p NAMARUPA ere Evecare ae ranean ie rae Ses Pree a ates vena POUR ted rconianenn Renee Ronen Moss opie Sremy DT eee aaa AC LoLes Peavey Paar rere cit Pear eniter Orn era gcc Ts NCn CL eee ee oem Oey FSCO) a rad eR eee) ee res Peete ets eas een ater an ms DOSSE CUE NAMAROPA, Categories of Indian Thought is a journal chat seeks to record, illastrate, and honor, as well as comment on, the many systems of knowledge, practical and theoretical, ehat hhave originated in India. Passed down through che ages, these systems have eft racks, paths already traveled chat can guide us een ea ae eee eee Nee eo ROL ee eee ee eee incredible array of DARSANAS, YOGAS, and VIDYAS that iene ea en eee cs ee ae tual minds and hearts. The publishers have ereated this journal eas ee ee cen its content be presented clearly and inspirational, but without eee eer ee eee contributors to present offerings that accurately represent theit ‘own traditions, without endorsement or condemnation, Each traditional perspective on reality is like a different branch on a vase tree of knowledge, offering diverse fruits to the discering Pores oe Ce ee ee ic grows, offer shade, shelter and sustenance co its readers and, ete eee ee et a oe ee with articles, images, ideas and contsibutions, We invite you t0 eRe se eee Ree DOU eee Pee tee er ee Cel NON et een eee ee ene Sg een ee eee ee ee eee ee Peer eee nee ee ea eee cee eee See ae i a $e 8Saaaa ssa aoa seNAMARUPA See Ose a en es Tao Dr Robert E.Seabods Saini Taentidananda Sanseats Ne nee ed Rea ee re aa oe eas on eee ne PCE ate DST SNe OCIEAZN SINHA GANAPATI & GAJA LAKSMT ORT ENE e TEM TEN eT SEN STRUTS CO CLEMENTE RICA TE ENE OULN PCR Tey PN NE TLE aero) SR UOC ee] PE ence Ue) De RCO eo Ee cea De eNaRUE aN Sere er Ne CEES PUTER OCEnN Pe eS] rr Tea ae eeeSAMADHIPADA: SOTRAS 5-77 YOGA SUTRA oF PATANJALI & 1s COMMENTARIES Edwin Bryant's translation of Patamjialés Yoga Sutras with commentaries contributes to the growing body of literature on classical yoga by providing insights from all traditional Sanskrit commentators on the text EDWIN BRYANT aR: Teer: Premera 1.5 Vpetayah patcauayy th Mligtbligah Veweayab, the changing sacs of mind: patcaeayab, five-fold; hligs detimennal, —armfl, damaging, afflicted; aklisap, nondetrimental, tnafited ‘There are five kinds of changing states of the mind, and they are either detrimental or nondetrimental [to the practice of yor: TASJALL HAS CIVEN HIS DEEINTION OF ‘yoga in 1.2. As has been noted, the term rts used frequently throughout the Yoga Saar to essentially refer t0 any sensual impression, thought, idea, for mental cognition, activity, oF state whatsoever Since the mind is never static but always active and changing, eis are constantly being produced, and thus constantly absorb the consciousness of ‘ruse away from its own pure natu, directing it out into the realm of subrle or gross prafri. In 1.2, Peas defined yoga as the complete cesation of all vptis whatsoever. Here Pataiali turns his attention to what these vps that must be eliminated are. There are five categories of vps, which will be discussed in the following verses, and Pacafjali indicates chat these can be cither conducive (atleast initially) co the ultimate goal of yoge, or detrimental ‘Vyasa states chat the detrimental watts are caused by the five Ales, the impediments to the practice of yoga that wil be discussed in IL3—the term for detrimental here is Aliza, which ‘comes from the same verbal root as beta (EU). These types of mental states are decsimental tothe goals of yoga because they are the fertile soil fiom which the seeds of karma sprout. When under the influence of the detrimental vps, the mind becomes attracted oF repelled by sense objects drawing its attention. In its arempt to ata that which aeracts it and avoid that which repels it, the mind provokes action, karma, which initiates a vicious cycle thac will be discussed below. Karma, fiom the root fp, 10 ‘do! or ‘make, literally means ‘work,’ but inherent in the Indic concept of work, or any type of activi every action breeds reaction. ‘Thus karma refers not only to an inital act, ‘whether benevolent or malicious, but also tothe reaction it produces (pleasant or unpleasant in accordance with the original act), which ripens for the actor cither inthis life of a ature one. (Hence, people are born into different socioeconomic situations, and pleasant or unpleasant ehings happen +0 them throughout life in accordance with their ‘own previous actions.) This cycle of action and reaction, (or sarhra, s potentially