This is a term, which I had not encountered before, coined by Fort in Ref. 200. He uses it to refer to those teachers and texts that incorporate elements of sAMkhya and yoga philosophy into their supposedly Advaitic teaching. This applies to texts such as yogavAsiShTha and jIvanmukti viveka, as was already indicated in the discussion on vidyAraNya above. There are also 20 of the later, minor Upanishads that relate to Yoga (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoga_Upanishads) and there is a danger of referring to these to support ideas that are actually alien to traditional Advaita. These ideas are characterized by the notion that Self-knowledge gained through the usual route has to be supplemented by something else before liberation is achieved. Typically, this might be samAdhi or destruction of ego/mind, as discussed above (and below) but even ideas from other traditions might be incorporated. The yogavAsiShTha also has much emphasis on the ‘illusory’ nature of the world. The j~nAnI acts or does not act without any attachment, according to circumstances.
Rather than prArabdha, yogic Advaita tends to refer to vAsanA-s as being the key ‘obstruction’ to mokSha. While we have them, we are bound to the body; once they are purified, we are freed from saMsAra. When destroyed, we gain videha mukti.
In the yogavAsiShTha itself, there is reference to the fact that ‘impressions’ may remain after gaining Self-knowledge. It differentiates two ‘levels’ of ridding oneself of ‘impressions’. The first is called ‘Contemplation-based Eradication of Impressions’ and the higher level, achieved after practicing nirvikalpa samAdhi, is called ‘Wisdom-based Eradication of Impressions’. “While he is in the Nirvikalpa Samadhi state, his current sufferage (prArabdha karma) comes to an end. His body dies.” (Ref. 206) The text continues:
“The person who practices Contemplation-based Eradication of Impressions is Liberated in this Life. The one who practices Wisdom-based Eradication of Impressions is liberated and without body. As far as liberation is concerned, both are same. Sorrow does not affect either of them. But one is Arisen (arisen from deep meditation – Samadhi). The other continues to be in deep meditation (Samadhi). The former is with the body, but untroubled. The latter is without a body.”
This is not clear. If the body has dropped, one would have assumed that the ‘person’ no longer exists, Atman having ‘merged’ with brahman as it were.
Finally, the text adds (the key part is in bold):
“Hence Rama, we cannot for sure hold that ending of egoism is equivalent to Wisdom-based Eradication of Impressions and the person would die because the current sufferage (prArabdha) is totally annihilated. In case there is some residual balance of current sufferage, termination of impressions and eradication of ego will stop at the stage of Contemplation-based Eradication of Impressions. He is liberated but he will not die.”
It seems that there is differentiation between j~nAna and videha mukti but no intermediate state of jIvanmukti. But it is necessary to clear outstanding prArabdha after gaining Self-knowledge. As he says: “Even liberated persons have to necessarily go through the effects of their past deeds (prArabdha)” (Ref. 206) And the laghu yoga vasiShTha states: “Those jivanmukta-s who have disentangled themselves from the meshes of vAsanA-s will but live in this world to wear out their prArabdha, like a potter s wheel continuing to roll on of itself through the impetus given by the potter.” (Ref. 207)
Later the Yoga practices that the sage Uddalaka goes through in order to achieve final liberation are described and it is noted that “The residual nescience that is the root cause for experiencing prArabdha began to dissolve. The reason for the continued existence of his body was prArabdha.”
Vidyaranya, in his jIvanmukti viveka, also emphasizes the importance of yoga in attaining liberation. He states that physical renunciation is key, not simply the mental attitude that one does not act. This is clearly in contradiction of Shankara. Shankara states that prArabdha karma is ‘stronger than’ knowledge (Brihadaranyaka Up. 1.4.7 quotation in the introduction to this section). But, as was discussed in the section on jIvanmukti above, Vidyaranya says that the practices of yoga are stronger than prArabdha in that they are able effectively to overcome those obstacles that maintain the bodily existence and give liberation before the death of the body, i.e. jIvanmukti. “Because operative action is more powerful than knowledge of truth, we could take it that yogic discipline is more powerful than this action [1.3.11].” (Quoted in Ref. 154)
According to Vidyaranya, gaining liberation is achieved via a three-pronged attack. Certainly, one has to gain the Self-knowledge from scriptures and guru, but also one has to destroy the mind and thereby clear the obstacles that still remain. He quotes from laghu yoga vAsiShTha 28.116 in his jIvanmukti viveka: “Simultaneous practice of the effacement of the latent impressions (vAsanA kShaya), [the means to] knowledge (vij~nAna), and the annihilation of the mind (manonAsha), for a long time, O Wise (Rama), brings about the result.” (Ref. 152)
For the seeker who becomes a saMnyAsin prior to gaining knowledge (a vidviShA saMnyAsin), the key factor is now to gain Self-knowledge. But for the one who is already a j~nAnI (vidvat saMnyAsin), in order to become a jIvanmukta, the other two factors have to be pursued. I.e. vidyAraNya clearly accepts that there are likely to be ‘obstacles’ to be removed following the gaining of Self-knowledge. Indeed, if yoga is not practiced after gaining Self-knowledge, doubt (saMshaya) and error (viparyaya) may still arise. Vidyaranya says that the knowledge has to be ‘protected’:
“It may be asked – what is the necessity of protecting knowledge? The question of sublation does not arise inasmuch as the knowledge of Reality has been obtained through proper evidence.
The answer is this – in the absence of tranquility of the mind doubt and error may creep in.” (Ref. 152)
The solution is manonAsha: “But when by the dissolution of the mind the world itself is dissolved for him whose mind has reached the state of tranquility, there remains no question of doubt and misapprehension then.” (Ref. 152) This topic has been addressed and refuted earlier.
It seems to me that Vivekananda’s primary aim (in respect of teaching Advaita) was to present the ‘general idea’ to a naïve Western audience. As such, he was either not interested in differentiating the finer points in his talks or, conceivably, he had never considered them for himself. Needless to say, he does not use the word ‘pratibandha’ even once in all 9 volumes of his ‘Complete Works’. He does occasionally speak of prArabdha karma and, in Volume 3, he talks about the difference between a j~nAnI and a jIvanmukta.
In his talk ‘The Free Soul’ (New York, 1896), he speaks of seeing a mirage whilst crossing a desert in India and says:
“Once known it had lost its power of illusion. So this illusion of the universe will break one day. The whole of this will vanish, melt away. This is realization. Philosophy is no joke or talk. It has to be realized; this body will vanish, this earth and everything will vanish, this idea that I am the body or the mind will for some time vanish, or if the Karma is ended it will disappear, never to come back; but if one part of the Karma remains, then as a potter’s wheel, after the potter has finished the pot, will sometimes go on from the past momentum, so this body, when the delusion has vanished altogether, will go on for some time. Again this world will come, men and women and animals will come, just as the mirage came the next day, but not with the same force; along with it will come the idea that I know its nature now, and it will cause no bondage, no more pain, nor grief, nor misery. Whenever anything miserable will come, the mind will be able to say, ‘I know you as hallucination.’ When a man has reached that state, he is called Jivanmukta, living-free, free even while living. The aim and end in this life for the j~nAna-Yogi is to become this jIvanmukta, ‘living-free’. (Ref. 49)
So he clearly distinguished between a j~nAnI and a jIvanmukta, the latter being a j~nAnI who has eliminated any outstanding karmic ‘remnants’, in the same way as the earlier post-Shankara teachers discussed above. (Quite how he justifies saying that “if the Karma is ended it [i.e. the world] will disappear, never to come back” and yet state several sentences later that “He is a jIvanmukta who can live in this world without being attached.” is another question!)