Sūtra 3.9

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Sūtra 3.9:

व्युत्थाननिरोधसंस्कारयोरभिभवप्रादुर्भावौ निरोधक्षणचित्तान्वयो निरोधपरिणामः ॥ ३.९ ॥

vyutthānanirodhasaṃskārayorabhibhavaprādurbhāvau nirodhakṣaṇacittānvayo nirodhapariṇāmaḥ || 3.9 ||

9. The suppressive modification is the moment of conjunction of the thinking principle with suppres-sion on the overthrow and success of the twofold residua of waking and suppression.

The Rajamartanda commentary by King Bhoja:

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

[Sanskrit text for commentary available]

Having now clearly explained the subject of Sañjama, wishing to disclose the nature of perfection of the different members of Yoga, he describes successively the three modifications.

[Read Sūtra 3.9]

“Waking” (vyutthāna) includes the three conditions of agitation, bewilderment, and voluptuousness. “Suppression” (nirodhā) is that modification of the thinking principle in which the quality of goodness becomes a part of it, or retires to it. When successively the “overthrow” (avibhava) and success “prevalence” (prādurbhāva) of the residua of the two, i.e., of the waking and the suppressive conditions, are produced, then at the moment of “suppression,” the conjunction (anvaya) which takes place from the thinking principle having then both functions is called “suppressive modification” (nirodhapariṇāma). “Overthrow” is the condition of incapacity to perform work, there being a contempt for it. “Prevalence” is the condition of manifestation in the present condition. The meaning is this:—When the residua cognate to waking are pacified, and the residua of suppression are prevailing and the thinking principle appears connected with both from its being the substratum of quality, then that state is indicated by the word suppressive modification (nirodhapariṇāma).

Although there is no stillness of the thinking principle when effected by the functions of the qualities, nevertheless this modification is called still or motionless.

Notes and Extracts

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

[Having explained the exact position of the threefold exercise of Saṃyama, the author now proceeds to describe what follows that exercise, and in doing so first defines three terms, and the first of them is suppressive modification (nirodhapariṇāma). This is defined to be the time when all the residua of the waking state being overthrown, the thinking principle begins to be worked by the residua of the suppressive state; it is the moment of transition from the one condition to the other that the term indicates.

The Pātañjala Bhāṣya thus defines the term:

(vyutthāna-saṃskārāścittadharma na te pratyayātmakā iti, pratyaya-nirodhena niruddhā nirodhasaṃskārā api cittadharmāḥ, tayorabhibhava-prādurbhāvau vyutthāna-saṃskārā hīyante nirodha-saṃskārā ādhīyante, nirodhakṣaṇam cittamanveti tad ekasya cittasy a pratikṣaṇamidam saṃskārānyathātvam nirodhapariṇamaḥ.)

“The residua of the waking state are the attributes of the thinking principle, but they are not intelligent. The residua of suppression, produced by the intelligence of the suppressive state, are also the attributes of the thinking principle. On the overthrow and the success of the two, the residua of tbe waking state are put down, those of the suppressive state rise up, and there is then a correlation of the thinking principle, and the changes, thus constantly occurring in a thinking principle is suppressive modification.”—

In explaining the text, Bhoja uses a term which, as playing an important part in subsequent explanations, requires a few words of comment. The word is vartamānādhvan, a compound of vartamān “present” and adhvan “a road,” but here “time” (adhvaśabda kālavacanaḥ,) which I have rendered into “present condition.” The theory is that every image, shape, or idea exists from eternity in a latent form; circumstances make it manifest, and when those circumstances are overcome it reverts to its former condition. The first is anāgatādhvan, or the unmanifest or antecedent condition; the second or what we see is the vartamānādhvan, or the present condition; and the third is atītādhvan, or the postcedent condition, which is reversion to the first condition. The image existed in the marble in a latent condition; the sculptor brings it to its present condition, and when it is broken it passes on to its postcedent condition. This theory is the same which prevailed in Greece in ancient times. Thus, says Sir William Hamilton; “Plato agreed with the rest of the ancient philosophers in this—that all things consist of matter and form; and that the matter of which all things were made, existed from eternity, without form; but he likewise believed that there are eternal forms of all possible things which exist, without matter; and to those eternal and immaterial forms he gave the name of ideas. In the Platonic sense, then, ideas were the patterns according to which the Deity fashioned the phenomenal or ectypal world.” So Tiberghien, (Essai des Connoissance humane, p. 207,) “Seneca considered ideas, according to Plato, as the eternal exemplars of things, Cicero as their form, Diogenes Laertius as their cause and principle, Aristotle as substances.”

The word saṃskāra, which, for the sake of uniformity, I have rendered into residua, would have been more pointed here if translated into idea.]

The fruit thereof.