The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali

Gerald Massey

A young Palestinian boy observes that an Israeli bomb and soldiers have killed one's mother, brother, sister, and father. That Israelis are occupying his town and beat, arrest, and order around his few remaining friends creating fear and poverty. Through inference, he sees Israelis as the enemy. His religious authorities and town mayor validates this conclusion; i.e., all Israelis are evil and it is his sacred duty to eradicate them. Thus it becomes a proven theory. His hatred and anger (kleshas) toward the Israelis thus reinforced, he decides to be a terrorist killing Israelis and those who support their evil ways.

Likewise an Israeli child grows up in an orphanage because his family was killed by an Arab suicide bomber. He is told by those that he accepts as authority that Moslem Arabs hate Jews. His own experience appears to validate that conclusion. hence he concludes that the Arab Moslems are a threat which must be eradicated. Here both in the preceding example and this, belief pramana-vrtti as proven conclusions lead to more suffering, Which one is right?

Another example, in Gujarat India, there has just been a murderous riot. One's entire family and village has been murdered. You observed it and saw the perpetuators (pratyaksha). Through inference (anumana) it deduced to be Moslems and the tribal chieftain arrives and declares that all Moslems are our enemies. Out of attachment, fear, and hatred (dvesa klesha) a belief is validated (pramana) that all Moslems must be killed in order to feel safe and survive. One's relatives, peers, and leaders confirm that belief. Hence mob hysteria is fed from a proven theory (proven by means pratyaksha, anumana, and agama).

Another example: I see a red car driven by a purple driver. It goes through a red light and crashes into a blue car. I infer that it might hit me, so I move to get out of the way. I and the other witnesses might conclude that purple drivers are bad drivers and red cars are dangerous. This was based on right observation (pratyaksha), logical inference (anumana), and confirmation based on reliable peer validation (agama). However the conclusion doesn't’t hold up in all situations (it is a specific pramana-vrtti).

Any unmet unrealistic expectation based on assumptions (true or false) can be met with eventual frustration, anger, resentment, grief, and/or pain. For example, I might come into a situation with an assumption or hope based on an assumption that maybe consensus could be reached in regard to a perceived negative “situation”. It might prove that that expectation based on that assumption was entirely unrealistic. What I lacked was perhaps more wisdom and experience. If I could just release my attachment to my expectation, then there would be no resentment, anger, or frustration, but it would have been better yet,  to go into that situation with a more open mind and heart, without being fixated on the citta-vrtti of a specific problem, but rather open minded to a larger potential opportunity to occur.

So called pramana, especially when not thoroughly questioned and examined, easily lends itself to strident convictions, which in turn can be used to manipulate those who are confused. The more confused the people, the more ripe they are for exploitation, manipulation, demagoguery, fundamentalists, and strident ideologues who will volunteer to do their thinking for them. An orderly and rigid structure, appears as secure and safe to the insecure. The predictability or familiarity of prison bars are often mistaken for safety, where predictability replaces inner order and inner authority, by those overcome by confusion, fear, anger, helplessness, and paranoia. In such fear filled and/or confused situations abdicating responsibility may appear very seductive, but such mechanisms lead to the greater danger of slavery. Nothing is more empowering and liberating than awareness. There are countless vrttis and combinations of vrttis. We don’t have to know them all, just know how to free ourselves from them.

Similarly, democracy can serve despotism, tyranny, and destruction if the general populace is confused, paranoid, angry, or greatly disturbed. There, consensus reality or conventional wisdom as mob rule substitutes for agama (authority), hence mass hysteria or mob rule reigns. A democracy is only as healthy as its people's ability to think clearly for themselves, while a democracy made up of crazy, masochistic, sadistic, greedy, rapacious, insatiable, or confused people is capable of great error and destruction. Again awareness breeds freedom, while confusion is the precursor for deception, manipulation, exploitation, and slavery by wannabe puppetmasters and control freaks.

One can go on with a myriad examples of false generalities, stereotyping errors, and false conclusions based on limited observation, inference, and validation which are mistaken. Are the above pramana or viparyaya? The problem is simple, i.e., that people become indoctrinated with belief systems which they no longer question., but rather take the belief to be true and thus their reality is colored (citta-vrtti) by the belief system which acts as a serious filter/bias. or tint. Attachment to pramana, agama, and/or anumana is a stubborn habit to liberate. Often people who lack critical thinking powers or who lack confidence in their ability to think for themselves (viveka will attack those who contradict their agama or sruti – their belief systems. Their egoic self-identity will feel under attack, while they do not have a stable base elsewhere in truth to fall back upon.

