|
You are on the page: Scriptures.ru ➤ Books ➤ The ultimate meditation guide
|
Part 1 of the commentary to sutra 3.4 of the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali,
translated and with commentary by Vasyl Vernyhora
3.4. Three (traya, that is, dharana, dhyana and samadhi) all taken together/completed (ekatra) [give (allow one to gain the ability to receive)] clairvoyance insight (saṁyama) [into the essence of any object].
Interpretation of Sutra 3.4 in the context of aspects of the cumulative practice of samadhi
Although in the current edition of the Yoga Sutras (with its illogical placement of pratyahara—the fifth part/stage of eight—at the end of the second chapter of four instead of its expected placement at the beginning of the third chapter, that is, after crossing the "equator" of the text) the word "three" supposedly indicates dharana, dhyana and samadhi from sutras 3.1-3, nevertheless, in the context of an obvious understanding of the essence of the practice of samadhi as consisting of the combined application of the aspects of pratyahara-samprajnata, dharana-ekagrata and dhyana-smriti, and also taking into account the fact that in the current edition of this sutra these "three" for some reason are not named directly, one can make a cautious assumption that in the original edition of this sutra 3.4 of this ancient text the discussion could be precisely about these three aspects of the practice of samadhi—pratyahara, dharana and dhyana.
It is worth noting that almost the entire semantic content of sutra 3.3 is a repetition of part of the text of the earlier sutra 1.43:
1.43. smṛtipariśuddhau svarūpa-śūnya-iva-artha-mātra-nirbhāsā nirvitarkā.
3.3. tadeva-artha-mātra-nirbhāsaṁ svarūpa-śūnyam-iva samādhiḥ.
According to the rules of sandhi (the merging of letters), the phrase "śūnya-iva" (शून्य इव) in sutra 1.43 is written as "śūnyeva" (शून्येव). Sandhi are phonological rules that describe the changes in sounds that occur when words or morphemes meet, usually used to make pronunciation more melodic, smooth, and easier to recite.
Sutra 3.3 differs from sutra 1.43 only in its additional words ("introduction" and "conclusion"): "It is (eva) that (tad) [state]... [that is] samadhi (samādhi)." Sutra 1.43 itself, with its unmistakable Buddhist overtones, will be examined in detail later.
Thus, sutra 3.3 does not introduce any new meaning compared to sutra 1.43. This allows us to cautiously assume that, also based on the previously mentioned illogicality of the description of pratyahara even before the "halfway point" of the Yoga Sutras text, sutra 3.3 could have been inserted into the text by one of the "co-authors" after sutra 3.4 was already in its current writing. For example, this could have been done at the time when the description of the eight-limbed yoga was added to the text, and it was necessary to clearly designate the part/stage of samadhi immediately after the part/stage of dhyana. Moreover, "dhyana" itself, as already noted in the commentary to the sutra 3.2, can very well be interpreted as the guardian effort of "remembering"-smriti from the Buddhist practice of samadhi/shamatha, and not as a separate stage of practice.
This assumption may serve as further confirmation that the word "three" in sutra 3.4 refers to pratyahara/samprajnata, dharana/ekagrata, and dhyana/smriti (and not to dharana, dhyana, and samadhi), which together constitute the single (ekatra) practice of samadhi/shamatha, the successful completion of which, that is, the development of superconsciousness, enables the use of clairvoyance and other supernormal abilities ("samyama") inherent in superconsciousness. This interpretation of the origin of the word "samyama" will be given later.
Given the obvious problem with many modern Buddhists' understanding of the Buddha's vipashyana (vipaśyanā), when Buddhist theorists as early as the time of Asanga (4th century) and Buddhaghosa (5th century) began to distort this clairvoyant insight as mere logical reasoning at the level of the mind-manas (and this attitude toward understanding the essence of vipashyana is widespread in Buddhism even today), it would be difficult to expect a different approach to samyama/vipashyana among yogis at the time of the writing of the Yoga Sutras and, what is especially important in this case, at the time of the completion of the initial sutras of its third chapter. Indian yogis of that time lived among numerous Buddhists on the territory of Hindustan.
Nevertheless, the absence in the text of the Yoga Sutras of a literal description of a possible (albeit erroneous) practice of samyama as logical reasoning serves as important evidence that the third chapter of the Yoga Sutras was written and finally edited before the emergence and spread of the distorted interpretation of vipashyana in Buddhism. This allows us to conclude that the Yoga Sutras were written down in this version no later than the 4th (or at most the 5th) century.
Nevertheless, the author of sutras 3.3-4 in their surviving version still experienced the same difficulties in formulating them as Buddhists experienced in interpreting the essence of the clairvoyant vipashyana spoken of by the Buddha, which was completely inaccessible to those who had not put the Buddha's teaching into practice. After the obvious addition of sutra 3.3 in the process of introducing the concept of eight-limbed yoga into the text of the Yoga Sutras, the co-author of the ancient yogic text in question, judging by the glaring gap in this section of the text, was unable to provide a clear, unifying description and justification of what exactly provides the incredible opportunity to transition from the practice of samadhi to the performance of clairvoyant samyama.
