Maharishi's Biographer on Meditation

Update from Paul Mason, posted on November 20, 2013 :

On the strength of feedback given at TM-Free Blog, the contents of the http://www.thoughtfreemeditation.com

webpage have been revised, and in response to the request to bring it out in book form it will be published on 15 December, 2013. I want to thank you and everyone at TM-Free Blog for giving me the chance to share this information and to find out people's reactions. Hopefully, those who are interested in meditation can find enough to satisfy them without needing to get involved in any cult or money-making enterprise.
'The Knack of Meditation' is a not-for-profit publication and a FREE pre-publication copy is available online at:-
http://www.thoughtfreemeditation.com/The_Knack_of_Meditation_FREE_e-book.pdf
Thanks again to all at TM-Free.Paul  

   

Paul Mason, biographer of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, translator of Guru Dev's lectures, former co-moderator of TMFree.blogspot, and free thinking traveler extraordinaire submitted the following essay about meditation :

Are You Sitting Comfortably?

Let me tell you a story…

It was a snap decision, to buy the old wooden armchair from the secondhand furniture shop. I was seventeen years old, had the money spare, and on impulse suddenly decided I wanted to buy it. I had never bought an item of furniture before and I enjoyed the freedom of making a choice over what I sat on at home – I put it in my bedroom in a corner near the window. It didn’t cost a lot so I didn’t get to regretting it. I was working at that time, and recall that when I came home I would, more often than not, park myself down on my armchair, get comfortable and close my eyes for a while. It was my bit of lazy time. I would sit just watching my thoughts until there appeared to be no thoughts to watch. Then, I would open my eyes and look around at my bedroom and enjoy just being me and having all my stuff around me.

As it happened, my routine would soon become disrupted, I left that job, and indeed, I lost the habit of sitting in the chair.

I would not describe myself as a comtemplative person, nor would I say I am particularly patient, so I am not the sort of person that one would necessarily associate with being interested in meditation, in fact, I was not really, other than a mild curiousity about it. However, that was to change!

I first realised I needed to meditate when I felt an internal pressure, an unrest, an unfamiliar and intense discomfort, which I wanted to dissolve or remove myself from. But, though I experimented unsuccessfully at gazing at a candle I realised I just wasn’t ‘getting it’, actually, it was making matters worse, making me feel worse!

Some months later, whilst travelling with my girlfriend, I was given a pep talk on meditation, and I was persuaded to learn how to meditate, which occurred the very next day. The technique involved the repetition of a mantra, a special word which was meaningless to me, and the idea was that I should not sit there thinking my thoughts but to instead repeat the mantra until arriving at the source of thought, to a state of tranquil awareness. Well it sounded good but in truth the tranquil awareness did not happen for me, so, rather naughtily, and just to see what would happen, I decided to give up repeating the mantra, let go of thoughts, and see what happened. Well, the first thing that happened is that I heard clearly the sounds in the garden outside, and then, well….. The extraoridinary truth is that it happened just the way I had been told. I found myself in a state of tranquil awareness. I was delighted, utterly delighted.

I decided to keep the practice of meditation going, but forgot the little trick of letting go of the mantra, and it became more difficult to access that state of tranquility, which was a shame, because though meditation became a routine for me, it did not always give me the peace of mind I craved. But I consoled myself that one day it would all resolve and my meditations would get better, and perhaps they did, but I still did not find tranquility on tap.

Something happened to make me question again the practice of TM meditation. I had sat to meditate and somehow I could not think the mantra, I just couldn’t do it, try as I might to recall and repeat it, it just would not happen, so instead, I just sat and enjoyed doing nothing instead. The experience was just astonishing, time kind of stopped still, I was bathed in tranquility and satisfaction was here at hand.

Well, you would have thought I would have abandoned TM and just adopted a routine of sitting with my eyes closed and settling down naturally. But I didn’t. Such was the inculcation of the teaching of TM that I carried on with the practice, even though I had discovered something more satisfying. I think the reason for this is that the mind has difficulty remembering times when it was not busy, it tends to remember best those times when something was ‘happening’.

I have looked into the topic of meditation deeply, and in so doing have discovered many descriptions of how the practice of meditation is best done. So, I have collected them together for others to see, along with a simplified guide to how it can be practiced successfully, at www.thoughtfreemeditation.com - The site is not there to make any money, it has no advertisements and there is nothing to buy there, just information and quotations which you might find very interesting. Either way, thanks for reading my story.

Paul

Paul Mason Developing Alternative to Transcendental Meditation

Paul Mason shared some of his recent work with me recently. He generously gave me permission to post it on TMFB.

This not an endorsement. But Paul's an interesting thinker.

I always give him a listen.

J.

---

From the many references in Guru Dev's discourses it is clear that he advocated several practices including puja, bhajan, pranayama, japaand dhyana.

Here are a couple of further quotes from Guru Dev:-

'The method to join the mind to Paramatma is japa of Bhagwan’s mantra, and dhyaana (contemplation / meditation) of swaroop (true nature of the Supreme Being).

तज्जपस्तदर्थ भावनम्
" tajjapastadartha bhaavanam "
[Patanjali's Yoga-Darshanam 1:28]
[tat = that, japa = repetition, astadartha = that purpose, bhaavanam = contemplation]
‘The purpose of that japa (repetition of mantra) is contemplation.'

Shiva, Vishnu, Shakti, Surya, Ganesha are actually all forms of Bhagwan. Do japa of the names of any of these too and do dhyaana(contemplation / meditation) of the swaroop (true nature)of that fit mantra - right here is the method of Bhagwan’s bhajan (worship).
If you will do only japa then the mind will flit here and there. By doing dhyaana (contemplation / meditation) the mind is bound. Therefore, you should set in motion both japa and dhyaana together.'
- from 'Amrit Kana', Part 8
http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/AKtransrough.htm

'At daybreak and in the day do that puja (ritual worship), japa and dhyaana (meditation) etc. which is appropriate, but at night you should certainly do 10-15 minutes of japa (repetition) of the ishta mantra and dhyaana of the ishta murti (desired form) before sleeping. Rapid advancement occurs by this upasana (sitting near / devout meditation).

In darkness (nightime) you should sit with eyes closed and do japa of the mantra, and in the same way with eyes closed you should do dhyaana of the ishta with the mind. Not on their whole body, you should look on the foot or on the mouth area of the head, seeing our favourite ishta full of compassion, looking infused with tenderness. The vision of the ishta becomes one’s own desire. You should not envisage the eye of the ishta to be closed. This manner of having seen the vision of the infusion of tenderness, doing dhyaana of the ishta in the heart, you should remain doing japa of the ishta mantra. From this, the image of theishta will grow and provided that the mind gets strengthened and held with the ishta then in the end it will stay in this condition. You will be going across the ocean of samsara (worldliness) on the strength of this.
- 'Shri Shankaracharya Upadeshamrit', 88 of 108 Discourses of Guru Dev
http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm

Now when Maharishi taught meditation he also chose the mantra of the god, but soon he became aware he was teaching non-Hindus too. So, he taught the mantras but fell silent on the topic of the ishta, hoping that people would be able to focus on the unmanifest aspect. However Guru Dev warned that this was not possible, saying:-

'That person who meditates on the formless, in that connection we ask how did you meditate on nirakara? If you are to make contemplation then you will continue the vritti, but how can you make a meditation of the nirakara (formless)? You cannot make meditation of nirakara. If anyone says that they meditate on nirakara then it is like stating that there is a son of a childless woman is going in a marriage procession. There is not really a son of a barren woman, then of what kind is the marriage procession? When there is not any mark or form of the nirakara then how is meditation of it made? You should have some basis to consolidate the vritti (fluctuations of the mind). That which is the basis, that really will be sakara (having form). '
- 'Shri Shankaracharya Upadeshamrit', 48 of 108 Discourses of Guru Dev
http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/upadesh.htm

There is a method that reconciles the situation and that is a method that neither uses japa nor dhyana, an ancient system called raja yoga or 'royal yoga'.
http://www.paulmason.info/YogMeditation/nothoughtmeditation.htm

When Guru Dev met his guru, Dandi Swami Krishnanand Saraswati, apparently the study of raja yoga was being taught at the ashram:-

'There were quite a good many disciples there, people doing practises of yoga, and hatha yoga, and raja yoga, and mantra yoga, so many people, disciples, engaged in their own practices.'
- Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, speaking on July 27th 1961 in California, USA
http://www.paulmason.info/YogMeditation/nothoughtmeditation.htm

Swami Sivananda Saraswati tells us about Raja Yoga:-

'Raja Yoga is the king of Yogas. It concerns directly with the mind. In this Yoga there is no struggling with Prana or physical body. There are no Hatha Yogic Kriyas. The Yogi seats at ease, watches his mind and silences the bubbling thoughts. He stills the mind, restraints the thought-waves and enters into the thoughtless state or Asamprajnata Samadhi, Hence the name Raja Yoga.'

