तदर्थ एव दृश्यस्यात्मा ।। २१।।

तत् – his (the seer पुरुष), अर्थ – purpose, एव – only, दृश्यस्य – of the knowable, of that which is seen, आत्मा – essential nature, existence 

The essential nature of that which is seen is exclusively for the sake of the Seer.

That which is experienced, an object that is perceived through the senses, it has a meaning and significance only in respect of this पुरुष that experiences objects. The essence of an object is the capacity to serve the purpose of पुरुष – it has no intrinsic value of its own, no purpose to exist other than to serve its Seer. Do we appreciate this position? We seem to be controlled by objects. We like a car – we chase it, we like to travel – we go to Dubai, we like Nachos – we go to a restaurant. We are chasing experiences and always appear to be in a position not of control but of subjugation. If the object is meant to serve our purpose, why does it appear that subject is the one that is chasing but it is not the object that comes to us? Or is this सूत्र wrong?

Our habitual attachment from various births has been subjection of पुरुष to the processes of the mind. The velocity of the mind towards the objects is due to the similarity of structure between the senses and their objects. The गुण in प्रकृति existing both in the senses and objects become the cause for movement of the senses towards the objects. And so when there is identification of पुरुष with the senses, it looks as if, together with the senses, there is movement of पुरुष towards the objects.

Our choice of food, friends, speech, news we watch, songs we listen to, YouTube channels we have subscribed to, the movies we watch, the books we read, the places we visit…all of these tells us a lot about ourselves provided we do not live them unconsciously but observe these consciously. So a way to take control of our lives is to live a life oriented to “insight & learn” as against “chase & enjoy”. Pursuit of actions for धर्म, continually assessing our own choice of experiences will prevent us from getting swayed by worldly trends. And when “insight & learn” becomes our spontaneous habit of choice, that will become a first step in our direction towards freedom.

HB: How did you reach this conclusion that  we are controlled by objects from this shloka

UB: It’s quite simple really. If I see a Samosa and I am unable to stop myself from eating it even though the time and place are not suitable, I am controlled by the Samosa. You can extrapolate this to any other object including persons 😊

HB: The essential nature of that which is seen is exclusively for the sake of the Seer. The shloka and meaning is not in the sync. If this is so, the object is aligning towards the seer. The seer  decides ( perhaps unconsciously) what he wants to smell, hear, see, taste or feel

UB: What is meant to be conveyed is Seen is for the sake of Seer and not vice versa. It is the same age old debate of need based life vs a greed based life. If it is greed based, it means objects have control over us. That is the idea

कृतार्थं प्रति नष्टं अप्यनष्टं तदन्यसाधारणत्वात् ।। २२।।

कृत – accomplished, fulfilled, अर्थं – purpose, प्रति – toward, with regard to, नष्टं – destroyed, अपि – although, अनष्टं – not destroyed, तत् – that, अन्य – other, साधारणत्वात् – because of being common 

Although the seen ceases to exist for one whose purpose is accomplished (the liberated पुरुष), it has not ceased to exist altogether, since it is common to other (non-liberated) पुरुष.

This सूत्र is a fascinating one and while it may clarify a few questions, it raises many others. The various commentaries seem confusing (to me). Simply put, the सूत्र states that once someone regains their पुरुष state, while प्रकृति no longer has any hold on this person (it ceases to exist for this person), प्रकृति is an eternal matrix and it continues to exist for others who are still not liberated. Thus, while a Google map is no longer required for one who has reached the destination, it remains available for use by other travellers. प्रकृति is thus an eternal substance that always exists.

Few questions emerge here. If the goal of योगसूत्र is to attain पुरुष and then be established in one’s own स्वभाव, what is the relation of a liberated पुरुष with ईश्वर? Are both the same or are they different? How does a liberated पुरुष see other liberated or non-liberated पुरुष? Does the liberated पुरुष lose identity and merge in a larger ईश्वर identity? Multiple answers seem to be given by various वेद-schools. The योग school is aligned to the idea that there are crores of पुरुष who after being liberated remain in that state while ईश्वर is a special पुरुष. अद्वैत school suggests that just as river merges into sea, मोक्ष means losing one’s separate identity and merging into परमात्मा. But when a river merges into sea, does the river water cease to exist fully or does it merely lose its “river” identity? Another school explains the relationship of ईश्वर & पुरुष as akin to that of a body & cells within the body or a large body of fire and a spark within the fire. And some भक्ति schools express that a जीव lives in कैलाश or वैकुंठ or गोलोक or मणिद्वीप, etc. after attaining पुरुष state.

