Everything old is new again, and everything new is old again...or so it goes. Book II of Patañjali's Yoga Sutras is, on the surface, about the way we go about our abhyãsa, or diligent practice, that we learn about in Book I. However, with only marginal scratching, below this surface we find what is the core of the Sutras, namely, why bother?
Before I began a sutra-by-sutra exegesis of the Sutras, I posted on sutra 2.16, saying that for me, at least, it is that very core concept to answer that question, "why bother?" At this point we have slowly built up to that point, but not yet. A few missing pieces, however, need to be filled in before we return to that particular sutra. And, 2.10-14 provide just such pieces. So, let's take a look.
Sutra 2.10, picking up from the previous nine, which begin Book II and introduce the kleshas, or afflictions, that plague us all at one time or another, and can be varying in their intensity and effect upon us and our practice. Moreover, the kingpin of the kleshas according to Patañjali is no less than a-vidyã, or ignorance, which then generates all other kleshas.
Sutra 2.10 then takes us a step further in true Patañjali fashion by providing a solution to our problem:
te pratiprasavaheyãh sukshmãh 2.10
Or,
They/These [kleshas] [are] subtle and are eliminated by a return to the original state [of our Be-ing, or of the kleshas?].
It is not clear which "original state" is being referred to. And, yet again, owing to the hyper-economy of sutra grammar, we could also read this as:
The subtle [kleshas] are eliminated by returning to the original state.
So, either only the subtle kleshas are eliminated in this fashion, or all of them are, and they are subtle in nature. Both from more common syntax models and meaning, I am inclined to adopt the latter. This would mean that the kleshas, being subtle, are immaterial. In other words, it's all in our mind. This fits in alignment with Patañjali's overarching artha, or goal, that is, eliminating the disturbances in the mind, such as we saw from the very onset, and as we shall see in Book IV even more dramatically.
There is a common thread throughout the Sutras with this reading in that our mind is responsible for the vast majority, if not all, of our true suffering. Now, the obvious, and valid objection to this is that we can, and do, have physical afflictions that cause us suffering in life. That being said, the Yogi/ni in practice can overcome the physical obstacles through abhyãsa. Again, no small feat, nor does Patañjali give it to us as such. Patañjali does not discount the existence of the physical, but he does place a great deal more emphasis on the mental. The Sutras could easily be mistaken for modern psycho-analysis if one is not careful about which came first...
But, what is at hand here is, whichever way we do read 2.10, what is the original state? And, how do we return to it? The answer, being no surprise, is Yoga. But, let's scratch a bit deeper with 2.11, which gives us a spoiler alert for the ashtanga steps of Yoga that are imminent in Book II. We read:
dhyãna-heyãs-tad-vrittayah 2.11
Or,
The disturbances [of the kleshas] are eliminated through dhyãna. 2.11
Dhyãna, as we have already seen, and shall see again more in detail in Book III, is profound meditation, and is the seventh "step" in the 8-step program that Patañjali is building up to, more commonly known as the 8-limbs of Yoga. But, as we saw in Book I, Patañjali is wont to give us the answer first in Jeopardy! fashion, then build up to the question as he does here. The answer: Dhyãna. The question: How do we eliminate those pesky kleshas from our practice/life? And, the follow-up question is: To what end? with the answer being: Samãdhi, which is the consequence of this 8-fold path, which culminates with the application of the penultimate step, Dhyãna.
Fair enough, but we need to get to the root of the problem, or in this case, problems, which are the kleshas. Where do they come from? Sutra 2.12 happily provides the answer:
klesha-mulah karmãshayo dristha-adrishta-janma-vedaniyah 2.12
Giving us,
The root (mula) of the kleshas is the storehouse of karma, which is the lived experience of lives seen and unseen.
Now, karma, as we well know, has crept into our modern languages across the board, and most especially in New Age, Yoga and Metaphysical/Spiritual avenues of thought. But, here's the rub. More often than not, the word karma is misused at best, misunderstood even more so. Popularly used, it has come to mean, more or less, an nearly instant "tit for a tat" or "an eye for eye" essentially, meaning if you do something bad, then something bad happens to you later in the day, or if you do a good deed, then ye shall be duly rewarded by bedtime. Not exactly.
As this has been long a pet peeve of mine, I did post on this some years ago, but it bears repeating at this juncture. Karma, on its own, and its purest form simply means <<the thing done>>, or even more simply <<action>>. In itself, it does not carry a value charge, so to speak, that is, it is neither good, nor bad, nor evil, nor anything else, it just is. Karma is what we do. Basta. So, the storehouse of karma, or karmãshayah, is merely a metaphysical ledger that holds our accounts receivable of our deeds. What have we done? Karma.
This in turn is the root of our kleshas. In short, what we do in our lives affects us. Fair enough, right? So, if this is the case, then we should perhaps take a moment to be aware of what we do and how we do it. This soon becomes the crux of the first two steps of ashtanga, Yama and Niyama as we soon shall see. For now, we just need to be aware that actions have consequences, and those consequences lead to kleshas, which ultimately lead to duhkam, or suffering, which in turn, as we shall also see in my next post (or already here) is what is to be avoided in life by Yogic practice in order to free (moksha) us from the fetters of ignorance, or avidyã. Whew, that is another mouthful...