'ASAMPRAJNATA: Highest superconscious state where the mind is completely annihilated and Reality experienced.'
http://www.dlshq.org/teachings/rajayoga.htm

The "Just the facts, Ma'am" Approach To Meditation

TM-Free Blog reader and frequent Fairfield Life poster "Uncle Tantra" submitted the following article to TMFB. He's interested in the reactions and suggestions of the commenters in our community.

For those who didn't grow up American (or are young :-)), Joe Friday was a police detective on a TV series called "Dragnet." His approach was brusque and no-nonsense, and the quintessence of this approach was his signature phrase used when interviewing a witness to learn about a crime: "Just the facts, Ma'am."

For some reason I was thinking about Joe on my morning walk along the beach with the dogs, and got to wondering what the "Just the facts, Ma'am" answer might be about MEDITATION, the thing that we all have in common here.

What CAN we say about meditation that most of us can agree on as "facts?" No bullshit, no dogma, no assumptions, no theories, no assertions of "better" or "best." Just the facts, Ma'am.

Here is my start at such a list. They're not "facts" in the sense that I claim that they're comsically "true" or "truth." They're just me trying to make sense out of 40+ years on the spiritual path, and trying to write down a few of the things that are as close to "fact" about medi- tation as I'm ever likely to get. I am also NOT speaking of *only* TM, but of meditative practice as a wider phenomenon, in ANY of its many forms.

Other posters are invited to add their "facts" to my list, and to discuss it as they wish. I doubt I'm going to feel like defending it. Those who feel compelled to turn things into an argument can do so, if that's the only thing they see in this post to get off on. Me, I'm more interested in what the people without an axe to grind and without a crusade to fight have to say.

1. Meditation has been around a long time.

2. It exists in many forms, and has been associated with many different forms of religion and spiritual practice, but need not be associated with any of them. It can be practiced *as a practice*, with no associated belief system whatsoever.

3. Proponents of meditation have said that it has had subjective benefits for them -- increased clarity of mind after the practice, a feeling of restfulness or relaxation during the practice, and generally *enough* benefits for them in their personal lives that they practice it regularly.

4. Science has made a *start* at verifying some of the sub- jective claims made by proponents of meditation, but the extent of this verification varies from one form of meditation to another, and from one study of the same method to another. These scientific studies -- ALL of them, IMO -- have also been tainted by the associated belief systems *about* medi- tation that the people they are testing bring with them, and by the belief systems that the researchers themselves bring with them.

5. Many systems of meditation make claims that their tech- nique is "the best" or "better" or "more effective" than other forms of meditation.

6. So far, try as they might, neither subjective testimony by practitioners nor science has ever conclusively proved any of these claims of "betterness" or "bestness" or "most effectiveness."

7. The *mechanics* of these different forms of meditation vary greatly. Some may use mantras (the thinking or chanting of a word or words). Some practice meditation with eyes closed, some with eyes open or even during other activities. Some may use yantras or some other visual aids as a focus for their meditative practice. Some pay attention to the breath, or to just what is taking place at the moment -- mentally and in the environment. Some have no element of focus for their meditative practice at all. Some forms of meditation have a "goal," and others have no "goal" at all, except to meditate.

8. Again, so far science has proved none of these techniques or approaches to meditation definitively "better" than another.

9. Some proponents claim that meditation has benefits that extend beyond the benefits to the person practicing the medi- tation itself. That is, they claim that the meditation some- how affects the environment around the meditator in positive ways. These claims include reduction of environmental stress, lower crime rates, a more peaceful and settled environment, and even world peace.

10. Again, none of these claimed benefits have been conclu- sively proved by science.

11. One can come up with numerous examples of people who practice meditation who DO seem to exemplify positive traits in their daily lives. They are seen by most observers to be more flexible, more compassionate and caring about others around them, more capable of effective action in stressful situations, and generally happy with their lives and pleasant to be around.

12. One can come up with just as many examples of people who practice meditation who do NOT seem to exemplify these positive traits in their daily lives. We have seen meditators convicted of crimes such as fraud and rape and robbery and murder, we have seen numerous examples of depression and mental illness and even suicide among long-term meditators, and we all know people who have meditated for decades who do NOT seem to be happy with their lives or pleasant to be around.

13. We can find BOTH the positive traits AND the negative traits in those who do not practice and have never practiced any form of meditation.

14. Despite the claims of proponents, no form of meditation has ever universally produced the positive traits in ALL of its practitioners.

15. Despite the claims of *opponents* to meditation and medi- tative practice, no form of meditation has ever been shown to universally produce the negative traits in ALL of its prac- titioners.

16. Since the positive traits appear in people who have never practiced meditation, no conclusive link has ever been proved between meditation and these positive traits. Same with the negative traits.

17. For some, meditation practice is pleasant and even blissful. They look forward to each session because experience has shown them that it is enjoyable in itself, and that it produces benefits in their lives.

18. For some, meditation practice is not as pleasant. It may be perceived to be difficult or even unpleasant. Some who experience this may stop the practice of meditation as a result. Others experience this and continue to meditate regularly any- way, because the benefits they perceive in their lives outweigh for them the less-than-pleasant experience of meditation itself.

19. As a general statement, there is no evidence that meditation in ANY form is a panacea, and a universal "cure for what ails ya."

20. As another general statement, it seems valid to me that if you enjoy the practice of meditation and feel that it produces benefits in your life, there is nothing that anyone can or should say to try to talk you out of practicing it, or into practicing another form of meditation.

That's all I could come up with in the 15 minutes I gave myself to come up with this list. Please add your own "facts," as you see them, or otherwise react as you see fit.

If you are interested in seeing your post published on TMFB, please contact me at jmknapp53@gmail.com

When the Mantra Won't Get Lost

A commenter recently asked me to write about what one can do when the mantra keeps coming up — even when she had made the decision to stop meditating.

In reading her question, it became clear she was dealing with two separate problems: (1) the mantra was weaving in and out of her mind unbidden, and (2) she was apparently experiencing trance states in her daily activities and which were interfering with her life. I write below about the first problem. I hope to write a brief article on unwanted trance states tomorrow.

It makes sense that even people who are determined to stop meditating might find the mantra coming up when they no longer wish it to. It's a simple matter of a habit of mind. In a 20-year career of meditating, for instance, it's very likely that one has replaced conscious, linear thought with the mantra millions of times. The mind doing what it does, this quickly becomes an unconscious habit — one that continues, first as one falls asleep or when the mind wanders and later even in the midst of activity. Not everyone experiences this automatic mantra, but many, many of the people I've counseled have mentioned it.

There are some simple cognitive-behavioral techniques that can reduce, and eventually eliminate, the troublesome repetition of the mantra. Below are some ideas that have worked for my clients. No one method has worked for everyone, so I suggest if you suffer from this problem, try them all and determine which works for you best.

1. Practice forming the image of a bright red stop sign in your mind and mentally shout "No!" whenever the mantra comes up. The technique is known as "thought stopping." It was developed for people with anger, compulsions, and other unasked for thoughts. By replacing the habit of thinking the mantra with this simple visualization, many people stop the mantra repetition easily.


2. Wear a rubber band around your wrist and snap it whenever you think the mantra when you don't want to. A simple form of aversion therapy that works for compulsive eaters can also work for the wayward mantra repetition.


3. Think of a pleasant thought, prayer, inspirational saying, or affirmation that you would like to incorporate into your thoughts. Then whenever the mantra comes up, replace the mantra with this brief affirmation (third definition). You can also use a more directed affirmation, such as "I am successful at not thinking the mantra and enjoying my life."


4. Involve yourself in a distracting activity that you enjoy — particularly something taxing mentally. For instance, if you find the mantra arising, start doing a crossword puzzle or chess, something that challenges your mind. It's difficult to work your brain cells and repeat a mantra at the same time. The key here is that you want to replace the unwanted activity with one you actually enjoy. Your mind will quickly drop the old, unwanted mantra habit and substitute the more enjoyable activity.


5. Try exercise! This is another distracting activity, but has the added benefit of getting you out of your head and into your body and surroundings. Walk, run, lift weights — whatever suits your fancy and matches your fitness level.


6. Give yourself a reward every time you catch yourself thinking the mantra and stopping. While snapping a rubber band is negative reinforcement, this is positive reinforcement for achieving your goal. The reward could be a hard candy or any similar little joy.

Readers may have techniques that have worked for them. Please feel free to write me at jmknapp53@gmail.com with your suggestions. You may help dozens of others that I work with in the future!

J.
KnappFamilyCounseling.com

Donovan University

I'm speechless:


Peace and love, man - Donovan meditates on higher education

Highway to Hell

New York Times September 9, 2007:

Highway to Hell

The State of TM Research

Independent Research on various meditation practices concludes that previous studies were not rigorous enough in their methodology. Caution is warranted.

Read a survey of the research:
Meditation Practices for Health, State of the Research.

Experiences!

Advanced TM practice emphasizes "experience," rather than externally measureable phenomena.
Of course only feel-good experiences are valued.
Negative experiences are discredited as "un-stressing."

Some of us (moderators), along with experts in coercive persuasion, agree that many TM "experiences of (so called) higher states of consciousness" were induced through prolonged meditations, pseudo-hypnotic suggestion and group dynamics.

