Classifying "negative" thoughts
Pratipakshabhaavanaa: Part I
Om Sri Gurubhyo Namah. Salutations to all the teachers.
“We are going into all this so as to bring about order in our life - order in our “house”, which has no order. There is so much disorder in our life, and without establishing an order that is whole, integral, meditation has no meaning whatsoever.
If one’s “house” is not in order, one may sit in meditation, hoping that meditation will bring about order.
But what happens when one is living in disorder and one meditates? One has fanciful dreams, illusions, and all kinds of nonsensical results.
But a sane, intelligent, logical man must first establish order in daily life. Then he can go into the depths of meditation, into the meaning and the beauty of it, the greatness of it, the worth of it.”
- Jiddu Krishnamurti, The Network of Thought, Chapter 6
Over the last several weeks, we have been discussing the first two limbs of the eight-limbed Yoga - the Yamas and the Niyamas. The eight limbs work from the outside-in, starting with the outermost layer of the Yogi’s being - their interactions with the outside world, and moving gradually inward. The perfection of each limb allows the Yogi to sort of “drop away” that part of their being, so that it is no longer a distraction, therefore allowing the Yogi to move further inwards with ease.
The first limb - the Yamas - deals with the Yogi’s external interactions, simplifying them so that they are no longer a distraction. They are:
1. Ahimsa: Non-violence
2. Satya: Truthfulness
3. Asteya: Non-stealing
4. Brahmacharya: Non-indulgence
5. Aparigraha: Non-possession
The next limb - the Niyamas - deal with the Yogi’s personal conduct. In a similar manner to the Yamas, the purpose is to simplify the Yogi’s life so that the “things you need to do” are no longer a distraction to the Yogi. The five Niyamas are:
1. Shauch: Cleanliness
2. Santosh: Contentment
3. Tapas: Self-discipline
4. Svaadhyaay: Self-study
5. Ishvarpranidhaan: Self-surrender
These two limbs are core to Yoga, and without them, meditation can be extremely difficult. The mind is generally highly active with thoughts, ruminations, ideas, and sub-vocalizations that are in constant flux. These mental movements - or vrittis - are like ripples in a lake. The more active they are, the harder it is to see through to the bottom.
Additionally, the water is muddy. This mud is the kleshas - the five colourings or afflictions - that lead to feelings of suffering, and exacerbate the existing mental turbulence.
Finally, the Yamas and the Niyamas help to reduce avidya - the root cause of dukkha - or suffering. They do this by weakening the perceived divide between “self” and “other”, making it viscerally - not just theoretically - clear, that this divide is a mental construction, thus reducing the attachment to the idea of the separate self encased within the mind-body complex.
The Yamas and Niyamas are a systematic method to turn the Yogi’s daily life into an opportunity to practice, rather than waiting for a particular time of day to sit down and meditate. As one practices these, the mind calms down, the kleshas weaken, and feelings of peace and joy arise spontaneously. Don’t take my word for it - try it for yourself!
P: Ok, I get it, but these are really hard! I want to be non-violent, but I just get so angry sometimes. Not only that, but I love the taste of meat. Is this really realistic?
Jogi: You are right - these are really hard. However, know that every time you follow a tendency you strengthen it. This means that if you follow your tendency towards violence, it will be harder to break out of it the next time.
P: So then what should I do?
Jogi: The method is called Pratipakshabhaavana, or the “cultivation of counteracting thoughts.”
वितर्कबाधने प्रतिपक्षभावनम्॥VitarkaBaadhane pratipakshaBhaavanamWhen thoughts opposing [the Yamas and Niyamas] arise, [the Yogi should then] cultivate counteracting thoughts (ie. practice pratipaksha-bhaavanaa).
- Yoga Sutras, 2.33
It is important to note that the word used is “when”, and not “if.”
Negative thoughts will arise, even in the most highly trained Yogi. This is not something to feel guilty or ashamed about - it is simply the movement of the gunas. The mind, just like all of nature, is nothing but an interplay between the three gunas - sattva, rajas, and tamas - and so shows the characteristics of each of these gunas from time to time.
For example, you may sometimes feel energetic or passionate (rajas), while at other times you feel dull and lethargic (tamas), and at other times, you may feel lucid, calm, and clear (sattva). The goal of the eight limbs is to first sattvicize the mind, so that it is lucid, calm, and clear most of the time, and then to transcend the gunas altogether.
However, even when the mind is highly sattvic, rajas and tamas are still present. The three gunas always coexist - you can never find one without the other two.
This is a key insight. Without understanding this fact, it is easy to fall prey to feelings of guilt, shame, and disappointment in oneself when you find that the mind is going in a direction that is opposed to the Yamas or Niyamas.
