The word Yoga which was formerly used in Vedic literature in the sense of the restraint of the senses is used by Patanjali in his Yoga sutra in the sense of the partial or full restraint or steadying of the states of citta.  Some sort of concentration may be brought about by violent passions, as when fighting against a mortal enemy, or even by an ignorant attachment or instinct.  The citta which has the concentration of the former type is called k@sipta (wild) and of the latter type pramu@dha (ignorant).  There is another kind of citta, as with all ordinary people, in which concentration is only possible for a time, the mind remaining steady on one thing for a short time leaves that off and clings to another thing and so on.  This is called the vik@sipta (unsteady) stage of mind (cittabhumi).  As distinguished from these there is an advanced stage of citta in which it can concentrate steadily on an object for a long time.  This is the ekagra (one-pointed) stage.  There is a still further advanced stage in which the citta processes are absolutely stopped.  This happens immediately before mukti, and is called the nirodha (cessation) state of citta.  The purpose of Yoga is to achieve the conditions of the last two stages of citta.

The cittas have five processes (v@rtti), (1) prama@na [Footnote ref 1] (valid

_______________________________________________________

____________

[Footnote 1:  Sa@mkhya holds that both validity and invalidity of any cognition depend upon the cognitive state itself and not on correspondence with external facts or objects (svata@h prama@nya@m svata@h aprama@nya@m).  The contribution of Sa@mkhya to the doctrine of inference is not definitely known.  What little Vacaspati says on the subject has been borrowed from Vatsyayana such as the purvavat, s’e@savat and samanyatodr@s@ta types of inference, and these may better be consulted in our chapter on Nyaya or in the Tatparya@tika_ of Vacaspati.  Sa@mkhya inference was probably from particular to particular on the ground of seven kinds of relations according to which they had seven kinds of inference “matranimittasa@myogivirodhisahacaribhi@h.  Svasvamibadhyaghatadyai@h sa@mkhyana@m saptadhanuma” (Tatparya@tika, p. 109).  Sa@mkhya definition of inference as given by Udyotakara (I.I.  V) is “sambandhadekasmat pratyak@sacche@sasiddhiranumanam.”]

269

cognitive states such as are generated by perception, inference and scriptural testimony), (2) viparyaya (false knowledge, illusion, etc.), (3) vikalpa (abstraction, construction and different kinds of imagination), (4) nidra (sleep, is a vacant state of mind, in which tamas tends to predominate), (5) sm@rti (memory).

These states of mind (v@rtti) comprise our inner experience.  When they lead us towards sa@msara into the course of passions and their satisfactions, they are said to be kli@s@ta (afflicted or leading to affliction); when they lead us towards liberation, they are called akli@s@ta (unafflicted).  To whichever side we go, towards sa@msara or towards mukti, we have to make use of our states of mind; the states which are bad often alternate with good states, and whichever state should tend towards our final good (liberation) must be regarded as good.