Monday, September 17, 2018
Sunday, September 16, 2018
Yoga is... (Yoga Sutras 4.27-34)... The End
I only know one thing...and that is that I know No-thing...
One of the things that made the Athenians mad enough to condemn Socrates to death is his inadvertent bringing God to be his witness at his trial. Let God, and in this case, Apollo, be my witness to testify that "I am not a wise man," Socrates says in so many words, causing a ruckus in the courtroom to say the least.
In Plato's Apology (which literally means a "defense") of Socrates, the accused relates the story of how once Chaerephon, a fellow Athenian, went to the Oracle at Delphi and asked her who is the wisest man in Athens? The answer was that no-one was wiser than Socrates, with the emphasis on not saying that Socrates was wisest, but that no one was wiser. Socrates took this challenge to heart and went around Athens trying to find someone wiser, or for that matter, who truly knew anything at all. His conclusion was that everyone claims to "know" something, but in reality, we do not really know and nobody had true wisdom as such. And, since Socrates never claimed to know anything, rather, as above, he claimed that the only thing he did know was that he did not know anything...(That is, by the way, Socratic irony par excellence), which means at least he was not a hypocrite about being wise. The Athenians were not amused and sentenced him to death.
We are approaching that sentiment very quickly in the closure of Patañjali's Yoga Sutras as we shall see momentarily. Similar, but different; different, yet similar.
In 4.26, we arrived at the state of mind in which one needs to be in to engage with the ultimate concept of Yoga, Kaivalya, and that mind is one that is fully attuned to the process of discernment and discrimination, that is viveka. Viveka is the path of conscious decisions and processing of information, having shed the veils of a-vidya and the fog of samskãras so that one can see things as they are and not how we want them to be, which are often dramatically different things.
So, the stage is set, the well is primed, and the mind is engaged in viveka, however, we are human after all, as 4.27 reminds us:
tac-chidreshu pratyaya-antarãni samskãrebhyah 4.27
or,
Other ideas/concepts/perceptions arise from the samskãras within the lapses (of the viveka-mind). 4.27
In other words, to paraphrase Horace's lament (via Pope), even Homer nods...When the mind is not fully engaged then we relapse into the perceptions and prejudices governed by the samskãras, or mental impressions. So, at times, we shall all fall back into old habits, and from that comes indiscretion and avidyã rears its ugly head.
4.28, however, reminds us that there is a remedy:
hãnam-eshãm kleshavad-uktam 4.28
The extinction/cessation of these lapses have already been spoken of, as with the kleshas. 4.28
Here, Patañjali reminds us of YS II.10-11 which tells us that when the mind is back in its original state (pre-tainted by samskãras and avidyã), then the kleshas are eliminated, and dhyãna is the key to that return. To return to those highly important sutras, that is when we learn that avidyã is the root of all kleshas, or obstacles to our Yogic path, and consequently the source of our suffering, or duhkham. And, it is at that point that Patañjali provides the 8-limb program, which culminates in the samyama of dhãranã-dhyãna-samãdhi, about which is the focus of Book III.
The lynchpin of the samyama triad, namely dhyãna, or intensive, focused meditation, is once again the answer to ridding ourselves of the kleshas, clearing out the storehouse of karma (YS 4.6), and now also the lapses in our discretion. But, once again, this is not mere navel-gazing, for as we also have seen, that leads to an infinite loop, which leads us nowhere.
Rather, it is intensive, focused meditation on the fact that the Seer (I) and the Seen (thou) are not separate. To see that in everything, at all times then is Kaivalya. Blake's oft-quoted quatrain from "Auguries of Innocence" comes to mind:
To see the World in a Grain of Sand,
And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Hold Infinity in the Palm of your Hand,
And Eternity in an Hour...
One of the things that made the Athenians mad enough to condemn Socrates to death is his inadvertent bringing God to be his witness at his trial. Let God, and in this case, Apollo, be my witness to testify that "I am not a wise man," Socrates says in so many words, causing a ruckus in the courtroom to say the least.
In Plato's Apology (which literally means a "defense") of Socrates, the accused relates the story of how once Chaerephon, a fellow Athenian, went to the Oracle at Delphi and asked her who is the wisest man in Athens? The answer was that no-one was wiser than Socrates, with the emphasis on not saying that Socrates was wisest, but that no one was wiser. Socrates took this challenge to heart and went around Athens trying to find someone wiser, or for that matter, who truly knew anything at all. His conclusion was that everyone claims to "know" something, but in reality, we do not really know and nobody had true wisdom as such. And, since Socrates never claimed to know anything, rather, as above, he claimed that the only thing he did know was that he did not know anything...(That is, by the way, Socratic irony par excellence), which means at least he was not a hypocrite about being wise. The Athenians were not amused and sentenced him to death.
We are approaching that sentiment very quickly in the closure of Patañjali's Yoga Sutras as we shall see momentarily. Similar, but different; different, yet similar.
In 4.26, we arrived at the state of mind in which one needs to be in to engage with the ultimate concept of Yoga, Kaivalya, and that mind is one that is fully attuned to the process of discernment and discrimination, that is viveka. Viveka is the path of conscious decisions and processing of information, having shed the veils of a-vidya and the fog of samskãras so that one can see things as they are and not how we want them to be, which are often dramatically different things.
So, the stage is set, the well is primed, and the mind is engaged in viveka, however, we are human after all, as 4.27 reminds us:
tac-chidreshu pratyaya-antarãni samskãrebhyah 4.27
or,
Other ideas/concepts/perceptions arise from the samskãras within the lapses (of the viveka-mind). 4.27
In other words, to paraphrase Horace's lament (via Pope), even Homer nods...When the mind is not fully engaged then we relapse into the perceptions and prejudices governed by the samskãras, or mental impressions. So, at times, we shall all fall back into old habits, and from that comes indiscretion and avidyã rears its ugly head.
4.28, however, reminds us that there is a remedy:
hãnam-eshãm kleshavad-uktam 4.28
The extinction/cessation of these lapses have already been spoken of, as with the kleshas. 4.28
Here, Patañjali reminds us of YS II.10-11 which tells us that when the mind is back in its original state (pre-tainted by samskãras and avidyã), then the kleshas are eliminated, and dhyãna is the key to that return. To return to those highly important sutras, that is when we learn that avidyã is the root of all kleshas, or obstacles to our Yogic path, and consequently the source of our suffering, or duhkham. And, it is at that point that Patañjali provides the 8-limb program, which culminates in the samyama of dhãranã-dhyãna-samãdhi, about which is the focus of Book III.
The lynchpin of the samyama triad, namely dhyãna, or intensive, focused meditation, is once again the answer to ridding ourselves of the kleshas, clearing out the storehouse of karma (YS 4.6), and now also the lapses in our discretion. But, once again, this is not mere navel-gazing, for as we also have seen, that leads to an infinite loop, which leads us nowhere.
Rather, it is intensive, focused meditation on the fact that the Seer (I) and the Seen (thou) are not separate. To see that in everything, at all times then is Kaivalya. Blake's oft-quoted quatrain from "Auguries of Innocence" comes to mind:
To see the World in a Grain of Sand,
And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Hold Infinity in the Palm of your Hand,
And Eternity in an Hour...
This is the vision, the discretion that Kaivalya requires through dhyãna. It is the conscious awareness that leads to letting go of the dualities to arrive at the ultimate singularity.
We continue then with 4.29-30 which introduces us to the most curious phrase in all of the sutras:
prasamkhyãne'apyakusIdasya sarvathã viveka-khyãter-dharma-meghah samãdhih 4.29
tatah kleshakarmanivrittih 4.30
Giving us,
The "dharma-cloud" of samãdhi comes for the one whom is even disinterested/dispassionate about the constant perception of viveka. 4.29
Then, the kleshas and karma (or karmic affliction) are released. 4.30
Or, read slightly differently together:
The samãdhi (total integration/synthesis of Yoga) of the dharma-megha (dharma-cloud) comes about for one who is utterly free of attachment, even from the process of viveka and then, the affliction of karma is released. 4.29-30
The dharma-megha, or Dharma-cloud, then is a curious entity that does not appear anywhere else in Sanskrit philosophy, but is vaguely Buddhist in context...treading the Dhamma-pada, or path of Dharma is the highest order of enlightenment for the jivan-mukti, or one who is released in this life-time. None of the commentators actually know what the dharma-megha is, so I am not going to speculate further than the visual of one being fully enraptured by Dharma, meaning, one who has found his or her Dharma in life via the path of Yoga and then lives it, rather than just talks about it. The samãdhi, or total integration and synthesis then of Yoga is now at hand.
The dharma-megha also sounds similar, yet different to the mystical Christian concept of "The cloude of unknowyng" or "The Cloud of Unknowing," a chiefly medieval concept (via Neo-Platonists...) that to know God, to truly know God, means to let go of everything one knows...to forget in order to remember. The Greek concept of Truth as well is a-letheia, or un-forgetting in order to remember what we have lost, looking at the Universe for what it is, not what we make it. The veil of illusion, of Mãya, or demonic magic that the Buddha overcomes is none other than the human constructs and concepts and prejudices that we build up for ourselves and promote as "truths," yet as Socrates found, they are not wisdom, but merely opinions.
And so, for the Yogi/ni, the dharma-cloud engulfs and enshrouds, but does not blind nor veil, but reveals, apo-kalyptestai...
tadã sarvãvarana-mala-ãpetasya jñãnasyãdantyãjñeyam-alam 4.31
or,
Then, from the infinity from the result of the maladies of concealments have been removed, there is little to be known. 4.31
In other words, when we know longer seek to know by reason, and have fully integrated the Dharma, there is nothing much to be known. In other words, when the Dharma is known, and one walks the walk, there is nothing really more to know. However, it is then a continuous process of integrity, not an easy path. But, as Mark Twain is attributed to have said once, "If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." Here, if you live the Dharma, you don't need to know anything...Sounds easy, living it is another thing all together.
4.32 continues:
tatah kritãrthãnãm parinãma-krama-parisamãptir-gunãnãm 4.32
or,
From this, with their purposes now fulfilled, the sequence of permutations of the gunas comes to an end. 4.32
Echoing the Bhagavad Gita of Krishna's directive to Arjuna to eventually transcend the gunas, because Krishna is beyond the gunas, and Krishna is the Universe, when the Dharma-megha reigns supreme in the Yogi/ni's life, the gunas are irrelevant as they have served their purpose for the mundane, but now they are inconsequential.
And so, we come to the End with 4.33-34:
kshana-pratiyogI parinãmãparãnta-nirgrãhyah kramah 4.33
purushãrtha-shUnyãnãm gunãnãm pratiprasavah kaivalyam svarupa-pratishthã vã cit-shaktir-iti 4.34
Giving us,
The sequence (of permutations) is grasped at the extreme end of change, which corresponds to small increments of Time. 4.33
Ending with:
Kaivalya, the ultimate singularity of liberation, the returning to the original state of the gunas, devoid of all purpose for Purusha, is steadfast in one's own nature, known as the power of consciousness. 4.34
When there exists illusion of the separation between the Seer and the Seen (YS 3-4), this begins a series of perceived changes (parinãma) that are linked by infinitely small increments of Time (kshana), which causes the gunas to hold sway over our Self/Atman/Purusha because of the power of avidyã. Following the path of Yoga as has been laid out by Patañjali, these increments of Time no longer exist as in the state of Kaivalya, the Seer and the Seen are united (as they were never separate in reality) and the svarupa, or true form of our Selves is experienced by the samãdhi of the Dharma-megha, or the power of consciousness as true awareness...and the cessation of the fluctuations of the mind-stuff then happens.
Friday, September 14, 2018
Going, going, ... Ta-daa!! (Yoga Sutras 4.22-26)
As we ended the last time, we saw that if the mind becomes purely self-reflexive as a way towards inquiry into the nature of things, we are left with a hall of mirrors, infinitely reflecting each other's reflection. Although superficially this could seem like (my favorite metaphor for Being; hence my main blog) the image of Indra's Net as the infinitely-expansive net that has reflective gems at every interstice, reflecting each other ad infinitum, it is not quite the same, and the following sutras provide us with a clearer picture of just how.
The concept of solipsism, or the idea that universe is the mental creation of a single entity (and when it manifests with humans, you get pathological narcissism), comes to mind (pun intended). However, what we saw in the past few sutras, this is a pitfall, much like the siddhis, because ultimately, it is all smoke and infinite mirrors. It is the navel gazing back.
This is not the trajectory we are heading along with Patañjali's concept of Yoga. Instead of beginning with the concept of a singular mind manipulating the universe, we are instead, many minds moving towards the actual singularity of the universe. The gems within Indra's Net are no longer seeking to know which individual gem they are, but rather, the Net itself...But, it is not quite that simple. We still need to further understand the nature, of the (ultimately false) concept that there is a division at all, and this brings us to the final reconciliation of the Seer and the Seen which was introduced at the very beginning of our adventure.
So, turning back to the text, at 4.22, we see the futility of the hall of mirrors for the mind, and that in the end, as with YS 2.1, it is the stilling and cessation of such futile processes that brings us closer to understanding.
citer-apratisamkramãyãs-tad-ãkãra-ãpattau svabuddhi-samvedanam 4.22
Giving us,
There is a moment when the mind is/becomes stilled/non-reflexive, as this manifestation of the mind occurs, the true intellect is identified. 4.22
Here we see that it is the chattering of the mind once again that obscures the real intellect. Psycho-babble and navel gazing won't do the trick, which leads us to what is the final obstacle in 4.23:
drishthri-drishyoparaktam cittam sarvãrtham 4.23
Or,
The mind that is skillful in all matters is tainted by the Seer and the Seen 4.23
Despite being not just a Jack of all trades, even if the mind is a Master of them, it is no less tainted by the Seer and the Seen. In other words, it still is separated from the singularity because there is an object and a subject. There is still the concept of "I" and "thou" and there is division. The paradox of this, however, is then exposed in the next two sutras 4.24-25, leading us to the grand finale with 4.26.
tad-asamkhyeya-vãsanãbhish-citram-api parãrtham samhatya-kãritvãt 4.24
vishesha-darshina ãtma-bhãva-bhãvanã-nivrittih 4.25
Rendering,
Because of its nature of being conjoined (i.e. Seer/Seen), the mind is dependent upon something else though that mind is manifested/variegated by way of countless past impressions. 4.24
For the one who sees this distinction, there is a stilling of the perception of the existence of the Self (ãtman). 4.25
In other words, the mind is multi-faceted gem with countless sides, but, so long as it is stuck in the web of samskãras, or mental impressions and prejudices, it is but a gem reflecting upon its own existence. However, as we see in 4.25, when that mind/gem gets this, then the concept of being a gem disappears. It is the paradox of not being able to name the Tao. Here, for the mind/Self/ãtman to finally understand its nature, it has to see that this distinction is the very cause of not-knowing...To truly KNOW THYSELF then, is too completely and utterly UN-KNOW THYSELF.
And so, we have arrived.
A friend of mine from high school was easily one of the most brilliant minds to cross my path, and I was fortunate to witness this scorching comet's flash across the darkness of the benighted masses before it was extinguished too soon (always too soon and too young), but Andy would always introduce his next great thought or proof (he was a mathematical genius in the truest sense, prodigy of Penrose and Hawking no less) with a flourish and fanfare by exclaiming "Ta-daa!!!" And, with Andy, it was usually a pretty significant reveal.
