Comments on: Nidrā http://www.yogzilla.com/2009/06/20/nidra/ Wed, 14 Jul 2010 20:51:51 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: Sraddha http://www.yogzilla.com/2009/06/20/nidra/comment-page-1/#comment-527 Sraddha Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:34:06 +0000 http://www.yogzilla.com/?p=213#comment-527 Thanks, Hanuman. I agree there is a difference between nidrā and samādhi. I am yet to experience either : ) I think the way mind works during a common man's sleep is also an activity of the mind. memory is one thing, but getting it extrapolated it into a dream is another thing. Just like the dreamless sleep, that should have been an activity of the mind too. I will read more on the next sutra that talks about memory. I was also not clear about 'tamo'. I saw it being mentioned in Heart of Yoga, so I think the original has 'tamo'. Sri K cannot be wrong about YS, he studied them for so many years. This is my inference : ) Thanks, Hanuman. I agree there is a difference between nidrā and samādhi. I am yet to experience either : )

I think the way mind works during a common man’s sleep is also an activity of the mind. memory is one thing, but getting it extrapolated it into a dream is another thing. Just like the dreamless sleep, that should have been an activity of the mind too.

I will read more on the next sutra that talks about memory. I was also not clear about ‘tamo’. I saw it being mentioned in Heart of Yoga, so I think the original has ‘tamo’. Sri K cannot be wrong about YS, he studied them for so many years. This is my inference : )

]]> By: Hanuman http://www.yogzilla.com/2009/06/20/nidra/comment-page-1/#comment-522 Hanuman Mon, 22 Jun 2009 02:41:15 +0000 http://www.yogzilla.com/?p=213#comment-522 According to Śankara, non-existance (ābhava) means absence of the waking state, not absolute non-existance; so it is not void-ness in the sense of absolute emptiness, because there is something there: a notion (pratyaya) of non-existence; if this special notion wouldn't exist it would be difficult to distinguish sleep from nirodha. As you say, nidrā, refers only to dreamless sleep. But Patañjali makes a difference with dreaming state (svapna-avasthā) in I.38: "Or [restriction is achieved when consciousness] is resting on the insight [arising from] dreams (svapna) and sleep (nidrā)". The modifications of this dreaming state are included under smṛti (memory), so this story will continue... Does anybody knows why most of the yoga sūtra versions available don't include the word 'tamo' in this sūtra? (I know only two versions that include 'tamo'). Including 'tamo' makes sense because in this state there is a preponderance of tamas guṇa (that's really why this is a vṛtti). I just would like to know which one is the 'original' sūtra (with or without 'tamo'). According to Śankara, non-existance (ābhava) means absence of the waking state, not absolute non-existance; so it is not void-ness in the sense of absolute emptiness, because there is something there: a notion (pratyaya) of non-existence; if this special notion wouldn’t exist it would be difficult to distinguish sleep from nirodha.

As you say, nidrā, refers only to dreamless sleep. But Patañjali makes a difference with dreaming state (svapna-avasthā) in I.38: “Or [restriction is achieved when consciousness] is resting on the insight [arising from] dreams (svapna) and sleep (nidrā)”. The modifications of this dreaming state are included under smṛti (memory), so this story will continue…

Does anybody knows why most of the yoga sūtra versions available don’t include the word ‘tamo’ in this sūtra? (I know only two versions that include ‘tamo’). Including ‘tamo’ makes sense because in this state there is a preponderance of tamas guṇa (that’s really why this is a vṛtti). I just would like to know which one is the ‘original’ sūtra (with or without ‘tamo’).

]]>