yogena cittasya padena vācāṃ malaṃ śarīrasya ca vaidyakena.
yo'pākarot taṃ parvaraṃ munīnāṃ patañjaliṃ prāñjalir ānato'smi.

Now begins the traditional teaching of yoga (the means, the preparation and application).

Yoga (the means) is the mastery – discipline – of the thoughts of the mind.

From yoga’s success then, the self, the draṣṭṛ (witness) of thoughts and their objects, simply remains in its own nature.

On the other hand, until yoga’s success, one erroneously believes he or she has the same form as the thoughts of the mind.

These thoughts are of five types, and either hinder or do not hinder one’s progress in yoga.

These five types of thoughts are knowledge, error, imagination, sleep, and memory.

Knowledge is either direct knowledge – direct sense perception of their objects and perception of one’s mental states; indirect knowledge – various inferences based on direct knowledge, other inferences, or on scripture; or scripture, literally, truth that has come down from beginningless time through tradition – scriptural knowledge of those things that are not within the scope of perception and thus inference. In this way scripture becomes a unique source of knowledge.

Error is a false conclusion not based on the actual form of its object.

Imagination is based on and does not lead beyond verbal knowledge and lacks an actual, separate object.

Sleep is a mental state that is based on the cognition of absence of any object of thought, such that, “I knew nothing at that time”.

Memory is not losing in the mind an object experienced before.

The discipline of these thoughts is by repetition and by non-attachment, which together lead to contemplation and a contemplative life.

Repetition is mental and physical effort in remaining in that discipline.

But, lest one think otherwise, it, repetition, is to be thoroughly attended to with utmost respect and no interruption for a long enough time until firm success.

Non-attachment is known as mastery over the desire for objects seen or repeatedly heard from scriptures, such as the subtle, pleasant realms of nature called heaven.

The ultimate of that non-attachment is non-attachment to the guṇas (three constituents of all of nature), by discernment of the true nature of the puruṣa (self).

Samādhi (contemplation) is called deliberative when it is through appropriately following a form of reasoning in keeping with scripture, such as in prati-pakṣa-bhāvana (YS.2.33–34), and inquiry through the scripture into fullness, which is the basic nature of the self expressing in the sattva (non-dull and non-agitated mind), and on the sense of “I am”, a recognition of the reality basis in the self, the is-ness or is-notion present in every cognition (see comm. on YS.4.20).

The other samādhi is called a-saṃprajñāta (free from deliberation), preceded by repetition of the saṃprajñāta (deliberative) contemplation, results in the quietude of even those cognitions from saṃprajñāta contemplation. Nevertheless, latent tendencies – habitual potentials caused by prior ignorance and its crop, the seeds of affliction – remain, until nir-bīja samādhi (contemplation free of seed) through puruṣa-khyāti (discernment of the true nature of the self) that is kaivalya (freedom).

Temporary a-saṃprajñāta samādhi (contemplation without an assimilated knowledge) follows from the birth – the nature of the particular embodiments – of certain subtle beings in a heaven because of efforts in yoga in their prior birth, and of all beings who are temporarily absorbed in unmanifest nature, until their next manifestation.

For the rest of us right here and now in this life, success in yoga follows from trust in the scripture as a means of knowledge, the same as one trusts one’s perception and logic; tenacity in this pursuit; memory – continuous retention of the teaching; contemplation on the teaching; and finally assimilated knowledge of the self.

For those whose tenacity in repetition and non-attachment is acute, samādhi (contemplation) quickly succeeds.

And thus there is distinction due to weak, middling, or strong measures of tenacity in repetition and non-attachment.

The discipline of thoughts through repetition and non-attachment succeeds also by contemplation on the Lord, since the Lord is the puruṣa (self) in its completely free and fully understood nature.

The Lord is characterized as the puruṣa (self) untouched by the afflictions of ignorance and its crop – the I-notion, attachment, aversion, and the fear of death (see YS.2.3–9) – and by action along with its fruition and store-house waiting to fructify (see YS.2.12 & 4.6–7).

In that Lord the seed – capacity – of knowing all is unsurpassed.

The Lord is also the teacher of everyone before, now, and later, since the Lord, being the cause of all, including time, is not limited by time, and since the Lord is the knower in the seat of the intellect of all beings.

The expressive name of that Lord is the syllable Om.

One should do oral or mental repetition of that praṇava (Om), and contemplation on its meaning, as unfolded in the Upaniṣad scripture.