eternal and unlimited since nor only does any one single act breed a reaction, but the actor must then react co this reaction causing a reseaction, which in term fructilies and provokes ree-eactions, and so om ad infinitum Thus, since the vicious cycle of action and reaction for just one solitary momentary act is potentially unlimited, and since one has to act at is the notion chat every moment of one’ life (even blinking cor breathing is an act), the storehouse of karma is literally unlimited. Since these reactions and re-reactions, et, cannot possibly be fitted into one life, they spill ever from one lifetime into the next. It is in an attempt to portray the sheer unlimited and eternal productive power of karma that Indic thinkers, both Hindu and Buddhist, use such metaphors as ‘the ocean’ of birch and death, Thus karma, which keeps consciousness bound to the external world and forgetful ofits own nature is generated by the detrimental vis, and the vrtis, in turn, are produced by the esas, which will be discussed further in the next chapter. ‘The nondetrimental mental. vps, com the other hand, are produced by the sattvic faculty of discrimination that seeks to control the influence of rajas and tamas and thereby the detrimental vitis thae they produce. Vyisa notes that this ype of vyei is beneficial even if situated in a stream of detrimental vitis!' In other words, for the novice struggling to control his or her mind, even if the emergence of sattut occurs only periodically itis always a beneficial occurrence, and it can be gradually increased and strengthened by a yogic lifesyle. The reverse also holds «ruc, adds Vyasa: detrimental vis can also surface periodically in a predominandly sattvic citta (hence the Gd’ statement inI1.60 thatthe senses can carry away the ‘mind even of a man of discrimination). Vacaspatimisra mentions activities such as the practice of yoga and the cultivation of desirelessness born from ‘Bain Brant wee of Stems fan be found in Ks and of Nmap again “juss brthmenalving in he vllage of Sala, which lof Kis sys Vcaspatimita, does oc bcome a Kika Kita wera eben in he est of ld NAMAROPA ISSUE N®.6that is, mental ac the goal of yoga. ‘These actions, like personality traits, habits, compulsiveand 1.6 Pramapaviparyayavikalpanidra- any actions, produce seeds of reactions, addictive behaviors, etc. For example, smytayah. sarhskaras (discussed further below), but particular type of experience, say theae sede ate sattvicand beneficial to smokinga cigar, i imprinted in the Pram, epistemology, source of valld the path of yoga and theultimate goal cictaas a sariskara, which then activates proof, right knowledge: nparyaya of samadhi, In time, and with practice, asa desirable memory or impulse error; vikalpa, imagination, fang these seeds accumulate such tha they provoking 4 repetition of this activity wide sep: smrtayah memory. ‘eventually transform the nature of the which is likewise recorded, and so on, mind, ‘The mind then becomes more until acuster or grove of sarhskiras of The five changing states of the mind and more sattvic, or illuminated and an identical or similar sort is produced are right knowledge, error, imagination, contemplative, such that the beneficial in the citta, gaining strength with sleep, and memory. ‘vpttis eventually suppress any stirrings each repetition. The stronger or more ‘of rajas and tamas—the detrimental dominant such a cluster of sarhskaras ) ATARJALI HERE BEGINS HIS DEFINITION: wtie—automatcall, until the later becomes, the more it activates and L of hac these vs, which bind the remain only at inactive potencies. imposes iself upon the consciousness of punuga to the word of sahara, are. He When the cites manifests is pare sattra the individual, demanding indulgence lists five distinct types of vcs. What potential, ie becomes “like” the Zeman, and perpetuating a vicious oye that this means, then, is that In esence, ‘says Vyasa. By this he intends that it no can be very hard to break. The Klefas, the human mind finds itself in one of longer binds the purusa co prakg, the ws, caeletas, and karma are thus these ie sates at any gven moment. world of samsira, but reflects purusa all interconnected links in the chain of — In other words, all possible mental states in an undistorted fashion, allowing it sarhsara, that can be experienced are categorized to contemplate its true nature as per Through the practice of yoga, che by the yoga tradition as manifestations the mitror analogy outlined in the yogi atempts to supplantall the