SAUNDARYA LAHARI

 

 

INTRODUCTION TO VERSES 36 THROUGH 41

 

 

Verses 36 through 41 refer to stable psychophysical states of consciousness, conventionally named Chakras in the discipline of Yoga. Chakra means “wheel”. Sometimes, instead  of being called  a  wheel,  we find the  same  states  of  synergetic equilibrium  called  Adharas, which would suggest a  foundation  or basement.  Fixing  the  psycho-physical  self  attentively  on  a certain  type of syndrome or synergism, based on the  cancellation of  reciprocal functions, is also sometimes called a  Bandha, which would suggest a knot or binding force. There are Bandhas of this kind known to Yogic practice, such as Mula Bandha  and  Udyana Bandha.  Vital tendencies could be controlled and  cancelled  out through  the  regulation of breathing exercises, where  again  two opposing   tendencies  are  intended  to  be  cancelled   out   or neutralized.  Each Chakra or Adhara represents  a  psychophysical point  of equilibrium, attained at various levels of the  dynamism between the self and the non-self.

 

The  most  characteristic description of Yoga would be  the  word nirodha, which , in this context, means “restraint of the  outgoing mental  processes”, which, through chains of  natural  associations, keep the mind distracted and wandering from one item of  interest to another Patanjali's definition of Yoga is  based on this concept of restraint (nirodha) (Yoga Sutras; I; 2)

 

Each  Chakra  or  Adhara represents  a  point  of  psycho-physical equilibrium attained at various levels of the dynamism as between the self and the non-self.

 

According to  Patanjali,  there  are  eight  stages  (astanga) by   which a  Yogi  practices  the  discipline of  meditation  (II; 29).  This begins with the lowest physical limit, where control is indicated by the word yama, meaning “withdrawing inward of tendencies”. After yama comes niyama which applies to a slightly higher level of the personality, and which means “restraint or control conditioned by rules”. Then comes asana, which refers to the correct posture for restraining the mind.  Pranayama, the  fourth  stage   in   the process, refers  to  the regulation of the  outgoing  and  ingoing breaths, in  order  to  subdue or make less  obtrusive  the  vital tendencies which are at the basis of the function of breathing so that they do not obstruct  the process of meditation (dhyana) which is one of  the stages  to follow. The next stage of Patanjali's Astanga Yoga is pratyahara, which is a negative process of withdrawal - from the side of  the non-self to the self – of  the  outgoing  tendencies. The next stage, the sixth, is dhyana or meditation, where a  first-degree  participation  is established between the self  and  the non-self. Dharana, which is given as the sixth stage in the Yoga Sutras, underlines a sustained state of dhyana. Finally, the eighth stage is called samadhi. The word sama suggests equality and -dhi suggests intellect.  The intellect is thus expected to attain to a certain equality or equilibrium with itself.  The cancellability of the self and the non-self is implied here.

 

When  we  think of the subject of Yoga in the context  of  Indian spirituality, the  most canonical or authoritative  textbook, which all  correct  scholars or practitioners have to keep  in  mind, is Patanjali's series of aphorisms called the Yoga Sutras.  Although Patanjali is thus an authority, his Yoga, which is also  sometimes called  Raja Yoga, is considered defective in the full context  of Advaita  Vedanta.   Patanjali's  Yoga is  not  countenanced  with favour  in  the  Brahma Sutras  of  Badarayana, nor  in  the  Yoga Vasishta, which  is perhaps the latest authoritative  textbook  on Yoga,  as  its  name itself seems to claim . In it  there  is  an explicit  disavowal  of the Astanga Yoga of  Patanjali, when   Sri Rama  is asked by his Guru, Vasishta, to treat his own teaching  as the final authority, Vasishta speaks in terms of sapta bhumikas, or seven  grounds  in  consciousness, which  he  names  and   defines elaborately  in  more than one place. The main objection to  the Patanjali  system of Yoga by Vedantic texts such as the  Bhagavad Gita, is  that  its epistemology and methodology  are  necessarily vitiated by their being based on the Samkhya dualism of Kapila. As between  Kapila  and Patanjali and their  respective  schools  of Samkhya  and  Yoga, there  still persists  a  vestige  of  duality between  prakrti (nature)  and   purusha (spirit), which   is essentially  the same as between matter and  mind. Advaita, on the other  hand, cannot tolerate even the slightest taint  of  duality between  these two factors. The avowed purpose of Advaita is to abolish all duality, whether between causes and effects, means  and ends  or  between disciplines and their results. The  fourth  and fifth chapters of the Bhagavad Gita are specifically directed  to the purpose of cancelling the  duality between Samkhya and Yoga.

 

Verse 4 of  Chapter 5 goes  to the extent of saying that only  children think they  are distinct disciplines. Patanjali's Yoga itself has been  commented upon  by Vyasa in what is known as the Vyasa Bhasya, which  is  an attempt  to abolish  the taint of duality implied in  Patanjali's original  approach and which persisted within its core as  a  genetic element of error.   The well-known Bhojavartika of Bhojaraja  and the  Tattva Vaisaradi of Vacaspati Misra pushed this  revaluation still further and Advaitic notions of Yoga have also been revised and updated in the writings of Sankara and Narayana Guru.

 

It  is true that the Saundarya Lahari refers in these six  verses to  what  might  seem  at first  sight  to  be  six  conventional Chakras, Adharas  or Mudras, each implying a stable attitude of  the psycho-physical  self.  Ontological  aspects, when   implied, would justify  the  term  Adhara, while a  more  teleological  state  of equilibrium  would be more properly referred to as a  Chakra.  The term bandha might apply to a discipline conceived  under  Hatha Yoga, which  refers to a very wilful form of physical control  and is  only  indirectly important to Yoga, which should  be  properly understood from a more neutral standpoint. Some textbooks refer to four  kinds  of  Yoga:  Mantra, Laya, Raja  and  Hatha.  Mantra evidently refers  to  the  muttering  of  magic  syllables, while visualizing  ideograms that belong to them. Laya does not depend upon the nominalistic aspects of Yoga, but refers to an  intimate form  of merging the mind so as to dissolve the  duality  between object and subject. The term Raja is used in the Bhagavad Gita to underline a discipline in Yoga which is public and experimentally valid, as when we say “the royal road”. Raja Yoga thus corresponds to a normalized discipline of Yoga, neither too esoteric nor too exoteric.  We have already indicated the peculiarity of Hatha Yoga. Whatever the type of Yoga one might be interested in, there is always a subtle cancellation of counterparts implied, when Yoga is treated as a discipline in the most general terms, as we have already indicated at the end of our comments on Verse 33.

 

 

THE FRAME OF REFERENCE IMPLICIT IN THE CHAKRAS

 

 

If  Yoga is a discipline to be  practiced at all, it must necessarily   have  a  frame  of  reference, which   itself   must have a status that  is both physical  and  psychic  at  once. Space, whether subjective  “inner  space” or  objective  “outer space”,  is  necessarily made up of various elements which must  have a relational togetherness between them. If we  try  to think mathematically, this idea of the togetherness of the inter-related  elements  would suggest to us a pattern which  could  be formally visualized as a “mathematical object”, as Hilbert would call  it, whether that object is visualized in geometrical  terms or  merely conceived in terms of algebraic signs. The same  thing could  be  viewed conceptually or perceptually. At  the  negative levels  perceptual  forms are natural to the  mind.  At  positive levels  conceptual  relational  togetherness  or  unity  is  also equally  possible  to think of as an idea. Letters of  the  Greek alphabet  can be used to indicate points of intersection  between lines.  Just  as  a graph can verify a  formula, so  geometry  can verify algebra. Modern cybernetics is based on this possibility. Machine language could be codified and decodified.  Thus  we arrive at the possibility of a relational frame of reference  for all  yogic  meditations, however varied. This  is, according to us, what  Sankara suggests in his Sri Chakra in Verse 11, though  it is  true that there the Sri Chakra is presented in its  statically conceived  mathematical form as a ready-made cliché, so  repugnant to  the  philosophy of Bergson. This does not  mean, however  that Sankara is not aware of its dynamic version, as revealed in  Verse 7. Chakras, Adharas, Bandhas or Mudras are thus to be understood  as stable points of an equilibrium that could be established  within the amplitude of a parameter that we could postulate as  existing between the lower  or  Alpha limit and the higher Omega limit  of  a  total situation  proper to the world of yogic discipline. What is  true of yogic discipline could be equally true of Tantric or  semantic discipline  by  extrapolation or interpolation, permissible  by mathematical  convention. The six Chakras, having the  names  Ajna, Visuddhi, Anahata  (not mentioned  by  name), Svadhisthana, Manipura and  Muladhara, conform  to the conventionally  understood  stable centres (synergisms or syndromes) within the total  psychological makeup of the individual.

