MIND AND MORAL STATES
The Yoga philosophy has essentially a practical tone and its object
consists mainly in demonstrating the means of attaining salvation,
oneness, the liberation of the purusha. The metaphysical theory which we
have discussed at some length, though it is the basis which justifies
its ethical goal, is not itself the principal subject of Yoga
discussion, and is only dealt with to the extent that it can aid in
demonstrating the ethical view. We must now direct our attention to
these ethical theories. Citta or mind always exists in the form of its
states which are called vṛttis.[38] These comprehend all the manifold
states of consciousness of our phenomenal existence. We cannot
distinguish states of consciousness from consciousness itself, for the
consciousness is not something separate from its states; it exists in
them, passes away with their passing and submerges when they are
submerged. It differs from the senses in this, that they represent the
functions and faculties, whereas citta stands as the entity containing
the conscious states with which we are directly concerned. But the citta
which we have thus described as existing only in its states is called
the kāryyacitta or citta as effect as distinguished from the kāraṇacitta
or citta as cause. These kāraṇacittas or cittas as cause are
all-pervading like the ākāśa and are infinite in number, each being
connected with each of the numberless purushas or souls (_Chāyāvyākhyā_,
IV. 10). The reason assigned for acknowledging such a kāraṇacitta which
must be all-pervading, as is evident from the quotation, is that the
Yogin may have knowledge of all things at once.
Vācaspati says that this citta being essentially of the nature of
ahaṃkāra is as all-pervading as the ego itself (IV. 10).
This kāraṇacitta contracts or expands and appears as our individual
cittas in our various bodies at successive rebirths. The kāraṇacitta is
always connected with the purusha and appears contracted when the
purusha presides over animal bodies, and as relatively expanded when he
presides over human bodies, and more expanded when he presides over the
bodies of gods, etc. This contracted or expanded citta appears as our
kāryyacitta which always manifests itself as our states of
consciousness. After death the kāraṇacitta, which is always connected
with the purusha, manifests itself in the new body which is formed by
the āpūra (filling in of prakṛti on account of effective merit or
demerit that the purusha had apparently acquired). The formation of the
body as well as the contraction or expansion of the kāraṇacitta as the
corresponding kāryyacitta to suit it is due to this āpūra. The Yoga does
not hold that the citta has got a separate fine astral body within which
it may remain encased and be transferred along with it to another body
on rebirth. The citta being all-pervading, it appears both to contract
or expand to suit the particular body destined for it owing to its merit
or demerit, but there is no separate astral body (_Tattvavaiśāradī_, IV.
10). In reality the karaṇacitta as such always remains vibhu or
all-pervading; it is only its kāryyacitta or vṛtti that appears in a
contracted or expanded form, according to the particular body which it
may be said to occupy.
The Sāṃkhya view, however, does not regard the citta to be essentially
all-pervading, but small or great according as the body it has to
occupy. Thus Bhikshu and Nāgeśa in explaining the _Bhāshya_, “others
think that the citta expands or contracts according as it is in a bigger
or smaller body, just as light rays do according as they are placed in
the jug or in a room,” attributes this view to the Sāṃkhya
(_Vyāsabhāshya_, IV. 10, and the commentaries by Bhikshu and Nāgeśa on
it).[39]
It is this citta which appears as the particular states of consciousness
in which both the knower and the known are reflected, and it comprehends
them both in one state of consciousness. It must, however, be remembered
that this citta is essentially a modification of prakṛti, and as such is
non-intelligent; but by the seeming reflection of the purusha it appears
as the knower knowing a certain object, and we therefore see that in the
states themselves are comprehended both the knower and the known. This
citta is not, however, a separate tattva, but is the sum or unity of the
eleven senses and the ego and also of the five prāṇas or biomotor forces
(_Nāgeśa_, IV. 10). It thus stands for all that is psychical in man: his
states of consciousness including the living principle in man
represented by the activity of the five prāṇas.
