The Atma Jyoti Blog

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Success is one of the gods of the modern world–but only material success. Krishna, however, is interested in success of spirit, and we should be, too. So he begins this seventh chapter of the Gita, saying:

“Devote your whole mind to me, and practice yoga. Take me for your only refuge. I will tell you how, by doing this, you can know me in my total reality, without any shadow of doubt.” 1

Perhaps one of the reasons Vyasa chose a battlefield as the setting for the immortal dialogue of the Gita is the necessity for cutting straight to the facts without delays. Once the battlefield is entered, diplomacy is left behind–if it had not failed there would be no battle. Only the facts–the immediate facts–now matter. It is no surprise, then, that in all spiritual traditions we find military references and symbols to some degree. This verse certainly embodies the factuality and urgency of battle–traits that we require in our own personal battle for higher consciousness. Here then are the factors necessary for our success.

“He must consider the necessity of making yoga practice the core of his life.”

Devote your whole mind to me, and practice yoga. It is only to be expected that an inquirer will not commit to such an intense involvement with yoga, that first some experience of its value must be gained. But it is absolutely essential that once the aspirant comes to see the value of yoga he must consider the necessity of making yoga practice the core of his life–everything else must become secondary. In fact, anything found to conflict with the practice of yoga must be eliminated from the yogi’s inner and outer life. Without this complete dedication success in yoga is impossible.

I am not saying that everything in a person’s life is to be displaced by yoga, that yoga is supposed to crowd out everything so that nothing else remains, but only that yoga must be central to the yogis life and be given first priority. This is because every element in our life must be looked at from a yogic perspective and ordered accordingly. Since most people’s lives are conglomerates of addictions rather than principles or rational choices, this can be a very difficult matter indeed. With this in mind, toward the end of the Gita Krishna tells Arjuna: “Who knows the Atman knows that happiness born of pure knowledge: the joy of sattwa. Deep his delight after strict self-schooling: sour toil at first but at last what sweetness, the end of sorrow.” 2 To reach the sweet we must first go through the bitter. It would not be honest to tell you otherwise.

There should be no “hidden charges” in yoga. Right from the first we should know what will be required of us if we intend to persevere. And we must decide to meet the requirements. Otherwise it is all a waste of time for everyone. The mind must be totally dedicated to God as the Supreme Goal and the Supreme Means. This is because real yoga is nothing less than communion with God right from the start, however faint or tenuous it may be. For “the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day.”3

Take me for your only refuge. That is, we must make God the only answer to our internal problems, and not resort to mental and emotional gimmicks that will only hide the troubles. Even though we should sensibly do our best in a practical manner in relation to our external difficulties, even there God should have priority so our external tangles will not turn into mental turmoils.

If we will observe these two principles, Krishna assures us: “by doing this, you can know me in my total reality, without any shadow of doubt.” Then he continues: “I will give you all this knowledge, and direct spiritual experience, besides. When a man has that, nothing else in this world remains to be known.” 4 Then we will be ready to get out of what a friend of mine used to call “this dumb kindergarten” and move up to a higher level of evolution. About time!

The few

The benefits of yoga are so marvelous, yet: “Who cares to seek for that perfect freedom? One man, perhaps, in many thousands. Then tell me how many of those who seek freedom shall know the total truth of my being? Perhaps one only.” 5 Why so few? Because few will devote their whole mind to God, practice yoga, and take refuge in God alone, making God the Sole Reality in their life. Such persons are rare, but we must at some time or other in the round of rebirths become one of them. Why not now, rather than later?

Read more on this subject: Krishna Teaches Us How To Meditate.

Read more articles on meditation and practical spiritual life. Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog.

Q. I have dreams at night with sages from the past. I am wondering if these are just dreams or if the dead can make communication through dreams.

A. First, please see the section on visions in the question-and-answer material, because what applies to visions mostly applies to dreams. Ramana Maharshi’s caution about getting involved with vision and dreams is most important and trustworthy.

It is extremely hard trying to figure out whether a dream is “real” or “true.” Yogananda said that if we dream of a saint and they look exactly like their photographs, then the dream is real, for the subconscious mind cannot reproduce the form of a realized Master. I have found that this is an extremely valuable principle, for a lot of the time our mind is just fooling around or even trying to trick us.

