{"id":34615,"date":"2013-07-23T17:31:24","date_gmt":"2013-07-23T17:31:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/?p=34615"},"modified":"2023-07-27T11:39:00","modified_gmt":"2023-07-27T11:39:00","slug":"sutra-1-19-supernatural-beings-vs-people-of-spiritual-flow-mysterious-pratyaya","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/en\/sutra-1-19-supernatural-beings-vs-people-of-spiritual-flow-mysterious-pratyaya\/","title":{"rendered":"Sutra 1.19. Supernatural Beings vs People of Spiritual Flow. Mysterious Pratyaya"},"content":{"rendered":"
Would it occur to anyone to invite tenders for the most ambiguously understood and intricate sloka of the Yoga Sutras<\/b>, the line 1.19 would be the safe winner. Sorting out this case is not an easy thing to do, so that I beforehand beg the reader\u2019s pardon for this article to be this complicated. Now, here is the sloka:<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u092d\u0935\u092a\u094d\u0930\u0924\u094d\u092f\u092f\u094b \u0935\u093f\u0926\u0947\u0939\u092a\u094d\u0930\u0915\u0943\u0924\u093f\u0932\u092f\u093e\u0928\u093e\u092e\u094d \u0965\u0967\u096f\u0965\u00a0<\/b><\/div>\n
1.19. bhava-pratyayo videha-prak\u1e5btilay\u0101n\u0101m\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Seems like \u2013 well, only 5 words, each of them has a translation from the dictionary. However, let us take the best know translation variants of this sloka:<\/div>\n
<\/a><\/div>\n
(1) (The Samadhi, not followed by extreme non-attachment) becomes the cause of the re-manifestation of the gods and of those that become merged in nature (Vivekananda).<\/i><\/div>\n
(2) The resolution of one\u2019s self in reality (Prakritilaya) is the Bhava-pratyaya (the Samadhi of comprehending the objective reality, the 1st type of Asamprajna Samadhi; the 2nd type is Upayapratyaya Samadhi \u2013 the cognition of the self as the one who sees) (Rigin).<\/i><\/div>\n
(3) One of the ways it occurs in the real world is through those who have mastered the limitless consciousness or have merged with nature (Falkov).<\/i><\/div>\n
(4) Having filled the consciousness with the world of becoming, they deliver themselves from bodies and merge with Prakriti.\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
(5) [Concentration not conscious of objects] caused by worldly [means] is the one to which discarnate attain and to which those [whose bodies] are resolved into primary-matter attain (J.H. Woods).<\/i><\/div>\n
(6) For those beings who are formless and for those beings who are merged in unitive consciousness, the world is the cause (Radheshyam Mishra).<\/i><\/div>\n
(7) The world-caused belongs to the Disembodied and to the Resolved-into-Nature (Ganganatha Jha).\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
(8) To become ultramundane [in relation to] the material, having believed into existence, is to resolve in nature (Nikolaeva).<\/i><\/div>\n
(9) Some who have attained higher levels (videhas) or know unmanifest nature (prakritilayas), are drawn into birth in this world by their remaining latent impressions of ignorance, and more naturally come to these states of samadhi. (SwamiJ)<\/i><\/div>\n
(10) Subjective consciousness arising from a natural cause is possessed by those who have laid aside their bodies and been absorbed into subjective nature (Charles Johnston)<\/i><\/div>\n
(11) [The ecstasy of those who have] merged with Nature (prakriti-laya) and [of those who are] bodiless (videha) [arises from the persistence of] the idea of becoming. (Feuerstein)<\/i><\/div>\n
(12)Yoga is a state, and one can be born in that state and does not need to practice (Desikachar.)<\/i><\/div>\n
(13) Disembodied yogins and those merged with nature attain Samadhi through being intent on birth (i.e., just by being born) (Stephen Phillips)\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
I think the reader will agree that only subject to having a very keen insight one can guess that it all refers to one and the same verse, for the sense conveyed by translation variants is strikingly different. Almost all translations contain added words \u201con the side\u201d (sometimes the number of these added words is larger than that of original words in the line), and this somehow puts us on our guard. Such global divergence of meanings can be found both in Russian and English translation variants, though many interpreters cannot be caught speaking no Sanskrit. Moreover, some of them are recognized authorities, while others, like Vivekananda or Krishnamacharya, came as its native, authentic speakers. So we should admit that it is not the linguistic problem that we have come across here, yet the problem of understanding grounded upon Patanjali\u2019s usage of the terms that have ambiguous understanding in the time of ours.