rajasic of one ofthese five types of ves. The previous commentary. Ramminanda and tamasic samstaras with sattvic commentators reserve thee comments Sarasa notes here that essentially the ones until these, too, are restricted for the ensuing verse, which explain cits wg but sartskcras, in the higher states of trance. Tis is cach of these items in turn mental imprints or impresions (aot co because while satvic sarslars, the bbe confused with sarhsara, the cycle of nondetrimental vpttis mentioned by | birth and death), Saskaras are a very Patajali in this verse, are conducive TAATPATAPTAT: FATT | important feature of yoga psychology: to liberation, they nonetheless are still every sensual experience or mental vpttis and thus an external distraction 1.7 Pratyakidmumandgamah pramayani. thought char has ever been experienced — to the pure consciousness of the atman. formsa sathskara, an imprint, in thecitta Of course, as Vijitinabhiksu points out, Pratyakga, sense perception; ansoana, mind. The mind is hus a storehouse of all vis, including sattvic ones, are infetence, logis demi, tesimony. these recorded sutras, deposited and ulkimatly detrimental from theabsolute vebal communication; pramddnt accumulated in the citta over countless perspective of the purusa, as they bind lifetimes. Vyasa notes that there is thus consciousness to the world of matter. Right knowledge comists of sense a cycle of vptis and sariskaras: vpttis, So the notions of detrimental and non- perception, logic, and verbal testimony. that is sense experiences and thoughts, detrimental are ftom the perspective of crc. (and thee comequent actions) are srhsra; the detrimental (ajc and [ur mast or THe ve vers 10 recorded inthe cia a sarskaras, and tamasi) vis cause pain, andthe non- be dlscused is prampa, viz, these samskiras cently activate detrimental (attic) ones at least lead in epistemology, cha i, what constitutes, consciously or subliminally producing the ditection of liberation, even though valid knowledge of an object. Philosophy furter is, These ws then provoke they too must eventually be given up. and, of couse, scence-—s2mbhya, the action and reaction noted above, The phenomenon of non-detrimental after all, sees itself as dealing with ‘which in turn are recorded as sarhskaras, vpttis eventually undertaking their own physical reality—have as their goals the andthe cle continues. elimination wil be discussed more filly attainment of knowledge about realy, ‘Memories, in Hindu psychology, are . later on, but Vijfianabhiksu quotes the so itis standard in Hindu philosophical consieted to be vivid saslaras fiom Bhigavase Puntoa here to make the discourse for thinkers sate, what this lifetime, which are retrievable, point: “Other things [ic., the obstacles methods of attaining such knowledge while the notion of the subconscious to yoga] must be eliminated by sactva, of reality they accept as valid. The Yoga in Western psychology corresponds and satva is eliminated by sattva” School accepts three sources of receiving. to other, less retrievable sarhskaras, (XI.25.20) knowledge as valid, as docs the Sarhkhya perhaps from previous lives, which tradition (Sambhya KarikaTV; but other thestyofsriprueasnon-detrimenal, remain tent asubliinalimpesions. ECR ASPARTATE: | s beneficial (0 Sarhsarasals secoune for such things a he extra pramainas posted by other schools are considered by the Yoga school tobe variants of the pramagas mentioned here. NAMARDPA SPRING 2007 83philosophical schools accept differing mental impression, as if it were taking particular category shares the same rnumbers from one to six). The fist place within itself, indistinguishable qualities as other objects in the same ‘method of attaining knowledge listed from islf In actual fat, the impression category—qualites that are not shared by Pataijali is sense perception: we ean is imprinted on the ctta mind. by objects in different categories. He know something ro be true or valid if Vacaspatimisra raises a question gives the example ofthe moon and sar we experience ic through one or more of here. If the impression is imprinted which belong to the category of moving ‘ur senses—if we se it, smell it, couch on the mind, which, according to the objects because they are seen to move, it, hear it oF taste it. Satara notes metaphysics of yoga, isa totally separate but mountains belong to a category of that sense perception is placed first on entity from the purusa soul, then how immobile objects, because they have the lis of pramanas because the other is ic