From that contemplation, one indeed comes to know the conscious being, the consciousness, at the center of one’s being, and one’s obstacles to liberation as the knowledge of that limitless reality disappear by one’s understanding and by grace gained through this ultimate worship of the Lord as one’s self.

Those obstacles, which are distractions of the mind, are dis-ease mental and physical; lack of mental acumen; doubt; inattention; laziness of body and mind; intemperance – an inability to abstain from the excessive attraction to objects of desire; erroneous understanding; not attaining success at the stages in one’s progress in yoga; and lack of stability at various stages of progress one has made in yoga.

Arising together with distraction of the mind are sorrow, despair, and unsteady inhalation and exhalation causing agitation to the body, which in turn further agitates the mind.

For removing these distractions of the mind there is repetition of keeping the mind on the one reality – the Lord that is at the center of oneself as the completely free puruṣa, the conscious being that is the truth of oneself, the only draṣṭṛ (witness).

This clarity, which is sthiti (steadiness), of mind is also through the value structures of cultivating goodwill (cf. YS.3.23) instead of envy towards the joyful, compassion instead of advantage towards the sorrowful, approval instead of jealousy towards the meritorious, and allowance instead of contempt towards the non-meritorious.

This steadiness of mind is also through the practice of controlling the exhalation and retention of the breath, which naturally calms the restlessness of the mind.

Also developing a concerted pursuit having but one object, recommended by scripture or by one’s teacher, brings about a steadiness of mind.

Also developing a concerted mental pursuit having the light, which is one’s conscious being, the light of all lights as its contemplation, which is free of all limitations including sorrow, brings about a steadiness of mind.

The mind also attains steadiness when it has no attachment towards objects.

The mind also attains steadiness when it has as its basis the knowledge of dream and sleep states, as taught in the Upaniṣads as part of the unfoldment of the one conscious being that unites all experiences.

The mind also attains steadiness through retaining a single pointed inquiry in contemplation on any object one likes, and thus staying put upon that object for a time.

Mastery in the form of vairāgya (non-attachment) of this mind extends from the most minute to the most pervasive.

The contemplation of one whose distracting thoughts have waned is what makes clearly evident that which it rests upon: whether that be the knower – the notion of I as a knower, the knowing – the senses and the mind, or the known – the object, like a quality crystal ball clearly takes on the exact color of whatever it rests on.

There in contemplation, the contemplation that is mixed up with imagination based on word, the perceptual or logical object, and its related idea is called sa-vitarka (with reasoning), a part of saṃprajñāta samādhi.

When purified of memory of word and idea, the samāpatti (contemplation) that is the illumination of only the perceptual or logical object in assimilated knowledge of the nature of the object free from erroneous mental projections, as if the mind had no form of its own, is called nir-vitarka (free of reasoning), also a part of saṃprajñāta samādhi because it is as if, so the mind is still subtly there.

In that same way alone, mixed and not mixed with word and idea – with name and form – samāpatti (contemplation) in regard also to scriptural subtle objects is explained as being sa-vicāra (with inquiry) and nir-vicāra (free of inquiry). Both are a part of saṃprajñāta samādhi.

And the nature of being a subtle object reaches up to (see YS.2.19), but does not include, the unmanifest total, also called prakṛti, pradhāna, or a-vyakta (unmanifest nature).

These four samāpattis are indeed each a contemplation that retains the seed of ignorance and its afflictions, as long as that assimilated knowledge is not complete by including everything and oneself.

When there is mastery in the free of inquiry samāpatti, there is clarity of mind.

When that takes place – when there is sufficient clarity of mind – one’s knowledge bears the truth.

Since the object of this prajñā (assimilated knowledge), being the very nature of everything and oneself, is unique – is not an object or goal that can be defined or inferred by words, or objectified with the senses – its object is other than the direct knowledge of the words of the scripture heard or the inferences made.

The new latent tendency, the subtle seed of thought born of that prajñā (clear knowledge), with the help of sa-bīja samādhi (contemplation that retains this new seed in the form of the teaching) which nourished and matured that new seed, counter-acts the other latent tendencies one has gained in this and in prior life-times, that have kept one as though a separate individuality to be reborn again and again.

