by Yogi Ananda Viraj (Eugene P, Kelly, Jr.)
Yoga is defined by Patanjali as the restriction or checking of the fluctuations or modifications of the citta (yogas-citta-vrtti-nirodha), (Yoga Sutra, I.2). The citta includes intelligence (buddhi), the I-maker (ahamkara ) and the conceptual faculty or reflective capacity (manas). However, for our purposes we will translate citta as “mind.” Therefore, yoga is the restriction of the modifications (vrtti) of mind.
The Modifications (Vrtti) of Mind
Previously,1 we have discussed the citta and how the modifications of the citta conceal the own-form (sva-rupa) of pure consciousness. It therefore becomes necessary for us to discuss the various modifications of the mind which structurally limit consciousness.
Patanjali views the citta-vrtti-s as either afflicted (klista) or unafflicted (aklista). The afflicted modifications are those caused by the five klesas or afflictions.2 These “…are the field for the generation of the accumulation of action-deposits,” (karma-asaya-pracaya-ksetri-bhutah, (Yoga-Bhasya 1.5). Action deposits are the residuum of citta-vrtti-s as well as actions (karma). The unafflicted modifications are those that have knowledge (khyati) as their object. So, basically, the citta can operate in one of two directions: the vrtti-s can lead toward or away from freedom or knowledge.
Patanjali views the citta as functioning in five distinct modes, i.e., there are five types of citta-vrtti-s: Cognition (pramana), error ( viparyaya), imagination or conceptualization (vikalpa), sleep (nidra), and memory (smrtayaha or smrti ). We will examine each separately. Cognition (Pramana),
There are three forms of cognition: perception (pratyaksa), inference (anumana), and testimony (agama). Perception is that cognition wherein the citta has been affected by some external thing (bahya-vastu) through the sense organs. It is the perception of some particular. Inference, suffice it to say, is mainly concerned with knowledge of the genus, e.g. “the moon and stars have motion as does Chaitra (a man’s name), for like him, they change position; the Vindhya Mountains do not, therefore they do not possess motion” (YB., I.7). Testimony is that vrtti which arises in the mind of one who hears the words of another who is attempting to convey some knowledge. Agama is said to be valid, if the knowledge is accurate, or invalid, and therefore not a pramana, if the transmission is ill founded.
Error (Viparyaya)
“Error is a false knowledge (mithya-jnanam) not based on that form,” (Y.S., I.8). The sutra states that error is a false knowledge not based on the “form” of that which it is supposed to know. Quite simply, error is wrong “knowledge” with regard to an object (visaya). Vyasa, in his commentary, uses the example of visual perception of two moons. This perception is obviously an error which can be displaced by the accurate perception (pramana) of one moon. Vyasa adds that viparyaya includes the fundamental error of avidya (ignorance), the primal affliction (klesa).
Conceptualization (Vikalpa)
“Vikalpa is without object or reality (vastu-sunya) and follows from verbal knowledge (sabda-jinana), ” (Y.S. I.9). Vikalpa is neither a cognition or an error. It is not a cognition because it has no reality outside of the words that constitute it. It is not an error because there is a verbal usage or conventionality by which there is a valid communication. One of Vyasa’s examples is “purusa is consciousness.” In this case we are not attributing consciousness to purusa because purusa is consciousness. Yet, something of validity is being communicated, i.e., the identity of purusa and consciousness. Another example is: “Look up in the sky.” There is no real existent being talked about, but the words have communicative weight.
Sleep (Nidra)
“Sleep is a modification (vrtti) sustained by the abhava-pratyaya, ” (“non-existence idea”), (Y .S. I.10). It is a difficult sutra to translate but the meaning is rather straightforward. Sleep is the movement of the citta as the exclusion of waking and dreaming. One may ask what the contents (pratyaya) of the citta are in sleep, but the most accurate answer would be “sleep.” So, we might say, that sleep is the pratyaya of sleep. Vyasa adds, this must also be restricted (nirodhah) to realize yoga.
