I.41 is crucial in understanding the differences between these stilled states of samādhi. After discussing a variety of ālaṁbanas, in I.41, Patañjali resumes the discussion he briefly initiated in I.17:
kṣīṇa-vṛtter-abhijātasyeva maṇer-grahītṛ-grahaṇa-grāhyeṣu tat-stha-tad-añjanatā samāpattiḥ
Samāpatti, complete absorption of the mind when it is free from its vṛttis, occurs when the mind becomes just like a transparent jewel, taking the form of whatever object is placed before it, whether the object be the knower, the instrument of knowledge, or the object of knowledge.
We will here correlate the technical term samāpatti, introduced in this sūtra for the first time, with samādhi, even as the terms are not technically synonymous, since the states of mind they represent overlap, and the difference need not detain us here.19 This verse indicates that, when the mind is freed from all distractions in the form of the vṛttis, it becomes like a pure crystal, maṇi.20 Just as a crystal exactly reflects the color of whatever object is placed adjacent to it, such as a red hibiscus flower, so the peaceful mind, when fixed and focused one-pointedly on the object of concentration, is colored by and reflects that object; that is, in advanced meditation, the mind becomes completely absorbed in the presence of that object. Moreover, Patañjali states here that the mind can reflect and assume the form of any object, whether the object be an external object made of gross or subtle elements (grāhya), the very instruments of knowledge themselves, such as the sense organs (grahaṇa), or the intelligence (grahītṛ), the knower, even in its purest and most subtle function, which will be discussed below. As discussed above, the gross elements and subtle qualities evolve out of citta (mind stuff—intelligence and ego and so on), in Sāṁkhya, and thus the mind, being more subtle than its evolutes, and, indeed, their very essence, can pervade them (whether these objects are the grahya, the grahaṇa, or the grahitṛ). The mind can not only internally mold its own guṇic essence into the prakṛtic form of an object or sense organ but can intrusively penetrate, or, better, merge into and percolate the object’s very essence.21 In a sense it becomes the object by merging with it, and thereby gains ultimate insight into its nature. Additionally, when completely pure and steady, the mind can ultimately reflect puruṣa back to itself, the penultimate stage of yoga practice. This will become clearer as we proceed.
Returning to the states of samādhi indicated in I.17, the ninth-century commentator Vācaspati Miśra considers the first state on Patañjali’s list, vitarka samādhi, to be contemplation on a gross physical object, that is to say, meditating on an object which one experiences as a manifestation or construct of the gross physical or atomic elements. It is the first level of experiencing an object in samādhi. In I.42–43, this first stage is further refined by Patañjali and subdivided into two subdivisions: sa- (with) vitarka and nir- (without) vitarka. I.42 states,
tatra śabdārtha jñāna vikalpaiḥ saṁkīrṇā savitarkā samāpattiḥ
Savitarka samāpatti, “samādhi absorption with physical awareness,” is intermixed with the notions of word, meaning, and idea.
Vyāsa takes a cow to exemplify savitarka. The actual physical object, the two-syllable word used in speech to refer to that object, and the knowledge, or idea, produced in the mind of a person who hears that word are all different categories of things. They have different characteristics, even though they are conflated in normal cognition: the first is a real-life object made of flesh and blood, the second is a linguistic indicator consisting of a vibrational phoneme, and the third is a mental image or idea predicated on memory recognition and containing meaning—a pratyaya or saṁskāra.
When the yogī uses an object such as a cow as the ālaṁbana, but the yogī’s awareness of this object is conflated with the word for and semantic-laden concept of a cow, this level of samādhi absorption is known as savitarka samāpatti, “absorption with physical awareness.” In other words, the yogī’s experience of the object is still subtly or perhaps subconsciously tinged with awareness of what the object is called, and with the memory or knowledge corresponding to that object—śabdārthajñāna-vikalpa, that is, the experience of the object is mixed up (saṅkīrṇā) with a mental construct in the form of language and idea. Consequently, direct experience of the object in its own right and on its own ground of being is tainted by the imposition of recognition or conceptual semantic thought upon it.
