Patañjali's sutras

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namaste


I thought to start a conversation on the various sūtra-s of atañjali-s yogadarśana (the yoga sūtra-s of patañjali) other then yama and niyama, which we have an abundance of HDF posts.

There is great wisdom that is offered. But why did Patañjali-ji talk in stitches ( sūtra ) ? Simply to minimize clutter as I see it. Words tend to cause mischief when used in abundance i.e. multiple interpretations and the like. So, Patañjali and others took to the method of brevity-in-truth.

Let me offer an idea or two this is based upon the 2nd ūtra ,samādhi-pāda ( 1st chapter,). Patañjali-muni defines yoga in the following manner:
yogaś citta-vṛtti-nirodhaḥ

yogaś - process of yoking; union from 'yuj'
citta - as a noun it is thinking , reflecting , imagining , thought; some put this as active mind
vṛtti - ' rolling , or rolling down' i.e. patterning, turnings, movements.
nirodhaḥ - suppression , destruction ; some prefer stilling, cessation, restriction

My view
Yoga is the stilling (nirodhaḥ) of the active (vṛtti) mind (citta).

What others say:

Yoga happens when there is stilling (in the sense of continual and vigilant watchfulness) of the movement of thought - without which there is no movement. Svāmi Venkatesānanda (śiṣya of Svāmi Śivānanda)

Yoga occurs when the field of consciousness is liberated from its patterned spinnings. Then the mind rests in clarified stillness devoid of any conditioned bias - Śakti Das (a.k.a. sahaj yogi)

Yoga is the suppression of the modifications of the mind. - Yogāchārya Svāmi Hariharānanda Āraṇa

Why is this fruitful to do? the next 2 sūtra-s tell us why... Let me offer them in very plain words that I find appealing.

- stilling of the active mind - 2nd sūtra
- ( allows the ) SELF to stay/abide in its true, original unperturbed form - 3rd sūtra
- Otherwise it adopts the form of the mind's activities - 4th sūtra

IMHO one practicing various techniques that experiences this silence, would appreciate the idea offered in sūtra's 2 through 4.

This Self is so infinite, so nimble, it easily adapts to any 'container'. Just as a fluid takes the shape of its container then one says ' Oh this Self must be the glass, or the jar or the ern'. Yet this Self is
so flexible any possible configuration becomes a perfect fit each time.

So this 4th sūtra helps us better understand this notion: The Self (Awareness itself) takes on the form of the mind - it's thoughts,
observations, dialog, etc. Why so?
In my opinion because of its innocence. This Awareness is so much apart of us that we do not see it. How can we? Awareness is the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear. That is, it does the perceiving says the upaniṣad-s. That is why there is so much attention to nirodhaḥ. If we give the mind a chance to settle down and just be, then what shines though is awareness itself (Self).

praṇām

[harekrishna]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~


Let me offer an idea or two this is based upon the 2nd ūtra ,samādhi-pāda ( 1st chapter,). Patañjali-muni defines yoga in the following manner:
yogaś citta-vṛtti-nirodhaḥ

yogaś - process of yoking; union from 'yuj'
citta - as a noun it is thinking , reflecting , imagining , thought; some put this as active mind
vṛtti - ' rolling , or rolling down' i.e. patterning, turnings, movements.
nirodhaḥ - suppression , destruction ; some prefer stilling, cessation, restrictionMy view
Yoga is the stilling (nirodhaḥ) of the active (vṛtti) mind (citta).

praṇām


Yajvan Jee -
I find, this definition of Yoga to be quite deep. In this - the words Yoga and Vritti (disturbance, that you call active) is fairly well understood. It is Chitta that confuses me.
Metaphorically, let us say that water in the pond is Chitta. What we observe are the reflections of existence. Vrittis are the waves, the disturbances, that blur this vision. Simply speaking, an agitated mind does not see, hear, observe the whole. Yoga helps us diminish, and remove the Vrittis, and help us observe better.
Question that I have, what actually is Chitta? Which layer of our existence sits on it?
Yoga Vasistha talks about - Bhutakasha, Chittakasha, chidakasha. Is it the middle Akasha in this? If this is so, how does it bring about the union?
How can I person observe own Chitta? When I close my eyes, and let us say thoughts die down, is it Chittakasha that is being observed?

HariH Om!

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast� harekrishna.


Yajvan Jee -
Question that I have, what actually is Chitta? Which layer of our existence sits on it?
Yoga Vasistha talks about - Bhutakasha, Chittakasha, chidakasha. Is it the middle Akasha in this? If this is so, how does it bring about the union?

How can I person observe own Chitta? When I close my eyes, and let us say thoughts die down, is it Chittakasha that is being observed?
HariH Om!

Much can be said about this .
citta is rooted in cit - is a 'piling up'. It is considered consciousness, yet awareness ( applied Consciousness) is the definition I appreciate. as in ṛta-c�t - 'knowing' . There is is active knowing, and pure knowing. There is active consciousness ( awareness) and there is pure consciousness, Being, some too call pure Awareness.
And we note that cit is rooted in ci - to collect , gather together , accumulate , acquire for one's self.

Yet how does one get to a definition of Pure Consciousness? The cit in the feminine gender is defined as pure Thought a.k.a. Pure Consciousness, Pure Awareness a.k.a brahman.
And this idea of applied consciousness ? Consider c�tati or c�ttā to perceive , fix the mind upon , attend to , be attentive , observe , take notice of i.e. we are using consciousness as 'awareness' - being aware of.