Memory (Smrtih)
“Memory is the not allowing to be carried off of the experienced object (viaya),” (Y.S. I.11). Memory is the remembering of the object or event once experienced. It is the bringing forth as the citta of something once experienced. There are two vrtti-s present in memory: first, there is the experienced object and second, there is the knowing of the object experienced. Memory (smrti) refers to the object side, and the knowing or grasping (grahana) of the object experienced is a pramana or cognition. Therefore, in the act of memory, an object is remembered both as it was experienced and as it is currently being known (pramana), “I remember that, now.” So the buddhi (intellect) is presenting the remembered object to consciousness and herein the process of knowing (grahana) is dominant and simultaneously the form of the object remembered (grahya, “grasped”) is dominant as smrti.
Memory is held to be of two types: imagined (bhavita), as in dreams, and not imagined (abhavita) as in the waking condition. Vyasa says that all memory stems from cognitions, errors, conceptualizations, sleep, or other memories. All of these vrtti-s must be restricted to arrive at samadhi (unitive attention).
Our Fallen Condition
The citta or mind is a movement from the wholeness of the unmanifest to the manifest. This movement (rajas) “downward,” as it were, into the manifest carries the intellect into the experience which is the dualism of subject and object. This movement (parinama) is synonymous with the first interaction of the three gunas: sattva , rajas, and tamas. As stated above, when in the vision of the unmanifest “whole” body, the three gunas are not interacting. Therefore the sattva-guna, which is illumination (prakasa or prakhya), is said to be dominant and pure because there is no manifestation (suddhi, see Y.S . III.55). When the purity of sattva is tainted by rajas and/or tamas, the movement of manifestation emerges out of wholeness and I and that are born. The citta is then in motion as its modifications. So, once again, our fallen condition, termed ignorance, not knowing (avidya), consists of a concealing of our primal or total conscious body and the emergence of a disintegrated body, manifestation.
The citta is said to have five stages or levels (bhumi): restless (ksipta), dull or confused (mudha), frustrated or distracted (viksipta), one pointed ( ekagra), and restricted (niruddha). It is said that the first two have nothing to do with Yoga and the third, even though focused on something particular, is still not one-pointed and therefore not Yogic. It is only through ekagra and niruddha that Yoga is realized.
When the citta has arrived at restriction of its vrtti-s, the pure consciousness is said to abide in its own-form (sva-rupa). “…I see you everywhere, unlimited in form; and see no beginning, middle, or end to you, 0 universal form,” (Bhagavad Gita XI.16). This is Yogic knowledge. Yet, we find ourselves in the manifest world of duality and in this embodiment the own-form of the purusa or consciousness is concealed. Consciousness has conformed to the structural limits of the modifications of the citta. One such modification might be “I see the stars.” In this case consciousness takes the form or incarnation of an I here seeing stars there, and the world is felt to be that way. Its universal form, which is pervading the whole body (avyakta), is narrowed by the vrtti. As long as the Yogi is untrained in the practice of nirodhah or restriction, consciousness is felt to be confined. So actually, it is the citta which must be released from movement (parinama) of its modifications and reintegrated or resolved back into its origin in order that the universal form of purusa be “seen.” When the modifications of the mind have subsided there is a movement of a universal or wholistic order, nirodhah-parinama, the moment by moment (ksana) movement of conscious totality. The whole, resting on the light of consciousness, is a divine becoming. This knowledge is beyond time as sequence (akramam), it is eternal, (Y.S. III,54). It is the fall from this conscious or living whole which gives rise to the separation of past, present, and future. This is termed sequence (krama) by Yogis and is held to be a fabrication of the mind (buddhi-nirmana).
To summarize, our fallen or ignorant condition conceals (avarana) our entire conscious body and confines consciousness to the embodied structural limits of the citti-vrtti-s. The escape from limitation (avidya) is knowledge gained through the restriction of vrtti-s. Such restriction is termed “Yoga.” Escape terminates in the realization of the whole body consciousness, the divine and eternal union of prakrti and purusa.
Our escape from limitation can only be enacted through the practice of nirodhah. But this practice is not easily made incarnate. Having “found” ourselves within the confines of the manifest, we must now examine the structures which hold us there.