thatthe latter is aware of it? (Or, never been seen to move. Thus, if one pramanas are dependent on it, as will be as he puts it, fan axe cuts a Ahedira sees an unfamiliar mountain ot hill, one seen below (indeed, some philosophical tee, itis not a platya tee that is thereby can infer that i¢ will not move, because schools such as that ‘stemming from cur). In other words, ifan impression is other known objects in this category, the materialist Carvaka accept sense something that is made on the mind, hat is, all mountains and hills with perception asthe only pramana, arguing then how does it end up being made on which one is familar, do not move. that the other means of knowledge are the purusa? Here again, Vacaspatimiéra The more classic example of inference derived from i). introduces the analogy of the mirror. among Hindu logicians is chat fre can ‘Vyasa explains sense perception as It is the mind and intelligence that be inferred from the presence of smoke. being the state or condition of the take the form of the object as @ result Since wherever there is smoke, there is ‘mind, vrei, which apprehends both the of sense perception, not the soul. invariably fie eausing i, the presence of specificand generic natureof anexternal According to the “reflection” model of fire can be inferred upon the perception ‘object through the channels of the five awareness, consciousness is effected of smoke even if the actual fire itself senses The “generic” and “specific” in the intelligence due 0 proximity is not perceived. So one can say with nature Fobjectsare categories especially and then misidentifies itself with the assurance chat there must be fie on @ associated with one of the other six reflection. This reflection, in turn, is distant mountain, even if one cannot schools of Hinda philosophy noted altered according to the form assumed actually see the blaze itself, if one sees cearler, the Vaisesika School, and are _by the intelligence—just 2s a teflection clouds of smoke billowing forch from technical ways of attempting to analyze appears dirty ifthe mirror isdiry. Thus, it. Ie is in chis regard chat inference, physical reality. The generic nature of since the mind and intelligence have _anumdna, differs from the fst source of dog that one might happen to come taken the formof the objec in question, knowledge, praryatra, sense perception. upon, for example, is that it belongs to consciousness sees its own reflection as Pratyaksa requires that one actully sce the canine species; the specific nature containing that form. This corresponds the fre. In anumana the fie itself is not is that which demareates it from other to the analogy of the moon appearing actually seen, its presence is inferred _members ofthis generic category, that it rippled when reflected in rippling wates. from something else chat is perceived, is, say, a ginger Irish terrier (technically Accordingto the“non-reflection’ model, viz, smoke.* The principle here is that speaking, vita is whac differentiates awareness simply pervades the cicta just here must always be an absolute and ultimate entities such as the smallest as it pervades the body, misidentfjing invariable relationship (concomitant), particles of matter from each other, with theforms ofcira in chesamewayit between the thing infered, viz, the but Vyasa is using the term in a looser misidentifies withthe form ofthe body. fire, and che reason upon which the sense’). When one sees a particular dog, According o cither understanding, ic is inference is made, viz, the presence of the mind typically apprehends both this misidentifcation of the awareness smoke—in other words, wherever there its generic and specific natures, ‘This of purusa with the forms of the intellect is or has ever been smoke, there must apprehension is accomplished by the chat isthe essence of ignorance. ac all places and ar all times always be senses encountering a sense object and Moving on co the second pramana, or have been fire present as its cause relaying an impression of the object to source of receiving valid knowledge, with no exceptions. If these cont the cita mind, which forms a vr, or mentioned by Patafijali in this verse, are met, the inference is accepted 25 a impression, of the object. The purusa Vyasa defines logic (inference) as valid source of knowledge lif exceptions soul then becomes conscious of this the assumption that an object of ato the rule can be found, ie, instances The five senses ae hearing sight, smell, ate, and ouch. “In Vaiteika, all manifest realty can be