पतंजलि has chosen to remain silent on these questions. So what should a साधक do for answers to these questions? Maybe we should echo पतंजलि spirit and say “it does not matter”. It may be better to avoid non-साधक scholars who focus on differences among various schools rather than trying to find a समन्वय among them. Avoid also those belonging to a संप्रदाय who extol their own संप्रदाय alone with (misplaced) exclusivity. One who reaches the पुरुष-state will have direct access to Truth anyway. Till such time, have सत्संग of a genuine साधक who does daily साधना by imbibing the helpful aspects from all schools. Common aspects that unite these schools can be used by all of us for our साधना:

1. पुरुष represents a state when one is मुक्त or free. And in such a state, one is not bound by prejudices or limiting thought-templates but instead experiences infinity. 
2. One remains in a state of eternal आनन्द once one realizes one’s own स्वरूप.
3. Till one attains पुरुष, one is under the spell of अविद्या or माया. When one attains पुरुष, अविद्या or माया is under the control of पुरुष. 
4. All Indic schools frame their दृष्टि using common terms viz existence of प्रकृति and its building blocks viz गुण, पञ्चभूत, बुद्धि, अहंकार, कर्म, यज्ञ, संस्कार, वासना, देवता व्यवस्था, etc through which they see all ज्ञान.

• Just by doing a few good कर्म or being nice to others now and then cannot aid in gaining company of ईश्वर. At best, one may gain स्वर्ग which is however a temporary place. 

Just as all of us gravitate to people like ourselves naturally, to gravitate towards ईश्वर requires us also to acquire ईश्वरत्वम् right here right now. And if one leaves the body without attaining ईश्वरत्वम्, even if they gain the company of ईश्वर by accident, they will certainly get bored after a while and will want to move out 😊😊.

स्वस्वामिशक्त्यो: स्वरूपोपलब्धिहेतुः संयोगः ।।२३।।

स्व – of being owned, the possessed, स्वामि – of being owner, शक्त्यो: – of the powers, स्वरूप – own nature, true form, उपलब्धि – understanding, recognition, हेतुः – the cause, संयोगः – contact, association 

The reason for the coming together of the seen and the seer is for the seer to unfold the awareness of his true nature and power

A profound सूत्र that is stunning in its import. पुरुष is the स्वामि and He has संयोग (association) with स्व (what He possesses viz प्रकृति) and Her objects. And why does this संयोग happen? For the sake of knowing Its स्वरूप. Every अनुभव we indulge in happens within us only. And the purpose of any अनुभव is simply to know one’s own स्वरूप. When we meet friends and come out happy, we come to know that we like company of friends. When we lift a bag of 50 KG, we know that we have the power to lift 50 KG. When we meet an ex-friend and come out unhappy we know that we hate this person. When we see a movie or someone we love or drive a car or anything else, all अनुभव of any kind happens within us only. This is why we often feel that every event that happens anywhere in the world has a message for us. And this self-evaluation out of every अनुभव of ours tells us something about us to us.

There are now two ways in which we gain knowledge of our स्वरूप. We may have अनुभव of pleasure & pain – such अनुभव is भोग and व्यास names this as अदर्शन. The other अनुभव is where we know or realize that it is the body and mind that is having भोग but I am separate from the body-mind complex. Such an अनुभव of detachment when we are able to see the distinction between प्रकृति & पुरुष is named as दर्शन. Thus, mis-apprehension of our own स्वरूप is अदर्शन and right apprehension of our own स्वरूप is दर्शन. पुरुष is not an object of अनुभव nor is it remembered from memory – पुरुष is not a भोगवस्तु. What happens is that when पुरुष realization happens, our बुद्धि is arrested for sometime. But pre-existing वासना make बुद्धि emerge again and we then realise that the बुद्धि we have regained is a separate principle from पुरुष. This विवेक within बुद्धि is based on retained impressions of the arrested state of बुद्धि is दर्शन.

Therefore, while अदर्शन is a state of modification of बुद्धि (mind) in the shape of अनुभव of pleasure and pain, दर्शन is a state where अनुभव ceases and the mind has knowledge of पुरुष as a principle separate from the बुद्धि. But there is a third state that is the state of मोक्ष. When मोक्ष happens, this is a mode of no knowledge of any aspect of प्रकृति – in this no-mind state, one merely abides in one’s own स्वरूप – the सत्-चित-आनन्द पूर्ण being-ness. Thus in all three states, our स्वरूप is at the centre of our being driving our conduct and action.

PK: In which of these is the truly wise (wo)nan 😜( sorry , cannot resist) living in the world of prakrithi yet detached and aware of his/ her true nature? I am assuming that is feasible for learned folks and seems different from moksha ?

What man – woman, Priya? These are merely external bodies – underlying is one for both 😊. On your question – can I request you to reframe your question? Apologies but I am unable to understand what you are exactly seeking.

PK: I am assuming there are wise folks who are realized regarding true nature of purush – some of them will still be dealing with the world / prakrithi right ? I wanted to clarify if that is true as I am assuming it is not the same as a soul achieving moksha? So people like Nisargatta maharaj etc are like that ? Lived in the world of prakrithi in a detached manner ? All theoretical still .. I still do not get how one understands our true nature of purush / turiya if we cannot access mind- intellect which at present are our best tools …Examples of not being able to see our own retina do not satisfy as we have cameras that can photograph our retinas and so by inference knowledge of experts we know we have a retina even though we obviously cannot see our own.. The purush/ turiya conundrum at present to me in my lowly stage of evolution/ knowledge seems like a leap of faith and I have some problems with that 😃😃. So I still just to trying to follow other principles which can be applied to real life like trying to not get attached / control outcomes .. go with the flow .. try to surround yourself with wise kind folks and read as much as feasible etc 🙏

UB: A-ha – got it. There are categories here. So you have those who take अवतार or कारण-जन्म types who descend into प्रकृति for a certain purpose. They come, they do their bit and move on. They are anyway like the Terminator robot – focussed on their purpose and move on. There may be others who are in their last life, have become जीवनमुक्त who have attained मोक्ष but the body continues just like a fan switched off does not stop immediately but stops after a while. Ramana or Nisargadutta Maharaj may be of the former or latter categories – no one knows.