We are not done discussing this part, and more inspection and discussion is needed to bring out more light on this matter. More will be added on your most appropriate questions you offer. Various posts on citta are available on this subject:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3539&highlight=chitta (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3539&highlight=chitta)

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=4470&page=2&highlight=chitta (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=4470&page=2&highlight=chitta)

That said, let me offer the following:

Regarding experience of this citta, in one's yoga there are two flavors:

saṃpraj�āta (saṃ+pra+j�āta�) samādhi - the mind is not fully absorbed ( many like to call this not fully 'arrested')
And therefore sātatya� gamane � - or who comes and goes, always in movement.
asaṃpraj�āta (a+saṃ+pra+j�āta�) samādhi - the mind is fully absorbed , and some call objectless samādhi Vaśiṣṭa speaking to king karaka ( of janaka's race) - mahābhārata , śānti parva ( or parvan division or section). This IMHO is equal to asaṃpraj�āta:

When men of knowledge, conversant with the rules of yoga, become as fixed (steady) as a stake of wood, and as immovable as a mountain then they are said to be in yoga. When one does not hear , and smell, and taste, and see ; when one is not conscious of any touch; when one's mind becomes perfectly free from every purpose; when one's mind becomes perfectly free from every thought, then is one called the wise to be in perfect yoga.

praṇām

words

sātatya सातत्य - consistency, uninterruptedness
gamane or gama गम - going, marching, flightiness, going away from

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté harekrishna (et.al),

you mention,

Yoga Vasistha talks about - Bhutakasha, Chittakasha, chidakasha. Is it the middle Akasha in this? If this is so, how does it bring about the union?
How can I person observe own Chitta? When I close my eyes, and let us say thoughts die down, is it Chittakasha that is being observed?

If we use Yogavasișțharāmāyaṇa, also known as the Yoga Vasișțha, as our reference for this conversation cid-ākāśa is infinite consciousness. So if you have your eyes closed and ask, am I viewing this cid-ākāśa
the answer is yes-and-no.

Yes, because all consciousness is part and parcel of this cid-ākāśa. Yet the answer is 'no' because you are localizing it by evaluating, saying ' is this it ?'. That makes the infinite finite.
Here's is the pickle. If you are looking to see this cid-ākāśa as an object to experience how can you because it (cid-ākāśa) is also the perceiver. It supplies the awareness as the tool for you to experience life. 'Awareness' becomes sight, smell, taste, feel, etc. as it is applied to the senses. Another form of IT is the intellect. See my point?


So this expansiveness of consciousness is experienced by being it. Settling the mind down to such an extent that one is in asaṃprajñāta (a+saṃ+pra+jñāta¹) samādhi - the mind is fully absorbed , and some call objectless samādhi. In this case there are no boundaries and this cid-ākāśa is experienced on its level of unbounded awareness.

But the caution again is it is not some other part of you looking at this unbounded awareness because the looker ( Some call the seer) Is the SAME as what is being seen. There is no 2 - perceiver and perceived are one.

Two points of discussion
A few things need to be discussed... how does one experience this without the eyes being closed? We must note this is possible and it is the intent of the śāstra-s to discuss / explain this level of functioning.
Hence - yoga. Patañjali’s yogadarśana (the yoga sūtra-s of patañjali) when exercised and taught by a capable instructor ( guru, muni, etc) is designed to groom the nervous system to function in this manner. That is, to have daily activity without losing the silence of the SELF. This comes with His grace.

The other point we must consider:
The upaniṣads say the Self realizes itSelf to itSelf. We find this reiewed in the kaṭha and muṇḍaka upaniṣads. So what to do if this happens , what are we suppose to do? Prepare.
We prepare the soil just like the farmer does so a rich harvest can take place. We are that soil. Our actions are the seeds we drop in. The water is our behavior. Our meditations is our yajñya. The sprout that begins is one's more rested composure and point of view, more relaxed and insightful. The fertilizer we use is the knowledge from the śāstra-s and āgama-s.

The bṛhadaraṇyaka upaniṣad gives us some advice as yajñavalkya-muni speaks to his wife:
O' maitreyi this Self is to be properly heard of; to be properly cogitated upon and to be realized in meditation.

Yajñavalkya-muni points to 3 things worthy for this preparation:

śravaṇa - the act of hearing or 'that which is heard' = śruti iti śravaṇāt , 'because it is so heard or revealed'
manana - thinking , reflection , thought , intelligence , understanding
nidīdhyāsana - or nidī + dhyāna + āsana = to shine down upon + meditation + seat or posture.
Hence the posture of meditation that brings one light and luste, luminance, brillance.

To return back to Patañjali’s yogadarśana his attention is on knowledge and experience yet IMHO it is greatly focused on this nidīdhyāsana approach . We will talk more about this in a future post:
dhyāna, dhāraṇa, samādhi and saṁyama.

praṇām

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté
I offered the 2nd sūtra of patañjali’s yogadarśana :



yogaś citta-vṛtti-nirodhaḥ
yogaś - process of yoking; union from 'yuj'
citta - as a noun it is thinking , reflecting , imagining , thought; some put this as active mind
vṛtti - ' rolling , or rolling down' i.e. patterning, turnings, movements.
nirodhaḥ - suppression , destruction ; some prefer stilling, cessation, restriction

My view
Yoga is the stilling (nirodhaḥ) of the active (vṛtti) mind (citta).

Before we can advance on this matter, one must ask,
What are the other conditions/states of the mind that can occur in-or-out of one's sādhana (meditation, upāya, etc) ?

kṣipta - " scattered " , distraction or absence of mind ; thrown , cast , sent , dispatched , dismissed
mūḍha - stupefied , bewildered , perplexed , confused , uncertain or at a loss about
vikṣipta - sent , dispatched i.e. being dispersed in different places
ekāgra - one-pointed , having one point , fixing one's attention upon one point or object , closely attentive , intent , absorbed
nirodhaḥ - suppression , destruction ; some prefer stilling, cessation, restriction Lets review the 4, the 5th nirodhaḥ I think has been reviewed substantially.