But even if the dream proves to be “real” is it completely trustworthy? For often a dream has both superconscious and subconscious elements mixed together. It is not uncommon for the mind to splice in subconscious “footage” even if the basic part of the dream is real. I have known for dreams to start out real and end up fantasy. How can the difference be detected?

It is best to just take note of what is dreamed but to go no further than that. In time life itself will reveal the truth or falsehood of the dream, as well as its value or worthlessness.

Masters never die, but live forever, and they can communicate with us. It has been my experience that such communication is always backed up with more objective elements, that the communications are more a pointing out than a stand-alone kind of teaching.

There is no substitute for the intuition developed by meditation–not even visitations from saints and angels.

Keep up to date with the latest tips on meditation and practical spiritual life. Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog.

Avatars (to use the Sanskrit term) do not come to earth for the vague purpose of somehow uplifting humanity and “saving” sinners. Rather, They come with the intention enunciated by Saint John the Beloved at the beginning of his Gospel: “To as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God.” (John 1:12) That is, an incarnation of God manifests upon the earth for the purpose of establishing a repository of spiritual power which will outlast His physical “lifetime,” and will bring salvation to future generations. Sometimes the avatar establishes a new religion upon the earth, and sometimes He regenerates a religion whose inner power has waned or even been lost.

In the case of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, a storehouse of power–the Church–was established which was to be a haven for those adherents of the ancient mysteries of the Mediterranean world which had lost their deifying power. I use the word “deifying” because “salvation” is not having our sins forgiven or escaping a miserable afterlife in hell, but rather it is freedom–freedom from all ignorance, and therefore from all necessity of further birth-manifestations in this lowest of planes of existence and in all other higher planes of existence as well. That is, salvation is the return of the individual spirit into the bosom of the Father from whence it came, and within which it has existed eternally.

Since human beings are what they are, in time the spiritual power so brought to earth becomes dimmed, distorted, and (often) eventually lost. Therefore the Lord must come again to again establish “the power to become the sons of God” among men.

Dual Incarnations

In the foregoing I have implied that God comes in a single form at a time–and that form a male form. Except in extremely rare instances, divine incarnation always takes place in a dual manifestation–that is, in both male and female forms. In the fourteenth century, in the controversy surrounding the Hesychast fathers of Mount Athos and their defender Saint Gregory Palamas, it was established as an irrevocable part of Eastern Christian theology that God, though one, has–from our standpoint at least–a dual nature: essence and energies. This teaching was not novel to Christianity, but had never before needed official expression and approbation. In Hinduism this duality is also to be found–that is, that God consists of two aspects, divine consciousness and divine creative power–Purusha and Prakriti. For this reason, also in Hinduism, every male deity representing the infinite guiding consciousness behind the universe also has a female consort (known as His Shakti, energy) Who represents the limitless field of conscious energy that is manifesting as the universe over which the Lord presides. Since the individual souls manifest and evolve within this great energy and are ultimately “born” out of it into the realm of pure consciousness, that energy field is called “Mother,” as distinguished from the “Father” of pure consciousness. All creation is looked upon as both the Mother and Her evolutionary “womb.”

In Christianity, this divine duality is manifested and symbolized through our Lord Jesus Christ and His Virgin Mother Mary. Usually the male incarnation marries His female counterpart, but because of Jesus’ unique spiritual mission–as well as the symbology which was to unfold through His life-drama–the divine power (also known as the Holy Spirit) was first born on earth and became His Virgin Mother.

Thus, there are virtually as many incarnations of God in female form as there in male form. (Although rare, sometimes there has been an incarnation in female form without the male counterpart.)

Two distinct modes

Since we are on the subject of divine incarnations, let me add that there are two distinct modes of divine incarnation.

The first–and most common–is the one in which the Supreme Consciousness manifests upon the earth in a body that is illusory–that is, it is not a body formed of dense matter but is itself a theophany (swarupa), formed of the Divine Consciousness, and is itself a revelation of God. That is, God is not inside that body, but God actually is that body. Therefore, whenever anyone sees the Incarnation they literally are beholding God. (The question as to whether they are seeing God with their two physical eyes or are actually having an internal, spiritual perception which seems to them external is to my way of thinking completely irrelevant.) As stated in the Bhagavad Gita, the Incarnation’s “birth” on earth is a mere appearance only. Such an Incarnation really has neither a father nor a mother, though for the sake of relating to human beings there is that appearance, including gestation and birth. The “body” of such an incarnation bears several distinctive marks or traits by which it can be known as what it truly is.

