by Yogi Ananda Viraj (Eugene P, Kelly, Jr.)
A Yogic Meditation
In this essay we ate attempting to provide the reader with some insight into the nature of human experience and two of the practices whereby freedom (moksa) is realized to be at the heart of experience itself. First, we will examine the two-tiered practice of vairagyam (dispassion or detachment). Second, we will examine the practice Isvara-pranidhana (devotion to the Lord). Third, we will demonstrate their relatedness within the context of freedom from the Patanjali-yoga perspective.
Both “detachment” and “devotion” ate words which beat certain histories for the “westerner” and we hope that we can clarify the context of their usage within the yogic tradition.
All of the practices of yoga relate, in one way or another, to the structure of experience. We hope that we have provided the reader with an introduction to this relation as seen in and through the two practices discussed. It is further hoped that the student of yoga (or samkhya) will, from this meditation, gain the necessary skills to relate the other yogic practices to experience in similar fashion.
Section I – Vairagyam
Yoga is defined in the sutras as:
Yogai-citta-vrtti-nirodhah
Yoga is the restriction of the fluctuations (or modifications) of
Yoga Sutra I.2.
The consciousness here referred to is termed citta as contrasted with pure consciousness or purusa. Citta is the “consciousness of ‘ analyzed into the five functions or vrtti-s (fluctuations) of: cognition (pramana), error (viparyaya), imaginative conceptualization (vikalpa), sleep (nidra), and memory (smrtih). When these five vrtti-s are restricted ( nirodhah pure consciousness (purusa) * is said to abide in its own-form (sva-rupa). This is held by yogis to be freedom. At times other than in restriction the purusa is said to “take the form of the vrtti-s,” (Y .S. I.4).
(* A discussion of the nature of pure consciousness follows.)
The issue that now arises is the “how” of the restriction. How is freedom attained?
Abhyasa-vairagyabhyam tannirodhah
Restriction through dispassion and practice.
Yoga Sutra I.12.
As stated above, in this essay we will concern ourselves with dispassion (vairagyam) and devotion (pranidhana) leaving the discussion of the many practices of yoga for future investigations. Let it suffice to say for our present purposes that practice (abhyasa) is defined, in the broadest sense, as the aim toward (yatna) stability (sthiti) in nirodhah. (Y.S. I.13).
Patanjali divides vairagyam into two levels, apara-vairagyam and
para-vairagyam. Sutra I.15 states:
drsta-anusravika-visaya-vitrsnasya vasikara-samjnavairagyam
Dispassion is the knowledge of mastery of one who does not thirst for objects (or conditions) perceived or heard.
This is the lower dispassion or apara-vairagyam. Vyasa, in his Yoga-bhasya says that the citta will have a consciousness of being master (vasikara-samjna) if it is rid of the thirst (vitrsna) for I.) perceived objects: such as the opposite sex, food, drink, or power; 2.) revealed (anusravika ) objects: such as the attainment of heaven, the disembodied state, or dissolution into the original cause; and 3.) objects or conditions (viaya), either supernatural or not, that by virtue of the strength of higher meditation (prasamkhya) have been realized to be inadequate. This consciousness of mastery, being of the nature of non-enjoyment (abhoga) and empty of rejection and obtainment is dispassion.1
We understand from Vyasa’s commentary that it is the citta or consciousness of which must rid itself of the impurities of “thirst” if it is to attain mastery. The Bhagavad Gita traces the movement of attachment in chapter II.61,62:
When a man dwells upon objects (visaya) of sense, Attachment to them is born:
From attachment, desire is born; From desire, anger is born;
From anger arises delusion;
From delusion, wandering of the memory;
From wandering of memory, loss of intelligence;
From loss of intelligence one is lost.
It is not that dispassion removes one from the world but only from the thirst (trsna) for worldly and extraworldly objects or conditions. The latter are those meditative states discussed in the Vedas and elsewhere that grant a less than liberative “pleasure.” The yogi must come to a realization that these objects and states are flawed or inadequate (dosa) in light of the completeness of final liberation (kaivalyam).
The second or higher (param) level of detachment or vairagyam is described in Yoga Sutra I.16:
Tatparam purusa-khyater guna-vaitrsnyam
That highest [dispassion], thirstlessness for the gunas, from knowledge of the purusa.
The three gunas, sattva (illumination), rajas (activation), and tamas (limitation or restriction) are the constitutive movements of prakrti or the objective side of experience.2 The subjective side, purusa, is held to be distinct or isolated (kevala) from the three gunas. Sattva binds one to ignorance by attachment to happiness and knowledge (in the cognitive sense). Rajas bind by attachment to action or the sense of doership.
Here the “individual” is held in the grip of the manifest world by a focus on sensory, motor, or cognitive activity.
Greed, exertion, the undertaking actions [doership], restlessness, lust; these are born when rajas is dominant ..
Bhagavad Gita XIV. 12.
Tamas binds by “… obscuring wisdom, causing attachment to negligence [or confusion].”3
One way of gaining access to an understanding of the workings of the three gunas is to view them as three different foci. In all acts of the citta, or consciousness of, these three are present. However, one is always dominant. A sattvic focus renders the perception (or cognition) light. That is to say, sattva, being of the nature of illumination, is closest in likeness to the function of pure consciousness or purusa. A sattvic focus, therefore, is a focus upon the fact or facticity of the illumined. The purusa is that which grants experience its conscious or living nature. A sattvic focus reveals this role of the purusa within experience. Rajas, because of its motivating nature, is a focus upon the I-centered desire within experience. This comes in the form of “I want,” “I want more,” “I do,” etc. It is being carried away by the movement of experience and the desires which foster it. A tamasic focus is a focus upon the defined components of experience. Tamas thingifies the world seeing experience in terms of its objects, the “heavy” aspects of life. It obscures both the conscious principle and the movement of desire with a focus upon concrete objectivity or concrete subjectivity as I am-ness.
These three foci are not body-neutral. Each of these is attended by their respective embodiments. A sattvic body is open and light; rajas defines the body as an excited encasement for the I; and tamas is a weighted body heedless of its movements. Space limits our discussion of the gunas to these few lines. Our main intent in broaching the subject is to provide enough background for an understanding of yogic vairagyam.
We return now to Patanjali’s discussion of the higher vairagyam.
Dispassion is not a virtue that is to be imposed upon the yogi’s life. Patanjali says that the higher dispassion results from knowledge (khyati) of the purusa. The purusa is that pure “reflecting” consciousness (as a mirror reflects its images) at the heart of all experience. As stated above, it provides the life or awareness that makes all experience conscious experience. It is not the phenomenal self or I-am-ness (asmita) but a necessary condition for its arising. However, It is not a sufficient condition. We also need the manifesting movements of the three gunas. When these two aspects of experience are associated (samyoga) I-am-ness arises. Our ignorance results from the inability to discern (khyati) their distinct natures within experience. We stated that consciousness is isolated from the gunas. It grants consciousness to their activity as a mirror grants life to its images. The mirror is totally unaffected by the images, totally untouched. Yet, a mirror is not a mirror without its images. Both sides of experience are necessary; neither is sufficient unto itself. Dispassion, as a practice, serves to reveal this two-fold structure of experience. The purusa, being untouched by the movements of the gunas , is eternally dispassionate. The yogi merely “sees” this detachment as a “quality” of experience itself. It is not that the yogi, as an I-am-ness, is a detached or dispassionate person. Yet, within the yogi’s experience a divine core of consciousness is at rest and unaffected.
Weapons do not pierce it,
Fire does not burn it,
Waters do not wet it,
Winds do not dry it.Bhagavad Gita II.23.
The higher vairagyam, requiring a sattvic condition of the citta, includes the practice of meditation. It is only through the calm of sattva as opposed to the excitement of rajas and the indolence of tamas that is revealed that quiet center that is purusa. The yogi does not yearn for a detachment. The yogi simply sees, through the calm of knowledge (khyati), that detachment is already the case. The yogi cultivates a sattvic focus through practice of nirodhah or restriction of the citta-vrtti (modifications of the consciousness of). This is not to say, however, that the yogi lives exclusively in a sattvic condition fighting off the onslaughts of rajas and tamas.
He neither hates nor desires
the occurring or non-occurring
of illumination [sattva], activity [rajas],
or delusion [tamas]…He who, seated as if
indifferent not disturbed by the gunas ,
Who thinks “the gunas alone act,”
Who stands firm and does not waver…Bhagavad Gita XIV.22, 23.
So we see that the yogi stands firm in a sattvic “vision” despite the movements of the gunas.4 This stand is the taking of refuge in the pure consciousness within experience. This is in no way to be considered a withdrawal from experience. Rather vairagyam is an unqualified attentiveness to and concentrated immersion in action or experience. Ridding oneself from the “thirst” for seen or revealed objects or conditions experienced is not viewed as a context for personal gain. The fruits of actions are renounced. By concentrated immersion in action, excluding a view toward personal gain, the conscious core of experience (purusa) becomes the seat of the yogi.
He who can see action in inaction,
And inaction in action,
Is wise among men;
He performs all action in a (yoked) disciplined way.Bhagavad Gita IV.18.
The performance of actions without the compulsive desire for their fruits is a sattvic “seeing” which is synonymous with the revelation of the pure, restful consciousness within experience.