When there is the dropping of even that latent tendency in the form of the teaching due to the dropping of everything as not other than oneself (YS.3.53 & 55), through discernment of the limitless nature of the puruṣa, arrived at through continuous repetition of sa-bīja samādhi (contemplation that has the new seed which is the teaching of the self), this complete clarity in the knowledge that frees, that is not just another state of mind, is called contemplation free of seed.

The kriyā-yoga (means in regard to activity) is prayerful discipline, one’s study of the family’s Veda scripture as it has been taught by one’s teacher, and intelligently surrendering to the Lord, to the whole interconnected order of this universe.

Kriyā-yoga (activity when used as a means) is meant for bringing about contemplation of the proper means of knowledge resulting in assimilation of this reality that is the Lord and for minimizing the afflictions.

The five afflictions are ignorance and its crop or germinations, namely, the I-notion, attachment, aversion, and the fear of death.

Ignorance is the soil (field of activity, arena) for the others, the other afflictions – whether they are dormant; sprouting, literally, gained a form; variously breaking out at different times and situations; or fully grown.

Ignorance is determining the timeless, pure (attributeless), satisfied (full and complete) self to be in what is not the self, within time, impure (having attributes), and unsatisfied (empty and incomplete). And visa-versa.

The I-notion – the problematic “possessive I,” not the unproblematic “is-ness I” of Yoga Sūtra 1.17 – is the resulting apparent identity of the natures of the seer – the witness self, and the instrument for seeing – the mind.

Attachment is being in-keeping, literally, to lie down, with pleasurable objects.

Aversion is being in-keeping with painful objects.

Fear of death is passed on in one’s subtle essence. In that way it is well rooted even for a scriptural scholar.

Those kleśas (afflictions) which are already or made subtle – dormant or sprouting, are to be given up by resolving them, seeing that they are sourced in ignorance and thus unreal.

Their, the already subtle or made subtle afflictions’, expressions are also to be given up by retaining a single pointed inquiry in contemplation.

Having the afflictions as its source, the karma-storage, accumulated in a beginningless succession of human births, yet to fructify, and belonging to one jīva (individual), is to be experienced as births seen – the current birth, and unseen – births past and future.

As long as that source of the karma-storage is there – as long as there is the fundamental ignorance manifesting as the afflictions – the fruition of those karmas becomes the births, life-spans, and life-experiences.

These three – births, life-spans, and experiences – have results that are pleasures and pains, since they are caused by karma merit (puṇya) and demerit (pāpa).

The discerning view all separate entities as painful alone due to the pains of change, worry, and latent tendencies, and because of the opposition of the play of the three guṇas (components of nature).

Sorrow not yet come is to be objectively given up.

Ignorance in the form of the mutual identification of the seer and the seen, literally, the seeable, is the cause of these to be given up.

The seen has the nature of the three guṇas, light-action-inertia; has the nature of the five material and subtle elements including the subtle organs of sensing and acting; and is for enjoyment in the form of what can bind and freedom in the form of the teaching that frees one from bondage.

The levels in reverse order of the manifestation of the guṇas (components of nature) are particularized – the five mixed material and subtle elements; non-particularized – the five unmixed subtle elements (see comm. on YS.3.41); the merely indicated – the universal order or intellect assumed to exist because of its effects, otherwise called mahat (the great), and elsewhere called Hiraṇya-garbha (the Golden Womb); and the non-indicated – the unmanifest prakṛti (nature).

The seer is pure perception – the jñapti-svarūpa (nature of the source of knowing) free of the three-fold knower-knowing-known aspects of the act of knowing, and though pure, indivisible and without a second thing, it sees, as it were, the thoughts.

The nature of the seen is simply as its, draṣṭṛ’s (the pure-witnesses’), object.

Though lost, as being absolutely real, in regard to one who has achieved the goal – kaivalya (freedom) – it, the dṛśya (seen), is not lost, since it has commonality with others who remain in ignorance of the seen’s (un)reality.

The seeming conjunction of the natures of itself – the dṛśya (object) – and its master – the draṣṭṛ (witness) – is the cause of the ascertainment of each of their separate natures, namely, that one is the seer and the other is the seen, that this duality is somehow real.

The cause of that conjunction is ignorance – the mutual misidentification of the seer and the seen as being separate and limiting.

The giving up of heya (what is to be given up) is the disappearance of this conjunction by the disappearance of that a-vidyā (ignorance), its cause, in the wake of puruṣa-khyāti (self knowledge), and that is the freedom of the seer.