This kṣipta state is that of much distraction, absence of attention, the mind flies here and there on a whim, a smell
a sight, a sound. There is maximum fluctuations that exist in one's thought process and the ability to settle down
is a challenge.
Another state is that of mūḍha - bewildered , and a state of confusion. Here too the mind is challenged for settling down.
Some say the mind may be stupefied with family issues, money, the pursuit of wealth and hence the ability to forgo these thoughts for subtler notions is a struggle.The remaining 3 will be addressed in the next post - as the mind begins to gain discipline ( but not in full) with vikṣipta

praṇām

references
My reference for this knowledge:

patañjali’s yogadarśana by śakti das (a.k.a. sahaj yogi)
Yoga Philosophy of patañjali by saṁkhya yogāchārya svāmi hariharānanda āraṇa (Founder of the Kāpila Monastery);
Personal experiences, study , etc.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


Lets review the 4, the 5th nirodhaḥ I think has been reviewed substantially.

This kṣipta state is that of much distraction, absence of attention, the mind flies here and there on a whim, a smell
a sight, a sound. There is maximum fluctuations that exist in one's thought process and the ability to settle down
is a challenge.
Another state is that of mūḍha - bewildered , and a state of confusion. Here too the mind is challenged for settling down.
Some say the mind may be stupefied with family issues, money, the pursuit of wealth and hence the ability to forgo these thoughts for subtler notions is a struggle. The 3rd condition is vikṣipta - sent , dispatched i.e. being dispersed in different places. We need to note that this 3rd condition is right in the middle ( madhya) of the 5. Two below it and two above it. This is significant as it indicates the type of condition. The mind at times can be absorbed and calm, and other times not. The mind goes from calm to restless.

Many who practice their sādhana ,meditation, upāya are familiar with this experience. One can be at deep peace and steadiness within their meditation. In activity some of that steadiness is infused into one's actions, but still there is restlessness that returns. It is from this stage that one can advance to more steadiness. Like adding dye to a sheet. The dye is added then put in the sun to dry - some of the dye fades with the brightness of the sun. Like that is altering between one's meditation then going into the sun ( activity) takes some of the color away, yet the dye begins to stabilize over time and 'stays-fast' in time. One then is able to proceed to the next level or condition:
ekāgra - one-pointed , having one point , fixing one's attention upon one point or object , closely attentive , intent , absorbed .

This one pointedness in meditation is called out by patañjali-muni where one thought, idea, sound, mantra remains in the aspirants awareness. When it fades it is still replaced by the same thought, idea, sound, etc. - the same thought arises, hence consistency remains. It is said when one-pointedness is effortless it leads to saṃprajñāta (saṃ+pra+jñāta¹) samādhi - the mind is not fully absorbed ( many like to call this not fully 'arrested') yet progress has been made.

We have talked of the 5th condition that of nirodhaḥ - suppression , destruction ; some prefer stilling, cessation, restriction .
The mind has been considered in an arrested state, absorbed. Randomness of thoughts, scattering, etc. are no longer active, one is absorbed in yoga. This some call nirvīja or nir + vīja; nir = nis = ' without' , 'destitute of' , 'free from' + vīja = bīja = seed, any germ , element , primary cause or principle. Hence the mind is without see or germ.

But what does that mean? It ( the mind) is calm, silent, steady with no 'seed' to sprout kṣipta - ' scattered' , mūḍha - 'stupefied , bewildered , perplexed'. Some say the mind is no more. Others say it is totally devoid of any afflictions called kliṣṭa-s i.e. torment , afflicted , distressed. The mind is free from the 'seeds of disturbance' and hence from the 3 guna-s.


When this is in total bloom ( as some can go in and out of this state and have a flavor of it) it is considered kaivalya in this yogadarśana
and also in saṁkhya philosophy. It is defined as emancipation, perfect isolation , detachment from all other connections , detachment of the soul from matter or further trans-migrations.

The Self resides in itSelf. Note there is another way of spelling this word kaivalya, as kevala. It means alone , only , mere , sole , one , excluding others and also the absolute unity of spirit i.e. absorbed in the Self.

praṇām

[harekrishna]

hariḥ oṁ


citta is rooted in cit - is a 'piling up'. It is considered consciousness, yet awareness ( applied Consciousness) is the definition I appreciate. as in ṛta-c�t - 'knowing' . There is is active knowing, and pure knowing. There is active consciousness ( awareness) and there is pure consciousness, Being, some too call pure Awareness.
And we note that cit is rooted in ci - to collect , gather together , accumulate , acquire for one's self.



HariH Om!
I went through the older threads, and there is a lot of information. This is excellent. My understanding also improves with this. Here is a POV.

Yoga Vasishtha says -
चित्ताकाशम चिदाकाशम आकाशम च तृतीयकम ।
द्वाभयम शून्यतरम विधि चिदाकाशम वराणने ॥
Swami Venkateshanand translates this as "There are three types of spaces - the physical space (bhutakasha), the psychological space (chittakasha) and the consciousness space (chidakasha). Of these most subtle is the infinite space of consciousness"

I want to stress the difference between chitta ( चित्त ) and chit(चित) . All existence is vibrations. Some vibrations are gross such as matter, while some are yet finer such as light rays. All these vibrations are occuring in a field (called Akasha). Among the three akasha, the existence in physical space is easy to see - that of body and prana. Conscious space is infinite and not describable. Gita talks about the wonders that one has with relation to this space. All duality ends here, the experience is that of wonder, pleasure.

There is the middle space - the psychological space. This is important because it connects the two fields. In this space, lie the inner vibrations (अंत: करण ) which are mind, intellect and ego. (मन, बुद्धि , अहंकार)
The vibration in this space is due to Vaasana and Sanskara, triggered by the experiences of the Indriyas. These vibrations are Vritties. Yoga so succintly puts it to stop it. But it is not easy. Because if this were to stop, one immediately becomes a Janaka, not affected by the duality of the existence.

Hare Krishna

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast�


HariH Om!
I Yoga Vasishtha says -
चित्ताकाशम चिदाकाशम आकाशम च तृतीयकम ।
द्वाभयम शून्यतरम विधि चिदाकाशम वराणने ॥
Swami Venkateshanand translates this as "There are three types of spaces - the physical space (bhutakasha), the psychological space (chittakasha) and the consciousness space (chidakasha). Of these most subtle is the infinite space of consciousness"

I want to stress the difference between chitta ( चित्त ) and chit(चित) . All existence is vibrations.

well said.

praṇām

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

This post brings out some of the knowledge found in sūtra-s 8 & 48.

I have wondered about the phrase ' that makes sense'. Let me explain.
When we say that makes sense it infers in a colloquial way ( a familiar style ) that something is acceptable in logic, being reasonable or even comprehensible. Why do we align this with the senses i.e. perception done via the ears, nose, eyes, hands , etc. ?

The senses are the transmitters of the world around us. They in turn deliver what they perceive to the mind, intellect and heart. It is the role of the intellect (buddhi) to discriminate, reason, judge or discern the data/information that is presented to it, the senses do not discern anything, so how can they 'make sense'?

Here is my point - what 'makes sense' depends on how much one's intellect has developed, how much it (buddhi) has been honed, shaped, exercised or developed. That is, how viveka (discrimination) without vimala ( without stain) has blossomed in one's awareness.This viveka faculty distinguishes and classifies things, knowledge, perception according to their real properties.

Before this viveka is fully developed perceptions are filtered, influenced by likes, dislikes, prejudices, that taint clear understanding.
Patañjali-muni calls this out in the 8th sūtra as viparyaya -transposition , change , alteration , inverted order or succession , opposite or false knowledge. They say this viparyaya ( filters as I call 'em) has 5 parts :

tamas or mental darkness , ignorance , illusion , error
asmitā ego or excessive ego
moha , infatuation , delusion , bewilderment , perplexity , distraction
mahāmoha - extreme attachment
tāmisra ' nightwalker', a rākṣasa or ~the fear of death~Look at the challenge we have with viparyaya-s . How can we really see and comprehend clearly i.e. truth. Some call these viparyaya-s kleśa-s (pain , affliction , distress , pain from disease , anguish) and we can see why.

Yet there is a state of ultimate discriminative knowledge called viveka-khyāti ( khyāti =renown, fame , celebrity + viveka = discrimination).
It is talked about as ṛtambharā prajñā - luminous wisdom that is carried out , brought out, some may say sung out. It is knowledge with no hint of viparyaya ( the filters). The 48th sūtra reads this way:

ṛtambharā tatra prajñā
Supreme Truth (ṛtambharā) inner wisdom (prajñā) rises, and prevails in that place (tatra)
That is, a level of consciousness that only sees the truth. The wise also call this full of unalloyed Truth. One's awareness holds truth, sees truth, with no trace of misconception.

This ṛtambharā happens when one gains proficiency; This proficiency can be called pure consciousness, yet the technical term used by patañjali-muni is nirvichāra¹. Just think how practical this is for the individual to exercise this? I can only think what good can come from this in being a teacher, a councilor, an advisor, scientist, etc.

praṇām

words
1. nirvichāra - If the reader has interest, this is the subject matter found in Chapter 1 (samādhi pada and is part of 4 samāpati's or engrossments of the mind).

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


I wrote here: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=46589&postcount=12

Then vyāsa-ji says the following - engulfed within the dharma of ahiṁsā is every other duty and observance. He who forswears ( swears off) the religion of injury (called tikśnaṁ tanuṁ¹) succeeds in attaining mokṣa whence is the assurance of harmlessness to all creatures.

Within the mahābhārata the ṛṣi tulādhāra ( tulā+dhāraḥ - who possesses or upholds balance, even-ness ) talked of ahiṁsā. He says, there is no duty superior to the duty of abstention from injuring other creatures. Of all gifts the assurance of harmlessness to creatures is the highest ( point of merit).

The benefit here as I read it is very profound on a few levels, as tulādhāra-ji suggests the following:
They that are seeking ordinary happiness practice this duty of universal harmlessness for the sake of fame; they that are truly skilled practice the same for the sake of attaining brahma. What ever fruit one enjoys by tapas or by yajña or practicing liberality (giving, generosity and broad-mindedness), by speaking the truth and by heeding wisdom may all be had by practicing the dharma of ahiṁsā.


Now what is most interesting to me is within patañjali’s yogadarśana, the 3rd chapter called vibhūti pāda, calls out various siddhi-s or perfections. He calls out in the 23rd ( some may have this as the 24th ) sūtra:

maitryādiśu balāni
maitrī = friendliness + ādiśu = aim or intent ( some say 'and the others') + balāni = powers, strengths

This formula¹ says the power (balāni) of friendliness is the intent (ādiśu) by practicing saṁyama¹ on friendliness ( maitrī ) and others (ādiśu).
This 'and others' means other virtues like compassion, goodwill, harmlessness (ahiṁsā ) etc. Note that since this is a sūtra the words 'by practicing saṁyama' is implied
as this is defined in the initial instruction of this 3rd chapter itself.

