by Yogi Ananda Viraj (Eugene P. Kelly)
This is the fourth in a series of essays intended to provide a comprehensive introduction to Yoga-Samkhya philosophy.
Certainly one of the most problematic topics in the transmission of Yoga Philosophy (Darsana) to Western ears is Isvara. The word is derived from the verbal root is, “to own, possess, be valid or powerful, to be master of, to command, to rule”; plus vara, “choicest, best, most excellent, eminent”; from the root vr, “to choose”. Most commonly translated as “Lord,” Isvara varies greatly from our Western notions of God or Lord. Other translations of Isvara include: able to do, master, prince, king. All of these translations carry connotations of a being that exists independently of human perception. Our Western ears hear the word “Lord” or “Master” and immediately a great being is conceived of as being separate from and more powerful than us; at least this is the most common of meanings. However, the Isvara of the Yoga Sutras has an entirely different meaning and function than that of a separately existing being who is “in charge” of things. It is with this contrast in mind that we explore the practice and perspective that Isvara is and has been to the Yogins.
Our exploration will take a number of steps. Firstly, we will go directly to the Yoga Sutras and its commentaries and attempt to determine the nature of Isvara. Here it should be noted that we will be avoiding the common translation of Isvara as “Lord,” because of the word’s history and therefore its connotations. Instead we will use the word “Vision,” (with the capital) or simply “It.” “Vision” was selected in light of the significance of the term in the yogic context, as it implies the experiential dimension. As we shall see, Isvara functions very much within human experience. However, for the most part, we have left the term untranslated. This first step will address Isvara as perspective.
In section II we will examine the practice of isvara-pranidhana (devotion or dedication to Isvara). This will take us into an exploration of om-japam (repetition of Om) and bhakti-yoga (the yoga of devotion). Implied in the practice of devotion is Isvara’s relation to us, wherein a sacred reciprocity is uncovered.
There are three distinct, but not unrelated, practices of devotion to Isvara in the Yoga Sutras. In the first of these isvara-pranidhana is viewed as a means to attain a restriction of the modifications of the mind (citta-vrtti-nirodhah), also referred to as asamprajnata-samadhi (objectless awareness). In section III devotion constitutes one member of the action-yoga (kriya-yoga) triad, which also includes study and austerity. Here isvara-pranidhana is a means to weaken the five afflictions (klesas) and attain samadhi.1 In section IV devotion to the Vision as a niyama (observance), one of five which the Yogin practices in asta-anga-yoga (eight-limbed-yoga) is examined. As we mentioned above, these various practices of devotion are not dissimilar, as the reader will see.
These topics will be examined with the use of three major commentaries: Vyasa’s Samkhyapravacanabhasya (ca. 500-700 C.E.), Vacaspati Misra’s Tattvavaisaradi (ca. 850 or 975 C.E.), and Vijnanabhiksu’s Yogavarttika (ca.l550-1600 C.E.).2
Section V of the essay will summarize and conclude the foregoing while attempting to bring the reader to appreciate the relevance of both the perspective and the practice. The Vision has the greatest significance for contemporary life. Once the certainty of the Vision is embodied through the practice, all that was once concrete becomes tenuous. The practitioner, the devotee is brought to understand the worshipful attitude of our ancestors and their reliance on the “transcendent” for meaning. One also comes to terms with human suffering in a way that was heretofore incomprehensible. I only hope that this essay lends some degree of clarity to a subject that deserves more than mere examination.
Section I
klesa-karma-vipakasayair aparamrstah purusa-visesa isvara
Isvara is a distinct purusa untouched by afflictions, actions, fruitions, or their residue.3
Here we arrive at an understanding of Isvara through the negative definition provided by Patanjali. This definition is intended to establish Isvara as being different or distinct from other purusas (consciousness) in four ways. We will examine each in turn.
Isvara has never been, nor will It ever be, touched by the five klesas (afflictions): avidya (ignorance), asmita (l-am-ness), raga (attachment), dvesa (aversion) and abhinivesah (the desire to continue, will to live).4
The Isvara, situated outside of time, is eternal (nitya) and therefore, never ignorant. Ignorance, defined as perceiving the temporal as the eternal, the impure as pure, dissatisfaction as pleasure, and non-self as self,5 implies a limited embodiment in time as the movement of the manifest (vyakta) order. Isvara is an integrity and is therefore undivided, unmixed, i.e., pure (suci). It is only through being mixed with an alien element that impurity arises. Dissatisfaction (duhkha) is an intrinsic component of the interaction of the three modalities of experience, the three gunas: sattva (illumination), rajas (activity), and tamas (inertia). It is the interaction of these three that brings about the self and other of human experience. In Isvara, there is no commingling of the gunas and therefore no creation. The Vision is one of wholeness without particularity. When the Vision is divided manifestation or creation (sarga) occurs.6
An initial stage in the unfolding of the Isvara is the movement of rajas to mingle with the pure illumination of sattva thus (apparently) limiting or staining the Vision thereby giving rise to a sense of I-am-ness (asmita). The energizing movement of rajas or desire destabilizes the gunas which previously were “vibrating” as eternity in isolation from one another. This is not a statement about entities moving but more of a description. This vibratory movement or “dynamic of eternity” is the illumination of the simultaneous operation of past, present, and future. In the Vision, there is only the total illumination (sattva) and pure consciousness in its universal form (visva-rupa) which is a union of the whole body (mula-prakrti) and consciousness. Rajas and tamas are not interacting with themselves or sattva and therefore their manifestations are not perceived. Only illumination coupled with consciousness in a union of total Vision is “seen.” The Vision bears no relation to past, present or future as movements of linear time.
The return from the Vision, leaving the Isvara, is initiated by remnants from past actions or action-deposits (karma-asaya). Only the Vision is free of them, not the returnee. Action-deposits initiate the return to a manifest condition first disclosed as a self (asmita). Subsequent disclosures of the manifest order following asmita give rise, through the operation of rajas on the reifing modality of embodiment (tamas), to those components of experience that become the locus of attachments (raga) and aversions (dvesa).