It is the object of Yoga gradually to restrain the citta from its
various states and thus cause it to turn back to its original cause, the
kāraṇacitta, which is all-pervading. The modifications of the
kāraṇacitta into such states as the kāryyacitta is due to its being
overcome by its inherent tamas and rajas; so when the transformations of
the citta into the passing states are arrested by concentration, there
takes place a backward movement and the all-pervading state of the citta
being restored to itself and all tamas being overcome, the Yogin
acquires omniscience, and finally when this citta becomes as pure as the
form of purusha itself, the purusha becomes conscious of himself and is
liberated from the bonds of prakṛti.
The Yoga philosophy in the first chapter describes the Yoga for him
whose mind is inclined towards trance-cognition. In the second chapter
is described the means by which one with an ordinary worldly mind
(_vyutthāna citta_) may also acquire Yoga. In the third chapter are
described those phenomena which strengthen the faith of the Yogin on the
means of attaining Yoga described in the second chapter. In the fourth
chapter is described kaivalya, absolute independence or oneness, which
is the end of all the Yoga practices.
The _Bhāshya_ describes the five classes of cittas and comments upon
their fitness for the Yoga leading to kaivalya. Those are I. _kshipta_
(wandering), II. _mūḍha_ (forgetful), III. _vikshipta_ (occasionally
steady), IV. _ekāgra_ (one-pointed), _niruddha_ (restrained).
I. The _kshiptacitta_ is characterised as wandering, because it is being
always moved by the rajas. This is that citta which is always moved to
and fro by the rise of passions, the excess of which may indeed for the
time overpower the mind and thus generate a temporary concentration, but
it has nothing to do with the contemplative concentration required for
attaining absolute independence. The man moved by rajas, far from
attaining any mastery of himself, is rather a slave to his own passions
and is always being moved to and fro and shaken by them (see
_Siddhānta-candrikā_, I. 2, _Bhojavṛtti_, I. 2).
II. The mūḍhacitta is that which is overpowered by tamas, or passions,
like that of anger, etc., by which it loses its senses and always
chooses the wrong course. Svāmin Hariharāraṇya suggests a beautiful
example of such concentration as similar to that of certain snakes which
become completely absorbed in the prey upon which they are about to
pounce.
III. The vikshiptacitta, or distracted or occasionally steady citta, is
that mind which rationally avoids the painful actions and chooses the
pleasurable ones. Now none of these three kinds of mind can hope to
attain that contemplative concentration called Yoga. This last type of
mind represents ordinary people, who sometimes tend towards good but
relapse back to evil.
IV. The one-pointed (ekāgra) is that kind of mind in which true
knowledge of the nature of reality is present and the afflictions due to
nescience or false knowledge are thus attenuated and the mind better
adapted to attain the nirodha or restrained state. All these come under
the saṃprajñāta (concentration on an object of knowledge) type.
V. The nirodha or restrained mind is that in which all mental states are
arrested. This leads to kaivalya.
Ordinarily our minds are engaged only in perception, inference,
etc.—those mental states which we all naturally possess. These ordinary
mental states are full of rajas and tamas. When these are arrested, the
mind flows with an abundance of sattva in the saṃprajñāta samādhi;
lastly when even the saṃprajñāta state is arrested, all possible states
become arrested.