Back to karma, however, we read that it can come from births/lives both seen and unseen. This can be interpreted again in more than one way. One reading is that this means the seen births/lives are those from our Past and the unseen are those from our Future. However, it could also mean that unlike the Buddha, who could see all of his past lives, our unseen ones could be the ones which did in fact come before us and the seen birth/life is merely the one that we are living today. Both can be read logically and grammatically from this sutra.
Moving on then to 2.13-14, we see further that karma does yield consequence, or as we see, fruits (of our labors/missteps).
sati mule tad-vipãko jãtyãyurbhogah 2.13
te hlãda-paritãpah-phalãh punya-apunya-hetutvãt 2.14
Or,
When/so long as the root still exists, its yield/fruition is the experiences of life and birth. 2.13
These fruits are either pleasure or pain, as a result of pure (virtuous) or impure (vice) [karma]. 2.14
And, further, following the grammar and not the accepted translations (which don't), for 2.13, we get something akin (not identical) to:
The consequence of our action is the experience of samsãra (cycle of birth/death)
{NB: for all of you language geeks out there, the first two words of 2.14, sati mule, are a locative absolute! ]
From this we then see that karma, our actions do yield results, and it is directly related to the nature of the action, but not the action itself. That is an important distinction because some actions can also be non-action, as we see in the Bhagavad Gita in Book 3 on Karma Yoga. Often not doing something is even more important than doing something, and vice versa. It is the effects of the karma, or action, moreover that will then add or detract from our ledger in the karmãshayah.
And, since these consequences, or fruits of action, can be pleasure or pain, hlãda or paritãpah, we can relate them directly to the kleshas of rãga, passion/desire and dvesha, aversion that we saw in 2.7-8. As such, our actions are indeed the root of these two kleshas. Moreover, because of our ignoranc, or avidyã, of the ultimate consequences of our karma, both past and present (and even future), then we are led into further disruptions of the karmic balance, leading to the anxiety of what is coming our way, namely, abhiniveshah.
So, the more that we are aware of what we do, karma, and how we do it, the less impact the kleshas will exert upon us. In other words, when we then learn to follow the precepts of the 8-fold path we are about to learn, the kleshas become irrelevant.
To answer our earlier question then, to eliminate the kleshas, we go back to the original state, the root of the klesha, which is no less than karma.
Take -home message?
Act well, live well, be well...
The result?
Stay tuned...
 |
| Only in New Mexico, though East 108 would have been interesting! |
Before I began a sutra-by-sutra exegesis of the Sutras, I posted on sutra 2.16, saying that for me, at least, it is that very core concept to answer that question, "why bother?" At this point we have slowly built up to that point, but not yet. A few missing pieces, however, need to be filled in before we return to that particular sutra. And, 2.10-14 provide just such pieces. So, let's take a look.
Sutra 2.10, picking up from the previous nine, which begin Book II and introduce the kleshas, or afflictions, that plague us all at one time or another, and can be varying in their intensity and effect upon us and our practice. Moreover, the kingpin of the kleshas according to Patañjali is no less than a-vidyã, or ignorance, which then generates all other kleshas.
Sutra 2.10 then takes us a step further in true Patañjali fashion by providing a solution to our problem:
te pratiprasavaheyãh sukshmãh 2.10
Or,
They/These [kleshas] [are] subtle and are eliminated by a return to the original state [of our Be-ing, or of the kleshas?].
It is not clear which "original state" is being referred to. And, yet again, owing to the hyper-economy of sutra grammar, we could also read this as:
The subtle [kleshas] are eliminated by returning to the original state.
So, either only the subtle kleshas are eliminated in this fashion, or all of them are, and they are subtle in nature. Both from more common syntax models and meaning, I am inclined to adopt the latter. This would mean that the kleshas, being subtle, are immaterial. In other words, it's all in our mind. This fits in alignment with Patañjali's overarching artha, or goal, that is, eliminating the disturbances in the mind, such as we saw from the very onset, and as we shall see in Book IV even more dramatically.
There is a common thread throughout the Sutras with this reading in that our mind is responsible for the vast majority, if not all, of our true suffering. Now, the obvious, and valid objection to this is that we can, and do, have physical afflictions that cause us suffering in life. That being said, the Yogi/ni in practice can overcome the physical obstacles through abhyãsa. Again, no small feat, nor does Patañjali give it to us as such. Patañjali does not discount the existence of the physical, but he does place a great deal more emphasis on the mental. The Sutras could easily be mistaken for modern psycho-analysis if one is not careful about which came first...
