Sarvadarshanasangraha 15.53

15.53

sa ca samādhir dvividhaḥ/ saṃprajñātāsaṃprajñātabhedāt/ tatraikāgracetasi yaḥ pramāṇādivṛttīnāṃ bāhyaviṣayāṇāṃ nirodhaḥ sa saṃprajñātaḥ samādhiḥ/ samyak prajñāyate 'smin prakṛter viviktatayā dhyeyam iti vyutpatteḥ/ sa caturvidhaḥ/ savitarkādibhedāt/ samādhir nāma bhāvanā/ sā ca bhāvyasya viṣayāntaraparihāreṇa cetasi punaḥ punar niveśanam/ bhāvyaṃ ca dvividham — īśvaras tattvāni ca/ tāny api dvividhāni jaḍājaḍabhedāt/ jaḍāni prakṛtimahadahaṃkārādīni caturviṃśatiḥ/ ajaḍaḥ puruṣaḥ/ tatra yadā pṛthivyādīni sthūlāni viṣayatvenādāya pūrvāparānusaṃdhānena śabdārthollekhasaṃbhedena ca bhāvanā pravartate sa samādhiḥ savitarkaḥ/ yadā tanmātrāntaḥkaraṇalakṣaṇaṃ sūkṣmaṃ viṣayam ālambya deśādyavacchedena bhāvanā pravartate tadā savicāraḥ/ yadā rajastamoleśānuviddhaṃ cittaṃ bhāvyate tadā sukhaprakāśamayasya sattvasyodrekāt sānandaḥ/ yadā rajastamoleśānabhibhūtaṃ śuddhaṃ sattvam ālambanīkṛtya yā pravartate bhāvanā tadā tasyāṃ sattvasya nyagbhāvāc citiśakter udrekāc ca sattāmātrāvaśeṣatvena sāsmitaḥ samādhiḥ/ tad uktaṃ patañjalinā — vitarkavicārānandāsmitārūpānugamāt saṃprajñātaḥ iti/ sarvavṛttinirodhe tv asaṃprajñātaḥ samādhiḥ/ nanu sarvavṛttinirodho yoga ity ukte saṃprajñāte vyāptir na syāt/ tatra sattvapradhānāyāḥ sattvapuruṣānyatākhyātilakṣaṇāyā vṛtter anirodhād iti cet — tad etad vārtam/ kleśakarmavipākāśayaparipanthicittavṛttinirodho yoga ity aṅgīkārāt/

Now this samādhi, "meditation" [in the highest sense], is twofold: "that in which there is distinct recognition" (saṃprajñāta), and "that in which distinct recognition is lost" (asaṃprajñāta) [Yoga S., i. 17, 18].[33] The former is defined as that meditation where the thought is intent on its own object, and all the "modifications," such as "right notion," &c., so far as they depend on external things, are suppressed, or, according to the etymology of the term, it is where the intellect[34] is thoroughly recognised (samyak prajñāyate) as distinct from Nature. It has a fourfold division, as savitarka, savicāra, sānanda, and sāsmita. Now this "meditation" is a kind of "pondering" (bhāvanā), which is the taking into the mind again and again, to the exclusion of all other objects, that which is to be pondered. And that which is thus to be pondered is of two kinds, being either Īśvara or the twenty-five principles. And these principles also are of two kinds—senseless and not senseless. Twenty-four, including nature, intellect, egoism, &c., are senseless; that which is not senseless is Soul. Now among these objects which are to be pondered, when, having taken as the object the gross elements, as earth, &c., pondering is pursued in the form of an investigation as to which is antecedent and which consequent,[35] or in the form of a union of the word, its meaning, and the idea which is to be produced [cf. i. 42]; then the meditation is called "argumentative" (savitarka). When, having taken as its object something subtile, as the five subtile elements and the internal organ, pondering is pursued in relation to space, time, &c., then the meditation is called "deliberative" (savicāra). When the mind, commingled with some "passion" and "darkness," is pondered, then the meditation is called "beatific" (sānanda), because "goodness" is then predominant, which consists in the manifestation of joy.[36] When pondering is pursued, having as its object the pure element of "goodness," unaffected by even a little of "passion" or "darkness," then that meditation is called "egoistical" (sāsmita), because here personal existence[37] only remains, since the intellectual faculty becomes now predominant, and the quality of "goodness" has become quite subordinate [as a mere stepping-stone to higher things].

But the "meditation, where distinct recognition is lost," consists in the suppression of all "modifications" whatever.

"But" [it may be asked] "was not 'concentration' defined as the suppression of all the modifications? How, then, can the 'meditation where there is distinct recognition' be included in it at all, since we still find active in it that modification of the mind, with the quality of goodness predominant, which views the soul and the quality of goodness as distinct from each other?" This, however, is untenable, because we maintain that concentration is the suppression of the "modifications" of the thinking power, as especially stopping the operation of the "afflictions," the "actions," the "fructifications," and the "stock of deserts."[38]