Wednesday, April 29, 2009




In the earlier two bluffs there are two underlying currents of thought. First that humanity as a whole is passing through the present bluffing stage on its way to ultimate enlightenment. Is this a kind of evolution? Is this thought really mentioned in Vedas? Yes it is. Then how does this evolution differ from Darwin’s theory of the processes of natural selection and survival of the fittest? Secondly; any individual anywhere in the world is capable of skipping this stage of bluffing. Is it really possible? Is this thought also mentioned in Vedas? Yes it is. If so, then it militates against the certainty of gradual and slow process of Darwinian evolution wherein we are still searching for the missing link and are hesitant to consider this theory a law in spite of overwhelming evidence in its favor. This hesitancy is rather a sprinkle of hope and a step in the direction of Vedic prediction of ultimate enlightenment. Otherwise we are quite fond of certainty in nearly all the fields of our activity as a result of sheer progress so far in bluffing. This bluffing is entirely due to the two artificially created non-existent bluffs of ‘spiritualism’ and ‘religion’. These bluffs only are coming in the way of grasping the Vedic concept of evolution of humanity and the concept of an individual’s possibility of skipping the mechanics of bluff. Both these aspects are discussed in YOG SHASTRA of sage PATANJALI, but these bluffs have converted this completely scientific treatise elucidated with finest artistic rendition into another bluff of an imaginary, mystical, incomprehensible and pedantic doctrine of YOGA. Strange are the ways of bluff. On one hand the imaginary and non-existent concepts of spiritualism and religion have been made to exist in Vedas even after proclaiming Vedas as the books of material physical sciences (अपरा विद्या) only (refer anecdotes of Narad and Shaunak in First Bluff-Spiritualism) and on the other YOG a subject of pure physical science existing in Vedas has been propagated as an ethereal, out of reach of ordinary common people, something mystical, metaphysical and always desirable but never achievable objective. In Indian contexts such bluffs have completely deprived us of not only the unique treasure of knowledge the parameters of which are so vividly and passionately discussed in Vedas; but the very path of finding it out i.e., YOG has been willfully decimated and made non-existent over the centuries. Instead we have been lured and mesmerized into the labyrinths of a fabricated path still known as YOGA or mischievously given the name YOGA which is non-existing and can, therefore, never reach that goal of acquiring professed Knowledge. This path has been carved out and projected as so much full of imponderable thorns and dangers that it requires super human efforts (सीस देई ले जाई) to even imagine taking the first step. The person who happens to take this step either by design or by accident starts suffering from ‘super human syndrome’ immediately or all efforts are made to make him suffer because he is so revered by others in the hope of realizing that knowledge through this new found medium. That way medium have kept on mushrooming in all the ages and those who manage to get the state patronage become more privileged and often give birth to bluffs called sect, cult and sub-religion etc waiting to die natural deaths ultimately. The path is bluff; the medium is bluff because the desired goal spiritualism is bluff. And that’s why when knowledge is discovered somewhere else we have very often gloated, “Oh! This airplane is already existing knowledge with us. Our RAMA traveled in PUSHPAK (पुष्पक विमान).Oh! This radio is already AKASHVANI (आकाशवाणी) at various places in our scriptures’! This television is our old knowledge. SANJAY (संजय) in MAHABHARAT (महाभारत) narrated the entire war to DHRITRASHTRA (धृतराष्ट्र) by seeing the direct relay. Oh! These proton, electron and neutron are nothing but TRIGUNAS (त्रिगुण) we have already discussed in Vedas as SATOGUN (सतोगुण), TAMOGUN (तमोगुण) and RAJOGUN (रजोगुण) Oh! This nebula is HIRANYAGARBHA (हिरण्यगर्भ) which was wrongly understood by Max Mueller”. Is it not bluff that that professed highest of the highest knowledge spiritualism is looking for the crutches of mundane physical sciences every now and then to prove its scientific base? A simple cursory look at the books on spiritualism published in last 150 yeas will bear out the gradual addition of discovered or invented scientific knowledge to prove authentically the scientific basis of spiritualism. The latest additions are the PRAN (प्राण) and CHAKRAS (चक्र) as the Nano Technology of Vedas. The revealed knowledge concept (अपौरुषेयता) of Vedas is proved by data storage concept of a computer. Why couldn’t we invent a computer or discover a single measurement technique of Nano Technology if the concepts were already existent in Vedas? We are thus adding to these examples daily and refusing to accept one simple conclusion that if that is so then there must be hundred others which we don’t know yet and instead of falling into the trap of false self admiration later why not to give a thought at least now to discovering them ourselves and accept gracefully that there is definite need to come out of this bluff. I intend calling this bluff under the series THIRD BLUFF-YOGA in various installments with a view to opening the possibilities of finding out and experimenting with concepts given in Vedas and espoused by Patanjali in his YOG SUTRAS (योग सूत्र) for various fields of present day human interest. To begin with I come back to the two underlying currents of thought mentioned in Vedas which open up innumerable possibilities of discovery and invention in various branches of knowledge. I intend therefore, first discussing the complete thought process of how I arrived at these two conclusions and later on discuss the details as found out by Patanjali Who knows these Vedic thoughts of humanity passing through the bluffing stage and the possibility of an individual skipping it may give answers to the questions that may lead to presently unimaginable discoveries and inventions.


