--- In [email protected], cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > svaviSayaasaMprayoge citta-svaruupaanukaara ivendriyaaNaaM > pratyaahaaraH .. 54.. > > Sandhi-samaasa-vigraha: > > sva-viSaya+asaMprayoge; citta-svaruupa+anukaaraH; > iva+indriyaaNaam; pratyaahaaraH > > Withdrawal of the senses is where objects are not allowed to stir the > mind at all, and it follows, rather, after its own nature. > > Word-for-word, based on Taimni's vocabulary: > > own(sva)object(viSaya)[in]not-coming-into-contact(asaMprayoge: > locative singular) mind (citta) own-form (sva-ruupa) > functioning-according-to (anukaaraH) as it were(iva) of the senses > (indriyaaNaam) [is] pratyaahaara. (Oh shucks!) > > PS. Taimni's translation goes like this: > > /Pratyaahaara/ or abstraction is , as it were, the imitation > by the senses of the mind by withdrawing themselves from > their objects. > > Just realised pondering on the differences between different > translations that perhaps some translators take the genitive > attribute /indriyaaNaam/ to modify the word /pratyaahaara/ > (indriyaaNaam pratyaahaaraH: withdrawal of the senses). Taimni's > translation suggests that he takes /indriyaaNaam/ to modify the > compound word /citta-svaruupa-anukaara/. I tend to agree > with Taimni because my gut feeling is that Sanskrit prefers genitive > attribute *after* it's head word, like for instance /desha-bandhash > cittasya/. OTOH, what the heck is "imitation by the senses of the mind"? >
Taimini's got it wrong... When the senses are withdrawn [reduction of the activity of the thalamus to disallow sense-perception from outside OR sensory feedback loops from inside], the mind [brain] follows its own nature, which is Turiya.