The will to live (abhinivesa) is the desire inherent in this movement to perpetuate itself. The Vision, being outside of time, does not entail the separation of past, present, and future which this affliction requires.
As far as action (karma) is concerned, totality cannot be said to act in our sense of the word. Action implies manifestation of the I-sense, the mind-organ (manas), the sense-capacities (jnana-indriyas), motor-capacities (karma-indriyas), the subtle elements (tanmatras) and the elements (bhutas). In the Vision no such manifestation has occurred. In short, action requires the intermingling of the three gunas and, as we know, in the Vision there is only pure illumination (sattva) and consciousness. Therefore, Isvara cannot act and produce good (kusala) or bad actions which bear results.
The effects or fruits (phalam) of actions are the results (vipaka). The results are said to be threefold: jati (birth, production, caste), ayus (duration, lifespan), and bhoga (experience).7 That which is eternal is unborn, outside of time, and beyond ordinary experience.
The deposits of actions (karma-asaya) are the impressions (vasana) left in the mind (citta) that correspond to these.”8 Birth, duration and experience leave impressions which remain latent in the mind until awakened, (by the circumstances appropriate to them) into experience, only to leave more impressions to perpetuate the cycle (samsara).
The commentators on Yoga Sutra 1.24, fill the gap left by Patanjali’s via negativa and describe a “normal” purusa‘s general relation to actions, deposits, afflictions, and fruitions in order to refine the differentiation. The “normal” or embodied consciousness (jiva) being “related” to the manifest order (vyakta) is (apparently) bound by afflictions, actions, etc. Even though these four expressions of the gunas abide in the mind-organ (manas) they are falsely imputed (vyapadisya) to purusa.9 Consciousness is said to experience their fruit. That special or distinct purusa, Isvara, is untouched by this.
But what of those many who have arrived at kaivalyam (liberation, the goal of Yoga)? Are they not to be equated with Isvara? In a word, no. Isvara has never been connected with bondage. Being eternal, Isvara is forever untouched by it. Those who have arrived at liberation were at one time in bondage or, if their liberation is not complete, will be associated with bondage in the future. Even if they have arrived at liberation, they must still bear the consequences (vipaka) from actions taken prior to it.
The next point the commentators (Bhasya-Karas) address is “our” knowledge of Isvara. It is said that Isvara has assumed a superior or perfect (prakrsta) illumination (sattva) which is eternally superior.10 The proof of this is said to be the sacred texts (sastra). These texts contain descriptions of the Vision which would have required the Vision in order to have been authored. It is therefore said that Isvara “authored” the sastras through perfect illumination. Conversely, it is said that the proof of the sastras is this pure illumination. It is only by having had access to the Vision that the sages could have been “instrumental” in authoring the texts and it is only by way of pure illumination that the texts have any validity or proof. There is a reciprocity at work here.
Further proofs for the superiority of Isvara are offered by Vyasa and elaborated upon by others. We have no intention or need to discuss them here. They are designed to address anticipated arguments of the opponents of the doctrine of Isvara, who were contemporaries of the commentators. We have included the sastra or “sacred text argument” in order to point out the necessity of having the Vision for the production of sacred literature. Commentaries to sutra 1.25 also enter into arguments that would take us too far afield from our present concerns. Therefore, we will focus on the commentary only in so far as it suits our purposes.
tatra niratisayam sarva-jna-bijam
There, the seed of omniscience is unsurpassed.11
Although the commentators provide various views on the meaning of the word “seed” (bijam), they share the view that knowledge (jnana) is incremental. Knowledge extends from the most obscured (tamasic) to the omniscient (sarva-jna, lit. “all-knowing”), which is synonymous with pure sattva. Isvara, obviously, is the most sattvic and is therefore the uppermost limit of knowledge. There is nothing, past, present and/or future which lies outside that Vision. Also, the Isvara is inclusive of the singular and collective, of the small or great.12 This is the Vision of all-inclusiveness, completion itself. It is not that a detailed knowledge of facts great or small, singular or collective is known. It is a timeless and comprehensive knowledge that is revealed, all at once, in this incorporate knowing. Nothing, while in the Vision, remains to be known. All is complete. There is omniscience. The Vision itself “tells” of its utter completeness.
In the ecstatic embrace of this Vision one gets a glimpse into the reasons for its emergence into diversity. One knows, in some sense, that it is for us that manifestation has occurred. The overabundance of the totality ecstatically exudes us, diversity. Yet, our “participation” in the Isvara is never severed, only concealed. The commentators use the word anugraha (support, oblige, welcome, treat with kindness, favor, foster) to express the “relation” of Isvara to the embodied purusas, i.e., consciousness entangled in the interaction of the three gunas. To all those many purusas or embodied beings (bhuta) Isvara, without a purpose of his own, obliges them through the instruction (upadesa) of knowledge (jnana) and lawfulness or virtue (dharma), thus raising them from samsara (lit. wandering; the cyclic nature of an ignorant existence).13
It is through our intimacy with the Isvara that we are saved. The Vision is eternally intact as the “support” of our manifest and embodied existence. It is the concealed dimension which the manifest presupposes. Ignorance (avidya) is our manner of camouflaging it. It is only through our access to the Vision that we are able to extricate ourselves from the bondage that marks our difference from Isvara. The Isvara, in becoming accessible to us, “performs” bhutanugraha, the favoring of embodied beings. When we prepare the way for the Vision it obliges us.14
In the Vision that is Isvara, one’s mind is no longer operating. It has returned to its source in the origin (pradhana) which is the body of Isvara. Recall that mind (citta) operates through the three gunas’ interaction. In Isvara’s pure sattva no interaction is occurring; there is no time as sequence or continuity. In order to “return” to the manifest a mind is to be fabricated out of compassion. The “favoring” (anugraha) by Isvara is analogous to the compassion (karuna) of the seers. “The first knower, assuming a fabricated mind (nirmana-citta) through compassion, the illustrious (bhagavan), the highest sage (parama-rsi), declared this doctrine to Asuri who desired to know.”15 The “first knower” is a reference to Kapila, the founder of Samkhya and Asuri was the first to receive instruction from him.