We observed others' "experiences" to the extremes of psychosis, schizophrenic-like symptoms, some leading to mental institutions and suicides. sigh.

The following New York Times article describes studies of induced "out of body experiences."
This is among the first of such neurologic research, using external sensory stimuli to create internal experiences.

Using electronic devices, out-of-body experiences were induced in participants. We hope there will be more such studies to come. Such studies may eventually explain 'siddhi-experiences.'
To read about this, click here.

A consideration of kriyāyogaḥ in the the yoga sutras (10)

Before any more “progress” can be made with respect to sharing my understanding of the yoga sutras (YS), some review is necessary. It is my opinion that the fourth “book”, part, section is a later addition. I cannot prove this, but, to me, the Sanskrit is slightly different. However, no true understanding of the 4th section can come about unless the first three sections are clearly grasped.

The first section clarifies one special thing in particular: citta (mind/consciousness) is obscured by vṛtti (conceptualizations, notions, pre-conceived ideas, that absolute certainty that you knew what you were talking about, when it later turns out that you did not). YOGA is that condition in which the citta has been freed from the influence of vṛtti. Freeing, in this case is nirodha which means stopping or ending. When the vṛtti have been ended, then the citta mind or consciousness functions freely.

The usual image is mistaking a rope for a snake. The vṛtti tell us that we are seeing a snake. The heart rate increases, the adrenal glands fill the bloodstream with sudden vitality to get away. It is, as it were, as if the vṛtti were filters between the sense-doors and the perception (citta). The vṛtti are the lies we believe when we look but do not see.

If we try to read the first section of the YS as meaning that we have to stop the activity of mind, then we have taken a useless turn that will only lead to discontentment. Simply put: if you were able to stop the activity of your mind, how would you turn it back on. How will you say to yourself wake up, wake up, don’t be dead, Dude? When the mind stops there is no more perception. This is not good.

The second section of the YS deals with kriyā. This should not be read in the sense of a predetermined “method”. It should not be confused with the teachings of Yogananda also called Kriya Yoga. In the way that kriyā is used in the YS, we need to understand kriyā more as the means or way we work this out for ourselves. However, the author or redactor who may or may not have added the 4th section, gives some very specific guidelines that, apparently, he felt were vital. These are usually passed over and ignored by practitioners who, then, fail to make headway in the third section of the text.

The third section is generally felt to be about gaining or cultivating magical or supernormal “powers”. Since this particular vṛtti exists, the way the third section is read, like the problem with the rope/snake, becomes obscured and corrupted leading to nothing of any particular value.

The third section does not deal with what we think magical or supernormal “powers” might be. It does not deal with what we imagine, suppose or want. It deals with very specific means to clarify the direct experience of citta. I am very much indebted to Paul Mason for his exacting and perspicacious insight:

As a human I have far more use for cheerfulness and confidence than for supernatural powers.

I think the author or redactor of the YS would wholeheartedly agree. If you have supernormal powers, whatever they might be and do not have clear and direct experience of mind, then you might as well not have supernormal powers. You would be no more than a thoughtless child playing with matches. Public figures who do not make good decisions seem to be fair game for comedians and satirists. I am sure that to many un-sophisticated individuals the President of the United States might appear to have supernormal powers. Would it be so great to be George Bush? Would it be great to be able to zap the people you don’t like or approve of?

If you think that supernormal powers would be a terrific way to get our own way and show other who’s boss, then you have not understood the second section of the YS. You certainly have not understood the very important caveat from the Christian New Testament: what does it profit you to gain the whole world yet sacrifice the vital thing that makes you who you are. [My paraphrase.]

I take exception to ending the second section in the midst of the explanation of the eight limbs of yoga. This, I feel, is someone’s error. The third section ought to begin with “the three together (or “as one thing”) is saṃyama”. The misunderstanding is that the three refers to the last three limbs being described. But the last three limbs are one thing in a progression, namely, attention progressing through the three states or limbs, as explained. This illustrates three conditions of awareness or attention. But, like water, how would you have all three states at once (as one thing), gas, liquid and solid?

The supposed ‘sidhi’ sutras the Mahesh sells as something that is just so great is something I feel is deceitful and misleading on his part. Something certain to deprive you of the direct experience of that vital thing that makes you who you are. They are not powers that turn you into superman/woman, they are means for you to certify the holism or unity of who/what you are, your sense perceptions, and what is perceived.


But further progress cannot be made until the second section of the YS is carefully examined, which comes next.

A consideration of kriyāyogaḥ in the the yoga sutras (11)

A consideration of kriyāyogaḥ in the yoga sutras (9)

I have been working very hard to avoid writing more about the Yoga Sutras. First because writing is hard work and TM certainly isn’t about work of any kind. But it is also difficult to avoid the pitfalls of subtle words and shades of meaning that pepper the Sutras. Many a commentator has fallen victim to discoursing upon the clever meanings found in the words like an epicurean ignoramus pouring condiments on a perfectly served meal.

The Sutras depend upon the words, of course. But to be lost in the dazzle of meanings is to miss the meal, to miss the meaning altogether. The second section of the Sutras begins with the words kriyāyogaḥ. This is a significant departure from the first 51 sutras or statements that basically defined what the author was endeavouring to convey: yoga is the nirodha of the vṛtti of the citta – yoga is the extinguishing of the muddle of the mind. The muddle, the conceptualizing, the vṛtti, of the mind is the point of these first 51 sutras.

If this is not understood, becoming sidetracked by the fascinating shades of meaning – shades that are very important, but whose importance only has significance much later – takes over and the path is missed. Kriya, not to be confused with what Yogananda taught, is the “process” or “path” that is undertaken. This section is about kriya, process, actions, method, path. This section is about the method of allowing the mind to be understood while at the same time allowing oneself to be free of the overshadowing vṛtti that conceal it.

II:1 says that the path requires submission (praṇidhāna, profound religious meditation). Praṇdhāna+an+i = “an” makes praṇidhāna masculine and ‘i’ indicates that it is in the Locative sense: thus in the submission to īśvara, (that great antiquity known to be the teacher of the ancients), i.e. mind, citta.

The author lists in addition, svādhyāya. This means study, scrutiny. Mahesh translated this as sva+adhyāya “awareness opening to self”; but this is not correct. This is bending the words to fit a pre-conceived vṛtti or ideology. It will also not work in this sutra. The author then adds tapaḥ which means “burning” or “consuming”.

You may now wonder why I read the sutra from end to beginning. Many times the author lists several ideas and then ends with the kicker, the conditionality that draws them into a single bolus of meaning.

This sutra then becomes: the path of freedom (yoga, mind free of overshadowing notions) [requires] profound contemplation (praṇidhāna) [of one’s own] essence (īśvara), scrutiny and a burning [desire, but in the sense of commitment/application] -OR- a burning/consuming scrutiny.

Scrutiny (svādhyāya) certainly involves one’s own actions. Sva refers to what is one’s own. Scrutiny of what is one’s own. Ādhyāna is to meditate upon, to reflect upon. It is a curious word in that it has the connotation of sorrowful memory. This is interesting because when one is sorrowful, that occupies the mind fully. It is this total-occupation-of-endeavour that is the kind of meditation/reflection that is going on here.

This and this entire section is so far from what Mahesh made of whatever he got/took from Guru Dev, that one can see clearly from this point onwards that TM and Patañjali are simply not related.

Mahesh made no mention, as far as I know, of anything but the third part of the Yoga Sutras. Obviously, this was for no small reason. Effectively, there are only two parts to the Yoga Sutras, Sutras 1 to 51, forming the first part and from this sutra to the end of what is presented as part three. This kriyāyogaḥ of the second part is one continuous teaching from the beginnings of dawning-essential-realization (mind seeing/knowing mind, not just looking at it) through an entirely different approach to what Mahesh calls “sidhi”, bringing realization to perfection (siddhs).

ADDENDUM:

Two things seem apparent. First Mahesh did not understand Patañjali and second he had to do a lot of experimenting to get something people bought into.

Each "Gov" course was THE "Gov" course same as each TTC was THE TTC but people came away from each “Gov” course and TTC with different information and attitudes.

With regard to understanding Patañjali it is clear that the magical and supernormal powers are described as counterproductive and are not recommended. The siddhi that Patañjali describes in part 3 of his Yogasutras is something altogether different that I feel Mahesh either had no understanding of or wished no one ever to know.

Thus when you get a decent teacher who actually understands what s/he is doing (it is my opinion) you discover, as Mahesh DID NOT, that the "third book" has nothing to do with supernormal powers, magical thinking, magical powers or any of the other such thing that Mahesh is so eager for you buy, buy, buy. (And use to rot your brain.)

The "third book" is all about something entirely different. It is only upon understanding the first two books or parts of the Yogasutra that the third book or part becomes clear. These are methods to free mind/citta from obscuration/vritti on a grand scale and become established on an equally grand scale in the purity of one’s own freedom in primordial mind/citta. This cannot be done by repetition of Patañjali’s instructions any more than opening a can of beans can be accomplished by saying open, open, open, open.