In practice, for example, the Yogi may feel angry at person who has frustrated them in some way. This anger may then result in violence (in thought, word, or deed), which would be in opposition to the Yama of ahimsa (non-violence). What’s worse, when the Yogi realizes that they have violated the Yama of ahimsa, they may feel angry with themselves for being angry. This results in an infinite loop of anger, from which it can be very difficult to get out.
Rather than berating oneself for having thoughts that oppose the Yamas or the Niyamas, the practice is to notice it, acknowledge that it is just the natural interplay of the gunas, and then to cultivate the counteracting thought - the pratipakshabhaavanaa.
P: Ok, but what are these “opposing thoughts”, and what is a “counteracting thought”?
वितर्का हिंसादयः कृतकारितानुमोदिता लोभक्रोधमोहपूर्वका मृदुमध्याधिमात्रा दुःखाज्ञानानन्तफला इति प्रतिपक्षभावनम् ॥Vitarkaa himsaAadayah kritKaaritAnumoditaa lobhaKrodhaMohaPurvakaa mriduMadhyaAdhimaatraa dukkhaAgyaanaAnantaPhalaa iti pratipakshaBhaavanam“Opposing thoughts” are violence, etc. They can be personally performed, on one’s behalf, and/or consented to, may be triggered by greed, anger, and/or delusion, and can be low, middling, or high in intensity. The “counteracting thoughts” to cultivate are of the form “the result [of these thoughts] will be unending suffering and ignorance.”
- Yoga Sutras, 2.34
An “opposing thought” - vitarka - is any thought that is opposed to one or more of the Yamas or Niyamas. For example, this can be a thought about violence, untruthfulness, stealing, and so on, or a mixture of these. These kinds of thoughts lead to a strengthening of avidya, and so are unhelpful in the practice of Yoga. Additionally, this kind of mental activity leads to a strengthening of kleshas, and feelings of sadness, dejection, anxiety, worry, anger, and so on. On the other hand, the absence of these kinds of thoughts leads to feelings of calm, clarity, focus, peace, and joy. Below is a list of the opposing thoughts, and how they relate to the Yamas and Niyamas.
There are two other ways to frame this:
1. In terms of karma
2. In terms of the gunas
In terms of karma, vitarkaa - opposing thoughts - lead to an exacerbation of karma. Specifically, the stronger these thoughts are, the stronger the mental tendencies that lead towards the feeling of doership. In this way, weakening these thoughts is the same thing as saying “weakening” or “burning” karma.
In terms of the gunas, vitarkaa are caused by, and lead towards, an increase in tamas and rajas in the mind. For example, thoughts of violence are caused by tamas (dullness) and rajas (passion), and also lead to an increase in these two gunas. On the other hand, weakening these thoughts leads to an increase in sattva (clarity/lucidity/calm).
P: Why are thoughts being spoken of here, and not words or actions?
The goal with the Yamas and Niyamas is to adjust our behaviours - actions, words, and thought patterns - to maximize sattva. In order to do this, we must root out rajasic and tamasic tendencies at the root.
All words and actions are rooted in thought, and so the focus for the Yogi is on counteracting thoughts, and not just counteracting words or actions.
The idea is to catch ourselves as early as possible. If you can only catch yourself as you act, that is ok - but try to work your way to stopping yourself earlier, and earlier, and earlier, until you are attentive enough that you can catch yourself before the thought even arises in the mind.
Ok - at this point we understand what opposing thoughts are, at a high level, and how to frame this idea in terms of karma, the gunas, and kleshas. Additionally, we understand the effects of these kinds of thoughts in these terms. Now the question is - what is the actual practice?
In order to understand the practice, in proper Yogic fashion, we must first properly understand the problem we are trying to solve. The more we understand our patterns of “non-useful/negative” thought, the easier it becomes to shift the thought patterns to more useful ones.
In this regard, categorizing the vitarkaa is a good place to start. Patanjali provides a framework to do just this, breaking down these opposing thoughts into 270 different types using a simple three step framework:
1. The trigger: What mental activity triggered the actions, words, or thoughts?
2. The doer: Who did, said, or thought it?
3. The intensity: How intense was the thought that triggered the words or actions?
We will go over these systematically. In this article, we will go over the first two categories, and next time we will discuss the third category, along with the method to counteract such thoughts when they occur.
For each of these, we will use the example of the first Yama - ahimsa (non-violence) - but keep in mind that it is applicable to all the Yamas and the Niyamas.