UB: On the question of how mind cannot access PURUSHA, you already know the answer since you are listening to Sarvapriyananda on deep sleep. Deep sleep state is a state where cognitive mind is dormant. It also goes into sleep. But when you wake up, you remember that you had deep sleep.  So here, the mind does not cognize peace but it cognizes this experience when it wakes up. Here also, the commentary explains in a similar way. So the commentators state that when mind becomes dormant (or as they say in meditation language as the space between thoughts), पुरुष realizes its own blissful nature. But then the  pre-existing Vasana gets the thoughts to emerge. A discerning mind who had दर्शन did not cognize पुरुष but once he starts cognizing again, the experience the bliss is remembered just as the one who wakes up after deep sleep remembers deep sleep. And let me add that I too am being theoretical here but this is what they seem to be stating here.

UB: Vasanas forces thoughts to emerge. This is why Surdas removed his eyesight after having दर्शन of श्रीकृष्ण  or the dumb मूक कवी who sang मूकपञ्चशती after he had दर्शन of देवी asked for his voice to be taken away since after having दर्शन of the blissful state, they did not want प्रकृति to dwell on anything mundane and thereby lose connect with the दर्शन they already experienced

PK: Yup – this makes sense – deep sleep as dormant yet we are aware when we wake up that we were in deep sleep 🙏

तस्य हेतुरविद्या ।।२४।।

तस्य – of it (conjunction or संयोग) हेतु: – the cause, अविद्या

The cause of संयोग is अविद्या

This is a rather strange language. Earlier सूत्र states that there is संयोग between पुरुष & प्रकृति to enable पुरुष to know its स्वरूप. But here, the सूत्र states that this संयोग between पुरुष & प्रकृति is caused by अविद्या. If अविद्या helps in knowing one’s स्वरूप, then it should be seen as a helpful aid. Why should that which is helpful be named as अविद्या? What exactly is this अविद्या?

Possibly the best ancient invention of mankind was not the wheel but the humble mirror, of the 1800s was a camera (not telephone) and of the 21st century being a humble selfie. We love ourselves, are curious about ourselves. We are dragged to a mirror time and again, if a group photo comes to us, we try to locate ourselves first. In our kids, we look for likeness to us in them. This attraction to our स्वरूप and see it everywhere seems like our most natural expression.

So if looking at a mirror is a natural expression or climbing a mountain helps us know our स्वरूप, अविद्या which brings about संयोग of पुरुष with प्रकृति may not appear as a bad thing. But here, a key question is ask is – does the mirror or an experience of adventure reflect our full स्वरूप? The answer is a “No” – it reflects a limited aspect only since there is a lot more to me than the persona seen in a mirror or known by climbing a mountain. However, as I see the mirror daily, some form of vanity probably sets in forcing, for example, actors like देवानन्द & राजेश खन्ना to continue playing a 25-year old character and thereby lose opportunity to display other talents. अविद्या may thus be seen as a force that binds us to a sub-optimal स्वरूप and keeping us tied to limited कर्म which does not do justice to our infinite स्वरूप.

परशुराम अवतार was for a certain reason. Having fulfilled His purpose, He should have moved on. But He lived on and when राम broke the शिव-धनुष, He approached राम with anger and reminded राम of His previous massacre of the क्षत्रिय. राम reminded Him that the purpose of परशुराम was over and He should not be struck to one aspect of स्वभाव that He may have taken on at a certain point of time. परशुराम got the message and returned to महेन्द्रगिरी for योग. So परशुराम became bound but राम set Him free. So while अविद्या no doubt presents a स्वरूप to the पुरुष, what पुरुष experiences is a split from Its पूर्ण स्वरूप and this दृष्टिदोष triggers गुण imbalance within प्रकृति and all images reflected of पुरुष on प्रकृति represent sub-optimal स्वरूप, a dented vision, as determined by fluctuating गुण within प्रकृति.

अविद्या may be seen as a force that brings about a split in orientation of पुरुष and creates a duality of a subject on one side and object on other, the experiencer and the experienced. But is अविद्या innate of or a latent tendency within पुरुष Itself? There is a principle of सत्कार्यवाद viz the doctrine of pre-existence of effect in the cause, both cause and effect are always existing. What will happen in the future exists unmanifested in the present. So one may argue that अविद्या is a latent tendency within पुरुष Itself and this is why वासना is present within the पुरुष itself. But our texts do not agree with this view. पुरुष is seen as eternally free. अविद्या brings about संयोग between पुरुष & प्रकृति in a manner of superimposition just as a cloud comes in front thus hiding the vision of the Sun. Remove the cloud and the vision becomes clear.