broken down into seven basic categories, one of which is “substance” There ate nine differen rypes ‘of substances, che minutest particles of earth, water, fre, gas, and ether (mater, liquids, energy ga, space), the mind, the soul, time, and space. The "specific" aspect of one ofthese substances (vies, from which the school gests name) is that which distinguishes one substance fom another, which keeps particles, for example, separate and individual such char one can difereaciate between one molecule of earth and another, oF between one soul and another * Some schools of thought; however, hold chat anumana is nota separate source of knowiedge becaus tis predicated on sense perception — the smoke is seen, evn ifthe ie is not—and chu tia variant of pratyakga ther than an independent source of knowledge. 84 NAMAROPA ISSUEN®.6of smoke that do not have fire as their ‘cause, then the inference is invalid) Finally, cstimony.” the third source of valid knowledge accepted by Paral, is information through the medium of relaying of accurate words by a “trustworthy” person who has perceived or inferred the existence of an object, t0 someone who has not. “The words of such a reliable authority enter the ear and produce an image, vit, in the mind of the hearer that corresponds to the object experienced by the trustworthy person. The person receiving che information in this manner has neither personally experienced nor inferred the existence of the object of knowledge, but valid knowledge of the object is nonetheless achieved, which distinguishes this source of knowledge from the eo discussed previously. Vyasa describes a “eeustworthy” person as someone whose statements cannot be contradicted. Vijianabhiksu adds to this thae a reliable or trustworthy person is one who is free from defects such as illusion, lzines, deceit, dullwicedness, and so forth. The most importane category of this source of valid knowledge in the form of verbal testimony is divine scripture. Since scriptures are umered by cwustworthy persons in the form of enlightened sages and divine beings, their status as trustworthy sources of knowledge are especially valuable, In order to elaborate on this, Vacaspatimifra raises the issue as to how sacred scriprures can be considered valid given thar all accurate verbal knowledge must itself originally come either from perception or inference (hence other schools do not even consider them separate sources of knowledge, as mentioned above); but scriptures deal with certin subjects that no human being has either seen or inferred (such as the existence of heavenly realms, et.) Te is for his reazon that some schools also reject scripture ar a valid source of knowledge. Along the same lines a indicted inthe previous footnote, such schools hold thar scriprue, ro, is simply an extension ot subcategory of pratyaa, sense perception, The focus ofthe Mimarhst, howeves, was fn the sripeurs pertaining o ritual, che Brahmana texts, as opposed to the mystico- philosophical Upanisad texts, chat were of inerest ro the Vedanta In response to this, he argues thac the from scriprute in his treatise (in contrast truths of scripture have been perceived withthe Vetta Steras which are almost by God, Ivara; thus divine scripture, entirely composed of references from the too, is based on perception. And God, Upanisad:). Whil quips Ramananda Sarasvat, is surely a occasion, such asin his arguments against eustworthy person! certain Buddhist views (1V.14-24), clearly Differentschoolsofthoughtprioritized almost his entice thrust throughout the different pramanas. As we have seen with Sumas is on pratyakga as the Vijpiznabbiksa’s comments on the fist verse and elsewhere in the text, the Yoga School prioritizes pratyaksa, direct ‘experience, as che highest pramana, The Nyaya School _ prioritizes anumana, dedicating itself for centuries co refining categories of logic, and the Vedanta School, agama (Vedanta Satras 11.3), dedicating itself co the interpretationandsystematization ofthe Upanisad)and the Vedanta Sitras derived from them (the Mimarhst School, coo, prioritized gama, and became especially asociated with developing ulkimate form of knowledge. Anwmana and agama are forms of knowledge bu mnediate form, che ruth of which are indirect, where the yoga tration bases its chime to author itaiveness on diet, personal experience (A9).te hermeneutics—the methods of scriptural interpretation’). While Pataijali accepts agama as a valid source of knowledge, one can note that he does not quote cor even imply single verse