The Upāya (means) for the giving up of this saṃyoga (conjunction) is a discerning knowledge which does not go astray.

Its final stage is a seven-fold assimilated knowledge.

By following the eight limbs of yoga, as the impurities diminish, the light of knowledge reaches to the discerning knowledge that frees.

The eight limbs of yoga are yama (avoidance) of the kliṣṭa (what hinders), niyama (observance) of the a-kliṣṭa (what helps), āsana (sitting posture) – controlling the body for meditation, prāṇa-āyāma (controlling the breath), pratyāhāra (withdrawing) the senses, dhāraṇā (restraining the pursuit of unwanted or hindering thoughts in contemplation), dhyāna (retaining the flow of wanted or helpful thoughts in contemplation), and samādhi (contemplation resulting in assimilation).

The first limb of yoga: the avoidances of the kliṣṭa (what hinders) are non-violence to one’s own body and mind, to other people and creatures, to cultures, and to the environment; truthfulness, actually, as a yama (avoidance), it is not harboring and speaking untruth; non-usurping what is not given; pursuing the scripture, as a yama (avoidance) it is not chasing after pursuits other than the āgama (scripture), which is the knowledge of truths that are outside one’s own two means of knowledge (see comm. on YS.1.7); and renunciation of what is given – renunciation of the notion of ownership.

These yamas (avoidances) applied to the entire universe and not limited toward origination [species, class, and so on], place, time, or circumstance is the great vow, namely, sannyāsa (renunciation) in terms of knowledge within the lifestyle of the jñāna-yogin, or within the lifestyle of a mature karma-yogin.

The second limb of yoga: the observances of the a-kliṣṭa (what helps) are cleanliness mental and physical; contentment, where satisfaction is found in one’s self instead of in circumstances; and kriyā-yoga (YS.2.1–2), namely, prayerful discipline, one’s study of the family’s Veda scripture as it has been taught by one’s teacher, and intelligently surrendering what is the Lord’s – this body-mind and its actions – to the Lord as the whole.

When these yamas (avoidances) and niyamas (observances) are hindered by wrong thinking, one should contemplate the contradiction – apply correct reasoning, as a result of correct vicāra (inquiry).

Contemplating the contradiction would be, for example, “violence and the other avoidances in the yamas done, ordered, or permitted, out of greed, anger, or delusion, whether in small, middling, or great measure, have unfailing results of pain and remaining in ignorance, which turns the pain into sorrow, so they are illogical.”

When there is establishment in non-violence as a yama (avoidance), there is a dropping of hostility in and towards those around that person.

When there is establishment in truthfulness as a yama (avoidance), that truthfulness has the power of sustaining – lends the pure, uninhibited power of its conviction in fructifying the results of one’s action.

When there is establishment in non-usurping as a yama (avoidance), everything around becomes one’s jewels, glories of the limitless reality, the Lord, not needing to be individually possessed.

When there is establishment in pursuing the scripture, without distracting pursuits, as a yama (avoidance), then, like with satya (truth, cf. YS.2.36) in strengthening the results of action, there is the gain of strength, or rather tīvra-saṃvega (tenacity) in this pursuit.

When there is establishment in renunciation as a yama (avoidance), there is an understanding of beginningless, unwarranted desires (YS.4.10) as being the reason, literally, the how-ness, for birth.

From the niyama (observance) of physical cleanliness, where the naturally accumulating bodily filth is recognized for what it is and then expunged, there is prati-pakṣa-bhāvana (contemplating the contradiction) of repulse from aspects of one’s own body, which counter-acts excessive admiration of one’s body, and there is non-attachment with others – the alluring beauty in others is objectively balanced with the non-alluring that will also be present.

From the niyama (observance) of mental cleanliness – the second aspect of śauca (cleanliness), where the mental waste and excesses, including excessive rajas (agitation) and tamas (dullness), and the errors in thinking that increase these two, is recognized for what it is and then reduced or neutralized – there arises contentment – the alert, clear, and bright mind attains an abiding peace; from that arises the ability to stay on one topic of contemplation; from that arises the mastery over the senses – mastering the mind first, which should be and now is the master of the senses; and from that arises the capacity of knowing the self – the clarity of mind to stay in contemplation leading to assimilated knowledge of the self.

From the niyama (observance) of contentment, where satisfaction is found in one’s self instead of in circumstances, one attains the unsurpassed fullness, which is the nature of the self.