But, what is at hand here is, whichever way we do read 2.10, what is the original state? And, how do we return to it? The answer, being no surprise, is Yoga. But, let's scratch a bit deeper with 2.11, which gives us a spoiler alert for the ashtanga steps of Yoga that are imminent in Book II. We read:
dhyãna-heyãs-tad-vrittayah 2.11
Or,
The disturbances [of the kleshas] are eliminated through dhyãna. 2.11
Dhyãna, as we have already seen, and shall see again more in detail in Book III, is profound meditation, and is the seventh "step" in the 8-step program that Patañjali is building up to, more commonly known as the 8-limbs of Yoga. But, as we saw in Book I, Patañjali is wont to give us the answer first in Jeopardy! fashion, then build up to the question as he does here. The answer: Dhyãna. The question: How do we eliminate those pesky kleshas from our practice/life? And, the follow-up question is: To what end? with the answer being: Samãdhi, which is the consequence of this 8-fold path, which culminates with the application of the penultimate step, Dhyãna.
Fair enough, but we need to get to the root of the problem, or in this case, problems, which are the kleshas. Where do they come from? Sutra 2.12 happily provides the answer:
klesha-mulah karmãshayo dristha-adrishta-janma-vedaniyah 2.12
Giving us,
The root (mula) of the kleshas is the storehouse of karma, which is the lived experience of lives seen and unseen.
Now, karma, as we well know, has crept into our modern languages across the board, and most especially in New Age, Yoga and Metaphysical/Spiritual avenues of thought. But, here's the rub. More often than not, the word karma is misused at best, misunderstood even more so. Popularly used, it has come to mean, more or less, an nearly instant "tit for a tat" or "an eye for eye" essentially, meaning if you do something bad, then something bad happens to you later in the day, or if you do a good deed, then ye shall be duly rewarded by bedtime. Not exactly.
As this has been long a pet peeve of mine, I did post on this some years ago, but it bears repeating at this juncture. Karma, on its own, and its purest form simply means <<the thing done>>, or even more simply <<action>>. In itself, it does not carry a value charge, so to speak, that is, it is neither good, nor bad, nor evil, nor anything else, it just is. Karma is what we do. Basta. So, the storehouse of karma, or karmãshayah, is merely a metaphysical ledger that holds our accounts receivable of our deeds. What have we done? Karma.
This in turn is the root of our kleshas. In short, what we do in our lives affects us. Fair enough, right? So, if this is the case, then we should perhaps take a moment to be aware of what we do and how we do it. This soon becomes the crux of the first two steps of ashtanga, Yama and Niyama as we soon shall see. For now, we just need to be aware that actions have consequences, and those consequences lead to kleshas, which ultimately lead to duhkam, or suffering, which in turn, as we shall also see in my next post (or already here) is what is to be avoided in life by Yogic practice in order to free (moksha) us from the fetters of ignorance, or avidyã. Whew, that is another mouthful...
Back to karma, however, we read that it can come from births/lives both seen and unseen. This can be interpreted again in more than one way. One reading is that this means the seen births/lives are those from our Past and the unseen are those from our Future. However, it could also mean that unlike the Buddha, who could see all of his past lives, our unseen ones could be the ones which did in fact come before us and the seen birth/life is merely the one that we are living today. Both can be read logically and grammatically from this sutra.
Moving on then to 2.13-14, we see further that karma does yield consequence, or as we see, fruits (of our labors/missteps).
sati mule tad-vipãko jãtyãyurbhogah 2.13
te hlãda-paritãpah-phalãh punya-apunya-hetutvãt 2.14
Or,
When/so long as the root still exists, its yield/fruition is the experiences of life and birth. 2.13
These fruits are either pleasure or pain, as a result of pure (virtuous) or impure (vice) [karma]. 2.14
And, further, following the grammar and not the accepted translations (which don't), for 2.13, we get something akin (not identical) to:
The consequence of our action is the experience of samsãra (cycle of birth/death)
{NB: for all of you language geeks out there, the first two words of 2.14, sati mule, are a locative absolute! ]
From this we then see that karma, our actions do yield results, and it is directly related to the nature of the action, but not the action itself. That is an important distinction because some actions can also be non-action, as we see in the Bhagavad Gita in Book 3 on Karma Yoga. Often not doing something is even more important than doing something, and vice versa. It is the effects of the karma, or action, moreover that will then add or detract from our ledger in the karmãshayah.
And, since these consequences, or fruits of action, can be pleasure or pain, hlãda or paritãpah, we can relate them directly to the kleshas of rãga, passion/desire and dvesha, aversion that we saw in 2.7-8. As such, our actions are indeed the root of these two kleshas. Moreover, because of our ignoranc, or avidyã, of the ultimate consequences of our karma, both past and present (and even future), then we are led into further disruptions of the karmic balance, leading to the anxiety of what is coming our way, namely, abhiniveshah.
So, the more that we are aware of what we do, karma, and how we do it, the less impact the kleshas will exert upon us. In other words, when we then learn to follow the precepts of the 8-fold path we are about to learn, the kleshas become irrelevant.
To answer our earlier question then, to eliminate the kleshas, we go back to the original state, the root of the klesha, which is no less than karma.
Take -home message?
Act well, live well, be well...
The result?
Stay tuned...
No comments:
Post a Comment