Sutra 1.24.Ishvarapranidhana (continued). Ishvarapranidhana and purusha

In my two previous posts I have without further ado explicated to the reader my understanding of the “ishvarapranidhana” category introduced by Patanjali. Yet an attentive reader might remember that the author of Yoga Sutras tends to give the definition of the new concepts in the lines that follow their introduction. Now, does the understanding of ishavara proposed by me meet the definition that was given by Patanjali?

Sutras 1.12 - 1.18. Vairagya and Samprajna. The Logic of the Few Latest Slokas Arrangement

I hope the reader remembers that the lines 1.12-1.16 were dedicated to abhyasa and vairagya. In particular, the line 1.15 gave an extensive definition of vairagya:

1.15 the disengagement from emotions [related to] the seen and heard objects is the sign of mastery in vairagya, 

while the 1.16 defined the ultimate experience of vairagya through disengagement from gunas:

1.16 the utmost (vairagya) comes when Purusha is comprehended by means of disengagement from gunas.

Out of sudden, in slokas 1.17 and 1.18 Patanjali dramatically (as one may think) changes the subject and starts telling about the category of Samprajna. However, if we rely upon the understanding that was offered in our previous posts, the logic and the coherence of exposition shall become obvious. The actual interrelation between vairagya and amprajna does exist. One’s disengagement from emotional experience (vairagya) naturally comes upon comprehension of its origin and character. 

Thus the line 1.17 in fact clarifies the only reasonable method of reaching vairagya – apprehension of one’s emotional and intellectual vrittis and going to meta-context in respect of them.

Sutra 1.16. The Gunas: Psychological Interpretation

So, as we have already mentioned earlier, the shloka 1.16 of the Yoga Sutras links the practice of vairagya to the category of gunas.

तत्परं पुरुषख्यातेर्गुणवैतृष्णयम् ॥१६॥

1.16 tatparaṃ puruṣakhyāterguṇavaitṛṣṇayam

First of all let us outline the translation of the shloka.

tat - that. In this case this word denotes the vairagya from the previous line

paraṃ – highest, at the utmost

puruṣa - Purusha, a man, Me

khyāteh - knowledge, comprehension

guṇa - guna

vai-tṛṣṇayam – this word contains the root trishna already known to us and the prefix vai that the Monier-Williams dictionary translates as “to be deprived of”.

Let us draw the initial variant of the translation:

1.16 the utmost (vairagya) comes when Purusha is comprehended by means of disengagement from gunas.

Such variant of translation comes in line with the text logic. Indeed, if we assume that Patanjali has determined vairagya as dis-trishning/disengagement (sorry for this self citation J) from emotions in relation to the observed objects, the utmost vairagya shall be the one that comes to disengagement from some primary experiences that are the gunas. In such translation version the gunas should be correlated with some psychological states. Let us do this and in such a way UNDERSTAND the meaning of this phrase and the hence ensuing psycho-practices.