In Buddhism, the transition to a distorted understanding of the essence of vipashyana was caused by the dominance of theoretical scholars in monasteries and the almost complete absence of realized practitioners during the gradual decline of Buddhism from the 5th to the 8th centuries. Most likely, such a gap in the text of the "Yoga Sutras", that is, the absence of a description of the connecting transition from the practice of samadhi by an ordinary person to the application/performance of samyama (clairvoyance) by a saint, is caused by the same reason.
Although the earlier sutras 2.49-52 (on pranayama) attempt to provide a rationale and description of the "technological process" of such a transition from the mind-manas to developed superconsciousness, it is obscured for two reasons. The first is another obvious disruption of the sequence of presentation of the stages of practice, when the description of the strengthening of the flow of prana and radiance-prakasha is given even before the description of pratyahara and dharana, not to mention dhyana and samadhi (and this does not count another disruption of sequence in the similar place, associated with sutras 2.45-48). Because of this, sutras 2.49-52 are not perceived as an explanation of the transition from sutra 3.3 to sutras 3.4-5.
The second reason is a distorted understanding of the essence of pranayama itself. Unlike the content of sutras 2.49-52, which have survived, pranayama is now interpreted as a variety of breathing exercises, rather than the flow of prana (kundalini) during a continuous 3-hour proper practice of samadhi. This is the meaning of the word "pranayama", which will be clarified later when examining these sutras.
Most likely, sutra 3.4 originally described the cumulative (ekatra, "all together constitute one") practice of pratyahara/samprajnata, dharana/ekagrata, and dhyana/smriti. The presence of the word "ekatra" along with the absence of the words "completed practice [of samadhi]" or "long-term [months or years] practice [of samadhi]" (which is necessary for the possibility of clairvoyant insight/application of samyama) in sutra 3.4 serves as confirmation of this version of its interpretation.
However, a misunderstanding of how exactly the practice of samadhi allows one to progress to clairvoyant insight and the supernormal abilities described later in the third chapter led to the editing of sutra 3.4 and its recording in its current version, which provided at least some kind of “yogic” explanation for the appearance in the text of the term “samyama”, borrowed, as will be shown later, from Buddhism.
It's possible that in the original version of the Yoga Sutras, the word "samadhi" was used instead of "samyama" in sutra 3.4, in which case it appears perfectly logical and consistent. Then came sutra 3.5, in the same version as now, but in that case, the word "this (tad)" in sutra 3.5 would logically refer to samadhi, not samyama. It is the completed practice of samadhi that enables one to attain transcendental wisdom (prajna), which becomes accessible to those who have developed superconsciousness.
The possible replacement of the word "samadhi" by the "co-author" of sutra 3.4 with the word "samyama"—the de facto equivalent of Buddhist vipashyana—may be explained by the fact that already at that time, in Buddhism, which coexisted side by side with Indian yoga, Buddhist theorists were beginning to posit that shamatha and vipashyana were two equally important concepts that supposedly "go hand in hand", as Buddhists often say today. But they only went "hand in hand" after the distorted interpretation of the Buddha's clairvoyant vipashyana as logical thinking, when such a thinker still resides at the level of the mind-manas (due to the lack of developed supramental structures of the superconscious). It should be noted that nowhere in the Pali Canon is there any mention of the practice of vipaśyanā (in Sanskrit; "vipassanā" in Pali) as such, while the requirement to practice śamatha (in Sanskrit; "samatha" in Pali) and enter the jhanas is repeated numerous times in the Buddha's sermons. It is the practice of shamatha and the attainment of the jhanas that constitute the methodological core of the Buddha's teaching, which aims to develop superconsciousness. Only the attainment of the fourth jhana, that is, arhatship, allows one to begin to apply vipashyana. And only then can shamatha and vipashyana "go hand in hand" in the process of attaining the arupa-ayatanas. But this is already the level of holy miracle workers.
It should be noted that the word "samyama", after its first appearance in sutra 3.4, appears again only in sutra 3.16. This is another obvious disruption in the sequence of presentation, indicating multiple stages of editing of the Yoga Sutras due to the intervention of "co-authors". This discrepancy can be explained by both the addition of the word "samyama" (instead of the word "samadhi" that was removed) to sutra 3.4, and the later addition of sutras 3.6-15.
What's particularly interesting is that in all the sutras of the third chapter (beginning with sutra 3.16) that use the word "samyama", it can be interpreted as "transcendental/supra-mundane knowledge" or "super-power obtained through the use of supra-mundane knowledge". In this case, the word "samyama" denotes certain varieties of prajna, being a continuation of sutra 3.5 (in which the word "samyama" is not mentioned), and not 3.4 (in which the word "samyama" is now mentioned).
Be that as it may, the essence of sutra 3.4 does not change from all of the above, since the practice of samadhi in any case includes the three previous parts of the eight-limbed yoga.
The full version of the book "The True Practical Essence of the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali" with a translation of all 196 sutras of the Yoga Sutras with commentaries on all important and/or complex sutras: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0G6GT6M8B.
|
|