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Having considered the translations available we can see that they can be divided into 2 basic groups of similar meanings.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The first group deals with some supernatural beings (\u201cgods\u201d, \u201cdisembodied\u201d, \u201cformless\u201d, \u201cmerged with nature\u201d etc.). The second one tells about yogis (though there isn\u2019t a trace of the word \u201cyogi\u201d in the original text) that achieve some states or have them initially (by birth). Such variety of interpretations is caused by understanding of the words videha and prakritilayanam, though both the first and the second case provide for a vast space for mystifications.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Let us address the dictionary.<\/div>\n
According to Monier-Williams, videha<\/b> is interpreted as bodiless, incorporeal, deceased and even ghost. Indeed, the word consists of the prefix vi- that, as far as we remember, resembles the meaning of de- or dis- in the sense of detaching, singling out of smth from smth, and the root deha meaning \u2018body\u2019. That is, the cumulative meaning is \u201csingled out from body\u201d, and it makes the authors of the dictionary \u2013 and the interpreters that use it \u2013 thus draw the afore-mentioned meanings, followed by commentators\u2019 suppositions about videha to stand for a class of \u201csupernatural\u201d beings, like spirits of European traditions. However there are some concepts that make us doubt about the correctness of such interpretation.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
1. The Indian mythology is rich in various creatures. There are Apsaras, Vidyadharas<\/a>, Gandharvas, Siddhas, Daityas, Danavas, Marutas, Rudras, Rakshasas, Dakini, Yakshas, Vetalas, Pretas, Pishachas <\/i>and another few dozens of names. Finally, there are gods (Suras) and Asuras. They can be found in thousands of myths, fairy-tales, Indian prose and lyrics. But \u201cvidehas\u201d are found nowhere but for Yoga Sutras and commentaries on it. They are neither listed in any dictionary. This is not the way that mythological consciousness works. If there is a class of beings, they should be mentioned in some mythological pieces.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
2. It is not traditional of Indian mythology to treat \u201csupernatural\u201d beings as the \u201cincorporeal\u201d spirits without bodies. It\u2019s rather that the bodies of all the above-mentioned creatures are very specific, but they are material in their own way. Maybe the Vetals can be set as an exception, for these creatures take possession of corpses, thus \u201creviving\u201d them, yet Vetals do have their own bodies as well. It is rather the European spiritualistic doctrine formed in post-Christian culture under the influence of Swedenborg and co. that represents mystical creatures as spirits. I believe it is this pre-set that has made it possible to translate the word videha as a bodiless spirit.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
3. In no other line of Patanjali\u2019s one can find contemplations about supernatural beings (he mentions Siddhas once (meaning the creatures, not the skills and abilities), but my interpretation of this line is not traditional as well). In this sense Patanjali is similar to Confucius who used to speak more about a man than about gods and spirits. It\u2019s hard to believe that the classic launched the topic and then gave it up.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
So far leaving the word videha without proposition on its meaning, let us consider the last word of the sentence and the second \u201cpersonage\u201d \u2013 the\u00a0prak\u1e5btilay\u0101n\u0101m<\/i>. In this case the translation is even more obvious \u2013 and more obscure. Literally\u00a0prak\u1e5btilay\u0101n\u0101m<\/i>\u00a0means \u201cresolved in prakriti\u201d, and the fact that Prakriti is a complex philosophic category of Samkhya does not make it more clear. Here, again, there exists a popular hypothesis that says that\u00a0prak\u1e5btilay\u0101n\u0101m<\/i>\u00a0is another class of beings (in fact, you will find this opinion when searching through pseudo-yogic internet sites, with reference to Yoga Sutra), however the ideas set forth earlier make us once again doubt about it. I don\u2019t know any Indian work that would mention the class of beings called\u00a0prak\u1e5btilay\u0101n\u0101m<\/i>. And if one looks more closely, the term \u201cresolved in\u00a0prak\u1e5bti<\/i>\u201d might also seem a somehow queer name for beings.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Unfortunately, we cannot rely upon the text of Yoga Sutra the way we often used to do it in relation to other unclear categories, since this is the first and only case that videha and prakritilayanam are mentioned. We may try to analyze the whole line and understand something from the context, however this will bring us to another problem. It is about the second world of the line,\u00a0the pratyaya<\/b> (\u092a\u094d\u0930\u0924\u094d\u092f\u092f).<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