Vedic YOG is a completely scientific concept which has been made non-existent by the spiritualized YOGA The fiefdom of spiritualism is so vast, overpowering and awe inspiring that any comparison of its any ingredient; YOG in the present context with science tends to become a misnomer instantly. The centuries of misinformation and terror have established in the psyche of a common Indian that scientific knowledge is inferior knowledge and even not worth aspiring for. Till recent past only it was considered sacrilegious to cross seven seas for gaining knowledge. The pure scientific derivations of Vedas i.e. science of medicine (आयुर्वेद), science of archery (धनुर्वेद), science of sound (गंधर्ववेद) and science of architecture (स्थापत्यवेद) have been designated as UPVED (उपवेद) meaning inferior knowledge to Vedas. Only those books of knowledge like BRAHMAN (ब्राह्मण) UPNISHAD (उपनिषद), ARANYAK (आरण्यक) and SHASTRAS (शास्त्र) etc were created, manipulated and given credence which eulogized spiritualism. YOG by sage PATANJALI (पतंजलि) is one such SHASTRA (शास्त्र) which has been MANIPULATED to mean a book of spiritual excellence which in fact has nothing to do with spiritualism. This manipulation has deprived us of the scientific facts the authors of Vedas wanted to convey. The salient areas of scientific deliberation in this SHASTRA are as under:-

· A unique concept of knowledge

· A unique concept of human behavior patterns

· A unique concept of mind

· A unique concept of evolution

· A unique technique of skipping bluff by acquisition, application and administration of knowledge

To arrive at the above five broad scientific areas discussed by PATANJALI in his YOG SUTRAS it is absolutely essential to have an unbiased approach towards the study of these sutras meaning formulae. Otherwise the pull of spiritualism is so strong that escaping the abysmal depths of ignorance is more or less impossible. I would rather recommend to the extent that only unbiased approach towards this study has got to be a complete and unswerving bias against spiritualism. This bias is essential for the simple reason that the truth must be found out. If at all there is any scientific knowledge in Vedas it has got to be there for the simple reason that it is there; not for the reason of any later on interpolation and any obstacle coming in way of finding the truth must be ruthlessly neglected. Spiritualism is such an obstruction. If we consider the existing translations, explanations and treatises on PATANJALI YOG SHASTRA, all of them without exception are heavily loaded with a spiritualistic bias. Therefore to give a trial to a completely steadfast converse angle which is scientific, verifiable and achievable and completely anti-spiritualistic is quite justified. Yes spiritualism is an imaginary, unscientific and mythical concept that leans heavily on present day strides of science for its very survival.


