प्रत्यक्षानुमानागमाः प्रमाणानि ॥७॥
पदविभाग: (separating individual words): प्रत्यक्ष-अनुमान-आगमाः, प्रमाणानि
(Note: प्रत्यक्ष-अनुमान-आगमाः is an Itaretara Dvandva Samasa, a copulative compound linking three distinct nouns. The sandhis have been separated by hyphens here—प्रत्यक्ष + अनुमान + आगमाः—but it acts as a single, pluralized grammatical unit).
अन्वय: (Rearranging in logical prose sequence): प्रत्यक्षानुमानागमाः प्रमाणानि
प्रतिपदार्थ: (word-by-word meaning): प्रत्यक्ष = Direct perception (knowledge gained directly through the senses), अनुमान = inference (logical deduction based on prior observation), आगमाः = and competent evidence (or the words of a trusted, realized authority), प्रमाणानि = (are) the valid sources of right knowledge,
तात्पर्यम्: (final translation): Direct perception, inference, and competent evidence are the three sources of valid knowledge
Further context on the 7th sutra in Patanjali’s Yogasutras
The next five verses explain the five classes of Vrittis each. प्रमाण being the first one. It loosely translates to proof or validity of knowledge. It’s crazy that correct knowledge is categorized as a mental wave within the Yoga Sutras.
In this verse, Patanjali says that valid proofs are of three types. The first is प्रत्यक्ष (pratyakṣa), or direct perception. As long as your senses are functioning clearly and you have the capacity to record events into memory, no one can invalidate something you have directly experienced through your five senses and your power of cognition.
The second is अनुमान (anumāna), which means inference. This is knowledge deduced entirely through logic. For example, if you cannot see a fire directly but you observe smoke rising from a distant hill, you logically infer the presence of fire. The mind connects a known universal rule (where there is smoke, there is fire) to a current observation and draws a firm conclusion. The term itself splits into anu, meaning “follows” or “after,” and mana, meaning “to measure.” Together, it translates to knowledge that follows.
Finally, the आगमाः or trusted authority. This one’s the trickiest part. This proof lies completely outside of your direct experience, meaning you must place your belief in an external authority, whether that is a guru or the shastras. Going back to the previous example, if you cannot see the fire or the smoke, but a highly reliable person returning from the hill tells you there is a fire, you accept it as true. In Indian philosophy, this heavily refers to the Vedas, the Upanishads, or the teachings of enlightened masters who have directly perceived the truth.
Swami Vivekananda famously said, “There is knowledge beyond the senses, and whenever it does not contradict reason and past human experience, that knowledge is proof.”
Therefore, in the context of Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS), a proof is considered valid only when it meets three specific criteria:
- It must be inherently true.
- It must not contradict established knowledge of the past.
- It must come from an Apta, which is a valid authority who is perfectly unselfish, holy, and noble.
One thing to note about sutra 1.7 is how its logic moves gradually outward. It starts purely with the individual who is perfectly capable of witnessing reality firsthand (प्रत्यक्ष). It then moves to the space where we interact with the outside world and draw logical conclusions (अनुमान). Finally, it expands to a collective level where authorities are established and knowledge is passed down across generations (आगमाः).
Comments