I am trying to practice Yamas but have been observing that I am not able to follow them. I notice that though I am not doing violence in my actions and words, but the thoughts do come in my thoughts. Same is with other Yamas. I am aware that the thoughts are prevailing in my mind though not in my action/words.
I understand that we need to deeply observe these thoughts so that they can be dissolved. But, I practically feel that during work or conversation with others, I can’t simultaneously “deeply observe” and remain focused on my work. I am not currently doing meditation and am only trying to practice Yamas. I may be doing something wrong. Can someone suggest me the right way to go ahead.
Practicing yama doesn’t start with certain behavior, it ends with it. You are right, the word and thought have to follow yama first. But your idea of observing the thoughts to dissolve them is jumping ahead of yourself.
In Ashtanga (8-limb) practice, yama-niyama-asana-pranayama create a foundation which helps becomig inward-bound. Only after that we can work on thoughts to ease them out at will, to create internal silence. So, one needs to master yama by taking help from thoughts and not dissolving them as yet.
At this early stage, thoughts are to be watched more to notice their growth patterns. Ordinarily, our mind makes the thoughts proliferate, change directions, make diversions, squat on a pet subject, go in loops, and do flip-flops. None of this helps yama. For example, when hungry you go and eat meat as the most natural thing. But, on a full stomach the same mind makes you feel guilty of breaching ahimsa.
Yamas never become one’s way of life, as they should be, until one develops higher awareness and abilty to see a ‘big picture’. Only that ressolves apparent conflicts in our mundane life. When yama becomes a natural behavior and not a deliberate act, any excitement to the mind from the external triggers goes away. Then, doing work and watching the thoughts is not a conflict anymore.
Of tremendous importance is patience. Beating the mind at its own game with the help of mind itself is neither simple nor quick.
something that has helped me the most is to become a witness to myself. when i initially read about becoming a witness to yourself i didn’t think much of it, but i kept reading different books by different yogis recommending it, and gradually started putting it into practice more and more.
here is a personal example. i was riding on the freeway with my girlfriend, she was driving (she is a good driver btw) and i noticed i was tense in my jaw, so i relaxed my jaw. then i thought, well why am i tensing my jaw? after thinking about it for a minute or so i started to realize i really don’t like cars, freeways or driving at higher speeds. it was nice to just acknowledge this and be aware of it. i didn’t have to suppress my feelings or thoughts. it was immediately relaxing and freeing.
that is just one example, and i know it doesn’t necessarily refer to yamas. but becoming a witness to your thoughts and actions can help you develop deeper awareness or yourself, and definitely help with yamas and niyamas.
[QUOTE=e09piyushv;73414]I am trying to practice Yamas but have been observing that I am not able to follow them. I notice that though I am not doing violence in my actions and words, but the thoughts do come in my thoughts. Same is with other Yamas. I am aware that the thoughts are prevailing in my mind though not in my action/words.
I understand that we need to deeply observe these thoughts so that they can be dissolved. But, I practically feel that during work or conversation with others, I can’t simultaneously “deeply observe” and remain focused on my work. I am not currently doing meditation and am only trying to practice Yamas. I may be doing something wrong. Can someone suggest me the right way to go ahead.[/QUOTE]
I don’t think you are doing anything wrong. I’m not exactly sure what you mean when you say the thoughts are ‘prevailing’, but just being aware of them and not acting on them is a good step. You cannot expect that you will never have any unwholesome thoughts, but as long as you do not invite, entertain, and dwell on them, you’re fine. I’d suggest that the next step for you would be to learn about [I]klesas[/I] (causes of affliction). If you recognize them in yourself, you might find that reducing them also reduces the frequency of the troublesome thoughts and emotions. You can find out about [I]klesas[/I] in the beginning of chapter 2 of the Yoga Sutras.
[QUOTE=e09piyushv;73414]I am trying to practice Yamas but have been observing that I am not able to follow them. I notice that though I am not doing violence in my actions and words, but the thoughts do come in my thoughts. Same is with other Yamas. I am aware that the thoughts are prevailing in my mind though not in my action/words.
