On the inward knowledge, samādhi-yoga — by this chapter (the one before) renunciation has been declared. He says: sannyāsa together with yoga is ‘anāśrita’ (not dependent on external support). Even the fourth āśrama’s fire and actions are mentioned as before (4.25 etc.). Fire, Brahman, that worship, action and initiation are reckoned as āśramas. Therefore, one who is without fire and without action is not a sannyāsī nor a yogī — so it is.

He says: even sannyāsa is included in yoga — ‘yam sannyāsam’ — implying: how can one abandon the resolve of desire without some means? This is the import.

‘How long must one perform action?’ — thus he says, ‘Arurukṣo mūnera’ (do not be discouraged, sage). He seeks completeness of the means of ascending to yoga. ‘Yoga‑mārūḍha’ is one who has attained yoga; the fully equipped means yield direct knowledge. The cause is the supreme reason for bliss. Even the directly knowing ones have the fruits like samādhi mentioned (pp.199–200). By the complete calming of all (the faculties), samādhi becomes the primary cause. Yet when the state of enjoyment to be attained has arisen as samyag‑samprajñāta‑samādhi, then one abides in the Lord’s conduct; for ‘Those who behold you, O Lord, alone are supremely happy’ — the samādhi that conforms is produced in those men. When actions to be enjoyed cease (bhoktavya-karma kṣīṇa), by chanting or by other means great souls and devotees who are devoted to that (i.e., to the Lord) conduct themselves so.

Of the one who has ascended to yoga he states the mark: ‘yada’ — his conduct will be of steady recollection. It is said that one becomes a receptacle of faults by seeing one’s own faults; by the endeavors of others (one avoids that) — this is the sense.

He says the ascent in yoga must be effected by effort: ‘Uddhared’ — lift up by exertion.

Who is the friend of the self? He answers: the mind is the friend of the self. ‘Ātmā’ here is the mind of the jīva. By the self with the mind, the jīva knows the self; by the self with mind and intellect, or by the jīva with intellect, one overcomes. Indeed the intellect conquers. It is said: since the mind is the supreme cause, the mind is the cause of bondage and liberation for humans. ‘Uddharet manasā jīvam’ — one should lift the jīva with the mind and not depress the jīva. The mind is surely the friend and the enemy of the jīva. When by the jīva with intellect the mind is conquered, then the bond becomes the enemy and is no more elsewhere. A man who conquers by the power of intellect and devotion to God overcomes enemies like Madhu and Kaitabha — so it is said in the Brahmavaivarta. The non‑self is hostile to the unconquered self; even if it serves, it does not properly act as a servant — hence it functions as an adversary to the self.

“Jitātmanah” is stated as the fruit — ‘one whose self is conquered.’ A conqueror of the self becomes tranquil; his mind no longer ordinarily turns to sense-objects. Then the Supreme Self is duly present in the heart, and he becomes one with direct knowledge (aparokṣajñānī). The mark of one possessing direct knowledge is explained by contrasts such as cold and heat. In the contexts of cold, heat, etc., the term kūṭastha denotes one established in the core (unchanged), a soul satisfied with jñāna and vijñāna, and one who has conquered the senses — these are the reasons for the designation kūṭastha. Vijñāna may mean particular knowledge or direct knowledge. Whatever is spoken of by the general terms and yet the particulars of which are not known to me are within my purview. For the gods and others that knowledge is called vijñāna. Thus: by hearing and reflection that knowledge arises. That knowledge is darśana; Vishnu called it vijñāna. Vijñāna is distinguished from jñāna and is a particularized direct cognition; darśana is likewise. ‘Kūṭastho nirvikāraḥ’ and ‘kūṭavat-sthita’ are derived forms. Kūṭa (a hollow) — kūṭa and kha (space) are terms for the gap of the sky; hence the name. ‘Yogī yogaṁ kurvan’ — one engaged in yoga; ‘yuktaḥ’ — one completed in yoga. Thus: one who practices yoga becomes called ‘yogānusṭhātā’ or ‘yogasampūrṇa.’

(same as 6.7) “Jitātmanah” is stated as the fruit — ‘one whose self is conquered.’ A conqueror of the self becomes tranquil; his mind no longer ordinarily turns to sense-objects. Then the Supreme Self is duly present in the heart, and he becomes one with direct knowledge (aparokṣajñānī). The mark of one possessing direct knowledge is explained by contrasts such as cold and heat. In the contexts of cold, heat, etc., the term kūṭastha denotes one established in the core (unchanged), a soul satisfied with jñāna and vijñāna, and one who has conquered the senses — these are the reasons for the designation kūṭastha. Vijñāna may mean particular knowledge or direct knowledge. Whatever is spoken of by the general terms and yet the particulars of which are not known to me are within my purview. For the gods and others that knowledge is called vijñāna. Thus: by hearing and reflection that knowledge arises. That knowledge is darśana; Vishnu called it vijñāna. Vijñāna is distinguished from jñāna and is a particularized direct cognition; darśana is likewise. ‘Kūṭastho nirvikāraḥ’ and ‘kūṭavat-sthita’ are derived forms. Kūṭa (a hollow) — kūṭa and kha (space) are terms for the gap of the sky; hence the name. ‘Yogī yogaṁ kurvan’ — one engaged in yoga; ‘yuktaḥ’ — one completed in yoga. Thus: one who practices yoga becomes called ‘yogānusṭhātā’ or ‘yogasampūrṇa.’