Once having “seen,” the seers fabricate a compassionate mind. The Vision does not dictate the compassion required to instruct. That is why it is said that Isvara has no interest or purpose of his own.16 The timeless totality that is Isvara is completion itself. It is out of sheer “abundance” that Isvara overflows for our benefit. The mind of the seers, after having “seen,” must be “arrived at” (adhistha; adhi, over, on; stha, stand). The word “adhistha” could also be rendered “rely on” or “stand over” in the sense of governing. So the seer relies on a mind fabricated out of compassion. Compassion has no self-interest (atma-anugrahah).
In a slight reordering of the Sutras, we now turn our attention back to Y.S. 1.23 wherein Patanjali speaks of dedication to Isvara.
Section II
isvara-pranidhanad va
or by devotion to Isvara
Having discussed various means of arriving at samadhi in the first section (pada) of the Yoga Sutras, this additional means is given; that of devotion. Pradhana (dedication, devotion) is said by Vyasa to be a distinct or special devotion (bhakti-visesa). It is through this devotion that Isvara is said to “pour out” or “incline” (avarjita, from vrj, to twist) to the Yogi and favor (anugrhnati) him/her. Isvara, the Vision, in an “act” of sacred reciprocity twists or turns to grant the Yogi jnanam, the sacred knowledge of the totality. Vyasa says the only reason for this is the Yogi’s profound meditation (abhidhyana-matra). Samadhi, the restriction of the modifications of the mind, (citta-vrtti-nirodhah) and its result (kaivalyam) is said to be very close for this Yogin.17 Vacaspati Misra adds that this bhakti (devotion) can be mental, verbal or bodily.18
As we have noted, the sacred texts (sastras) were “authored” by Isvara’s perfect sattva (illumination). If that is the case, then Isvara or the Vision is the original teacher.
sa esa purvesam-api guruh kalena-anavacchedat
Due to Its not being limited by time, [It is] also the guru of the earlier (or ancient) ones.19
The Vision has always been available. Its etenality is our insurance. It is this Vision that has been and always will be the primal preceptor. All the earlier teachers (gurus), despite their access to immortality through Isvara, are limited by time, i.e., the interaction of the gunas.
How then do we gain access to Isvara? What is the nature of this devotion (bhakti)?
tasya vacakah pranavah
Its expression is pranava (Om).20
Om is the “seed-sound” out of which all sounds in Sanskrit are derived. Technically, it is a combination of three syllables, A, U, M. In the final syllable, the mouth closes to complete the movement of the mouth from total openness to closure. This mantra is said to contain the many in the one. In that way also, Isvara contains within Its body (of pure sattva) a conscious eternity wherein the many are united in one absolute present. The Samkhya and Yoga philosophies hold the doctrine of causality known as satkaryavada which means the “doctrine of the existence of the effect (karya).” Briefly stated, this doctrine holds that the past and future are contained in an absolute present. The past determines the present indicating that the future, which is the effect of past actions and events, “exists” in the present in latent form. Given that Isvara has a perfect sattva, untouched by rajas and tamas, Its illumination is the Vision of the absolute present wherein all possibilities (past to future) are contained in a subtle and integral matrix (pradhana) which is the “body” or “universal form” of pure consciousness.21 Therefore, this relationship between Isvara and Om is said to be fixed (stithas) and eternal (nitya).
Given this relation between the expressed (vacya) and expressing (vacaka), the practice of bhakti includes Om.
taj-japas tad artha-bhavanam
Repetition of it and realization [or cultivation] of its meaning [is prescribed].22
The word japas, from the root jap meaning “whisper” or “mutter,” means “repeating in a low voice,” in this case, repeating Om. The mere repetition of Om is not enough for Patanjali; one must perform bhavanam. Derived from the verbal root bhu (be, exist), bhavanam may be translated as “effecting, producing, manifesting, generating, forming in the mind, imagination, meditation.” All these possibilities connote bringing something about, whether it be a condition of meditation, or a certain cognitive formation.
Next, through Vyasa’s commentary, we must discover what Patanjali had in mind, regarding bhavanam. “The repetition of Om and the imagining in the mind of that which is expressed by Om and Isvara bhavanam [is prescribed]. Then, in the case of that Yogin who performs om-japam and imagines the intent (or purpose) of Om he/she obtains one-pointedness of mind. “23
Vyasa asks that we perform isvara-bhavanam, the imaging of Isvara in the mind. What does this entail? For one thing, Isvara defies the mind’s ability to grasp it. The Vision is simply beyond or beneath the mind. As we stated above, the activity of the manifest order “presupposes” this radical or foundational dimension of existence. The Vision is the totality out of which we manifest and into which we dissolve. Consciousness, as we embody it, is limited only by the operation of the manifest order of ever-changing structures of experience (tattvas).24 Isvara is the unchanging eternity underlying change. To embody Isvara, to incarnate the fundamental reality of non-dualistic divine life, is the aim of the practice of isvara-bhavanam. This practice is accompanied by Om-japam, the repetition of the sacred syllable. It is this devotion to the fundamental reality “beneath” the mind that constitutes bhakti-yoga. This dimension is the foundation of all human endeavor, be it practical or theoretical. It is the throbbing, raw, naked reality of Absolute time.25
Once again, what differentiates us from this reality is our association with avidya or ignorance. Even if we are freed from it through practice, we remain bound by its having been there in the form of results (vipaka) and action deposits (asaya).26 The Vision has never been touched by ignorance. Eternity “remains” beyond linear time.
Vyasa also informs us that the Yogin must perform bhavanam on the purpose or intent (artha) of Om. The purpose of the pranava is to express Isvara. Therefore in chanting the mantra Om, one must do bhavanam on the Isvara and identify the sound with what it expresses. In his Tattvavaisaradi, Vacaspati Misra tells us that bhavanam is the penetrating into or entering of the mind (citta) again and again. “Entering” is a translation of nivesana from vis (to enter). Nivesana also connotes “resting” or “settling.” The mind enters the Isvara through Om-japam and isvara-bhavanam. The citta arrives at one-pointedness (ekagra) and delights (aramati) in the Illustrious One (bhagavan). The verbal root ram also implies a “resting” (a-ram). To summarize, the repeated action of japam and bhavanam moves the mind to one-pointedness resulting in delight in the One. Vacaspati Misra, echoing Vyasa’s commentary of Y.S. 1.23, adds that Isvara then favors (anugraha) the Yogin. The Yogin then attains samadhi and its result, which refers to kaivalyam.
This “entering” or “resting” is not an act of imagination (bhavanam) which remains cognitive. The verbal root bhu itself indicates a becoming. This imagining brings about entrance into the Vision transforming the body, i.e. changing the gunas, into the totality. Bhavanam is an exercise in incarnation.
Vijnanabhiksu, in his commentary (Yogavarttika) on Y.S. 1.28, provides us with a twofold practice of bhavanam. He states that there are two kinds of thoughts regarding the intention or purpose of Om (pranava-artha-cintanam). The first is viewing identity (abheda) between atma (conscious self) and brahman (consciousness in its universal form). He offers us a number of quotations from various scriptures (sruti) which are to be used to understand and practice bhavanam with Om, e.g., “All is brahma,” and ” .. .Brahman and atma are one and Om is one with atma …. “
The second type of thought views difference (bheda) between prakrti (the origin and its effects) and the purusas as a discrimination (viveka) that needs to be practiced. However, for Vijnanabhiksu, ultimately one must “know” Isvara in a direct manner and also realize the difference between Isvara and the purusas.
We have been discussing isvara-bhavanam and Om-japam. We have not completed our task because we have yet to determine the manner in which we “form in the mind” or “imagine” Isvara. The commentators have given us some valuable assistance. They have referred us to the sacred literature (sruti) and even supplied us with a number of quotations to steer us in the right direction. These sacred texts, having been composed by those who “saw” Isvara, have indeed provided us with numerous descriptions and formulas for the performance of bhavanam. The genius of Vijnanabhiksu was to see how those various depictions of the Vision can be harmonized so that their multiplicity could work to our advantage. One may disagree with his manner of constructing that harmonious picture, but certainly his intentions were noble and fruitful. His hierarchical scheme with a Vedantic pinnacle is a work of art, but only one of a number of possible perspectives that can lend cohesion to textual diversity. However, the final answer is the Vision itself. There is no substitute for the harmony and certainty only It can provide. Experience places the Yogi at the center of all the texts from which point he/she can look out and confirm the text’s authenticity.
The bhavanam of Om defies conceptualization. The Om-japam is to lead the mind of the Yogin to its inner fullness; the mind empties itself of all but Om, it becomes Om and merges with Isvara. The textual foundation, having been laid down through study (svadyaya), is at once both a directive and a preventive. It guides our bhavanam and prevents unjustified or unwarranted considerations from entering the process.
tatah pratyak-cetana-adhigamo’py-antaraya-abhavas-ca
From it, inward consciousness is reached and obstacles are absent.27
Vyasa tells us that the obstacles to yoga are removed by practicing isvara-pranidhana.28 It is also through this practice that the Yogin comes to a “perception of the own-form” (svarupa-darsana).29 The own-form of the purusa is consciousness freed from the structural limitations of the vrtti-s or modifications of the mind. When such a perception is not possible, consciousness takes the form of the vrtti-s.30 The perception of the own form is one that is considered inward (pratyak). It is not a spatial designation; “inward” points to the “core” of experience wherein consciousness is “situated.”
Vyasa goes on to add: “Just as Isvara is a purusa, pure (suddhah), transparent (prasannah), distinct or isolated (kevala), and untroubled (anupasarga), so also he/she perceives this purusa conscious ‘of’ the buddhi (intellect).”31 Although not entirely clear from the translation, Vyasa is saying that the Yogin comes to knowledge of the functioning of consciousness within his/her own experience. Purusa is pure, according to the T.V., because it is unchangeable, absolutely eternal, and free from origination and decay. Purusa is transparent due to its being free from the klesas, and isolated due to its being free from merit (or virtue) and demerit, and hence untroubled.32 (Vacaspati Misra defines the troubles or misfortunes [upasarga] as birth, life span, and experience.)33 These “traits” of the purusa are synonymous with Isvara’s freedom. However, the difference is that Isvara has never been caught in ignorance, even apparently, and therefore is a special or distinct (visesa) consciousness. It is because of this similarity of Isvara to all other purusas, that isvara-bhavanam is effective. One comes to the realization of purusa as free in exactly the same sense as the Isvara is free. For purusa there remains the traces of the past to contend with. But the contact with Isvara is always one that is timeless.