So why has this physical universe and differences among life forms comes about? Just as clay cannot take the shape of pot/ plate on its own, raw प्रकृति also cannot turn into this physical universe teeming with life on its own. Matter lends its body while ब्रह्मा gives a specific shape or form to the universe as determined by the accumulated वासना of all जीव at the end the previous creative cycle. So while ब्रह्मा takes on the role of a potter, the trigger for creation is अविद्या and creation is thus not a random will of ब्रह्मा or ईश्वर. Their intent is solely to help crores of जीव fulfill their वासना stock and return to their पुरुष-hood.

And if I am allowed to indulge in speculation. As we scroll through various photos or videos, why do we stop at a certain photo and imbibe joy and/or anxiety seeing them? While we may be blissful already, rekindled old videos compel us to call the friends (though we may say that calling friends is a free choice 😊) and set in motion a series of कर्म to recreate old joys. Can we see पुरुष taking on to प्रकृति during the act of scrolling through its own grandeur as displayed on प्रकृति, getting mesmerized by them and get bound? A पुराण story refers to ब्रह्मा getting so carried away by the beauty of सरस्वती that He created that He ran after Her to become one with Her?

Adopting this दृष्टि, अविद्या is merely पुरुष getting struck at a sub-optimal idea of Itself, getting bound and causing separation from Its own पूर्ण स्वभाव. But like a benevolent Mother, अविद्या brings such kinds of life experiences to us that enable us to discern that our idea of our स्वरूप is limited. So if we develop a ज्ञान orientation, we can learn from hundreds of अनुभव that engage us tell us time and again that we are सत्-चित्-आनन्द स्वरूप – all we need to do is to seize the truth from these learning opportunities and set ourselves free. And once अविद्या is removed, just as fire burns up the fuel and then shuts itself out, mind is also burnt up, अविद्या gets set aside and पुरुष then gets established in Its own nature.

PA: So The conjunction (Sanyog) between the Real non dual (Purusha ) you and the dependent reality which are the external objects ( body / mind complex) ( Prakriti) is because of avidya which is created by Maya also called shakti. Maya or shakti or power cannot exist by itself but it seems powerful and real. It’s like the web of spider originating from the spider. if we choose to stay our awareness in the web then we are caught forever but if we remember and choose to remain in the idea that we are the spider then we are free. With perfect knowledge the web of maya does not exist or perhaps better to say does not Exert force on the real you.  It all comes down to finding out the lowest common denomination in the equation which exists by itself because of which everything exists and appears so real.  Another example from Ramakrishna Paramahansa – imagine a number 10 now if we add a few zeros behind it then it becomes 100000. And it appears so much valuable than 10 but if we remove the one behind it number 1 then all the zeros lose their value. So yes a million of a billion appears valuable ( maya) but without the number One it’s of no value and worthless.

UB: And that “1” is the real “Me” 👍

तदभावात् संयोगाभावो हानं तद्दृशे: कैवल्यम् ।। २५।।

तत – of it (अविद्या), अभावात् – from absence, removal, संयोग – conjunction, अभाव: – absence, हानं – removal, escape, तत् – that दृश: – of the seer, कैवल्यम्ल- absolute freedom, liberation

By the removal of अविद्या, संयोग is removed. This is the absolute freedom of the seer.

When बुद्धि contains संस्कार of अविद्या, says व्यास, it remains active in the realm of प्रकृति and does not produce विवेक over the true nature of पुरुष. संस्कार always pushes बुद्धि to perform the first of its two functions viz to produce experience of प्रकृति and it is this that causes bondage (बंधन). बुद्धि only ceases activity when it is able to provide विवेक to see the distinction between पुरुष & प्रकृति. And as soon as विवेक descends into बुद्धि, the grip of संस्कार over the person reduces and this causes क्लेश also to weaken and thereby अविद्या is removed.

We reach an interesting situation. बुद्धि is essential to reach a state where the विवेक is intense and it is able to project distinction between प्रकृति & पुरुष. However, till बुद्धि exists and still active, प्रकृति still remains connected to पुरुष and full मुक्ति does not come about. Says हरिहरानन्द, just as fire destroys its own fuel, similarly, the विवेक ability of बुद्धि destroys its own base viz अविद्या and once अविद्या is destroyed, it ceases to operate.

Asks व्यास – can an impotent man seed his wife after he dies 😊? If not, how can बुद्धि provide मुक्ति after it ceases to operate? व्यास then states that मुक्ति occurs when बुद्धि ceases to act. बुद्धि ceases to act when अविद्या is removed. And अविद्या is removed by ज्ञान. Put another way, बंधन is caused by अविद्या, अविद्या is removed by ज्ञान and then once ज्ञान performs its final act, it ceases to operate and full मुक्ति to पुरुष occurs. Thus, बुद्धि & ज्ञान are not the direct cause of मुक्ति but by removing अविद्या, they become the indirect cause.

PA: 👍👍it’s like you always said using a thorn to remove a thorn and then throw away both the thorns.

UB: 👍 Indeed. What always fascinates me is how these guys conceived of this thought process 1000s of years back which sounds sci-fi even for us moderns…

PA: I so much totally agree and was telling  the same thing yesterday to Sumeet the same thing. She said that this knowledge/science of liberating oneself and be really Free must  have  been channelled through..