Another important fact which must be noted is the relation of the actual
states of mind called the vṛttis with the latent states called the
saṃskāras—the potency. When a particular mental state passes away into
another, it is not altogether lost, but is preserved in the mind in a
latent form as a saṃskāra, which is always trying to manifest itself in
actuality. The vṛttis or actual states are thus both generating the
saṃskāras and are also always tending to manifest themselves and
actually generating similar vṛttis or actual states. There is a
circulation from vṛttis to saṃskāras and from them again to vṛttis
(_saṃskārāḥ vṛttibhiḥ kriyante, saṃskāraiśca vṛttayaḥ evaṃ
vṛttisaṃskāracakramaniśamāvarttate_). So the formation of saṃskāras and
their conservation are gradually being strengthened by the habit of
similar vṛttis or actual states, and their continuity is again
guaranteed by the strength and continuity of these saṃskāras. The
saṃskāras are like roots striking deep into the soil and growing with
the growth of the plant above, but even when the plant above the soil is
destroyed, the roots remain undisturbed and may again shoot forth as
plants whenever they obtain a favourable season. Thus it is not enough
for a Yogin to arrest any particular class of mental states; he must
attain such a habit of restraint that the saṃskāra thus generated is
able to overcome, weaken and destroy the saṃskāra of those actual states
which he has arrested by his contemplation. Unless restrained by such a
habit, the saṃskāra of cessation (_nirodhaja saṃskāra_) which is opposed
to the previously acquired mental states become powerful and destroy the
latter, these are sure to shoot forth again in favourable season into
their corresponding actual states.
The conception of avidyā or nescience is here not negative but has a
definite positive aspect. It means that kind of knowledge which is
opposed to true knowledge (_vidyāviparītaṃ jñānāntaramavidyā_). This is
of four kinds: (1) The thinking of the non-eternal world, which is
merely an effect, as eternal. (2) The thinking of the impure as the
pure, as for example the attraction that a woman’s body may have for a
man leading him to think the impure body pure. (3) The thinking of vice
as virtue, of the undesirable as the desirable, of pain as pleasure. We
know that for a Yogin every phenomenal state of existence is painful
(II. 15). A Yogin knows that attachment (_rāga_) to sensual and other
objects can only give temporary pleasure, for it is sure to be soon
turned into pain. Enjoyment can never bring satisfaction, but only
involves a man further and further in sorrows. (4) Considering the
non-self, e.g. the body as the self. This causes a feeling of being
injured on the injury of the body.
At the moment of enjoyment there is always present suffering from pain
in the form of aversion to pain; for the tendency to aversion from pain
can only result from the incipient memory of previous sufferings. Of
course this is also a case of pleasure turned into pain
(_pariṇāmaduḥkhatā_), but it differs from it in this that in the case of
pariṇāmaduḥkha pleasure is turned into pain as a result of change or
pariṇāma in the future, whereas in this case the anxiety as to pain is a
thing of the present, happening at one and the same time that a man is
enjoying pleasure.
Enjoyment of pleasure or suffering from pain causes those impressions
called saṃskāra or potencies, and these again when aided by association
naturally create their memory and thence comes attachment or aversion,
then again action, and again pleasure and pain and hence impressions,
memory, attachment or aversion, and again action and so forth.
All states are modifications of the three guṇas; in each one of them the
functions of all the three guṇas are seen, contrary to one another.
These contraries are observable in their developed forms, for the guṇas
are seen to abide in various proportions and compose all our mental
states. Thus a Yogin who wishes to be released from pain once for all is
very sensitive and anxious to avoid even our so-called pleasures. The
wise are like the eye-ball. As a thread of wool thrown into the eye
pains by merely touching it, but not when it comes into contact with any
other organ, so the Yogin is as tender as the eye-ball, when others are
insensible of pain. Ordinary persons, however, who have again and again
suffered pains as the consequence of their own karma, and who again seek
them after having given them up, are all round pierced through as it
were by nescience, their minds become full of afflictions, variegated by
the eternal residua of the passions. They follow in the wake of the “I”
and the “Mine” in relation to things that should be left apart, pursuing
threefold pain in repeated births, due to external and internal causes.
The Yogin seeing himself and the world of living beings surrounded by
the eternal flow of pain, turns for refuge to right knowledge, cause of
the destruction of all pains (_Vyāsa-bhāshya_, II. 15).
Thinking of the mind and body and the objects of the external world as
the true self and feeling affected by their change is avidyā (false
knowledge).
The modifications that this avidyā suffers may be summarised under four
heads.
I. The ego, which, as described above, springs from the identification
of the buddhi with the purusha.
II. From this ego springs attachment (_rāga_) which is the inclination
towards pleasure and consequently towards the means necessary for
attaining it in a person who has previously experienced pleasures and
remembers them.