According to the dictionary pratyaya <\/a>means: belief, firm conviction, faith, trust, proof, ascertainment, conception, assumption, notion, consciousness, understanding, intelligence, intellect, analysis, solution, explanation.<\/i> Generally speaking, almost all psychical functions<\/i>availableL. And by the way, in some translation variants they interpret pratyaya as \u201cthe practice of the mind\u201d. Yet we cannot rest satisfied with such explanations. Maybe, the linguist can treat the listed words as the things very close to each other, yet the psychologist will find it difficult even to bring these totally different products of mind activity into one line. And as far as the practicing person is concerned, he will merely state his complete misunderstanding.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
However, in case of pratyaya<\/i> we still have some help. It is that in scope of Yoga Sutra this term can be found ten times, so that we can juxtapose the contexts in order to understand which psychical function is actually implied. It would be reasonable to suppose that Patanjali uses this word in one and the same meaning, however this meaning is not obvious, and this is confirmed by the fact that many authors translate this word in different ways for different lines. Even Swami Satyananda, a recognized Yoga authority, in those 10 times has given 8 different variants, obviously adjusting the translation to the required context.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

So, here are the 10 lines where pratyaya is mentioned:<\/b>
\n1. (1.10) abh\u0101va-pratyay\u0101lamban\u0101 v\u1e5bttirnidr\u0101 (10)
\n2. (1.18) vir\u0101ma-pratyay\u0101bhy\u0101sa-p\u016brva\u1e25 sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra-\u015be\u1e63o’nya\u1e25 (18)
\n3. (1.19) bhava-pratyayo videha-prak\u1e5btilay\u0101n\u0101m (19)
\n4. (2.20) dra\u1e63\u1e6d\u0101 d\u1e5b\u015bim\u0101tra\u1e25 \u015buddho’pi pratyay\u0101nupa\u015bya\u1e25 (71)
\n5. (3.2) tatra pratyayaikat\u0101nat\u0101 dhy\u0101nam (108)
\n6. (3.12) tata\u1e25 puna\u1e25 \u015b\u0101ntoditau tulya-pratyayau cittasyaik\u0101grat\u0101-pari\u1e47\u0101ma\u1e25 (118)
\n7. (3.17) \u015babd\u0101rtha-pratyay\u0101n\u0101m-itaretar\u0101dhy\u0101s\u0101t sa\u1e45karas-tat-pravibh\u0101ga-sa\u1e43yam\u0101t-sarva-bh\u016bta-ruta-j\u00f1\u0101nam (123)
\n8. (3.19) pratyayasya para-citta-j\u00f1\u0101nam (125)
\n9. (3.35) sattva-puru\u1e63ayor-atyant\u0101sa\u1e43k\u012br\u1e47ayo\u1e25 pratyay\u0101vi\u015be\u1e63o bhoga\u1e25 par\u0101rthatv\u0101tsv\u0101rtha-sa\u1e43yam\u0101t-puru\u1e63a-j\u00f1\u0101nam (142)
\n10. (4.27) tacchidre\u1e63u pratyay\u0101ntar\u0101\u1e47i sa\u1e43sk\u0101rebhya\u1e25 (189)<\/i><\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n
We have already discussed the first three lines, as well as the fifth one. I don\u2019t want to tire the reader by giving a detailed translation and analysis of the rest 6 verses, especially that we will do this in due course. That\u2019s why I will only give my resume. Pratyaya<\/i> corresponds to the process of thinking<\/i>, consideration in the sense of cognitive activity. This last remark of mine is caused by that confusion occurring in everyday language when they don\u2019t tell the process of thinking focused on solution of a problem and generation of new knowledge from the internal dialogue and other forms of vritti<\/i>: memories, dreams, recollections and so on. One may say \u201cI was thinking about these or these events\u201d. But will become concerned with the question: \u201cand what was the understanding that resulted from your considerations?\u201d So this is not the type of activity that I take for thinking.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
In connection to this I cannot keep from quoting Bernard Shaw whose reply to the question \u201chow did you manage to become so well-known\u201d was: \u201cFew people think more than two or three times a year; I\u2019ve made an international reputation for myself by thinking once or twice a week\u201d.<\/i><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
But let us now come back to analysis of the line 1.19. Being unable to base ourselves upon accurate understanding of the words meaning let us be guided by the context formed by the adjacent lines.<\/div>\n

\u0935\u093f\u0924\u0930\u094d\u0915\u0935\u093f\u091a\u093e\u0930\u093e\u0928\u0928\u094d\u0926\u093e\u0938\u094d\u092e\u093f\u0924\u093e\u0930\u0942\u092a\u093e\u0928\u0941\u0917\u092e\u093e\u0924\u094d \u0938\u092e\u094d\u092a\u094d\u0930\u091c\u094d\u091e\u093e\u0924\u0903 \u0965 \u0967\u096d\u0965
\n1.17. vitarkavic\u0101r\u0101nand\u0101smit\u0101r\u016bp\u0101nugam\u0101t sampraj\u00f1\u0101ta\u1e25<\/i><\/p>\n

\u0935\u093f\u0930\u093e\u092e\u092a\u094d\u0930\u0924\u094d\u092f\u092f\u093e\u092d\u094d\u092f\u093e\u0938\u092a\u0942\u0930\u094d\u0935\u0903 \u0938\u0902\u0938\u094d\u0915\u093e\u0930\u0936\u0947\u0937\u094b\u093d\u0928\u094d\u092f\u0903 \u0965 \u0967\u096e\u0965
\n1.18. vir\u0101ma-pratyay\u0101bhy\u0101sap\u016brva\u1e25 sa\u1e43sk\u0101ra\u015be\u1e63o’nya\u1e25<\/p>\n

\u092d\u0935\u092a\u094d\u0930\u0924\u094d\u092f\u092f\u094b \u0935\u093f\u0926\u0947\u0939\u092a\u094d\u0930\u0915\u0943\u0924\u093f\u0932\u092f\u093e\u0928\u093e\u092e\u094d \u0965 \u0967\u096f\u0965
\n1.19. bhavapratyayo videhaprak\u1e5btilay\u0101n\u0101m<\/p>\n

\u0936\u094d\u0930\u0926\u094d\u0927\u093e\u0935\u0940\u0930\u094d\u092f\u0938\u094d\u092e\u0943\u0924\u093f\u0938\u092e\u093e\u0927\u093f\u092a\u094d\u0930\u091c\u094d\u091e\u093e\u092a\u0942\u0930\u094d\u0935\u0915 \u0907\u0924\u0930\u0947\u0937\u093e\u092e\u094d \u0965 \u0968\u0966\u0965
\n1.20. \u015braddh\u0101v\u012bryasm\u1e5btisam\u0101dhipraj\u00f1\u0101p\u016brvaka itare\u1e63\u0101m<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n
I\u2019ve used underlining and coloured highlighting to mark obvious contextual links between the lines.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
1. the opposition\u00a0vir\u0101ma-pratyay\u0101<\/i>\u00a0—- bhava-pratyayo that approximately stands for \u201ccessation of thinking\u201d \u2013 \u201cexistence of thinking\u201d.<\/div>\n
2. Unclear nouns\u00a0videha-prak\u1e5btilay\u0101n\u0101m<\/i>\u00a0—— the pronoun\u00a0itare\u1e63\u0101m<\/i>\u00a0that means of the others (that is, not of\u00a0videha-prak\u1e5btilay\u0101n\u0101m<\/i>).<\/div>\n
3. The word\u00a0praj\u00f1\u0101<\/i>\u00a0\u2013 the knowledge in the lines 1.17 and 1.20<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
To provide for good understanding, I shall draw the translation of the words from the line 1.20.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\u015braddha<\/i> – faith;<\/div>\n
v\u012brya<\/i>\u00a0\u2013 energy, vigor, heroism;<\/div>\n
sm\u1e5bti<\/i>\u00a0– memory;<\/div>\n
sam\u0101dhi<\/i>\u00a0– samadhi;<\/div>\n
praj\u00f1\u0101<\/i>\u00a0– knowledge;<\/div>\n
p\u016brvaka<\/i>\u00a0– precede;<\/div>\n
bhava<\/i> (from 1.19) \u2013 existence, being.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Thus let us set up the general meaning of the four lines:<\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
1.17 The comprehension is accompanied by emergence of opinion, analysis, delight and experience of one\u2019s I-ness.<\/i><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
1.18 In the other state (of unawareness) samskaras remain after reiterated cessations of mental activity.<\/i><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
1.19 Considerations are always present (never stop) in those [who are] videha-prakritilayanam.<\/i><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/i><\/div>\n
1.20 The others reach for the knowledge through faith, vigor, memory and samadhi.<\/i><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Now we can see the general sense outlined.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
I would point out here that samadhi in 1.20 \u201cprecedes\u201d the knowledge (praj\u00f1\u0101<\/i>), and this totally repudiates the opinion that samadhi is the goal (drawn in translations of Vivekananda and Ostrovskaya-Rudoi) and, on the contrary, it supports my idea of Samadhi to be the instrument of cognition.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Now let us come back to\u00a0videha-prak\u1e5btilay\u0101n\u0101m<\/i>. I shall express an opinion that I cannot completely confirm in scope of the given text, yet that makes the whole context of the few mentioned lines totally linked and filled with sense. So, let us note that videha \u2013 those detached from their bodies \u2013 may come not only as supernatural beings, but also as people who identify themselves not so much with corporeal needs as with intellectual or spiritual activity<\/b>. Even in modern Russian language psychologists use the term \u201ca non-bodily person\u201d. If we try to find analogues, we shall immediately recall Gumilev\u2019s theory of passionarias – the people whole desires go beyond the framework of the standard Maslow\u2019s pyramid that is typical of ordinary people, for in broad sense it is still in this or that way related to satisfaction of corporeal (or personal) needs in a loose sense. According to Gumilev, passionarias, unlike ordinary people \u2013 apassionarias, are characterized by strange and global desires that \u201cnormal\u201d people neither need nor understand, but these desires are so strong that they form an independent motive that usually contradicts the motives of the body, up to that of survival. In terms of transpersonal psychology such desires and motives can be referred to as transpersonal ones.