 

Various  textbooks on Yoga  define and describe these  Chakras or Adharas with an endless variety  of subtleties. To enter into these would  be to court disaster through “confusion of tongues”  in  a verbose  forest  of words, otherwise known as “Babelization”  in  biblical  language. In order to  avoid  falling into such a dire predicament, it is recommended that we steer our own speculation clear of the Scylla  and Charybdis  involved here.

 

We  have already indicated that, as an Advaitin, Sankara could not countenance any dualistically tainted school of Yoga  theory. Various  questionable  textbooks  on Tantra  esoterics  refer  to Chakras  and  Adharas, and  describe  them  in  terms  of  fires or phalluses or petals of different colours and numbers too numerous to  examine cursorily, or even enumerate. The voluminous  writings of  Sir  John Woodroffe give us an example  of  such  material, to which  could  be  added  many  others  derived  from  schools  of Tantrism, whether Bengali, Tibetan or of the monsoon west coast  of India, extending from Ujjain down to Kanya Kumari. For a  complete list  of  the  available  works one  is  referred  to  the  publication of Harvard  University by Professor W. Norman Brown  (PP. 99 ff.), under what he calls “critical apparatus”.

 

We  have  carefully avoided entering into  the  deeper  polemical controversies  in  the  present study, in order  to  salvage  this wonderful  work from being lost in the ocean  of  verbosity whose volume  is  increasing as days pass by. In order  to  settle  any controversy  on  such  matters, it  has  once  and  for  all  been recommended  in  the Bhagavad  Gita, in the  words of Krishna himself,  that  it is the canonical  texts (Sastras)  that are to  be treated  as  authorities  (pramanas), (XVI; 24).  Guru  Vak (the  word  of  the  Guru)  and  Sastra  Pramana (the authority  of  the  canonical  scriptures)  are  the  two   final touchstones for doctrinal validity or acceptability. For our own part, we  have avoided getting lost  in the  bypaths of  Tantrism  or textbooks of Yoga, however much each might claim to be more secret or profound than  another. Our enquiry would never come to an  end were we to follow them.

 

We  have  used  for reference two Upanishads which  we  have  come across, one of which is called the Saubhagya Lakshmi and the other the Yogaraja. The first is included in a translation of the Shakta Upanishads  by  Dr. A.G. Krishna Warrier, published  by  the  Adyar Library. The second appears in the Upanishad Samgraha, published by Motilal Banarsidas, New Delhi. The very fact that these two  texts claim to be Upanishads must be sufficient guarantee that they  are fully acceptable to Vedantins. What is more, both of them use  the word “Brahma Chakra” or “Brahma Randhra”,  thus  bringing into the  picture the notion of the  Absolute, which is a sure indication that the context is that of the Absolute and not any other lesser discipline, such as that of Kapila, Kanada or Gautama. Tantrism, which gives primacy to the  Goddess, would not normally speak of the Brahma Randhra either.