by Yogi Ananda Viraj (Eugene P. Kelly, Jr.)
The three remaining niyamas listed in the Yoga Sutras, tapas, svadhyaya and isvara pranidhana, are also the constituents of kriya-yoga, sutra 2.1. Contemporary scholars view this redundancy as the result of the composite nature of the Yoga Sutras. The kriya-yoga section and the yoga-anga section are probably the work of two different authors. These two separate works along with up to two more are believed to have been somewhat awkwardly “fitted together” to comprise the Yoga Sutras. With respect to this, the present exposition of the practice of tapas will take both aspects, i.e., tapas as kriya-yoga and niyama, into consideration.
The word “tapas,” meaning “heat,” is derived from the root tap also meaning “heat” or “glow.” Many comments have been made regarding this literal meaning. Some have said that as a result of austerity, heat is produced in the body, so, tapas denotes the practice of austerities. Others have said that unitive awareness (samadhi) is accompanied by heat in the body which is produced by intense concentration. So, tapas as the practice of austerities is viewed as heat producing and conducive to samadhi.
A few commentators have noted the significance of “tapas” in one of the creation themes in the Rg Veda (10:129.3). I this hymn, the “one” or undifferentiated is made manifest (many) through tapas. In the Bhagavad Gita three forms of tapas are given: tapas of body, speech and mind. (XVII, 14-19). In the Classical Yoga tradition, tapas as both a niyama and a component of kriya-yoga involves both an attitude and practices. We would be hard pressed to construct a theory of continuity from the Rg Vedic conception through the Gita and into the Classical Yoga tradition. The Gita and the Yoga commentaries do share aspects of the practice of tapas. The Rg Vedic notion is seemingly metaphysical, however, on close examination of the hymns and their “intent” this metaphysics turns out to be a macroscopic and microscopic identity. Man, in a primal sense, is the “one” and tapas is the practice of “knowing” this one as the many. Putting speculation aside, it is our task here to present the practice of tapas as discussed in the yoga tradition.
Vyasa defines tapas as the endurance of the pairs of opposites (dvandva-sahana). With an eye toward the “imposed” endurance tests Vyasa cites various disciplines. These include enduring cold and heat, hunger and thirst, sitting and standing, non-expressiveness and silence. He also adds other disciplines which were prevalent at the time (650-850 A.D.) and are still practiced in some parts of India today. These are the krcchra-candrayana or “difficult lunar fast” and samtapana, a generic label for any number of austerities practiced with the intent of achieving liberation or moksha. This “endurance of opposites” is easily understood but non-expressiveness (kastha-mauna) and silence (akara-mauna) are explained by Vacaspati as “the absence of any indication of one’s intent even by signs” and” merely refraining from speech,” respectively. This is the whole of the comment given by Vyasa and Vacaspati regarding tapas as a niyama.
The results of the practice of tapas as a niyama or observance are most interesting. “From tapas, perfection of body and organs (indriya) as a result of the diminishing of impurities.” (sutra 2.43). We see from this sutra that tapas has as its intent the destruction of impurities which in turn results in certain perfection (siddhi). Vyasa adds that the completion or accomplishment (nirvartya) of tapas is the removal of impurity (asuddhi). In other words, the performance of austerities does not “result” in the removal of impurities, but is itself the removal. He views genuine nature (atma) as defiled by a covering of impurities (avarana-mala) which conceals the perfection (siddhi) of organs (indriyas) and body (kaya). He then provides examples of these perfections, which are also discussed in great detail in Book 3 of the sutras. These include, as perfection of the body (kaya-siddhi) the ability to become minute or as small as an atom (anima), and as perfection of the organs (indriya-siddhi) the ability to hear and see from great distances. One does not necessarily have to cultivate siddhis, they are the outcome of endurance of opposites.