Hence one can increase the quality of universal harmlessness and friendliness offered to all creatures via ones sādhana, in this case patañjali’s yogadarśana where
he calls out the qualities of yama and niyama as part of the sādhana of yoga. It is a very profound and far reaching approach to improving society overall .

praṇām

words

the 23rd sūtra is a formula , and is practiced via the approach called saṁyama. There are multiple HDF posts regarding saṁyama, yet let me offer a POV.

saṁyama (संयम) defined by Monier Williams Dictionary is considered holding together , restraint , control; concentration of mind. Yet I find this a 'clinical' definition, devoid of practice or experience. The sense of control maybe mis-leading to many. The word control comes with the following: dominate, command, to hold in check and more extremely to eliminate or prevent the flourishing or spread ( like in controlling a forest fire perhaps).
I not a fan of the word 'control' as it suggests effort. With effort expended saṁyama becomes a fleeting idea that one does not capture. This saṁyama is more towards the notion of holding together, gently, then 'restraining or controlling' . It's a very delicate thing that happens when practiced.
If I had to define it i.e. the Monier Williams Dictionary offer, I would not do much better then their entry, but would add one operative word, formula. This saṁyama is the formula for (gently and with minimum effort) holding together dhāraṅā, dhyāna, and samādhi within the field of consciousness.

[Skull]

It is helpful (to me anyway) to have a translation visible online as we go through the text.

Swami J. is a disciple of the late Swami Rama and his website is very good on the Yoga Sutras.

Here is the link: http://www.swamij.com/yoga-sutras.htm

By-the-by, I noticed that Swami Rama has some Yoga Sutra lectures on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/swamiramahimalayas

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

I wrote in post 9 above:



Before this viveka is fully developed perceptions are filtered, influenced by likes, dislikes, prejudices, that taint clear understanding.
Patañjali-muni calls this out in the 8th sūtra as viparyaya -transposition , change , alteration , inverted order or succession , opposite or false knowledge. They say this viparyaya ( filters as I call 'em) has 5 parts :

tamas or mental darkness , ignorance , illusion , error
asmitā ego or excessive ego
moha , infatuation , delusion , bewilderment , perplexity , distraction
mahāmoha - extreme attachment
tāmisra ' nightwalker', a rākṣasa or ~the fear of death~


There too are another ways that errors and blemishes can arise. From a naiyāyaka school of reasoning ( nyāya¹ darśana) knowledge (pramāṇa¹) they say is gained in 4 ways.

perception
inference
comparrison
testimony

Lets take a look¹ at these 4 and see how they too can be challenged by viparyaya .

Perception - I view something and say it to be true because I see it. Yet I have the doṣa of color blindness and cannot perceive certain colors - hence I do not see truly.
Inference

the cause and effect - I see black clouds coming my way and assume it will rain shortly , and it does not.
the effect to the cause - I see black smoke arising from the other side of a mountain and infer that is must be fire; yet on further inspection it
is a dust storm, no fire.
what is commonly seen - I am walking behind a person of tall stature, yet am 10 meters from this person. By the looks of the arms, they look
muscular. The hair in the back of the head is short, the person is wearing pants. I assume by what I commonly see men wearing and looking
this person too must be male. Yet upon catching up to the person, it is a female by observing her face, gesture and facial makeup.


Comparison - I pick up a 1 meter square box and it weighs about 1 kilo. I see another box of the exact same size, shape, color, taped the same way, and
yet when I try and pick it up I cannot as it weighs in about 10 kilo's.
Testimony - a person on the witness stand swears they saw Abba cross the street at 10: 30 AM to which he entered a shop, held it up and robbed the proprietor.
Yet another eye-witness said Abba entered the shop to stop the crime that was in process.

fear - I walk into a dimly lit room and feel timid. I see a snake on the floor and run out. I testify to a friend outside that there is a snake in the room
and if he would remove it for me. He enters the room, turns on the light and sees nothing but a piece of rope in the corner of the room.
scriptures - a true source of knowledge. Yet I read it and completely mistake the knowledge for something else. The source is right and perfect yet my comprehension is flawed.


We can see that viparyaya can be alive and well in one's daily activities.

praṇām

words

Any errors in my examples can only be assigned to me. No author has suggested these examples, hence all blemishes are of my making.
nyāya -that into which a thing goes back i.e. an original type , standard , method ; named such as because it ' goes into' all subjects physical and metaphysical according to a method; It is suggested this nyāya darśana is tightly aligned with another branch called vaiśeṣikadarśana
pramāṇa - a means of acquiring pramā or certain knowledge.
As an fyi in vedānta the are 6 ways:

pratyakṣa , perception by the senses
anumāna , inference
upamāna , analogy or comparison
śabda or āpta-vacana , verbal authority , revelation
an-upalabdhi or abhāva-pratyakṣa , non-perception or negative proof
arthāpatti , inference from circumstances
As mentioned the nyāya admits only 4 , excluding the last two mentioned above


sāṃkhya views only 3 ways i.e. pratyakṣa , anumāna and śabda
viparyaya -transposition , change , alteration , inverted order or succession , opposite or false knowledge

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

So, now we two maco-types of perception.

laukika - worldly , terrestrial , belonging to or occurring in ordinary life , common , usual , customary
alaukika - not current in the world , uncommon


With laukika, perception is blemished. Even with 20-20 vision one does not see clearly . Why so ? viparyaya¹ .
With alaukika, perception or cognition one sees clearly. It is talked about as ṛtambharā prajñā¹ - luminous wisdom that is carried out , brought out, some may say sung out. This is what is developed within patañjali’s yogadarśana (the yoga sūtra-s of patañjali) .

praṇām

words

viparyaya - see post 9 and 12 above.
ṛtambharā prajñā - see post 9.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


we two maco-types of perception:
laukika - worldly , terrestrial , belonging to or occurring in ordinary life , common , usual , customary
alaukika - not current in the world , uncommon

With laukika, perception is blemished. Even with 20-20 vision one does not see clearly . Why so ? viparyaya¹ .
With alaukika, perception or cognition one sees clearly. It is talked about as ṛtambharā prajñā - luminous wisdom that is carried out , brought out, some may say sung out.