For sticking to this unbiased approach the following two steps are to be always kept in mind. The facts of these steps are not only verifiable but attempt to present Vedic knowledge from an entirely non-conventional angle from where it will be apparent that all spiritualistic versions of YOGA are contrived. The approach from these facts will lead to emergence of the above mentioned five scientific facts explained by Patanjali. The steps are to know:

· The Facts of presentation by Patanjali

· The Resolutions of Bluffs of YOGA


There are 195 formulae encompassing the entire knowledge about YOG as Patanjali found it in Vedas. If we just deliberate upon the presentation of these sutras certain irrefutable facts emerge which give a fair insight into not only the subject matter but the reason governing such a presentation. The facts are:

A. Grammatically incomplete sentences

B. Deliberate and Purposeful Arrangement

C. Choice of words

(A) Grammatically Incomplete Sentences

All the sutras of which the spiritualists are never found wanting in appreciation are considered by them to be grammatically incomplete sentences and thus a legitimate excuse for them to offer umpteen explanations for these sutras. This fact cannot be an accidental lapse or a clerical mistake, the notorious excuse. The general explanation is that these sutras are the jottings of a student listening to the discourses of a teacher. In my opinion there is a definite intention on the part of the author of exemplary repute by choosing such a presentation. Was he a victim of the machinations of the spiritualists of that age who will not permit him to be explicit? And thus leave plenty of room for those incurable protagonists of spiritualism (अध्यात्म) to interpret his understanding of Vedas as they liked as he and they were certain that his voice was a cry in the wilderness (नक्कारखाने में तूती) even if he becomes completely explicit. Or was he certain that his presentation meets the parameters of not only scientific but artistic rendition also fully and come what may the BLUFF element of human nature is such that he will be interpreted arbitrarily? So he still considered it his bounden duty to present at least his understanding as it is for the individual benefits in particular and general benefits of humanity at large at any date in future. He could only take precautions to minimize the propagation of bluff as far as possible. And that is what he exactly did.

(B) Deliberate and Purposeful Arrangement

The overt grammatical incompleteness of sutras disappears instantly if the poetic freedom and lyrical aspects of a presentation are taken into consideration. Vedas are his source of inspiration and these are also three types (त्रयी) for presentation reasons alone i.e. poetical, prosaic and lyrical. Vedic hymns also appear grammatically incomplete sentences and one of the reasons for varied and diametrically opposite translations. However, the lexicon of Patanjali Sutras is day to day Sanskrit, unlike Vedas where it is classical Sanskrit. The scientific precision in presentation has been followed so meticulously by him that one can easily predict the content of succeeding sutra. It can only be a deliberate arrangement with a purpose. First a concept is introduced, and then its ingredients are explained till it is completely discussed. Then another idea is introduced and the same drill is followed. The PURPOSE of this deliberate, scientific arrangement of presentation can be only one. And that is –“it should not be interpreted in any other way than it has been made explicit by this sutra.” In spite of this precaution Patanjali was interpreted whimsically from the very first Sutra and the fact of so happening was known to him in advance because of his Vedic knowledge of ATM JYAN (आत्म ज्ञान), a portion of which he had set out to explain in his treatise YOG SHASTRA with special reference to this human nature only. He could have taken only precautions and leave the rest, which he did. Let me explain this by illustrating from the text. The first Sutra is:
(I-1) - अथ योगानुशासनम् - It is a sutra of three words ATH (अथ), YOG (योग) and ANUSHASAN (अनुशासन) which mean – here, (a customary word used for beginning), YOG (a name Proper Noun) and subject / discipline respectively. The overall meaning is: ‘Here begins the subject YOG’. The reader is settled to this simple and straightforward meaning but the spiritualists lead him into the blind alleys of the etymology of these three words with hundred meanings and hundreds of pages wasted which the author most probably never meant. The result is that the reader is unsettled with a meek submission before the gigantic expanse of the abysmal depth of such knowledge. Now compare it with Patanjali and his soothing finger of presentation. Let me dramatize it. “Oh! YOG is the new word for you in my first sutra. Don’t worry; it is a word found in Vedas and it definitely signifies a very unique concept. Here is what I intend you to understand by this word”. And he comes out with his second sutra a complete miniscule definition of YOG which he is bound to explain as per the standard of presentation set by him for himself:
(I-2) - योगश्चित्तवृत्तिनिरोधः – It is a sutra with three new words introduced i.e. CHITTA (चित्त), VRITTI (वृत्ति) and NIRODH (निरोधः). Here again the spiritualists goad the reader into the labyrinths of nuances of these three words again in hundreds of pages but never drawing his attention to what Patanjali meant which he starts clarifying from the third sutra onwards till he takes up another new concept. Let me dramatize once again. “Oh! I know. These are three new words here and I’ll explain them as and when the context demands but the first two i. e. CHITTA and VRITTI you have been using very loosely and first I must warn you to be a very clear observer (द्रष्टुः) about the nature and form (स्वरूपेऽवस्थानम्) of these two:
(I- 3) तदा द्रष्टुः स्वरूपेऽवस्थानम्-. Otherwise ITRATRA (इतरत्र)
You are likely to confuse between the two and continue considering both as having (सारूप्यम) i.e. same nature.
(I-4) वृत्तिसारूप्यमितरत्र.
To avoid this confusion let me now explain the nature and form of VRITTI (वृत्ति) first and I’ll keep on explaining CHITTA (चित्त) as and when the need arises”. And that’s how Patanjali proceeds to his fifth sutra mentioning five groups of VRITTI (वृत्ति):
(I-5) वृत्तयः पञ्चतय्यः क्लिष्टाऽक्लिष्टाः
By now we have a fair idea of one fact of the presentation technique of deliberate and purposeful arrangement of ideas by the author. One can predict with almost certainty that the next sutra must mention these five kinds of Vritti Yes that is what he does in sutra I-6. Now we can predict further. Next sutras must explain these Vritti one by one. Yes that is exactly what he does in sutras I-7 to I-11. Now if there is nothing more to be added to the VRITTI concept, he must revert to third word NIRODH he had introduced in his second sutra. As expected he defines this word and goes on to explain the ingredients in sutra I-12 onwards. If the reader finds this predictable sequence of presentation broken somewhere, the finger of suspicion should straightaway point towards spiritualists who did not spare even VEDAS and willfully distorted, mutilated and created versions according to the branch (शाखा) of thought they belonged to. Patanjali text was a small fry for them and easier to meddle with.

