A series of articles based on the teachings of Master E.K. All omissions & commissions belong to the author.
The author, Patañjali uses the sūtra form of writing to convey the knowledge of Yoga. A sūtra must be alpakṣara (concise) and asandigdha (free from ambiguity). Having already explained the result of pursuing citta-vṛtti-nirodhaḥ in the previous sutra, Patañjali now explains what happens when this is not performed.
1.3 तदा द्रष्टुः स्वरूपेऽवस्थानम्
Tadā draṣṭuḥ svarūpe’vasthānam
tadā – then (after achieving chitta vritti nirodha), draṣṭuḥ – Of the seer (self), svarūpe – in his or her own form, avasthānam – Abiding, remaining, dwelling
Translation: Then, the seer abides in his true form.
Patanjali says here that you will be established firmly in your own form. So, does that mean that you are not established in your own (original) form right now? He elaborates in the next sutra.
1.4 वृत्तिसारूप्यमितरत्र
vṛtti – modifications of the mind, sārūpyam – Identification (with) itaratra – (For those who have not achieved)
Translation: Otherwise, the seer identifies with the modifications of the mind.
The one who has achieved chitta-vritti-nirodha exists in the state of non-identification with the objective world. The one who has not achieved this state still exists in “vritti sarūpya”, that is he or she identifies with the vritti or modification that is currently fixed in his mind.
For example, we have the five sense organs – when we see with our eyes, the eye acts as a medium for the mind to “see” the outside world i.e the object is reflected in our mind through the eye. So, as long as we continue to see the object, the swarupa or form of the object exists in the mind. If I am looking at a pole in front of me, does the pole exist there in the outside world or here in my mind? The pole exists in the objective world outside us but a reflection of the pole needs to appear in our mind within us. If not, how else would we be able to see it? While the actual pole may exist outside us, the image of the pole is formed on the screen of our mind. When this phenomenon happens, the mind loses its original quality and assumes the form of the pole.
Similarly, when listening to sound, the sound is reflected on the screen of the mind through the medium of the ears. The mind then assumes the form (identifies with the form) of the sound and loses its original quality. The same phenomenon occurs when we smell something nice. We smell through the nose which acts as the medium of sense perception and the smell is “reflected” upon the mind. While we are in the process of smelling a fragrance, does the mind not exist as the fragrance at that instant in time? We cannot say that at that particular moment the mind is unattached from any sensory object. Similarly when we taste something with our tongue, the tongue captures the taste which is then reflected in the mind. We can then describe the taste saying, “this is sugar, it is sweet” or “this is green chili, it is hot”. In that particular moment, the mind exists as the taste of the sugar or chili and not as itself.
In this way, the mind is influenced by whichever sensory perception is acting on the mind at that time. This is like the movie screen which ceases to exist as a blank slate and instead takes on the identity of whatever film is projected onto it. A movie screen becomes a tragedy during a tragic film, a comedy during a comedy, an intense battle in an action movie, or an expression of devotion in a devotional film. When does the screen become just a screen and stop being a movie? It is only when the movie finishes playing.
For the Yogi who can achieve a state of non-attachment with his senses, can he or she then exist as the unattached mind alone? That is not possible. Instead, he or she exists in a state of background awareness behind the screen of the mind. He exists as himself to himself. We should understand that our true existence lies behind the screen of the mind. So far, we have been living as our minds i.e we identify ourselves with our minds and think we are the mind. We are not. We should learn to live in the awareness of the I AM or the Self which is the background consciousness of man. Patanjali explains more about this in the next sutra.
This is why he says “swarūpe” (in our true form) “avasthānam” (abiding in). We need to understand the various mechanisms within ourselves. This understanding does not dawn on us when we achieve degrees at a University. For example, if one were to ask the question – How does the eye see the world around us? Those who have studied Physics or Optics will say that we can see because light reflects off objects in front of us and passes through the lens of the eye. It then forms an image on the retina. While this explanation is scientifically accurate, the deeper question of what vision truly is remains unanswered. Neither physicists nor experts in the field of optics have been able to fully explain the essence of visual perception.
Vision is what we see with our eyes, no scientist or textbook can explain what it truly means to “see”. The same logic applies if one were to ask them, “What is hearing?”. We can readily answer questions about the weight and volume of an object, its colour, the chemical formula of the paint applied to it and so on. We can also immediately calculate the initial velocity and the change of velocity by the second for an object dropped from a height. All of these questions can be answered by anyone who has learned Physics. While this is knowledge, it cannot be called Vidya or higher knowledge.
If someone has an accidental fall, we can describe the exact angle at which his head struck the floor, how the injury caused the skin to split and bleed, mention if there were any fractures and their severity. What about the pain experienced by the person? Now, can anyone describe what the sensation of pain feels like? A person may know all the scientific subjects in the world like dynamics, statics, physiology, zoology, botany and any other “ology” or “ism” but he can never explain what pain truly is other than simply saying it’s a “sensation”. Even the well qualified doctor with an MBBS or MD degree is still at a loss when asked to describe pain.
Pain can only be felt; it cannot be described. The entirety of our modern scientific understanding is only circling the sanctum sanctorum – it cannot enter into the sacred core of subjective experience.
The knowledge which is actually present in the garbhālaya or the sanctum sanctorum of the temple has not been discovered by any of the modern sciences. This is what we are seeking to learn here. Patanjali uses the word “swarupa” to refer to original form and gives us the teachings and practices required to experience it. I have named this science, “The Science of Man” in a lecture I delivered at a University in Geneva. There is no university in the world that currently has the stature to offer courses about this, nor do any of the professors have the necessary spiritual evolution to teach this sacred science.
[To be continued]