Sūtra 3.35

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Sūtra 3.35:

सत्त्वपुरुषयोरत्यन्तासङ्कीर्णयोः प्रत्ययाविशेषो भोगः परार्थान्यस्वार्थसंयमात्पुरुषज्ञानम् ॥ ३.३५ ॥

sattvapuruṣayoratyantāsaṅkīrṇayoḥ pratyayāviśeṣo bhogaḥ parārthānyasvārthasaṃyamātpuruṣajñānam || 3.35 ||

35. Experience is an undefined conception of the quality of goodness and the soul, which are totally unconnected. From Saṃyama for its own object, and not for another’s object, proceeds a knowledge of the soul.

The Rajamartanda commentary by King Bhoja:

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

[Sanskrit text for commentary available]

Another perfection.

[Read Sūtra 3.34]

“The quality of goodness” (sattva) is a particular modification of nature (pradhāna); it is characterised by illumination and joy. ‘Soul’ (puruṣa) is the experiencer in the form of a ruler. From the distinction of the experiencer and the experience,—of the rational and the irrational—there is total unconnection between the two, i.e., they are separate. “A conception” of the two without any distinction, not knowing them distinctly, is experience. Hence whatever consciousness of pleasure and pain is felt by the quality of goodness assuming itself to be the master is experience. Goodness having no object of its own, its work is for “another’s object,” (parārtha) i.e., for the object of the soul. That which is distinct from it is its “own object,” (svārtha); which is reliance on the true nature of the soul, or the connection of the shadow of the soul with the quality of goodness (sattva) devoid of egotism. By the performance of Saṃyama in that connection, a knowledge of the object of the soul is derived, i.e., the soul knows reliant perception to be in this way dependant on the quality of goodness. Nor does there arise any difficulty about the soul, the knower, becoming the object of knowledge, for the objection will be met by the argument of knowability (i.e., that which is the knower cannot be the knowable); because the knower and the knowable are quite contrary.

Notes and Extracts

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

[The soul is the experiencer of joys and sorrows; it experiences them by its being reflected on the intellect, which is the immediate experiencer. The two are essentially different; one is sentient, the other inert; one the enjoyer, the other the enjoyed. An association of the two is brought about by the former being reflected on the latter, and then the former experiences what is produced in the latter. The latter, however, being irradiated by the former, acts the part of the agent or actor, and whatever it thereby feels is called enjoyment. This feeling, however, is for another’s purpose, i.e., for the purpose of the soul, its own purpose being the merging in that soul. In the one case it works for another, and falsely imagines itself to be the actor, and in the other it acts with a vew [vow?] to attain its own end. When Saṃyama is performed with this discrimination and with the object of knowing the soul, the knowledge is acquired.]

He now describes the fruits of this Saṃyama.