From the niyama (observance) of prayerful discipline, due to the wane of impurities, then the body and senses attain their success.

From the niyama (observance) of one’s study of the family’s Veda scripture as it has been taught by one’s teacher, there is identity with the nature of the Lord of one’s family or personal worship.

From the niyama (observance) of contemplation on and intelligently surrendering what is the Lord’s – this body-mind and its actions – to the Lord as the whole, there is attainment of contemplation resulting in assimilation.

The third limb of yoga: the sitting practice – controlling the body for meditation – is stable and comfortable.

Sthairya (stability) is gained by relaxation of straining, and sukha (comfort) is gained by contemplating on the limitless, for example, on limitless space, or on the limitless Lord, reality, or consciousness, which are all three the same.

From that stable and comfortable sitting posture one is not assailed by the pairs of opposites, for example, environmental hot-cold, bodily pain-pleasure, and other pairs of sensations.

Established in this āsana, the fourth limb of yoga: controlling the breath is separating with a pause the flow of inhalation and exhalation.

In prāṇāyāma (controlling the breath), the operation of pausing the breath first happens outward – after the out-breath when the lungs are empty. Next, the pausing is inward – after the in-breath when the lungs are full. And also there is stoppage – during out-breathing or in-breathing there is stoppage, where at least some air is retained in the lungs and held there. These three prāṇāyāmas are observed according to location, length, and count of the breaths, and their pausing and stoppage. With practice, they become long – the lengths of the out-breath and the pausing and stoppage become long, and subtle – the observance moves from the gross movement of the breath to the subtle presence of this life-force called prāṇa.

The fourth prāṇāyāma is diminishing attention, literally, objectification, towards the outward and the inward movements and holding of the breath, so that they become imperceptibly lost in the attention upon the quiet stillness of the presence of the life breath itself.

From that prāṇāyāma, the blocking of clarity of mind is lessened.

And the mind gains fitness – discipline – for restraining the pursuit of unwanted or hindering thoughts in contemplation.

The fifth limb of yoga: withdrawing of the senses is their seeming to take on the very nature of the mind, when, because the mind’s attention has been withdrawn by āsana and prāṇāyāma, they also withdraw from their own objects.

The best mastery of the senses is by that taking the lead by a mind, which is first itself quiet.

The sixth limb of yoga: restraining the pursuit of unwanted or hindering thoughts in contemplation is keeping the mind in one place.

When that is complete, the seventh limb of yoga: retaining the flow of wanted or helpful thoughts in contemplation is this mind’s nature of having a oneness of thoughts.

The eighth and final limb of yoga: contemplation that culminates in assimilation is the same dhyāna (retaining in contemplation), where there is the appearance of only the object of the contemplation as if the mind lacks its own separate form.

The three – dhāraṇā, dhyāna, and samādhi – together is called saṃyama (uniting).

By mastering that saṃyama (three-fold uniting) there manifests a knowledge that is assimilated – the jñāna (scriptural knowledge) brought into the contemplation becomes pra-jñā (assimilated knowledge).

The application of that saṃyama (three-fold uniting) should occur in the various stages in one’s progress in yoga.

These three, namely, dhāraṇā, dhyāna, and sa-bīja samādhi, are more internal limbs than the preceding five limbs of yoga, namely, yama, niyama, āsana, prāṇāyāma, and pratyāhāra.

But even they are external limbs to the nir-bīja (free of seed) samādhi.

There is a change by way of dharmas (distinguishing characteristics) during assimilation of the teaching in samādhi regarding the mind at the first moment of assimilation. The change is the arising of the latent tendencies introduced by the teaching that negate the kleśas (afflictions) in assimilation and the quelling of the other saṃskāras from the active mind that nourished the kleśas.

Its, the mind’s, flow of clarity is due to the final latent tendency, which is knowledge of reality in the form of the teaching becoming fully assimilated.

The change by way of lakṣaṇas (extrinsic symptoms) prior but leading to samādhi (contemplation) is the mind’s losing its all directedness in dhāranā and gaining its one directedness in dhyāna.

And apart from those two changes, the change by way of avasthās (periods) during one directedness in dhyāna is the mind’s same thought in the past, literally, the ended, and the present, literally, the arisen.

By this three-fold change of the mind within saṃyama are explained the changes in distinguishing characteristics, extrinsic symptoms as to place, and periods in time, respectively, namely, the three factors of everything – in terms of content, place, and time (cf. YS.2.31 & 3.53) – in regard to all objects – the elements and everything made from them, both subtle and material, including the subtle senses for experiencing the material objects.