He alone indeed transcends all. In good and bad people alike there is the same jīvacitto (individual consciousness). All jīvas are essentially forms of chit — the Supreme Lord is the cause of all and of their being instruments everywhere; yet they are forms of chit and differ by internal modifications caused by their inner instruments (antaḥkaraṇa). Whatever goodness exists in all beings is produced by the Lord alone; nothing of that comes from themselves. All this has been said: all are forms of chit, free of defects. As for jīvas, those defects have been ascribed to them. All that is in them is from īśvara; nothing is by themselves. Because all are alike in this way, diversity arises from delusion. Thus similar jīvas are distinguished only by devatās, etc. Their own natures, however, are eternal by rule. Similarly, defects in asuras are eternal and natural; the good and bad qualities of humans are held to be eternal and natural. Gods are always regarded as possessing only auspicious qualities. Thus, in the Brāhma, it is said: but not that worship equality of good and bad — there the remembrance of defects leads to unequal worship, and uneven worship leads to equal respect for the unequal. By acting in a manner whereby even a deity falls from his position a man is one who causes the fall. Property, kin, youth, action and knowledge — these five are valued places and are higher or lower accordingly. (Manava 2.136) A man whose worship and impartial vision correspond to the nature of qualities among beings — to such one Vishnu shows favor; equality in regard to difference grants excellence to the man’s accumulation. Unequal worship but equal vision is like the seed of misery. (Brahmavaivarte) Scriptures prescribe equal worship among friends etc.; whether fewer or more, that too is equality. It is said that one should act toward friends as one ought toward friends, and toward fathers, enemies’ sons, etc., likewise; such impartial worship is called samabuddhi. (Garuda) A friend who helps without expectation, who protects the distressed, who slays the foe — such a one is a friend. One who is indifferent in performing duty, help or harm is apathetic; one who performs both duties is middling. One who hates but acts as if hospitable is hostile. One who protects what harms a dear one is a friend; one who benefits without expectation is a friend; who then slays the enemy is also counted enemy by some. Thus explained.

‘Yogaṁ yujyate’ — the manner of samādhi-yoga is indicated: one should practice samādhi-yoga. He should unite the self and the mind (ātman and manas).

(same as 6.10) ‘Yogaṁ yujyate’ — the manner of samādhi-yoga is indicated: one should practice samādhi-yoga. He should unite the self and the mind (ātman and manas).

‘Yogaṁ’ here means samādhi-yoga — one should practice samādhi-yoga.

(same as 6.12) ‘Yogaṁ’ here means samādhi-yoga — one should practice samādhi-yoga.

(same as 6.12) ‘Yogaṁ’ here means samādhi-yoga — one should practice samādhi-yoga.

This refers to the body at the time of final departure after attaining nirvāṇa.

Prohibitions such as fasting are for the incapable. It was said: avoid hunger, sleep, fear, rapid breathing and restless movements. If, with eyelids half-closed, one is capable, meditation will become established. (According to the Nārada text.)

‘Of regulated diet and recreation’ — the phrase refers to moderation in food, etc.; as long as one lacks exertion, so much restraint in food and so on is meant.

He abides in the Self.

योगः आत्मनः भगवद्-विषयः — अर्थात् योगः आत्मन्येव भगवत्तवविषये स्थितः; योगाश्रयेन आत्मा भगवतः विभवम् अनुभवति।

आत्मना मनसा आत्मनि देहे आत्मानम् भगवन्तम् पश्यन् — मनसा आत्मेन्द्रियैः चात्मनः ध्यानेन देहस्थे आत्मन्येव भगवन्तं, अर्थात् भगवतः रूपं आत्मनि दृशेत्।

तत्त्वतः भगवद्-रूपत्वात् — तदर्थः यतः सत्त्वतः (तत्त्वतः) भगवतः स्वरूपं विद्यमानं स एव भगवद्-रूपत्वं प्रदर्शयति।

तत्त्वतः भगवद्-रूपत्वात् — (अयमेव पुनरुक्तिः) कारणं यत् तद् तत्त्वतः भगवतः रूपत्वाद् इति।

दुःखसंयोगो येन वियुज्यते स दुःखसंयोगवियोगः — ‘संयोग’ शब्देन दर्शनीयम् यत् वियुक्ते संयोगे उत्पन्नं दुःखं न केवलं नाशं भवति, किं तु तद् दुःखस्य उत्पत्तिं एव निवर्तयति। ‘निश्चयेन योक्तव्यः’ इति युक्तव्यं निश्चितरूपेण-अर्थः; योक्तव्य एव बुभूषुणे।