The second type of Incarnation is quite different, though morally-spiritually the same. This form of Incarnation differs in two major points. Firstly, rather than being a direct “raying forth” or extension of the Absolute Consciousness into the world in an illusory manner, the Incarnation is an individualized spirit that has traversed the entire range of evolution and attained absolute oneness with the Supreme and thereby participates in and manifests the omnipresence, omniscience and omnipotence of God. Of such a person it is rightly said: “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” (Colossians 2:9) In such a being humanity and divinity are manifested as one. In the other type of incarnation, there is no humanity whatsoever–not even a human body–but only divinity manifest in an inexplicable manner. This second type of divine incarnation is born into a truly material human body and has actual human ancestry. Whereas it is incorrect to speak of the first type of incarnation as human, it is improper to deny the humanity of this second mode of avatar.

Jesus Christ was this second type of incarnation. By the end of the third century the general consciousness of the Christian Church became dimmed to such a degree that the nature of Jesus Christ in His incarnation was incomprehensible. This gave rise to various erroneous definitions of His incarnate nature–definitions that would not even have been bothered with if Christians had not lost the direct communication with Christ that was the normal mode of Christian consciousness in the preceding generations.

There were those who held that the birth and body of Jesus Christ were merely an illusion and that consequently He was incapable of experiencing any material sensations whatever, especially the sufferings upon the cross. This was the view of those known as Docetists, and is currently (erroneously) considered the “Gnostic” view. Later there were those that concluded that Jesus Christ was a great super-being created by God and sent into the world for the purpose of its salvation. This is known as the Arian view. Another view was that Jesus the Christ was a virtuous human being who was somehow overshadowed or possessed by God and used as a sacred medium or shaman for communication with humanity, and that divinity withdrew itself from the human Christ before His crucifixion. This is known as the Nestorian view. Things came back somewhat full circle to the Docetic possession in the teachings of a Greek monk named Eutyches, who taught that Jesus Christ was in no way human but only divine. The current “orthodoxy” among Eastern and Oriental Christians is the view that Jesus Christ was God Who assumed a human nature and thereby became as fully human as He was divine. However, since their (contemporary) understanding of both divinity and humanity is defective, this “orthodoxy” is of little practical meaning.

If you found this article helpful, Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog.

Q: Can you help me find or choose a spiritual name, one that will express my understanding?

Since you are interested in a name that indicates your inner spiritual life, you can go about it in two ways.

1) You can choose a proper name, such as that of a great holy person, a figure in religious lore (such as the Mahabharata, Ramayana, etc.) or scriptures, or even the name or title of an aspect of God. (There are thousands in Indian religion.) Of course to do so you need to be well acquainted with such things.

2) You adopt a spiritual quality or state as a name. For example, you can take a Sanskrit dictionary and look through it for words that correspond to your inner feeling. We recommend that you start with A Brief Sanskrit Glossary, and if that does not yield what you need, then look into larger dictionaries. In India many people have names that indicate spiritual qualities, such as Abhaya (without fear; steadfast), Jnana (wisdom), Vivekan (one endowed with discrimination), or Brahmavadin (one who follows the path to Brahman).

But this is very important: the name should be your choice, not one recommended by another. Since you want it to express your inner feeling (bhava,) it must be determined from within, through your own intuition. Otherwise in time you may not feel completely satisfied with it.

Learn about real practical spiritual life. Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog.

This is Part 16 of A Catechism of Enlightenment–a serialized commentary on “A Method Of Enlightening A Disciple” from Shankara’s Upadeshasahasri–A Thousand Teachings

52) “In what does the sun find its support? The eye. In what does the eye find its support? Colors, for one sees colors with the eye. In what do colors find their support? The heart [hridaya], for one knows colors through the heart. Therefore it is in the heart that colors find their support.” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3:9:20)

By citing the prior upanishad Shankara has shown us that the lesser self consists of mind, speech, and prana-breath. Now by presenting us with this verse he shows that the faculty, body, or level which embraces the three together, which is the unity of the three, is the “heart,” the hridaya. We see from this verse that the heart is the ultimate sensorium, that which perceives all and also unifies and assimilates them to the atman-self. It is not at all the physical organ that circulates the blood, nor is it the anahata center or “heart chakra.” The hridaya is far, far beyond them. The heart is the core of our experiential existence, the essential faculty of objective awareness blended with the subjective awareness of the pure Self.