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Now as for prakritilayanam<\/i>. The term prakriti means initial substance that is correlated with matter and female aspect. But prakriti<\/i> and shakti<\/i>also mean energy that \u201cenlivens\u201d the world when been structured by the original male element (that, according to tantra, is ordering, regulating one, yet passive (see the fig.). Let us bring another associative analogy: in Greek mythology Muses, the deities inspiring on creative activity, were of female gender. In Indian tradition there were Dakini (yogini) that were also females and that carried (or, to be more precise, personified) this or that lineage. In Tibet they were referred to as Prajnyas<\/i>! What is it about prakriti<\/i> here? It is that I believe that prakritilayanam<\/i> \u2013 those resolved in prakriti<\/i> \u2013 are the people who are constantly abiding within the flow of creative activity, those never abandoned by inspiration, the geniuses obsessed by creativity in their field \u2013 from art and science to social formation. They don\u2019t need long concentration, dharana, dhyana and samadhi. It\u2019s rather that they continuously remain within the state of creative activity, and thus their samadhi (though, in this case this might be not the proper term since Samadhi stands for a one-time insight) never stops. We refer to such state as the state of [Spiritual] Flow.<\/b><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
I shall draw a couple of examples:<\/div>\n
In his reminiscences about Landau one of his students wrote: \u201cI had a feeling that physics or nature were some kind of garden behind a high magic fence, and we are all trying to jump high and to see what it is there, in that garden. Someone manages to jump that high, someone fails. But we all see just the parts of the garden available during those seconds that the jump lasts. While Dau had his own wicket to this garden. He used to go in, walk there for a while, gather some apples \u2013 and then came back to watch us jumping\u201d<\/i>. This is a bright description of a man of the flow\u2026<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Another example from the life of Landau is drawn, as far as I remember, by Ginsburg. People from some research institute were solving a task, and within the process they came across a difficult sub-task, so that having spent ca. 2 months on trying to solve it they came to Landau who said: \u201cY<\/i>es, I remember such task. I was once sitting in the dentist\u2019s office, my tooth was aching, and in order to distract myself I thought up and solved this task. It\u2019s just that I don\u2019t remember how\u201d<\/i>. The institute people got inspired by the idea that it can be solved and finally, in four months, did manage to find the answer\u2026<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Another brilliant example of the man with the flow in scope of his field is shown in the movie \u201cAmadeus\u201d.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Is one’s non-bodily videha<\/i> related to resolution within the Flow of creative activity (I will take the liberty of reformulating it this way) – the prakritilayanam<\/i>? It obviously is. The creative work of a genius is always bigger than his personality. In fact, just like the passionarity, it is also transpersonal.<\/div>\n
\"\"<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Would it occur to anyone to invite tenders for the most ambiguously understood and intricate sloka of the Yoga Sutras, the line 1.19 would be the safe winner. Sorting out this case is not an easy thing to do, so that I beforehand beg the reader\u2019s pardon for this article to be this complicated. Now,… Continue reading Sutra 1.19. Supernatural Beings vs People of Spiritual Flow. Mysterious Pratyaya<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[200],"tags":[251,216,683],"class_list":["post-34615","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-yoga-sutra-en","tag-patanjali","tag-samadhi","tag-siddhi-en","entry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34615","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=34615"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34615\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34615"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=34615"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.in.yoga\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=34615"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}