I understand that we need to deeply observe these thoughts so that they can be dissolved. But, I practically feel that during work or conversation with others, I can’t simultaneously “deeply observe” and remain focused on my work. I am not currently doing meditation and am only trying to practice Yamas. I may be doing something wrong. Can someone suggest me the right way to go ahead.[/QUOTE]
I think the problem might be you are treating Yamas like morals, so when you find your practice of a yama falling short you feel you have failed. This is the classic dilemma of anybody who abides by a moral code, they find that they can not live up to their code. Unfortunately, the confutation of yamas with morals is perpetrated by translating the yamas as morals. The Yamas are not morals, rather they are certain behavioural observances we make which keep our mind the most balanced. It is easy to see why ahimsa(non-violence) would keep the more mind more balanced than himsa(violence) because the latter disturbs the mind, the former keeps it calm.
So do not practice the yamas like a strict moral code you must follow - treat them more like a behavioural habit you are trying to cultivate.
It takes a long time before we internalize a new habit, so don’t be disheartened if you fail a few times. Just acknowledge it and try practicing the yama e.g. If you feel you get angry at somebody, notice your anger, and then, act calmly to that person.
The practice of Yoga is not a religion where you MUST follow some strict code of conduct. The practice of Yoga is to monitor your thoughts, feelings and bahaviours and correct them gradually. It does not happen overnight. It takes time to change all of this.
Morever, although you can just practice the yamas if you want, you will find your practice of the yamas will become a lot more effective if you combine it with the other limbs: niyamas, asanas, pranayama, pratyhara and meditation. Yoga is a holistic and integral practice, so it is not wise to only focus on one part of Yoga and neglect the others. They all compliment one another.
I think Surya’s a little off base here. That’s the product of his anti-Christian sentiment. The yamas are identical with the moral principles taught in Christianity. The difference is that yamas are presented as a natural law rather than as the commandment of God. Take your pick: moral law, natural law, it’s the same thing. Heeding them has benefits, violating them has consequences.
I never said anything about Christianity. Asuri is the one equating the yamas of Yoga with Christian morals. In the same way he equates many other Yogic and Samkhyan concepts with Christian doctrines. However, he is entitled to do that of course, he has for himself reinterpreted Yoga to fit in with his Christian worldview. This helps him remain at peace with his religion. Must be hard trying to be a Christian and Yogi at the same time.
However, in terms of actual Yogaa - yamas are not identical with morals. As Yoga is not a religion, how can they be morals? Yoga is a practical psychology which makes its aim very clear, “cessation of the activities of the mind” The activities are thoughts and beliefs, feelings, habits etc. In order to do this it devises a program consisting of physical and mental practices of yamas, niyamas, asanas, pranayama and meditation. All of the practices are designed to cease the activities/still the mind. They each a target a different area of our life: Pranayama targets the energy flow in our body through breathing practices; asanas target the actual body itself and the circulation , through stretching exercises; meditation targets the flow of thoughts in our mind through meditation practice. Yamas target our behaviour through behavioural practices; Niyamas target our personal health through health practices. All round Yoga is an integral and holistic practice for total personal development. All areas are covered.
Each practice works to release any habits(samskaras) we may have e.g., if we are greedy, if we steal or exploit others, if we are lustful, if we are violent and angry, if w are dishonest, this can be released through the practice of yamas. If we are unhealthy, anxious or depressed this can be released through the practice of niyamas. If we are unfit, inflexible, stiff this can be released through the practice of asanas. If we have unrhythmic breathing, disease, emotional blockages this can be released through the practice of pranayama. If we have ego issues, scattered minds, prejudices, assumptions this can be released through the practice of meditation. Thus all Yoga practices only play a role to release habits. Not to replace habits with other habits. The aim in Yoga is to release every habit.
Adopting a moral code does not work because it is like replacing one so-called bad habit with another so-called good habit. The process of Yoga is to be free of all habits. To be free, spontaneous and present in the moment.
Good old Surya Deva, never misses an opportunity to misrepresent my views.
Yoga sutras II.33 [I]vitarka-badhane pratipaksa bhavana[/I]
[I]vitarka[/I] - cognitive thinking, in this context, the unwholesome thoughts
[I]badhana[/I] - repelling
[I]pratipaksa[/I] - opposite
[I]bhavana[/I] - cultivation
Translation: For repelling unwholesome thoughts, [the yogin should practice] cultivation of the opposites.
It sounds to me like Patanjali said to get rid of your bad thoughts, replace them with good ones. Maybe Surya Deva doesn’t know everything after all. At any rate, I consider him to be unqualified to talk about yama. What can you say about someone who refuses to acknowledge the most basic and obvious truth?