Thus I feel very strongly that Mahesh happily advertises himself as a first rate fraud – at least he does so to those who have understood and shared just a little more than he did.

It appears that this and that Gov and citizen course all tell us only about his inability to live up to his self-granted title "big know it all Mahesh united-with-the-universe-one".

The biggest "sidhi" is Mahesh discovering that some people will pay almost anything in order to get something for nothing.

Mahesh Chandra Shrivastava (aka Maharishi Mahesh Yogi) is no different from any other fundamentalist in pursuit of power and authority over others. But, he has taken his time to build his empire and rather than serving fatally poisoned Kool Aid to his faithful he has doled out the poison in very small doses so that his deluded faithful have built up a tolerance. But poison is still poison, no matter how much he praises himself and it.

S

a consideration of the yoga sutras (7)

Paul Mason has very generously quoted from Guru Dev on the topic of “salvation”. If I understand correctly, 'anta meM bhii sad.hgati hogii' were Guru Dev’s exact words. First of all, this gave me a much better understanding of what illiteracy might be like. But when we translate from one language into another, our own, the tendency is to find the same concept in our language that we encountered in the language from which we are translating. So, obviously “salvation” in English is assumed to be what Guru Dev was saying. Except, it is very unlikely that Guru Dev meant in Hindi, in India in the first half of the 20th Century, the same thing that someone in the West in the beginning of the 21st century might understand as “salvation”. Therein lies the rub.

If you were raised in a Muslim community, whether in the West or East, “salvation” is unlikely to mean the same thing as it does for a Christian person raised either in the West or East. If you are not a religious person of any persuasion, “salvation” is unlikely to hold any kind of meaning similar to either Christians or Muslims. So, we might ask, what was Guru Dev talking about!

“Salvation” then, as a word or a concept, has no inherent meaning. Assuming that Guru Dev was talking about YOUR understanding of “salvation” is not going to help you understand what Guru Dev was talking about. It all becomes just more vṛtti.

In order to understand what Patanjali is talking about, we must pay very close attention to sutra # 2: yoga is the cessation or absence of vṛtti. Yoga is mind free of conceptualization, pre-conceptions, notions, ideas. Yoga is mind. Just mind.

Patanjali is not talking about what we, you or I, might think yoga is. He (they, whatever and whoever wrote/redacted this text) is not talking about our understanding. First of all, he is making it clear that we have to first have no notions so that we will understand the explanation he is giving.

This is how I see the first three chapters or sections of the Yoga Sūtras, the Yoga Darśana. Patanjali had, in effect, to be careful. Going against the priests whose notions, ideas and control/power was “law” might me awkward, to understate it delicately. Therefore we see the language of the religion of the day with the caveat that we must be free of preconceptions (thus disregard what you think you know and listen to what is being said).

In sūtra 23 he says that by surrender to īśvara, that which is great, yoga comes about. What is “great”? He defines īśvara (that which is great) in 24-26 and then says that praṇava is the signifier/calling-card/clue of īśvara. I translated praṇava as “reverberation”, that which reverberates with our understanding. It’s at best an inadequate translation. What reverberates is not something outside ourselves, something we can point to and say, “this is it”; but it is something within, mind, what he has been talking about from sūtra 2.

In this section, he gives some indication how we might come to a better understanding of that reverberation/praṇava.

28: it (praṇava) is realized by study (japa, repetition). Patanjali very clearly does NOT say “by assuming you already know all about this and have to pay no attention to what I/Patanjali am saying”.

29: and (ca, moreover) obstacles go, as well as (also) cetanā arises from that (see 28, from study/repetition, “japa”). Cetanā is from the root cit. Cetanā means intelligence (NOT IQ), the state or quality of sentience, that what which makes sentient beings sentient. This is another reference to citta. From study of praṇava, from contemplation or curiosity about that which reverberates with what is being discussed (not some vibration about which Patanjali is not talking), obstacles [to] and awareness [of] (cetanā) arises.

30: these are the obstacles that go: “sickness (disease? it is unclear), doubt, carelessness, laziness, hedonism, delusion, lack of progress and inconstance” (quoting from Hartranft). Patanjali cautions that that which distracts (vikṣepā, rouses up) citta is an obstacle, barrier (anatarāyā).

(Thinking Guru Dev was using your definition of “salvation” would be vikṣepā.)

31: these barriers cause problems “distress, depression or the inability to maintain steadiness of posture or breathing” (Hartranft).

32: the means of subduing the distractions follows.

So common: when we set about to do the spring cleaning, go to the gym, go on a diet … suddenly there are so many reasons to do something else. Patanjali was obviously aware of this. Not much new under the sun as the Biblical writer lamented. The good news, however, is that if you really want to set about freeing mind from vṛtti, not getting mucked up with vikṣepā, here’s what you can do to get started:

33: prasādana, calming, settling citta [is as follows]: (you can) radiate friendliness [more about this when we talk about section 3], compassion, delight [or] equanimity toward good/bad, distress/pleasure.

This might sound quite familiar. Those who have been involved in Buddhist teachings recognize this as the Viharas, the divine abidings.

Whether Patanjali borrowed from Buddha or Buddha from Patanjali or they both knew an older source is immaterial. The technique works. Be kind, radiate compassion towards everything whether it is good or bad, painful or pleasant.

OK, not everyone’s cup of tea. Some people are so naturally kind and considerate. For others (no blame here) it isn’t easy and might be such a strain (again, no blame) as to be an obstacle. So …

34: vā, or [thus it follows; “vā” can also mean ‘like’, [it is] like [this]) (one may) vidhāraṇa, suppress, maintain, stop, support the pracchardana exhalation. Hold your breath? Well, that’s what it says. Those familiar with the biography of the Buddha know that he practised holding his breath until his ears rang and he almost passed out. In the Buddha’s later teaching on ānāpānasati (mindfulness, sati, a Pāḷi word coming from Vedic smṛti) of āna (in breath) apāna (out breath), he says to be aware of calmness on the out breath. It is a little more difficult, to begin with, to notice calmness on the in breath.

Very common. When someone is having a bad day, we are likely to tell her or him to just take a deep breath and let it out slowly. Apparently Patanjali and the Buddha knew this too. Thus, if cultivating compassion and equanimity towards good and bad, pleasure and pain isn’t your thing, you can follow, be aware of the calming quality of the outbreath, of just letting go. For the exact words, this might seem a leap. But the Buddha’s teaching and Patanjali’s teachings seem so similar at this point that this seems reasonable. Like Patanjali, the Buddha also taught to be free from the overlay of conceptualizing (vṛtti). So, (34) support the exhalation, note the calm on the exhalation?

35: or/vā (as above) watch/note the steadiness of manasa (faculty of discrimination, the internal organ of perception and cognition) as activity arises in it.

If cultivating compassion and equanimity isn’t your cup of tea, this might not be either. But some students are quicker at some things than others. So some might be able to note that no matter what arises in the mind, the mind in which those things arises doesn’t change.

My observation is this: Patanjali is listing a series of teaching tools, learning tools. The word vā meaning ‘or’ simply indicates something like this – try this and see what happens, or try this and see if it works for you, or try this if other things are difficult. PāḷI

36: vā (another thing that might work for you) notice the luminous, free of sorrow. Jyotiṣmat means luminous, that which has a pure quality, something celestial, in the world of light, the sun (surya, something we’ll talk about when we come to part three). The word comes from jyotis, light, brightness (of the sky). Monier-Williams translates jyotiṣmati as spiritual, pure. Apte, another author of a comprehensive Sanskrit dictionary, translates jyotiṣmati as “a state of mind permeated by sattaguṇa, a tranquil state of mind”.

If we assume we know what luminous is we miss the point. Looking at many definitions, we get a sense of the word that is different from the conclusions we might leap to if we only consider the word as an English word with which we could or might feel comfortable, familiar. Thus, 36 suggests this alternative: just notice that pure viṣokā (sorrowless quality; one of the perfections gained from the study of yoga). Could this be another reference to the Buddhist divine abidings or another reference common to both Patanjali and Buddhist teachings?

Some can notice this clarity/luminosity/brightness, some can’t. There is no blame if you cannot; you simply use it if you can. Patanjali is suggesting you go with what you can; at least, this is what I understand these sūtras to mean.
37: vā/or be aware of things free from attachment (vītarāga, colourless; i.e. things about which you could care less). This seems to be another reference to exactly the same thing or teaching found in the Buddha’s doctrine/Dhamma (Pāḷi from the Sanskrit dharma).

Sometimes, when we are bored numb, aware of things about which we could care less, we notice that there is something behind this, some reverberation/praṇava. Maybe sometimes we notice that there is something (praṇava) other than what we are noticing.

38: vā/or ālambana, (a basis, noting, being aware of, considering [see 37]) jñāna (of, on) sleep (nidrā)/dream (svapna). Jñāna is to know, be aware of. If you think about sleep/dream you have to wonder, I think, where it is taking place. You know you were’t “there”, most adults do; children can have a difficult time of this. If you know it wasn’t “real” (whatever real is), where/what was it? Where does “real” take place?

This will also become clearer, oddly, when we consider “sun” in section three. But for some, it might already be clear what the teaching/technique, exercise is all about.

39: or/vā dhyānāt the ablative (–āt) from-dhyāna, as-a-result-of-dhyana, coming-out-of-dhyāna, serene reflection? Serene reflection is actually a Zen term. Sometimes, when you are just gazing (perhaps) or mentally pondering, just aware of something that is neither compelling nor repulsive, neither attractive nor off-putting, just aware of it without any special labeling of it, that is serene reflection and what I think Patanjali is in reference to here. Dhyāna will, of course, be referred to later in the yoga sūtras. The text says, yathāabhimata, as desired, or more likely “as you please”. The usual translation “on any desired object” doesn’t seem quite right.

Vā, or serene reflection as you please. – Something that is going to work for some and not others.

40: I like Hartranft’s translation here: “one can become fully absorbed in any object, whether vast or infinitesimal”. It is based on his understanding of how he translated the previous sūtra (or through meditative absorption in any desired object). I like it, but it isn’t what these two sūtras say. – (39) Or serene reflection as you please (40) this mastery (skill, ability [if y’got it]) extends from least to greatest. It isn’t a matter of being absorbed in an object. This would be a misunderstanding of citta, īśvara and praṇava as Patanjali has been using these words. Īśvara, praṇava and citta are not objects, not something material, not out there. They/this “awareness” is mind.

If you can do dhyāna/serene reflection, awareness that is non-conceptualizing, then that awareness that is non-conceptualizing extends or reaches from least/faintest to greatest (from the greatest magnitude to the utterly minute). He’s saying it does not have limitations because you have no conceptualizing going on. He is not, I am convinced, referring to dhyāna in reference to or on an object, but to dhyāna in and of itself as a very useful skill. Later in the sūtras, we will see that it is possible to cultivate dhyāna. Here it is just another skill he is helping the student(s) see if they have got so that their progress can be based on what they can do to begin with.

Curiously, the Buddha, the night of his awakening remembered something he had done as a child, just a non-conceptualizing awareness. He did it as a child, but apparently hadn’t been taught it.

41: the vṛtti decrease as these abilities already present are utilized. You find what you can do and, doing that, utilizing that, you progress and this enables a letting go of the vṛtti that cloud clarity of citta. He uses the lovely example of the jewel, maṇi. It is the same word we hear in the Tibetan mantra OM MANI PADME HUNG. But here it is more like a piece of crystal (I doubt glass existed in Patanjali’s time as we have it today, transparent or like crystal, another meaning of maṇi). If you place a small crystal ball (most lapidary stores sell small crystal balls, a pure, clear marble will do the same thing) on a piece of cloth, the crystal is so completely saturated (añjamantā) that it is not present to the eye. The colour or pattern of the cloth is so completely absorbed in, reflected by the unblemished crystal or marble that it doesn’t seem to have any quality of its own. Patanjali is saying that the mind is like this.

There is just this wonderful non-quality-something-ness (praṇava) that makes everything else possible. This is what the sutras from 2 to 41 are trying to get across.

42: (this is almost a little comedy, I think) if mind is overshadowed by what is in it (thought mixed with ideas and meaning), you’ve missed the boat. He doesn’t actually say “you’ve missed the boat”, he says: otherwise (tatra) it’s just thought mixed with ideas and meaning, not pure mind that you’re noticing.

43 to 51 next time.

a consideration of the yoga sutras (8)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (6)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (1)
a consideration of the yoga sutras (2)
a consideration of the yoga sutras (3)
a consideration of the yoga sutras (4)
a consideration of the yoga sutras (5)

We might think that such words as bīja, jāpa, īśvara and praṇava are extremely meaningful here. That, to no small extent is correct. But the understanding of these words, especially in the context of the sutras previous and those to come is not the same understanding we have if the words are taken out of the context of the Yoga Sutras, the Yoga Darśhana.

We must understand these words in the context of the sutras as a whole. Hence, the very first sutra suggests that NOW the study can begin because all of the sutras have been seen in the light of one another, NOW, the whole that is greater than the parts must be studied. See "a consideration of the yoga sutras (1)".

Of all the significant words we might hit upon, it is most likely that praṇidhāna is the most noteworthy. The root of ṇidhā is dhā, “deposit”. It’s prefix, pra means “in front”, “before” or can also mean “fulfilling”. But in Sanskrit usage, ṇidhāna suggests “putting or laying down, depositing, keeping or preserving”.

praṇidhāna or submitting has a much more profound interpretation in the holistic sense of the sutras: a profound or abstract contemplation. Just how this profound or abstract contemplation is to be undertaken is the subject of the first three books or sections of the collection of sutras. To leap to the conclusion that īśvara-praṇidhāna is profound worship of “god” is to leap to a conclusion not part of the sutras.

Such a conclusion is, however, most certainly part of Mahesh’s thinking. In my notes is a statement he made about īśvara-praṇidhāna:

īśvara-praṇidhāna – GC begins; we know god, maintainer of universe; law of being ‘sold out’ to creation begins. Īśvara is governor, maintainer of universe. Two levels: maintainer of relative and of absolute. Praṇidhāna is completely opening one’s self to finest values of relative and absolute. This is the law that structures unity, YOGA; developing supremely celestial relative values and transcendent value.

We may teach that TM is not a religion, but most assuredly Mahesh is a religious thinker and a religious oriented teacher! No doubt, as was Guru Dev.

There is no science in what Mahesh has said here! Science is not in opposition to religion, science is simply a different language about the same thing.

Yet, I am wholly in agreement with Mahesh here; he has expressed exactly what the yoga sutras is all about! Except, he has done it in the language of religion and this language is simply NOT the language of the yoga sutras.

Patañjali and all of the editors and redactors who have left us these instructions called the yoga sutras, the Yoga Darśana, have not spoken in the language of religion but with the language of religion making one thing perfectly clear in sutra 2. This set of instructions is about MIND, citta. Īśvara, that-most-supreme-thing, is citta. It is obvious that all concepts of god can be dispensed with and life does not change. But one cannot dispense with mind. Lacking “god” in your world, your world goes on. Lacking “mind” you have no world.

(23) [yoga comes about] like this, contemplation of that-most-supreme-thing; (24) that-most-supreme-thing is beyond corruption; (25) that-most-supreme-thing is the source of awareness and omniscience [what can you know or do if you do not have mind]; (26) that-most-supreme-thing has always been there and was the teacher of the ancients; (27) that-most-supreme-thing is that ever-present reverberation [the reverberation of which we are subtly aware speaks of/for that-most-supreme-thing]; (28) by studying that-most-supreme-thing it becomes clear. Sutras 27 and 28 can also be understood as saying that since that-most-supreme-thing is always and ever-present, being aware of that “something” is what speaks for that-most-supreme-thing.

29: then we begin to “recognize” yoga and obstacles to yoga fall away … yoga is citta, that-most-supreme-thing, The suggestion in this section is that īśvara, that-most-supreme-thing, has never-not been present in our own lives and has extended to us from the same experience/awareness had by the ancients. The yoga sutras is about praṇidhāna, the work necessary to recognize that-most-supreme-thing so that the obstacles can fall away.

In a TM lecture once, I said that TM made everything easy. My example was: our lives were kind of like watching TV: eventually we began to feel the picture was not clear. So we call the repairman [obviously Mahesh in this case, working through us, the TM teachers]. The repairman examines the TV very carefully and explains that it is working properly and the station is sending out a strong signal.

What, what, we might exclaim! The picture is not good, any fool can see that.

So the repairman takes out a tissue and wipes away the dust from a tiny corner of the screen. Suddenly everything we must do is perfectly clear. His instructions “reverberate” with your understanding.

I am no longer sure it is such a good TM lecture.

But here, in this case the Repairman is Patañjali and the technique is not to worship the repairman or to worship the repairman’s calling card (that which speaks for or of that-most-supreme-thing) but to listen to the repairman who is telling us that the technique is to search out within our own sense of selves, that reverberation that was the teacher even of the ancients.

Reverberation is not some “vibration” that we can link to Mahesh’s vibration technology! It is not “OM” in this context or anything like it. That is simply NOT what Patañjali is teaching, nor is what Mahesh is teaching what Patañjali is teaching.

Here “reverberation” praṇava is used much in the same way a person might way that this or that political candidate reverberates with his or her own feelings about some issue. A particular fashion of dress reverberates with some and not others.

That which speaks of it (the repairman, Patañjali, all the legitimate gurus through time) is NOT the sacred syllable OM but rather that which reverberates with your own sense of what you are seeking, your own mind.

This is, of course, also the context of “know thyself” in the Western tradition.
Patañjali and the Yoga Darśana are teaching the HOW-TO of not only recognizing that reverberation, but how to merge, meld with that reverberation, how to contemplate one’s own mind so that obstacles to yoga will be no more, will fall away, will, as in sutra 2, nirodha.

Ways to begin weakening the grip of the obstacles, as well as beginning to recognize one’s own mind are expressed in sutras 30 through 41. Here fundamental or rudimentary ways of recognizing what mind is while simultaneously weakening the obstacles are outlined. Again, we notice that there is not one way for everyone, but many ways so that the individual may begin to recognize īśvara, that-most-supreme-thing, and get under way.