53) “When all the desires that dwell in his heart are got rid of, then does the mortal man become immortal and attain Brahman in this very body.

“Just as the slough of a snake lies, dead and cast away, on an anthill, even so lies this body. Then the Self becomes disembodied and immortal Spirit, the Supreme Life [Prana], Brahman, the Light.” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4:4:7)

The subject of the heart is being continued. That is where the desires dwell, but when they are expelled from the heart, “then does the mortal man become immortal and attain Brahman in this very body.” Perhaps Jesus had this very verse in mind when he said: “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.” (Matthew 5:8)

The second part that speaks of the glory to be attained at the dropping of the body is thrilling. It is interesting that in India the birth of a saint or avatar is celebrated, but never the anniversary of his death. Yet here in America Yogananda instituted the celebration of the mahasamadhi (departure) of great masters. In the context of this verse it is perfectly reasonable.

54) “That Self, after enjoying himself and roaming in the dream state and merely witnessing the results of good and evil, hastens back in the reverse way to his former condition, the waking state. He remains unaffected by whatever he sees in that state, for this infinite being is unattached” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4:3:16)

This has a twofold meaning. One is that the Self is the witness who “lives” in dream and waking, yet is unaffected and unattached. The other is a wider meaning, and is speaking of the Self’s entry into the Cosmic Dream. There it roams through many dream-incarnations, seeming to undergo so many things as a result of its “karma.” But in time through yoga it reverses the process and returns to its eternal “waking state,” having ever remained unaffected by whatever it dreamed, for it is forever separate from any “other” and is unattached to any thing or experience.

55) “That indeed is his form–free from desires, free from evils, free from fear. This infinite being, when fully embraced by the Supreme Self, knows nothing that is without, nothing that is within.

“That indeed is his form, in which all his desires are fulfilled, in which all desires become the Self and which is free from desires and devoid of grief.” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4:3:21)

Here we see that the term “form” (rupa) when used in regard to the Self, which is essentially formless, means the bhava, the stithi, the state of the Self when resting in its own swarupa. (Please see A Brief Sanskrit Glossary for definitions of these important terms.) The Self can have no desire, negativity, or fear. Yet it feels and thinks it does while immersed in samsaric existence. But when it turns back to the Source and is “embraced by the Supreme Self” all such disappear and the duality of inner/outer is no more. There is only THAT in which all desires are fulfilled because they have been transmuted into desire-affinity for Brahman, its ultimate Self. In this way it becomes free from desires and devoid of the pain desires inevitably produce.

The liberated Self is tranquil and joyful–not a negative blank.

56) “This ]Self] is said to be unmanifested, unthinkable and unchangeable. Therefore, knowing This to be such, you should not grieve.” (Bhagavad Gita 2:25)

The previous verse says at the end that the Self is “devoid of grief.” The reason for this is given in this verse from the Gita. There can be no grief or frustration for that which is unmanifest, unthinkable and unchangeable. When we know (not just speculate or believe) that this is true by having experienced it for ourselves, then we shall never grieve, either.

57) “Unknowable and constant, It should be realized in one form only. The Self is free from taint, beyond the akasha, birthless, infinite and unchanging.” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4:4:20)

All forms are the forms of Brahman, being Its manifestations. But those forms are evanescent dreams. The necessary realization of Brahman must be in Its eternal form of Pure Consciousness, the Absolute Unity. The same applies to the Self, who takes on many forms in its wanderings in relativity, but is really only pure consciousness, as well. The Self is transcendent, so it is beyond even the subtle Ether.

58) “When there is duality, as it were, then one smells another, one sees another, one hears another, one speaks to another, one thinks of another, one knows another. But when everything has become the Self, then what should one smell and through what, what should one see and through what, what should one hear and through what, what should one speak and through what, what should one think and through what, what should one know and through what? Through what should One know That owing to which all this is known–through what should one know the Knower?” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2:4:14)

In ignorance we think there are “others” to perceive, and in realization we see that those “others” are not other–or many–at all, but the One Brahman. So we will continue to perceive the forms or modes, but will know they are no “things” but The One. The triad of seer, seen, and seeing will have become The One as well.