Manifestation (Vyakta) and Dissatisfaction (Duhkha)
As noted above, in a passage from the Bhagavad Gita, this entire manifest creation is brought about by the union (samyoga) of the field (prakrti) and the knower of the field (purusa). We find ourselves on this side of the manifest, after the fact. Our mission is to awaken to this union and realize, bodily, our origin. We, finding ourselves estranged from the origin, abide in a condition of ignorance (avidya), the fundamental or original error. To one who is discriminating (vivekin), all manifestation is unsatisfactory due to the conflict or opposition of the fluctuations of the gunas, through the dissatisfaction due to transformations (parinama), sorrow (tapa), and tendencies (samskara) due to past actions, (Y.S. II,15). Because the citta is a movement of gunas and these gunas are interdependent in their movements in the manifest condition, the citta is constituted by a continual inter-action of brightness or illumination (prakasa), activity ( kriya) and inertia or concretization (sthiti). So at times there is the dominant movement of sattva and its result is pleasure. At other times, rajas may dominate sattva and tamas, presenting the experience of pain or dissatisfaction (duhkha ). Lastly, the dominance of tamas gives rise to delusion (moha).
These presentations of the citta to the pure consciousness are known as pratyayas or “contents” of the citta-vrtti-s. The movements of the pratyayas are dependent on all three gunas, the distinctions between pratyayas are the result of gunas being dominant or subordinate. In which case they are interdependent, each one includes the functioning of the other two. Therefore, Yogis are aware that the citta or mind is in rapid change. When pleasure, derived from sensory gratification is dominant, there is a reliance on rajas (duhkha ) for inner support. Therefore, implicit in pleasure is dissatisfaction. The same goes for tamas in terms of delusion (moha). If delusion is dominant, it is a presentation (pratyaya) which is in reliance on rajas and sattva (its inner supports) and therefore, conflict or opposition resides at its core. There is no rest in the mind. The vivekinah (the discriminating one) is sensitive to this inner conflict which constitutes the rapidly changing citta and therefore realizes that even in the midst of pleasure, pain and delusion are subtly active.
We must remember, the citta comprises all three gunas whenever it is in the manifest (vyakta) condition. So there is conflict of the modifications of the gunas ( guna-vrtti-virodha ) and therefore dissatisfaction.
The suffering (duhkha ) inherent in transformations (parinama) results from the movement of the citta through the sense organs. When craving ceases because of the satiation with enjoyment of sense objects we call that pleasure (sukha); when craving (trsna) fails to subside, we call it pain. When the desire for pleasure increases, because of repeated experience at acquiring pleasure, the senses gain expertise and novel means of obtaining pleasure are pursued.3 There is no end to this cycle of obtainment. Craving or thirst for sensory gratification continues with no end in sight. This is not freedom.
Patanjali’s understanding of the intrinsic dissatisfaction of the manifest leads him and his commentators (bhasya-karas) to look at tapa (sorrow, pain, affliction). Sorrow is seen as being permeated with aversion (dvesa). We employ the mind and senses in the search for pleasure which is very often rooted in the aversions that have been formed from the search. Sorrow is always bound up with the search for pleasure.
Lastly, the Yogic appraisal of the painful status of the manifest must draw on past actions that bear fruit. Once an action has been taken it leaves an impression (samskara ) which inclines toward remanifestation as citta-vrtti , or in terms of embodied contents, a pratyaya. Relatedly, these impressions are stored as action-deposits (karma-asaya). A samskara of pleasure results from the experience (anubhava) of pleasure; a painful samskara from the experience of pain. As a samskara rises into manifestation as a citta-vrtti, and as an experience, it reestablishes itself as a samskara again. There is a movement from deposit to manifestation, to deposit, a full self-reinforcing cycle, samsara. “Therefore, this stream of dissatisfaction from beginningless time (an-adi), spreading ever wider, pains even the Yogin because its nature is adverse or inverted (pratikula). “(YB., II.15). That is, by its own nature, the cyclic process of samskara to vrtti to samskara is a movement in opposition to freedom. The way out is a rejection of this cycle and the establishment of correct perception (samyag-darsana).
Having examined the stages of the citta and the nature of the manifest with regard to duhkha, we are in a position to explore the structures of experience which bind “us” to the manifest and conceal our original wholeness.