विवेकख्यातिरविप्लवा हानोपाय: ।।२६।।

विवेकख्याति: – discriminative discernment अविप्लवा – undeviating हान – freedom, liberation उपाय: – the means 

The means to liberation is uninterrupted discriminative discernment

What is the उपाय for मुक्ति? It is विवेकख्याति (बुद्धि is at its best or highest when it is able to make distinction between पुरुष & प्रकृति). As long as false ज्ञान is not removed, any विवेक present within बुद्धि tends to be shaky. Says आदिशंकर – “As unrefined gold does not shine forth, so the knowledge of an immature person attached to the world does not shine forth”. विवेकख्याति thus refers to ability of विवेक to burn up all seeds of latent संस्कार of अविद्या present and once these are burnt up, पुरुष then gets established in Its own स्वरूप. Note the stress on the word अविप्लवा viz uninterrupted – विवेकख्याति thus needs to be uninterrupted for it to take us to the desired goal of योग.

Commentaries suggest that विवेकख्याति is initially awakened by listening to the शास्त्र (श्रवण) and then gets strengthened by contemplating on their contents (मनन) and pursued with reverence for a long time. This is followed by practice of योग (निधिध्यास) (conveyed in the सूत्र that will follow). With this, विवेक is initially able to remove the impact of तमस् & रजस् present within the चित्त by doing चित्तशुद्धि (which removes attachment to भोग or that of स्वर्ग). And as सत्व shines, विवेक deepens and becomes very powerful and the possibility of falling into confusion again gets erased fully. With विवेक then taking full control, चित्त is no longer disturbed and can now reflect on the पुरुष being free from distraction. The योगी thus approaches मुक्ति.

PA: Attachment to Bhog or to Svarg – Interesting line again Reenforces the idea that attainment of Svarg is not what one is looking for as an ultimate goal as this is also a temporary abode which one has to leave after the Satvik Karmas have been exhausted

UB Yes – स्वर्ग is a temporary place. In रामायण, इंद्र approaches ऋषि शरभंग to take him to स्वर्ग which the ऋषि refuses stating that he has crossed the need for experience of स्वर्ग. He then meets राम and attains the Highest.  And logically also, if we still have a mind and clamour for experience of good things, how can one attain the highest even though one may have done good कर्म? One may attain स्वर्ग but the journey has to continue till one attains the highest.

तस्य सप्तधा प्रान्तभूमि: प्रज्ञा ।। २७।।

तस्य – his (योगी), सप्तधा – seven-fold, प्रान्तभूमि: – final place, प्रज्ञा – true insight, wisdom

The true insight of the योगी has seven ultimate stages.

Out of seven stages, the first four pertain to liberation from कर्म and arise from personal effort of the योगी while last three arise spontaneously representing complete cessation of activities of the बुद्धि.

1. That which is to be avoided is known and there is nothing further to be “known” in this regard. Says हरिहरानन्द, that the very desire to know ceases and thus knowledge itself can cease. 
2. The क्लेश, that represent the causes for कर्म become fully eradicated.
3. By निरोध समाधि, the removal of misidentification of पुरुष with बुद्धि befome directly realized (see 1:50). 
4. विवेक ख्याति that is the means to accomplish removal given under 3 above has been attained.
5. बुद्धि has fulfilled its purpose viz to either provide भोग or मुक्ति. It has now become redundant. 
6. The गुण of the योगी dissolve into प्रकृति and emerge no more since they have no purpose left. Note however that गुण is an eternal substance that can never be destroyed – thus in this state, the effect of गुण dissolves (not the गुण themselves).
7. Free from गुण, पुरुष shines in Its own स्वरूप. This is called केवल where one is fully separated from organ of बुद्धि. Now, if such a योगी comes out of असंप्रज्ञात समाधि into external awareness, he will see this worldly experience as दुःख just as one who has had good sleep feels once he comes out of his deep-sleep state. 

The योगी is now a जीवनमुक्त if body is retained. While there may be no reason to retain the body, योगी may do so to help fellow beings. And even if योगी retains the body, such a one rises above any भोग of सुख or दुःख since विवेक ख्याति will ensure that the योगी will remain free from such an अनुभव.

योगाङ्गानुष्ठानाद् अशुद्धिक्षये ज्ञानदीप्तिराविवेकख्याते ।।२८।।

योग, अङ्ग – limbs, अनुष्ठानाद् – from the practice of, अशुद्धि – impurities, क्षये – destruction, ज्ञान, दीप्ति: – light, lamp, आ – up-to, विवेकख्याते: 

Upon the destruction of अशुद्धि as a result of practice of योग, the lamp of ज्ञान arises. This cultivates in विवेकख्याति.

We now enter into the part for which योग पतंजलि is famous for – the 8 limbs or अष्टाङ्ग. In the earlier सूत्र , we talked about benefits of विवेकख्याति. So the question is – how does one acquire विवेकख्याति? Asks वाचस्पति मिश्र – milk may be in the udders of a cow but how does one extract it? What are the अशुद्धि that a योगी seeks to remove? The are the क्लेश. And once these are removed, ज्ञान दीप्ति arises just as the Sun shines forth in all its splendour after the cold season, says आदिशंकर. Or put in technical language, as अशुद्धि generated by रजस् & तमस् dwindle, the clarity of सत्व shines. Just as an axe slices the wood of a tree, says व्यास, practice of अष्टाङ्ग योग slices the अशुद्धि away from the चित्त.