Vācaspati Miśra calls this type of samādhi lower perception, apara pratyakṣa (with an eye to the para pratyakṣa, higher perception, that Vyāsa will call the next state of samādhi outlined in I.43). This awareness of the object’s “word, meaning, and knowledge” is not to be confused with conventional vṛttis. The yogī is not deliberating or reasoning about the object in any kind of analytical or intellectually sequential fashion at the level of discursive thought, or consciously activating a memory saṁskāra to recognize the object, since that would involve the activation and presence of vṛttis: we are at the level of samādhi here, when all vṛttis have been stilled. Nonetheless, the yogī’s complete absorption on the object still includes an intuitive level of awareness or spontaneous (i.e., nondiscursive) insight as to the object’s name and its meaning, and this can only mean that the subconscious memory saṁskāras of recognition are still not fully latent or inactive.
Savitarka might be better understood in comparison with nirvitarka, the next stage of samādhi in I.43, which is when, in contrast, the object stands out in its own right without (nir-) being conflated with the conventional terminologies of language that might refer to it, and without being conflated with any knowledge, recognition, or meaning it might generate:
smṛti-pariśuddhau svarūpa-śūnyevārtha-mātra-nirbhāsā nirvitarkā
Nirvitarka [samāpatti] “absorption without conceptualization” occurs when memory has been purged and the mind is empty, as it were, of its own [reflective] nature. Now only the object [of meditation] shines forth [in its own right].
Nirvitarka means “nonconceptual,” or, better, “transconceptual.” This occurs when the yogī’s citta has been purged of any memory awareness of what the object is or what it is called. In other words, no saṁskāra imprints pertaining to the ālaṁbana, the “cow” in Vyāsa’a example, activate on any subconscious or intuitive level whatsoever. Vācaspati Miśra states that this type of object awareness is real yogic perception, because conceptual or artificial notions and names are not superimposed upon the object. The object can “shine forth” in its own autonomous existence. When the mind allows itself to be colored exclusively by the object of focus itself without any cognitive awareness of the object’s place in the greater scheme of things and without the normal instinctive impulse to identify it, then the yogī has attained the stage of nirvitarka samāpatti, or nirvitarka samādhi. After all, word and knowledge are different from the ultimate prakṛtic metaphysical ingredients that make up a cow in reality. In nirvitarka samāpatti, the object itself stands forth in its own right, free of projected designation or mental imaging and clutter.
In this state, the mind has also given up being conscious of itself as an organ of knowledge; in other words, the mind is not even aware of itself as an instrument channeling awareness onto an object. In a sense, all “knowledge” of the object as conventionally understood has been suspended, and the mind has completely transformed itself into the object, free from either any objective cognitive intention or subjective self-awareness. The object can now shine forth in its own right as an object with its own inherent existence, artha-mātra-nirbhāsa, free from labels, categorizations, or situatedness in the grand scheme of things. In effect, the object has become the yogī’s entire universe; awareness is focused on it exclusively and is thus unaware of anything else, not even the cognitive process itself.
Vyāsa notes that the type of insightful perception into the true nature of an object gained through savitarka samāpatti supersedes the other two means of gaining right knowledge of reality recognized by t
he schools of Yoga: inference (logic) and verbal authority (I.7). Both inference and verbal authority (whether human, pauruṣeya, or transhuman, apauruṣeya, viz., scripture) are mediate: they depend on sense perception, words, and ideas to impart knowledge. And words and ideas are different from the things they denote; they are secondhand. Nirvitarka samāpatti is based on firsthand experiential and unmediated direct perception that transcends words and ideas, and penetrates the essential nature of an object itself at a far more profound level than clumsy and artificial words and meanings or ideas. Vyāsa calls it para pratyakṣa, “supreme perception,” and therefore distinct from loka [apara] pratyakṣa, “mundane perception.” However, says Vyāsa, nirvitarka samāpatti can and does become the “seed” from which logic and scripture may sprout. In other words, says Vācaspati Miśra, yogīs who have experienced the lofty levels of samādhi discussed in these sūtras might use words and logic to share their experiences with ordinary people—as indeed, Patañjali is doing—and their words thus become the basis of scripture, as is the case with the Yoga Sūtras. Put differently, scripture can be the product of a nirvitarka (higher) level of awareness of reality expressed by God or by the sages through words and concepts.