In summarizing, let us return to the notion of pratyak-cetanta, the inward consciousness. Isvara-pranidhana brings the Yogin to a perception (darsana) of the own-form (sva-rupa) of the purusa. Isvara grants (anugraha) the Yogin the knowledge of the similarity, in terms of freedom, between purusa and Isvara. It is only the Vision which can provide this knowledge. The Yogin cannot obtain this knowledge without Isvara, i.e., the Vision. This is a direct knowing beyond the mind.34
One more point concerning the commentaries deserves mention. Vijnanabhiksu interprets “pratyak” as the paramatma or unlimited consciousness. He sees prati as prati-vastu (anything contrasted with another, equivalent) and ancati, from anc (to bend), as wandering about, going everywhere, like the wind. This renders pratyak as “moving about without obstruction.”35 So “pratyak” is seen as equivalent to Isvara; and cetana (from Y.S. 1.30) is mentioned merely to separate consciousness from prakrti. I cite this only to illustrate the multifaceted nature of the texts. All of these interpretations, be they philosophical or etymological, can be put in the service of bhavanam and the Vision. The commentators multiplied the text and in so doing, multiplied our possible approaches to knowledge.
Sutra 1.29 makes mention of the obstacles (antaraya). We, however, will not be discussing them in this essay. That will have to wait for another time. What we will be exploring next are the other two roles that Isvara plays in the Yoga Darsana. First as an aspect of kriya yoga and secondly as a niyama in asta-anga-yoga (eight-limbed yoga).
Section III
tapah svadhyaya isvara-pranidhanani kriya-yogah
Austerity, self study, and devotion to the Isvara are kriya-yoga.36
This sutra introduces the second book, the sadhana (method) pada. Vyasa, in his brief preface to the sutra states that the yoga for one whose mind is steadied (samahita-citta) has been shown, i.e., in the first book (samadhi-pada). This second book is for one whose mind is outgoing (vyutthita), meaning restless and engaged in an active life, hence kriya (action) yoga.
We will discuss, briefly, the three aspects of kriya-yoga. There is not a lot to say concerning the role of isvara-pranidhana in this yoga as the commentators must have felt that most of what they had to say concerning the practice was said in Book I. However, we will examine what they have provided.
Vyasa says that a person without tapas (lit. “heat,” here”austerity”), the first of the three practices of kriya-yoga, cannot accomplish yoga.37 Tapas is defined as the endurance of opposites. The opposites are hunger and thirst, cold and heat, standing and sitting, gestural silence, silence of speech and the like.38 The impurities of the mind cannot be weakened without tapas. Because of “beginningless” actions (karma), afflictions (klesa), and impressions (vasana), impurities are diverse and we get caught in the fabric of objects (visaya).39 Only those austerities which do not obstruct the clarity of the mind (citta-prasadanam) are to be practiced.
Svadyaya (self-study) is the repetition of the means of purifying, such as chanting Om.40 Or, one can study the sacred texts on liberation (moksa-sastram).
Isvara-pranidhana is the offering (arpanam) of all actions to the highest teacher (parama-guru) or renunciation (samnyasa) of the results (phalam) of actions. That is all that Vyasa says on the subject. Vacaspati Misra adds the following quotation:
Your jurisdiction is in action alone;
never in the results at any time.
Never should the results of action be your motive;
never let there be attachment to inaction.
B.G. 2.47
If the reader will recall, the true agents of action are the three gunas.41 Also, pure consciousness, not the I-sense, is the authentic experiencer. We can lay no claim to the fruit of our actions because, structurally speaking, we are not the experiencers of their results. When we do lay claim to actions and their results, as if the I-sense were a conscious experiencer, we perpetuate the movement of ignorance and continue to conceal the own-form (sva-rupa) of purusa. Vacaspati also provides us with a bhavanam that embodies renunciation: “Whatever I do, intentionally or unintentionally, pleasant or unpleasant, all that is consigned (samnyas) to you [Isvara]. Used (prayuktah) by you, I do.”42 Isvara is seen here to be the impeller (prayuktah) of our actions as well as the experiencer. We view our actions as being given over (samnyas) to Isvara. Whether those actions are the ritualistic movements of the formal sacrifice (yajna) or actions in general, Isvara is their true experiencer (bhokta). In this light Vijnanabhiksu says: “The thought that Isvara is the experiencer of the results of action is the renunciation of the fruits of action.”43 We have translated cintanam as “thought.” However, this does not really capture what Vijnanabhiksu intended. It is more like “seeing” one’s experience in this manner, not simply reflecting on experience after the fact. The devotion (pranidhana) here involves a shift in perspective guided by the bhavanam. In fact, all bhavanam guides a perspectival shift from erroneous perception to perception in line with our structural determinations. It may be viewed, albeit rather simplistically, as aligning oneself with oneself, or becoming what we already are. In the renunciation (samnyas) of the results of our actions we consign (samnyas) them to the authentic experiencer of them, Isvara. Vijnanabhiksu drives the point home with this quotation:
Knowing me as the experiencer (bhoktaram)
of sacrifices and austerities,
the great Isvara of all worlds,
the companion of all beings,
one attains peace (santim).
B.G. 5.29
As the companion (suhrdam, from the prefix su meaning “good” or “kind,” and hrd meaning “heart”), Isvara resides at the heart of all experience, our true intimate; a pure, unadulterated consciousness to which all experience is directed and which makes all experience possible.
In order to differentiate the pranidhana of the first book (samadhi-pada) and the pranidhana of the second book (sadhana-pada), Vijnanabhiksu says that the latter devotion is the renunciation of actions and results whereas the former is strictly knowledge (jnanam-eva), as there is an absence of actions and results. Please recall that the devotion of the first book dealt with the “Vision” of Isvara as the eternal consciousness with a “body” of pure sattva (illumination). As such, there would be an absence of movement in time, i.e., actions and results. We could say that kriya-yoga brings the Vision into the manifest order wherein we intimately “know” the heart of experience to be pure consciousness. In renouncing actions and results we are offering (arpanam) to the experiencer (bhokta) what truly belongs to It. At the same time we recall the Vision. It is the quiet, sattvic mind, the unclaiming mind, which is able to offer.
He who perceives inaction in action,
And action in inaction,
Is wise among men.