Through what should One know That owing to which all this is known–through what should one know the Knower? Through the Knower alone can It be known. That is why we use the expression “Self-knowledge.” What, then, is the way to know the Knower? Meditation. “This effulgent Self is to be realized within the lotus of the heart by meditation.” (Mundaka Upanishad 3.1.5) “Taking as the bow the great weapon of the Upanishads [Om], one should place in It the arrow sharpened by meditation. Drawing It with a mind engaged in the contemplation of That [Brahman], O beloved, know that Imperishable Brahman as the target. The Syllable Om is the bow: One’s Self, indeed, is the arrow. Brahman is spoken of as the target of that. It is to be hit without making a mistake. Thus one becomes united with it [Brahman] as the arrow becomes one with the target. He in Whom the sky, the earth, and the interspace are woven, as also the mind along with all the pranas, know Him alone as the one Self. Dismiss other utterances. This [Om] is the bridge to immortality. Meditate on Om as the Self. May you be successful in crossing over to the farther shore of darkness.” (Mundaka Upanishad 2.2.3-6)

59) “As these flowing rivers, bound for the ocean, disappear into the ocean after having reached it, their names and forms being destroyed and are called simply the ocean–even so, these sixteen parts of the seer, whose goal is the Purusha, disappear into the Purusha after having reached Him, their names and forms being destroyed and are called simply the Purusha. He becomes free of parts and immortal.” (Prashna Upanishad 6:5)

When the creation is withdrawn into Brahman at the end of the creation cycle, it ceases to exist as a separate entity and returns to the state of Brahman. Brahman alone remains. When our subtle bodies are withdrawn into our Self at the end of relative manifestation, the same thing occurs. Only when we are free of “parts” will we be truly imperishable and immortal.

60) “It is the heart and the mind. It is consciousness, lordship, knowledge, wisdom, retentive power of mind, sense knowledge, steadfastness, thought, thoughtfulness, sorrow, memory, concepts, purpose, life, desire, longing: all these are but various names of Consciousness [Prajna].” (Aitareya Upanishad 3:1:2)

This is cited to support and explain the preceding statement of the Prashna Upanishad. All that is withdrawn ultimately into Brahman and into the Self are only the One Consciousness that has been (seemingly) existing separately under various names.

• Read more installments of A Catechism of Enlightenment.

Keep up to date with the latest posts. Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog.

How tapasya is influenced by the dominant guna of the practicioner

[for those not familiar with the Sanskrit terms in this article, see A Definition of the Gunas and A Brief Sanskrit Glossary.]

• Sattwic tapasya

“When men practice this threefold austerity devotedly, with enlightened faith and no desire for reward, it is said to have the nature of sattwa.” (Bhagavad Gita 17:17)
Sargeant’s translation: “This threefold austerity practiced with the highest faith by men who are not desirous of fruits and are steadfast, they regard as sattwic.”

There are some key words we should look at in this verse to appreciate its profound meaning.

Shraddhaya paraya, highest faith, means mumukshutwa: intense desire or yearning for liberation (moksha). This is the sole basis for sattwic tapasya, the primary trait of a sattwic spiritual aspirant. Although tapasya accomplishes many things in the life and mind of a tapaswin (one who engages in tapasya), not the least of which is intense purification and opening of higher faculties of awareness, all those are but the means to the single end: liberation of the spirit. Thus it is called aphalakankshibhir–without desire for personal gain (fruit) in the egoic sense, though of course moksha is the supreme attainment (paramartha). Such an aspirant is then described as yuktaih–always “in yoga,” through the continual fixing of the mind upon the Highest through the japa and meditation of Om, which is Itself the Highest.

Such are the sattwic, and such is sattwic tapasya.

• Rajasic tapasya

“Austerity which is practiced out of selfish pride, or to gain notoriety, honor and worship, is said to have the nature of rajas. Its effect is not lasting, because it lacks resolution.” (Bhagavad Gita 17:18)
Sargeant’s translation: “Austerity which is practiced with hypocrisy for the sake of honor, respect, and reverence; that, here in the world, is declared to be rajasic, unsteady, and impermanent.”This is much more on target than the Prabhavananda translation. Still we need a closer look at the words.