The Afflictions (Klesas)
The structure of ordinary experience is considered by Yogis to be afflicted. They see a five-fold movement of affliction. This movement derives from the fundamental error (or original sin) of avidya (lit. “not knowing”). “Avidya is the perception (khyati) of the eternal, pure, satisfying, and the self (atman) in what is impermanent, impure, dissatisfactory, and not-self,” (Y .S. II.5). Avidya has many manifestations. Basically, however, ignorance is the concealment of pure consciousness. Purusa is the eternal or timeless witness. The ignorant perspective confuses pure consciousness with the instrument that provides consciousness with the seen. This confusion gives rise to selfhood or I-am ness. “I-am-ness (asmita) is when the two powers of seer (drs) and seen (darsana ) [appear] as a single self (eka-atmata) ” (Y.S.II.6). Recall that buddhi (intelligence), ahamkara (I-maker), and manas (mind-organ, conceptualizer) which constitute the citta are on the side of the seen ( drsya), i.e., they are movements of prakrti rendered experience by the presence of purusa. The citta is the power (sakti) by which the seen occurs. I-am-ness, the second listed affliction (klesa), results when there is a movement (rajas) within the pure sattva , or “illumination” by consciousness, to localize perception or seeing. This movement identifies consciousness as the I-sense and consciousness appears as an active agent. Please recall that consciousness is inactive, pure witnessing. Only prakrti, as the movement of the three gunas, acts. Any movement ,away from the pure witnessing mode of the purusa via the pure sattva, i.e., the gunas in balance or equilibrium, results in I-am-ness. This movement is simultaneously both a concealment of consciousness and a disintegration of the total conscious body. Purusa, having become localized through the movement of rajas as I-am-ness, now becomes identified with the I-sense and “takes the form of the citta-vrtti-s,” the modifications of the power by which the seen is presented. These modifications generally entail the division of subject and object. The I-sense “projects,” as it were, the perceived outward, further disintegrating the body, concealing the universal or total form of purusa. This movement or activity of rajas conceals the sattvic nature of the seen and supports the movement of tamas or concretization. The world or objects are now perceived to be “out-there” and “heavy” or independent of the body as the home of 1-am-ness. The tamasic perspective, the movement of rajas sustaining tamas as dominant, views the world as populated with objects, independent of the body and mind whose reality consists in their being in themselves.
The purely sattvic perspective, by contrast, is “prior” to the movement of 1-am-ness (rajas) and holds the world to be living as the integrated total body occurring to and for pure consciousness. Totality is conscious becoming; the whole is conscious time as the movement of the divine incarnation. Here, prakrti and purusa are wed in ecstatic union. This is a far cry from the torment of concealment wherein this union (samyoga), because it is viewed as a unity or identity (asmita), disintegrates, and sets the cycle (samsara) of suffering in motion.
Having projected the world apart from the body, through the interaction of the gunas , a movement of attachment and aversion is born. “Attachment (ragas) is the dwelling (anusaya) on the satisfying.” “Aversion (dvesa) is the dwelling on the dissatisfying (duhkha)” (Y.S. II.7,8). Ragah and dvesah are the third and fourth klesas discussed by Patanjali. Th key to understanding these afflictions is the word anusaya, derived from the verbal root si meaning to lie or rest. The prefix anu (along, after) plus saya (+ in, possessive suffix) meaning to rest, connotes a resting on, or, even stronger, a clinging to. Vyasa, in his commentary, states: “That greed (garddhas), thirst (trsna), or desire (lobhah) on the part of one familiar with pleasure (sukha), after a memory of pleasure, for either pleasure or the means (sadhana) [of gaining it] is ragah.” As for dvesa Vyasa says: “The resistance (pratigha, fr. han, to strike), rage (manyur), malice or revenge (jighamsa), or anger (krodhah) on the part of one familiar with dissatisfaction (duhkha), after memory of dissatisfaction or the means [of gaining it] is dvesa,” (Y.B. 11.7,8.).
