Editing Mind in Indian Tradition (section)

=== MIND AND PSYCHOLOGY IN SANKHYA-YOGA TRADITION ===

==== METAPHYSICS ====
The Sankhya and Yoga systems are in significantly broad agreement about the metaphysical nature of the world, man, mind and ultimate truth and therefore, have been regarded as one category. Similar is the case with Vaisheshika and Nyaya schools. In Sankhya-Yoga tradition, there is one primordial pure consciousness ‘Purusha’ out of which ‘manifests’ Prakriti, the material reality. The entire existential drama is an interplay between Purusha and Prakriti. They are, in a way, the ‘soul and substance of the world’ (Bernard, 1947).  Purusha has no easy English equivalent. The words ‘consciousness-as-such’ or ‘pure-consciousness’ come closest to capture its spiritual as well as psychological connotations. Rao and Paranjpe define it as the principle behind consciousness manifesting in the person. According to them, ‘Purusha refers to both common as well as individualized forms of consciousness. It is the transcendental principle that makes awareness subjectively possible.’ Quoting SankhyaKarika, they note that Purusha is an isolated, indifferent, neutral and inactive spectator (saksin). 

In contrast to Purusha- an essentially subjective dimension, Prakriti is the ‘primordial matrix of matter; the material basis of our universe and our physical being.’ Three fundamental characteristics (gunas) are inherent in Prakriti – sattva (essence), rajas (energy) and tamas (mass/inertia). In its primordial conditions, there is a perfect equilibrium between three gunas, the modifications in which lead to the process of evolution. Through the combinations and recombination of essence, energy and mass, Prakriti unfolds from an ‘incoherent, indeterminate, and undifferentiated to a coherent, determinate, and differentiated form.’ The primordial state of Prakriti is elusive, captured best by this mysterious verse taken from the commentary of Vyasa on Yoga-sutras of Patanjali- "that which never is, nor is not, that which exists and does not exist, that in which there is no nonexistence, the unmanifested, without any specific mark, the central background of all" (quoted from Radhakrishnan, 1923/1989, vol. 2. pp. 260-261)<sup>4</sup>. The striking resemblance with the NasadiyaSukta of Rigveda is more than incidental. Moreover, the duality of Prakriti and Purusha is almost identical to the Rigvedic binary of yat and sthitam. It is clear that Rigvedic ideas were shaping the subsequent philosophical discourse- an influence that has hitherto not been given adequate attention.  

==== META-PSYCHOLOGY ====
The psychological apparatus conceived within this metaphysical framework is both descriptive as well as remedial. It must be noted that, following the Upanishadic precedent, Sankhya-Yoga also considered mind-stuff (Buddhi and its evolutes) as material in nature. Therefore, their development has been traced from the primordial unfolding of Prakriti. In the process of evolution of Prakriti, the first manifestation was that of Mahat, the ‘cosmic intellect’. As Rao (1999) calls to our attention, Pañchaśikha, quoted in Vyāsa’sSāṁkhya-pravacana-bhāṣya, considers Mahat as “mere ‘I-ness’ (asmīti-mātra); it is the subjective counterpart of the objective ‘mere i-ness’ (tan-mātra) of things” (p. 32). Mahat, when individuated, transformed into Buddhi. The Buddhi has a predominantly sattvic characteristic, making it capable of reflecting pure-consciousness of Purusha. Despite its sattvic nature, buddhi, being an evolute of Prakriti, is incapable of consciousness on its own. It is the reflection of Purusha that renders it conscious. Rao and Paranjpe have attempted to argue that Purusha too is not entirely unaffected in the process. Influenced by Vijnanabhikshu, another Sankhya commentator, they observe that the consciousness of Buddhi is itself ‘superimposed on the Purusha, who gets the notion of an experiencing person by mistaking the modifications of Buddhi as his/her own. Thus, it is the conjunction of the purusha and the buddhi, the reflexive relation between the two, that gives us self-consciousness and the subjective experience we have of the world.’  

While the sattvic part of Buddhi makes self-consciousness possible, the minor Rajas element predisposes it to ‘act’. In the process, the undifferentiated ‘mere I-ness’ becomes differentiated, structured and coherent as an individual, giving rise to Ahamkara or the ego-sense. According to Sankhya, ego is not an entity but a process that gives identity to the psycho-physical framework of the person. Manas and indriyas (sensory motor-processes) are further evolutes of Ahamkara. Manas, in Sankhya-Yoga, symbolises the connecting link between the sensory motor apparatus and the Ahamkara. Buddhi, Ahamkara and Manas together constitute the mind-stuff, called Antahkarana in Sankhya and Citta in Yoga tradition. The modifications in the mind-stuff have been titled ‘vritti’.  The increasing analytical approach is evident in the fact that while Upanishads were content with a single entity- manas, to represent the whole of psychic faculties, a greater differentiation and specification was now preferred. However, the broad framework was still the same- a pure consciousness illuminating the mind thus bestowing it with intelligence and in the process, conferring on it, twin functions of cognition and liberation. 

==== SUFFERING AND SALVATION ====
The Sankhya-Yoga philosophy of suffering is also an Upanishadic import, albeit in a modified form. Instead of simply tracing the root of suffering to the inherent predisposition of mind towards attachment, the latter two Gunas are held responsible for it.  As was indirectly implied earlier, the third Guna, Tamas is obstructive to the illumination of Purusha and therefore clouds the pure consciousness. The Rajasi and Tamasic attitudes lead one towards ego-dominance, attachment and consequent suffering. The ego-sense or empirical self begins to identify itself with the real consciousness. Suffering therefore, is built into the very fabric of evolution of Prakriti. The only way to escape it is a reversal of this process, an involution or enfoldment instead of evolutionary unfolding. In the words of Ramachandra Rao, “a backward process of attention, closing in, and turning back of the consciousness into an undifferentiated mass (samādhi). The world then becomes a mere ‘is’, the individual a bare ‘am’” (1999, p. 38).   

Cognition, in Yogic understanding, takes place in two directions, outward and inward. The cognitive faculty, called Citta in yoga, comprises of instinctual tendencies derived from actions of previous births and this life (vāsanās and saṁskāras) which taint one’s cognition and predispose them to act in certain ways. The external cognition is a sequenced process where manas first receives information from the senses and determines its character by discrimination and integration. Ahamkara then appropriates the material provided by the manas and gives a frame of reference to perception. Buddhi then reacts to the information in appropriate manner. Manas, Ahamkara and Buddhi are conceived as functional aspects of a single entity- Citta, rather than three separate entities. The inward cognition implies the cognition of consciousness. Consciousness-as-such, the ground of all cognition, however, cannot be directly apprehended as it has no ‘content’. It can solely be intuited. The following observation of Rao and Paranjpe is significant: 

It (Consciousness-as-such) manifests in two basic forms: (1) transcendental and (2) empirical. In its transcendental aspect consciousness is apprehended in immediate intuition where there is no distinction between subject and object. In its empirical form it manifests in the cognitions where there is a differentiation between the cognizing subject (grahitr), the object of cognition (grahya) and the process of cognition (grahana).

In day-to-day cognition, the influence of Consciousness can only be rationally inferred. The intuitive experience of it however, occurs only when the mind-stuff has been cleared of modifications and subject has reached the stage of Samadhi or Kaivalya. The significance of Yoga, particularly the synthesis provided by Patanjali in his concise Yoga-sutras, lies in its sequenced demonstration of eight-fold path towards Samadhi and ultimately self-realization.  

The Citta-vrittis, the fleeting states of mind or the modifications produced in mind are of critical importance in Indian psychology and form the basis of Patanjali’s sutras. At the very outset, in second sutra, it is asserted that Yoga is controlling of vrittis. The five vrittis described in Yoga are – pramanas or true cognition, viparyaya or false cognition, vikalpa which is merely an idea with no corresponding material reality, nidra or sleep and finally smriti or memory which involves storage and retrieval. Patanjali also describes five sources of hindrance (klesa) that corrupt the mind and stand in the way of controlling mental fluctuations. They are avidya, asmita, raga, dvesa, and abhinivesha (Yoga-Sutras, II.3). Avidya has been defined as the incapacity to distinguish ‘between good and bad, truth and falsehood, the permanent and the impermanent, and the pure and the impure.’ It furnishes as the ground (khsetram) for all other hindrances (II.4). Asmita is personal identity, the I-ness generated by the wrongful identification of purusha with buddhi. Raga is passion for pleasure. Dvesa is opposite of raga and represents aversion towards objects. Abhinivesa is indicated by the will-to-live and the instinctive fear of death. All these hindrances are responsible for suffering. 

Correspondent to these five hindrances are the five attentive stages of mind, of which the initial three- fluctuating level, inactivity (in drowsiness or sleep) and occasional concentration- are commonly experienced. The latter two however, i.e., Ekagrata (one-pointed concentration) and Niruddha - access to consciousness-as-such through complete restraining of all mental-functions, are achieved through Yogic practises of dharana (concentration) and dhyana (meditation). Another profound aspect of Yoga psychology is the inclusion of unconscious impressions like Samskaras on mind. They play a critical role in one’s spiritual progress. These Samskaras are the depositions of Karma (good or bad actions) and thus give Indian psychology its distinctive psycho-ethical characteristic. Samskaras resulting from bad actions produce greater obstructions in the path to self-realization by magnifying Rajasi and Tamasic elements, and hence, perpetuate suffering. The idea of salvation and psychological stability therefore, becomes intricately connected with the ethical concerns at macroscopic level.