--- In [email protected], cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > saMprajñâta-vitarka: savitarka > nirvitarka > > asaMprajñâta > > saMprajñâta-vicâra: savicâra > nirvicâra > > asaMprajñâta > > saMprajñâta-sânanda > > asaMprajñâta > > saMprajñâta-sasmitâ (sâsmitâ?) > > nirbîja-samâdhi
> dharma-megha-samâdhi That diagram of Taimni's is mainly (save 'nirbiija' and 'dharma- megha') based on YS I 17: vitarka-vicaaraanandaasmitaanugamaat samprajñaataH. Without sandhi: vitarka; vicaara; aananda; asmitaa; anugamaat samprajñaataH. The next suutra defines(?) 'asamprajñaata-samaadhi': viraama-pratyayaabhyaasa-puurvaH saMskaara-sheSo 'nyaH. Without sandhi: viraama-pratyaya+abhyaasa-puurvaH saMskaara-sheSaH; anyaH. Why does Patañjali "replace" the word 'asamprajñaataH' with the pronoun 'anyaH' (the other [(kind of?) samaadhi]). Well, *perhaps*, because would he've used 'asamprajñaataH', it would've become ''samprajñaataH' by the same rule of sandhi as 'anyaH' becomes ''nyaH'... :o
