This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Yoga High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Yoga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Yoga, Hatha yoga, Yoga as exercise and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YogaWikipedia:WikiProject YogaTemplate:WikiProject YogaYoga High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Hinduism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Alternative views High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Skepticism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory, conspiracy theories, and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. Spirituality Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirituality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spirituality-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpiritualityWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritualityTemplate:WikiProject SpiritualitySpirituality Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Alternative medicine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine

The section on dhyana is clearly taken directly from Swami Sivananda's works. It should be attributed to him with the proper reference. --Raga 07:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gīta-4.2 speaks of a very ancient "The Yoga of Rājarṣi", but it seems to be a secret discipline, not properly explained anywhere. Rājarṣi may mean a king who was like a ṛṣi. The present article defines Rāja Yoga as the "king of yogas" , but Gīta seems to have a concept "Yoga of kings".--Vinay Jha 07:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

evam parampara-praptam imam rajarshayo viduh sa kaleneha mahata yogo nashtah parantapa

Your contention is far from obvious and unworthy of inclusion. Maybe Chap 6 is the closest to Yoga Sutras, albeit with increased theocentricity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simon D M (talk • contribs) 14:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Would love to see this included so others can expand if they find something related to the keyword. We live interesting times. Wakari07 (talk) 02:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tried to integrate it in a compact way. Feel free to improve contents and cosmetics. Wakari07 (talk) 03:16, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The term Raja Yoga in hyp does not refer to Patanjalis yoga but to Techniques described in the HYP, The first perosn to associate Raja Yoga with Patanjali is Vivekananda in an attempt to denigrate hatha Yoga as mereley physical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.193.164.90 (talk) 15:06, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I applaud the writers at their efforts to explain this immense subject, generally, I find the tone of this wiki to be too personal and "instructional" - in other words, just the facts, please. For example, the "definition" of Niyama is briefly stated, then includes the following instruction -

"He who practises meditation without ethical perfection, without the practice of Yama-Niyama cannot obtain the fruits of meditation. Purify your mind first through the practice of Yama-Niyama. Then practice regular meditation. Then you will attain illumination."

Are these intrepretations from Patanjalis sutras, and if so, which translation? Or, is the writer just giving us his/her own interpretation of the Niyamas, etc. and instructing us on practice? Does this even belong here? The source for this quote - and all similar quotes - would be helpful and would improve the quality of this wiki.

There are also inconsistencies in structure - why the briefest of statements for most of the eight limbs, followed by three paragraphs full of (somewhat) unneccesary details for the dhyana section? Omit needless words.Ekadesha (talk) 13:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your first comment seems to refer to sloppily included translation. Your 2nd comment reflects Patanjali's own emphasis. --Simon D M (talk) 13:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had a cursory curiosity about Yoga so I started reading Wikipedia. I found this article to be incredibly hard to follow, especially the latter part. It need to be reworked by someone who knows the topic to be more descriptive and to use a LOT more English words or translations. As it reads now, it's not very useful. Kevin Rector (talk) 06:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, the head of this article needs major help. Looking at it, I have no idea what Raja Yoga is!!!! It says a "succession of steps," which tells the reader absolutely nothing aside from the fact that there's more than one part to the practice. Flies 1 (talk) 18:43, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the lead. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:09, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Flies 1 (talk) 15:35, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The whole article reads as nonsense. This is what they means when they say "a camel is a horse designed by a committee." I can't tell what much of it is attempting to communicate. Straight away it's confusing, Rāja yoga was both the goal of yoga and a method of attaining it (Which is what?). The term also became a modern name for the practice of yoga (the practice of which yoga!? There are dozens)." Imagine reading about oranges, "Raja orange also became the modern name for oranges." Mandarin orange? Sweet orange? Bitter orange? I don't even know how to edit the article because I can't understand the original intent of the authors.--173.18.253.215 (talk) 17:28, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Er, that was 12 years ago, when the article was quite different. The subject is complicated but the article certainly makes clear that there are alternative and indeed rival meanings, and makes a fair attempt at explaining what each of those is. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:43, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

this quote seems nice, but was too broad for Meditation#Hinduism so I'm putting it here for potential future use. makeswell (talk) 17:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC) Pantajali recommended "meditation with the Lord as the object" as a part of the spiritual practices (sadhana) that leads to samadhi, or blissful inner peace.^[1][reply]

I removed the following block of text ("<nowiki>" added here for clarity):