Good or bad is subjective and it is unlikely that Patanjali would imply that, given his very objective exposition of all the sutras. (For example,he never mentions ‘good’ karma vs ‘bad’ karma either.)
We will do greater justice to Sutras by avoiding lame translations with subjective slant. We should also live by the real meaning of the word ‘sutra’ that is the ‘underlying thread’ and consistently apply his conceptual models across.
Having eloquently spoken about need for suspending thoughts altogther to be able to see the ultimate truth, it is unlikely that Patanjali will make a naive suggestion of replacing bad thoughts with good. So, one doesn’t need to repel the onslaught of thoughts negating the compliance of yama by any opposition. The opposition itself (a la ‘an eye for an eye’) will create mind modifications that we are trying to restrain.
Instead, a deeper understaning of the very process that germinates negative thoughts; realization that thoughts keep coming back like unceasing tides not on their own but because of the seeds of desire and awareness that one’s target has to be these desires and not the negative thoughts will do the trick. It will be the right opposite that will pre-empt and not oppose.
There is nothing lame or subjective about the translation, it’s pretty much word for word. This sutra is given immediately following the definitions of yama and niyama, so it is clear that it is laying the philosophical foundation for their practice. And since it is quite clear from the context that Patanjali does mean to replace negative ways of thinking, emoting, and acting with their more positive opposites, that indicates that there is a need to reassess the interpretation of the sutras as calling for suspending thoughts altogether. At best that is something that is done in the highest states of meditation and is not a prescription for daily living.
You’ve misunderstood the concept of ‘an eye for an eye’. That is about justice, not personal morality or achieving a tranquil state of mind. It appears that we agree about the need for a deeper understanding of how the troublesome thoughts and emotions arise.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;73480]I think the problem might be you are treating Yamas like morals, so when you find your practice of a yama falling short you feel you have failed. This is the classic dilemma of anybody who abides by a moral code, they find that they can not live up to their code. Unfortunately, the confutation of yamas with morals is perpetrated by translating the yamas as morals. The Yamas are not morals, rather they are certain behavioural observances we make which keep our mind the most balanced. It is easy to see why ahimsa(non-violence) would keep the more mind more balanced than himsa(violence) because the latter disturbs the mind, the former keeps it calm.
So do not practice the yamas like a strict moral code you must follow - treat them more like a behavioural habit you are trying to cultivate.
It takes a long time before we internalize a new habit, so don’t be disheartened if you fail a few times. Just acknowledge it and try practicing the yama e.g. If you feel you get angry at somebody, notice your anger, and then, act calmly to that person.
The practice of Yoga is not a religion where you MUST follow some strict code of conduct. The practice of Yoga is to monitor your thoughts, feelings and bahaviours and correct them gradually. It does not happen overnight. It takes time to change all of this.
Morever, although you can just practice the yamas if you want, you will find your practice of the yamas will become a lot more effective if you combine it with the other limbs: niyamas, asanas, pranayama, pratyhara and meditation. Yoga is a holistic and integral practice, so it is not wise to only focus on one part of Yoga and neglect the others. They all compliment one another.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for guiding me. I thought on this and realized that I am viewing it more from morals and ethics.
I have also started doing bhastrika and kapalbhanti pranayama (few do not call them pranayama) followed by few minutes of focus on breathing. But while I was doing this, I realised that I should proceed with Niyama, Asana and Pranayama (as explained by Swami Vivekananda).
[QUOTE=Asuri;73498]Good old Surya Deva, never misses an opportunity to misrepresent my views.
Yoga sutras II.33 [I]vitarka-badhane pratipaksa bhavana[/I]
[I]vitarka[/I] - cognitive thinking, in this context, the unwholesome thoughts
[I]badhana[/I] - repelling
[I]pratipaksa[/I] - opposite
[I]bhavana[/I] - cultivation
Translation: For repelling unwholesome thoughts, [the yogin should practice] cultivation of the opposites.
It sounds to me like Patanjali said to get rid of your bad thoughts, replace them with good ones. Maybe Surya Deva doesn’t know everything after all. At any rate, I consider him to be unqualified to talk about yama. What can you say about someone who refuses to acknowledge the most basic and obvious truth?[/QUOTE]
I agree that we need to get rid of negative thoughts. But, for those who have started their journey, how should they treat themselves if they are breaking any yama? I have experienced that when I supress any negative feeling it gives me uneasiness and I feel like expressing myself. While I am not doing it, I am accumulating all this negative feeling and it sometimes happens that there is an explosion (which I can’t help). This is followed by guilt feeling. I even tried to replace my irritation/anger with love towards the subject but it was superficial (may be I am doing it in a wrong way). So if I supress or express any negative feeling, the effect is same. I am still not able to ‘only observe’ the feeling and let it dissolve.