With regard to objects and their characteristics, the domain of the characteristics, literally, that which has dharmas (distinguishing characteristics), is the object. It is the conditioned reality basis within which the characteristics appear as recognizable phenomena. This domain of the characteristics is an indirect consequence of its distinguishing characteristics in the past, the present, and the future, literally, the not yet manifest.

Difference during sequence of past, present, and future is a cause for difference in change.

From the three-fold saṃyama (contemplation) on change there is knowledge of past and future, as being essentially a mental construct in the mind.

The confusion of word-object-idea (YS.1.42–43) is due to their being imposed on each other. From saṃyama (contemplation) on its, the confusion’s, separate parts there is knowledge about sounds – communication – of all beings.

From saṃyama on latent tendencies one is born with, as being the immediate instrumental cause of one’s birth, there is knowledge of prior births – their role in effecting and affecting one’s own tendencies and the tendencies in others.

From saṃyama about one’s own thought there is knowledge of the thoughts in other minds.

But the other mind’s thought is not accompanied with its basis – its object – since that latter is not within the scope of that yogin’s mind. Hence, the particular reasons others think the way they do cannot be fully known.

From saṃyama on the form of a body when its capability of being grasped is stopped and there is non-contact of the light of sight, then there is concealment of the body, when need of avoiding others is helpful.

Karma (the subtle result of willful action) has a sequence that is quick and has a sequence that is slow. From saṃyama on that, or from noticing ill-omens, there is knowledge of certain death and perhaps when it will come.

From saṃyama on goodwill, […karuṇā (compassion), mudita (approval), and upekṣa (allowance)], there are strengths of being in accord with all, in these ways.

From saṃyama on strengths there is the strength, […grace, balance, and so on] of an elephant, and of other creatures. How the creatures exhibit their powers can be helpful in your own life.

By directing the light of the intellect outward, there is the knowledge of the subtle, the concealed, and the remote in this universe before us.

From saṃyama on the sun there is knowledge of the worlds – the other solar systems and the realms beyond the physical.

From saṃyama on the moon there is knowledge of the relative arrangement of the stars – the zodiac, and the path for rebirth.

From saṃyama on the pole star there is knowledge of their movement – the movement of the constellations and the annual and epochal rhythms of the universe from the human perspective.

From saṃyama on the navel plexus, as a point of reference physically and energetically, there is knowledge of the arrangement of the body.

From saṃyama on the cavity of the throat there is suppression of hunger and thirst – when needed.

From saṃyama on the bronchial passage[s], literally, the turtle tube, there is calmness.

From saṃyama on the light in the head there is the vision of ethereal accomplished beings that may help guide one’s way in the afterlife, or inspire one in this.

And from saṃyama on the light of intelligence there is knowledge of everything that needs to be known.

From saṃyama on the center, literally, the heart, and in particular the limitless expanse within the heart, there is knowledge of the mind – and the limitless expanse within, lit by the light of awareness, like the sun and stars light the universe outside.

Seeking experience for the sake of the other – all other objects – is a non-distinguishing – a mixed up – notion between the mind, literally, pure-energy, and the puruṣa (self), which are completely separate. From saṃyama for the sake of the self there is knowledge of the puruṣa (self).

From that saṃyama for the sake of the self may arise various degrees of powers of the light of intelligence, and the activities of hearing, sensation – touch, sight, and taste.

Though being siddhis (superpowers) in the active mind outside of contemplation, these are, or may be, impediments [or secondary] in final progress in samādhi.

From the loosening of the cause of bondage to this body and from fully understanding the travel of the mind to new embodiments, there may be the entering of the mind into another body of the next life, perhaps even in this life, if one goes by the stories.

From mastering the upward energy in the body there is the power of not getting stuck in water or mud, or by thorns and so on, and the power of ascending out of the body at will.

From mastering the uniting energy – center directed energy, including digestion in the body – there is glowing of good health in body, senses, and mind.

From saṃyama on the connection between the sense of hearing and the element space there is divine hearing – the listening to and the understanding of the cosmic worldview from the scripture, and the pervasive connection between the individual and the universe, including the divine realms therein.

From saṃyama on the connection between the body and space, and from contemplation on light cotton, there is movement through space – the free movement, as it were, of the body-space within space, and the free movement of the mind within the space of the heart.

Thought directed externally to the nature of the universe that is without error, correctly seeing the limitations as only belonging to the phenomenon, not to oneself, is called the great disembodiment – oneself disembodied of all limitations. From that, the covering of the light of knowledge is removed.

From saṃyama on the significance of the connection between the gross, the subtle, and its own real nature – the latter sub-rating the prior, there is mastery over the created universe, through this mature, objective understanding of realities, wherein one appreciates one’s reality as the reality that swallows, subsumes, all.

From that mastery, in terms of knowledge, becomes evident what is from the smallest to the largest – namely, the self – as well as the attainment of the body of the universe itself, and that body’s nature cannot be assailed by anything.

And there is the attainment in terms of knowledge of all bodies that are shapely, beautiful, strong, and hard as diamond (cf. YS.2.37).

From saṃyama on the significance of the connection between the I-notion – the is-ness presence only notionally appearing in the landscape of the mind – and its own real nature – the limitless is-ness that is the presence everywhere – in regard to perceiving, there is mastery over the sense organs.

From that mastery over the sense organs, there is the swiftness of the mind. One exists completely free from the senses, and there is mastery of mother nature, instead of mother nature mastering the senses and mind.

For one who has reached discernment of the distinction between the mind – any object including the mind – and the puruṣa (self), then like/as the Lord, one presides as the reality in all beings, and is the very nature of the knower of all.

And from non-attachment to that – from no longer identifying with that mind and all other objects, including superpowers and even the teaching as a last crutch, in other words, from ultimate non-attachment (YS.1.15-16 & 49-51) – when the defect-seeds – the afflictions in their seed form onwards (YS.2.2-4) – are finally withered by this complete knowledge that destroys the ignorance that is the fertile field for these seeds, there is kaivalya (freedom).

When there is invitation to join from those in high position, no matter what one’s karma brings, there is no reason for attachment or conceit, because attachment and conceit necessitate a return of what would not be chosen.

From saṃyama on the notional reality basis of the moments of time and their sequence, there is knowledge born of discernment between the timeless self and the transactional universe.

From that knowledge born of discernment of the self in this transactional universe, since there is no real separation of distinction in terms of character, symptom, and place in time – the very ways we carve out dualities are themselves exposed as fleeting notions and their separations and limitations are known to be only apparent – then there is ascertainment of both the mind or universe within time and the self as being the same – the one reality within which the apparent are active.

This knowledge, born of discernment of the self from this transactional universe, is said to liberate one from saṃsāra, which is mistaken identification of oneself with the limitations of this transactional universe, includes everything in the universe in everyway, and lacks a progression – since liberation is not a simple gradual feeling of freedom on a relative, sliding scale of reaching in condition, place, and time, but is an absolute and timeless knowledge of what already is, as complete freedom.

When there is understanding and assimilation of the pure equality of the mind, including any and all objects, and the puruṣa (self), this is called kaivalya (freedom).

The siddhis (superpowers or accomplishments) mentioned in the preceding section can be effected by one’s birth with a fast-track to maturity due to one’s prior efforts, or in this life by healthy herbs, repetition of mantras, austerities, and/or samādhi.

The change into and within another birth, which may bring these powers, as well as any and all abilities one is capable of in keeping with that embodiment, is due to the filling in of one’s pre-existing nature. In the context of change into a new birth, this filling in is the possibility within one’s entire storehouse of karma; in the context within this birth, this is the subset of latent tendencies one is born with.

An efficient cause – one’s current action – is not the instigator of the pre-existing causes – the already existing store of karma – rather, like a farmer opening a gate in an irrigation system and removing weeds, there is only the removal of obstacles to them, to the preferred karma pathways possible in this life.

Minds are fashioned purely by a notional-I, identified with actions as the doer and enjoyer, creating new and different karma – adding to and reinforcing the latent tendencies in these minds.

When there is distinction of one’s self from activity, hence no doership and no limited I-notion, there is only the one Mind [or self] – the Lord or the limitless consciousness – that instigates all other ones, all other individuals.

In that clear vision of oneness, born of contemplation that brings the clarity and allows assimilation of this teaching, there is no storehouse of karma.

For that yogin (the one who has attained success in yoga) there is neither pure nor impure karmas; for everyone else there is the three fold – sattva-rajas-tamas karmas – with their full range from pure to impure.

For everyone else, from that store of karmas, there is the manifestation of latent tendencies that are in keeping with the fruition of those karmas alone which are not obstructed.

Due to having the same form, there is linkage between memories and their latent impressions that cause them, though the formation of those latent impressions by past karmas are separated from their manifest memories by many, different intervening births, locations, and times.

And there is no beginning for these saṃskāras (latent tendencies) because desire that induces will-based action which in turn creates karma is eternal – beginningless.

Since those saṃskāras (the latent impressions) are held together by their causes starting from ignorance of oneself, initiating a chain of causes, their results which instigate a new round of saṃskāras, their abode – the uninformed mind, and their bases – the physical or subtle objects that form the basis or motive for the saṃskāras, when these four factors have no overvalued existence, then those saṃskāras have no overvalued existence.

The past and the future exist in their own form as different notions in the mind, because of the difference in the path of their characteristics.

These times exist as the manifest – as the manifest present – and subtle – as the subtle thought of a past and future – natures of their characteristics.

The reality of an entity is due to the oneness of its various modifications.

Though there is a oneness of an entity (YS.4.14 & 2.22), because of different thoughts about that one entity there is a separate karma path for the two – the object and the thought of the object.

Nor is an object totally dependent on – only equal to – a single thought of it. Were that ever to be the case, that object, being unique and momentary, would never have a means of independently knowing it as true or false – as being verifiable.

From the requirement of its influence on the mind [or thought] – its mutation of the mind – an object is separate and becomes known or remains unknown. Therefore, the mind has to distinctly mutate over time for its object to be known.

Though the mutation of the mind is the form of the knowledge, it is not the knowledge itself, since the thoughts themselves need to be known. Due to the immutability of the puruṣa (self) who is its, the mind’s, master, the thoughts in the mind are always known.

Nor is it, the mind – each thought in the flow called the mind – self-revealing (YS.4.22), because it has the nature of being seen.

And at the same moment, there is no ascertainment of both a thought (citta) and its distinct object (vastu, YS.4.15), for example, “this is a pot” and “this is a thought about a pot” – one or the other disappears in attention. Therefore, thought cannot always be self-revealing itself.

In the case of a thought becoming an object of another following thought in order to be known, there is an over necessity – a logically vicious infinite series, infinite progression – of cognitions of cognitions, and there would be confusion with memories, which would be required, but could not even exist, for this endless series to continue.

The unchanging consciousness has the knowledge of its cognition when it seems to take the form of that cognition.

The mind, affected by the limited seen and the presence of the limitless witness – limitless existence-consciousness – has everything, the entire known and unknown universe, as its object.

That mind, though diverse – consisting of parts, through the countless old and new latent tendencies, seemingly adjusting itself – is for another, not for itself, since it acts like it is being put together – is a construction with a foundation and new additions, like a house made for its occupant.

For the one who knows as clear as seeing the distinction of the witness self from the mind there is cessation of imagining the mind being ātman (oneself).

Then the mind surrenders to this discernment and has freedom before it.

When there are cracks in that discerning knowledge, those different thoughts are to be known as born of the latent tendencies in the mind, laid down by prior ignorance.

Their, the ignorant saṃskāras’, giving up is like that said (YS.2.10–11 & 4.11) for the afflictions.

For one who even has no interest in any way in the pleasurable meditation process, including secondary benefits, and who has discerning knowledge, samādhi (contemplation) is a mass of support.

From that discerning knowledge there is cessation of afflictions (YS.2.3) and results of action (YS.2.12) that seem to bind the individual.

Then, for the one whose impurities that cover everything have all gone away – have become transparently unreal – what is to be known is insignificant because one’s knowledge is limitless.

From that, when the guṇas (constituents of nature) in the form of this embodiment and its karma, have completed their purpose – the wisdom is gained, nothing more needs to be known, and the karma that brought the physical embodiment has played out – then the sequence of their changes comes to an end.

Sequence is associated with moments of time (YS.3.15), which only exist for the guṇas not the puruṣa, and can only be assumed to exist at the other end of a change, of which the puruṣa has none (YS.4.18).

When they serve no more purpose for the puruṣa (person), the guṇas (constituents of nature) – the elements that make up this embodiment and this universe – return to their origin without identifying with and thus limiting the person. This is kaivalya (freedom). Otherwise, positively it is known as the pure power of consciousness remaining in its own nature, always beyond time, beyond change (YS.1.3).