One day a young man called ātmāśraya¹ walked into the forest and wished to see a gavaya¹ or wild ox. He came upon a man and asked, I wish to view a gavaya but I do not know what they look
look like. Do you? The man said I have heard they look just like a cow, and off he went.

The man with this mental picture of a cow in his mind continues to walk through the woods hoping to encounter a cow-like creature known as the gavaya. He came upon a man sitting by a river and asked have you seen a gavaya in this part of the forest? The man said no, not of late, but I am not exactly certain what this creature looks like, I was told it looks like a deer.

So, ātmāśraya continued his wandering and came upon a man, who he asked the same thing. Can you tell me where I may find a gavaya, I wish to know this type of being. The man said yes, I can tell you of this gavaya, I know of it. I will describe it for you intimately and I will bring you to the herd of these beings, yet in the end I cannot see for you. Will this meet with your pleasure dear boy? The boy said this will bring satisfaction to my wondering.
The man, of clear vision outlined the salient features, behaviors, and qualities of this gavaya. The boy ātmāśraya asked many questions to his hearts content. Yet better questions and more insightful conversation began after the boy viewed the gavaya with his own eyes. The man who ātmāśraya called yogāya-ji¹ taught the boy upon his request all that he knew regarding this animal-being.

What are the lessons here? It is of upamāna and śabdha-pramāṇa.

This upamāna is comparison , resemblance , analogy and śabdha-pramāṇa is testimony;
śabdha-pramāṇa is śabdha = sound, the right word , correct expression + pramāṇa = a correct notion , right perception or testimony, evidence = knowledge (pramā -right measure , true knowledge)

The first two people that ātmāśraya met gave the best information they had but it fell short. They did not have direct experience, yet offered upamāna i.e. cow, deer comparisons.
Their testimony was flawed i.e. laukika¹, perception is blemished. Yet when ātmāśraya met yogāya-ji his knowledge was not flawed and can be considered unflawed (alaukika).

This is what we wish to converse with as much as possible , śabdha-pramāṇa, right knowledge that is infallible. We do not have this infallibility on HDF as yet. We all are here to help the best we can yet our vision (including mine) is not to the level of ṛtambharā prajñā - luminous wisdom that is carried out , brought out, some may say sung out. This is what is developed within patañjali’s yogadarśana (the yoga sūtra-s of patañjali) .

Hence the notion then is we offer the best we can with the best intentions. We offer the knowledge based upon śāstra-s as often as possible, or direct personal experience if that aligns with the knowledge. Yet we are all still learning , no?

For some that had this direct experience of listening to the wise from their lips are fortunate indeed. Others may not have had this option.
So it seems the best we can do is remain open to the idea and notion of finding this muni that may assist us. It seems to me studying the śāstra-s, the āgama-s the best we can is worthy of merit. This study also includes the conversations on HDF with the notion that the final word on truth may be offered here but not comprehended to the full level of one's ability.

praṇām

words

ātmāśraya - dependence - one that approaches the self for protection , asylum , refuge , protection
yogāya-ji - yogāya = to be changed into religious contemplation or devotion + ji = word or respect given.
śraya - approaching for protection , asylum , refuge , protection
gavaua is a species of oxen yet some writers have used this word for a species of deer
viparyaya - see post 9 and 12 above.
ṛtambharā prajñā- see post 9.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

from post 9 above,



Can you tell me where I may find a gavaya, I wish to know this type of being. The man said yes, I can tell you of this gavaya, I know of it.
I will describe it for you intimately and I will bring you to the herd of these beings, yet in the end I cannot see for you. Will this meet with your pleasure dear boy? The boy said this will bring satisfaction to my wondering.

What do you think is the significance of yogāya-ji informing ātmāśraya that he cannot see for him? Any POV's on this matter?

praṇām

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namaste





Let me offer an idea or two this is based upon the 2nd ūtra ,samādhi-pāda ( 1st chapter,). Patañjali-muni defines yoga in the following manner:
yogaś citta-vṛtti-nirodhaḥ

yogaś - process of yoking; union from 'yuj'
citta - as a noun it is thinking , reflecting , imagining , thought; some put this as active mind
vṛtti - ' rolling , or rolling down' i.e. patterning, turnings, movements.
nirodhaḥ - suppression , destruction ; some prefer stilling, cessation, restriction

My view
Yoga is the stilling (nirodhaḥ) of the active (vṛtti) mind (citta).
If we look at this one sūtra (yogaścittavṛttinirodhaḥ), the one word that has not sat well with me is nirodhaḥ. Why is that ? It is because the prefix 'nir' is another way of writing 'nis'. This 'nis' too can be written 'nir' but also niḥ , niś , niṣ , and nī.

If we look at this word 'nis' it means ' away from'; 'out of' , 'without' . And the end of the word nirodhaḥ is nirodhaḥ . dhaḥ or 'dha' which means the following:

holding , possessing , having
bestowing , granting , causing
placing , putting

So, if we look at nirodhaḥ from this POV we have holding (dha) the moving mind (or citta-vṛtti ) or being without (nis) mind (or citta-vṛtti ).

One more word too needs to be polished., that of yogaś. We know yoga is union and this makes perfect sense. Yet too we can look at yogaś as yogas and this is defined as 'meditation'.

Now we have an other meaning albeit tangent and applicable to the 1st offered , this sūtra (yogaścittavṛttinirodhaḥ) can now mean :
meditation (yogaś) is holding or being without (nirodhaḥ) the movement of the mind (cittavṛttini).