यमनियमासनप्राणायामप्रत्याहारधारणाध्यानसमाधयोsष्टाव् अङ्गानि ।।२९।।

The eight limbs of योग are यम, नियम, आसन, प्राणायाम, प्रत्याहार, धारणा, ध्यान and समाधि.

The first two out of the eight अङ्ग of योग are यम & नियम that deal with cultivation of values. पतंजलि has thus far not specified virtues but अष्टाङ्गयोग process will show that the starting point of योग itself requires living a धार्मिक life. What is the purpose of a धार्मिक life; why should we ask our kids to lead a धार्मिक life? What is the benefit of living with धर्म in a world that seems to be steeped in अधर्म? We often face these questions from others while these often plague our own minds too. When पांडव were undergoing their वनवास, द्रौपदी asks युधिष्ठिर on what benefit he got from following a life of धर्म -13 years of life in a forest? And his famous reply was – “I do not live a life of धर्म to get benefits; I live a life of धर्म for the sake of धर्म itself”.

Modern day ideas about family morals, constitutional morals, workplace morals, etc, seem to have a limited end goal – peace in family, society, office, etc. Being nice to a spouse so as to continue to be served well or being loyal to Company we work for so as to continue to get promotions or bonus cannot be called as living a virtuous life – it is merely a tool for survival or attainment of भोग. The highest goal of a modern secular society is to provide opportunities to all citizens to pursue and attain maximum भोग. Focus of विषय like Economics is ज्ञान about भोग maximization for individuals and nations – higher GDP, higher usage of electricity, etc. Ideas like “Free Will” or “Equality” are also constructed not for true freedom of mind but solely driven towards pursuit of a life of भोग.

The success stories we read today are also about those who have attained highest भोग (richest Corporate CEOs, richest investors, richest actors, etc whose attainments are प्राकृतिक only) while योग is termed as a private quest done inside homes only 😊. How many Indians talk about lifestyle of रमण महऋषि or चंद्रशेखर सरस्वती? Hardly any. I’ve met many who do not even know आदिशंकर 😫. Parameters for success for a योगी vs a भोगी are diametrically opposite to one another. Of course, when a भोगी becomes a रोगी, he suddenly takes on to योग (of the आसन-kind) but this too is for भोग (better body shape, better digestion, etc) 😊. Virtues in our enlightened modern society is only for peace in society so that all citizens are free to collectively milk the cow dry (viz Earth) till the last drop and then kill and eat it and feel happy with a feeling that one has lived a virtuous life.

Being true to one’s own innate पुरुष identity is धर्म or living with virtues. But till the time we are a जीव, life of धर्म is an “effort”, a struggle for the sole purpose viz चित्तशुद्धि. Prescription in धर्म texts or life of राम can be evaluated from only one lens – whether such acts are conducive to चित्तशुद्धि to the person practicing it. प्राकृतिक lens cannot be applied to such texts. And without चित्तशुद्धि, we will not acquire सत्व and without सत्व, there is no विवेक and without विवेक, there is no मोक्ष. Now, in the pursuit of चित्तशुद्धि, living a life of धर्म may assist in attaining the lower प्राकृतिक goals (like wealth, peace of mind, fame in society, स्वर्ग, attainment of पुण्य, etc). But these benefits will be seen as a distraction by a योगी whose only goal is to acquire विवेकख्याति for मुक्ति. And once one becomes a जीवन्मुक्त, living with धर्म is no longer an “effort”, it becomes our स्वभाव itself. Study of each अङ्ग of योग will begin from the next सूत्र.

PA: Beautiful! As you always say change a life that is based on chase and enjoy ( Bhog ) to be Aware of each external event and use that event to learn about one self (yog). Based on that learning try to recognize the vasanas that are being played out and even better try to identity the Klesha that is being played out. The avidya Klesha is the breeding ground for all the other Klesha namely Rag Dwesh Asmita and clinging to life. Perhaps one could just try to see what Rag and Dwesh is being played right now and as a antidote try to correct ones attitude and bring it towards middle. If a A strong attraction towards repeating a experience arises then just our oneself back in the middle and say if this good thing happens it’s fine else also it’s fine and I will just do my duty along the way. If a strong repulsion from a unpleasant experience happens then try not to be carried away by anger and remove the emotion from the event and try to see from a neutral perspective and try to separate the event from the person.  At least the goal should be that these strong reactions are losing their  shackles on you.

PA: Imagine a pond which has a Lot of dirt and lotus floating around on the top but below the water is clean. One can see the dirt floating around on top from below but on the top one experiences attraction and aversion. Similarly we experience this sort of dirt ( any positive or negative experience is eventually dirt or Mall) in our daily life but our consciousness is still associated with this ( asmita ) and we are unable to separate ourself from the top layer to the bottom of the pond where it’s stillness.  The challenge / goal is to look oneself at oneself meaning ones dirt because a part of me is associating with it and this is the part ( avidya) causes by the force of Maya that will keep us recognizing oneself with the dirt and strengthen the asmita (Klesha) further increase avidya and further strengthen the Rag and Dwesh.

UB: Apologies for long commentaries but before starting अष्टाङ्गयोग, some context setting based on wisdom gained from writings of स्वामी कृष्णानन्द on धर्म may be useful and should serve us well. अष्टाङ्गयोग specifics should begin from Monday 👇

Doing good is not धर्म and doing bad is not अधर्म. देवता is not force of “good” and असुर not the force of “bad”. To bring the binary of “good” and “bad” or “virtue or vice” to understand धर्म is sub-optimal. धर्म is a non-translatable संस्कृत word that has no English equivalent. People may mistake धर्म as good and may indulge in a charity in a foolish manner – but if one does charity with a view “I am giving”, the “I” idea will deepen and such deepening may take this person towards “bad” in another situation. All of us switch to taking sides of “good” and “bad” like a pendulum since both of them are relative to each other. There is no योग evolution for one immersed in “good” and “bad”. धर्म, however, is absolute and not relative. धर्म may thus be seen as acts that we will do when we are established in “totality”. Now what is this “totality”?

Let me put a crude thought example. Suppose we are standing at the edge of a forest next to a tree and we see a person running towards us with a rod in his hand. Our instinct makes us go behind the tree and hide from the alleged attacker. But as the person comes comes closer, we see a lion causing this person. Now seeing the lion, our instinct makes us climb the tree quickly and also extend hand to help the alleged attacker to climb the same tree. Then as we go up the tree, what becomes visible is that a poacher is chasing the lion causing it to run. My instinct may now make me take a gun out of my pocket and shoot the poacher and prevent him from his act. As I see (or know), so I act.

So what is happening here? As our insight moves from “subjective” to “objective”, “from personal” to “total”, what we term as “good” or “bad”, “right” or “wrong” changes – the realm of personal opinions is always into these binaries. However, at the highest level, when our insight is the deepest or total, there is no personal opinion – there is just an objective impersonal wisdom. Wisdom from top of the tree is धर्म and from the bottom of the tree is अधर्म. When we thus say that वेद or धर्म or शास्त्र is अपौरुषेय (impersonal), what we are saying is that the कर्म prescribed in these texts is impersonal or objective. This means that the कर्म prescribed here will move us to eventually be established in “totality” (viz the state of पुरुष). In such a state, we are standing on a peak or a vantage point from where one sees everything and because of this total ज्ञान, all our कर्म becomes धर्म because such कर्म is not based on personal prejudices or limitations.

शास्त्र describe परमात्मा is one who is नित्ययौवन. Why is श्रीकृष्ण always shown with a youthful & fresh persona? Why are सनत्कुमार are always seen as five-year old? Reason is obvious – one who is established in “totality” is a नित्ययौवन. Why so? Let us take a fresh fruit in a tree. The “totality” of the best in a tree is within the fruit. Anyone who plucks the fruit and consumes it gets the best that the fruit has to offer. Take a baby who is born. As it was immersed in a “totality”, it remains innocent and is able to absorb maximum ज्ञान for a few years.

However, the natural order of everything in प्रकृति is decay and therefore, this freshness diminishes for the same fruit stored in a cold storage for a week or the same baby after a few years. As long as we are immersed in or close to one in “totality”, our capabilities are the highest. Similarly, waking up early morning after being immersed in “totality” of deep sleep is called as ब्रह्ममुहूर्त which is seen as the best time for meditation. We remain pleasant in this state enabling us to even indulge in play and fun within our family until the previous day स्मृति (संस्कार) and current day engagements (सुकर्म/ दुष्कर्म) take away our यौवन and make us older. Note that पुरुष cannot decay and is seen as ever-fresh and complete.

These crude analogies are meant to convey that journey of योग is a journey towards “totality”. When our “I-ness” is low or under control, we remain peaceful, our actions calm and our capabilities the best. With this दृष्टिकोण, पुराण state that in सतयुग, all are able to lead a life of धर्म since we have just emerged from the womb of the Creator. But as time moves on, “I-ness” deepens, selfishness takes over and rise of अधर्म in कलयुग is an inevitable outcome. To attain a पुरुष state means a return to our नित्ययौवन mode in which we remain eternally fresh and complete.

And when we look at यम & नियम from tomorrow, these should not be seen as गुण or qualities since गुण is part of प्रकृति while पुरुष or ईश्वर is निर्गुण (this is a complex topic – so I will keep away from this). Instead, these need to be seen as expressions of पुरुष. And just as one wanting to play the role of a king starts by wearing the dress of a king, योगी must begin योग by cultivating अहिंसा, सत्य, etc. And only when one takes on to these, we become calmer, distractions come down and we attain fitness to get deeper into योग. And when living with these expressions finally becomes our स्वभाव, only then can we hope to attain the state of “totality”, our स्वरूप, the नित्ययौवन truth of our being.

PA: The totality, freshness and completeness is in the Now and in the present. Our memory and identification of self with the past keeps strengthening the I ness and make us do further sukarm and dushkaram.

UB: Correct – it is here that we use the words “Power of Now” comes up

PA: My Lord and Master is forever new; He is the Giver, forever and Ever. 

Sahib Mera neet nava sada sada datar – The line from Guru Granth Sahib page 660.

UB: Wah – the words “forever new” is indeed fantastic 👍👏

HB: Evkhart Tolle . Who is Sanatkumar ?

UB: Brahma has four मानसपुत्र together called as Sanatkumaras. They are seen as fully endowed in ब्रह्मविद्या and there are many events in उपनिषद, पुराण and महाभारत about them. In fact, there is text in महाभारत called as Sanak-Sujatiya on which even the great आदिशंकर has written on commentary on. In short, wherever the word wisdom is talked about, some names come up again and again in Hindu tradition – नारद, शुक, व्यास, etc apart from Sanatkumaras.

अहंसासत्यास्तेयब्रह्मचर्यापरिग्रहा यमा: ।।३०।।

अहंसा, सत्य, आस्तेय, ब्रह्मचर्य and अपरिग्रहा are the यम.

Since अहंसा is given first in the list, it carries highest weightage and thus leads the others and is said to be the root of other यम. Says विज्ञानभिक्षु that just as the foot of an 🐘 covers the foot of all other creatures, so does अहिंसा cover all other यम. व्यास says that the goal of other four यम is for the sole purpose of purifying अहिंसा. To start with, व्यास defines अहिंसा as not injuring any living being at any time. विज्ञानभिक्षु however cautions that since performing one’s own धर्म is essential and it is impossible to even live without causing harm to insects and bacteria while doing activities like bathing, etc., one must strive to avoid harming even an insect.

Says मनु in the धर्मशास्त्र, “to protect living creatures, one must inspect the ground constantly as one walks, by night and day, because of risk of grievous body harm”. हरिहरानन्द adds that one must not even harm 🌲. The idea is clear – all living beings have the same आत्मा within and are thus spiritually equal and thus harm to another is harm to पुरुष Itself. A सात्विक person is empathetic towards other living beings and understands the कार्मिक outcome of violent कर्म meaning that they too will be at the receiving end of हिंसा in future lives (as clearly laid out in मनुस्मृति). अहिंसा also includes giving up spirit of malice and hatred and avoiding violence in the form of harsh words as per हरिहरानन्द, since these produce tendencies to injure others. आदिशंकर also adds here that अहिंसा must be followed in thought, word and deed.

व्यास defines सत्य as one’s words and thoughts being aligned to facts, IE whatever is known though sense perception, inference and verbal testimony. Speech must not be deceitful, misleading or devoid of value. It should be for benefit of all creatures and not their harm, else it becomes a पापकर्म. Says मनु “Let him not speak what is true but unkind; let him speak what is kind and not untrue. This is eternal धर्म”. One must note here that सत्य is subservient to अहिंसा and thus if सत्य causes हिंसा, one need not adhere to it just as one does not convey truth to robbers about whereabouts of the merchants who are running away from them. This means that if there is a conflict between अहिंसा and other यम, अहिंसा must be respected most. Adds हरिहरानन्द that अहिंसा also includes not speaking bluntly and truthfully about the shortcomings of others. He extends अहिंसा to abstain from reading fiction, worldly trivia, silly fantasy, daydreaming or imagination for a योगी (so surrender Netflix & Prime 😊😊).

PA: सत्य is subservient to अहिंसा 👍👍- this summarizes it quite well to remember what is of most importance when faced with a choice.

आस्तेय is refraining from stealing. Do not take what does not belong to you. Do not even harbour a desire for something that is not yours. वाचस्पति adds here that since action is initiated in the mind, the more one desires something, the more one is inclined to acquire it – so if the root desire is controlled, the thought of stealing will not arise. हरिहरानन्द adds that if one gets treasure by accident, one should not take it since money belongs to someone else.

व्यास defines ब्रह्मचर्य as control of sexual organs while वाचस्पति refines this as not seeing, speaking with, embracing or otherwise interacting with any other person as an object of desire. शास्त्र add here that if one sticks to one’s own spouse, one may be seen as aligned to ब्रह्मचर्य. वाचस्पति quotes दक्षसंहिता to state “Eight kinds of sexual indulgences are thinking, talking and joking about sex, looking (at another sexually), talking secretly about sex, determining to engage in it, attempting to do so and actually engaging in it” – avoid all of them. हरिहरानन्द adds here that frugal diet and moderate sleep are important for ब्रह्मचर्य and even plenty of milk and butter, which may be seen as सात्विक, is निषेध for a योगी.

अपरिग्रहा refers to renunciation of possessions. This does not mean actually giving up things on owns but the ability to see the problems caused by acquisition, preservation and destruction of things since these only provoke attachment and injury. Given the trouble one goes through in acquiring and preserving things, possessions produce संस्कार and these activate in future to cause distress in the form of hankering for objects and lamenting for having lost them. A योगी thus only keeps essentials with him necessary for survival. वाचस्पति adds that no enjoyment is possible without some level of direct or indirect injury to others – more enjoyable a thing is, more the attachment, more the repetition for such an experience often without consideration of consequences to others and thus making us indulge in हिंसा (remember “Gods must be Crazy” 😊)