There are many types of yoga, such as hatha-yoga, astanga-yoga, raja-yoga, dhyana-yoga, and bhakti-yoga. Rudimentary hatha-yoga has become very popular as a form of exercise and relaxation, but real yoga -- as taught by Patanjali in his Yoga-sutra or by Krsna in the Sixth Chapter of Bhagavad-gita -- is an eightfold system of meditation for attaining samadhi, or complete absorption of the mind in the Supreme. The eightfold yoga process is very difficult to perform, and even Arjuna decided it was too difficult for him. And those few who can practice it often become captivated by the siddhis, or perfections, that one can gain through this yoga, such as the ability to walk on water, become extremely small, and control other people's minds. So the mystic yoga process, being very difficult and full of many possible distractions, is not recommended in this age.<ref>Pure devotional service, on the other hand, is far superior to fruitive work, philosophical speculation, and mystic meditation. ... Similarly, Krsna tells Arjuna at the end of the Sixth Chapter of the Gita that absorption in Krsna consciousness is the ultimate yoga: yoginam api sarvesam mad-gatenantar atmana sraddhavan bhajate yo mam sa me yuktatamo matah / "And of all yogis, the one with great faith who always abides in Me, thinks of Me within himself, and renders transcendental loving service to Me -- he is the most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all. That is My opinion" (Bg. 6.47). [http://vedabase.net/nbs/25/en2 Narada Bhakti Sutra 25]</ref>

<End removed text.>

The first part seemed out out of place, and "but real yoga" is very POV. The rest sounded like it was supposed to be a quote but was written as text to the article, which changes its significance. --Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 21:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that Yoga Sutras of Patanjali be merged into Ashtanga Yoga/Raja Yoga. The current sizes of the articles are 22,813 bytes and 17,664 bytes respectively. The largest section on the "eight limbs" (present in both articles) has a significant overlap (12,288 bytes in the former article and 8,192 bytes in the latter). And this is inevitable since Ashtanga Yoga/Raja Yoga is based on Patanjali's Yoga Sutras. A merger will allow us to gain the 'critical mass' necessary to develop the combined article to good article level initially and FA level someday. Zuggernaut (talk) 02:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Yoga Sutras of Patanjali is a book, which should have sections like organization of the book, chapters, dating, impact. Raja Yoga is a yoga system, which interpreted by many experts [1], though its foundations lie in the Yoga Sutras. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's good feedback and something I overlooked, having always thought of the Sutras as sutras and not as a book in the modern/Western sense of the word (remember, the sutras were not written down as a book until much later). But by that logic the merge does not make sense. It may be possible to include Yoga Sutras of Patanjali in a section in Raja Yoga as a text. The text itself is really terse and the article has not grown for a while. If the combined article grows beyond 90-100 KB then we can split. Or you still think it's not a good idea to merge? Zuggernaut (talk) 05:51, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Yoga Sutras" brings up 23,000 citations in Google Book Search (HERE). The fact that the article hasn't grown in a while doesn't mean it couldn't grow. In my opinion it's silly to consider a merger. Not quite as silly as merging the page for the Bible into Christianity, but still silly. Health Researcher (talk) 17:07, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Redtigerrxyz; also, there is additional material on the influence of Patanjali's Yoga Sutras that would probably not be appropriate for an article on Raja Yoga (e.g., see Singleton, 2010, Yoga Postures, ISBN 9780195395341). -- Health Researcher (talk) 16:30, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Redtigerrxyz;Sankarrukku (talk) 17:16, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Emphatic Oppose. There is no clear definition of Raja Yoga, and the Yoga Sutras are notable in the extreme. There is no doubt that this basic and seminal text deserves a separate article. Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 13:06, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. These are quite different topics, of course. (May I suggest that transliterations across both articles be checked for accuracy and consistency?) Noetica^Tea? 23:53, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. - Why combine two different things into one topic - are we running out of room on the internet already? ridiculous.<cB> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisberlin brooklyn (talk • contribs) 13:54, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• OPPOSE! Zuggernaut: you obviously know nothing about Hatha and Raja Yoga. Your suggestion is tantamount to suggesting that the article on the New Testament be merged with the article on Christianity! And yes, Health Researcher, it is JUST as silly as merging the Bible with Christianity. Give us a reasoned response on why the two are different, though you'll certainly come up short. Merging articles, one on a key text, with another one a spiritual tradition, is just dumb. --LordSuryaofShropshire (talk) 19:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be overwhelming consensus opposed to the merger. I don't think there's any need for further discussion. I have requested an administrator to close the discussion and remove the templates. --Presearch (talk) 22:57, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• is there a *good* reason to not have Rāja Yoga as article title? Wakari07 (talk) 16:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Or would that reason be Rāja yoga? - personally my favourite - i set it meanwhile :) Wakari07 (talk) 04:36, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "the mind is traditionally the king of the body" is poorly supported and arguably a complete misinterpretation of the phrase raja yoga. Raja yoga is referred to as such partly because this path is being differentiated from other yogas as the "king" of all yogas.