Why mention this ? Because many-an-author take nirodhaḥ as suppression , destruction ; restriction. It suggests a more aggressive or deeply disciplined approach then I think patañjali-ji intended , based upon my personal experience.

iti śivaṁ

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
svāgata (hello)

Revisiting the very first post,


· yogaś - process of yoking; union from 'yuj'
· citta - as a noun it is thinking , reflecting , imagining , thought; some put this as active mind
· vṛtti - ' rolling , or rolling down' i.e. patterning, turnings, movements.
· nirodhaḥ - suppression , destruction ; some prefer stilling, cessation, restriction

My view
Yoga is the stilling (nirodhaḥ) of the active (vṛtti) mind (citta).
If one critically reviews this one sūtra we can find just how insightful it is...it takes a ‘razor’s edge’ in one’s discernment to ‘capture’ the idea within one’s own personal experience. It took me quite some time to ‘get’ this – that is, to comprehend it properly. For others it could be in an instant ; others may take a period of time, and still for others may not as yet have that discernment¹ to ‘capture’ this idea in themselves. But first one needs to be told of it, AND be aware of it before any capturing can occur.

Within this string and another ( http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?14214-A-bit-more-light-on-yoga ) I offered some very granular information and knowledge. This offer will be consumed by the intellect but it is important to find this in one's self, within their direct personal experience. So what is it? Let’s begin.

The sūtra says this: yogaś citta-vṛtti-nirodhaḥ
The only term I wish to literally point one’s attention to is vṛtti - ' rolling , or rolling down' i.e. patterning, turnings, movements of mind; many translate this term as ‘fluctuation’. It is a reasonable translation. This ~fluctuation~ is some bubbling-up of a thought or even feeling, even an impression that comes to you with or without a label of identification on it. They come and go all day long, wave after wave they ‘roll’ in.

When these occur ( these thoughts & feelings) we come to associate them as if they were our own self and we refer to them as ‘I’ . We think ‘ I’ had this thought. The thoughts come and go yet for some reason we think that ‘I’ had them, but in fact they were just ‘fluctuations’ that occur, some call mental modifications. Try it yourself. Watch a thought come and go... it is our awareness watching , no? And it is the mind that did this fluctuation, yes? And they keep on coming. Yet when our awareness
does not pay attention to this and gets absorbed in the thought, that is , awareness is not on the outside watching these thoughts come and go, we then think ‘ oh I had this thought, that thought’ as the awareness is stuck to the thought. Some say, you are caught-up in the thought. You had no distance between the thought and the awareness of that thought. See the point?

With all this going on within one’s mind we have been conditioned to think ‘I’ am doing this and that... Yet it is none other than these waves that continue, yet we think ‘I’. We have been groomed by repetition and by some of the distinct traits we inherited that bundled ( thoughts, feelings, likes , responses to dislikes, etc.) form an ego and we take this to be our real self. In fact the term ‘ego’ is Latin for ‘I’. so ‘I’ and ‘ego’ are one and the same. And, we are supported by all these ego’s around us: I, we, me, us, myself, ourselves, are all ‘I’ bundles of mind modifications / fluctuations.

Now for this post ( and many others I have offered) the ‘I’ that is the ego being discussed will be called small ‘i’. This keeps our terms aligned and will cause less thrashing. The key idea of this ‘i’ then that it is composed of thoughts and feelings that come and go. Now we will not get involved in the storage of these thoughts and feelings, responses to actions and reactions as it only complicates the matter.

The point is, if these thoughts and feelings come and go, it also suggests that ‘i’ rises and falls, it too comes and goes. The litmus paper test is when you are in deep sleep. Where is this ‘i’ ? Where is anything ( any object) as a matter of fact, when in deep sleep, yet you still wake up the next day, existing. So if you relate to yourself as 'i' , who then are you? do 'you' come and go from existence to non-existence? How can this be? There must be more to 'me' than a bundle of thoughts and feelings. This is what patañjali-muni is pointing to in a very-very condensed way in this sūtra. How so? We will take a look.

So for those that are interested, i will continue the conversation in the next post, but ask you to do one thing... see for yourself on your own ‘screen’ ( the mind) how thoughts come and go. Take some time to catch yourself having thoughts. The content is of less importance. Note how they come and go.

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

terms

razor's edge or discernment:


vivekakhyātiraviplavā hānopāyaḥ|| pātañjali’s yoga-sūtras - 2.26

This says, discriminative knowledge/perception (vivekakhyāti) is the means (upāya) for its removal (hāna).

Reviewed here: http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?14214-A-bit-more-light-on-yoga post # 25

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
svāgata (hello)


The point is, if these thoughts and feelings come and go, it also suggests that ‘i’ rises and falls, it too comes and goes. The litmus paper test is when you are in deep sleep. Where is this ‘i’ ? Where is anything ( any object) as a matter of fact, when in deep sleep, yet you still wake up the next day, existing. So if you relate to yourself as 'i' , who then are you? do 'you' come and go from existence to non-existence? How can this be? There must be more to 'me' than a bundle of thoughts and feelings. This is what patañjali-muni is pointing to in a very-very condensed way in this sūtra. How so? We will take a look.
To answer this question above patañjali-muni says if ( or when) all the fluctuations are stilled (nirodhaḥ) then yogaḥ occurs. That is yogaḥ = yuj, to yoke or join or fasten or harness. One is ‘joined’. But to what? Here’s a way to think this through.

If this ‘i’ that was offered in the last post comes-and-goes it must have some foundation to rest on which provides it the ability to come-and-go. Think of a wave on an ocean ... it to rises and falls but it’s foundation is the ocean itself. It rises up then comes back down but all within the unboundedness of the ocean’s waters.

http://cdn.playbuzz.com/cdn/446f3cc2-fb44-4fec-ae0a-5074e8e46ec2/4b18b31b-59e7-4eed-a6e7-ea0d3443f74a.jpg

What patañjali-muni is saying is when all the thrashing of thoughts stops or are stilled (nirodhaḥ), then one regains (yuj) one’s original status, the ocean. The individuality of ‘i’ disperses and becomes Self ... the ocean of pure awareness once again.
It is the thrashing of the mind over and over that convinces ourselves that the trashing is ‘i’; yet if you look for it, it is none other than the rise and fall of thoughts, feelings and emotions that come and go. We are the ocean (Self) and not the trashing (wave).