Patañjali gives us no less with 4.26
tadã viveka-nimnam kaivalya-prãg-bhãram cittam 4.26
Then (ta-daa!!), the inclination towards discretion is the consciousness that gravitates to kaivalya (the singularity of Being). 4.26
As we saw before, we must first divide (viveka) and conquer, and then unite and transcend (kaivalya).
And that shall be our final trick...
To be continued and concluded soon.
The concept of solipsism, or the idea that universe is the mental creation of a single entity (and when it manifests with humans, you get pathological narcissism), comes to mind (pun intended). However, what we saw in the past few sutras, this is a pitfall, much like the siddhis, because ultimately, it is all smoke and infinite mirrors. It is the navel gazing back.
This is not the trajectory we are heading along with Patañjali's concept of Yoga. Instead of beginning with the concept of a singular mind manipulating the universe, we are instead, many minds moving towards the actual singularity of the universe. The gems within Indra's Net are no longer seeking to know which individual gem they are, but rather, the Net itself...But, it is not quite that simple. We still need to further understand the nature, of the (ultimately false) concept that there is a division at all, and this brings us to the final reconciliation of the Seer and the Seen which was introduced at the very beginning of our adventure.
So, turning back to the text, at 4.22, we see the futility of the hall of mirrors for the mind, and that in the end, as with YS 2.1, it is the stilling and cessation of such futile processes that brings us closer to understanding.
citer-apratisamkramãyãs-tad-ãkãra-ãpattau svabuddhi-samvedanam 4.22
Giving us,
There is a moment when the mind is/becomes stilled/non-reflexive, as this manifestation of the mind occurs, the true intellect is identified. 4.22
Here we see that it is the chattering of the mind once again that obscures the real intellect. Psycho-babble and navel gazing won't do the trick, which leads us to what is the final obstacle in 4.23:
drishthri-drishyoparaktam cittam sarvãrtham 4.23
Or,
The mind that is skillful in all matters is tainted by the Seer and the Seen 4.23
Despite being not just a Jack of all trades, even if the mind is a Master of them, it is no less tainted by the Seer and the Seen. In other words, it still is separated from the singularity because there is an object and a subject. There is still the concept of "I" and "thou" and there is division. The paradox of this, however, is then exposed in the next two sutras 4.24-25, leading us to the grand finale with 4.26.
tad-asamkhyeya-vãsanãbhish-citram-api parãrtham samhatya-kãritvãt 4.24
vishesha-darshina ãtma-bhãva-bhãvanã-nivrittih 4.25
Rendering,
Because of its nature of being conjoined (i.e. Seer/Seen), the mind is dependent upon something else though that mind is manifested/variegated by way of countless past impressions. 4.24
For the one who sees this distinction, there is a stilling of the perception of the existence of the Self (ãtman). 4.25
In other words, the mind is multi-faceted gem with countless sides, but, so long as it is stuck in the web of samskãras, or mental impressions and prejudices, it is but a gem reflecting upon its own existence. However, as we see in 4.25, when that mind/gem gets this, then the concept of being a gem disappears. It is the paradox of not being able to name the Tao. Here, for the mind/Self/ãtman to finally understand its nature, it has to see that this distinction is the very cause of not-knowing...To truly KNOW THYSELF then, is too completely and utterly UN-KNOW THYSELF.
And so, we have arrived.
A friend of mine from high school was easily one of the most brilliant minds to cross my path, and I was fortunate to witness this scorching comet's flash across the darkness of the benighted masses before it was extinguished too soon (always too soon and too young), but Andy would always introduce his next great thought or proof (he was a mathematical genius in the truest sense, prodigy of Penrose and Hawking no less) with a flourish and fanfare by exclaiming "Ta-daa!!!" And, with Andy, it was usually a pretty significant reveal.
Patañjali gives us no less with 4.26
tadã viveka-nimnam kaivalya-prãg-bhãram cittam 4.26
Then (ta-daa!!), the inclination towards discretion is the consciousness that gravitates to kaivalya (the singularity of Being). 4.26
As we saw before, we must first divide (viveka) and conquer, and then unite and transcend (kaivalya).
And that shall be our final trick...
To be continued and concluded soon.
Monday, September 10, 2018
Beauty is (Not) in the Eye of the Beholder (Yoga Sutras 4.16-21)
Turning the last corner of the Yoga Sutras on our quest for discerning what actually Kaivalya is, we found that the method of Neti Neti is being used to some extent, namely: to define something, sometimes the best way is to say what it is not, rather than what it is. This seems to be the case at hand.
Before moving on to 4.16, it is prudent to take a step back to 4.15, which seems to be rather linked to it.
In the last post, we saw that 4.15 tells us more or less that due to a multiplicity of minds, there are many paths for the perception of an object, begging the question of perspectivism and/or relativity, meaning: if I see an object as one thing, and you see it as another, are we both right and there are two objects? Or, are we both wrong? Or...both and neither? This likewise leads to the questions of taste and aversion and attraction and so forth. Is an object/person inherently beautiful/repulsive, or is it in the eye of the beholder as the saying goes?
Turning to 4.16 then with this in mind, we see:
na caika-citta-tantram ced-vastu tad-apramãnakam tadã kim syãt 4.16
Giving us,
Nor is it (the being--vastu) dependent upon a singular consciousness (eka-citta), for if the object was not perceived/observed, then what would it be? 4.16
So, 4.16 is interesting for a number of reason, not in the least that it truly asks the reader a question: tadã kim syãt? Then, what would it (the being/existing object) be [if not observed]? This is highly interesting in the subject/object split, because it says that an object does not exist because it is perceived...The more interesting flip-side of that is that what we perceive an object or person to be, does not make it so, and moreover, may not at all be what we think/perceive/believe/observe it to be! You could think something/someone is very beautiful/good/ugly/harmful, but it does not matter if that is not what that person or thing is.
Only by seeing it/him/her as what they truly are, then there is perception. However, as we have seen again and again, the samskãra filters and memory and preconceived ideas inhibit this process, hence the goal of Yoga to remove those filters and de-clutter the noise of the senses so that we can finally begin to see things as they truly are. The hesitation of course is that we might not like what we see...
Which leads us to 4.17:
tad-uparãgãpekshatvãc-cittasya vastu jñãtãjñãtam 4.17
Or,
Due to the influence of expectation, an object is known or not known by a mind/consciousness. 4.17
In other words, what we bring to the table with respect to expectations can cloud our judgment about what is actually going on. If we want something to better than it is, we can fool ourselves, or, we can likewise make something worse than it is, and in both cases, we are not actually seeing the event/person/object for what it is. Okay, that is rather a negative thought, begging the question, "can we ever get past this?"
Yoga and Buddhism say "yes," despite the veneer of Pessimism that is attached to this situation. However, that "yes" does not come easy. We are still not quite there, so we need to look into the situation a bit further, with 4.18-19 then:
sadã jñãtãsh-citta-vrittayas-tat-prabhoh purushasya-aparinãmitvãt 4.18
na tat svãbhãsam drishyatvãt 4.19
Giving us,
The fluctuations/movements/behaviors of the mind are always known because of the non-changing nature of the guiding/governing Purusha (Soul). 4.18
And not because of the ability to see the radiance of them. 4.19
Here I am deviating from many of the translations out there but sticking to the Sanskrit instead, which ultimately yields a rather logical couplet. In other words, we have:
The immutable Soul truly knows the behaviors/fluctuations (vrittayah) of consciousness/the mind (citta), not because it perceives them. 4.18-19
Which bring us back to Do, a female deer....The circle finally begins to close. We began back in February with the first two sutras, the second one being the well-known "definition" of Yoga by Patañjali:
Yogas'citta-vritti-nirodhah....Yoga is the temperance/cessation of the mind's fluctuations/modifications/behaviors and the like...
And now, here in the middle of Book 4, with the end in sight, we are reminded why we came to this party in the first place, to find out what Yoga is and what is its purpose. With 4.18-19, we start to return to the original question after building up the method of the 8-limb path, figuring out what role the senses play, the mind, and the Soul...So, here, we have the notion that it is not because the Soul/Purusha perceives something, it is because it is beyond Time...a-parinãma, because parinãma, or change and evolution or transformation is only a perception of Time.
Because, if we were to experience something across the Space-Time continuum, within the 4th Dimension, so to speak, then we would not see change, but all things at all times...and that, according to 4.19 is the actual nature of the Soul, and it is the Mind, or reason that perceives change and therefore difference, causing us to judge and not truly observe. Again, Patañjali is not proposing some simple solution, this is heavy stuff.
And, then we arrive at 4.20-21:
eka-samaye cobhayãnavadhãranam 4.20
citta-antaradrishye buddhi-buddher-atiprasangah smriti-samkarah 4.21
And, there can be no discernment of both at the same time (mind/Soul) 4.20
In the seeing of the mind within the mind, as a thought of a thought, there would be an endless loop and a confusion of memory. 4.21
These two sutras are a bit murky still, but this the gist of the matter:
Mind/Soul cannot be distinguished as Subject/Object, because the result would be an infinite regress or loop of self-reflection--mirrors reflecting mirrors ad infinitum.
This version of Neti, Neti here then, of saying why something cannot happen, is setting us up for the final dozen or so sutras to lead us to the end, to Kaivalya, and the rejection of a duality between the Seer and the Seen, which will then lead us to the temperance of the vrittayah of the citta...
So close now.
To be continued.
Before moving on to 4.16, it is prudent to take a step back to 4.15, which seems to be rather linked to it.
In the last post, we saw that 4.15 tells us more or less that due to a multiplicity of minds, there are many paths for the perception of an object, begging the question of perspectivism and/or relativity, meaning: if I see an object as one thing, and you see it as another, are we both right and there are two objects? Or, are we both wrong? Or...both and neither? This likewise leads to the questions of taste and aversion and attraction and so forth. Is an object/person inherently beautiful/repulsive, or is it in the eye of the beholder as the saying goes?
Turning to 4.16 then with this in mind, we see:
na caika-citta-tantram ced-vastu tad-apramãnakam tadã kim syãt 4.16
Giving us,
Nor is it (the being--vastu) dependent upon a singular consciousness (eka-citta), for if the object was not perceived/observed, then what would it be? 4.16
So, 4.16 is interesting for a number of reason, not in the least that it truly asks the reader a question: tadã kim syãt? Then, what would it (the being/existing object) be [if not observed]? This is highly interesting in the subject/object split, because it says that an object does not exist because it is perceived...The more interesting flip-side of that is that what we perceive an object or person to be, does not make it so, and moreover, may not at all be what we think/perceive/believe/observe it to be! You could think something/someone is very beautiful/good/ugly/harmful, but it does not matter if that is not what that person or thing is.
Only by seeing it/him/her as what they truly are, then there is perception. However, as we have seen again and again, the samskãra filters and memory and preconceived ideas inhibit this process, hence the goal of Yoga to remove those filters and de-clutter the noise of the senses so that we can finally begin to see things as they truly are. The hesitation of course is that we might not like what we see...
Which leads us to 4.17:
tad-uparãgãpekshatvãc-cittasya vastu jñãtãjñãtam 4.17
Or,
Due to the influence of expectation, an object is known or not known by a mind/consciousness. 4.17
In other words, what we bring to the table with respect to expectations can cloud our judgment about what is actually going on. If we want something to better than it is, we can fool ourselves, or, we can likewise make something worse than it is, and in both cases, we are not actually seeing the event/person/object for what it is. Okay, that is rather a negative thought, begging the question, "can we ever get past this?"
Yoga and Buddhism say "yes," despite the veneer of Pessimism that is attached to this situation. However, that "yes" does not come easy. We are still not quite there, so we need to look into the situation a bit further, with 4.18-19 then:
sadã jñãtãsh-citta-vrittayas-tat-prabhoh purushasya-aparinãmitvãt 4.18
na tat svãbhãsam drishyatvãt 4.19
Giving us,
The fluctuations/movements/behaviors of the mind are always known because of the non-changing nature of the guiding/governing Purusha (Soul). 4.18
And not because of the ability to see the radiance of them. 4.19
Here I am deviating from many of the translations out there but sticking to the Sanskrit instead, which ultimately yields a rather logical couplet. In other words, we have:
The immutable Soul truly knows the behaviors/fluctuations (vrittayah) of consciousness/the mind (citta), not because it perceives them. 4.18-19
Which bring us back to Do, a female deer....The circle finally begins to close. We began back in February with the first two sutras, the second one being the well-known "definition" of Yoga by Patañjali:
Yogas'citta-vritti-nirodhah....Yoga is the temperance/cessation of the mind's fluctuations/modifications/behaviors and the like...
And now, here in the middle of Book 4, with the end in sight, we are reminded why we came to this party in the first place, to find out what Yoga is and what is its purpose. With 4.18-19, we start to return to the original question after building up the method of the 8-limb path, figuring out what role the senses play, the mind, and the Soul...So, here, we have the notion that it is not because the Soul/Purusha perceives something, it is because it is beyond Time...a-parinãma, because parinãma, or change and evolution or transformation is only a perception of Time.
Because, if we were to experience something across the Space-Time continuum, within the 4th Dimension, so to speak, then we would not see change, but all things at all times...and that, according to 4.19 is the actual nature of the Soul, and it is the Mind, or reason that perceives change and therefore difference, causing us to judge and not truly observe. Again, Patañjali is not proposing some simple solution, this is heavy stuff.
And, then we arrive at 4.20-21:
eka-samaye cobhayãnavadhãranam 4.20
citta-antaradrishye buddhi-buddher-atiprasangah smriti-samkarah 4.21
And, there can be no discernment of both at the same time (mind/Soul) 4.20
In the seeing of the mind within the mind, as a thought of a thought, there would be an endless loop and a confusion of memory. 4.21
These two sutras are a bit murky still, but this the gist of the matter:
Mind/Soul cannot be distinguished as Subject/Object, because the result would be an infinite regress or loop of self-reflection--mirrors reflecting mirrors ad infinitum.
This version of Neti, Neti here then, of saying why something cannot happen, is setting us up for the final dozen or so sutras to lead us to the end, to Kaivalya, and the rejection of a duality between the Seer and the Seen, which will then lead us to the temperance of the vrittayah of the citta...
So close now.
To be continued.
Thursday, September 6, 2018
Time Out, Out of Time (Yoga Sutras 4.13-15)
Time. Who has the Time? Time for reading posts about the Yoga Sutras, for example...
We're always running out of Time, or Time is short, never enough Time...
Time has been a great fascination for me, well, for a long Time. Yet, not in the way that I am obsessed with punctuality or expensive time pieces, or that I am a clock watcher (far from it actually), but rather what I am interested in is what we are looking at today in these three sutras: The relationship between the Perception of Time and the Mind.
There is a well-worn Zen koan (illogical word puzzles to confound "rational" mind; think one hand clapping) that tells the situation of two monks arguing about a flag waving in the wind. One asserts that the flag is moving, the other says that it is the wind that is moving. A third, much wiser of course, master overhears and tells them that they are both wrong. Not the wind, not the flag,;but the Mind is moving...
Such is the case with most things in life. Two sides arguing, both are usually in the wrong to some extent, if not fully, hence the argument.
The Mind Moves. Can it be so? What really is the passage of Time other than the perception of its passage by the mind? If we do not perceive the change, does the change happen? It's the old chestnut of the tree falling in the forest...did it make a sound? How can we ever know. For, like Schrödinger's unfortunate cat, as soon as we perceive something, we create its reality from a possibility. We decided the fate of the cat in the box as well as the flag in the wind, with our Minds.