Sutras 30 through 41 and 42 through 51 can be much more clearly expressed once this section of discussion and the section before it (5) are taken out of the realm of religious thought and context or TM thinking and simply viewed as matter-of-fact statements about ordinary human life. The sutras or instructions of Patañjali are not religious or other-oriented. They are oriented toward the individual’s experience of his own most profound essence, realizing mind.

a consideration of the yoga sutras (7)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (5)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (1)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (2)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (3)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (4)

The YS isn't simple; it is complex and not written a language anything like English. So far, I hope, I have illustrated that this path to spiritual development, what else can it be called, isn't a simple natural process of paying money and being taught how to think a mantra. It should as well, be obvious that the YS does not suggest that it’s all going to be automatic and effortless on our part.

What is yoga?

Yoga is bringing the colourations/obscurations of the mind to naught (2). On a foggy day, the fog obscures your ability to see very far. Driving a car is risky. Even walking could end you up in a ditch! The fog is there, yet you cannot grab a handful. Most certainly, you have no power to make it go away. You are in it and yet it eludes your grasp.

This is vṛtti.

On its own, without some kind of intervention, things will remain just like this. Imagining you know where you are going, using reason to guide you in this fog, is unwise. But when the sun comes out, the fog gradually (slowly or rapidly) “comes to naught” (nirodha). The trees, lampposts, buildings and so forth appear. But they were never not there as far as the fog is concerned. They therefore do not appear; it is your perception that becomes un-obscured. The perception/mind (citta, sutra 2) is perfect and always present, of course, so nothing happens to it anymore than anything happens to reality when the fog is or is no more (nirodha).

In one simple sutra (2) Patanjali has laid it all out. Yoga is what you are; your mind is what you are; yoga and mind are synonymous. If there were no yoga, how could you be?

If the fog cleared and you found that you were in the middle of nothingness, where would you go to look for reality? How would you go about the business of just looking? But this situation cannot be because you and reality are inseparable. The arrangement and pattern we perceive in nature isn’t just there because it’s pretty. That we are able to perceive the organization of nature is what yoga (and the yoga sutras) is all about; this sense of sensing order in reality is the essential evidence leading us to be able to understand what governs the external reality and in this context it enables us to recognize how to penetrate that internal reality of citta, mind.

Yoga is what is.

The long explanations of what-is-to-be-understood is necessary, otherwise what Patanjali (as a person or as a series of editors) is explaining would be like using reason to guide you in a thick fog or smoke filled room, in a blizzard or dense forest.

Therefore the sutras from 3 through 22 help us understand what needs to be grasped before progress can be made.

Then comes the BUT [in the sense of: it is like this].

Sutra 23: [literally] īśvara-praṇidhāna + at (submission + -ing/out of submission [to]) it-is-like-this (vā also means ‘or’)

=> A note about Sanskrit: an ‘a’ (ending of one word) before a word beginning with ‘a’ means that the two a’s change to ‘ā’. The final ‘t’ of “at” changes to “ad” before ‘v’. Thus praṇidhāna + at (a suffix forming a present and future participle) changes to praṇidhānād (submitting). But, to complicate matters, an ‘a’ before an ‘ā’ changes a+ā to ‘ā’. So the suffix could be ‘āt’, the ablative form of a masculine or neuter word. But the meaning is the same “from (out of) (ablative) submission” so the sutra could be translated submitting [to] īśvara, it-is-like-this. In Sanskrit, ablative is not like ablative in Latin which gives the sense of ‘with’ or ‘by’. Ablative is more the sense of “coming from/coming out of” almost always translated with from.

So, what about īśvara – we all know it means god, right!

Not really. Just for starters the word īśvara can mean “god”, but it can also mean a powerful ruler, Self, able to do, capable of, liable, exposed to, master, lord, prince, king and so on including ātman and the idea of an eternal self.

This sutra functions much like sutra 20; see part 4.

To understand īśvara as Patanjali appears to intend it, we must look at the next sutra, 24: this īśvara is that distinctive purity of perception untroubled by the store of ripening intent (karma). This īśvara operates, or simply just is, whether there is fog/vṛtti/obscuration or whatnot. You might have done some good or bad things out of bad intent or good intent. That action (karma) will ripen (cause vṛtti in future) without having an effect on īśvara (that which empowers you, mind or mind-self). It was īśvara that was already being talked about in sutra 3 (when this is accomplished, realization has taken place; when this is accomplished, the one who sees is).

Your own perception can be likened to the sun. The sun shines and the fog is no more. Your own perception comes to fullness and that which obscured it is no more. Presto, chango, nirodha. Voilà. YOGA. Sounds simple enough, at least in the abstract. In striving to be free of vṛtti, however, it is something a little more challenging.

We can read 23, but [it-is-like-this] submitting to (or from/out of submission),[is] īśvara (our own power, your own mind, citta [grasped, known] and 24, this īśvara is that distinctive purity of perception untroubled by the store of ripening intent (karma).

25: when you know this, everything is possible.

As if!

It is not a simple matter, this “knowing”. There’s more to the word “know” here. Sarva is everything and jña is to-know, to-be-familiar-with and also means wise. The suffix tva adds the sense of “ness” as used in English. Yes, the sutra contains, as well, the word bīja, but it means “source”; it has nothing to do here with ‘seed mantras’.

So, 25: the source of this all-encompassing wisdom (perception [mind/yoga/reality] free of the obscuration of vṛtti,) [is] unsurpassed.

26: this īśvara was the ideal of the ancient ones. (Not some new invention or idea.)

27: tasya (tad + ya) ‘this’ + ‘to be’ or “thus it follows” [lit having become thus], vācak, the speaker [the one who gives expression to this], is praṇava.

Thus it follows, the one (that which) who expresses this, is praṇava. The one (that which) expresses this is not some leap into a dense-fog-guess like “oh, I know, the guru” (?), god (?), OM (?).

Think it through.

What is Patanjali talking about in sutras 23-26? He/we are talking about the human being having and being in possession of an innate perception, a reality of perception that is clouded over by vṛtti. This is a storehouse not only of karma, but of the conclusions we have drawn from a lifetime of experiences which clouds, measures, cramps, predicts, limits and otherwise colours and obscures our innate reality.

I see a connection here between vṛtti and karma. I think it’s worth exploring; but at this time I am going to pass on that.

When we are free from this “fog” of vṛtti, as Patanjali again and again drives home, we have perception that has no limitations. We are no longer limited by the fog of our own-created limitations. No matter what kinds of limitations we have, the reality is still there. The thicker the “fog” the harder the work to bring it to nirodha, sutras 21 and 22.

The ancients knew this; it is not something new.

Patanjali is telling us what the ancients knew, namely that this “reverberation” has always been there. This reverberation, something we have always sensed, has always been there and has always been pointing us towards this. AND has always been available to teach us.

Maybe you were thinking that praṇava (reverberation) was om and by muttering om, everything was going to just be dandy.

Not likely.

If it was that easy, then the world wouldn’t be in such a mess. If it was that easy, why, you might consider asking yourself, would Patanjali go to all the bother of such a lengthy explanation if he could have just written “mutter om and everything will be nice”. Why would he do that?

Mahesh did this very thing, more or less; how nice is everything?

So, praṇava is a way of indicating that faint, distant itch on the tip of your tongue, in the back of your mind, that pestering sense of something that has always been there but has more or less been forgotten in the process of getting on with your life and creating more and more karma and vṛtti.

26: this great power was the ideal or teacher of the ancient ones.

27: it is that reverberation that is always present.

To this point the YS illustrates the hard work to be faced (thus explaining the mess, because who does hard work). It’s just our nature to look for something easy, a shortcut, something instant – or to imagine we can see/reason our way through the fog.

Few are those with dedication, commitment and purpose-driven desire for awakening from the fog.

28: jāpa repetition. But one of the oldest meanings of jāpa is study, not just simple repetition – and yet the connection is obvious, the meaning is clear: by jāpa, by studying, going over it (3-27) again and again until the message sinks in, tadartha (therefore) bhāvanam [it] comes [to be/is]. Union, knowing, realization of one’s own mind is what comes to be.

This just isn’t a description of Mahesh’s TM. Mental repetition of a bīja, a mantra, the special name of some god simply isn’t the issue, subject or teaching here.

This section extends to sutra 33; but I am going to stop here because this is a lot to digest. We have to go back to sutra 23 now and re-consider the word submit. We have to understand how “submission” operates. The word praṇidhāna indicates profound religious meditation, abstract contemplation and profound aspiration. But, it now seems, in the context of 23, the context of this section, in light of sutras 2 –22, what we have to do is sincerely, energetically and purposefully contemplate our own minds (reality) until the “fog” begins to clear. As it does, the object, the mind/reality (citta, sutra 2), becomes clearer. No magic mantra, meaningless sound to take us skidding off into dissociative states of muzzy awareness and meaningless daydreaming; increased meaninglessness is increased vṛiti!

(to continue in part 6).

Just a parting question to consider before launching into the how of “submit”: if you muttered the special name of a god, why would the god give a tinker’s fart? What kind of a “god” is under ‘your’ control that you can have such expectations of getting his or her blessings by being, basically, a pain in the butt?

a consideration of the yoga sutras (6)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (4)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (1)
a consideration of the yoga sutras (2)
a consideration of the yoga sutras (3)

Sutras 1-15 have laid out the undertaking. Now 16-22 clarifies more detail. The difficult word in sutra 16 is puruṣa (purusha). Fortunately, we all know what Purusha is; it’s Mahesh’s monastic thing, young guys wearing wet diapers so they don’t get erections. Ah, vṛtti spotted. A preconceived notion can really be a limitation. Mahesh’s Purusha either hadn’t been invented when I started my translation project or, more likely I didn’t know about it.

In Sanskrit, puruṣa means many things. These days, it’s easy to check on-line dictionaries for many languages. When I started my project, however, there was no “on-line”, so I bought many, many dictionaries of Sanskrit, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, Pāli, Chinese (because many Sanskrit texts were translated into Chinese and knowing what the ancient translators in China thought the equally ancient Sanskrit words meant is quite valuable).

So, puruṣa; here I think the word just refers to the individual person. But in the sense spoken of in the preceding 15 sutras. Not just the ordinary person, but much more likely, the essence of the individual person. The sutra could be read: this [is] the essence of non-attachment (referring to vṛtti), the ultimate clarity of the individual (what is the essence of the individual person, mind, of course, just mind, clear mind, unclouded by preconception).

17: this is an explanation of 16 – [the essence of non-attachment is the ultimate clarity of the individual (mind)] [i.e. this] samprajñāta (insight or clear sight) is accompanied by awareness, happiness and reflection (as in thought or contemplation, pondering; any yet, not exactly the same as thinking).

Meditation becomes a matter of clarity of a fully awake mind. Curiously, Hartranft’s text add’s rūpa, but Taimni does not. No one makes this easy. Do not leap to the conclusion or vṛtti that Patañjali is talking about pure consciousness in TM terms. He is definitely talking about pure awareness, pure consciousness in terms of the always awakened mind being free from all obstruction of perception. The mind seeing things just as they are, not as bad, or ugly, or nice, or possess-able or any such thing. He is talking about just seeing/perceiving.

18: the remnant of impressions left from before is no more. The pratyaya (tendencies or propensities) is no more.

The author is talking about proper training, something involved both in intellectual understanding of what to do, where to aim and how to do as well as doing it with intent and purpose. One does not learn to realize clarity of mind by thinking a meaningless thought.

19: those/for those [who are] absorbed in the natural (prakṛti) videha (dead?, probably not, more like “no-more-ness”) [i.e. those who by diligent practise achieve (merge with) calm and clarity, videhaprakṛtilayānām)] become.

I don’t think bhava here means to take birth. That doesn’t seem to fit. The meaning seems to be that those who are diligent in applying the lessons presented here achieve awakening, something like “realization of” their calm and clarity which then becomes that in effect is what could be seen as taking birth.

20: others, people who do not have the advantage of this teaching may achieve this “birth” or achievement of clarity and consciousness by faith, diligence, mental-purposefulness (smṛti), trance (samādhi … lots of meanings for this word, but I think that at this stage the author is talking about just plain ‘spacing-out’ which really does generate insight sometimes, which we all know from experience) or wisdom (prajñā). Some people are just very wise, have penetrating understanding. We’ve all met them. They’re just that way. For the rest of us, there’s hard work and application (as directed).

21: it is near for those who are seeking it.

Obviously, be careful what you wish for. The sutras lay out the definitions and the procedures. There is a clarity here, difficult to wade through, granted. But what to do and how to recognize the correctness of what one is doing as well as how to recognize the goal and whether or not it is being achieved is here. It's a cookbook and the author is at pains to make sure you know how to pay attention to the directions (if, of course, you are paying attention to begin with).

22: how near? That depends on you. Like somewhat outdated computer language, GIGO. You get out of it what you put into it.

a consideration of the yoga sutras (5)

A consideration of the yoga sutras (3)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (1)
a consideration of the yoga sutras (2)

Sutras 4 through 11 address the curious questions raised by sutras 2 and 3.

Sutra 2 seems to indicate that yoga is mind control. But cittavritti (in Sanskrit, the ‘ch’ phoneme is generally represented as ‘c’ and the more difficult sound ‘chh', as in church house, is represented by ‘ch’) is two words, the second (vritti) the modifier of the first (citta). When we say “polishing the red apple” are we referring to the apple or the colour red? The apple does not change, but the appearance, the vritti, changes.

Thus, it seems much more helpful in understanding the difficulties posed by this album of wise direction to see that the ancient teachers who pioneered the difficult terrain of understanding what goes on in our heads and how that affects our lives were referring to something quite profound: yoga is not mind control. Yoga is nirodha of the vritti of the mind. Mind is just mind, however. What comes into the mind and what goes out from the mind are both filtered by vritti.

Yoga, the subject of this text is a free mind, something a little different. When the vritti are nirodha (eliminated) then mind is free, mind just is. Sutras 4 through 11 define this vritti business and the obvious, problematic qualities of vritti modifying citta. A modified citta is not a free citta is not yoga.

Happy folks seem to see everthing through rose-coloured glasses; miserable folks seem to see everything through very clouded, foggy glasses. These are vritti, filtres to be nirodha. Then seeing is just seeing, in other words perception is no longer filtered through vritti of any kind and perception is just perception. There is nothing to modify what comes to the mind, things just as they are are perceived just as they are.

This is the free citta.

Otherwise, sutra 3, the seer, the one who sees, the yogi will not be able to stand in his own nature. Until the vritti modifying/masking incoming date to the citta are nirodha, the seer will have no idea what his own nature is.

It is the mind, of course.

One’s “own nature” is a free mind, a mind freed of the colourations of vritti. This is the implication. A cook book can give you an implication of deliciousness and this collection of teachings is definitely a cook book. In and of itself, however, neither a cook book nor this anthology can supply nutrition.

At one time, Mahesh talked to a very small group of us interested in translation. His first suggestion was not to go learn the language you want to translate, although that certainly has its merits. He suggested something else, something very interesting that I still utilize. He said to compare some very good translations and see where your own experience from meditation tells you some word or idea is not quite right, then start checking on the meaning of that word.

This is how I came to compile a dictionary and a word-by-word translation, sutra-by-sutra, noting, considering if my understanding of the first sutra was supported by the second and so on.

If you have the idea, the vritti, that yoga is mind control and the collection of sutras will tell you how to control your mind, then that vritti is not freeing the mind to follow the teachings.

So, first, sutras 4 through 11 must be understood and then, sutra 12, a new section of teaching, can make sense.

There is a very interesting Sufi teaching that is quite valuable to keep in mind here: what you have to learn is different from what you expect to learn and the way you have to learn it is different from the way you expect to learn it.

Sutra 12: the vritti are nirodha by knowing what to do and by not clinging (to your vritti).

Sutra 13: what you have to do is become calm and quiet.

Sutra 14: this takes time and commitment – I see, here, no reference to easy, natural method.

Sutra 15 (explaining “by not clinging” in sutra 12): the quick translation is LET GO OF EVERYTHING which can also be rendered CLING TO NOTHING.

Sutra 15 suggests something very, very difficult and in conjunction with Sutra 2 and the implications of sutra 14 very, very clearly tells us that we will have our hands full. We must have an alertness (sañjña, from jña, to know; sañjña is the knowing aspect of mind) that is free from every kind of desire, a mind free from all desire for any/everything. The sutra calls this the supreme consciousness.

a consideration of the yoga sutras (4)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (2)

a consideration of the yoga sutras (1)

Paul asked about the first 4 sutras. In celebration of Paul’s continued interest in the Blog I wanted to address these. Are they sufficient unto themselves. What is sufficient depends upon factors relative to the individual practitioner.

1 now yoga [is] explained
2 yoga is the nirodha (ceasing) [of] vritti (stuff the mind does, such as conceptualizing, judging, planning, daydreaming and so on)
3 then (when this is accomplished) [the] drashta (the one who sees, experiences) [is/knows] sva-rupa (his own being, mind (?) “own-form” would be literal, but this is a kind of colloquialism so I felt “being” might be appropriate)
4 [the] vritti sarupyam (complex word possibly best translated as ‘reflect’ or take-on-the-characteristics-of or the qualities-of), otherwise (or possibly ‘elsewhere’ meaning outside the experience of knowing or merging the knowing mind with one's own being)

So, 2 explains 1, 3 explains 2 and 4 explains 3. How I interpret this and how others interpret this simply demonstrates the nature of the sutras to show us, like a mirror, what we wish to see. Hence, a guide is necessary and, in part, the sutras fulfill this function. The more one's vritti cling to a particular interpretation, the more difficult headway in understanding/practising the sutras becomes. There are no shortcuts. You either “do” the sutras on their own terms or you fail to make sense of any of it. – This is the first lesson the sutras taught me. I tried to make my translation efforts conform to my theories. This simply did not work. Theory must reflect facts and alter when new facts or new understanding of facts becomes clear.