II. Repulsion from pain also springs from the ego and is of the nature
of anxiety for its removal; anger at pain and the means which produces
pain, remains in the mind in consequence of the feeling of pain, in the
case of him who has felt and remembers pain.
IV. Love of life also springs from the ego. This feeling exists in all
persons and appears in a positive aspect in the form “would that I were
never to cease.” This is due to the painful experience of death in some
previous existence, which abides in us as a residual potency (_vāsanā_)
and causes the instincts of self-preservation, fear of death and love of
life. These modifications including avidyā are called the five kleśas or
afflictions.
We are now in a position to see the far-reaching effects of the
identification of the purusha with the buddhi. We have already seen how
it has generated the macrocosm or external world on the one hand, and
manas and the senses on the other. Now we see that from it also spring
attachment to pleasure, aversion from pain and love of life, motives
observable in most of our states of consciousness, which are therefore
called the _klishṭa vṛtti_ or afflicted states. The five afflictions
(false knowledge and its four modifications spoken above) just mentioned
are all comprehended in avidyā, since avidyā or false knowledge is at
the root of all worldly experiences. The sphere of avidyā is all false
knowledge generally, and that of asmitā is also inseparably connected
with all our experiences which consist in the identification of the
intelligent self with the sensual objects of the world, the attainment
of which seems to please us and the loss of which is so painful to us.
It must, however, be remembered that these five afflictions are only
different aspects of avidyā and cannot be conceived separately from
avidyā. These always lead us into the meshes of the world, far from our
final goal—the realisation of our own self—emancipation of the purusha.
Opposed to it are the vṛttis or states which are called unafflicted,
aklishṭa, the habit of steadiness (_abhyāsa_) and non-attachment to
pleasures (_vairāgya_) which being antagonistic to the afflicted states,
are helpful towards achieving true knowledge. These represent such
thoughts as tend towards emancipation and are produced from our attempts
to conceive rationally our final state of emancipation, or to adopt
suitable means for this. They must not, however, be confused with
puṇyakarma (virtuous action), for both puṇya and pāpa karma are said to
have sprung from the kleśas. There is no hard and fast rule with regard
to the appearance of these klishṭa and aklishṭa states, so that in the
stream of the klishṭa states or in the intervals thereof, aklishṭa
states may also appear—as practice and desirelessness born from the
study of the Veda-reasoning and precepts—and remain quite distinct in
itself, unmixed with the klishṭa states. A Brahman being in a village
which is full of the Kirātas, does not himself become a Kirāta (a forest
tribe) for that reason.
Each aklishṭa state produces its own potency or saṃskāra, and with the
frequency of the states their saṃskāra is strengthened which in due
course suppresses the aklishṭa states.
These klishṭa and aklishṭa modifications are of five descriptions:
pramāṇa (real cognition), viparyyaya (unreal cognition), vikalpa
(logical abstraction and imagination), nidrā (sleep), smṛti (memory).
These vṛttis or states, however, must be distinguished from the six
kinds of mental activity mentioned in _Vyāsa-bhāshya_, II. 18: grahaṇa
(reception or presentative ideation), dhāraṇa (retention), ūha
(assimilation), apoha (differentiation), tattvajñāna (right knowledge),
abhiniveśa (decision and determination), of which these states are the
products.
We have seen that from avidyā spring all the kleśas or afflictions,
which are therefore seen to be the source of the klishṭa vṛttis as well.
Abhyāsa and vairāgya—the aklishṭa vṛttis, which spring from precepts,
etc., lead to right knowledge, and as such are antagonistic to the
modification of the guṇas on the avidyā side.
We know also that both these sets of vṛttis—the klishṭa and the
aklishṭa—produce their own kinds of saṃskāras, the klishṭa saṃskāra and
the aklishṭa or prajñā saṃskāra. All these modifications of citta as
vṛtti and saṃskāra are the dharmas of citta, considered as the dharmin
or substance.