Turning then, our minds, to the Yoga Sutras again, we have arrived at 4.13-14. Three simple, concise sutras, which read almost like a footnote. However, footnotes often contain the keys to the puzzle, so let's see what we can see here:
te vyakta-sUksmã gunãtmãnah 4.13
parinãmaikatvãt-vastu-tattvam 4.14
vastu-sãmye citta-bhedãt-tayor-vibhaktah panthãh 4.15
Giving us,
The constitution of the gunas are either prominent or subtle. 4.13
Because of the singular nature of evolution/transformation (parinãma), the essential state of an object (vastu) persists. 4.14 (we'll clean this up shortly)
Because of the difference of minds (citta) in the singularity of an object (vastu), there are divided paths for them. 4.15 (again, clean-up is coming)
Before we clean this up a bit, it is best to rehearse the three gunas and what they are because, as with the Bhagavad Gita, the Yoga Sutras primary goal is to overcome the dominance of the gunas...so, what are they?
The three gunas (qualities, characteristics, attributes) are:
Sattva--radiance, intelligence, clarity, harmony
Tamah--darkness, ignorance, obscurity, discord
Rajah--dynamism, passion, turbulence, chaos, change
Sattva is arguably the "best" guna to manifest, but, the entire system of the gunas is based upon the fact that everything is a mixture of the three, yet, at any given time, one may be dominant, and it is in our best interest to cultivate the sattva; though, at all times? Does rationality always seem like the best answer over passion and change?
Ultimately, both the Gita and the Sutras will say, like the Zen master above, mu, or neither (and both). We shall have to wait just a bit longer to go into more detail on that, but for now, we are in the realm of the gunas, and everything that we perceive in the Universe is a mixture of them.
Returning then to the 3 sutras, we see:
These three gunas then can either be manifested boldly or subtly (4.13). In other words, sometimes we may readily perceive which guna is dominant and in what proportion, other times, not so apparent.
However, it is the inherent combination of the three gunas in an object that gives it its "existence" in the physical world (4.14). We call something a name because we recognize it through the singular evolution of Time (or, rather, our perception of that transformation (parinãma)). My cat sitting in front of me is "Lucky" because he was "Lucky" yesterday and the day before, etc. If suddenly, he was "another" cat, then he would no longer be "Lucky". But, what makes him "Lucky"? At this physical level, that of Prakriti, or Nature, it is persistent constitution of gunas.
The constitution of the gunas create the quiddity of the thing, or cat, itself...or, what makes you you.
However, it's not that simple...because, what makes you you to you is different than what makes you you to me, or to your mom or dad or your best friend...
Which leads us to 4.15 again, and the question of the flag in the wind. 4.15 says that there is a singularity of the object/Cat (and its mixture of gunas), however, there are differences in minds perceiving that object/Cat, which leads to many paths, or perceptions, and ultimately perceived realities.
One of my cats was named "Babette", for example, before we adopted her. My daughter and I did not keep that name, yet, the cat remained the same, or did she? Does she become a new cat with a new name and new humans?
Comparing III.55...we have the formula of divide and conquering; uniting and transcending again. In the mind (citta) we perceive and we divide things into categories and name them. But, that stagnates them in time, freezing them in a prison of a definition as to what they "are". In the Mind's Eye, however, which is beyond reason and rational thinking, and more in the realm of intuition, imagination and proper intelligence (that is, not book learning, but "seeing" something or someone for what it or he/she is, not what we want it/them to be...), then we go beyond the moment in Time, we transcend the moment...and we then begin to finally "see the light"...
To be continued...
We're always running out of Time, or Time is short, never enough Time...
Time has been a great fascination for me, well, for a long Time. Yet, not in the way that I am obsessed with punctuality or expensive time pieces, or that I am a clock watcher (far from it actually), but rather what I am interested in is what we are looking at today in these three sutras: The relationship between the Perception of Time and the Mind.
There is a well-worn Zen koan (illogical word puzzles to confound "rational" mind; think one hand clapping) that tells the situation of two monks arguing about a flag waving in the wind. One asserts that the flag is moving, the other says that it is the wind that is moving. A third, much wiser of course, master overhears and tells them that they are both wrong. Not the wind, not the flag,;but the Mind is moving...
Such is the case with most things in life. Two sides arguing, both are usually in the wrong to some extent, if not fully, hence the argument.
The Mind Moves. Can it be so? What really is the passage of Time other than the perception of its passage by the mind? If we do not perceive the change, does the change happen? It's the old chestnut of the tree falling in the forest...did it make a sound? How can we ever know. For, like Schrödinger's unfortunate cat, as soon as we perceive something, we create its reality from a possibility. We decided the fate of the cat in the box as well as the flag in the wind, with our Minds.
Turning then, our minds, to the Yoga Sutras again, we have arrived at 4.13-14. Three simple, concise sutras, which read almost like a footnote. However, footnotes often contain the keys to the puzzle, so let's see what we can see here:
te vyakta-sUksmã gunãtmãnah 4.13
parinãmaikatvãt-vastu-tattvam 4.14
vastu-sãmye citta-bhedãt-tayor-vibhaktah panthãh 4.15
Giving us,
The constitution of the gunas are either prominent or subtle. 4.13
Because of the singular nature of evolution/transformation (parinãma), the essential state of an object (vastu) persists. 4.14 (we'll clean this up shortly)
Because of the difference of minds (citta) in the singularity of an object (vastu), there are divided paths for them. 4.15 (again, clean-up is coming)
Before we clean this up a bit, it is best to rehearse the three gunas and what they are because, as with the Bhagavad Gita, the Yoga Sutras primary goal is to overcome the dominance of the gunas...so, what are they?
The three gunas (qualities, characteristics, attributes) are:
Sattva--radiance, intelligence, clarity, harmony
Tamah--darkness, ignorance, obscurity, discord
Rajah--dynamism, passion, turbulence, chaos, change
Sattva is arguably the "best" guna to manifest, but, the entire system of the gunas is based upon the fact that everything is a mixture of the three, yet, at any given time, one may be dominant, and it is in our best interest to cultivate the sattva; though, at all times? Does rationality always seem like the best answer over passion and change?
Ultimately, both the Gita and the Sutras will say, like the Zen master above, mu, or neither (and both). We shall have to wait just a bit longer to go into more detail on that, but for now, we are in the realm of the gunas, and everything that we perceive in the Universe is a mixture of them.
Returning then to the 3 sutras, we see:
These three gunas then can either be manifested boldly or subtly (4.13). In other words, sometimes we may readily perceive which guna is dominant and in what proportion, other times, not so apparent.
However, it is the inherent combination of the three gunas in an object that gives it its "existence" in the physical world (4.14). We call something a name because we recognize it through the singular evolution of Time (or, rather, our perception of that transformation (parinãma)). My cat sitting in front of me is "Lucky" because he was "Lucky" yesterday and the day before, etc. If suddenly, he was "another" cat, then he would no longer be "Lucky". But, what makes him "Lucky"? At this physical level, that of Prakriti, or Nature, it is persistent constitution of gunas.
The constitution of the gunas create the quiddity of the thing, or cat, itself...or, what makes you you.
However, it's not that simple...because, what makes you you to you is different than what makes you you to me, or to your mom or dad or your best friend...
Which leads us to 4.15 again, and the question of the flag in the wind. 4.15 says that there is a singularity of the object/Cat (and its mixture of gunas), however, there are differences in minds perceiving that object/Cat, which leads to many paths, or perceptions, and ultimately perceived realities.
One of my cats was named "Babette", for example, before we adopted her. My daughter and I did not keep that name, yet, the cat remained the same, or did she? Does she become a new cat with a new name and new humans?
Comparing III.55...we have the formula of divide and conquering; uniting and transcending again. In the mind (citta) we perceive and we divide things into categories and name them. But, that stagnates them in time, freezing them in a prison of a definition as to what they "are". In the Mind's Eye, however, which is beyond reason and rational thinking, and more in the realm of intuition, imagination and proper intelligence (that is, not book learning, but "seeing" something or someone for what it or he/she is, not what we want it/them to be...), then we go beyond the moment in Time, we transcend the moment...and we then begin to finally "see the light"...
To be continued...
Monday, September 3, 2018
The Neti-Neti Plot Turns (Yoga Sutras 4.7-12)
As we saw last time, Book 4 is starting to wrap things up, but there are still some loose ends that need tying before we get the end...or, the beginning, depending upon your perspective.
Within the Indian philosophical tradition, there is an interesting approach to determining what something is, and that is by saying what it is not. The phrase "Neti Neti" is the paradigm of this tactic, and it is something that is being applied in this next section of the Kaivalyam chapter.
Neti, Neti is a contraction of Na iti, Na iti, which means "Neither this, nor that." In other words, along with the traditions of Zen and Taoism (Daoism) and sometimes in Socratic irony, to name something is to misunderstand it. The paradox is that if you name it, you don't understand it, and if you understand it, you cannot name it.
Neti, Neti then, is similar, but different. What many ancient Indian thinkers would do then is to list attributes or arguments about what something is not, or give an contrasting example of something inferior to highlight the superiority of the subject at hand.
Turning then to YS 4.7, we see this in action:
karma-ashukla-akrishnam yoginas-trividham-itareshãm 4.7
Giving us,
Karma is not-white and not-black for the Yogi, for others, it is three-fold. 4.7
In other words, for the "true" Yogi/ni, karma is no longer a loaded concept, but rather, it goes back to the proper and true meaning of karma, which is action, neither good, nor bad. White karma is action with good intention or expectations of doing good, while black (krishna, which can also be dark indigo) is with less-than-savory intentions and ultimately effects harm, or himsã to oneself or others. The third type then would be mixed, or "grey" karma, which might mean an action that is well-intended but ultimately harms, or vice versa, something bad that ultimately has positive results. For the Yogi/ni, however, it is not about intention, nor expectation of the results.
With the discretion built up from long-term viveka through diligent practice, abhyãsa, the Yogi will simply act in a proper manner that does no harm, but more importantly, he or she will not care about the results, nor seek any merit for them, nor shun de-merit if they are injurious. It is pure responsibility without attachment for one's actions and their results. Altruism is a tricky thing, because I personally believe that even altruism (doing good for others) usually has at least a trace of Ego and selfishness attached. 4.7 suggest that the Yogi/ni can transcend even that...
Moving along to 4.8, we get a corollary:
tatas-tad-vipãka-anugunãnãm-eva-abhivyaktir-vãsanãnãnm 4.8
Or,
From this, the fruition/results of (these types of) karma are indeed accordingly manifested being derived from memory. 4.8
In other words,
The results of our actions yield mental impressions (samskãra/vãsanã), which means that ultimately we seek results based upon habits and experience. The more one become attached to such results, the more "colored" one's actions become. Through Yoga, however, we exercise vairagyam, or detachment from these habits, and again, simply act, not because it will make us feel better about ourselves or harm our enemies, but because it is proper action (karma), or at times non-action (a-karma), befitting the situation.
So, with these 2 sutras, we see what the karma of the Yogi/ni is not...hence the Neti, Neti of it.
The following 2 sutras are another example of possibly being a single sutra, or at the very least, a couplet as follows:
jãti-desha-kãla-vyavahitãnãm-apyãnantaryam smriti-samskãrayor-ekarupatvãt 4.9
tãsãm-anãditvam ca-ãshisho nityatvãt 4.10
Bringing us,
Because of the singular, true nature of memory and samskãra, there is no interruption between, even if there are intervals/separations of lineage, place or time. 4.9
And, because of the eternal nature of the Will to be, they are without beginning. 4.10
These two sutras, then, take us into a bit more detail of the mental impressions that are inextricably linked with memory, despite breaks in time, place and even births, and they are eternally present where there is a Will to Be. What this means is that our habits and expectations are seriously hard-wired, so we need to completely re-wire the system if we are to break free.
What is truly amazing about these two sutras, however, is that they pre-date modern neurological research into this very phenomena under the rubric of neuroplasticity, which basically means, we can willfully change our brains, literally! This is the exact path that we have taken with Yoga, to literally, change our minds...
The next 2 sutras can likewise be taken together, though not as intimately linked, yet:
hetu-phalãshrayãlambanaih samgrihItatvãd-eshãm-abhãve tad-abhãvah 4.11
and
atItãnãgatam svarupato'astyadhva-bhedãd-dharmãnãm 4.12
Bringing us to:
Due to the constitutional nature of being supported by the refuge of cause and effect, when these are absent, then there is absence of samskãra 4.11
The past and the not-yet-manifest (future) exist in their true form because of the nature of being different/discrete of inherent properties/characteristics. 4.12
Dissecting this a bit more, this means:
Our mental categories/impressions, that are bound to our memory are supported by cause and effect, and when these are gone, so to do the samskãras dissipate, and our perception of time is merely contingent upon the perception of there being differences, based upon our mental constructs, bound to memory.
In other words, as is über-trendy now to say, When you truly live in the NOW, then prejudices fall away, and we can see without clouded mental filters...
What a wonderful world it would be...
To be continued.
Within the Indian philosophical tradition, there is an interesting approach to determining what something is, and that is by saying what it is not. The phrase "Neti Neti" is the paradigm of this tactic, and it is something that is being applied in this next section of the Kaivalyam chapter.
Neti, Neti is a contraction of Na iti, Na iti, which means "Neither this, nor that." In other words, along with the traditions of Zen and Taoism (Daoism) and sometimes in Socratic irony, to name something is to misunderstand it. The paradox is that if you name it, you don't understand it, and if you understand it, you cannot name it.
Neti, Neti then, is similar, but different. What many ancient Indian thinkers would do then is to list attributes or arguments about what something is not, or give an contrasting example of something inferior to highlight the superiority of the subject at hand.
Turning then to YS 4.7, we see this in action:
karma-ashukla-akrishnam yoginas-trividham-itareshãm 4.7
Giving us,
Karma is not-white and not-black for the Yogi, for others, it is three-fold. 4.7
In other words, for the "true" Yogi/ni, karma is no longer a loaded concept, but rather, it goes back to the proper and true meaning of karma, which is action, neither good, nor bad. White karma is action with good intention or expectations of doing good, while black (krishna, which can also be dark indigo) is with less-than-savory intentions and ultimately effects harm, or himsã to oneself or others. The third type then would be mixed, or "grey" karma, which might mean an action that is well-intended but ultimately harms, or vice versa, something bad that ultimately has positive results. For the Yogi/ni, however, it is not about intention, nor expectation of the results.
With the discretion built up from long-term viveka through diligent practice, abhyãsa, the Yogi will simply act in a proper manner that does no harm, but more importantly, he or she will not care about the results, nor seek any merit for them, nor shun de-merit if they are injurious. It is pure responsibility without attachment for one's actions and their results. Altruism is a tricky thing, because I personally believe that even altruism (doing good for others) usually has at least a trace of Ego and selfishness attached. 4.7 suggest that the Yogi/ni can transcend even that...
Moving along to 4.8, we get a corollary:
tatas-tad-vipãka-anugunãnãm-eva-abhivyaktir-vãsanãnãnm 4.8
Or,
From this, the fruition/results of (these types of) karma are indeed accordingly manifested being derived from memory. 4.8
In other words,
The results of our actions yield mental impressions (samskãra/vãsanã), which means that ultimately we seek results based upon habits and experience. The more one become attached to such results, the more "colored" one's actions become. Through Yoga, however, we exercise vairagyam, or detachment from these habits, and again, simply act, not because it will make us feel better about ourselves or harm our enemies, but because it is proper action (karma), or at times non-action (a-karma), befitting the situation.
