The Yoga Sutras of Patañjali: A New Edition, Translation, and Commentary

The translation is not quite perfect. The commentary seems scholarly and useful. This presentation of Patañjali's yoga sūtras by Edwin Francis Bryant is pretty good, but I prefer the Iqbal Kishen Taimni translation, which I bought in around 1970 (for $1.95 from the Theosophical Society bookshop in Adelaide).About half of the Bryant translations of individual sutras seem to be not quite right, although I know little about Sanskrit. The translations don't even match his own word-by-word vocabulary notes. Here's a random sample, sutra 1.21."Tīvra-samvegānām āsannah." [I've missed out a couple of accents which I can't type.]Here is the Bryant translation."[This state of samprajñāta] is near for those who apply themselves intensely."Here is the Taimni translation."It (Samādhi) is nearest to those whose desire (for Samādhi) is intensely strong."But Bryant writes that "tīvra" means "keen", and that "samvegānām" means "for those with intensity", while Taimni says that "Tīvra-samvegānām" means "of those whose wish is extremely strong". But Bryant has inserted the word "apply", which gives a rather different meaning. Intense application is not the same as intense desire.This would be a very minor matter if this was rare. But my comparison of the two translations suggests that the Bryant version has avoidable inaccuracies for roughly 50% of sutras. The word-for-word translations of both authors are very similar, but the Bryant whole-sentence translations do not match so well with his word-by-word translations.Let me give another example, probably the most important of the sutras, in my humble opinion, namely sutra 1.2.Bryant translation: "Yoga is the stilling of the changing states of the mind."Taimni translation: "Yoga is the inhibition of the modifications of the mind."The Taimni translation seems preferable and more accurate to me. It seems fairly clear that Bryant has done a bit of modernizing and personal interpretation in the translations. Of course, the commentary is whatever the commentator wants to say. But the translation should be accurate. My number one principle of translation is that the translator should try to give readers the same understanding that they would obtain if they were fluent in the source language.The Bryant commentary (as opposed to the translation) seems very good and useful to me. He refers to multiple interpretations by named authors, and makes cross-references to other Indian literature, which the Taimni commentary does not do very well at all. My personal suggestion would be that anyone who wants to make sense of Patañjali's yoga sūtras should read both translations and commentaries side by side. They are so different that by combining them, I think it should be possible to get much more meaning than with either one.The Taimni translation and commentary is currently available on Amazon as a  second-hand copy  of the exact edition which I have, and as various editions published by " Quest Books, 1961 ", " Quest Books, 1999 ", and " Theosophical Publishing House, 2007 ".

I am thoroughly enjoying this translation. I am currently also reading the classic Thibaut translation is the Vedanta Sutras with commentary by Shankara and I can say that without a doubt, this reads much easier.For those who found this commentary dry or impenetrable, I wonder if they read the great introduction that explains the Yoga sutras in context of the philosophical systems of ancient India or in other words, the greater historical culture of the Yoga sutras. There are also convenient chapter summaries that are collected at the end of the book that you can read to get into the mindset for reading a chapter.I particularly like how Bryant commits to the repeated uses of the Sanskrit terms and doesn’t depend on English words that fail to catch the subtle differences of meaning between the two languages. This encourages the reader to leave at the door their presuppositions and prejudices that they carry unknowingly being dependent on English.Another great thing is that Bryant explains not only the standard Vyasa commentary, but also connects it to many other commentators including the previously mentioned Shankara, who was a Vedantin and not a Yogin. Bryant will even connect the Sutras in similarity and contrast to Buddhism. Giving context to the different commentaries is essential because in the classic commentaries themselves there are a lot more esoteric and foreign references to scripture, mythology, and other thinkers that aren’t as explicitly explained.I think this book is most valuable for those who might not have been aware of the philosophical depth of the culture of Yoga. Bryant is oftentimes critical of the mass commercial culture that has appropriated Yoga and I think his translation and commentary is perfect for those who want to take the time and explore the ideas unique to Western thought and develop a deeper understanding of what goes into any action, practice, or lifestyle.For those who just want a feel good shallow explication of Yoga that satisfies the minimal threshold of what it is to be “cultural”, then reading any set of Sutras and their commentary is going to disappointing anyway. And for all their complaints about it being too academic, I think that based on a certain prejudice of what “academic” is to them. Because this does not read at all like a philological text or western philosophical treatise.

Classic book of course. I set out with the intention of reading cover to cover, but it doesn't really work like that. It provides a very useful but lengthy introduction on the history of yoga and also gives a deep understanding of yoga as intended as opposed to how yoga has been modified in the West. The sutras are very thought provoking, so I found reading one a couple of times over and dwelling on it for a day or so before reading the next was the way to go. Of course once you've read the book, it then becomes something to constantly refer back to, to reconsider. If you're interested in the philosophy of yoga, this is a must buy. It's perhaps made me think more than anything I've read in decades.

Reading this it soon becomes apparent that the sutras are so brief that any modern interpretation is probably worthless; in comparison the Samkhya Karika seems like a full explanation, So as the latter states, for right cognition one must look to 'valid testimony'. In this respect Vyasa, Vacaspati Misra and Vijnana Bhikshu are the top choices. Books by SURENDRANATH DASGUPTA: THE STUDY OF PATANJALI later revised as YOGA AS PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION based on these authorities are a better bet than Western academics and modern 'asana' Yoga authorities.

This book was far, far greater than I had ever hoped! The author begins by taking the reader through the history of yoga and how it sat philosophically with the other traditions and thoughts of the day. I found that enormously helpful and invaluable.The sutras are broken down word for word as well as translated as an unbroken statement before being “unpacked” as the author puts it, through references to various commentators.The commentaries, which make up the meat of the book are not excessively academic, nor do they appear to lack grounding. On the contrary, the references to the various commentators are beautifully weaved together in a readible and concise form, without compromising or watering down the content.The various concepts are carefully built up over the course of the book (starting with the elaborate introductory chapters), never leaving the reader lost at any stage.I would highly recommend this book .

I was lucky to attend several lectures of the author at Jiva Institute, Vrindavan, India in October 2016. Having studies Yoga Sutras before on my own and the Sanskrit language at SOAS, London, I find this book the best exposition of the subject matter I ever came across. I am very much tempted to enroll for an MA in Hinduism at Rutgers University, where Dr Bryant teaches. Or ask him to adopt me. Hugely inspiring!

Lovely book and really fast delivery. Can't wait to read more, thank you