Of special import are belief systems, whose basic assumptions have not been critically analyzed by the subject because of an assumed "rightness". Not capable of withstanding critical analysis, contrasting beliefs are not readily tolerated, but rather feared, scorned, and/or demonized. The stronger the uncritical belief, the more resistant to change the subject becomes, and the more dangerous they become to those who do not share their zeal. Strongly impassioned fundamentalists who believe in their own unquestioned righteousness have plagued the world for millennia. Such take the form of crusaders, jihadists, kamikaze suicide warriors, unpaid assassins, and death squads, who eagerly kill and torture for their beliefs (political or otherwise).

What is necessary then is to welcome self awareness and critical thought above that of fancy, egoic pleasure, and prideful arrogance where one group is paired against another. Nothing beats being open to knowing our own mind and how it works. The result is clarity/vidya, compassion, and tolerance. Accordingly effective activities follow which preclude violence and conflict. The ability, confidence, and desire to question our sacredly held belief systems must be held more sacred, and given the highest priority. Only then can humans decide wisely. This is done through opening up one's own inner wisdom (discriminating awareness) or viveka by making distinctions (differentiations within the wholistic context of the undifferentiated, and not at its expense), which we will learn much more about in Pada II. Thoroughly, questioning and examining past assumptions is critical, but it is not cynicism. It is simply being able to doubt everything assumed without attachment in order to abide in the innate light of the truth -- as the truth.

The more discriminating wisdom that one has developed, the less they are fooled or distracted in life and the more they are informed by accessing the heart -- the intrinsic wisdom. Hence this is a two way street; i.e., the more one wakes up, the clearer they see the intrinsic wisdom (purusa) in all. The more they see the intrinsic awareness (purusa) in all. the more they wake up.

So this fits the category where the pramana is not necessarily false, but are still severely limiting and afflictive -- still producing fractual modifications of the citta. It is not only that relative observation through the sense organs can be faulty, that logic can be faulty, but also what authority is absolutely trustworthy except the Sat Guru? According to Patanjali there is no external teacher separate from the innate teacher, the teacher of the most ancient teachers (isvara as purvesham). Even a theory which actually corresponds to the Truth, if not derived from direct experience too often may prevent such. For example:

"I am not the body". True statement? It is stated in the negative and thus can foster a severe limitation. In one sense, we are not just the body, the ego, or separate from the all, but who in truth am I 9the true seeker asks)? If the "I" atman is one with Brahman, then it is all inclusive and not separate (according to a certain school of advaita), thus it includes the body (there being no place where Brahman is not). One can use observation, inference, and authority to validate neti, neti (not I, not I), but this is not the same as experiencing its truth. One may be filled with pride that one has this knowledge, but it is merely pramana, it did not come from direct experience. The above is very similar to the Buddhist negative pramana of proving that there is no independent self. After all where does the ego abide? But pramana based on observation, inference, and external validation should never substitute for the spiritual experience itself which is a more widespread mistake of academicians, fundamentalists, philosophers, and intellectuals than they might presume.

One could go even further by categorizing pramana as to being positive or negative, religious or scientific, partial and contingent, or true and objective, but its common limitation to a yogi is that pramana is at the same time, self-limiting, fractualizing, and spiritually dysfunctional, as it blocks the natural flow of cit. It holds us back in practice. As noted, pramana is most often defined by scholars as "valid cognition". But what makes it valid? We have already discussed the shortcomings of pratyaksha, anumana, and agama. If we use that definition there would be many contradicting "valid cognitions" some of which would invalidate others. It is an absurd proposition, but that does not at all mean that clear vision is impossible or that everything is a joke, absurd, illusory, or contrived. The latter conclusion is NOT the teaching of yoga. Rather swarupa (the true nature of our`own mind, can be known, but not as an ordinary cognition (samprajnata). The much larger field spiritual knowledge beyond the vrttis is not dependent upon the processes of mere observation, rational inference, and external validation. Take it or leave it, but don't stop there. Pramana is not labeled a vrtti by Patanjali only because the processes of observation, inference, authority, and validation may be limited or faulty, but rather pramana is a very limited and fractional dualistic veil in which the common man peers out into the world with a " spin" on life. It obscures clear vision (vidya), vividness, and the true nature of mind and phenomena. It colors the world and reinforces bias (avidya) and bondage preventing us from going further into true spiritual experience, awakening, and liberation (avidya being the major klesha).

Patanjali repeats this again in I,49: