What is it about? We cannot run about higgledy-piggledy without understanding it.
The purpose of the withdrawal of the mind or the senses from the objects is simple;
and that simple answer to this question is that the nature of things does not permit
the notion that the mind entertains when it contacts an object. The idea that we have
in our mind at the time of cognising an object is not in consonance with the nature of
Truth. This is why the mind is to be withdrawn from the object. There is a peculiar
definition which the mind imposes upon the object of sense at the time of cognising
it, for the purpose of contacting it, etc. This definition is contrary to the true nature of
that object. If we call an ass a dog, that would not be a proper definition; it would be
a misunderstanding of its real essence. The object of sense is not related to the
subject of perception in the manner in which the subject is defining it or conceiving
it.
Hence, the very activity of the mind in respect of this cognising or contacting is
misdirected from the very beginning itself. Yoga asks us to set right this notion first;
and this setting right of the notion cannot be done unless the mind is first withdrawn
from the object. If there is a very serious illness from which someone is suffering, and
the illness has come to a crisis, to an advanced stage, we first of all put the patient on
a kind of semi-fast and isolate the patient completely from all contact of every kind—
social and personal, even psychological—so that there is a proper atmosphere for the
investigation and diagnosis. This is the pratyahara—the complete quarantining of
the patient, and not allowing any kind of intrusion from outside. Physically and in
every sense of the term there should be isolation so that we can have a clear
observation of the situation and also a study of the various techniques that have to be
adopted for rectifying the mistaken notion that is in the mind. Pratyahara is not
yoga proper. Just as the isolation of the patient in a ward is not the main treatment
but is a necessary aspect of the treatment, likewise, pratyahara is an essential part of
yoga though it is not yet yoga. Yoga is yet to start. For a few days the doctor may not
do anything at all and will simply keep on observing what is happening. After days
and days of observation, the physician may come to a conclusion as to what is the
condition of the patient, and then the treatment will be started. Likewise, the mind is
first of all segregated from its involvements. This segregation is pratyahara.
There is a prejudiced notion which the mind entertains in respect of its things, of its
objects. This prejudice has arisen on account of a preconceived notion that is already
there; and that notion has only one objective in front of it—namely, the exploitation
of that object for its purposes. It has got a single intent, a deeply concentrated
objective. If a wild beast looks at a prey, it has a single intention, which is not very
complicated. Likewise, the mental cognition of an object, especially when it is
charged with a forceful emotion, is backed up by a single intent. This is the prejudice,
which is very irrational, and it will not be amenable to any kind of rational analysis.
A sentiment or a prejudice cannot be rationally analysed. It will not be subject to
analysis, and it will not agree to it either—that is the force that is behind it. So there
is a need to completely isolate the mind in its individual aspect as well as its
externally related social aspect. The mind may not think of an object when it does not
like it. This is one kind of pratyahara. Suppose we are averse to a thing; we will not
think of that thing. But this is not yogic pratyahara, because the spontaneous dislike
that arises in the mind on account of that particular object being an obstructing
factor to its satisfactions is not a healthy condition.