by Yogi Ananda Viraj (Eugene P. Kelly, Jr.)
The term “corporeal consciousness” is employed here in a most specialized sense. The word “corporeal” is derived from the Latin corpus meaning “body.” The word “consciousness” is derived again, from the Latin conscius, from com plus scire meaning “to know”. Simply put, the term means “to know the body”. However, in the yogic frame of reference this “knowing the body” may be somewhat alien to our usual thoughts on this matter.
To begin with, the term “body” means something different to a yogi than it does to the student of medicine. As for the medical and therefore physical point of view the body is viewed as an organism that lives within the bounds of space and time. This is no doubt a crude definition but, nevertheless, one that suffices to place the medical “body” apart from the yogic conception.
For the yogin the body has a different meaning. In Sanskrit there are many words which we would translate into English to mean body. This essay will use only two of these words. The first is kaya from the root ci meaning “gather.” Second, is the word deha from the root dih meaning “smear, plaster, mold, fashion.” The first of these implies a gathering, assemblage, or collection. Taking this one step into the yoga philosophy the body or klya is seen to be an assemblage of elements, both gross and subtle, senses, organs, mind, the principle of individuality (ahamkara) and the determinative intellect. The word “deha” implies a fashioning or molding of these same constituents. So we see that from the yogic point of view the “body” includes much more than the popular notion which we have been taught from the medical frame of reference. It should be kept in mind however, that no value judgment is being passed on the superiority or inferiority of either view. The two different notions of body are presented here only for the purposes of clarity by way of contrast.
Given that the yogic point of view involves more than the physical, including what we would term the psychological, we must adapt our thinking to this “new” notion if we are to set out on a yogic course of action. Clarification of the fundamental concepts of the “yogic body” is the purpose of this essay.
Constituents of the yogic body (yoga-kaya):
Starting from the gross and working towards the subtle, in this explanation we begin with the gross elements which compose the physical frame. There are five of these gross elements (bhutas): earth, water, fire, air , space. At the next level the body (kaya) includes the subtle elementals (tanmatras). These again are five in number and are held to be the objects of the senses. They are the subtle elementals of smell, taste, sight, touch, and sound. Corresponding to these are the five sense instruments (indriyas) of smelling, tasting, seeing, touching and hearing. Along with sensation the interior organs of bodily activity are included. These are the organs of speaking, grasping, walking, excreting and generation. These last two groups are seen as being subtle and operating through the gross, such as the eye for seeing or the feet for walking. One could say these are the “impulses” to see and walk, although this deserves much clarification and is, therefore, beyond the scope of this essay. The next in the order is the internal organ of cognition. This is composed of the three functions of the mind, which organizes sensation, the principle of individuation which asserts the “self” into experience, and the determinative intellect. This last function serves to “present” all experience to the pure consciousness which only looks on and provides the force to “live” the experience. It is this pure consciousness which is embodied, not the personality. This embodied one is the knower.
Given that the yoga-kaya includes the senses, elements and psychological instruments our concept of body must be altered a great deal. The senses imply in all cases contact with the “external” world. The elements imply a unity with the physical environment. The psychological instruments imply contact with and absorption in the “external” world. Can we rightly divorce the yoga-kaya from our surroundings? Obviously the answer is no. In fact, the notion of internal and external must take on an entirely new meaning. Our surroundings are no longer external as the senses, elements and psyche place us in immediate contact with what was considered external. We can no longer separate “body” from environment. Either we must take both the body along with the “external” environment to be external or we must take the surrounding environment to be internal-actually making it part of the body. We can, in fact, avoid the terms “internal” and “external” if we focus our attention on this notion of contact. For the senses to be senses they must sense; for the elements to be elements, they must be derived from the environment. All of our bodily functions imply contact with the world around us. This implication is the basis for rejecting the notions of interior and exterior. Simply stated, we can’t help but be involved in the world; we are not separate from, but an integral function of, the entire world process. It is but one process or movement and any division in that one-ness is artificial or perhaps merely functional. In light of this we come to the notion of a field.
“Field” in our sense here means an area of activity. The body does not act within the field as we would again be employing “internal” and “external”. The body, as we have seen, is joined with its surroundings. We can no longer deem it separate. The physical body and its environment must now be considered as one “field.” It is this “field” that provides our authentic conscious self with experience.
In Sanskrit the word for field is ksetra, a word derived from the root kgi meaning to “possess.” If we take the word “possess” here in the sense that a sphere of action (field) belongs to a knower or possessor we can readily understand the yogic view. A conscious knower (purusa) is surrounded by a field (ksetra). This field belongs to this knower. This field is the yoga-kgya. The knower is pure awareness. The mind, senses, organs, elements, are all the field. This field also includes that which is known, sensed and lived in. The most subtle thoughts on down to the most gross elements are all objective to the knower. It is the task of yoga practice to realize this distinction between the field and the knower of the field.
Yoga Sadhana and Yoga Kaya:
The relationship between sadhana and the yoga-kaya is one of cause and effect. It is through the yoga practices that one makes real or true the yoga-kaya. It is not enough to “know” in an academic sense in yoga training. Most of us live as if our individual personalities were our authentic selves, or even as if our bodies are “us.” It is the goal of yoga practice to free us from this view and allow the distinction between field and knower of the field to be realized, not merely understood. Sadhana is that body of practices which, when used sincerely, bring about such a realization. Yoga practice starts with the gross, the physical body, and moves to the subtle. This “movement” of the practice brings us to the conscious realization of and hence responsibility for every level of the yoga-kgya. It is the conditioned or habitualized actions of everyday living that are suspended in order to create a new “effort” which brings us to realize each respective level of the kaya. When the most subtle level is realized, through the practice of intense concentration, the knowledge of the distinction between the field or body and the knower or possessor is brought about.
The beginning levels of yoga training must of necessity start with the gross. This is the task of both the Introductory Courses and beginning Comprehensive Yoga Training classes. Our habitualized thought processes prevent us from “making real” the yoga-kaya and therefore, prevent us from realizing the truth of the knower of all possible fields or bodies. The truth of this knower is freedom from the limitations of the body be it the physical body or the yoga-kaya.