Sutra 5 starts a new idea: here we see an explanation of "vritti".
6 clarifies 5 and 7 clarifies the first item of 6.

Following the sutras very carefully, abandoning your own preconceptions about what the sutras are going to tell you and carefully adjusting your thinking to what you find them actually telling you is the first order of business. It’s almost impossible. I translated the sutras 9 times in a ten-year period, compiling a dictionary of meanings from many sources for each word, tracking where each word occurred and the meaning I felt it had in the context of each sutra in which it appeared. I continue to update my dictionary when a new way of looking at a difficult word becomes clear or takes on a clarity I had not before considered.

If you could simply abandon all your preconceptions about everything and anything and just see things just as they are (that is, experience what the senses tell you without overlaying your notions, preconceptions, conceptualizing tendencies), then you wouldn't need the rest of the sutras. But the process of letting go of anything, let along our preconceptions is a difficult an arduous task.

Sanskrit is a very precise language related to Greek and Latin. It uses endings on words rather than the function words (in, of, by, to, from, through and so on) that we use in English to express relationships between words. Most of the sutras in parts 1, 2 and 3 have no verbs; like Russian, “is” or the relationship of this/that is implied. This makes the sutras easier and sometimes harder to sort out. Like French, modifiers come after (apple red) rather than before (red apple) as in English.

Sanskrit does not use capital and lower case letters and punctuation is confined to (stop) and (full stop) or end of idea end of group of ideas or end of sentence end of paragraph.

a consideration of the yoga sutras (3)

Mantras Part 4: unstressing, feeling the body and beyond

Mantras Part 1
Mantras Part 2: Some thoughts preliminary to an examination of the mechanics of TM
Mantras Part 3: the makings of the “TM Casualties” or what colour is your cloth becoming?


There is a significant difference between what Mahesh said (“For our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods.”) and understanding the concept that some things are endowed with spiritual significance. To endow a thing with spiritual or religious significance does not change the thing in any way. What changes is attitude on the part of those who subscribe to the endowment.

Mahesh clearly endowed his actions/teachings and "vision" with spiritual and religious significance and cultured that attitude in us. Remember The Spiritual Regeneration Movement ?

Unstressing

When bizarre behaviour began to erupt at Mallorca, Mahesh called it waves of bliss. He said something good was happening. He didn’t teach that the experience was just another experience and we were to experience the feeling until it resolved itself.

From my side, I see "unstressing" as the body-mind experiencing a crisis, cognitive dissonance in opposition to which it cannot restore its integrity: body and mind feel like they are coming apart and behaviours beyond will-power or aside from what one had previously considered her/his will-power display themselves. I think that many of us accepted Mahesh in toto rather than resolve a crisis.

Feeling the Body

Many of us were there, saw it, even experienced it. The checking notes as they appear on line now (Checking Notes or General Points) give excellent if somewhat inconsistent teaching regarding untoward experiences arising in meditation. But were these "general points" in the checking notes at the time? I would very much appreciate knowing if anyone has the checking notes from Mallorca or prior to Mallorca and could tell me or preferably show me how the understanding of "feeling the body" was taught.

I only remember a conversation with Jerry Jarvis, prior to Mallora. He said that 'it' probably shouldn't be called feeling the body but should be called continuing. At the time, however, this concept seemed a very minor consideration.

I do not ever recall any time when Mahesh explained "feeling the body" as anything integral or as a necessary element to know or practise with as part of long periods of rounding. I can recall no mention of feeling-the-body as a "stitch in time". Regarding the horrendous freak-out that was Mallorca and (to a lesser extent) Fiuggi, apparently very few if any others remembered or knew or thought about this, either.

Beyond

I knew that I was really seeking something.

In a story Ramakrishna* told, he said that the seeker is like a thief in the night, he slips into the darkened house, touches this and that always muttering not the gold, not the gold. But when his hand feels the gold, he knows, he grasps it and is immediately gone into the night.

In some way, I knew I was in the darkened house of ignorance and TM really had the feel of gold. Maybe it might have been just that; but much later I discovered that Mahesh was corrupted by his own greed and narcissism subsequently corrupting not only what he had purloined from his tradition and teacher, but those he taught as well. This is my perception to this day, based upon my interaction with Mahesh and observing his interaction with others.

But just because I had been hoodwinked by a charlatan whose motives I felt were highly suspicious, I did not cease seeking. I kept looking for the gold and now I feel I have found that gold and have been examining it in the broad daylight, questioning practitioners and teachers alike, watching, observing, certainly looking for the behaviours and attitudes with which TM allowed me to be familiar. I am also looking at criteria such as Lifton’s to see if I am being cheated. I wish I could have done this from the beginning with TM.

I have continued the search that began in the spring of 1964. I can only conclude at this time that there is much more to life than TM. There is more than imagining that if you believe something good is happening long enough something good will happen. There is more to life than imagining you have been spiritually endowed by using the suitable mantras for personal gods.

I am a Buddhist presently practicing in the Thai Forest Tradition of Theravada Buddhism. I have no intention of suggesting that this is better than or superior to what Mahesh or Guru Dev is teaching/taught. However, if you are or feel you might be or might have been a TM casualty, you might want to look at “feeling the body” as explained in the Buddhist teachings.

If, and only if after considerable reflection on your part you feel that this is a step, endeavour or exercise you feel confident in making read through The Anapanasati Sutta – A Practical Guide to Mindfulness of Breathing and Tranquil Wisdom and/or The Satipatthana Sutta.

I am suggesting nothing easy. But, if you will, notice that the teaching begins with following the breath and letting mind and body become calm. Do you remember from the checking procedure how, before any mention of mantra, after opening and closing the eyes, you felt some quiet and calm, just naturally?

Did you realize anything or ever think about this?

You already knew how to be calm and quiet. It is my opinion that Mahesh’s teachings beyond establishing this insight is nothing more than a distraction from that calm and quiet, sidestepping the only meaningful reality, your own innate, knowable reality.

How can there possibly be any other basis for happiness in the world than knowing your own specific reality?

Cultivating this calm-and-quiet is the object of the Anapanasati Sutta. The method and teaching above (A Practical Guide) has been extremely helpful for me and I feel that if it is only read as an explanation it is helpful to understand the concept of mindfulness in the Buddhist tradition.

Further, in the The Satipatthana Sutta, we read how the Buddha established mindfulness in four REALITIES, the primary four realities of the individual, the person, YOU.

The first foundation is, basically, feeling the body, getting settled in and comfortable with your own physical reality just as it is. Little by little, as the impediments to mindfulness come up, they are skillfully abandoned.

I want to leave off with the advice of Padmasambhava**, an 8th century CE Tibetan teacher, who summarized his advice on spiritual development like this:

As for the innermost advice: no matter what kind of disturbing emotion you feel, look into the emotion and it tracelessly subsides. The disturbing emotion is thus naturally freed. This is simple to practice.

This is for me the gold and legitimate teachers share this innermost advice but do not sell it.

_____________
* Ramakrishna late 19th Century Indian saint living in the Bengal
** Padmasambhava’s Advice from the Lotus-Born (‘Pointing the Staff at the Old Man’)

THINK FREE: 02/09/07

THINK FREE is a regular feature of TM-Free Blog. It features a summary of news about TM and other orgs labeled "cults" by critics.

• Minister Claims Scientology Is World's Fastest-Growing Religion Albany Times Union [Does that Mean They Have Greater "Support of Nature" than the Maharishi?]
  
• Five Nigerians Charged with Arson, Cult Activities The Tide
  
• Arizona to Extradite Scientology Protester Inland News
  
• David Lynch Talks Movies and Meditation -- Yet Again San Jose Mercury News
  
• Police Manhunt for "Black Jesus" Who Eats Girls This London
  
• The Science of Evil and Its Use for Political Purposes Atlantic Free Press
  

Have a hot tip? See something we missed? Email jmknapp53@gmail.com.

THINK FREE: 02/05/07

THINK FREE is a regular feature of TM-Free Blog. It features a summary of news about TM and other orgs labeled "cults" by critics.

• Scientology Critic Arrested after 6 Years Slashdot.org
  
• Sudan: Jim Jones-style Cult Sudan Tribune
  
• Mental Techniques – Including Transcendental Meditation – for Pain Control Charlotte Observer
  
• Alleged Cult Connection to Parents Charged with Murder Ashland City Times
  

Have a hot tip? See something we missed? Email jmknapp53@gmail.com.

THINK FREE: 02/04/07

THINK FREE is a regular feature of TM-Free Blog. It features a summary of news about TM and other orgs labeled "cults" by critics.

• Transcendental Meditation Said to Reduce Perception of Pain Seattle Times [Now, if It Weren't for Those Pesky Side-Effects, Bayer Would Need to Worry!]
  
• Juliette Lewis, Scientologist Sydney Morning Herald
  
• San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome Flirting with Scientology? Ventura Country Star
  

Have a hot tip? See something we missed? Email jmknapp53@gmail.com.