Vacaspati adds that these impurities are effects of tamas, which is the concealing aspect of the citta or mind-consciousness. Tamas is either dominating the two other aspects of the citta, sattva (illumination) and rajas (activation), or else subordinate to one of these. Impurity, the inherent nature of which tamas (darkness), is considered as that which is opposed to siddhi. Impure motives cannot be behind the desire to cultivate the perfection, not only in the ethical, but in the practical sense. Impurity is simply opposite in nature to siddhi. There are legends which tell of “impure” people practicing or demonstrating super-normal powers, however, these legends generally tell of the tragic downfall of such people. Furthermore, the siddhis spoken of here and in Book 3 are not perfection which can be put to a utilitarian end. They arise “for the yogin only” as a result of skill in concentration. They are “powers” of the intentional or noetic order; they are not to be considered as “content” for verification or explanation under laboratory conditions. The yogin’s laboratory is the field of experience. Who can verify or explain experience? No theory “captures’ experience. No verification reveals the nature of experience.
The intent of the “bearing of opposites” (dvandva-sahana) is the removal of the covering of impurity. Siddhi is the result of this removal. Tapas is, actually not in potential, the purification process. It is this active endurance of opposites which purifies. Tamas, the nature of which is delusion, acts to limit or confine the mind-consciousness (citta). The practice of tapas establishes conditions which make apparent this limiting or confining nature of citta dominated by tamas. A tamas dominated citta can be characterized by inertia which takes a cognitive or bodily form. A dogmatic inertia or a laziness of body both indicate the predominance of tamas. Static frames of reference and actions are overcome only by the intent to reside as pure (a sattvic disposition) and by the action (rajas) which will induce purity. When purity of intention (sattva) and action (rajas) motivated by the same are present the obstacle is tamas. “I will perform this discipline for the sake of liberation of self and others” is a sattvic intention which must gather the motivating force (rajas) to displace a tamas dominated field of action. This “gathering” or deliberate activation of a pure (sattvic) intention will tip the scales and rajas, the activating aspect, will lean toward and manifest the sattva and tamas will be made dormant. This activation of sattva however, is not without its difficulties. As the nature (atmaka) of tamas is impure and covering (visada) the nature of rajas is pain (apriti). In order to shift from the indolence of tamas to the purity of sattva exertion or effort is required. The nature of rajas includes or is this effort. “I will perform this discipline…” is initially an effortful task. The pain involved is the gravitational effect of tamas or habit (inertia). However, the incarnation of this sattvic intention is itself the removal of impurity and effects the realization of perfection (siddhi). The language of sattva must be “energized” over and over thereby accumulating the momentum required for the subjection of tamas. This movement is tapas. The extremes (dvandva) are the opposing natures of the gunas, sattva, and tamas.
Any intention, however pure at the outset may become inert (tamas) or demented. This is accomplished by the activating force (rajas) tending toward inertia (tamas). These three gunas are mutually supportive, i.e., no one guna can come into activation without the operations of the other two. Habit is not the way one “is” but they way one is “disposed.” Tamas or sattva will remain dominant via their sustained activation by rajas. Therefore, rajas must be “drawn” to a sattvic intention. Like “tapas” the word rajas denotes a “wanning” or “glow.” The word is derived from the root ranj meaning “red” or “color.” Rajas is also used to denote passion. When this guna is dominant one is said to be passionate, angry or desiring. The practice of tapas is not meant to place rajas in the dominant position but to use passion to activate the sattvic. Returning to what was said above concerning intentions becoming inert, a disposition toward sattva “I will perform these disciplines,” can become “I always perform disciplines, I am a very austere person.” The most pure intention, when overcome by too much rajas or passion takes on the nature of static passion, pride. Pride in its turn becomes “the way one is,” i.e., habitual and hence tamasic or inert. The practice of tapas is the animation of a sattvic or pure intention for the sake of the intention. To hope to gain from the intention, i.e., siddhis, is to cloud the purity with pride. “I have miraculous powers” may be the outcome of what was initially a pure intention gone sour.
A discussion of the three gunas was included because of the nature of the practice of tapas. The bearing of extremes is the movement from tamas to sattva in a circular manner. No guna can remain dominant. However, because of predispositions (samskaras) impurities will predominate until removed by right effort. Tapas is not the practice of extremes, but the bearing (sahana) of extremes. The yogin learns to accept life as a play of extremes and thereby the citta ebbs and flows with the flux of infinite situations. It is the stagnation in one or another of these extremes that defines the life of the ordinary person. (See Bhagavad Gita 2.12,13). The genuine nature (atma) of humans is unattached to extremes. This detachment is the result of neither being outside or above life, but fully engaged, selflessly engaged, in action.
The undertaking of disciplines, e.g., silence, fasts, etc., in the practice of tapas is intended to reveal and counter predispositions. We are (habitually) predisposed to talk, eat, sit, etc. These disciplines which aim to deny habit its realization consequently weaken predispositions. What was once unnoticed tendency becomes apparent compulsion. All compulsions are obstacles to mind stabilization, the necessary correlate of the revelation of genuine nature. What is now tendency has become so through action. The repeated embodiment of an intention, (or that?) which was once necessary and now habitual, is the accumulation of a predisposition. Our primal drives to accumulate these are called afflictions (klesas). The practice of disciplines is the reverse of accumulation. In fact, it is revelatory of that which is accumulated. Again, not only does taps reveal habits and compulsions but it counters them as well. It counters them not for the “ideal,” a life of total serenity, but for the practical, a life of detachment in the midst of extremes.
Next we must consider the practice of tapas, not as a niyama, but as a component of kriya-yoga. This yoga is designed for practice by those whose citta is unrestrained or agitated (vyutthita-citta). This yoga is apparently unnecessary for those (whose) citta is composed (samahita-citta). The intent of kriya-yoga is to bring an agitated mind-consciousness into the yoga of concentration (yoga-yukta). Vyasa says “Yoga is not perfected (sidhyati) in one who is not disciplined [by the endurance of opposites]. He continues with a brief discussion of the nature of impurities (asuddhi) saying that these impurities are agitated or variegated (citra) with latencies (vasana). These latencies, which are beginningless (anadi), derive from the klesas and from (past) actions (karma). Into the field of this impurity the snare or net of objects (visaya jala) has entered. This impurity is not reduced unless tapas is employed. In sum, Vyasa has explained the use of tapas as that which is observed to reduce impurities tainted with vasanas which stem from klesas and past actions and into which the snare of objects has entered.
The vasanas are latencies which arise in the mind (manas) or interpretive faculty as a
result of past actions. These latencies are stored until such time as the environment is conducive to their arising into and as consciousness. These vasanas are associated with cause, beneficial actions reap pleasure, harmful actions result in pain; motive, i.e., the purpose for taking any action; cognitive substrate (asraya), interpretive activity relies on past impressions which “enter” the mind; and stimulus, the environment which prompts the arising of a latency. Therefore, cause determines the nature of the vasana, motive brings about the operation of a cause, the manas is “where” the vasana arises, and the stimulus, obviously, incites arising. A circular process can be observed. The motive arises to act compassionately and brings about a like action (cause). This in turn reinforces the motive to act compassionately, etc. One acts in situations (stimuli) and with interpretation (substrate).
Action (karma) is divided into three types; this with respect to the results of the action. Karma is either pure (sukla), dark (krsna) or both (suklakrsna). There is a fourth type which bears no results; this action is neither pure nor dark. Only yogins who have “followed up” or completed yoga training are said to act without a view toward results for a self. Action bearing no results for a self is action taken for the continuation of life alone. all other action is taken with a view toward results. The dark (krsna) karma is found in criminals, etc. The dark and pure (suklakrsna) karma accumulates deposits (asaya) of a positive or negative character as it either benefits or harms others. Suklakarma (pure) is the action performed with a view toward the goal of yoga. Those who practice tapas, svadhyaya or the study of texts discussing liberation, and dhyana or meditation are said to be acting purely (sukla). This is because these actions are mainly a matter of intention and interpretive functioning (manas) and do not involve others. These actions are performed in relative isolation and therefore do not incline toward injury to others. As a result, suklakarma does not accumulate negative deposits (asaya).