So, with these 2 sutras, we see what the karma of the Yogi/ni is not...hence the Neti, Neti of it.
The following 2 sutras are another example of possibly being a single sutra, or at the very least, a couplet as follows:
jãti-desha-kãla-vyavahitãnãm-apyãnantaryam smriti-samskãrayor-ekarupatvãt 4.9
tãsãm-anãditvam ca-ãshisho nityatvãt 4.10
Bringing us,
Because of the singular, true nature of memory and samskãra, there is no interruption between, even if there are intervals/separations of lineage, place or time. 4.9
And, because of the eternal nature of the Will to be, they are without beginning. 4.10
These two sutras, then, take us into a bit more detail of the mental impressions that are inextricably linked with memory, despite breaks in time, place and even births, and they are eternally present where there is a Will to Be. What this means is that our habits and expectations are seriously hard-wired, so we need to completely re-wire the system if we are to break free.
What is truly amazing about these two sutras, however, is that they pre-date modern neurological research into this very phenomena under the rubric of neuroplasticity, which basically means, we can willfully change our brains, literally! This is the exact path that we have taken with Yoga, to literally, change our minds...
The next 2 sutras can likewise be taken together, though not as intimately linked, yet:
hetu-phalãshrayãlambanaih samgrihItatvãd-eshãm-abhãve tad-abhãvah 4.11
and
atItãnãgatam svarupato'astyadhva-bhedãd-dharmãnãm 4.12
Bringing us to:
Due to the constitutional nature of being supported by the refuge of cause and effect, when these are absent, then there is absence of samskãra 4.11
The past and the not-yet-manifest (future) exist in their true form because of the nature of being different/discrete of inherent properties/characteristics. 4.12
Dissecting this a bit more, this means:
Our mental categories/impressions, that are bound to our memory are supported by cause and effect, and when these are gone, so to do the samskãras dissipate, and our perception of time is merely contingent upon the perception of there being differences, based upon our mental constructs, bound to memory.
In other words, as is über-trendy now to say, When you truly live in the NOW, then prejudices fall away, and we can see without clouded mental filters...
What a wonderful world it would be...
To be continued.
Friday, August 31, 2018
Kaivalyam...And, Then There was ONE (Yoga Sutras 4.1-6)
And so, we move ever closer to the end.
Book IV will bring us challenges to be sure. The nominal title given to this Book is Kaivalya, which as we have seen means: to be utterly alone; a singularity. However, this singularity is no less than the pinnacle of self-awareness, the goal of Yoga, which is why we began this journey. Book IV is no longer a road map as we have seen in Book II with the introduction of the 8 Limbs of Yoga. It is not a cautionary tale of what could go wrong if we let our Ego be overcome by the powers of Siddhi as in Book III. And, though it will hearken back to the original explanation of the quest for Samãdhi in Book I, where we began, it shall move even further beyond...
One of the oft-quoted definitions of Yoga is from the Bhagavad Gita in 2.50 with the phrase: yogah karmasu kaushalam, or Yoga is skill in actions. A common crossover, and related, phrase that we also see in Zen is upaya kaushalya, or skillful/expedient means. Up to this point, we have been encountering a mixture of these two concepts on the path of Yoga, as being a sort of skillful means to navigate through actions. Now, however, it is time to see where that has led us with respect to avidyã, or ignorance, and the relationship to duhkham, or suffering, which from YS 2.16, we saw was the purpose of Yoga: to avoid suffering that has not yet manifested/happened.
In other words, what have we learned?
One of the words that has been coming up quite often and its importance being made more each time is the concept of parinãma, or change/evolution/transformation.
Why is this so important to our Yoga path? Simply put, without change, without an evolution of thinking from experience or without a transformation from what we were when we began, then nothing has happened. Or worse, we have been given vidyã, and yet we choose avidyã. In Book VI of Plato's Republic, there is the story that has generally become known as "The Allegory of the Cave."
It tells the story of our condition as being shackled to benches in a cave, with our backs to the opening of the cave. By way of the light source behind us, shadows of figures are cast upon the wall in front of us, with everyone believing, "this is reality." However, one prisoner escapes, crawls out of the cave and "sees the true Light" and is literally blinded for a while. When his sight returns, he is in awe of the Beauty he now see for the first time. He goes back to share this wonderful gift to his fellow prisoners of the cave. They promptly think him mad, and are annoyed that he disturbs their mindless and false entertainment of the shadows dancing on the wall. So, they do what we always do to those who wish to share vidyã to our avidyã. They kill him.
The Yoga Sutras, likewise, are offering a key to the shackles. And yet, in the name of "Yoga" so many people shun the hard work, the abhyãsa in favor of bumper-stickers turn it into a multi-billion dollar network, all the while apparently being oh-so appalled at those who dare to make money off of Yoga as it is not "real Yoga." And, yet, what is the "real" Yoga that they speak of? I wonder.
But, all in good time.
We begin with Book IV as we begin our end. It begins, however, a bit bumpy with some curiosities before we get back on track so to speak.
4.1 concludes the discussion of the Siddhis gained by various samyamas from Book III with a list of possible ways to obtain them:
janmaushadhi-mantra-tapah-samãdhijãh siddhayah 4.1
Or,
Siddhis are born from birth, herbal tonics, acts of austerity and samãdhi. 4.1
Although it is very straight forward, with no real room for further interpretation, it is odd that Book III was all about the relationship between samyama and siddhi, then we have 4.1, and these causes are not discussed further in any details. So, personally, 4.1 sticks out a bit like a sore thumb for me.
So, with that, we might move along to 4.2:
jãtyantara-parinãmah prakrityãpUrãt 4.2
Or,
Because of the abundance of Nature/Prakriti, there is an evolution/transformation in births. 4.2
There are a variety of interpretations for this sutra, but I am inclined to go with the concept that because of the abundance of Nature, there is diversity in Life...makes sense. More or less Darwin's theory of evolution (parinãma) in a Yogic nutshell. As we saw in Book III, parinãma is the essence of growth for the Yogi/ni as well. Without that evolution or transformation, there is no progress.
Moving onto 4.3, we arrive at an extended metaphor that is usually explained in terms of agricultural irrigation:
nimittam-aprayojakam prakritInãm varna-bhedas-tu tatah kshetrivat 4.3
Giving us,
Causality is ultimately non-useful, for natural modalities [parinãma/evolution/transformation]; as such, as a farmer irrigates a field, impediments are cut away.
The general analogy here is lost on modern ears, so it is best to defer to the commentaries about this metaphor. In traditional agriculture, the farmer would have little sluices/trenches in the ground and would move the earth to re-channel the water. Here, Patañjali is saying that ultimately the efficient cause of things is irrelevant because in the end, the obstacles must be cleared, which is again, the goal of Yoga here. There is cause and effect in the physical world, that is not to be denied, but what the Yogi/ni is moving towards is the free-flowing of the mind, devoid of the cluttering of obstacles caused by a-vidyã.
And, moving on, we arrive at:
nirmãna-cittãnyasmitã-mãtrãt 4.4
Or,
Transforming thoughts are solely the product of the Ego. 4.4
In other words, the sense of being "I" is what causes the perception of change. It is the first division of the mind, separating "I" from "everything else" and from there, one perceives change in Time and Space, whereas without that construct, there are no divisions as we shall see later in the chapter. The situational irony at hand is that kaivalya is the movement back to singularity, the all-encompassing "I" with no separation, but it is that very "I" that causes the separation, but also what is the Seer who must transcend itself...it is the Ouroboros of consciousness, the snake which swallows its own tail and ultimately disappears...
And, so, we move along to find out how, step by step.
pravritti-bhede prayojakam cittam-ekam-anekanãm 4.5
Giving us,
A single, necessary consciousness exists in the immanent division of [conceived] pluralities. 4.5
Here we begin our journey to catch the Bull as we see in the 10 Bulls story of Zen. The "Bull" is the Self or consciousness that one needs to catch and tame; but that is the illusion. The Bull was never lost, never not one with the boy. And, in the end, they are both transcended, which is then, and only then, the true singular consciousness, the kaivalya.
And, then,
tatra dhyãna-jam-anãshayam 4.6
As such, the freedom from karmic stock is born from intense concentration. 4.6
Dhyãna, then, the root of the word Zen itself as well, is the means towards the solution. What binds us to our prejudices and false perceptions is karma, or the deeds of our Past. Again, karma is neither good, nor bad, but it just is. Our Past simply is, but, it is the baggage the prohibits our freedom from a-vidyã... Dhyãna, the core element of the samyama that we learned about at length in Book III is again just the means, not the solution itself. For that, we need to go further...
To be continued...
Book IV will bring us challenges to be sure. The nominal title given to this Book is Kaivalya, which as we have seen means: to be utterly alone; a singularity. However, this singularity is no less than the pinnacle of self-awareness, the goal of Yoga, which is why we began this journey. Book IV is no longer a road map as we have seen in Book II with the introduction of the 8 Limbs of Yoga. It is not a cautionary tale of what could go wrong if we let our Ego be overcome by the powers of Siddhi as in Book III. And, though it will hearken back to the original explanation of the quest for Samãdhi in Book I, where we began, it shall move even further beyond...
One of the oft-quoted definitions of Yoga is from the Bhagavad Gita in 2.50 with the phrase: yogah karmasu kaushalam, or Yoga is skill in actions. A common crossover, and related, phrase that we also see in Zen is upaya kaushalya, or skillful/expedient means. Up to this point, we have been encountering a mixture of these two concepts on the path of Yoga, as being a sort of skillful means to navigate through actions. Now, however, it is time to see where that has led us with respect to avidyã, or ignorance, and the relationship to duhkham, or suffering, which from YS 2.16, we saw was the purpose of Yoga: to avoid suffering that has not yet manifested/happened.
In other words, what have we learned?
One of the words that has been coming up quite often and its importance being made more each time is the concept of parinãma, or change/evolution/transformation.
Why is this so important to our Yoga path? Simply put, without change, without an evolution of thinking from experience or without a transformation from what we were when we began, then nothing has happened. Or worse, we have been given vidyã, and yet we choose avidyã. In Book VI of Plato's Republic, there is the story that has generally become known as "The Allegory of the Cave."
It tells the story of our condition as being shackled to benches in a cave, with our backs to the opening of the cave. By way of the light source behind us, shadows of figures are cast upon the wall in front of us, with everyone believing, "this is reality." However, one prisoner escapes, crawls out of the cave and "sees the true Light" and is literally blinded for a while. When his sight returns, he is in awe of the Beauty he now see for the first time. He goes back to share this wonderful gift to his fellow prisoners of the cave. They promptly think him mad, and are annoyed that he disturbs their mindless and false entertainment of the shadows dancing on the wall. So, they do what we always do to those who wish to share vidyã to our avidyã. They kill him.
The Yoga Sutras, likewise, are offering a key to the shackles. And yet, in the name of "Yoga" so many people shun the hard work, the abhyãsa in favor of bumper-stickers turn it into a multi-billion dollar network, all the while apparently being oh-so appalled at those who dare to make money off of Yoga as it is not "real Yoga." And, yet, what is the "real" Yoga that they speak of? I wonder.
But, all in good time.
We begin with Book IV as we begin our end. It begins, however, a bit bumpy with some curiosities before we get back on track so to speak.
4.1 concludes the discussion of the Siddhis gained by various samyamas from Book III with a list of possible ways to obtain them:
janmaushadhi-mantra-tapah-samãdhijãh siddhayah 4.1
Or,
Siddhis are born from birth, herbal tonics, acts of austerity and samãdhi. 4.1
Although it is very straight forward, with no real room for further interpretation, it is odd that Book III was all about the relationship between samyama and siddhi, then we have 4.1, and these causes are not discussed further in any details. So, personally, 4.1 sticks out a bit like a sore thumb for me.
So, with that, we might move along to 4.2:
jãtyantara-parinãmah prakrityãpUrãt 4.2
Or,
Because of the abundance of Nature/Prakriti, there is an evolution/transformation in births. 4.2
There are a variety of interpretations for this sutra, but I am inclined to go with the concept that because of the abundance of Nature, there is diversity in Life...makes sense. More or less Darwin's theory of evolution (parinãma) in a Yogic nutshell. As we saw in Book III, parinãma is the essence of growth for the Yogi/ni as well. Without that evolution or transformation, there is no progress.
Moving onto 4.3, we arrive at an extended metaphor that is usually explained in terms of agricultural irrigation:
nimittam-aprayojakam prakritInãm varna-bhedas-tu tatah kshetrivat 4.3
Giving us,
Causality is ultimately non-useful, for natural modalities [parinãma/evolution/transformation]; as such, as a farmer irrigates a field, impediments are cut away.
The general analogy here is lost on modern ears, so it is best to defer to the commentaries about this metaphor. In traditional agriculture, the farmer would have little sluices/trenches in the ground and would move the earth to re-channel the water. Here, Patañjali is saying that ultimately the efficient cause of things is irrelevant because in the end, the obstacles must be cleared, which is again, the goal of Yoga here. There is cause and effect in the physical world, that is not to be denied, but what the Yogi/ni is moving towards is the free-flowing of the mind, devoid of the cluttering of obstacles caused by a-vidyã.
And, moving on, we arrive at:
nirmãna-cittãnyasmitã-mãtrãt 4.4
Or,
Transforming thoughts are solely the product of the Ego. 4.4
In other words, the sense of being "I" is what causes the perception of change. It is the first division of the mind, separating "I" from "everything else" and from there, one perceives change in Time and Space, whereas without that construct, there are no divisions as we shall see later in the chapter. The situational irony at hand is that kaivalya is the movement back to singularity, the all-encompassing "I" with no separation, but it is that very "I" that causes the separation, but also what is the Seer who must transcend itself...it is the Ouroboros of consciousness, the snake which swallows its own tail and ultimately disappears...
And, so, we move along to find out how, step by step.
pravritti-bhede prayojakam cittam-ekam-anekanãm 4.5
Giving us,
A single, necessary consciousness exists in the immanent division of [conceived] pluralities. 4.5
Here we begin our journey to catch the Bull as we see in the 10 Bulls story of Zen. The "Bull" is the Self or consciousness that one needs to catch and tame; but that is the illusion. The Bull was never lost, never not one with the boy. And, in the end, they are both transcended, which is then, and only then, the true singular consciousness, the kaivalya.
And, then,
tatra dhyãna-jam-anãshayam 4.6
As such, the freedom from karmic stock is born from intense concentration. 4.6
Dhyãna, then, the root of the word Zen itself as well, is the means towards the solution. What binds us to our prejudices and false perceptions is karma, or the deeds of our Past. Again, karma is neither good, nor bad, but it just is. Our Past simply is, but, it is the baggage the prohibits our freedom from a-vidyã... Dhyãna, the core element of the samyama that we learned about at length in Book III is again just the means, not the solution itself. For that, we need to go further...
To be continued...