Once these truths become filtered through and expressed in words, ideas, and logical thought, however, they become subject to the faults and limitations inherent in the adoption of words and ideas (one need only consider, for example, how different commentators sometimes understand cryptic sūtras differently—especially in the Vedānta tradition22). Therefore, in Yoga, direct perception is the highest form of epistemology; one must practice and experience the truths of Yoga, not merely read about, discuss, or try to understand them theoretically. By definition, then, since nirvitarka samādhi is a state beyond the ability of words and concepts to describe, a theoretical analysis on sūtras such as I.17 (as we are undertaking here) is a priori oxymoronic. Vijñānabhikṣu adds that since words and ideas are subject to error, and inference and scripture are consequent and derived from them, one must take recourse of a guru who has experienced such states. Even then, says Vijñānabhikṣu, despite the fact that the guru may have realized the true nature of things, it is not possible to give experiential insight into such things through words, even the words of the guru, any more than one can convey through words the actual taste of sugarcane or milk to one who has not experienced them. Therefore, ultimately, one returns to the yogic truism that one must experience these states for oneself. Analyses such as this are useful only insofar as they might inspire individuals to take up the actual practice of yoga.
In this hierarchization of nirvitarka over savitarka, Patañjali, and certainly the commentators, are essentially reversing the two stages of conventional perception as understood by a number of Indic philosophical traditions,23 including (with differences in vocabulary) Sāṁkhya.24 In conventional non-yogic cognition, when one, say, ambles along the road and encounters an unfamiliar object, one first becomes aware of it in a vague sort of way, as raw sense data, without assigning a name or identification to it, like the preconceptual awareness of an infant. After this moment, the mind processes the data, and memory saṁskāras identify and recognize the object in terms of its specific name, the category of thing that it is, and its function in the grand scheme of things, for example, “This is a red clay pot for carrying water.”25 The first stage of indeterminate awareness is called nirvikalpa, and the second, savikalpa. Thus, in conventional perception, nirvikalpa pratyakṣa, preverbal, preconceptual awareness, is followed by savikalpa pratyakṣa, the recognition of the name, category, and function of an object; the latter is considered a more exact form of cognition. In samādhi the reverse holds true—savitarka, when there is still awareness of an object’s name and function, is superseded by nirvitarka, where the object stands out freed from the mental clutter of naming, identification, and recognition. Thus, in samādhi, in contrast to mundane perception, nirvitarka is considered to be a superior level of awareness due to experiencing the object ontologically, rather than conceptually. Returning to I.17, the next level of samādhi after vitarka is vicāra. The overall difference between vitarka and vicāra samādhi (samāpatti), Vyāsa informs us, is that the focus of the former is on the gross physical elements that comprise an object, and the focus of the latter is on the subtle essences, sūkṣma-viṣayatvaṁ, that underpin these gross elements. As indicated in figure 3.2, in Sāṁkhya metaphysics, gross atomic elements are densifications26 of the qualities perceived by the senses (made of subtler vibrational energies, as ice, say, is to water), and (with a view to the higher stages of samādhi that are to come), water to vapor. In I.44, Patañjali also divides vicāra samādhi into two subdivisions, sa- (with) and nir- (without), as he did with vitarka:
etayaiva savicārā nirvicārā ca sūkṣma-viṣayā vyākhyātā
The states of samādhi with “subtle awareness” and without “subtle awareness,” whose object of focus is the subtle nature [of things], are explained in the same manner.
Figure 3.2. Puruṣa, prakṛti and the four stages of samādhi. Image courtesy of Edwin F. Bryant.
The subtler essences from which the atomic elements constituting gross physical objects evolve are the tanmātras, the five qualities. Vācaspati Miśra states that vicāra samādhi involves mental absorption in this more subtle aspect of the object of meditation, the direct experiencing of the object as actually consisting of these more subtle ingredients.
In fact, I.44 informs us that the subtle substructure of physical reality can refer to any of the evolutes from prakṛti as conceived of by Sāṁkhya, since, as can be seen from the chart, even the tanmātras evolve from ahaṁkāra, ego, which in turn evolves from buddhi, intelligence. Thus, the latter can also be considered sūkṣma, subtle. (Vijñānabhikṣu defines “subtle” as that which is the source or cause of something that evolves from it—that is, since the gross elements are evolutes from the subtle elements, the latter are thereby their causes and thus subtle vis-à-vis the former).
As a new archer first aims at large objects, says Vācaspati Miśra, and then at progressively smaller ones, so the neophyte yogī first experiences the gross nature of the object in meditation, and then its progressively more subtle nature. Thus, instead of experiencing the object as comprised of compact quantum masses, the mahābhūta gross elements, as in the first state of vitarka, the yogī experiences them in vicāra, as the vibratory, potential, subtle essences underpinning the qualities as perceived by the senses.
As noted, this process of penetrating into the subtle or essential nature of an object might be analogous to seeing a piece of ice as a hard chunk of solid substance, or perceiving its deeper nature as essentially the fluid element of water, or, penetrating deeper still, seeing it as solidified vapor. And one can go further in the analogy and see all of these as combinations of yet finer entities—hydrogen and oxygen molecules—and these can in turn be dissolved into their still finer subatomic physical constituents. As this principle that a gross object is in fact constituted of finer and then still finer elements and essences holds good in modern physics, so it does in Sāṁkhyan physics—one difference from normative physics perhaps being that in modern science, the atomic or subatomic structures of matter can be perceived (or inferred as existing) only with advanced mechanical instrumentation, whereas Patañjali and the Yoga tradition claim that the yogī can actually and directly perceive, or, more accurately, experience with the mind, the subtle essences of an object without any such instrumental extensions. The subtle essences are directly experiential, since the subtle (and gross) elements are evolutes of a substratum of mind stuff, and the Sāṁkhyan principle of perception is that subtler dimensions of prakṛti can experience grosser ones. In other words, since one’s buddhi (intelligence aspect of the citta) is composed of the same substance as the buddhi substratum of any object, gross or subtle, it can blend with this substratum and thus percolate the object intimately from within, so to speak (a principle fundamental to unders
tanding the metaphysics underpinning the siddhis, mystic powers, claimed by the Yoga tradition27).
Vicāra, then, is when meditative focus becomes absorbed in the tanmātras, the subtle energies underpinning any object of meditation, but it too is divided into sa- and nir- forms. Thus, when the intensity of focus on the object of meditation has deepened such that the yogī has penetrated its gross externalization, transcended language and conceptualization, and is experiencing the object as consisting of tanmātras, subtle essences, but subtle essences circumscribed as existing in time and space, then the ensuing concentrative state of awareness is known as savicāra. In other words, in savicāra meditation, while the object is perceived as consisting of subtle essences, it is still experienced as existing in the present time, rather than in the past or future, and is still bounded by space, that is, it is taking up some distinct physical space in the presence of the meditator rather than being situated anywhere else. Briefly put, at this stage, the yogī’s consciousness is spatially and temporally circumscribed—it still has some level of awareness of space and time.
When, however, the yogī can focus on the object unconditioned by such dimensionality, in other words when he or she can not just focus on the subtle nature of an object but transcend space and time and perceive that these subtle essences pervade and underpin all things at all times, then the yogī has attained the state of nirvicāra. In this state, the yogī is no longer aware of spatiality and temporality—the here and now. The object is no longer a distinct object taking up extension in a portion of space different from other spatial objects, nor is it any longer experienced as existing in the present, rather than any other time, because the yogī experiences the subtle qualities of the object as underpinning all objects at all times. In other words, the form of the object dissolves as it were under the power of the yogī’s focus, and the yogī is now simply experiencing vibrant subtle energies eternally pervading all reality everywhere and at all times. This is a preliminary experience of a certain level of objectified eternality and infinity.
Asian Traditions of Meditation Page 11