(C) Choice of Words

In order to achieve the purpose of the least misinterpretation besides employing the technique of deliberate sequence of thought as explained in (b) above, Patanjali appears to have used a deliberate lexicon also. A close study reveals that he has used three varieties of words as under:
I. Words of current use
II. Defined words
III. Explained words

(I) Words of current use: Those words which were in use during Patanjali time and for such words he does not think that either a definition or an explanation is required. This is a fair indicator for any student of YOG SHASTRA to take with a pinch of salt any explanation of any word that has not been either defined or explained by Patanjali. Such explanations are more or less impositions which the original author does not endorse. For example, in the first sutra there are explanations for the words ATH (अथ) and ANUSHASAN (अनुशासन) in many translations which Patanjali himself has not deemed fit either to define or explain. Similarly in sutra 3 and 4, the words DRASHTU (द्रष्टुः), SWARUP (स्वरूप), AWASTHA (अवस्था) and SARUPYAM (सारूप्यम) have been used by Patanjali as words of current use only. Otherwise he would have defined or explained them as per his set method of presentation. Similarly in sutra
(I-5) वृत्तयः पञ्चतय्यः क्लिष्टाःऽक्लिष्टाः the new words are PANCHTAYYA (पञ्चतय्यः) KLISHT (क्लिष्ट) and AKLISHT (अक्लिष्ट) and none of these have been defined by Patanjali. Obviously these have been used as the words of current use .To attribute arbitrary spiritual meaning to them is a step in the direction of bluff, a reader should guard against. In fact if only this analysis is adhered to for words in each sutra, a completely scientific concept and outlook towards YOG emerges, which Patanjali most probably wanted to convey by employing such simple scientific techniques of presentation