Three words are used in the first line: Satkara, which means honor, reverence, favor, or hospitality. Literally, it means “good-doing,” so it implies that the rajasic tapaswin wants to be thought well of in general, which of course will result in the four meanings just listed. Mana, which means honor and respect. Puja, which usually is translated as “worship,” but can also mean reverence akin to worship. In India they basically go together. Guru puja is quite common, and almost as common is the claim of disciples that their guru is really an avatar, a divine incarnation. This is carried to absurd lengths all the time. Contrary to Buddha’s assertions, many contemporary Indian teachers are fingers pointing to themselves–not to the goal of nirvana.

Dambhena means fraudulent and hypocritical. Such people supposedly engage in extreme ascetic actions and continually have the most exalted experiences. But when you look closer it is all puff and patter. They do nothing but sit around being adored and toadying to the rich and the influential, occasionally emitting a string of platitudes whose banality is astonishing–but not as amazing as the mindless plaudits of their admirers.

Swami Yukteswar, the guru of Paramhansa Yogananda, continually cautioned people to never believe the claims made about yogis, especially the claims made by their disciples. Rather, he counseled them to carefully examine matters for themselves. As a young man he heard of a yogi who always slept in a state of levitation. So he hid under the yogi’s bed and waited. Nothing but snores. So he crawled from under the bed and said in a loud voice: “I don’t see any levitation–only sleep!” The yogi woke up, and to cover himself shouted: “I wondered why I did not levitate tonight as usual. You were spying on me!” The young Priya Nath merely laughed and went his way, not impressed by the declaration.

Pious hypocrisy is common coin of the crowd-pleaser. It is a favorite ploy in India to claim that you spent decades doing intense tapasya in the Himalayas. I personally know one Big Baba of Bengal who claims he spent over twenty years in the Himalayas, when investigation easily shows that he was a building contractor in Calcutta all the time! Swami Sivananda humorously wrote some instruction for these people. First, he said, rent a little house (kutir) in Rishikesh or Hardwar for six months. Arrange to have your food brought to you, and never be seen by anybody. Sit around inside and do what you like, including a lot of sleep. During that time write two or three “trash leaflets” (his expression) and a couple of bad devotional songs (bhajans). Then at the end of the six months go down to the plains and put it out that you have been living in silence (mauna) for many years way up in the Himalayas, even beyond Uttar Kashi. Arrange for yourself a few meetings where you will talk aimlessly, sing your bad songs, and give out your worthless leaflets. In no time at all you will be a sought-after guru, and maybe even an avatar.

This is no idle allegation. Once in Rishikesh I was stopped and grilled by a fairly well-educated “sadhu” who begged me to tell him how to get to America and “make a splash.” On another occasion in holy Naimisharanya a monk told me that if I would spend a few hours with him each day for a week, “I will show you how to get the people of America in the palm of your hand.” That is how these people think. Rajasic is a nice word for it.

Krishna winds up the subject by saying that rajasic tapasya, besides its obvious flaws, is worthless because it is chalam–unsteady and wavering–and adhruvam–impermanent, infirm, and unfixed. This is because rajas by its nature is restless and changing. A rajasic person does not hold single-mindedly to anything for long. Therefore any tapasya will be impermanent, especially because it is not oriented toward the unchanging and ever-existent Absolute, but rather toward the ever-changing and unsteady ego-dream.

• Tamasic tapasya

“Austerity is said to have the nature of tamas when it is practiced for some foolish purpose, or for the excitement of self-torture, or in order to harm another person.” (Bhagavad Gita 17:19) Here is the literal meaning: “Austerity performed with deluded notion of the Self, with torture, or with the aim of destroying another, is declared to be tamasic.”

There is a lot to look at here, and all unpleasant. But the result will be positive.

Mudhagrahenatmano means with deluded or confused understanding or concept of the Atman, the Self. This is a crucial point. For if there is no right understanding of the nature of our Self, we will do a great deal of foolish and pointless things. This is true of religion in general. In Sanatana Dharma alone is there a clear understanding of the Atman-Self. And if you don’t even know who or what you are, how can you even live life in a sensible manner? Most people do not. What kind of religion can we have if we have no clue as to what we really are? Any discipline will be as mistaken as our ideas about ourself. This is why most religion is destructive, as are the disciplines (or lack thereof) of most religion.