Going from whatever I have read from posts, I feel that I should also practice Niyama, Asana and Pranayama.
[QUOTE=Asuri;73498]Good old Surya Deva, never misses an opportunity to misrepresent my views.
Yoga sutras II.33 [I]vitarka-badhane pratipaksa bhavana[/I]
[I]vitarka[/I] - cognitive thinking, in this context, the unwholesome thoughts
[I]badhana[/I] - repelling
[I]pratipaksa[/I] - opposite
[I]bhavana[/I] - cultivation
Translation: For repelling unwholesome thoughts, [the yogin should practice] cultivation of the opposites.
It sounds to me like Patanjali said to get rid of your bad thoughts, replace them with good ones. Maybe Surya Deva doesn’t know everything after all. At any rate, I consider him to be unqualified to talk about yama. What can you say about someone who refuses to acknowledge the most basic and obvious truth?[/QUOTE]
As always me and Asuri are clashing on our interpretation of Yoga/Samkhya. I only need to say this much Asuri has already made clear that he filters Yoga through a Christian worldview. He has admitted in this thread the yamas are identical to Christians morals. Thus one would expect that Asuri’s interpretation to be Christianized and obviously not authentic.
My interpretation, on the other hand is based directly on the scholarship on Yoga and the actual tradition. My academic work being partly based on it. So I will leave it to the reader whose interpretation you want to trust.
In order to help the reader make an informed decision I will cite the the relevant sutras on the yamas in Patanjali’s Yoga sutras, citing one of the best translations by an order of Yoga monks with a very detailed word for word breakdown: http://swamij.com/yoga-sutras.htm
2.30 Non-injury or non-harming (ahimsa), truthfulness (satya), abstention from stealing (asteya), walking in awareness of the highest reality (brahmacharya), and non-possessiveness or non-grasping with the senses (aparigraha) are the five yamas, or codes of self-regulation or restraint, and are the first of the eight steps of Yoga.
(ahimsa satya asteya brahmacharya aparigraha yama)
ahimsa = non-violence, non-harming, non-injury
satya = truthfulness, honesty
asteya = non-stealing, abstention from theft
brahmacharya = walking in awareness of the highest reality, continence, remembering the divine, practicing the presence of God
aparigraha = non-possessiveness, non-holding through senses, non-greed, non-grasping, non-indulgence, non-acquisitiveness
yama = codes of restraint, abstinences, self-regulations
2.31 These codes of self-regulation or restraint become a great vow when they become universal and are not restricted by any consideration of the nature of the kind of living being to whom one is related, nor in any place, time or situation.
(jati desha kala samaya anavachchhinnah sarva-bhaumah maha-vratam)
jati = type of birth, species, state of life
desha = space, place
kala = time
samaya = circumstance, condition, consideration
anavachchhinnah = not limited by
sarva-bhaumah = universal, in all parts (sarva = all; bhaumah = parts, spheres)
maha-vratam = great vow (maha = great; vratam = vow)
2.32 Cleanliness and purity of body and mind (shaucha), an attitude of contentment (santosha), ascesis or training of the senses (tapas), self-study and reflection on sacred words (svadhyaya), and an attitude of letting go into one’s source (ishvarapranidhana) are the observances or practices of self-training (niyamas), and are the second rung on the ladder of Yoga.
(shaucha santosha tapah svadhyaya ishvarapranidhana niyamah)
shaucha = purity of body and mind
santosha = contentment
tapah = training the senses, austerities, ascesis
svadhyaya = self-study, reflection on sacred words
ishvara = creative source, causal field, God, supreme Guru or teacher
pranidhana = practicing the presence, dedication, devotion, surrender of fruits of practice
niyamah = observances or practices of self-training
2.33 When these codes of self-regulation or restraint (yamas) and observances or practices of self-training (niyamas) are inhibited from being practiced due to perverse, unwholesome, troublesome, or deviant thoughts, principles in the opposite direction, or contrary thought should be cultivated.