The Trigger
There are three possible triggers that may cause the Yogi to think, speak or act in opposition to the Yamas and Niyamas. These triggers are all in the mind, and are different combinations of the five kleshas. They are the proximate cause of the vitarkaa, or “opposing thoughts”. The three triggers are:
Lobh: Greed
Krodh: Anger
Moh: Delusion
Lobh: Greed
Using the example of violence, one may inflict violence - in thought, word, or deed - upon another being because of greed. For example, one may eat meat because they feel it is delicious, and they are greedy for the pleasurable sensation of taste. As another example, one may verbally injure someone out of a greed for the feeling of power over them.
As we have discussed at length, greed extends beyond a desire for physical objects, but to mental objects as well. Often, our greed can be subtle and difficult to identify, but with practice it becomes easier to see.
Krodh: Anger
In this category, the Yogi has thoughts about violence towards other beings triggered by a feeling of anger. These thoughts need not only be about physical violence, but extend to thoughts of verbal and mental violence as well. For example, one may feel anger towards their friend because they feel wronged by them in some way. This feeling of anger can then result in thoughts about insulting them verbally, physically harming them, or even thoughts about planning a future where they are harmed (e.g. “one day I will find a way to get back at them for this”).
One may also feel angry at oneself, and this may result in thoughts of violence to oneself - an opposition to the Yama of ahimsa.
This extends to the other Yamas and Niyamas as well. For example, if you are angry at yourself, you may have thoughts of not being good enough, skilled enough, beautiful enough, kind enough, and so on. In this example, the thoughts would be in opposition to the Yama of satya, which includes speaking and thinking kindly of others, including the body-mind you call “me”.
Moh: Delusion
Sometimes, we feel we are justified in actions, words, or thoughts that are in violation of the Yamas and Niyamas. This may be due to a clouding of the mind through tamas and rajas. In this category, it is neither greed nor anger, but a general cloudiness of the mind, referred to as moh, or delusion.
The traditional examples here are that of a warrior, a fisherman, and a priest.
The warrior feels that it is their duty to kill others, and so they must kill. This sense of “duty” is out of delusion, since they have identified with the body and its origins. For example, they fight for their kingdom because their body was born in that physical location. However, in truth, they are the Purusha - they are neither the body, nor their mind. As a result of this delusion, they feel a misplaced sense of duty, and so inflict violence upon others.1
The example of the fisherman is similar. The fisherman, being born into a family of fishermen, feels that it is their duty to kill fish. However, they are not the body, and so their sense of duty is misplaced. In this way, they kill out of delusion.
Finally, the example of the priest is that the priest kills animals as a ritual sacrifice. They feel that they are “doing the right thing” by upholding the tradition, but they are deluded because they do not see the animal as another living being, but only as an object for their own personal gain (e.g. heaven, etc.). As a result, they kill out of delusion.
We can extend this example to eating meat, for example. One may feel that they must eat meat because otherwise they will not have a source of protein, because it is natural, or because it is normal. This is rooted in delusion, since it is not based in evidence.
Note: Plant-based eating is not the main purpose of this newsletter, but if you want to learn more you can take a look at this Wikipedia article on Carnism.
Another example may be around verbal violence. One may feel that they are a senior person in their workplace, and so they can be rude to others who are less experienced than them, or to those who have a different job title. This stems from an identification with the body-mind and related conceptual creations, and so this kind of verbal violence inflicted upon others is based in delusion.
A final grouping within this category is when the Yogi does not realize that violence is being committed. For example, one may wear a jacket made of leather without questioning the source, one may purchase jewellery not knowing if it came from a place of violence, or one may eat some food without asking what is in it. This also includes the use of words where one may not know the violence behind it, but uses the word anyway. For example, the use of language that has its roots in racism, casteism, or colonialism may inflict mental injury upon those who listen, especially if they come from historically oppressed or marginalised communities. The use of such language when one does not know the history behind it is an example of violence triggered by delusion.
As with all the categories above, these extend beyond just violence to thoughts contrary to any of the Yamas or Niyamas.
The doer
Once the trigger has found root in the mind, for each of the Yamas and the Niyamas, there are three possible doers in relation to the opposing thought. Simply said, it starts with anger, greed, or delusion, and then you may feel that you want to hurt someone, lie, steal, and so on, due to that trigger.
The thought itself may be in the mind of the Yogi, but the content of the thought relates to one or more of these three people actually playing out the action. Specifically, the three doers are:
Krit: The Yogi does the action themselves
Kaarit: The Yogi gets someone else to do it for them
Anumodita: The Yogi allows it to happen within their sphere of influence
Using the example of ahimsa - the first Yama - we know that the opposing thought (aka the vitarka) is any thought of violence. Using this framework, we can see that thoughts of violence extend beyond just the Yogi doing the action themselves to thoughts of the action being done by someone else as well.
