Sometimes the Yoga Sutras are quite
logical, almost strikingly so in their language and composition. Following the
mystery character of the “seer” we are relieved to see the next 7 Sutras are
quite straightforward and provide us with some important definitions. However,
as we shall see, it is the application of these definitions that shall present
us with the challenge. Moreover, the following Sutras show just how incredibly
prescient the Sutras are, anticipating modern psychoanalysis by about 2,000
years, and they are human, oh so human.
YS 1.5 and YS 1.6 read as follows:
vrittayah
pañchatayyah klishtãklishtãh 1.5
And
pramãnaviparyayvikalpanidrãsmrtayah 1.6
Translated:
The vritti’s
are five in number and can be either afflicted or non-afflicted. 1.5
And
[They
are] pramãna, viparyaya, vikalpa, nidrã
and smritih
1.6
Meaning,
[They
are] valid/correct knowledge/experience, false knowledge/illusion, imagination,
sleep (dreams) and memory. 1.6
The only comment on 1.5 is that we shall
see these vritti’s can be klishta or a-klishta, (as in Ancient Greek, a short “a” most often means “not”
or “lack of” the word that follows) meaning afflicted or non-afflicted, more
specifically tainted by experience and prejudice. We’ll return to this in a
later post.
As for 1.6, this is merely a list, and the
definitions follow in the subsequent 5 Sutras, which we now turn to.
Pratyaksãnumãnãgamãh
pramãnãni
1.7
Or
Pramãna (valid/correct knowledge) consists of pratyaksa (direct perception), anumãna
(conjecture), and ãgamah (sacred
writings).
What this means is that these are considered
potentially authoritative sources of information. I want to stress the
“potentially” because they can be highly misleading, misinformed, and people
can be easily swayed into believing them to be true, though in truth, they may
be highly tainted and afflicted with falsehood. Pratyaksa literally means “in front of the eyes.” But, as mentioned
before, eye-witness accounts can fool both us and those we are reporting to.
Anumãna means something akin to the
Greek concept of anamnesis, which is literally bringing up to the surface of
the mind, to conjecture is to throw it up and out to the world from within our
minds. Yet, again, this can lead to misinformation as even Sherlock Holmes can
make mistakes….
And, finally, the one that is a personal
pet peeve of mine. When someone says, “but I read it in a book, it must be
true…” Were I to have a dollar each time I heard this as “proof,” well, I
wouldn’t be worried about making a living, that’s for sure. Placing all your
bets on something just because it is written is a very slippery slope indeed.
As such, our three types of “correct”
knowledge are all highly susceptible to being false, hence qualifying as a vritti that needs to be reined in by
Yoga.
Viparyayah
mithyãjñãnamatadrupapratishtham 1.8
Or
Viparyayah (illusion) is erroneous knowledge that is not rooted in the thing
itself. 1.8
In other words, we say “this”, when in
reality, it is “that”. The classic
Indian example that I have written about before is when one is walking down a
pathway in poor light and he or she sees a long cylindrical object on the path
and the mind immediately imagines it to be a deadly cobra, but in reality, it
is a rope. Sometimes our minds process faster than we are aware, and in the
instant, we can experience viparyayah.
Or, more commonly, we can convince ourselves that something is other than it
is. Sound familiar?
Shabdajñãnãnupãti
vastushunyo vikalpah 1.9
Or
Vikalpah (imagination) is something devoid of reality contingent upon the
knowledge of its verbal expression.
Simply put, we imagine things based upon
our experience of hearing/reading about something and then creating a story
that is not founded upon reality. It is quite the flavor of the times to talk
about “creating stories” for ourselves that deceive us. Patañjali was way ahead
of the curve on this one. I don’t want to live in a world devoid of
imagination, but when we need to get the balance right, it is our stories
(sometimes known as lies) that we tell ourselves and others that can knock
things out of whack, and they are often highly prevalent in relationships,
whether with friends or lovers, and this can be quite troublesome. I speak from
experience. Imagination is a fickle beast.
Abhãvapratyayãlmbanã
vrittirnidrã 1.10
Or
Nidrã (sleep, dreams inclusive) sleep is a modality founded upon a lack
of understanding or awareness.
In other words, sleep/dreams are a
subconscious modulation of the mind. Hmmmm…let’s see, I’ve heard that before.
Ah, yes, Sigmund Freud, who was given and took credit for dream analysis. News
flash, Indian thinkers have been doing this for over 2,000 years. There is a
great deal of literature on the nature of dreams in Sanskrit, especially in
connection with the sacred syllable OM, or A-U-M, as I have written about before (check it out if interested). As such, when we sleep and dream, we
puzzle together the pieces of our lives, interspersed with unconscious
imagination, creating false knowledge, or at least, something not completely
founded upon awareness, hence a vritti
in our Mind’s Eye.
And, finally:
Anubhutavishayãsampramoshah
smrtih 1.11
Or,
Smritih (memory) is an impression of a lived experience that remains with
us.
Yet, as we can all attest, even the
clearest memories take on a life of their own. We have a grave tendency to
filter, for better or for worse, the memories of our lives and experiences we
have lived. Sometimes we filter out bad memories and sometimes we filter out good ones, often in each case for self-protection against heartache or mental
anguish. When this happens, the full gamut of the lived experiences is
compromised, insufficient and can lead to delusions of times passed, again, for
better or for worse.
What we can take away from these five vritti’s is that our psychological
constitution does not always work in our favor. Sometimes a self-preservation
kicks in, and at those moments, it may seem that we are doing ourselves a favor,
but more often then not, it is repression, pure and simple. We, as a species,
like to bury the dead. In another lifetime I used to work on the Irish writer
James Joyce, and wrote a book on the relationship between memory and death
within his writings. In a shameless bout of self-promotion I’ll quote from that work (for, I don't always know what another author may mean...but watch out for falling into the trap of ãgamah!) to conclude:
- Joyce's works were shot through with both pain and hope, the oscillation between the two were the balance of the tragi-comedy that is life, and to write was to become bigger than ourselves by becoming part of something larger than life, memory. (from When We Waken the Dead: Readings on Memory and Death in Joyce by Robert L. Fulton, Jr.)
And so, we tell ourselves stories, in hope and in pain...often upsetting the balance of the citta, but often just to feel alive.