सर्वान् सर्वविषयान् अशेषतः — अर्थः, सर्वेषां विषयाणां सम्यक् निग्रहः; एवं अपि एकविषय एव कामः स्वल्पः कादाचित् अपि न कर्तव्यः। ‘मनसा एव नियन्तुं शक्यते नान्येन’ इति वचनेन निर्दिष्टम् यत् केवलेन मनसा एव विषयान् नियोजयितुं शक्यते, अन्यत्र न।

बुद्धेः कारणत्वं मनोनिग्रहे आत्मरमणे च — बुद्धिः मननिग्रहे कारणरूपा; आत्मरमण (आत्मन्येव रमण) च बुद्ध्या साध्यते।

यतो यतो यत्र यत्र... — ‘यतो यतो’ इत्यादि प्रयोगात् आशयः यद् यत्र यतो यतो मनो धावति तत्र भाग्यते; अतः आत्मन्येव वशं नेय्यादित्यर्थः — मनम् आत्मविषये एव वशीकुर्यात्।

Sri Madhvacharya did not comment on this sloka.

पूर्वश्लोकोक्तं प्रपञ्चयति एवं युञ्जन्निति — अर्थः पूर्वश्लोके यथुक्तं तदनुरूपं प्रपञ्चमुदाहृत्य इति एव युज्यते।

ध्येयमाह सर्वभूतस्थमिति — ध्येयम् इति उक्तं सर्वभूतस्थं आत्मानम् उच्यते; तत् परमेश्वरः। सर्वभूतानि च आत्मनि परमेश्वरे एव दृश्यन्ते। अथवा सर्वभूतेषु स्थितं परमेश्वरं तथा चतुर्मुखब्रह्मादिश्रुतैः ऐश्वर्यलक्षणैः समानरूपेण पश्यति। तस्मात् उक्तम् — आत्मानं सर्वभूतेषु भगवन्तमवस्थितम्; अपश्यत् इति च: ‘सर्वभूतानि भगवत्यपि चात्मनि अपि पश्यति’ इति। ‘समं सर्वेषु भूतेषु तिष्ठन्तं परमेश्वरम्’ इति अपि।

फलमाह यो मामिति — तस्याहं न प्रणश्यामि इति अर्थः, मम भक्तस्य सर्वदा रक्षणार्थं अहं योगक्षेमं वहामि। सः मम न प्रणश्यति; सः सर्वदा मद्भक्तो भवति। तथैव स्वामी भृता वा रक्षते इति प्रसिद्धिः। उक्तम् च — ‘सर्वदा सर्वभूतेषु समं मां यः प्रपश्यति अचला तस्य भक्तिः स्याद्; योगक्षेमं वहाम्यहम्’ इति गारुडसंहिता।

This makes plain that the Self is present in all beings. Though distinct, the Lord abides everywhere as the One; He pervades all modes yet remains present with Me alone. Thus the fruit of knowledge is said to be certain when one realizes Him directly. Yet generally one will not cease from unrighteous acts; if he continues to do them, they indicate great suffering. Even a little unrighteousness in one with vision toward Vishnu is said to be blameworthy. For sin committed from carelessness will soon be consumed. How much more so when performed by mighty kings, gods, or sages — the multiplicity of their acts only signals greater pain.

Equality is here explained by way of difference of kind, using the simile of the Self.

I do not see firm steadiness in this yoga, for the mind is fickle.

It was said that steadiness of yoga is indeed firm because the mind is fickle. Without practice it cannot be attained; there is no doubt that detachment is required, says Vyasa's Yoga.

Sri Madhvacharya did not comment on this sloka.

The mind is never controlled simply by one's own effort. One does not attain liberation then for those devoid of wholesome desire, for the hostile, for those fallen into sensuality. Nor is liberation appropriate for atheists, hence the disallowance in the Brahma-sutra.

No undue effort (i.e., not exerting excessive strain).

No undue effort (i.e., not exerting excessive strain).

No undue effort (i.e., not exerting excessive strain).

Sri Madhvacharya did not comment on this sloka.

Sri Madhvacharya did not comment on this sloka.

Sri Madhvacharya did not comment on this sloka.

Sri Madhvacharya did not comment on this verse.

Even one who inquires about yoga: ‘I must know yoga’—if his desire is very great, he also transcends mere verbal Brahman. The sense is: he attains Brahman.

‘Not of a single birth’—it is said that by effort. The inquirer, having known, makes effort. Thus, having been perfected through many births, becoming a direct knower, one attains the supreme goal. And in the Naradiya text: ‘Indeed, the inquirers who are very full of faith and devoted to Vishnu, having known, meditated, and thus seen, after many births the person—distinctly Narayana, the Lord—no other way is there.’

From the knowers and from those learned in yoga, from ascetics and from those undergoing hardships—the text distinguishes the yoga of meditation even from sacrificial rites and the like. Still, remaining is the meditation on Hari, Brahma, Shiva, etc. Meditation is said to be multiplied by crores, or more, for those desirous of liberation, says Garuda. Unconscious meditators, not knowing, are surpassed by mere knowledge. Knowing, meditation becomes mere knowledge; beyond meditation is vision; and beyond vision is devotion, which is not surpassed by any other means, says Narada.

Sri Madhvacharya did not comment on this verse.