Friday, August 24, 2018
Be Careful What You Ask For, Book III of Patañjali's Yoga Sutras
Turn and Face the Strange (Ch-ch-changes...YS 3.8-13)
Journey to the East (YS 3.14-16)
You Don't Say... (YS 3.17-20)
I am Superman, and I know what's happening... (YS 3.21-34)
And, Along came a Spider (YS 3.35-37)
Walk the Rice Paper, Young Grasshopper (YS 3.38-43)
The Measure of All Things (YS 3.43-48)
Divide and Conquer, Unite and Transcend (YS 3.49-55)
Tuesday, August 21, 2018
Divide and Conquer, Unite and Transcend (Yoga Sutras 3.49-55)
The time has come. The pathway has been laid out before us, the pitfalls and obstacles identified, we have been given the key to release the shackles of ignorance, the maps have been drawn and the warnings given. There is only one choice to be made at this juncture.
Continue with this challenge, or return to status quo, the familiar.
We now close in on Book 3 with this daunting, and it is daunting, challenge when we arrive at the following sutras. The well has been fully primed, and it should be no surprise what lies behind the veil, and yet, it is...so let us continue.
3.49-50 then reveal:
sattva-purusha-anyatã-khyãti-mãtrasya sarvabhãva-adhishthãnritvam sarva-jñãtritvam 3.49
tad-vairãgyãd-api dosha-bîja-kshaye kaivalyam 3.50
Giving us:
Only for the one who recognizes the difference between sattva (reason/Mind) and purusha (consciousness/true awareness/Soul) is there the intelligence of all and supremacy over all beings. 3.49
However, even from vairãgyam (detachment) from that state comes kaivalyam (absolute singularity) in the destruction of the affliction of the seed concept (for samãdhi). 3.50
Bam. The sutra heard around the Yoga world...duality is only apparently the final step...non-duality is the ultimate one.
I cannot stress how influential it has been for centuries that this turn at 3.50 has been ignored or simply denied.
The message here is quite clear: Duality brings us omniscience and omnipotence; Non-Duality brings us freedom, because the former is the highest form of bondage ever.
To restate.
What we have been building up for the entire Yoga Sutras thus far are the tools to refine our sense of discretion, or viveka, in order to recognize the difference between sattva (pure reason) and purusha (pure intelligence) through the 8-limb path of Yoga and through diligent, long-lasting practice (abhyãsa) and ultimate detachment (vairãgyam) from the fruits of our actions. It is what we do when the Bee stings.
That is to stand at the abyss. 3.50 dares us to jump. And, this is when we falter, we hesitate, we freeze, or we turn around.
We fear Kaivalyam above all else. It is the most primal fear of all. It drives us to act when we should not or not to act when we should. It paralyzes and it enervates us to even think about it. It is the monster in the closet, the fear of turning off the lights.
Krishnamurti often spoke about the difference between being lonely and being alone. Being lonely gives us a perverse comfort because we can feel sorry for ourselves, we can play the victim to an audience of one, thus creating two. From the singularity comes duality. To be alone is the opposite, it is to extract yourself from the continuum of the flow, and to still the thoughts, the vrittis in the mind, because at that moment, you are no longer distracted by the buzzing of technology, the chatter of inane conversations around you, the to-do lists in your head, the frets and anxieties of what "might" happen, the text messages that barrage you on your Smart phone...and the list goes on. To be alone is to detach from all of that. To un-plug, unconditionally. To actually see and to listen to your own heartbeat and breath. To be as primal as the original, first element of the Universe. And, it is terrifying. But, it is the ultimate liberation.
Kaivalyam is: To be utterly alone.
And, we balk. We hesitate. We turn back to the familiar.
Or, we go forward.
3.51-53 give us some final tools of advice before we leap. One final samyama to perform...
sthãnyupanimantrane sangasmayãkaranam punar-anisththaprasangãt 3.51
ksana-tat-kramayoh samyamãd-vivekajam jñãnam 3.52
jãti-lakshana-deshair-anyatãnavacchedãt-tulyayos-tatah pratipattih 3.53
Upon the enticement of divine beings, one should shun being/acting in awe, lest falling prey to attachment/desire again. 3.51
By performing samyama on the absolute present and its progression, knowledge born from discretion (viveka) occurs. 3.52
At that time, the discernment of two identical essences can be determined, though they are not distinct in species/type, quality or location. 3.53
3.51 gives us the final warning...the warning of the Midas Touch. The Temptation of Christ. The apple to Adam and Eve.
If the Yogi/ni has reached such a level of progression upon his or her 8-limb path that the deities themselves are enticing them, beware because that is merely seduction. When Buddha was nearing his ultimate Enlightenment, to become the Buddha, the Awakened One, he was first seduced by Mara (the agent of Death), the demon who tries to seduce Guatama with the most prevalent human temptation of all: sex and power...
The Buddha saw that this too was seduction for attachment and was not to be his path. He touched the Earth as his witness as testimony that even the divine and demonic could not sway him and that he was grounded in being alone. Kaivalyam.
3.52 and 3.53 then return to the concept of setting up discretion (viveka) as the ultimate tool, one that soon too will be discarded. However, like Picasso learning the rules of Realism first, he could then break the rules to create Cubism. John Cage had to know the meaning of sound before presenting silence. The Yogi/ni has to refine discretion/discernment before abandoning even that. For, if we have not truly looked, truly seen and experienced, then it is false. It becomes bumper-sticker slogans: "All is One" "Be One with the Universe" "Love and Light" that eventually mean No-thing if one has not truly experienced them.
In 12-step programs, one saying is "One day at a Time." A bumper sticker. A wall poster. If you have not lived it. 3.52 calls upon us to live it. To perform samyama on the immediate NOW. It is very trendy for people to spout out "Live in the Moment" and some people have made millions of dollars saying what Patañjali and others have said for thousands of years. Nothing new under the sun. It is mere psycho-babble, a palliative for the masses, and it sells.
To buy it is one thing, to live it another.
3.52 challenges us to live in the ever-present now, that kshana (which like the original Greek meaning of a-tom, means that which cannot be divided/cut further) is the smallest, infinitesimal description of Time, meaning, no Time. And yet, things change. There is a krama, a progression form one kshana to the next, that is imperceptible to one who is casually living, but for the Yogi/ni who is aware and hyper-observant, there is discretion, but that too, is not the bigger picture. It is the forest for the trees once again.
3.53 is resonant with a concept in Physics that has fascinated me for some time now. Entanglement. It is the process in which two essences become entangled at the quantum level, the absolute fundamental level in such a way that they can be on opposite sides of the Universe and still be linked by communication that supersedes even the speed of Light. They are linked identically and simultaneously, irrespective of Time and Place, and once entangled, it is permanent.
3.53 says then that even the Yogi/ni can discern between the Entanglement, despite to all other observers, there is no difference.
And, yet, that again, is just parlor tricks. 3.54-55 lead us beyond that Rabbit Hole that we entered at the beginning of Book 3. We are on the other side of the Black Hole now.
tãrakam sarvavishayam sarvathã-vishayam akramam ceti vivekajam jñãnam 3.54
sattva-purushayoh shuddhi-sãmye kaivalyam iti 3.55
Leaving us to conclude Book 3 with:
Knowledge born of discretion is the liberator of all objects, everywhere and is a singularity in Time. 3.54
Kavilayam occurs then in the absolute equality of the pureness of sattva (reason) and purusha (consciousness). 3.55
We divide by discretion. We recognize the difference between pure reason and pure consciousness, only to then see that they are merely two sides of the same coin, Kaivalyam, so we then unite, and transcend.
And, so, the curtain has been pulled back, the veil removed, the apo-calpyse begins, and what do we find behind?
A mirror.
With the reflection of ourselves, ... alone.
Book 4 awaits.
Continue with this challenge, or return to status quo, the familiar.
We now close in on Book 3 with this daunting, and it is daunting, challenge when we arrive at the following sutras. The well has been fully primed, and it should be no surprise what lies behind the veil, and yet, it is...so let us continue.
3.49-50 then reveal:
sattva-purusha-anyatã-khyãti-mãtrasya sarvabhãva-adhishthãnritvam sarva-jñãtritvam 3.49
tad-vairãgyãd-api dosha-bîja-kshaye kaivalyam 3.50
Giving us:
Only for the one who recognizes the difference between sattva (reason/Mind) and purusha (consciousness/true awareness/Soul) is there the intelligence of all and supremacy over all beings. 3.49
However, even from vairãgyam (detachment) from that state comes kaivalyam (absolute singularity) in the destruction of the affliction of the seed concept (for samãdhi). 3.50
Bam. The sutra heard around the Yoga world...duality is only apparently the final step...non-duality is the ultimate one.
I cannot stress how influential it has been for centuries that this turn at 3.50 has been ignored or simply denied.
The message here is quite clear: Duality brings us omniscience and omnipotence; Non-Duality brings us freedom, because the former is the highest form of bondage ever.
To restate.
What we have been building up for the entire Yoga Sutras thus far are the tools to refine our sense of discretion, or viveka, in order to recognize the difference between sattva (pure reason) and purusha (pure intelligence) through the 8-limb path of Yoga and through diligent, long-lasting practice (abhyãsa) and ultimate detachment (vairãgyam) from the fruits of our actions. It is what we do when the Bee stings.
That is to stand at the abyss. 3.50 dares us to jump. And, this is when we falter, we hesitate, we freeze, or we turn around.
We fear Kaivalyam above all else. It is the most primal fear of all. It drives us to act when we should not or not to act when we should. It paralyzes and it enervates us to even think about it. It is the monster in the closet, the fear of turning off the lights.
Krishnamurti often spoke about the difference between being lonely and being alone. Being lonely gives us a perverse comfort because we can feel sorry for ourselves, we can play the victim to an audience of one, thus creating two. From the singularity comes duality. To be alone is the opposite, it is to extract yourself from the continuum of the flow, and to still the thoughts, the vrittis in the mind, because at that moment, you are no longer distracted by the buzzing of technology, the chatter of inane conversations around you, the to-do lists in your head, the frets and anxieties of what "might" happen, the text messages that barrage you on your Smart phone...and the list goes on. To be alone is to detach from all of that. To un-plug, unconditionally. To actually see and to listen to your own heartbeat and breath. To be as primal as the original, first element of the Universe. And, it is terrifying. But, it is the ultimate liberation.
Kaivalyam is: To be utterly alone.
And, we balk. We hesitate. We turn back to the familiar.
Or, we go forward.
3.51-53 give us some final tools of advice before we leap. One final samyama to perform...
sthãnyupanimantrane sangasmayãkaranam punar-anisththaprasangãt 3.51
ksana-tat-kramayoh samyamãd-vivekajam jñãnam 3.52
jãti-lakshana-deshair-anyatãnavacchedãt-tulyayos-tatah pratipattih 3.53
Upon the enticement of divine beings, one should shun being/acting in awe, lest falling prey to attachment/desire again. 3.51
By performing samyama on the absolute present and its progression, knowledge born from discretion (viveka) occurs. 3.52
At that time, the discernment of two identical essences can be determined, though they are not distinct in species/type, quality or location. 3.53
3.51 gives us the final warning...the warning of the Midas Touch. The Temptation of Christ. The apple to Adam and Eve.
If the Yogi/ni has reached such a level of progression upon his or her 8-limb path that the deities themselves are enticing them, beware because that is merely seduction. When Buddha was nearing his ultimate Enlightenment, to become the Buddha, the Awakened One, he was first seduced by Mara (the agent of Death), the demon who tries to seduce Guatama with the most prevalent human temptation of all: sex and power...
The Buddha saw that this too was seduction for attachment and was not to be his path. He touched the Earth as his witness as testimony that even the divine and demonic could not sway him and that he was grounded in being alone. Kaivalyam.
3.52 and 3.53 then return to the concept of setting up discretion (viveka) as the ultimate tool, one that soon too will be discarded. However, like Picasso learning the rules of Realism first, he could then break the rules to create Cubism. John Cage had to know the meaning of sound before presenting silence. The Yogi/ni has to refine discretion/discernment before abandoning even that. For, if we have not truly looked, truly seen and experienced, then it is false. It becomes bumper-sticker slogans: "All is One" "Be One with the Universe" "Love and Light" that eventually mean No-thing if one has not truly experienced them.
In 12-step programs, one saying is "One day at a Time." A bumper sticker. A wall poster. If you have not lived it. 3.52 calls upon us to live it. To perform samyama on the immediate NOW. It is very trendy for people to spout out "Live in the Moment" and some people have made millions of dollars saying what Patañjali and others have said for thousands of years. Nothing new under the sun. It is mere psycho-babble, a palliative for the masses, and it sells.
To buy it is one thing, to live it another.
3.52 challenges us to live in the ever-present now, that kshana (which like the original Greek meaning of a-tom, means that which cannot be divided/cut further) is the smallest, infinitesimal description of Time, meaning, no Time. And yet, things change. There is a krama, a progression form one kshana to the next, that is imperceptible to one who is casually living, but for the Yogi/ni who is aware and hyper-observant, there is discretion, but that too, is not the bigger picture. It is the forest for the trees once again.
3.53 is resonant with a concept in Physics that has fascinated me for some time now. Entanglement. It is the process in which two essences become entangled at the quantum level, the absolute fundamental level in such a way that they can be on opposite sides of the Universe and still be linked by communication that supersedes even the speed of Light. They are linked identically and simultaneously, irrespective of Time and Place, and once entangled, it is permanent.
3.53 says then that even the Yogi/ni can discern between the Entanglement, despite to all other observers, there is no difference.
And, yet, that again, is just parlor tricks. 3.54-55 lead us beyond that Rabbit Hole that we entered at the beginning of Book 3. We are on the other side of the Black Hole now.
tãrakam sarvavishayam sarvathã-vishayam akramam ceti vivekajam jñãnam 3.54
sattva-purushayoh shuddhi-sãmye kaivalyam iti 3.55
Leaving us to conclude Book 3 with:
Knowledge born of discretion is the liberator of all objects, everywhere and is a singularity in Time. 3.54
Kavilayam occurs then in the absolute equality of the pureness of sattva (reason) and purusha (consciousness). 3.55
We divide by discretion. We recognize the difference between pure reason and pure consciousness, only to then see that they are merely two sides of the same coin, Kaivalyam, so we then unite, and transcend.
And, so, the curtain has been pulled back, the veil removed, the apo-calpyse begins, and what do we find behind?
A mirror.
With the reflection of ourselves, ... alone.
Book 4 awaits.
Thursday, August 16, 2018
The Measure of All Things... (Yoga Sutras 3.44-48)
According to Plato in his dialogue the Theatetus, Protagoras is credited with the concept that "Man (anthropos) is the measure of all things, of those that are being (that they are) as well as those that are not (that they are not)." The first part, that man (anthropos: human being, not necessarily male) is the measure of all things/ panton chrematon metron estin anthropos, has caused many a discussion over the millennia, and funny enough, is a Greek echo of today's post on the Yoga Sutras.
Some have seen the declaration of Protagoras to be short-sightedly anthropocentric, which, by definition, it is. In other words, this gives too much power to human beings to be the measure of all things. Others revel in the thought that this means that a single anthropos, or human being, is the measure of his or her entire universe, meaning, we are at the center of our our universal existence. Others have argued that humans have insufficient knowledge to be the measure of all things.
The jury is still out, ironically, because to come to a consensus, it would mean that a human being, the anthropos makes that decision, one way or another, thus being right and wrong at the same time possibly. A paradox par excellence.
As this is about the Yoga Sutras, I only wanted to pause on this dilemma that Protagoras raised and focus for a moment on the word metron, the measure. This becomes very relevant in the sutras that are about to follow because, we can only be the measure of our own experience, even if we are using tools to help us measure, it is still relative to us. If something is enormous, it is enormous to US. If something is super small, it is so to US...Contrarily, a single human being can be colossal to a Hydrogen atom, but sub-atomic to a galaxy...Size is indeed relative, whether it is about matter or not.