He performs all actions in a
disciplined fashion.44
A quiet mind is a devoted mind; the mind must be still to perceive the inaction in action. Then, the silent authentic consciousness, not the I -sense, is receiving the offering. The more this offering is made, in its purest sense, the more accessible the Isvara becomes, i.e., the more Isvara yields (avarjita) to the Yogin. Isvara fills only the quiet, surrendered mind. There is a sacred reciprocity in this action, or shall we say inaction, of renunciation.
The next sutra (2.2) makes explicit the reason for kriya-yoga:
samadhi-bhavana-arthah klesa-tanu-karana-arthas ca
For the purpose of producing (or cultivating) samadhi and for the purpose of causing the weakening of the afflictions.
Action yoga is for samadhi-bhavanam and weakening the klesas.45 Vyasa says that when this yoga is “frequently attended to” (asevyamanah) it gives rise to samadhi and greatly weakens (pratanu) the afflictions. The afflictions, having become very weakened, are like seeds burned and rendered sterile by the fire of higher knowledge (prasamkhyana). Higher knowledge is the knowledge of the difference between the sattva, or illumined mind, and that which illuminates it (purusa). This knowledge is considered subtle wisdom (suksma-prajna) because of the nature of its “object” and because it is untouched by the weakened afflictions. However, this wisdom too must ultimately be surrendered into the dimension of total body consciousness through the movement of pratiprasava (returning to the origin).
To summarize, we see that in kriya-yoga one studies the sacred texts dealing with liberation and chants the appropriate mantras that establish the correct intention for devotion to the Vision. Additionally, one practices austerities to purify one’s life of the effects of prior actions which have incarnated the afflictions. This threefold yoga is said to be for those of us who are not yet fit for samadhi and whose afflictions are not yet weakened.46 The Yoga Sutras themselves do not explicitly say this; however, the commentators, in seeking to lend unity to an otherwise disparate collection of aphorisms, saw fit to place kriya-yoga in a subordinate position to the various yogas mentioned in the first book.
Section IV
sauca-samtosa-tapah-svadhyaya-isvara-pranidhanani niyamah
Purity, contentment, austerity, self-study and devotion to Isvara are the observances47
Obviously, the last of the three niyamas are the three practices of kriya-yoga and therefore, need not be defined here. We will, however, provide definitions for the other two niyamas and then proceed with a discussion of isvara-pranidhana as a niyama.
Sauca (purity) is twofold: Outer purity is produced by cleaning with water, earth, etc. and the consumption of pure (medhya) food; and inner purity is the cleansing of the impurities (mala) of the mind. Samtosa (contentment) is not desiring more than the means at hand for the maintenance of life.
Isvara-pranidhana as a niyama or observance is defined in a more limited manner than the two previous forms discussed. It is ” … the offering of all actions to the Highest Guru.”48 Vacaspati Misra adds from the Visnu Purana that the Yogin ” … should make his mind-organ (manas) intent upon (pravanam) Brahman (total body consciousness).”49 This offering of actions is a renunciation of doership or agency on the part of the Yogin. As we have noted already, upon mindful inspection of the structure and movement of experience, it is observed that the I-sense is not an agent of actions. Yogically speaking, it is gunas acting upon gunas, the fleeting movements of incarnate perspectives granted awareness and rendered experience by purusa (pure consciousness).50
As if to characterize the Yogin who has practiced Isvara-pranidhana, Vyasa employs a quote:
He who is self-abiding, for whom the matrix of thoughts (vitarka-jalah) has been exhausted, whether in a seat or a bed, or traveling on a road, he would observe the destruction of the seed of samsara (cyclic existence of an ignorant life) and would be permanently released and would participate in the experience of immortality.51
Vijnanabhiksu says that “self-abiding” means one who is established in the highest Self, (param-atma, total body consciousness).52 He also adds that as a niyama, and inclusive of the five yamas (abstinences), Isvara-pranidhana is principal (mukhya) because it is the cause (hetu) of union with the paramatma. One who is devoted to Isvara is receptive of favor (anugraha) and is absorbed in yoga (yoga-yuktah), i.e., union with the eternal. In sutra II,45 Patanjali states that from isvara-pranidhana one accomplishes samadhi. This could be taken as a precedent for Vijnanabhiksu’s view.
It is understandable, given Vijnanabhiksu’s Vedantic leanings, why he emphasizes Isvara-pranidhana in the way he does. His inclinations are most obvious when he adds that the matrix of thought is exhausted by this practice “even without” the practice of pratipaksa-bhavanam which the next sutra (II,33) says is necessary for the practice of niyama and yama. Pratipaksa-bhavanam is the production or generation (bhavanam) of opposition (pratipaksa) to binding or oppressive thoughts (vitarka-badhana). One practices the yamas and niyamas by generating perspectives which oppose any violation of them. For example, if one is inclined to view someone as an enemy and wish them harm, one practices the yama ahimsa (non-violence) by producing thoughts, speech, or actions which run counter to the violence. Eventually, when practiced regularly with sincerity, a new perspective is gained which may grant compassion and understanding to our perceptions and thoughts. This type of bhavanam weakens the hold of oppressive perspectives. But, according to Vijnanabhiksu, devotion to Isvara alone will weaken their hold.
In addition, he says that when all actions are dedicated to Isvara alone, there is attainment of union with power (aisvarya) and an entrance is made into direct witnessing of Isvara.53 Also, a direct witnessing of the structure of total embodied existence (jiva-tattva) is made. It is clear from this, that through practice, the Yogin is granted direct access to Isvara.
It is curious, however, that earlier in his commentary on Sutra II,32, Vijnanbhiksu says Isvara-pranidhana as a component of kriya-yoga and a niyama is an outer limb (bahir-anga) of yoga whereas Isvara-pranidhana in the first section (pada) of the sutras has the form of meditation (dhyana-rupa) and is therefore, an inner limb (antar-anga). Because of having the form of meditation it is the very “thatness” of Isvara (isvara-tattva) not “only” the dedication of all actions. On the surface, at least, Vijnanabhiksu “wants to have his cake and eat it too.” Although he says isvara-pranidhana as a niyama grants one “union with the paramatma,” he stresses that it is not an “inner limb.” And therefore does not have the “form of meditation” as it does in the first pada.
I am not at all sure that he makes a very strong case for differentiating between the two given what he says concerning them. However, an issue such as this is, for us, a secondary consideration at best. Our concern is to explicate what the commentators said and attempt to add to it what we can to make the sutras more accessible.
Section IV
In the way of concluding remarks, I would like to emphasize that Isvara was not only a doctrinal aspect of the Yoga Darsana, but an experiential one. The Vision, as we have been referring to it, is that “perfection” or “completion” which lies on the other side of time. The practitioner has access to “eternity,” in the fullest sense of the word. Isvara is a distinct consciousness (visesa-purusa) not because It is a separate consciousness, but because It is a different mode of consciousness. It is this consciousness which, once experienced, sanctifies life.
Our consciousness differs from Isvara in that it is “bound” within the space-time continuum, i.e., manifestation. Once the Yogin ascends to the Isvara, he/she leaves location and, for that timeless time, incarnates the Vision without relation to time as sequence. It is then that the Yogin can be said to have gained access to that “special” or “distinct” consciousness. Having been “taken up” into the Vision, the Yogin also realizes that he/she did not effect this by him/herself. It may be said to be an act of grace (avarjita) on the part of Isvara. It is because of devotion (bhakti) and dedication (pranidhana) that this grace has been granted. “God helps those who help themselves.” As we noted above, there is a sacred reciprocity at work in devotional practice; bhakti-yoga is a two-way street. Central to this yoga is the proper mind cultivation or mind-production (bhavanam). One must garner from the sacred texts on liberation (moksa-sastras) those passages that were “in fact” authored by Isvara; descriptions of the Vision which are not only the expressed, but also become the impressed. Once having amassed the appropriate selections, one sets (nivesana) the mind on them “entering them again and again.” Coupled with the chanting of Om, the Yogin elicits the Vision. In this sense bhavanam, which originates in the Isvara as the expressed, the way down, becomes the way up (to play on Heraclitus).
The mystic syllable Om (pranava) is the bow. The arrow is the soul (atman). Brahma is said to be the mark (laksya). By the undistracted man, it is to be penetrated. One should come to be in It, as the arrow [in the mark].54
By making one’s own body the lower friction-stick
and the syllable Om the upper friction-stick,
By practicing the friction of meditation (dhyana),
one may see the God (deva) who is hidden, as it were.55
It is interesting to note that in the second of these bhavanas the “body” is mentioned. We must not neglect to add a reminder of Isvara as embodiment. The body or prakrtic nature of Isvara is pure sattva (or illumination). This is a body of knowledge, of omniscience. It is only through the purification of the sattva that such a special consciousness can shine forth. This dyad of pure sattva and consciousness is a union which is the fundamental reality or certainty from which all other realities, incarnate perspectives, derive. It is the self-sacrifice of Isvara which provides multiplicity. In turn it is our self-sacrifice which reveals the dyadic oneness. We again observe the sacred reciprocity at work. Isvara is said to rescue us, the embodied purusas in samsara through jnana (knowledge) and dharma (virtue, law, teachings). It is knowledge and virtue that enable us to perform the self-sacrifice of limited illumination, wherein rajas and tamas taint the sattva, and enter the Vision only to continue the movement (rta) in the sacrifice of the Vision into manifestation.56 So the Yogin descends (avatara) after having received the Vision and assumes the task of the incorporation of Isvara.57 To descend back into manifestation carrying the Vision, the message of the Lord, is to attempt devotional yoga at all times. However, once the Yogin has returned, he/she is no longer that special consciousness, but is once again subject to that which the Isvara is devoid of, i.e., klesa, karma, vipaka, asaya, (afflictions, actions, results, and action-deposits). There is no escape from the need to practice and perfect one’s yogic strengths. The Yogin must practice in order to recall this Vision “again and again.”58 It is only through constant “recollection” of the Vision, through practice and dispassion toward the manifest, that the seeds or deposits remaining from past actions can be sterilized, canceling their ability to germinate and flower into painful embodiments.59
In this context, action becomes service to the Isvara. Not only may actions be transformed into offerings (arpanam) dedicated to the Vision, but through the Vision one is granted the grace to “see” that, fundamentally, it is the work of the divine union of sattva and consciousness which manifests all actions. We are not substantial agents of “our” actions.
There is a very real sense in which we abide in the Vision at all times regardless of our limitations. However, not having “seen” the Vision, this insight remains merely theory. It remains some sort of postulated background or horizon out of which particularity arises into subjective awareness. Postulation is not realization. The Yogin fully embodies the horizon, or “world” as origin, and in the process relinquishes subjectivity in the bargain. Yet, the Yogin returns to a subjective stance in a world of objects with a newly found sense of intimacy that connects him/her to the source while yielding to the movements of the manifest. The Vision is truly transformative.
Keep in mind, however, that past deeds play a major role in the Yogin’s skill at incarnational intensity. The more purified the Yogin, the more intimate Isvara becomes. Reciprocity is always at work. “Seeing” Isvara, which is synonymous with the movement of pratiprasava (the return to the origin), the deeply rooted embodied presuppositions which continually configure the world are “shaken” by the radically incongruous nature of this special purusa. These jolts to the system of habitual ontological structuring “burn” the seeds of past actions and allow for alternative embodiments. The “natural” world of realism, which construes a world apart from a perceptual system, is left without foundation. What was once considered as hardware has been shown to be software. This is why Patanjali says that the practice of meditation (dhyana) is effective in escaping the [gross] fluctuations (vrtti-s) of the afflictions (klesas).60 The vrtti-s, however, are dependent on subtle and silent presuppositions (samskara) for their arising. In order to get at that subtle dimension of the ontological determinants, a more radical reach is required.61 Isvara is the savior. The soteriological function of the Vision is Its distinct (visesa) nature. To “see” is to be well on the way to being saved. The Vision, whether it be construed as Isvara, asamprajnata samadhi (samadhi without an object), or any number of other terms is the only “treatment” radical enough to challenge the deeply rooted and incarnate presuppositions which lie at the bottom of our ignorance and dissatisfaction.
