Editing Yoga (section)

==== Synthesis model ====

Heinrich Zimmer was an exponent of the synthesis model,{{sfn|Crangle|1994|p=5}} arguing for non-Vedic [[East India|eastern states of India]].{{sfn|Zimmer|1951|p=217, 314}} According to Zimmer, yoga is part of a non-Vedic system which includes the [[Samkhya]] school of [[Hindu philosophy]], [[Jainism]] and [[Buddhism]]:{{sfn|Zimmer|1951|p=217, 314}} "[Jainism] does not derive from Brahman-Aryan sources, but reflects the cosmology and anthropology of a much older pre-Aryan upper class of northeastern India [Bihar] – being rooted in the same subsoil of archaic metaphysical speculation as Yoga, [[Samkhya|Sankhya]], and Buddhism, the other non-Vedic Indian systems."{{sfn|Zimmer|1951|p=217}}{{refn|group=note|Zimmer's point of view is supported by other scholars, such as Niniam Smart in ''Doctrine and argument in Indian Philosophy'', 1964, pp. 27–32, 76{{sfn|Crangle|1994|p=7}} and S. K. Belvakar and [[Inchegeri Sampradaya]] in ''History of Indian philosophy'', 1974 (1927), pp. 81, 303–409.{{sfn|Crangle|1994|pp=5–7}}}} More recently, [[Richard Gombrich]]{{sfn|Gombrich|2007}} and Geoffrey Samuel{{sfn|Samuel|2008}} also argue that the ''[[śramaṇa]]'' movement originated in the non-Vedic eastern Ganges basin,{{sfn|Samuel|2008}} specifically [[Greater Magadha]].{{sfn|Gombrich|2007}}

Thomas McEvilley favors a composite model in which a pre-Aryan yoga prototype existed in the pre-Vedic period and was refined during the Vedic period.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=McEvilley|first=Thomas|year=1981|title=An Archaeology of Yoga|journal=Res: Anthropology and Aesthetics |volume=1 |issue=spring |page=51 |doi=10.1086/RESv1n1ms20166655 |s2cid=192221643|issn=0277-1322}}</ref> According to Gavin D. Flood, the Upanishads differ fundamentally from the Vedic ritual tradition and indicate non-Vedic influences.{{sfn|Flood|1996|p=78}} However, the traditions may be connected:
{{blockquote|[T]his dichotomization is too simplistic, for continuities can undoubtedly be found between renunciation and vedic Brahmanism, while elements from non-Brahmanical, Sramana traditions also played an important part in the formation of the renunciate ideal.{{sfn|Flood|1996|p=77}}{{refn|group=note|Gavin Flood: "These renouncer traditions offered a new vision of the human condition which became incorporated, to some degree, into the worldview of the Brahman householder. The ideology of asceticism and renunciation seems, at first, discontinuous with the brahmanical ideology of the affirmation of social obligations and the performance of public and domestic rituals. Indeed, there has been some debate as to whether asceticism and its ideas of retributive action, reincarnation and spiritual liberation, might not have originated outside the orthodox vedic sphere, or even outside Aryan culture: that a divergent historical origin might account for the apparent contradiction within 'Hinduism' between the world affirmation of the householder and the world negation of the renouncer. However, this dichotomization is too simplistic, for continuities can undoubtedly be found between renunciation and vedic Brahmanism, while elements from non-Brahmanical, Sramana traditions also played an important part in the formation of the renunciate ideal. Indeed there are continuities between vedic Brahmanism and Buddhism, and it has been argued that the Buddha sought to return to the ideals of a vedic society which he saw as being eroded in his own day."{{sfn|Flood|1996|pp=76–77}}}}}}

The ascetic traditions of the eastern Ganges plain are thought to drew from a common body of practices and philosophies,{{sfn|Bryant|2009|p=xxi}}{{sfn|Samuel|2008}}{{sfn|Flood|1996|p=233}} with proto-samkhya concepts of ''purusha'' and ''prakriti'' as a common denominator.{{sfn|Larson|2014}}{{sfn|Flood|1996|p=233}}