Yoga literature supports an idea that the mind is not king nor subject. The treatise on raja yoga, patanjalis yoga sutra describes a much subtler relationship between mind and body.

Thus I'll go ahead and remove this unsupported and in my opinion very deceptive and unhelpful statement. The tradition where the mind rules the body is not from the yogic perspective at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.136.144.39 (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The term rāja yoga is a very ancient Sanskrit word. It was used in Upanishads and Puranas.

It is wrong to say "The term rāja yoga is a retronym, introduced in the 19th-century by Swami Vivekananda."

Vivekananda just translated the famous Yoga Sutras of Patanjali naming it as Rāja Yoga. He was just a translator and interpreter of the book.

The more original and authentic works are in Bhagavad Gita and Upanishads.The term rāja yoga is used in Bhagavad Gita. The ninth chapter of Bhagavad Gita is known as "Raja-Vidya_Raja_Guhy_Yoga". See Bhagavad-Gita By Sir Edwin Arnold. I think, Vivekananda took the name from Bhagavad Gita.

Some more ancient references for the name Rāja Yoga are as follows:

Jaimini Sutras,19.SU-26-27

Yogasara Upanishad

Yoga Tattva Upanishad,129-131(a)

AndrewNewYork (talk) 09:21, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, and you may be correct, but you'll need WP:RS. I've tried to find them for this topic, but I failed, unfortunately. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:03, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've split the article into Rāja yoga and Yoga (philosophy). Yoga is more than Patanjali's and Ashtanga. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:40, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ms Sarah Welch: "In all historical texts, Rāja yoga in the modern sense of its meaning, is known simply as Yoga, where it means one of six major orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy" - is this this correct? Doesn't it refer to the practice of yoga, instead of the school of philosophy? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Raja yoga refers to samadhi. It is not a practice.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 18:40, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@JJ/@VG: Indeed, that sentence needs surgery, and Raja yoga means different things depending on the context. This article needs some clean up. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What does this sentence mean?VictoriaGrayson^Talk 00:16, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@VictoriaGrayson: I'm curious why White is "probably not reliable" here. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:57, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See this.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 05:29, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I'll read it. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:27, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joshua Jonathan. Greetings of the day! I saw you revert the added content on the Raja Yoga page. May I know the reason, please. Was the added content not to the point? As I am new to Wikipedia, your explanation might help me to improve my editing skills. Thanks Rachel Ross Green Geller (talk) 15:26, 5 January 2023 (UTC) Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 17:19, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rachel Ross Green Geller: I reverted diff the following addition:

In modern era, Raja Yoga is emerging as Heartfulness meditation, also known as Sahaj Marg or Natural Path. It is continue in practice since 1945 under the name Shri Ram Chandra Mission (SRCM).

with the explanation WP:UNDUE; WP:LEAD summarizes the article (forgot to mention "unsourced"). This means that:

• this piece of info is not relevant enough for the lead;
• the lead summarizes the article; this piece of info is not in the article, so it shouldn't be in the lead;
• there's no source, so nobody can verify it.

If you want to add this to the article, it should be in the body of the article. NB: there seems to be missing a lot; I'll check if info was removed. Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 17:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per the n-grams the title should be uppercased. Uppercasing seems obvious, please have a look. The other major yoga forms all come in at uppercase as well although Raja has a higher percentage. Move them all? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:16, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, we don't do that on Wikipedia. Scholars of yoga certainly don't do it. Perhaps there are people in India who are VERY CERTAIN that RAJA YOGA is VERY IMPORTANT and feel empowered to SHOUT ABOUT IT A LOT, but that doesn't mean we're going to do so: quite the opposite.

And by the way I've never heard any scholar say 'kingly yoga' either, it seems a rather over-literal translation. At the very least, we need a citation for that. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:23, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

? Not suggesting shouting in all caps, just the standard 'Raja Yoga' instead of 'Raja yoga', which is the common name (see the n-grams above). Raja Yoga has also been called 'Kingly yoga' as long as I've been aware of it. 'Raja' means 'King' or 'Royal', both meanings. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:27, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, interesting ambiguity. Title Case is fine. But "Kingly yoga" needs a citation to a WP:RS, or removal. Perhaps it's a US usage (a USage for short?). Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:34, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Apologies if I wasn't clear about title case and not shouting case. Lots of search engine results for Kingly yoga, although not sure which are reliable sources. Signing off for now though, more tomorrow. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:39, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I'm not sure we should use Title Case either, as some usage us generic, some as the name of one brand or another. It would very wrong and confusing to use TC for all of it, and the ngrans cheerfully conflate the two kinds so they're no help. Best we stay lowercase here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:50, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]