Endnotes
1. See Y.S. 2.2.↩
2. These texts will be cited as Y.S.B., T.V., and Y.V. respectively. Also the Bhagavad Gita will be cited as B.G. and the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali as Y.S. Translations are the author’s own.↩
3. Y.S. 1.24.↩
4. Y.S. 2.3.↩
5. Y.S. 2.5.↩
6. See Yogi Ananda Viraj, “Affliction and the Structure of Experience,” Moksha Journal 6.1 for a detailed examination of the functioning of the three gunas and their relation to the afflictions.↩
7. Y.S. 2.13 and Y.V. 1.24.↩
8. Y.S.B. 1.24.↩
9. Ibid.↩
10. Ibid.↩
11. Y.S. 1.25.↩
12. Y.S.B. 1.25.↩
13. Ibid.↩
14. B.G. 13.14-16.↩
15. Y.S.B. and T.V. 1.25. Vacaspati Misra attributes this quotation to Pancasikha, the third teacher in the Samkhya lineage.↩
16. Y.B.S. 1.25.↩
17. Y.S.B. 1.23.↩
18. T.V. 1.23.↩
19. Y.S. 1.26.↩
20. Y.S. 1.27 Om is pranava; the sacred syllable, from pra, “before, forward” plus nava from the root nu, “sound, shout, exult, roar.”↩
21. See B.G.11.7.↩
22. Y.S. 1.28.↩
23. pranavasya japah pranava-abhidhyeyasya ca isvara bhavanam.
tadasya yoginah pranavam japatah pranava-artham ca bhavayatas cittam ekagram sampadyate. Y.S.B. 1.28.↩
24. Yogi Ananda Viraj, “An Outline of Samkhya-Yoga Philosophy,” Moksha Journal, 5.2.↩
25. For a depiction of a Yogi’s contact with Isvara, see Chapter 11 of the B.G.↩
26. Recall Y.S. 1.24.↩
27. Y.S. 1.29.↩
28. See Y.S. 1.30.↩
29. See Y.S. 1.3.↩
30. See Y.S. 1.4.↩
31. Y.S.B. 1.29.↩
32. suddhah kutastha-nityataya-udaya-vyaya-rahitah prasannah klesa-varjitah kevalah dharma-adharma-apetah. ata eva-anupasargah. T.V. 1.29.↩
33. See Y.S. 2.13.↩
34. One can now readily understand from a Yogic point of view statements such as: “Knowledge is possible only through God,” or “The grace of God grants us life and knowledge.” These are not, to my knowledge, scriptural quotations, but their comparison with isvara-pranidhana can serve to open up a line of Yogic inquiry into Western theological language.↩
35. Y.V. 1.29.↩
36. Y.S. 2.1.↩
37. Y.S.B. 1.2.↩
38. Y.S.B. 2.32.↩
39. Yogi Ananda Viraj, “Affliction,” 8, for a detailed study of being “caught” in the fabric of objects.↩
40. svadhyayah pranava-adi-pavitranam japam. Y.S.B. 2.1.↩
41. Yogi Ananda Viraj, “On Yogic Dispassion (Vairagyam),” Moksha Journal, 6.2.↩
42. kamatos-akamatas va-api yat-karomi subha-asubham; tat-sarvam; tvayi samnyas-tam tvat-prayukth karomi-aham. T.V. 2.1.↩
43. karma-phalanam-isvaras bhoktas-iti cintanam karma-phala-samnyasah. Y. V. 2.1.↩
44. B.G. 4.18.↩
45. tat eva-artha-matra-nirbhasam svarupa-sunyam iva samadhih.
When the object (artha) alone shines forth, as if empty of own-form, that indeed is samadhi. Y.S. 3.3.
This sutra is explained as the performance of meditation which leads to an acute focus wherein the mind’s own form is absent, and only the intended object is present. One could classify this as true objectivity because the mind has ceased to project its own desires or interpretations onto the object. The mind’s movement is absent to itself, devoid of reflexive activity but active as the object alone, whether that object be subtle, as in the case of prajna, or gross.↩
46. Y.S.B., T.V., Y.V., 2.1.↩
47. Y.S. 2.32.↩
48. Isvara pranidhanam tasmin paramagurau sarva-karma-arpanam. Y.S.B. II,32.↩
49. T.V., II,32; Visnu-Purana VI:7:36-37.↩
50. Yogi Ananda Viraj,”An Outline of Yoga-Samkhya Philosophy,” and “Affliction (Klesa) and the Structure of Experience,” also see B.G. 3, 27.↩
51. Y.S.B. II,32.↩
52. Y.V. II,32.↩
53. ” …aisvarya-yoga eva bhavati; api tvisvara-saksat karadvara …. ” Y.V., II,32.↩
54. Mundaka Upanisad II.2.4 as found in Robert Ernest Hume, The Thirteen Principal Upanishads, 2nd ed. (London: Oxford University Press, 1931), p. 372.↩
55. Ibid. Svetasvatara Upanisad I.1.14, Hume p. 396.↩
56. Yogi Ananda Viraj, “Affliction and the Structure of Experience.”↩
57. B.G. XV, 15-18.↩
58. B.G. XVIII, 76-77.↩
59. Yogi Ananda Viraj, “On Yogic Dispassion (Vairagyam),” Moksha Journal, 6.2. Also see Y.S. II,1O.↩
60. Y.S. II,11.↩
61. Y.S. II,1O.↩