In addition to karma, vasanas also stem from the klesas or afflictions. As noted above, klesas are the “primal drives” to accumulate predispositions (samskaras). That is, these afflictions maintain the momentum to act in the three ways of the non-yogin. In so acting deposits are accumulated and lead to further actions of similar order unless this circuit is interrupted through tapas, svadhyaya and dhyana. These actions will eventually lead to that stage of life, the yogin’s, which sterilizes the seeds of the klesas. Then, action with a view toward life-maintenance alone is possible.
The klesas are five in number:
1) Avidya, or ignorance, is the context (ksetra) for the other four. Avidya is the recognition of the eternal (nitya) , pure (suci), pleasurable (sukha) and genuine nature (atma) in the impermanent, impure, unsatisfactory, and inauthentic.
2) Asmita, or l-am-ness, results when the power of perceiving (drs-sakti) is confused with the power of knowing (darsana-sakti). This confusion gives to the appearance of their being of one nature. Perception free of linguistic convention, i.e., pure, does not” see” the contents of language. It “knows nothing.” The power of knowing is cognition. Language is the residence of the is (as) and is not and their relations. When these two ways of perceiving are confused, it appears as if language is referential. In other words, nouns become existents (asmi) and cease being words. Instead of being distinct from the power of cognition, the power of perceiving becomes the “base” for ascription. When we say “I” it is then believed that this power of perceiving is I. Also, when dealing with other language units such as “that.” (that) which is perceived does not “begin’ by being a that. I’s and that’s are linguistic. Perceiving is perceiving; it neither claims, rejects, posits, nor negates. These are the activities of the power of cognition.
3) Raga, or attachment, is the compulsive clinging (anusayi) to pleasure (sukha). Having once experienced pleasure thoughts continually arise which are the thirst for pleasure or for the means of attaining it (note avidya).
4) Dvesa, or aversion, is the compulsive dwelling on dissatisfaction (duhkha). Again, on the part of one who has experienced dissatisfaction or pain, repulsion continually arises following a memory of pain. This repulsion is toward pain or the means of acquiring it (note avidya).
5. Abhinivesa, or clinging to life is founded in the error of asmita. Once it is “felt” that there is a substrate for the language of existents (asmi) or existence (sasmita), i.e., a real substance, then continuation of existence becomes imperative. The fundamental error (avidya) is the confusion of language and change. Language fixes, or is the fixation of movement. It accomplishes this via nouns, pronouns, etc. Analogously, the conceptual isolation of musical fifths, fourths, thirds, etc. from the harmonics of a tone does not stop the tone (movement) but simply cognizes (darsana) or abstractly “orders” the movement. The order is not the movement; language is not life. Few musicians realize that fifths and fourths are not sounds, but are “conventionally” designated as such. The clinging to “existence,” which is actually the struggle to maintain an existent, is rooted in them is use of language.
Language indicates no-thing. Indication is language; the indicated resides in language alone. When we “talk to ourselves” it appears as if we are talking to someone. This is only appearance. When we imagine a “person” we know or a “person” we know is brought to mind, the name arouses the image of a form. As long as we can attach a form to a name a person (or thing) is identified. However, if we are given a name only and have no form to connect with it we say “I don’t know that person.” The same is true when a form is given and not name. Names are conventionally employed. It is forgetting this that gives rise to asmita, particularly in the context of personal pronouns. “I” is a conventional designation; it signifies neither parts nor wholes. Avidya is taking the conventional to be the real in an absolute sense. It is the non-discrimination of perception and cognition. Perception perceives no-things; cognition perceives things, selves etc., i.e., language. Avidya is the innate tendency to confuse the two. From this life becomes populated with the possibilities of language.
Avidya reproduces itself via reinforcement. Actions based on or rooted in avidya form latencies which give rise to more actions. This process has no beginning (anadi). There is nothing behind language; things like beginnings are language.