(vitarka badhane pratipaksha bhavanam)
vitarka = troublesome thoughts, deviating (from the yamas and niyamas)
badhane = disturbed by, inhibited by
pratipaksha = to the contrary, opposite thoughts or principles
bhavanam = cultivate, habituate, thought of, contemplate on, reflect on
2.34 Actions arising out of such negative thoughts are performed directly by oneself, caused to be done through others, or approved of when done by others. All of these may be preceded by, or performed through anger, greed or delusion, and can be mild, moderate or intense in nature. To remind oneself that these negative thoughts and actions are the causes of unending misery and ignorance is the contrary thought, or principle in the opposite direction that was recommended in the previous sutra.
(vitarkah himsadayah krita karita anumoditah lobha krodha moha purvakah mridu madhya adhimatrah dukha ajnana ananta phala iti pratipaksha bhavanam)
vitarkah = troublesome thoughts, deviating (from the yamas and niyamas)
himsadayah = harmful and the others (himsa = harmful; adayah = et cetera, and so forth)
krita = committed (by oneself)
karita = caused to be done (by others)
anumoditah = consented to, approved of (when done by others)
lobha = greed, desire
krodha = anger
moha = delusion
purvakah = preceded by
mridu = mild, slight
madhya = middling
adhimatrah = intense, extreme
dukha = misery, pain, suffering, sorrow
ajnana = ignorance (a = without; jnana = knowledge)
ananta = infinite, unending (an = un; anta = ending)
phala = fruition, results, effects
iti = thus
pratipaksha = to the contrary, opposite thoughts or principles
bhavanam = cultivate, habituate, thought of, contemplate on, reflect on
So we can surmize from the above that the yamas are not morals, they are self-regulation observances or self-control, the word yama meaning control. They are to applied in all circumstances irrespective of time, place or society. When one finds that their practice of the yamas is faltering, one should contemplate their thoughts and remind themselves that they are divergent/unwholesome and return back to the practice of the yamas.
In fact the technique that is being discussed here is identical to CBT techniques used in psychotherapy. When one contemplates on the irrational nature of their thoughts they are able to dissolve them.
You will find the translation and interpretation I have given you to be authentic, precise and accurate. However, if you are still in doubt, I encourage you to cross reference the scholarship on Yoga.
I caution anybody on this forum to take Asuri’s interpretations of Yoga with a grain of salt knowing his Christian biases. The rest is up to the reader.
Once you realize that you are only a thread in the fabric of life and that all life is woven together, the yamas become THE way to live. Knowing you are an intricate part of life, you could not be harmful in any way whether it is thought or action. Yamas are more of a spontaneous reaction to behavioral changes. You act or think in a right way without consequences.
[QUOTE=e09piyushv;73522]I agree that we need to get rid of negative thoughts. But, for those who have started their journey, how should they treat themselves if they are breaking any yama? I have experienced that when I supress any negative feeling it gives me uneasiness and I feel like expressing myself. While I am not doing it, I am accumulating all this negative feeling and it sometimes happens that there is an explosion (which I can’t help). This is followed by guilt feeling. I even tried to replace my irritation/anger with love towards the subject but it was superficial (may be I am doing it in a wrong way). So if I supress or express any negative feeling, the effect is same. I am still not able to ‘only observe’ the feeling and let it dissolve.
Going from whatever I have read from posts, I feel that I should also practice Niyama, Asana and Pranayama.[/QUOTE]
The often quoted old saying is “hate the sin, not the sinner”. I am going to assume that you are talking about feelings of anger that you are suppressing. If that’s not the case, then it will just serve as an example.
Anger in itself is not the problem. Just because someone makes you angry does not necessarily mean that you are at fault. And expressing your anger towards another person is not necessarily harmful to that person, in fact it can often do both parties some good. What is required is that you do not allow your anger to get out of control. If you lose control and react with violence or even with words that cause injury, that is certain to have unhappy consequences. Part of the trick is just staying centered.
On the other hand if you feel that there is some fault in your nature that needs to be corrected, then I recommend that you lean about [I]klesas[/I], in chapter 2 of the Yoga Sutras. The Bhagavad Gita starting around chapter 13 or 14 can also be helpful. Actually I recommend these readings even if yo do not feel you are at fault. You may discover some fault that you didn’t now you had.
The old injunction to love your enemy seems to be in perfect agreement with Patanjali’s philosophy. But it takes a lot of contemplation and life experience to understand what that really means and how to apply it.