It is said by Patanjali that the nature or being of the seen (prakrti) exists only for the sake of the purusa (Y.S. II.21). The pure consciousness is the only experiencer or seer (Y.S. II.20). The asmita or sense of I-ness is on the side of the seen. So structurally, for us, i.e., the I, to lay claim to experience or fruits of experience is erroneous (viparyaya). We are not exhorted by yoga to change the structure of experience but to come to a (sattvic) knowledge of how it In so doing we become free of the mistakes made by ignorance (avidya) and the consequent dissatisfaction (duhkha)that results.
Section II – Isvara-Pranidhana
Isvara-pranidhanad va
Or, from devotion to Isvara
Yoga Sutra I.24.
Devotion to the Lord (Isvara) is viewed by Patanjali as being a way of re-viewing our experience and therefore liberating us from ignorance. Isvara is a special or distinct (visesa) purusa that is held to be untouched by the afflictions (klesas), fruitions of actions (vipaka), actions (karma), or the residue of actions (asaya).
In addition, Isvara is omniscient and unsurpassed. As such, The Lord is the teacher (guru) of the earliest teachers because, being eternal, it is unlimited by time. The Lord is that vision of the All that once entered into is revealed to be the All. It is the purusa unlimited by the gunas’ workings. It is that consciousness which, joined to the highest prakrti as its body,5 is the first guru. By its very nature, by its magnificence, it brings one to lawful-worship (pranidhana). Ultimately, all acton, experience, and fruits of action belong to the all-pervasive experiencer, Isvara.
In everyday waking existence, the purusa is seen as providing our experience with the consciousness that gives it life. However, because this experience is not total or omniscient, purusa is viewed as limited to the foreground experiences of the citta-vrtti-s or consciousness of. When this consciousness of is suspended(nirodha ) and the gunas have “accomplished their task” the pure consciousness is “released” into what we may consider as the background or ambient embodiment which is totality or omniscience itself. Because this is non-linear or eternal, it has always been the first teacher. The practice of Isvara-pranidhana is a reflection of this movement of experience from the limitations of vrtti to the incarnation of the whole (visua-rupa).
Vyasa tells us in his commentary on Yoga Sutra II.l, that Isvara – pranadhana is the “offering up” of actions to Isvara and the renunciation of the fruits of actions. As we have noted, the authentic structure of experience shows us that we are not the conscious agents of our actions nor are we (as I-nesses) the seers of experience. It is an erroneous claiming process, by the grammar of I-am-ness (rajas and tamas), which lays a false claim to actions and their results. This is a case of not “seeing” the structure of experience clearly (sattva). It is not difficult to understand that, given the way in which experience is processed, we “should” offer our actions to Isvara and renounce their fruits simply because they do not structurally “belong” to us,_ Devotion is lawful, not only because we are able to “participate” in Isvara through the yogic vision, but because it is demanded by the very anatomy of experience itself. It is in this sense that yogic ethics (yama and niyama) are not imposed upon us from outside but derive from a clear insight into the movement of life. To violate the order is to misconstrue its structure and hence to remain dissatisfied within it.
Section III – Devotion and Dispassion
Already, the relations that abide between vairagyam and Isvara-pranidhana are becoming obvious. On the one hand the practice of detachment, through the realization of thirstlessness, is seen to be revelatory of the calm and conscious core of experience (purusa). On the other, devotion to Isvara, as the renunciation of actions and fruitions, starts from the knowledge that purusa as Isvara is the true seer and is “structurally deserving” of our offerings.
Of course, both of these practices are begun on the fundamental level of language. The yogi must re-frame or re-constitute experience on the linguistic level, cultivating those vrtti-s or modifications of the consciousness of which lead to a sattvic outlook. This requires the practices of niyama (observance) and yama (restraint), asana (posture) meditation and the rest. Our aim in this essay is merely to demonstrate that the yogic practices of vairagyam and Isvara-pranidhana are not tools by which the yogi effortfully aspires to freedom but that they are structural requirements for freedom to be seen as the movement of experience itself.
NOTES
1. Translations of the yoga sutras and commentaries consulted for my translations include:
__ Woods, James Houghton. The Yoga System of Patanjali. (Delhi: Motilal
__ Banarsidass, 1977. First published by Harvard University Press, 1914.)
__Baba, Bangali. Yoga Sutra of Patanjali with Commentary of Vyasa, Translated from Sanskrit into English with Copious Notes. (Delhi:Motilal Banarsidass, 1976.)
2. See Samkhya Karika XII
3. BhagavadGita XIV.9.
4. Ibid, 11.45.
5. See Ibid. chapter XI for an understanding of the body of the great vision, Isvara .