With this in mind, let's return to Patañjali with 3.44:
sthUla-svarupa-sUkshma-anvaya-arthavattva-samyamãt-bhUta-jayah 3.44
Giving us,
By performing/exerting samyama on the inherent gross nature, the subtle constitution and the state of having a purpose, mastery of gross and subtle matter is gained. 3.44
In other words,
Samyama on the base material, subtle features and purpose of something gives us mastery over the elements. 3.44
In other, other words: The Natural Sciences provide us with profound knowledge of how things are.
This does not say, "Why things are," but "How things are." And, again, this does not mean that simply staring at a candle gives us insight into its molecular constitution, and the physics and chemical reactions of fire. But, it does mean a triple PhD in Chemistry, Physics and Biology would help us understand the how of the candle, but never the "why"... But, from the point of view of the anthropos, we could measure it in a variety of ways, but that does not mean understand it. That is still out of our purview. We can measure, but not divine its essence.
3.45 provides a follow-up to this:
tato'animãdi-prãdurbhãvah kãysampat-tad-dharma-anabhighãtash-ca 3.45
Or,
At that time, atomization and so forth come to light/manifest as the concord/perfect/enjoyment/splendor of the body and the lack of obstacle for its true nature/quality 3.45
I would be lying if I were to say that this sutra is not messy...partially because the grammar leaves it somewhat ambiguous as to whether there are two things happening or three. My guess based upon the nature of all the other sutras that is two as I have translated above. Sticking with this for the moment, we can tease out something more like:
Then, the full splendor of the body is manifest with the powers of atomization and such as well as its true nature being unimpeded. 3.45
Again, messy. Especially because the tradition from Vyãsa is to take "atomization and such" as super powers like Ant Man being able to shrink to an atom, or expand to a colossus. But, when taken in context of the comparison to Protagoras, a human can be "as small as an atom" or as "large as a mountain" in relative situations. This may or may not be what is meant, but it helps to get a handle on this concept. When we close our eyes in meditation, we are no longer confined to the size of the body, and its "true nature" and "splendor" could be the fact that now the physical sheath, this mortal coil, is transcended, and the mind can be as small or large as it "sees" fit to be. Perhaps. The laws of natural physics work really well at the human level. We can do all kinds of human-scale projects. However, at the Quantum level and the Cosmic level, things get pretty wonky, which is why extremes are thrown out and the average is taken. When things get to close to 0, the very small, or Infinity, the very large, all bets are off. Man can no longer be the measure. Physical man, that is. But, the Mind is another story.
Let's continue with 3.46, which seems to be a corollary to 3.45's "perfect body" concept:
rupa-lãvanya-bala-vajra-samhanananvãni kãya-sampat 3.46
Or,
The splendor/perfection of the body consists of beauty in form, adamantine strength, and constitutional unity. 3.46
Strength, integrity and grace more or less. Something I inherited from my first Yoga mentor, Bekir, was that Yoga is: Strength, flexibility and grace, which is something I still teach today in physical asana, but I believe that as with the Zen-mind thinking of the likes of Thich Nhat Hanh, everyday activities can also be "beautiful" and "graceful" when performed with samyama, the true origins of today's trend of being "Mindful" or "Mindfulness." Samyama is the source...and from that, we can perceive and create Beauty from the mundane, the gross matter.
Finishing up this section then with 3.47-48:
grahana-svarupa-asmitã-anvaya-arthavattva-samyamãd-indriya-jayah 3.47
tato manojavitvam vikarana-bhãvah pradhãna-jayash-ca 3.48
Giving us,
Mastery of the senses comes from samyama on the process of knowledge (grasping), the essence, the ego-ness, inherent consequence and state of having a purpose. 3.47
At that time, mastery of the essential elements along with/by the quickness of the mind and the state of being devoid of the sense organs. 3.48
What these two seem to say is that first one must master the senses (3.47) and then one must even go beyond that for the mind to work at optimal speed to gain the mastery (3.48) of the essential elements of the world/universe.
In short: Divide and conquer, then unite and transcend.
That is the underlying message building momentum as we go along, moving closer and closer to the goal of Yoga, which goes beyond the body and mind division, beyond the body-mind union, and leads us to understanding, rather than knowledge. But, we are not there yet. Still some ground to cover. Still some things to measure. As the carpenter says, "measure twice, cut once..."
And, so we shall.
Some have seen the declaration of Protagoras to be short-sightedly anthropocentric, which, by definition, it is. In other words, this gives too much power to human beings to be the measure of all things. Others revel in the thought that this means that a single anthropos, or human being, is the measure of his or her entire universe, meaning, we are at the center of our our universal existence. Others have argued that humans have insufficient knowledge to be the measure of all things.
The jury is still out, ironically, because to come to a consensus, it would mean that a human being, the anthropos makes that decision, one way or another, thus being right and wrong at the same time possibly. A paradox par excellence.
As this is about the Yoga Sutras, I only wanted to pause on this dilemma that Protagoras raised and focus for a moment on the word metron, the measure. This becomes very relevant in the sutras that are about to follow because, we can only be the measure of our own experience, even if we are using tools to help us measure, it is still relative to us. If something is enormous, it is enormous to US. If something is super small, it is so to US...Contrarily, a single human being can be colossal to a Hydrogen atom, but sub-atomic to a galaxy...Size is indeed relative, whether it is about matter or not.
With this in mind, let's return to Patañjali with 3.44:
sthUla-svarupa-sUkshma-anvaya-arthavattva-samyamãt-bhUta-jayah 3.44
Giving us,
By performing/exerting samyama on the inherent gross nature, the subtle constitution and the state of having a purpose, mastery of gross and subtle matter is gained. 3.44
In other words,
Samyama on the base material, subtle features and purpose of something gives us mastery over the elements. 3.44
In other, other words: The Natural Sciences provide us with profound knowledge of how things are.
This does not say, "Why things are," but "How things are." And, again, this does not mean that simply staring at a candle gives us insight into its molecular constitution, and the physics and chemical reactions of fire. But, it does mean a triple PhD in Chemistry, Physics and Biology would help us understand the how of the candle, but never the "why"... But, from the point of view of the anthropos, we could measure it in a variety of ways, but that does not mean understand it. That is still out of our purview. We can measure, but not divine its essence.
3.45 provides a follow-up to this:
tato'animãdi-prãdurbhãvah kãysampat-tad-dharma-anabhighãtash-ca 3.45
Or,
At that time, atomization and so forth come to light/manifest as the concord/perfect/enjoyment/splendor of the body and the lack of obstacle for its true nature/quality 3.45
I would be lying if I were to say that this sutra is not messy...partially because the grammar leaves it somewhat ambiguous as to whether there are two things happening or three. My guess based upon the nature of all the other sutras that is two as I have translated above. Sticking with this for the moment, we can tease out something more like:
Then, the full splendor of the body is manifest with the powers of atomization and such as well as its true nature being unimpeded. 3.45
Again, messy. Especially because the tradition from Vyãsa is to take "atomization and such" as super powers like Ant Man being able to shrink to an atom, or expand to a colossus. But, when taken in context of the comparison to Protagoras, a human can be "as small as an atom" or as "large as a mountain" in relative situations. This may or may not be what is meant, but it helps to get a handle on this concept. When we close our eyes in meditation, we are no longer confined to the size of the body, and its "true nature" and "splendor" could be the fact that now the physical sheath, this mortal coil, is transcended, and the mind can be as small or large as it "sees" fit to be. Perhaps. The laws of natural physics work really well at the human level. We can do all kinds of human-scale projects. However, at the Quantum level and the Cosmic level, things get pretty wonky, which is why extremes are thrown out and the average is taken. When things get to close to 0, the very small, or Infinity, the very large, all bets are off. Man can no longer be the measure. Physical man, that is. But, the Mind is another story.
Let's continue with 3.46, which seems to be a corollary to 3.45's "perfect body" concept:
rupa-lãvanya-bala-vajra-samhanananvãni kãya-sampat 3.46
Or,
The splendor/perfection of the body consists of beauty in form, adamantine strength, and constitutional unity. 3.46
Strength, integrity and grace more or less. Something I inherited from my first Yoga mentor, Bekir, was that Yoga is: Strength, flexibility and grace, which is something I still teach today in physical asana, but I believe that as with the Zen-mind thinking of the likes of Thich Nhat Hanh, everyday activities can also be "beautiful" and "graceful" when performed with samyama, the true origins of today's trend of being "Mindful" or "Mindfulness." Samyama is the source...and from that, we can perceive and create Beauty from the mundane, the gross matter.
Finishing up this section then with 3.47-48:
grahana-svarupa-asmitã-anvaya-arthavattva-samyamãd-indriya-jayah 3.47
tato manojavitvam vikarana-bhãvah pradhãna-jayash-ca 3.48
Giving us,
Mastery of the senses comes from samyama on the process of knowledge (grasping), the essence, the ego-ness, inherent consequence and state of having a purpose. 3.47
At that time, mastery of the essential elements along with/by the quickness of the mind and the state of being devoid of the sense organs. 3.48
What these two seem to say is that first one must master the senses (3.47) and then one must even go beyond that for the mind to work at optimal speed to gain the mastery (3.48) of the essential elements of the world/universe.
In short: Divide and conquer, then unite and transcend.
That is the underlying message building momentum as we go along, moving closer and closer to the goal of Yoga, which goes beyond the body and mind division, beyond the body-mind union, and leads us to understanding, rather than knowledge. But, we are not there yet. Still some ground to cover. Still some things to measure. As the carpenter says, "measure twice, cut once..."
And, so we shall.
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
Walk the Rice Paper, Young Grasshopper... (YS 3.38-43)
Or, ... these are not the droids you are looking for...and other such Jedi Mind tricks await us in the concluding sutras of Book III. The Yoga Sutras are often much-maligned for some of the Siddhis or powerful skills that the Yogi/ni can acquire according to Patañjali, but truly they pale in comparison to the skills of most religious figures (think of Lazarus...) and the hagiographies are filled with Saints performing all sorts or miraculous (it is there job, after all) feats, not to mention the modern-day fascination with super heroes and villains of all stripes and shapes. So, what is it really that throws people off when it comes to the potential powers that a Yogi/ni might accrue?
Perhaps it is the disconnect with Yoga's origins and what we see everyday in a Yoga shala around the globe. Maybe it is the overly (and incorrectly) applied sense that "everything is Okay" in Yoga. News flash, it is not. The Yoga world has its fair and more share of problems, ranging from narcissistic pseudo-gurus to abuses of power and sex to hypocritical declarations of non-judgement on the one face and on the other self-righteous condemnation of others. Jealousy, envy, coveting, adultery, fraud, addictions, and the dirty-laundry list goes on and on...Yoga is not immune. Humans are not immune. We are not immune.
But, it is the veneer of "light and love" that ironically obscures the darker sides of the Yoga world. As such, there is the idea that one is not "better" than an other, or that there "is no right or wrong" in Yoga. Well, another news flash. This is not in any Yoga text from the Sutras to the Gita to the Upanishads and the Hatha Yoga Pradipika.
Quite the contrary in fact. Yoga is exactly about bettering oneself through hard work and over a period of Time as we have seen. Abhyãsa is no quick fix. The 8-limb path is not easily trodden. As such, the Siddhis don't just fall into one's lap, and if they do appear, the Yogi/ni is supposed to be strong enough to RESIST them, not embrace them, and certainly not abuse them. However, in the history of Yoga, there have been many abuses with charlatans through the ages, promoting Siddhis and using them for personal gain or Spiritual Materialism, for credentials.
In the old TV-series, Kung Fu, Young Grasshopper is told to walk across the rice paper without tearing it. In his first attempt, he fails miserably as the paper is riddled with holes. It is many YEARS later that he can finally, with strength, flexibility and grace, tread upon the rice paper without tearing it. He has mastered it via Yoga...
Which brings us to 3.38 (and 3.39-40):
bandha-kãrana-shaithalyãt-pracãra-samvedanãc-cittasya parasharIrãveshah 3.38
Or,
From dissolving/loosening/releasing the cause/instrument of the mind's bondage, and from knowledge of its conduct, the mind can transfer to another's body. 3.38
Jedi Mind trick 101.
Is this meant literally? Possibly. But, it is quite easy to think about psychological manipulation, the tool of the narcissist, inter alia, as well as our dear Yoda. By studying/meditating upon that which binds the mind to one's body, and it conduct, we can apparently then project it into the body of another. And, again, these Siddhis are to be avoided, because, this is the ultimate weapon...
Moving on to 3.39-40, there is a bit of a logistical problem. These two sutras as we will see presently deal with only two of the five vayus, or vital breaths/air/winds that are associated with Yoga practice, and which are enumerated in an earlier text, the Taittiriya Upanishad. They are: apãna (downward), samãna (collecting/gathering), prãna (central, life force), udãna (uplifting) and vyãna (dispersing). The root <<an>> means, "life force" and comes into Latin and modern language via an-imus, the Soul, and animals, beings with a life force. Here, we just see two, and not necessarily the main two, so it feels both incomplete, and somewhat out of place. Moreover, the noun that has been used for the process of gaining the Siddhis, namely samyama is suddenly replaced by jaya (mastery), but then just as quickly returned in 3.41...
However, let's take a look at 3.39-40
udãna-jayãj-jala-pankah-kanthakãdisvasangah utkrãntish-ca 3.39
samãna-jayãj-jvalanam 3.40
Or,
By mastery of udãna (uplifting breath/wind/air), one can avoid contact with water, mud, sharp things and such, as well as going over them. 3.39
By mastery of samãna (gathering breath), radiance occurs. 3.40
However! Because of the incomplete feeling, and the grammar/syntax, (namely, the placement of the "ca" (and) and the agreement of noun/adjectives), this could easily be read as a single sutra, rendering:
By master of udãna, one can cross over water, mud, sharp things and such unscathed and by mastery of samãna, one gains radiance. 3.39-40
Because the manuscript traditions in India are very hard (no, nearly impossible) to fully trace, there are still many question marks about what is the "original" Yoga Sutras, and where the exact breaks are/were (especially with the division of the "books/chapter"). In other words, it might be better sometimes to see what makes sense, rather than force an antiquated translation...
But, at any rate, 3.39 is the epitome of Young Grasshopper's quest, to master the body's movements through space to become "lighter than air"...
Moving along to 3.41, the disjunct with suddenly bringing in only 2 of the vayus is felt when we then jump to the 5 senses, which are dealt with in a little more detail later, but still fragmented, giving Book III a very fractured feeling in all.
To continue then with 3.41-42 taken as a logical couplet (but not a single sutra as suggested above, though it is not inconceivable):
shrota-ãkãshayoh sambandha-samyamãd-divyam shrotram 3.41
kãya-ãkãshayoh sambandha-samyamãl-laghu-tUla-samãpattesh-cãkãsha-gamanam 3.42
Giving us:
By performing samyama on the connection/relationship between hearing and the ether, divine hearing is gained. 3.41
By performing samyama on the connection/relationship between the body and the ether, and meditation on the lightness of cotton, movement through the ether is gained. 3.42
Returning to the usage of samyama, we then see two more potential Siddhis, which are often taken very literally. However, with 3.4, keener (maybe not divine) hearing can be developed, especially in meditation. A simple exercise to show this is to simply sit on a bench in a crowded urban setting for a while. Try to focus on the twittering of a single songbird, or the voice of someone in a crowd, and when you focus intently upon that, you can isolate that sound. At the Zen dojo I go to for zazen, Luc, the dojo's leader, often opens the windows as the dojo is adjacent to a very busy street in the urban center of Antwerp. At first, it may be cacophony. It may be distracting. However, over Time, sounds become isolated, the tiniest noise augmented, or the loudest din becomes irrelevant. Nothing changes with the physical sounds themselves, except for the Mind's Eye...
As for traveling through the ether. I got nothing on that. I can certainly attest to having many, many dreams in which I am flying that are so lucid, that upon "waking" I am not so sure that it was not real...but, who knows, right?
Coming to 3.43:
bahir-akalpitã vrittir-mahãvidehã tatah prakãshãvaran-kshayah 3.43
Giving us,
When there is the great deliverance, being external to the body, and which is a genuine disposition of the mind, at that time, the covering of clarity is destroyed. 3.43
Or,
True clarity comes with the disengagement of the mind from the body...
At this point, we are starting to make a turn back to 1.2...the definition of Yoga. What we are about to see now is that in order to go beyond the duality of the Mind and Body, there must first be distinction, then union (Yoga) of the two, and then transcendence of the two...leading us to the great singularity of Kaivalya...And, 3.43 initiates this final process with the suggestion of a proper Apocalypse, which, from the Greek apo-calypsis, which means, "pulling back the veil" to re-veal what lies beneath or behind.
Shall it be the Wizard, or the fraud behind the curtain making us believe in Oz?
The Lady or the Tiger?
Or...?
Perhaps it is the disconnect with Yoga's origins and what we see everyday in a Yoga shala around the globe. Maybe it is the overly (and incorrectly) applied sense that "everything is Okay" in Yoga. News flash, it is not. The Yoga world has its fair and more share of problems, ranging from narcissistic pseudo-gurus to abuses of power and sex to hypocritical declarations of non-judgement on the one face and on the other self-righteous condemnation of others. Jealousy, envy, coveting, adultery, fraud, addictions, and the dirty-laundry list goes on and on...Yoga is not immune. Humans are not immune. We are not immune.
But, it is the veneer of "light and love" that ironically obscures the darker sides of the Yoga world. As such, there is the idea that one is not "better" than an other, or that there "is no right or wrong" in Yoga. Well, another news flash. This is not in any Yoga text from the Sutras to the Gita to the Upanishads and the Hatha Yoga Pradipika.
Quite the contrary in fact. Yoga is exactly about bettering oneself through hard work and over a period of Time as we have seen. Abhyãsa is no quick fix. The 8-limb path is not easily trodden. As such, the Siddhis don't just fall into one's lap, and if they do appear, the Yogi/ni is supposed to be strong enough to RESIST them, not embrace them, and certainly not abuse them. However, in the history of Yoga, there have been many abuses with charlatans through the ages, promoting Siddhis and using them for personal gain or Spiritual Materialism, for credentials.
In the old TV-series, Kung Fu, Young Grasshopper is told to walk across the rice paper without tearing it. In his first attempt, he fails miserably as the paper is riddled with holes. It is many YEARS later that he can finally, with strength, flexibility and grace, tread upon the rice paper without tearing it. He has mastered it via Yoga...
Which brings us to 3.38 (and 3.39-40):
bandha-kãrana-shaithalyãt-pracãra-samvedanãc-cittasya parasharIrãveshah 3.38
Or,
From dissolving/loosening/releasing the cause/instrument of the mind's bondage, and from knowledge of its conduct, the mind can transfer to another's body. 3.38
Jedi Mind trick 101.
Is this meant literally? Possibly. But, it is quite easy to think about psychological manipulation, the tool of the narcissist, inter alia, as well as our dear Yoda. By studying/meditating upon that which binds the mind to one's body, and it conduct, we can apparently then project it into the body of another. And, again, these Siddhis are to be avoided, because, this is the ultimate weapon...
Moving on to 3.39-40, there is a bit of a logistical problem. These two sutras as we will see presently deal with only two of the five vayus, or vital breaths/air/winds that are associated with Yoga practice, and which are enumerated in an earlier text, the Taittiriya Upanishad. They are: apãna (downward), samãna (collecting/gathering), prãna (central, life force), udãna (uplifting) and vyãna (dispersing). The root <<an>> means, "life force" and comes into Latin and modern language via an-imus, the Soul, and animals, beings with a life force. Here, we just see two, and not necessarily the main two, so it feels both incomplete, and somewhat out of place. Moreover, the noun that has been used for the process of gaining the Siddhis, namely samyama is suddenly replaced by jaya (mastery), but then just as quickly returned in 3.41...
However, let's take a look at 3.39-40
udãna-jayãj-jala-pankah-kanthakãdisvasangah utkrãntish-ca 3.39
samãna-jayãj-jvalanam 3.40
Or,
By mastery of udãna (uplifting breath/wind/air), one can avoid contact with water, mud, sharp things and such, as well as going over them. 3.39
By mastery of samãna (gathering breath), radiance occurs. 3.40
However! Because of the incomplete feeling, and the grammar/syntax, (namely, the placement of the "ca" (and) and the agreement of noun/adjectives), this could easily be read as a single sutra, rendering:
By master of udãna, one can cross over water, mud, sharp things and such unscathed and by mastery of samãna, one gains radiance. 3.39-40
Because the manuscript traditions in India are very hard (no, nearly impossible) to fully trace, there are still many question marks about what is the "original" Yoga Sutras, and where the exact breaks are/were (especially with the division of the "books/chapter"). In other words, it might be better sometimes to see what makes sense, rather than force an antiquated translation...
But, at any rate, 3.39 is the epitome of Young Grasshopper's quest, to master the body's movements through space to become "lighter than air"...
Moving along to 3.41, the disjunct with suddenly bringing in only 2 of the vayus is felt when we then jump to the 5 senses, which are dealt with in a little more detail later, but still fragmented, giving Book III a very fractured feeling in all.
To continue then with 3.41-42 taken as a logical couplet (but not a single sutra as suggested above, though it is not inconceivable):
shrota-ãkãshayoh sambandha-samyamãd-divyam shrotram 3.41
kãya-ãkãshayoh sambandha-samyamãl-laghu-tUla-samãpattesh-cãkãsha-gamanam 3.42
Giving us:
By performing samyama on the connection/relationship between hearing and the ether, divine hearing is gained. 3.41
By performing samyama on the connection/relationship between the body and the ether, and meditation on the lightness of cotton, movement through the ether is gained. 3.42
Returning to the usage of samyama, we then see two more potential Siddhis, which are often taken very literally. However, with 3.4, keener (maybe not divine) hearing can be developed, especially in meditation. A simple exercise to show this is to simply sit on a bench in a crowded urban setting for a while. Try to focus on the twittering of a single songbird, or the voice of someone in a crowd, and when you focus intently upon that, you can isolate that sound. At the Zen dojo I go to for zazen, Luc, the dojo's leader, often opens the windows as the dojo is adjacent to a very busy street in the urban center of Antwerp. At first, it may be cacophony. It may be distracting. However, over Time, sounds become isolated, the tiniest noise augmented, or the loudest din becomes irrelevant. Nothing changes with the physical sounds themselves, except for the Mind's Eye...
As for traveling through the ether. I got nothing on that. I can certainly attest to having many, many dreams in which I am flying that are so lucid, that upon "waking" I am not so sure that it was not real...but, who knows, right?
Coming to 3.43:
bahir-akalpitã vrittir-mahãvidehã tatah prakãshãvaran-kshayah 3.43
Giving us,
When there is the great deliverance, being external to the body, and which is a genuine disposition of the mind, at that time, the covering of clarity is destroyed. 3.43
Or,
True clarity comes with the disengagement of the mind from the body...
At this point, we are starting to make a turn back to 1.2...the definition of Yoga. What we are about to see now is that in order to go beyond the duality of the Mind and Body, there must first be distinction, then union (Yoga) of the two, and then transcendence of the two...leading us to the great singularity of Kaivalya...And, 3.43 initiates this final process with the suggestion of a proper Apocalypse, which, from the Greek apo-calypsis, which means, "pulling back the veil" to re-veal what lies beneath or behind.
Shall it be the Wizard, or the fraud behind the curtain making us believe in Oz?
The Lady or the Tiger?
Or...?
Sunday, August 12, 2018
And, Along came a Spider (Yoga Sutras 3.35-37)
Things get a little murky now for a bit, so be warned. Clarity comes back in a bit, but for the moment, there are some issues in the tissues of our sutras.
In the previous posts we have been talking about the siddhis, or powerful skills, that the Yogi/ni may acquire through profound meditative means with samyama on various objects (in the sense of an object of meditation). For the most part, despite being somewhat of an esoteric nature, they are all within the realm of possibilities...more or less.
However, the following dozen or so sutras present some serious problems with both meaning and syntax. It is also with these dozen or so sutras that ALL of the commentaries and translations (I am currently working with 8-10 versions) do one of two things: 1) say absolutely nothing and just provide an "accepted" translation that has been handed down through the ages; or 2) go into major metaphysical discourse about the nature of Yoga being dualistic and attempt to squeeze or extract the entirety of Samkhya-Dualist philosophy into a few sutras, where these ideas are blatantly lacking in all the rest of the Yoga Sutras.
This is troublesome, but seems to be symptomatic of a systemic flaw here...these handful of sutras we are about to delve into seem to be dubious at best as to how they fit into the Sutras as a whole, and when they begin to go into some detail, (namely with the concept of the 5 vayus, which will see in the next post), they are lacking in several ways.
Moreover, the syntax and grammar is very different from much of the rest of the text. There has been very strong research done (primarily on the first book of) Patañjali from a stylistic analysis vantage point, and the conclusion by Philipp Maas is that Patañjali and Vyãsa, the principle commentary are one and the same. Well, that would be quite something, but is not overly convincing in the latter portions of the book, such as we find ourselves in now.
However, it is the nearly unwavering exaltation of Vyãsa's word to be the final word, that I believe many translations and commentaries have suffered over the years as a result. Ascribing a date and an author to ANY Indian text is just asking for trouble. And, furthermore, to ascribe the Yoga Sutras to a SINGLE author AND commentator is, in my opinion, flirting with disaster.
As such, this portion of the Sutras reads more like a cobbling-together of ideas that may or may not be crucial to the text as a whole, and may or may not be Patañjali (or whoever else) at all...They almost seem to be like lecture notes for a Professor, jotted down before a lesson, and are incomplete at best and almost incoherent at worst.
Having said all of this, I am still intending to puzzle through these linguistic nettles and philosophical quagmires as I know that soon things clear up again for the rest of the Sutras.
So, let's proceed with the next 3 sutras, 3.35-37..., the first two being taken together due to the "tatah" that leads off 3.36.
sattva-purushayor-atyanta-asamkIrnayoh pratyaya-avishesho bhogah parãrthatvãt sãrtha-samyamãt purusha-jñãnam 3.35
tatah prãtibha-shrãvana-vedanã-ãdarsha-ãsvãda-vãrtãh jãyante 3.36
Giving us to begin:
Because of the nature of Being for another, experience is the concept of non-distinction for the utterly unmixed Purusha and Sattva, and from samyama on Being for Itself, the knowledge of Pursusha comes about. 3.35
From that/then (tatah), (exalted/illuminated) hearing, touch, sight, taste and smell arise. 3.36
As I said, the grammar takes a radical turn, the concepts being put forth are incongruous and there is great ambiguity in the meaning based upon syntax, because we could just as easily translate these two as:
The nature of Sattva and Purusha are utterly pure, and the experiencing the concept of them being indistinct come from the nature of dualistic thought; by contemplating on Being in and of itself, the nature of Purusha is known. 3.35
At that moment, intuition and the 5 senses are born. 3.36
The difference in 3.36 is whether prãtibha is taken as being a distributive adjective (divine/illuminated/exalted) for the following five nouns of the 5 senses, as is usually the case because Vyãsa does, or if it is the "sixth sense" of intuition, and is a noun too, meaning "illumination/intuition". There is no way to know from the grammar because it is a long compound with six elements...so the tradition sticks with Vyãsa, though the second reading is quite different, and more interesting to be fair.
These two (or one) sutra/s are completely out of left field, and the entire meaning of "sutra" as we learned long ago is that they are connected by a thread of thought or meaning from one to the next. This is a complete disjunct, with the only stretch being that it could related to the samvit of the citta from 3.34, which is gained by samyama on the heart, but that is a stretch...
What we may glean from this is that samyama of some sort can lead to jñãnam of the Purusha (the eternal Soul). But, as we will continue to see more and more, that leads us to a non-Dualistic reading with Kaivalya (utter aloneness/singularity) being the apex (book 4) of our Yogic quest. So, for now, shall we put a pin in this and move on?
Trust me, we should...
3.37 is more lucid and seems to put us back on track again after this strange and highly incomplete and non-sequitor digression on Purusha and the senses...but, there is a hitch to this one as well as we shall presently see:
te samãdhãv-upasargã vyutthane siddhayah 3.37
Or,
These are obstacles (upasargã) to samãdi [and/but] are powerful skills (siddhayah) for the one who is straying/deviating. 3.37
Generally, this sutra is taken as a caveat emptor, or buyer beware, warning for the aspiring Yogi/ni. In other words, it is taken to mean, Siddhis are powerful skills for one who is deviating from a Yogic path, but for the one engaged with true Samãdhi, they are obstacles. This is in line with most of the Sutras as Yoga is all about removing obstacles, but, there is one slight hitch...
This sutra appears in the midst of two sets of Siddhis, the ones we already looked at in YS 3.16-34, then we have our weird interlude of 3.35-36, then this warning, then some truly supernatural Siddhis that many take for being dangerous or beyond the physical realms of possibility.
So, the question is: does "te", that is "these" refer to the Siddhis PREVIOUSLY mentioned, which do not seem overly dangerous, or do they refer to the Siddhis ABOUT to be listed, and which could easily be abused, or does it apply to ALL Siddhis (siddhayah is the plural in Sanskrit)??
Simple answer. We do not know. This is the one and only reference to the Siddhis (and one of only 4 direct references/uses of "siddhi" in the entire text) being obstacles (any for that matter) and it is completely ambiguous what is the scope of "te".
Personally, I am inclined to believe that it applies to all powerful skills, because they can all be abused. The quality does not lie in the skill itself (that is, it is neither good nor bad), but in the application. Second place would be that "te" applies to just the following Sutras we are about to see, and finally, and least likely, just to the preceding Siddhis.
Take-home message...back to Uncle Ben's advice to Peter...great power comes with great responsibility...
With that in mind, we continue next time with the Super Siddhis!
In the previous posts we have been talking about the siddhis, or powerful skills, that the Yogi/ni may acquire through profound meditative means with samyama on various objects (in the sense of an object of meditation). For the most part, despite being somewhat of an esoteric nature, they are all within the realm of possibilities...more or less.
However, the following dozen or so sutras present some serious problems with both meaning and syntax. It is also with these dozen or so sutras that ALL of the commentaries and translations (I am currently working with 8-10 versions) do one of two things: 1) say absolutely nothing and just provide an "accepted" translation that has been handed down through the ages; or 2) go into major metaphysical discourse about the nature of Yoga being dualistic and attempt to squeeze or extract the entirety of Samkhya-Dualist philosophy into a few sutras, where these ideas are blatantly lacking in all the rest of the Yoga Sutras.