The citta, inclusive of the five vrtti-s, is here operating in a world of polarity. There are desired fruits of mental and physical activity and there are fruits that are painful and are to be rejected as such. The citta knows or is familiar with pleasure and pain and craves the pleasurable and avoids the painful. The citta moves from one pole to the other in a search for satisfaction. From the tamasic perspective, the I operates on a world of objects that provide it with pleasure or pain. I remember which are which and act accordingly within certain means. As we noted above, the senses grow more expert or desensitized in their pursuit of pleasure and therefore sensory gratification is not conducive to freedom. We also noted that pain or dissatisfaction is, to the discriminating ones, intrinsic to the manifest order of interacting gunas. The Bhagavad Gita sums up our predicament:
For a person dwelling on the objects of the senses,
Attachment to them is born;
From attachment, desire is born;
From desire, anger is born;From anger arises delusion;
From delusion, wandering of memory;
From wandering of memory, destruction of intelligence;
From destruction of intelligence, One is lost (or destroyed).B.G. II.62, 63
As long as we remain bound by and to the movement of rajas towards support of tamas, excluding the revelation of the pure consciousness within this movement, life appears as a consciously active subject (asmita) moving as a substance, a “this,” seeking pleasure and avoiding pain in a world populated by substances existing independently.4 There is neither rest or freedom in such a world. Knowing this, however, is not enough. Conceptually, we may accede to this argument, and yet, the movements of ragah and dvesah continue to rule our lives. It is as if we have no control over their manifestation. We want to hang on to the life we are familiar with, despite its dissatisfying nature. Even the most intelligent of us have this yearning. This brings us to the fifth and final affliction discussed by Patanjali, abhinivesah, “the will to live.” “Abhinivesah, flowing on (vahin) by its own essence, (sva-rasa, lit. ‘own juice or liquid’), is manifest (rudha) even in the learned (vidusa, vidvas) ” (Y.S. II.9).
At this point, I ask the reader to recall our discussion of samsara or the cycle of vrtti to samskara (also vasana and asaya or deposit) and full circle to vrtti. No life, no experience ever dies, it simply recedes into the condition of the avyakta or unmanifest wherein it is consciously but latently abiding within the totality.5 Given the appropriate set of circumstances, what is latent as past impressions (samskaras ) will become patent as vrtti , or experience, only to return to latency, reinforced, if embodied or acted out. One can, through yogic disciplines, place resistance in the circuitry. This will be discussed at the appropriate time. The sutra states that abhinivesah “flows” on by its own-essence. There is no agency involved here. The past is alive, latent but conscious, in the present. If it were not, it could not be effective. The past, in the form of samskaras or asayas or vasanas, is being relied on to perform almost all of the functions of human life. We could not start a car or turn on a light without the effectiveness, the living potency of the past in the present. Our bodies, prakrti, house the entirety of the past. Simply because we are not “conscious of ‘ the past, i.e., it is not an object that affects the citta, does not mean that pure consciousness does not pervade it. Given the appropriate set of circumstances, waking or dreaming, past experiences will arise, drawn out, as it were, through their own power (sva-rasa). The past needs an embodiment to re-live. The force of the past to re-incarnate is the will-to-live, abhinivesah.
Not being a “substantial being,” in the sense of an individuated entity that moves through time and space, I am an I-am-ness, asmita, an I-sense. This I-sense does not have a desire to live as a substance has a quality. There is no agency involved in abhinivesah. Past lives, given the right time and place, will, barring Yogic intervention, arise to embodiment. One might say, metaphorically, we are all possessed by demons and angels, the klista and aklista.
In asmita there is a confusion of continuity and consciousness, time as sequence (krama) and eternity, prakrti and purusa. It is not that I feel the same as I did yesterday or the day before as I do today, but, I feel the sameness at the core of my being. The appropriation of eternity by the temporal is a denial of death. How could “I” want to continue (abhinivesah) if eternity were not at my center. The eternal consciousness is isolated (kevala) from the flux of the I-sense. It is indifferent (madhyasthyam) to the presentations (pratyaya) engendered by the gunas. Life and death pertain to presentations not to purusa. In and through the vision of becoming, one realizes the simultaneity and reciprocity of life and death. Recall our image of the flame. If the flame were not dying in its process of becoming, it could not abide. If the world were not continually passing out of existence, it could not become, it would disappear. Death is a necessary correlate to life. In creation is destruction. The error of imputing substantiality to the I-sense, the error of reification, usurps the eternal role of consciousness, concealing its function within experience. What “abides” is not static; it is becoming. Consciousness cannot properly be said to abide. It is other than time as continuity. Eternity is timeless. Abiding is a thought-construct (buddhi-nirmana). What is, is becoming, conscious becoming. The simultaneity of birth and death (implying the doctrine of momentariness [kana]) misconstrued, gives rise to the notion of abiding. Momentariness is a necessary correlate to the vision of becoming. The present must give way to the next present for the world to be.