Krit: The Yogi did it
In this category, the thought is of the Yogi themselves either doing, speaking, or thinking about violence. Specifically, this means that the Yogi is either thinking about acting violently, thinking about speaking violently, or thinking about thinking violently (yes, we can think about thinking). Some examples of this category are as follows:
The Yogi has thoughts about hurting another being physically
The Yogi has thoughts about hurting another being verbally
The Yogi has thoughts about planning or thinking about hurting another being
Some examples of this category may include warfare - where a soldier may think about fighting or killing others, or planning to kill or hurt others. Other examples may be of hunters who think about killing other beings. Examples in the workplace or at home may include the verbal or thought aspects, where one may feel that they want to speak to others in such a way that it hurts them or makes them feel bad in some way.
Kaarit: The Yogi got someone to do it
In this category, the thought is of the Yogi getting someone else to either act, speak, or think violently. Some examples of this are as follows:
The Yogi has thoughts about getting someone else to physically injure another being
The Yogi has thoughts about getting someone else to verbally injure another being
The Yogi has thoughts about getting someone else to plan or otherwise think about injuring another being
The example of warfare also falls into this category, where a general may not be doing the killing themselves, but may be thinking about how their soldiers will be killing or injuring others on their behalf.
Another, perhaps more relatable, example in this category is that of eating meat. We most often do not kill the animals ourselves, but we get others to do it for us, and partake in the killing by paying for the service. In this scenario, thinking about eating meat, or thinking about thinking about eating meat also fall into this category.
Anumodita: The Yogi allowed it
In this category, the thought is of the Yogi allowing someone else to either act, speak, or think violently when they could reasonably have stopped it from happening. It is up to the individual practitioner to decide whether or not they feel they were in a position to have stopped something from happening without causing more violence than the original act. Some examples of this are as follows:
The Yogi has thoughts about allowing someone else to physically injure another being
The Yogi has thoughts about allowing someone else to verbally injure another being
The Yogi has thoughts about getting soneone else to plan or otherwise think about injuring another being
More concretely, this may include allowing someone to physically or verbally hurt someone else, when you could reasonably have stopped them. For example, if your friend is speaking rudely of someone else, if you engage in or encourage the discussion, it falls into this category. A more extreme example is that of a bar fight - if your friend is drunkenly trying to fight someone, and you allow them to go through with it rather than stopping them, it would fall into this category.
In terms of meat-eating, actively encouraging others to eat meat also falls into this category.
P: So I have to be one of those annoying vegans who doesn’t allow people to eat meat in their presence?
Jogi: Not at all. You may let others know that there is violence involved, to the degree that you can do so without causing violence. Lean towards discouragement, and certainly do not encourage it.
However, be careful not to be violent in how you speak about these matters.
Telling people about factory-farms and the practices of the meat-industry as they are enjoying their meal may in itself be a form of violence that you yourself are now inflicting upon them. Rather, do what you can, as non-violently as you can, but do not force others to conform to your own belief systems. One may suggest, but enforcement of any sort is violence in itself.
P: Is there a difference in degree of violence in these categories?
Jogi: Certainly. The highest degree is in doing it oneself, followed by getting someone to do it on your behalf, followed by allowing it. The goal is to minimize violence as much as possible.
As mentioned above, while we are using the example of violence, these categories apply to all of the Yamas and Niyamas.
Ok, now what?
The purpose of this framework is to disentagle the mess of thoughts in the mind, so that the Yogi can see clearly. Only once the thoughts can be clearly seen, can they can be effectively addressed.
Next time, we will go over the third component of this framework - the intensity of thoughts - as well as the method to counteract them in such a way that it trains the mind to be automatically tilted in the direction of the Yamas and Niyamas. This way, over time, with the twin foundations of practice and letting go, the first two limbs become effortless and stable, enabling you to move further inwards on your journey to the Self.
Until next time:
As you go about your day, try to notice any thoughts that are contrary to the Yamas and Niyamas. If there are too many, try to write them down to find patterns. Use the list of vitarkaa above to find your own tendencies.
Classify these thoughts using the framework above - what is the trigger, and who is the doer?
The goal is to keep track of how you did every day, so that over time you can see patterns, get to know your own tendencies (ie. see your own karma) and know where to target your practice.
As always, feel free to reach out with any questions, objections or feedback by responding to this email, commenting down below, or by posting anonymously at r/EmptyYourCup.
Next time: Cultivating the garden: Pratipakshabhaavanaa Part II
It is not quite as simple as this, since at the transactional level of reality, the body-mind has certain expectations of itself and of other body-minds around it. There is nothing wrong with carrying out these “duties” - Yoga is simply pointing out the karmic consequences. Actions of violence, for example, no matter the feeling of duty or righteousness, will always lead to an increase in avidya. Knowing this, one may do what they wish. As with everything in Yoga, there is no compulsion.