonstrably focused on critical aspects of Dharmaśāstra, specifically addressing vyavahāra, the principles of legal procedure and adjudication, and Kāla, the complex calculations and prescriptions concerning time for various religious and social observances. Scholarly consensus, based on cross-referencing and contextual clues within these later works, places Yogloka's active period of scholarship and writing between approximately 950 and 1050 of the Common Era.
— Synopsis by P.V. Kane, from History of Dharmaśāstra
70. Yogloka
70. Yogloka
Yogloka like Jitendriya and Bālaka is a writer about whom we know only from the works of Jīmūtavāhana and Raghunandana. He is the last of the series of writers enume- rated in one place by the Kālāviveka as having dealt with the subject of kāla (vide note 611 above). The Vyavahāra- mātṛkā of Jīmūtavāhana very frequently1 cites the views of Yogloka and generally twits him with thinking himself as being a logician or a new-fangled (nava-tārkikaṁ-manya) logiciaṇ Both in the Kālāviveka and the Vyavahāramātṛkā Yogloka is generally cited for being refuted (e. g. pp. 457-58, 465, 483 of the Kālāviveka). It is only very rarely that Jīmūtavāhana agrees with Yogloka (as on p. 369 of the Kāla- viveka). From certain passages of the Kālāviveka it follows that Yogloka composed two works, one called Bṛhad-Yogloka (larger work) and the other styled Svalpa-Yogloka (a sma- ller-work).2 It appears that Yogloka was later than Śrī- kara and accepted certain illustrations given by the latter.3 The Vyavahāratattva of Raghunandana informs us that like Śrīkara and Bālaka, Yogloka held the view that twenty years' adverse possession of immovables conferred ownership (vide note 624 above). The same work tells us that the Maithilas followed the view of Yogloka that the verse of Kātyāyana (yadyekadeśavyāptāpi....nṛṇām) was intended to apply to a case where a litigant threw down the challenge that if even one out of several items of property charged were brought home to him as having been stolen by him, he would restore all the items claimeḍ4
The foregoing establishes that Yogloka wrote at least on kāla and vyavahāru and composed two treatises on kāla. Jīmūtavāhana5 says that a predecessor of his styled Dīkṣita criticized a certain reading of Yogloka's, i. e. Yogloka preceded Dīkṣita, who was a predecessor of Jīmūtavāhana. Jīmūtavāhana further refers to ancient ( purātana ) msṣ of Yogloka's work. Hence Yogloka must have preceded Jimūta- vāhana by at least a hundred yearṣ He is later than Śrīkara (note 632 above ). Therefore he must have flourished between 950–1050 A. D.