Yogic Intervention
We have already discussed the cyclic momentum of afflicted existence, i.e., the movement of vrtti to samskara to vrtti. It is the task of Yoga practice (sadhana) to intervene in this cycle in order to generate and perpetuate a cycle in opposition (pratipaksa) to the afflicted (klista) cycle.
Yogis, being in full realization of this cyclic nature of existence (samsara), do not attempt to thwart the cycle, but to restructure its experienced contents. For the Yogi, “That which is to be overcome is the dissatisfaction (duhkha) yet to come,” (Y.S.II.16). As mentioned above, the foundation of afflicted existence is avidya and its derivatives, asmita, raga, dvesa, and abhinivesah, (Y.S. II.12). These afflictions are the root of the action deposits (karma-asaya). In other words, the klesas give rise to afflicted experience which is, in turn, stored or deposited only to be activated at a future time given the appropriate set of circumstances. “[As long as] the root [the klesas] exists [there is] fruition (vipaka) from it, [i.e.] birth, (jati), life span (ayus), and the experience (bhoga)” (Y.S. II.13). Birth, life-span, and experience “…have joy or distress as fruits according to their causes whether they be merit (punya) or demerit (apunya)” (Y.S. II.14).
The fluctuations or modifications (vrtti) which arise in the citta or mind as a result of these afflictions are to be abandoned (heya) by meditation (dhyana), (Y.S. II.11). These vrtti-s are considered the gross or obvious manifestations of the klesas. These fluctuations are our actual experience of klista-vrtti. The subtle (sukmah) aspects of the klesas are to be abandoned by the practice of pratiprasava, “the return to the origin” (Y.S. II.10).
Recalling what was discussed above, our manifest creation is brought about through the unfolding of the body (prakrti) via the interaction of the three gunas: sattva, rajas, and tamas. The more sattvic the more subtle, the more tamasic, the more gross, and rajas is the energizing movement in either direction. A sattvic perspective retrieves the gross world of “heavy” independently existing substances which result from the tamasic perspective. Pratiprasava is not the disappearance of the world, but, one might say, the embodiment of it. To cancel the atomic perspective of tamas is to absorb the world into a conscious bodily integrity. Recall that purusa pervades the body. When the world is fully incarnate the world is a conscious body-totality. We have returned the reified world of substances to its primal origin in the whole body (pradhana, prakrti).
The repetition of this perspective gives rise to a knowledge which obstructs the operation of the klesas at the subtle levels. When once one “sees” the world as one’s body, the inclinations (samskaras) to incarnate the afflicted perspectives of rajas and tamas, and hence to cast the world away, are weakened. The ontological presuppositions which incarnately construe the whole, dividing it into a world of substances are “burned,” as it were, in the truth of the universal form.
So in no way is the world dissolved through pratiprasava , but it is incorporated, embodied. The practice of meditation initiates the practice of pratiprasava. One first “settles” the vrtti-s of the klesas then one operates on the incarnate presuppositions of afflicted life which promotes I-am-ness as a substantial being and thrust a “self ‘ into a world of entities which provide pleasure or pain (raga or dvesa) and an addiction to the entire process (abhinivesa).
Pratiprasava is the inverse movement of re-integration wherein the world is made truly “my own.”
There are these two purusas in the world,
the perishable and the imperishable.
The perishable are all beings,
the unchanging is called the imperishable.But the highest purusa is another,
called the Paramatma
Who, entering the three worlds as the
eternal lord (Isvara),
supports them.Since I transcend the perishable
and am higher than the imperishable,
therefore I am in the world,
in the veda (knowledge)
known as the Purusottamas,
(highest purusa).B.G. XV 16-18.
Footnotes:
1. See Moksha Journal Volume V, Number 2.
2. The afflictions are discussed below.
3. This analysis is based on Vyasa’s Bhsaya to Y.S . II.15. The “expertise of the senses” could also be viewed as a desensitization process wherein novel forms of sensory gratification are pursued because a pleasure grown used to ceases to be pleasurable.
4. Chapter I of the Bhagavad Gita exemplifies this crisis- engendering perspective.
5. Recall our quotation from B.G. N .5.