Sūtra 2.34

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Sūtra 2.34:

वितर्का हिंसादयः कृतकारितानुमोदिता लोभक्रोधमोहपूर्वका मृदुमध्याधिमात्रा दुःखाज्ञानानन्तफला इति प्रतिपक्षभाअवनम् ॥ २.३४ ॥

vitarkā hiṃsādayaḥ kṛtakāritānumoditā lobhakrodhamohapūrvakā mṛdumadhyādhimātrā duḥkhājñānānantaphalā iti pratipakṣabhāavanam || 2.34 ||

34. The questionables are slaughter and the rest. (Whether) they are done, caused to be done, or abetted; (whether) preceded by longing, anger or delusion; (whether) slight, moderate or excessive; they have pain and ignorance for their endless fruits. Hence (the necessity) of the thought of opposites.

The Rajamartanda commentary by King Bhoja:

[English translation of the 11th century commentary by Bhoja called the Rājamārtaṇḍa]

[Sanskrit text for commentary available]

Now he successively describes the natures, the distinctions, the varieties, the causes, and the fruits of the questionables.

[Read Sūtra 2.34]

The aforesaid slaughter and the rest are first divided into three kinds, viz., done, caused to be done, and abetted. Thereof those which are accomplished by oneself are “done” (kṛta). Those which follow from orders to the effect “do them,” “they should be done,” are caused to be done (kārita). Those which, on being accomplished by others, are encouraged by (the saying) “well done, well done,” are “abetted” (anumodita). These three forms are described to prevent mistakes respecting them; otherwise a dull-witted person might fancy, “the slaughter has not been completed by me, so no fault rests on me”

To indicate their causes he says, “proceeded by longing, anger, or delusion.” Although longing and anger are first noticed, yet since delusion, which is characterised by its accepting that to be soul which is not soul, the source of all pains, and since longing and anger arise from distinctions about differences of relation as to one’s own or another, delusion should be known to be the root, i.e., all faults proceed from antecedent delusion. “Longing” (lobha) is thirst. “Anger” (krodha) is an inflammatory function of the thinking principle, which sets aside all sense of discrimination about what is proper and what is improper. Each of these is threefold, according as it is distinguished by being done, caused to be done, &c., and slaughter and the rest are divisible into these according as they are caused by delusion, &c.

They are again divided into three kinds according as they are “mild, moderate, and excessive.” “Mild,” (manda) are slow, i.e., neither excessive nor moderate. The “moderate” (madhyama) are neither mild nor excessive. The “excessive” (adhimātra) are ardent, neither mild nor moderate.

Thus there are nine kinds, and these being three-fold the total becomes twenty-seven. Again, of the mild &c., each being divisible according as it is mild, moderate and excessive, becomes threefold. The combination to be made as it becomes appropriate; thus mildly mild (mṛdu-mṛdu) “mildly moderate” (mṛdu-madhya), “mildly ardent,” (mṛdu-tīvra).

Their fruits he describes (by the words) “having pain and ignorance for endless fruits.” Pain (duḥkhā) is a function of the quality of foulness, manifesting itself in the form of repugnance. “Ignorance” (ajñāna) is false knowledge in the form of doubt or error. Their fruits are indicated by (the compound term) duḥkhajñānānanta-phalāḥ, From such pain and ignorance proceed “endless” (ananta) unintermitting fruit. What is enjoined is that these should be overcome by the Yogī, who has known their nature, cause, &c. by thinking on their opposites.

Notes and Extracts

[Notes and comparative extracts from other commentaries on the Yogasūtra]

[The works condemned by the restraints and the obligations have been lumped together under the name of questionable (Vitarka) for easy treatment, and then their natures, distinctions, varieties and fruits are generally described. They call for no explanatory remark.]

In order to explain how perfections arise successively by ardent exercise of these (duties) he says: