Yoga Sutra 1.17
Meditationtime Forum Post
Date: Posted 6 years before Feb 15, 2017
neil 6 years ago
The Yoga Sutras of Pantanjali stresses the importance of understanding the true self and to become detached from distractions from the outside. In sutra 1.17 Pantanjali is talking about directing the mind on an object in order to prevent such distractions. He says, "Then the object is gradually understood in totality. At first this understanding is at a more superficial level. In time, comprehension becomes deeper. And finally it is total. There is pure joy in reaching such a depth of understanding. For then, the individual is so much in unity with the object that he is oblivious to his surroundings."
This practice of clearing the mind of all obstacles and distractions leads the practitioner further on into an understanding of thoughts that make up the mind and therefore the makeup of the individual. If you read further into the Yoga Sutras you will find that Pantanjali leads us into a state of mind full of clarity concerning all things at all times. So, by following the Yoga Sutras we are lead from a confused mind to a state of pure awareness. But it takes a lot of practice and patience.
MiBeloved 6 years ago
I wish to draw everyone's attention to one particular Sanskrit word which is asmitaa. Here is verse 17:
vitarka vicaara aananda asmitaarupa
anugamaat samprajnaatah
The Sanskrit word rupa means form, shape, recognizable appearance of an object
But asmitaa comes from a verb form which indicates I. Asmi is the Sanskrit for I am.
For instance you may have heard the mantric phrase:
Aham brahmaasmi
That is three words
aham - I (pronoun)
Brahma - (exclusive spiritual existence)
asmi - am (1st. person of the verb to be)
This sentence means that I am exclusive spiritual existence
Adi Shankaracharya is the one who made that phrase popular and it is a major mantra for sannyasis of his lineage. But it originated in the Brahmasutras and Upanishads.
So if the individuality can be eliminated that mantra has no meaning and the Vedic rishis who established it are just joking.
In addition in the Gita Krishna asserted individuality as being permanent even though he explained that its degraded forms are worthless in the ultimate sense.
Patanjali in this verse 17 makes an alert that when one begins the practice of fusing one’s consciousness into higher realities, then one will do so with flaws and therefore one should not be alarmed.
In this verse asmitaa means that when one first achieves fusion into higher dimensions or when one achieves fusion association with divine beings, one will still be aware of the old cultural I-ness which one was accustomed in this existence.
One has to do much meditation before one can completely shed that social identity and develop or experience the self free of the old trappings. It is important to distinguish the spiritually pure identity from the socially impure one that we are using at present. In other words banishing identity is not a real thing and it won’t happen. Identity is eternal and so is individuality.
There is not a single liberated person like Buddha for instance or Shuka or Narad or Shankara or in modern history Paramhamsa Ramakrishna, whose liberations was the liberation of anyone else but these persons themselves, and they existed after their liberated condition occurred as individual living entities distinct from others.
A bothersome flawed identity does not in any way mean that identity can be banished forever. It is in existence eternally despite the numerous misapplications we endure with it.
neil 6 years ago
If we follow the Yoga Sutras closely we will find in ourselves a light that shines so brightly our eyes will be blinded and all of our senses will be reduced to nothing. But from that absence of senses will grow the ability to interact with what we seek to understand - the object. This is samyama. If we focus on the physical strength of an elephant we will have the strength of an elephant. If we focus on God we will become God. When we reach this state, all that is evident is the object itself. We become one with the object.
The question is, do we become nonhuman or do we retain some of our human limitations? When we become one with the object are we limited or are we the same as the object?
MiBeloved 6 years ago
neil’s query:
The question is, do we become nonhuman or do we retain some of our human limits? When we become one with the object are we limited or are we the same as the object?
MiBeloved’s Response:
Tough questions!
How will any answers, true or false, be verified?
In my yoga experience the interpretation of oneness with the object occurs due to a lack of detailed sensual distinction on higher planes, just as when a person comes out of a dark cave where he resided in isolation for say about a year or so. When he first comes out he is blinded by the light and cannot see anything. To him for all practical purposes he has become one with whatever there is there. But factually he has only been restricted in sense perception in the new environment.
That has to do with environments.
There are also higher experiences with divine persons and there is the story which Markandeya told Yudhishthira in the Mahabharata how he (Markandeya) was lost in Krishna's Cosmic Body for billions of eons and then he was thrown out into another atmosphere in which that Cosmic Body resided. Even though it may be said that he merged, Markandeya, as a great yogi and favorite devotee of Krishna, was aware during his travels in that body that the Cosmic Person was distinct from himself.
Has a fetus merged with the entity who is the mother using that pregnant body. In a way the fetus is merged and in a way it is distinct.
Spiritual sense perception, I can testify, is a reality but normally we do not develop it and thus when we enter into spiritual zones of consciousness we experience that as mergence without any distinct sense perception. But that is only the beginning of the spiritual journey.
What is sad and what is something we should cry about daily is that the development of supernatural and spiritual sense perception is very very hard to come by and its attainment is almost completely out of our reach.
So yes when I consider that, then mergence is all we may ever achieve.
neil 6 years ago
I understand what you are saying Michael. When 'I am' in pure awareness - one with the Divine, the feeling is blissful but yet the feeling is still sensual in regards to emotions and perceptions. I may feel so joyful that tears run down my face but I am aware that tears are running down my face. It is as though 'I am' in two places at the same time - still in the body but yet outside the body. I think these two conditions or states of consciousness are the "self" and the "witness."