Patañjali-muni says then it is possible to re-recognize and establish ( uplift your self with your SELF as the wise say) one's very being back to its original condition. In fact it has never left anyone' it is impossible for It to leave anyone because there is no place It is not. So where could it possibly go?

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
svāgata (hello)


But first one needs to be told of it, AND be aware of it before any capturing can occur.
If one really ‘gets’ what was offered in in the last two posts ( number 17 & 18) then one could conclude the following:

this ‘i’ = ego
Many times we are taught in our practices that curtailing the ego is a ‘good thing’. An inflated ego is looked down upon in many circles. Yet we can conclude that if one continues to frame themselves as ‘i’ ( ‘i’ am this, ‘i’ and going there, coming here, ‘i’ need this or that) we have not dampened the ego at all . For it to be big or small seems a trifle if this ‘i’ continues to remain.
Some look to great men and women in which this ‘ego’ is quite small or non-existent from our point of view i.e. the various muni-s, svamī-s, ācārya-s & sāstri-s we may encounter. We then say, let me emulate what I see in these beings. But, pretending to have a small ego and still have this ‘i’ being fed daily does little good. It may be a noble gesture and it in some way instills better values in the person emulating the ‘small’ ego, this is all well and good; but at its root, that ‘i’ still persists and is the instigator of ego ( big or small). We are still stuck in ignorance.


this ‘i’ comes and goes
By our own experience one should be able to conclude that this ‘i’ waxes and wanes. The ‘easy’ conclusion is during sleep. It ( ‘i’ ) is no-where to be found. In fact one does not even have the facilities to look , as ‘looking’ would suggest an active awareness and it is not there in sleep.
Sleep is the absence of experiencing things. It is not the absence of consciousness ( yet for some they use the term ‘unconscious’ for sleep); a more
precise proclamation of is ‘I was not aware of any thing, even my body, or thoughts, as these are things’ ; yet ‘i’ wake up the next day, ‘i’ am still here
and ‘i’ know ‘i’ slept soundly , in fact it was an enjoyable rest.

So , here is one conclusion that is not so easy to discern without help... this ‘i’ cannot exist independently. It only exists when in the company of objects. And what are some of these ~objects~? Thoughts for one as they are most readily available to us. People usually do not see thoughts as objects but they are. So is our body, and the ‘objects’ of the world that stimulate thoughts or notions and that stimulates ‘i’ to exist. This ‘i’ can only exist when there is an object ( thoughts, the environment of things) and subject ( ‘i’ ). Some even think ‘i’ am the body and the wise suggest this is the root of the problem.
There is just a flow of things that come to us that stimulate thoughts, feelings and the like. Hence the ‘i’ is propped-up by these things but once gone
( as in sleep) the ‘i’ subsides.

we are challenged
We are challenged on occasion by the wise (rāmaṇa mahaṛṣi, śrī nisargadatta maharāj, śrī siddharameśvara maharāj, etc.) to find this ‘i’ if it really exists. They instruct us to look for it , for this aham-vṛtti or ‘i’ thoughts that one thinks they are. They suggest ātmavicara or Self-inquiry as one possible practice. Their premise is quite simple, if a thing comes-and-goes it cannot be real. Others say if it ( ‘i’ ) comes and goes it cannot be sustainable.
This ‘sustainable’ is more palatable to many , as ‘real’ seems to be a bit much to digest for the average person. So, why do the wise use the term ‘not real’ ? To get your attention, to get your focus. Hey wait a minute, I ‘feel’ real, I see real things, I think real things, how can you say it is not ‘real’ ? From here, one can teach and take one step-by-step into what you really are.

What is to unfold
If I take this ‘i’ away , am I dead? I only know this ‘i’ as being ‘me’... what else can I be? To use a fancy term , the subsidence of ‘i’ is upahṛtāhaṅkāraḥ or we can say then one becomes the upahṛtāhaṅkāraḥ. That is, for whom (yasmai) ego (ahaṅkāraḥ) (has been) destroyed (upahṛtaḥ).
When we see a term like this it causes some angst and some bewilderment ( I hope!). If the ‘lesson’ has stuck properly by the wise what is to be destroyed if there really is not an ‘i’ to begin with? This is a reasonable assessment to make.
If anything is ~destroyed~ it is the notion of limitation and individuality. It is the notion of fractional awareness. Thought-after-thought is differentiatedness, awareness divided again and again by the incessant rise-and-fall of ‘i’. What then comes? continuity of awareness. And, we are told by the wise ( abhinavaguapa-ji) it is present in everything – nothing can elude it or give it the slip ( hide); in fact everything is an expression of it!

continuity
If something is uninterrupted, in continuity, it therefore is whole, full. One goes from viśeṣa (particular) to aviśeṣa (non-particular). Rāmaṇa mahaṛṣi said ( my words here) that the difference of appearance falls to the back and the unity of things comes to the front. He said ( his words now) differences are but appearances , he ( the jñāni¹) sees them ( appearances) as not separate from the true, the real, with which he (the jñāni) is one. Equality is the true sign of jñāna¹. It is the unity that the jñāni perceives in all differences, which I call equality.

So, one may think everything is vanilla! everything is just plain white and all the diversity is gone! This is not the case. The multiplicity of the world
is sewn together by the unity of it all, as an expression of Self, of Being, of the Supreme , and one sees this whole creation as an extension of one’s
Self.

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

1. jñāni is one with jñāna or the higher knowledge; possessed of Self, pure awareness is his/her frame of reference.