Samadhi is oneness with the subject of meditation

There is niente affatto distinction, during the eighth limb of yoga, between the actor of meditation, the act of meditation and the subject of meditation. Samadhi is that spiritual state when okcupid one’s mind is so absorbed in whatever it is contemplating on, that the mind loses the sense of its own identity. The thinker, the thought process and the thought fuse with the subject of thought. There is only oneness, samadhi.

Samadhi

• Samprajnata Samadhi, also called savikalpa samadhi and Sabija Samadhi, meditation with support of an object. Samprajnata samadhi is associated with deliberation, reflection, bliss, and I-am-ness.

• Savitarka, “deliberative”: The citta is concentrated upon verso gross object of meditation, an object with verso manifest appearance that is perceptible puro our senses, such as a flame of verso lamp, the tip of the nose, or the image of verso deity. Conceptualization (vikalpa) still takes place, in the form of perception, the word and the knowledge of the object of meditation. When the deliberation is ended this is called nirvitarka samadhi.
• Savichara, “reflective”: the citta is concentrated upon verso subtle object of meditation, which is not percpetible puro the senses, but arrived at through inference, such as the senses, the process of cognition, the mind, the I-am-ness, the chakras, the inner-breath (prana), the nadis, the intellect (buddhi). The stilling of reflection is called nirvichara samapatti.

• Sananda Samadhi, ananda, “bliss”: this state emphasizes the still subtler state of bliss sopra meditation;

• Sasmita: the citta is concentrated upon the sense or feeling of “I-am-ness”.

• Asamprajnata Samadhi, also called Nirvikalpa Samadhi and Nirbija Samadhi: meditation without an object, which leads preciso knowledge of purusha or consciousness, the subtlest element.

Ananda and asmita

According puro Ian Whicher, the status of ananda and asmita con Patanjali’s system is per matter of dispute. According puro Maehle, the first two constituents, deliberation and reflection, form the basis of the various types of samapatti. According preciso Feuerstein,

“Joy” and “I-am-ness” […] must be regarded as accompanying phenomena of every cognitive [ecstasy]. The explanations of the classical commentators on this point appear esatto be foreign esatto Patanjali’s hierarchy of [ecstatic] states, and it seems unlikely that ananda and asmita should constitute independent levels of samadhi.

Ian Whicher disagrees with Feuerstein, seeing ananda and asmita as later stages of nirvicara-samapatti. Whicher refers onesto Vacaspati Misra (900-980 CE), the founder of the Bhamati Advaita Vedanta who proposes eight types of samapatti:

• Savitarka-samapatti and Nirvitarka-samapatti, both with gross objects as objects of support;
• Savicara-samapatti and Nirvicara-samapatti, both with subtle objects as objects of support;
• Sananda-samapatti and Nirananda-samapatti, both with the sense organs as objects of support
• Sasmita-samapatti and Nirasmita-samapatti, both with the sense of “I-am-ness” as support.

Vijnana Bikshu (ca. 1550-1600) proposes per six-stage model, explicitly rejecting Vacaspati Misra’s model. Vijnana Bikshu regards joy (ananda) as per state that arises when the mind passes beyond the vicara stage. Whicher agrees that ananda is not verso adhi. According to Whicher, Patanjali’s own view seems puro be that nirvicara-samadhi is the highest form of cognitive ecstasy.

Epistemology

The epistemology sopra Patanjali’s system of Yoga, like the Samkhya school of Hinduism, relies on three of six Pramanas, as the means of gaining reliable knowledge. These included Pratyak?a (perception), Anuma?a (inference) and Sabda (Aptavacana, word/testimony of reliable sources).

Patanjali’s system, like the Samkhya school, considers Pratyak?a or D???am (direct sense perception), Anumana (inference), and Sabda or Aptavacana (verbal testimony of the sages or shastras) preciso be the only valid means of knowledge or Pramana. Unlike few other schools of Hinduism such as Advaita Vedanta, Yoga did not adopt the following three Pramanas: Upama?a (comparison and analogy), Arthapatti (postulation, deriving from circumstances) or Anupalabdi (non-perception, negative/cognitive proof).