(II) Defined Words: In this category are those words which the author either defines immediately after introducing them or explains them after or before defining even though the words may appear to be of routine / current usage. For example in sutras I-7 to I-11 he defines the five groups of Vritti after mentioning in sutra I-5 and introducing their names in sutra I-6
(I-6) प्रमाण विपर्यय विकल्प निद्रा स्मृतयः
In sutras I-7 to I-11 he proceeds to define these groups respectively by choosing words of routine use and does not feel the need to define any of these routine words. But in the next sutra
(I-12) (अभ्यास्वैराग्याभ्यां तन्निरोधः)
He introduces the routine words ABHYAS (अभ्यास) and VAIRAGYA (वैराग्य) for defining NIRODH (निरोध) and he is so certain about the varied usage of these words that he immediately defines ABHYAS in next sutra only
(I-13) तत्र स्थितौ यत्नोंऽ भ्यासः
And again uses a word here of routine use i.e. स्थितौ meaning stability but is quite apprehensive of its misuse and therefore explains it further in next sutra
(I-14) स तु दीर्घकालनैरन्तर्यसत्काराऽऽसेवितो दृढभूमिः
None of the words in this sutra are either defined or explained by the author as these are of routine use and he proceeds to define VAIRAGYA in sutra (I-15). The intention is obvious. Patanjali is crying loudly and clearly, “I know you people will interpret NIRODH (निरोध) in all the shades which I don’t mean at all. Therefore I am defining it using two key words ABHYAS (अभ्यास) and VAIRAGYA (वैराग्य) and explaining them further and further. Please don’t try even to find any other meaning if you want to know the truth”. But bluff we must! NIRODH thus becomes suppression, control or even complete destruction of Vritti in various translations. Thus a simple scientific fact of any VRITTI being indestructible as explained by Patanjali in various sutras becomes a completely opposite concept that can be destroyed, controlled or suppressed in the manipulations of the spiritualists

(III) Explained Words: Though defining and explaining are complementary functions generally yet Patanjali has used certain words which he prefers not to define but explain endlessly. The choice of employing such a technique for presentation must be with a purpose. Besides the obvious purpose of achieving the least misinterpretation, he is clearly pointing towards a basic fact that the words acquire meaning as per co text and context only or there are concepts which cannot be defined but explained only. Any attempt at definition will restrict the expanse of the concept and will create unnecessary acrimonious results. For example CHITTA (चित्त), VRITTI (वृत्ति), ISHWAR (ईश्वर) and KAIVALYA (कैवल्य) etc are concepts which cannot be restricted by definitions. Hence Patanjali explains these concepts as and when required at various places in his YOG SUTRAS. He introduces the words CHITTA (चित्त) and VRITTI (वृत्ति) as early as in second sutra only but keeps on explaining these concepts in various contexts throughout his treatise after giving the immediate warning in third and fourth sutras of imperative need of clearly understanding the difference between the two. CHITTA (चित्त) is compared and explained in the context of CHITTVRITTI (चित्तवृत्ति), MAN (मन), SATTVA (सत्त्व), PRABHO (प्रभो), PURUSH (पुरुष) and CHITI (चिति). Similarly the Vrittis (वृत्ति) have been explained as PRAMAN (प्रमाण), VIPARYA (विपर्यय) VIKALP (विकल्प), NIDRA (निद्रा), SMRITI (स्मृति), KLESH (क्लेश), SANSKAR (संस्कार) etc. Any attempt to find out the equivalent of any Vedic concept in any other language can be a concoction only which will lead to further bluffs of that language. A language is actually the mirror of any civilization and a perfect standard for measuring the scientific, cultural and ethical treasures which keep on getting accumulated or diminished over a period of time due to environmental interactions. Each language thus has its heritage of concepts that have been identified by specific names. Such concepts cannot be made to mean such and such concept of any other language. These have to be accepted as such with nomenclature and explanations intact by other languages. Let me elaborate it with an example of a scientific word since the above mentioned concepts from Vedas are scientific in nature. The word TATTVA (तत्त्व) in Vedas is generally equated with ‘element’ a word of chemistry in English language; while both the words have nothing in common if we go into the respective explanations given in the concerned disciplines. In chemistry these are hundred odd in number and the latest advances in the fields of molecular sciences are forcing the scientists to revise the very concept of element. On the other hand in Vedic concept these are only five and none of these five finds a mention in hundred odds of chemistry. The result is an English speaking Indian considers Vedic approach as unscientific primitive and not even worth knowing and an Indian spiritualist revels in confusion created by him and is completely insensitive to the damage caused by gleefully accepting the equation only to quote as evidence to prove the scientific basis of TATTVA (तत्त्व) but still advocating about its spiritual purport. The saner approach of accepting the names of the Vedic concepts as such and assimilate them was never done by any language because such assimilations take place only when enrichment of a language is ensured. All Vedic words were made to be so heavily loaded with spiritualistic overtones that their scientific contents were completely lost. This presentation technique of Patanjali of explaining words is a step in the direction of salvaging that scientific meaning.

No comments: