back to questions
Yoga-sūtra with Vyāsa's bhāṣya · 1.4
vṛttisārūpyam itaratra
Translation. Otherwise—during emergence (vyutthāna)—[there is] the seer’s conformity of form (sārūpya) with the mind’s fluctuations (vṛtti).
Grammar check: 2 words pass / 0 flagged / 0 beyond the checkerPāṇini-verified
Every word's claimed grammar is re-derived with vidyut-prakriya, software implementing Pāṇini's rules. Flags are shown, never hidden; some are the text taking epic or Vedic liberties the classical rules do not generate.
Word by word
| surface | lemma | grammar |
|---|
| vṛttisārūpyam | vṛttisārūpya | pass |
| itaratra | itaratra | pass |
How the commentary settled it
Where the verse alone is ambiguous, the reading follows Vyāsa's commentary; the deciding lines are quoted below each decision.
Read vṛttisārūpyam as a single instrumental-relation tatpuruṣa, vṛttibhiḥ sārūpyam, ‘conformity with the fluctuations,’ rather than ‘the resemblance belonging to the fluctuations.’→ Instrumental-relation tatpuruṣa: the puruṣa’s functioning appears non-distinct from the fluctuations, so the relevant relation is conformity with them.
ys [1]vyutthāne yāś cittavṛttayas tadaviśiṣṭavṛttiḥ puruṣaḥ.
In emergence, whatever the mind’s fluctuations are, the puruṣa has a functioning not distinguished from those.
Take vṛtti here specifically as a fluctuation or functioning of the mind (citta), not as conduct, livelihood, or activity in general.→ Mental fluctuation, because the commentary explicitly expands the sūtra’s vṛtti as cittavṛtti.
ys [1]vyutthāne yāś cittavṛttayas tadaviśiṣṭavṛttiḥ puruṣaḥ.
In emergence, whatever the mind’s fluctuations are, the puruṣa has a functioning not distinguished from those.
Render itaratra as ‘otherwise,’ specifically ‘during emergence (vyutthāna),’ rather than spatial ‘elsewhere.’ This contextual value also agrees with ‘on the other hand, else’ in [MW s.v. itaratra, 164,3].→ Otherwise—during the condition of emergence (vyutthāna).
ys [1]vyutthāne yāś cittavṛttayas tadaviśiṣṭavṛttiḥ puruṣaḥ.
In emergence, whatever the mind’s fluctuations are, the puruṣa has a functioning not distinguished from those.
Analyze sārūpyam as Napumsaka Prathama Eka, the abstract nominative in an elliptical nominal clause, and understand the bearer of that conformity as the puruṣa or seer—not as the mind or the fluctuations themselves.→ Nominative singular; the supplied sense is ‘there is the seer’s conformity,’ since the commentary recasts the sūtra with puruṣaḥ as its subject.
ys [1]vyutthāne yāś cittavṛttayas tadaviśiṣṭavṛttiḥ puruṣaḥ.
In emergence, whatever the mind’s fluctuations are, the puruṣa has a functioning not distinguished from those.
Render sārūpya as ‘conformity of form’ ([MW s.v. sārūpya, 1209,2]), not as an ontological merger or numerical identity of mind and puruṣa. The cognition appears non-distinct from the mind’s fluctuation, while the commentary continues to distinguish the seen mind from the puruṣa who owns it.→ Conformity of form: non-distinction at the level of functioning or cognition, without erasing the distinction between citta and puruṣa.
ys [1]vyutthāne yāś cittavṛttayas tadaviśiṣṭavṛttiḥ puruṣaḥ.
In emergence, whatever the mind’s fluctuations are, the puruṣa has a functioning not distinguished from those.
ys [3]cittam ayaskāntamaṇikalpaṃ saṃnidhimātropakāri dṛśyatvena svaṃ bhavati puruṣasya svāminaḥ.
The mind, comparable to a lodestone, assists merely through proximity; as something seen, it becomes the property of the puruṣa, its master.
Vyāsa's commentary on this unit
1vyutthāne yāś cittavṛttayas tadaviśiṣṭavṛttiḥ puruṣaḥ.
2tathā ca sūtram ekam eva darśanaṃ khyātir eva darśanam iti.
3cittam ayaskāntamaṇikalpaṃ saṃnidhimātropakāri dṛśyatvena svaṃ bhavati puruṣasya svāminaḥ.
4tasmāc cittavṛttibod