When people mistake their physical and psychic makeup for their self, they cannot help but misunderstand what is really needed for spiritual life, and will waste their time to no purpose, ultimately harming themselves. Such persons will often engage in padaya–torture or torment. They will torture the body with strenuous and painful actions, even mutilating it or hastening its death by injury to its health. Ritual mutilation is often practiced on their own bodies by those engaged in negative ascesis. Or just the opposite: they will harm the body through deluded indulgence and lack of discipline or purification. But most of all they will torment their Self by burying It beneath ignorant ideas and actions, clouding and distorting their minds so there is no hope of comprehending true spiritual matters or disciplines. They will live a life contrary to their real spirit-nature, and thus bring nothing but suffering to themselves and others.

Finally, tamasic tapasya is sometimes engaged in as a kind of evil magical practice whose intention is to gain the power to harm another, or to placate negative entities who will do the harming on behalf of the tapaswin. I am sorry to say that this is found in India even to this day. I know of a “sadhu” who lives in a temple in Kerala and who does incredibly complex and strenuous disciplines to get such power. This man was once hired to bring about the death of a friend of mine, supposedly through placation of a “deity.” Fortunately a letter from this evil man to the one hiring him was missent to my friend who spiritually armed himself and came to no harm.

The expression used for this in the text is parasyotsadanartham, which means the destruction of another, but it can also mean for the overturning or defeat of another. This is often the aim of such tapasya: either the unseating of a person in authority or advantage, or the bringing about of his loss of money, position, or reputation. Sometimes tapasya is engaged in just to be thought “more ascetic than thou” in relation to others engaged in spiritual discipline. A kind of ascetic one-upmanship and rivalry is often found among monastics of all religions. This was especially the case in Christian monasticism in the Egyptian desert during the third century (and after) when enough time had lapsed for the Church to have greatly forgotten what Jesus had really taught about spiritual life and discipline. Regarding this, in his book, Benedictine Monachism, Dom Cuthbert Butler wrote:

“The spirit, the dominating principle of this monachism, may be thus characterized. It was a spirit of individualism. Each worked for his personal advance in virtue; each strove to do his utmost in all kinds of ascetical exercises and austerities, in prolonging his fasts, his prayers, his silence. The favorite name to describe any of the prominent monks was ‘great athlete.’ And they were athletes, and filled with the spirit of the modern athlete. They loved to ‘make a record’ in austerities, and to contend with one another in mortifications; and they would freely boast of their spiritual achievements. One who had seen them describes the Nitrian monks as ‘surpassing one another in virtues, and being filled with a spirit of rivalry in asceticism, showing forth all virtue, and striving to outdo one another in manner of life.’ But it is in Palladius’ account of Macarius of Alexandria that this spirit shows itself most conspicuously: ‘If he ever heard of any one having performed a work of asceticism, he was all on fire to do the same;” and Palladius illustrates it by examples. Did Macarius hear that another monk ate nothing but one pound of bread a day? For three years he ate each day only what broken bread he could extract in a single handful through the narrow neck of a jar. Did he hear that the monks of Pachomius’ monastery ate nothing cooked by fire throughout Lent? He did the same for seven years. Did he hear that their observance was ““great””? He did not rest satisfied till he had gone to see, and had beaten them all.’ Thus the practice of asceticism constituted a predominant feature of this type of Egyptian monachism. Their prolonged fasts and vigils, their combats with sleep, their exposures to heat and cold, their endurance of thirst and bodily fatigue, their loneliness and silence, are features that constantly recur in the authentic records of the lives of these hermits, and they looked on such austerities as among the essential features of the monastic state.”

Much more crazy things were (and are) done, but this is sufficient for us to get the idea–and hopefully avoid it.

In conclusion

Krishna has given us all this information so we can determine the type and quality (guna) of our personal spiritual practice. This alone would make the Gita unparalleled in value for those who seek the higher life. And it contains so much more. All glory be to Sri Vyasadeva (the author of the Bhagavad Gita), the supreme guide of all who aspire to liberation!

Learn about real practical spiritual life. Subscribe to the Atma Jyoti Blog.