For those readers who in this multitude of articles might havelost the general thread and the logic of YS doctrine exposition Ishall put in remembrance the basic points.
• In the second line Patanjali gives the definition of yoga as chitta-vritti-nirodhah
• Then he draws definitions of each vritti.
• In the line 1.12 he points out at abhyasa and vairagya as the methods of nirodha accomplishment.
• He defines the core point of these methods.
• In the line 1.17 he proceeds from vairagya to samprajna that, as we have shown in our last but one post, come in logic mutual interrelation being the notions denoting disengagement from and comprehension.
Thus, provided to our correct understanding of things, there should be logical link between nirodha and samprajna. Andindeed such link does exist and it is almost obviously laid within the terms themselves. Let us recall one of the meanings of theword nirodha – “confinement”. In this way chitta (as the subjectperforming an action) confines vritti (as the object). Roughlyspeaking, the consciousness takes it within itself.
Mind here thatit neither “dilutes” nor “eliminates” not “subsides” J.
And that this is the definition of comprehension process – the conscious mind absorbs, takes in all objects that previously served as the elements of unconscious mind: “Where Id is, there shall Ego be”. And let the devotees of religiously-ecstatic “yoga” and dopey “yoga” without thinking keep themselves from throwing stones at me because of this “Ego” in Freud’s quotation. Patanjali makes it clear in line 1.17 that samprajna is followed by asmita. Varnished tale can’t be round. Yoga is not aimed at delivery from one’s Ego. They are some pseudo-Easternreligions that do.
And as for us, we have come to a concept that is obvious to any practicing person.
Awareness is the basic virtue of a yogi :)
and expansion of one’s consciousness (comprehending) is one of fundamental paths in Yoga.