This is troublesome, but seems to be symptomatic of a systemic flaw here...these handful of sutras we are about to delve into seem to be dubious at best as to how they fit into the Sutras as a whole, and when they begin to go into some detail, (namely with the concept of the 5 vayus, which will see in the next post), they are lacking in several ways.
Moreover, the syntax and grammar is very different from much of the rest of the text. There has been very strong research done (primarily on the first book of) Patañjali from a stylistic analysis vantage point, and the conclusion by Philipp Maas is that Patañjali and Vyãsa, the principle commentary are one and the same. Well, that would be quite something, but is not overly convincing in the latter portions of the book, such as we find ourselves in now.
However, it is the nearly unwavering exaltation of Vyãsa's word to be the final word, that I believe many translations and commentaries have suffered over the years as a result. Ascribing a date and an author to ANY Indian text is just asking for trouble. And, furthermore, to ascribe the Yoga Sutras to a SINGLE author AND commentator is, in my opinion, flirting with disaster.
As such, this portion of the Sutras reads more like a cobbling-together of ideas that may or may not be crucial to the text as a whole, and may or may not be Patañjali (or whoever else) at all...They almost seem to be like lecture notes for a Professor, jotted down before a lesson, and are incomplete at best and almost incoherent at worst.
Having said all of this, I am still intending to puzzle through these linguistic nettles and philosophical quagmires as I know that soon things clear up again for the rest of the Sutras.
So, let's proceed with the next 3 sutras, 3.35-37..., the first two being taken together due to the "tatah" that leads off 3.36.
sattva-purushayor-atyanta-asamkIrnayoh pratyaya-avishesho bhogah parãrthatvãt sãrtha-samyamãt purusha-jñãnam 3.35
tatah prãtibha-shrãvana-vedanã-ãdarsha-ãsvãda-vãrtãh jãyante 3.36
Giving us to begin:
Because of the nature of Being for another, experience is the concept of non-distinction for the utterly unmixed Purusha and Sattva, and from samyama on Being for Itself, the knowledge of Pursusha comes about. 3.35
From that/then (tatah), (exalted/illuminated) hearing, touch, sight, taste and smell arise. 3.36
As I said, the grammar takes a radical turn, the concepts being put forth are incongruous and there is great ambiguity in the meaning based upon syntax, because we could just as easily translate these two as:
The nature of Sattva and Purusha are utterly pure, and the experiencing the concept of them being indistinct come from the nature of dualistic thought; by contemplating on Being in and of itself, the nature of Purusha is known. 3.35
At that moment, intuition and the 5 senses are born. 3.36
The difference in 3.36 is whether prãtibha is taken as being a distributive adjective (divine/illuminated/exalted) for the following five nouns of the 5 senses, as is usually the case because Vyãsa does, or if it is the "sixth sense" of intuition, and is a noun too, meaning "illumination/intuition". There is no way to know from the grammar because it is a long compound with six elements...so the tradition sticks with Vyãsa, though the second reading is quite different, and more interesting to be fair.
These two (or one) sutra/s are completely out of left field, and the entire meaning of "sutra" as we learned long ago is that they are connected by a thread of thought or meaning from one to the next. This is a complete disjunct, with the only stretch being that it could related to the samvit of the citta from 3.34, which is gained by samyama on the heart, but that is a stretch...
What we may glean from this is that samyama of some sort can lead to jñãnam of the Purusha (the eternal Soul). But, as we will continue to see more and more, that leads us to a non-Dualistic reading with Kaivalya (utter aloneness/singularity) being the apex (book 4) of our Yogic quest. So, for now, shall we put a pin in this and move on?
Trust me, we should...
3.37 is more lucid and seems to put us back on track again after this strange and highly incomplete and non-sequitor digression on Purusha and the senses...but, there is a hitch to this one as well as we shall presently see:
te samãdhãv-upasargã vyutthane siddhayah 3.37
Or,
These are obstacles (upasargã) to samãdi [and/but] are powerful skills (siddhayah) for the one who is straying/deviating. 3.37
Generally, this sutra is taken as a caveat emptor, or buyer beware, warning for the aspiring Yogi/ni. In other words, it is taken to mean, Siddhis are powerful skills for one who is deviating from a Yogic path, but for the one engaged with true Samãdhi, they are obstacles. This is in line with most of the Sutras as Yoga is all about removing obstacles, but, there is one slight hitch...
This sutra appears in the midst of two sets of Siddhis, the ones we already looked at in YS 3.16-34, then we have our weird interlude of 3.35-36, then this warning, then some truly supernatural Siddhis that many take for being dangerous or beyond the physical realms of possibility.
So, the question is: does "te", that is "these" refer to the Siddhis PREVIOUSLY mentioned, which do not seem overly dangerous, or do they refer to the Siddhis ABOUT to be listed, and which could easily be abused, or does it apply to ALL Siddhis (siddhayah is the plural in Sanskrit)??
Simple answer. We do not know. This is the one and only reference to the Siddhis (and one of only 4 direct references/uses of "siddhi" in the entire text) being obstacles (any for that matter) and it is completely ambiguous what is the scope of "te".
Personally, I am inclined to believe that it applies to all powerful skills, because they can all be abused. The quality does not lie in the skill itself (that is, it is neither good nor bad), but in the application. Second place would be that "te" applies to just the following Sutras we are about to see, and finally, and least likely, just to the preceding Siddhis.
Take-home message...back to Uncle Ben's advice to Peter...great power comes with great responsibility...
With that in mind, we continue next time with the Super Siddhis!
Thursday, August 9, 2018
I am Superman...and I know what's happening... (Yoga Sutras 3.21-34)
And so it goes according to REM...and Patañjali.
Looking back to our dear Alice who tries to imagine 6 impossible things before breakfast, the more we look, actually look and read Patañjali's list of Siddhis, or "powerful skills," things don't actually seem that impossible at all. In fact, they seem down-right applicable to our modern sensibility. One of the things I have tried to do in this extended exercise of translating and expounding upon Patañjali's Yoga Sutras, diligently and over a long period of Time, with reverence, is to bring to light how real they can be for us if we don't shroud them in a cloak of mysticism and esoteric fear of the unfamiliar.
As I always say when translating a text, no matter the source, the time or the language. If it was written by a human, for humans (some texts are truly delusional, however, and that is another question altogether), then there is a level of communication, and it will make sense at some level.
The Siddhis often get glossed over with the perfunctory "well, it was another time, and they had different beliefs" or some other such laziness of thought. As we have already seen, even some of the boldest claims still remain on the human level, as do the following 14 sutras that introduce several Siddhis, including the (in)famous one regarding "invisibility".
In short, if one reads with an open mind, interesting things can happen. So, let's tune in and see what we can see. Maybe Lions, Tigers and Bears, Oh My!
Let's continue down the Rabbit Hole then with 3.21:
Looking back to our dear Alice who tries to imagine 6 impossible things before breakfast, the more we look, actually look and read Patañjali's list of Siddhis, or "powerful skills," things don't actually seem that impossible at all. In fact, they seem down-right applicable to our modern sensibility. One of the things I have tried to do in this extended exercise of translating and expounding upon Patañjali's Yoga Sutras, diligently and over a long period of Time, with reverence, is to bring to light how real they can be for us if we don't shroud them in a cloak of mysticism and esoteric fear of the unfamiliar.
As I always say when translating a text, no matter the source, the time or the language. If it was written by a human, for humans (some texts are truly delusional, however, and that is another question altogether), then there is a level of communication, and it will make sense at some level.
The Siddhis often get glossed over with the perfunctory "well, it was another time, and they had different beliefs" or some other such laziness of thought. As we have already seen, even some of the boldest claims still remain on the human level, as do the following 14 sutras that introduce several Siddhis, including the (in)famous one regarding "invisibility".
In short, if one reads with an open mind, interesting things can happen. So, let's tune in and see what we can see. Maybe Lions, Tigers and Bears, Oh My!
Let's continue down the Rabbit Hole then with 3.21:
Kãya-rupa-samyamãt tad-grãhya-shakti-stambhe
cakshuh-prakãshãsha-asamprayoge’antardhãnam
3.21
Giving us,
By performing samyama on the bodily form, a profound turning inward occurs at moment of stilling the power of beholding that form, when there is no longer contact with light. 3.21
This is the (in)famous Siddhi of invisibility, but, not quite... antar-dhãnam is most often the culprit, being translated as "invisibility". While it CAN mean that, it is taking the part for the whole when we look at that word with a bit more scrutiny. The first component "antar" means "within" and "dhãnam" comes from the root <<dhã>>, one of the core verbs in Sanskrit (and Indo-European languages at large) which means to place, put, assume, fix and so forth. So, antar-dhãnam literally means: to fix within, a profound turning inwards...
Put into the context of the 3.21, there is a profound turning inwards when there is an absence of light before the eyes. Next time you are in a meditative seat, or a likewise deeply invested Yin ãsana, closing your eyes then, namely, removing the light source, I have one question for you: Where does your body go? Does it not become invisible when you turn the gaze fully inwards?
I have a commutative belief of existence in life: I exist because you exist and you exist because I exist... For me, 3.21 is a direct corollary to that thought. When I fully turn within, the world without (for that moment) does not exist...it becomes invisible to me, and I to it. Try it sometime.
Onwards.
Sopakramam nirupakramam ca karma
tat-samyamãd-aparãnta-jñãnam-aristhebyo vã
3.22
Or,
Karma is both with an origin (or, discernible progression), or without. By performing samyama on that, or by portents and omens, knowledge of the end of one's life is gained. 3.22
This sutra is likewise usually taken as "aparãnta" meaning "death", thus giving rise to the Siddhi of knowing when one is going to die. Yes and no.
The word "a-para-anta" when broken down, means "not (having)-(an)other-end", or poetically rendered, "that which has no other shore," that is, the Isle of the Dead...or Avalon in Celtic lore, the Fields of Elysium, and so forth. It can also mean, the latter end of one's life.
Looking back then at 3.22, we see that if we meditate upon Karma (action/s) or by paying attention to portents and omens, we can have knowledge of our years ahead. Not a big stretch. Think simply about lifestyle. If I drink and smoke heavily, and I develop certain symptoms (portents) that my body is in decline, guess what? That is a pro-gnosis (Greek cognate to the Sanskrit pra-jñã) that I may have a terminal illness and may die. 3.22 is saying the exact thing. Some of our actions have beginnings, namely those we initiate (internal) and those that don't (external forces we may not have a direct relation to, but which affect us anyways) and those can affect our life's span/quality. Omens and portents are merely things to pay attention to that might signal something is wrong (or right, as they are not always bad), and can again affect our life's span.
In short: Directed awareness of things can yield knowledge of our life's condition...
Moving right along...taking the next 2 sutras together as they seem to be a couplet of sorts:
Maitryãdishu balãni 3.23
Baleshu hasti-balãdIni 3.24
Giving us,
By performing samyama on friendliness and the like, we gain strengths [and] by meditating upon such strengths, we gain the strength of elephants and so forth. 3.23-24
Somewhere, Bruce Banner is scratching his head.
Simply put, focus on the positive, we become strong, focus on those strengths, we become even stronger...even hulking in our skills. We regularly say, he's got the strength of an ox, or she has eagle eyes, or the speed of a cheetah...Do we "hound" people to take them literally when we hear that? Just a question.
To continue:
Pravrittyãloka-nyãsãt-sUksma-vyavhita-viprakrishtha-jñãnam 3.25
Or,
By directing vision to phenomena, knowledge of things subtle, discrete and remote is gained. 3.25
There are a few interpretations of this sutra, but the gist is generally the same as Newton's 1st Law of Motion stating that "Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state
of motion unless an external force is applied to it." In other words, if nothing is in the way, then nothing shall stop one's line of sight, just as a light from Earth will travel across the cosmos if there is nothing to get in its way, such as, say a Black Hole or something. When obstacles are removed, there are no boundaries then.
The following 4 sutras have a nearly identical syntax, so I have placed them together as the form mirrors the function as well:
Bhuvana-jñãnam sUrye samyamãt 3.26
Chandre tãrã-vyUha-jñãnam 3.27
Dhruve tad-gati-jñãnam 3.28
Nãbhi-chakre kaya-vyUha-jñãnam 3.29
[Except for 3.26, there is an exact formula, but 3.26 introduces the ablative samyamãt that is inferred in the next three as evidenced by the locative of the first terms.]
Giving us then,
By performing samyama on:
- the sun, one gains knowledge of the 3 (or 7) worlds 3.26
- the moon, one gains knowledge of the arrangement of the stars 3.27
- the firmament (or, fixed point--Pole Star), one gains knowledge its movement 3.28
- the wheel of the navel, one gains knowledge of the arrangement of the body 3.29
Simply put, the study of the sun, moon, stars and personal anatomy gives rise to knowledge of the bigger picture of astronomy, physics and biology.
Though, I must admit, Ecclesiastics 1:9 comes to mind:
What has been will be again
What has been done will be done again
There is nothing new under the Sun...
Moving on then from the Natural Sciences to study of the Self and Body, we find 3.30-31 waiting:
Kantha-kUpe kshut-papãsã-nivrittih 3.30
kUrma-nãdyãm sthairyam 3.31
Or,
The cessation of hunger and thirst comes from samyama on the hollow of the throat (gullet). 3.30
Stability/firmness comes from samyama on the tortoise nerve channel (nãdI). 3.31
Some have and still take 3.30 to mean that the advance Yogi/ni can go without food or water indefinitely. Well, there have been some seriously fascinating attests to incredible feats of fasting and no hydration, but, eventually the body dies. Period. In addition, this Siddhi is not one to be coveted if we heed the warnings later that Siddhis are in fact just more obstacles. In other words, going to such an extreme would be a complete MIS-understanding of this sutra. Following the Buddha's advice, don't pull the string too tightly, nor too loosely because both extremes cause the sound of the instrument to be out of tune.
3.31 is somewhat nebulous as it deals with the kurma-nãdI, or tortoise nerve channel, which is not properly identified anywhere. It is possible that this is the ability to become as still/stable as a reptile, such as a lizard or snake where it is not clear if they are alive or dead.
And, finally, we move further inwards with 3.32-34:
mUrdha-jyotishi siddha-darshanam 3.32
prãtibhãt-vã sarvam 3.33
hridaye citta-samvit 3.34
Taking 3.32 and 3.33 together with the conjunction "vã", which means "or" we get two possibilities:
Or, total vision of skill comes from intuition focused upon the light of the forehead.
OR,
Perfected vision comes from [samyama] on the light of the forehead, or everything comes from intuition...
Neither is very elegant, and so, at this point, these are works in progress...What seems to be at the core of this is that focusing upon the Mind's Eye produces enhanced vision. Now, whether that is physical or metaphysical vision is then up for debate with 3.34 following:
Understanding of the Mind [comes from samyama] on the Heart. 3.34
When my daughter was younger, she once asked me, "Papa, which is most specialist part of the body, the Heart or the Brain?" My answer was: Yin and Yang, Heart and Brain in this post:
Patañjali gives us more or less the same...by meditating upon the heart comes understanding of the mind, but in order to have such meditation, we need the mind, and for the body to work, we need the heart (the Sanskrit, btw, is hrid, which is where we get "heart" from...), so the two are entangled.
And, now for some REM...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)